My Diet Plan - AnabolicMinds.com - Page 2

My Diet Plan

Page 2 of 3 First 123 Last
  1. Senior Member
    cumminslifter's Avatar
    Stats
    6'0"  205 lbs.
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Age
    21
    Posts
    1,885
    Rep Power
    1415846

    Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation

    they just dont get it. i give up

  2. Elite Member
    Jiigzz's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  205 lbs.
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    5,203
    Rep Power
    3370560

    Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by jonpaulevans View Post
    Detailed cholesterol numbers:
    overall - 329 - should be below 200
    triglycerides - 63 - should be below 150
    HDL - 37 - should be above 40 and desirable is above 60
    LDL - 279 - very high is considered above 190 and optimal is below 100

    I will be going on cholesterol med (statins) soon.

    Can someone please tell me what amounts of Sat fats are said to be healthy, in mg/grams please. The medical field is constantly learning but what it seems to know is that fats cause the body to produce cholesterol as part of the digesting process. Unsaturated fats hold on to these lipids and get passed; but the saturated fats bond to the lipids and settle in the arteries and create plaque buildup. That's my basic understanding. So if that's (remotely) correct, why should I not curb my sat fat intake? And, again, please give me some numbers/amounts of sat fats in diets of people who claim they feel good and who have blood-work to support its healthy and beneficial ingestion. Believe me, I'd love to up my sat fats - but only if I can do it while lowering my cholesterol.
    LDL-C and LDL-p are better measures. Theres little correlation between high cholestrol numbers and an associated CVD risk. In fact, because your TG's are low, i'd say LDL-p would be low (at a glance).

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23386699 This study shows that LDL-p (particles) are a much better predictor of increased CVD risk than those with just high LDL-C.
    So essentially all I am saying is that those numbers mean little to me.
    Serious Nutrition Solutions Representative
    X-gels: Arachidonic Acid made affordable
  3. New Member
    jonpaulevans's Avatar
    Stats
    5'11"  240 lbs.
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    78
    Rep Power
    97

    Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by jimbuick View Post
    180g Protein
    356g Carbs
    198g Fat

    Those are my daily goals. Sometimes I get a little higher in protein and lower in carbs. This will be upped by another 3-500 kCal when I come back from the field and I will get most of the additional kCal from Carbs.

    My food choices vary but my staples are:

    Chicken (thighs + breasts)
    Ground beef
    White rice
    Pasta
    EVOO
    Steak
    Whole Milk
    Potatoes (sometimes sweet but normally regular potatoes do fine)
    Eggs

    As long as I hit my macros I don't stress the sources as much. From a general health perspective I realize that the sources are more important than I care to stress but I don't have any noticeable lactose/gluten issues yet and I try to enjoy my food. As far as a physique/performance aspect goes, I don't notice much of a difference as long as the macros are hit but I'm also not a physique competitor (or trainee for that matter)

    Meal timing is mostly irrelevant. I eat 4-5 times a day, mostly out of convenience. I'm allowed a certain time for breakfast and lunch so those are the same everyday, all other meals are based upon the time I get off work/time I get out of the gym.
    wow! I have dialed in my diet and I like how I feel with a 45 carb/35 pro/20 fat. Maybe I'll up my calories and'or go 45/30/25 after this phase to see if a boost in fat makes me feel any better. I may be switching to whole milk tomorrow tho.
    thanks for sharing
    •   
       

  4. New Member
    jonpaulevans's Avatar
    Stats
    5'11"  240 lbs.
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    78
    Rep Power
    97

    Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by Jiigzz View Post
    LDL-C and LDL-p are better measures. Theres little correlation between high cholestrol numbers and an associated CVD risk. In fact, because your TG's are low, i'd say LDL-p would be low (at a glance).

    This study shows that LDL-p (particles) are a much better predictor of increased CVD risk than those with just high LDL-C.
    So essentially all I am saying is that those numbers mean little to me.
    thanks for the link.
    This is all I think I have in my paperwork (unless I'm missing a section on my lipids). where can I get those additional numbers? Should I ask my doc for them next time (dumb question - of course I should)
  5. Elite Member
    Jiigzz's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  205 lbs.
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    5,203
    Rep Power
    3370560

    Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by jonpaulevans View Post
    thanks for the link.
    This is all I think I have in my paperwork (unless I'm missing a section on my lipids). where can I get those additional numbers? Should I ask my doc for them next time (dumb question - of course I should)
    And further; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21292264

    The problem I have is that studies and some articles blanket statement LDL-C and LDL-p dispite evidence showing that high LDL-C but low LDL-p are at a much reduced risk of CVD. In fact, even with low LDL-C (C= cholesterol mass within LDL particle) you are still at risk for CVD if LDL-p is high. Furthermore, a correlation between plasma measurements of different subtypes of fats or lipoproteins and the risk for heart disease, does not have to imply a causative relationship.

    LDL particles come in different sizes (indicated by -p), On one hand you have large cotton ball like particles and on the other, small dense particles. Studies show that the higher numbere of small dense particles you have, the higher the chance of developing CVD whereas more of the Fluffy type may actually be protective.

