Wow guys, there are what appears to be several thread topics in one here.
And I actaully think some great and relevant points have been raised which should lead to some great discussion.
The kcal debate is a difficult one. 300 makes some very good points as do many other posters in the thread too. And for reasons I hope to explain, I believe all view points are valid.
I think many of the problems we have observed over the years concerning diets and dieting are based on a a couple of differing view points concerning nutrients, in my opinion.
Firstly, the assumption that nutrients serve to provide energy, hence the whole low kcal diet phenomenon and the kcal is kcal debate(s), we know is probably incorrect - although nutrients do provide energy.
The second view point is that nutrients serve functions, and that by manipulating our nutrient intake, whether it be by reducing or eliminating them, combining nutrients or cycling them, we can manipulate our response to ingesting them and favourably alter our bodycomposition as a result.
Personally, I fall somewhere between the two groups. We have to remember that fundamentally foods serve functions, however, we must also be aware that they have energetic value too, and that through careful manipulation of both energy intake and nutrient effect(s), we can achieve our goals to good effect.
In the case of muscle gain, providing adequate nutrients to ensure sufficient recovery and supercompensation from training requires an energy surplus, with adequate macro and micronutrients too. In the case of fat loss, we need to ensure an energy deficit, with sufficient nutrients to ensure adequate recovery and minimisation of muscle and performance loss.
The Kcalorie provides an estimate of energetic value yes, but it is indeed very flawed. However counting kcalories does provide an estimate of the amount of energy we consume.
But really when we think about whether we choose to manipulate gram amounts of certain nutrients, macronutrient ratios, kcalorie counting, or food combining, we really are manipulating the amount of ‘energetic’ value of the foods we eat. Many different journeys to ultimately the same destination, each with their own peculiarities and methods.
John Berardi bases his carbohydrate consumption guidelines on the view point that we better utilise and store them in the hours surrounding exercise, from the nutrient timing research in the academic literature.
The protein and carb and protein and fat debate is interesting. I can see logic to the argument that the synergistic consumption of carbohydrates and fat may increase fat storage.
However, we have to remember that, save for the hours immediately upon waking, we rarely are in a true fasted state, particularly if we are eating every 2 - 3 hours. So, if we are in a post absorptive state, then we will likely still be digesting and absorbing some foodstuffs prior to the onset of eating another.
Meaning that you could still be absorbing some fat at the time that you ingest a carbohydrate. If we look at many of the foods we eat, often they contain a mixture of all the macronutrients. The human digestive system is fairly capable at digesting and absorbing foods - if we look after it well!
Some great topics here guys.