How do you guys think that would work for cutting up?
Ofcourse go lower on the kcal then the body can burn.
I just wonder if anyone has tried this before, and likes it?
Printable View
How do you guys think that would work for cutting up?
Ofcourse go lower on the kcal then the body can burn.
I just wonder if anyone has tried this before, and likes it?
im no expert but 35% fat seems way to high.
I dont think its bad. 35% fat isnt too high, you need fat to burn it.
I eat 6 to 8% carbs. Works great. In fact I pretty much have to as I am very resistant to fat loss.
Not really.Quote:
Originally Posted by sponger
That's true, I will try it out!Quote:
Originally Posted by Johny-too-small
Good to hear ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by sonnygll
I don't see how you guys do it. If I don't get enough carbs I feel sluggish and fatigue easy and my gets slowed down and foggy.
It's all about having a steady blood sugar.Quote:
Originally Posted by ecto9
Have you ever tried low karb, high fat and protein for 2-3 weeks before?
Yeah, it sucks to cut, bro.Quote:
Originally Posted by ecto9
Those ratios definitely work. As Johnny-too-small said you need fat to burn fat. The thing is making sure the fat is of the right kind. Keep the Mono high and the Sat low. Ive eaten this way and lost a good amount of pounds. Actually thinking of doing it again really soon.
Actually the most important thing when it comes to fat is the poly to mono ratio.
Actually non of that matters THAT MUCH, not for fat loss anyway. You need a certain amount of fat in order to keep the fat-burning metabolic pathways at optimal efficiency, but 100 calories from one fat is the same as it is for any other. As far as health goes, the largest study of cholesterol and fat and its relationship to heart disease was the Framingham Study. It was 40 years long. It showed a stronger correlation with margarine intake and heart disease than saturated fat. In fact, as the percentage of saturated fat has fallen in the american diet from more than 80% in 1900 to only 60% today, heart disease has skyrocketed. This really makes perfect sense from an evolutionary biology standpoint. Throughout the history of man, most of his fats have been saturated, not unsaturated. Nature has selected for genes that produce a body chemistry favorable to that diet. The idea that unsaturated is better comes from saturated fats greater ability to be used in the production of Lipoproteins (cholesterol). Of course the real problem molecules are the "Transfats". Without getting to heavy, lets just say that the partial hydrogenation that is designed to cause unsaturated fats to behave like saturated fats and stay solid at room temperature (they did this so they can display a lower saturated fat content on the label and maintain the same texture in order to cash in on the publics oversimplified view of fats, and also because unsaturated fats - such as from soybean oil- are cheap, thats why you see "partially hydrogenated soybean oil" ****ING EVERYWHERE- but its getting less common now that people are catching on somewhat). The problem arises when the body digests these fats and they get into the bloodstream. You see, your cell membranes are made up of - among other things - saturated fats and cholesterol. This is why animal tissue is high in saturated fat (plants prefer cellulose). The cells in your body mistake transfats for saturated fats and incorporate them into their membranes, but they arent saturated they are still missing hydgrogen and their bonds are inferior. This weakens the cell membranes. Now here's where the science gets HAZY...the precise chain of events is still being researched, but somehow this is believed to lead to a great oxidation of fats in the body - and one of many harmful oxidated byproducts that may be increased is called 7-ketocholesterol. This is the stuff that forms the basis of the plaques in your arteries, especially those in the heart. This - in a nutshell - is how Trans Fatty Acids slowly KILL you.