disproving stupid debloat and starve/leanmaxx propaganda

[wesgibbins300]

preface: hollow cheeks
I hope this helps anyone who thinks that if they don’t have hollow cheeks when they’re younger, they’ll never have them—that’s far from the truth. In reality, hollow cheeks tend to become more noticeable with age as facial fat distribution changes and overall body fat decreases. A lot of people expect to have sharp facial features early on, but puberty isn’t the stage where hollow cheeks typically develop. It’s actually more common for them to start showing later in life as your face naturally loses fat and your bone structure becomes more defined.



fat distribution
A lot of people mistake poor fat distribution for being “fat” or “bloated” when, in reality, they just have low muscle mass and aren’t giving their body what it needs to develop properly. Where your body stores fat is largely genetic, and some areas—like the face, stomach, and thighs—tend to hold onto fat more stubbornly. This doesn’t mean you’re overweight; it just means your body composition isn’t ideal. The issue isn’t the presence of fat itself but the lack of lean muscle underneath to create a more structured look.



actually helping yourself
Starving yourself or going on extreme calorie deficits at a young age isn’t the answer—it only deprives your body of the nutrients it needs to build proper bone structure and muscle tone, which are key for achieving a more defined look later on. If anything, focusing on a balanced diet with enough protein and training consistently will set you up for better fat distribution and more prominent facial features as you age. I learned this the hard way, so don’t wreck your body trying to force results that will come naturally with time.

If anyone disagrees with this, I'll be more than happy to debate them and go into a scientific argument on how I'm right and they're wrong. Everything here is researched and properly written, so yeah.

 

[iblamemandible7]

You said an extreme calorie deficit is bad, what do you think of a 500 calorie deficit as a skinny fat 17 year old?

 

[wesgibbins300]

You said an extreme calorie deficit is bad, what do you think of a 500 calorie deficit as a skinny fat 17 year old?

NO! you do not need to be in a calorie deficit if you’re “skinny fat.” To determine the right approach, you first need to understand the root cause of being MONW (which is an imbalance between body fat and lean muscle mass). This occurs when the body lacks sufficient muscle tissue, leading to metabolic inefficiencies that promote excess fat storage as compensation

The solution isn’t to restrict yourself but to prioritize muscle gain. Focus on progressive overload while training, make sure ur consistently challenging growth. Your diet should be high in protein to support muscle hypertrophy, while consuming maintenance overall calories. OT, this shift in body comp will naturally reduce excess tissue while improving metabolic efficiency (ur currently fucked up MBR), leading to a leaner and more defined physique. Instead of focusing on cutting, think of it as recomping


I’ve seen so many fitness influencers preach about how you need to be in a calorie deficit if you’re skinny fat. They haven’t done the research. They don’t understand what Metabolically Obese Normal Weight (MONW) actually is, how fat deposition and redistribution work, or how to properly fix it. All you need to do is eat at maintenance calories and train as much as you can to build muscle. Eating in a calorie deficit will only mess up your hormones even more, significantly reduce your nutrient intake, and actually decrease your chances of fixing your “skinny fat” look. So please, just eat at maintenance. I don’t believe anyone should ever go into a calorie deficit unless they are clinically obese or are already at a high level of muscle mass and looking to cut for peak definition.

 

[Snowskinned]

Just get to 12% body fat. Yea, no wonder your cheeks are made of fat. Just lose it and you'll get them hollow

Also, fat distribution, despite being genetic, also depends on your hormones. So just blast Test for better distribution

 

[wesgibbins300]

Just get to 12% body fat. Yea, no wonder your cheeks are made of fat. Just lose it and you'll get them hollow

Also, fat distribution, despite being genetic, also depends on your hormones. So just blast Test for better distribution

That’s such an oversimplified and ignorant take that it’s almost laughable. “Just get to 12% body fat” as if body fat percentage is the only factor in facial structure. most will never get hollow cheeks even at 10% body fat because their bone structure, fat distribution, and facial musculature aren’t built for it. Genetics and overall body composition play a much bigger role than some arbitrary body fat percentage.


