The Five Biggest Contradictions in Fitness
Latest Article

The Five Biggest Contradictions in Fitness

Itís no secret that when people contradict themselves, it has the effect of making the flaws in their actions or statements seem glaringly obvious. But what about when WE ourselves get caught contradicting ourselves by someone else?

By: Nick Tumminello Added: January 6th, 2014
More Recent Articles
Contrast Training for Size
By: Lee Boyce
An Interview with Marianne Kane of Girls Gone Strong
By: Jordan Syatt
What Supplements Should I be Taking? By: Jay Wainwright
Bench Like a Girl By: Julia Ladewski
Some Thoughts on Building a Big Pull By: Christopher Mason

Facebook Join Facebook Group       Twitter Follow on Twitter       rss Subscribe via RSS
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 42
  1. #1
    Senior Member HighSchoolGuy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    240

    So wait...you're saying Cals IN vs Cals OUT??

    If I ate 3500cals of pure chicken breast/fish/whole wheat bread/pasta/peanuts.
    (only healthy foods)
    OR
    I ate 3500cals of pure chicken breast/some doritoes/chocolate cake/mcdonalds/some veggies. (healthy foods + junk + fast food)

    I will grow the exact same? As long as calories are the same?

    Does the body choose where to put the excess calories? That basically means clean bulk/dirty bulk is exactly the same. It should be called close bulk and excess bulk..or something.

    I used the search, and everyone says cals are cals. But that can't be right can it?

  2.    Support Wannabebig and use AtLarge Nutrition Supplements!


  3. #2
    Must...work...out... nockits's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Squat rack or bench.
    Posts
    948
    i don't think this is true. i think the ratio of proteins/carbs/fat is what counts here. although i'm not sure what the exact numbers are.
    protein is about 1.5g per lb, but im not sure about the 2.
    you can increase the calorie count, as long as the ratio remains the same, i think thats how it works.
    Check out my Journal!

    Quote Originally Posted by Skalami View Post
    I just give the worked on muscle group tough riddles before my workouts... or sometimes I'll tell them we're going to the park and then go to the gym, or visa versa. They start to catch on so you have to tell the truth every so often.
    *While on the topic of muscle confusion, and how often a routine needs to be changed.*

  4. #3
    Ich bin Legende. Torrok's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    672
    also, the quality, vitamins and minerals, and type of food counts. quality woudl be like, which do you think is better: frozen packed, processed, shipped and microwaved beef from mcdonalds, or lean, healthy fed, organic, carefully packaged and delivered or even better fresh off the farm beef?
    honesly life is simpler if you just go and eat these: http://whfoods.org/foodstoc.php
    Green Tea
    17ys -175lbs
    Squat: 300
    Bench: 200
    Deadlift: 360
    Clean: 235

  5. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    new jersey
    Posts
    434
    calories equals growth. heres an example of my diet. i am a pler not a bodybuilder but its all the same.

    http://fitday.com/fitness/PublicJour...er=SICKONSTORM

  6. #5
    Senior Member Klotz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    559
    Calories in vs Calories out determines how much weight you gain/lose. The composition of your body and your overall health depend on what the calories consist of.

  7. #6
    Senior Member Big Jay's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    409
    agree with wats said so far... plus i'm thinkin a diet with alot of sugar would produce different results than a diet with low sugar

  8. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    963
    Quote Originally Posted by Klotz View Post
    Calories in vs Calories out determines how much weight you gain/lose. The composition of your body and your overall health depend on what the calories consist of.
    This one.

  9. #8
    My own personal trainer dumbbell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Long Beach, CA
    Posts
    481
    Quote Originally Posted by Klotz View Post
    Calories in vs Calories out determines how much weight you gain/lose. The composition of your body and your overall health depend on what the calories consist of.

    I second that.
    Jason

    It is currently a fad, at this writing, for boys to think they need a "six pack", although most of them don't have an ice chest to put it in.
    -Mark Rippetoe

  10. #9
    Wannabebig Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Wytheville VA
    Posts
    7
    If you think of calories as fuel, there are different grades. High octane fuel such as chicken breast and tuna will burn cleaner then low grade fuels such as twinkies and donuts. Carbon buildup and sludge (FAT) results from too much low grade fuel. Also remember there are 9 calories per gram of fat and only 4 calories per gram of protien and carbs.

