or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Health & Body › Random health and exercise thoughts
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Random health and exercise thoughts - Page 3136

post #47026 of 57261
Because we want to be ripped?

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
post #47027 of 57261
Quote:
Originally Posted by skeen7908 View Post

is that his porn name or what

surely it can't be real


Imaginative parents. It was that, kooper or sebastian.


Got my gymnastics rings, anchored into the ceiling and I just bought 60kg of shitty non olympic plates for like $60. Also have a 20lb weight vest. BW + 150lb pull up before I finish uni? New flat mates haven't moved in yet, don't know if they'll like this.



I don't find fat satiating at all so I keep it very low, like 20-30g a day with very high carbs.
post #47028 of 57261
Quote:
Originally Posted by skeen7908 View Post

Because we want to be ripped?

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.

post #47029 of 57261
Quote:
Originally Posted by skeen7908 View Post

@@conceptionist

Why is de novo lipogenesis more likely to form around organs? Are you sure youre not talking about hepatic (intracellular) steatosis/fat deposition (which comes with health problems of its own)
Do you have a source at all? Im not disbelieving just curious as ive never heard it before

In any case those carb numbers are really high im thinking more 250P, 500C, 30F slow clean bulk: do you think fat creation would be essentially 0 with this?

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.

post #47030 of 57261

I just got done with breakfast, and it was small, and it was 32g of fat. 

I'm not anti-carb either. It just seems like there are a lot more people who are scared of fat then there are that are scared of carbs. And people have a warped sense of what "high" fat is.

post #47031 of 57261

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.

post #47032 of 57261
Quote:
Originally Posted by OccultaVexillum View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by skeen7908 View Post

Because we want to be ripped?


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.

Well that isn't true (at least when on a caloric surplus) as we have been discussing
Unless you have knowledge to the contrary

Quote:
Originally Posted by conceptionist View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by skeen7908 View Post

@@conceptionist


Why is de novo lipogenesis more likely to form around organs? Are you sure youre not talking about hepatic (intracellular) steatosis/fat deposition (which comes with health problems of its own)

Do you have a source at all? Im not disbelieving just curious as ive never heard it before


In any case those carb numbers are really high im thinking more 250P, 500C, 30F slow clean bulk: do you think fat creation would be essentially 0 with this?
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.


Here is an article, lyle mcdonald hes weird but he doesnt usually make shit up

http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/how-we-get-fat.html

Seems like de novo lipogenesis kicks in when dietary fat is less than 10% of calories (so like 30g if youre on 3000cal/day) or carb intake >700-900 (though he does not cite sources for either of these claims im inclined to believe him)
And dietary protein cannot be converted to fat

So a bulking diet could be ~30g fat, <600g carb (to be safe) then protein to make up the rest and no DNL

Of course the entire 30g of consumed fat may go all to subcut stores with no oxidation: 30g a day is 210g a week, less than a kg a month but still thats quite a lot!

But youre right, its very difficult to keep fat <30g if you are also trying to get high protein. Basically can only eat whey or chicken breast. Unless youre rich you can eat seafood i guess but youll die from mercury poisoning

I couldnt find anything about visceral fat creation or intracellular fat on a quick google search
post #47033 of 57261
Quote:
Originally Posted by skeen7908 View Post


Well that isn't true (at least when on a caloric surplus) as we have been discussing
Unless you have knowledge to the contrary
Here is an article, lyle mcdonald hes weird but he doesnt usually make shit up

http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/how-we-get-fat.html
 

 

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.

post #47034 of 57261
Im not sure many of those things are true

I think the Tldr is: the only solution is better genetics or better drugs. Your physiology will find a way to fuck you over
As is the case with most bodybuilding/weightlifting issues

Carry on.
post #47035 of 57261
Quote:
Originally Posted by TeeKay View Post

Halfway thru deload week. Feelsgoodman. Woke up with a ton of energy. Hoping I don't have to take a step back on weight next week tho

I did my first ever on purpose deload week a while back, came back and PR'd

My gym sessions were getting too long so I am going to try a 6 day split. Just pop in, do 1-2 compound movements and superset 2 sets of accessories. Today will be my longest day, hoping to be there and back in under an hour. Will be interesting to mix in cycling with that, but with monthly deloads I think I'll be able to handle it.
post #47036 of 57261
Quote:
Originally Posted by OccultaVexillum View Post

I'm only going to take advice on diet and excercise from people who are bigger, stronger and leaner than me.

Sure, why listen to someone who is SMARTER than you lol.

And I got fat on a low fat diet. I would say, anecdotally, sugar is worse for fat gain.
post #47037 of 57261
Quote:
Originally Posted by skeen7908 View Post

Here is an article, lyle mcdonald hes weird but he doesnt usually make shit up

http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/how-we-get-fat.html

Seems like de novo lipogenesis kicks in when dietary fat is less than 10% of calories (so like 30g if youre on 3000cal/day) or carb intake >700-900 (though he does not cite sources for either of these claims im inclined to believe him)
And dietary protein cannot be converted to fat

So a bulking diet could be ~30g fat, <600g carb (to be safe) then protein to make up the rest and no DNL

Of course the entire 30g of consumed fat may go all to subcut stores with no oxidation: 30g a day is 210g a week, less than a kg a month but still thats quite a lot!

But youre right, its very difficult to keep fat <30g if you are also trying to get high protein. Basically can only eat whey or chicken breast. Unless youre rich you can eat seafood i guess but youll die from mercury poisoning

I couldnt find anything about visceral fat creation or intracellular fat on a quick google search

Nice find on that article.

Yeah, personally I don't like to go below 50g fat for food choices and expenses.

About optimal bulking macros, while your reasoning is all well and good, I'm not sure it holds up practically.
In a surplus, max protein synthesis tops out at a protein intake of 0.75xLBM or so, so 250g+ a day is rather unnecessary unless you weight 300 pounds. Now, there's other reasons to go high protein, such as being able to eat balanced meals while on a big surplus (I find under 200g protein is very hard on my 3800 calories), and you will get leaner gains (and slower) as the extra protein will not be stored.

The guidelines you wrote for a 3000 kcal intake would in my case where 4000 kcals is needed for weight gain be about 600g carbs, 60g fat, 225g protein, which almost is what I eat.

And about that guy who did the extreme carb lean bulk experiement, his conclusion was essentially just what you wrote: He started gaining weight on 4200 kcals with a 40g fat intake (only 8% of total kcals from fat, which Lyle says is where de novo lipogenesis kicks in). This guys conclusion was also just that, that de novo lipogenesis had started and so he lowered the carbs and upped the fats a bit.

Unless you're on drugs it's as far as I know impossible to gain weight without any fat gain. You can gain muscle without weight gain, as its only the amino acids from protein that dictates muscle growth and thus you can be in a calorie deficit and gain muscle if you eat enough protein, take care of everything as good as possible, have good genetics and perhaps a bit of luck. But as soon as you go into a calorie surplus, you're gonna gain some fat.
post #47038 of 57261
Brb taking all my training advice from rich piana. hrrrrr drrrrr u can only dissolve 250mg of test in a ml of oil, science dun told me.
post #47039 of 57261
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cool The Kid View Post


Sure, why listen to someone who is SMARTER than you lol.
 

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.

post #47040 of 57261
Quote:
Originally Posted by fuji View Post

Brb taking all my training advice from rich piana. hrrrrr drrrrr u can only dissolve 250mg of test in a ml of oil, science dun told me.

 

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.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Health & Body
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Health & Body › Random health and exercise thoughts