shaker cups

Share your training programs, favorite exercises, training secrets and tips with the rest of the group. Discuss contest preparation, off-season diets, carb depleting and loading, posing, and training programs.

Moderators: Mini Forklift Ⓥ, C.O., Richard, robert, SyrLinus

Message
Author
compassionategirl
Stegosaurus
Posts: 3110
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm

#16 Postby compassionategirl » Fri Jan 06, 2006 12:13 pm

Not here.

Here, when an item says that it has a macronutrient combination of say 40:40:20, (in other words, 40% protein, 40% carbs, 20% fat) that means that 40% of the calories come from carbs, 40% of the calories come from protein, and 20% of the calories come from fat. So if the item was say 280 calories, and it stated that it was a 40:40:20 combination, then that means that in GRAMS, it had 28 grams of proteins, 28 grams of carbs, and 6.2 grams of fats.

Lots of the different protein shakes and bars have this type of labelling. The most common ones are 40:30:30 (i.e. 40% of calories from protein, 30% of calories from carbs, and 30% of calories from fats), and 40:40:20.

peanut example. Peanuts are 79% fat, and 16% protein. What that means is that 79% of the calories from peanuts come from fat. 16% of the calories in peanuts come from protein (which is why it boggles my mind that some people view peanuts as a source of protein, when it should properly be viewed as a source of fat!).

So we'll have to agree to disagree, Jonathan, unless it is different in Europe. :?
Last edited by compassionategirl on Fri Jan 06, 2006 11:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.
People reviled today for their activism will be tomorrow's angels, and people respected today for their power will be tomorrow's demons. History will absolve us and condemn them. ~ Paul Watson

compassionategirl
Stegosaurus
Posts: 3110
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm

#17 Postby compassionategirl » Fri Jan 06, 2006 2:30 pm

jonathan wrote: actually compash that isnt correct.

when an item says that it is 40% protein it means that 40% of the weight of it is protein.

for instance - [color=red]pumpkin seeds are 25% protein and about 50% fat. they have around 600cal per 100g, with 100cal coming from protein. this doesnt however mean they are 16.8% protein.[/color]

jonathan


yes, Jonathan, that DOES mean they are roughly 17% protein. So I have no idea where you are getting the figures above in red.

Pumpkin seeds are approximately 17% protein and 76% fat. SO for a 600 calorie serving of pumpkin seeds, approximately 102 of those calories come from protein (as you indicated), which, in grams, works out to roughly 25 grams. The calories from fat are approximately 456 (i.e. 76% x 600= 456). In grams, that works out to about 51 grams of fat.

As Richard would say, ya feelin' me playa? :P :P

Compassionate 'stilleto' girl (Jonathan's new nickname for me).
People reviled today for their activism will be tomorrow's angels, and people respected today for their power will be tomorrow's demons. History will absolve us and condemn them. ~ Paul Watson

compassionategirl
Stegosaurus
Posts: 3110
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm

#18 Postby compassionategirl » Fri Jan 06, 2006 10:38 pm

How come nobody else is weighing in on our disagreement? :shock:
People reviled today for their activism will be tomorrow's angels, and people respected today for their power will be tomorrow's demons. History will absolve us and condemn them. ~ Paul Watson

User avatar
Hero
Elephant
Posts: 1115
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2005 5:53 pm
Location: poconos, pa
Contact:

#19 Postby Hero » Sat Jan 07, 2006 2:25 am

thanks compash and jonathan for trying to help. but i dont understand. its something i cant grasp.

User avatar
buzz
Rabbit
Posts: 170
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm
Location: edinburgh, scotland

#20 Postby buzz » Sat Jan 07, 2006 4:32 am

compash - i think that it is a difference between the US and europe. over here the system i listed is used, whereas over with you its different. i stil think that our system makes more sense! :P

jonathan

User avatar
jonathan
Elephant
Posts: 1108
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2005 3:39 pm
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland

#21 Postby jonathan » Sat Jan 07, 2006 8:33 am

whoops - posted under brians name there - forgot to log out :oops:
Squat
Press
Eat
Repeat

compassionategirl
Stegosaurus
Posts: 3110
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm

#22 Postby compassionategirl » Sat Jan 07, 2006 1:05 pm

buzz wrote:compash - i think that it is a difference between the US and europe. over here the system i listed is used, whereas over with you its different. i stil think that our system makes more sense! :P

jonathan


No way! I think the system I described makes more sense. What people want to know is the calories and grams of proteins, fats and carbs. That is what makes sense! :P :P :P :P :P

I still think you may be interpretting the European system incorrectly. It makes no sense to say that pumpkin seeds are 50% fat and 25 % protein. Show me da proof. :P :P :P :P
People reviled today for their activism will be tomorrow's angels, and people respected today for their power will be tomorrow's demons. History will absolve us and condemn them. ~ Paul Watson

User avatar
jonathan
Elephant
Posts: 1108
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2005 3:39 pm
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland

#23 Postby jonathan » Sat Jan 07, 2006 2:32 pm

i shall dig up the proof later!!

for the mean time i have to say that i think it makes far more sense to say the percentage of the weight that is fat/protein etc.

example - you take 50g of tofu. you look on the packet and you see that it is 12% protein 6% carbs and 6% fat. so you know that in that in that 50g lump of tofu there are 6g of protein, 3g of carbs and 3g of fat.

surely that makes more sense?

jonathan
Squat

Press

Eat

Repeat

compassionategirl
Stegosaurus
Posts: 3110
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm

#24 Postby compassionategirl » Sat Jan 07, 2006 2:58 pm

compassionategirl wrote:
jonathan wrote: actually compash that isnt correct.

when an item says that it is 40% protein it means that 40% of the weight of it is protein.

for instance - [color=red]pumpkin seeds are 25% protein and about 50% fat. they have around 600cal per 100g, with 100cal coming from protein. this doesnt however mean they are 16.8% protein.[/color]

jonathan


yes, Jonathan, that DOES mean they are roughly 17% protein. So I have no idea where you are getting the figures above in red.

