This is a continuation of a long topic, addressed by post number rather than by page. Start at post 1.
Strength and hypertrophy respond to different things, and preserving one during a deficit is a different objective from building the other.
Anybody returning after a break should expect to start lower than they left, and expecting otherwise is where injuries come from.
Picking up post #34: that is the part I would want checked first.
Machine-based work is often better tolerated when energy is low and is not inferior for this purpose.
I would put this at better than even and not much better.
On post #33 — agreed on the reasoning, with one qualification.
Recovery: heavier training on a energy deficit and on a compound that slows gastric emptying requires attention to recovery (sleep, nutrition, stress). Recovery capacity declines with deficit, so training volume might need adjustment.
Adding this to the thread rather than to the wiki, because I am not confident enough for the wiki.
Nothing here is medical advice and anybody with a relevant condition should have a programme reviewed by somebody qualified rather than assembled from a forum.
Two sources, same conclusion, and I could not rule out that one copied the other.
Cardiovascular work has its own benefits and is not a substitute for a resistance stimulus for this particular purpose.
It cost nothing to check and would have cost something not to.
A resistance stimulus during a deficit is the other half of the lean-tissue argument, and the evidence for it is reasonably strong.
Post #41 answers the question as asked. The question underneath it is different.
Deload weeks matter more during a deficit than at maintenance because recovery is the limiting factor.
Marking that as an opinion rather than a finding.
Recovery capacity falls with energy availability, so a programme that worked at maintenance may be too much during a large deficit.
I would put the burden of proof on the interesting explanation, not the dull one.
Performance usually declines somewhat during a substantial deficit, and expecting it to improve is the most common source of disappointment reported here.
A single observation, in a thread that deserves better than single observations.
Quietly grateful for the plain phrasing. Not every thread gets that.
Post #45 is right about the mechanism and I think understates the practical bit.
Programming while losing weight quickly: realistic expectations are crucial. Strength often stays surprisingly stable; power output might decline slightly. Expecting gains during an energy deficit sets yourself up for disappointment.
Programming during a large energy looks different depending on whether you are reading the primary literature or the summaries of it, and the difference is not in our favour.
Where training is new, the early gains are largely neural, which is why they can appear even during a deficit and do not indicate tissue change.
That is one dataset and I would not build a rule on it.
| Topic | Participants | Replies | Views | Activity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
About the Resistance training category
Programming while losing weight quickly, realistic expectations, and recovery. This post is a community wiki: any member at trust level 3 or above can edit it, and every edit is recorded with its author and a…
|
4 | 40k | 17d | |
|
Progressive overload when the scale is falling — one year on
Progressive overload when the scale is falling — one year on Writing it up because I had to work it out twice and would rather nobody else did. The question about Progressive overload that I actually want…
|
+152 | 167 | 6.6k | 21mo |
|
Training through a dose escalation week
Training through a dose escalation week — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. What changes if the standard account of training through a dose escalation is wrong? I ask because…
|
4 | 42k | 20mo | |
|
Progressive overload when the scale is falling
Posting this under the heading it deserves: Progressive overload when the scale is falling Everything below is what sits behind that. Trying to establish the boundary conditions on progressive overload. The…
|
+4 | 8 | 14k | 8mo |
|
Follow-up: Recovery when intake is low: what to cut first
Posting this under the heading it deserves: Recovery when intake is low: what to cut first Everything below is what sits behind that. A follow-up question about Recovery that I did not know to ask the first…
|
+36 | 40 | 38k | 20mo |
| Topic | Participants | Replies | Views | Activity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Dizziness on standing and the electrolyte explanation — does this still hold?
The question in the title: Dizziness on standing and the electrolyte explanation — does this still hold? I will give what I have already checked below so nobody repeats it. Trying to work out what would count…
|
+89 | 94 | 18k | 1mo |
|
Revisiting: Protein density versus volume when you cannot eat much
Revisiting: Protein density versus volume when you cannot eat much Writing it up because I had to work it out twice and would rather nobody else did. I have spent a fortnight trying to pin Protein density…
|
+97 | 108 | 3.6k | 2d |
|
About the Progress reports category
Longitudinal self-reports with the method stated. Scales, tape measures, and their error bars. This post is a community wiki: any member at trust level 3 or above can edit it, and every edit is recorded with…
|
4 | 139 | 16mo | |
|
Second pass at: Sleep tracking data and its considerable limitations
Posting this under the heading it deserves: Second pass at: Sleep tracking data and its considerable limitations Everything below is what sits behind that. A measurement question rather than a physiology one.…
|
2 | 59 | 12mo | |
|
A side-effect grading scheme this community uses, and its limits
Posting this under the heading it deserves: A side-effect grading scheme this community uses, and its limits Everything below is what sits behind that. Side-effect grading scheme keeps being re-asked here and…
|
+1 | 5 | 3.8k | 12mo |