more or less yep. watching total calories is still important though, but overall you are somewhat less likely to store calories from eaten fat as fat than calories from carbs.
I think you meant fats get stored more easier because the process required is easier then protein or carbohydrates!
JajaNe20 said:Well I am not going to argue, sorry to inform you I learned this in Nutrtion II which is an advanced course last semester! I am not trying to be a smart a$s, I am just trying to relay "Correct" information instead of myths.
The fat and protein groups lost weight while the carb group either stayed the same or gained some
^ Also carbs hold onto water therefore could have caused the weight to stay steady as opposed to the other people's diets who didn't have carbohydrates in which they would have lost a significant amount of water weight. Let's use our heads here guys instead of reading an abstract! BAHAHA
Hmm no use arhuing with a lost cause. You guys have to realize limitations, exercise, and others before you "bark" with your studies. Someone being sedentary will not need carbohydrates as much as someone being vigorously active. EASY it's okay to be wrong sometimes lil man :hug:
I agree you Easy. But how is this an anabolic diet? It definitely is a great diet for weight loss, but I don't see it being good for building muscle either.
Always thought thats why a lot of people carb cycled?
Well I am not going to argue, sorry to inform you I learned this in Nutrtion II which is an advanced course last semester! I am not trying to be a smart a$s, I am just trying to relay "Correct" information instead of myths.
There were studies done on individual groups eating isocaloric diets of either fat, protein, or carbohydrates. Each group was to ingest 1000 calories with ~90% coming from their respective macronutrient. The fat and protein groups lost weight while the carb group either stayed the same or gained some. There are numerous physiological mechanisms behind this, and that study was well as many others shows you that the traditional dietetics courses base their curriculum on outdated information.
My advice for the OP on his attempt at the anabolic diet is to really watch the carb load time. Based on my personal, as well as many others, experiences, the 5-on-2-off approach outlined in the book is simply too great a window for carbs. I found that having an entire weekend for carbs gave me too much "spillover". I feel a 4-on-1-off approach provides the greatest results while also being psychologically easier.
For the low carb days jus make sure to eat your fatty protein/meat sources, get some fiber, and watch the carbs from nuts and some high starch veggies.
Definitely a good diet to help you get down to a solid weight. I would never use it below 15% bodyfat since I really think it can be catabolic.So this turned out great... I'll start this diet probally next month.... See how it goes.... Just no carbs seems easy when I love meat and eggs and hotdogs etc....
Definitely a good diet to help you get down to a solid weight. I would never use it below 15% bodyfat since I really think it can be catabolic.
Kev do you have info on that study? I read a mention to this study in either protein power or 4hr body (I can't remember but I think one of them) and I tried to find the actual study and I couldn't find it.
Well in that case, I want my money back! It's bullshi* that I payed for an innaccurate class that cost me 3,000$. My apologies everyone, it was what I was taught :lame:
JajaNe20 said:Well in that case, I want my money back! It's bullshi* that I payed for an innaccurate class that cost me 3,000$. My apologies everyone, it was what I was taught :lame:
It is largely political which is sad. Look at the food pyramid and guess how much support a high fat, no grains high protein diet gets ? But all evidence points to that sort of diet having the lowest incidence of obesity, diabetes, cancer, and a bunch of other issues. Wonder why obesity has skyrocketed since the 70s? That was when children who grew up hearing the AHA's "low fat, high carb with fiber" message startes becoming adults, and began raising their children eating less eggs, less bacon, but more waffles and pancakes.
I'll still argue though that the evidence that there is less muscle loss in a ketogenic diet as most guys do it is almost nonexistent. To be a real ketogenic diet a 15% bf 200lb guy would have to eat only around 130 g protein a day. More than that and a good amount gets turned to glucose via gluconeogenesis anyhow, ruining the ketogenic state.
Keto stick readings are meaningless. You'd only have high ketones in your urine if you were creating more ketones than you are burning.
Hmm no use arhuing with a lost cause. You guys have to realize limitations, exercise, and others before you "bark" with your studies. Someone being sedentary will not need carbohydrates as much as someone being vigorously active. EASY it's okay to be wrong sometimes lil man :hug:
fitmom110 said:wow, that is good to know ... i had been stressing over the keto stix readings for apparently nothing ...
So like after a carb up day I would typically follow with 2 days of depletion style training and wonder why my stix was still reading trace / small ... it was apparently because only the ketones that I did not burn were showing up on there. is that a correct interpretation of what you said?
I was so sure I had to go down further on the carbs due to my stix not getting really dark.
What are your thoughts about the Anabolic Diet's 30net carb limit? like for women (with a slow metabolism like mine that needs to be built up) and for my fat loss goals (between 20 - 25pds), do you think 30net is too much? Not that I'm complaining - I like being able to eat that much net carbs ... it's just that I only dropped 2pds in this month on this and would really prefer dropping at least 1pd / wk
30g isn't bad, so long as its moderately spread out. Have you been tracking calories accurately? Using a scale to weigh everything, measuring cups/spoons etc ?