No doubt now Ladies..... I'm going much LOWER with the calories...

Despite that really interesting article I posted over in the "Introduce Yourself" Forum, here's what I'm thinking now:

I have read through just about every thread on this site and dozens and dozens of threads on the JP Fitness site regarding NROL4W.  I would say that the vast majority of women are UNhappy with the results they've gotten in terms of physique transformation.  Most seem quite pleased though with their overall improvement in strength.

I have spent hundreds of hours (literally!) researching caloric needs, calories in vs. calories out, weightlifting, steady-state cardio, HIIT, etc.  I have read this book cover to cover, and while I agree with almost everything in the book, I think those of us who are trying to burn fat are all eating too many calories.  To build muscle you have to be in a calorie SURPLUS; to lose fat you have to be in a calorie DEFICIT.  You simply cannot do both at the same time!  You can appear to be gaining muscle through strength training in a caloric deficit, but in fact you are only improving the muscle that is already there, not adding any new muscle.  One exception to this is total newbies who really do add some new muscle in the beginning, but this levels off very quickly.

After visiting dozens of sites with calorie counters and fitness plans, and after talking with a trainer at  my club whose clients have achieved fantastic results, I am cutting back to 1550 calories per day (down from the 1800 I was eating on this plan with absolutely no loss in fat).  My plan is to continue lifting weights and using a modified version of this plan as I think this program is too intense on just 1550 calories.  I will keep lifting so as not to lose any muscle while I am stripping the fat.  Once I strip the fat, I will slowly increase the caloric intake upwards to 1800-2000 calories while really upping the intensity of the weight lifting, hopefully adding new muscle to boot!  Basically, all I'm doing is the age-old tried-and-true bodybuilding technique of cutting first, then bulking.  Once I add the muscle, I will probably have to cut slightly once more, as a little bit of fat is almost always added when adding new muscle.

Here's a quote I read from Alwyn Cosgrove's blog which really got me thinking I need to change my approach, since even HE doesn't consider this the best strategy for FAT loss:

"The New Rules of Lifting for Women is an overall 'general fitness' book for women where we tried to explode some myths as regarding women and weight training.

 But it's not a sports conditioning book - nor is it a fat loss program or a pure strength program. Although it will work reasonably well for these - it's definitely not designed purely for any of those goals.

 I'd write a different program if the goal were primarily fat loss - or if the goal was to compete in a sport - a sports-specific program would be better. In other words - if I had to get someone as lean as possible, as fast as possible - I'd use a different program. And if I wanted to get someone stronger - I wouldn't use one of my fat loss programs.

I definitely don't want to be one of those strong "fluffy" people that someone's trainer mentioned.  As it stands right now, my jeans have gotten so tight that I can't stand this any longer.  I will post back in a week and let y'all know if I've lost any fat.  I have calipers and a bodyfat scale so I should be able to track body fat loss fairly accurately, as opposed to just weight loss.

By the way, I'm a very "clean" eater so the variable of junk food should be completely out of the equation.  Have a great week and I'll post results next Wednesday!

I totally agree with this... in fact, I have suggested to several unhappy people to cut their calories!  I think the only way to lose weight is to be in a calorie deficit.

I think there have been some success stories with people cutting calories and still doing the program as is... Miss Jane is one on the JP Fitness forum.  Even if you are at a maintenance amount of calories though to maintain weight, you should see some good progress in the way you look.  Tighter and more "toned".

This is where I am at... I was not necessarily looking to lose weight on the program, so I have allowed myself to eat as much as I want.  I lost a few pounds initially, but that was it... but my body looks a million times better now than it was before. 

Definitely diet has to do with loss/no loss.

THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU.

It's sure not that I haven't researched this myself, but the mixed messages had me going zig-zag in my mind, wondering which way to go.

I AM SO THANKFUL that someone actually... FINALLY answered my question.

I ultimately concluded that I was intended to be fat. LOL! And that adding additional cardio was going to kill me with heart failure. Fat loss being my real goal, while gaining health is also a priority, I didn't want to do the starvation thing. I want real maintainable HEALTH. From much of what I had read, gaining muscle was a way to boost your metabolism. And with all the talk about needing calories to build muscle, it made sense that if I gained muscle, I'd raise my BMR.

