Optimizing Your Caloric Intake

C

colby2152

New Member
Warning: If you do not plan on counting calories, or at least estimating your daily amount, read no further...

Figuring out the correct amount of calories you need in order to bulk, cut, or maintain can be a tricky thing to do. Eliminating errors and inaccuracies is a must for someone who is serious about their diet, and anyone who is serious about bodybuilding must be serious about their diet.

Often times on this forum, people may struggle with an HST cycle and not have the gains they wished for. If they followed HST principals, then the lack of weight gain/loss is because of an incorrect amount of calories consumed day-to-day.

Basal Metabolic Rate (BMR) and Total Daily Energy Expenditure (TDEE)
Your BMR, or Resting Metabolic Rate is the amount of calories your body burns at a sedentary state. There are many options for how to calculate this number. In my example, I will use two examples from the Eating for Size article on HSN.

The first equation multiplies your bodyweight in pounds by 11 or 12 to find your BMR. If you want to cut, times your weight by 8 or 9, and for bulking, times it by 14-16. The inaccuracies could be a lot for one week, let alone a whole cycle. The second equation has slightly less error and multiplies your bodyweight in kilograms by 24. Also, see this equation provided by need2eat.

To figure out your TDEE, you times your BMR by an activity level.
• Very active = 1.4 - 1.5 (Daily Intense exercise + construction work most of day)
• Active = 1.3 -­ 1.4 (Daily exercise + work on feet most of day)
• Light active = 1.1 - 1.2 (Regular Exercise 3 times/week + desk job or at home most of day)
• Sedentary = 1 (No exercise + desk job or at home most of day)

I have used the activity level approach myself and found large errors that I could not catch up to until my HST cycle was over. What these equations lack is the seperation between fat and muscle. The Katch-McArdle equation (which applies to men and women equally) uses your bodyfat% to figure out your BMR.

BMR = (((bodyweight in kg -(bf%*bw in kg))*21.6)+370)

However, even if you use the activity levels to find your TDEE, you can still have a lot of error. I suggest multiplying your BMR by 1.1 for your day to day light activities, and then adding the calories burned for exercises - see this Example.

Cutting
If I am cutting, I underestimate my TDEE and overestimate the caloric intake. To lose the optimal 1lb/week, you should eat 500 less calories than your TDEE per day (500*7 = 3500kcals = 1lb). This number may not be exact because it is an average for all people. Genetics play a role here. After all, your caloric intake, BMR, and TDEE are all estimates of actual statistics.

Bulking
Do the inverse of method laid out for cutting. You should eat 550-600 calories over your TDEE per day to account for the 10% Thermogenesis effect. If my body's weight is not changing within the goals, I would make some minor adjustments to the TDEE equation by shifting it +/- 100 calories based on the weight I should be at.

Notes
Whether you use an equation like Katch-McArdle, the calculator need2eat provided, or the bodyweight multipliers that are mentioned in the FAQ's; the same principals of estimation are constant:

1) The more strict that you count, the less error you will have.
2) It takes a few weeks to truely find your BMR no matter what method you use.
3) No estimate is ever 100% correct. This is why they are called estimates.

Also, the idea of overstimating caloric intake / underestimating TDEE (Total Daily Energy Expenditure) during a cut is commonly applied no matter what estimations you use.

Let me know what you guys think.
 
i agree that anyone who is serious about bbb must be serious about diet. new lifters, seriously underwgt and the seriously overwgt can get away with simple eat alot or eat alot less type of diets and still progress but eventually you have to put more effort into it to make progress.

personally i just use the simple bw multiplier. ive tried the other methods but it seemed like alot of extra math to no extra benefit. even in the summer when my TDEE can be hugely different each day i found just keeping a cal goal constant for the week (regardless of activity) still lead to gains. consistency is the key. kind of like trying to gain a pound a week...........how much should i gain each day to make that happen??? you know what im talking about.

your right about needing a couple weeks to get your BMR but once you do get it your set. as long as you continue to count youll always know what you need to do to gain or cut.
 
I'll try this out and see how it compares to results I have gotten by other methods.

One question I have is how much your body can compensate for caloric intake.  We all know that on a cut eventually your body reduces BMR in response to the decrease in calories.  This ability seems to me to make your maintenance requirements a moving target.

For instance, experience tells me that I can maintain body weight at about 3000 kcals/day (at least up until this cut).  If I use McDonald's method for determing maintenance need (TDEE), I calculate 2700 kcals/day.  I am now having a successful cut (loosing 1.5 lbs/wk) on 2000 kcals/day.  My read from this board is that would normally be too much of a deficit, but I had to go down this far to see much response.  I am wondering if my body doesn't actually have a range of caloric intake that it can adjust to for maintenance.  In my case, probably about 2500-3000 kcals/day.

This is actually my first real "diet" ever, so I am interested if others have found their maintenance need to be more of a range than a more-or-less discrete number.

BTW, this article by Lyle McDonald on how much of a deficit you can sustain may be of interest: How Much Dietary Deficit?
 
<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">One question I have is how much your body can compensate for caloric intake. We all know that on a cut eventually your body reduces BMR in response to the decrease in calories. This ability seems to me to make your maintenance requirements a moving target.</div>

This is why I would recommend eating at or even slightly above maintenance during your SD. Therefore, if you go into another cutting cycle, your metabolism has had some time (1-2 weeks depending on your SD) to return to the levels it was before the cut. Either way, you should not cut calories during SD.

My question regarding metabolic compensation of caloric intake during a cut is the length of time (days, weeks...) it takes for a person's BMR to drop, and conversely how long it takes to return to normal during a calorie boost.

<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE"> I am wondering if my body doesn't actually have a range of caloric intake that it can adjust to for maintenance. In my case, probably about 2500-3000 kcals/day.</div>

It is a good thought. Like any statistic, there will be some variance. However, the amount of calories you need is dependent upon how many your burn through thermogenesis, BMR, and exercise. If all those are accounted for, I do not see how your BMR would have such a range. Your idea of maintaining body weight at 3000 kcals/day may be due to certain errors in measurement of caloric intake. As you said yourself, I believe the BMR is a discrete number with some variance. This variance will be reduced when calculations of BMR and caloric intake are reduced. Also, the longer you record and calculate such numbers, the better figures you will have.
 
<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">BTW, this article by Lyle McDonald on how much of a deficit you can sustain may be of interest: How Much Dietary Deficit?</div>

Ruthenian, thanks for the link. I'll extract the main points for discussion.

<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">It’s a nasty little paper, filled primarily with equations, explanations of those equations and some more equations to boot. Headache inducing to be sure. I’ll spare you the details. Based on a somewhat simplified analysis of what data exists (including the seminal Minnesota semi-starvation experiment), they conclude that the maximal rate at which fat stores can provide energy to the body is 290 +- 25 kj/kg which is approximately 31 kcal/lb of fat per day.</div>

The end-all be-all summary cites back to this paper, but he doesn't explain how caloric deficit is correlated to the energy provided by fat (regardless of the actual figure) except by using base principals that:

<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">
a. fatter individuals lose more fat and less lean body mass (LBM) than leaner individuals; and
b. bigger individuals lose weight more quickly</div>

He is right that this cannot be refuted and is well established ideas about weight loss. I have used these principals in my many debates about &quot;gaining muscle while losing fat&quot; and the greatness of the slow bulk. I may have to read the research from those golden gopher yuppies up in Minnesota.

<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">So, the basic assertion of the paper is that, so long as the net daily deficit does not exceed what your fat stores can provide, you should spare lean body mass. </div>

Should....

<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Our 180 lb man at 15% starts his diet. He has 27 lbs. of fat and can sustain a maximum deficit of 27 lbs. * 31 cal/lb = 837 calories. Assuming a maintenance of 15 cal/lb (2700), his starting calorie level will be 2700 cal - 837 calories = 1863 calories/day. He’ll be losing around 1.5 lb fat/week.

So now we check in 8 weeks later, he’s down 12 lbs., almost purely of fat (we’ll ignore any small LBM losses). His new numbers are 168 lbs. with 15 lbs. of fat = 9% bodyfat. Maximal sustainable deficit = 15 * 31 = 465 cal</div>

Just an example that Lyle used in his article.

<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">In this article, I’ve been able to give dieters a starting point for the maximum sustainable deficit which can come from calorie restriction. To summarize: simply determine how many pounds of fat you’re carrying. Then multiply that value by 31 calories. That’s how much you can potentially decrease your daily food intake. If you want to try to increase fat loss, any further increase in the deficit should either come from increased activity or compounds that either increase the mobilization or burning of fatty acids for fuel. As well, as you get leaner/lighter, you will need to periodically recalculate your daily calories to take into account your diminishing fat mass and decreased maintenance requirements due to both decreased bodymass and the adaptive component of metabolic rate. An argument can also be made for saving increases in activity for later in the diet when your diet deficit has to be lower.</div>

That's the summary; Thanks for the article Ruthenian. It is worth a test of my own as it reflects basic weight loss principals. I started off my current cutting cycle at an extreme cut for 2 weeks with a ramp down to 500cal/day. I'll take a risk and try out the Minnesota Golden Gophers' theoretical ideas and calculations. Like Lyle mentions, I will take it with a grain of salt and back off from the deficit limit if I lose strength and/or muscle. If it works, I will try it again for another cycle, and then I may be a strong supporter - hey, I can only hope!
 
In case anyone was interested...

&quot;A limit on the maximum energy transfer rate from the human fat store in hypophagia is deduced from experimental data of underfed subjects maintaining moderate activity levels and is found to have a value of (290+/-25) kJ/kgd. A dietary restriction which exceeds the limited capability of the fat store to compensate for the energy deficiency results in an immediate decrease in the fat free mass (FFM). In cases of a less severe dietary deficiency, the FFM will not be depleted. The transition between these two dietary regions is developed and a criterion to distinguish the regions is defined. An exact mathematical solution for the decrease of the FFM is derived for the case where the fat mass (FM) is in its limited energy transfer mode. The solution shows a steady-state term which is in agreement with conventional ideas, a term indicating a slow decrease of much of the FFM moderated by the limited energy transferred from the fat store, and a final term showing an unprotected rapid decrease of the remaining part of the FFM. The average resting metabolic rate of subjects undergoing hypophagia is shown to decrease linearly as a function of the FFM with a slope of (249+/-25) kJ/kgd. This value disagrees with the results of other observers who have measured metabolic rates of diverse groups. The disagreement is explained in terms of individual metabolic properties as opposed to those of the larger population.&quot;

1. Alpert SS. A limit on the energy transfer rate from the human fat store in hypophagia. J Theor Biol. 2005 Mar 7;233(1):1-13.
 
I am applying the research that Lyle discussed about. Some notes...

My maximum caloric deficit is about 1,000 calories. I cut 700 calories per day last week. So far so good, but it has only been a week.
 
another point that may seem common sense to most (unfortunatly not me at first) was to avg out your cal totals each week or 2 (i currently do every 2). i use the bw multiplier method which is quite simple but even with that i found it necces. to avg out the weeks or you could be mislead.

in the beginning i was hitting my cal goals most days but the wgt was slow to go up. only when i avg out did i realize it was just a little below my goal (still enough to grow just not at the rate i wanted). the reason was i tried to hit the goal, not go far over it, so rarely was i much over it but i did have a few days (say 3-4 out of 14) where work and life got in the way so the total was 10-20% lower then normal. once i avg. it out for the 2 weeks it all made perfect sense for how much i was gaining and why.

another benefit of the avg. is when you have to enter foods for which you can only guess at the nutritional value. my sons birthday was a few weeks back and between eating out, delivery pizza, bakery cake etc. etc i did a fair amount of guessing for the weekend. well the #s i came up with probaly should have put 2lbs on me over the weekend but in reality i started the week down a lb. im not that clueless at searching out good guesstimations for food. bottom line is when you avg. those crazy meals that your only taking a guess at become a very small part of the equation.

ok thats enough for now.
 
