PDA

View Full Version : more important while bulking: protein vs cals



235orbust
04-21-2006, 10:23 PM
I know both are very important, but which has a more important role in bulking, or which is worst for me, falling short of my protein intake or falling short of my calorie intake. MY diet is pretty good with both respects, but i am thinking about making changes to my macro and knowing which aspect of my bulk i should focus more on would help.

Keith
04-21-2006, 10:27 PM
Calories man, cant stress enough how important it is. You should be consuming +500 more than your maintenance when bulking. Your protein intake will come with the foods you consume when bulking. That is of course if your bulk is relatively clean.

kad
04-21-2006, 10:51 PM
As long as you get 0.5g/lb LBM in fats and 1g/lb LBM in protein as a minimum, you can fill in the rest of your cals with whatever you want.

edit: By that I meant the calories are most important, of course.

smalls
04-22-2006, 01:31 AM
I could take in 1000 grams of protein a day and lose weight.

Calories are king. There is no way around thermodynamics. It doesnt matter what your training or diet consist of, if your not taking in more cals than you burn your just spinning your wheels.

El Kelio
04-22-2006, 03:05 PM
Quality calories

Built
04-22-2006, 03:06 PM
Muscles. They aren't made out of air.

Calories, baby.

235orbust
04-22-2006, 03:16 PM
Muscles. They aren't made out of air.

Calories, baby.

Ive always wondered about that. It is funny how all these supplements claim that you will put on X pounds of muscle if you take it, It contradicts newtons law. Even if it were the best pill in the world you would still need mass to see gains. But ive always wondered, just theoretically,what if you were bulking and you drank 7000 cals worth of olive oil and nothing else. would the ratio of weight put on be exacly the same as the cups of olive oil or could you acually gain 5-10 pounds while doing this? I know it would be too extreme to acually be done but what would happen?

TheGimp
04-22-2006, 03:45 PM
Approximately 70% of mammalian skeletal muscle is water, so there is only about 140g of protein in a lb of human muscle. Clearly the limiting factor therefore is calorie intake.

Canadian Crippler
04-22-2006, 04:00 PM
It'd all be stored as fat, basically.

235orbust
04-22-2006, 05:24 PM
It'd all be stored as fat, basically.

but would you gain 3 cups of fat, or 5-10 pounds of fat?

betastas
04-22-2006, 05:34 PM
Your fat would be stored in human fat cells. You can't store Olive oil in your body as it is. Also, assuming you didn't crap your guts out from so much oil, you would only gain on that which was greater than your needed calories. However, you'd be on the can for hours so the whole thing is pretty much moot.

EDIT: if you were to store it, you would store it as weight related, with a new volume.

WildCard
04-22-2006, 07:35 PM
As long as you get 0.5g/lb LBM in fats and 1g/lb LBM in protein as a minimum, you can fill in the rest of your cals with whatever you want.

edit: By that I meant the calories are most important, of course.

ok, I know that they came up with the 1g/lb lbm protein by measuring nitrogen excretion versus nitrogen intake,

BUT how did we get the 0.5g/lb LBM figure. I eat a lot of fat(unhealthy fats, like mcdonalds fats ) but I am just curious.

Built
04-23-2006, 02:14 AM
fats >0.5g/lb lbm for endocrine support**, satiety and as a caloric ballast, carbs added in around lifting.
**Dorgan J, et al. Effects of dietary fat and fiber on plasma and urine androgens and estrogens in men: a controlled feeding study. Am J Clin Nutr 64(6): 850-855. 1996.
I first read about this here. (http://ruggedmag.com/index.php?type=Article&i=2&a=6)