    There is an inverse correlation between blood levels of triglycerides and particle size. Thus, the higher your triglycerides, the higher the number of small LDL particles. Conversely, the lower your triglycerides, the higher the number of large, fluffy LDL particles.

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19657464
    Serious Nutrition Solutions Representative
    X-gels: Arachidonic Acid made affordable
  6. Elite Member
    Jiigzz's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  205 lbs.
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    5,203
    Rep Power
    3370560

    Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by jonpaulevans View Post
    thanks for the link.
    This is all I think I have in my paperwork (unless I'm missing a section on my lipids). where can I get those additional numbers? Should I ask my doc for them next time (dumb question - of course I should)
    I ask my doctor to refer me to a lipidologist. Because i'm from NZ, the medical pathway may differ so i'm not sure how you would go about it.

    FWIW I follow the Perfect Health Diet, hence my belief in saturated fats and understanding the relationship between LDL-p, TG's and CVD.
    Serious Nutrition Solutions Representative
    X-gels: Arachidonic Acid made affordable
  7. New Member
    jonpaulevans's Avatar
    Stats
    5'11"  240 lbs.
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    78
    Rep Power
    97

    Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by Jiigzz View Post
    I ask my doctor to refer me to a lipidologist. Because i'm from NZ, the medical pathway may differ so i'm not sure how you would go about it.

    FWIW I follow the Perfect Health Diet, hence my belief in saturated fats and understanding the relationship between LDL-p, TG's and CVD.
    Ah a Kiwi eh? My girlfriend is from Australia. I appreciate the reply - I'll have to read it a few times over to get a good grasp on it. My cholesterol is something I am finally taking an interest in now that I am 33. History of heart disease and high chol on fathers side. I'll look into the diet and check out some books like the one you recommended.

    helpful as always jigzz

    I miss red meat so I look forward to justifying it in my diet
  8. Elite Member
    Jiigzz's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  205 lbs.
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    5,203
    Rep Power
    3370560

    Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by jonpaulevans View Post
    Ah a Kiwi eh? My girlfriend is from Australia. I appreciate the reply - I'll have to read it a few times over to get a good grasp on it. My cholesterol is something I am finally taking an interest in now that I am 33. History of heart disease and high chol on fathers side. I'll look into the diet and check out some books like the one you recommended.

    helpful as always jigzz

    I miss red meat so I look forward to justifying it in my diet
    The thing to make sure is that you find a way to get LDL-C and LDL-p measured, then get them checked after a period of eating saturated fats. Because you have a family history of heart disease, you may have some confounders in there (including limited cholesterol transporters) and therefore may be susceptible to developing low dense LDL particles; in the mean time i'd recommend sticking to your current plan as there is nothing wrong with it, at least until you find somewhere to get a CAC or more comprehensive LDL blood work.

    Just showing you two sides to the LDL debate; its always interesting when things aren't quite as black and white as people make them seem.
    Serious Nutrition Solutions Representative
    X-gels: Arachidonic Acid made affordable
  9. New Member
    NeighbourMike's Avatar
    Stats
    6'2"  190 lbs.
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    95
    Rep Power
    325

    Reputation

    God damnit I agree.
    PTAG-CPT, TSCC, ViPR
    Functional Training Hell Workout (An Offday/Cardio Workout!)
    http://anabolicminds.com/forum/workout-logs/223675-welcome-functional-training.html
  10. Professional Member
    fueledpassion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    3,525
    Rep Power
    645670

    Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by Jiigzz View Post
    And further; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21292264

    The problem I have is that studies and some articles blanket statement LDL-C and LDL-p dispite evidence showing that high LDL-C but low LDL-p are at a much reduced risk of CVD. In fact, even with low LDL-C (C= cholesterol mass within LDL particle) you are still at risk for CVD if LDL-p is high. Furthermore, a correlation between plasma measurements of different subtypes of fats or lipoproteins and the risk for heart disease, does not have to imply a causative relationship.

    LDL particles come in different sizes (indicated by -p), On one hand you have large cotton ball like particles and on the other, small dense particles. Studies show that the higher numbere of small dense particles you have, the higher the chance of developing CVD whereas more of the Fluffy type may actually be protective.

    There is an inverse correlation between blood levels of triglycerides and particle size. Thus, the higher your triglycerides, the higher the number of small LDL particles. Conversely, the lower your triglycerides, the higher the number of large, fluffy LDL particles.

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19657464
    Thanks for the info, Jigzz
  11. Elite Member
    Jiigzz's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  205 lbs.
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    5,203
    Rep Power
    3370560

    Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by fueledpassion View Post
    Thanks for the info, Jigzz
    No problems
    Serious Nutrition Solutions Representative
    X-gels: Arachidonic Acid made affordable
  12. Senior Member
    02sixxer's Avatar
    Stats
    6'2"  215 lbs.
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    1,654
    Rep Power
    389584

    Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation

    Wow, this has got into a battle.

    Diet differ from person to person and different people get different responses.

