Sport Good food or bad food? Does it matter on a bulk?

Sport Fitness
O

Oldspice

0
I've always been curious about this, but never got a good answer.

I understand the benefit of eating proper food for nutrition purposes, but for weight lifting and trying to gain weight, what does it matter? For instance, lets say someone eats all crappy food from McDonald's on a bulk, but still consumes 3000 calories a day. Now, lets assume this person ate 3000 calories a day from a good diet. Essential fatty acids, good carbs, a lot of protein, etc...How would the results change? Doesn't your body just see a calorie for calorie?

I'm not going to eat bad, because i don't like to. But, I'm just curious on how this works for my own knowledge...
 
It just isn't as simple as saying a calorie is a calorie. I'm thoroughly convinced your energy levels would suffer, seeing as how you would be eating nothing but ****ty processed carbs and get no oats, whole grains, brown rice, etc...not to mention you can kiss healthy fats goodbye, since all the fats at McDs are junk, unless they have started using olive oil and are no longer deep frying...yeah, didn't think so. You wouldn't be able to balance out your meals worth a damn, since I'm betting the protein you do get comes at a huuuuggge saturated fat price.
 
MarkMyWords said:
It just isn't as simple as saying a calorie is a calorie. I'm thoroughly convinced your energy levels would suffer, seeing as how you would be eating nothing but ****ty processed carbs and get no oats, whole grains, brown rice, etc...not to mention you can kiss healthy fats goodbye, since all the fats at McDs are junk, unless they have started using olive oil and are no longer deep frying...yeah, didn't think so. You wouldn't be able to balance out your meals worth a damn, since I'm betting the protein you do get comes at a huuuuggge saturated fat price.
Click to expand...


This is true, but at the end of the day you still have 3000 calories. You would be getting fat, protein from the meat and carbs...Protein is protein. Don't get me wrong, I'm with you and agree eating healthy is better, but i can't find anything that really makes a point why in this situation it would matter.

From what i've gathered, eating properly just allows your body to perform at optimal levels...
 
MarkMyWords said:
What more reason do you need?
Click to expand...

Because that doesn't mean their would be a difference. For instance, if someone did this dirty bulk for 3 months and the other a clean bulk for 3 months, essentially they would look exactly the same. The other person just better cholesterol and healthier...But, this says nothing about their appearance. See what I'm saying? So essentially, for a temporary bulk it wouldn't matter...

I'm trying to convince myself otherwise, but i can't find anything that makes sense...You could get fat eating chicken breast and broccoli every night and you could get fat eating 2 double cheeseburgers every night. You would just need to eat more chicken for the calories and not too many cheeseburgers to keep the calorie consumption the same as a chicken breast...
 
But if your eating cleaner this results in optimal performance so youll fatigue less easily, be able to focus more which over time is going to give you better hypertrophy/ strength.
 
BigTomW said:
But if your eating cleaner this results in optimal performance so youll fatigue less easily, be able to focus more which over time is going to give you better hypertrophy/ strength.
Click to expand...

This is a good point. I can understand that eating all the crappy food will not make you feel right for your workouts. But, people could get around this by taking a supplement, like creatine for example for a little more pump. How would bulking and eating properly change where the weight is going, if your daily activities/workouts are the same?

This is a good conversation. I'm not trying to argue here, just trying to get the facts done. Thanks for all the advice!
 
Oldspice said:
Because that doesn't mean their would be a difference. For instance, if someone did this dirty bulk for 3 months and the other a clean bulk for 3 months, essentially they would look exactly the same. The other person just better cholesterol and healthier...But, this says nothing about their appearance. See what I'm saying? So essentially, for a temporary bulk it wouldn't matter...

I'm trying to convince myself otherwise, but i can't find anything that makes sense...You could get fat eating chicken breast and broccoli every night and you could get fat eating 2 double cheeseburgers every night. You would just need to eat more chicken for the calories and not too many cheeseburgers to keep the calorie consumption the same as a chicken breast...
Click to expand...

I'm not convinced they would look the same though. Your exact words were eating right will allow your body to perform at optimal levels, meaning it has the best available macronutrients to put on mass, while adding as little fat as possible. So I believe the 2 people would NOT have the same results, simply because the 3000 cals came from better sources and lead to better performance and better mass building.
 
MarkMyWords said:
I'm not convinced they would look the same though. Your exact words were eating right will allow your body to perform at optimal levels, meaning it has the best available macronutrients to put on mass, while adding as little fat as possible. So I believe the 2 people would NOT have the same results, simply because the 3000 cals came from better sources and lead to better performance and better mass building.
Click to expand...

This is exactly what i believe. Someone just asked me this question the other day and i couldn't give him an answer to how both people would look. I wish their was a study done or something...I just haven't found any research showing a physical difference between two people eating this way.

It's a good topic, but tough to answer.
 
Oldspice said:
Because that doesn't mean their would be a difference. For instance, if someone did this dirty bulk for 3 months and the other a clean bulk for 3 months, essentially they would look exactly the same. The other person just better cholesterol and healthier...But, this says nothing about their appearance. See what I'm saying? So essentially, for a temporary bulk it wouldn't matter...

I'm trying to convince myself otherwise, but i can't find anything that makes sense...You could get fat eating chicken breast and broccoli every night and you could get fat eating 2 double cheeseburgers every night. You would just need to eat more chicken for the calories and not too many cheeseburgers to keep the calorie consumption the same as a chicken breast...
Click to expand...

It would show on their appearance.

