Isocaloric 30-30-30....anyone ever notice that the numbers dont add up?

[dEgeNeRaTe8211]

The isocaloric diet gives only 90% of the calories one needs. Is the missing 10% of the calories important for this diet to work? I hear many people here saying this worked great for cutting. So then would the 40-30-30 be too many calories for cutting?

~dE

 

[Vageta]

The other 10% is from paint chips, but I think you've been getting about 50% of your current diet from them already.... Just kidding


Actually it's 33/33/33, and they don't have to add up perfectly. 40/30/30 is probably close enough to an iso-caloric ratio to not make much of a difference so long as the 40 is protein.

 

[Mr.X]

LOL, bump this, Vageta you are hilarious :EL:

I'll echo: it's actually 33/33/33 = 99
But a 40/30/30 ratio is feasible, although, I would use a 50/30/20 (protein/carb/fat)...it can be a very good ratio for some people.

Mr.X

 

[keiko]

The 50/30/20 ratio is popularized by a Diet Doc. named Larrian Gillina. She calls it the "Goddess" and the "Gladiator" diets.


Isocaloric is divided into 33% but sometimes I'm too friggin' tired to type the extra 3.
THis is a stupid thread, IMHO.