high-rep is best for fat loss right? Or should I stick to 3x5?

eat less u fat dumb bastard

>>40178182
actually low rep high weights is better for fat loss, suprisingly. meaning all those women doing meme high reps with the pink dumbbells just trying to "tone up" aka lose fat are actually doing even that wrong.

Eat-less is best for fat loss.

Difference in rep range makes so little difference to actual calories burned, you could literally eat the difference between a 20 rep set and a 5 rep set in one bite.

obviously eat less but I'm talking difference in the gym. If I'm burning 500 cals each session in gym that's p significant, the difference could be quite big. Just did high reps today and I was definitely more tired throughout so it's probably better for fat loss. So I'm basing this off personal experience only, don't have any studies to cite. All I know for sure is low rep is best for increasing strength quickest.

>>40178304
don't listen to this retard, he obviously knows nothing. listen to this anon instead >>40178223

Diet is best for fat loss

neither is particularly best for fat loss, the only way the former would one up the other is if youre using the same weights for both high rep and low rep exercises.

meaning, squatting 25kg for 20 reps would burn the same amount of calories (roughly) with 50kg squats for 5 reps.

tldr; neither is better, your body eventually adapts, and in order for you to progress and have consistent benefits, you have to eat.

File: printer.jpg (37KB, 640x627px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 640x627px

More weight = more strength = more ability over time and thus more calories burned over time

So the answer 100% depends on how long you're going to be losing weight for and since most people want to remain lean and healthy the correct answer is to lift more weight for less reps to increase strength sooner rather than later

That said, 3x5 is too low, regardless.