John Berardi

[Aaron_F]

The Horton paper is one of the popular references for the low fat brigade, but one of the minorities that I can find in the over feeding stakes. I have it at home in one of my boxes, I cant remember if it showed a significant difference in weight at the end of the period, or not.

theres also

Am J Clin Nutr. 2000 Aug;72(2):369-77.

Macronutrient disposal during controlled overfeeding with glucose, fructose, sucrose, or fat in lean and obese women.

McDevitt RM, Poppitt SD, Murgatroyd PR, Prentice AM.

Medical Research Council Dunn Clinical Nutrition Centre, Cambridge, United Kingdom. r.mcdevitt@au.sac.ac.uk

BACKGROUND: Previous short-term studies (< or =6 h) showed differences in energy expenditure (EE) and macronutrient oxidation in response to overfeeding with different types of dietary carbohydrate. This finding could have implications for obesity. OBJECTIVE: We used 96-h continuous whole-body calorimetry in 8 lean and 5 obese women to assess metabolic disposal (energy dissipation and glycogen or fat storage) of a controlled excess of dietary energy supplied as different carbohydrate sources or as fat. DESIGN: Five dietary treatments were applied in random order: energy balance (control) and overfeeding by 50% of energy requirements with fat (O(fat)) or predominantly with glucose, fructose, or sucrose (O(cho)). Macronutrient oxidation rates were assessed from nonprotein gaseous exchanges. Net macronutrient balances were calculated as cumulative differences between intake and oxidation. RESULTS: Increased EE in response to overfeeding dissipated 7.9% of the energy excess with a variation in EE of <1.7% across overfeeding treatments (NS). EE during the O(fat) treatment significantly exceeded that during the control treatment in the lean but not in the obese women. There were no significant differences between lean and obese women in macronutrient oxidation or balances, so data were pooled. O(cho) induced glycogen storage on day 1 ( approximately 100 g) but thereafter progressively stimulated carbohydrate oxidation so that balance was reached on days 3 and 4. Fat oxidation was proportionately suppressed. Of the excess carbohydrate, 74% was oxidized; there were no significant differences between the various O(cho) treatments. O(fat) stimulated fat oxidation by 18% and suppressed carbohydrate oxidation. On average, 12% of the excess energy was stored as glycogen and 88% as fat; there was no significant difference between overfeeding treatments. CONCLUSION: There was no significant difference in fat balance during controlled overfeeding with fat, fructose, glucose, or sucrose.


In terms of fat:carb balances I think it more depends on the individual, and how well they respond to overfeeding from any source. Some are lucky, some just get fat

 

[kurnia38]

Quote[/b] (Bryan Haycock @ Jan. 07 2004,1:01)]

Quote[/b] (kurnia38 @ Jan. 07 2004,10:29)]Bryan, what do you mean by things start to change when one is underfeeding? Could you explain it in more details?

When one begins to diet, meaning, you aren't eating enough calories to maintain your bodyweight, there is much less impact of eating sugars and fats. This is because the body then increases its ability to burn whatever fuel is available, thus compensating for a large variety of macronutrient ratios in the diet.
In short (I always say that then ramble on and on), when you are dieting, there is very little difference in the end result of a low carb diet or a low fat diet. Each has its pros and cons, but it really does come down to calories in vs calories out.
From a practicle standpoint, some peopel do much better with low carb diets, and some people do much better with a low fat diet. Both diets only work "really" well with lots of cardio/exercise.
However, when you overfeed, things change. The body will shift its genetic expression towards fuel storage and thermogenesis. This is where eating high-fat & high-carb makes you fatter than eating high protein with lessor amounts of either "fuel" carbs or fat.

Bryan,

Are you saying that when one is underfeeding, the rate of fatloss won't depend on the macronutrients at all?

In the context of underfeeding,
if subject A eats 50% carb, 25% pro, 25% fat, with most of the carbs coming from low GI, and subject B eats 75% sugar and 25% pro, will both of them achieve the same rate of fatloss?

That's the impression I got from your statement. Please correct me if I'm wrong. Thank you.

 

[restless]

Quote[/b] (kurnia38 @ Jan. 08 2004,5:11)]if subject A eats 50% carb, 25% pro, 25% fat, with most of the carbs coming from low GI, and subject B eats 75% sugar and 25% pro, will both of them achieve the same rate of fatloss?

If subject number two ate no fat whatsoever for a significant period of time he would risk getting seriously hill and eventually dying. And don't forget that too low of a fat intake will have an undesirable effect on your endocrinous system, lowering endogenous androgens, thus possibly resulting in more lean mass loss.

 

[Aaron_F]

Quote[/b] (restless @ Jan. 08 2004,8:10)]If subject number two ate no fat whatsoever for a significant period of time he would risk getting seriously hill and eventually dying.

THis would take a seriously long time, potentially >1-2years

Quote[/b] ]And don't forget that too low of a fat intake will have an undesirable effect on your endocrinous system, lowering endogenous androgens, thus possibly resulting in more lean mass loss.

on a zero fat diet, highly likely something will go wrong.

 

[Blade]

Well, a theory I've been implementing for the last couple of years with my clients - and recently gotten some positive input from Lyle on, is the following:

- Jacking up fat intake will, along with lower carbs, increase plasma fatty acids, which in turn generates insulin resistance.

- Exercise selectively increases insulin sensitivity at the muscle acutely, so put the majority of carb intake immediately prior to- and for up to 4-6hrs post workout. Total carb intake maybe around 200g/day on training days, around 100g/day on non-workout days (just sufficient to stay out of ketosis).

Protein kept around 1.5g/lbs of bodyweight or so. Moderate overfeeding. This should partition nutrients away from fat cells and towards muscle - in theory obviously, but seems to be working fine anecdotally.

De novo lipogenesis seems to play a minor role unless one is talking about massive carb overfeeding.

Or maybe this is more evidence that one should follow a cyclical dieting approach, sort of like the mass gaining version of UD2.0...

 

[Arbitro]

Quote[/b] (Blade @ Jan. 08 2004,9:33)]Total carb intake maybe around 200g/day on training days, around 100g/day on non-workout days (just sufficient to stay out of ketosis).

How dependant are these amounts on 1) bodyweight, 2) activity level outside of workouts, 3) BF% and 4) total calorie intake for maintenance?

I could see how these might have to be downwardly adjusted for someone who is cutting & has a relatively low maintenance calorie level (2000 cals or less).

 

[Bryan Haycock]

Quote[/b] (Aaron_F @ Jan. 07 2004,7:26)]In terms of fat:carb balances I think it more depends on the individual, and how well they respond to overfeeding from any source. Some are lucky, some just get fat

I'm one of those lucky people who just get fat.

But I also strongly feel that once a natural lifter gets big enough, further growth is almost entirely dependant on overfeeding.

 

[Aaron_F]

Yes, I get fat normally, HST helped limit it tho

Some of the studies with the Pratio n stuff are interesting in that regard, but still doesnt show the situation with a dieted down lifters and over feeding tho..
why wont anyone spend millions on researching us (providing all food sources )

 

[Aaron_F]

I think blades way will work extremely well. But I am still unsure whether any potential benefit will be large enough to actually sod around with all the seperating things out

Possibly just me tho, bodybuilders are a tad more finicky

 

[Blade]

Quote[/b] (Arbitro @ Jan. 08 2004,5:20)]

Quote[/b] (Blade @ Jan. 08 2004,9:33)]Total carb intake maybe around 200g/day on training days, around 100g/day on non-workout days (just sufficient to stay out of ketosis).

How dependant are these amounts on 1) bodyweight, 2) activity level outside of workouts, 3) BF% and 4) total calorie intake for maintenance?

1. The 100g/day amount depends more one size of internal organs (brain, liver) which doesn't really vary much with bodyweight. The carbs you put on top of that would vary according to muscle size and degree of depletion (determined by training volume).

2. You'd increase total calories if you have a higher activity level, i.e. higher maintenance level.

3. At higher bf% it would probably be wiser to diet first.

4. Don't quite understand the question. How dependent are these amounts on total caloric intake for maintenance? You obviously have a higher caloric expenditure with higher bodyweight, muscle mass, and activity level. Carbs would be adjusted according to 1. while calories (in terms of fats and protein) would be adjusted according to bodyweight and activity level in order to stay hypercaloric.

Quote[/b] ]I could see how these might have to be downwardly adjusted for someone who is cutting & has a relatively low maintenance calorie level (2000 cals or less).

This is only relevant to a hypercaloric situation. For dieting, I'd use a different approach.

 

[Dianabol]

Blade, this theory of yours is rather interesting.

How would you do it for a hypocaloric situation?

And how impressive were the results on your clients?

Any supplements adminstered (non-AAS)?

 

[Arbitro]

Quote[/b] (Dianabol @ Jan. 09 2004,3:29)]Blade, this theory of yours is rather interesting.
How would you do it for a hypocaloric situation?
And how impressive were the results on your clients?
Any supplements adminstered (non-AAS)?

Bump for Blade on this.

 

[Blade]

Quote[/b] ]How would you do it for a hypocaloric situation?

Unless you're below 12-15%, there isn't much to worry about. 10-12kcals/lbs, protein at 1-1.5g/lbs, 20-25% of calories from fats, the rest in carbs, and adjust as you go along - finding the balance between caloric intake and cardio volume that nets a fat loss of maybe 1-1.5lbs per week with little to no muscle or strength loss.

When you get leaner you usually run into problems with screwed up hormone levels (leptin etc), and a cyclical approach seems to be the best way to go about further fat loss. I'd recommend an approach similar to Lyle's UD2.0 concept at www.bodyrecomposition.com

Quote[/b] ]And how impressive were the results on your clients? Any supplements adminstered (non-AAS)?

Steady mass gains with no real increases in caliper measurements, some even dropped 1-2 mm while increasing bodyweight and strength. With HST, of course. Only supplements used were protein, fish oil, and in some cases CLA.

 

[anoopbal]

Everything seems to be confusing to me.It would be greatly appreciated if you could help me out with these questions
1) If calorie in and calorie out is what matters the most, why the body needs 3 types of macronutrients.Is there a specidifc reason?
2) I have heard a lot of people who wants to loose weight saying that I never eat anything ..i just eat once a day and stuff.So if its just calorie in and out why arent they loosing weight?
3) And , finally why is protein requirement so high in almost all of the cutting diets, if its all about calorie expenditute and intake?
4) Finally, if someone who has never lifted and if he wants to looseweight, is it better start with a cutting phase or do a bulking phase(pack some muscle) and then cutback.Or is it possible to do weight traiang and cardio together and lose fat at the same time put muscle?

Thanks in advance
Anoop

 

[Aaron_F]

Quote[/b] (anoopbal @ Jan. 18 2004,8:33)]Everything seems to be confusing to me.It would be greatly appreciated if you could help me out with these questions
1) If calorie in and calorie out is what matters the most, why the body needs 3 types of macronutrients.Is there a specidifc reason?

you need certain amino acids (protein) essential fatty acids adn vits/mins. You dont need carbs, but they are extremely useful and also provide a vast quantity of vits/mins and other phytonutrients.

Quote[/b] ]2) I have heard a lot of people who wants to loose weight saying that I never eat anything ..i just eat once a day and stuff.So if its just calorie in and out why arent they loosing weight?

a lot of people are stupid and also lie to themselves...the mythical 300lb woman who gains weight on 600kcal, but has never been found in reasarch....

Quote[/b] ]3) And , finally why is protein requirement so high in almost all of the cutting diets, if its all about calorie expenditute and intake?

you are trying to beat the inevitable decline in muscle protein. if you are in negative calorie balance, your requirement for protein icnreases to maintain nitrogen balance.

Quote[/b] ]4) Finally, if someone who has never lifted and if he wants to looseweight, is it better start with a cutting phase or do a bulking phase(pack some muscle) and then cutback.Or is it possible to do weight traiang and cardio together and lose fat at the same time put muscle?

being a noob, they need to eat adequate protein, moderate amounts of fats/carbs (~maintenance) and start weight training. PRotein requirements during the starting phase of weight training is at its highest, once the body adapts to the stress of training, protein requirements decrease. So 'cutting' would be best kept until they have adequate ability in training first (they will have a bodycompsition change in this time, becuase of the effects of weight training)

 

[anoopbal]

Quote[/b] ]a lot of people are stupid and also lie to themselves...the mythical 300lb woman who gains weight on 600kcal, but has never been found in reasarch....

Is there a possibilty that they are not loosing weight bcos their metabolism has gone really low.And once they start eating at their maintatnce level thier metablism is goona be back to normal and they start loosing weight.
Also, is there a differnce in calorie expenditure in the form of exercise and reducing calorie intake through diet?. I have read somewhere Bryan stating that even at zero calorie diet he dnt lose any weight until he started exercising.what is that all about
Thanks Aaron for all the advise.You have a great ability to see simple things and state it simply.Thats the mark of a genius
Anoop

 

[Bryan Haycock]

Metabolism does slow, and is most closely related to the drop in lean mass, but it doesn't drop so much as to allow a 300 pound woman not to lose weight if she is only eating 600 calories.

Think about it, why is it that ALL people who undergo gastric bypass surgery lose weight? There is not a single person I have ever heard of who didn't claim that "diets simply don't work for me" before getting the surgical procedure done. All the surgery does is prevent them from eating so much. If they really weren't eating that much before, the surgery would have no effect.

 

[anoopbal]

Fromthe FAQ

Quote[/b] ]Additionally, thyroid hormones play a major role in regulating body weight. If you have been "sort of dieting" for a long time, your thyroid levels may be reduced. The only way to get thyroid levels optimized for fat loss is to refeed yourself with more healthy food and calories for a couple weeks before attempting to diet again

I am not reffering to really heavy people..I was refering to people who are the around the 20% bf.I was just curious was muscle lose the only cause of lowering metabolism.One of my really close friends he lost like 26 lbs in six weeks recently.He did not even exercise, the only thing he did was eat more than he used to. His diet was really hypocaloric but he used to lifts weight regularly, but he never lost any weight.He went home home for 6 weeks ate a lot manly fruits, andhe lost like 26 lbs>the only thing he did was sit on his butt.But when he came back he went back to his usual eating and gained the same weight again.What can be eason for this weight loss.Can it be due to thyroid levels being optimises or is there some other reason.
Anoop

 

[Aaron_F]

You wouldnt know exactly what he was taking in, I doubt thyroid reduction would make that large a difference in the big picture (unless he has a thyroid problem)

eating a lot (mainly fruits) could actually have added up to less

 

[anoopbal]

Two more questions

1) Under normal circumastances, is excess calories the only reason( or the major reason) why people put on weight or not loose weight?

2)What is the differnce in reducing calories by doing exercising or just by reducing calories through diet?Why both?

Anoop