# Macros breakdowns, Calorics Surpluses, Caloric Deficits, Recalculation frequencies, and YOUR OPINION



## Mayday (Mar 19, 2019)

*Macros breakdowns, Calorics Surpluses, Caloric Deficits, Recalculation frequencies, and YOUR OPINION*

Diet sometimes seems like a cruel voodoo science based around absurd assumptions and conjecture. Sure, it makes total sense. Kinda. That is, if we're getting the results we desire. When we're not, it's another story altogether. Seeing as though there are some pretty experienced people on this forum that oftentimes note the importance of diet, I figured this topic would be prudent to discuss. So here goes. And let us try to make things as simple as possible.

We all realize (hopefully) that proper diet is, first and foremost, based around accurately estimating a baseline caloric requirement. Age, height, weight, and activity level all play a crucial role in accurately deducing our individual "magic" number. This magic number is unique to each one of us and embodies our baseline caloric requirements. If we are to eat exactly at this nutritional requirement on a consistent basis whilst maintaining the activity level utilized in our original calculation with zero deviation, we could expect our weight to remain exactly the same. It's sort of like nutritional stagnation, sort of speak. That's hypothetical, of course. Afterall, the result is totally dependent on the accuracy of the original baseline caloric requirement calculation.

Nevertheless, if we modify our activity level, we can expect our baseline caloric requirement to change. Likewise, if we modify our caloric intake, we can expect the caloric surplus or caloric deficit to affect our total body weight. The result of a steady caloric surplus or caloric deficit would inevitably modify our baseline caloric requirement. So, the result of a steady caloric surplus or caloric deficit would ultimately require a nutritional recalculation to determine a relevant new baseline caloric requirement. 

Then, there’s macronutrients. There’s a lot of talk centered around macronutrient ratios. How many times have we heard that AAS promotes a vastly increased rate of protein synthesis? We kill ourselves in the gym in hopes of tearing down muscle fibers, thereby forcing our body to repair them bigger, better, and stronger than before. It’s what makes muscles grow. And, on anabolic drugs the muscles repair faster which results in a shortened recovery time. This creates an increased demand relating to protein requirements for the average bodybuilder, especially the bodybuilder utilizing anabolic drugs. 

We often hear the conventional wisdom of a bodybuilder's protein demand being met by consuming 1-2 grams of protein per pound of body weight per day. For example, this would entail a 175lb bodybuilder consuming 175 grams to 350 grams of protein per day to meet his or her needs. Seeing as though one gram of protein represents 4 calories, this places the range of daily caloric expenditure exclusive to protein consumption at around 700 to 1400 calories. If this bodybuilder was a 27-year-old man, roughly 5’10, engaged in light weekly activity, having a baseline caloric requirement of 2,441 calories, we could easily determine the percentage of total protein consumed daily. If we used the "two grams of protein per pound of body weight" recommendation (350g), multiplied this number by 4 (4 calories per gram of protein), then divided this number (1,400) by his baseline caloric requirement (2,441), we would approximate that 57.35% of his daily caloric intake consisted of protein exclusively. If we subtract 57.35% from 100%, it leaves us with 42.65%, or 1,041 remaining calories.

Therefore, that leaves us with 1,041 calories to divvy between carbohydrates and lipids. Of course, carbohydrates embody our primary energy source. So, they’re very important. However, lipids also provide energy and help to produce and regulate all the hormones in our bodies. So, which should be prioritized? Clearly, limiting fats sounds more important given the fact that if utilizing anabolic drugs, the average bodybuilder no longer requires as much hormone production. Why? Well, because an important and necessary hormone is now being artificially supplied via an external source. Thus, carbohydrates seem to become the bigger priority. If this man was to prioritize carbohydrates by allocating 30% of the 42.65% remainder, this man would be forced to consume roughly 183 grams, or 732 calories, of carbohydrates per day. All that's left is lipids, a gram of which represents 9 calories. Given the 12.65% remainder, it works out to 308.78 calories, or 34 grams of fats.

