• Keep up to date with Ausbb via Twitter and Facebook. Please add us!
  • Join the Ausbb - Australian BodyBuilding forum

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.

    The Ausbb - Australian BodyBuilding forum is dedicated to no nonsense muscle and strength building. If you need advice that works, you have come to the right place. This forum focuses on building strength and muscle using the basics. You will also find that the Ausbb- Australian Bodybuilding Forum stresses encouragement and respect. Trolls and name calling are not allowed here. No matter what your personal goals are, you will be given effective advice that produces results.

    Please consider registering. It takes 30 seconds, and will allow you to get the most out of the forum.

Post up what you are eating V2.0

You kunce have some strange views on food. I have to agree with Baz, carbs are the only thing that satisfies, for me anyway. Some people definitely have predispositions towards particular macro groups though.
 
Last edited:
showdownhero said:
It's not personal preference it's fact backed up by scientific research.
Click to expand...

You saying 150g of nuts keep you full for the day is personal preference. You just saying that it is backed up by scientific research doesn't mean you win the argument. What research, you haven't posted or even mentioned any.

You have also failed to address your mythical 1500 calorie diet that contained heaps of nuts when even if half your total calories for the day were nuts depending on the nut you would be around 100g. Lol. So heaps of nuts is impossible on 1500 calories.
 

The scientific research I was referring to was based on a non-insulinogenic diet preventing cravings and making a calorie controlled diet easier to maintain.

Would regularly snack on 58g of cashew nuts during this 1500 calorie diet which is 350 calories.
 
el gaye male said:
Hi Mick. What's a Sim Sim pls? And where do you live?
Click to expand...

My son spilled tea on my keyboard and some keys now stick. Supposed to be Dim Sims,

North west NSW, near Goondiwindi QLD, and I use 'near' lightly, about 100km west from there, but it is the closest town.
 

Post the research.

Since when is 58g of nuts heaps.
 
I admire you for continually fighting the good fight Baz. I'd have given up long ago, head bloodied from bashing the wall too many times...
 
Bazza20 said:
Post the research.

Since when is 58g of nuts heaps.
Click to expand...
I would say more than 1/5 of my daily calorie intake would be classed as heaps,

Regarding the research

Considering were talking about fat loss here and calorie restriciton I'll start off with the links between insulin preventing lypolysis (that's fat burning)

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2953052/

Lower insulin means your body is more readily able to burn your fat stores

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1749-6632.1965.tb34804.x/abstract

Also this study by Donald Novin shows

1) appetite and hunger may be direct functions of dietary carbohydrate. Therefore, low-carbohydrate diets are probably effective by reducing appetite and hunger motivation and thereby affecting weight loss indirectly,
2) we have attributed the appetite- and hunger effects of carbohydrates to insulin-induced hypoglycemia,
3) post-absorptive insulin-induced hypoglycemia can stimulate hunger after a high-carbohydrate meal,
4) rather than increasing appetite and hunger in general, insulin-induced hypoglycemia may specifically increase appetite and hunger for carbohydrates, then one can easily envision that a vicious cycle might ensue and ultimately may lead to exhaustion of the pancreatic beta cells,
5) all carbohydrates are probably not equally important in the prevention and treatment of obesity, and
6) in addition to causing obesity by increasing appetite and hunger, high-carbohydrate diets may also
perpetuate the obese condition by maintaining hyperinsulinemia and the consequent hypoglycemia and hyperphagia.
 
Last edited:
He purely used 1000 calories as a means of measurement. He could have easily cut it in half or a quarter, the discussion is still the same. What are you fuller on for longer?
 
White_Lie said:
He purely used 1000 calories as a means of measurement. He could have easily cut it in half or a quarter, the discussion is still the same. What are you fuller on for longer?
Click to expand...

It's a fucking stupid argument to make regardless

Looking at foods in isolation like that makes absolutely zero sense

And potatoes are empty calories, very strange nutritional decision for anyone looking to limit calories

Not as fibrous as other vegetables vegetables. Less vitamins, minerals and very minimal protein.

And as my studies show stuffing your face full of carbs spikes insulin and leaves you ravenously hungry only a few hours later.
 
Timeah said:
You weigh 80 ish kg? 5'11"? And you are dieting on 1500 calories?

Tim.
Click to expand...
5'11" and currently 88kg

When I started that diet I was 90kg and horrendously out of shape.

I only went down to 1500 calories as an experiement to

a)see if I could
b)see if it was sustainable
c)see what the results were

it resulted in rapid weight loss as you would expect but after 6 weeks (and 6kgs of weight loss) metabolic adaption took hold and weight loss completely plateaued.

Biggest takeaway for me was to make sure you start a weight loss diet at a high calorie level and only drop when you stop losing weight.

Still nice to know I'm capable of maintaining such low calories
 
Here's some more studies linking high carbohydrate consumption and elevated insulin to over eating

Cincotta AH, Luo S, Liang Y: Hyperinsulinemia increases norepinephrine metabolism in the ventromedial hypothalamus of rats. Neuroreport 11:383-7, 2000
Swaab DF: Prader-Willi syndrome and the hypothalamus. Acta paediatrica 423:50-4, 1997
Rodin J: Insulin levels, hunger, and food intake: an example of feedback loops in body weight regulation. Health psychology : official journal of the Division of Health Psychology, American Psychological Association 4:1-24, 1985
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register