Reply
Results 1 to 25 of 25
  1. #1
    Registered User sandaltan's Avatar
    Join Date: Sep 2009
    Posts: 9,351
    Rep Power: 6844
    sandaltan is a name known to all. (+5000) sandaltan is a name known to all. (+5000) sandaltan is a name known to all. (+5000) sandaltan is a name known to all. (+5000) sandaltan is a name known to all. (+5000) sandaltan is a name known to all. (+5000) sandaltan is a name known to all. (+5000) sandaltan is a name known to all. (+5000) sandaltan is a name known to all. (+5000) sandaltan is a name known to all. (+5000) sandaltan is a name known to all. (+5000)
    sandaltan is offline

    calories in =/= calories out

    if this were true, and if it were this simple, then you could eat 2000 calories of candy bars and achieve the same results as someone who eats 2000 calories of nutritious food. this is not true, and it should seem obviously not true, because the human body and the metabolic and physiological mechanisms that process the foods we eat is way, WAY more complicated than CICO.

    I don't think CICO is helpful advice. in fact, i think it's really misleading. can we PLEASE try to be a little more precise?

    it is true that if you burn more calories than you consume, you will lose weight.

    but this is also misleading, since for many, the goal isnt to lose weight, it's to lose fat.

    if you lose water weight and muscle weight, you've lost weight. congrats?

    and even if you can measure exactly how many calories you're consuming, there is really no way to know (within even a large margin of error) how many calories your body is burning, and or what its doing with those foods. you might lose more weight eating more calories of different foods than you would eating fewer calories of other foods, and vice versa. you cant really measure the second half of the CICO equation!

    so thats my rant. my advice is to eat plenty of healthy food, sleep, exercise, be consistent, and then measure your results over time and adjust.

    good day!
    Reply With Quote

  2. #2
    Registered User hardyboysare's Avatar
    Join Date: Oct 2018
    Age: 49
    Posts: 2,661
    Rep Power: 19291
    hardyboysare is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) hardyboysare is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) hardyboysare is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) hardyboysare is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) hardyboysare is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) hardyboysare is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) hardyboysare is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) hardyboysare is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) hardyboysare is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) hardyboysare is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) hardyboysare is a splendid one to behold. (+10000)
    hardyboysare is offline
    First enjoy this basic self study done by Dr Mark Haub:-

    http://edition.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/1...sor/index.html

    He ate basically ***p and lost weight so on that front yes calories in vs calories out causes weight loss.

    Now for muscle retention, satiety and health would it work. Most likely not (but as you can see his health markers did improve with weight loss so health is very loose depending on your goal). As for muscle retention weight training and adequate amounts of protein would cover that and consuming extra protein won't make any difference in muscle retention. That is why this sticky exists:-

    https://forum.bodybuilding.com/showt...hp?t=173439001

    No-one here says that optimal body composition is dependant on just CICO however for weight loss or fat loss your body must be in a caloric deficit therefore on that front CICO is the king. You need other stuff for optimal body comp but really these are quite easy to hit as the required protein really is not that much (anywhere between 100-160g protein is plenty for most people). The third important part is weight training but as that is nothing to do with nutrition is not part of this discussion.

    As the effects of TEF I wouldn't even bother considering it. It makes up so little amount of calories burnt it really makes no significant difference.

    So IMO calories in vs calories out is not misleading as once you hit your optimal amounts of protein and micros (which as stated really isnt that high) body composition is controlled by calories, this is especially true for fat loss.
    Reply With Quote

  3. #3
    Gaintaining Mrpb's Avatar
    Join Date: May 2012
    Location: Netherlands
    Posts: 28,746
    Rep Power: 144603
    Mrpb has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Mrpb has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Mrpb has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Mrpb has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Mrpb has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Mrpb has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Mrpb has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Mrpb has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Mrpb has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Mrpb has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Mrpb has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000)
    Mrpb is offline
    Originally Posted by sandaltan View Post
    if this were true, and if it were this simple, then you could eat 2000 calories of candy bars and achieve the same results as someone who eats 2000 calories of nutritious food. this is not true, and it should seem obviously not true, because the human body and the metabolic and physiological mechanisms that process the foods we eat is way, WAY more complicated than CICO.

    I don't think CICO is helpful advice. in fact, i think it's really misleading. can we PLEASE try to be a little more precise?

    it is true that if you burn more calories than you consume, you will lose weight.

    but this is also misleading, since for many, the goal isnt to lose weight, it's to lose fat.

    if you lose water weight and muscle weight, you've lost weight. congrats?

    and even if you can measure exactly how many calories you're consuming, there is really no way to know (within even a large margin of error) how many calories your body is burning, and or what its doing with those foods. you might lose more weight eating more calories of different foods than you would eating fewer calories of other foods, and vice versa. you cant really measure the second half of the CICO equation!

    so thats my rant. my advice is to eat plenty of healthy food, sleep, exercise, be consistent, and then measure your results over time and adjust.

    good day!
    Start by reading this: https://forum.bodybuilding.com/showt...hp?t=173439001

    Then let us know if you have any questions.
    Recommended science based fitness & nutrition information:
    Alan Aragon https://alanaragon.com/
    Brad Schoenfeld http://www.lookgreatnaked.com/
    James Krieger https://weightology.net/
    Jorn Trommelen http://www.nutritiontactics.com/
    Eric Helms & Team3DMJ https://3dmusclejourney.com/
    Reply With Quote

  4. #4
    Registered User rtpmarine's Avatar
    Join Date: Jun 2019
    Posts: 65
    Rep Power: 973
    rtpmarine is a jewel in the rough. (+500) rtpmarine is a jewel in the rough. (+500) rtpmarine is a jewel in the rough. (+500) rtpmarine is a jewel in the rough. (+500) rtpmarine is a jewel in the rough. (+500) rtpmarine is a jewel in the rough. (+500) rtpmarine is a jewel in the rough. (+500) rtpmarine is a jewel in the rough. (+500) rtpmarine is a jewel in the rough. (+500) rtpmarine is a jewel in the rough. (+500) rtpmarine is a jewel in the rough. (+500)
    rtpmarine is online now
    OP, you’re not wrong but you’re throwing the baby out with the bath water. CICO, despite being very deeply flawed, is pretty much the best approximation that we have today for directionality of weight change. I personally feel that sensation of hunger or fullness is a better approximation, but it is super subjective and unique to each person.

    Yes, food choices matter and they have a huge effect on calorie expenditure. But for 99% of people simply using CICO is going to get them headed in the right direction. Once they are on their way, they will slowly pick up more and more knowledge about the complicated web of metabolic physiology.
    Reply With Quote

  5. #5
    Verified Aesthetic rhadam's Avatar
    Join Date: Mar 2009
    Posts: 37,245
    Rep Power: 289917
    rhadam has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) rhadam has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) rhadam has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) rhadam has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) rhadam has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) rhadam has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) rhadam has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) rhadam has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) rhadam has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) rhadam has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) rhadam has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000)
    rhadam is offline
    Originally Posted by sandaltan View Post
    if this were true, and if it were this simple, then you could eat 2000 calories of candy bars and achieve the same results as someone who eats 2000 calories of nutritious food. this is not true, and it should seem obviously not true, because the human body and the metabolic and physiological mechanisms that process the foods we eat is way, WAY more complicated than CICO.

    I don't think CICO is helpful advice. in fact, i think it's really misleading. can we PLEASE try to be a little more precise?

    it is true that if you burn more calories than you consume, you will lose weight.

    but this is also misleading, since for many, the goal isnt to lose weight, it's to lose fat.

    if you lose water weight and muscle weight, you've lost weight. congrats?

    and even if you can measure exactly how many calories you're consuming, there is really no way to know (within even a large margin of error) how many calories your body is burning, and or what its doing with those foods. you might lose more weight eating more calories of different foods than you would eating fewer calories of other foods, and vice versa. you cant really measure the second half of the CICO equation!

    so thats my rant. my advice is to eat plenty of healthy food, sleep, exercise, be consistent, and then measure your results over time and adjust.

    good day!
    Lol you already plague the R/P section with your idiocy, don't subject this forum to it as well.