the whole “just blast Test for better fat distribution” cope? more just reckless and completely missing the point. Hormones absolutely influence fat distribution, but throwing exogenous testosterone into the mix isn’t some magic fix but will do more harm than good (i.e; endocrine system) messing with natural hormone regulation, and can even cause worse fat retention if mismanaged. You don’t “fix” poor fat distribution by taking shortcuts. this entire forum is pure retardistry

 

[Snowskinned]

That’s such an oversimplified and ignorant take that it’s almost laughable. “Just get to 12% body fat” as if body fat percentage is the only factor in facial structure. most will never get hollow cheeks even at 10% body fat because their bone structure, fat distribution, and facial musculature aren’t built for it. Genetics and overall body composition play a much bigger role than some arbitrary body fat percentage.


the whole “just blast Test for better fat distribution” cope? more just reckless and completely missing the point. Hormones absolutely influence fat distribution, but throwing exogenous testosterone into the mix isn’t some magic fix but will do more harm than good (i.e; endocrine system) messing with natural hormone regulation, and can even cause worse fat retention if mismanaged. You don’t “fix” poor fat distribution by taking shortcuts. this entire forum is pure retardistry

You're just a low T soyboy, scared of any risk and trying to hide your cowardice behind logic
You can not not get hollow cheeks if you have low bf% and low water retention. Legit impossible and I haven't seen any proofs. Only retards at 15-20% bf saying they are at 8%

 

[wesgibbins300]

You're just a low T soyboy, scared of any risk and trying to hide your cowardice behind logic
You can not not get hollow cheeks if you have low bf% and low water retention. Legit impossible and I haven't seen any proofs. Only retards at 15-20% bf saying they are at 8%

It’s always the least informed people on this forum who resort to calling others “low-T soyboys” the moment they get publicly disproved and humiliated. If you seriously believe that facial anatomy and bone structure don’t play the biggest role in determining how you’ll look as you age especially when your fat pads naturally dissolve; you’re completely out of your depth. It’s embarrassing to debate someone who lacks even a basic understanding of human physiology.


btw if you don’t know that water retention is not the same as facial fat, and that it fluctuates due to multiple factors like which i’ve stated here multiple times, then you have no business discussing this topic. Subcutaneous fat is what actually contributes to facial fullness, not temporary fluctuations in water weight.

So no, it is absolutely possible to have low body fat and still not have hollow cheeks, and the idea that it’s “legit impossible” is nothing but incel-tier cope from someone who doesn’t understand even the basics of physiology or thermodynamics.

i’ll be sitting here knowing i’m smarter than you in every way, enjoy reflecting ur insecurity

 

[Snowskinned]

It’s always the least informed people on this forum who resort to calling others “low-T soyboys” the moment they get publicly disproved and humiliated. If you seriously believe that facial anatomy and bone structure don’t play the biggest role in determining how you’ll look as you age especially when your fat pads naturally dissolve; you’re completely out of your depth. It’s embarrassing to debate someone who lacks even a basic understanding of human physiology.


btw if you don’t know that water retention is not the same as facial fat, and that it fluctuates due to multiple factors like which i’ve stated here multiple times, then you have no business discussing this topic. Subcutaneous fat is what actually contributes to facial fullness, not temporary fluctuations in water weight.

So no, it is absolutely possible to have low body fat and still not have hollow cheeks, and the idea that it’s “legit impossible” is nothing but incel-tier cope from someone who doesn’t understand even the basics of physiology or thermodynamics.

i’ll be sitting here knowing i’m smarter than you in every way, enjoy reflecting ur insecurity

Sounds like cope tbh

Just get lean, you’re fat and that’s the reason you look fat. Not cuz “meh bone structure”

JFL at trying to use irrelevant smart words to not look like a midwit

 

[wesgibbins300]

Sounds like cope tbh

Just get lean, you’re fat and that’s the reason you look fat. Not cuz “meh bone structure”

JFL at trying to use irrelevant smart words to not look like a midwit

no ur just obviously retarded use science to backup ur statement (you can’t, as ur proven wrong). my fault you can’t understand what i’m saying so u rebut with “irrelevant words” anecdotal evidence also proves just because ur lean doesn’t mean you instantly unlock cheekbones. i’m not using my defence for the entirety of looking fat just for face structure

 

[Snowskinned]

no ur just obviously retarded use science to backup ur statement (you can’t, as ur proven wrong). my fault you can’t understand what i’m saying so u rebut with “irrelevant words” anecdotal evidence also proves just because ur lean doesn’t mean you instantly unlock cheekbones. i’m not using my defence for the entirety of looking fat just for face structure

You have provided 0 scientific evidence and have thrown a bunch of irrelevant words
"Thermodynamics"

Losing fat = less fat. Seems like a very hard concept for you to understand

 

[wesgibbins300]

You have provided 0 scientific evidence and have thrown a bunch of irrelevant words
"Thermodynamics"

Losing fat = less fat. Seems like a very hard concept for you to understand

“Losing fat equals less fat” is such an embarrassingly simplistic take that it completely ignores how fat distribution actually works. Fat loss happens across the entire body, not just in specific areas, which means you don’t get to pick where you lose fat first or last. Genetics play a huge role in where your body holds onto fat, and for a lot of people, facial fat is one of the last things to go.


You’re acting like bone structure and fat distribution aren’t a thing, which is just straight-up ignorance. Scientific research on adipose tissue distribution has already confirmed that people store and lose fat at different rates depending on their genetics. Not everyone is going to have hollow cheeks just because they hit a certain body fat percentage. Some people naturally have thicker facial fat pads, different zygomatic structures, and varying muscle-to-fat ratios in their face, which all affect how their face looks when they lean down.



And as for anecdotal evidence? There’s plenty. There are guys who drop to single-digit body fat and still don’t have hollow cheeks because their facial structure just doesn’t allow for it. If losing fat was the only thing that mattered, every single lean person would have the same facial definition, which clearly isn’t the case.


The fact that you’re dismissing basic physiology, endocrinology, and genetics just to push this brain-dead “just get lean” argument proves you don’t actually understand how the human body works. I’m not throwing around “irrelevant words.” I’m using actual scientific terminology that you clearly don’t have the capacity to grasp. Instead of projecting your ignorance onto others, maybe read a basic study on fat distribution and facial adiposity before embarrassing yourself any further.

want me to throw a bunch of studies that prove exactly what I’m talking about?

 

[chadisbeingmade]

NO! you do not need to be in a calorie deficit if you’re “skinny fat.” To determine the right approach, you first need to understand the root cause of being MONW (which is an imbalance between body fat and lean muscle mass). This occurs when the body lacks sufficient muscle tissue, leading to metabolic inefficiencies that promote excess fat storage as compensation

The solution isn’t to restrict yourself but to prioritize muscle gain. Focus on progressive overload while training, make sure ur consistently challenging growth. Your diet should be high in protein to support muscle hypertrophy, while consuming maintenance overall calories. OT, this shift in body comp will naturally reduce excess tissue while improving metabolic efficiency (ur currently fucked up MBR), leading to a leaner and more defined physique. Instead of focusing on cutting, think of it as recomping


I’ve seen so many fitness influencers preach about how you need to be in a calorie deficit if you’re skinny fat. They haven’t done the research. They don’t understand what Metabolically Obese Normal Weight (MONW) actually is, how fat deposition and redistribution work, or how to properly fix it. All you need to do is eat at maintenance calories and train as much as you can to build muscle. Eating in a calorie deficit will only mess up your hormones even more, significantly reduce your nutrient intake, and actually decrease your chances of fixing your “skinny fat” look. So please, just eat at maintenance. I don’t believe anyone should ever go into a calorie deficit unless they are clinically obese or are already at a high level of muscle mass and looking to cut for peak definition.

Eating in a small deficit doesn’t affect your growth stop the cope. You will still get all the nutrients you need. Skinny fat is too much fat mass and too little muscle. 500 deficit resolves both.

 

[wesgibbins300]

Eating in a small deficit doesn’t affect your growth stop the cope. You will still get all the nutrients you need. Skinny fat is too much fat mass and too little muscle. 500 deficit resolves both.

200-500 is fine, but science proves it isn’t needed.

 

[badexilw]

You said an extreme calorie deficit is bad, what do you think of a 500 calorie deficit as a skinny fat 17 year old?

u are just killing ur self