# Do you minus the fibre from the carb content or not..?



## SonOfZeus (Feb 15, 2009)

Okay so I was under the impression you could subtract the fibre from the number of carbs in a food to get the actual carb content, as your body can't process the fibre or something along those lines.. Now as I'm currently doing the anabolic diet, during the week I aim to eat less than 30g of carbs a day, so watching carb intake is pretty important.

For example. KP Salted Peanuts, 100g contains 7.8g of carbs, but 6.2g of fibre.

Does that mean its 7.8-6.2 = a total of 1.6g of carbs which I need to count towards my daily total? For i'd best clear this up incase I was potentially holding my progress back!


----------



## SonOfZeus (Feb 15, 2009)

No-one knows?


----------



## OJay (Mar 7, 2008)

You would count 7.8 mate that's the amount of carbs fibrous or not in the peanut

Aren't mp nuts processed though?


----------



## chrisj22 (Mar 22, 2006)

Dude, I think you're looking far too deeply into things.

Do you really think that's going to make a morsel of difference to your physique??

Jeez, and I thought I was bad :lol:


----------



## dixie normus (May 11, 2008)

Most of the american guru's talk about net carbs = total - fibre.

I hope you aren't eating salted peanuts:confused1:

One of the flaws of the anabolic diet is that encourages the eating of too much of certain things thus creating a dietary imbalance.


----------



## Dota (Mar 18, 2010)

Mate trust me stop carb counting, it's not worth it. Eat well, healthy and a good combination DO NOT CARB COUNT!!


----------



## SonOfZeus (Feb 15, 2009)

I still want an answer wasn't really after opinions! I'm following the anabolic diet where you're not meant to eat more than 30g carb a day, obviously if i'm eating 2-3x this due to an error of knowledge it defeats the object. I know a few extra carbs won't hurt me but you get what you give, the better my diet, the better the results.


----------



## ElfinTan (May 23, 2008)

What's the 'anabolic diet'?


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

WannaGetStacked said:


> Okay so I was under the impression you could subtract the fibre from the number of carbs in a food to get the actual carb content, as your body can't process the fibre or something along those lines.. Now as I'm currently doing the anabolic diet, during the week I aim to eat less than 30g of carbs a day, so watching carb intake is pretty important.
> 
> For example. KP Salted Peanuts, 100g contains 7.8g of carbs, but 6.2g of fibre.
> 
> Does that mean its 7.8-6.2 = a total of 1.6g of carbs which I need to count towards my daily total? For i'd best clear this up incase I was potentially holding my progress back!


dietry fibre is not processed by the body at all so do not count towards your daily carb amount...

for those that say don't count carbs can i ask why not?? you can only continue to make progress if you know what your eating then you know what to alter....maybe counting carbs or looking deeply into the diet side of things with stop him using to much gear to bridge the gap that is made by him not counting carbs??


----------



## dixie normus (May 11, 2008)

ElfinTan said:


> What's the 'anabolic diet'?


In simple terms its 5 days keto style then a weekend carb bonanza.


----------



## Prodiver (Nov 14, 2008)

WannaGetStacked said:


> I still want an answer wasn't really after opinions! I'm following the anabolic diet where you're not meant to eat more than 30g carb a day, obviously if i'm eating 2-3x this due to an error of knowledge it defeats the object. I know a few extra carbs won't hurt me but you get what you give, the better my diet, the better the results.


No - the number of carbs that are turned into energy is the number of carbs given - in the case of the nuts, 7.8 gms.

Fibre does not count as carbs as it can't be turned into energy.

But, as others have said, don't count carbs and calories. There's no way of predicting how many you need each day. Just look in the mirror: if you're getting porky or not losing flab, reduce the carbs.

The only thing that may be wrong with salted peanuts is the salt content: the nuts and oil are good but of course are high in calories so contribute a lot to your daily intake of energy. Cut carbs before fats, though.

Just watch your total salt intake to avoid water retention and raised blood pressure. Don't forget though that a big bodybuilder taking in lots of water will need a good deal more salt than the average person. Cramp can be one of the first signs of too low a salt intake.


----------



## chrisj22 (Mar 22, 2006)

I didn't say don't count carbs, as I believe they should be counted. As you say Paul, how can you track progress without counting them??

My point was why bother count the fibrous carbs? IMO it is verging on too anal


----------



## Prodiver (Nov 14, 2008)

chrisj22 said:


> I didn't say don't count carbs, as I believe they should be counted. As you say Paul, how can you track progress without counting them??
> 
> My point was why bother count the fibrous carbs? IMO it is verging on too anal


There's no point whatsoever in counting carbs or calories.

Despite all the nostrums, it's impossible to predict or know how many calories and therefore carbs you need each day: your daily routine, activities, workouts and the weather temperature will change and therefore your calorie needs.

If you eat the same fixed calculated amount every day you'll gradually get fatter or more and more lack energy unless you're porky.

The only thing you must count is your daily protein intake.

And you need fats to make your testosterone work and for energy before you need any carbs.

In fact you don't actually need to eat any carbs at all to survive and gain muscle, except that some vits and bioflavonoids come in carbs like fruit.

The easiest way to tell if you're getting too many calories is to look in the mirror every day...


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

Prodiver said:


> No - the number of carbs that are turned into energy is the number of carbs given - in the case of the nuts, 7.8 gms.
> 
> Fibre does not count as carbs as it can't be turned into energy.
> 
> .


sorry mate but this is wrong many foods give the amount of carbs including fibre, oats being a prime example for every 100g of oats there are approx 60g carbs this includes 9g of fibre which can be dismissed as it has no use in the body....



chrisj22 said:


> I didn't say don't count carbs, as I believe they should be counted. As you say Paul, how can you track progress without counting them??
> 
> My point was why bother count the fibrous carbs? IMO it is verging on too anal


this is my point he wants to know should he count them?? and the answer is no, they have no use....



Prodiver said:


> There's no point whatsoever in counting carbs or calories.
> 
> Despite all the nostrums, it's impossible to predict or know how many calories and therefore carbs you need each day: your daily routine, activities, workouts and the weather temperature will change and therefore your calorie needs.
> 
> ...


again mate this is wrong.....you do need to count both carbs and fats as well as protein.....especially when dieting....no it is not an exact science but then nothing is.....

so why only count protein when daily due to stress and tiredness, training and non training days your required amounts change just as you have pointed out with carbs and fats.....

if you approximate your calorific needs then drop 500cals a day then you will not get porky as you put it you will drop weight until your body adjusts and then you will need to drop your cals again....now if you are not counting all the macro's how do you drop the cals sufficiently enough to allow your body to yet again burn fat??

there as always exceptions to this rule but they are just that exceptions and not the norm.......i can guarantee you that 99% of the guys and girls out there will need to count carbs/fats and protein to make steady gains in either muscle mass or fat loss......

i will say you can gain and drop weight without counting macro's but IMO the amount of muscle you will burn when trying to lose fat will be more and the amount you will build when trying to gain will be less.....


----------



## OJay (Mar 7, 2008)

Agree totally with what pscarb is saying

If you don't know exactly what is being put into you body from every makro how can you adjust to make a change?

If You only keep on top of your protein intake what is going to give you the energy to build muscle? If your protein intake is spot on but carb and fats too high you will be putting on fat

Carbs will replenish glycogen stores which protein won't, if you under eat carbs you will not have the energy in the gym to break down the protein fibres and make use of the protein you are intaking


----------



## najybomb (Nov 19, 2008)

Paul is spot on! If you don't see progress and haven't counted what your eating or your not seeing sufficient progress then OBVIOUSLY you need to sort your diet out and count everything, meal plans etc. To say you don't need to is just ludicrous how would anyone achieve a decent physique like that. Especially a comp ready physique aswell.


----------



## Prodiver (Nov 14, 2008)

Pscarb said:


> sorry mate but this is wrong many foods give the amount of carbs including fibre, oats being a prime example for every 100g of oats there are approx 60g carbs this includes 9g of fibre which can be dismissed as it has no use in the body....
> 
> this is my point he wants to know should he count them?? and the answer is no, they have no use....
> 
> ...


I thought I made it clear. Fibre does not count as carbs. If the calories stated were worked out from the weight of food including the fibre, it's incorrect labelling.

We'll have to disagree about counting carbs and calories. I believe counting carbs and cals is a mistaken crutch for most would-be bodybuilders working out and eating to grow. I observe that it doesn't help most guys but just makes distracts them with the wrong focus and objectives.

