usman
10-03-2003, 10:57 AM
I read an article about contest prep covering all the fine details of carb/sodium/water manipulation. However the advice about carbing up intrigued me, this isnt another question on what do I do (as a search on this probably would answer my questions). Im just looking for peoples impressions and thoughts on this.
Anyway I'll start with a few facts from the article:
Under normal conditions skeletal muscle stores between 1.5-2g carbs per 100g of muscle tissue. Secondly each gram of carb binds with 2.7g water.
Firstly I'll talk about carb depletion, so lets take a 200lb person with a 6% bf would give a a fat free mass of 188lbs. Because non skeletal muscle (i.e. bone, water, organs etc) account to approx 35% of this wieght he actualy has 122lbs skeletal muscle, which is 56kg of muscle. So now lets assume glycogen stores are about 1.5g/100g muscle, (as dieting low carbs glycogen levels probably going to be lower than normal). Also since its advised that leg training shouldnt be done this means that 39.2kg of muscle is going to be depleted (we are just including upper body muscle tissue, and for arguements sake lets assume lower body is 30% of muscle mass).
39.2kg (upper body muscle) * 1000 = 39200g of muscle
39200/100 = 392hg of muscle (remember glycogen stored per 100g).
392 * 1.5 (carb/100g muscle) = 588
588 * 2.7 (water+1g carb) = 1587.6g / 1000 to get of depleted glycogen, of 1.6kg/3.5lbs of weight should in theory be reduced by the end of the carb depleting workouts. This is not approximate as nothing is 100%, so in real life glycogen depot depletion may only be acheived to 70% so this figure would be lower, but gives you a basic picture. So now our guy weighs 196.5lbs overall body weight.
So now the carbing up. He now has the potential to store between 3.5-4g of carbs per 100g of skeletal muscle, also remember the 2.7 of water binded to 1g of carb. Remember we are interested in increasing upper body glycogen depots, which is now 37.6kg (less due to depletion).
37.6 * 1000 = 37600g
37600/100 = 376hg
376 * 4 (carbs stored per 100g skeletal muscle) = 1504
1504 * 2.7 (water for every g of carb) = 4061 / 1000 to get 4kg of increase in glycogen depot or 8.8lbs. So 37.6 + 4 + 16.8 (lower body muscle) + 5.45 (fat mass) + 29.9kg (non skeletal muscle) = 93.75kg or 206lbs. But this in reality does not count for water or extracellular water loss (remember). So he has increased his muscle weight artificially by extra 6lbs due to increased glycogen content.
Now onto carb intake, now for this 6lbs increase to happen theoretically his depleted muscles have the capacity to absorb 1504g carbs. This over a 3 day period equals to 501g carbs per day. This entire article is purely hypothetical and im not saying it accurate or true, but lets just imagine for arguemts sake that it was. This is where it gets interesting for me and confusing. If this was true 501g carbs would be a cal intake of 2004.
remember his fat free mass was 188lbs. So lets assume his basal metabolic rate is (188 * 12) = 2256. Lets add another 700 cals for energy expenditure throughout the day, (this guys going to be doing nothing all day hence the low energy expenditure). Now his total cal needs are 2256 + 700 = 2956cals.
What I have conflict with is if this cal intake is to cover his energy expenditure, that means he has potentially 2004 cals of energy to store into his muscles that day. So does that make his energy intake 4960 cals? Also going back to his energy expenditure of 2956 cals. Since his weight is 188lbs of FFM that means he takes in approx 200g protien per day. Lets say fat intake is at 30g per day. These macro nutrients Im assuming are going to cover his total energy expenditure, so 200g prot is 800 - 2956 = 2156 left over. fat is 30g, 270 - 2156 = 1886 cals left over. This then would be covered by intake of carbs 1886 / 4 = 471g carbs.
Now assuming this his correct his total cal intake would be 4960cal and an intake of 972g carbs (remeber extra needed to store glycogen 471 + 501), and 200g protien, and 30g fat. His energy expenditure by the way is purely made up and am aware is innacurate and could be higher or lower, but you get the idea. So my query is do you think idea of eating extra surplus cals or carbs has any validity, it makes sense that the extra carbs that can be stored must be taken in as well as the carbs/prot/fat needed to cover overall energy expenditure. It also makes sense as all you are trying to do is store energy into muscles.
