PDA

View Full Version : Daily Eating Schedule



Victor_20
02-25-2003, 02:16 PM
Hey guys here's my revised eating schedule........my stats are as follows: I'm 6"1,168lbs

Breakfast 8am CAL PROTEIN CARBS FAT
Mammoth (2scoops) 485 25 76 9
Glass of 1% milk 200 14 20 9
Multivitamin 0 0 0 0
Vector Cereal 205 0 39 3.4

Lunch 11am
Pasta 400 0 70 3
Cottage Cheese 120 21 0 0
Yogurt 80 0 5 2
Cranberry Juice+Creatine 120 0 30 1

Snack 2:00pm
Chicken sandwich 314 20 39 7
Tuna (170g) 130 40 0 0.2

Snack 5:00pm
Cranbery Juice+Creatine 120 0 30 1
Mammoth (3scoops) 728 38 114 14
Banana 138 0 35 1

Super 8:00pm
Steak 268 40 0 11
French fries 200 0 24 6
Potato 138 0 32 0
Celery+PB 200 5 18 10

Snack 11:00pm
Mammoth (3scoops) 728 38 114 14
Flax seed oil 120 0 0 14

TOTAL 4694 241 646 105.6


This schedule gives me a 65/24/11 split........i also try to drink about a gallon of water a day. If you have any comments, suggestions or disscusion i'm all ears.....thanks everyone

MrWebb78
02-25-2003, 02:28 PM
eating the same exact thing gets boring really fast. mix it up. also try apple juice with your creatine instead of cranberry

aka23
02-25-2003, 03:04 PM
It looks like you ignored the protein totals in many of your foods. For example the entry for pasta is:

Pasta 400 0 70 3

70g carb + 3g fat should have a little over 300 calories (70*4 +3*9 = 307), but this food has 400. The missing calories are coming from protein. A typical 400 calorie serving of pasta has about 16g protein. The specific amount varies depending on the type. Other foods with negelected protein totals include Vector Cereal, Yogurt, and smaller amounts in the potato, fries, and fruit. You also may want to recheck the cottage cheese for carbs and fat.

When people express macronutrients percentages, they usually do so by percent of calories, not percent of grams. These measures differ because fat contains about 9cal/gram while protein+ carbs are about 4calories/gram. Using the percent of calories method:

241*4 (using incorrect protein total) + 646*4 + 105.6*9 ~= 4500.
241*4/4500 ~= .21 (21% Protein)
646*4/4500 ~= .57 (57% Carbs)
105.6*9/4500 ~= .21 (21% Fat)

This difference almost doubles your fat percentage and moves it into the commonly recommended range for althletes.

You are eating a lot of calories for your height and weight. Are you sure that you need that many to bulk? I might suggest adding some leafy, cruciferous type vegatables; adding some whole grains; and cutting some of the unnatural Mammoth (you get 1941 calories of Mammoth per day). You may also want to cut out the unhealthly french fries.

bradley
02-25-2003, 04:15 PM
That is a large amount of calories for someone your size. What is your current calorie intake?

Frozenmoses
02-25-2003, 04:19 PM
You and I are about the same size, and the diet you have posted is almost double my maintenance. I'd say it's too much for your size if you want to keep fat gain relatively low. Also, you don't need to take 2 servings of creatine a day.

Victor_20
02-25-2003, 08:28 PM
Thanks for your replies everyone.......i've been on a similar diet to this one since January of this year.....Bradely my calroie intake was about 4200 in total.......i've gained 8lbs since January on this diet.

aka23 i've neglected the protien from some of the foods because they are considered plant protein sources which are incomplete to my understanding. This is why i've only counted protein intake from egg, casein (milk, cottage cheese, etc), animals, and whey for my protein totals. I will adjust my calroie intake accordingly since i removed the protein from these foods.

Frozenmoses i just started Creatine up again yesterday...i know loading period is not neccesary so i'll only be running the creatine twice a day for a week.

My maintance calorie intake is about 3100.....i've set a goal to weigh in at 180lbs by the end of may so i'm trying to make sure i hit that goal.....:) even though i'll get a fair portion of fat from it

aka23
02-25-2003, 08:51 PM
Originally posted by Victor_20
aka23 i've neglected the protien from some of the foods because they are considered plant protein sources which are incomplete to my understanding. This is why i've only counted protein intake from egg, casein (milk, cottage cheese, etc), animals, and whey for my protein totals.

Proteins from plant sources are usually incomplete, but that does not make them useless. Your body uses them in a similar way to complete proteins. Incomplete proteins are easily combined to make complete proteins. This is especially true with a diet such as your that is rich in complete protein throughout the day. Your body has a lot of available amino acids to combine with the incomplete proteins. Incomplete proteins can be combined with complete proteins to make complete proteins, or they can be combined with other complimentary incomplete proteins to make complete proteins. Examples include milk & cereal, grains & legumes, grains & nuts, etc. Complimentary protiens do not need to be consumed in the same meal, but they need to be eaten in the same day.