Hence, this example macronutrient breakdown would end up *roughly* P 57.35% (350g), C 30% (183g), F 12.65% (34g). I'm off around 6 calories due to rounding the following: 349.978375 to 350, 183.075 to 183, and 34.3096111 to 34 respectively. So, more or less, this would be the exact breakdown to supposedly maintain his exact body weight provided he also maintained an identical activity level. In essence, this macronutrient ratio is a much more detailed report of his actual dietary habits. This is his 2,441 calories under the proverbial “microscope”.

_So, at this point, you totally asking “Great. What the f*ck is the point, douche?”_

*Well, I’m getting there. Really.*

The first point I’m attempting to make is based around an arbitrary concept of nutritional requirements; in this case, protein. As you saw, from that original protein requirement, this man deduced his remaining caloric expenditure and allotted the remainder accordingly. After all, who is to say the exact protein demands required to facilitate muscle repair in this man are guaranteed by this arbitrary number? Who is to say that the two grams of protein is enough and that the one gram of protein may too little? Surely, I’m positive that several studies would agree that this range is accurate (roughly). However, it is also surely possible that this man could be an outlier. It is also surely possible that the sample size enlisted in this hypothetical research study might have neglected pertinent factors relevant to this man’s dietary needs.

This brings me to my second point. The macronutrient breakdown is seemingly irrelevant to his baseline caloric requirement. Let's face it- NOWHERE does it say that he must consume a certain macronutrient more heavily. The only requirement is that he adheres to the total caloric needs represented by his baseline caloric requirement of 2,441 calories. He is not to go over or above that magic number. So, in theory, his macronutrient breakdown could end up P 10%/ C 80%/ F 10% and he still would neither gain nor lose weight! Carbohydrate sensitivity be damned! 

So, herein lies the disconnect in the philosophy of IIFYM (if it fits your macros). It seems obvious that one’s body would not function correctly when employing any extreme macronutrient breakdown. It would impair one’s normal functionality! I’m no nutritionist, but I’m confident that this impairment would have a substantial effect on one’s baseline metabolic rate. However, the original formula does not account for a baseline metabolic rate in any way relevant to this application. So, even if the baseline caloric requirement is adhered to, it might end up being irrelevant depending on dietary habits. I’m not sure the effect a 10%/ C 80%/ F 10% diet would have on the body, but I doubt it would be beneficial in any way for the conventional bodybuilder.

All in all, I propose that some things may work for some people. In fact, they may work very well. Unfortunately, that does not mean that certain things work for everyone. So, what’s the answer?

There’s only one answer.

Trial and error. A shitload of experimentation is required to find out what works and, even then, it doesn’t mean that it will continue to work in the future. It doesn’t even mean that the exact conditions which facilitated the apparent success could even be replicated again. 

So, what’s good diet? What’s bad diet?

In the end, a diet that works for you that can be consistently replicated and produces good results is probably pretty good. Any diet that is erratic, uncalculated, and impossible to replicate which produces no results is bad.

*With that being said, what do your macros look like when maintaining, bulking, or cutting? What has worked for you? What advice regarding diet would you give yourself if you could go back in time?*


----------



## CJ (Mar 19, 2019)

Advice that I would give myself would be to not try to be so exact in hitting numbers. Over the years I found that a range is better than a specific number.

I heard a great analogy about macros once, but forget who said it to give them proper credit. The analogy was that a macro total was like driving down a 3 lane highway. We'll use protein in the example. Say you determine that 225g was your daily target. That number would be like driving down the middle lane. Say you happened to hit 250g or 200g in a particular day. That would be like driving down the right or the left lane. Still in a good direction, heading to where you want to go.

But if you happen to hit 275g or 175g in a particular day, that like riding on the rumble strip, a warning to get back into your lane. If you do something drastic, like 500g or 50g, now you're in the ditch. Unnecessary or counterproductive.


----------



## CJ (Mar 19, 2019)

Also I believe obsessing over a specific calorie/macro number is more or less an exercise in futility. Labels are inaccurate, different cuts of the exact same meat will have different macro breakdowns, and I also believe that the body adjusts to SLIGHT calorie fluctuations accordingly, meaning your body wont just immediately store an extra 100 calories as fat, that you have to be a chronic state of overeating to truly gain any appreciable fat. Your body will just burn that little bit off if it's just once in a while. Same for fat loss. The body wants homeostasis, and you have to get outside of the norms to make that.


----------



## BRICKS (Mar 20, 2019)

Ah, where do I start.....I know

Warning: if you are easily offended stop reading now or put on your big girl panties and read through this like I foolishly read through the pile of bullshit above.

Dude, WTF are you yammering on about? First of all no one except an idiot like me is gonna read through that slog of sh*t.  Second, well, just what the fk???

It's food.  As far as I know human physiology and biochemistry hasn't changed in a couple thousand years.  You eat more calories than you burn, you gain and vice versa.  What is complicated about this process?  

No shit it's trial and error.  You wrote a fkn book and answered your own question.  TDEE is a ballpark starting point.  Eat X amount of calories, in 2-4 weeks reevaluate using the mirror and scale and adjust your calories up or down.  Get X amount of protein daily and eat the rest in fats and carbs.  What's complex about that?

How would anybody else's "macro" break down apply to you or anyone else?  Science and bro science aside, 1 gram/pound a day protein should suffice.  Little bit more if your'e cutting.  But I can almost guarantee that my cutting calories are way above your "bulking" calories, so what I do is non applicable to you.

You want the easy solution? Eat the same shit every day.  Eat less to lose fat, eat more to gain.  Oh but BRICKS, that is soooo boring and tedious.  Well, so is going into the gym and picking up heavy shit every damn day if you really think about it.  So is being sore somewhere in multiples 24/7. And so on....

Rant over.  You need to do the work and have the discipline to figure out what works for you and stick to it.  Nobody has the magic formula except for themselves.  And if you read this post even half assed carefully I have answered the questions you asked and layed it out for you.  

Quit complicating the simple.  Eat and train like you have a set of balls.

Oh, and what's up with the profile? This ain't Match.com.  I read that and I wasn't sure if I wanted to date you or just fk you a couple times.


----------



## Mayday (Mar 21, 2019)

BRICKS said:


> Ah, where do I start.....I know
> 
> Warning: if you are easily offended stop reading now or put on your big girl panties and read through this like I foolishly read through the pile of bullshit above.
> 
> ...



That's certainly one way of looking at things. Granted, presumptions aside, I'll take your advice under consideration.

It could be argued that a calorie isn't a calorie, you know. Eating the aforementioned "same shit" everyday might very well end up being detrimental in the long run. Regardless of results, I doubt bulking on double cheeseburgers as opposed to high quality lean protein would end up having an identical effect on one's body. Atherosclerosis notwithstanding, I'd wager a bet a person's energy levels would tank pretty quickly. 

I think you missed the point, brother. The post was more about inconsistency and the subjective concept around good or bad diet.

Either way, I appreciate you reading my profile. Unfortunately, while I appreciate the sexual advances, I'm not interested.


----------



## Flyingdragon (Mar 21, 2019)

This is what we do at Applebees, 1g of protein per pound if off gear, 1.5g of protein per pound if on gear.  Carbs are adjusted based on bulking, maintaining, leaning out.  Fats are tossed in where needed.....Again as Bricks has explained this isnt complicated and is pretty boring when eating the same foods day in day out but this is the lifestyle we decided to be apart of.  

Again what I described above is for a bodybuilder type of mindset, powerlifting is a different mindset and I cant comment on something I know nothing about when it comes to the caloric intake of a powerlifter.....And if neither applies to you I would keep the protein intake lower than 1g per pound....


----------



## Mayday (Mar 21, 2019)

Flyingdragon said:


> This is what we do at Applebees, 1g of protein per pound if off gear, 1.5g of protein per pound if on gear.  Carbs are adjusted based on bulking, maintaining, leaning out.  Fats are tossed in where needed.....Again as Bricks has explained this isnt complicated and is pretty boring when eating the same foods day in day out but this is the lifestyle we decided to be apart of.
> 
> Again what I described above is for a bodybuilder type of mindset, powerlifting is a different mindset and I cant comment on something I know nothing about when it comes to the caloric intake of a powerlifter.....And if neither applies to you I would keep the protein intake lower than 1g per pound....



I get what you're saying, FD. It makes total sense. Brick's post makes total sense. That's not the point though. The point I'm trying to make is that the concept of good or bad diet is entirely subjective in some ways. I see both you and Brick agree that numerical dietary allotments are mostly arbitrary (outside your mention of protein) and that good diet is based primarily on what you see staring back at you from the other side of the mirror. In other words, good diet is not based on some far fetched macronutrient breakdown or carefully calculated baseline caloric requirement. It's based on results. That, too, makes sense. Actually, it's more or less what I said originally.

Once again, it's all subjective. A calorie isn't a calorie. There's much, much more going on. 

For instance, how many calories are in a pound of salt? How about a pinch? Think it matters? It shouldn't. It's zero calories either way.

But it does if you don't want to see a bloated piece of shit staring back at you following a 5 week (50md ED) dbol cycle.

Honestly, relating to diet, I just want to see what's working for everyone here.


----------



## Mayday (Mar 21, 2019)

:32 (17): :32 (6): :32 (4): :32 (15): :32 (2): :32 (17): :32 (15): :32 (5): :32 (13): :32 (17): :32 (2): :32 (16): :32 (17): :32 (5): :32 (15):




:32 (17): :32 (6): :32 (4): :32 (15): :32 (2): :32 (17): :32 (15): :32 (5): :32 (13): :32 (17): :32 (2): :32 (16): :32 (17): :32 (5): :32 (15):



*(art bump 4 lols)*


----------



## Jin (Mar 21, 2019)

Are you One of Dr. Who’s kids?


----------



## Mayday (Mar 21, 2019)

Jin said:


> Are you One of Dr. Who’s kids?



I'm just a meek protégé of the vanilla godzilla. It is what it is.

How's your diet? 

I can donate some protein to your cause if need be.


----------



## Jin (Mar 21, 2019)

Mayday said:


> I'm just a meek protégé of the vanilla godzilla. It is what it is.
> 
> How's your diet?
> 
> I can donate some protein to your cause if need be.




My diet is absolute shit right now.

I have always wanted to try human flesh. From where will you amputate?

Pretty sure protégé means I have to take an active role in supporting you. I mean, I’m more of a fan than a mentor.


----------



## Mayday (Mar 21, 2019)

Jin said:


> My diet is absolute shit right now.
> 
> I have always wanted to try human flesh. From where will you amputate?
> 
> Pretty sure protégé means I have to take an active role in supporting you. I mean, I’m more of a fan than a mentor.



Oh, come on. You're the one that put me up to this. VG, at least accept a modicum of responsibility.

Amputations? My protein flows free. No need for tourniquets or subsequent cauterization.

In some ways, I fault you for derailing my diet thread to petition for my vanilla love butter. But, seeing as though you're the Palpatine to my Anakin, I'll kowtow to your wisdom, sire. Hey, wisdom of the east, right?

Does this mean I'm turning Japanese? Am I'm turning Japanese? I really think so.


----------



## BRICKS (Mar 21, 2019)

The proof is in the result.  And where you fall down is in your analogy of lean protein vs double cheeseburgers.   Almost like comparing apples to oranges.  Compare protein to protein.  Your body doesn't know if that protein came from the grocery or Burger King.  Of course there's a difference when you factor in the fats.  I did mention in my post that you answered your own questions.  And no, eating the same shit everyday isn't detrimental in the long run so long as you are getting what you need with respect to vitamins, etc....  Do you think that the guys at the elite of levels of bodybuilding aren't pretty much eating the same shit everyday? Guess again.


----------



## Flyingdragon (Mar 21, 2019)

An easier way of answering is simply u r what u eat....


----------



## bigdog (Mar 21, 2019)

thanks FD... im a fukking poptart LMAO


----------



## Jin (Mar 22, 2019)

Flyingdragon said:


> An easier way of answering is simply u r what u eat....



Everybody knows I am an asshole.


----------



## Mayday (Mar 22, 2019)

BRICKS said:


> The proof is in the result.  And where you fall down is in your analogy of lean protein vs double cheeseburgers.   Almost like comparing apples to oranges.  Compare protein to protein.  Your body doesn't know if that protein came from the grocery or Burger King.  Of course there's a difference when you factor in the fats.  I did mention in my post that you answered your own questions.  And no, eating the same shit everyday isn't detrimental in the long run so long as you are getting what you need with respect to vitamins, etc....  Do you think that the guys at the elite of levels of bodybuilding aren't pretty much eating the same shit everyday? Guess again.



Many pro bodybuilders have died from cardiovascular related illness. As fit as they were, how many pros succumbed to problems with the pump, the pipes, or the stuff that flows through them? Sometimes, it saddens me thinking about how many hardcore mofos ate it from their diet (no pun intended). 

Granted, there's also an abundance of additional distracting factors: predisposition, stress, drug use, etc. I guess no one can say what originally caused the ailment for sure. All I know is that while protein available ends up protein utilized (potentially), garbage in means garbage out. Or, more specifically, garbage in means the garbage stays in. 

As far as macros are concerned, a shit ton of fats is never recommended for quality gains. Double meat double cheese? Yikes. It sure smells good, but I can visualize the ST elevation. 

That's not to say you're wrong in general. Not only are your successes pretty amazing at your age, they make the one's I've achieved seem pretty mediocre. 

However, if I was you, I'd be more so concerned with the long term ramifications as opposed to the short term successes. That is, if you want to live to see 65.


----------



## BRICKS (Mar 22, 2019)

Mayday said:


> Many pro bodybuilders have died from cardiovascular related illness. As fit as they were, how many pros succumbed to problems with the pump, the pipes, or the stuff that flows through them? Sometimes, it saddens me thinking about how many hardcore mofos ate it from their diet (no pun intended).
> 
> Granted, there's also an abundance of additional distracting factors: predisposition, stress, drug use, etc. I guess no one can say what originally caused the ailment for sure. All I know is that while protein available ends up protein utilized (potentially), garbage in means garbage out. Or, more specifically, garbage in means the garbage stays in.
> 
> ...



Brother, you have absolutely no idea what I do for a living or my knowledge base/education, both formal and experience wise. I'm probably not the guy you want to argue about health with.  Stop digging the hole you're digging man.  And the big pros are not fit.  That's laughable.

And "at my age"???? That's also laughable.  Try at any age.

And before you think I'm writing this response because you're pushing my buttons, you have no idea what my buttons are.  I'm trying to save you further embarrassment with the brothers on here who actually know a little something about me.


----------



## Mayday (Mar 23, 2019)

BRICKS said:


> Brother, you have absolutely no idea what I do for a living or my knowledge base/education, both formal and experience wise. I'm probably not the guy you want to argue about health with.  Stop digging the hole you're digging man.  And the big pros are not fit.  That's laughable.
> 
> And "at my age"???? That's also laughable.  Try at any age.
> 
> And before you think I'm writing this response because you're pushing my buttons, you have no idea what my buttons are.  I'm trying to save you further embarrassment with the brothers on here who actually know a little something about me.



Brother,

But I have to know.

Enlighten the foolish.

After all, you're badass. Why deny me an asskicking?

I'm zero percent worried about getting wrecked on an internet forum if it means I learn something worthwhile.




