Hey fit tell me, if I burn 3200 cal a day at a 2000 cal diet

probably not.

>>41733612
no chance in hell without gear.

>black "person"

>>41733612

>315 g protons

How much do you weigh?

>>41733612
Maybe on steroids. The good kind too. It's not the amount of fat you want to lose that's the problem. 15% to 11% I would say maybe. But 9% to 5%? Your body doesn't "want" to be at 5%. It will be difficult and you'll lose muscle first.

>>41733612
>315 protons
Jesus Christ how much do you weigh?

File: Carson.jpg (118KB, 470x468px) Image search: [Google]

118KB, 470x468px

AYO

HOOOOOOL UP

>>41733612
A nigger has never beaten me in an argument in real life nor on the internet and it's not through my use of "nigger".

>>41733674
>>41733682
180

>>41733612

The thermic effect is about 350 kcal, so that would only amount to a net 1650 kcal. That's a massive deficit that'll end in tons of muscle loss.

>>41733680
this

at a muscle:fat ratio that unnecessary where the body's survival mechanisms are concerned, its going to take a fuck ton of brute force to strip that fat off and retain the muscle, brute force being extremely meticulously planned dieting, appropriate training, supplementation and (correct) steroid use. 9% - 4% in 4 weeks is just not possible for a natty.

>>41733753
Would it make a difference if this was my 4th cut in the last 6 months

>>41733704
Read the sticky.

Idiot.

File: Screenshots_2017-03-22-12-31-38.png (114KB, 182x344px) Image search: [Google]

114KB, 182x344px

>>41733850
That's a nice fukin post you got there nerd

>>41733822
you need to take a reality check and realize that natty cutting just ain't all that. remember that bodybuilding diets assume gear is being used, even natural bodybuilding diets since that's just a less drugs show.