T Nation

Going to Cut Without a Thermogenic

For the first time in as long as I can remember, I’m going to actually start a cutting phase (in about a week) without using any thermogenics or so-called “fat-burner” supplements. I’ve always used some version of HOT-ROX or MD6 in the past, and before that I would use the regular old ECA stack. I’m actually curious to see whether I experience any difference at all by not using one – this should show me whether or not they’re worth bothering with.

I plan on following Dan John’s advice and just “attacking” fat for 28 days, using essentially the T-Dawg 2.0 diet, with only slight modification. (I’ll usually have a carb-up day a little more frequently than recommended, i.e. every 5th or 6th day instead of every 7th day).

It’s not that I’m not supplementing at all – I am, quite a bit. I’ll still be using fish oil as always (8 caps of Flameout per day), a multi, 3,000 mg of extra C, high dose BCAAs (ala Waterbury), Rez-V, ZMA and 1,650 mg per day of phosphatidylserine (divided up strategically). I usually have a cup of coffee in the morning, but that’s it as far as stimulants go.

I’m starting the process weighing about 207 at 5’11". (I’m 32. And male. :slight_smile: ) I’m not too far off – I figure I’ll look the way I want at about 200 to 202, but I have trouble really, really tightening up unless I dedicate myself with nazi-like precision to it for a few weeks. I can see my abs now when flexed, but there’s still a thin, smooth layer over them, and my love handle area could stand to shrink a bit.

Any guesses on whether the lack of a thermogenic supplement will make any difference? (I’ve done a pretty similar thing a few times in the past, usually starting from a pretty similar position, but always using a thermogenic). I vote no . . . .

:wink:

Damici, I have mentioned this a few times recently on other threads and feel it is appropriate here. Though it isn’t your 28 day diet and over a much longer period of time, since using Flameout and BCAA’s consistently I have experienced for me pretty dramatic fat loss in the past year. The workouts I have been doing in the past year of course have played a big role. However, I can’t say enough about the Flameout/BCAA combo as evidenced in recent posts of mine. I am really pleased with body composition as of late.

Good luck,

D

I am interested to see your results. I am looking to lean out in preparation for warm weather and outdoor soccer, but I tend to be rather sensitive to most thermogenics and avoid them.

Uhh you don’t need a thermogenic to lose fat. It’s just to help out and supplement your diet and training. People have been doing it for years, it’s not a big accomplishment or huge task.

I realize that. Like I said, I’m just curious to witness the difference between cutting with and without thermogenics, both with regard to fat loss and with regard to maintaining muscle.

[quote]Roy wrote:
Uhh you don’t need a thermogenic to lose fat. It’s just to help out and supplement your diet and training. People have been doing it for years, it’s not a big accomplishment or huge task.[/quote]

Dedicated,

Cool, thanks for your input. This will actually be the first time I’ve done it while using BCAAs, so that should be interesting. I do feel that, when taken in high enough doses, they seem to keep me looking “fuller,” so hopefully they can help maintain that look during a cut and help me avoid looking “flat.”

[quote]Dedicated wrote:
Damici, I have mentioned this a few times recently on other threads and feel it is appropriate here. Though it isn’t your 28 day diet and over a much longer period of time, since using Flameout and BCAA’s consistently I have experienced for me pretty dramatic fat loss in the past year. The workouts I have been doing in the past year of course have played a big role. However, I can’t say enough about the Flameout/BCAA combo as evidenced in recent posts of mine. I am really pleased with body composition as of late.

Good luck,

D[/quote]

Jeezus H., Dedicated! I saw your avatar and figured I was talking to a hottie with a great rack; then I looked at your profile and realized you’re a dude. :frowning: Misleading, man!! Your avatar’s gotta’ represent YOU! Wait until some unsuspecting pervy dude starts PM’ing you sweet nothings . . . !

j/k (kind of).

:wink:

[quote]Damici wrote:
Jeezus H., Dedicated! I saw your avatar and figured I was talking to a hottie with a great rack; then I looked at your profile and realized you’re a dude. :frowning: Misleading, man!! Your avatar’s gotta’ represent YOU! Wait until some unsuspecting pervy dude starts PM’ing you sweet nothings . . . !

j/k (kind of).

:wink:
[/quote]

I’m just glad you didn’t send me some sweet talking PM! Hey, it’s just appreciation of the beautiful female body my friend. :slight_smile:

D

[quote]Damici wrote:
For the first time in as long as I can remember, I’m going to actually start a cutting phase (in about a week) without using any thermogenics or so-called “fat-burner” supplements. I’ve always used some version of HOT-ROX or MD6 in the past, and before that I would use the regular old ECA stack. I’m actually curious to see whether I experience any difference at all by not using one – this should show me whether or not they’re worth bothering with.