    My diet is approx: 1:1:.5 ratio or 40/40/20 meaning 300P/300C/60F approx 3000 cals

    On of my personal freinds who is a IFBB pro has a way different approach their diet is
    1:.5:1.5 ratio a= 150p/75C/100gF= 1800 cals

    Now the person I am speaking is quite smaller than I (it's a she) and both these are our lean bulking diets. She has been begging me to bulk with fats instead of carbs because of how well she does with it. I may next off season to try it out.

    I just wanted to post this because of the big arguments I see on here to show the differnt diet style that work eaqually as well.
    Formutech Nutrition Rep --------------Team IronClad Physiques!!!
    www.formutechnutrition.com------------------ NPC Competitor
    www.facebook.com/fnutrition
  13. Professional Member
    fueledpassion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    3,525
    Rep Power
    645670

    Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by 02sixxer View Post
    Wow, this has got into a battle.

    Diet differ from person to person and different people get different responses.

    My diet is approx: 1:1:.5 ratio or 40/40/20 meaning 300P/300C/60F approx 3000 cals

    On of my personal freinds who is a IFBB pro has a way different approach their diet is
    1:.5:1.5 ratio a= 150p/75C/100gF= 1800 cals

    Now the person I am speaking is quite smaller than I (it's a she) and both these are our lean bulking diets. She has been begging me to bulk with fats instead of carbs because of how well she does with it. I may next off season to try it out.

    I just wanted to post this because of the big arguments I see on here to show the differnt diet style that work eaqually as well.
    Something else I didn't consider either was that people have different percentages of Type I & Type II muscle fibers. Obviously, Type I's are good at burning fat and providing endurance while the faster twitch Type II's are better at using glucose for energy.

    I obviously have lots of Type IIb's (the far right side) since I can eat 400+ grams of carbs, and actually stay lean, if not actually lose some BF.

    And as a side note, I have come to the conclusion that a low fat, high carb, high protein diet is good for people who are already considerably lean, have a high tolerance for carbs and look to exclusively pack on lean muscle mass with minimal fat gain.
  14. New Member
    NeighbourMike's Avatar
    Stats
    6'2"  190 lbs.
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    95
    Rep Power
    325

    Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by fueledpassion View Post
    Something else I didn't consider either was that people have different percentages of Type I & Type II muscle fibers. Obviously, Type I's are good at burning fat and providing endurance while the faster twitch Type II's are better at using glucose for energy.

    I obviously have lots of Type IIb's (the far right side) since I can eat 400+ grams of carbs, and actually stay lean, if not actually lose some BF.

    And as a side note, I have come to the conclusion that a low fat, high carb, high protein diet is good for people who are already considerably lean, have a high tolerance for carbs and look to exclusively pack on lean muscle mass with minimal fat gain.
    Tomorrow when I have the energy, I will address the facts / and/or bunk behind these statements. For now, good night.
    PTAG-CPT, TSCC, ViPR
    Functional Training Hell Workout (An Offday/Cardio Workout!)
    http://anabolicminds.com/forum/workout-logs/223675-welcome-functional-training.html
  15. Professional Member
    fueledpassion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    3,525
    Rep Power
    645670

    Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by NeighbourMike View Post
    Tomorrow when I have the energy, I will address the facts / and/or bunk behind these statements. For now, good night.
    That sounds a little like a threat. But before you go on, perhaps in an unfriendly way, just know that I am not trying to start a fight here. I have observed over the years that some people are hardwired to do better with aerobics, while others are designed well in strength and mass. I also know (based on conventional research studies) that naturally-gifted endurance trainers have loads of Type I slow twitch fibers, where the fibers have a higher count of mitochondria than do the Fast Twitch Type IIb's. Type IIa's are in the middle and can potientially share both traits of slow & fast twitch fibers.

    I also know that everyone has all three of these types, just in different ratios. These ratios, IMO, is what determines our body's performance and what it is good at. Guys with more slow twitch fibers will tend to be great runners but generally struggle to pack on mass. While it is just the contrary for people like myself.

    Type I is ideal for endurance. Endurance training focuses on fat burning. Fat burning takes oxidation. Oxidation for energy takes lots of mitochondria. These characteristics are a consistent theme in runners. For me it's just the opposite - I have carppy cardio capabilities that I have to intentionally work on to see any improvement. Furthermore, I am naturally strong for my size and I cannot operate very well in a gym without being in a fully glycogen-saturated state. All this tells me that my muscles (while not all of them) are predominantly Type II's of some sort. Probably Type IIb's, which are the most inferior of the three. I'm great at sudden bursts of strength but suck at endurance training.

    Case in point: I weight around 162lbs as of right now @ 5'5". I can:

    Bench 225 X 10-12 on Incline Bench, or 245 X 6.

    Squat (so far) about 365lbs 1RM, doing deep.

    Dead-lift 405lbs 1RM w/ chalk

    Yet I can walk on a 15* incline @ 3.5 mph for 15 minutes and havea a heart rate of 160bpm. Cardio sucks. But this shouldn't surprise you at all. Look at all the strongest men in the world - most of them are huge but also very fat, too. Again, I realize they eat alot. But so does my friend down the street who is 6'0 and 145lbs. His body does a good job pulling from fat for energy while the powerlifters typically have a good body for utilizing glycogen for energy. Hence, the high carb diets you see these types of people on.