    Kindly (not really) gtfo
    USAF
    LEO

    Operation Inherent Resolve ~ 2019
    Reply With Quote

  6. #6
    I love my power hour MrCarrot's Avatar
    Join Date: Jun 2008
    Age: 38
    Posts: 982
    Rep Power: 3179
    MrCarrot is a glorious beacon of knowledge. (+2500) MrCarrot is a glorious beacon of knowledge. (+2500) MrCarrot is a glorious beacon of knowledge. (+2500) MrCarrot is a glorious beacon of knowledge. (+2500) MrCarrot is a glorious beacon of knowledge. (+2500) MrCarrot is a glorious beacon of knowledge. (+2500) MrCarrot is a glorious beacon of knowledge. (+2500) MrCarrot is a glorious beacon of knowledge. (+2500) MrCarrot is a glorious beacon of knowledge. (+2500) MrCarrot is a glorious beacon of knowledge. (+2500) MrCarrot is a glorious beacon of knowledge. (+2500)
    MrCarrot is offline
    Whilst there might be more than CICO when it comes to health and body composition, at the other end of the scale we have people who will eat nothing but chicken breast and broccoli because they believe everything else will instantly turn to fat.

    CICO is really easy for people to understand, and as Hardyboysare pointed out, if you couple CICO with optimal amounts of protein and fat, you're probably off to a good start. When cutting in particular, it's difficult to hit the recommended protein and fat minimums if you stay within your calories but only eat junk.
    Reply With Quote

  7. #7
    Gaintaining Mrpb's Avatar
    Join Date: May 2012
    Location: Netherlands
    Posts: 28,746
    Rep Power: 144603
    Mrpb has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Mrpb has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Mrpb has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Mrpb has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Mrpb has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Mrpb has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Mrpb has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Mrpb has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Mrpb has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Mrpb has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Mrpb has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000)
    Mrpb is offline
    Originally Posted by rtpmarine View Post
    OP, you’re not wrong but you’re throwing the baby out with the bath water. CICO, despite being very deeply flawed, is pretty much the best approximation that we have today for directionality of weight change. I personally feel that sensation of hunger or fullness is a better approximation, but it is super subjective and unique to each person.
    Not really. "Sensation of hunger or fulness" is heavily influenced by food choices. It's not necessarily a sign for eating under or over maintenance. CICO, while far from perfect, is a much better model for predicting weight gain or loss. As demonstrated by this study, for example: https://osf.io/preprints/nutrixiv/w3zh2
    Reply With Quote

  8. #8
    Registered User rtpmarine's Avatar
    Join Date: Jun 2019
    Posts: 65
    Rep Power: 973
    rtpmarine is a jewel in the rough. (+500) rtpmarine is a jewel in the rough. (+500) rtpmarine is a jewel in the rough. (+500) rtpmarine is a jewel in the rough. (+500) rtpmarine is a jewel in the rough. (+500) rtpmarine is a jewel in the rough. (+500) rtpmarine is a jewel in the rough. (+500) rtpmarine is a jewel in the rough. (+500) rtpmarine is a jewel in the rough. (+500) rtpmarine is a jewel in the rough. (+500) rtpmarine is a jewel in the rough. (+500)
    rtpmarine is online now
    Originally Posted by Mrpb View Post
    Not really. "Sensation of hunger or fulness" is heavily influenced by food choices. It's not necessarily a sign for eating under or over maintenance. CICO, while far from perfect, is a much better model for predicting weight gain or loss. As demonstrated by this study, for example: https://osf.io/preprints/nutrixiv/w3zh2
    Believe me, I am a huge advocate of “food choices matter”. All I’m saying is that, given a certain diet, being hungry or being full tells me with good accuracy which direction I’m heading in. The bell curve shifts if I eat 400 calories of steak vs. 400 calories of bread, so I’ve learned to use it as an approximation dependent on my food choices.
    Reply With Quote

  9. #9
    team ketchup AdamWW's Avatar
    Join Date: Mar 2006
    Location: Seattle, Washington, United States
    Posts: 17,306
    Rep Power: 84518
    AdamWW has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) AdamWW has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) AdamWW has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) AdamWW has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) AdamWW has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) AdamWW has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) AdamWW has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) AdamWW has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) AdamWW has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) AdamWW has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) AdamWW has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000)
    AdamWW is offline
    Srsly? Another CICO thread?
    The power of carbs compels me!
    Reply With Quote

