G Flux theory, eat more and burn more, what's your take on it?

alright so recently I have been reading a lot on John Berardi's G flux theory for optimal fitness and health. its basically outlines to create a caloric deficit, but not by diet, through 100 percent exercise instead.

a typical cutting calories approach insists that lets an individual's maintenance level is 2000 calories a day, and through some exercise your burn 300 calories, and you eat 1800 a day to make a 500 deficit, which leads to weight loss.

Berardi's theory insists that however that same individual instead raise his maintenance to 3000 calories a day through exercise, and to eat 2500 to reach a 500 caloric deficit, hence eat more, burn more. also some benefits are that one is eating above their typical maintenance so they dont feel deprived even though they are on a deficit, also all the excess exercise stimulates an even high metabolism and stimulates the maintenance and growth of lean mass tissue. the approach also doesnt let the body go into starvation mode because more than enough calories are given to meet basic demands for energy, and the body is receiving a larger percentage of macro nutrients overall.

even though both approaches give a 500 caloric deficit, apparantly creating a deficit by pure exercise and eating more to make sure that deficit doesnt get to big has way more benefits than just creating a 500 deficit by simply cutting calories.  most people of course are ok with the eating more part, but not so much the exercising more.

This is also basically the same method emphasized in Tom Venuto's best seller E-Book "Burn the Fat, Feed the Muscle"  (GREAT BOOK BTW, I RECOMMEND IT TO EVERYONE)

so far I have stopped cutting calories and tried this approach to fatloss to see if there are any benefits, and personally I find that my overall fitness has increased, i dont feel sluggish, and the extra caloric intake balanced out because it gives me way more energy to carry on with longer and more intense workouts, or shorter and EVEN MORE intense workouts.

I personally advocate this approach, but im curious as to what other people's opinions are  :D

This sounds really interesting. It seems logical, but I don't pretend to be a scientist... I just watch a lot of Discovery Channel. I think it's worth a try if only for the fact that cutting back on food is where I seem to have trouble. Burning an extra 500 calories in a day is an attainable goal for me.

i mean you still gotta keep a deficit right? see my maintenance is only 2200 calories, but i burn about 3000 calories a day on average by execising hard (through lifting weights and daily cardio), so i eat about 2500 calories a day. this is a great psycological weapon specially because eating that much keeps you from feeling like you are on a diet. and really its easy to burn all those extra calories and exercise more when you are eating more, because all the energy intake balances out, you have more energy to workout and have more freedom to eat.

also i personally prefer to run an extra 20 minutes on the treadmill than have to cut 200 calories from my day  :D, and seriously if someone's typical workout lasts for 45 mins, whats an extra 20? youve already done 45, why not complete the hour while you're at it?  :)

and to quote john berardi:

“The best bodies are always built on higher levels of physical activity.”"

I think creating a deficit through exercise gives more benefits than a deficit through diet, because you are more easily able to get adequate nutrients, plus you get the benefits of exercise.

However, I think this approach takes it too far - the exercise sounds extreme and not sustainable for most people. I think it's better to aim for a lifestyle you can maintain long term, not a short-term diet (or extreme exercise) programme that you will eventually stop following.

Sounds like it works great for you.

I do this kind of thing often but not always. I will not go hungry. !!

It isn't that hard to burn an extra 100 calories. I am on a 2150 calorie per day intake average sometimes it is 1850 and sometimes 2500.  My burn is an average of at least 2850 calories so that is about a 700 per day deficit average and sometimes only 500 deficit. So that adds up to a minimum of 1 pound per week loss and not deprived of food. I can do with that easy.

You can build muscle and lose fat faster if you don't go hungry and just exercise a little more.

exactly, and burning a few more calories isnt too "extreme" i used to run for 45 minutes at med-low intensity before and consume about 2000 calories a day, now I just run for a whole hour at the same intensity and have increased my caloric intake to an average of 2500 a day. IM NEVER HUNGRY, and im always soo full of energy that the hour of high intensity exercise feels like nothing, even tho im sweating like a pig after haha.

Also i find that my bodyweight isnt changing much, however my body composition is, and that is what people should towards, to changing their body composition, not simply to "lose weight".

once again, the extra work pays off cuz I never feel deprived cause im eating a lot of food, and still carrying on a 500 deficit, and this even allows me to "cheat" more because my metabolism is faster than before.extra calories are going towards repairing damaged muscles rather than being stored as fat. and the for once in my life I feel that my body is finally working at full performance, and i know its only gonna get better :)

as i said before, most people are ok with the eating more part, not so much the exercise, but hey, no one said that drastically changing your body composition was easy :p and trust me, cutting calories and exercising a little alone will not achieve that.