<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">another point that may seem common sense to most (unfortunatly not me at first) was to avg out your cal totals each week or 2 (i currently do every 2). i use the bw multiplier method which is quite simple but even with that i found it necces. to avg out the weeks or you could be mislead. </div>

That's another good point... even though I feel my measurements are pretty good, I average them out each week to analyze. I look at the shifts in weight matched up with the difference in TDEE and caloric intake.
 
The MaxCalDeficit is going pretty good. However, I can't give credit to the technique for my retention of muscle. I think my three and a half month SD has a lot to do with it!
laugh.gif
 
Optimizing your caloric intake can be tedious with the many measurements that may be needed. I have developed some simple assumptions that can make it much easier, and in most cases improve (or optimize) your diet.

Uniform Change of Weight Assumption

Basis - UCW, for short, is a method of simplifying the complexity and often tedious calories counting methods and analysis by assumptions, that I supplied earlier.

Definition - It assumes that weight change, whether it is a loss or gain, will be constant. Therefore, Ucw assumes that on average, you are following your diet in accordance with your goals in a given period of time.

The single most important application of the UCW assumption is the development of your BMR based on these assumptions and principles.

Info Needed - Depending on the application, you will need starting and target weight/body fat%. For the two applications that I will present today, only starting/target weight along with your starting bf% will be needed, not your target bf%.

Applying UCW - When cutting, no matter how you figure out your BMR, recording a BMR higher than what yours actually is will imply less weight loss. Therefore, you want your BMR to be listed lower than normal in a given period of time (Ex: HST cycle.) Your minimum BMR (as we will call it) during a cut will be when your weight is at the lowest and bodyfat% is highest. Therefore, your BMR should be be based off your target weight and starting bf%.

Believe it or not, the BMR you use for a bulk is the same as when you cut. For example, you want your BMR to be listed higher than normal. Maximum BMR is when your weight is at the highest and bodyfat% is lowest. Therefore, your BMR should be based off your target weight and starting bf%.

Example - You weigh 200 at 15% bodyfat and would like to do a cutting cycle of HST. The cycle is 8 weeks long, and you plan on cutting more than 500 calories/week because summer is just around the corner. You want to lose 12 pounds (1.5/week) by the end of the cycle. Your BMR will be constant throughout the cycle and be based off your target weight of 188 and starting bodyfat% of 15%.

Conclusion
The UCW assumption is great for those who count calories, take measurements such as weight and bodyfat% daily with their BMR dependent upon such measurements. The assumption works for all such cuts and bulks except for the slow bulk which will be discussed next week.

The UCW easily derives your BMR for a given period of time. You figure out your TDEE by previous applications of activity levels or other energy expenditure counting methods.
 
I am still working on the slow bulk - it's a bit more tedious than I originally thought. (I know, tedious to develop a simple assumption, sounds nuts)
 
Applying UCW to the Slow Bulk
The slow bulk works for a lot of people. The idea is that you eat slightly above maintenance (+200-300 calories) and either you will simultaneously lose some fat or gain very little. The underlying point is that you gain weight and your bodyfat percentage goes down. Like a bulk, you want your estimated BMR to be high., but not too high as you will eat too much and the slow bulk will turn into a bulk.

MaxBMR in a cycle should be based off the highest weight and lowest bodyfat%. One problem is that we do not know what the lowest or target bf% will be. Therefore, let:

a = starting weight
b = target weight
k = starting bf%
w = b - a = weight gain
x = target bf%
z = %muscle gained during cycle

bx - ak = wz
x = (ak + wz)/b

Let's assume z=1/2 as the average between perfect efficiency and none at all, so:

x = a(k + .5)/b - .5

Example:
a = 230, b=234, k = .15

x = 230(.65)/234 - .5 = .139

That figure is actually pretty damn good for a slow bulk, but once again we want to overestimate the BMR in any type of bulk.
 
Wow gents thank you all for you're hard work. I feel as though I have stumbled across the best website for developing efficient musular hypertrophy.

As a newbie can I ask for some clarification?

I will be starting my first ever cycle of HST this week.

Here are my stats 175lbs at 22% bf

Using the formulas from above

Caloric Defecit 38.5*31=1193.5

Maintenance intake 15*175=2625

Revised Intake 2625-1193.5=1431.50

Can this be right? I have calculated my basal metabolic rate and it comes out at 1824.9
rock.gif
How can I only consume 1431.50 without losing LBM? My biggest concern is I don't want to lose what minimal lbm I have at this point. In fact I would like to add some. Is that possible using the above approach???


My target goal is 180lbs @ 10%bf

Thanks again for all of your help and guidance.
 
I missed my very own thread while I was busy with school. It's a bit late, but I will answer your question anyhow...

<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Can this be right? I have calculated my basal metabolic rate and it comes out at 1824.9
rock.gif
How can I only consume 1431.50 without losing LBM? My biggest concern is I don't want to lose what minimal lbm I have at this point. In fact I would like to add some. Is that possible using the above approach???</div>

The MaxCal Deficit formula may not work for everyone, and I am still skeptic of it. However, you must subtract the deficit from TDEE. You multiplied your weight by 15 which shows you took that from the HST FAQ's for high exercise, so that figure is your TDEE.

1431.50 calories is the maximum amount of calories per day that you could eat without losing a significant amount of muscle. If your bodyfat% is true, then that is probably right.

I wouldn't go over 1000 though because as you said, that deficit just seems like too much. You could also apply ULW and call it a day...

<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Applying UCW - When cutting, no matter how you figure out your BMR, recording a BMR higher than what yours actually is will imply less weight loss. Therefore, you want your BMR to be listed lower than normal in a given period of time (Ex: HST cycle.) Your minimum BMR (as we will call it) during a cut will be when your weight is at the lowest and bodyfat% is highest. Therefore, your BMR should be be based off your target weight and starting bf%.</div>
 
Great article Colby. I've really realized that at this point, I'm going to HAVE to focus on my diet if I'm going to get to where I want to be. I looked at the link you posted, but wasn't able to find resistance training on there, when it comes to calories burned / minute. How many calories do you estimate per minute your routine burns?
 
<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">I looked at the link you posted, but wasn't able to find resistance training on there, when it comes to calories burned / minute. How many calories do you estimate per minute your routine burns? </div>

Calories burned per minute will depend on your weight. This link to an activity calorie counter should help.

As far as my routine is concerned, I burn anywhere between 600 and 1000 calories. I usually lift for almost an hour followed up by a mile's worth of HIIT.
 
Ok, so my maintainence amount would be TDEE + Workout Calories Burned... so to bulk I would need to go beyond that? If I'm right... by about how much?
 
<div>
(UFGatorDude30 @ Jul. 02 2007,14:18)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Ok, so my maintainence amount would be TDEE + Workout Calories Burned... so to bulk I would need to go beyond that? If I'm right... by about how much?</div>
Your maintenance level is your BMR + Calories burned = TDEE.

Read the earlier parts of this thread about bulking - slow and normal. Normal bulking is about 500 calories above maintenance level.

Try the UGW assumption...

<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Believe it or not, the BMR you use for a bulk is the same as when you cut. For example, you want your BMR to be listed higher than normal. Maximum BMR is when your weight is at the highest and bodyfat% is lowest. Therefore, your BMR should be based off your target weight and starting bf%.</div>

The entire reasoning behind the UCW assumptions is that you want to underestimate and overestimate in respect to your caloric balance.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top