PDA

View Full Version : So how do you calculate how much cals, fat, and protein you need for a bulk?



Lofemofe
02-23-2006, 02:44 PM
So how do you calculate how much cals, carbs, fat, and protein you need for a bulk? Is there a for sure way to know how much you should be eating?

ShockBoxer
02-23-2006, 02:47 PM
There's only one way to be sure.

Track your calories for a week or three.
Track your weight for the same amount of time.

If you went up, then your calories are fine.
If you went down they're way too low... add 750 - 1000
If you didn't change at all add 500.

There are plenty of estimates (23xbody weight in calories to bulk, etc) but the above method is the only way to be certain what's right for you.

As for protein and stuff... once you know your calorie target make sure you get 1 gram or more of protein per pound of lean body mass, and 0.5 grams or more of fat. Fill the rest however you want.

ddegroff
02-23-2006, 02:56 PM
and track on fitday.com

Lofemofe
02-23-2006, 03:43 PM
There's only one way to be sure.

Track your calories for a week or three.
Track your weight for the same amount of time.

If you went up, then your calories are fine.
If you went down they're way too low... add 750 - 1000
If you didn't change at all add 500.

There are plenty of estimates (23xbody weight in calories to bulk, etc) but the above method is the only way to be certain what's right for you.

As for protein and stuff... once you know your calorie target make sure you get 1 gram or more of protein per pound of lean body mass, and 0.5 grams or more of fat. Fill the rest however you want.

:eek: Too much work.

Any other methods out there?

offhegoes03
02-23-2006, 03:56 PM
hah unfortunately there's no simple way to really do it. you have to know how many calories keeps you at maintenance and then increase by about 500 if you're bulking. There's really no magic number as far as it goes since it's different for everyone's metabolism, etc. Listen to what everyone else has told you.

HILL
02-23-2006, 03:58 PM
If thats to much work go home. There is no cheat way around this. You wanted a for sure way shockboxer gave you one his advice is sound and ell repeated around here. aim for 1-1.5 grams of protein per pound of bodyweight and 0.5 grams of fat per pound od lean body mass as a minimum. Then amix the rest up between proteins/fats and carbs untill you get above maintanance.

If this is to much work for you eat mcdonalds 4 times a day and you will gain weight however it will most likely be fat. The above information is a very good starting point as well as BUILTs sticky on help with diet

ShockBoxer
02-23-2006, 05:38 PM
:eek: Too much work.

Any other methods out there?

Yep. Eat until you nearly puke, lift until you nearly puke, sleep a lot and when you're so fat you can't stand yourself go on a cut (which is even harder to track than a bulk... no easy way out there besides liposuction).

My way, the way around here, keeps your fat gains down. If you don't give a **** about getting fat while getting strong then eat. Eat everything. Eat so much that people will be afraid to lose fingers, hands, or arms if they have the misfortune of reaching for the same slice of pizza as you.

Spartacus
02-23-2006, 10:13 PM
i'd guess most people on here are doing 10x as much math a day as that. i do several times more, and thats just what i'm doing in my head out of habit. its not that hard.

Sidior
02-23-2006, 11:49 PM
the right way: what everyone else said

the easy way: if you aren't gaining weight, eat more...continue till weight gain occurs

superhombre2k
03-01-2006, 12:43 PM
The math is simple. The ratios vary some, but what I've read most often and go by myself is 40/30/30 ratio of CHO/PRO/FAT by calories (!!!). For a 3000 calorie diet, here's the math:

Protein (PRO) and carbohydrates (CHO) each have 4 calories per gram and fats (FAT) have 9 calories per gram.

Totals:

40% of 3000 is 1200, 30% is 900

1200 kcal CHO = 300g
900 kcal PRO = 225g
900 kcal FAT = 100g


Per meal if you eat 5 meals a day:

3000/5 = 600 kcal per meal

240 kcal CHO = 60g
180 kcal PRO = 45g
180 kcal FAT = 20g


That's simple enough :)

Built
03-01-2006, 01:28 PM
The math is simple. The ratios vary some, but what I've read most often and go by myself is 40/30/30 ratio of CHO/PRO/FAT by calories (!!!). For a 3000 calorie diet, here's the math:

Protein (PRO) and carbohydrates (CHO) each have 4 calories per gram and fats (FAT) have 9 calories per gram.

