If I ate 3500cals of pure chicken breast/fish/whole wheat bread/pasta/peanuts.
(only healthy foods)
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?
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.
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
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.
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
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.
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.
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
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.
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
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
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
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).
Calorie Partitioning Part 1At 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 2
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
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.
Last edited by Brad08; 04-22-2009 at 08:02 AM.
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.
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
Or do you disagree?