Ive counted calories for like 2 years, and i feel like ive completely wasted my time. I mean sure...

Ive counted calories for like 2 years, and i feel like ive completely wasted my time. I mean sure, it was nice because i have a very good understanding now of what product contain, and i can make very nice estimates of what a meal contains etc. But the basic fucking concept of calorie counting now just makes so little sense to me. Who on earth ever came with the idea that our calorie intakes should be the same everyday? That literally isnt what our bodies our made for. Literally not a single animal does it that way. Our ability to burn fat when we just dont eat at all is fucking perfect. All the new studies show that fasting has benefits on every aspect of weightloss, muscle retention, hormonal balance, etc etc etc. There literally isnt a single reason to eat steady every day anymore. Going back to the natural aproach is so much more effective, healthy and FUN to do. You ate too much? just fucking dont eat for a day, or maybe even a few days. Then when your hungry again, just eat as much as you want. This aproach is 100 times more fun/social and sustainable for a lifetime. I seriously would recommend anyone to do this.

Also i am a nutrition student and a nerd who spends alot of time on the internet doing my own research, so ask me anything you want to know, i guess. Ill try my best to answer.

Nice bait. Well played.

Sage. Report. Benched off a bridge.

I dont even understand what the bait could possibly be, but thx for bumping.

What a fag
sage

I am genuinly trying to teach you guys a method that is more natural, healthy and fun, while having an opinion that is way more education than often encountered on this board. Why so negative? If you have any ideas on why my method is not going to work, etc, then go ahead. I am more then willing to answer questions or engage a debate.

I think you're right

Calorie counting is only good to give you a rough estimation of what you’re eating. Companies in the US are legally allowed to be off by as much as 20% on their calorie reporting of their products. That means the 1500 calories you “logged” for the day is probably more like 1800. While companies are allowed a 20% margin, I believe the technology is there for them to be extremely accurate, but they know the country is “counting caloires, so the lower they can report the better for them.

Secondly, most people underreport their intake. Most people can’t tell the difference between a full cup and 3/4 of a cup, nor do they know what the restaurant is adding to the dish.

Calorie counting is good for about a week to get an idea of what your portion size should be. Add 20% to your end of day total then adjust from there. Once you have your portions down there’s no need to religiously log everything.

>Calorie counting is good for about a week to get an idea of what your portion size should be
Yes, but i am actualyl starting to become more and more convinced that there is no size that your portions "should" be. The idea that our average needs some for some reason be steadily divident every day, or even every meal, just doesnt make any sense to how nature and our fysiology works. Our ability to store and burn fat is literally what is made for this. This is how its been for the entire evolution of our species. It is only since very recent that we suddenly decided to no longer make use of this system, and that eating every day, every few hours should be the new standard.

I kinda stop
I only count meals not snacks cause I’m bulking so if I hit my goal with only meals the snacks will be a little buffer

I agree that alternate day or intermittent fasting is great, but how do I get energy for morning gym?

If fasting isnt completely new to you then your body should have to trouble at all creating energy from glycogen and fat deposits. Being dependant on food for energy is really only due to being hormonally used to it (due to eating that way for your entire life) or due to psychological factors.

>have to trouble at al
have NO trouble at all*

We already know how the longest lived, healthiest people in the world eat.

...

We do know that indeed, but we dont know why that is. We can only point at a correlation, not a causation. Are you actually going to make a point or try to debate one of my made points, or are you just going to say "go plant power" and thats it?

Not dependant on food for energy but it still makes a noticeable difference.

How much experience do you have with fasting, and whats the longest youve ever fasted? Most people i know who are adapt to fasting say that they have no energy problems at all with workout. Alot even say that feel like they have more energy compared to when your body is processing food (which theoretically makes sense). Are a male who lifts, you should easily be carrying 2000+ calories of glycogen. So there really is no need of eating carbs before a workout, assuming your body is properly abled to use that glycogen (which could take a little time to adapt if youve been eating every 2 or 3 hours for your entire life and never exercised when not having eaten before).

I undertand your point about the problem of counting for social life, but what I remember is that it is only healthy to be in a 500 cal deficit, otherwise the person loose more muscle than fat. What I trying to say is that it is easier to eat less from the first time than to try to loose that weight after.

All of the arguments of not losing weight too fast/ not eating to little dont apply to fasting. When you fast, your hormonal balance is significantly different. You body understands that it has no food and therefore preserves muscle. All of the science in the subject points to the fact that from all weightloss methods available, fasting preserves by far the most muscle.

It is when we try to lose weight on a 'traditional method', when you eat every x hours, that our body starts to lose muscle, because it never really gets into that mode of where it thinks that there is no food, so it has no intend to increase the hormones that preserve muscle.

i agree with you, and thats why i eat more on the days i lift and a little less on the days i rest

Post source

Source of what? The studies that show muscle preserving hormones in relation to fasting? The studies comparing muscle loss in different weightloss methods etc? Theres dozens of studies in these subject. You can easily google scolar search it for yourself if you want to. Its not very practical for me to now spend an hour searching and to then link a couple of dozen of studies. I dont exactly have a word file with a list of studies in every subject either.

>my /fast/fag way is best way
We get it faggot, all you are doing is stating opinions like this is a blog. A deficit is a deficit, enjoy never knowing peak performance fatty

The days you rest is when your body needs more food, cause that's when it rebuilds itself.

>A deficit is a deficit
It definitly is not. Studies show that the amount of metablic adaption differs significantly in fasting compared to non fasting, amount of muscle preservance differs singificantly when fasting vs not fasting, amount of apoptosis (that means your body cleaning out old cells, precancerous cells, loose skin, scar tissue etc) differs significantly in fasting vs non fasting. And we could go on like this for a while.
>enjoy never knowing peak performance fatty
What do you mean to suggest by this?

Repair does indeed require more energie, but not more than the exercise itself. So to say that you need more food on rest days than on training days is just not try. It uses more energy on a 'rest' day than on a day where your body isnt repairing, yes. But it doesnt actually use more energy than on a training day.

>fysiology
>nutrition student

Sure thing, champ.

From what I've read, you should cunt calories only for 1 or 2 weeks.
No reason to count them more, because after that you know how much calories your meal have.

Are you saying that nutrition educations dont teach how the fysiology of metabolism and fat storage and burning works? Are you saying that they teach this incorrectly? Do you even know what country i live in and what the quality of the education there is?

Please elaborate your point.

Right, but what im also saying is, that its really not even that relevant to know how much your meals contain. Because there is no such thing as "too much". We are naturally designed to be abled too eat "too much" or "too little". When we eat too much, we store it as fat, when we eat too little, we burn fat. The idea that we should eat a set amount of calories a day, or per meal, is completely ignoring this fat mechanism. It is as if its assuming we dont have the ability to store and burn fat. Which is just silly in my opinion. Our ability to store and burn fat is one of the most usefull and basic ways of handling food/energy.

"We are naturally designed to be abled too eat "too much" or "too little"." True that.
Basically the rule "calories in, calories out" is used for one day, but if you're gonna have more calories eaten than your TDEE at whole week , you gonna gain weight.

You add up your TDEE for 1 day 7 times to have your TDEE for week of course.

>but if you're gonna have more calories eaten than your TDEE at whole week , you gonna gain weight.
Ofcourse. But our body's our more than capable of 'compensating' for that as well. We can easily go for a week without food. Our ancestors probably did that quite often. We see that same with other animals. Some go for months without food. There is no reason to put a pin on a week and say "this is the right amount of time for food in vs food out to be balanced out".

no hes probably just pointing out that you spell physiology with an f

Oh, ye. My english isnt that great i guess. Its spelled with an f in alot of european languages.

I know this is sub-optimal bait but...

We live in a time of plenty now. Not just the amount of food we have available, but the caloric value of that food.
100 years ago a decent meal at home came in around 300 - 475 calories (eaten 2 to 3 times a day).

200 years ago was likely even less, and offset by the amount of physical labor people had to do in the absence of certain technological advancements.

Today? You can get a single Nachos Bell Grande (pleb food I know, but I'm weak) from Taco Bell clocking in at 600 cal. For a snack.

CICO should not be discounted. The world is full of fat fucks who lack the willpower to control themselves as it is.

TL;DR
> I weigh 175lbs and just Squat 225lbs for 2. Enjoy some free thickness.

Well ofcourse. Im not actually suggesting that you should eat unlimited amounts of anything that you want. You still have to remain using common sense and try to eat healthy in general. But the idea that we have X amount of calories we are allowed to eat in a day is just silly. Its literally ignoring the existance of our bodies ability to store and burn fat.

You act like you are breaking some big scientific news. Literally no one disputes the body's ability to store fat.
You are ignoring the fact that consistent low bf% (aesthetics) and peak performance (strength) has different requirements than just being skinny. If all you want to do is be average, enjoy whatever the fuck it is that you are preaching here.

>Literally no one disputes the body's ability to store fat.
Most countries dietary advices are. They might not literally dispute it. But the advice is completely bypassing the mechanism.
>You are ignoring the fact that consistent low bf% (aesthetics) and peak performance (strength) has different requirements than just being skinny. If all you want to do is be average, enjoy whatever the fuck it is that you are preaching here.
I dont see your point here. If you are looking for optimilization, wouldnt that infact make fasting a useful tool? The science says that its the method of cutting with the least amount of muscle loss. Thats just 1 example. Seems like a pretty usefull thing to know when you are looking for things like an aesthetic body, to me.
I not saying that you should never have periods where you dont eat regularly. Obviously when you want to gain as much muscle as possible, having more frequent leucine spikes and protein available is a good idea. But like my example i just gave. When its time to cut, then why not utilize fasting?

I've been doing IF and recently alternate day fasting for 4 months now. I workout while in a fasted state atleast 4 times a week too.

Just because our ancestors did it doesn't mean it's optimal for preformance or health.

>nutrition student

so whats your major?

I tracked when I cut and got shredded
Now I'm trying to lean bulk without counting, I actually intuitively eat and have to force myself sometimes some food to not lose weight so a toast with shit load of peanut butter to up the kcals kek
I barely eat grains, instead I opt for vegetables so thats why

Nice joke. But the education is called "nutrition and dietetics" if id translate it to english. It is a bachelors degree.

forgot to add

cutting and bulking isnt optimal if youre also interested in your health
too much stress for your body

I personally am fasting 12-16h depending on life stuff or if I ate too little/didnt have time that day to make meals and then eating healthy and how much I want in the feeding window
I