  10. #10
    Registered User rtpmarine's Avatar
    Join Date: Jun 2019
    Posts: 65
    Rep Power: 973
    rtpmarine is a jewel in the rough. (+500) rtpmarine is a jewel in the rough. (+500) rtpmarine is a jewel in the rough. (+500) rtpmarine is a jewel in the rough. (+500) rtpmarine is a jewel in the rough. (+500) rtpmarine is a jewel in the rough. (+500) rtpmarine is a jewel in the rough. (+500) rtpmarine is a jewel in the rough. (+500) rtpmarine is a jewel in the rough. (+500) rtpmarine is a jewel in the rough. (+500) rtpmarine is a jewel in the rough. (+500)
    rtpmarine is online now
    Originally Posted by AdamWW View Post
    Srsly? Another CICO thread?
    It seems like society wants to become more and more precise as time goes by, regardless of whether or not we have the ability to achieve such precision. It’s like in sports how people demand every little ticky tacky call to be instantly reviewed for accuracy. The expectation is that doing so somehow elevates the experience and makes it more fair, but we see in practice that it’s just a never-ending rabbit-hole that ultimately degrades the entertainment value.

    So it goes with CICO. It’s not perfect, but it’s the best we got right now. Attempts to improve it are not done out of malice but out of desire to get the call right.
    Reply With Quote

  11. #11
    Gaintaining Mrpb's Avatar
    Join Date: May 2012
    Location: Netherlands
    Posts: 28,746
    Rep Power: 144603
    Mrpb has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Mrpb has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Mrpb has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Mrpb has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Mrpb has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Mrpb has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Mrpb has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Mrpb has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Mrpb has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Mrpb has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Mrpb has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000)
    Mrpb is offline
    Originally Posted by rtpmarine View Post
    Believe me, I am a huge advocate of “food choices matter”.
    My point wasn't really "food choices matter". My point was that CICO is a better approximation for directionality and magnitude of weight gain/loss than sensations of fulness or hunger. And that's supported by many studies.
    Reply With Quote

  12. #12
    Registered User rtpmarine's Avatar
    Join Date: Jun 2019
    Posts: 65
    Rep Power: 973
    rtpmarine is a jewel in the rough. (+500) rtpmarine is a jewel in the rough. (+500) rtpmarine is a jewel in the rough. (+500) rtpmarine is a jewel in the rough. (+500) rtpmarine is a jewel in the rough. (+500) rtpmarine is a jewel in the rough. (+500) rtpmarine is a jewel in the rough. (+500) rtpmarine is a jewel in the rough. (+500) rtpmarine is a jewel in the rough. (+500) rtpmarine is a jewel in the rough. (+500) rtpmarine is a jewel in the rough. (+500)
    rtpmarine is online now
    Originally Posted by Mrpb View Post
    My point wasn't really "food choices matter". My point was that CICO is a better approximation for directionality and magnitude of weight gain/loss than sensations of fulness or hunger. And that's supported by many studies.
    I disagree with your interpretation of the study. I don’t think the study set out to prove the efficacy of CICO, it just wanted to show that some foods will leave you hungrier than others. This obviously must be taken into account when using satiety as a guide stick.

    If you are saying that CICO is a better tool for the majority of people, then I’m with you 100%. I only prefer to use satiety because it’s less of a PITA.
    Reply With Quote

  13. #13
    Gaintaining Mrpb's Avatar
    Join Date: May 2012
    Location: Netherlands
    Posts: 28,746
    Rep Power: 144603
    Mrpb has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Mrpb has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Mrpb has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Mrpb has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Mrpb has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Mrpb has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Mrpb has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Mrpb has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Mrpb has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Mrpb has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Mrpb has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000)
    Mrpb is offline
    Originally Posted by rtpmarine View Post
    I disagree with your interpretation of the study.
    You probably didn't understand what my interpretation was. Both groups ate ad libitum. The group that ate ultra processed foods ended up eating more calories. They gained more weight, in accordance to how many calories they ate. In this highly controlled study CICO was a much better predictor of weight gain than sensations of fulness.

    I understand that you prefer to go by fullness for personal reasons. That's fine of course. I only objected to the claim that it's a better approximation of weight gain than CICO. This is not supported by science.
    Reply With Quote

  14. #14
    Registered Lifter boo99's Avatar
    Join Date: Dec 2008
    Location: Los Angeles, CA United States
    Posts: 12,711
    Rep Power: 122338
    boo99 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) boo99 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) boo99 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) boo99 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) boo99 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) boo99 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) boo99 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) boo99 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) boo99 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) boo99 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) boo99 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000)
    boo99 is offline
    Originally Posted by AdamWW View Post
    Srsly? Another CICO thread?
    I thought the same but first I thought it was that other one till I saw the date