I agree that maintaining muscle while in Deficit mode is key, but now I understand why I was not losing, EVEN THOUGH like you, eating clean has never been a question, I felt I SHOULD have been losing, because I was working so effin hard at raising my BMR! NOW, (thanks a million times over!) I am not so "nervous" about cutting!

The quote strikes me also! It's an eye opener.

I will join you in exactly what you are doing! I also am in the 1800 range, which I have from the getgo believed was a maintenance level... SO, I'm in the 1500 club with you...

ANYONE ELSE?

Have a Healthgain Day!,
~Julie
AKA: "MsStrongFluffy"

Yeah I'm right there with you guys! I had decided to cut my calories a couple weeks ago because the only way I've ever been able to lose weight was to eat about 1300 a day, rather than the 1900 they are telling me I should be. I am also going to 2 days a week with lifting and the rest cardio so I can focus more on shedding the fat. I have also expirienced the jeans barely fitting, and the scale continuously climbing so, I've had enough of that!! Thanks for sharing that info girls!

Trim - thanks for doing all the research.  I know I have read so many times 'to lose fat one has to have a calorie deficit'.  I am just trying to figure what mine is because I do not want to eat too little because that in turn would be counter productive.  I am doing NROLFW twice a week, I am now on stage 2.  I am 5'2" and weight (today) 134.  I do have a small frame so with this extra weight I have a major muffin top and larger thighs.  I started at 140 Feb 08 so as you can see I have not lost much.  I did get down to 129 but that did not last long.  I started eating 1500 to 1700 when I started the program.  I did not see any weightloss and my pants were getting tighter so just this week I have been eating between 1300 and 1500.  Although some days, especially workout days, I may only eat 1000 calories.  My stomach just does not want anything, although I do get my protein shake down. 

puppykisses - 1000 is not enough...  1300 is probably good for weight loss if that is what you are looking for.  I am 5'2.5" as well.  That would probably not be enough for someone taller.

I will stick with the 1300 and go to 1400 on the workout days to compensate for the protein shake.  The 1000 in not a number I strive for sometimes I just do not get lunch and I cannot eat that much in the evening when I get home.  It is my fault when I miss lunch I just have to try harder.

Hi,

So, I am a long distance runner and I maintain a 500 to 1000 cal deficit most days. But I always eat at least 1400 cal / day.  I also completed the first stage of NROLFW, but have stalled due to lack of equipment.  But I did lose weight on this regimen for me.  But I do believe you need to change your mix towards more calores from protein vs. from carb. I would have to balance this on a daily basis. If I was running it would be more carb and if I was lifting then it was more protein.

When I first started this program I was eating 1600 to 1800 cal/day and the weight was coming off nicely.  But was also walking and biking a lot.  Now that I am just doing the program with little additional exercise, and I have been eating poorly, I gained a little weight back.  Overall though, I still like the results.  I find that if I try to stick to 1200 to 1400 calories, I get too hungry and overeat - usually making bad choices.  I have to have a program that allows me to eat more.  After I finish NROLFW, I plan to try afterburn by Alwyn Cosgrove or RFFL to strip out fat.  Hopefully in time for summer.  But I think everyone has to do what works best for them.  Truthfully, I didnt' have a lot of weight to lose and was trying to shape up.  I was a skinny/fat person.  So best of luck to all.  Do what you feel most comfortable doing and keep posting results here!

Laura - yeah - I think everyone needs to work with how their body responds.  I think if the calories are not working for someone, they need to adjust them to see what works for them.  Same with cardio.

Some more result info regarding calories:

http://forums.jpfitness.com/new-rules-lifting -women/36513-something-i-just-dont-understand -about-fat-loss.html

This thread has a link to an interview with Alwyn Cosgrove:

http://forums.jpfitness.com/new-rules-lifting -women/36488-nrol4w-enough.html

Thanks for the links yogagirl, they led me to a very very interesting article by Cosgrove himself.

http://www.alwyncosgrove.com/non-sexy-trainin g-and-nutrition.html

THIS answers all the questions. Get down toward the end and read about Nutrition: Loading and Progressions.

~Julie

EDIT: In fact, once you are on Alwyn's site, just click "Articles" at the top, and there are a slew of "OMG I wish I read this before!" revealing writings all by him. "Complexes for Fat Loss" has been my fave so far, I already have my charts made to do it. Looks like I'll be inserting a quick detour into my NROL4W program. Stage 2 now officially begins on March 9 for me.