    But getting back to my point earlier, how it all ties to your "diet plan". What I was saying is that I do believe some people are predispositioned to get fat on high intake of carbs, while others can eat them all day long. Now assuming that neither of these examples has an autoimmune disorder like Type I Diabetes, my earlier post and the stuff ^^^ could be an indicator as to why people are different at handling certain macros.

    If I were an endurance trainee, as in I was super skinny, lean, struggled with packing on real mass given my frame, and was really good a running - I'd consider a not-so-extreme version of Keto dieting where I put more emphasis on protein and fats over carbs, since my body sucks at manufacturing energy from carbs anyways. Live off the fats, grow off the protein.

    However, I'm not like that at all lol. I'm just the opposite which is why a low fat, high carb & high protein diet has been working decently for me.
  16. Elite Member
    Jiigzz's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  205 lbs.
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    5,203
    Rep Power
    3370560

    Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by fueledpassion View Post
    Something else I didn't consider either was that people have different percentages of Type I & Type II muscle fibers. Obviously, Type I's are good at burning fat and providing endurance while the faster twitch Type II's are better at using glucose for energy.

    I obviously have lots of Type IIb's (the far right side) since I can eat 400+ grams of carbs, and actually stay lean, if not actually lose some BF.

    And as a side note, I have come to the conclusion that a low fat, high carb, high protein diet is good for people who are already considerably lean, have a high tolerance for carbs and look to exclusively pack on lean muscle mass with minimal fat gain.
    This I think, is a very valid argument. I haven't yet seen a study which draws a correlation between muscle fiber types and dietary intakes; what we do know is that muscle fiber activation is dependant on the intensity of exercise being performed but what i'm unsure of is if fiber types can alter nutrient requirements at rest or if it really makes any difference. I.e. sitting on a chair reading a book is no longer high intensity, therefore fatty acids are used as a fuel etc. Interesting to see if anyone else knows.

    The only thing i'd throw into the argument is that, although Marathon runners utilise predominatly fat for oxidation, their carb intakes can exceed 7-8g per KG of bodyweight.

    Research time Nice thinking fueled.
    Serious Nutrition Solutions Representative
    X-gels: Arachidonic Acid made affordable
  17. Professional Member
    fueledpassion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    3,525
    Rep Power
    645670

    Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by Jiigzz View Post
    This I think, is a very valid argument. I haven't yet seen a study which draws a correlation between muscle fiber types and dietary intakes; what we do know is that muscle fiber activation is dependant on the intensity of exercise being performed but what i'm unsure of is if fiber types can alter nutrient requirements at rest or if it really makes any difference. I.e. sitting on a chair reading a book is no longer high intensity, therefore fatty acids are used as a fuel etc. Interesting to see if anyone else knows.

    The only thing i'd throw into the argument is that, although Marathon runners utilise predominatly fat for oxidation, their carb intakes can exceed 7-8g per KG of bodyweight.

    Research time Nice thinking fueled.

    Someone needs to get to the bottom of this within the next few years. We need an explanation as to why I rock the gym while others dont.
  18. Pro Virili Parte
    JudoJosh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Age
    29
    Posts
    8,847
    Rep Power
    2142557

    Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation

    Re: My Diet Plan


    Thinking muscle fiber type has an influence on dietary needs is just silly. Your activities has a much bigger influence. Such as a wrestler vs a long distance runner but take a group of people who all have different fiber dominance and have them workout and nutrient needs will be the same. I think what you guys are confusing is comparing metabolic efficient to metabolic inefficiency.

    Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S™II using Tapatalk 2
    "The only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance." - Socrates
  19. New Member
    jonpaulevans's Avatar
    Stats
    5'11"  240 lbs.
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    78
    Rep Power
    97

    Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by JudoJosh View Post
    Thinking muscle fiber type has an influence on dietary needs is just silly. Your activities has a much bigger influence. Such as a wrestler vs a long distance runner but take a group of people who all have different fiber dominance and have them workout and nutrient needs will be the same. I think what you guys are confusing is comparing metabolic efficient to metabolic inefficiency.

    Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S™II using Tapatalk 2
    Not that I have any clue as to which point is right but... Let's assume the subjects are working out in a certain way that is best suited to their muscle fibers. For example a long distance runner is running at almost full effort and a powerlifter is lifting close to 1 RM and each are doing this for the same length of time. Is there a chance that the nutrient needs will be different or should be different. Or another way to think of it is to ask if each would benefit from a different amount of the various nutrients - or a different ratio or c/p/f? Not debating, Just curious. It's an interesting idea.

    Or are the nutrients or ratios the same (or similar) and it's just the calories or meal timing that sort of differ from one type of athlete to the other?

    If not - what then makes certain people respond better or worse to a particular ratio? The Met efficiency as Judo stated?
  20. Pro Virili Parte
    JudoJosh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Age
    29
    Posts
    8,847
    Rep Power
    2142557

    Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation

    Re: My Diet Plan


    Think of it this way. We know that across all sports a ketogenic diet (once fat adapted) has been shown to not significantly effect strength gains or performance.

    Now is it optimal? Would performance change with different ratios such as more carbs? This is going to be highly individualized and will vary depending on lots of factors and I don't believe muscle fiber types would be one of those factors but I suppose anything is possible.

    Ultimately anyone can go on a high fat/low carb or low fat/high carb or whatever type diet and make progress.



    Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S™II using Tapatalk 2
    "The only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance." - Socrates
  21. Advanced Member
    TexasGuy's Avatar
    Stats
    6'0"  238 lbs.
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    796
    Rep Power
    188234

    Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by jonpaulevans View Post
    from a harvard review:
    One highly-publicized report analyzed the findings of 21 studies that followed 350,000 people for up to 23 years. Investigators looked at the relationship between saturated fat intake and coronary heart disease (CHD), stroke, and cardiovascular disease (CVD). Their controversial conclusion: “There is insufficient evidence from prospective epidemiologic studies to conclude that dietary saturated fat is associated with an increased risk of CHD, stroke, or CVD...

    My words: So it seems people would read that paragraph and leave thinking, "okay so I can eat more saturated fats."

    Next paragraph in article:
    With headlines like “Saturated Fat is Not Your Heart’s Enemy,” and “NOT GUILTY: The Long-Standing Vilification of Saturated Fat Finally Turning to Vindication,” some of the media and blog coverage of these studies would have you believe that scientists had given a green light to eating bacon, butter, and cheese. But that’s an oversimplified and erroneous interpretation. Read the study and subsequent studies more closely, and the message is more nuanced: Cutting back on saturated fat can be good for health if people replace saturated fat with good fats, especially, polyunsaturated fats. Eating good fats in place of saturated fat lowers the “bad” LDL cholesterol, and it improves the ratio of total cholesterol to “good” HDL cholesterol, lowering the risk of heart disease. Eating good fats in place of saturated fat can also help prevent insulin resistance, a precursor to diabetes.

    next para
    Cutting back on saturated fat will likely have no benefit, however, if people replace saturated fat with refined carbohydrates—white bread, white rice, mashed potatoes, sugary drinks, and the like. Eating refined carbs in place of saturated fat does lower “bad” LDL cholesterol—but it also lowers the “good” HDL cholesterol and increases triglycerides. The net effect is as bad for the heart as eating too much saturated fat—and perhaps even worse for people who have insulin resistance because they are overweight or inactive

    my words: so cut sat fats (to a degree) and avoid high-glycemic carbs (as my earliest conversation with a poster discussed 'about bread')

    final point from the article:
    The latest Dietary Guidelines for Americans recommends getting less than 10 percent of calories each day from saturated fat. The American Heart Association goes even further, recommending limiting saturated fat to no more than 7 percent of calories. But framing diet recommendations in terms of “percentage of daily calories” is not terribly useful for the average consumer. That’s because people eat foods—not isolated nutrients.

    my words: So I seem to have the AHA recommendations of sat fat intake that I asked about previously. And before those two guys say "see, don't use percentages" notice the article says "average consumers" yet points out the percentage to aim for. Average consumers don't break down diets like us lifters and fitness freaks. If you are serious about monitoring your diet, learning where you operate at your best you need to know your macro count and have a good idea of the ratio/% it represents to your overall caloric intake. As a lifter I indeed look at my diet as isolated nutrients - that come in the form of chicken, lima beans, eggs, etc; which are packed full of nutrients to account for.
    my diet is 45/35/20 and total cals of 2992 based on my target body weight of 220 at 15% bf
    that makes my fat intake: of 66 grams (20%) so 10% would be 33 g of sat fat - I may go on the lower recommendation and cap off at 25 g of sat fats ( I think my math is right - it's from memory and in my head)

    Since this is a diet advice post - please advise
    Well you've done it now. Just had to introduce application, didn't you?




    * f@ck me running, just couldn't hold the snark.
  22. Elite Member
    Jiigzz's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  205 lbs.
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    5,203
    Rep Power
    3370560

    Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by JudoJosh View Post
    Thinking muscle fiber type has an influence on dietary needs is just silly. Your activities has a much bigger influence. Such as a wrestler vs a long distance runner but take a group of people who all have different fiber dominance and have them workout and nutrient needs will be the same. I think what you guys are confusing is comparing metabolic efficient to metabolic inefficiency.

    Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S™II using Tapatalk 2
    Of course; the muscle fibers will only be activated dependant on the type of activity being performed, and type II are not likely to be activated whilist at rest etc. etc. hence why I stated that.

    Forgive me
    Serious Nutrition Solutions Representative
    X-gels: Arachidonic Acid made affordable
  23. Elite Member
    Jiigzz's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  205 lbs.
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    5,203
    Rep Power
    3370560

    Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by TexasGuy View Post
    Well you've done it now. Just had to introduce application, didn't you?




    * f@ck me running, just couldn't hold the snark.
    Oh, never mind. Lol.
    Serious Nutrition Solutions Representative
    X-gels: Arachidonic Acid made affordable
  24. Advanced Member
    TexasGuy's Avatar
    Stats
    6'0"  238 lbs.
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    796
    Rep Power
    188234

    Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by Jiigzz View Post
    Oh, never mind. Lol.
    I just can't help myself.

