[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
If nothing else one can rely on some very basic and unavoidable facts.
The only things that can happen with carbohydrates, fat, or protein once absorbed into the bloodstream are:
They can be burned, yielding CO2 and water (or also ultimately) urea, and thus eliminated from the body. Or
Their mass can be incorporated into the body.
Absorbed fats, carbs, and protein can’t be breathed out (except after being burned), pissed out (except for the nitrogen content in protein after being burned), or escape via the ass. A small amount is lost from shed skin and hair but this is not important: there is also some nitrogen loss in sweat but I am not sure if this before or after protein is burned, or both.
So in other words if calories are absorbed the amount in excess of what is burned IS going to go to increased weight, usually fat. And the idea that the amount that is burned will automatically go up to match intake pretty much no matter what it is, is not correct. In fact it generally is not true at a 1:1 ratio for anything about usual maintenance. That is to say, the thermic effect of added food beyond usual maintenance is normally not fully equal to the added calorie intake.
There is no magic way for them to have some other fate, such as in the radio ads for thermal wrap treatments that supposedly result in major fat losses and “shrinking of fat calls” from a single treatment. (Where does the fat supposedly go? Does the starship Enterprise cruise by and beam it out?)[/quote]
This is good basic understanding, everyone should realize this, I hope. I think where all the different diet and meal plan strategies come from is that the food you eat, and when and how you eat it does in fact have an influence over how your body uses it, what you resting metabolic rate is, etc… So while total calories is very important to either building or tearing down the body, I also feel that there are ways to manipulate what when and how you consume nutrients to have the greatest effect of burning bodyfat, and or building muscle.
One of the ideas which doesn’t sit well with me is the idea that to gain muscle you also need to gain some fat along with it. And to lose fat you will also lose some muscle. I think the holy grail would be a diet or nutrition strategy which would allow us to gain muscle while losing fat or keeping it to a baseline figure once that figure is reached.
In my mind what would be an optimal strategy would be to consume one large P&C meal with a low GI carb like oatmeal with very little fat as a first AM meal. Then have all other meals of the day be P&F in a calorie amount that would be suitable to your overall current goals, for instance if burning fat was your priority, these meals would be slightly lower in total calories so that your body will look to reserves shortly after the meal is used up. Then around your workout time, you would go with High GI carbs and protien, this would build muscle. So in one day you could effectively burn some fat and build some muscle, if you do this day in and day out, why would it not be possible to say over 2 months, gain 5 lbs of muscle and lose 5 lbs of fat? If done for a year could one possibly realize gaining 30 lbs of muscle and losing 30 lbs of fat? Even if half of that was possible, wouldn’t gaining 15 lbs of muscle and losing 15 lbs of fat be a very good result for a 1 year period?