This is a very nice simplistic summation of food’s contribution to the human body.
But to @asmonius point, the genetically gifted make these look like a piece of cake. They have a huge latitude of compliance and still get phenomenal results. These freaks will reaffirm that life is not fair.
When giving guidelines who cares about the extreme outliers? Whether they are genetically gifted or ungifted.
Obviously, there is individual variance but, you start with an outline and adjust accordingly.
Latitude of compliance does not mean it does not apply.
Regardless of their results with a poor diet, they would improve with adjustments. Many athletes/bodybuilders have acknowledged and spoken on this.
Just because an individual looks or feels better than someone else does not mean they cannot achieve even better appearance or well-being.
No one said it’s a one-size-fits-all approach.
No one said you need 15xBW to maintain weight.
No one said you need 1 gram of protein per pound of body weight.
What was stated is:
Calories determine your weight.
Macronutrients determine your body composition.
Micronutrients determine how you feel.
Individual differences and genetics were implied.
I will agree on all but one point.
For your last statement to sit well with me, it would need worded closer to:
There will be individual differences and genetics plays a very large role in the outcome.
The listener must also realize that on the other tail of the distribution curve resides those with horrible genetics. They need to manage their expectations.
I only added the last point to clarify that the word “your” accounts for personal variability and genetics because outliers kept being brought up. There is no need to explicitly mention variance/genetics.
You can add:
Whether results are exceptional or not, the three points make no guarantees of the outcomes you want. They have no feelings. They simply state:
Calories determine your weight.
Macronutrients determine your body composition.
Micronutrients determine how you feel.
We could just agree to disagree, but one more time.
It seems to me that you are taking an academic view, where I am taking a real-world view.
This is primarily because when I started lifting weights in 1968 nutritional knowledge was little more than carbohydrates have 4 calories per gram, etc.
I learned everything through my experiences, word of mouth, and watching others try putting on muscle for the last 56 years and I competed in bodybuilding for three decades at a rate of between 2 and 3 contests per year.
All that I bring to the table is real-world experience. So, let’s go back to one of the three statements:
Macronutrients determine your body composition. Really?
Don’t you believe “Macronutrients influence your body composition” is better wording. If any one of these is highly influenced by genetics, it is body composition. “Determine” is dependent on the factor of having the capability to put on muscle or drop fat. The average person couldn’t come close to dropping fat as easily as I could.
When I posted:
I did start the post with:
And for a good portion of the non-hardcore, average Joe population, it fits. YES, there are genetic factors and other exceptions and outliers to this. As @RT_Nomad mentioned, “influence” rather than “determine” would be more accurate wording.
At the end of the day, every body is different - our responses will not be the same and nutrition should be tailored to the individual. I’ve been an RD for almost 20 years and have worked with the morbidly obese, professional athletes, bodybuilders/physique competitors, high-level Crossfitters, disease compromised individuals, and members of the general population. I’ve tailored and adjusted my recommendations and nutrition plans to fit each one of them. But whenever I’m starting from ground zero with no info going in - what I posted is a pretty solid place to start. What that looks like in terms of diet recs:
I didn’t mean to start a p!$$ing match here. I was only trying to simplify some fairly advanced concepts into a 30 second elevator pitch. Lesson learned. I’ll show myself out.
Please do not! And I don’t think that was @asmonius’ intent. I feel like much is getting lost in the written nature of a forum over the last couple dozen posts, where many of the “arguments” seem more similar than different to me.
Please never do. Folks will always use a post to springboard: you have the best signal-to-noise ratio on this forum. Please, for my sake: don’t deprive us.
This was a great simplification - I appreciate it, and all the other info you give.
Half of the comments are people sword-fighting with their dicks, but the good knowledge, like what you contribute shines. I’m firmly in the don’t leave choir.
@TrainForPain @T3hPwnisher and @Brant_Drake - y’all are awesome. Just thank you.
Please could you expand on this?
Vitamins and minerals are important for health and bodily functions. Lack of micros can cause issues like fatigue, mood swings, weakened immunity, and poor cognitive function. Choosing the right foods (whole/natural, not processed) is crucial for well-being.
@OTay hit the high points. Micronutrients are the vitamins and minerals that our body needs to do all the “behind the scenes” work. They function in regulating metabolism (B-vitamins), immunity (Vit C, Zinc, Selenium), muscle function (potassium, magnesium, calcium, Vit D, Vit C, Vit E, Iron), and so many other things. The micros generally just make everything in our bodies run. If we want to feel good and want our bodies to perform optimally, focusing on nutrient density when choosing what to eat is pretty damn important.
This was my first thought … Good grief, people …
Charlie Brown spittin reality.