T Nation

Best Diet to Get Lean?

After seeing several articles recently such as Christian’s “The Truth About Bulking” in which he shows how leaner bodies appear bigger despite the difference in weight comapred to the before pictures. Im trying hard to achieve a similiar transformation but was wondering if someone could recomend the optimal diet to do so.

Should I go with something like the “Dont Diet, Diet”, “get shredded Diet” or maybe follow Christians plan in “the beast evolves”. Ive been limiting my carb intake to ~44 g. per day and have seen some change in the 2.5 weeks that ive done that so far. but im concerned as to whether or not this is the optimal diet to have relativley similiar results. as of now my diet is ~1700 calories per day, ~ 130 g. protein, ~112 g. fat, ~44 g. carbs. Not eating junk, pasta, potatoes, bread(rarley). majority of my carbs come from rice which is also rare and vegetables. Majority of my diet consists of Chicken breast, tuna, eggs, ground beef.

Any suggestions?

How much do you weigh? If you’re eating that little, even for a “cutting” diet, your problem is likely not having enough muscle rather than having too much fat.

[quote]vicktimised wrote:
as of now my diet is ~1700 calories per day, [/quote]

Are you a woman?

[quote]Professor X wrote:
vicktimised wrote:
as of now my diet is ~1700 calories per day,

Are you a woman?[/quote]

God I hope so…

[quote]PGA200X wrote:
Professor X wrote:
vicktimised wrote:
as of now my diet is ~1700 calories per day,

Are you a woman?

God I hope so…[/quote]

What???!!!

1,700 calories a day?
Thats my breakfast.

How about providing more details regarding stats? If you’re really out of shape, I would look into something relatively basic like Don’t Diet or T-Dawg. No point into going into something hardcore like GSD until you are already relatively lean and going for ultra-low levels.

If you’re in good shape, you may consider GSD or Lyle McDonald’s Ultimate Diet 2.0. Joel Marion’s Cheater’s Diet is great too.

I was going to post the question so I’ll be following this thread closely. I’ve been only concerned with getting enough protein but now I need to focus on not losing muscle but improving visual appearance. Just not sure which direction to head in…

This is your thread right?

http://www.T-Nation.com/readTopic.do?id=594513&pageNo=0#594597

Those pics were from the start of '05 and you were 162lbs.

What are your stats now?

[quote]t-ha wrote:
This is your thread right?

http://www.T-Nation.com/readTopic.do?id=594513&pageNo=0#594597

Those pics were from the start of '05 and you were 162lbs.

What are your stats now?[/quote]

Holy crap the backlash of CT’s article is starting already. “Help I’m not 10% BF so I [i]need[/i] to cut!”

Arrgh!

[quote]t-ha wrote:
This is your thread right?

http://www.T-Nation.com/readTopic.do?id=594513&pageNo=0#594597

Those pics were from the start of '05 and you were 162lbs.

What are your stats now?[/quote]

Jesus Christ.

NO, im not a women. I weigh 173 right now. and was up to about 178 during the summer. Im trying to get more muscle seperation in my appearance (abs etc.). Hence the hyporcaloric diet.

[quote]Cthulhu wrote:
What???!!!

1,700 calories a day?
Thats my breakfast.[/quote]

I love this. Should be in “Strong Words”.

[quote]vicktimised wrote:
NO, im not a women. I weigh 173 right now. and was up to about 178 during the summer. Im trying to get more muscle seperation in my appearance (abs etc.). Hence the hyporcaloric diet. [/quote]

unless you under 5’, even then, your problem is you have very little muscle to show you need to eat above maint. and concentratwe on getting some muscle.

[quote]vicktimised wrote:
NO, im not a women. I weigh 173 right now. and was up to about 178 during the summer. Im trying to get more muscle seperation in my appearance (abs etc.). Hence the hyporcaloric diet. [/quote]

A few things. Firstly, if you’re aiming for that ‘fitness model’ kind of look you still have a bit of a ways to go building muscle. I’d say 20lbs minimum (or even 30lbs if your legs aren’t that developed - there’s no pics of them) more muscle on your frame is needed.

Secondly, at 173lbs, there is no way you should be thinking of eating only 1,700kcal/day. That’s less than 10kcal/lb bodyweight. Even towards the end of an extreme diet going below 11 or 12 kcals/lb is not advisable (by me anyway & I have no problem cutting), you make up whatever else you need with cardio.

And lastly, seriously man get your act in gear and build yourself up some!

  • Muscle takes a long time to grow as you read in CT’s article.

  • Getting ripped can be done in a month!

  • Once you build up muscle it’ll always come back to you with minimal effort.

  • Once you’re ripped you can ruin it all by pigging out for a few days!

  • Girls DO like guys to be ripped.

  • By the time she finds out if you’re ripped or not it’s too late for her to back out! :smiley:

  • Girls prefer guys who are built AND ripped.

  • Being built is one of the first things someone will notice about you…

Think about it…

(sorry about assuming that you’re doing it for the ladies, but you’ve got no wheel pics & the label band of your calvins are visible above your trousers.)

[quote]eengrms76 wrote:
t-ha wrote:
This is your thread right?

http://www.T-Nation.com/readTopic.do?id=594513&pageNo=0#594597

Those pics were from the start of '05 and you were 162lbs.

What are your stats now?

Holy crap the backlash of CT’s article is starting already. “Help I’m not 10% BF so I [i]need[/i] to cut!”

Arrgh![/quote]

It’s NOT the article’s fault. You can’t blame others’ ignorance on CT for writing a good article.

It’s like criticizing a good article about the benefits of bulking when an obese guy with very little muscle starts trying it out.

All you can do is try to tell the OP who the article is and isn’t aimed at, although I can see how that can become tiresome after a while.

Then again, it’s also just as tiresome to see all the skinny-kid posts in the pictures section.

I don’t know what the answer is, but it’s not to stop writing articles like that one.

[quote]SWR-1240 wrote:
eengrms76 wrote:
t-ha wrote:
This is your thread right?

http://www.T-Nation.com/readTopic.do?id=594513&pageNo=0#594597

Those pics were from the start of '05 and you were 162lbs.

What are your stats now?

Holy crap the backlash of CT’s article is starting already. “Help I’m not 10% BF so I [i]need[/i] to cut!”

Arrgh!

It’s NOT the article’s fault. You can’t blame others’ ignorance on CT for writing a good article.

It’s like criticizing a good article about the benefits of bulking when an obese guy with very little muscle starts trying it out.

All you can do is try to tell the OP who the article is and isn’t aimed at, although I can see how that can become tiresome after a while.

Then again, it’s also just as tiresome to see all the skinny-kid posts in the pictures section.

I don’t know what the answer is, but it’s not to stop writing articles like that one.[/quote]

The difference is, how many obese guys would be lifting weights at all. This site is being overrun by skinny little guys afraid of gaining any body fat who all apparently want to weigh under 170lbs yet look like light heavy weight bodybuilders.

They don’t get that most in that condition DIET DOWN to get there and are usually much heavier.

Yes, I do believe it is irresponsible to be unaware of this considering this site has fallen GREATLY from what it used to be in terms of audience.

It would seem most of the people who are the type who read and follow every one of these articles are the type who shouldn’t be following the advice given.

Anyone with any sense could see this coming a mile away. So what is the point of giving any advice on a forum where people are this much like sheep regardless of the fact that the AUTHOR of the article has been much heavier before and gained much of his size WHILE BULKED UP?

ok so i come here seeking legitimate adive, and instead get flammed for my intentions. seems like some people are to ignorant to understand that not everyone has the goal of looking like a profesional bodybuilder. seems like the answer to anyone weighing less than 220 lbs is to gain mass, but sorry not everyone wants to look like a linebacker.

[quote]vicktimised wrote:
ok so i come here seeking legitimate adive, and instead get flammed for my intentions.[/quote]
You didn’t get flamed - you just got lightly toasted, & there is some good advice up there if you look.

[quote]vicktimised wrote:
seems like some people are to ignorant to understand that not everyone has the goal of looking like a profesional bodybuilder.[/quote]
I presume you meant to say ‘too ignorant’.

I really don’t get this logic, even though everyone seems to use it: “I don’t want to look like a bodybuilding pro so I won’t work out as hard or eat as much as someone who does”. I mean does it make sense to drive slower just because the place you’re going is nearer? Of course not! You aim to achieve all you can as fast as you can - then once your happy with the muscle you’ve put on, you cut down & get shredded all you want!

[quote]vicktimised wrote:
seems like the answer to anyone weighing less than 220 lbs is to gain mass, but sorry not everyone wants to look like a linebacker. [/quote]
Easy easy, 200lbs will be fine mate!

  • and I even got through the whole thing without making one wise-ass comment about you being ‘vicktimised’… :smiley:

[quote]vicktimised wrote:
ok so i come here seeking legitimate adive, and instead get flammed for my intentions. seems like some people are to ignorant to understand that not everyone has the goal of looking like a profesional bodybuilder. seems like the answer to anyone weighing less than 220 lbs is to gain mass, but sorry not everyone wants to look like a linebacker. [/quote]

What does any of what you wrote have to do with the fact that you ARE NOT EATING ENOUGH?

There are a lot of people like you on this board and it makes no sense. Even if your goal is to only weigh 180lbs, YOU ARE NOT EATING ENOUGH.

Does this need to be written slower?

You aren’t ‘vicktimised’, just really slow.

[quote]t-ha wrote:
I mean does it make sense to drive slower just because the place you’re going is nearer? [/quote]

This is a brilliant analogy. Simple and directly illustrative of your point. On the topic at hand, These guys are right. Nothing else will make any difference until you start eating and training correctly. In other words adjust the whole frame of reference from which you’re viewing your goals.

You are most likely in no danger of EVER being built like an IFBB pro even with gear nevermind naturally. So not having that as a goal is a moot point. All the work and proper nutrition you can imagine will still be necessary to make ANY kind of physical transformation on yourself.

To directly address this thread. You need more food. Any way you want to look at it the effect 1700 cals a day is having on your metabolism is counterproductive unless you want to place in an upcoming Mr. Somalia contest.

–Tiribulus->