The exception is where a bodybuilder is actually on a tight diet cutting for a comp, and has a true measure and strict control over several weeks of their carb intake, so that they can increase or reduce it finely.

Dutch Scott posted on a thread yesterday pointing out that you won't lose any muscle by undereating so long as you eat protein, work out and still have some bodyfat, which is what I was taught by a nutritionist.


----------



## Prodiver (Nov 14, 2008)

OJay said:


> Agree totally with what pscarb is saying
> 
> If you don't know exactly what is being put into you body from every makro how can you adjust to make a change?
> 
> ...


Please read what I wrote very precisely again.

You cannot actually know what your calorie requirements/gms of carbs needed are - any figures are mad stabs in the dark for most. You'll only get fairly close on a strict comp prep diet.

Of course most will get a fair proportion of their energy from carbs. But - quoting a nutritionist - you don't really need any carbs at all to have energy to work out - protein and fats will do.

It's easy to tell if you haven't enough energy - calorie figures won't tell you this - how you feel will! I'm frequently told by exhausted bodybuilders "I can't be lacking energy - I'm eating 500 gms carbs (or whatever) a day..." Duh!

Course what they usually need is less carbs and more fat.


----------



## SonOfZeus (Feb 15, 2009)

I'm still confused though.. So fibre can't be digested and doesn't count. BUT, do I MINUS the fibre figure from the carb figure? Does that carb figure include fibre? Or are they being mentioned as two seperate figures, in which case I should account for all the carbs specified on a regular food packet, but ignore the fibre.


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

Prodiver said:


> I thought I made it clear. Fibre does not count as carbs. If the calories stated were worked out from the weight of food including the fibre, it's incorrect labelling.
> 
> We'll have to disagree about counting carbs and calories. I believe counting carbs and cals is a mistaken crutch for most would-be bodybuilders working out and eating to grow. I observe that it doesn't help most guys but just makes distracts them with the wrong focus and objectives.
> 
> ...


i am sure i made it clear as well.....labelling does count the fibre in both the carb amounts and the calories just check the labelling for Oats....

sorry mate but i disagree with you analogy of the not counting carbs/fats and only counting protein....if you just eat carbs willy nilly then you will get fat but hey if your goal is to look fat then hey thats the game plan.....the truth is that most have to have an idea what they are eating otherwise they will get fat.....FACT.....those who are more accurate with their macro's do not gain loads of fat and build muscle more effectively.....

if you undereat in carbs and fats but eat enough protein then the body will break the protein down for energy again this is FACT.....so if you have no idea then how do you know that the protein you are eating is preserving muscle or is being converted to simple carbs for energy??

having no idea in what you are eating makes no sense that's like saying just jab a load of gear don't measure what your taking as you will still build muscle....


----------



## Prodiver (Nov 14, 2008)

Pscarb said:


> i am sure i made it clear as well.....labelling does count the fibre in both the carb amounts and the calories just check the labelling for Oats....
> 
> sorry mate but i disagree with you analogy of the not counting carbs/fats and only counting protein....*if you just eat carbs willy nilly then you will get fat* but hey if your goal is to look fat then hey thats the game plan.....the truth is that most have to have an idea what they are eating otherwise they will get fat.....FACT.....those who are more accurate with their macro's do not gain loads of fat and build muscle more effectively.....
> 
> ...


I'm the last person to advocate eating carbs willy-nilly!! The whole point of my approach is to avoid this! Let me try to explain.

Knowing how many grams of carbs or calories they ingest will do nothing to prevent anyone eating too many or too few, because no-one knows actually how many calories they will expend day by day!

If you eat a slight excess of protein - which is wise to ensure growth - the excess will always be converted into energy. So then you'll need to eat sightly less carbs and/or fats than otherwise; any excess calories will still be stored as fat.

Your protein requirement can be calculated with a high degree of confidence in relation to bodyweight - in fact only protein can be - fat and carbs can't.

So if you eat enough protein and a modicum of fat, you can control your energy input/fat storage most easily and fastest by adjusting your carb intake.

This is because your body regulates its fat storage and useage preferentially according to your carb intake.

You don't need to calculate your carb or fat intake - you just look in the mirror every day and adjust your carbs slightly. It takes about 2 days max for any tendency gain or lose flab to become apparent.

This is the classic control system used wherever there are 3-variables: fix one, let one float and regulate the third to achieve the goal. Fixing two or all three of the 3 variables correctly is all but impossible...

And as Dutch Scott pointed out you will not convert muscle into energy so long as you have any bodyfat.


----------



## Prodiver (Nov 14, 2008)

WannaGetStacked said:


> I'm still confused though.. So fibre can't be digested and doesn't count. BUT, do I MINUS the fibre figure from the carb figure? Does that carb figure include fibre? Or are they being mentioned as two seperate figures, in which case I should account for all the carbs specified on a regular food packet, but ignore the fibre.


On all the food packets I've looked at fibre content is stated separately, is not included in the carb figure and can be ignored.


----------



## SonOfZeus (Feb 15, 2009)

Prodiver said:


> On all the food packets I've looked at fibre content is stated separately, is not included in the carb figure and can be ignored.


Okay this is what I wanted to know. So infact I've been calculating carbs wrong and shouldn't have eaten as many peanuts as I had! Now I can in future avoid making this mistake, allowing me to run my diet as my diet should be run optimally (30g or less per week day). :thumbup1:


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

Prodiver said:


> I'm the last person to advocate eating carbs willy-nilly!! The whole point of my approach is to avoid this! Let me try to explain.
> 
> Knowing how many grams of carbs or calories they ingest will do nothing to prevent anyone eating too many or too few, because no-one knows actually how many calories they will expend day by day!
> 
> ...


as long as Dutch has said it then i must agree:lol:

sorry but this does not translate into the real world when you take into consideration training, cardio, stress from work , families etc.....

ProDiver how many people have you successfully given this type of diet to and they have either lost fat or gained a good size of muscle??

looking in the mirror to gauge your carb need is a very bad way to judge anything on your own as your state of mind not what you see in the mirror will make the decision........i have seen some incredible physiques fail or stand still because they have no clue the amount the eat day by day....as i said earlier this is not everyone but certainly most......

75% of board members on any board who post up saying that they are not gaining because their gear is either fake or they are taking to little will not be able to tell you what they eat everyday....this failing is why they are not making progress, get this person to document everything they eat then and only then you can adjust their food intake to make progress.....i have not only done this with many clients but with myself in 2004 and since that day i have not lost a qualifier and i have placed as high as top 3 in Britain all on 1/3 of the gear i used to use when i had no clue what i was eating......

theory's are just that theory......put it into practice and you will see that 9 out of 10 times it will fail.....as your theory relies mainly on the level head needed to look in a mirror and make a judgment......

to the OP unless you are eating low carb foods where they do the math for you with the fibre most foods carb amount contain the carbs add the calories up and you will see this....


----------



## Prodiver (Nov 14, 2008)

Pscarb said:


> as long as Dutch has said it then i must agree:lol:
> 
> sorry but this does not translate into the real world when you take into consideration training, cardio, stress from work , families etc.....
> 
> ...


Over the years, Paul, I've advocated this approach to a good many bodybuilders including a number who've competed successfully - there are several on here who've posted saying how effective they find it for losing flab and gaining lean muscle, including Ramsay, and I've had a lot of PMs confirming it.

I do not for a moment say you should have no idea how much you eat! Of course you should. It's just that actual figures are useless.

If someone were eating, say, 100 gms of fat and 500 gms of carbs a day and clearly storing fat, what figure should they reduce each to? Would 50 gms of fat and 250 gms carbs a day make them put on half as much flab as before? Or lose fat? Or would 75 gms fat and 300 gms carbs put them into stasis? If they lack energy what should they raise their intakes to? On what scientific basis would figures be determined, seeing that we all burn calories at different rates depending on a number of factors?

Supposing they altered their intakes to specific numbers which calculations 'proved' must provide enough energy but they were always exhausted or plainly getting porky. What then!?

It's more effective simply to determine your protein intake, eat fats as they come, and control your carb intake gradually over a week or two by altering portion sizes a little and monitor your bodyfat and energy levels (the 3-variable control approach). There's no need to measure portions to the gram. You quickly get to know when you're really hungry or need more energy from fast carbs.

Because fats are satiating you'll rarely feel hungry and limiting your carbs will make your body use your fat as a very efficient energy source.

Carb intake changes give a much faster change in bodyfat than changes in fat intake.

Anyone who can't be objective about their fat levels from mainly looking in the mirror or with others' help either has no hope of attaining their goals, or needs a good kick!

Please note that a comp prep cutting diet of course needs closer control - but even then I know several successful competitors who don't bother to weigh their food or calculate their calories accurately...


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

Prodiver said:


> Over the years, Paul, I've advocated this approach to a good many bodybuilders including a number who've competed successfully - there are several on here who've posted saying how effective they find it for losing flab and gaining lean muscle, including Ramsay, and I've had a lot of PMs confirming it.


this is excellent and i am glad it has worked for so many but then the way i am talking about works for so many as well??



Prodiver said:


> I do not for a moment say you should have no idea how much you eat! Of course you should. It's just that actual figures are useless.


so if you do not weigh your food how do you know what your eating??



Prodiver said:


> If someone were eating, say, 100 gms of fat and 500 gms of carbs a day and clearly storing fat, what figure should they reduce each to? Would 50 gms of fat and 250 gms carbs a day make them put on half as much flab as before? Or lose fat? Or would 75 gms fat and 300 gms carbs put them into stasis? If they lack energy what should they raise their intakes to? On what scientific basis would figures be determined, seeing that we all burn calories at different rates depending on a number of factors?


you reduce it or increase depending on your goals gradually in the example you give you reduce it from 500g of carbs to 400g, no need to reduce both carbs and fats if you do you have no idea what you was eating to much of.....

you have mentioned things here about numbers depending on alot of factors why do you feel that people cannot address these factors?? and why are these factors not relevant with protein? you mention a few posts back that you should only measure protein yes?, but then say you should not measure carbs as daily factors have an effect on your energy levels yes? what about the daily factors that effect your protein requirements? are these different to the ones you mention for carbs?



Prodiver said:


> Supposing they altered their intakes to specific numbers which calculations 'proved' must provide enough energy but they were always exhausted or plainly getting porky. What then!?


 i don't think at any time PD i have said just make a number up and stick with it?? you have to place a flag in the ground and go from there so if you work your numbers out and you find you are not gaining or dropping the fat then you alter the numbers.....do you really need me to point this out to you??



Prodiver said:


> It's more effective simply to determine your protein intake, eat fats as they come, and control your carb intake gradually over a week or two by altering portion sizes a little and monitor your bodyfat and energy levels (the 3-variable control approach). There's no need to measure portions to the gram. You quickly get to know when you're really hungry or need more energy from fast carbs.


more effective for who? those you may have worked with but not everyone, as my approach does not work for everyone either...nor does James approach or Neil hill....you find what fits and apply it....it certainly is not more effective for all....



Prodiver said:


> Because fats are satiating you'll rarely feel hungry and limiting your carbs will make your body use your fat as a very efficient energy source.


yes you are correct but again you are making assumptions as high or even medium fat diets do not work for everyone i know as i have tried them......plus you are assuming i advocate high or medium only approaches which is not true i myself diet and bulk on medium carbs and fats and high protein......



Prodiver said:


> Carb intake changes give a much faster change in bodyfat than changes in fat intake.


not exactly true carbs will influence weight more quickly than fat intake as for every 1g of carbs you eat your body will store 2.7g of water, this does not happen with fat.....but fat, carbs or protein does not make you fat excess calories makes you fat and if you have no clue to the amounts you are eating maintaining muscle and burning fat is harder......yes you will drop weight but will you drop fat more effectively?? how do you know the body is not burning muscle? just because you are monitoring your protein amounts does not mean you are eating enough or your body is using it all....



Prodiver said:


> Anyone who can't be objective about their fat levels from mainly looking in the mirror or with others' help either has no hope of attaining their goals, or needs a good kick!


again your making huge assumption, the person may not be objective enough or experienced enough to make that call......i am sure anorexics just need a good kick....this may sound over the top but it is the same both anorexics and bodybuilders suffer from a distorted body image in their own mind.....anorexics are never slim enough and bodybuilders are never lean and big enough....giving them a good kick is certainly not the answer.....getting them to detail everything they eat is..



 Prodiver said:


> Please note that a comp prep cutting diet of course needs closer control - but even then I know several successful competitors who don't bother to weigh their food or calculate their calories accurately...


as i said at the beginning of this debate their are exceptions to the rule but the majority do have to weigh all their foods to make sure they have constant progress.....

you have mentioned in earlier posts that there is no need to monitor your carb or fat intake only your protein but then in this last post you mention that you are not advocating not knowing what your eating?? how can this be achieved if you do not monitor the carbs or fats?...

you mention that you should just eat when you are hungry as the body will tell you this and this is obviously true but what if this is at 3.00am should the person break sleep to eat or should they increase the amount they eat before bed? and if so how much should they increase that amount? what factors will apply? for example should that meal be larger in carbs and fats or just carbs if they trained say quads that day? opposed to biceps?......my point is you are assuming that everyone in this game male and female are level headed to adjust what they eat by the mirror and to control things by just eating when your hungry many in fact most NEED the control that weighing food brings so adjustments can be made more easily....


----------



## damon86 (Aug 7, 2010)

Prodiver said:


> .
> 
> Just watch your total salt intake to avoid water retention and raised blood pressure. Don't forget though that a big bodybuilder taking in lots of water will need a good deal more salt than the average person. Cramp can be one of the first signs of too low a salt intake.


Hmmm, that interests me as I was training Hamstrings on Friday and got cramp like a mother ****er in my calves. I don't really put much salt on anything I eat. How much salt is recommended. You have said make sure you have enough but not too much, any idea how much is enough?


----------



## Prodiver (Nov 14, 2008)

damon86 said:


> Hmmm, that interests me as I was training Hamstrings on Friday and got cramp like a mother ****er in my calves. I don't really put much salt on anything I eat. How much salt is recommended. You have said make sure you have enough but not too much, any idea how much is enough?


The UK RDA for an "average adult" is 6 gms of salt.

This is quite easy to consume, as there's salt in almost all processed foods these days.

But since the average adult weighs perhaps 10 stone, a big bodybuilder with a greater blood volume could probably eat about 9 gms a day or even more without any adverse effects.


----------



## dtlv (Jul 24, 2009)

WannaGetStacked said:


> I'm still confused though.. So fibre can't be digested and doesn't count. BUT, do I MINUS the fibre figure from the carb figure? Does that carb figure include fibre? Or are they being mentioned as two seperate figures, in which case I should account for all the carbs specified on a regular food packet, but ignore the fibre.


I think the confusion comes from the difference between Uk and US food labelling.

It should be the case that with UK food labelling the fibre content is listed as seperate from the carb content.. so something like:

Carbohydrate 10g

Sugar 3g

Fibre 5g

would mean there are 10g of digestable carbs *of which* 3g are sugary/fast carbs (and 7g as un-named complex carbs) *plus* an additional 5g of fibre (so 15g carbs total if you consider fibre as a carb).

In US food labelling you would read the above differently as they inculde the fibre in the total for carbs - so it would read 10g of carbs *of which* 5g was fibre (so contributes no kcals) and 3g was sugar (leaving 2g as un-named complex carbs).

Hope that makes sense :confused1:


----------



## SonOfZeus (Feb 15, 2009)

Dtlv74 said:


> I think the confusion comes from the difference between Uk and US food labelling.
> 
> It should be the case that with UK food labelling the fibre content is listed as seperate from the carb content.. so something like:
> 
> ...


Yeah makes total sense bud, that's the answer I was looking for. Glad this is cleared up! :thumbup1:

Prodiver, care to elaborate on the point you made about 'you'll never lose muscle whilst you've still got bodyfat'? Seems quite controversial and goes against many peoples of catabolism which can occur from too much cardio etc. Would be very interested to hear the science behind this!


----------



## Prodiver (Nov 14, 2008)

WannaGetStacked said:


> ...
> 
> Prodiver, care to elaborate on the point you made about 'you'll never lose muscle whilst you've still got bodyfat'? Seems quite controversial and goes against many peoples of catabolism which can occur from too much cardio etc. Would be very interested to hear the science behind this!


So long as you have sufficient energy to work out to stimulate your muscles, and you eat enough protein to support them, you will not lose muscle.

If you work out hard enough and eat sufficient protein, you will cause hypertrophy - lean muscle gain.

A significant catabolic state will only occur if you have long-term insufficient energy reserves and protein intake. The body has enormous nutritional capacity and holds ample fat, glycogen and amino acid reserves to last several days.

In the absence of carbs, you body will preferentially turn your bodyfat, not your muscle mass, into energy. So long as you have any bodyfat, you will have energy to work out.

If you limit your carb intake, you can still work out using bodyfat for energy. If you eat enough protein, your muscles will grow. So you can gain lean muscle and lose bodyfat at the same time, and this applies when "cutting" too.


----------



## zeevolution (Aug 24, 2013)

@Pscarb

hey man old thread I know lol, but looking at this:
https://www.cardiffsportsnutrition.co.uk/muscletech-mission-1-clean-protein-bars-1-x-60g?search=MUSCLETECH MISSION 1

being

Nutritional Information Per 60g Serving

Energy 200 kcal
Total Fat 7 g
of which Saturated 2.5 g
of which Trans 0 g
Cholesterol 5 mg
Sodium 180 mg
Total Carbohydrate 22 g
of which Dietary Fiber 17 g
of which Sugars 1 g
of which Sugar Alcohol 0 g
Protein: 21 g

does this mean it's 22g pure carbs and I should count the bar as 22 carbs OR, it's 4g carbs because 17g of it is fibre.

I'm so confused reading this thread lol...

thanks


----------



## Prince Adam (Mar 17, 2012)

zeevolution said:


> @Pscarb
> 
> hey man old thread I know lol, but looking at this:
> https://www.cardiffsportsnutrition.co.uk/muscletech-mission-1-clean-protein-bars-1-x-60g?search=MUSCLETECH MISSION 1
> ...


 3 posts up is your answer.

It's US labelling, so you'd subtract.


----------



## zeevolution (Aug 24, 2013)

Prince Adam said:


> 3 posts up is your answer.
> 
> It's US labelling, so you'd subtract.


 so it would be
22g carbs - 17g fibre - 1g sugar = 4g complex carbs?

so I have a question, if youre cutting at a deficit how much fibre should one consume?

Nutritional Information Per 60g Serving

Energy 200 kcal
Total Fat 7 g
of which Saturated 2.5 g
of which Trans 0 g
Cholesterol 5 mg
Sodium 180 mg
Total Carbohydrate 22 g
of which Dietary Fiber 17 g
of which Sugars 1 g
of which Sugar Alcohol 0 g
Protein: 21 g


----------



## Prince Adam (Mar 17, 2012)

There's an ideal ratio I've heard somewhere, something like 10g / 1000 calories


----------



## zeevolution (Aug 24, 2013)

Prince Adam said:


> There's an ideal ratio I've heard somewhere, something like 10g / 1000 calories


 and if you go over then what?


----------



## sneeky_dave (Apr 2, 2013)

zeevolution said:


> and if you go over then what?


 Retract my stupid comment


----------



## zeevolution (Aug 24, 2013)

so bloating is the main issue, does this bloat you everywhere, face too or just stomach? test e gives me enough bloat.... comparing to prop anyway


----------



## spaglemon (Mar 15, 2012)

SonOfZeus said:


> Okay so I was under the impression you could subtract the fibre from the number of carbs in a food to get the actual carb content, as your body can't process the fibre or something along those lines.. Now as I'm currently doing the anabolic diet, during the week I aim to eat less than 30g of carbs a day, so watching carb intake is pretty important.
> 
> For example. KP Salted Peanuts, 100g contains 7.8g of carbs, but 6.2g of fibre.
> 
> Does that mean its 7.8-6.2 = a total of 1.6g of carbs which I need to count towards my daily total? For i'd best clear this up incase I was potentially holding my progress back!


 Only in America


----------



## Ultrasonic (Jul 13, 2004)

zeevolution said:


> so bloating is the main issue, does this bloat you everywhere, face too or just stomach? test e gives me enough bloat.... comparing to prop anyway


 Too much or actually also too little fibre can affect bowel movements and therefore abdominal distension, as of course could gas. Fibre won't affect your face!


----------



## Goranchero (Mar 26, 2015)

Don't overdo it with these bars. The bulk of the fibre is IMO (Vitafiber), it is technically not a fibre but behaves similarly since they are a group of digestion resistant oligosacharides (1-4 link which the human metabolism has difficulty breaking down, so they are fermented in the colon), and there is an undefined amount of erythritol. I'd expect more than two a day would cause digestion problems.

IMO should in theory have a 6% digestion rate, actual data varies. In some individuals it is much higher, this is why IMO bars are unsuitable for diabetics.


----------



## zeevolution (Aug 24, 2013)

it's mainly for going outta town, 1 a day if I'm out and about and need it. making my life easier


----------

