Is It Macros Or Total Calories
- 08-10-2008, 10:35 AM
- 08-10-2008, 10:45 AM
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...
08-10-2008, 11:37 AM
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!
08-10-2008, 01:48 PM
Prove it ... give me some hard data that shows this in humans. Otherwise your foundational support on that fact is nothing but bro-talk.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.
pubmed.com ... scholar.google.com ... search up my friend.
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.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.
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.
Well, use your experiences with other diabetes patients. Not us.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.
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.
You are still jumping on the high-gi-to-much-insulin-makes-me-obese-broz stance.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...
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.
08-10-2008, 01:51 PM
But don't give a simple answer like this. There could many other possible reasons why this happens for him.
08-10-2008, 01:54 PM
08-10-2008, 02:11 PM
08-10-2008, 02:49 PM
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.
08-10-2008, 02:56 PM
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.
08-10-2008, 03:07 PM
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
08-10-2008, 03:29 PM
08-10-2008, 03:31 PM
08-11-2008, 09:09 PM
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
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
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.
08-11-2008, 09:50 PM
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
- By bigzach1234 in forum Nutrition / HealthReplies: 1Last Post: 03-13-2009, 12:58 AM
- By stfdkd37 in forum Weight LossReplies: 3Last Post: 10-02-2008, 07:48 PM
- By RoberG623 in forum Male Anti-Aging MedicineReplies: 8Last Post: 06-28-2007, 10:02 PM
- By xaktsaroth in forum BulkingReplies: 15Last Post: 03-24-2006, 11:01 AM
- By Goat in forum Weight LossReplies: 0Last Post: 05-18-2005, 01:19 AM