Calories, macros timing and meal size questions...

[gtdmb]

I know that I will probably get bashed for this because I am sure it has been covered, but I can't find it in the search. While I have lifted for a long time, I have finally decided to really get serious about my eating. I feel like I have a pretty good handle on my caloric needs (~2860 to bulk) and macros (180gP, 102gF, 306gC). Based on this info, I have a couple questions.

1. I know most folks say what you eat does not matter as long as you stay within your macros and overall calories. In the most dramatic examples, are the carbs related to the refined sugar in a piece of chocolate cake equivalent to the carbs in brown rice or an apple? Within these macros, should all carbs be considered equal? Same goes for fats, good fats from fish vs. saturated fats from dairy products? Maybe it is just as simple as counting totals and not worrying about simple vs. complex carbs or saturated vs good fats. Just seems a little counter-intuitive.

2. Does it really matter when you eat what throughout the day? For example, I have trouble getting solid food down first thing in the morning, so I always make a shake. The shake consists of milk, all natural peanut butter, oats, a banana and protein powder. The macros are in the neighborhood of 60gP, 26gF, 77gC. It is a pretty heavy shake. Are there too many calories (and protein or fat) in this one meal? Can the body absorb and use all of it or is it too much at one time?

Again, I am sure this has been covered over and over, but I am still a little confused. Any guidance or explanations will be most appreciated. Thanks.

[Tyreedge]

I know that I will probably get bashed for this because I am sure it has been covered, but I can't find it in the search. While I have lifted for a long time, I have finally decided to really get serious about my eating. I feel like I have a pretty good handle on my caloric needs (~2860 to bulk) and macros (180gP, 102gF, 306gC). Based on this info, I have a couple questions.

1. I know most folks say what you eat does not matter as long as you stay within your macros and overall calories. In the most dramatic examples, are the carbs related to the refined sugar in a piece of chocolate cake equivalent to the carbs in brown rice or an apple? Within these macros, should all carbs be considered equal? Same goes for fats, good fats from fish vs. saturated fats from dairy products? Maybe it is just as simple as counting totals and not worrying about simple vs. complex carbs or saturated vs good fats. Just seems a little counter-intuitive.

2. Does it really matter when you eat what throughout the day? For example, I have trouble getting solid food down first thing in the morning, so I always make a shake. The shake consists of milk, all natural peanut butter, oats, a banana and protein powder. The macros are in the neighborhood of 60gP, 26gF, 77gC. It is a pretty heavy shake. Are there too many calories (and protein or fat) in this one meal? Can the body absorb and use all of it or is it too much at one time?

Again, I am sure this has been covered over and over, but I am still a little confused. Any guidance or explanations will be most appreciated. Thanks.

It matters a ton what you eat, 200 calorie chocolate bar is not the same as 200 calories of vegetables. I have read and followed the lean mass diet and it is a little confusing at first, but after 2 weeks, it is simple to follow. There is a bunch of other diets on this site that you can search for as well.

The breakfast you are having is more than fine, you have your proteins, fats, carbs, banana and milk.

There is no stupid questions here, people get bashed if they don't provide any information.

[ironwill2008]

I know that I will probably get bashed for this because I am sure it has been covered, but I can't find it in the search. While I have lifted for a long time, I have finally decided to really get serious about my eating. I feel like I have a pretty good handle on my caloric needs (~2860 to bulk) and macros (180gP, 102gF, 306gC). Based on this info, I have a couple questions.

1. I know most folks say what you eat does not matter as long as you stay within your macros and overall calories. In the most dramatic examples, are the carbs related to the refined sugar in a piece of chocolate cake equivalent to the carbs in brown rice or an apple? Within these macros, should all carbs be considered equal? Same goes for fats, good fats from fish vs. saturated fats from dairy products? Maybe it is just as simple as counting totals and not worrying about simple vs. complex carbs or saturated vs good fats. Just seems a little counter-intuitive.

2. Does it really matter when you eat what throughout the day? For example, I have trouble getting solid food down first thing in the morning, so I always make a shake. The shake consists of milk, all natural peanut butter, oats, a banana and protein powder. The macros are in the neighborhood of 60gP, 26gF, 77gC. It is a pretty heavy shake. Are there too many calories (and protein or fat) in this one meal? Can the body absorb and use all of it or is it too much at one time?

