Calories in versus calories out right?? No, I’m afraid it’s not that simple at all. Eating more and doing more cardio will always be superior, compared to eating less and doing less(or no) cardio, even if the calorie balance is exactly the same. Here is why: -SHBG, which binds up testosterone, and lowers the free testosterone that can act on tissues is inversely correlated with insulin. It means if you are fasting, eating less carbs (less insulin), SHBG will go up, so basically the bioavailable testosterone that your body can use becomes less. We cant avoid this fully if we are cutting weight, but if you move more and can keep carbs higher, then you can keep your SHBG lower, and your free testosterone more favorable. (keto or carnivore guys usually are very proud of their total testosterone levels, meanwhile their SHBG is sky high) -Indirectly more free testosterone will help you to hold on to more muscle, which will help you to burn more energy, even when resting, so your cut can become more effective. -When eating less calories and carbs, usually thyroid hormone production slows down, TSH goes up, T4 to T3 conversion becomes less, Reverse T3 goes up (the active thyroid hormone that regulates metabolism, heart rate and metabolic function is T3). If your thyroid hormone production becomes less, and also the T4->T3 conversions reduce, your cut will be slower, harder, and ineffective. On top of this if you further lower the food, you just make the problem worse. What is the solution to all of this? Eat more and move more. Don't follow crazy starvation diets, play with the food/cardio/refeeds, put a break on the cut if it becomes ineffective, stay a couple of weeks around maintaining your bodyweight by upping the food, then give it another go.

New drugs are coming out all the time with large promises...Sarms were the first "new" drugs since I became involved in this field. The promise was, that they could replace steroids, mainly because they have the muscle building benefits of steroids, without the negative side effects. No masculinizing effects (female use), no prostate enlargement, hairloss, no testosterone supression, because they selectively target only the androgen receptor and trigger muscle growth...Guess what, none of them turned out to be true, and the effects on bloodwork was much worse than anabolic steroids. Zero professional bodybuilders are using sarms. Now the new GLP1-s...Supressing appetite, slowing down gastric emptying...In my opinion Ozempic for example is only useful if you are a complete retard with zero self control. Lowering appetite is not beneficial...If you have a proper diet your appetite does not matter. If it is high, then you need to stick to your diet. If you are not hungry, the same thing. Your appetite should have zero influence on how much you eat, if you know what you are doing. Other than lowering appetite, the drug doesnt offer any advantage. I see zero sense in ever using it....Injectable self control, what a beautiful world. Retatrutide seems to have a lot of health benefits, and seems to offer more than just lowering appetite...Better insulin sensitivity, better cholesterol, better bloodwork markers. However, these benefits are also coming from losing bodyfat, and having a better diet..That makes me think, does the drug have these positive effects, or is it just the lowered appetite, and the loss of bodyfat is influencing these "health benefits"? Hard to determine, not enough time has past yet... In my opinion, everyone should be able to get lean to a reasonable level (10% bf) completely drug free. There are more drugs and more "help" than ever out there and body composition and general health is worse than ever. If you are looking to get into the best shape of your life, here is the recipe: fix your hormones, testosterone/estrogen balance, fix your thyroid issues, fix your insulin resistance issues, fix your low IGF1 if you have....Follow a diet, train, and boom, you are in the best shape of your life. You are hungry? Be hungry, embrace it, suffer, be proud of yourself.