Calorie Confusion (need help)

[imported_dkm1987]

It's very funny to me, being an ex fat body, how this debate continues and with such intensity. So just to add my experience in the subject with a little hint of science behind it.

Eat less move more and whichever route you choose, IE lo carb, lo fat you have to maintain it over a duration of time. Drop out rates on diets are phenomenal for example looking at 4 diet methods of 160 overweight people (mean age, 49; 51% women; mean BMI, 35) to follow one of four diets: low-fat (Ornish), low-carb (Atkins), low-glycemic-load (Zone), or portion- and calorie-restricted (Weight Watchers). All participants attended four diet classes over 8 weeks to improve adherence, with no specific interventions thereafter.
By 1 year, all diet groups had achieved only modest, albeit statistically significant, mean weight reduction (range, 2.1-3.3 kg), with no significant differences among the diets. In addition, benefits in LDL-to-HDL cholesterol ratio, triglyceride levels, and blood pressure were similar among the diets. The weight loss seen was significantly associated with improvements in total-to-HDL cholesterol ratio, C-reactive protein levels, and insulin levels, regardless of diet type.

The greatest weight-loss and risk-factor benefits were observed among study completers (12-month completion rate, 58%). Completion rates trended lower with the Ornish (50%) and Atkins (52%) diets than with the Zone and Weight Watchers diets (65% each).

Bottom line dietary adherence, which is generally low, yields the greater benefits.

You all can debate til the cows come home on the trivial responses to lipid/insulin responses but in the end any compostion change for the postive improves these and I recommend the "low-fad" diet,

eat less move more.

P.S. We are the worrrrrllllldddd, we are the chillllllldren, come on now sing it with me....hey where'd the bouncing balls go? Hey do you guys see the bouncing balls?

Oh my god, I lost my bouncing balls.

 

[Heavy Duty dude]

If it makes no difference to eat carbs or fat, why does Lyle continue to design ketogenic diets?

It was my understanding that insulin started to play a role at low bf. It made some sense because if you eat the same amount of carbs at 10% or at 30% bf, the effect of inulin can be expected to be different. At 30% you have 3 times more fat so fat can still be mobilized easily, while at 10%, there's 3 times less fat, and on top of that the fat is probably more "stubborn", so the insulin can have a sufficient effect to prevent fat mobilization.

Also IS sensitivity plays a role in determining the setpoint doesn't it?

All of this is kind of hard to grasp for my poor little brain.. lol

 

[Bryan Haycock]

Quote[/b] (jvroig @ July 30 2005,2:54)]

Quote[/b] ]All I have to add here is, it's not really the point of "eating clean" to avoid certain (mostly heavily processed) foods like twinkies or such just because they have "sub-standard" or totally different quality calories (because this really is highly debatable thanks to old and new knowledge). The totality is what we should focus on... let's say it's really about "looking at the big picture". We eat clean because the foods we ought to avoid contan a heck of a lot of other bad stuff, like unholy trans-fats, saturated fats, too much calories due to sugars, too much sugars, etc. So we eat clean so we still get all the good stuff we want (Protein, our target calories, good fats, carbs, fiber, whatever vitamins and minerals, etc), all the while sparing ourselves the bad stuff (trans fats, sat fats, cholesterol, too much sugar, etc).

Excellent point! Whether you are a bodybuilder or a sofa jockey with a desk job, some things just aren't good for you to eat. Eating too much of the junk the food industry puts out is just not good for you. Granted, if you train all the time like most of us here you are unlikely to suffer as many ill effects but I personally think it is a good idea to eat well anyway. Issues such as immunity, cancer, and brain health seem to be effected when people rely on processed food to live on there entire lives.

Quote[/b] ]If they released a verison of brownies that still taste exactly the same (so it's still delicious), but they somehow managed to remove all the saturated fats, trans fats, excess sugar, and instead again somehow loaded it with good fats and a little more protein, then we could eat brownies all day and easily maintain a "clean" diet.

Again, another good point. At the same time, I eat brownies every once in a while because I like them. I still eat clean, but when its time for a treat, I have one. That's why they call them "treats".

Ok, I'm rambling now, but I like the idea that eating clean (whole fresh fruits & veggies, lean meats etc) should be the default, rather than the exception ragardless of whether you are a bodybuilder or not.

 

[Aaron_F]

Quote[/b] (Heavy Duty dude @ July 31 2005,10:24)]If it makes no difference to eat carbs or fat, why does Lyle continue to design ketogenic diets?

Becuase when going as low in calories as he is looking for in some of his work (depletion period of UD2* nad the overall PSMF setup) there is no room for carbohydrates. PSMF is protein, thats it, lyle sets it up with fishoils as well, but the basics of PSMF is protein alone. UD2 is set up to utilize a short term ability of glycogen depletion and loading, but the overall weekly caloric balance still drives the fat loss. Then there is his guide to flexible dieting, which isnt a ketogenic diet ether





*Ud2 is not setup to be a keto diet

 

[Aaron_F]

Quote[/b] (Heavy Duty dude @ July 31 2005,10:24)]It was my understanding that insulin started to play a role at low bf. It made some sense because if you eat the same amount of carbs at 10% or at 30% bf, the effect of inulin can be expected to be different. At 30% you have 3 times more fat so fat can still be mobilized easily, while at 10%, there's 3 times less fat, and on top of that the fat is probably more "stubborn", so the insulin can have a sufficient effect to prevent fat mobilization.

There is less insulin at low bodyfat (due to lower intracellular energy) so it becomes less important compared to the obese

even at starvation levels there is enough insulin in the blood to significantly impact on lipolysis.

Quote[/b] ]
Also IS sensitivity plays a role in determining the setpoint doesn't it?

not really, high IS is a good determinant of weight gain

 

[Heavy Duty dude]

But isn't it true that people who are more endomorphs have a worse IS?

Quote[/b] ]
UD2 is set up to utilize a short term ability of glycogen depletion and loading, but the overall weekly caloric balance still drives the fat loss. Then there is his guide to flexible dieting, which isnt a ketogenic diet ether

You mean that the fact that the UD2 is a ketogenic diet doesn't change anything?

How does the depletion and loading help?

And Lyle often points out in his book, and on his forum , that insulin f**** off lipolysis, like he would say lol

 

[Aaron_F]

Quote[/b] (Heavy Duty dude @ July 31 2005,12:19)]But isn't it true that people who are more endomorphs have a worse IS?

Remember, somatotyping is based off observation of bodyshape, when I am lean I am classified as predominantly mesomorph, currently i will be classified as endomorph.
Therefore endomorphs are fat. Which means they have a higher level of cellular energy, so insulin sensitivity will reduce. (as part of the adaptation to reduce energy uptake by the cells)
With a cell sensitive to insulin the amount of insulin to achieve a response is lower. if you could raise sensitivity in muscle and reduce it in adipose, that would be good. However, there is little you can do to mess up the overall ratio.. Fish oils may help (rat research) but the major effect is from exercise, as it increases insulin dependant (and non insulindependant) uptake
of energy to the muscle rather than adipose.
When somebody diets to a low bodyfat, insulin sensitivity increases in the whole body (due to the lowered energy within all cells) as the body fights to get every scrap of energy possible.
As you get leaner, the amount of fat comming out of adipose decreases becuase they are stimulated more easily by insulin.
Once back into a higher calorie intake you store energy extremely well, which is why you put on fat very easily when dieted down, the cells want energy, especially adipose.

Quote[/b] ]You mean that the fact that the UD2 is a ketogenic diet doesn't change anything?

UD2 achieves ketosis as a product of lowering calories and carbohydrates. During the depletion work, lyle is trying to minimise carbs and deplete cellular energy so he can manipulate a short term phenominon of carb loading (where carbs are deposited in muscle while fat is still being oxidised), which lasts 1-2days maximum. If your calories allow, you can do UD2 eating higher amounts of carbs that would limit ketosis.

Quote[/b] ]How does the depletion and loading help?

The depletion ad loading is what lyle is trying to achieve, not the ketosis per se.

Quote[/b] ]And Lyle often points out in his book, and on his forum , that insulin f**** off lipolysis, like he would say lol

and as lyle often says, starvation levels of insulin are enough to severely limit lipolysis (i have a paper on it in my mess). Once you add food intake hte mix, lets say protein, there is enough insulin floating around to limit lipolysis majorly. Add even a little carbs (~ud2 depletion recommendations are around 50-70g, i have done 100-120) is enough to lower it again.