Again, I am sure this has been covered over and over, but I am still a little confused. Any guidance or explanations will be most appreciated. Thanks.

From a pure macro standpoint, carbs are carbs, fat is fat, and protein is protein. Taken in the context of a complete meal, your body doesn't know, or care, the difference between, say a spoonful of sugar, and, say, a spoonful of rice. Either will be burned for fuel, or stored as bodyfat, depending on whether or not you've eaten in excess for the day.

From a pure health standpoint, you're obviously going to be better off eating the rice rather than the sugar. And no one would claim that eating a 500-calorie piece of cake has more micronutrients than, say the equivalent in calories of whole-wheat pasta with Marinara sauce. The point I'm trying to make is that from a calorie standpoint, carbs are carbs. That aside, your health issues, and your food choices, are for you to decide.

As far as meal timing is concerned, your body doesn't run on a "3 hour clock." In other words, there's no requirement to eat this frequently, unless it helps keep you sated, or, if you have a very fast metabolism requiring you to eat vast quantities of food in order to be at a surplus, and it's the only way you can manage to eat enough to satisfy your daily totals. (A regular meal will still be in the digestive process after 5-6 hours, so there's no real need to try to eat more any sooner; you can't "force" more protein into your muscles by just eating more, despite what the supplement ads might have you believe. The idea that you'll "go catabolic" or "go into starvation mode" after just a few hours after eating has been long-disproven by science. Again, it's contrary to what the supplement companies would have you believe, so these myths get repeated and reinforced, over and over and over.

What you consume after training should be predicated on what you consumed before training. As above, if you trained in a 'fed' state, there is still protein/nutrients in your bloodstream for several hours after that meal, so there's no need to rush to consume something that's "fast-digesting," again, not what the supplement companies would have you believe.

If you were a marathon runner, or Lance Armstrong, this might be different, but bodybuilders aren't going to deplete themselves by lifting weights for 90 minutes, providing they've eaten regularly before training.


Bottom line--can you build muscle by eating every 2 hours, and slugging down a whey shake a few milliseconds after training? Sure; bodybuilders have been doing it that way for years..

Is it at all necessary? Not as long as you eat to your daily totals of P/C/F for the day.













Here's some pertinent information on this subject. No broscience or 'anecdotal' evidence; just facts:





On meal timing from Lyle McDonald:

http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/mus...ass-gains.html

Given a moderately sized whole food meal, the body will generally remain in an anabolic state for at least five to six hours (and possibly longer depending on the foods chosen). Conservatively, we might use five hours as the upper limit cutoff for time between meals.

This yields a duration between meals of anywhere from three to five hours. This should keep the body in an overall anabolic state without causing problems related to too frequent or too infrequent consumption of meals.

On meal timing from Alan Aragon:

Pre, During, & Postworkout Nutrition

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hierarchy of Importance

When speaking of nutrition for improving body composition or training performance, it's crucial to realize there's an underlying hierarchy of importance. At the top of the hierarchy is total amount of the macronutrients by the end of the day. Distantly below that is the precise timing of those nutrients. With very few exceptions, athletes and active individuals eat multiple times per day. Thus, the majority of their day is spent in the postprandial (fed) rather than a post-absorptive (fasted) state. The vast majority of nutrient timing studies have been done on overnight-fasted subjects put through glycogen depletion protocols, which obviously limits the applicability of the outcomes. Pre-exercise (and/or during-exercise) nutrient intake often has a lingering carry-over effect into the post-exercise period. Throughout the day, there's a constant overlap of meal digestion & nutrient absorption. For this reason, the effectiveness of nutrient timing does not require a high degree of precision.

The Primary Laws of Nutrient Timing

The First Law of Nutrient Timing is: hitting your daily macronutrient targets is FAR more important than nutrient timing.
The Second Law of Nutrient Timing is: hitting your daily macronutrient targets is FAR more important than nutrient timing.

Some interesting information on meal timing:


http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1905998

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8383639

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11319656




And again, from Alan Aragon:

Post-exercise insulin spiking has become standard practice in fitness circles because of misinterpretation of research done on fasted subjects. As a result, many people believe that unless you consume a fast-acting liquid mix of [insert the latest hyped quickie carb & protein source], you won't achieve the walloping insulin spike supposedly necessary to optimize recovery & anabolism. But here's what everyone misses: the nutrient-mediated insulin elevation required to max out net anabolism is relatively minor; it's about 2-3 times the normal basal levels of insulin (this was seen even in the midst of ample amino acid availability via continuous infusion).