    FWIW, I eat lots of saturated fats. Steak is as important as water in Texas. I still understand OP however.

    OP, consider pears, peaches, quinoa, shrimp, scallops, clams, plums, kale, cauliflower and lean pork cuts to your various categories.
  25. Pro Virili Parte
    JudoJosh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Age
    29
    Posts
    8,847
    Rep Power
    2142557

    Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation

    Re: My Diet Plan


    Quote Originally Posted by jonpaulevans View Post
    from a harvard review:
    One highly-publicized report analyzed the findings of 21 studies that followed 350,000 people for up to 23 years. Investigators looked at the relationship between saturated fat intake and coronary heart disease (CHD), stroke, and cardiovascular disease (CVD). Their controversial conclusion: “There is insufficient evidence from prospective epidemiologic studies to conclude that dietary saturated fat is associated with an increased risk of CHD, stroke, or CVD...

    My words: So it seems people would read that paragraph and leave thinking, "okay so I can eat more saturated fats."

    Next paragraph in article:
    With headlines like “Saturated Fat is Not Your Heart’s Enemy,” and “NOT GUILTY: The Long-Standing Vilification of Saturated Fat Finally Turning to Vindication,” some of the media and blog coverage of these studies would have you believe that scientists had given a green light to eating bacon, butter, and cheese. But that’s an oversimplified and erroneous interpretation. Read the study and subsequent studies more closely, and the message is more nuanced: Cutting back on saturated fat can be good for health if people replace saturated fat with good fats, especially, polyunsaturated fats. Eating good fats in place of saturated fat lowers the “bad” LDL cholesterol, and it improves the ratio of total cholesterol to “good” HDL cholesterol, lowering the risk of heart disease. Eating good fats in place of saturated fat can also help prevent insulin resistance, a precursor to diabetes.

    next para
    Cutting back on saturated fat will likely have no benefit, however, if people replace saturated fat with refined carbohydrates—white bread, white rice, mashed potatoes, sugary drinks, and the like. Eating refined carbs in place of saturated fat does lower “bad” LDL cholesterol—but it also lowers the “good” HDL cholesterol and increases triglycerides. The net effect is as bad for the heart as eating too much saturated fat—and perhaps even worse for people who have insulin resistance because they are overweight or inactive

    my words: so cut sat fats (to a degree) and avoid high-glycemic carbs (as my earliest conversation with a poster discussed 'about bread')

    final point from the article:
    The latest Dietary Guidelines for Americans recommends getting less than 10 percent of calories each day from saturated fat. The American Heart Association goes even further, recommending limiting saturated fat to no more than 7 percent of calories. But framing diet recommendations in terms of “percentage of daily calories” is not terribly useful for the average consumer. That’s because people eat foods—not isolated nutrients.

    my words: So I seem to have the AHA recommendations of sat fat intake that I asked about previously. And before those two guys say "see, don't use percentages" notice the article says "average consumers" yet points out the percentage to aim for. Average consumers don't break down diets like us lifters and fitness freaks. If you are serious about monitoring your diet, learning where you operate at your best you need to know your macro count and have a good idea of the ratio/% it represents to your overall caloric intake. As a lifter I indeed look at my diet as isolated nutrients - that come in the form of chicken, lima beans, eggs, etc; which are packed full of nutrients to account for.
    my diet is 45/35/20 and total cals of 2992 based on my target body weight of 220 at 15% bf
    that makes my fat intake: of 66 grams (20%) so 10% would be 33 g of sat fat - I may go on the lower recommendation and cap off at 25 g of sat fats ( I think my math is right - it's from memory and in my head)

    Since this is a diet advice post - please advise
    Please post either the link, PMID or title of the paper.

    Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S™II using Tapatalk 2
    "The only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance." - Socrates
  26. New Member
    jonpaulevans's Avatar
    Stats
    5'11"  240 lbs.
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    78
    Rep Power
    97

    Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by JudoJosh View Post
    Please post either the link, PMID or title of the paper.

    Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S™II using Tapatalk 2
    Anabolic minds wont let me post links until I have 150 posts but I'll see if I can find the paper again and post it somehow.

    EDIT: www(dot)hsph(dot)harvard(dot)e du/nutritionsource/fats-full-story/
  27. Pro Virili Parte
    JudoJosh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Age
    29
    Posts
    8,847
    Rep Power
    2142557

    Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation

    Re: My Diet Plan


    Harvard study


    Red and processed meat consumption and risk of incident coronary heart disease, stroke, and diabetes mellitus: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

    Micha R, Wallace SK, Mozaffarian D.
    Source

    Department of Epidemiology, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA. rmicha@hsph.harvard.edu

    Abstract

    BACKGROUND:

    Meat consumption is inconsistently associated with development of coronary heart disease (CHD), stroke, and diabetes mellitus, limiting quantitative recommendations for consumption levels. Effects of meat intake on these different outcomes, as well as of red versus processed meat, may also vary.