    Im guessing another "is protein based on body weight or goal weight" thread is due lol
    NASM CPT

    IG: jeff.galanzzi

    -----------------------------
    RIP my friend D4K
    Reply With Quote

  15. #15
    Train hard play harder Tommy W.'s Avatar
    Join Date: Feb 2006
    Age: 67
    Posts: 16,392
    Rep Power: 74208
    Tommy W. has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Tommy W. has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Tommy W. has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Tommy W. has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Tommy W. has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Tommy W. has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Tommy W. has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Tommy W. has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Tommy W. has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Tommy W. has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Tommy W. has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000)
    Tommy W. is online now
    OP why don't you eat 2,000 cals of candy bars for a month and report back
    If you don't get what you want you didn't want it bad enough
    Reply With Quote

  16. #16
    Han shot first! TolerantLactose's Avatar
    Join Date: Aug 2019
    Posts: 290
    Rep Power: 1345
    TolerantLactose is just really nice. (+1000) TolerantLactose is just really nice. (+1000) TolerantLactose is just really nice. (+1000) TolerantLactose is just really nice. (+1000) TolerantLactose is just really nice. (+1000) TolerantLactose is just really nice. (+1000) TolerantLactose is just really nice. (+1000) TolerantLactose is just really nice. (+1000) TolerantLactose is just really nice. (+1000) TolerantLactose is just really nice. (+1000) TolerantLactose is just really nice. (+1000)
    TolerantLactose is online now
    OP completely misses the point regarding how and why advice here is given. I don't even know where to begin.
    I can tell time. Time cannot tell me.

    Formerly LactoseTolerant. I'm not very imaginative.
    Reply With Quote

  17. #17
    Registered User CommitmentRulz's Avatar
    Join Date: Mar 2017
    Location: United States
    Age: 60
    Posts: 6,135
    Rep Power: 51828
    CommitmentRulz has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) CommitmentRulz has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) CommitmentRulz has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) CommitmentRulz has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) CommitmentRulz has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) CommitmentRulz has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) CommitmentRulz has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) CommitmentRulz has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) CommitmentRulz has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) CommitmentRulz has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) CommitmentRulz has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000)
    CommitmentRulz is offline
    Originally Posted by sandaltan View Post
    calories in =/= calories out
    Originally Posted by sandaltan View Post
    it is true that if you burn more calories than you consume, you will lose weight.
    Ummm....
    Reply With Quote

  18. #18
    Verified Aesthetic rhadam's Avatar
    Join Date: Mar 2009
    Posts: 37,245
    Rep Power: 289917
    rhadam has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) rhadam has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) rhadam has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) rhadam has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) rhadam has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) rhadam has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) rhadam has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) rhadam has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) rhadam has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) rhadam has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) rhadam has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000)
    rhadam is offline
    Originally Posted by CommitmentRulz View Post
    Ummm....
    That poster frequents the R/P section with comparable idiocy shown here. Be grateful you aren't subjected to it lol.
    USAF
    LEO

    Operation Inherent Resolve ~ 2019
    Reply With Quote

  19. #19
    team ketchup AdamWW's Avatar
    Join Date: Mar 2006
    Location: Seattle, Washington, United States
    Posts: 17,306
    Rep Power: 84518
    AdamWW has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) AdamWW has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) AdamWW has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) AdamWW has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) AdamWW has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) AdamWW has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) AdamWW has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) AdamWW has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) AdamWW has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) AdamWW has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) AdamWW has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000)
    AdamWW is offline
    Originally Posted by CommitmentRulz View Post
    Ummm....

    lol on spread
    The power of carbs compels me!
    Reply With Quote

  20. #20
    Registered User sandaltan's Avatar
    Join Date: Sep 2009
    Posts: 9,351
    Rep Power: 6844
    sandaltan is a name known to all. (+5000) sandaltan is a name known to all. (+5000) sandaltan is a name known to all. (+5000) sandaltan is a name known to all. (+5000) sandaltan is a name known to all. (+5000) sandaltan is a name known to all. (+5000) sandaltan is a name known to all. (+5000) sandaltan is a name known to all. (+5000) sandaltan is a name known to all. (+5000) sandaltan is a name known to all. (+5000) sandaltan is a name known to all. (+5000)
    sandaltan is offline
    Originally Posted by CommitmentRulz View Post
    Ummm....
    you literally ignored 90% of my post
    Reply With Quote

