You’ve probably been told you have to pick. Cut first, then bulk, or bulk first and cut later, because you can’t build muscle while you’re eating less than you burn. Then you read someone else saying the opposite, with a study attached, and now you have two confident answers and no idea which one is yours.
Here’s the answer, and it isn’t a coin toss. Most people who ask this question can do both at once, and the ones who can’t are easy to describe. If you have fat to lose and you’re new to lifting, or coming back to it, your body has everything it needs to build muscle while the fat comes off, as long as you lift, eat enough protein and don’t cut too hard. The leaner you already are and the longer you’ve trained, the smaller that room gets, until the honest goal in a deficit becomes keeping your muscle rather than adding to it. That isn’t a failure. It’s the same rule, seen from the other end.
So this article does three things. It sorts you into the situation you’re actually in and says what to expect there. It gives you the numbers that decide it, the size of the deficit above all, worked out from your own body rather than from a number you found online, and it answers the calorie questions everyone types into Google. And it shows you how to tell over the next few months whether it’s happening, because when the scale is going down, the usual signs of muscle growth need reading differently.
Why you’ve heard both answers
Both answers come from real studies, and they’re describing the two halves of one process.
The “no” comes from what a deficit does to muscle. Building muscle costs energy, and when you eat less than you burn, your body turns the building down. When young overweight men spent ten days on a hard diet, the rate at which muscle was being built fell in the leg they rested, and the rate at which it was being broken down didn’t change at all. Muscle wasn’t being torn down faster. It was being built slower, which over months comes to the same thing. That’s why people who diet without lifting lose muscle along with the fat, and why, in a review of 59 lifting trials, a deficit of around 500 calories a day was enough to stop the average person gaining any.
The “yes” comes from what happened in the leg that trained. Five lifting sessions in those ten days brought its building rate back to where it had been before the diet, and the trained leg lost less lean mass than the rested one. Lifting tells the body this tissue is in use, and the body listens even when it’s short of food. Protein is the other half of that message, because building needs something to build with, and the trained leg held its rate best in the men eating the most of it.
Then there’s the question of where the energy comes from, and this is the part the “no” camp gets wrong. A kilo of new muscle doesn’t cost much. The tissue itself stores about 1,200 calories, and building it takes some work on top, but you’re not funding it out of that day’s dinner. You’re funding it out of what’s already on you. Ten kilos of body fat is somewhere around 90,000 calories in the bank. For a person carrying that, a deficit isn’t a shortage. It’s a withdrawal, and there’s plenty in the account to cover a little muscle on the side. For someone at 10 percent body fat, the account is nearly empty, and the body guards what’s left.
That’s the whole thing, really. The deficit decides how fast the fat comes off. Lifting and protein decide whether the body treats your muscle as something to keep and build, or as spare fuel. And how much fat you’re carrying decides how much room there is to do both. Everything below is those three facts, applied to you.
Who can lose fat and build muscle at the same time
If you’re new to lifting and have fat to lose, you’re in the best position anyone is ever in. In a four-week study, overweight young men who had never lifted ate 40 percent less than they burned, trained six days a week and ate 2.4 g of protein per kg of body weight. They lost 4.8 kg of fat and gained 1.2 kg of lean mass, in a month, on a diet that hard. The group on half the protein lost 3.5 kg of fat and held their lean mass exactly, which is worth noticing too: even at 1.2 g per kg, the lifting stopped the loss. Nobody is telling you to eat 40 percent less and train six days a week. The point is what your body can do when it has fat to draw on and a reason to build.
The everyday version looks like this. Overweight women who hadn’t been exercising went on a diet about 500 calories a day below what they needed, exercised every day and lifted twice a week for sixteen weeks. The group eating about 1.3 g of protein per kg lost the most fat and gained 0.7 kg of lean mass. The group eating the least protein, same training, lost 0.7 kg of it. Two lifting sessions a week, a moderate deficit, four months, and the difference between gaining muscle and losing it came down mostly to protein.
If you lifted years ago and you’re coming back softer than you left, your case is different enough to get its own section, below.
If you’ve been lifting for a year or more and still have fat to lose, you can still do both, more slowly. In a small 2026 trial, people with about a year and a half of lifting behind them and body fat around 25 percent ran a deficit of just 250 calories a day, with 2.5 g of protein per kg and four sessions a week. Over ten weeks they lost about 3 kg of fat and gained a kilo of lean mass, the same lean gain as a matching group eating at maintenance, who lost half as much fat. The deficit cost them nothing on the muscle side. It was small, the protein was high, and they were at a body fat where the account still had something in it.
If you’re lean and experienced, this is where the honest answer changes. When elite athletes were put on a slow cut, losing about 0.7 percent of their body weight a week with four lifting sessions a week, the group gained about a kilo of lean mass over two months. But the men in that study started around 16 or 17 percent body fat and the women around 27 to 30, which is lean for most of us and not lean for an athlete, and the men on the faster cut, 1 percent a week, tended to lose lean mass instead. Across the studies of lean, well-trained people dieting, the usual result is that muscle is held or a little is lost, not gained, and the ones who held it ran small deficits and kept their training volume up. If that’s you, the goal in a deficit is to keep what you’ve built. The growth comes later, at maintenance or a little above it.
What to expect, by where you’re starting
Where you’re starting | What to expect, and what it takes |
|---|---|
New to lifting, with fat to lose | Both at once, and this is the best position there is: waist coming in, lifts climbing fast, arms and thighs holding or growing. A small deficit, protein at the top of your range, two or three full-body sessions a week. |
Coming back after a break | Your old strength back within weeks, then the beginner’s picture above. The same plan as a beginner, starting lighter than your old numbers. |
Lifting a year or more, still some fat to lose | Both, slowly: a slower waist, lifts holding or creeping up, a kilo of muscle over a few months. A deficit of about 10 percent, protein at the top of your range, no drop in training volume. |
Lean and experienced | Keeping your muscle is the realistic goal: waist coming in slowly, lifts held, muscle measurements flat. A very small deficit or none, high protein, training volume kept up. |
One more thing about who. Women do this at least as well as men. In the athlete study, the women gained lean mass on both cuts and the men only on the slow one, and the deficit review found no clear difference between the sexes. Age changes the size of the numbers, not the rule: people over 50 still build muscle, a bit less of it. Our article on how long it takes to build muscle has both sets of figures.
Coming back after years off
If you lifted for a while, stopped, and are coming back a few years later with more of you around the middle, two things are true, and they pull in opposite directions.
The first is good news. Your strength is much stickier than your size. When untrained adults trained for ten weeks and then stopped for ten, their thigh muscles shrank almost back to where they’d started, but their leg press dropped only about 5 percent. Five weeks back in the gym returned both to where they’d been, and after another five they were level with people who had never taken the break. In a study that trained one arm for ten weeks and then rested it for sixteen, the arm’s strength dropped by 7 percent while its muscle fibers shrank by about a fifth, and the extra nuclei the muscle had built during training were still all there four months later.
The second is the caveat, and I’d rather you heard it from me than found out in month three. All of that is weeks and months. Nobody has run a proper trial on people who stopped for years, and in the trials we do have, the previously trained arm or leg didn’t regrow faster than an untrained one. It started stronger and got back to its old size on about the same schedule as a beginner. So “muscle memory” is real in the sense that matters day to day: the movements come back fast, the weights come back faster than they came the first time, and you know what you’re doing. Whether your muscle itself regrows faster than a beginner’s is not proven, and after years off you should plan as a beginner who happens to know the exercises.
Which is a good place to be for this question. A beginner with fat to lose has the best odds on the page, and you’re that beginner with a head start on the skill. Run the small deficit, lift the way you used to, and expect your log to move quickly for the first couple of months. Just don’t load the bar from what it says in your old notebook. Start lighter than your memory wants and let the numbers catch up. That will take weeks, not months.
How big a deficit is too big
This is the number that decides it, and the good news is that it isn’t a number you look up. It’s a rate you watch.
The 59-trial review put the break-even at about 500 calories a day. At that deficit, on average, lifting added no lean mass; at smaller deficits it added some. Two things about that figure before you carve it into the kitchen wall. The people in those trials were mostly older, mostly women and mostly hadn’t lifted before, so hold it loosely. And 500 calories is a very different cut for different people. For a small woman eating 1,800 a day it’s more than a quarter of her food. For a 100 kg man eating 3,000, it’s a sixth.
Which is why the studies read better as percentages. Where trained people gained muscle while dieting, the cut was modest, around 10 to 20 percent of what they burned. Where the cut was around 30 percent, they held what they had. The overweight beginners on the six-day-a-week program held at 40 percent on the lower protein and gained on the higher, which tells you how much a lot of fat to spare and a heavy training stimulus can cover.
The athlete study made the same point as a rate. The group losing about 0.7 percent of their body weight a week gained lean mass; the group losing 1 percent a week held it. (The slow group also trained three weeks longer, which the researchers think explains part of that, so take the rate as a direction rather than a law.) In our coaching, a reasonable pace of fat loss is half a percent to one percent of body weight a week, and for someone who wants the muscle to come along, the bottom of that range is the one to aim at. Half a percent a week is 0.3 kg for a 60 kg woman and 0.5 kg for a 100 kg man, and it means a 10 kg loss takes five or six months. Slow. Also the fastest way I know to arrive there with more muscle than you left with.
How you find your own number. Not from a calculator, at least not at first. Eat exactly as you do now for one week and log everything, honestly, with an app. Change nothing. The average of those seven days is your maintenance, near enough, and it’s a better number than any formula because it’s yours. Most people lose a little weight that week anyway, because watching changes behavior, which tells you something about where the calories were hiding. Then take about 10 to 15 percent off it, which is the size of cut the people who gained muscle in those trials were running, keep the protein up, and watch the scale’s weekly average. If it’s dropping around half a percent a week, you’ve found it. If it hasn’t moved after two weeks, take about 250 calories off, a handful of carbs or a thumb of fat at a couple of meals. If it’s dropping faster than 1 percent a week, you’ve cut too hard, and your muscle is the first thing to notice.
If you’d rather have a coach set the number and adjust it as you go, that is what we do at Gains For Gamers.
Is 1,200, 1,500 or 2,500 calories enough?
You’ll see these numbers everywhere, and they’re the wrong question, because the same number is a different diet on different bodies. What decides whether you can build muscle isn’t the number you eat. It’s the gap between that and what you burn, and the size of that gap is the whole of the section above.
Say two people log a week of normal eating, as above. She weighs 60 kg (130 lb) and her week averages 1,900 calories a day. He weighs 100 kg (220 lb) and his averages 3,000. Here is what the three numbers everyone asks about mean for each of them.
The same calorie target on two different people
Target | Her: 60 kg (130 lb), eats 1,900 | Him: 100 kg (220 lb), eats 3,000 |
|---|---|---|
1,200 | 700 below, about a third of her food: too hard to build muscle, and hard to keep it | 1,800 below, more than half his food: a crash diet, and muscle goes with the fat |
1,500 | 400 below, about a fifth: the top of the range that works, with the protein high | 1,500 below, half his food: no |
2,500 | 600 above: she gains weight | 500 below, about a sixth: a workable cut |
Where those numbers come from is worth knowing, because none of them were written with muscle in mind. 1,200 calories a day is a medical diet. In the guideline US doctors use for treating obesity, women are prescribed 1,200 to 1,500 a day and men 1,500 to 1,800, inside a supervised program, and anything under 800 is for a clinic with a doctor watching. In the UK, 800 to 1,200 a day counts as a low-energy diet, used only in specialist services for people with obesity and for no longer than twelve weeks. Those numbers exist to get weight off people whose health needs it, quickly, with a professional checking in. They are not a place to build anything.
