PDA

View Full Version : Low fat vs Low carb - discuss



Marnie
10-27-2007, 04:26 PM
So, I have read about Built's low carb, and yes it worked, BUT I was incredibly lathargic. I have read Mark Dugdales regime and he depletes fat, to lose fat, which will surely give me more energy due to carbs?
Let's hear your views and experiences.

Con
10-27-2007, 04:45 PM
There are pros and cons to each approach.

Some people function better with carbs, and are absolute ****(their training, mood, etc.) without them. Other are fine, and possibly are better off without cars.

Low fat starts to mess with hormones I believe, and isnt healthy. Sure fat is calorie dense, and thats makes it an easy candidate to reduce when calories need to be reduces, but fat is essential to the body.

Not sure how much more I can add, but possibly someone more intelligent will chime in.

Built
10-27-2007, 05:06 PM
Hmmm. I don't really do low carb Marnie. I carb cycle, and for me I just feel better when I target carbs around my lifting and keep protein and fat high elsewhere. It's very individual.You fiddle with the macros from a starting point of protein and fat minimums of a gram and half a gram per pound LBM respectively. You can fill up ALL of your remaining calories with carb if you like - and that would techically work out to a "low fat" approach. Truth be told, carb cycling is like alternating between low fat and low carb.

Marnie
10-29-2007, 02:54 AM
For me that'd mean eating 150 grams of fat a day though, which is going to make the carbs extremely hard to fit in. The other problem is that low carb foods are a pig to find; I used to have to cook weeeeeeeeird stuff. At the mo my carbs are around 300g a day, protein 250+ and fat around 60g a day. Is this ok?

Built
10-29-2007, 09:32 AM
Why would it mean 150g of fat a day - and for that matter, what's so hard about that?

What weird food? Steak, avocados, nuts, eggs, cheese... sounds pretty normal to me.

???

Marnie
11-02-2007, 05:03 PM
Why would it mean 150g of fat a day - and for that matter, what's so hard about that?

What weird food? Steak, avocados, nuts, eggs, cheese... sounds pretty normal to me.

???

Eurgh avocados! lol. Well I have 158lbs of LBM, so surely that'd mean 1g per pound of LBM?

sharkall2003
11-03-2007, 08:05 AM
You need 160 grams of fat for 158 pounds of bodyweight? I think you're a little off.....

Marnie
11-03-2007, 05:55 PM
You need 160 grams of fat for 158 pounds of bodyweight? I think you're a little off.....

1 gram per pound of LBM is how I read what Built put?

Edit: half ag ram per pound of LBM, my bad!

CrazyK
11-04-2007, 11:27 AM
It doesn't really matter as long as you are getting enough protein and are under maintinince calories.

Slim Schaedle
11-04-2007, 01:16 PM
My thoughts/experience...


Higher Fat

Better sex drive
Easier to get calories
Lower Glycogen
Smaller pumps/fullness
Less lathargic throughout day


Higher Carb

Great pumps/pumped feeling when not lifting
Look bigger
More energy (despite below)
Lethragic feeling after eating carbs
Harder to get more calories


In terms of muscle gain/fat loss, I am still unsure which is better. (for me)

I do know that a few years ago, upon getting out of the air force, I followed a diet out of a book (MuscleNow) and used it for bulking. Without any effort towards cutting, I lost fat almost magically. This was after unintentionally following a higher fat/moderate carb diet and switching to lower fat (50g/day) and high carb that the MuscleNow program called for.

Scientificaly, that doesn't give you a good answer other than the fact that everyone is different. But, that's my experience.

Right now I am now testing higher fat (.5g/pound LBM)

sCaRz*Of*PaiN
11-04-2007, 01:20 PM
You're probably the only other person I've seen bring up "MuscleNow", lol. There's some pretty solid advice in there. The website could sure use some work though.