I plan on following Dan John’s advice and just “attacking” fat for 28 days, using essentially the T-Dawg 2.0 diet, with only slight modification. (I’ll usually have a carb-up day a little more frequently than recommended, i.e. every 5th or 6th day instead of every 7th day).

It’s not that I’m not supplementing at all – I am, quite a bit. I’ll still be using fish oil as always (8 caps of Flameout per day), a multi, 3,000 mg of extra C, high dose BCAAs (ala Waterbury), Rez-V, ZMA and 1,650 mg per day of phosphatidylserine (divided up strategically). I usually have a cup of coffee in the morning, but that’s it as far as stimulants go.

I’m starting the process weighing about 207 at 5’11". (I’m 32. And male. :slight_smile: ) I’m not too far off – I figure I’ll look the way I want at about 200 to 202, but I have trouble really, really tightening up unless I dedicate myself with nazi-like precision to it for a few weeks. I can see my abs now when flexed, but there’s still a thin, smooth layer over them, and my love handle area could stand to shrink a bit.

Any guesses on whether the lack of a thermogenic supplement will make any difference? (I’ve done a pretty similar thing a few times in the past, usually starting from a pretty similar position, but always using a thermogenic). I vote no . . . .

;)[/quote]

I promise this question is not intended to be snide. You are planning an all out war, a diet plan, etc. to lose 5-7 pounds? I ask, because I can gain or lose that amount with very minor changes in diet and workout. For that matter, will that amount of weight loss be even noticeable on your frame? Will it really require a 28 day commitment? Or am I misreading your goal?

I could lose 5 pounds in probably 3 days if that’s all I wanted to do. But, at least for me personally, losing 5-7 pounds while keeping the muscle – which is the key to the whole thing – is a lot trickier. If I lost it much faster than the few weeks I plan on using, I’d end up looking smaller and kind of “flat.” When I do it right – which typically takes about 4 weeks, give or take, I can end up looking full and sharp, while having more defined abs and a smaller midsection, yet having my delts, pecs, arms, etc. still look full.

Maybe it’s just me.

[quote]Damici wrote:
I could lose 5 pounds in probably 3 days if that’s all I wanted to do. But, at least for me personally, losing 5-7 pounds while keeping the muscle – which is the key to the whole thing – is a lot trickier. If I lost it much faster than the few weeks I plan on using, I’d end up looking smaller and kind of “flat.” When I do it right – which typically takes about 4 weeks, give or take, I can end up looking full and sharp, while having more defined abs and a smaller midsection, yet having my delts, pecs, arms, etc. still look full.

Maybe it’s just me.

I promise this question is not intended to be snide. You are planning an all out war, a diet plan, etc. to lose 5-7 pounds? I ask, because I can gain or lose that amount with very minor changes in diet and workout. For that matter, will that amount of weight loss be even noticeable on your frame? Will it really require a 28 day commitment? Or am I misreading your goal?

[/quote]

if you are losing five pounds in two or three days, it is most likely just water weight any ways. unless you are super obese.

[quote]Damici wrote:
Jeezus H., Dedicated! I saw your avatar and figured I was talking to a hottie with a great rack; then I looked at your profile and realized you’re a dude. :frowning: Misleading, man!! Your avatar’s gotta’ represent YOU! Wait until some unsuspecting pervy dude starts PM’ing you sweet nothings . . . !

j/k (kind of).

:wink:
[/quote]

Dedicated has a reputation for having an outstanding avatar rotation. Firefox users rick-click and hit view image for a good time.

Good God, that IS a good time. Which further exemplifies my point that a DUDE shouldn’t have a boner-inducing pic of a big-titted hottie as HIS avatar!! :slight_smile: Do you see me walking around in drag, with my legs shaved?? NO! It’s the equivalent of that!

P; :slight_smile:

[quote]Lonnie123 wrote:
Damici wrote:
Jeezus H., Dedicated! I saw your avatar and figured I was talking to a hottie with a great rack; then I looked at your profile and realized you’re a dude. :frowning: Misleading, man!! Your avatar’s gotta’ represent YOU! Wait until some unsuspecting pervy dude starts PM’ing you sweet nothings . . . !

j/k (kind of).

:wink:

Dedicated has a reputation for having an outstanding avatar rotation. Firefox users rick-click and hit view image for a good time.[/quote]

I don’t know exactly how thermogenic fat-burners really are, but what I find most useful about them is their appetite suppression properties. Now that really helps when you’re dieting with low calories :slight_smile: