A calorie is not a calorie

[adamrochester]

yup, you either eat all candy or only chicken and raw broccoli. There is no in between !

amen !

[JohnBrowne]

Kurt sounds like he knows very little about nutritional science

[JohnBrowne]

Kurt sounds like he knows very little about nutritional science

I read the whole thing again. To be totally honest I am blown away that someone that is so totally clueless about basic physiology could possibly compete and do well at his level.

holybrotardsciencebatman/10

Not to mention he obviously has a huge superiority complex based around his DIET of ALL things. It's hard to respect a guy that blatantly insults anyone that disagrees with his personal beliefs.

[Cumulonimbus]

I read the whole thing again. To be totally honest I am blown away that someone that is so totally clueless about basic physiology could possibly compete and do well at his level.

holybrotardsciencebatman/10

Not to mention he obviously has a huge superiority complex based around his DIET of ALL things. It's hard to respect a guy that blatantly insults anyone that disagrees with his personal beliefs.

Bro, I'm like so lost, do I want that insulin surge post workout or do I want to avoid it by not eating Lays Baked chips?!

[JohnBrowne]

Bro, I'm like so lost, do I want that insulin surge post workout or do I want to avoid it by not eating Lays Baked chips?!

Well you want an insulin spike PWO and junk food like baked Lays cause an insulin spike yet for some reason you shouldn't eat baked Lays.

blown = mind

[Cumulonimbus]

But insulin is very broabolic.

WHAT DO I DO?!

[JohnBrowne]

I've heard that Xtend enemas elevate insulin and leucinanabolismz

Only Xtend works though!!!!!111!!!1!

[juliacheh]

Guys, did you two smoke pot together or smth?

[JohnBrowne]

Nope but I just cut a line of Scivation LeucineX10000

[Cumulonimbus]

I only bun a day prior to off days, makes the whole next day a mess..








wut

[juliacheh]

This should clarify everything.

I was trying to put the point across that, Macro nutrient requirements and calorie requirements are 2 very different things. If IIFYM Crew was telling them to eat a whole cake every day, it would be called IIFYCR (If IT Fits Your Calorie Requirements) not IIFYM (If It Fits Your MACROS). What people need to learn is that you cannot and will not fit a whole cake, ice cream bucket, box of cereal, three super sized big mac meals, and whatever other ridiculous amount of "junk food" you can think of into your daily macro nutrient requirements. Everyone please be aware that IIFYM Crew doesn't eat ice cream all day, they most likely meet their protein and fat requirements for the day and after they've consumed about 80% of their total intake for the day, they calculate the last bit as ice cream, or whatever else they enjoy eating.
(c) l2ambo

[wakingmalice]

I've lost 20 pounds so far using krispy kremes as significant carb and fat source. Feels good man.

[Spottydog]

yup, you either eat all candy or only chicken and raw broccoli. there is no in between !

LOL. What about chicken, brocoli and CHOCOLATE?

[AustrianOakJr]

Id like to post a link up to one of the best single posts (well, okay...there are two parts) that I have read on this forum regarding this topic. Scroll down to post 928 in Kurt Weidner's log (or prior if you want the background info) made by Quelly.

http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showth...825321&page=31

[coltmasterj]

This should clarify everything.

I was trying to put the point across that, Macro nutrient requirements and calorie requirements are 2 very different things. If IIFYM Crew was telling them to eat a whole cake every day, it would be called IIFYCR (If IT Fits Your Calorie Requirements) not IIFYM (If It Fits Your MACROS). What people need to learn is that you cannot and will not fit a whole cake, ice cream bucket, box of cereal, three super sized big mac meals, and whatever other ridiculous amount of "junk food" you can think of into your daily macro nutrient requirements. Everyone please be aware that IIFYM Crew doesn't eat ice cream all day, they most likely meet their protein and fat requirements for the day and after they've consumed about 80% of their total intake for the day, they calculate the last bit as ice cream, or whatever else they enjoy eating.
(c) l2ambo

I agree with the IIFYM philosophy to an extent, but one needs to remember that "If it fits your macros" is personal and people will set "their" macros where they want them. What I mean is, some of these people are setting their macros based on what "they" think they should or would even like to be eating. On a bulking diet, I believe people will be looser with the macros than they would with dieting. Eating crap fits "their" macros because they are where "they" set them. And, I do believe, each individual has probably an ideal personal macro profile or dietary strategy, but very few actually know it or follow it. Setting macros for most novices is just a guessing game. So, I think the junk eaters may be a little out of touch with what may be ideal for their macro profile and will have to learn to eat better in order to reach their long-term goals.

[Cumulonimbus]

^ Facepalm.

I am actually baffled to say the least. I just remembered who you are, you're the guy claiming that your 1999 photo was taken at sub 3% BF, correct?

[juliacheh]

I agree with the IIFYM philosophy to an extent, but one needs to remember that "If it fits your macros" is personal and people will set "their" macros where they want them. What I mean is, some of these people are setting their macros based on what "they" think they should or would even like to be eating. On a bulking diet, I believe people will be looser with the macros than they would with dieting. Eating crap fits "their" macros because they are where "they" set them. And, I do believe, each individual has probably an ideal personal macro profile or dietary strategy, but very few actually know it or follow it. Setting macros for most novices is just a guessing game. So, I think the junk eaters may be a little out of touch with what may be ideal for their macro profile and will have to learn to eat better in order to reach their long-term goals.

I am also baffled by your comment.
You really think that there are some "ideal" macros and every calories can be accounted for to the T?
And eating crap and junk...Didn't I just explain that IIFYM people fit in foods they like in moderation? It doesn't necessarily have to be fast food, e.g.
Are you following an IDEAL dietary strategy?

[str8flexed]

I agree with the IIFYM philosophy to an extent, but one needs to remember that "If it fits your macros" is personal and people will set "their" macros where they want them. What I mean is, some of these people are setting their macros based on what "they" think they should or would even like to be eating. On a bulking diet, I believe people will be looser with the macros than they would with dieting. Eating crap fits "their" macros because they are where "they" set them. And, I do believe, each individual has probably an ideal personal macro profile or dietary strategy, but very few actually know it or follow it. Setting macros for most novices is just a guessing game. So, I think the junk eaters may be a little out of touch with what may be ideal for their macro profile and will have to learn to eat better in order to reach their long-term goals.

what?

[coltmasterj]

^ Facepalm.

I am actually baffled to say the least. I just remembered who you are, you're the guy claiming that your 1999 photo was taken at sub 3% BF, correct?

Nope. Never claimed that. I would say I was in the 7-8% range there. I never reached shredded condition because I ran out of time. It was a show I did because I just wanted to give it a go being the only "natural" show in the state that year. I found out about the show about 4 weeks out, so I hadn't really peaked yet on show day. I lost a good deal of mass in the final 4 weeks just trying to get in the respectable bodyfat range. I don't really care what happened then because it was my first and only show.
Hell, so many things in my life have happened since then, that have lit a fire in me to get back on stage and actually do it right this time. Saying that, to present the best package I know I am capable of, I will not compete for at least 18 months from now. I will have to diet for about a year to get shredded, and unlike last time, I can choose my show...not let the one and only show available dictate my stage condition like last time. I'm pretty excited about it, so please understand that I am just trying to get acquainted with successful competitors like yourself (and have much respect for), and learn from y'all so that I can make my second go at this sport a successful one.

[coltmasterj]

I am also baffled by your comment.
You really think that there are some "ideal" macros and every calories can be accounted for to the T?
And eating crap and junk...Didn't I just explain that IIFYM people fit in foods they like in moderation? It doesn't necessarily have to be fast food, e.g.
Are you following an IDEAL dietary strategy?

I think everybody misunderstood my post. Sorry for the confusion folks. I am just saying that macros are a guessing game for a lot of dieters and they can set up macro targets that are not ideal for themselves. It takes some time to get it right.
For me, I'm definitely NOT following an ideal dietary strategy since I can measure that I have gained bodyfat while bulking. Although realistically, that is expected and a good gage of that I am eating enough calories to maximize muscle growth during bulking.

[Cumulonimbus]

I think everybody misunderstood my post. Sorry for the confusion folks. I am just saying that macros are a guessing game for a lot of dieters and they can set up macro targets that are not ideal for themselves. It takes some time to get it right.
For me, I'm definitely NOT following an ideal dietary strategy since I can measure that I have gained bodyfat while bulking. Although realistically, that is expected and a good gage of that I am eating enough calories to maximize muscle growth during bulking.

Uhhh, and how is your argument any different if some clueless tard were to set their own macros and eat only the foods that are deemed "clean" and not follow an IIFYM approach?

Are we talking about caloric balance or food choices or what? My mind is full of fukc.

[str8flexed]

let's keep it respectful guys

[juliacheh]

I think everybody misunderstood my post. Sorry for the confusion folks. I am just saying that macros are a guessing game for a lot of dieters and they can set up macro targets that are not ideal for themselves. It takes some time to get it right.
For me, I'm definitely NOT following an ideal dietary strategy since I can measure that I have gained bodyfat while bulking. Although realistically, that is expected and a good gage of that I am eating enough calories to maximize muscle growth during bulking.

I'm sorry, no disrespect meant, I'm just honestly not getting the point here.

I'm a total noob at this, but my understanding is that there are no ideal macros. After meeting protein and fat requirements the rest is personal preference.

As per IIFYM, I follow smth like Alan's approach -80% whole foods, 20% fun foods, sometimes it's 90-10 or 85-15
My point is that as long as I am consistent, make gains in the gym, and able to reach body recompositioning goals (muscle gain/fat loss), it doesn't matter if I eat 100% "clean" or, let's say, a bagel with PB and jelly per day.

[coltmasterj]

Uhhh, and how is your argument any different if some clueless tard were to set their own macros and eat only the foods that are deemed "clean" and not follow an IIFYM approach?

