Guide to calorie deficits

thanks for the info!!

:bigsmile:

bump

Bumping to go back and re-read when i'm not exhausted. Thanks!

Figuring out your perfect deficit isn't magic, it's a few simple formula's base on some basic, worldwide standards, and generally with slight modefication, will work for just about anyone who (besides weight) is generally healthy.

Here's what you need:
Height, weight, age, activity level, sex

I agree with pretty much everything you say, except the quoted sections. These calculations, are generalizations. As you already know, LBM(lean body mass) plays a critical roll in metabolism. So if someone is 200lbs with 30% bodyfat. and there is someone else who is 200lbs with 20% bodyfat. That can throw off the calculation off by 10 percent, and the way this is calculated is with a math formula. In turn, this can create a very very inaccurate result. I am also against the BMI for pretty much a similar reason. you said it's flawed, so I want touch on the BMI.

Real world example. I haved used those calculated to calculate my BMR. They pretty much said I should be eating about 3500 calories for maintenance. I got the bodybugg, it's a device you wear on your arm. That tells you how many calories you burn through the entire day, you wear it the entire day. It measures tempeture, sweat, and resistance in the body, it's 90% accurate. I was burning... 2500 calories a day. That calculator was wrong by 1000 calories.

I know many people will say "I can't eat my exercise calories, I gain weight when I do". Well I have news for you, that's not correct. I submit this, if you eat your exercise calories and gain weight 1 of 3 things happened:
1 you were previously in starvation mode, and you upped your calories, and had an immediate weight gain, that's normal, to be expected, and necessary to get your body on track. Give it a month, that will stop, and you, once again, will begin to lose, but this time, in a healthy manner.

My education in nutrition didn't come from the national academy of sports medicine. They just go by a standard ratio. Pretty much the typical high carb diet. This is more of a performance diet(. I also disagree with that diet for performance. This is what is taught to PTs. My education came from my own willingness to learn about nutrition. The exercise counter on this webpage is dead wrong. As you already know, the heavier a person is, the more calories they burn on a specific activity compared to a thinner person. This caloric counter doesn't take that in to consideration.

I am not going to call it starvation mode. I'll call it when your reduce caloric intake finds an equilibrium with your body composition. There where studies done, where people where put on a 100% carbohydrate diet, they lost no bodyfat. They did lose muscle mass. Eating higher levels of protein while on a low caloric diet, helps preserve muscle, which also releases glucagon which helps release fat stores. I think the starvation mode theory is just about the proper macro nutrient ratios.

Keeping in mind after what I said... different things work for different people. Endromorphic, mesomorphic, and ectromophic body types can verify this. As you know, some people are better at marathon style events, where they are dominant in type A muscle fibers, and there are people who are dominant in type 2A and 2B muscle fibers. They utilize energy differently. In lamens terms, high carb diets will work for some people but not for others, low carb diets will work for some people but not so well for others.

Like I said, I agree with most of your post. The things I didn't agree with, i mentioned. Not much.

Thanks boss, bumping for my topics.

I'm one of those 'small' people, I've discovered that my net base minimum is 1070 cals, plus exercise of course.

Just to help other inch highs out there :laugh:

:flowerforyou:

WT Heck is a "Bruin bump?".....I'm so non-sport........

asmcriminal,


Your posts are so long that I find them hard to follow....are you in support of or against IF?

asmcriminal,


Your posts are so long that I find them hard to follow....are you in support of or against IF?

I saw what banks said, he thought it was funny. I went back to read what i said... lmao yeah i can see what you're saying. I don't know why i make things sound complicated. To answer your question directly, I am in full support for IF, but depends which method you use. Some forms of IF will get you better results than others.

Aside from anecdotal claims, why do you feel some forms of IF will yield better results. Keep it short, please. :-)

In the book "eat stop eat" or maybe it's called "stop eat stop" whatever. He has a large window for feeding. Which is 8hrs. You eat for 8 hours and you fast for 16hrs. That 8hrs of eating is a very large window. The wariror diet is pretty much the same, but you have a 2-4hr window.

The method that got me in to IF was the warrior diet. I eat for maybe an hour, maybe 2, depends on what i am trying to do, and I am done. It's not necessary to eat 8hrs too many calories.

]

In the book "eat stop eat" or maybe it's called "stop eat stop" whatever. He has a large window for feeding. Which is 8hrs. You eat for 8 hours and you fast for 16hrs. That 8hrs of eating is a very large window. The wariror diet is pretty much the same, but you have a 2-4hr window.

The method that got me in to IF was the warrior diet. I eat for maybe an hour, maybe 2, depends on what i am trying to do, and I am done. It's not necessary to eat 8hrs too many calories.

the first one is right, eat stop eat. IF is cool.

I write about short term and long term fasting in my blog guys, if you'd like to read it.

http://bankshealth.wordpress.com/2011/02/19/inaugural-blog-short-and-long-term-underfeeding/

I just finished reading the blog. As you know, when a bodily system is used too much it will break down, and have reverse effects of growth. You exercise too much, your muscles start to get weaker, under eat too much, you will deteriorate muscle instead of oxidizing fat. Growth hormone is present when you're hungry(gherlin is present). I think that's why Long term fasting is shown to have a decrease of growth hormone over time. I think the pituitary gland is just being overly used and it can't produce as much as GH.

bump

Bump!

Bump