  21. #21
    Registered User sandaltan's Avatar
    Join Date: Sep 2009
    Posts: 9,351
    Rep Power: 6844
    sandaltan is a name known to all. (+5000) sandaltan is a name known to all. (+5000) sandaltan is a name known to all. (+5000) sandaltan is a name known to all. (+5000) sandaltan is a name known to all. (+5000) sandaltan is a name known to all. (+5000) sandaltan is a name known to all. (+5000) sandaltan is a name known to all. (+5000) sandaltan is a name known to all. (+5000) sandaltan is a name known to all. (+5000) sandaltan is a name known to all. (+5000)
    sandaltan is offline
    Originally Posted by rhadam View Post
    That poster frequents the R/P section with comparable idiocy shown here. Be grateful you aren't subjected to it lol.
    gotta let go of the grudges dude. i cant remember, and dont think about, anything you've ever said

    but here you are still upset about stuff i posted like a year ago

    i think that means i win
    Reply With Quote

  22. #22
    Registered User sandaltan's Avatar
    Join Date: Sep 2009
    Posts: 9,351
    Rep Power: 6844
    sandaltan is a name known to all. (+5000) sandaltan is a name known to all. (+5000) sandaltan is a name known to all. (+5000) sandaltan is a name known to all. (+5000) sandaltan is a name known to all. (+5000) sandaltan is a name known to all. (+5000) sandaltan is a name known to all. (+5000) sandaltan is a name known to all. (+5000) sandaltan is a name known to all. (+5000) sandaltan is a name known to all. (+5000) sandaltan is a name known to all. (+5000)
    sandaltan is offline
    Originally Posted by Mrpb View Post
    Start by reading this: https://forum.bodybuilding.com/showt...hp?t=173439001

    Then let us know if you have any questions.
    hey that is actually a very informative post! thank you!
    Reply With Quote

  23. #23
    Registered Lifter boo99's Avatar
    Join Date: Dec 2008
    Location: Los Angeles, CA United States
    Posts: 12,711
    Rep Power: 122338
    boo99 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) boo99 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) boo99 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) boo99 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) boo99 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) boo99 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) boo99 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) boo99 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) boo99 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) boo99 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) boo99 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000)
    boo99 is offline
    Originally Posted by sandaltan View Post
    hey that is actually a very informative post! thank you!

    Yes

    He created it as well
    NASM CPT

    IG: jeff.galanzzi

    -----------------------------
    RIP my friend D4K
    Reply With Quote

  24. #24
    Train hard play harder Tommy W.'s Avatar
    Join Date: Feb 2006
    Age: 67
    Posts: 16,392
    Rep Power: 74208
    Tommy W. has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Tommy W. has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Tommy W. has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Tommy W. has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Tommy W. has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Tommy W. has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Tommy W. has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Tommy W. has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Tommy W. has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Tommy W. has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Tommy W. has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000)
    Tommy W. is online now
    Originally Posted by Vassilis30 View Post
    Calories in - calorie out works for WEIGHT changes.
    Macros dictate muscle/fat changes.
    So it's a little more complicated than calories in/out
    Fat changes dictated by a deficit or surplus of calories and muscle change is dictated by training program. A normal, conscientious diet will provide sufficient macro split provided calories are in line with goals
    If you don't get what you want you didn't want it bad enough
    Reply With Quote

  25. #25
    Registered User allrnder's Avatar
    Join Date: Aug 2015
    Age: 31
    Posts: 2,408
    Rep Power: 25978
    allrnder has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) allrnder has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) allrnder has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) allrnder has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) allrnder has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) allrnder has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) allrnder has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) allrnder has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) allrnder has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) allrnder has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) allrnder has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000)
    allrnder is offline
    is the search feature broken? or did OP not have a look for recent posts before posting this?

    My prev reply
    Calories in vs calories out is not a myth
    Not all calories are created equal.

    Also humans are not closed systems. We are open systems. the 1st law of thermodynamics applies but the 2nd law is more detailed for humans.
    Alan Aragon, Brad Schoenfeld, Stu Phillips, Lyle McDonald. FTW.

    Not a physique competitor but hope to compete in powerlifting next year. Max bench 1RM with pause 160kg. 352lbs.

    Lift and learn.
    Reply With Quote

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts