Dieting Information

[Tatyana]

How to Calculate Your Caloric Needs in Your Diet

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

These are merged posts from Tatyana and Carlos901.


How to Calculate Your Daily Caloric Needs


To calculate your BMR based on your total body weight (Harris-Benedict Formula)

BMR= basal metabolic rate

BMR (women) = 665 + (9.6 x weight in Kg) + (1.8 x height in cm) - (4.7 x age in years)

BMR (men) = 66 + (13.7 x weight in Kg) + (5 x height in cm) - (6.8 x age in years)

To calculate your BMR based on lean body weight (Katch-McArdle Formula)

BMR (both sexes) = 370 + (21.6 x lean mass in kg)

THis will give you what your body requires for all of your basic biological processes, such as digestion, nerve transmission, respiration etc, or your basal metabolic rate.

NEVER DROP YOUR CALORIES BELOW THIS LEVEL!!!!!

To figure out how many calories you need for the day multiply your BMR by your activity levels
Sedentary BMR x 1.2 no exercise/desk job
Lightly active BMR x 1.375 light exercise/sports 1-3 days/week
Moderately active BMR x 1.55 moderate exercise/sports 3-5 days/week
Very active BMR x 1.725 hard exercise/sports 6-7 days/week
Extremely active BMR x 1.9 hard daily training/physical job or training 2x/day

To lose weight/fat, obviously, you do need to burn more calories than you need!!
So, take about 10-20 % off of your total calorie requirements

To put on weight/muscle, you need more calories than your basic daily needs so ADD about 10-20% to your total calorie daily requirements.

If you change your calorie intake too drastically, your body may not do what you want it to do.

'Starvation' diets (very low calorie) only work on about 5% of the population, and too low calories or rapid 'weight' loss will probably be muscle and water, rather than the fat you want.

Similarily if you go from a 2500 kcal/day average to 4000 kcals, you are more likely putting on FAT and water rather than muscle.

1 g carbs = 4 kcals
1 g protein = 4 kcals
1 g fat = 9 kcals

After sorting out your daily intake, you have to work out the percentage of each of the macronutrients:

Carbohydrate Definitions:

Very High carbs = 65-70% +
High carbs = 55-60 %
Moderate carbs = 40-50 %
Low carbs = 25-30%
Very low carb (ketogenic) = 5-15 % or 30- 70 grams carbs per day

Protein Definitions
Very high protein = 41-50 % +
High protein = 31-40 %
Moderate protein = 25-30 %
Low Protein = 15-24%
Very low protein = less than 15%

Fat definitions
Very high fat = 40% +
High fat = 30-39%
Moderate fat = 20 -29%
Low fat = 10-19 %
Very low fat = less than 10%


Definitions for macronutrient percentages taken from Burn the Fat Feed the Muscle by Tom Venuto




-------------------------------------

Basal Metabolic Rate - BMR

Your basal metabolic rate, or BMR, is the minimum calorific requirement needed to sustain life in a resting individual. It can be looked at as being the amount of energy (measured in calories) expended by the body to remain in bed asleep all day!

BMR can be responsible for burning up to 70% of the total calories expended, but this figure varies due to different factors (see below). Calories are burned by bodily processes such as respiration, the pumping of blood around the body and maintenance of body temperature. Obviously the body will burn more calories on top of those burned due to BMR.

BMR is the largest factor in determining overall metabolic rate and how many calories you need to maintain, lose or gain weight. BMR is determined by a combination of genetic and environmental factors, as follows:

Genetics. Some people are born with faster metabolisms; some with slower metabolisms.

Gender. Men have a greater muscle mass and a lower body fat percentage. This means they have a higher basal metabolic rate.

Age. BMR reduces with age. After 20 years, it drops about 2 per cent, per decade.

Weight. The heavier your weight, the higher your BMR. Example: the metabolic rate of obese women is 25 percent higher than the metabolic rate of thin women.

Body Surface Area. This is a reflection of your height and weight. The greater your Body Surface Area factor, the higher your BMR. Tall, thin people have higher BMRs. If you compare a tall person with a short person of equal weight, then if they both follow a diet calorie-controlled to maintain the weight of the taller person, the shorter person may gain up to 15 pounds in a year.

Body Fat Percentage. The lower your body fat percentage, the higher your BMR. The lower body fat percentage in the male body is one reason why men generally have a 10-15% faster BMR than women.

Diet. Starvation or serious abrupt calorie-reduction can dramatically reduce BMR by up to 30 percent.Restrictive low-calorie weight loss diets may cause your BMR to drop as much as 20%.

Body Temperature/Health. For every increase of 0.5C in internal temperature of the body, the BMR increases by about 7 percent. The chemical reactions in the body actually occur more quickly at higher temperatures. So a patient with a fever of 42C (about 4C above normal) would have an increase of about 50 percent in BMR.

External temperature. Temperature outside the body also affects basal metabolic rate. Exposure to cold temperature causes an increase in the BMR, so as to create the extra heat needed to maintain the body's internal temperature. A short exposure to hot temperature has little effect on the body's metabolism as it is compensated mainly by increased heat loss. But prolonged exposure to heat can raise BMR.

Glands. Thyroxin (produced by the thyroid gland) is a key BMR-regulator which speeds up the metabolic activity of the body. The more thyroxin produced, the higher the BMR. If too much thyroxin is produced (a condition known as thyrotoxicosis) BMR can actually double. If too little thyroxin is produced (myxoedema) BMR may shrink to 30-40 percent of normal. Like thyroxin, adrenaline also increases the BMR but to a lesser extent.

Exercise. Physical exercise not only influences body weight by burning calories, it also helps raise your BMR by building extra lean tissue. (Lean tissue is more metabolically demanding than fat tissue.) So you burn more calories even when sleeping.

Short Term Factors Affecting BMR
Illnesses such as a fever, high levels of stress hormones in the body and either an increase or decrease in the environmental temperature will result in an increase in BMR. Fasting, starving or malnutrition all result in a lowering of BMR. This lowering of BMR can be one side effect of following a diet and nothing else. Solely dieting , i.e. reducing the amount of calories the body takes on, will not be as affective as dieting and increased exercise. The negative effect of dieting on BMR can be offset with a positive effect from increased exercise.

How to Calculate Basal Metabolic Rate (BMR)

The first step in designing a personal nutrition plan for yourself is to calculate how many calories you burn in a day; your total daily energy expenditure (TDEE). TDEE is the total number of calories that your body expends in 24 hours, including all activities. TDEE is also known as your "maintenance level". Knowing your maintenance level will give you a starting reference point from which to begin your diet.

According to exercise physiologists William McArdle and Frank Katch, the average maintenance level for women in the United States is 2000-2100 calories per day and the average for men is 2700-2900 per day. These are only averages; caloric expenditure can vary widely and is much higher for athletes or extremely active individuals. Some triathletes and ultra-endurance athletes may require as many as 6000 calories per day or more just to maintain their weight! Calorie requirements may also vary among otherwise identical individuals due to differences in inherited metabolic rates.

Methods of determining caloric needs

There are many different formulas you can use to determine your caloric maintenance level by taking into account the factors of age, sex, height, weight, lean body mass, and activity level. Any formula that takes into account your lean body mass (LBM) will give you the most accurate determination of your energy expenditure, but even without LBM you can still get a reasonably close estimate.

The "quick" method (based on total bodyweight)
A fast and easy method to determine calorie needs is to use total current body weight times a multiplier.

Fat loss = 12 - 13 calories per lb. of bodyweight
Maintenance (TDEE) = 15 - 16 calories per lb. of bodyweight
Weight gain: = 18 - 19 calories per lb. of bodyweight

This is a very easy way to estimate caloric needs, but there are obvious drawbacks to this method because it doesn't take into account activity levels or body composition. Extremely active individuals may require far more calories than this formula indicates. In addition, the more lean body mass one has, the higher the TDEE will be.

Because body fatness is not accounted for, this formula may greatly overestimate the caloric needs if someone is extremely overfat. For example, a lightly active 50 year old woman who weighs 235 lbs. and has 34% body fat will not lose weight on 3000 calories per day (255 X 13 as per the "quick" formula for fat loss).

Equations based on BMR.


A much more accurate method for calculating TDEE is to determine basal metabolic rate (BMR) using multiple factors, including height, weight, age and sex, then multiply the BMR by an activity factor to determine TDEE. BMR is the total number of calories your body requires for normal bodily functions (excluding activity factors).

This includes keeping your heart beating, inhaling and exhaling air, digesting food, making new blood cells, maintaining your body temperature and every other metabolic process in your body. In other words, your BMR is all the energy used for the basic processes of life itself. BMR usually accounts for about two-thirds of total daily energy expenditure.

BMR may vary dramatically from person to person depending on genetic factors. If you know someone who claims they can eat anything they want and never gain an ounce of fat, they have inherited a naturally high BMR. BMR is at it's lowest when you are sleeping undisturbed and you are not digesting anything. It is very important to note that the higher your lean body mass is, the higher your BMR will be.