Plant proteins are often not as "high quality" as animal proteins for reasons such as completeness and digestibility, but this is no reason to ignore them. They can be used to build muscle just like complete proteins, and they are stored as fat or burned as fuel when consumed in excess, just like complete proteins. Note that have been several successful vegetarian bodybuilders, such as Bill Pearl, who was a 4 time Mr. Universe and regarded as the greatest bodybulider of his time.

fuzz
02-25-2003, 09:00 PM
Originally posted by aka23

[snip]
Note that have been several successful vegetarian bodybuilders, such as Bill Pearl, who was a 4 time Mr. Universe and regarded as the greatest bodybulider of his time.

Bill Pearl is the greatest bodybuilder of all time? I think a lot of fans of Reg Park, Steve Reeves, Arnie, and the rest would have something to say about that.

Also, Pearl was an omnivore up until he turned partially veggie in 1969/1970, which was a year before he won his last contest. So he built the majority of his muscle before he stopped eating meat, and he became a lacto-ovo-vegetarian (spelling?), meaning he still ate milk and eggs.

aka23
02-25-2003, 09:08 PM
Originally posted by fuzz


Bill Pearl is the greatest bodybuilder of all time? I think a lot of fans of Reg Park, Steve Reeves, Arnie, and the rest would have something to say about that.

I said he was regarded as the greatest bodybuilder of his time, not all time. I would say the same thing about Arnold and some of "the rest." Considering Bill's dominance in competitions, I do not think this is a stretch. I have seen several other sources use this description as well.

aka23
02-25-2003, 09:21 PM
Originally posted by fuzz
Also, Pearl was an omnivore up until he turned partially veggie in 1969/1970, which was a year before he won his last contest. So he built the majority of his muscle before he stopped eating meat, and he became a lacto-ovo-vegetarian (spelling?), meaning he still ate milk and eggs.

I do not know the year he became a vegetarian, but I do know that he claims to have had an aversion to meat throughout his life. He writes...

"I have now been vegetarian for almost 20 years. We have no fish, fowl, or red meat in our diet. Yet I can still carry the same amount of muscle as I did in winning my four Mr. Universe titles. People can't believe it. They think that to have big muscles you have to eat meat - it's a persistent and recurring myth."

fuzz
02-25-2003, 09:38 PM
The fact remains, he built a world class physique eating meat - he only maintained it as a vegetarian. Being a vegetarian and becoming a world class body builder are two fundamentally opposing lifestyle choices.


Originally posted by aka23


I do not know the year he became a vegetarian, but I do know that he claims to have had an aversion to meat throughout his life. He writes...

"I have now been vegetarian for almost 20 years. We have no fish, fowl, or red meat in our diet. Yet I can still carry the same amount of muscle as I did in winning my four Mr. Universe titles. People can't believe it. They think that to have big muscles you have to eat meat - it's a persistent and recurring myth."

Vido
02-25-2003, 10:00 PM
Back to the original post: The fact remains, Aka23, that Victor_20 is doing the right thing by only counting protein that comes from either meat or dairy IMO. As far as the diet itself goes, if he needs that many calories to grow (ie. he has a fast metabolism) then I don't see a problem with it. I would however, suggest replacing some of those shakes with solid food, especially the one right before bed.

aka23
02-26-2003, 12:12 AM
Originally posted by Vido
Back to the original post: The fact remains, Aka23, that Victor_20 is doing the right thing by only counting protein that comes from either meat or dairy IMO.

So you are saying when expressing dietary percentages, one should ignore incomplete protein? A diet with 500 calories complete protein, 500 calories incomplete protein, 500 calories carb and 500 calories fat would be a 33%/33%/33% split? The online diet analyzers such as the ones at fitday.com and the USDA's site are all doing the protein totals the wrong way?

These type of calculations leads to underestimating your protein totals. When sports nutritionists and other well known organizations set protein recommendations, they expect that you count all of your protein -- both the complete and incomplete. When setting those limits they assume that some is from plant sources and some is from animal sources.

A healthy person with a balanced diet uses a large portion of their plant proteins. They absorb a slightly larger portion of animal proteins, but the plant proteins certainly can not be ignored. For example according to National Research Council RDA , approximately 94% of meat/fish protein is digestable; while approximately 86% of whole wheat/oatmeal protein is digestable. BV (Biological Value -- a measurement of protein quality expressing the rate of efficiency with which protein is used for growth) measures shows meat at 60%-70% and whole grains at 50%-60%. There are many other ways to measure protein quality. The protein average score method which gives equal weight to the most common protein measures rates beef at 6.3 and wheat at 6.0 . Most protein quality measures show higher numbers for the animal sources, but the plant sources are often not too far behind. Plant sources can and do provide valuable proteins that can be used for repairing muscle and other important processes.