I believe he is a no BS type of guy. If you read his Bio, you'll see he is a two time cancer survivor. His success as a trainer speaks more than he could ever write, and even moreso now, everything about what he says just makes so much sense to me!

Thanks for all the replies so far!  I'm glad to know that others are thinking the same thing I am .

Just had to giggle for a minute.... the thread that Yogagirl posted from JP Fitness Forum was started by ME!!!  Funny how this keeps coming around!

I am excited to see how the program will work once I cut the calories back a little bit.  I don't have much weight to lose -- I'm definitely in the skinny-fat camp.  I love the NROL4W program and think it will pay off in the long run because I actually look forward to doing the workouts.

One thing I want to add:  I think Lou Schuler (author of NROL4W) could have done a much better job explaining that this program might be better suited for people who have already burned off most of the fat.  Nannygabber's link to the article from Alwyn Cosgrove could have saved us all a lot of agony. (excellent detective work, Gabbers!)

Let's all keep eachother informed of our progress.

Here are a couple more "gem" quotes from Alwyn's blog article (Hierarchy of Fat Loss) that now confirm what we all already suspect:

"There's pretty much nothing that can be done to out-train a crappy diet. You quite simply have to create a caloric deficit while eating enough protein and essential fats. There's no way around this.

I think whenever we try to pursue two goals at once we tend to compromise results. This is usually because we have a limited resource: time. If our goal is to generate fat loss, then using a periodized training approach with a specific fat loss phase (e.g. four weeks, eight weeks, etc.) where we focus exclusively on fat loss will always yield better results in the long term than trying to juggle two goals at once."

My approach to massive fat loss is attacking from the complete opposite of the norm. If you're a professional bodybuilder, then you typically have extra time to add in cardio and do extra work to get lean. A "real world" client with a job and a family can rarely afford additional time; therefore, we need to look at our training in a more efficient manner and focus on our time available first, then design our programming based on that.

If you have 3 hours per week, use only #1 above: metabolic resistance training. This can be three, one-hour training sessions, or four 45-minute training sessions. It doesn't seem to matter. However, once you're getting three hours per week of total body resistance training, in my experience I haven't seen an additional effect in terms of fat loss by doing more. My guess is that, at that point, recovery starts to become a concern and intensity is impaired. This type of training involves barbell complexes, supersets, tri-sets, circuits, EDT work, kettlebell combos, etc.

If you have 3-5 hours, use #1 and # 2: weight training plus high intensity interval work. At this point, any additional work is usually in the form of high intensity interval training. I'm looking to burn up more calories and continue to elevate EPOC. Interval training is like putting your savings into a high return investment account. Low intensity aerobics is like hiding it under your mattress. Both will work, but the return you get is radically different.

If you have 5-6 hours available, add #3: aerobic interval training. Aerobic intervals wins out at this point because it's still higher intensity overall than steady state work so it burns more calories. There appears to be a fat oxidation benefit and will still be easier to recover from than additional anaerobic work.

If you have 6-8 hours available, add #4. If you're not losing a lot of fat with six hours of training already, then I'd be taking a very close look at your diet. If everything is in place, but we just need to ramp up fat loss some more (e.g. for a special event: a photo shoot, high school reunion, etc.) then we'll add in some hard cardio — a long run or bike ride with heart rate at 75% of max or higher.

Why not do as much of this as possible then? Well, the goal is to burn as many calories as we can without negatively impacting the intensity of our higher priority activities.

To conclude, I agree with coach Dan John. Attack body fat with a passion and a single minded goal. The best way to do this is with an all-out assault implementing the hierarchy I described above. Summer is almost here. Shirts are coming off whether you're ready or not. Attack your body fat with a massive action plan for the next eight weeks!"

If you all haven't visited Alwyn's blog yet, I highly recommend it.  http://alwyncosgrove.com/Home.html   He has loads of articles that are really eye-opening.  I'm going to continue lifting (in fact, it will be the cornerstone of my program just like he says) but I am cutting way back on calories.  I'm gonna assault this fat for the next 8 weeks and blast it outta here!!!!!!!

I guess I'll be going back to my 1200 calorie days lol and more on weight lifting days of course.

Hey Trim - I thought that was your post... same name!

Anyway - I don't think this program is a BAD program for people who want to lose weight...  I think it is a good thing to lift heavy to retain muscle and not lose it while dieting. 

The above is really an argument against cardio first.... soooooo let's all buck up eat right and lift heavy!  Yeah to looking like godesses!!

Check his article "Complexes for Fat Loss" I am going to do it.... I need a 'lil help with some of the exercises though! Anyone familiar with any or all of em?

NOTE: Somewhere in one of his articles (I read about 5 of them last night!), he said... the order of the workouts should be... Lift first, HIIT afterward. I have been doing it backwards. He warns that using HIIT as a warmup, which is exactly what I was doing, does not reap the full benefit of the HIIT. If you do it after, your muscles are already tired, and it maximizes their expenditure with respect to burning fat.

Also, he dispelled as myth, that you don't burn fat during the first 20 minutes of cardio. Think about it... I am paraphrasing here... you burn fat watching TV. You are always burning fat. So the first 20 minutes of HIIT, or what ever cardio you are doing... what do you think is happening? Yep, fat is burnin'!

Have a healthgain day!
~Julie

Yoga -- I agree with you totally -- your assessment is spot-on!  I think NROL4W is a fantastic program.  I agree that we need to lift heavy and also really concentrate on the correct caloric levels and good, clean nutrition.  And avoid the long, boring steady-state cardio that seems to undermine our efforts.

I just really think Lou Schuler could have done a better job translating Alwyn Cosgrove's workout philosophy though.  I have seen dozens and dozens of posts where the women have either no fat loss or have actually gained on this program, which indicates to me that something has been lost in the translation.  Perhaps he could have been more clear for women who are trying to lose fat.  In all fairness to Schuler, he DOES suggest cutting calories by 300 if your fat loss is stalled, but I think most women come away from this book thinking they need to eat nearly 2000 calories!

Amayou... don't go TOO low in your calories! 1200 is very low and might be really hard to maintain.  You and I are almost identical in stats and I'm going to start at 1550.  I'll drop if I need to, but I figure that will be a good starting point.  Most people at our weight/height have a basal metabolic rate somewhere around 1300 calories and it's important not to go below that or your metabolism will slow down.

Edited above posting... need answer to boldface question!

Nanny,

Does this help?  I just googled the name followed by the word "exercise" and this is what I came up with:

Hang Clean:  http://www.criticalbench.com/exercises/hang-c lean.htm

Good Morning: http://www.bullz-eye.com/furci/2004/exercise_ of_month/good_morning.htm

High Pull:  http://www.criticalbench.com/exercises/high-p ull.htm

Jump Squat: http://www.shapefit.com/quadriceps-exercises- freehand-jump-squats.html

Original Post by trim4ever:

Yoga -- I agree with you totally -- your assessment is spot-on!  I think NROL4W is a fantastic program.  I agree that we need to lift heavy and also really concentrate on the correct caloric levels and good, clean nutrition.  And avoid the long, boring steady-state cardio that seems to undermine our efforts.

I just really think Lou Schuler could have done a better job translating Alwyn Cosgrove's workout philosophy though.  I have seen dozens and dozens of posts where the women have either no fat loss or have actually gained on this program, which indicates to me that something has been lost in the translation.  Perhaps he could have been more clear for women who are trying to lose fat.  In all fairness to Schuler, he DOES suggest cutting calories by 300 if your fat loss is stalled, but I think most women come away from this book thinking they need to eat nearly 2000 calories!

Amayou... don't go TOO low in your calories! 1200 is very low and might be really hard to maintain.  You and I are almost identical in stats and I'm going to start at 1550.  I'll drop if I need to, but I figure that will be a good starting point.  Most people at our weight/height have a basal metabolic rate somewhere around 1300 calories and it's important not to go below that or your metabolism will slow down.

 Agreed on all points!  Amayou - I agree that 1200 is probably too low for your height.  You may end up binging if you go too low, like Larua was saying.  I think it would be safer to cut by 300 at a time and see what happens.  The good thing is we have a long way until spring where we can show off... lol.

Thanks, trim!! I was having trouble finding Good Morning!

... and the squat & press... is that with dumbells??