    METHODS AND RESULTS:

    We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of evidence for relationships of red (unprocessed), processed, and total meat consumption with incident CHD, stroke, and diabetes mellitus. We searched for any cohort study, case-control study, or randomized trial that assessed these exposures and outcomes in generally healthy adults. Of 1598 identified abstracts, 20 studies met inclusion criteria, including 17 prospective cohorts and 3 case-control studies. All data were abstracted independently in duplicate. Random-effects generalized least squares models for trend estimation were used to derive pooled dose-response estimates. The 20 studies included 1 218 380 individuals and 23 889 CHD, 2280 stroke, and 10 797 diabetes mellitus cases. Red meat intake was not associated with CHD (n=4 studies; relative risk per 100-g serving per day=1.00; 95% confidence interval, 0.81 to 1.23; P for heterogeneity=0.36) or diabetes mellitus (n=5; relative risk=1.16; 95% confidence interval, 0.92 to 1.46; P=0.25). Conversely, processed meat intake was associated with 42% higher risk of CHD (n=5; relative risk per 50-g serving per day=1.42; 95% confidence interval, 1.07 to 1.89; P=0.04) and 19% higher risk of diabetes mellitus (n=7; relative risk=1.19; 95% confidence interval, 1.11 to 1.27; P<0.001). Associations were intermediate for total meat intake. Consumption of red and processed meat were not associated with stroke, but only 3 studies evaluated these relationships.
    CONCLUSIONS:

    Consumption of processed meats, but not red meats, is associated with higher incidence of CHD and diabetes mellitus. These results highlight the need for better understanding of potential mechanisms of effects and for particular focus on processed meats for dietary and policy recommendations.
    Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S™II using Tapatalk 2
    "The only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance." - Socrates
  28. New Member
    jonpaulevans's Avatar
    Stats
    5'11"  240 lbs.
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    78
    Rep Power
    97

    Reputation

    JudoJosh - That's good news to me bc as someone with High cholesterol I was convinced I had to cut saturated fats - and that mainly meant I'd have to drastically reduce my beef intake. Jiigzz recommended a book about the cholesterol myth which I'm happy to say I received the other day and started reading it last night. I learning it's more about the TRANS-FATS than saturated. Bc of the input I've received on this thread I have upped my saturated fats by re-introducing beef into my regular diet and I gotta say I feel pretty good. It's only been a few days but I think I feel a huge relief with the new permission of steaks and ground beef in my meals. So thank you to everyone who is contributing and to everyone who will continue to contribute.
  29. Elite Member
    Jiigzz's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  205 lbs.
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    5,203
    Rep Power
    3370560

    Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by JudoJosh View Post
    Thinking muscle fiber type has an influence on dietary needs is just silly. Your activities has a much bigger influence. Such as a wrestler vs a long distance runner but take a group of people who all have different fiber dominance and have them workout and nutrient needs will be the same. I think what you guys are confusing is comparing metabolic efficient to metabolic inefficiency.

    Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S™II using Tapatalk 2
    Not sure if you're following the discussion on CS, but a high fat, low carb diet induces PCF-1Alpha. So I guess diet can be manipulated in this scenario for oxidative fibers. Not too sure about type II though. Be interesting to see
    Serious Nutrition Solutions Representative
    X-gels: Arachidonic Acid made affordable
  30. Professional Member
    fueledpassion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    3,525
    Rep Power
    645670

    Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by jonpaulevans View Post
    JudoJosh - That's good news to me bc as someone with High cholesterol I was convinced I had to cut saturated fats - and that mainly meant I'd have to drastically reduce my beef intake. Jiigzz recommended a book about the cholesterol myth which I'm happy to say I received the other day and started reading it last night. I learning it's more about the TRANS-FATS than saturated. Bc of the input I've received on this thread I have upped my saturated fats by re-introducing beef into my regular diet and I gotta say I feel pretty good. It's only been a few days but I think I feel a huge relief with the new permission of steaks and ground beef in my meals. So thank you to everyone who is contributing and to everyone who will continue to contribute.
    One thing is for certain, regardless of saturated fats being good or bad, you get lots of high-quality iron from your red meats. I usually eat deer/venison in place of beef which has less fat, less cholesterol (doesn't really matter though) and high in protein...and it's cheaper too since I pay about 50 bucks for an entire deer (30-60lbs of meat).
  31. Professional Member
    fueledpassion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    3,525
    Rep Power
    645670

    Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by Jiigzz View Post
    Not sure if you're following the discussion on CS, but a high fat, low carb diet induces PCF-1Alpha. So I guess diet can be manipulated in this scenario for oxidative fibers. Not too sure about type II though. Be interesting to see
    Now I have also read that you can convert a Type IIb into a Type IIa fast twitch with enough higher intensity cardio. As in, you can increase mitochondria to a point that the muscle evolves into a muscle that has some characteristics of both TI and TII's.

    Is there currently any studies looking into this? The long-term effects of muscle fiber adaptation to cardio?
  32. Elite Member
    Jiigzz's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  205 lbs.
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    5,203
    Rep Power
    3370560

    Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by fueledpassion View Post
    Now I have also read that you can convert a Type IIb into a Type IIa fast twitch with enough higher intensity cardio. As in, you can increase mitochondria to a point that the muscle evolves into a muscle that has some characteristics of both TI and TII's.

