REF-760 · Garthe et al., 2011 · International Journal of Sport Nutrition and Exercise Metabolism, Vol. · Paper · PubMed
Effect of Two Different Weight-Loss Rates on Body Composition and Strength and Power-Related Performance in Elite Athletes
Twenty-four elite athletes were randomised to lose body weight at a target of 0.7% per week (slow) or 1.4% per week (fast) while doing 4 resistance-training sessions a week. Both groups lost the same share of body weight (5.6% and 5.5%), but the slow group gained lean body mass (+2.1%) while the fast group's did not change (-0.2%), a significant between-group difference.
The authors conclude that athletes who want to gain lean mass and 1RM strength during a weight-loss period should aim for 0.7% of body weight per week.
Participants
n=24 elite athletes (abstract: "Twenty-four athletes"), randomised to:
SR, slow reduction: n = 13, 24 ± 3 yr, 71.9 ± 12.7 kg
FR, fast reduction: n = 11, 22 ± 5 yr, 74.8 ± 11.7 kg
Sex split and sports are not given in the abstract (the MEDLINE indexing lists both female and male participants).
Protocol
Energy-restricted diets set to produce a predetermined weekly body-weight loss: 0.7% per week (SR) or 1.4% per week (FR).
All athletes added 4 resistance-training sessions per week to their usual training.
Each athlete stayed in the intervention until the weight target was reached: mean time 8.5 ± 2.2 wk (SR) vs 5.3 ± 0.9 wk (FR) (p < .001).
Before and after: body weight, body composition by DEXA, 1-repetition maximum (1RM) tests, 40-m sprint, countermovement jump.
Key Results
| SR (target 0.7%/wk) | FR (target 1.4%/wk) | Between groups | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Energy intake reduction | 19% ± 2% | 30% ± 4% | p = .003 |
| Weekly body-weight loss achieved | 0.7% ± 0.8% | 1.0% ± 0.4% | — |
| Total body-weight loss | 5.6% ± 0.8% | 5.5% ± 0.7% | — |
| Fat mass | -31% ± 3% | -21 ± 4% | not stated in the abstract |
| Lean body mass | +2.1% ± 0.4% (p < .001) | -0.2% ± 0.7% (unchanged) | p < .01 |
The abstract gives no numbers for 1RM, 40-m sprint or countermovement jump. The only statement on performance is the authors' conclusion that athletes who want to "increase 1RM strength" during weight loss should aim for 0.7% per week.
The fast group achieved 1.0% per week on average, not the 1.4% target.
Practical Application
In 24 elite athletes randomised to a slow (0.7% of body weight per week) or fast (1.4% per week target, 1.0% achieved) weight loss while lifting 4 times a week, both groups lost the same weight (5.6% vs 5.5%), but only the slow group gained lean body mass (+2.1% vs -0.2%, p < .01), eating 19% rather than 30% less. If you want to lose weight without losing muscle, lose it at about 0.7% of body weight a week and keep lifting; the faster cut reached the same scale weight sooner but gave up the lean-mass gain.
On power specifically, this abstract cannot answer the question. It measured 1RM, 40-m sprint and countermovement jump but reports no numbers for them; say so rather than quoting a strength or power result.
Inference, not tested here: at the tested body masses (71.9 and 74.8 kg), 0.7% a week sits near the 0.5 kg/wk end of the usual 0.5-1 kg/wk advice the paper opens with.
Inference, not tested here: the slower cut also meant a longer intervention (8.5 vs 5.3 wk) and therefore more resistance-training sessions, so part of the lean-mass gain may be training time rather than rate of loss.
Not from this paper; the base's own practice: an endurance athlete in a high-volume block should not run a deficit of this size without checking energy availability; a two-week induced low energy availability already cost male endurance athletes explosive power in REF-545, and the REDs consequences are in REF-341.
Limitations
n=24 (13 vs 11); elite athletes from unnamed sports; sex split not given in the abstract.
Rate and duration are confounded: both groups stopped at a similar total loss, so the slow group trained for longer (8.5 vs 5.3 wk).
The fast group missed its target (1.0% vs 1.4% per week achieved), so the comparison is effectively 0.7% vs 1.0% per week, and the SR rate varied widely (± 0.8%).
Strength, sprint and jump outcomes are named in the abstract without results; this entry is written from the abstract and record metadata only (full text not read).
Lean body mass by DEXA includes water and glycogen, not only muscle.
Every athlete lifted 4 times a week; the result may not hold for an athlete who cuts weight without resistance training.
How this entry was checked and changed
Why this level
parallel RCT, n=24