Totals:

40% of 3000 is 1200, 30% is 900

1200 kcal CHO = 300g
900 kcal PRO = 225g
900 kcal FAT = 100g


Per meal if you eat 5 meals a day:

3000/5 = 600 kcal per meal

240 kcal CHO = 60g
180 kcal PRO = 45g
180 kcal FAT = 20g


That's simple enough :)

The problem, of course, with a ratio approach is that it's anchored to a moving target - total calories.

On a bulk, you might need to eat 4000 calories a day, or 5000.

On a cut, you might need 2000.

Looking at some numbers here…

2000 cals: 66 g fat, 150g protein, and 200g carbohydrate

3000 cals: 100 g fat, 225g protein, and 300g carbohydrate

4000 cals: 133 g fat, 300g protein, and 400g carbohydrate


This makes no sense - you're getting a lot less protein and fat on a cut - when you need them the most.

That's why "dosing" protein and fat to LBM makes more sense.

superhombre2k
03-01-2006, 04:21 PM
I don't believe that is the ONLY way. The ratio method works extremely well. Not everyone necessarily needs to use 40/30/30, but it's a good place to start from. You can always ramp up the carbohydrates around workouts and decrease them elsewhere, etc. I didn't think that decreasing intake of the macronutrients in proportion was a problem. After all, it's how I build my diet. If anything, I'd bump up my pre- and post-workout carbs and drop some of the fats in their favor. Even your sample 2000 calorie diet listed has 150g of protein which sounds fair. If you're only eating 2000 calories, then chances are your LBM is less than 150. The real issue with sparing muscle on a cut is to keep the caloric deficit realistic, spread your meals out so you're never starving, and conversely, do the same with a bulking diet. Too much of anything at any given time is just going to be stored as fat.


The problem, of course, with a ratio approach is that it's anchored to a moving target - total calories.

On a bulk, you might need to eat 4000 calories a day, or 5000.

On a cut, you might need 2000.

Looking at some numbers here…

2000 cals: 66 g fat, 150g protein, and 200g carbohydrate

3000 cals: 100 g fat, 225g protein, and 300g carbohydrate

4000 cals: 133 g fat, 300g protein, and 400g carbohydrate


This makes no sense - you're getting a lot less protein and fat on a cut - when you need them the most.

That's why "dosing" protein and fat to LBM makes more sense.

Optimum08
03-01-2006, 06:41 PM
Too much of anything at any given time is just going to be stored as fat.

Wrong. An excess of calories causes fat storage, but saying that if you eat 75 g of protein in one meal/sitting and saying that it will not all be used and will be stored as fat is completely and utterly wrong.

It's all about cals.

superhombre2k
03-01-2006, 07:06 PM
Wrong. An excess of calories causes fat storage, but saying that if you eat 75 g of protein in one meal/sitting and saying that it will not all be used and will be stored as fat is completely and utterly wrong.

It's all about cals.

It is all about cals. That's what I said. Too much of anything, any one thing or any combination of things, that your body isn't going to use in a short span of time, get stored. Bigger people have greater needs, smaller people have smaller needs... level of activity is also a variable. I don't know why I'm being nitpicked here on this forum on virtually every post I make.

Optimum08
03-01-2006, 08:10 PM
It is all about cals. That's what I said. Too much of anything, any one thing or any combination of things, that your body isn't going to use in a short span of time, get stored. Bigger people have greater needs, smaller people have smaller needs... level of activity is also a variable. I don't know why I'm being nitpicked here on this forum on virtually every post I make.

i apologize and i must admit i didn't read your whole post, i just saw that last line and presumed it was talking about macro's etc.

superhombre2k
03-01-2006, 11:03 PM
i apologize and i must admit i didn't read your whole post, i just saw that last line and presumed it was talking about macro's etc.

Eh, it's all good. It's too easy to get into an debate online! :)

SpecialK
03-01-2006, 11:38 PM
The problem, of course, with a ratio approach is that it's anchored to a moving target - total calories.

On a bulk, you might need to eat 4000 calories a day, or 5000.

On a cut, you might need 2000.

Looking at some numbers here…

2000 cals: 66 g fat, 150g protein, and 200g carbohydrate

3000 cals: 100 g fat, 225g protein, and 300g carbohydrate

4000 cals: 133 g fat, 300g protein, and 400g carbohydrate


This makes no sense - you're getting a lot less protein and fat on a cut - when you need them the most.

That's why "dosing" protein and fat to LBM makes more sense.