Happy 3/22


----------



## Seeker (Mar 23, 2019)

Did you know you can save 15% by switching your car insurance to Geico?


----------



## BRICKS (Mar 23, 2019)

You are persistent. The take home, and ask any of the vets on here who have been at this a while, is you don't have to complicate it.  Some people like the mental gymnastics but it's not necessary nor is it efficient.

1-1.5 grams protein per pound bodyweight depending on gaining or cutting

The rest of your cals in carbs and fats.  Some prefer to focus on carbs, some on fats.  I like carbs.

Increase to gain, decrease to lose.

Eating the same shit everyday is not detrimental to you unless you are missing vitamins, etc....

Pros are not fit.  Look more to the massive amounts of shit these guys inject before you look at their diet.  The guys I know eat very healthy during their season and off season they can't afford to turn into pigs.  But...

You can't get big on chicken breast and broccoli bro.  Try it, let me know when you've had enough.

I don't believe I ever saw any of your stats.  Age, height, weight, training program and diet, year training.  Please post that up and if you have provide a link.


----------



## Mayday (Mar 23, 2019)

BRICKS said:


> You are persistent. The take home, and ask any of the vets on here who have been at this a while, is you don't have to complicate it.  Some people like the mental gymnastics but it's not necessary nor is it efficient.
> 
> 1-1.5 grams protein per pound bodyweight depending on gaining or cutting
> 
> ...



5'7 161. 1 cycle. I do mainly jump rope and tap dance. I tend to vary between the ball-change and heel-step. Life's rough as a tap dancer, ju kno? 

My preparations are concealed not published. My mistakes are buried, not headlined. My dissenters are silenced, not praised. No expenditure is questioned, no rumor is printed, no secret is revealed.

Just kidding. That was a modified section of John F. Kennedy's speech at the Waldorf Astoria.

I mean, it could be all about you and your questioning, but that would be rather egotistical and presumptuous, don't you think? 

I'd rather just continue with the thread, k? That is, if you have nothing further to add..


----------



## BRICKS (Mar 23, 2019)

Actually I'm done.  And seriously, I have a dog that weighs more than you.  Seriously.  Enjoy the flail.


----------



## Mayday (Mar 23, 2019)

BRICKS said:


> Actually I'm done.  And seriously, I have a dog that weighs more than you.  Seriously.  Enjoy the flail.



Thanks big b. I just pray your 161 pound dog has a better personality than your 54 year old buxom body! 

Hey.. Wait..

Why do you have a 161 pound dog?

EWWWWWW


----------



## Mayday (Mar 23, 2019)

Jin said:


> Everybody knows I am an asshole.



THAT is NOT TRUE. I know palpebral slant, potentially jaundiced mommy dropped the ball a dozen or so times but you're an outstanding person.

Every time I think VG, I think A-M-A-Z-I-N-G. 

Maybe you're wrong, but you feel so f*cking right,


----------



## silvereyes87 (Mar 23, 2019)

Dys was right. Things are getting ghey around here.
Dude just go back to your davinci code forum and leave the lifting talk for the people who actually do.


----------



## DevilDoc87 (Mar 23, 2019)

What the fk did I just read .....


----------



## bigdog (Mar 23, 2019)

I only read a few posts because I get to eat popcorn or a poptart as I do..  otherwise I wouldn't waste my time on sheer stupidity like this.


----------



## BigSwolePump (Mar 23, 2019)




----------



## Mayday (Mar 26, 2019)

silvereyes87 said:


> Dys was right. Things are getting ghey around here.
> Dude just go back to your davinci code forum and leave the lifting talk for the people who actually do.



Dan Brown, dude?

Really?

Yaaaawn..

Lifting talk?

What talk? School me on diet, brah.


----------



## DeltaWave (Mar 26, 2019)

Good post, MD.

You did expand on a lot. Some will understand, some will already know, the majority won't understand or know any of it.

You're clearly well-versed with nutrition. Perhaps consider being a dietitian?


----------



## Mayday (Mar 26, 2019)

DeltaWave said:


> Good post, MD.
> 
> You did expand on a lot. Some will understand, some will already know, the majority won't understand or know any of it.
> 
> You're clearly well-versed with nutrition. Perhaps consider being a dietitian?



Thanks for checking my profile out, DeltaWave.

It means a lot.

As far as becoming a dietician, I'm not so sure. I was hoping for logical discourse instead of ab hominem attacks and arbitrary conjecture. 

Maybe I touched upon a sore subject.. maybe I worded it in a way people disliked..

Either way, thanks!


----------



## silvereyes87 (Mar 26, 2019)

Mayday said:


> Dan Brown, dude?
> 
> Really?
> 
> ...



What would you like to know?  I can attempt to provide you answers based on my own experiences with trial and error.


----------



## DeltaWave (Mar 27, 2019)

Mayday said:


> Thanks for checking my profile out, DeltaWave.
> 
> It means a lot.
> 
> ...


People often view it as an unnecessary discussion I suppose. "A calorie is a calorie" is the old but generally standard way of looking at it.

 But remember there's an audience and business for just about everything. Especially the professional/scientific side of the industry.


----------



## Mayday (Mar 29, 2019)

silvereyes87 said:


> What would you like to know?  I can attempt to provide you answers based on my own experiences with trial and error.



Raw feces. When you consumed it, how did you factor in the calories? Count the kernels?

Dude- totally kidding.

Like what were your macros like

totally???


----------



## Mayday (Mar 29, 2019)

DeltaWave said:


> People often view it as an unnecessary discussion I suppose. "A calorie is a calorie" is the old but generally standard way of looking at it.
> 
> But remember there's an audience and business for just about everything. Especially the professional/scientific side of the industry.



Pretty boss reply. 

I don't see any reason to believe that a calorie is a calorie. That assumption more or less implies that our current nutritional unit of energy is fully expressive. It isn't.  The adverse  health repercussions of an individual consuming an identical daily caloric value could have a vastly varying effect dependent mostly on its daily macronutrient breakdown. 

Hopefully  that makes sense


----------



## CJ (Mar 29, 2019)

Maybe a better phrase would be.. it's not only about calories.

A calorie is a calorie in a limited scope, but it's what comes along with those calories that can shift the balance.


----------



## silvereyes87 (Mar 29, 2019)

Mayday said:


> Raw feces. When you consumed it, how did you factor in the calories? Count the kernels?
> 
> Dude- totally kidding.
> 
> ...



Ok last year i was able to cut from 251 lbs to 195 lbs at 12% bf. 1st i went to get a dexa scan to findout my initial bodyfat composition.  Then i used that data to findout my maintenance calories. From there i subtracted 500 cals from maintenance a day. I always made sure i got 230 grams of protein everyday and i filled in the rest with fats and carbs. Whatever was convientient and i had for my prep. I think i was averaging around 175 carbs and rest fat.
U can play with those 2. But if youre lifting heavy definitly make carbs your bigger priority then fat ofcourse.


----------



## Straight30weight (Mar 29, 2019)

Mayday said:


> Thanks for checking my profile out, DeltaWave.
> 
> It means a lot.
> 
> ...


I’m too stupid to understand what you’re saying most of the time.


----------



## DeltaWave (Mar 30, 2019)

Mayday said:


> Pretty boss reply.
> 
> I don't see any reason to believe that a calorie is a calorie. That assumption more or less implies that our current nutritional unit of energy is fully expressive. It isn't.  The adverse  health repercussions of an individual consuming an identical daily caloric value could have a vastly varying effect dependent mostly on its daily macronutrient breakdown.
> 
> Hopefully  that makes sense


I remember listening to a dietitian a couple days ago explain that we've only really scratched the surface of nutrition. 

And ya it makes sense. Although it's something I haven't really explored much of tbh. :32 (18):



Straight30weight said:


> I’m too stupid to understand what you’re saying most of the time.


I think he called you a homunculus, S30.


----------