2,500 is the other kind of number: an average. The average man is said to use about 2,500 calories a day and the average woman about 2,000, and the official US estimates run from about 2,000 to 3,000 a day for men and 1,600 to 2,400 for women, depending on age and how much you move. So for a man of average size, 2,500 is roughly what he burns. For a big, active one it’s a cut. For most women it’s a gain. The number was never the answer. Your week of logging is.
Protein, lifting and sleep: where the loss comes from
When someone starts with us, the first month has three rules, and they’re the same three that decide this: eat less than you burn, hit your protein, and get into a strength training routine. The deficit is the first. These are the other two, plus the one nobody puts on a list.
Protein: the same number as always, at the top end
Protein is what the muscle is built from, and when you’re eating less, more of what you eat gets burned for fuel, so you need more of it, not less. Our number for losing fat or building muscle is 1.6 to 2.2 g per kg of body weight a day (0.75 to 1 g per lb), and doing both at once is the situation it was made for. Sit at the top of it. The latest review of trained people dieting found that, on average, fat-free mass stopped going down at about 1.9 g per kg and improved a little above that, and the link was clearest in lean people and in men, which is exactly the group with the least room. If you’re carrying a lot of extra weight, work the range out from an adjusted weight rather than your full weight, as our protein article explains, or the number gets silly. How much protein you need a day has the calculator and the foods that get you there.
Lifting: keep the sessions, keep the weights moving
In every study where dieters kept their muscle, the lifting was the reason. When overweight men spent twelve weeks on roughly 1,500 calories a day, the ones who only dieted lost 3 kg of lean mass along with the fat. Diet plus cardio lost 2 kg. Diet plus cardio plus heavy lifting three times a week lost almost none, and 97 percent of the weight that came off those men was fat. Across 25 trials of people with overweight, adding lifting to a diet didn’t change how much weight came off, but it changed what the weight was made of, and strength went up a great deal. Fat loss happens in the kitchen. A defined, pain-free and strong body happens in the gym.
What the lifting needs to be: hard enough to be a reason. Two or three full-body sessions a week is what we start people on, and it’s enough (our full-body workout plan is built for exactly this). The trap in a deficit is quietly doing less: lighter weights, fewer sets, a skipped session because you’re tired and dinner was small. In the studies of trained people who kept or gained muscle while dieting, they kept or increased their training volume; the ones who lost muscle had cut it. Keep the weights going up when you can and hold them when you can’t. A session at last week’s numbers is a win on a diet. A session skipped is the loss.
Cardio is fine on top, not instead. Adding cardio to lifting hasn’t been found to reduce muscle growth in the trials that tested it, and in the trials of dieters it was the lifting that protected the muscle, with the cardio helping the fat come off. Walk as much as you like. Just don’t let a run replace a lifting session.
Sleep: the lever most people cut first
This one is short, and I want you to take it seriously. Ten overweight adults spent two weeks on the same diet twice, once sleeping 8.5 hours a night and once 5.5. They lost the same 3 kg both times. With the long nights, more than half of it was fat. With the short nights, a quarter of it was fat and the rest was lean mass, they were hungrier, and their resting metabolism dropped. A real-life version of the same experiment, an hour less sleep on five nights a week for eight weeks, found the same direction more weakly. Nobody in either study was lifting, and a chunk of that lean loss will have been water, so I won’t tell you short sleep ate their muscle. I’ll tell you that on a diet, sleep decides what the diet takes, and that we ask clients for seven to eight hours for a reason.
How to tell it’s working when the scale is going down
Our article on how long it takes to build muscle has the method: your log first, a tape measure once a month, a photo, the scale with a pinch of salt. Read that. Here is what changes when you’re losing fat at the same time.
The scale is now doing two jobs, so read the trend, never the day. Your weight swings by about half a percent from one morning to the next, water and stored carbohydrate and whatever’s in your gut, and by about a third of a percent across a normal week, highest on Monday. On an 80 kg person that’s 0.4 kg of noise a day, and a half-percent-a-week fat loss is also 0.4 kg a week. So a single weigh-in tells you nothing. The average of this week against the average of last week tells you whether you’re on the rate. Weigh every morning if it doesn’t mess with your head, once a week if it does, and only ever compare averages.
The waist is your fat gauge. Once a month, same landmark (the top of the hip bone, or halfway between it and your lowest rib; pick one and keep it), tape level, after you breathe out, no sucking in. Your waist comes in when fat comes off, even in weeks when the scale sulks, and a centimeter of movement is within the noise, so you’re looking for a trend over months, not a reading.
Your arms and thighs are the muscle gauge, with the waist as the control. If the waist is coming in while the arm and thigh measurements hold or creep up, that’s the picture: fat going, muscle staying or growing. If everything is shrinking together at the same pace, the deficit is too big, or the protein or the lifting isn’t there.
The log is more honest than you’d like. In a deficit, strength going up is a good sign but not a proof. In the 59-trial review, people got stronger at about the normal rate whether or not they were dieting, even where their lean mass fell, because early strength is mostly your nervous system learning the lift. So read it the other way round. A log that’s holding or climbing is what you want, and it fits with keeping your muscle. A log that’s falling week after week, on a diet, is the clearest warning there is: eat a little more, sleep, check the protein, before you decide you’re someone this doesn’t work for.
Don’t buy a scan for this. A body-composition scan, or a smart scale that prints “muscle mass”, reads water and stored carbohydrate as lean tissue. In trained cyclists, two days of eating more carbohydrate moved the lean-mass reading on a medical scanner up by 1 to 2 kg with no muscle built, and a long ride followed by a low-carb evening moved the legs’ reading down again. The first weeks of a diet drain exactly that store, so the scan will tell you you’ve lost muscle when you’ve lost water. Your tape and your log are cheaper and less wrong.
What a good eight weeks looks like, for someone with fat to lose.
Say you start at 95 kg (210 lb) with a 100 cm (39 in) waist, on a cut of about 12 percent, three full-body sessions a week and protein at the top of your range.
Week 8: the scale’s weekly average is down about 3.5 kg (8 lb), roughly half a percent a week. Waist 96 cm. Upper arm the same as week zero, thigh a centimeter up. Leg press up from 3 sets of 8 at 80 kg (175 lb) to 3 sets of 10 at 95 kg (210 lb). Mirror: not sure.
That’s it working. The mirror is last in the queue anyway, and on a diet it’s later still, because the fat on top is what it’s waiting on.
One of our clients, Chloe, was 11 kilos down after four months with a smaller waist and muscle showing. That combination, the waist and the muscle together, is what you’re waiting for, and it took her four months. Give yourself the same.
When to stop doing both. When the waist stops moving and the lifts have stalled for three or four weeks despite the sleep and the protein, you’ve either arrived at a body fat where the account is empty, or the diet has run long enough. Give any change four weeks before you judge it, then take a week or two at maintenance and decide. If you’re lean now and want more muscle, eat at maintenance or a little above and let the lifting do its job. If there’s still fat to lose, another block on the same slow rate. Eating in a surplus properly is its own subject, and not this page’s.
The deficit takes the fat. The lifting decides what’s left.
Questions we get asked
Is a 500 calorie deficit too much to build muscle?
For a big person, no; for a small one it’s about the edge. In the review of 59 lifting trials, 500 calories a day was the deficit at which the average person stopped gaining lean mass, but those people were mostly older beginners, and 500 is a sixth of a big man’s food and a quarter or more of a small woman’s. Aim to lose about half a percent of your body weight a week instead, and let that set the calories.
Can you build muscle on 1,200 calories a day?
Almost nobody can, and most people shouldn’t try. 1,200 a day is what doctors prescribe to women with obesity inside a supervised program, and for anyone bigger it’s a crash diet where muscle goes with the fat. If your week of logging shows you maintain on around 1,700, a cut to 1,500 with the protein high is a better bet than 1,200, and slower is not worse.
Is 1,500 calories a day enough to build muscle?
It depends entirely on what you burn. For a small woman maintaining on 1,900, 1,500 is a cut of about a fifth, which is around the size of cut where lean people have gained muscle in trials. For a 100 kg man it’s half his food, and no. Log a normal week first; the answer is in the gap, not the number.
Is 2,500 calories enough to build muscle?
For most men it isn’t even a deficit: 2,500 is about what an average man burns in a day, and official estimates for men run from about 2,000 to 3,000. For a big, active man it’s a workable cut. For most women it’s a gain. If 2,500 is about your maintenance and you want to lose fat and build muscle, the cut starts from there, not at it.
Is it better to lose fat first, then build muscle?
Not if you’re new to lifting or carrying a fair amount of fat: you’d be giving up the best period anyone gets for doing both, and lifting during the fat loss is what keeps the weight you lose from being muscle. The order matters more once you’re lean and experienced, where a deficit mostly holds muscle rather than adding it, and the growth comes at maintenance or a little above.
Will the scale go up if I’m building muscle while losing fat?
Rarely, for long. Muscle is built slowly and fat comes off faster on a sensible deficit, so the weekly average should still drift down, just a little slower than on a pure diet. A scale that holds still for a week while your waist comes in is fine. A scale that climbs for three weeks means you aren’t in a deficit.
Thanks for reading. I’m Daniel, and I wrote this. I’m a certified personal trainer with more than 10,000 hours on the gym floor with clients, and as founder and head coach of Gains For Gamers, I get to combine the best of my two favorite worlds: gaming and fitness.
Sources
Murphy C, Koehler K. Energy deficiency impairs resistance training gains in lean mass but not strength: a meta-analysis and meta-regression. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine and Science in Sports, 2022;32(1):125-137. The 59 trials; the deficit of about 500 calories a day. DOI.
Hector AJ, McGlory C, Damas F, Mazara N, Baker SK, Phillips SM. Pronounced energy restriction with elevated protein intake results in no change in proteolysis and reductions in skeletal muscle protein synthesis that are mitigated by resistance exercise. The FASEB Journal, 2018;32(1):265-275. The rested leg and the trained leg. DOI.
Slater GJ, Dieter BP, Marsh DJ, Helms ER, Shaw G, Iraki J. Is an energy surplus required to maximize skeletal muscle hypertrophy associated with resistance training. Frontiers in Nutrition, 2019;6:131. The energy stored in a kilo of muscle. DOI.
Hall KD, Sacks G, Chandramohan D, et al. Quantification of the effect of energy imbalance on bodyweight. The Lancet, 2011;378(9793):826-837. The energy in a kilo of body fat. DOI.
Longland TM, Oikawa SY, Mitchell CJ, Devries MC, Phillips SM. Higher compared with lower dietary protein during an energy deficit combined with intense exercise promotes greater lean mass gain and fat mass loss: a randomized trial. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 2016;103(3):738-746. The two diets also differed in fat. DOI.
Josse AR, Atkinson SA, Tarnopolsky MA, Phillips SM. Increased consumption of dairy foods and protein during diet- and exercise-induced weight loss promotes fat mass loss and lean mass gain in overweight and obese premenopausal women. The Journal of Nutrition, 2011;141(9):1626-1634. DOI.
Vargas-Molina S, García-Palumbo A, García-Sillero M, et al. Comparison of two nutritional protocols in body re-composition of resistance-trained participants. European Journal of Applied Physiology, 2026;126(7):4019-4030. The 250-calorie deficit. DOI.
Garthe I, Raastad T, Refsnes PE, Koivisto A, Sundgot-Borgen J. Effect of two different weight-loss rates on body composition and strength and power-related performance in elite athletes. International Journal of Sport Nutrition and Exercise Metabolism, 2011;21(2):97-104. DOI.
Roth C, Schoenfeld BJ, Behringer M. Lean mass sparing in resistance-trained athletes during caloric restriction: the role of resistance training volume. European Journal of Applied Physiology, 2022;122(5):1129-1151. DOI.
Halonen EJ, Gabriel I, Kelahaara MM, Ahtiainen JP, Hulmi JJ. Does taking a break matter: adaptations in muscle strength and size between continuous and periodic resistance training. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine and Science in Sports, 2024;34(10):e14739. DOI.
Cumming KT, Reitzner SM, Hanslien M, et al. Muscle memory in humans: evidence for myonuclear permanence and long-term transcriptional regulation after strength training. The Journal of Physiology, 2024;602(17):4171-4193. DOI.
Psilander N, Eftestøl E, Cumming KT, et al. Effects of training, detraining, and retraining on strength, hypertrophy, and myonuclear number in human skeletal muscle. Journal of Applied Physiology, 2019;126(6):1636-1645. DOI.
Refalo MC, Trexler ET, Helms ER. Effect of dietary protein on fat-free mass in energy restricted, resistance-trained individuals: an updated systematic review with meta-regression. Strength and Conditioning Journal, 2025, published online 22 January 2025. The 1.9 g per kg. DOI.
Kraemer WJ, Volek JS, Clark KL, et al. Influence of exercise training on physiological and performance changes with weight loss in men. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 1999;31(9):1320-1329. The 97 percent. DOI.
Binmahfoz A, Dighriri A, Gray C, Gray SR. Effect of resistance exercise on body composition, muscle strength and cardiometabolic health during dietary weight loss in people living with overweight or obesity: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ Open Sport and Exercise Medicine, 2025;11(3):e002363. DOI.
Schumann M, Feuerbacher JF, Sünkeler M, Freitag N, Rønnestad BR, Doma K, Lundberg TR. Compatibility of concurrent aerobic and strength training for skeletal muscle size and function: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis. Sports Medicine, 2022;52(3):601-612. DOI.
Nedeltcheva AV, Kilkus JM, Imperial J, Schoeller DA, Penev PD. Insufficient sleep undermines dietary efforts to reduce adiposity. Annals of Internal Medicine, 2010;153(7):435-441. DOI.
Wang X, Sparks JR, Bowyer KP, Youngstedt SD. Influence of sleep restriction on weight loss outcomes associated with caloric restriction. Sleep, 2018;41(5):zsy027. DOI.
Schneditz D, Hofmann P, Krenn S, Waller M, Mussnig S, Hecking M. Day-to-day variability in euvolemic body mass. Renal Failure, 2023;45(2):2273421. DOI.
Turicchi J, O’Driscoll R, Horgan G, et al. Weekly, seasonal and holiday body weight fluctuation patterns among individuals engaged in a European multi-centre behavioural weight loss maintenance intervention. PLoS ONE, 2020;15(4):e0232152. DOI.
World Health Organization. Waist circumference and waist-hip ratio: report of a WHO expert consultation, Geneva, 8 to 11 December 2008. WHO, 2011. The measurement protocol. WHO.
Ross R, Neeland IJ, Yamashita S, et al. Waist circumference as a vital sign in clinical practice: a consensus statement from the IAS and ICCR Working Group on Visceral Obesity. Nature Reviews Endocrinology, 2020;16(3):177-189. DOI.
Bone JL, Ross ML, Tomcik KA, Jeacocke NA, Hopkins WG, Burke LM. Manipulation of muscle creatine and glycogen changes dual X-ray absorptiometry estimates of body composition. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 2017;49(5):1029-1035. DOI.
Jensen MD, Ryan DH, Apovian CM, et al. 2013 AHA/ACC/TOS guideline for the management of overweight and obesity in adults. Circulation, 2014;129(25 Suppl 2):S102-S138. The 1,200 to 1,500 and 1,500 to 1,800 prescriptions; very-low-calorie diets under medical supervision. DOI.
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Overweight and obesity management, NICE guideline NG246, physical activity and diet. January 2025. Low-energy and very-low-energy diets. NICE.
U.S. Department of Agriculture and U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Dietary Guidelines for Americans, 2020 to 2025, Appendix 2, Estimated calorie needs. The 1,600 to 2,400 and 2,000 to 3,000 ranges. Guidelines PDF.
NHS. Overweight and obesity. The 2,000 and 2,500 calorie averages. nhs.uk.
This page is general information from coaches, not medical advice. If you have a medical condition or an injury, or take medication, talk to your doctor before you change your training or diet.