# reps for weight loss



## psmith123 (Apr 24, 2011)

for weight loss is a particular rep range more beneficial? i have read that higher rep ranges produce more lactic acid which is beneficial to weight loss?


----------



## ihateschoolmt (Apr 24, 2011)

No higher reps aren't better. It's actually more beneficial to train less while cutting because you are just trying to maintain muscle mass and maybe have a slight increase in strength. I would recommend the 4-8 range while cutting with minimal isolation work.


----------



## Marat (Apr 24, 2011)

In addition to what ihateschoolmt said, the primary focus of your resistance training while losing fat is to maintain muscle mass. In order to do so, you need to provide a relatively heavy stimulus to support the maintenance of your muscle tissue.

Higher reps imply a lighter weight -- the relatively light weight will not support the maintenance of your muscle tissue and as you lose fat, you will lose muscle tissue as well.


----------



## TJTJ (Apr 24, 2011)

psmith123 said:


> for weight loss is a particular rep range more beneficial? i have read that higher rep ranges produce more lactic acid which is beneficial to weight loss?



Training in high rep range is best used for first timers. You want to build up your endurance. There are 3 types of muscle fibers. Type 1, type 2a and 2b

You want to do the high rep ranges because that build up of lactic acid is because the lack of Mitochondria. *Mitochondria uses 70% of its energy from fat* and thats what you want. I dont know where these guys are getting their information from, but read a book. 
Im studying Physical Therapy and a Personal Trainer so im not pulling this information our of my ass like some other people. If you need further information check this out.  Bodybuilding.com - Muscle Fibers: How Do They Differ?


----------



## Marat (Apr 24, 2011)

TJTJ said:


> I dont know where these guys are getting their information from, but read a book.
> ...
> 
> im not pulling this information our of my ass like some other people.



In the article below, Lyle McDonald briefly explains why high intensity/low rep training is preferred over low intensity/high rep work for fat loss.

Weight Training for Fat Loss Part 1 | BodyRecomposition - The Home of Lyle McDonald

As indicated in the article, The Protein Book goes into greater depth on this topic. It's a good read. Regarding "read a book", that's not a bad one, if you haven't checked it out. 

Would you mind addressing Lyle's argument for lower rep/high intensity work? 

I'm familiar with beta oxidation and mitochondria and the Krebs cycle and all that fun stuff, however, can you elaborate on your argument regarding lactic acid, mitochondria, and what that has to do with lifting light weights for fat loss? What is the goal of that style of training? To produce lactic acid? 

 Can you point me to one of the books that you are referring to? Or preferably quote a passage? Can you provide a defense of your argument besides  an encyclopedic article explaining muscle types?


----------



## ihateschoolmt (Apr 24, 2011)

TJTJ said:


> Training in high rep range is best used for first timers. You want to build up your endurance. There are 3 types of muscle fibers. Type 1, type 2a and 2b
> 
> You want to do the high rep ranges because that build up of lactic acid is because the lack of Mitochondria. *Mitochondria uses 70% of its energy from fat* and thats what you want. I dont know where these guys are getting their information from, but read a book.
> Im studying Physical Therapy and a Personal Trainer so im not pulling this information our of my ass like some other people. If you need further information check this out.  Bodybuilding.com - Muscle Fibers: How Do They Differ?


So what they are going to do 5 more reps and burn 7 extra calories? The point of weight training on a cut is to maintain muscle not to burn fat. Diet is really the only way someone is going to loose fat. Ya you can burn a few hundred extra calories doing cardio but come on. Doing high reps isn't going to make any difference. If you want to build up lactic acid or whatever you can just go for a run. As someone studying to be a personal trainer you should be open minded because this sport is forever changing it's mind and putting out new science.


----------



## TJTJ (Apr 24, 2011)

For sake of argument everyone has different goals and genetics. Depending on your goals targeting what some would call "sports specific" training. Each muscle fiber, 1, 2a, 2b each have a maximum target rep ranges and maintained heart rate efficiency. His only question was for fat lost, not maintaining size. 

There are a lot of theories towards this subject but the science is true about higher amounts of Mitochondria and fat loss. This is why people will include Acety L Carnitine supplements to oxidize the fat for easier transportation into the mitochondria.

Also depending on this guys age will determine his specific fat burning heart rate zone.

The easy mathematical formula you can apply when using a HR monitor is very beneficial towards your sport specific goals.  