To reiterate, insulin's positive effect on net protein balance is maximal with modest elevations; even less than what's seen during normal feeding. As a matter of fact, a properly placed pre-exercise meal will keep insulin sufficiently elevated even after your training bout is over. To put things into perspective, a regular solid meal can elevate insulin anywhere from 4-8 times fasting levels depending on size, and keep it elevated for a few hours. As little as 6 g of essential amino acids plus 35 g sucrose taken immediately pre-exercise can keep insulin elevated to roughly 4 times fasting levels an hour after 40-50 minutes of resistance training. What do you think insulin levels would look like with a typical preworkout meal or shake containing at least as much carbs & double the protein?

Another little-known fact is that amino acids can stimulate protein synthesis without any additional insulin output beyond that caused on their own. I'm gonna assume at this point that everyone has some protein pre & postworkout, so this is yet another reason to nix the empty-calorie refined carb & go for a more nutritious carb source whenever possible.

[ironwill2008]

I've read on many, many occasions in posts here in the O35 that many O35ers state that they rarely stray out of this forum, for various reasons. That's everyone's personal choice, of course, but those who don't venture into some of the other forums miss out on a vast amount of excellent information.

Alan Aragon, who is a frequent contributor to the 'nutrition' form, and also a moderator on this site, also has his own site, chock-full of solid, research-reviewed information. I'd urge everyone here to spend some time at his site, and get up to speed on what's really up as far as nutrition is concerned. He can be found here when he's not posting in the bbdotcom forums:

http://www.alanaragon.com/Home.html

[BigRalph73]

Thank you for the post. Yours and similar are the reasons some of us surf through this site.

[bustasinclair]

I've read on many, many occasions in posts here in the O35 that many O35ers state that they rarely stray out of this forum, for various reasons. That's everyone's personal choice, of course, but those who don't venture into some of the other forums miss out on a vast amount of excellent information.

Alan Aragon, who is a frequent contributor to the 'nutrition' form, and also a moderator on this site, also has his own site, chock-full of solid, research-reviewed information. I'd urge everyone here to spend some time at his site, and get up to speed on what's really up as far as nutrition is concerned. He can be found here when he's not posting in the bbdotcom forums:

http://www.alanaragon.com/Home.html

Remind me Bill, why are you not a Mod?

Great info as usual! I'm on spread......perpetually with you

[*STEVE*]

1. I know most folks say what you eat does not matter as long as you stay within your macros and overall calories.

Not this folk , IMO it def matters.

2. Does it really matter when you eat what throughout the day?

IMO YES

[gtdmb]

IMO YES

Can you explain?

[*STEVE*]

Can you explain?

sure.

6 meals of with whatever mix you want of healthy carbs , protein and fats dependent on your diet type and goals

or

6 meals of Mc Crap


what you eat matters ....

[gtdmb]

sure.

6 meals of with whatever mix you want of healthy carbs , protein and fats dependent on your diet type and goals

or

6 meals of Mc Crap


what you eat matters ....

I was asking if you cared to explain that you think WHEN you eat matters.

[peacesells]

sure.

6 meals of with whatever mix you want of healthy carbs , protein and fats dependent on your diet type and goals

or

6 meals of Mc Crap


what you eat matters ....

Negged for reading comprehension skills. You are probably light headed though from not eating.

[*STEVE*]

I was asking if you cared to explain that you think WHEN you eat matters.

my bad , I read it wrong ...

ok IMO 3000 cals spread throughout the day into 5 or 6 meals is better than 2 1500 cal meals with one in the early am and the other at night.

Negged for reading comprehension skills. You are probably light headed though from not eating.

lulz

Im eatin , no worries about that

[gtdmb]

Thanks to everyone that posted. I feel better that what I am doing is a move in the right direction. I am going to just keep plugging away and staying on top of my intake. I really appreciate you guys taking the time to reply.

[desslok]

. In the most dramatic examples, are the carbs related to the refined sugar in a piece of chocolate cake equivalent to the carbs in brown rice or .

Ironwill did a great job explaining things, but I wanted to add something. Stay away from extreme examples. Would I ever use cake as my only source of carbs the whole day? No. But, if I want a pice of cake occasionally, and I can fit it into my macros I'm not going to deprive myself of it. Moderation.