# FAO ToxicToffie on protein intake.



## hackskii (Jul 27, 2003)

Hey man, for ever I have been saying people eat too much protein.

Bill Phillips some time ago talked about cycling your protein.

I have noticed on more than one thread you suggest less protein.

In your opinion (gotta love that one eh?  ) what is the requirement for a body builder in grams per lbs of body weight.

I hear all the normal numbers from 1.0 to 2.0 grams per pound.

I have done some reading on protein requirements and it seems far less is needed.

I in my life never had over 1 gram per pound. I dont need alot of calories, so the more protein I intake the less other food I take in.

Not starting a debate, I am starting a thread for all to participate to shake the protein carpet to get the dirt out.

Well?


----------



## ah24 (Jun 25, 2006)

I aim for 1.2g. There is no perfect amount, it'll be debated for ages, everyones different but that seems to suit me.


----------



## danimal (Aug 14, 2012)

300-350g per day about 100 from powder


----------



## ah24 (Jun 25, 2006)

danimal said:


> 300-350g per day about 100 from powder


So what does that work out with relation to your bodyweight?


----------



## toxictoffee (May 2, 2007)

> I in my life never had over 1 gram per pound.


thats because you are american



> I in my life never had over 1 gram per pound.


thats because you are are right



> I hear all the normal numbers from 1.0 to 2.0 grams per pound.


thats because this is a .co.uk board and we for sme reason are scared sh1tless of not eating enough

lets look logically

why do we consume so much?

fcuk knows

when mixed macro meals are ingested the requirement for protein is lowered as less it utilised for energy. then the presence of CHO enables for the syntehsis to be more efficieint

people in the UK seem to think protein, protein , protein and actually over consume and neglect the other two macros

of course excess protein, once nitrogen requirements are met sinmply mean the carb skeleton from the aminos inefficiently follw the carb or fat pathway anyway with none of the benefits of the said macros

so no insulin like carbs, no micronutrients and none of the test enhancing functions of dietary fat

when low carbing of course excess protein hinde3rs ketosis and some may argue the nitrogenous waste from excess protein is harmful, again thats a debate i am not going into

layne norton is trying to pin down an 'ideal' grams per serving amount but TBH basing it on weight alone is crazy

the use of AAS obviouslt enhances the protein turnover rate and therefore some exceptions can be made for those on a cycle

the notion of protein cycling though is BS

it seems we are more in and age where carbs are the malligned dietary marco and if we keep them low we wont get fat and pritein high we will gain muscle

no

we need the anabolic nature and synergistic effect of CHO to maintain the positive nitrogen balance

most of the crazy intakes suggested are based on anecdotal evidence and chinese whispers

here is some good reading

http://www.jacn.org/cgi/content/full/19/suppl_5/513S

lyle mcdonald, john berarid and chris aceto will all say the same and the further i pursue this magic figure the more i say 200g tops for a muscled guy, high carbs and fats to suit is better to bulk on than this high protein and 'enough' carbs BS people try in order to cut and bulk in one

quality AA ingestion

adeqauet CHO ingestion

appreciate turnover of the trainer in hand

=

growth

300g of protein +200g of carbs = ineffective use of macros to grow

the notion of grams per lb of bodyweight is also suboptimal as the metabolic state, the FFM/FM ratio and the timing will determine the amount

in short, do not sacrafice carbs for protein in order to grow

dont over eat protein to diet as it kicks you out of ketosis and of course too low a carb intake hinders thyroid and letpin levels

too low carbs to keep in calori budget hinders recovery, ATP synthesis and aneorib power

protein is required but is not the be all and end all of fieting

for me

250g of protein

500g of carbs

90g of fat bulks niceley

hat though is anecdotaol evidence from and AAS user who has an RER which favours CHO over fat


----------



## ah24 (Jun 25, 2006)

Yep agree with toxics post there. I was debating with big over the protein consumption - he recommends 2g per lb I and people i advise are growing off 1.2g per lb. All theories, im not saying bigs wrong at all as definately knows his stuff!

Iv upped my carbs quite a bit. At the moment im aiming for;

Protein = 175g

Carbs = 385g

Fats = 45-55g


----------



## Nytol (Jul 16, 2005)

Very nice post Toxic, the more I read, the more I agree with many of the things you said there.


----------



## hackskii (Jul 27, 2003)

Ah, just the refreshing post I was looking for.

Several key elements stand out.

Ketosis and protein intake.

ATP production.

Test enhancing of dietary fats......Oh, cholesterol and saturated fats come to mind here.

I started this thread to shake the protein carpet as this was a concern to me forever.

I feel protein supports lean muscle mass.

But again if you look at lean muscle instead of overall bodyweight there is a huge diffrence (for me anyway....Don't even start lads Grrrrrr,,,,,,I am old).

Nice to see some input here and I cant think of any other topic off hand that is more suitable to body building.

Even tho my spelling friggin sucks

Thanks Toxic.................................


----------



## toxictoffee (May 2, 2007)

> Iv upped my carbs quite a bit. At the moment im aiming for;
> 
> Protein = 175g
> 
> ...


now time to up the fat, as that is anabolic of course

scott



> Ketosis and protein intake.


i think lyle mcodnanld rams this home

some proteins are ketogenic, some glycogenic and of course protein has the abilitiy (IIRC) to be 58% efficieint at being turned into glucose

so over consumption = out of letosis

(ps i cant spell for sh1t and i have no excuse as im english, you are merely a foreigner learning the lingo...you know the score)

7 meals of 35g of protein ED for a well set BB'er is fine is generally ok in my book

i am not even going to go into the 'eat more protein when you come off a steroid cycle' to keep lean mass

its ll about the carbs which go with it

the notion of low carb lean bulks also becomes laughable IMO for the natural trainer

fill the amino pool like you would fill your car petrol tank

enough for your needs, not too much that you spill over and make a mess

dont forget too the car aint going to go anywhere without any oil or a driver no matter how much petrol you put in it


----------



## Tinytom (Sep 16, 2005)

Good points about emphasis on protein.

Lots of guys consume endless shakes because of protein which is a waste.

Personally I get better results from 350g protein a day than I did from 400g. However if I drop below 250g a day I definately see a detrimental effect.

Too many people have an idea that calories are the figure to work buy and as a result ingest too many saturated fat and processed carb calories most of which are useless to the body in terms of muscle building.

500g Carbs from sugar and bread is not the same as from Rice or potatoes. I think when people see breakdowns like this they just look for the food they like to match the numbers.


----------



## toxictoffee (May 2, 2007)

hi tom

yes

for someone like yourself who is an an AAS user i believe the level may increase slightly die to the nature of gear and your additional LBM, thus increasing the requirements to ensure a positive nitrogen balance



> many saturated fat and processed carb calories most of which are useless to the body in terms of muscle building.


careful now  :lift:

lots of benefits of these babies in the diet, just the type of them but as staple items i have to agree although whole eggs and red meat should of course be advocated and dextrose PWO...apart from that, yep i agree

i think some forget the notion of CHO requirements of the brain and CNS, which is ~120g ED for most

so 'bulk' off 250g of carbs and really you are not ultimately providing enough carbs for anabolism and on the flip side, consume too many and you do create anabolism but the anabolism of fat

IMO its about creating the right insulin response at the right time but thats a whole different debate (which would be nice some day)

i believe if people backed off a touch on protein and upped quality cals they would be better off but thats the nature of the UK, the US seem a little more 'clued' up on it


----------



## Tinytom (Sep 16, 2005)

Yeah I agree mate

You do need some staurated fat and simple sugars in your diet but as you said Insulin is a major bonus or burden depending on the time of day.

I always have at least 2 or 3 red meat meals a week off season and of course egg yolks.

Dextrose for me isnt a good thing cos I always get tired from the sugar spike, I like Vitargo better.

I do also like OJ in the morning which I cant have while dieting :boohoo:

I was looking at some of Milos's articles and he's on thebutton with carbs. Lots of his guys start their diet on 800g of carbs a day!!!!

BUt then everyone diets different. I have never been able to get massively shredded on over 300g of carbs a day but I do substitute the calories from good fats from various sources.

Each diet I have been able to keep carbs higher - an indication of my increase in LMM I think as I can burn more during the day and the demand for glycogen is higher. Maybe soon I'll be at the 800g mark lol.


----------



## toxictoffee (May 2, 2007)

i think i could have dieted off 800g of carbs before due to my RER and active lifestyle

milo has some good stuff but some is a little 'way out there' and some a bit too marketing based NOW compared to before, but i like him

i am now very much for carb cycling BUT high flux (high inflow and high output) is equally handy for those who work

have a read on ronnies view on PPWO whole egg consumption off set by statins, it makes for interesting reading RE anabolism whilst obviating the issues of LDL/HDL cholesterol issues...but we aint all rinnie are we!!!!!

anyhow i would like some more info on vitargo and WMS as most is marketing related and anecdotal evidence over in vivo empirical evidence under different environments

i have loads sitting here but it 'aint sweet enough' to hit my taste buds...so dextrose wins, again i will read more into it later down the line

why red meat only a few times a week? surel the 'non protein' related benefits pull you in such as CLA content? and of course n3 intake from grass fed animals?


----------



## Nytol (Jul 16, 2005)

Here is another very interesting article on excess protein consumption.

http://www.ukiron.net/showthread.php?t=3773&highlight=Protein


----------



## Tinytom (Sep 16, 2005)

Vitargo Barley starch was researched at Nottingham UNiversity so I presume theres some data there. Having tried both I can definately say that Vitargo is better for carb loading and replenishment. More so than Dextrose as well.

I'm not a fan of redmeat as a grilled steak but I do like Chilli, Spag Bol, Burgers etc.


----------



## toxictoffee (May 2, 2007)

nytol

nice read

i will throw my 2 cents on it when i get a moment...or 1 cent

tom

how far out are you carbing up though?


----------



## thestudbeast (Jul 20, 2007)

very interesting thread, how do you find out your RER?

I think the high protein thing was manafactured by the supplement companies as good carbs are cheap so there no niche there. Saturated fat being a total no no has got to be the other great myth but I'm not paleo or anabolic diet expert so I'll leave that arguement there.


----------



## toxictoffee (May 2, 2007)

RER is done by gas analysis although you can over the years work out how you respond to low and high carb diets and whether you can live in ketosis too

sat fats have many benefits, just about getting the ratios right


----------



## thestudbeast (Jul 20, 2007)

> RER is done by gas analysis


interesting I remember reading a thread about this now on another U.K forum just the skeptic in me thought it would'nt be possible. Still lesson learnt. Is there some people in the u.k doing this right now? Do you think it's good to go with 2 high carb meals and 4 high fat meals everyone seems to pick one camp or the other (high fat or high carb, let's forget high protein for now  ).


----------



## toxictoffee (May 2, 2007)

i personally ran hundreds of gas analysis test

it works

as for low carb meals on a bulk?

never


----------



## thestudbeast (Jul 20, 2007)

> as for low carb meals on a bulk?


Well I've got to do it or change jobs (there's little work available around here) as my work involves low level cardio (walking and picking up small boxes) and all carbs are giving me chronic heart burn. When replaced with a high fat meal there's no response at all. Plus my IBS has gone! So at least 2 meals during the day need to be low carb, then there's my last meal of the day carbs here bloats me!!! Still I'm open to idea's as I'm not far off a body fat level where I'll be ready to bulk again.



> i personally ran hundreds of gas analysis test


Do you have a link to the full benifits of this and where's best to get tested?


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

well their are far to many long words in this thread for me to understand 

I work best with 300g of protein no matter the bodyweight i am at i also seem to react better to a moderate intake of carbs it seems if i go down the higher carb route in the off season i get to fat and bloated and no i don't eat crap carbs 

I say that no one person can dictate accurately the amount of any macro that will fit everyone the best way to go is by trial and error.....


----------



## bow chika wow (Aug 1, 2007)

toxictoffee said:


> here is some good reading
> 
> http://www.jacn.org/cgi/content/full/19/suppl_5/513S


Have you any other links to other journals which you have used/read information from regarding the thread title , as the journal titled 'Beyond the Zone: Protein Needs of Active Individuals' , which u provided a linbk for, uses references of some age, some over 30yrs old. I just wondered if you had anything more contempory?


----------



## hackskii (Jul 27, 2003)

I am a huge fan of red meat and always have been.

Every doc I talk to cringe at this.

Eggs, hell Vince Gironda swore by range fed organic eggs and anabolism.

Agreed all sex hormones are made from cholesterol and low cholesterol, low fat diets result in low testosterone levels.

Whey can spike insulin and post workout is killer.

John Barardi(sp) suggests that half the total amount of protein can be injested PWO when in a insulin sensitive environment.

Thinking of my grand parents, they ate bacon and eggs or sausage and eggs every morning for breakfast and some toast.

None of my grand parents had problems with cholesterol nor high blood pressure and for the most part were fit their whole lives.

They all died in their 80's and 90's with the exception of my hard working grand father that smoked every day and got emphisima (man that was so sad).

I also am going to go out of context and talk my opinions about milk.

I feel that when they take the fat out of milk it ruins its profile.

Again Vince Gironda's guys used to eat heavy cream in their protein shakes.


----------



## Bulldozer (Nov 24, 2006)

hackskii said:


> .
> 
> Again Vince Gironda's guys used to eat heavy cream in their protein shakes.


So did Arnie


----------



## Jimmy1 (Aug 14, 2003)

harold had to lower his protein from 600 to 400 as the excess was actually preventing him from growing

bare in mind he is around 320 in the off season with feint abs...

i find i can still grow without counting protein

if i have eggs/chicken/fish and red meat once a day with a shake i grow fine

but to get beyond my biggest i do need to up it somewhat

i did try 500g of protein for a period of time...and i grew loads...maybe it was the extra cals...but after a while it all slowed down

hhmmm


----------



## Bulldozer (Nov 24, 2006)

Its a little off topic but how do you guys think macro breakdown should vary from a body type point of view?

I am endo, so find im carb sensitive and can grow on medium amounts of carbs. If i eat high carbs i get fat !... ter lol

Ecto's are more than likely gonna need high carbs. Also high pro / fat. !!?

Guess what im getting at is do you think protein requirements vary depending on bodytype!? Then carbs/ fats vary accordingly ?

Do you simple shoot for say 40/40/20 , or do you think that should vary deepending on bodytype?

Clear as mud !?


----------



## toxictoffee (May 2, 2007)

endos are not carb sensitive per se, some triats oif an endo are insuline insensitivity through nature and nurture but TBH this can be obviated and reversed

the notion of breakdowsn is pointless as a builder working 10 hours a day has a different ratio % to an office worker

RER and gas analysis allows for RER to be tested to see if at rest you burn fat or sugar. thats one method

oral glucose testing will allow for some measure of how you handle carbs but i have seen raging 'ectos' be near the .71 fpoint where at rest they are burning fat

intake of protein doesnt need to be high and the other macros jjigged to suit

i am not a fan of fat people claiming to be carb sensitive when they are ramming 300-350g of protein down their throats Ed which ultitamely turns to glucose or fat

drop this and you may realise you aint carb sensitive afterall, just taking the wrong amount of calories and wrong split of macros

i personally believe we over eat protein, are scared of carbs and have no appreciation of how to manipulate fat in our diets

exercise alone will make you more insulin sensitive, that wouild again show changes

people also misunderstand body fat and water after carb ingestion as glycogen attracts per gram, 2.7g of water, therefore weight and 'bloat'


----------



## Cookie (Sep 14, 2009)

In the past I experimented with protein levels as low as 100grms per day and still recovered and grew from my workouts, & no gear.

I think I weighed around the 182lbs region at the time or maybe a tad more but not much...


----------



## hackskii (Jul 27, 2003)

What is PER?

Ok, if my memory serves me correctly I think most burn fat sitting on the couch watching TV.

For me I am a bit carb sensitive I have found and the best of the best dieting I ever had success wise was the zone diet where the marcro's are 40/30/30 carbs/protein/fats

Never did I get so lean and still maintained almost all of my strength.

I felt like superman.

Ate 7 meals a day and everything was measured perfect.

Biggest problem for me and carbs is this.

When I eat them, they tast so good I amost cant stop, so I end up over eating.

I have done keto dieting and find this the easiest for hunger issues and for the most part I lost alot of weight pretty fast but in the end I had some funny ass smell comming off of me that I hated.

At that tmie the diet stalled, probably due to thyroid out put being lower and probably cortisol elivation (I hear this is common on keto diets).

Once I added in carbs, POW weight loss started happening and that funny ass smell left me.

I also believe that you should vary your protein sources, if you can get free range eggs, get them as they have 19 times the Omega 3 fatty acids than the other eggs.

If you can get some free range meat for the same reasons above and also for more CLA.


----------



## Bulldozer (Nov 24, 2006)

hackskii said:


> For me I am a bit carb sensitive I have found and the best of the best dieting I ever had success wise was the zone diet where the marcro's are 40/30/30 carbs/protein/fats
> 
> I have found this also, and thats how i break my macro's down now and i seem to be leaning out nicely.
> 
> ...


----------



## hackskii (Jul 27, 2003)

My worst drawback is pizza.

If I take one bite I am going to eat it all.

Then I end up waking up with acid reflux and bloated as hell for a while.

This is one reason I dont stock things that I should not eat in the fridge and cubbords, if I do and I am weak then *ITS ON *big time.


----------



## Jimmy1 (Aug 14, 2003)

i do still like isocaloric ratio's 30/30/30

but sometimes i cant manage that much protein without scoffing a ton of junk food to help get it down

so rather than do this, i eat less protein

so i suppose this alters the ratio's to 20/40/40 p/f/c

i dont calculate any veg into the totals...so maybe carbs are a little higher than fats


----------



## Bulldozer (Nov 24, 2006)

Jimmy said:


> i do still like isocaloric ratio's 30/30/30


What happened to the other 10 % Jimmy lol 

I know what you mean tho


----------



## hackskii (Jul 27, 2003)

The diatia diet is 33/33/33

I remember Pritican(sp) swore by low fat diets and he ended up having some medical condition and died from his very insistance on not eating fats.

I have to refresh my memory on that guy.


----------



## toxictoffee (May 2, 2007)

PER = protein efficiency ratio, a measure, and a por one of protein quality

RER = respiriatory echange ratio

ok first read re over eating

http://www.psyc.canterbury.ac.nz/people/cv's_papers_&_other_info/Janet_IJEDpaper.pdf

then something i wrote on RER below (hopefully)


----------



## toxictoffee (May 2, 2007)

Altering body composition. Adding muscle, stripping fat

Understanding your metabolism and how to manipulate it

By Muscletalk moderator Steve Blades (toxictoffee) and metabolic tester rightyho

"Men should eat 2500 calories a day, woman 500 less." So state government recommendations. (GDA)

"The more muscle you have, the more calories you need."

"The body doesn't use carbs after 5pm."

"65% of your maximum heart rate equates to fat loss."

All of these blanket statements are incorrect yet so freely banded around the fitness industry and often published in leading magazines. There is no 'standard calculation' for metabolic rate, the idea of online calculators is flawed and even respected testing methods such as the Harris Benedict (1) method can be inaccurate. Testing in this manner will exclude many subsections of society, including strength athletes, sportsmen and bodybuilders.

RMR, RER, RQ and DEE are, in fact, ultimately dictated by genetics. Nature rules, with nurture and medical conditions offering a hand in altering matters in relation to different environments created.

Firstly, let's address the acronyms above

RMR (Resting Metabolic Rate)

Resting metabolic rate is the amount of calories the body uses to maintain homeostasis when at rest (with the digestive system 'inactive') This is the base line figure to maintain weight if you lay down for a 24 hour period. Many studies will refer to your BMR (basal metabolic rate) which is similar but does not factor into the equation a resting digestive system. RMR is a more accurate calculation due to being in a fasted state. This is your metabolic rate.

RER (Respiratory Exchange Ratio)

This equation works out which macronutrient the body burns at rest during the RMR test. Many people will be carbohydrate burners while others will be fat burners at rest, with the remainder appearing somewhere in the middle. A measure of carbon dioxide exhaled in relation to oxygen inhaled will give a score up to 1.0, showing total sugar burning. In short this resultant figure indicates the preferred fuel of the body. A score of 0.70 shows very few carbohydrates are utilised by the body. The government recommendation of 55% of calories from carbohydrates, 30% from fat and 15% from protein are blown out of the water when this data is generated.

RQ (Respiratory Quotient)

RQ is similar to RER but monitored at a cellular level in the working muscle (during exercise). Again on a scale to 1.0, this test shows which fuel the body prefers to burn at each incremental heart rate from rest to maximum beats. Data on the contribution of fats and carbohydrates is accompanied by an overall calorie burning figure in this test.