220 - your age = some #, multiplied between 60-90% exertion 

ex. 220-30=190x.65=123.5   I went with 65% because low intensity cardio sustained for a minimum of 30mins (60-70% exertion) will be within the fat burning zone.


----------



## ihateschoolmt (Apr 24, 2011)

So are you saying he should be using weight lifting as a low intensity aerobic activity?


----------



## Marat (Apr 24, 2011)

TJTJ said:


> His only question was for fat lost, not maintaining size.



So if you were to cut, it would be acceptable to lose 'significant' amounts of muscle as you drop fat?



TJTJ said:


> This is why people will include Acety L Carnitine supplements to oxidize the fat for easier transportation into the mitochondria.
> 
> Also depending on this guys age will determine his specific fat burning heart rate zone.
> 
> ...



Perhaps I'm missing something but I don't see what the about passage has to do with supporting your argument for lifting high reps/low intensity for fat loss. 

I certainly agree with you that lifting low intensity/high reps will allow for a greater weight loss, but in practice, one would ideally want to lose the most possible fat while preserving the most muscle. Is there anybody who wants to be "skinny fat"?

Regarding the fat burning zone, he's a short thread post on that topic from Lyle McDonald:

The fat burning zone - BodyRecomposition Support Forums


----------



## Marat (Apr 24, 2011)

ihateschoolmt said:


> So are you saying he should be using weight lifting as a low intensity aerobic activity?



In support of TJTJ, one CAN use light weights as aerobic activity -- think: complexes. 

However, that shouldn't be the primary training modality for fat loss. Low intensity aerobic barbell work does not preserve lean muscle tissue.


----------



## ihateschoolmt (Apr 24, 2011)

Marat said:


> In support of TJTJ, one CAN use light weights as aerobic activity -- think: complexes.
> 
> However, that shouldn't be the primary training modality for fat loss. Low intensity aerobic barbell work does not preserve lean muscle tissue.


Ya I know, I was just confused at what he was trying to say. I guess I assumed the OP was trying to keep some muscle, if he wants to look like a runner then by all means do lots and lots of reps.


----------



## TJTJ (Apr 24, 2011)

Just dont allow your body go in to a catabolic state by maintaining your meals. To build muscle and burn fat at the same time is a debatable topic. Some say it can be done others not. But one thing is true, more muscle = more fat loss. IMO I would stick with the target HR zone cardio and keep it simple. Work all three muscle fibers not allowing your body to plateau and you'll see results.


----------



## Marat (Apr 24, 2011)

TJTJ said:


> Work all three muscle fibers not allowing your body to plateau and you'll see results.



I'm glad you clarified your point...or perhaps backpedaled.

If you're working all the muscle fibers, that implies that you have both high rep and low rep work. 

Below, you mentioned that one would be best served sticking with high rep work:



TJTJ said:


> You want to do the high rep ranges because that build up of lactic acid is because the lack of Mitochondria.




Now that you are saying that one should do both high rep work and low rep work (I believe you are implying that by suggesting that we should work all muscle fibers), what is the purpose of the high rep work while cutting? For hypertrophy, high rep work begets sarcoplasmic growth, which is a good thing for those whose primarily goal is larger muscles.

But what's the idea behind high rep work for fat loss? Would you do the high reps in the same session and the heavier lifter or would you reserve the high rep work for a separate day -- perhaps a complex session?

Now for a beginner (I presume) like the OP, is getting into all that complex stuff necessary? That type of shit makes people hungry and it's great for guys like Charles Polinquin who trade elite athletes and intermediate/advanced lifters who can control their appetites, but is it necessary for beginner guys?


----------



## Merkaba (Apr 24, 2011)

Lactic Acid.....

Hey Gaz, what do you think about all this?  

You can dig into all of this and write two novels but as far as I'm concerned do heavier work to stimulate the maximum amount of muscle/groups.  Then get your ass home and concentrate on eating something good and Not countering the work you just did.  Hell do some HIIT a few times a week if you're worried about muscle fiber types.


----------



## jasjotbains (Apr 25, 2011)

psmith123 said:


> for weight loss is a particular rep range more beneficial? i have read that higher rep ranges produce more lactic acid which is beneficial to weight loss?



no this is not exactly true..higher rep range with lighter weights helps to get cutting,and very less weight loss..you need to do cardio to lose weight


----------



## psmith123 (Apr 25, 2011)

i wasnt saying lactic acid for building muscle. but lactic acid is proven to stimulate growth hormone. And this is useful for fat loss. that is 100% documented and true, i was only asking what peoples opinions experiences were not trying to start some kind of argument....


----------



## fraseram (Apr 25, 2011)

easy boys.... lol everyone is diff with diff goals and diff opinions (which IS fun to debate) 
there is NOTHING wrong with 'wanting to look like a runner' (though this IS a 'bodybuilding' forum lol ......... 
I myself like playing with my stimulus and diet to see what I can do with my shape and find what results feel the best for me 
we also have to realize too that though we can do A LOT our bodies each have a natural type of shape and rhythm that is best not to fight too much 
play up what your genetics gave you and youll do the best there


----------



## Marat (Apr 25, 2011)

psmith123 said:


> i wasnt saying lactic acid for building muscle. but lactic acid is proven to stimulate growth hormone. And this is useful for fat loss. that is 100% documented and true



The application of any piece of data is as, if not more, important than the fact itself.


----------



## TJTJ (Apr 25, 2011)

Marat said:


> The application of any piece of data is as, if not more, important than the fact itself.




Very true. Any piece of information must be able to be replicated to be considered factual.


----------



## Marat (Apr 25, 2011)

And useful in practice. 

It's nice that high rep training may release a bit of GH -- and perhaps having more GH floating around is beneficial for fat loss --- but fat loss isn't contingent solely on how much GH is floating around. 

There's a bigger picture to fat loss (holding onto muscle mass, etc.) that isn't covered by high rep work. 

I do think that high rep work can have a place in cutting for some individuals but I think that modality can be completed neglected as well and still produce positive results. On the other hand, if one eliminates low rep/high intensity work, there's a pretty good chance that one will miss out on the strength and lean body mass preservative qualities that heavy lifting provides.


----------



## TJTJ (Apr 25, 2011)

Exactly. This is why I wanted to inform about the three muscle fibers and their specific area of strength(s). But I believe we can both agree that a target HR maintained between 60 to 70% exertion for a set time of duration is (one of) the best methods for controlled fat loss.


----------



## jasjotbains (Apr 26, 2011)

psmith123 said:


> i wasnt saying lactic acid for building muscle. but lactic acid is proven to stimulate growth hormone. And this is useful for fat loss. that is 100% documented and true, i was only asking what peoples opinions experiences were not trying to start some kind of argument....



Hey no offense mate its cool  i dont have any idea about lactic acid,so i'll take your word for it  well i guess than what i must be doing to get rid of fat,is the technique you just told !! thanks for the added info


----------



## Built (Apr 26, 2011)

TJTJ said:


> For sake of argument everyone has different goals and genetics. Depending on your goals targeting what some would call "sports specific" training. Each muscle fiber, 1, 2a, 2b each have a maximum target rep ranges and maintained heart rate efficiency. His only question was for fat lost, not maintaining size.
> 
> There are a lot of theories towards this subject but the science is true about higher amounts of Mitochondria and fat loss. This is why people will include Acety L Carnitine supplements to oxidize the fat for easier transportation into the mitochondria.


And this supplement really doesn't do much or we'd see a lot more ripped people walking around. 


TJTJ said:


> Also depending on this guys age will determine his specific fat burning heart rate zone.


Who cares if you're burning fat while you train? You just want to run a deficit and maintain muscle. 



TJTJ said:


> The easy mathematical formula you can apply when using a HR monitor is very beneficial towards your sport specific goals.
> 
> 220 - your age = some #, multiplied between 60-90% exertion
> 
> ex. 220-30=190x.65=123.5   I went with 65% because low intensity cardio sustained for a minimum of 30mins (60-70% exertion) will be within the fat burning zone.


The fat burning zone. Yep, you'll burn fat. Grams and GRAMS of it. 

I'll stick with my deficit and heavy lifting, thanks. It's how I got down to my profile pic and avatar. 



jasjotbains said:


> no this is not exactly true..higher rep range with lighter weights helps to get cutting,and very less weight loss..you need to do cardio to lose weight


No, no, and um, NO! Thanks for playing. Now kindly shut up. Every time you post, there's something factually wrong. 



