Body Recomposition
Reframe the conversation
Just a little message on caffeine…
I’m currently working on a hydration project and the subject of caffeine and dehydration is constantly coming up. Many people believe that coffee causes dehydration, which is not the case.
Coffee intake up to your habitual intake does not cause dehydration.
High doses and those above your typical intake can have a diuretic effect and contribute to dehydration. However, most people are improving their hydration status with their coffees.
The incorrect association between coffee and dehydration is because caffeine can have a diuretic effect (increase urination).
Whilst this is the case, it’s important to remember that coffee contains more than caffeine - including a significant amount of water.
The body adapts to habitual intake and begins to maintain fluid balance despite the caffeine. This is why intake up to habitual levels does not cause dehydration.
If you’re thirsty or potentially dehydrated, water is the best option to consume. However, coffee will help, so long as it's within your habitual intake.
The Body Recomposition Approach
I first used the term “body recomposition” during an Exercise Physiology presentation back at uni. We had been assigned case studies of certain athletes and had to build physical preparation programs to help them improve performance for each of their unique situations.
My athlete was a netballer transitioning from a power position (goal attack) to an endurance position (centre). I knew little about netball, so I researched the physiological demands of the position and identified changes in body composition (i.e. reducing muscle mass) that would benefit endurance.
“Weight loss” captured the change because the weight would ultimately be reduced, but it didn’t seem the right term for me due to the association with changing body fat. So instead I termed it body recomposition - something I thought I had created.
The presentation went well and from then on I referred to body recomposition instead of weight loss. Of course, there are times when weight loss is the term I use, particularly before explaining body recomposition to new groups or audiences,
When I started my business in 2014, I discovered that I wasn’t the term's inventor - it had been around for ages. But I liked the change in terminology and stuck with it.
Today, I want to run through three reasons I prefer “body recomposition” to “weight loss” when it comes to fitness and nutrition. They can be used interchangeable, and at the end of the day we are literally arguing about semantics, but I wanted to share why it’s something I find beneficial for myself and my clients.
Benefit one: focus on the positives
The art of body recomposition is balancing seemingly different goals - reducing body fat while increasing or maintaining muscle mass.
Generally speaking, we associate reducing body fat with an energy deficit and increasing muscle mass with an energy surplus, so it seems illogical to do both simultaneously.
But that isn’t the whole story.
While reducing body fat does require an energy deficit, increasing muscle mass isn’t as simple as just creating an energy surplus. More specifically, it requires a stimulus (from resistance training) and adequate amino acids (from protein).
Both conditions can be met while the body is in an energy deficit. However, the greater the deficit and/or the more training stimulus required, the harder it becomes to do both.
But don’t be discouraged - most people starting out or with less than two years of resistance training experience can make body recomposition changes.
The delicate balance encourages us to use a small-moderate energy deficit while getting sufficient protein intake and resistance training.
Dietary changes are about optimising the current intake to create the deficit and ensure adequate protein, which is very different from just ripping out all of the foods you enjoy. This is why getting people to track food is critical - it is the starting point for all strategies.
On the training side, the focus is on doing a combination of resistance training with sufficient intensity to build strength and muscle alongside cardio for fitness and energy expenditure.
Likewise, this is a very different approach to many rapid weight loss plans where the training is high-energy expenditure cardio to burn calories, with no focus on improving strength, fitness or building muscle.
This approach is completely different from rapid weight loss plans where all pleasure from food is removed and significant pain from exercise is added. Sure, this works for rapid results for the 5% of people who stick with it, but the majority fail and go back to their previous routine, maybe trying the plan again later.
The recomposition approach is slower and it’s critical to see progress to facilitate adherence. This isn’t always reflected on the scales, especially in the first couple of weeks, so we often focus on strength and fitness improvements, to begin with, and then body composition begins to change.
The scales aren’t always the best marker in general. Sometimes weight stays the same, but body composition noticeably changes through appearance or how clothes fit.
Benefit two: less deficit = better adherence
The body recomposition plan that gets results in the first six months is different to what you are doing at the six-year mark. However, it shares similar foundations, unlike a rapid weight loss plan followed by a maintenance strategy.
Smaller energy deficits mean energy intake remains more similar to the intake required for an energy balance, which is required to maintain weight. This leads to greater carryover between the progress phase and the transition to longer-term maintenance.
It also sets up the opportunity to swap between the two. Let’s just say ideal body composition is losing 10kg (even though we’re focusing on recomposition). Instead of pushing a deficit until the 10kg target is hit, we can do something different.
We might lose 6kg but then return to an energy surplus to better support strength development for a hard training block or two. When that’s done, we return to the energy deficit and work on losing the remaining 4 kg.
This is drastically different to doing everything you can to lose 10kg and then having to start again with managing the final weight (energy balance). It’s difficult to do because you get to that point and you are familiar with two things - what you were doing before (which wasn’t working) and what got you the 10kg loss (which isn’t sustainable long term).
The new approach doesn’t need to be drastically different, it’s usually just a matter of adding a few hundred calories back into the diet (depending on how aggressive the surplus was). However, many people will hit the target and default back to the previous approach, which can lead to relatively quick weight regain.
The smaller changes and sustainable recomposition approach is better suited to long-term adherence.
Benefit three: reframe the conversion
Perhaps the greatest benefit of recomposition has nothing to do with fitness, nutrition or physiology - it’s all about mindset.
Many people are disillusioned with weight loss due to the failure of their previous endeavours. They have tried everything, but nothing really worked.
It’s hard to saddle up for the same thing over again, especially when there is more hope than enthusiasm in the approach (maybe this time it will click).
Changing the phrasing helps many people start again. It becomes an approach they haven’t tried before, not a variation of something that has failed multiple times.
Don’t underestimate the impact this can have. When I first started using the term, this was not even on the radar - my reasoning was purely based on the physiological underpinnings of muscle and strength gain while losing body fat.
However, over the years this changing of mindset has been something that clients repeatedly mention.
So even if you don’t want to have me as your coach, read a few articles on the process and build your own approach. If you have any questions, you can always reach out and I can point you in the direction of the right content to guide you.
Q&A
If there is anything fitness and nutrition related that you are trying to get your head around, post it below or reply to this email and it will go straight to my inbox. All questions are posted without names unless you specify otherwise.
Thank you for taking the time to read this week’s email. The next one will be in your inbox at 12 pm next Friday.