[quote]Bricknyce wrote:
“If I was eating 1500 calories per day and my protein intake was high it would not make a difference weather I ate carbs or fat to reach my calories for the day.”
This is very ambiguous. When calories are below 1,500 calories, maintaining a high level of protein intake would require removing the other macronutrients drastically.
Yes, it does make a difference. When calorie are VERY LOW (keyword: VERY), the macronutrient composition of the diet becomes very important. That’s why quite a few studies using very-low-calorie (<1,200 kcals) diets have been conducted with diferent macronutrient compositions. The ones with a relatively higher-carb and -fat percentage do a poor job at preserving muscle compared to ones consisting of nearly all protein. [/quote]
I believe he was referring to two different diets providing the same amount of protein, but differing ratios of carbs to fat. In that case, he is correct, there is no statistically significant difference between those two diets on average.
You are correct though, as calories come down, protein needs go up so on a VERY low cal diet, there’s not going to be room for much of either (save for veggies & EFAs)
To the OP: the FASTEST way to lose fat IS a low carb diet…but it is also a low fat diet too. Basically protein, protein and more protein (and some omega 3 fats). But not a lot of people can handle a diet so extreme, so as far as more moderate diets are concerned, no, low carbs offer no distinct “metabolic advantage” over low fat diets, regardless of what some people may believe.
[quote]ronaldo7 wrote:
Bricknyce wrote:
“If I was eating 1500 calories per day and my protein intake was high it would not make a difference weather I ate carbs or fat to reach my calories for the day.”
This is very ambiguous. When calories are below 1,500 calories, maintaining a high level of protein intake would require removing the other macronutrients drastically.
Yes, it does make a difference. When calorie are VERY LOW (keyword: VERY), the macronutrient composition of the diet becomes very important. That’s why quite a few studies using very-low-calorie (<1,200 kcals) diets have been conducted with diferent macronutrient compositions. The ones with a relatively higher-carb and -fat percentage do a poor job at preserving muscle compared to ones consisting of nearly all protein.
Look man I have tried both. I’m not getting my info from bullshit studies. Studies don’t prove anything but the results a few people got. I’ve gotten lean eating all sorts of carbs as well as all sorts of fats . As long as my calories were under control everything works out at the end.[/quote]
Thanks for interpreting my writings well; you really know how to absorb information adequately and see what the other person is trying to communicate.
I’m not saying what will work best for you or what you prefer! I’m discussing the god-damned fastest way to lose weight!
But then again, you’re the guy who doesn’t know to let food cool off or to just heat it up less to avoid being burned.
[quote]ronaldo7 wrote:
Look man I have tried both. I’m not getting my info from bullshit studies. Studies don’t prove anything but the results a few people got. I’ve gotten lean eating all sorts of carbs as well as all sorts of fats . As long as my calories were under control everything works out at the end.[/quote]
While you CAN get lean eating “all sorts of carbs and fats” (even gasp combining them in the same meal)…the question was what is the FASTEST way to lose fat. The answer to that is a low fat/low carb diet. Basically, a diet consisting of protein, essential fatty acids, micronutrients and little else.
Yes, calories are the ultimate determinate of weight loss, and the fastest way to lose fat is to severely restrict calories… but if you want to keep as much muscle as possible (and most do), the protein must be kept high, ergo carbs and fat must be slashed.
To the OP, this is what they’re all talking about;
Want the fastest fat loss possible? Do the Rapid Loss Diet or V-Diet. Is it going to be fun? Nope.
Want a decent fat loss plan while maintaining most or even build some muscle? Do some kind of carb cycling approach. Either a targeted approach (eating most of the carbs around your workout and very low carbs on other days) or a cyclical approach (very low carb on most days of the weak then a carb up during the weekend).
Can’t be bothered with all the hassle? Just do a normal lower carb diet or a typical calorie controlled diet (eating 10-15% less calories than your maintenance). You will probably won’t lose fat very fast but it’s easier to do as you can have more variety with the food you eat and you can eat more.
[quote]JMoUCF87 wrote:
ronaldo7 wrote:
Look man I have tried both. I’m not getting my info from bullshit studies. Studies don’t prove anything but the results a few people got. I’ve gotten lean eating all sorts of carbs as well as all sorts of fats . As long as my calories were under control everything works out at the end.
While you CAN get lean eating “all sorts of carbs and fats” (even gasp combining them in the same meal)…the question was what is the FASTEST way to lose fat. The answer to that is a low fat/low carb diet. Basically, a diet consisting of protein, essential fatty acids, micronutrients and little else.
Yes, calories are the ultimate determinate of weight loss, and the fastest way to lose fat is to severely restrict calories… but if you want to keep as much muscle as possible (and most do), the protein must be kept high, ergo carbs and fat must be slashed.[/quote]
Well, that’s what I said…High protein, low calories and the rest can be either fat or carbs as long as the protein is high and the calories are low. There is really nothing that can prove low carb diets are the “fastest” way to lose fat.
[quote]Bricknyce wrote:
ronaldo7 wrote:
Bricknyce wrote:
“If I was eating 1500 calories per day and my protein intake was high it would not make a difference weather I ate carbs or fat to reach my calories for the day.”
This is very ambiguous. When calories are below 1,500 calories, maintaining a high level of protein intake would require removing the other macronutrients drastically.
Yes, it does make a difference. When calorie are VERY LOW (keyword: VERY), the macronutrient composition of the diet becomes very important. That’s why quite a few studies using very-low-calorie (<1,200 kcals) diets have been conducted with diferent macronutrient compositions. The ones with a relatively higher-carb and -fat percentage do a poor job at preserving muscle compared to ones consisting of nearly all protein.
Look man I have tried both. I’m not getting my info from bullshit studies. Studies don’t prove anything but the results a few people got. I’ve gotten lean eating all sorts of carbs as well as all sorts of fats . As long as my calories were under control everything works out at the end.
Thanks for interpreting my writings well; you really know how to absorb information adequately and see what the other person is trying to communicate.
I’m not saying what will work best for you or what you prefer! I’m discussing the god-damned fastest way to lose weight!
But then again, you’re the guy who doesn’t know to let food cool off or to just heat it up less to avoid being burned. [/quote]
Anyways, Brick has me really wondering if I posess the cajones to go through with a PSMF. It seems a bit more easier(to me) than the GSD and way more appealing (and sound) than the V-Diet.
Maybe some day when I don’t have shit to do for two weeks I will take the dive. But for now… No thanks.
[quote]ronaldo7 wrote:
JMoUCF87 wrote:
ronaldo7 wrote:
Look man I have tried both. I’m not getting my info from bullshit studies. Studies don’t prove anything but the results a few people got. I’ve gotten lean eating all sorts of carbs as well as all sorts of fats . As long as my calories were under control everything works out at the end.
While you CAN get lean eating “all sorts of carbs and fats” (even gasp combining them in the same meal)…the question was what is the FASTEST way to lose fat. The answer to that is a low fat/low carb diet. Basically, a diet consisting of protein, essential fatty acids, micronutrients and little else.
Yes, calories are the ultimate determinate of weight loss, and the fastest way to lose fat is to severely restrict calories… but if you want to keep as much muscle as possible (and most do), the protein must be kept high, ergo carbs and fat must be slashed.
Well, that’s what I said…High protein, low calories and the rest can be either fat or carbs as long as the protein is high and the calories are low. There is really nothing that can prove low carb diets are the “fastest” way to lose fat.
[/quote]
ummm…you don’t seem to get it. When talking about dropping fat at the FASTEST rate possible, there won’t be any room for fat OR carbs, because protein will make up 90% or more if your total calories (and only because most sources of protein have a small amount of tag-along carbs or fat)
yes, if one is doing a moderate deficit, then as long as protein is high and calories are low, fat loss will progress at a decent rate.
But in order to achieve an OPTIMAL rate of fat loss, one cannot afford ANY extra calories from fat or carbs than is necessary and/or unavoidable (e.g. essential fatty acids from fish oil and fiber from green veggies)
[quote]ronaldo7 wrote:
JMoUCF87 wrote:
ronaldo7 wrote:
Look man I have tried both. I’m not getting my info from bullshit studies. Studies don’t prove anything but the results a few people got. I’ve gotten lean eating all sorts of carbs as well as all sorts of fats . As long as my calories were under control everything works out at the end.
While you CAN get lean eating “all sorts of carbs and fats” (even gasp combining them in the same meal)…the question was what is the FASTEST way to lose fat. The answer to that is a low fat/low carb diet. Basically, a diet consisting of protein, essential fatty acids, micronutrients and little else.
Yes, calories are the ultimate determinate of weight loss, and the fastest way to lose fat is to severely restrict calories… but if you want to keep as much muscle as possible (and most do), the protein must be kept high, ergo carbs and fat must be slashed.
Well, that’s what I said…High protein, low calories and the rest can be either fat or carbs as long as the protein is high and the calories are low. There is really nothing that can prove low carb diets are the “fastest” way to lose fat.
[/quote]
Again, thanks for interpreting our writings properly.
Easier mentally…And one of the reason that got me started on it…It fit more my lifestyle…In a restaurant i can get a chicken wrap with about 25g of carbs and not screwing up my diet…that one example but there others…
Its also the coolthing right now…and why not??[/quote]
It has never been coolthing to order a chicken wrap at a restaurant.
As long as you’re at least in positive nitrogen balance, I would add more fat than the 5% recommended here, to the diet. I believe after positive nitrogen balance levels of protein intake, the slope of benefits of just adding protein levels off, and the slope of benefits of adding fats increases.
Anyways, Brick has me really wondering if I posess the cajones to go through with a PSMF. It seems a bit more easier(to me) than the GSD and way more appealing (and sound) than the V-Diet.
Maybe some day when I don’t have shit to do for two weeks I will take the dive. But for now… No thanks. [/quote]
Haha, good luck with it dude, the last time I did a PSMF during a holiday I kept on going to the fridge drinking some cold water or green tea or checking the internet for some kind of PSMF recipe because I was really hungry and I don’t have anything to do to distract myself. And besides, you can’t and shouldn’t workout that often (at most is 2 or 3 weight training sessions and a few low intensity cardio per week) so personally, for me I think it’s better to do it when you’re really busy.
If you do plan on doing the diet, would you mind putting up a log here? It’ll be interesting for everyone here to see.
[quote]toocul4u wrote:
As long as you’re at least in positive nitrogen balance, I would add more fat than the 5% recommended here, to the diet. I believe after positive nitrogen balance levels of protein intake, the slope of benefits of just adding protein levels off, and the slope of benefits of adding fats increases.[/quote]
unless you count slower fat loss as a “benefit”, why would someone looking to drop fat as fast as possible ADD fat to a diet?
[quote]toocul4u wrote:
As long as you’re at least in positive nitrogen balance, I would add more fat than the 5% recommended here, to the diet. I believe after positive nitrogen balance levels of protein intake, the slope of benefits of just adding protein levels off, and the slope of benefits of adding fats increases.[/quote]
See Jo’s writings.
We’re not speaking of adding more protein to any diet. We’re talking of taking calories as low as possible while maintaing health and muscle mass; that’s it! And that requires a diet that is very low in calories and nearly all protein with a small amount of EFAs.
We’re not pushing this stuff on anyone. If you want to lose weight slower on a higher-calorie, low- to moderate-carb diet, do it!
[quote]Bricknyce wrote:
toocul4u wrote:
As long as you’re at least in positive nitrogen balance, I would add more fat than the 5% recommended here, to the diet. I believe after positive nitrogen balance levels of protein intake, the slope of benefits of just adding protein levels off, and the slope of benefits of adding fats increases.
See Jo’s writings.
We’re not speaking of adding more protein to any diet. We’re talking of taking calories as low as possible while maintaing health and muscle mass; that’s it! And that requires a diet that is very low in calories and nearly all protein with a small amount of EFAs.
We’re not pushing this stuff on anyone. If you want to lose weight slower on a higher-calorie, low- to moderate-carb diet, do it! [/quote]
who’s Jo? I didn’t say anything about a higher calorie diet
My problem is ive been able to eat anything and as much as ive wanted all my life because of my skinny tall frame.But genetics are catching up with my as i approach my 30’s.So ive never been on a diet …EVER so im going to have to man up and take some of your ideas on board. I spend hours a week in the gym yet im embarrassed to take my shirt off to go swimming,something has to be done on my part fast.
All my fat storage is in my stomach and chest…just like my old man.
I’ll check out some of the diets u guys reccomended.
[quote]toocul4u wrote:
Bricknyce wrote:
toocul4u wrote:
As long as you’re at least in positive nitrogen balance, I would add more fat than the 5% recommended here, to the diet. I believe after positive nitrogen balance levels of protein intake, the slope of benefits of just adding protein levels off, and the slope of benefits of adding fats increases.
See Jo’s writings.
We’re not speaking of adding more protein to any diet. We’re talking of taking calories as low as possible while maintaing health and muscle mass; that’s it! And that requires a diet that is very low in calories and nearly all protein with a small amount of EFAs.
We’re not pushing this stuff on anyone. If you want to lose weight slower on a higher-calorie, low- to moderate-carb diet, do it!
who’s Jo? I didn’t say anything about a higher calorie diet
[/quote]
I meant JM, short for his screen name that I can’t remember by heart.
I didn’t say anything about higher-calorie diets either.
Refer again to our writings.
You spoke of the fact that adding more and more protein to a diet doesn’t have concurrent benefits in muscle gain. We agree with this.
In a nutshell, a PSMF looks like this:
1Take your maintenance diet with the protein amount that maintans your muscle.
2) Strip all the fat and carbs from this diet.
3) Add in a shitload of fiber supplements or veggies and some EFs.
[quote]Bricknyce wrote:
toocul4u wrote:
Bricknyce wrote:
toocul4u wrote:
As long as you’re at least in positive nitrogen balance, I would add more fat than the 5% recommended here, to the diet. I believe after positive nitrogen balance levels of protein intake, the slope of benefits of just adding protein levels off, and the slope of benefits of adding fats increases.
See Jo’s writings.
We’re not speaking of adding more protein to any diet. We’re talking of taking calories as low as possible while maintaing health and muscle mass; that’s it! And that requires a diet that is very low in calories and nearly all protein with a small amount of EFAs.
We’re not pushing this stuff on anyone. If you want to lose weight slower on a higher-calorie, low- to moderate-carb diet, do it!
who’s Jo? I didn’t say anything about a higher calorie diet
I meant JM, short for his screen name that I can’t remember by heart.
I didn’t say anything about higher-calorie diets either.
Refer again to our writings.
You spoke of the fact that adding more and more protein to a diet doesn’t have concurrent benefits in muscle gain. We agree with this.
In a nutshell, a PSMF looks like this:
1Take your maintenance diet with the protein amount that maintans your muscle.
2) Strip all the fat and carbs from this diet.
3) Add in a shitload of fiber supplements or veggies and some EFs.
That’s the diet: protein, EFAs, fiber. [/quote]
right on. and you did mention the words high calorie diets. I just wonder what we think the amount of protein is that at least breaks us even regarding muscle catabolism/anabolism? any ideas when hypocaloric?
So, let’s say 1.1g/kg of protein to remain above zero in nitrogen balance. that’s about 360 calories of protein for a 180 lb man. and according to jmocfu78, that’s 90 percent of our total calories here. so we’d be eating 400 total calories a day, and this would provide the fastest loss. whatev