DEE (Daily Energy Expenditure)

EE is the RMR plus calories used in thermogenesis plus additional calories required to complete daily tasks. This figure will create your maintenance calorie figure. Any alteration in this figure will lead to either a positive or negative energy balance. Rarely does this equate to the suggested guidelines of 2500 calories for men and 2000 for women. REE is often used in place of RMR but for the purpose of this study, DEE is determined as a daily total as opposed to a resting figure. The technical term is EE but its important to establish the difference between REE and DEE

What does this mean in relation to body composition?

With the data above it is easy to take the guesswork out of training and nutrition, and work out how many calories your body needs to maintain weight, which macronutrient it prefers to achieve specific tasks, and how many calories are required to add or lose weight through a positive or negative energy balance.

What can you determine from the test information?

1	How many calories your body needs to maintain weight

2	Which macronutrient (fat or carbohydrates) it prefers at rest

3	Which foods you should eat at which times

4	Your ideal heartbeat range for burning fat

5	Where you begin to burn muscle and go catabolic in a fasted state

6	How many calories you are actually burning at any given heart rate intensity

7	Your body's own macronutrient split of carbohydrate and fat when exercising

8	Predict your daily EE

9	Create and sustain anabolic (and avoid lengthy catabolic) environments

10	Avoid starvation mode, allow the body to burn fat again, and avoid thyroid down-regulation

How does this impact the bodybuilder and fitness enthusiast?

The implications of this data are massive. It's a powerful weapon for the trainer to employ to tackle their goals whether it be muscle gain, fat loss, or both. If you know where your body burns fat during cardio you can ultimately make any cardio work you do non-catabolic (preserve muscle mass) and simply strip off fat, leaving vital nutrients for repair and recovery. Users of the data have literally avoided years of wasted training and suboptimal diets in the pursuit of physical perfection.

For pre-competition bodybuilders this information is vital. For those who are not willing to sacrifice hard-earned muscle mass, again it's simply invaluable. Even for those looking to get into their wedding dress, or look good on holiday with only limited time to prepare, it's a breakthrough in exercise science.

It's important to know where the body burns fat and where it burns carbohydrates. When carbohydrate is not present, the body is forced to use protein and fat to fuel exercise - which leads to weight loss but muscle loss, too. Data personally collected by the authors shows 65% of maximum heart rate is highly catabolic for many people contrary to what we are told by the media. The fat burning zone is not a myth, but it is individual, and it's simply a case of finding your own zone and designing your cardiovascular work around this. The data will also give an accurate figure of calories expelled in the session allowing the trainer to again formulate EE and modify bodyweight as a result. This figure again is inaccurately calculated by many pieces of gym equipment Find the real number and work in your fat burning zone, not the muscle burning zone.

What can you do with RMR? Resting metabolic rate allows the trainer to establish how many calories they can cut and bulk on. Data again personally collected has shown two male subjects of similar weight, age and body composition to have a 700 calorie difference in their RMR. This figure is huge and can be the difference between someone adding muscle on a 3000 calorie diet and one losing weight on what was designed to be a bulking diet. Know your RMR; know where to start when creating a calorie deficit (to cut), or surplus (to bulk). When people shout "I'm not gaining, I'm eating loads" we now have one more source of information as to why this is the case.

Below are the RMR test results from two men of the same age using gas analysis:

Subject 1

Height: 180 cm

Weight: 103kg

Body fat %: 15

RMR 1800 calories

Subject 2

Height: 180 cm

Weight: 84kg

Body fat %: 17

RMR 2500 calories

In these real world examples, the heavier, more muscular man requires less calories than the lighter, but proportionally fatter man. The usual assumption is that the facts would be the other way round.

This emphasises how person-specific metabolic rate is, and how simple measurements applied to an online 'metabolic rate calculator' are highly inaccurate when trying to establish RMR. Gas analysis is a requirement if gains are your goal. Without it, you're purely flying by guesswork.

(700 calories equates to 1lb/0.4kg alteration in weight every 5 days)

Here are some online examples for the same subjects taken from a respected and fairly standard online calculator (3) for the same subjects:

Subject 1

Height: 180 cm

Weight: 103kg

Body fat %: 15 (excluded from online calculator)

RMR 2050 calories

(250 calories over actual requirement)

Subject 2

Height: 180 cm

Weight: 84kg

Body fat %: 17 (excluded from online calculator)

RMR 1884 calories

(616 calories under actual requirement)

The RER will allow the trainer to find what their body prefers as a macronutrient source of energy. "No carbs after 5pm" is often banded around the fitness world. This is utter rubbish. An RER of 1.0 will show, at rest, the body is 100% reliant on carbohydrates and is not burning fat while an RER of 0.7 will show the body simply doesn't metabolise carbohydrates at rest and is predominantly reliant on fat as its source of energy. This means some people can sit at night and eat carbohydrate rich food and burn it when resting whilst others will have to ensure meals in sedentary times are fat and protein-based. Everyone is different.

Does this mean you can cut and bulk at the same time? Yes, it does. You can create environments that are both anabolic and catabolic in a day. If the anabolic environment is more prevalent than the catabolic environment you can strip fat and add muscle. This is the holy grail of bodybuilding and training for aesthetics or body recomposition. The notion of requiring a calorie deficit to alter body composition is also thrown into doubt in favour of subtrate utilisation. In short, if you know which macronutrients your body uses at different times, you can manipulate the environments that allow for muscle to be added and fat to be lost.

Gas analysis is the only way to acquire accurate data on RQ, which debunks the Balke VO2 test (2) for those trying to establish how many calories they are burning in a cardio session and what percentage of those calories are attributed to each macronutrient.

Here is an example of the plan in action:

1	Wake

2	Carry out cardio in your determined fat burning, non catabolic zone

3	Purely burn the fat from excess calories ingested (required to bulk)

4	Then eat to bulk using data from your RMR/RER tests, thereby not touching the calories required to add new muscle tissue

5	Continue this cycle and continue to burn fat and build muscle

This is not reserved for the new trainer either. The seasoned trainer who thought periodization (bulking and cutting cycling) was the only way to look good can use this data to continue with steady linear gains. Adding mass with low fat gains is possible and as stated above the 'cut and bulk in one' can be achieved when an adequate diet and training plan are formulated from the data.

Burn fat add muscle, don't burn muscle and fat.

How to get tested

With limited resources in the UK, metabolic testing is both rare and often the data presented is not interpreted well by the testing centre. Very few people are able to put the numbers into a tailored nutrition and training plan leaving the trainer lost in a sea of decimal places and percentage signs. Many scientists understand the data but they often fail to appreciate what it means in terms of body recomposition.

Worse still, they are unable to suggest effective diets, and training and exercise routines designed to capitalise on and maximise the data relevant to each individual.

But things have changed. A new era of metabolic testing and data interpretation has begun.

Muscletalk moderator toxictoffee and Muscletalk member rightyho are now able to offer the testing, training and nutrition advice to suit. As fitness professionals, experienced trainers, professional athletes, competitors and gym-owners, the knowledge is formulated to suit any given goal or time frame. The testing centre is located in Peterborough, Cambridgeshire with additional scope for testing to be completed at your gym/leisure centre if block bookings are assured. Home visits can be negotiated via email.

There are plenty of tests that can be carried out above and beyond those stated above including VO2 max testing and full day-by-day data sampling and analysis. Individual response to supplements, thermogenics and drugs can also be assessed in completely confidential surroundings.

To contact the team, email [email protected] or [email protected] or simply direct the questions on the Muscletalk board.

If you wish to speak "live time" about your requirements, an MSN Messenger feature has been enabled to answer online questions. Add [email protected] to your MSN to ask questions about the testing (emails should, however be directed to toxictoffee and rightyho at the addresses above)

References:

1 Harris J, Benedict F (1918). "A Biometric Study of Human Basal Metabolism.". Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 4 (12): 370-3

2 Wells, J., Balke, B. and Van Fossan, D. Lactic Acid accumulation during work. A suggested standardization of work classification. J Appl. Physiol. 10: 51-55. 1957.

3 http://www.reply42.com/metabolism/basal.php4


----------



## Bulldozer (Nov 24, 2006)

IMHO no diet should be less than 20 % fat.


----------



## toxictoffee (May 2, 2007)

hackskii said:


> The diatia diet is 33/33/33
> 
> I remember Pritican(sp) swore by low fat diets and he ended up having some medical condition and died from his very insistance on not eating fats.
> 
> I have to refresh my memory on that guy.


isolcaloric diets cannot be adhered to by most as goals, lifestyle etc etc deteremine CHO use and protein turnover


----------



## toxictoffee (May 2, 2007)

Bulldozer said:


> IMHO no diet should be less than 20 % fat.


that is not applicable though

10 stone **** wet through kid on a building site needs 1000g of carbs to even hold weight

4000 calories there plus some to grow

200g of protein = 800 calories baseline?

would that mean at least 130g of fat ED????

ratios mean nothing


----------



## Bulldozer (Nov 24, 2006)

I dont see that ratios mean *nothing*!


----------



## toxictoffee (May 2, 2007)

why 20% though

what about an endurance athlete riding a bicycle in the tour de france

ratios cannot be universally stated, simple as

grams per lb maybe, grams per hour but ratios? no

not as a universal

metabolism, lifestyle, RER, goals eliminate ratios out of the equations as a UNIVERSAL

for one specific diet maybe you could say "mr X needs 20 or 40% of each macro for his lifestyle and goals" but not as a universal


----------



## hackskii (Jul 27, 2003)

I wonder if they do the testing in the States?

Or I can always have you come to my home to do the test


----------



## Jimmy1 (Aug 14, 2003)

so whats your take on the VO2 test toxic?

i had one done back around '03/4 and it said i was a 50/50 burner of fats/carbs


----------



## Bulldozer (Nov 24, 2006)

Bulldozer said:


> IMHO no diet should be less than 20 % fat.


I didnt say 20 % for everybody! I said imo you shouldnt drop below 20 % fat. Some people see fat as the bad guy for some reason and dont realise your body needs fats to function properly.

There is a difference.

As you said it depends on many factors, but ratios *are *very important depending on goals. life style etc. But yes i agree there is no one size fits all here.


----------



## toxictoffee (May 2, 2007)

the VO2 is for sporst performance

the RER and RMR tests what you are burning at rest

it has its place

in the states its called trainsmart or new leaf

it certainly can help although i simply go on logic and science these days, we had some great info from it though


----------



## Jimmy1 (Aug 14, 2003)

i was tested at rest and under strenous excersize

i think the ratio's were higher fats at rest, and 50/50 durin excersize (makes sense i spose)

but if these ratios are true, then surely we can mimic them when we formulate our diets?

i have a manual job..

so if i eat 50/50 at work, but lower the carbs the rest of the time...then i would be on the right track right?


----------



## hackskii (Jul 27, 2003)

Well, lets look at ratio's here for a minute.

Ok, lets say I am carrying around 180 lbs of lean muscle mass.

Lets also say that I maintain at about 2500 cals a day.

If I establish my protein requirement at lets say 180 grams or 720 calories,

my carbohydrate at 252 grams or 1008 calories

and my 80 grams of fat or 720 calories then that would be a total of 2448 cals

Dividing 6 or 7 meals into that would be where you would want to fall.

I think that after you estabilsh how much protein you need you can then figure out how much fat and carbs you need.

But I feel that the everything evolves around protein in regards to how much you need due to lean muscle mass and also activity level to support that.


----------



## toxictoffee (May 2, 2007)

thats the RQ test

if you can employ substrate utilisation then you can strip fat and add muscle

it has been done with some but is very hard to replicate and genetics play a part

i would suggest if you are at aroun .80 (half fat half carb burner) at rest that would suggest an isocaloric diet would be applicable

i am 100% carb burner, even on low carbs

bring on the high card and DNP bulk slash cut slash bulk and cut in one ...of course


----------



## toxictoffee (May 2, 2007)

hackskii said:


> Well, lets look at ratio's here for a minute.
> 
> Ok, lets say I am carrying around 180 lbs of lean muscle mass.
> 
> ...


then your job changes and TDEE changes and ratios are in the bin


----------



## Jimmy1 (Aug 14, 2003)

yeah

my friend won the efbb midleweights a few years back

he came and had the test done the same time as me

he was a 100% carb burner

kev (origin) told him that he burned carbs in his sl;eep

that he was like a furnce

i never asked him what happened to a 100% carb burner if they consume large amounts of fat...as my friend also ate tons of junk food also...he has abs all year round

2 weeks out from the britain he has on 400g carbs a day and had big mac's etc...still getting ripped?????


----------



## hackskii (Jul 27, 2003)

toxictoffee said:


> then your job changes and TDEE changes and ratios are in the bin


Sorry I am not up on all the acronymes, what is TDEE?

What do you mean by job changes?

Would not insulin sensitivity and insulin resistance change things depending?


----------



## Bulldozer (Nov 24, 2006)

TDEE

Total daily energy expenditure ???

Maintenance calories in other words


----------



## Jimmy1 (Aug 14, 2003)

toxictoffee said:


> then your job changes and TDEE changes and ratios are in the bin


but would this not be where knowing the ratio's used both sedentialy, and under more strenuos conditions comes in handy?

surely we can adjust ratios according to our output at certain times of the day?

a bit like the old fave people have of not eating carbs after 5pm...it kinda fits


----------



## toxictoffee (May 2, 2007)

RQ will tell you substarte utilisation at different heart rates

so you may be 0.9 when you are running at full pelt which means all carbs

AND

0.7 when walking which means all fat

everything in the middle therefore is between the two, how do you work that out

when sedentry its easier with RER but TBH dont over complicate things

just have mixed macro meals if you are .08 on the RER test

if people dhould not eat carbs after 5pm they should not eat them at all unless their is a dramatic change in their activity levels

so if they burn 100% fat at rest then carbs, apart from for exercise wouldnt be required, even at breakfast and conversly a 'sugar burner' can eat late night carbs


----------



## Jimmy1 (Aug 14, 2003)

so in essence, rather than relying on ratios, your opinion is to set p/c/f at an individual level for each macro

a bit like john hodgesons way of keeping protein the same all year round, whilst adjusting carbs and fats according to whether bulking or cutting, and depending on how much cardio is being done each day?

the funny thing is this brings me back full circle to the way i was origonally tought by harrold over ten years ago LOL

but i still feel that i need more carbs at work, than i do in the evening when i am sittting on my ass

cutting carbs after 5pm was just an example i used for the purpose of the conversation


----------



## hackskii (Jul 27, 2003)

I swear my daughter can live on all carbs only, but she plays hard all day long.

Toxic, when one gets older do they tend to burn more fat for fuel due to some efficiency thing eg. more body fat, loss lean muscle mass, lower hormonal levels?

Would insulin sensitivity or insulin resistance change the ratio that you burn carbs or fats?

If so then if one were to exercise and take fish oils would this change what you burn?

Would one if they did a type of keto diet would they change to burning more fat than carbs if that is what you are telling the body due to your eating habits?

Or is this some hard wired genetic disposition thing independent of what we are doing?


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

my head is spinning with all these long words did you guys swallow a thesaurus 

by far the best way for me over the yrs is trial and error and making sure i write everything down and track my progress no SCEFB calculations for me.....


----------



## toxictoffee (May 2, 2007)

ok

a few points

if forced into ketosis the body will not burn carbs, it cant but some will simply not enjoy ketosis, and they are generally carb burners we found but again i havent run enough research on it

women can live off carbs as physically you see less change in their body than a guys when protein is low, if she is not lifting wieights of course protein turnover is lower also. women also can diet down hardeer and be in a bigger deficit for longer before they shed lean tissue

back on ratios

protein stays IMO baseline year round and cardio sheds the fat and the reduction of carbs through cycling or going ketogenic

upping protein hinders ketosis, upping protein in a calorie defitic is pointless if it inhibits the BENEFITS of insulin

in short, use carbs to suit and remember any additional protein beyond what the pool requires follows the fat or carb pathway, now its all about calories in vs calories out at the end of the day

cycle carbs on a diet

cycle cardio (length/frequncy/intensity) year round

leave protein alone

consume enough fat to suit

RER BTW is generally genetically determined but cvan be influenced by diet and lifestyle


----------



## toxictoffee (May 2, 2007)

Pscarb said:


> my head is spinning with all these long words did you guys swallow a thesaurus
> 
> by far the best way for me over the yrs is trial and error and making sure i write everything down and track my progress no SCEFB calculations for me.....


agree mate

there is simple ways of doing things which i do advocate but i like to talk a bit of science, but im not from a scientific background

more a:

hard work

no excuses

crack on

school of thought


----------



## hackskii (Jul 27, 2003)

Ok, this leads me to another question.

With out taking the test, would it be safe to assume that people that have alot of success on a keto diet and have hardly any food cravings, would this point to them being more fat burners over carbs?

Or opposites, when I eat carbs I get super hungry even tho I am full, could this be triggering insulin to store fat (from excess carbs), lowering blood sugars and having the mind call out for glucose?

Would both above (in my case actually) would this not suggest I burn more fat over carbs?

Are there any guidlines that you have found to be a common thread for fat burners over carb burners or visa versa that seems to be validated with the tests that you run?

For instance the guy that crashes when a meal is skipped, craving sweets, binge eating, food cravings, age, men or women, etc.?


----------



## toxictoffee (May 2, 2007)

ok

we have to establish whether you are talking hunger or binge eating

some people find certain foods have an orexigenic nature to them and certain situations stimulate this

dietary protein is shown to lower over eating due to CCK levels but again to what extent pscyholoigcal issue determine YOUR binge eating Vs macro compositon would be the question

you also have to look at the carbs used and the fat content, for example oleic acid has a low satiety level, sat fats a higher one and n3 fats even higher

n6 fats stimulate a large insulin responce, n3 dont

its a massive area with so many variables

you have to ask yourself which bracket you fall into RE eating issues or simply have issues with hunger and have your diet wrong

protein does aid satiety but abstaining from carbs can force those with BN or BE to going crazy on carbs

i know a bit about eating issues but its more a psychological science which i am not 100% up on, i know enough but couldnt debate with the true players

some good reading

http://www.johnberardi.com/articles/hormones/hungry_2.htm

part two also


----------



## SD (Sep 3, 2004)

Wow, interesting thread, I did a big article a while back about the overuse of Protein in bbing diet, that being said I eat for my metabolic type which is a not so scientific way of individualising ratios for ones specific metabolism. Without lab tests its the closest thing I have found to be accurate, despite my feelings that it may be 'quackery science'.

SD


----------



## Peg (Feb 9, 2006)

I will still say that the body knows what it needs and will tell the mind if the mind will just learn how to interpret correctly what the body is saying.

I firmly believe that we overeat. This was brought home to me when a student and his wife went on a diet in which they had to purchase the foods from the diet company.

Their first thought was. OMG!! The portions are so small!

They have lost 30 pounds.

They discovered what they thought was one cup of oatmeal was really 3 cups!

The math will always be calories in < calories out to lose weight.

Sometimes we get so caught up in the science that we forget the simplicity of that equation.

To gain muscle will be determined by the work the muscles are asked to do be it in career or weight training.

As the muscles are taxed more they will ask for more protein/carbs/fats not just proteins.

In our study of the macronutrients and the dissection of how they work in the body and how we find the optimum for the body, we may have forgotten the whole.

The nutritional needs of the human body are dynamic based on the work that is required of it and the genetics of the person.

My question is should the protein intake be varied every day based on the amount of work the body does that day?

Do we eat the same amount of protein on days there is no work-out or do we cut back the amount of protein on rest days?


----------



## SD (Sep 3, 2004)

Peg said:


> My question is should the protein intake be varied every day based on the amount of work the body does that day?
> 
> Do we eat the same amount of protein on days there is no work-out or do we cut back the amount of protein on rest days?


I think most of us are doing this if you consider the PWO shake. Personally I dont drink protein shakes at any other time, except my MRP which I take for meal 2 for convenience.

SD


----------



## JohnOvManc (Oct 25, 2003)

TT -

are you/righty still doing the gas testing?

I know the machine smashed or something, did it get fixed?

You know anyone good in the Manchester area?


----------



## toxictoffee (May 2, 2007)

hi john

no we dont have it

dont know many who do TBH

google trainsmart and new leaf

that may help mate


----------



## Stanco (Jan 7, 2007)

Great thread. I've experienced this first hand from my years of training. The periods in which i've upped the carbs and not worry about protein are the times when i actaully GAINED muscle.


----------

