higher caloric intake/more cardio vs. lower caloric intake/less cardio v. bodyfat

Discussion in 'Fitness & Nutrition' started by UnleashTheBeast, Jan 29, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. UnleashTheBeast

    UnleashTheBeast rawR OT Supporter

    Joined:
    May 13, 2006
    Messages:
    3,136
    Likes Received:
    0
    If you have a caloric intake of 2500cals a day, and you burn 500 cals a day doing cardio, your maitenance is 2000cals a day.

    If you increase your caloric intake to around 3000cals a day, but double your cardio and maybe burn 1000cals via cardio a day, your maitenance is still 2000cals a day...

    Does having a higher caloric intake/burning more calories via cardio help lean you out more than a little bit lower intake/less cardio?
     
  2. 4cd-Air

    4cd-Air Rape seemed like the next logical step

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2001
    Messages:
    9,899
    Likes Received:
    1
    what? where did you get a maintanence number

    still lost as fuck


    fuck, finally a question...taking in 1000 calories over "maintanence" is going to slow the loss of bodyfat, even if you do the cardio. Unless you do cardio after every meal to counter the extra calories, there will be a point where you are taking in too much and storing it as fat (I think)
     
  3. GTLifter

    GTLifter Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2005
    Messages:
    62,453
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Durty Durty ATL Niggah
    calories in and calories out....


    unless you are trying to step on stage it doesn't matter that much as long as you burn more then you eat...
     
  4. V!

    V! New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2004
    Messages:
    28,709
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Local MOTOGP Track
    He's trying to ask this question, is it better to eat that extra hamburger and work out for 60 minutes instead of 30 minutes to counter those calories or is it better to skip the extra hamburger and only work out for 30 minutes.
     
  5. BlackIce72

    BlackIce72 New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    7,867
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    NJ
    As far as likeliness to get sufficient nutrients without supplements then high/high
     
  6. ralyks

    ralyks New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2005
    Messages:
    6,796
    Likes Received:
    1
    You mad retarded, son.

    Personally, I prefer the higher calorie intake and more exercise. More cals = more nutrients (if you're eating correctly). It'll also help lessen the chances of carb spillover and let you get more muscle-sparing protein.

    And then there's the added benefit of extra exercise.
     
  7. Uglybob69

    Uglybob69 I miss beer.

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2006
    Messages:
    9,032
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Cincinnati, OH
    I feel 100% better when I eat a ton and I'm more active to make up for it.
     
  8. 4cd-Air

    4cd-Air Rape seemed like the next logical step

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2001
    Messages:
    9,899
    Likes Received:
    1
    GT is right, calories in vs. calories out is all that matters when leaning out

    as far as more nutrients, if you mean vitamins and minerals, then he could just as well take a multi-vitamin

    and I have no idea what you mean by "carb spill-over", and more "muscle-sparing protein" is still just excess calories that must be burned in order to prevent storage as bodyfat.

    perhaps it is you who are mad retarded, son
     
  9. jokka

    jokka OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2005
    Messages:
    38,421
    Likes Received:
    32
    Location:
    GO REDSKINS
    Wirelessly posted via wap.offtopic.com (BlackBerry8320/4.2.2 Profile/MIDP-2.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 VendorID/100)

    Wisdom
     
  10. ralyks

    ralyks New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2005
    Messages:
    6,796
    Likes Received:
    1
    Wrong. Cals in vs Cals out will determine WEIGHT LOSS, not quality of weight loss. You could eat 1000 cals/day of fat, lose 5 lbs in a week, and it would be all muscle lost.

    Vitamins are plan B, not A. If you're getting all your nutrients from vitamins, you're retarded. Vitamins and minerals are generally more bio-available in food form. I've seen enough articles saying that multi's are essentially useless to know not to rely on them.

    I'll forego the insult and share some of my infinite knowledge with you, son. When your glycogen stores are full from eating too many carbs, and you eat more carbs, the carbs can not be stored as glycogen and so are instead stored as fat. Exercise burns primarily glycogen, therefore the more you exercise the more you'll burn glycogen and the less likely you are to have full glycogen stores, and the less likely you are to add fat.

    Your body needs to consume protein for normal activities. This is called nitrogen turnover. Let's say you hypothetically require 200g of protein in a day (at 1g/LBM), and because you're dieting you don't get that. Where is the difference going to come from? Your body will break down your existing muscle to feed itself. Therefore, the protein is considered "muscle sparing".
     
  11. 4cd-Air

    4cd-Air Rape seemed like the next logical step

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2001
    Messages:
    9,899
    Likes Received:
    1
    If you are getting ALL your nutrients from vitamins, you are either eating NO FOOD AT ALL or you have a GI tract issue such as Crohns that prevents absorption. If you think multi-vitamins are useless that's your opinion, but I doubt you are meeting all your RDA's without one. Some of the more obscure minerals such as selinium, zinc, and a few others are hardly a part of the average persons diet.


    I'll wait while you go put away your textbook...done? Good. First, nobody "requires" 200g of protein. The 1g/LBM equation is a reccomendation for people involved in activity requiring high levels of physical exertion leading to excess muscle tissue damage.

    As far as glycogen stores go in relation the the original thread question, the more you excercise the more you convert available sugars to glycogen, this is true. The original question however, was some shit about taking in extra calories and then attempting to burn them off through extra activity leading to quicker loss of body fat. This is a circular pattern of taking in too much and then making up for it, taking in too much and then making up for it, over and over and over. If I take in 6000 calories and only need 2000 a day, could I just burn off the extra 4000 through exercise and have no ill effect? Maybe. Does that make any sense from the viewpoint of the person paying for all those extra calories with their money, only to have to work harder in the gym to burn it right back off. No.