So basically if you were cutting and reducing cals over time, you would just take them all out of carbs and leave fats and protein alone? Aren't carbs important too?

Also wouldn't someone need to measure their bf% every week to readjust their macro requirements, if they were going by X gm/lb LBM?

Finally, once you have met your x gm protein/lb LBM and y gm fats/lb LBM rules, what about carbs? How are they rationed out?

ddegroff
03-01-2006, 11:51 PM
i eat 190g of protein a day, 90g of fat and 140cho(130g is the RDA). It works great for me. Don't forget your body burns fat for energy also.

Built
03-02-2006, 01:55 AM
So basically if you were cutting and reducing cals over time, you would just take them all out of carbs and leave fats and protein alone? Aren't carbs important too?
I find fat and protein far more satisfying on a cut than carb. Others don't. It's all about the hunger control. But the carbs aren't nearly as important as protein and fat - carb isn't essential. That being said, as long as your protein and fat minimums are being met, you're fine - in practice, most folks will need to drop fat and protein somewhat from where they were while bulking.


Also wouldn't someone need to measure their bf% every week to readjust their macro requirements, if they were going by X gm/lb LBM? - well ... not really. If you gain a pound of LBM, you need an extra gram of protein and an extra half a gram of fat.

I don't think there's much of a risk here. LBM changes a LOT slower than total calories do. That's why anchoring protein and fat to LBM is a better idea than anchoring them to total calories.

[QUOTE=SpecialK]

Finally, once you have met your x gm protein/lb LBM and y gm fats/lb LBM rules, what about carbs? How are they rationed out?

Yeah, they get dropped quite a bit when I cut. Not Atkins levels or anything, but a lot lower than they are when I'm bulking, to be sure. I really save them for the pre and post workout meal.

superhombre2k
03-02-2006, 10:41 AM
I find fat and protein far more satisfying on a cut than carb. Others don't. It's all about the hunger control. But the carbs aren't nearly as important as protein and fat - carb isn't essential. That being said, as long as your protein and fat minimums are being met, you're fine - in practice, most folks will need to drop fat and protein somewhat from where they were while bulking.
Yeah, they get dropped quite a bit when I cut. Not Atkins levels or anything, but a lot lower than they are when I'm bulking, to be sure. I really save them for the pre and post workout meal.

Carbohydrates not essential?

They're the only fuel your CNS and PNS can use! The average person needs 150g of carbohydrates a day just to spare protein, including muscle, from being broken down into glucose and waste to be used by the nervous systems.

ShockBoxer
03-02-2006, 10:49 AM
There are some great examples of ketonisis fueled people around here.

ddegroff
03-02-2006, 11:00 AM
Carbohydrates not essential?

They're the only fuel your CNS and PNS can use! The average person needs 150g of carbohydrates a day just to spare protein, including muscle, from being broken down into glucose and waste to be used by the nervous systems.

RDA for the average person is 130g, you get a lot of energy from fats. Remember these ideas apply to recomposing, were not "average" by any means.

and just so were clear, protein isnt broken down into glucose, but the extra amino acids are broken down for energy

Built
03-02-2006, 11:04 AM
Carbohydrates not essential?

They're the only fuel your CNS and PNS can use! The average person needs 150g of carbohydrates a day just to spare protein, including muscle, from being broken down into glucose and waste to be used by the nervous systems.

If this is true, I must be dead.

;)

superhombre2k
03-02-2006, 11:19 AM
RDA for the average person is 130g, you get a lot of energy from fats. Remember these ideas apply to recomposing, were not "average" by any means.

and just so were clear, protein isnt broken down into glucose, but the extra amino acids are broken down for energy

Proteins are made up of amino acids. As they are digested, they are broken down into amino acids, which will then be either converted to glucose for fuel or used for building blocks of proteins and enzymes within the body.


If this is true, I must be dead.

You prefer proteins to carbs for satiety, and most likely the physiology behind that is it takes considerably longer to process proteins that way. The end result is your excess protein intake is being broken down and the amino acids converted to glucose to fuel your nervous system if your carbohydrate intake is lower throughout other parts of the day vs. around your workouts.

ddegroff
03-02-2006, 02:04 PM
Proteins are made up of amino acids. As they are digested, they are broken down into amino acids, which will then be either converted to glucose for fuel or used for building blocks of proteins and enzymes within the body.


