Sport Caloric Trends > Calorie Balance

Sport Fitness
L

limestix

0
So over the last month I've put this idea to the test and have come to the conclusion that Caloric Trends are vastly more important than Calorie Balance.

I spent 4 weeks eating a 6 day deficit followed by a 1 day surplus spike giving me a net calorie balance of 0 or more likely than that, a small surplus.

However the Caloric trend of 6 days in deficit proved to be much more important as I lost weight during this time.

In conclusion, overall caloric trends are far far more important than short term calorie balance.

The end. :D


Comments?
 
Last edited:
My comment - The use of the word "Trend" in the fitness field is confusing.

I haven't the slightest clue what a Caloric Trend is...there are so many.
 
By trend I simply mean the overall caloric intake trend.

From my example I ate 6 deficit days and 1 surplus day. thats 24 deficit to 4 surplus, so the overall trend is a caloric deficit.
 
Observations are in reality more in line with the conclusion that what you think is a slight overall surplus is actually a sizable deficit, but, whatever floats your boat. ^_^
 
[Focus] said:
Observations are in reality more in line with the conclusion that what you think is a slight overall surplus is actually a sizable deficit, but, whatever floats your boat. ^_^
Click to expand...

I eat relatively the same thing on all weekdays, so I know I maintained a small deficit on those days. And if you saw what I ate on my spike days you wouldn't be saying that :D I also changed my regular workout schedule to reduce cals burned. But who knows I could still have been in a deficit. Nonetheless I still think it is an interesting idea. Maybe one of those things you just believe without proof. Like that you'll lose more weight by eating more more more as long as you maintain the same deficit. :)
 
If you had a total deficit of, let's say 2000 cals over the 6 days and then eat a 500 cal surplus on the 7th day, you're still in a 1500 cal deficit at the end of the week.. so then you'll lose weight.
 
my spike days were like 3000-4000 cal surpluses :D
But still my BMR is just an estimate so no real way to know
I just dont think the human body gains or loses 2 pounds of fat overnight so the trend is more important than the balance.
 
I don't know enough aboyt physiology to know how the body deals with a surplus that big, but it either stays in you in some form or another or you poop out calories.. it pretty much has to be one or the other.

3-4000 cal surplusses? so you're eating like 6-7000 cals on your spike days (assuming you're maintenance is 2-3000)
 
yea. my maintenance as far as i figure is somewhere around 3000-3500.

Eating 6000-7000 cals isnt hard when you down an entire pizza and other such feats of hunger and stomach capacity.

hmmm i wonder if i poop out calories.... interesting...
 
A lot of it has to do with the body not being able to store all those extra calories in one day as fat. some did store, but most didn't.

if we could burn or store fat that efficiently, you'd be able to gain or lose several pounds of fat per day.

You're right though...being consistent 90% of the time means 10% of the time you can basically ignore 'proper eating' and you don't really get bit in the ass for it (though I often feel like hell the day after I eat poorly or drink much).

As long as the trend is a deficit, you should be losing some weight.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top