A calorie is a calorie the same way a kilogram is a kilogram. It's a unit of measurement, a calorie is a unit of energy measurement, but energy is not all that matters. The body processes different nutrients different ways. Fast carbs for example, would spike insulin, if you ate a lot of fast acting carbs, your insulin would be high all the time causing your body to store a lot of fat.

Another thing of course is that if you don't get the vitamins and minerals you need, you won't perform very well. Now, who do you think gains more muscle, someone who was performing at 100% or someone performing at 80%? 100% performance will stimulate the muscle more.

Essentially, the main difference wouldn't be in how much weight you gained, but how much of the weight you gain that is muscle, and how much that is fat.
 
It matters. What if you just ate bread? Where's the protein you need going to come from? Extreme example, but not all calories are equal.
 
Here's a simple explanation using McDonalds readily supplied Nutrition Facts. :)
 

Attachments

  • mcD.jpg
    mcD.jpg
    39 KB · Views: 5,234
Last edited:
Karky said:
It would show on their appearance.

A calorie is a calorie the same way a kilogram is a kilogram. It's a unit of measurement, a calorie is a unit of energy measurement, but energy is not all that matters. The body processes different nutrients different ways. Fast carbs for example, would spike insulin, if you ate a lot of fast acting carbs, your insulin would be high all the time causing your body to store a lot of fat.

Another thing of course is that if you don't get the vitamins and minerals you need, you won't perform very well. Now, who do you think gains more muscle, someone who was performing at 100% or someone performing at 80%? 100% performance will stimulate the muscle more.

Essentially, the main difference wouldn't be in how much weight you gained, but how much of the weight you gain that is muscle, and how much that is fat.
Click to expand...

This really explained a lot and puts it more into perspective. Thanks for the response, i appreciate it.

So, essentially the person eating high saturated fat, or fried foods would feel more sluggish throughout the day and wouldn't have the proper building blocks to restore torn muscle fibers from prior workouts. Eating correctly gives the extra kick your body needs to keep in on track and make your muscles recuperate faster, giving you more of an "alive" feeling on your workout days.

This is what i got from your response and everyone's mixed together. That about sums it up, right?
 
Oldspice said:
Because that doesn't mean their would be a difference. For instance, if someone did this dirty bulk for 3 months and the other a clean bulk for 3 months, essentially they would look exactly the same. The other person just better cholesterol and healthier...But, this says nothing about their appearance. See what I'm saying? So essentially, for a temporary bulk it wouldn't matter...
Click to expand...

Wouldn't you rather bulk and stay healthy, compared to bulk and be less healthy?

Also, clean bulking means that you'll have to change your diet less than if you did dirty bulking. To clean bulk, you just change the proportion of high calorie versus low calorie clean foods, and then change back when done bulking. To dirty bulk, you change from clean foods to dirty foods and back, which may be harder since you will have been used to different foods before each change. (That's assuming that your normal non-bulking diet is clean foods.)
 
*What about the gigantic brutes that populate our prisons*?? - these guys certainly eat 100% government issue junk food, mostly carbs from what I understand, don't have access to any supplement, vitamins or powders, and probably use equipment made in the 70s, if any.

I think someone already answered at the top of this thread - it's about 'optimal performance' - yes there were musclemen long before there were dieteticians to tell us what to eat however by following their advice you get the most out of your training - the best 'bang for the buck' if you will.
 
Eating saturated and trans fats as opposed to MUF and PUF will reduce health and performance, as well as increase circulatory problems, harden your arteries, increase LDL cholesterol and a whole other cluster**** of problems.
Eating much simple carbs as opposed to fibrous carbs will cause excessive insulin spikes causing insulin resistance causing fat storage
Eating poor quality incomplete protein as opposed to complete quality protein will reduce your bodies ability to utilize that protein for muscle building and repair.
Eating nutrient deficient foods as opposed to nutrient and phytonutrient rich foods (like fruits and veggies) will leave you your body weak and preforming at a level no where near as efficient as it could be.

Get the picture yet?
Garbage in = Garbage results
Quality in = Quality results
 
I get the point. Basically, eat good food perform 100% throughout your workout.

Although, what about eating fast food and losing weight? I bet their are plenty of people who eat fast food everyday, lose weight and still stay healthy. I know that sounds crazy, but i think there have been studies on that. (as weird as it sounds)

The key would be moderation i suppose...
 
Cigaro78 said:
*What about the gigantic brutes that populate our prisons*?? - these guys certainly eat 100% government issue junk food, mostly carbs from what I understand, don't have access to any supplement, vitamins or powders, and probably use equipment made in the 70s, if any.

I think someone already answered at the top of this thread - it's about 'optimal performance' - yes there were musclemen long before there were dieteticians to tell us what to eat however by following their advice you get the most out of your training - the best 'bang for the buck' if you will.
Click to expand...

Don't forget that access to anabolics is very easy in prisons.
 
Thread necromancy: My favorite past time.

I wanted to add - Initially I wasn't convinced the results wouldn't be the same - until I realized I have a colleage at work who eats junks - but in very low quantities - and he's what one might considered 'well defined'. Goes to show.

BUT - IMHO while the bodies would indeed look the same (although it's still arguable how fast they each would reach their goals) - eating junk, saturated fats, chemical-ladden food would (again, I'm not a doctor, this is IMHO) lead to diseases such as cancer faster. Certainly, eating very cooked red meat in large quantities every day is a known carcinogen for example.

My two cents.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top