    In any event, this is all just bullshit math and numbers.
     
  12. TheMarchHare

    TheMarchHare OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2008
    Messages:
    2,982
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Gon-Ju, South Korea to Californ-I-A
    haha forgot to mention that i fucking love the av meng~
     
  13. DTR rex

    DTR rex New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2004
    Messages:
    14,518
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Chi-Town
    I prefer higher cals with more exercise.

    When trying to lean out diet is the primary factor but it gets to a point where diet can only get you so far and proper cardio conditioning is what will get you that extra mile of definition and aesthetic conditioning.

    That being said, I wouldn't eat 1,000 cals over maintenance and then rely on having to complete 1,000 cals worth of cardio. I am not sure you know how much cardio is necessary to burn 1,000 cals.
    Stick with a more manageable number like 500 cals to be burnt. Eating at maintenance isn't enough to lean out, you'll need to be under.

    Thus; using your example of 2,000 cals being your maintenance: I would eat 2300-2400 (300-400 cals over maintenance) and aim to accomplish an extra 500 cals worth of cardio.
    This will ensure you're operating under maintenance, but still getting in enough protein/carbs/fats to sustain muscle mass. And more importantly, does not require the ridiculous idea of having to put aside 2 hours a day of cardio time to actually succeed in burning 1,000+ cals.
     
  14. devman

    devman New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2004
    Messages:
    1,204
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Nova
  15. 4cd-Air

    4cd-Air Rape seemed like the next logical step

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2001
    Messages:
    9,899
    Likes Received:
    1
    a fucking ton, that's half the reason the idea is just silly
     
  16. DTR rex

    DTR rex New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2004
    Messages:
    14,518
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Chi-Town
    Hence my revamp on his original plan.
     
  17. CodsterTX

    CodsterTX OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2005
    Messages:
    26,425
    Likes Received:
    1
    Do it BIG, bigger burgers, bigger weights
     
  18. BimmerJustin

    BimmerJustin Why would you deny yourself something you want?

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2000
    Messages:
    57,527
    Likes Received:
    8
    Location:
    Fantasyland
    i think there is a happy medium for everyone. Obviously if you eat 1000 cals/day, you're going to feel awful regardless of cardio. Eat too much, and you'll feel just as bad. IMO, the best thing to do (when maintaining or cutting) is eat just enough so you feel good and adjust your cardio based on your goals.
     
  19. fatmoocow

    fatmoocow bored OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    18,329
    Likes Received:
    307
    Location:
    the intarweb
    A couple things, the math isn't as clean as you may imagine. The number on the treadmill that says you burned 200 calories has nothing to do with reality. In reality you may burn those 200 calories, but depending on the intensity of the exercise that treadmill time increases your overall metabolism, this is not easy to calculate.

    Eating also increases your metabolism, particularly protein and fat as they require more calories to process/digest. So technically eating more/exercising more should be easier, however, it's doesn't take much to add 2k dirty calories to your diet, and it's a bitch to work off 2k calories. So you gotta find which ever one you're better at doing.

    I think you are asking the wrong question though. Eating an additional cheaseburger and put in an extra hour on the treadmill is not going to be much different than doing neither. What will be different is lifting like a maniac and then eating a shit ton of clean protein.
     
  20. Cumstang02

    Cumstang02 New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2005
    Messages:
    6,374
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Is it in yet?
    I agree that the number of calories that a treadmill displays as burned is far from reality, but the number that is burned from increased metabolism is insignificant.

    Fat does take more to process but yeilds higher calorie gains. The main reason people lose weight from higher fat diets is because they're less likely to get hungry while the food sits in the disgestive system.

    If you eat 2,000 calories a day and burn 500 you net 1,500. If you eat 1,750 and burn 250 you net 1,500. I think the difference isn't important although personally i'd rather take in more calories a day and do cardio. I feel it helps with nutrient dispersion.
     
  21. el es dee

    el es dee ...through a cloud of chalk and the midst of pain.

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2006
    Messages:
    6,534
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Pittsburgh, PA
    John Berardi pushes the eat more burn more approach
     
  22. Drewski

    Drewski New Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2002
    Messages:
    11,340
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Scarberia aka Scarlem, ON
    I wouldn't listen to anything anybody who got a degree from the University of Western Ontario said.

    oh, wait, I went to UWO, so maybe you shouldn't listen to me, which means you should listen to a UWO grad, but then you should listen to me....I'm so confused :o



    :mamoru:
     
  23. gsxtasyd

    gsxtasyd Lift Big........Eat Big........Sleep Big........GE

    Joined:
    May 27, 2001
    Messages:
    4,251
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    San Diego-Back in Cali, Love it.
    if you prefer eating more then eat more and do the cardio if you prefer doing less cardio eat less and do less cardio.
     
  24. gsxtasyd

    gsxtasyd Lift Big........Eat Big........Sleep Big........GE

    Joined:
    May 27, 2001
    Messages:
    4,251
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    San Diego-Back in Cali, Love it.
    depending on your bodyweight its really not that much...

    I was burning 1100-1200 in 45 mins on elliptical when I was cutting...

    I know those aren't completely accurate buts its really not THAT much cardio.
     
  25. 4cd-Air

    4cd-Air Rape seemed like the next logical step

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2001
    Messages:
    9,899
    Likes Received:
    1
    I have no way to prove or disprove this, but I would guess that the machine was off.


    example
    http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/exercise/SM00109
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page