See you have the idea right. Aimino acids are building blocks of protein. Glucose is part of CHO's. We break down CHO's into glucose through glycolysis, which we get 2 ATP from. Then if O2 is present the 2pyruvic acids (broken down glucose) go to the citric acid cycle, net 2 ATP. The realeased electrons from the citric acid go to ETC (electron-transport chain) from that we get water and 34 ATP.

Amino acids can enter into this system at many different points. All of which are AFTER the step where glucose is broken down. We get energy from amino acids from oxidative deamination. The body takes the amine group off, leaving ammonia (which is toxic to cells) and a keto acid. Our liver takes care of the ammonia and the keto acid enters the citric acid cycle or is converted to pyruvic acid or acetyl-coa. Both of which are parts of glucose, but AFTER it has been broken apart.

ATP is what our cells use for energy, not glucose (as a whole molecule).

Built
03-02-2006, 02:11 PM
Proteins are made up of amino acids. As they are digested, they are broken down into amino acids, which will then be either converted to glucose for fuel or used for building blocks of proteins and enzymes within the body.



You prefer proteins to carbs for satiety, and most likely the physiology behind that is it takes considerably longer to process proteins that way. The end result is your excess protein intake is being broken down and the amino acids converted to glucose to fuel your nervous system if your carbohydrate intake is lower throughout other parts of the day vs. around your workouts.

Indeed. Your original post implied that DIETARY carbohydrate is necessary for this, which of course, it is not.

SpecialK
03-03-2006, 12:08 PM
I find fat and protein far more satisfying on a cut than carb. Others don't. It's all about the hunger control. But the carbs aren't nearly as important as protein and fat - carb isn't essential. That being said, as long as your protein and fat minimums are being met, you're fine - in practice, most folks will need to drop fat and protein somewhat from where they were while bulking.
[QUOTE=SpecialK]
Also wouldn't someone need to measure their bf% every week to readjust their macro requirements, if they were going by X gm/lb LBM? - well ... not really. If you gain a pound of LBM, you need an extra gram of protein and an extra half a gram of fat.

I don't think there's much of a risk here. LBM changes a LOT slower than total calories do. That's why anchoring protein and fat to LBM is a better idea than anchoring them to total calories.



Yeah, they get dropped quite a bit when I cut. Not Atkins levels or anything, but a lot lower than they are when I'm bulking, to be sure. I really save them for the pre and post workout meal.

Does you strength suffer while cutting, due to the lack of carbs?

Built
03-03-2006, 12:26 PM
My strength suffers due to a lack of CALORIES.
I target what little carb I get to the meal before and the meal after I lift.

ddegroff
03-03-2006, 01:45 PM
thats interesting, i haven't lost an ounce of strength since i started cutting about 6wks(even added weight on some). I eat oats in the am to get me through the school day. Then brown rice about an hour before then some honey/whey before workout. The other misc carbs are from the veggies I eat.

Built
03-03-2006, 02:52 PM
try cutting for four months, then we'll talk.

ddegroff
03-03-2006, 02:58 PM
sounds good

Spartacus
03-03-2006, 04:53 PM
there is a different between something being essential, and being useful for the optimal

SpecialK
03-03-2006, 07:03 PM
My strength suffers due to a lack of CALORIES.
I target what little carb I get to the meal before and the meal after I lift.


Why the distinction between carbs and calories in general? I thought the primary energy source for brief powerful movements (as in heavy weightlifting) was carbs.

Built
03-03-2006, 08:46 PM
No - unless I'm mistaken, it's muscle glycogen and muscle triglyceride.

http://www.unm.edu/~lkravitz/Article%20folder/glycogen.html this is kinda interesting.

SpecialK
03-03-2006, 10:28 PM
No - unless I'm mistaken, it's muscle glycogen and muscle triglyceride.

http://www.unm.edu/~lkravitz/Article%20folder/glycogen.html this is kinda interesting.

But don't those come from carbs? I thought glycogen was just carbs + water.

Built
03-03-2006, 11:45 PM
Glycogen is made from glucose, and your body can make glucose: gluconeogenesis (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gluconeogenesis).

sCaRz*Of*PaiN
03-04-2006, 01:55 AM
And the pancreas secretes glucagon...which stimulates the breakdown of glycogen, which then becomes glucose.

ddegroff
03-04-2006, 01:42 PM
then becomes ATP for the cells


sorry we had a nice thing goin...

superhombre2k
03-05-2006, 09:29 AM
It kills me that this thread's argumentative, know-it-all manner is still going strong although most everyone is in agreement :)