  11. #10
    Da Bears slashkills's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Joliet, IL
    Posts
    2,749
    Here is a qoute from the power fat loss plan on efs

    Not all calories were created equal

    Letís start with calories. Yes, they are a consideration but not the overriding factor of success or failure. Focus on consuming the right foods in the right combination and at the right time. The calorie issue will take care of itself. After all, would you consider 2,000 calories of corn chips to be equivalent to 2,000 calories of lean protein? The answer is no because each would have a distinctly different impact on your hormonal environment that governs fat loss, muscle growth, and performance.
    Last edited by slashkills; 04-19-2009 at 11:24 AM.

  12. #11
    Senior Member Phenom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    1,062
    So basically you're asking if macros are meaningless? Think about it.
    Age: 23 - Weight: 237 lbs - Height: 6'1''

    S(atg) - B - DL
    375 - 335 - 515

    "Gaining weight and having bigger body will make you look great on any clothing. Men with strong body are very attractive to women. General people tend to admire big muscle too." -mbijay

  13. #12
    Getting un-streamlined Progress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Buffalo, NY
    Posts
    3,000
    Quote Originally Posted by Klotz View Post
    Calories in vs Calories out determines how much weight you gain/lose. The composition of your body and your overall health depend on what the calories consist of.
    Not sure if I agree with this.

    Let's assume protein stays at least at 1-1.5g/lb LBM and caloric fat is at least .5g/lb LBM.

    Amount/percentage of calories above or below maintenance have WAY more affect on composition than macros.

    A slow bulk, assuming it's clean, will result in a more efficient body re-composition, meaning ratio of fat gain to muscle gain will be small. A fast bulk, even assuming it's clean, will likely result in a less than efficient recomp.

    You can eat as cleanly as you'd like but if you bulk at 200% maintenance you're going to get fat.
    Last edited by Progress; 04-20-2009 at 08:55 AM.

  14. #13
    Controlled mutation Trainwreck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    262
    Wouldn't bulking with healthy foods mean that you would spend less time cutting? (assuming of course that your macros are where they should be) or am I just way off
    Currently: Sore

  15. #14
    Getting un-streamlined Progress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Buffalo, NY
    Posts
    3,000
    Quote Originally Posted by Trainwreck View Post
    Wouldn't bulking with healthy foods mean that you would spend less time cutting? (assuming of course that your macros are where they should be) or am I just way off
    A slow bulk (10-20% above maintenance) will limit fat gain if macros are in order. Like I said, regardless if your diet is clean or dirty, if you're eating at a relatively high percentage above maintenance, you won't be able to keep fat off. Our bodies are just not that efficient. The most efficient bulks and cuts should be carried over a long period of time or just with limited results.

  16. #15
    Squat Heavy, Squat Often Cards's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    2,938
    Quote Originally Posted by Phenom View Post
    So basically you're asking if macros are meaningless? Think about it.
    I don't think this is what he was getting at. I believe it was based on the idea that if you meet your macros, can the body distinguish calories.

    I think a better question would have been:

    "Assuming macronutrient needs are met, is a piece of whole wheat bread the same as a doughnut?"

    In my opinion, yes. I don't believe the body can tell the difference in calories but it will have an effect on your health.
    H: 5'7" W:185
    Goals: 495 -315 -585

    ďPersistence Persistence.Ē - Calvin Coolidge.
    "I'm so pissed at how dumb this thread is that I think I'll go kick my cat. Again"-Belial
    "I mean, it's kind of like neutering your cat, hoping that'll stop your dog from humping your leg." - Belial
    Journal

  17. #16
    The Flyfisher rbtrout's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    So. Cal.
    Posts
    2,155
    As far as fast vs. slow bulk, your body can only burn off so many cals. Anything over that will be stored - as fat. I've tested this quite a bit on myself. Fast bulk (higher % over maintenance), even with clean food, equals more fat. Slower bulks, eating crap still equals more fat. A well-balanced diet on a slower bulk is the ticket to minimal fat gains. Same goes for cutting and muscle loss. For some one obese, it will be different, but for most of us, a fast cut will result in more muscle loss than a slow cut will.
    Last edited by rbtrout; 04-20-2009 at 10:36 AM.
    Give chalk a chance.


    49 years old

    665 squat
    700 deadlift
    325 bench

  18. #17
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    1,147
    Nutrient partitioning has a role here but I'm not really sure it answers the question of, if you overeat, does it matter if those calories are "clean" or "dirty" (assuming, of course, you get enough protein, which is always important).

    At a very fundamental level, the problem that natural bodybuilders and athletes have is one of partitioning; that is, where the calories go when you eat more of them or come from when you eat less of them. In an ideal universe, every calorie you ate would go to muscle tissue, with none going into fat cells; youíd gain 100% muscle and no fat. In that same ideal universe, every calorie used during dieting would come from fat stores; youíd lose 100% fat and no muscle. Unfortunately, we donít live in an ideal universe.
    Calorie Partitioning Part 1
    Calorie Partitioning Part 2

  19. #18
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    1,147
    Quote Originally Posted by rbtrout View Post
    Fast bulk (higher % over maintenance), even with clean food, equals more fat. Slower bulks, eating crap still equals more fat.
    In your experience, eating crap made you fat(ter) while bulking than if you'd eaten clean?
    Last edited by Brad08; 04-20-2009 at 10:39 AM.

  20. #19
    The Flyfisher rbtrout's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    So. Cal.
    Posts
    2,155
    Oh yes. In fact, I've measured the difference with calipers in just one week. I spent several years testing this on myself, just to see how it would go. The problem is - I love to eat. I really have to watch what I eat or I put on alot of bf, especially in the stomach.
    When I bulked fast (eating about 6000 cals per day) and all the food was measured out and very clean, I put on fat, but not as much as eating crap. The benefits during that bulk were eating cleanly, I had more strength than when I ate crap.
    Give chalk a chance.


    49 years old

    665 squat
    700 deadlift
    325 bench

  21. #20
    Senior Member 11not10's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    86
    Quote Originally Posted by Progress View Post
    A slow bulk (10-20% above maintenance) will limit fat gain if macros are in order. Like I said, regardless if your diet is clean or dirty, if you're eating at a relatively high percentage above maintenance, you won't be able to keep fat off. Our bodies are just not that efficient. The most efficient bulks and cuts should be carried over a long period of time or just with limited results.
    this
    Pain is weakness leaving the body.

    6'0"
    215 lbs.

  22. #21
    Bodybuilding Mythbuster
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Yeongsan. South Korea
    Posts
    5,907
    Quote Originally Posted by Brad08 View Post
    In your experience, eating crap made you fat(ter) while bulking than if you'd eaten clean?
    Calories from a fat source are stored more readily as body fat than calories from carbohydrates or protein. While the difference is not huge, over a period of time it can add up.

  23. #22
    Former Fatass Unreal's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    SLC,UT
    Posts
    3,084
    But if your eating the same exact macro breakdown does it matter if it is a donut or a cup of oats and peanut butter. If both are 300cals with 30g carbs and 10gs of fat?

    The problem with dirty food to me is it is hard to track, not filling, calorie dense, lacks nutrients, and can contain bad trans fat.

    I would say if your eating 3500 cals with the same exact macro breakdown (protein,fat,carbs), getting sufficient fiber and nutrients then the difference between eating all "clean" foods and "dirty" foods will be so small I doubt it could be statistically measured.
    Nick V

  24. #23
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    1,147
    Quote Originally Posted by Unreal View Post
    But if your eating the same exact macro breakdown does it matter if it is a donut or a cup of oats and peanut butter. If both are 300cals with 30g carbs and 10gs of fat?

    The problem with dirty food to me is it is hard to track, not filling, calorie dense, lacks nutrients, and can contain bad trans fat.

    I would say if your eating 3500 cals with the same exact macro breakdown (protein,fat,carbs), getting sufficient fiber and nutrients then the difference between eating all "clean" foods and "dirty" foods will be so small I doubt it could be statistically measured.
    At least one diet expert agrees

    Quote Originally Posted by Lyle Mcdonald
    Fundamentally, my belief is that, given identical macro-nutrient intakes (in terms of protein, carbs, and fats) that there is going to be little difference in terms of bodily response to a given meal. There may be small differences mind you (and of course research supports that) but, overall, they are not large. And certainly not of the magnitude that many make it sound like.

    . . . .

    Itís not uncommon for the physique obsessed to literally become social pariahs, afraid to eat out because eating out is somehow defined as Ďuncleaní (never mind that a grilled chicken breast eaten out is fundamentally no different than a grilled chicken breast cooked at home) and fast food is, of course, the death of any diet. This is in addition to the fact that apparently eating fast food makes you morally inferior as well. Well, thatís what bodybuilders and other orthorexics will tell you anyhow.

    Except that itís clearly not. Given caloric control, the bodyís response to a given set of nutrients, with the exception of blood lipids would appear to be more determined by the total caloric and macro content of that meal more than the source of the food.

    In terms of the hormonal response, clean vs. unclean just doesnít matter, itís all about calories and macros.
    Last edited by Brad08; 04-22-2009 at 08:02 AM.

  25. #24
    Chubbilicious. VikingWarlord's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Inderminapolis.
    Posts
    3,761
    Quote Originally Posted by Progress View Post
    Not sure if I agree with this.

    Let's assume protein stays at least at 1-1.5g/lb LBM and caloric fat is at least .5g/lb LBM.

    Amount/percentage of calories above or below maintenance have WAY more affect on composition than macros.

    A slow bulk, assuming it's clean, will result in a more efficient body re-composition, meaning ratio of fat gain to muscle gain will be small. A fast bulk, even assuming it's clean, will likely result in a less than efficient recomp.

    You can eat as cleanly as you'd like but if you bulk at 200% maintenance you're going to get fat.
    It looks like you said pretty much exactly what he did. His wording was just slightly awkward. I read his statement "...the composition of your body and your overall health depend on what the calories consist of" to say that the composition of the calories determines your body composition in the end.

    If that's the case, you're both saying the same thing and I agree. So would anyone with even a cursory understanding of metabolic physiology.

    Quote Originally Posted by Songsangnim View Post
    Calories from a fat source are stored more readily as body fat than calories from carbohydrates or protein. While the difference is not huge, over a period of time it can add up.
    This depends a lot on what else is going on with metabolic hormone levels. If insulin levels are kept low, glucagon levels rise and that will result in fat being more readily utilized for fuel.
    If one person can do something, anyone can learn to do it.
    Do what you've always done and get what you've always gotten.
    There is no failure, only feedback.

    "Journey of 1000 miles starts with a single step".--Lao Tzu

    Pro-Choice...ON EVERYTHING.

  26. #25
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    1,147
    Quote Originally Posted by VikingWarlord View Post
    I read his statement "...the composition of your body and your overall health depend on what the calories consist of" to say that the composition of the calories determines your body composition in the end.
    IF calories are held constant, right? Because if they aren't, then the precise ratio of carbs to fat makes less difference than the AMOUNT of calories you eat. For example, you WILL get fat if you eat too many calories; it doesn't matter if you're eating 10% carbs or %50 carbs.

    Or do you disagree?

Similar Threads

  1. Bah, I suck at bulking
    By Madd Hatter in forum Diet and Nutrition
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 12-26-2003, 10:25 PM
  2. Check out these pics of my progress so far..
    By MD2000 in forum Members' Pics and Videos
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 05-16-2003, 03:32 PM
  3. my journal
    By Mystic Eric in forum Member Online Journals
    Replies: 81
    Last Post: 08-30-2001, 01:22 AM
  4. Time to get the ass in gear
    By heathj in forum Member Online Journals
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: 07-24-2001, 08:17 PM
  5. New Diet and Training Program
    By heathj in forum Bodybuilding & Weight Training
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 06-22-2001, 08:09 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •