Welcome Guest

  • Welcome to the StrongLifts.com Forum, a place for intelligent discussion about losing fat, building muscle, getting stronger, eating healthier and much more.

    You're currently viewing as a guest, which gives you limited read-only access. By joining the free StrongLifts.com community, you'll be able to post messages & videos, keep an online training log, see new messages posted since your last visit and remove this header message. Registration is fast, simple and 100% free!

    Click here to join the StrongLifts.com Community today.

    I really debated about starting a log. This journey gets very personal at times. It's hard to announce to the world things you didn't even want to admit to yourself. But that's why I did it. It needed to be right in front of me so I could deal with it head on. And I needed support to get through it. Who would have thought I'd find that here of all places. :lol: But I did. These guys have been a great help and encouragement through some tough times for me and they probably don't even realize it. - Pagangoddess


Eating "Clean" versus Calorie Counting

Food, supplements, diets, recipes.

Re: Eating "Clean" versus Calorie Counting

Postby Bosun » Wed Jun 03, 2009 7:00 am


Click here to register for free and get rid of this ad.
First of all Vlad, I am not contending the laws of preservation of energy, however, could you please tell me how you can use this law of physics to conclude that the energy required for digestion of proteins is equal to ten percent of its energy content? Why not 15% or 2.5485%? Furthermore, why do you assume that this relationship linear to the amount of protein digested?

Is is not unreasonable to assume that the extra energy required to digest 10g of protein over 10g of carbs is neglible small, and non-linear, meaning that this "thermic effect" is diminishing through consumption. However, this is why we need proper studies, to establish the effect and an explanation behind. As I said, I am sure you will find plenty of top-tier studies of such an effect if you use Google Scholar.

Believing that simple logic and high school knowledge can describe complex processes within the body is a fallacy. I am not saying you guys should not believe in the a thermic effect from eating proteins, that is up to yourself, I am just saying that this view is contented by academics and professionals and that you might want to read up on the topic before you take it as given. Or you could trust your own logic and posts on forums etc.
Bosun
StrongLifts Member
 
Posts: 34
Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 9:07 am

Re: Eating "Clean" versus Calorie Counting

Postby Vlad » Wed Jun 03, 2009 9:14 am

Bosun, just for the background, I am a biochemist and hold a PhD degree. I specialise in mathematical modelling of biological processes but have expertise in a lot of other stuff as well. Believe it not, simple logic and high school knowledge can be used to describe very complex biological process, if this knowledge is applied correctly. As a example, see my latest paper in a top systems biology journal:
http://www.nature.com/msb/journal/v5/n1/full/msb200878.html

But back to the subject:
Carbs are utilised in the body in a straightforward way: glycolysis and the oxidation in the Crebs cycle. For proteins this is much more complex. There are 20 different amino acids, and depending on the amino acid there are various preparatory steps before they can be oxidised in the Crebs cycle. These preparatory steps require some energy consumption, and it is estimated that it is on average around 10% of the energy contained in amino acids. But this number could vary depending on the protein source. This relationship is linear if one assumes that proteins are utilised 100% for energy. But of course this does not have to be so and probably is not so.

Again, I would like to repeat, IMO the thermic effect is negligible and has no practical importance.
Age 38, Ht 190 cm (6'3)
Current stats: Deadlift 3x3x193.2 kg (426 lb), Squat 3x162.5 kg (358 lb),
Bench press 4x99.4 kg (219 lb), Overhead press 3x3x69 kg (152 lb),
my training log
User avatar
Vlad
Moderator
 
Posts: 1271
Joined: Mon Jan 19, 2009 10:54 am
Location: Denmark

Re: Eating "Clean" versus Calorie Counting

Postby Bosun » Thu Jun 04, 2009 3:03 pm

If Nature.com is the homepage of the journal "Nature", then congratulations for publishing in a top journal!

However, as a phd you should be the first person to admit that empirical studies matter and that theory based on logic often leads to incorrect conclusions. Since I couldnt be bothered checking for studies on the topic of protein digestion you might be right, however, my point was that in bodybuilding/nutrition, as well as my own field finance, there are a lot of "truths" out there that are based on no more than wishful thinking.

Interesting discussion though.
Bosun
StrongLifts Member
 
Posts: 34
Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 9:07 am

Re: Eating "Clean" versus Calorie Counting

Postby Dada » Thu Jun 04, 2009 3:37 pm

Leanstrong wrote:
MidLifter wrote:Two Words: Dave Tate.

http://www.t-nation.com/free_online_art ... _project_i

This guy appears to be like most powerlifters. The reason he has all those health problems though is probably because of his body fat (which, as the article stated, is NOT 12%). I am going to go out on a limb here and say that if he:
1) Covered his protein needs (probably around 1g/lb)
2) Covered his essential fatty acid needs (which I am recently learning has much scientific evidence towards affecting body composition)
3) Eliminated trans-fat from his diet (which ample evidence shows can cause more body fat gain at equal calories)
3) Controlled his total calories, found his maintainance rate, subtracted 300-500 calories, and made sure he lost no more than 1lb/week
4) Continued to eat the same kind of crap he already was eating
Then most of his health problems would go away once his actual body fat percentage was in an acceptable range (maybe under 20%). I might also tell him to include some cardio in his routine, but Mehdi has shown that powerlifting-type moves already boost heart health to a healthy range.

Not sure if you've seen the subsequent articles on this one. He has since cleaned up his diet and changed his workouts since he doesn't compete anymore. Long story short, now he is huge and ripped! The thing about his original 'diet' was that he did it on purpose to maintain a bodyweight of 300 lbs for competition reasons.

Oh, the thing about his bodyfat %. The reason it measured as 12% is b/c all of his fat was basically in one place (obvious which place) and the rest was all muscle. Since he was so heavily muscled it kind of threw off the computations.
User avatar
Dada
StrongLifts Member
 
Posts: 1497
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 7:56 pm
Location: South Carolina

Previous

Return to Nutrition

 


  • Related topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users

  • Get My Free eBook
  • Learn how to build muscle and lose fat with strength training in only 3 workouts per week. Click here for more info.
  •