Are we talking about caloric balance or food choices or what? My mind is full of fukc.

When I am talking about macros, I am referring to grams of each, not percentage of total caloric input. Sorry for the confusion. All my original point was that macros (in grams/day) are set by ourselves, and people are going to make judgements and have different ideas on where to set their macros (and hence calories) to begin with. Some will eat high/low carbs, others high/low fat, and a few will have protein out of a reasonable range. When that happens, then you'll see a wide variety of what people eat to hit those numbers in terms of grams per day. So, people will claim that they can eat this or that all day to hit their targetted grams for each macronutrient, when really they are just trying to hit targets that are often just guesses and may not be ideal for their body. I hope this makes more sense.

[coltmasterj]

I'm sorry, no disrespect meant, I'm just honestly not getting the point here.

I'm a total noob at this, but my understanding is that there are no ideal macros. After meeting protein and fat requirements the rest is personal preference.

As per IIFYM, I follow smth like Alan's approach -80% whole foods, 20% fun foods, sometimes it's 90-10 or 85-15
My point is that as long as I am consistent, make gains in the gym, and able to reach body recompositioning goals (muscle gain/fat loss), it doesn't matter if I eat 100% "clean" or, let's say, a bagel with PB and jelly per day.

Agreed. I think we all are saying the same thing, but my communication skills over the computer are a little weak today...time to eat I guess.

[SupaaJ]

When I am talking about macros, I am referring to grams of each, not percentage of total caloric input. Sorry for the confusion. All my original point was that macros (in grams/day) are set by ourselves, and people are going to make judgements and have different ideas on where to set their macros (and hence calories) to begin with. Some will eat high/low carbs, others high/low fat, and a few will have protein out of a reasonable range. When that happens, then you'll see a wide variety of what people eat to hit those numbers in terms of grams per day. So, people will claim that they can eat this or that all day to hit their targetted grams for each macronutrient, when really they are just trying to hit targets that are often just guesses and may not be ideal for their body. I hope this makes more sense.

Is this not possible to do without being a macro ninja?
I mean, isn't it possible to track caloric levels precise enough so one can find their maintenance set point?

^That assumes someone willing to put a little effort in.

[coltmasterj]

Is this not possible to do without being a macro ninja?
I mean, isn't it possible to track caloric levels precise enough so one can find their maintenance set point?

^That assumes someone willing to put a little effort in.

Sure we can. Most of us do that. However, as you said, it requires some effort to track. I would expect every competitor to know their maintenance level within 300 cals/day. The more measurements one makes over time, the more confidence they will have in the number.

[Quelly]

Kurt sounds like he knows very little about nutritional science

I read the whole thing again. To be totally honest I am blown away that someone that is so totally clueless about basic physiology could possibly compete and do well at his level.

holybrotardsciencebatman/10

Not to mention he obviously has a huge superiority complex based around his DIET of ALL things. It's hard to respect a guy that blatantly insults anyone that disagrees with his personal beliefs.

Id like to post a link up to one of the best single posts (well, okay...there are two parts) that I have read on this forum regarding this topic. Scroll down to post 928 in Kurt Weidner's log (or prior if you want the background info) made by Quelly.

http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showth...825321&page=31

Having both met the man, being engaged in a discussion on the topic with him (thanks for linking Sean) and happening to disagree with him....

I will say the following, Kurt is a stand up guy, he is humble and he is respectful. He also does know his fair share of physiology, exercise science and nutrition.
But, I do believe he has a more one sided black and white view of the subject, but he definitely does not have a superiority complex, he also gets animated and I think his passion and emotion on the subject was apparent in the rant (he clarified it was a rant not an article).

So let's keep the discussion to the evidence and facts and not try to attack the credibility of the person with the opinion we disagree with.

For people on both sides of the fence, I challenge you to present your opinion without attacking the other side's credibility. That is the cowards way out, and it is basically saying "well I can't support my opinion very well, so I'll call you names so people think your point is wrong"

[Slovation]

I think you have a great argument Eric. What a lot of people are failing to understand is that MOST people that compete would also like to have a real life outside of it. If eating strictly "clean" actually does make the SLIGHTEST difference, the amount of sacrifice is not worth it for your everyday competitor. For someone like Kurt, Tommy, Layne, etc that are at that top level they might be willing to do whatever to takes to get every last bit out of their prep. So as I see it....

IIFYM - 95% people can get in very good competition shape/still have a social and comfortable life.

Strictly clean diet - Elite athletes looking for every edge

Im also not implying that people that avoid any "junk" food are miserable but I think most people wouldnt necessarily truly enjoy that lifestyle.

Different strokes for different folks, its all INDIVIDUAL.

[svespie]

To be technical, the definition of calorie is a measurement of heat energy.

A calorie is the amount of energy required to raise the temperature of 1 gram (or 1 mL) of pure water 1 degree Celsius.

So yes, a calorie is a calorie, strictly speaking.