Is It Macros Or Total Calories

Page 2 of 2 First 12

  1. Quote Originally Posted by Omen View Post
    I remember eating nothing but fatty meat for months, it's great and I wouldn't mind doing it, except :

    1- The cost

    2-It puts me in a more aggressive, "clearer" state of mind if that makes sense, which is a good thing, but not in everyday life within the city.
    You know what your side effect #2 is from? Higher testosterone.

  2. Unbreakable
    David Dunn's Avatar

    Ketones tend to be a most potent form of energy for me too. It can almost produce a manic state at times. I used to love to run keto diets for that reason and the tremendous appetite blunting effect after about the second week..

    There's a lot of urban legend of folk lore around carbs and carb phobia but anecdotally, my energy levels tend to be higher and more steady and I sleep much better when carbs are eliminated from my diet. Unfortunately its not the most anabolic or social convenient diet to maintain.

    No science here just speaking my mind...
    •   
       


  3. Some people in here remind me of my parents. I put them both on low-zero carb diets. My dad wasn't losing weight and asked me why. I watched him eat for a few days and it was because he was eating like 4k calories somehow. LOL. CALORIES DO MATTER!

  4. Quote Originally Posted by Nitrox View Post
    Do you have any independent thought or do you just throw up any study that happens to have some similar words in it?
    Your own "independent" thoughts seem to be governed by the old mythological ways of doing things. Mine are governed by people who know what the hell they are talking about. I could spew out supposely independent thoughts, but why not enforce them with people again .... who know what the hell is going on that actually can filter out the bull****. Your choice.

    Where in my points did I mention that upping meal frequency is a way to control obesity? Scroll way back up and you will that number one is total calories. Within that, all things equal, upping meal frequency will have a bias towards less fat gain during a bulk and less muscle loss during a cut.
    Prove it ... give me some hard data that shows this in humans. Otherwise your foundational support on that fact is nothing but bro-talk.

    pubmed.com ... scholar.google.com ... search up my friend.

    Also, since we are talking frequency, which has a time component, your position suggests that there is no value in meal timings whatsoever. If you think that fasting all day long and having one giant meal at the end of the day is just as effective as spacing smaller ones throughout, including pre, post, and if you are an endurance athlete, during WO then great. Good luck with that.
    Did I mention TIME in any of my arguments? Never ... so stop assuming what I said, since this is obviously your way of defending yourself by making false claims. Another brilliant move.

    I am a HUGE proponent of timing of nutrients ... especially around workout periods.

    Sure, frequency has a time component, but it gives you no argumentative stance against me assuming I do NOT take it into consideration. Applaud your efforts.



    My diabetes example is just personal testimony that how the body metoblizes food energy is path dependent (e.g. how much and when it is consumed). You choose to shoe-horn studies into the context of your argument while I try to use info that I have some experience with.
    Well, use your experiences with other diabetes patients. Not us.

    Please, I'm not trying pressuring anyone into a corner by providing studies. I suppose we can't supply scientifically performed studies to validate what we are saying to hopefully bring some insight to the argument? This is where the "broz" get all pissy. You show them research and they cry about it always using a statement just like yourself. "Dude, it works for me and I'm jakt'd!" Carry on with that if you wish.


    Again, go back and read it. I did not say elevated insulin is the culprit for fat gain. I said that all things equal, progressively higher levels lead to progressively more fat gain.

    Even if you don't believe in its value, you should try throwing some snacks into your regimen. I think you are experiencing some serious blood glucose, causing your irritability...
    You are still jumping on the high-gi-to-much-insulin-makes-me-obese-broz stance.

    I'm not irritable, but rather trying to help people (hopefully 1 or more here) to simply go out and question everything you know regarding your nutritional beliefs, and try to validate them with concrete data that is available to you. We all have access to this data, its just how we interpret that ****s people.

    And the sad thing is that if people do 10 meals / day, or 3 meals / day. All people who setup their calories and macros correctly, train hard, recover hard ... etc will get results. Thus, the 10 meal / day guy has already affirmed to himself that 10 meals / day is the way to go since it worked. The 3 meals / day guy has results too and he affirms that 3 is the way to go. Then we have the 10 guy and the 3 guy on these internet forums spewing out bull**** that their way is the best way because they got jakt and have visable abs.

    So essentially just study up on figuring out what things truly matter, then study the hell out of that. Then come up with your own conclusions. Just make sure you can validate your points when asked.

  5. Quote Originally Posted by EasyEJL View Post
    You know what your side effect #2 is from? Higher testosterone.
    This has been shown if you have low fat levels (I believe <10-15% of daily kcals) your testosterone can be affected negatively. You raise fat, your test goes up ... yes.

    But don't give a simple answer like this. There could many other possible reasons why this happens for him.
    •   
       


  6. Quote Originally Posted by B5150 View Post
    Ketones tend to be a most potent form of energy for me too. It can almost produce a manic state at times. I used to love to run keto diets for that reason and the tremendous appetite blunting effect after about the second week..

    No science here just speaking my mind...
    There are lot of people that feel the same way. Lyle talks about this in his Ketogenic Diet book. I've experienced this as well. I've also experienced an increase libido when I'm < 50g carbs. Some people it gets crushed.

  7. You guys all need to chill. Same side, same team.
  8. Unbreakable
    David Dunn's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by Cerberus View Post
    There are lot of people that feel the same way. Lyle talks about this in his Ketogenic Diet book. I've experienced this as well. I've also experienced an increase libido when I'm < 50g carbs. Some people it gets crushed.
    I have been at this for quite a while myself. I am a "study" of as much physiology as I am capable of understanding. I am also a study of several different diet types as well. I am very familiar with Lyle and Duchaines work and the Ketogenic/LowCarb diets.

    I am also very much a "study" of my own physiology and my own phenotype. There are certain generalities that are superceded by phenotypes. Generalities such as calories in calories out are superceded by phenotype IMHO and IMPE.

    I have had discussion with several credible individuals who have corroborated much of my anecdotal physiological self studies. Just one excerpt.

    Quote Originally Posted by B5150
    Quote Originally Posted by Sporto View Post
    There are several things physiologically that point you in the right direction on which approach is optimal, so if you pay attention to these, it can sharpen your learning curve.

    Sporto
    I know Layne (not personally but in cyber) and have followed (more like watched) him and Derrek (Beast) for a long time now. I remember on your video with Layne you discussed some things about your nutrition profile regarding carbs. I don't recall the detail but I know you guys discussed it.

    I know that physiology plays a huge part in how we process nutrients as well as our setpoint. How have you and or others (Layne and his clients) been able to determine what is ideal nutrition for your phenotype?

    I know there is some science behind phenotype dieting but am unsure, without the help of a physiologist, to determine my true physiology and or phenotype. I as surely an endo but (but who knows, may lean to meso somewhat too) but how does one know for sure?

    Obviously starving myself or running myself to death on a treadmill is not the answer.

    Just curious.
    Quote Originally Posted by Sporto View Post
    We very briefly touched on this, but you are right...there are several things to take into consideration (and not all physiological either) when setting up the most optimal diet for someone.

    There are some things just within our own bodies that sort of "point" to the right direction for us. For instance, there is a fairly strong correlation between the "endo" phenotype and those particular people having better mood and energy on low carb/ketogenic diets - obvisouly because of the role insulin is playing within their bodies. That, to me, is an obvious sign right there. There needs to be a low carb/ketogenic approach to their dieting methods for cutting/maintaining/bulking. Cutting would involve more refeeds (think CKD, TKD, etc...), maintaining and bulking might be something more along the lines of low carb or iso-caloric. The point being, that you would NOT put someone like this on moderate to high carb approach. They will feel like crap all the time, their energy levels will be a roller coaster with lots of crashes, and they will ultimately just end up quitting.

    Take me for instance. I'm extremely insulin sensitive (obvisouly if you've seen my journal and saw how high my carbs were even 1 week out from contest). But, in years past I tried the low carb approach. I was downright miserable. Now? I'm a little lethargic at times just from low calories, but I have excellent mood and energy most of the time. That tells me I'm using the more optimal approach for my body. Incidentally, my body before was telling me to stop the low carb approach LOL

    There is more than one way to skin a cat. With some trial and error, paying attention to your body, and some basic common sense, you'll be able to quickly see what route to start with (and then tweak beyond that) to make things optimal for you and whatever your goals are.

    Hope this helps...

    Sporto
    Quote Originally Posted by B5150 View Post
    It did. It is an affirmation and refresher.

    You reminded me how damn good I have felt being ketogenic

    Psychology and physiology often play cat and mouse with you. I love the carbs but they don't love me.

    Thanks.
    Quote Originally Posted by Sporto View Post
    Yep...that right there is your answer (whether it's the one you wanted to hear or not)

    Sporto
    Now I am not saying that ketogenic is the best for me. I am also not saying it isn't. But I will say that I take what everyone says with a grain of salt. I consider the science, the theory, the supporting data and apply it to myself to see if the evidence presents itself as viable to me, my phenotype and my goals.

  9. remember that the best dieticians of the 70s and 80s thought that dietary cholesterol affected serum cholesterol, and that low fat diets (below 10%) were better for you... So what todays best dieticians say I also take with a grain (maybe a few grains) of salt. But to inject some comedy

    A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it. Fifteen hundred years ago everybody knew the Earth was the center of the universe. Five hundred years ago, everybody knew the Earth was flat, and fifteen minutes ago, you knew that humans were alone on this planet. Imagine what you'll know tomorrow.

  10. Quote Originally Posted by EasyEJL View Post
    remember that the best dieticians of the 70s and 80s thought that dietary cholesterol affected serum cholesterol, and that low fat diets (below 10%) were better for you... So what todays best dieticians say I also take with a grain (maybe a few grains) of salt. But to inject some comedy
    Let's not blame the Dietitians. They were basing their information on current medical practice. Try to keep in mind that most of their practice was based on what physicians were writing and prescribing. I think it was Dean Ornish, MD that came up with the <10%fat diet


    Also, don't forget that most dieitians back in the 70's and 80's were not as well informed and in the informational loop as they are now. Thanks to the world wide web. Now they can do their own independant research, have access to thousands of studies, and most importantly they can draw their own conclusions.
    Give a man a fish, feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish, feed him for life. Lao Tse 6th century BC

  11. Quote Originally Posted by EasyEJL View Post
    remember that the best dieticians of the 70s and 80s thought that dietary cholesterol affected serum cholesterol, and that low fat diets (below 10%) were better for you... So what todays best dieticians say I also take with a grain (maybe a few grains) of salt. But to inject some comedy

    Was that quote from Independence Day? LOL

  12. close, men in black

  13. hmmm damn thats lot of info to digest in this thread. If I was the OP i'd be confused as hell by now. LOL I think a little personal experimentation is in order. Just stick to the basics and some common sense and adjust if you don't like to results your getting.

    Eat lean proteins
    Eat good fats
    Watch your carbs
    Don't gorge yourself
    and excersize

    I tried the "scientific route" with the bmi and all the crazy caloric calculations. But at the end of the day, I ended up just eating

    chickenbreast/broccoli/oatmeal/protein shakes

    LOL I am admittedly a noob so maybe this is "noob advice" but so far i'm down 23 pounds and 3 inches on my waist in 6 weeks while i've added 15 pounds to my bench and a 1/2 inch to both my arms. IN MY OPINION, I don't think weight loss is that complicated. Just eat lean and work hard.
  14. Unbreakable
    David Dunn's Avatar

    Sxhawnn,

    You're absolutely right. BMI/BMR are worthless IMO. One does not need to count calories but tracking food intake is at least required. If you are not losing weight, eat less or exercise more or both. If you are losing weight you're doing fine. But that is for weight loss. For those who are over weight and or obese it is indeed very simple.

    The thing with bodybuilding is that nutrition optimizes fat loss as opposed to just weight loss. The idea is to lose only body fat and retain LBM. Calories, macro nutrition, carbohydrates, nutrient timing are critical in the optimization of losing body fat and retaining LMB.

    At the end of the day if I am not a pro or a competitive bodybuilder it is obsessive compulsive behavior...

    ...hence we body build anyway
  •   

      
     

Similar Forum Threads

  1. questions about Macros/ total nutrtion
    By bigzach1234 in forum Nutrition / Health
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 03-12-2009, 11:58 PM
  2. calories/calories from fat/ sugar alcohol
    By stfdkd37 in forum Weight Loss
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 10-02-2008, 06:48 PM
  3. Total T and Total E both high...
    By RoberG623 in forum Male Anti-Aging Medicine
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 06-28-2007, 09:02 PM
  4. Calories Burned vs calories taken
    By xaktsaroth in forum Bulking
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 03-24-2006, 10:01 AM
  5. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-18-2005, 12:19 AM
Log in
Log in