thoughts on this high calorie experiment

[wbsgn12]

http://www.fathead-movie.com/index.p...ng-experiment/

I was wondering what your thoughts are regarding the outcomes of this experiment with respect to calorie counting.

similarly, I recognize that you need starch to build or even maintain muscle/strength. BUT , would you agree that a bulking or recomp routine only needs a negligible # of carbohydrates to support training, and that the rest of carbs should come from fats & proteins?

[Jordan Feigenbaum]

I was wondering what your thoughts are regarding the outcomes of this experiment with respect to calorie counting.

I think there's pretty good evidence for a body fat set point and a defense of that set point. I think this set point gets altered in many different situations, i.e. certain pharmaceuticals, dietary protocols, and diseases that alter either neural and/or hormonal governors on feeding, weight gain, etc. I also think that there are too many variables in Felham's experiement, namely the protein and fiber intake. Here's what I'd like to see: a person eat 5000kCal (overfeeding diet) with 250g of protein in treatment a (high carb low fat) and treatment B (low carb high fat) and 30g of fiber per day in each. I'd also like to use a radiotracer analysis to see how much intramuscular and liver glycogen was lost in the low carb treatment (and not restored via gluconeogenesis, which is very slow) and how much was regained with the influx of carbohydrates. All in all, this tends to support my assertion that some people respond better to high carb/low fat and others to low carb/high fat, with the caveat of the aforementioned confounders.

similarly, I recognize that you need starch to build or even maintain muscle/strength. BUT , would you agree that a bulking or recomp routine only needs a negligible # of carbohydrates to support training, and that the rest of carbs should come from fats & proteins?

I wouldn't say you need starch/carbs to maintain strength or build it, but I think to build muscle and strength OPTIMALLY, carbohydrates work synergistically with protein (whereas fat doesn't). I would not agree that you only need a negligible amount of carbs to support training, since we know that carbohydrates + protein = more muscle protein synthesis than protein alone or protein + fat in isocaloric situations.

[wbsgn12]

not trolling here, just challenging you--

carbs+protein+caloric surplus=muscle (and strength, though I think you can get marginally stronger without a caloric surplus);

my personal experience is that low carb/no carb/insufficient carbs=no muscle no strength gains, horrible workouts.

if there is a limit on the amount of muscle and strength a given workout can produce (i.e. you can only get so much productivity out of a particular workout), then there should also be a limit on the amount of carbohydrate that you should need to produce that desired outcome in a given day. And that amount of carbohydrate would certainly differ person to person--I think studies support this, as you alluded to. Finding that magic number should be each individual's goal in order to minimize fat gain; agreed?

Finally, I completely agree with you that there seems to be a natural set point person to person. Some people are just naturally lean, some are not. In your opinion, what does this mean for the individual who maintains a <10% BF year round, defying their set point? Does this almost necessarily imply day to day calorie monitoring and restriction?

[Jordan Feigenbaum]

if there is a limit on the amount of muscle and strength a given workout can produce (i.e. you can only get so much productivity out of a particular workout), then there should also be a limit on the amount of carbohydrate that you should need to produce that desired outcome in a given day. And that amount of carbohydrate would certainly differ person to person--I think studies support this, as you alluded to. Finding that magic number should be each individual's goal in order to minimize fat gain; agreed?

I need more context to actually answer this, but I don't agree with the end of your first sentence. There is no "limit" outside of caloric limits, which produce the desired outcome. This varies from person to person based on caloric need, training volume, and macro split- but technically you do not "need" any carbohydrates to produce strength or muscle gains. Similarly, you do not "need" 200g of protein a day for strength or muscle gains. Rather, there is an optimal amount of both within the context of goals of an individual and their personal physiology. The last sentence I agree with within the context of an intermediate to advanced lifter or someone whose sport is highly dependent on their weight.

Does this almost necessarily imply day to day calorie monitoring and restriction?

Either above or below for the desired outcome will likely be necessary, though this isn't limited to the <10% crowd IMO.