 

[Heavy Duty dude]

Quote[/b] ]Remember, somatotyping is based off observation of bodyshape, when I am lean I am classified as predominantly mesomorph, currently i will be classified as endomorph.

Yeah but it's clear that IS changes from person to person.

From Lyle's book:

Quote[/b] ]In addition to hormonal advantages, it's likely that the genetic elite have high skeletal muscle insulin sensitivity. They store tremendous amounts of calories in their muscles, which leaves less to go to fat cells. Their bodies also don't have to release as much insulin in response to food intake.
In contrast, individuals with poor skeletal muscle insulin sensitivity tend to overproduce insulin, don't store calories in muscle well (this is part of why they have trouble getting a pump: poor glycogen storage in muscle cells) and tend to spill calories over to fat cells more effectively.
So what controls insulin sensitivity? As always, there are a host of factors. One is simply genetic, folks can vary 10 fold in their sensitivity to insulin even if everything about them is the same.

So it is clear that insulin will create more problem for an endomorph than for a non-endomorph.

Quote[/b] ]
When somebody diets to a low bodyfat, insulin sensitivity increases in the whole body (due to the lowered energy within all cells) as the body fights to get every scrap of energy possible.

Then why does the p-ratio get worse when bf goes down? The less fat you have the more your body will try to store fat.

Also Lyle goes at great length to explain that what matters is input/output from bodyfat. Which is contradictory with the "all calories are equal" idea.

Quote[/b] ]
As you get leaner, the amount of fat comming out of adipose decreases becuase they are stimulated more easily by insulin.

So insulin prevents fat mobilization at low bf..

In other words, you store more in the muscles but you lipolysis still goes down. Right?

Quote[/b] ]
and as lyle often says, starvation levels of insulin are enough to severely limit lipolysis (i have a paper on it in my mess). Once you add food intake hte mix, lets say protein, there is enough insulin floating around to limit lipolysis majorly. Add even a little carbs (~ud2 depletion recommendations are around 50-70g, i have done 100-120) is enough to lower it again.

So.. insulin can "severely" limit lipolysis, hence the need to reduce it.

Quote[/b] ]
The depletion ad loading is what lyle is trying to achieve, not the ketosis per se.

Ok, so what? You can't do that without a low/no carb cyclical diet.

Whatever the reason is, better nutrient partitionning, better IS, it is STILL a low/no carb diet.

And for the depletion workouts, they're done because when the cells are carb-depleted, they become optimized to use fat. You can't get that without a low carb.

So..... I don't get it.. it's not just a question of calories.

 

[Aaron_F]

Quote[/b] (Heavy Duty dude @ Aug. 01 2005,1:35)]Yeah but it's clear that IS changes from person to person.
From Lyle's book:

Quote[/b] ]In addition to hormonal advantages, it's likely that the genetic elite have high skeletal muscle insulin sensitivity. They store tremendous amounts of calories in their muscles, which leaves less to go to fat cells. Their bodies also don't have to release as much insulin in response to food intake.
In contrast, individuals with poor skeletal muscle insulin sensitivity tend to overproduce insulin, don't store calories in muscle well (this is part of why they have trouble getting a pump: poor glycogen storage in muscle cells) and tend to spill calories over to fat cells more effectively.
So what controls insulin sensitivity? As always, there are a host of factors. One is simply genetic, folks can vary 10 fold in their sensitivity to insulin even if everything about them is the same.

read through your quote of lyle and see what I mentioned earlier

"With a cell sensitive to insulin the amount of insulin to achieve a response is lower. if you could raise sensitivity in muscle and reduce it in adipose, that would be good. However, there is little you can do to mess up the overall ratio.. "

You cant change your genes, and if you try to alter your IS, you alter ALL IS, not just specifically muscle. Other than exercises training and potentailly fish oils.

Quote[/b] ]So it is clear that insulin will create more problem for an endomorph than for a non-endomorph.

do you understand what endomorph means?

Quote[/b] ]Then why does the p-ratio get worse when bf goes down? The less fat you have the more your body will try to store fat.

becasue your body hates you? body hating you means that it will rob muscle to supply energy, p ratio is worse. Because adipose is supplying slowly less and less energy into the wholebody.

Quote[/b] ]Also Lyle goes at great length to explain that what matters is input/output from bodyfat. Which is contradictory with th "all calories are equal" idea.

How?

Quote[/b] ]So insulin prevents fat mobilization at low bf..

the same way it does at high BF... insulin sensitivity increases, the amount of insulin to achieve the same response goes down.

Quote[/b] ]In other words, you store more in the muscles but you lipolysis still goes down. Right?

Store what in muscle?

Quote[/b] ]So.. insulin can "severely" limit lipolysis, hence the need to reduce it.

Fat lowers lipolysis, hence the need to reduce it.

Quote[/b] ]Ok, so what? You can't do that without a low/no carb cyclical diet.

you can do it without ketosis per se

Quote[/b] ]Whatever the reason is, better nutrient partitionning, better IS, it is STILL a low/no carb diet.

Not really.

Quote[/b] ]And for the depletion workouts, they're done because when the cells are carb-depleted, they become optimized to use fat. You can't get that without a low carb.

The depletion weorkouts are done to deplete teh muscle of glycogen, without depletion the refeeding doesnt work as nicely

Quote[/b] ]So..... I don't get it.. it's not just a question of calories.

ultimately it is. UD2 works because of a weekly caloric deficit, while allowing maximal training loads during the period of high calories. Same reason calorie/carb cycling works, same reason low fat works, low carb blah blah blah. You eat less.

 

[Heavy Duty dude]

Quote[/b] ]read through your quote of lyle and see what I mentioned earlier

"With a cell sensitive to insulin the amount of insulin to achieve a response is lower. if you could raise sensitivity in muscle and reduce it in adipose, that would be good. However, there is little you can do to mess up the overall ratio.. "

You cant change your genes, and if you try to alter your IS, you alter ALL IS, not just specifically muscle. Other than exercises training and potentailly fish oils.

So bodyfat is even more sensitive to insulin at low bf, hence the need to reduce it.

And about insulin, Lyle says:

Quote[/b] ]First let's sum up what we want to do in terms of maximizing bodyfat loss during a diet. In the most general sense, we want to accelerate the rate of fat utilization by the body. Not only does this increase fat loss, it will exert a protein sparing effect. Let's look at how we might
accomplish this dietarily.
By using MCT or DAG, we can provide dietary fatty acids to tissues like the liver and muscle at a more rapid rate. But that's only part of the picture and the low-carbohydrate phase is not very high in fat as you'll soon see. Quite in fact, you'll only be allowed a relatively small
amount of fat during the diet phase but, if possible, that fat should come from either MCTs or DAGs. Coconut oil, which is half MCT can also be used. We also want to accelerate the processes of mobilization from the fat cell, transport (via
increased blood flow), and utilization in the muscle. Let's look at each.
First we want to lower insulin levels, which is easily accomplished by reducing dietary carbohydrate intake. This will have a natural effect of increasing catecholamine levels
(especially in the first few days of carb restriction), but we can do more. Exercise is a natural choice, of course, and both weight training and aerobics (or interval training) will enhance catecholamine output (this effect is further enhanced on low-carbohydrates). Compounds such
as ephedrine/caffeine or clenbuterol also enhance nervous system output, increasing fat mobilization (and possibly utilization in skeletal muscle). Both have anti-catabolic (protein sparing) effects.

So he doesn't do a low carb just like that.. he does a low carb because it helps to mobilize fat.

Quote[/b] ]
do you understand what endomorph means?

What? It's someone who is fat by nature..

Quote[/b] ]How?

He says that it's a question of partitionning. He says that over and over again. It's not just a question of calories.

Quote[/b] ]becasue your body hates you? body hating you means that it will rob muscle to supply energy, p ratio is worse. Because adipose is supplying slowly less and less energy into the wholebody.

Since you have less and less fat AND that the fat that remains tends to be more stubborn - less blood flow, more alpha-2 receptors-, insulin is likely to prevent fat loss more easily.

Quote[/b] ]
the same way it does at high BF... insulin sensitivity increases, the amount of insulin to achieve the same response goes down.

I thought that IS increased as bf decreased..

Again he says:

Quote[/b] ]When somebody diets to a low bodyfat, insulin sensitivity increases in the whole body (due to the lowered energy within all cells) as the body fights to get every scrap of energy possible.

Quote[/b] ]As you get leaner, the amount of fat comming out of adipose decreases becuase they are stimulated more easily by insulin.

Quote[/b] ]you can do it without ketosis per se

Right, but you can't do it without a low carb cyclical diet, or not as effectively.

Quote[/b] ]The depletion weorkouts are done to deplete teh muscle of glycogen, without depletion the refeeding doesnt work as nicely

Yeah of course. But the point is that Lyle explains that the primary objective of the depletion is to deplete the cells from glycogen, so that they can be more effective at using fat. That's why he does it at the beginning of the low carb days.

If it were just a question of calories, why would he do it the first 2 days? Why wouldn't he let the muscle deplete by themselves in a few days?

Quote[/b] ]
ultimately it is. UD2 works because of a weekly caloric deficit, while allowing maximal training loads during the period of high calories. Same reason calorie/carb cycling works, same reason low fat works, low carb blah blah blah. You eat less.

Of course how much weight will be lost will depend primarily on the caloric deficit during the diet. Doesn't mean that a low carb diet is not important to optimize fat loss.

Lyle spends an entire chapter on fat mobilization. He also emphasizes that he's trying to achieve BOTH a better partitionning and a better fat mobilization.

And if it makes no difference if you're at high bf or low bf, why is the UD2 optimized for getting under the setpoint?

 

[Heavy Duty dude]

I just fell upon those article:

http://www.maxcondition.com/article...._p1.htm

http://www.maxcondition.com/article...._p2.htm

It's clear that Lyle thinks that low carbs are the way to go.

 

[Aaron_F]

Maybe you should spend sometime talking to lyle rather than reading stuff into interviews with him.

Low carb is very much "a way" not "the way"

 

[Heavy Duty dude]

I read what he says on his forum from time to time, and to tell you the truth sometimes I'm a bit confused.

Sometimes he says it's just a question of calories, sometimes he emphasizes that partitionning and fat mobilization is important.

My understanding of what he says is that above the setpoint it's pretty much a question on caloric deficit, and under the setpoint it changes, hence the UD2..

Look, examples of people losing A LOT of muscle when trying to reach very low bf percentages are common. Fat is stubborn and DIFFICULT TO LOSE. It's very possible that decreasing insulin is imperative to be able to mobilize that fat.

Just my 2 cents..

 

[Lance]

Speaking of if calories are just merely calories, granted adequate protein and essential fats, is there any difference?

I know weight gain and loss there is not much difference, besides water mass and so on. But for instance, bulking on a more moderate carb and higher fat diet for hunger control and the ease of getting in fat dense calories. I want to think that it's just calories, that extra fat will be converted to glucose, fill my muscle stores, as well as extra fat added and so on. But i fear that with a higher fat approach, it won't be optimal. Or worse yet, much LESS effective.

 

[colby2152]

all this stuff about where the calories come from... if he wants to shed some bodyfat, just eat often slightly under maintenance, while doing HST with plenty of cardio.. if anything eat enough protein and have carbs around workouts, and he should lose weight quickly enough

 

[Aaron_F]

Quote[/b] (Heavy Duty dude @ Aug. 04 2005,12:03)]Look, examples of people losing A LOT of muscle when trying to reach very low bf percentages are common. Fat is stubborn and DIFFICULT TO LOSE. It's very possible that decreasing insulin is imperative to be able to mobilize that fat.
Just my 2 cents..

except when you are that low in BF, you are insulin sensitive, you cannot change that. So as you get leaner, the minimum level of insulin does more and more. But lowering carbs doesnt work at the adipocyte level, as fat is equally as good at shutting down lipolysis as insulin is, perhaps better.

And all you have to do is go back to the 1980s early 1990s and look at how ripped people got on high carb diets (if you delt with bbrs then you would have seen it on the non-pro bbrs as well)
And lyles lesbians he trained for PL and BB. The last one that competed in bb just did a normal hgih protein moderate carb and fat diet with no refeeding to achieve low BF.

 

[Rovi]

lyle's lesbians hahaha