TJTJ said:


> Exactly. This is why I wanted to inform about the three muscle fibers and their specific area of strength(s). But I believe we can both agree that a target HR maintained between 60 to 70% exertion for a set time of duration is (one of) the best methods for controlled fat loss.


No. It really isn't. 

Listen, I know you're taking a course and you're doing your reading because you have to pass a test,but have you ever been fat - significantly overfat - and dieted down to lean? Because I have. 

Have you ever dieted down to a bodybuilding competition? Because Merkaba has - and he sure as shit didn't worry about being in the fat-burning zone either. 

The bro-school will tell you that "high reps and cardio" is the way to leanness, but really, it all comes down to running a deficit and training heavy - that gives the stimulus to conserve muscle even while the body would prefer to toss it away. Do that, and you lean out. 

On the other hand, if you train for hypertrophy while cutting, hitting all the rep ranges, staying in the fat burning zone... unless you're on gear (which provides the muscle0-retention stimulus) you're going to chew through muscle on your way down to lean. You will lean out though, it works. 

It's just not optimal.


----------



## TJTJ (Apr 26, 2011)

Shit bro. Never knew everything they teach you at the University of Miami could be so wrong. But the BB community are a different breed than the rest of the world. Youre right Ive never been significantly over weight, or competed, but Ive trained such people with results. Im sorry to have spread such incorrect information. I'll keep to myself from now on since I'm only studying for an exam. This is all very discouraging to hear.


----------



## Marat (Apr 26, 2011)

I studied nutrition at UF. The curriculum is based on guidelines set by various organizations (FDA etc.). The professors teach the guidelines. Your professors are experts in anatomy, physiology, metabolism, and can tell you everything about beta oxidation and actin/myosin --- they just don't have the knowledge to apply that information towards muscle gain or fat loss, in practice.

No curriculum in any capacity will cover too much about superphysiological doses/illicit use of steroids. Bodybuilding  is not what the steroids are produced for.

Coincidentally,  I've looked over the curriculum at UM's Miller Med School and they don't cover anything about diet or nutrition. Doctors, as a profession, don't know anything about diet or training. Neither do physiologists or dieticians. Having an expert knowledge of origins/insertions and metabolism cannot be parlayed into knowledge of fat loss or muscle gain. Having the formal education does allow one to understand the peer-reviewed studies as well as understand the mechanisms of diet and training. 

It's not that your professors are wrong per se, it's just that you would be well served to take all of their diet and training advice with a grain of salt.


----------



## Merkaba (Apr 26, 2011)

Built said:


> And this supplement really doesn't do much or we'd see a lot more ripped people walking around.
> 
> Who cares if you're burning fat while you train? You just want to run a deficit and maintain muscle.
> 
> ...



I get tired of repeating this.  Looks like you're getting tired too....or at least a little more tired than usual.  

Yep i know guys who have competed before and still subscribe to the high rep stuff.  Of course they're geared up, so it doesn't matter as much what they do. They can cardio the fat off and keep more muscle.  

"Fat burning zone.....grams and grams of it"...love that.


----------



## zoco (Apr 28, 2011)

psmith123 said:


> for weight loss is a particular rep range more beneficial? i have read that higher rep ranges produce more lactic acid which is beneficial to weight loss?



Keep your weights high and reps low.Cardio and diet are the ones that shred the fat.


----------



## patricio (Apr 28, 2011)

Question for Built: you always talk against cardio, but I've seen that you include some at the end of your routines (at least HIIT). 
So should we do some for cutting, bulking, both or neither?
I hate cardio!


----------



## jagbender (Apr 28, 2011)

WHAT IS WORKING FOR ME. I am 50 years old. I was 260 pounds 2-26-11, 242 today
I am on TRT 140 mg pinning 70 twice a week. Diet is clean clean clean, running a signicant caloric deficit. My body loves to hold onto fat. I am lifting heavy 3 x a week. I try to keep my reps between 6-9 reps. If less that 6 too heavy, more than 9 to light. My strength has increased greatly in the last two months and my body compostion changes have been dramatic. I ride my bike 3 days a week about 50 miles total a week. average ride 14.5 miles in 1 hour. 
On Lifting days my protein is +- 50% and carbs fat 25/25%. Slightly less protien on cardio days. Um, who is helping my with this? *Built.* listen to her and you will lose fat. It seem very much to me like I am losing fat and maintaining or gaining muscle on this program. 
I have been journaling this here on IM forum with photos and video. It has been an interesting process and it DOES take a LOT of willpower make this work. But I am very determined! 

Diet diet diet not a "diet" but what you eat "Diet"
Lift heavy. 
Moderate cardio. 
WORKS FOR ME 

Thanks Built!


----------



## dave 236 (Apr 28, 2011)

Perfectly stated!


----------



## dave 236 (Apr 28, 2011)

Marat said:


> I studied nutrition at UF. The curriculum is based on guidelines set by various organizations (FDA etc.). The professors teach the guidelines. Your professors are experts in anatomy, physiology, metabolism, and can tell you everything about beta oxidation and actin/myosin --- they just don't have the knowledge to apply that information towards muscle gain or fat loss, in practice.
> 
> No curriculum in any capacity will cover too much about superphysiological doses/illicit use of steroids. Bodybuilding  is not what the steroids are produced for.
> 
> ...


sorry missed the quote. now perfectly stated lol


----------



## Built (Apr 28, 2011)

patricio said:


> Question for Built: you always talk against cardio, but I've seen that you include some at the end of your routines (at least HIIT).
> So should we do some for cutting, bulking, both or neither?
> I hate cardio!



I don't LIKE cardio - but I do it. Just not much. 
I like walking - that I do all the time and you really cannot walk too much. I do a little cardio,  bulking or cutting - helps me partition. Sometimes I'll toss in a session of hill repeats; last weekend I did complexes followed by hills, but it's not for body composition; it's for conditioning, so I can practice diving for longer than half an hour without my form going to shit from fatigue. 



jagbender said:


> WHAT IS WORKING FOR ME. I am 50 years old. I was 260 pounds 2-26-11, 242 today
> I am on TRT 140 mg pinning 70 twice a week. Diet is clean clean clean, running a signicant caloric deficit. My body loves to hold onto fat. I am lifting heavy 3 x a week. I try to keep my reps between 6-9 reps. If less that 6 too heavy, more than 9 to light. My strength has increased greatly in the last two months and my body compostion changes have been dramatic. I ride my bike 3 days a week about 50 miles total a week. average ride 14.5 miles in 1 hour.
> On Lifting days my protein is +- 50% and carbs fat 25/25%. Slightly less protien on cardio days. Um, who is helping my with this? *Built.* listen to her and you will lose fat. It seem very much to me like I am losing fat and maintaining or gaining muscle on this program.
> I have been journaling this here on IM forum with photos and video. It has been an interesting process and it DOES take a LOT of willpower make this work. But I am very determined!
> ...


Jag, I'm SO GLAD you finally got on HRT. That, heavy lifting and a tight diet are working WONDERS for you.


----------



## jasjotbains (Apr 29, 2011)

Built said:


> No, no, and um, NO! Thanks for playing. Now kindly shut up. Every time you post, there's something factually wrong.



First of all,EVERYTHING i post here is not factually wrong,and if I am wrong,YOU can always correct me where i am wrong,rather than trying to shut me up !! :/


----------



## jagbender (Apr 29, 2011)

Built said:


> I don't LIKE cardio - but I do it. Just not much.
> I like walking - that I do all the time and you really cannot walk too much. I do a little cardio, bulking or cutting - helps me partition. Sometimes I'll toss in a session of hill repeats; last weekend I did complexes followed by hills, but it's not for body composition; it's for conditioning, so I can practice diving for longer than half an hour without my form going to shit from fatigue.
> 
> 
> Jag, I'm SO GLAD you finally got on HRT. That, heavy lifting and a tight diet are working WONDERS for you.


 

Indeed

Thanks again for your help


----------



## packers6211 (Apr 29, 2011)

Just a simple question, but how come you talk to some people that say they never do any cardio yet their muscular and lean at the same time and I mean lean. I know a guy at my gym who lifts and lifts but never does cardio but the sucker's 6'1 235 and no fat at all. 



zoco said:


> Keep your weights high and reps low.Cardio and diet are the ones that shred the fat.


----------



## Marat (Apr 29, 2011)

Being lean is a function of body fat. It's certain possible to modulate one's bodyfat with diet alone -- one can get quite lean without cardio. Occasionally, individuals find it necessary to do some cardio to get rid of the "last bit" of fat but it isn't a requirement.

You also may not be familiar with any sort of drugs that he may be on.


----------

