PDA

View Full Version : My first real cut...



blinktx
06-06-2005, 07:42 AM
OK, I just did my first real bulk and now Im going to start on my first cut. I have no idea what maintanence calories are or anything like that. I just kind of threw this diet together and posted it here for help from ya'll. I weigh about 185 and am about 6'1. I work out 3x a week and will be doing some sort of cardio at least 5x a week for more than 45 mins each time. PLEASE HELP, PLEASE CRITIQUE :) :) :)

MEAL 1
6 egg whites
1 packet low sugar oatmeal
1 banana
2 oz. Chicken deli meat or ham cooked with eggs
Glass of soy milk

MEAL 2
Turkey sandwich on low sugar whole grain bread, lettuce, tomato

MEAL 3
MRP**
Turkey burger with lettuce or leaf spinach on whole grain bread and tomato

MEAL 4
PWO Shake--Muscle Milk Shake with nothing added

MEAL 5
Fish, Chicken or Beef
Veggies
1/2 brown rice

**I have about 5 MRP's left and I probably wont buy anymore after they're gone. I will probably buy some protein or MRP bars.

How does this look? Thanks.

ryuage
06-06-2005, 08:31 AM
might want to get in some sort of good fats in your diet or supplement with fish oil, personally Id take out the low sugar oatmeal (not sure if you are getting that flavored kind) and just using plain oatmeal and use some sugar substitute or calorie free flavoring. Guess the only real way to find out if it works is to actually put it into effect and see if you lose weight and adjust accordingly.

Built
06-06-2005, 08:33 AM
:withstupi

Good fats actually help your body drop fat, and make lower calorie dieting more tolerable.

Unreal
06-06-2005, 09:41 AM
I'm taking flax oil pills until I swing by and get some fish oil, but I find I have enough self control and tolerance to eat a very low fat diet.

Built, I know you keep your fat around 30% and say it helps control appetite, but if I have the self control to not eat extra do I really need to keep my fat intake that high? Can I keep it around 20% of my cals for better weight loss, or is it best to keep it around 30% even though I don't need it for appetite control?

Drai's
06-06-2005, 09:42 AM
Why would keeping it at 20% be better for weight loss?

Unreal
06-06-2005, 09:52 AM
Less fat in=less fat overall?

Drai's
06-06-2005, 10:18 AM
No, less CALORIES in = less fat overall.

Unreal
06-06-2005, 10:45 AM
So it doesn't matter if I take in 2000 calories that are 50% fat/50% protein, or 20% fat/20% carb/60% protein? Just look at calories?

ryuage
06-06-2005, 10:57 AM
well to a certain point....

YungLifter
06-06-2005, 11:02 AM
yeah i don't think it would be good if u had like 85%fats 10%carbs 5%protein just balance it out more or less. Their doesnt have to be an EXACT number but keep it reasonable and balanced out.

Drai's
06-06-2005, 11:10 AM
So it doesn't matter if I take in 2000 calories that are 50% fat/50% protein, or 20% fat/20% carb/60% protein? Just look at calories?

Like Ryu pointed out, the way you split up your calories isn't completely irrelevant, but total calories is what matters most.

The way you want to go about things is as follows:

1) Set your total number of calories
2) Get at least 1g protein/lb bodyweight
3) Get at least 20% of your cals from fats (25-30% is probably optimal)
4) Fill in the rest of your calories with carbs

ericg
06-06-2005, 02:53 PM
How successful was your first bulk? Meaning: were you able to gain some quality mass and little fat?

If it was a success then i would look at what your diet was then and cut out some of the carbs. Keep track of what your weight does. Pretty much monitor how your body reacts to the changes you make. You dont need to go from a calorie number that you used to bulk to a number that will take off 1lb per week over night. If you slowly make the transition it could be easier as far as meal planning and all the other habits you developed while you were bulking.

Built
06-06-2005, 02:59 PM
Like Ryu pointed out, the way you split up your calories isn't completely irrelevant, but total calories is what matters most.

The way you want to go about things is as follows:

1) Set your total number of calories
2) Get at least 1g protein/lb bodyweight
3) Get at least 20% of your cals from fats (25-30% is probably optimal)
4) Fill in the rest of your calories with carbs

Or, as a slight variation to this:

1) Set your total number of calories
2) Get at least 1g protein/lb bodyweight
3) Get at least 30% of your cals from fats
4) Fill in the rest of your calories with carbs and fats as you feel the need, and as your calories and comfort require.

Drai's
06-06-2005, 03:08 PM
3) Get at least 30% of your cals from fats

Personally I see no problem with getting this many calories from fat, but I don't agree with setting the minimum requirement so high for everyone.

Built
06-06-2005, 03:13 PM
How come?

ryuage
06-06-2005, 03:23 PM
cuz there is no magical set # on macro ratios :D

Drai's
06-06-2005, 03:27 PM
The reason we're recommending fat at all is for proper hormone levels (along with the slew of benefits EFAs provide). I don't think anyone knows for sure, but I think it's fairly agreed upon that 20% is sufficient for our purposes. I don't think going over significantly increases or decreases these benefits.

I also think that some people do quite well on high carbohydrate diets (ie. those with fast metabolisms). To limit the number of calories these guys can get from carbs based on some arbitrary number seems kind of silly, no?

Built
06-06-2005, 04:09 PM
The reason we're recommending fat at all is for proper hormone levels (along with the slew of benefits EFAs provide). I don't think anyone knows for sure, but I think it's fairly agreed upon that 20% is sufficient for our purposes. I don't think going over significantly increases or decreases these benefits.

