Can I lose fat with diet & strength training instead of cardio?

[Yellowfrizbee]

Excuse my ignorance, looking for advice from some experienced individuals. Cardio is really really boring and now that I am quarantined for the foreseeable future, I can't even play sports or do any kind of fun form of cardio. So I was wondering if strength training and diet would provide me the same benefit? I've been hitting the weights pretty hard, around 45 min a day for 6 days a week BUT my heart rate doesn't really get very high like it does with cardio, obviously. Which is what makes me question the efficiency of this approach.

I am a 154 lbs female and somewhere between 26-28% BF; my goal is to be ~18% BF and I don't really care what my weight ends up being, as long as its not below 130 lbs. Id ultimately love to gain muscle mass, but I need to cut some of this fat before I can work on any real gains.

[SuffolkPunch]

Yes, in fact it's probably the best way...

It's consuming less calories than you burn which causes fat loss - elevating your heart rate is not required although it can be a sign you are burning more calories - so it helps indirectly, it's just not essential.

[Caldef]

Diet is actually the only way to lose fat, really.

It's a lot easier to create a calorie deficit through eating less , than by running for hours.

Exercise is more about cardiovasicular fitness and strength, diet is for fat loss and nutrients.

[estikei]

The only way to lose fat is to consume less energy than the body needs to spend to sustain itself + activity.

It is hard to understand - i'm exactly the same - but muscle really is the more sustainable way to a healthier life.

Why? The muscles don't go away, while your cardio is finished at one point.
Of course, building muscle is hard work and it is slow, but they say each pound of muscle gained equals to 50kcal burned more per day.
If anything, weight loss is a game of small differences that compound over time. You save 500kcal via your nutrition per day, that makes half a kilo in fat per week, makes 2 kilo per month, makes ....
You gain 2 pounds of muscle, you spend 100kcal more per day, 700 per week, ...

So, look at it from this side: your metabolism is a camp fire. Muscle is wood. By building muscle you keep adding wood to your fire. Your fire will get bigger and bigger. Make a damn big fire!

[Tommy W.]

You always want to be lifting when dieting to maintain the muscle you already have. A calorie deficit and a good training program is necessary for fatloss while sparing muscle. Cardio is non essential unless you have a sedentary lifestyle outside of the gym then it makes up for low NEAT burn.

[estikei]

You always want to be lifting when dieting to maintain the muscle you already have. A calorie deficit and a good training program is necessary for fatloss while sparing muscle. Cardio is non essential unless you have a sedentary lifestyle outside of the gym then it makes up for low NEAT burn.

Which is exactly what i'm like. I like to do my daily 30 min cardio - light exercise... - just to kick up my baseline of NEAT. As you guys preach here, too: weight loss is a game of long term beneficial habits.
It is still mind bending for me to not understand cardio as a means of "i do this and tomorrow i'll be 2 lbs down", but as a way of life that determines my overall activity level.
Lifting, on the other hand, determines my strenght and physique and as i stated above, to me is like the wood i'm adding to my fire.

[njdfan30]

I hate lifting and dieting and even I have seen good results lifting in a calorie deficit. In my experience, you can for example have a 2000 calorie diet and get plenty of protein. You don't have to be in a calorie surplus just because you are lifting weights.

[Tommy W.]

I hate lifting and dieting and even I have seen good results lifting in a calorie deficit. In my experience, you can for example have a 2000 calorie diet and get plenty of protein. You don't have to be in a calorie surplus just because you are lifting weights.

huh?