6packmission - The information I used is what's generally accepted and not just my opinion. I admit that "generally accepted" does not necessarily mean correct though. We thought soy was good for us for a long time. There are still people who think that vaccines can cause autism, which they don't, but still.
My hands did change size (somewhat) with my weight, but no really, the grams rule is by body weight. I got far better results when I switched to it. Have you noticed the phenomena of people's hands getting "bigger" when they're more hungry or better like a particular food?
You need to eat for the body you have now. Call EAS on this one. They advocated this system for a long time.
Also, in your scenario the guy would only be eating 4 grams more per BFL meal. That's like 2 bites so it's really not a factor.
Ideally, if you'd want the most accurate amount of protein for your needs, is to figure out your number of calories you need based on your bodyfat, age, height, weight, etc.. (there are formulas that do that), and then multiply your daily caloric needs times the percentage of calories from protein you're shooting for in your macronutrient ratios. Then you will know how many calories from protein you need each day. 1 gram of protein equals 4 calories. Do the math and then you'll know how many grams per day you actually need based on the macronutrient ratio you choose.
If you were going to do it that way then do an RMR to determine how much you need total per day and now your individual body processes each macronutrient. I did one and it was cool. I had been cutting some carbs and totally got called out. It determined I was burning fat and carb at a relatively equal rate, which for me, is really bad. I'm very fast twitched so I didn't improve my endurance, but did slow down my natural abilities. I then upped my carbs again and not only became more physically capable again, but lost more weight. ...it was so cool.
The thing is jessica im 295lbs and when im good on the BFL program I eat only 2000 cals a day and I am very satisfied and feel great on that amount of food
Then there's nothing wrong with that! I can go as low as 1200 or at times, as high as 1800. 1500 tends to be where I stay and I'm now 127. There are variations and sometimes, by day. I was giving the general rule that's accepted by the industry. It certainly isn't to say that your 2000 calories for being 259 is wrong.
6packmission... The one thing you don't want to do is to go under your basal metabolic rate... the number of calories your body needs just to function without exercising. If you go below that, your body will sense "starvation" and slow down your metabolism to conserve energy. If you can find out through the measuring of your bodyfat percentage, weight, height, age, etc.. and plug it into the formula to find out your basic caloric needs, you will know the calorie amount you should never go below. Ideally, to save your muscle while going through a caloric deficit is to not go much below 20 to 30% your maintenance calorie level (which factors in your activity level also)... whatever that may be. It might be 2000 calories for you and that's why you feel good on that. It's not that hard to figure the numbers out.
Jesssica... That test sounds so cool to figure out how your body proceses the macronutrients! Would love to have one of those. I know from my body type (endomorph/mesomorph combo) and from just paying attention to how my body responds to food, that I feel better and have more energy on a little less carbs, so I just start out my day with the normal amount of carbs and taper them down as the day goes on.
All that being said ... I figure the fist size portions, etc as described in BFL puts you in the right calorie range anyway, and you don't have to worry about calories at all. I like counting calories, so that's why I'm talking about that route... been reading a lot of stuff lately to educate myself further, and have information overload. LOL!
I think one should base it on 3 things and not rely on theories that may or may not be true
1.are you feeling great
2.are you losing fat
3.are you getting stronger
Whatever works for you. We're all different and as long as you're getting the results you want, then that's what's right for you.
I both agree and disagree. There's nothing wrong with what you just said so this is more a devil's advocate thing.
I can't tell you how much better I got after that RMR. Remember that Lance Armstrong measured his food. He was that particular.
As for may or may not be true. That's true, in a way, but not really. The 1 gram rule has been used in the fitness community for well over a decade. It's been really tested.
But....if you feel great, are losing fat and getting stronger then who cares about a theory that's technically more "accurate". Whatever you're doing is working.
I just like precision and wonder if I can do better with more of it. So...palm/fist works, but if I do grams and do better then I like that more. For me, that's what feels right. That drives some crazy so they shouldn't do it that way.
Well put, Jessica.
BFL calls for fist-sized serving of carbohydrates, and palm-size servings of protein. I don't think there is universal agreement within the fitness community on the optimal amount of protein to consume:
In Chicago Tribune Magazine, Oct. 24, 2010, an article "Rethinking Protein Powder" by James S. Fell states most people don't need supplements to achieve their goals, but admits protein powder (& shakes) are a convenience. The daily dietary reference intake (DRI) is 0.36 g. per pound of body weight, but the folks who sell supplements recommend 1.1 g/lb. Not surprising eh? Helps profits. Anyway, in the article various researchers chime in; one at Northeastern Univerisity recommends 0.45 - 0.54 g/lb for people engaged in endurance training, but the DRI's are adequate for weight lifters. A highly regarded nutrition consultant, Alan Aragon specializes in bodybuilders, physique models, pro athletes, including LA Kings, Anaheim Ducks hockey and LA Lakers. He recommends 0.77 g/lb for those looking to lose fat and build muscle, but only 0.63 g/lb if solely building muscle. An article from the Journal of International Sports Nutrition showed the optimal results for weighlifting athletes was at 0.72 g/lb. I haven't found any references going at 1.0 g/lb. The real shocker is the statement that "researchers from McMaster Univ. in Mailton, Ontario recommended athletes consume a 60% to 65% carbohydrate diet to fuel sport performance - a figure that sends Dr. Atkins fans into apoplexy...." I'm sure it would. I think it's understood these would be complex carbs, as we eat.
Having read all this, I don't monitor protein all that closely in my diet.
palm / fist doesn't work for me for many things so I like precision. There isn't "universal" agreement, but there is industry accepted. Also, it was EAS who taught me about the 1 gram method. Using palm / fist on many carb items we get too much and on protein too little. It takes a lot of cottage cheese to get to 25 grams and very little brown rice.
Even with measuring, how can you be absolutely sure of the amount of protein you're getting? Do you weigh food before or after cooking? Do you subtract the water weight?
Weigh it? I'm not talking weight, but protein content. 1 small container of Greek yogurt is 20 grams of protein so if I eat that then I know it was 20 grams. I can't remember my brown rice off the top of my head, but let's say that 1/3 dry cup is 25 grams. I would make a 1 cup batch and put in 3 containers. I would know each container had about 25 grams of carb per one.
I'm sorry. Maybe I confused things by not clarifying. I am not talking weight. I am talking carb and protein grams. I use the package to tell me most things. Some are rather known. For instance, 3.5 oz of chicken is about 24 grams. I know what that piece looks like.
Also, once something is known you don't really have to go through it again. A medium apple is about 21 grams. I know that's the right size for me.
© Abbott Laboratories,2013