Mike, first off much respect as I know you are a legit competitor so dont take my disagreement as anything other than a difference of opinion. I agree that eating less can be catabolic, BUT not nearly as much as when you lose weight more slowly (read dont crash diet). Even "naturals" do a good job of holding their mass if they diet right over a longer stretch. Guys who rely more on anabolics let their offseason weight rise too much and then require very large deficits to hit contest shape.
Here is a study they did on a "natural" pro and his contest prep. He lost 15kg and only 8.8% of that was LBM. He however did not "crash" diet and included 2 carb reefeeds a week. (with carbs being very muscle sparing) But the big take away...was he dieted for
26 weeks! .
http://suppversity.blogspot.com/2014/06/natural-bb-contest-coverage-20-linear.html
With the help of anabolics guys can do a great job holding LBM dropping weight in a reasonable manor. (.75% down to .5%bw drop/ week) For a 200lb guy that means less than a lb / week towards the end of diet. Most guys are not committed enough to do this. But it can be done. I have had many friends do it.
Things like EC, clen, albuterol can actually help as well. They do have a metabolic boost component (but it is small. Something like 175cal / day by running EC). The the muscle sparing and lipoprotic effects are beneficial.
I dont think pure metabolic boosters like DNP are a necessity. I dont see any evidence that it helps do anything more than burn cals. That equation can be made the same just by eating less in my opinion. With the advantages of using AAS on a cut, the LBM retention is greatly shifted in your favor. I think (if a guy wanted) he could have all the fat loss he wanted with great LBM retention with only mild anabolics and given enough time. If you want to rush it....yea, you are going to need more help.
Again, just my opinion. It took me a while to figure it all out, but I am now at a point where I stay fairly lean year round solely with intake manipulation. It really is not that hard, but your lifestyle does have to change to do it. For me it was worth it. I have actually been able to hold most all of my strength even at lower body fat levels. But I took about a year to bring myself under 10%-ish.
Again....much respect to you as a competitor, but I dont see metabolic boosters like DNP or T3 being "required" to get lean. Things like Clen, EC can help (which I dont consider for their metabolic boosting properties) but even they are not a must have if you are patient enough. If you cant tell.... I am a 'less is more' kind of guy in my approach to training and anabolics. But I also respect others right to choose tier own paths as well.
The issue with those that compete is that they cannot afford to wait or be patient. They are on a strict time schedule once they decide to do a show and every little bit of difference can mean the difference between first and not even making the top 5. I do agree one can get very lean without drugs but when time is money and endorsements, sponsorships, etc etc are on the line an elite competitor will use every trick at their disposal.
Also here is some evidence of DNP be muscle sparing:
Harper JA, Dickinson K and Brand MD (2001) Mitochondrial uncoupling as a target for drug development for the treatment of obesity. Obesity Rev, 2, 255–265
"In contrast to the use of thyroid extract (also in common use at the time to treat obesity), DNP did not promote urinary nitrogen excretion, so the assumption was made that weight loss could be attributed to a specific loss of fat (47)."
Bell, Jacques. 1939. Etude biologique des produits dinitres chez l'homme. Medecine. 19:749-54.
"2. This increase of the metabolism is due mostly to an increase in the combustion of the fat and a little to combustion of carbohydrates.
3. Dinitrophenol does not attack cell tissue albumin and does not determine the fat loss to the expense of the muscles, contrary to thyroxine.
...
Finally, thyroxine causes a nitrogen malnutrition: it burns the muscle and fatigues the heart. Dinitrophenol-lysidine, to the contrary, causes a lipid-glycemic loss: it is the elimination of reserve materials without attacking visceral and muscle tissue."
Simkins S 1937
Dinitrophenol and desiccated thyroid in the treatment of
obesity. JAMA 108:2110–2119
"The extra energy of metabolism is derived mainly from fat and practically not at all from protein or carbohydrate. Consequently, dinitrophenol in therapeutic dosage produces no breakdown of significant amounts of body protein, even with patients on an inadequate protein intake. This is in marked contrast with the very consdierable increase in nitrogen excretion observed in patients undergoing treatment with thyroid. The fat is used completely and satisfactorily broken down, as no ketone bodies are found in urine. There is a no hyperlipidemia or constant change in the fixed and fatty acids of the blood."
Cutting WC, Tainter ML. Metabolic actions of dinitrophenol with the use of balanced and unbalanced diets. J Am Med Assoc 1933; 101: 2099–2102.
"Dinitrophenol, used in doses of therapeutic range,caused increases in metabolism of the usual magnitude irrespective of the type of diet. The nitrogen excretion was never greater than the intake, even when the subjects lost as much as 5 pounds in body weight during one week. From this it seemed probable that there was no actual tissue breakdown during these short periods of heightened metabolism, but that the loss of weight was due to the utilization of stored carbohydrate or fat. This does not mean, of course, that tissue breakdown would not occur if the drug should be given over longer periods, but probably when materials other than protein are available these are utilized first. Thus the assumption might be made that, as long as the protein intake is adequate, any reduction in body weight is not primarily at the expense of the tissue proteins.
...
3.The subjects excreted less nitrogen than they ingested, yet there were definite losses of body weight. Therefore, body proteins probably were not broken down. The output of urinary organic acid was not increased, thus indicating that the fats were completely burned without giving rise to acidosis."