Vido
02-26-2003, 12:31 AM
Originally posted by aka23


So you are saying when expressing dietary percentages, one should ignore incomplete protein? A diet with 500 calories complete protein, 500 calories incomplete protein, 500 calories carb and 500 calories fat would be a 33%/33%/33% split?



You have a point and if a person is uptight about sticking to a certain macronutrient split then I guess they will run into a problem. Personally, I count grams of protein (complete proteins that is) and total calories. That's it. This is really all you need to worry about imo. We have all been told to consume at least 1g protein per lb of bodyweight (which I know you do not agree with) and we all know (or should know from monitoring our own bodies) how many total calories we need. We do not, however, have any set number of carbs or fat that we need in a certain day, so I believe these 2 macros will work themselves out assuming your diet is fairly balanced.

restless
02-26-2003, 01:52 AM
I too make sure I get 1 gr per pound of complete animal protein per day. The rest of the protein is still part of overall calorie count obviously.

I am not sure about this right now and will have to research it, but I've read in the weighttrainer magazine that at least to muscle building purposes, your body will be limited by the least abundant essential aminoacid in your body, and to some extent this is even a problem with complete proteins as they have different aminoacid profiles.

I'll read the thing again today and will post about it at night.

aka23
02-26-2003, 02:32 PM
Originally posted by restless
I am not sure about this right now and will have to research it, but I've read in the weighttrainer magazine that at least to muscle building purposes, your body will be limited by the least abundant essential aminoacid in your body, and to some extent this is even a problem with complete proteins as they have different aminoacid profiles.

I think that many of the weightlifting magzines that have ads for protein/amino acid supplements exaggerate the importance of protein/amino acids in their articles. Nevertheless, I believe I understand the point of the article and limiting amino acids.

When you eat proteins, your body does not just move it directly from an animal's muscle to your own. Your body breaks them down into amino acids. This is true with both animal and plant proteins. The body needs to have nine essential amino acids from foods to create new proteins and build muscle. If any one of the nine is in short supply, then it may interfere with protein synthesis.

(Amino acid amounts in listings below are in mg/g, listed in order:
TRY THR ISO LEU LYS MET+CYS PHE+TYR VAL)
Some say an ideal condition profile of the nine essential amino acids that your body cannot manufacture is:
11 35 42 70 51 26 73 48

Cows milk has a profile like:
14 45 60 97 79 34 96 66
more than the minimum for ideal conditions in all areas.

An oat based cereal has a profile like:
13 35 42 83 45 57 84 61

The oat cereal is a little low in lysine (45 vs ideal of 51), but meets the other essential amino acid requirements. It is called incomplete because it is lacking in lysine. If someone were to eat a diet containing only oat based cereal, the amount of protein that could be created would be limited by the amino acid lycine. However, if that person were to eat the oat based cereal with milk, then the milk's extra lycine (79 vs ideal of 51) would make up for the oats missing lycine (45 vs ideal of 51), so the amino acid pool would have a good supply of all the nine essential amino acids for creating protiens and building muscle. Note that you do not need to eat amino acids in a certain ratio or combine proteins at each meal. They can be combined throughout the day.

Different proteins, both complete and incomplete, have different amino acid profiles. Some of the measures of protein quality are dependednt on the limiting amino acid and are ways of indicating the quality of this amino acid profile.

Given the large quantity of protein that bodybuilders eat, these ratios should not be a concern for a person who eats a balanced diet. They are probably getting far more amino acids than they need. I think there is no reason to track amino acids profiles or worry about limited amino acids unless you do not have a balanced diet, you consume below recommended levels or protein, or you have a medical problem that effects protein synthesis. It is more important to track total protein consumed, including both animal and plant sources.

restless
02-26-2003, 03:00 PM
Originally posted by aka23


I think that many of the weightlifting magzines that have ads for protein/amino acid supplements exaggerate the importance of protein/amino acids in their articles. Nevertheless, I believe I understand the point of the article and limiting amino acids.



LOL, clearly you never had the pleasure of reading the magazine in question, it hasn't got a single supplement ad anywere to be seen, it even has talks about that exact same practice by supplement companies of misleading consumers by convincing them that protein intakes beyond the ones that have been shown by research to result in a positive nitrogen balance are of any use other than to fill the bank accounts of supplement companies.

Anyway, what he does say in that article is that if there's a shortcoming of any of the essential aminoacids then all the physiological processes that also depend on that aminoacid will be limited by that shortcoming, regardless of how abundant the rest are. So while incomplete proteins do have their use, unless you actually bother to analyse what are the least abundant aminoacids (which I'm not at all willing to do), you might no be providing as much usefull protein for muscle building purposes as you really think you are, therefore I only count complete protein, although the remaining is still included in the total calories count.