Pumpkin seeds are approximately 17% protein and 76% fat. SO for a 600 calorie serving of pumpkin seeds, approximately 102 of those calories come from protein (as you indicated), which, in grams, works out to roughly 25 grams. The calories from fat are approximately 456 (i.e. 76% x 600= 456). In grams, that works out to about 51 grams of fat.



But wait a second Jonathan, I just realized that we are talking about two different things. The weight of the package is not the same thing as a food's macronutrient constitution. I am talking about the latter and you the former.

I think we are both right because we are talking about different things. But do you see how I am arriving at the numbers? It is factually accurate to say that 17% of a pumpkin seed's calories come from protein. It is also factually accurate to say that if an item is 100 grams, and 25% of those grams is proten, then 25 grams is the amount of prorein. You get to the same number. Of course, if you are trying to figure out the macronutrient constitution of an item, and it doesnt have the percentage of the weight of the protein, then your method cant be helpful. You'd have to take the more complicated route (i.e. my way).

if an item like your pumpkin seeds above is 100 grams per serving, and the package says 25% of those grams (i.e. the weight) is protein, then yes, 25 grams of it is from protein (a number we both arrived at, but differently).

:? :?:

It would be so much easier if we could talk this one through face to face . I bet we could resolve it in two minutes. :)
People reviled today for their activism will be tomorrow's angels, and people respected today for their power will be tomorrow's demons. History will absolve us and condemn them. ~ Paul Watson

User avatar
jonathan
Elephant
Posts: 1108
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2005 3:39 pm
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland

#25 Postby jonathan » Sat Jan 07, 2006 3:13 pm

yep - twud be much easier to actually discuss this, even if it isnt that important in the scheme of things!

from my point of view it is much easier to view things in tems of grams rather than calories. the only thing that i really pay attention to is protein, and i usually try to get around 200g a day. at the same time though, i eat as much fat as possible too, in order to make up total calories. to me, the percentage of calories from fat/protein/carb is irrellevant as i just want to know how many grams im getting.

jonathan
Squat

Press

Eat

Repeat

compassionategirl
Stegosaurus
Posts: 3110
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm

#26 Postby compassionategirl » Sat Jan 07, 2006 3:18 pm

jonathan wrote:yep - twud be much easier to actually discuss this, even if it isnt that important in the scheme of things!

from my point of view it is much easier to view things in tems of grams rather than calories. the only thing that i really pay attention to is protein, and i usually try to get around 200g a day. at the same time though, i eat as much fat as possible too, in order to make up total calories. to me, the percentage of calories from fat/protein/carb is irrellevant as i just want to know how many grams im getting.

jonathan


Ahh I see. For me it was the opposite. I wanted to know the total calories I was consuming, and the macronutrient breakdown.

This goes back to the fact that you guys are so lucky - you can eat whatever without having to worry about numbers, certainly not calories. As long as it has lots of protein and is calorie dense, that is good enough for you.

Lucky bastards! :D
People reviled today for their activism will be tomorrow's angels, and people respected today for their power will be tomorrow's demons. History will absolve us and condemn them. ~ Paul Watson

User avatar
jonathan
Elephant
Posts: 1108
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2005 3:39 pm
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland

#27 Postby jonathan » Sat Jan 07, 2006 3:36 pm

who says i dont worry about calories - i worry that i dont get enough!

i tell you something - its alot easier IMO to stick to a low calorie diet than a high calorie one. i suppose you have to try eating 4500-6000 cal a day to know! if i could get big without all the eating, i would!

jonathan
Squat

Press

Eat

Repeat

compassionategirl
Stegosaurus
Posts: 3110
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm

#28 Postby compassionategirl » Sat Jan 07, 2006 3:37 pm

jonathan wrote:who says i dont worry about calories - i worry that i dont get enough!

i tell you something - its alot easier IMO to stick to a low calorie diet than a high calorie one. i suppose you have to try eating 4500-6000 cal a day to know! if i could get big without all the eating, i would!

jonathan


Not if you're a glutton! :P :P :P :P
People reviled today for their activism will be tomorrow's angels, and people respected today for their power will be tomorrow's demons. History will absolve us and condemn them. ~ Paul Watson

User avatar
jonathan
Elephant
Posts: 1108
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2005 3:39 pm
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland

#29 Postby jonathan » Sat Jan 07, 2006 3:38 pm

oh im a greedy bastard alright! but the novelty soon wears off i assure you!
Squat

Press

Eat

Repeat


Return to “Bodybuilding/Strength Training”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests