Someone told me to post here, so I will. Gonna follow the checklist so I don't leave out anything.
Excuse my english if there are mistakes.
I'm bulking to be safe I gain as much muscle as possible, and I don't care about gaining/maintaining fat at the same time. I'm very comfortable around 20% fat, and have no intention of cutting down until I'm at least 10 kg's heavier. I went down to around 10% BF before i realized I need a few years of muscle. I'm not too caught up with bad types of fat either, even though I keep it in the back of my head, and try to have nuts, olive oil and such as my main source. Macronutrients are the most important to me, as this is what the body will care about.
INFO:
Stats:
20 years old
95-97kg's (210-215 pounds)
183 cm tall (6 feet)
~20% BF
Training for 4 years, last 2 very serious.
During the last 2-3 years I've gained approx 25 kg's (without any drug use), and around 2% bodyfat increase, because of my current bulking status (Meaning that 6,5kg of the 25 kg's are fat, since bodyfat% relates to my weight). I vary my training a lot, and at the moment I'm doing a 3-split, 6 days a week, with emphazis on arms and back.
According to the Harris Benedict Equation, I require 3738 kcalories per day.
What I want to achieve with the diet is to be safe I get the maximum muscle gains. That means I have no problem with going 500 kcal above what I need, in order to be certain.
DIET WITH EXPLANATION:
In a day, I do my best to keep above the 4k kcal mark. I usually do around 20-25% proteins, 30% fat and 45-50% carbs. This is due to the fact that every study I've read states that ~15% proteins (1,4-2g/kg BW) is what the body can make proper use of. (1)
I use 5g creatine monohydrate every morning (loaded a while ago). The reason I only eat this in the morning is that since I only work out once a day, and have no use to refill my creatine storage for something like a midnight run or so.
Number of meals in a day is somewhere around 4 (not counting shake after workout). The reason I do not bother boosting it up to 7 or 8 is that all the studies I've read confirms that eating more often does not boost your metabolism (2,3,4,5,6). Should you for some reason not eat for <40 hours, the body releases the hormone Ghrelin which in turn counteracts the protein breakdown. (7,8)
Additionally studies say that it is not necessary to eat frequently for the purpose of proteinintake. Whether you eat 90g protein in one meal or 30g in 3 meals is the same, the first one just lets your body acquire aminoacids over a longer period of time. (9,10)
IMAGINARY DAY (This is an example, naturally my intake varies, but I follow the general idea of ~20% prot, ~30% fat ~50% carb:
Meal 1:
2 scoops (50g) whey protein with 5 dl milk (53g prot/23,2g carb/2,3g fat)
omit, eat real food, do 10 egg whites instead.. lose the milk too, insulin spike
2dl grapejuice w/ 5g l-glutamine and 5g creatine (6g prot/20g carb/0g fat)
grapejuice causes insulin spike, omit.. everything else is okay
100g mixed nuts (18g prot/30g carb/41g fat)
omit, do a complex carb.. natural oats...
Vitamins and essential fatty acids
= 1009 kcal
Meal 2:
Pizza (73,1g prot/152,1g carb/44g fat)
seriously bro?? pizza?? omit for 8oz of a lean meat and a complex carb
= 1300 kcal
WORKOUT (with caffeine and water)
Meal 3:
2 scoops (50g) whey protein with 5 dl milk (53g prot/23,2g carb/2,3g fat)
1 Banana (1,7g prot/27,2g carb/0,5g fat)
okay, what kinda milk?? only skim should be used
= 460 kcal
Meal 4:
Dinner, for instance 700g Lasagne (51,8g prot/76,3g carb/58,1g fat)
again, horrible food choice.. omit for 8oz of lean meat and efas
= 1050 kcal
Meal 5:
2x toast with 4 slices of whole grain bread, salami, cheese and ketchup (16,7g prot/38,8g carb/13,4g fat)
wow.. horrible... omit for a lean beef and efas.. london broil would do you better
= 350 kcal
TOTAL: 4169 kcal: 267,3g prot / 390,8g carb / 161,6g fat
SPLIT: 26% Prot / 40% carb / 34% fat
The split is a tiny bit off on the carb/fat ratio since I don't eat the same dinner every day.
What I want to know is what your thoughts are on this, and if you could back up your arguments somehow they'd be a lot easier to go with.
Changes? Why? How?
a 40 40 20 split is best.. if you want me to run a buncha research it's not happening... this is the split and way i'v been dieting and many have followed my own advice with great success.. soo there's the "research"
SOURCES:
1. "(...)The debate regarding optimal protein/amino acid needs of strength athletes is an old one. Recent evidence indicates that actual requirements are higher than those of more sedentary individuals, although this is not widely recognized. Some data even suggest that high protein/amino acid diets can enhance the development of muscle mass and strength when combined with heavy resistance exercise training. Novices may have higher needs than experienced strength athletes, and substantial interindividual variability exists. Perhaps the most important single factor determining absolute protein/amino acid need is the adequacy of energy intake.
Present data indicate that strength athletes should consume approximately 12-15% of their daily total energy intake as protein, or about 1.5-2.0 g protein/kg.d-1 (approximately 188-250% of the U.S. recommended dietary allowance). Although routinely consumed by many strength athletes, higher protein intakes have not been shown to be consistently effective and may even be associated with some health risks."
Int J Sport Nutr. 1991 Jun;1(2):127-45. Protein and amino acid needs of the strength athlete. Lemon PW. Applied Physiology Research Laboratory, Kent State University, OH 44242.
2. "The daily distribution of food intake can influence the regulation of energy balance and, in consequence, the control of body weight. Two aspects of this question must be considered: the daily number of eating occasions and their temporal distribution. Since the 1960s, epidemiological studies have reported an inverse relationship between frequency of eating and body weight, suggesting that a "nibbling" pattern could help to prevent obesity. This notion has later been put into question by the recognition of a high level of dietary underreporting in overweight individuals.
In addition, no difference in total daily energy expenditure has been documented as a function of daily meal number. Weight loss is not facilitated by high meal frequency. Snacking in obese subjects is associated with higher energy and fat intake. By contrast, in normal-weight people, snacking does not necessarily lead to increased energy intake, while snacks often contain more carbohydrates and less fat than regular meals. Obese people tend to eat little in the morning and much in the afternoon and the evening. In extreme cases, a "night-eating syndrome" is observed. Understanding the relationship between the circadian distribution of intake and obesity (or resistance to weight loss) seems critical for theoretical as well as clinical reasons."
Impact of the daily meal pattern on energy balance; Scandinavian Journal of Nutrition, Volume 48, Number 3, October 2004 , pp. 114-118(5)
3. "Several epidemiological studies have observed an inverse relationship between people's habitual frequency of eating and body weight, leading to the suggestion that a 'nibbling' meal pattern may help in the avoidance of obesity. A review of all pertinent studies shows that, although many fail to find any significant relationship, the relationship is consistently inverse in those that do observe a relationship. However, this finding is highly vulnerable to the probable confounding effects of post hoc changes in dietary patterns as a consequence of weight gain and to dietary under-reporting which undoubtedly invalidates some of the studies. We conclude that the epidemiological evidence is at best very weak, and almost certainly represents an artefact. A detailed review of the possible mechanistic explanations for a metabolic advantage of nibbling meal patterns failed to reveal significant benefits in respect of energy expenditure. Although some short-term studies suggest that the thermic effect of feeding is higher when an isoenergetic test load is divided into multiple small meals, other studies refute this, and most are neutral. More importantly, studies using whole-body calorimetry and doubly-labelled water to assess total 24 h energy expenditure find no difference between nibbling and gorging.
Finally, with the exception of a single study, there is no evidence that weight loss on hypoenergetic regimens is altered by meal frequency. We conclude that any effects of meal pattern on the regulation of body weight are likely to be mediated through effects on the food intake side of the energy balance equation."
Meal frequency and energy balance. Br J Nutr. 1997 Apr;77 Suppl 1:S57-70.
4. OBJECTIVE: To test if a diet of 4.2 MJ/24 h as six isocaloric meals would result in a lower subsequent energy intake, or greater energy output than (a) 4.2 MJ/24 h as two isocaloric meals or (b) a morning fast followed by free access to food.
CONCLUSIONS:
In the short term, meal frequency and a period of fasting have no major impact on energy intake or expenditure but energy expenditure is delayed with a lower meal frequency compared with a higher meal frequency. This might be attributed to the thermogenic effect of food continuing into the night when a later, larger meal is given. A morning fast resulted in a diet which tended to have a lower percentage of energy from carbohydrate than with no fast.
Compared with nibbling, neither gorging nor a morning fast affect short-term energy balance in obese patients in a chamber calorimeter. International Journal Of Obesity, April 2001, Volume 25, Number 4, Pages 519-528
5. "To determine whether human lipogenesis is influenced by the frequency of meal consumption, 12 subjects were divided into two groups and fed isocaloric nutritionally adequate liquid diets over 3 days, either as three larger diurnal (n = 6) or as six small, evenly spaced (n = 6) meals per day."
"These findings suggest that consuming fewer but larger daily meals is not accompanied by increases in triglyceride fatty acid synthesis, despite the observation of hormonal peaks."
Meal frequency influences circulating hormone levels but not lipogenesis rates in humans. Metabolism. 1995 Feb;44(2):218-23.
6. "A gorging pattern of energy intake resulted in a stronger diurnal periodicity of nutrient utilization, compared to a nibbling pattern. However, there were no consequences for the total 24 h energy expenditure (24 h EE) of the two feeding patterns (5.57 +/- 0.16 kJ/min for the gorging pattern; 5.44 +/- 0.18 kJ/min for the nibbling pattern).
Concerning the periodicity of nutrient utilization, protein oxidation during the day did not change between the two feeding patterns. In the gorging pattern, carbohydrate oxidation was significantly elevated during the interval following the first meal (ie from 1200 h to 1500 h, P less than 0.01) and the second meal (ie from 1800 h to 2100 h, P less than 0.05). The decreased rate of carbohydrate oxidation observed during the fasting period (from rising in the morning until the first meal at 1200 h), was compensated by an increased fat oxidation from 0900 to 1200 h to cover energy needs. In the nibbling pattern, carbohydrate and fat oxidation remained relatively constant during the active hours of the day."
Influence of the feeding frequency on nutrient utilization in man: consequences for energy metabolism. Eur J Clin Nutr. 1991 Mar;45(3):161-9.
7. "RESULTS:
There were no significant alterations in either the positive or negative regulators of muscle mass at either 15 or 40 h, when compared to gene expression measured 3 h after a meal. Similarly, plasma myostatin and IGF-1 were also unaltered at these times. CONCLUSIONS: Unlike previous observations in catabolic and cachexic diseased states, short-term fasting (40 h) fails to elicit marked alteration of the genes regulating both muscle-specific protein synthesis or atrophy. Greater periods of fasting may be required to initiate coordinated inhibition of myogenic and atrogenic gene expression."
Actions of short-term fasting on human skeletal muscle myogenic and atrogenic gene expression. Ann Nutr Metab. 2006;50(5):476-81. Epub 2006 Aug 24.
8.
"These results demonstrate that GH—possibly by maintenance of circulating concentrations of free IGF-I—is a decisive component of protein conservation during fasting and provide evidence that the underlying mechanism involves a decrease in muscle protein breakdown."
The Protein-Retaining Effects of Growth Hormone During Fasting Involve Inhibition of Muscle-Protein Breakdown. Diabetes 50:96-104, 2001
9. "Glucose kinetics and organ substrate balance were measured basally and for 5 h after eating pizza (600 kcal) containing carbohydrates 75 g as starch, proteins 37 g, and lipids 17 g.
It is concluded that in human subjects, 1) the absorption of a natural mixed meal is still incomplete at 5 h after ingestion"
Splanchnic and leg substrate exchange after ingestion of a natural mixed meal in humans. Diabetes, Vol 48, Issue 5 958-966, (1999)
10. "When the diet was served in six equal meals per (lay, the women’s mean serum cholesterol level was intermediate between but not significantly different from that observed on the three meals per day or two small and one large meal per day regimens.
Serum levels of phospholipids, glycerides, and total fatty acids were not significantly affected by the frequency or size of meals. No significant differences among the regimens were observed in the retention of nitrogen, calcium, magnesium, and phosphorus, in fat digestibility, or in urinary excretion of thiamine and riboflavin."
Frequency and size of meals and serum lipids, nitrogen and mineral retention, fat digestibility, and urinary thiamine and riboflavin in young women. Am J Clin Nutr. 1967 Aug;20(8):816-24.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by shabby