    Is there currently any studies looking into this? The long-term effects of muscle fiber adaptation to cardio?
    Type I will never really transition to type II fibers, you can only shift the balance slightly. Type IIb can transition to type IIx under the right circumstances
    Serious Nutrition Solutions Representative
    X-gels: Arachidonic Acid made affordable
  33. New Member
    virago88's Avatar
    Stats
    5'3"  58 lbs.
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    41
    Rep Power
    47

    Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by fueledpassion View Post
    I get what ya'll are saying. There is a problem with the argument though.

    Someone who needs 2000 calories a day doesn't need as much fats, carbs or protein in general to maintain health as a person who needs 6000 calories per day. If 20% fats is healthy for a 250lb guy, it should also be healthy for a 150lb guy. If eating 40% protein is adequate for a 250lb guy on any given diet, then 40% protein should also be adequate for a 150lb guy.

    Does not everyone in the room understand that percentages are a type of measurement that is not tied to a specific unit of measure? Percentaged translate to any size person...

    Just because my 20% fat intake is 1000kcals less in per day compared to some other guy doesn't mean that I'm "knocking my macros out of wack". They are very much the same exact macros. I am not following what you guys are trying to say. The whole point of using percentages is so that it never gets knocked out of wack. I can't go around telling people to eat 250g protein daily to build muscle, because in some cases that is true and some it isn't. Yet I can say, eat 40% in protein. That applies every where.

    Percentages don't decide how big the pie is. They only decide how it is sliced.
    Percentage of the overall calorie intake.
  34. Elite Member
    Jiigzz's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  205 lbs.
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    5,203
    Rep Power
    3370560

    Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by fueledpassion View Post
    One thing is for certain, regardless of saturated fats being good or bad, you get lots of high-quality iron from your red meats. I usually eat deer/venison in place of beef which has less fat, less cholesterol (doesn't really matter though) and high in protein...and it's cheaper too since I pay about 50 bucks for an entire deer (30-60lbs of meat).
    What???!!! you can buy a whole deer for $50??? Damn thats good.
    Serious Nutrition Solutions Representative
    X-gels: Arachidonic Acid made affordable
  35. Advanced Member
    TexasGuy's Avatar
    Stats
    6'0"  238 lbs.
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    796
    Rep Power
    188234

    Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by Jiigzz View Post
    What???!!! you can buy a whole deer for $50??? Damn thats good.
    I'm going to guess shooting one and having it processed.
  36. Senior Member
    cumminslifter's Avatar
    Stats
    6'0"  205 lbs.
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Age
    21
    Posts
    1,885
    Rep Power
    1415846

    Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by TexasGuy View Post
    I'm going to guess shooting one and having it processed.
    proccessing costs alot more than 50 dollars where im from. closer to 200
  37. Advanced Member
    TexasGuy's Avatar
    Stats
    6'0"  238 lbs.
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    796
    Rep Power
    188234

    Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by cumminslifter View Post
    proccessing costs alot more than 50 dollars where im from. closer to 200
    Same here but it's the best guess I can come up with. I would be pretty surprised if he was just buying a deer flat out for $50.
  38. Professional Member
    fueledpassion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    3,525
    Rep Power
    645670

    Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by TexasGuy View Post
    I'm going to guess shooting one and having it processed.
    10-4.

    Gotta love Tennessee prices. Some processing plants are as much as $80 but thats about it. Shoot, field dress, quarter it and drop it off for processing is cheapest.
  39. Senior Member
    cumminslifter's Avatar
    Stats
    6'0"  205 lbs.
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Age
    21
    Posts
    1,885
    Rep Power
    1415846

    Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by fueledpassion View Post
    10-4.

    Gotta love Tennessee prices. Some processing plants are as much as $80 but thats about it. Shoot, field dress, quarter it and drop it off for processing is cheapest.
    your lucky. iowa is alot more expensive
  40. Professional Member
    fueledpassion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    3,525
    Rep Power
    645670

    Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by cumminslifter View Post
    your lucky. iowa is alot more expensive
    Well, I do at least field dress the deer and quarter em up before dropping them off. Granted, I usually only get the basics - ground/burger, a few various steaks and maybe a few pounds of sausage.


    My family bagged 4 of them this past fall so we're stocked up til next season!
  •   

      
     

Similar Forum Threads

  1. Critique my diet plan etc.
    By JordanYek in forum Nutrition / Health
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 04-30-2012, 09:13 AM
  2. hey i need help with my diet plan!!
    By HarleyPitts in forum Nutrition / Health
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 12-27-2010, 04:06 PM
  3. What do you guys think about my Diet plan?
    By Changing in forum Weight Loss
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 06-05-2005, 06:28 PM
  4. My diet Plan (rookie) please help
    By tommyboy in forum Weight Loss
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 11-25-2004, 09:32 AM
  5. My diet plan...first time so any advice is welcomed.
    By tommy36p in forum Weight Loss
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 07-01-2004, 02:42 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Log in
Log in