Dietary fat is more readily converted than other macros to subcutaneous fat than when calories are in excess
Of course, high fat on a cut may not be a bad thing provided you have enough calories left for adequate protein to still be in a deficit
You can get just as lean with high(er) fat/low(er) carbs than the other way around, assuming they are good fats. I'd argue you can get even leaner that way, especially if you're in ketosis.
MCT's function more like a carb than a traditional fat anyway.
This is gonna sound dumb, but I really don't know that much in the subject to have an informed opinion on this. Most of what I wrote above was based on what that guy did as his own Lean Bulk experiment. Anyway, if I understand what you say correctly then yes, maybe the super-high carbs could lead to intracellular fat increase. The main point was that carbs do not get stored as body fat directly under the skin (subcontaneous fat) like eating fat does. Carbs do not want to get stored as body fat at all, but when it eventually does due to huge amounts of carbs, it will be as the types of body fat that have higher heath risks.
I do not have a scientific source about that specifically, only this guys own experiment, but he is very knowledgable about dieting, have been lifting for 10+ years reaching his genetic potential, is ripped, etc... There are however studies showing that a surplus from carbs equal to a surplus from fat does not lead to as much fat gain (the carbs were not extreme, but high). They divided people in a high carb/low fat group and low carb/high fat group with the same total calories ans the latter gained more fat in the 8-12 weeks or whatever.
Imo, 30g fat is very low. I've tried that and it excluded a lot of foods. Most people seem to agree on that BWx0.25-0.3 is low enough to get the favourable effects of a low fat intake (if there is any).
This is my experience:
- started bulking in January. Maintenance 3000 calories at 6'3 180 lbs. Started a "lean bulk" by 500g carbs, 50g fat, 200g protein for 3250 calories. Gained weight slowly.
- Eventually weight gain stalled. Increased to 550g carbs. Gained maybe another pound then it stopped.
- Increased protein to 225g. Barely gained any weight. My reasoning here is that the extra calories from the carbs and protein was just being burnt off.
- Decided to bump up the fats instead. Have done so slowly with a steady weight increase. Now eating roughly 550g carbs, 75g fat, 225g protein for 3800 calories but I haven't gained any weight at all in a month of those macros. I am now 20 pounds heavier than back in January when my maintenance was 3000 calories. I suspect my maintenance have gone up a lot from being heavier and from eating more carbs and protein which increase the metabolism. I have gained some body fat, but it's less than I initially expected from a 20 pound gain.
- I'll have to increase calories calories further to gain more weight and will do so by carbs and fat, since I am already stuffing myself and I don't think more carbs will lead to as much weight gain as the same calorie increase from both carbs and fat.
I prefer to eat carbs rather than fat.
If you train 3x weekly by low volume like SS or Stronglifts 5x5 or even a split where some of your session are only arms or shoulders, then sure, you don't need many carbs. But if you do something like Sheiko where its mostly squatting, deadlifting and benching for 2+ hours 3-5 times a week, and do cardio on off days, then I think higher carbs are needed.
Firstly, I'm not going to pay attention to anything Lyle ever says or does. Dude is a fucking idiot, I'm only going to take advice on diet and excercise from people who are bigger, stronger and leaner than me. Lyle is none of those things.
If by "knowledge" you mean studies or whatever, there are plenty on PubMed, but that's besides the point (you can find studies to prove just about anything).
There is also evidence that limiting carbs to the morning is a good weight loss strategy for the general population (but that is only for weight loss, not necessarily fat loss) and that the opposite is true for recreational athletes and people that train (limit carbs to the last meals of the day).
And there is a ton of studies that cover that fat burning properties found in many healthy fats (CLA's etc).
As has been said, calorie deficit/surplus is the most important factor for weight loss/gain, macro's are largely a personal bias (how each macro effects you and what makes you feel the best personally in terms of energy and mood and whatnot).
My main point is - fat is not bad. Fat is very good.
My second point is - there is more than one way to do things.
When I want to lose fat I prefer to increase activity rather than lower cals anyway.
Because I don't give a fuck how smart somebody is if they can't apply that intelligence to their own body.
If you "know" how to get big and lean, but you aren't either of those things, why would I listen? What proof is there that what you're saying is going to work if it hasn't worked for yourself?
If I think somebody has something to offer then of course I will be all ears, I don't think Lyle has anything to offer me.
And honestly I don't think Lyle is all that smart to begin with.
I'm assuming this is directed at me.
Why would I listen to Piana? Because I don't care to listen to Lyle then I obviously get all my information from injected roid heads then, right?
If Lyle was huge, I would listen, he's not, so I don't. I'm more likely to listen to somebody like Layne Norton or Bill Willis, or better yet, read a bunch of shit on the topic that covers multiple angles and come to my own conclusions.