I also think that some people do quite well on high carbohydrate diets (ie. those with fast metabolisms). To limit the number of calories these guys can get from carbs based on some arbitrary number seems kind of silly, no?

I agree. But there ARE essential fatty acids. There are NO essential carbohydrates. Seems more prudent to increase the lower limit on the macronutrient that IS essential. NOT doing so would seem silly to me. And 30% of cals from fat is still considered to be a low fat diet. <shrugs>
In the end, it all comes down to comfort and results anyway.

Drai's
06-06-2005, 04:17 PM
I agree. But there ARE essential fatty acids. There are NO essential carbohydrates. Seems more prudent to increase the lower limit on the macronutrient that IS essential. NOT doing so would seem silly to me. And 30% of cals from fat is still considered to be a low fat diet. <shrugs>
In the end, it all comes down to comfort and results anyway.

That's why protein and fat are set first when determining your macro breakdown; carbs come later.

The point you're missing is that although some fatty acids are essential, you only need so much of them. You can easily get this "essential" amount using the 20% figure. Like I said before, anything above and beyond that won't hurt you, but it won't help much either.

YungLifter
06-06-2005, 04:18 PM
I use to eat like 10g of fat daily without noticing it was so low, now that I changed and usually have 25% or little more of calories coming from good fats I feel much better through out the day.

Drai's
06-06-2005, 04:38 PM
I use to eat like 10g of fat daily without noticing it was so low, now that I changed and usually have 25% or little more of calories coming from good fats I feel much better through out the day.

not surprising

Built
06-06-2005, 04:41 PM
That's why protein and fat are set first when determining your macro breakdown; carbs come later.

The point you're missing is that although some fatty acids are essential, you only need so much of them. You can easily get this "essential" amount using the 20% figure. Like I said before, anything above and beyond that won't hurt you, but it won't help much either.

I'm not missing it. I just don't think there's as much EFA in the typical cutting diet as you do. I take supplemental EFAs as insurance. Not everybody is so careful.

My feeling is that it may be more important to keep fats a little higher as a ratio (which I am the first to agree, is meaningless) during a cut than during a bulk. The thing I have to keep reminding myself of is that some of you fellas simply eat so much food during a bulk, that even a VERY low fat diet is likely to give you enough good fat for proper endocrine function.

During a cut, when calories are lower, well, on 3750 cals a day, 20% of cals from fat will give you over 83 g of fat per day. On 2500 cals a day, these 83g of fat become 30% of daily cals.

And I'll be the first to admit I like my fats higher than most. I'm starting to think this may be somewhat more important for women than for men, since our calories are so much lower than they are for men, particularly on a cut - it gets tricker to get in sufficient EFAs as your calories go down.

Drai's
06-06-2005, 05:00 PM
Built, just a question. How much EFAs do you think one needs to be getting per day?

On diets like UD2 and PSMF, Lyle says to take 6g of fish oil and that will be sufficient. I'm not saying this is going to lead to an optimal level of anything, but I think you're under the impression that you need more than you do.

Getting away from bodybuilding-type diets, I think the recommended intake is something like a tbsp of fish or flax oil per day. We're talking like 100 calories from EFAs as being necessary. So assuming you're taking in more than 500 calories/day, 20% is just fine ;).

Granted I think one should consume more than the aforementioned, but it demonstrates that you don't really "need" all that much fat.

Built
06-06-2005, 05:24 PM
I'm not interested in sufficient - I'm interested in optimal. And since there's no disadvantage to consuming more of one's calories from fat, it just seems prudent to focus on the macronutrient that actually IS essential. You DO need carbs for lifting. But you don't need all that much outside the anabolic window. The balance is a matter of personal preference and comfort, nothing more.

Bottom line, if you're getting optimal performance and comfort out of a super low fat diet, props to you. But it's not necessary to do so. It may not even be optimal.

ryuage
06-06-2005, 05:35 PM
carbs are essential to me, they taste good. :D

Built
06-06-2005, 05:39 PM
They ARE yummy. Especially in the form of donuts. God's perfect food.

Drai's
06-06-2005, 05:40 PM
Think about this:

You have 2 spaces out in your yard that you can put dirt on (dirt is going to represent calories). One of the spaces is a hole (this represents fat) and the other is just a regular piece of grass (representing carbs). Now, the only thing that is "essential" is that the hole be filled with dirt. You'll notice that you don't "need" any dirt on top of the grass (much like you don't "need" any carbs in your diet). Once this happens, analogous to when one reaches their necessary amount of EFA's, it doesn't matter where the rest of the dirt (calories) goes. Continuing to pile dirt on top of the already filled hole does not provide any extra benefit.

Crappy example I know.

My point is that EFAs are really only "essential" to a point. Once you've hit this point, it's just extra calories. Some people will get better results if their extra calories come from protein or fat, and others from carbs. I'm in the former category and so are you; it doesn't mean everyone is and therefore when RECOMMENDING something, you base it on something that applies more generally.

Built
06-06-2005, 06:03 PM
Oh, hey, I was by no means suggesting that everybody needs a high fat diet (30% is still a low-fat diet. And I really DO hate all this talk of ratios - it's just a really conservative minimum as a starting point). And I clearly understood (and agreed with) the basis of your argument long before you filled holes in the yard with dirt. ;)

But I stand by my assertion that an ultra-low fat diet is neither necessary nor optimal. My feeling is that since they're essential, we're better off erring on the high side than the low side for fats.

Personally, I regard fats beyond what we "need" as little more than a caloric ballast. And I really don't know what I need. So I make sure I get more than I need so I don't have to worry about it.

Bottom line, if you're comfortable and feel that you are being optimally nourished and obtaining optimal results on lower fats, go for it.