This is very significant if you want to lose body fat because it means that the more muscle you have, the more calories you will burn. Muscle is metabolically active tissue, and it requires a great deal of energy just to sustain it. It is obvious then that one way to increase your BMR is to engage in weight training in order to increase and/or maintain lean body mass. In this manner it could be said that weight training helps you lose body fat, albeit indirectly.

The Harris-Benedict formula (BMR based on total body weight)

The Harris Benedict equation is a calorie formula using the factors of height, weight, age, and sex to determine basal metabolic rate (BMR). This makes it more accurate than determining calorie needs based on total bodyweight alone. The only variable it does not take into consideration is lean body mass. Therefore, this equation will be very accurate in all but the extremely muscular (will underestimate caloric needs) and the extremely overfat (will overestimate caloric needs).

Men: BMR = 66 + (13.7 X wt in kg) + (5 X ht in cm) - (6.8 X age in years)
Women: BMR = 655 + (9.6 X wt in kg) + (1.8 X ht in cm) - (4.7 X age in years)

Note: 1 inch = 2.54 cm.
1 kilogram = 2.2 lbs.

Example:
You are female
You are 30 yrs old
You are 5' 6 " tall (167.6 cm)
You weigh 120 lbs. (54.5 kilos)
Your BMR = 655 + 523 + 302 - 141 = 1339 calories/day

Now that you know your BMR, you can calculate TDEE by multiplying your BMR by your activity multiplier from the chart below:

Activity Multiplier
Sedentary = BMR X 1.2 (little or no exercise, desk job)
Lightly active = BMR X 1.375 (light exercise/sports 1-3 days/wk)
Mod. active = BMR X 1.55 (moderate exercise/sports 3-5 days/wk)
Very active = BMR X 1.725 (hard exercise/sports 6-7 days/wk)
Extr. active = BMR X 1.9 (hard daily exercise/sports & physical job or 2X day training, i.e marathon, contest etc.)

Example:
Your BMR is 1339 calories per day
Your activity level is moderately active (work out 3-4 times per week)
Your activity factor is 1.55
Your TDEE = 1.55 X 1339 = 2075 calories/day

Katch-McArdle formula (BMR based on lean body weight)

If you have had your body composition tested and you know your lean body mass, then you can get the most accurate BMR estimate of all. This formula from Katch & McArdle takes into account lean mass and therefore is more accurate than a formula based on total body weight. The Harris Benedict equation has separate formulas for men and women because men generally have a higher LBM and this is factored into the men's formula. Since the Katch-McArdle formula accounts for LBM, this single formula applies equally to both men and women.

BMR (men and women) = 370 + (21.6 X lean mass in kg)

Example:
You are female
You weigh 120 lbs. (54.5 kilos)
Your body fat percentage is 20% (24 lbs. fat, 96 lbs. lean)
Your lean mass is 96 lbs. (43.6 kilos)
Your BMR = 370 + (21.6 X 43.6) = 1312 calories

To determine TDEE from BMR, you simply multiply BMR by the activity multiplier:

Example:
Your BMR is 1312
Your activity level is moderately active (work out 3-4 times per week)
Your activity factor is 1.55
Your TDEE = 1.55 X 1312 = 2033 calories

As you can see, the difference in the TDEE as determined by both formulas is statistically insignificant (2075 calories vs. 2033 calories) because the person we used as an example is average in body size and body composition. The primary benefit of factoring lean body mass into the equation is increased accuracy when your body composition leans to either end of the spectrum (very muscular or very obese).

Adjust your caloric intake according to your goal

Once you know your TDEE (maintenance level), the next step is to adjust your calories according to your primary goal. The mathematics of calorie balance are simple: To keep your weight at its current level, you should remain at your daily caloric maintenance level. To lose weight, you need to create a calorie deficit by reducing your calories slightly below your maintenance level (or keeping your calories the same and increasing your activity above your current level). To gain weight you need to increase your calories above your maintenance level. The only difference between weight gain programs and weight loss programs is the total number of calories required.

Negative calorie balance is essential to lose body fat.

Calories not only count, they are the bottom line when it comes to fat loss. If you are eating more calories than you expend, you simply will not lose fat, no matter what type of foods or food combinations you eat. Some foods do get stored as fat more easily than others, but always bear in mind that too much of anything, even "healthy food," will get stored as fat. You cannot override the laws of thermodynamics and energy balance. You must be in a calorie deficit to burn fat. This will force your body to use stored body fat to make up for the energy deficit.

There are 3500 calories in a pound of stored body fat. If you create a 3500-calorie deficit in a week through diet, exercise or a combination of both, you will lose one pound. If you create a 7000 calories deficit in a week you will lose two pounds. The calorie deficit can be created through diet, exercise or preferably, with a combination of both. Because we already factored in the exercise deficit by using an activity multiplier, the deficit we are concerned with here is the dietary deficit.

Calorie deficit thresholds: How low is too low?

It is well known that cutting calories too much slows down the metabolic rate, decreases thyroid output and causes loss of lean mass, so the question is how much of a deficit do you need? There definitely seems to be a specific cutoff or threshold where further reductions in calories will have detrimental effects.

The most common guideline for calorie deficits for fat loss is to reduce your calories by at least 500, but not more than 1000 below your maintenance level. For some, especially lighter people, 1000 calories may be too much of a deficit. The American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM) recommends that calorie levels never drop below 1200 calories per day for women or 1800 per day for men. Even these calorie levels are extremely low.

A more individualized way to determine the safe calorie deficit would be to account for one's bodyweight or TDEE. Reducing calories by 15-20% below TDEE is a good place to start. A larger deficit may be necessary in some cases, but the best approach would be to keep the calorie deficit through diet small while increasing activity level.

Example 1:
Your weight is 120 lbs.
Your TDEE is 2033 calories
Your calorie deficit to lose weight is 500 calories
Your optimal caloric intake for weight loss is 2033 - 500 = 1533 calories

Example 2:
Your calorie deficit to lose weight is 20% of TDEE (.20% X 2033 = 406 calories)
Your optimal caloric intake for weight loss = 1627 calories

Positive calorie balance is essential to gain lean bodyweight

If you want to gain lean bodyweight and become more muscular, you must consume more calories than you burn up in a day. Provided that you are participating in a weight-training program of a sufficient intensity, frequency and volume, the caloric surplus will be used to create new muscle tissue. Once you've determined your TDEE, the next step is to increase your calories high enough above your TDEE that you can gain weight. It is a basic law of energy balance that you must be on a positive calorie balance diet to gain muscular bodyweight. A general guideline for a starting point for gaining weight is to add approximately 300-500 calories per day onto your TDEE. An alternate method is to add an additional 15 - 20% onto your TDEE.

Example:
Your weight is 120 lbs.
Your TDEE is 2033 calories
Your additional calorie requirement for weight gain is + 15 - 20% = 305 - 406 calories
Your optimal caloric intake for weight gain is 2033 + 305 - 406 = 2338 - 2439 calories

Adjust your caloric intake gradually


It is not advisable to make any drastic changes to your diet all at once. After calculating your own total daily energy expenditure and adjusting it according to your goal, if the amount is substantially higher or lower than your current intake, then you may need to adjust your calories gradually.

For example, if your determine that your optimal caloric intake is 1900 calories per day, but you have only been eating 900 calories per day, your metabolism may be sluggish. An immediate jump to 1900 calories per day might actually cause a fat gain because your body has adapted to a lower caloric intake and the sudden jump up would create a surplus. The best approach would be to gradually increase your calories from 900 to 1900 over a period of a few weeks to allow your metabolism to speed up and acclimatize.

Measure your results and adjust calories accordingly

These calculations for finding your correct caloric intake are quite simplistic and are just estimates to give you a starting point. You will have to monitor your progress closely to make sure that this is the proper level for you. You will know if you’re at the correct level of calories by keeping track of your caloric intake, your bodyweight, and your body fat percentage.

You need to observe your bodyweight and body fat percentage to see how you respond. If you don't see the results you expect, then you can adjust your caloric intake and exercise levels accordingly. The bottom line is that it’s not effective to reduce calories to very low levels in order to lose fat. In fact, the more calories you consume the better, as long as a deficit is created through diet and exercise. The best approach is to reduce calories only slightly and raise your daily calorie expenditure by increasing your frequency, duration and or intensity of exercise.

 

[Tatyana]

Shopping List

Shopping List for Newbies

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Healthy Grocery List Fresh Vegetables
Lettuce Other Greens Cucumbers Carrots
Asparagus Zucchini Radishes Tomatoes
Green Beans Onions Green Onions Peppers
Cauliflower Broccoli Peas Celery
Potatoes Corn Sweet Potatoes Squash
Other Vegetables:
____________ ____________ ____________



Fresh Fruits
Bananas Apples Oranges Pears
Peaches Nectarines Grapefruit Berries
Other Fruits:
____________ ____________ ____________



Frozen Foods
Green Beans Peas Mixed Vegetables Carrots
Chicken Breasts Fruit Juice Bars Blueberries Corn
Fish Fillets Onions Vegetarian Burgers Shrimp
Other Frozen:
____________ ____________ ____________



Canned Foods
Black Beans Tomatoes Marinara Sauce Tuna
Salmon Pinto Beans White Beans Pineapples
Other Canned Foods:
____________ ____________ ____________



Meats
Lean Hamburger Pork Chops Steaks Fish
Shell Fish Chicken Turkey Ham
Other Meats:
____________ ____________ ____________



Grains and Cereals
Whole Grain Bread Whole Grain Pasta Whole Grain Cereal Oatmeal
Other Grains: Quinoa, buckwheat, spelt, amaranth, barley
____________ ____________ ____________



Beverages
100% Fruit Juice Sparkling Water Tomato Juice Herb Tea
Other Beverages:
____________ ____________ ____________



Dairy and Eggs
Low Fat Sour Cream Low Fat Milk Cheddar Cheese Butter
Low Fat Cream Cheese Colby Cheese Mozzerella Cheese Yogurt
Other Dairy:
____________ ____________ ____________



Miscellaneous Items
Herbs and Spices Sesame Oil Low Fat Dressings Mustard
Low Fat Mayonaise (HMMMMMM) Honey Low Sodium Soy Sauce Walnuts
Pumpkin Seeds Mixed Nuts Walnuts Pecans
Flax Seeds Olive Oil Walnut Oil Garlic

 

[Tatyana]

Spices and flavouring to make things interesting

Italian Flavouring

Basil

Oregano

Fennel Seeds

Sun dried tomatoes/tomatoe paste

Garlic

Olive Oil

'Mixed' Italian Spices


Mexican Flavouring

Safflower Oil

Ground Coriander

Ground Cumin

Cayenne Pepper

Oregano

Chilli Peppers

Chinese/Japanese flavourings

Toasted sesame seed oil

Ginger

Garlic

Soya Sauce

Mirin - cooking rice wine

Brown Rice Vineagar

Umeboshi Plum Vineager


Indian

Garlic

Onions

Ground Cumin or cumin seeds

Ground Coriander or coriander seeds

Tumeric

Astoefida (sp)

Cinnamon Stick

Cloves

Cardamon Seeds

Thai

Sesame Seed Oil

Lemon Grass

Fresh Coriander/Cilantro

Green curry leaves

Red chili peppers

(I am forgetting something here)

Anyway, my point is that the same old veg or rice or chicken can taste quite different with different spices.

It does help loads when eating clean.

 

[Tatyana]

More info on sorting your diet out

Written by Jimmy-Mod on Uk-Muscle.co.uk

Formulating your diet for beginers

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ok, this thread is written for those who dont have a clue on how to prepare a decent nutrition plan for a bodybuilding lifestyle.

I want to make 1 thing clear right now.....Its what you eat that makes you grow period!!!!!

Training and indeed steroids(if thats the route you choose) do play a major part in building that massive physique we desire, but without the correct nutrition we wont get very far at all!!

So the point of this post is really to outline a few basic rules for a newbie to adhere to, so that they all have a good idea of what foods to eat, how much and when to eat.

I will write another thread on more advanced nutrition tequniques soon.

Firstly we need to know how many kcals we need to grow or maintain our muscle tissue. To do this we need to know what macronutrients are, and how many kcals they contain.

Protein 4kcals per gram

So what is protein and what does it do?

Protein is made up of amino acids. These amino acids are what our bodies require to exist, to build muscle, skin, bone, hair...the list goes on. When we eat protein our body breaks it down into amino acids and uses them as and when it needs them, for what ever it requires.

For our interests its building muscle so we need to make sure that we have an abundance of amino's to satisfy our bodies needs, so that we have enough to grow bigger!

We do this by eating quality protein sources at regular intervals. This is so that our body doesn't turn catabolic and start to break down its hard earned muscle due to not being fed regularly!! In short, if we dont eat enough protein, we shrink!!!

The amount we need to eat in each meal depends on A.. the amount of meals, and B.. the lean mass we hold. The bigger we are the more we need in a day and the more meals we eat the less we need in each meal.

Some good protein sources are

Red meat
Chicken
Fish
Eggs
Whey powders
Milk
Soy
Nuts
Beans
Lentils

Human tissue has an individual string of amino acids as do all protein sources. Some are better than others for building muscle.

Whole eggs for instance, are near perfect for this purpose. We need not worry too much about amino spectrums as beginners, as long as we are eating a variation of some or all of the above choices through the day.

Carbohydrates 4kcals per gram

Carbs are used as an energy source for our bodies. We need energy to go about our daily lives and if in abundance, carbs give our bodies the calories it needs to grow. This energy is stored in the muscles, as well as the liver as a substance called glycogen. Its muscle glycogen that gives our muscles the energy to perform. It also is what gives them that full look. Liver glycogen is what gives our bodies the energy to live out our day to day lives.

Carbohydrates are all different. Some have a low glycemic index, whilst others are medium or high. What is the glycemic index (GI)?

The glycemic index is used to determine how quickly a particular food is absorbed and is principally used in reference to foods which are high in carbohydrates. The quicker the carb is absorbed, the shorter the burst of energy we get due to a sudden raise in blood sugar.

The slower the absorbtion, the lower the blood sugar and a long sustained amount of energy provided.

The higher the blood sugar, the more insulin the body provides to counter act that sudden raise.

So what will insulin do??

For the basic content of this beginners article, I wont go deep into insulin. Lets just say that insulin helps the uptake of all nutrients consumed. This means that while protein is stored more efficiently, so are fats and carbs. This may make a person fat, and we dont want that!!!

Although low GI carbs are a better source of energy, there are still times that we can manipulate hi GI alternatives such as before, during and after a workout. We need fast energy to train and a spike of insulin post workout PWO will obviously be handy to absorb protein when we need it most .

What happens if we eat high GI carbs all day long such as chocolates, sweets, sugary drinks?

Well it doesn't take a brain surgeon to work out that body fat may increase, but what else can go wrong??

If you think about it, high GI sugars raise blood sugar, which the body produces insulin to lower again. Now when this happens our blood sugar takes a nose dive which has the opposite effect and makes us feel tired and low. We then start to crave sugar again in order to raise those blood levels. Can you see what is happening here? Yes, we are on the slippery slope of raising and lowering our blood sugar which in turn makes us feel up and down in energy and mood! Anyone ever experienced this?? I think so!

So we can see that a long sustained release of energy is better for keeping our blood sugar stable, which is done by eating low GI carbs.

Examples of low/high GI carbohydrates are hard to put forward as there is a vary long scale of variables. The best thing to do is buy a book on GI which you can get in any good bookstore.

Alternatively you can find a GI database as well as learn more on GI at this link

http://www.glycemicindex.com/

One last point regarding GI

The GI of any given food is affected by a number of other variables. Fats, fibre and protein consumed with carbs slows down the absorbtion considerably. In fact, hi GI foods will slow quite a bit if eaten with low GI foods. This leads us to the fact that its good to eat well balanced meals containing protein, fibre and fats to keep our blood sugars stable.

Fats 9kcals per gram

Fats are also an energy source which some people prefer to carbohydrates

A further point to note is that fats will not spike insulin levels.

There are 5 different types of fats, all of which are beneficial in optimum health, some more than others.

saturated fats
polyunsaturated fats or omega 6 poly's
monounsaturated fats
trans fats*
omega 3 fish oils, a type of poly

*should be kept restricted as can lead to heart disease and cancer if taken in abundance.

Ok, again I wont confuse the issue here as it is a beginners article so I will only state that which applies to our beginners diet.

If we are using carbohydrates as our main energy fuel, we then need to keep fats to a moderate level. Although a small amount of all the above fats are needed, we as bb'ers should eat mainly monounsaturated fats i.e.
avocado pears
rapeseed oils
olive oils

and omega 3 oils
salmon
trout
mackerel
sardines
pilchards
tuna (to a lesser degree)

There are also some good omega oil blends on the market such as udos choice or Holland and Barrett optimum oil blend. Note that vegetarians cant have the fish oils that the above oils contain so flax seed oil would be a good choice for them.

The fats that come naturally in foods such as eggs and meats are ok as long as they are not over eaten.....the only one that possibly could be over eaten would be eggs.

If you are using fats as the main source of energy then more than moderate amounts can be consumed as long as carbohydrates are kept down somewhat.

So what should I use as my main source of fuel for energy??

This is a complicated question as we are all so different. There are technical computerised machines which measure our co2 levels that can determine our exact ratios of fats and carbohydrates needed as an individual but again, this is more advanced than we need to concern ourselves with as beginners.

I feel that trial and error is the best way to learn about our bodies and so what better than to try all the options for a period of X amount of time and see what suits us best?

Low fat, high carbs
Low carbs, high fat
Even a mix of the two (my favourite option)

I feel that if the low/zero carb, high fat route is the one you wish to follow then at least one carb meal a day is needed. Alternatively, some go for a "clean carb up" day once a week, finding it good to replenish depleted glycogen stores.

The ratios we eat will effect the amount of meals necesary in any given day. We already know fats and fibre slows the absorbtion of carbs we eat, but it also slows the whole meal down. So if we eat high fat and low carbs, we need not eat much more than 3 or 4 meals a day (as long as sufficient protein is present). On the other end of the sclae a high carb, low fat meal requires as many as 6-8 meals with moderate protein in each portion.

Other key things to remember when formulating our diets are

To drink plenty of fluids a day (2-3 litres)
Keeping hydrated is a must for optimum performance as an athlete as well as keeping in good health.

And eat plenty of fibre
Fibre comes naturally in countless foods but fruit, veg , nuts, beans and pulses are some of the best sources of fibre and some or all of the above should be incorporated daily in your nutrition plan.

An example daily food intake would look something like this

Meal 1
whole eggs
oats

Meal 2
chicken
basmati rice
fruit

Meal 3
tuna
salad
olive/flax oil
nuts

Meal 4
Baked beans
wholemeal toast
serving of whey

Meal 5 PWO
whey in water
glucose powder OR
maltodextrine powder

Meal 6
steak
jacket potato
green veg

So now we know what to eat and when to eat it, how much do we need to consume for optimum growth with minimum body fat BF?

Some bb'ers prefer to eat what ever they can get their hands on "if it aint nailed down then eat it!!" I have heard some say before. This can be an effective way of eating if you want sheer bulk, but has a few drawbacks.

1 Its very easy to gain a shed load of body fat

2 sometimes a person may eat too much of the wrong types of foods which can hinder their gains. For example, eating KFC all day long is great for protein and fat, but neglects carbohydrates.

Also eating food from the bakery down the street will fill you up on plenty of carbs and fat, but the protein will be lacking!!

So what do we do? How do we calculate our intake?

First off we need to know how much of each macronutrient is in the foods we eat. Again, any good bookstore will have a nutrition guide, or hit this link

http://www.nutritiondata.com/

Next we need to work out our calorie requirements and I must credit the next section to J. Beradi as it is an extract from his Massive Eating Article.....







Step #1: Resting Metabolic Rate

Resting metabolic rate (RMR) is the energy it costs the body to basically keep alive. This doesn't include the costs of getting your butt out of bed and moving around; those numbers are calculated in later. Although you might not guess it, about 50 to 70 percent of your entire day's calorie expenditure is a result of the RMR. So, let's figure out your RMR right now.


Determining RMR:

To start off with, you need to take your body weight in pounds and convert it to kilograms. (International readers, please bear with us silly non-metric Americans for a moment.) This is a simple conversion. Just divide your body weight by 2.2.

Next you take your percent of fat and multiply it by your body weight (which is now in kilograms). This will give you your fat mass (FM) in kilograms. Next simply subtract this number from your total weight in kilograms and you'll have your fat free mass (FFM) in kilograms.

Before we go on, why don't we try this out on me. Since I'm an athlete with a body weight of 200lbs at 5% body fat, I'd take my total body mass and divide it by 2.2:

Total body mass in kilograms = 200lbs / 2.2 = 91 kg

Next I'd multiply this kilogram number (91 kg) by my percent of body fat. Remember, percents are really decimals so 5% equals 0.05, 12% bodyfat will be .12 etc.

Fat Mass = 91kg x 0.05 = 4.55kg FM

Next I subtract this fat mass number (4.55 kg) from my total body mass (91kg):

Fat Free Mass = 91kg - 4.55kg = 86.45kg

Therefore my fat free mass is 86.45 kilograms. From that I can determine my RMR. The formula for RMR is as follows:

Resting Metabolic Rate for Athletes (in calories per day) = 500 + 22 x fat free mass (in kilograms).

Again, for me, I'd multiply 22 times my fat free mass and add 500 to that number as shown below:

RMR= 22 x 86.45 + 500 = 2402

Therefore my resting metabolic rate is about 2400 calories per day. Everyone have their RMR figured out? Good, let's move on.


Step #2: Cost of Activity

The Cost of Activity represents how many calories are required to move your butt around during the day. This includes the cost of walking out to your car, scraping the ice off the damn thing, driving to work, pinching the secretary's ass, going to lunch with the boys, and of course, training after work. These factors make up about 20 to 40% of your daily caloric intake based on your activity level. So let's figure out your costs of activity. I'll use myself as an example again.


Determining Activity Costs:

Cost of Daily Activity is equal to the RMR you calculated above multiplied by an activity factor that fits your daily routine. I've listed some common activity factors below:

Activity Factors:

1.2-1.3 for Very Light (bed rest)

1.5-1.6 for Light (office work/watching TV)

1.6-1.7 for Moderate (some activity during day)

1.9-2.1 for Heavy (labour type work)

Note: Don't consider your daily workout when choosing a number. We'll do that later.

With this information we can get back to determining my calorie needs. Since I work at a university, most of my day is pretty sedentary. Even though I run back and forth between the lab and classes, I've selected 1.6 as my activity factor. Therefore the amount of calories it takes to breathe and move around during the day is about 3800 calories as shown below:

RMR x Activity Factor = 2400 calories x 1.6 = 3800 calories


Costs of Exercise Activity:

Next, we need to determine how many calories your exercise activity burns so that we can factor this into the totals. Exercise activity can be calculated simply by multiplying your total body mass in kilograms (as calculated above) by the duration of your exercise (in hours). Then you'd multiply that number by the MET value of exercise as listed below. (MET or metabolic equivalent, is simply a way of expressing the rate of energy expenditure from a given physical activity.)

MET values for common activities:

high impact aerobics… 7
low impact aerobics… 5

high intensity cycling… 12
low intensity cycling… 3

high intensity walking - 6.5
low intensity walking - 2.5

high intensity running… 18
low intensity running… 7

circuit-type training… 8
intense free weight lifting… 6
moderate machine training… 3

So here's the formula:

Cost of Exercise Activity = Body Mass (in kg) x Duration (in hours) x MET value

And here's how I calculate it for myself:

Exercise Expenditure for weights = 6 METS X 91kg x 1.5 hours = 819 calories

Exercise Expenditure for cardio = 3 METS X 91 kg x .5 hours = 137 calories

Add these two together and I burn 956 total calories during one of my training sessions.

Since my training includes about 90 minutes of intense free weight training and 30 minutes of low intensity bicycling (four times per week), my exercise energy expenditure might be as high as 1000 calories per training day!

The next step is to add this exercise number to the number you generated when multiplying your RMR by your activity factor (3800 calories per day in my case).

So 3800 calories + about 1000 calories = a whopping 4800 calories per day! And we're not done yet! (Note: I rounded 956 up to 1000 for the sake of simplicity. If you're a thin guy trying to gain muscle, it's better to round up anyway than to round down.)


Step #3: Thermic Effect of Food

TEF is the amount of calories that it takes your body to digest, absorb, and metabolise your ingested food intake. This makes up about 5 to 15% of your total daily calorie expenditure. Since the metabolic rate is elevated via this mechanism 10 to 15% for one to four hours after a meal, the more meals you eat per day, the faster your metabolic rate will be. This is a good thing, though. It's far better to keep the metabolism high and eat above that level, than to allow the metabolism to slow down by eating infrequently. Protein tends to increase TEF to a rate double that of carbs and almost triple that of fats so that's one of the reasons why I'm a big fan of protein meals.


Determining the Thermic Effect of Food:

To determine the TEF, you need to multiply your original RMR value (2400 in my case) by 0.10 for a moderate protein diet or 0.15 for a high protein diet. So this is what the formula looks like:

TEF = RMR x 0.10 for moderate protein diet (1 gram per pound of bodyweight)

TEF = RMR x 0.15 for high protein diet (more than 1 gram per pound of bodyweight)

Since I eat a very high protein diet (about 350 to 400 grams per day), I use the 0.15 factor and my TEF is about 360 calories per day as displayed by the calculation below:

Thermic Effect of Food = 2400 calories x 0.15 = 360 calories per day

Now add that to your calorie total.


Step #4: Adaptive Thermogenesis

I like to call Adaptive Thermogenesis the "X factor" because we just aren't sure how much it can contribute to daily caloric needs. Some have predicted that it can either increase daily needs by 10% or even decrease daily needs by 10%. Because it's still a mystery, we typically don't factor it into the equation.

Just for interest's sake, one factor included in the "X factor" is unconscious or spontaneous activity. Some people, when overfed, get hyper and increase their spontaneous activity and even have been known to be "fidgety." Others just get sleepy when overfed — obviously the fidgets will be burning more calories that the sleepy ones.

Other factors include hormone responses to feeding, training, and drugs, hormone sensitivity (insulin, thyroid, etc), stress (dramatically increases metabolic rate) or temperature induced metabolic changes (cold weather induces increased metabolic activity and heat production).

With all that said, you don't need to do any math on this part or fiddle with your calorie total. This is just something to keep in mind.


Step #5: Putting it all together

Okay, so how many damn calories do you need to consume each and every day? Well, adding up RMR plus activity factor (3800 calories in my case), cost of weight training (819 calories), cost of cardio (137 calories), and TEF (360 calories), we get a grand total of about 5116 calories! (Remember, that's just my total. You'll get a different number.)

Now that's a lot of food! And I must eat this each and every day when I want to gain weight. Are you surprised at how many calories I need? Most people are. So the next time you complain that you're "eating all day and can't gain a pound" you'd better realistically evaluate how much you're really eating. If you're not gaining a pound, then you're falling short on calories.






Thank you John....Back to me now.

So this may seem like a lot of food and you may wonder where you will put it all. We must remember that the above article is only an example and can be modified a little. For instance there are a lot of whey powders, meal replacements MRP and weight gainer drinks available. These are very good for getting in those extra few kcals. Maybe one can eat 3-4 whole food meals and 2-3 liquid meals. That makes it a little easier doesn't it?

What if I am still struggling?

Well we can build up to this massive amount of food slowly. Start by eating half to two thirds of the suggested total calories. Once you can easily manage that, add one more meal, or up the kcals a little in your existing meals.

How ever you do it, you will get there in the end.

There will be some days that we just cant stomach all the food and other days, we will be as hungry as a horse...thats bodybuilding guys

So to summarise

Eat plenty of protein, every 2-3 hours. I suggest 1.5-2g per approximate LB of lean mass throughout the day.

Eat the rest of your calories from low GI carbohydrates and/or quality fats (both in the ratios that you have chosen)

Drink plenty of fluids.

Eat lots of fibrous foods like vegetables and fruit

Work out your individual calorie requirements and devise a well balanced food plan using correct nutrient data/guide.

Start growing






I want to thank a few guys for helping me write this article...

One Smart Cookie....(Biohazard)
Gary Howell....(Biohazard)
Boxer....(Muscle talk)
James Collier BSc(Hons)....(Muscle talk)

 

[Tatyana]

On line diet/calorie calculators

Some on line resources that can help to figure out calories, what percentage of carbs/fats/protein etc.......................................

http://strengthnspeed.tripod.com/Nu...mCalculator.htm


http://www.calorieking.com/


http://www.fitday.com/

Bodyfat calculators

http://www.linear-software.com/online.html

 

[Tatyana]

Dieting and metabolic damage

Dieting and Metabolic Damage

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ok ladies, this may be a bit of SCARE MONGERING, but I do think getting a few perspectives on dieting is a GOOD thing.

This is to encourage you to TRUST YOUR GUT. Only you and you alone know your body better than anyone else.

I also have an assertion, that while there are some people out there with years and years of competition experience, some still remain in the dark ages when it comes to nutrition, some training technique, and in the drugs acceptable for women.

It takes quite a bit to keep up with all the latest scientific papers, and if you don't have a scientific background, it can take AGES for correct information fto filter through, break through the long held 'truths' about diet and training.

I have only been competing for three years, but I have seen a few girls crash and burn already in that time.

For most, competing will be something that is done for a few year, but your body is for life.

By Scott Abel..............................................




Metabolic Damage

With the seemingly ever increasing popularity in the last few years of Figure Competitions, there has been a troubling corresponding scenario developing: Metabolic damage. Yes, folks dieting and training can actually make you FAT long term if done improperly and to extremes. I used to see this somewhat in female bodybuilders, but now with the Figure boom it’s becoming almost an epidemic. It’s time someone pointed this out, and also time to search for solutions.

What is happening is that for several years after a contest prep that was ill-advised, the body responds in ways to prevent the situation from happening again. While it programs itself for this, there is also immediate and resultant metabolic damage from undertaking poor diet and training strategies. The result is that within one to two years post contest the metabolism pretty much shuts down, or shuts off completely.

This sets off a cascade of negative hormonal events, as well as various potential metabolic dysfunctions, one of which I will discuss below. The result is that the individual gets fat or fatter even on controlled calories and carbs. Should they desire to compete again, this usually leads to mis-guided advice of “more cardio” and more calories restriction.


Those of you who have heard me speak before on the Cycle Diet know about the dangers of absolute calories deprivation. (Those who have not can soon download one of my last Seminars at SWIS on the topic). Combined with more exercise this leads to eventual metabolic stress and dysfunction. The result is that within a few years, girls are out of the sport and getting fat and fatter each year even though they stay on consistent diet and training protocols. Recent discussions with colleagues and their own observations and feedback from other colleagues reveal I am not the only one noticing this pattern.

The saddest part of it is that the girls who usually must endure the most to get contest ready are the girls who will suffer more from metabolic damage in the near future. One of the problems has been till now that it goes relatively undiagnosed when taken to a physician. Blood tests reveal “ everything to be normal” yet as a practicing professional I know for these clients everything is anything BUT normal.

Staying on a PROPERLY controlled diet, and a training protocol and still gaining weight, fat, bloating, or cellulite is not normal and is indicative of a problem. The contestable issue there is no observable proof. So Drs who know little about training adaptations and effects send these girls away telling them all is normal and nothing is wrong, yet all other evidence points to the contrary.

One of the existing manifestations of this is now illustrated in Wilson’s Low Temperature Syndrome. This will not explain all of the Metabolic Damage cases that I see but at least it is a start that this is a real phenomenon.


Now a little science before the explanation: Under normal hormonal conditions the body’s endocrine system is controlled by one of the master glands, the hypothalamus. The hypothalamus exerts its effect on many other glands, and of particular concern here is the pituitary gland and the thyroid. The hypothalamus stimulates the pituitary which then stimulates TSH (thyroid stimulating hormone).

TSH makes in the body T4, a form of traveling thyroid which the body then converts to T3, the active form of thyroid which exerts its influence on cells and tissues, to be metabolically active and responsive. Here is one of the problems. (I’m sorry this requires such intimate scientific analysis, but I want girls to understand the dangers of getting “contest ripped” at all costs).


What we now know is many things can screw up or otherwise distort this process even though it would not show up on blood tests. The first thing is just general hypothalamic burnout. Too much stress on this gland for too long and it just does not function as efficiently. Next is what we now call Wilson’s Low Temperature Syndrome. You see the whole T4 to T3 conversion can and is affected by many variables; the top ones being stress, diet or fasting, illness, and increased cortisol levels.

Well right away that peaks interest in the people I see with metabolic damage who have both, OVER-stressed their systems physically and usually mentally, while dieting; as well as being on “absolute calories deprivation” for way way too long. This is where it gets interesting. Remember also that cortisol is a stress hormone and will increase and exacerbate these effects of stress.

One of the ways the body converts T4 to T3 is via an enzyme called 5 Deiodinase. This enzyme we now know is inhibited by the above factors of stress, extreme dieting, cortisol and other contributing factors. Under stress and fasting (extreme Figure type diets) the body both, converts less T4 to T3, and converts more T4 to RT3. The problem with this is that the RT3 is an INACTIVE form of thyroid. It exerts too little to no influence on the cells and tissues.

Because the actual activity of T3 takes place in the cells and tissues, there is no proper way to measure it or see if it is actually doing its job. Blood tests only determine that hormones are doing their job by there being such and such an amount in the blood stream. But since most of the activity is in the cells and tissues, not the blood, a blood test would reveal normal levels of TSH, T4, and T3, yet none may be acting appropriately on their target tissues, especially the T3.


Girls can suffer all the symptoms of low thyroid function, but still show normal thyroid on a blood test. This means gaining weight easily even though dieting, fatigue, irritability, etc etc just to name a few effects. And Wilson’s Low Body Temperature Syndrome would not be possible to screen for on a blood test.

This is just one way metabolic damage can manifest itself after a disastrous contest approach and too long of a diet, with too much macro and micro nutrient deprivation for far too long. Seems that sometimes those who really do “try the hardest” suffer the most. The reason I keep referring to this being about girls is that is what I see the most, and of those who actually do have Wilson’s Syndrome, 80 % are female.


This phenomenon can also develop in other situations, like for instance, ladies who diet for their weddings, for far too long and end up with the same bad metabolic response over time. It’s not sometimes just that “eating habits changed” with being married, but metabolic damage ensued as a post-diet, stress response to the wedding itself. (And tons of girls find their weddings mentally and emotionally stressful: just like girls preparing for Figure shows)


Ok, this is just one such sample of metabolic damage.


Another factor I have little proof of right now but that I am sure exists is some kind of permanent or resultant damage to the aldosterone hormone and it’s feedback mechanisms, given that aldosterone is also a stress response hormone in general.


The good thing about Wilson’ Syndrome is that it “may” be reversible. If you are concerned you may have metabolic damage do a search and check out the symptoms for Wilson’s Syndrome and see if you fit the bill. This is NOT the only measure of how metabolisms get damaged in this over-train, over-diet, yo yo syndrome of the Fitness Industry.

Unfortunately the Fitness Industry and Figure events are now leading down the road to the Fatness Industry! I have seen and have several clients who formerly got bad advice and prepared for their contests with a “win at all costs” mentality that is now hurting them long term.


Ladies, (and gentlemen), you need to start choosing your coaches and trainers more wisely. Going to extremes of 2-3 hours cardio per day, plus training, plus over-dieting, may get you to the Winner’s Circle at level 1 or 2, but at what costs to you?????


One of the reasons I got into the whole Metabolic Power/ Metabolic Endurance Training was to try to find ways around these “other” potentially damaging pre- contest protocols. And the “Cycle Diet” also explains how to prevent the effects of Absolute Calories Deprivation, from destroying your metabolism long term.

I hope anyone reading this is paying close attention and will forward this to any other girls they know who are “die’ting for a show and may be doing damage to themselves. If your nails are brittle, and hair is falling out, etc, these are warning signs. Please abide them.

I feel sorry when I see a cattle call of women at Figure events, with some 80 girls in them. Some are born to do it, and others struggled like hell to get up there, and unknowingly (and usually by actually being coached!) have set themselves up a one way ticket to Fatsville, long term. They just don't know it yet.

The reason I explained about Wilson’s Syndrome is because it’s one way at least that we know of that is treatable and a way back to normal metabolic function and normal fat loss, with normal dieting.


More on women’s issues soon !!!! Please pass this around to anyone you know may be damaging themselves, by competing. As usual i welcome comments on my Forums section at scottabel.com

posted by Scott Abel at 2:37 PM

 

[Tatyana]

The Starvation Diet

A starvation diet does not mean the absence of food. It means cutting the total caloric intake to less than 50% of what the body requires.

To calculate what your body needs, you need to calculate your basal metabolic rate (BMR)as well as multiply this by the level of physical activity/training your are doing each week.

This is called the total daily energy expenditure (TDEE).

Many fear that going into starvation mode will drastically reduce their metabolic rate and cause them to hoard calories and gain weight instead of losing.

This is not borne out by the infamous Minnesota Semistarvation Study (1950), 36 young, healthy, psychologically normal men while restricting their caloric intake for 6 months. Their calories were restricted in various phases, but the least amount of calories they were allowed was 50% of the "normal" maintenance calories. Notice, this was dubbed a "semi" starvation diet.

Yes, their metabolic rates were significantly lowered -- to something like 40% below baseline. Yet at no point did the men stop losing fat until they hit 5% body fat at the end of the study.

Lyle McDonald explains it this way:

In general, it's true that metabolic rate tends to drop more with more excessive caloric deficits (and this is true whether the effect is from eating less or exercising more); as well, people vary in how hard or fast their bodies shut down. Women's bodies tend to shut down harder and faster.

But here's the thing: in no study I've ever seen has the drop in metabolic rate been sufficient to completely offset the caloric deficit. That is, say that cutting your calories by 50% per day leads to a reduction in the metabolic rate of 10%. Starvation mode you say. Well, yes. But you still have a 40% daily deficit.

And then he follows with the note about the Minnesota men still continuing to lose fat even thugh their metabolic rates had dropped to 40% below baseline. He says, further, that no study that he's aware of where people were put on strictly controlled diets failed to acknowledge weight or fat loss.

http://www.thefactsaboutfitness.com/research/lyle.htm

Did the Minnesota men suffer negative consequences from the experience. They most certainly did, and, interestingly, many of the same consequences that anorexics experience. You can read all about the various negative consequences at this site and the implications for EDs.

http://www.possibility.com/epowiki/...age=EffectsOfSe miStarvation

Another starvation study was done in England, at Cambridge University, to determine the different effects starvation had on lean people versus obese people. It's findings are quite relevant to our discussion. The entire study is found at http://www.unu.edu/unupress/food2/UID07E/uid07e11.htm.

Does starvation mode slow down the metabolism? No, and Yes.

In the first 2 days of starvation, there is a small absolute increase in BMR relative to values obtained from overnight fasting. Overnight fasting is what every one of us does during our sleeping hours.

So it is not true that going below recommended calories for one day is going to slow down your metabolism -- quite the contrary, it may speed it up just a little.

Does Starvation mode cause our bodies to catabilize (devour our muscles and other lean mass)? Yes and No.

Lean individuals lost great amounts of fat-free, lean tissue during starvation, but obese individuals lost much more fat tissue. Obese individuals have a mechanism that conserves lean mass and burns fat instead.

In the study, an example of a lean subject studied after death from starvation: it can be deduced that loss of body fat accounted for 28-36% of the weight loss and fat-free mass 64-72%.

In obese individuals, the proportion of energy derived from protein (Pcal%) is only 6% compared to 21% in the lean individual. More than half the weight loss in the obese is fat, whereas most of the weight loss in the lean individual is fat-free mass.

And the loss of lean mass is not as critical to the obese person as to the lean person simply because an obese person has more lean mass than a person of the same age and height but normal weight.

Grossly obese individuals (FORBES, 1987; JAMES et al., 1978) may have over 30% more fat-free mass than lean individuals of the same height. In the example shown in Figure 3, the obese individual weighting 140 kg has a fat-free mass that is 29% greater than the 70 kg man.

Obese individuals appear to have more muscle and bone than lean individuals, and these help support and move the excess body weight. Obese subjects have large vascular volumes and larger hearts, which are necessary to pump more blood around larger bodies, especially during weight-bearing activities. Obese individuals may also have visceromegaly (NAEYE and ROODE, 1970).

But when you think about it, doesn't that make fat storage sense? Why would our Maker create us with the ability to store fat if it couldn't sustain us and preserve our lean mass in cases of extreme want?

So the effects of a starvation diet upon a normal weight teen would be substantially more devastating than to me, a morbidly obese person.

Now, if the above gives anyone "permission" to undertake a starvation diet, I recommend remedial reading classes.

My opinion is, you should not go below your goal weight maintenance calories to lose weight, and you should do adequate research and dietary analysis to ensure you are getting the best nutrition you can for your calories.

If reducing your calorie intake to goal weight maintenance creates greater than 1000 calorie a day deficit, then I strongly suggest that you do a value half-way until you have lost some of your weight.

Now some advice for those unfortunate individuals who are suffering from EDs or who have foolishly ventured into starvation dieting. This comes from http://www.netwellness.org/question.cfm/28515.htm

Question:
Hi, I`m a RD. Have a client that is in the starvation mode. Know your are supposed to not change amount of calories consumed but help them to eat differently. Not sure what this means. Not had a client like this in past. Also, know it will take ~ 6 months for this client regain an appetite. Client states not hungry. I`m out in an area with not a lot of access to information. Hope you can help me to help them. God Bless
Answer:
Thank you for your question. Many people think that starving themselves will lead to fast weight loss. A starvation diet does not mean the absence of food. It means cutting the total caloric intake to less than 50% of what the body requires. The body responds by using its own reserves to provide energy, and these reserves are not just the body`s extra fat. Initially, glycogen stores are broken down for energy. Glycogen is the storage form of carbohydrate in our body. There is little glycogen available so this energy source is depleted during the first hours of starvation. When glycogen is used, water is released which is noticed as a drop in weight on the scale. These labile stores are quickly replenished when feeding is resumed which is noticed by an increase in weight.

The individual`s initial weight when starting a starvation diet will dictate to what extent fat is lost. Those individuals who are not obese (Body Mass Index (BMI) < 30) will tend to lose their lean body mass more easily and quickly than those who are obese (BMI > 30). It is dangerous for these smaller individuals to go on a starvation diet because the lean mass that is lost may come from organs such as the heart. In the 1970`s there were several deaths resulting from starvation-type diets. Death is a rare side effect, though.

The more common problem resulting from starvation-type diets is the resultant weight regain. Weight is typically regained because there has not been a change in the lifestyle that led to the original weight gain. When the starvation diet is ended, the individual returns to the same old habits. The scale will indicate the weight regain, but it will not identify the composition of the added weight. When weight is regained, it is fat. When fat replaces the muscle mass that was lost during starvation, the metabolic rate (the number of calories needed to maintain the current weight) is decreased. The frustrated individual typically initiates another starvation-type diet only to continue this cycle.

To help an individual break this cycle, begin with a diet history, and help the client make some small changes. The goal should be 4 - 6 small meals/snacks that result in a balanced intake. Also get the patient started exercising. Weight training will be important for rebuilding the lost muscle mass. Increasing muscle mass and increasing aerobic exercise will help increase the appetite appropriately. Don`t forget to help the client identify a realistic weight loss goal. That goal should never exceed 10% of initial weight in a six-month period. After six months, the client should try to maintain the loss for a few months before considering further weight loss.

 

[Tatyana]

Dieting and metabolism

Dieting and Metabolism


By WLR Dietitian
Juliette Kellow BSc RD



When we're bombarded with images of gorgeous celebrities who seem to lose weight in the time it takes us to eat a Danish pastry, it's no wonder we're often tempted to cut our already low calorie intakes in an effort to shift an extra pound or two each week.



But surprisingly, rather than helping us to reach our target weight more quickly, severely restricting calories actually prevents our bodies from burning unwanted fat stores effectively - and unfortunately, this means that weight loss slows down.

Why does a very low calorie intake slow down weight loss?
Quite simply, your body goes into 'starvation mode'. This mechanism, which is thought to have evolved as a defence against starvation, means the body becomes super efficient at making the most of the calories it does get from food and drink. The main way it does this is to protect its fat stores and instead use lean tissue or muscle to provide it with some of the calories it needs to keep functioning. This directly leads to a loss of muscle, which in turn lowers metabolic rate so that the body needs fewer calories to keep ticking over and weight loss slows down. Of course, this is the perfect solution if you're in a famine situation. But if you're trying to lose weight, it's going to do little to help you shift those unwanted pounds.

So how many calories should I have to prevent starvation mode?
Unfortunately, there's no single answer to this question. As everyone's metabolism varies in the first place, so too will the point when the body starts to use muscle to provide it with calories in a 'famine-type' situation. That's why WLR works out suitable calorie intakes for each member on an individual basis and never lets you opt to lose more than 2lb a week, which would require a severely restricted calorie intake. In other words, if you stick to the calorie intake recommended by WLR, you can be sure your body won't go into starvation mode.



As a general rule though, most nutrition experts recommend never going below 1,000-1,200 calories a day if you're dieting on your own. It's also worth bearing in mind that the body doesn't suddenly 'enter' and 'leave' starvation mode, like crossing the border from Devon into Cornwall. It's a gradual process - so you don't need to panic if you do go below your calorie intake very occasionally.

What's the link between muscle and metabolism?
The metabolic rate - the rate at which the body burns calories - is partly determined by the amount of muscle we have. In general, the more muscle we have, the higher our metabolic rate; the less muscle we have, the lower our metabolic rate. This explains why men, who have a high proportion of muscle, have a faster metabolism than women, and why a 20-year-old has a higher metabolism than a 70-year-old - again, they have more muscle.



Ultimately, muscle burns a lot more calories than fat so when we lose muscle, our metabolic rate drops and we burn fewer calories. In fact, research shows that the body loses a proportionately high amount of muscle with a very low calorie intake and this may considerably suppress metabolism by up to 45 percent.



This explains why it's crucial to do as much as you can to protect your metabolic rate, especially when you're dieting. And this means dieting sensibly with a suitable, rather than a very low calorie intake so that you lose fat rather than muscle.

Is there anything else I can do to stop losing muscle when I'm dieting?
As well as making sure you have sufficient calories to burn fat rather than muscle, it's also possible to build muscle, which in turn boosts metabolism. And the way to do this is, of course, to increase the amount of exercise you do. While aerobic activities such as jogging, swimming, fast walking and aerobic classes help to tone muscle and burn fat, strength or resistance training in particular will increase the amount of muscle you have in your body. And this is good news because for every extra 1lb of muscle you have, your body uses around an extra 50 calories a day! This means an extra 10lb of muscle will burn roughly an extra 500 calories a day without you doing anything - and that's a sufficient amount to lose 1lb in a week.

But doesn't your metabolism drop when you lose weight anyway?
Yes, your metabolic rate naturally slows down a little when you lose weight, but this isn't automatically because you've lost muscle. It's because when your body has less weight to carry around, it needs fewer calories. This means if you weighed 13st to start with and now weigh 9st, you need fewer calories to maintain your new weight than you did when you were heavier. Simply put, there's 4st less of you to carry up and down the stairs, into the bath, around the supermarket and to the bus stop - and because your body doesn't have to work as hard as it did in the past, it can survive on fewer calories! This is why you should regularly update your Goals and Results - as your weight drops, Weight Loss Resources will recalculate how many calories you need to keep losing weight at your chosen rate.

Will yo-yo dieting have damaged my metabolism permanently?
Fortunately not! The idea that yo-yo dieting permanently lowers your metabolism has been relegated to the archives. However, if you've frequently crash dieted and severely restricted your calorie intake without exercising, it's likely you'll have a lot less muscle now compared with the very first time you dieted. As a consequence, it's likely your metabolism will also be lower so that you need fewer calories to maintain your current weight. This is because when you follow a very low calorie diet, you lose muscle as well as fat (see above). But when the weight goes back on, you usually only regain fat. This means, your metabolic rate is likely to have dropped a little every time you've dieted, making it slightly harder each time for you to lose weight. The good news is you can increase the amount of muscle you have by increasing the amount of exercise you do. This in turn will rev up your metabolism so that you can lose weight one final time on a slightly higher calorie intake than you've perhaps been used to.


8 Ways to Speed Up Your Metabolism


By WLR Dietitian
Juliette Kellow BSc RD


Get active - it's a sure-fire way to increase the amount of muscle you have, which in turn will speed up your metabolism. Do a mixture of aerobic and resistance training for best results. And don't forget to be more active in your daily life too.

Eat little and often - there's evidence that eating small, regular meals throughout the day, rather than one or two large meals, may help to keep your metabolism ticking over. Surprisingly, around 10 percent of the calories we use each day go on digesting and absorbing food - so the more times you eat, the greater this effect is likely to be.

Eat plenty of protein-rich foods - research shows that around 25 percent of calories in a protein-rich meal may be burnt off. But make sure you choose low-fat protein foods such as lean meat, skinless chicken and low-fat dairy products.

Spice up meals - it's not an old wives tale after all! Spices like chilli are thought to raise metabolism by up to 50 percent for up to three hours after eating, due to increasing your heart rate. But before putting the local Indian takeaway on speed dial, work out which curries have the lowest calorie and fat content.

Swap you daily cuppa for green tea - there's evidence that it contains antioxidants that speed up metabolism.

Try a CLA supplement - more extensive studies need to be carried out before any definite conclusions can be drawn, but research has shown that conjugated linoleic acid (CLA) might increase muscle and therefore boost metabolism.

Chill out - research shows that being very cold can increase metabolism by up to 20 percent.

Have a sauna - being very hot is also thought to boost metabolism by about 20 percent (but check you don't have any underlying medical problems that mean you shouldn't go in saunas or steam rooms).

 

[Tatyana]

How much of a calorie deficit in my diet

Determining the Maximum Dietary Deficit for Fat Loss
by Lyle McDonald

The Question
A long-standing question in my mind has been, “What is the optimal (or maximal) deficit for a fat loss diet?” Yes, I know I’m not the first to address the issue but I’ve always wondered if we couldn’t figure out exactly what an optimal deficit might be on a diet, rather than relying on annoying trial and error.

I’m sure readers are familiar with previous approaches but let’s run through them quickly. The simplest (read: totally retarded) method of setting calories on a diet is to give everyone some fixed amount. Usually women get 1200, men get 1500. How such an intake can magically be correct regardless of bodyweight or activity, I have no idea. But apparently a 300 lb man and a 150 lb man should both eat an identical amount and that amount is 1500 calories/day when they diet. Amazingly, in 2006, that kind of moronic stuff is still out there.

The second approach is along the lines of, “To lose one pound of fat per week, eat 500 calories/day less than your maintenance; to lose 2 pounds, eat 1000 calories less per day.” Simple math, although not entirely correct for a variety of reasons I don’t want to get into. I addressed problems with both approaches in the big Ketogenic Diet book.

In Bodyopus, Dan Duchaine (who was writing for lean folks, remember) recommended a maximum deficit of 20% below maintenance. Better, as this at least scales the deficit relative to maintenance. A big ass guy with a 4000 calorie maintenance gets a larger deficit (800 cal/day) than a small female with a 1700 calorie maintenance (340 cal/day). Of course, weekly fat/weight loss will be significantly different for the two, which seems to pass the reality check. Bigger males do lose more fat than smaller females. I regularly advocate this approach.

In the Ketogenic Diet book, I suggested setting a deficit based on current total bodyweight, since most people have trouble figuring out their true maintenance intake. Assuming an average maintenance intake of 14-16 cal/lb (you can use 15 cal/lb and split the middle), a 20% deficit yields ~11-13 cal/lb (and 10-12 cal/lb for dieting has been around in the bodybuilding world for at least a decade), which will then have to be adjusted based on real world results. Some people, for example, with low daily activity and shitty genetics, may have to go to 8 cal/lb AND do aerobics to lose fat effectively. Back when I was lifting twice/week and doing fuckall else activity, I had to do that. Now that I’m training 16-20 hours/week, I get to eat more when I diet. Hooray.


Now, empirically and based on research, it’s well established that…

a. fatter individuals lose more fat and less lean body mass (LBM) than leaner individuals; and

b. bigger individuals lose weight more quickly

By corollary, smaller/leaner individuals not only lose total weight/fat at a slower rate, they lose a greater proportion of LBM. The whole issue of calorie partitioning has been discussed to death in my various books, especially The Ultimate Diet 2.0.

It’s why those fat asses on “The Biggest Loser” can drop 8-10 lbs. a week, well at least for the first week (and some of that is certainly water, glycogen and clearing the shit out of their bowels), and someone at 12% bodyfat may struggle to drop one pound per week without sacrificing muscle.

And anybody who read the Rapid Fat Loss book notes that I sort of worked the above into the schema: based on starting bodyfat, fatter individuals end up with a larger deficit than leaner individuals. Leaner folks ended up maybe 40% below maintenance but fatter folks might have been as much as 75% below maintenance. But it was a rough back of the hand kind of calculation; it was more that I wanted protein intake set at a certain level and daily caloric intake sort of fell out of that. As it turns out, the feedback I’ve received tells me I was at least in the right ballpark: leaner folks aren’t losing LBM (as long as they set it up correctly) and fatter folks are dropping fat like crazy.

Now, some work on fasting had suggested a maximal rate of fat oxidation (you’d expect this value to be largest during total fasting, but the numbers never quite worked out how I wanted to express them. So I gave up on the question for a bit.

The basic question in my mind, and the one I’m going to address here is, “Based on an individuals’ current bodyfat/bodyweight level, do we know what their maximum rate of weekly fat loss can or will be?” Phrased differently, what’s the maximum deficit that they can run and spare lean body mass?

The Answer
So imagine my surprise when this little theoretical paper (note the journal title) showed up on my Pubcrawler last year (1). Titled, “A limit on the energy transfer rate from the human fat store in hypophagia”, it examined (from a somewhat simplified and theoretical way) exactly the question I gave above: what is the maximum rate at which the body can derive energy from fat stores to cover a diet induced deficit while sparing lean body mass.

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.

So, if you are carrying a mere 10 lbs. of fat, you can sustain a 310 cal/day deficit.

20 lbs. = 620 calories.
30 lbs. = 930 calories

You get the idea and this is not difficult math. Multiply your total fat mass in pounds by 31, that’s how much of a caloric deficit that fat mass can support on a daily basis.

One quick note: the above values are for dieting only and one of the simplifying assumptions in the paper was relatively ‘normal/moderate’ activity levels. The paper mentions specifically that the values above might be varied through pharmaceutical means (which target the rate limiting steps of fat energy transfer), or through high levels of activity. It even mentions bodybuilders specifically as a group that might exceed this value with a lot of training. For now, I’ll just focus on the diet end, I’ll come back to drugs and exercise afterwards.

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. And based on the small amount of research that they found, this seemed to be generally true (many studies find an initial rapid LBM loss but this is most likely glycogen and water and stuff, not muscle mass). By extension, if your daily caloric deficit exceeds the above, your body will have to mobilize LBM to cover the difference. So let’s look at an example.

Say we have a 180 lb male at 15% bodyfat. He has 27 lbs. of fat, and his maintenance calorie intake is 15 cal/lb or 2700 calories. With 27 lbs. of fat, he should be able to sustain a caloric deficit, from diet alone, of 27 lbs. fat * 31 cal/lb = 837 calories/day. So he could reduce his calories to 1863 (ha! 10 cal/lb) and shouldn’t lose any LBM at that level of intake. He should get a weekly fat loss of just over 1.5 lbs./week.

If the same 180 lb guy was at 10% bodyfat, only 18 lbs. of fat, he could only sustain a 558 calorie/day deficit (2150 cal/day or 12 cal/lb), he’s down to 1 pound per week. By the time he’s at 8%, he’s down to 14.5 lbs. of fat and a total deficit of 446 calories/day and about 2/3 a pound of fat loss/week. Oh yeah, if he were a fat shit at 30% bodyfat, that’s 54 lbs. of fat, he could sustain a deficit of over 1500 cal/day and lose over 3 pounds per week of pure lard; of course he’d only be eating 1300 cal/day. Again, the above all seem to roughly pass the reality check in terms of what we see in human dieters.

Now, one implication of the above is that, as a diet proceeds and your fat stores shrink, your net deficit has to decrease. Ok, step back, take a breath and read that again. More importantly, note my use of the word ‘net’ in the first sentence of that paragraph.

Now it’s going to get confusing.

At first glance, the above seems to be indicating that, as you get leaner, you’ll need to raise calories to compensate, so that the deficit isn’t as extreme. But that’s incorrect; it is saying that fat loss will need to slow (because the net deficit you can sustain will be smaller). By ‘net’ deficit, I mean the difference between your current maintenance requirements and your intake. This is important because, as you diet, your maintenance requirements go down due to the loss of bodymass along with the adaptive component of metabolic rate (due to insulin, leptin, ghrelin, peptide YY, etc). Let’s simplify this by looking at the math.

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

Assuming his maintenance is still 15 cal/lb (not automatically a safe assumption), his maintenance requirements should now be 2520 calories. But the adaptive part of metabolic rate reduction has probably dropped him a good 10% below that. So let’s say his maintenance is 2250 cal/day or so. 2250 cal/day - 465 calories = 1785 calories. So, not much of a reduction from his previous 1863 calorie/day diet. Basically, the drop in his maintenance levels over the course of 8 weeks offsets the fact that he can’t sustain as much of a deficit and is now leaner. Of course, his fat loss has also slowed to just under a pound/week.

Now four weeks later, he’s dropped about 4 more pounds of fat. His new numbers are
164 lbs. with 11 lb of fat = 6.7% bodyfat. Maximal sustainable deficit = 11 * 31 = 341 cal


His maintenance will have dropped further, let’s say 14 cal/lb (people’s daily activity tends to go down due to the hormonal changes from extreme dieting) and a 15% adaptive reduction which brings him to 1951 calories/day. Reduce by 341 to get 1610 calories/day. He will need to reduce daily calories by a couple of hundred (from 1785/day to 1610/day) to achieve the maximum deficit but his fat loss will be down to 2/3rds pound per week.

Ok, step back for a second: the above calculations aren’t meant to be the holy word of god, there are a lot of estimates upon estimates being made, especially my guesses as to the changes in maintenance level and how big of an impact the adaptive component is having. The adaptive component is a big question mark with not enough data for my liking. Tracking morning body temperature gives a rough guideline: for every 1 degree drop in morning temperature below 97.8 degrees, your metabolism is suppressed by about 10%. This was more to illustrate what I meant by ‘net deficit’ with changes in both fat mass and maintenance requirements.

But, again, the above seems to scale roughly with reality. As people get leaner and leaner, fat loss slows drastically. To keep it moving, they have to either cut calories further or increase activity, both can cause muscle loss. Every bodybuilder who has had to move to 2 hours/day of aerobics to keep the fat coming off knows what I’m talking about. Drugs become more and more attractive as the myriad other systems start to fight back against you as well (on which note: will someone please get the folks working on intranasal leptin to hurry it up).

Drugs and exercise


As mentioned above, the paper I’m basing all of this nonsense on was looking at non-exercising dieting or fasting men, not folks who were training or taking drugs. And it mentioned specifically that both of those could potentially increase the maximum rate of fat mobilization value (above 31 cal/lb) without sacrificing lean body mass. Certainly, once again, this idea passes the reality check. Even the addition of the ephedrine/caffeine stack elevates fat loss while sparing muscle mass.

Clearly, exercise also has an impact. Even back in Bodyopus, Dan mentioned that only part of the total deficit (he used 20%) should come from diet, the other part should come from increased activity. This usually means aerobics, but some prefer to use high rep/short rest period weight training or interval training and there is some logic to picking one of the latter options. He suggested that men do better with 15% calorie deficit and 5% aerobics and women at 10% apiece.

Given the issues women have with lower bodyfat blood flow, and that aerobic activity can overcome some of the limitations that make lower bodyfat so stubborn, that makes a lot of sense. As well, women (because of their lower maintenance requirements), end up eating a tiny amount of food if they cut too much out of their diet. Increasing their net daily deficit via activity allows them to eat more and not starve to death on a daily basis.

Conclusion

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.

Please keep in mind, however, all of these theoretical calculations sort of pale to real world results. If you’re losing strength in the weight room like crazy, your deficit is too big regardless of what the math works out too, increase them until you stop hemorrhaging strength (and probably muscle). And even if you have to trial and error it a bit, the above should at least give you a starting point.

References
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.