On Mon, 25 Sep 2000, Justin Hasselman wrote:

> Here's an example.  Let's say that my BMR (basal metabolic rate) is 2000
> calories.  If my thyroid doesn't down regulate, then I should be able to
> merely reduce calories to 1800 calories and I would lose 200cal of fat per
> day (1lb of fat has 3500 cal).  On paper, I would lose fat even without an
> increase in activity.  In application, this simply does not work.  My
> thyroid would simply down regulate and my new BMR would be 1800 calories per
> day.

I wonder if this response pattern indicates that the "ABCDE"
approach would work.  Those letters are an acronym, the full
meaning of which I've forgotten, but it's something like
"Anabolic burst <something> diet and exercise."  I'm sure you
know about this, Justin.

The basic idea is to overfeed for about two weeks, then restrict
calories for two weeks, thus doing a rapid cycle "yo-yo" diet.
The theory is that during the anabolic phase you gain muscle and
fat, and during the catabolic phase you lose muscle and fat.  But
by limiting each phase to two weeks the net result is gaining a
bit more muscle than you lose and losing a bit more fat than you
gain.  The cumulative result after a series of cycles is an
increase in one's muscle:fat ratio.

That's the theory anyway.  I don't know if it works, and I
haven't tried it myself.

Anyway, tweaking this into a paleo format, it seems to me that
one might do high-carb paleo during the anabolic phase, along
with high-intensity strength training; then do strict ketosis
during the catabolic phase, along with low-intensity aerobic
exercise.  I think the evidence suggests that the 2-week rule is
a ceiling value, but one could make the cycles shorter.  That is,
supposedly after two weeks of overfeeding one is gaining mostly
fat and little muscle; after two weeks of underfeeding one is
losing more muscle than fat.

I'm thinking that the phases are short enough that significant
downregulation of the thyroid could be avoided.

Todd Moody
[log in to unmask]