Therefore if he took the 501g carbs per day, and just ate that amount he would no where near reach the potential of maximum carb strorage. The reason why this intrigues me as the article I got this from did assume this, and ignored cals needed to cover energy expenditure. Any thoughts on this would be appreciated.
Anyway I'll start with a few facts from the article:
Under normal conditions skeletal muscle stores between 1.5-2g carbs per 100g of muscle tissue. Secondly each gram of carb binds with 2.7g water.
Firstly I'll talk about carb depletion, so lets take a 200lb person with a 6% bf would give a a fat free mass of 188lbs. Because non skeletal muscle (i.e. bone, water, organs etc) account to approx 35% of this wieght he actualy has 122lbs skeletal muscle, which is 56kg of muscle. So now lets assume glycogen stores are about 1.5g/100g muscle, (as dieting low carbs glycogen levels probably going to be lower than normal). Also since its advised that leg training shouldnt be done this means that 39.2kg of muscle is going to be depleted (we are just including upper body muscle tissue, and for arguements sake lets assume lower body is 30% of muscle mass).
39.2kg (upper body muscle) * 1000 = 39200g of muscle
39200/100 = 392hg of muscle (remember glycogen stored per 100g).
392 * 1.5 (carb/100g muscle) = 588
588 * 2.7 (water+1g carb) = 1587.6g / 1000 to get of depleted glycogen, of 1.6kg/3.5lbs of weight should in theory be reduced by the end of the carb depleting workouts. This is not approximate as nothing is 100%, so in real life glycogen depot depletion may only be acheived to 70% so this figure would be lower, but gives you a basic picture. So now our guy weighs 196.5lbs overall body weight.
So now the carbing up. He now has the potential to store between 3.5-4g of carbs per 100g of skeletal muscle, also remember the 2.7 of water binded to 1g of carb. Remember we are interested in increasing upper body glycogen depots, which is now 37.6kg (less due to depletion).
37.6 * 1000 = 37600g
37600/100 = 376hg
376 * 4 (carbs stored per 100g skeletal muscle) = 1504
1504 * 2.7 (water for every g of carb) = 4061 / 1000 to get 4kg of increase in glycogen depot or 8.8lbs. So 37.6 + 4 + 16.8 (lower body muscle) + 5.45 (fat mass) + 29.9kg (non skeletal muscle) = 93.75kg or 206lbs. But this in reality does not count for water or extracellular water loss (remember). So he has increased his muscle weight artificially by extra 6lbs due to increased glycogen content.
Now onto carb intake, now for this 6lbs increase to happen theoretically his depleted muscles have the capacity to absorb 1504g carbs. This over a 3 day period equals to 501g carbs per day. This entire article is purely hypothetical and im not saying it accurate or true, but lets just imagine for arguemts sake that it was. This is where it gets interesting for me and confusing. If this was true 501g carbs would be a cal intake of 2004.
remember his fat free mass was 188lbs. So lets assume his basal metabolic rate is (188 * 12) = 2256. Lets add another 700 cals for energy expenditure throughout the day, (this guys going to be doing nothing all day hence the low energy expenditure). Now his total cal needs are 2256 + 700 = 2956cals.
What I have conflict with is if this cal intake is to cover his energy expenditure, that means he has potentially 2004 cals of energy to store into his muscles that day. So does that make his energy intake 4960 cals? Also going back to his energy expenditure of 2956 cals. Since his weight is 188lbs of FFM that means he takes in approx 200g protien per day. Lets say fat intake is at 30g per day. These macro nutrients Im assuming are going to cover his total energy expenditure, so 200g prot is 800 - 2956 = 2156 left over. fat is 30g, 270 - 2156 = 1886 cals left over. This then would be covered by intake of carbs 1886 / 4 = 471g carbs.
Now assuming this his correct his total cal intake would be 4960cal and an intake of 972g carbs (remeber extra needed to store glycogen 471 + 501), and 200g protien, and 30g fat. His energy expenditure by the way is purely made up and am aware is innacurate and could be higher or lower, but you get the idea. So my query is do you think idea of eating extra surplus cals or carbs has any validity, it makes sense that the extra carbs that can be stored must be taken in as well as the carbs/prot/fat needed to cover overall energy expenditure. It also makes sense as all you are trying to do is store energy into muscles.
Therefore if he took the 501g carbs per day, and just ate that amount he would no where near reach the potential of maximum carb strorage. The reason why this intrigues me as the article I got this from did assume this, and ignored cals needed to cover energy expenditure. Any thoughts on this would be appreciated.