Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 16

Thread: N-3 and n-6 ratio and the result of fat vs carbs on body composition?

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    5

    N-3 and n-6 ratio and the result of fat vs carbs on body composition?

    Morning everyone. I have a couple questions I was hoping someone could comment on. I was wondering if trying to balance omega 3 to 6 ratios to 1:1 is practical if even possible, and if so where did this originate from? A quick look at the average ratios of certain food groups is as follows; walnuts are 1:4 and they have the best ratio over all commonly consumed, though they are absurdly high in PUFAs, which would clearly make macadamia nuts superior in regards to the subject in question. Beans are roughly 1-1, the majority of seeds, corn, soybeans and grains pretty much don't get better than 1-10, fruit ~1-2, while vegetables can vary around 2-1. Poultry is around 1-14, and that's goose fat. Grass-fed beef is about 1-2 (with low PUFAs) and salmon is about 12-1. The majority of food sources clearly have more omega 6 than 3, but is it worth worrying about so long as you don't have health issues concerning the matter? Personally, I only live near a walmart (yeah I know) so I don't shop there and go to the albertson's across the street instead, but they're only so limited in their variety (so no grass fed or pasture products, only about 10% organic food :/) which means chicken, eggs, turkey, and wild seafood (sardines and salmon preferably) are my staples in regards to animal protein.

    Secondly, I was wondering what the changes in body composition would be between someone who consumes.. lets say the fat/protein/carb ratio is (55/25/20) compared to (25/20/55) with most of the carbs NOT coming from sugar?

    Personally I don't advocate calorie counting, stressing over precise macronutrient ratios, etc. but knowing what foods contain is definitely good information to have.
    Last edited by Fig50; 04-02-2013 at 10:12 AM.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    The Observable Universe
    Posts
    270
    Just avoid high omega 6 foods like oils. If you can't afford grass fed meat then eat what you can get - that's what I do. To answer your second question, calories affect body compostion not specific macros.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by Darz View Post
    Just avoid high omega 6 foods like oils. If you can't afford grass fed meat then eat what you can get - that's what I do. To answer your second question, calories affect body compostion not specific macros.
    Yeah, besides the fats I get from meats it's usually evoo, avocados, mac nuts, butter and ghee for me.. the typical. So as I thought before, it's pretty much about fish and limiting PUFAs; such as those in most vegetable oils - that actually matters.

    About the fat vs carb question.. the requirements for muscle is protein and water. Whatever doesn't get used by muscle, organs, or isn't used for energy, etc is stored as fat. My question is do equal amount of calories from fat or carb both end up with the same result?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    9,490
    Quote Originally Posted by Fig50 View Post
    Yeah, besides the fats I get from meats it's usually evoo, avocados, mac nuts, butter and ghee for me.. the typical. So as I thought before, it's pretty much about fish and limiting PUFAs; such as those in most vegetable oils - that actually matters.

    About the fat vs carb question.. the requirements for muscle is protein and water. Whatever doesn't get used by muscle, organs, or isn't used for energy, etc is stored as fat. My question is do equal amount of calories from fat or carb both end up with the same result?
    Ahh, the question that keeps coming back. Its going to depend on your current metabolic and hormonal state along with the frequency and type of exercise and DLA's that you are performing. I think thats sufficiently ambiguous enough to be considered the correct answer .

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    The Observable Universe
    Posts
    270
    Quote Originally Posted by Fig50 View Post

    About the fat vs carb question.. the requirements for muscle is protein and water. Whatever doesn't get used by muscle, organs, or isn't used for energy, etc is stored as fat. My question is do equal amount of calories from fat or carb both end up with the same result?
    If the amount of calories is the same then the results in terms of body composition will be the same.
    Last edited by Darz; 04-02-2013 at 12:02 PM.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by Darz View Post
    If the amount of calories is the same then the results in terms of body composition will be the same.
    250 calories from sugars and or starch would be the same as 250 calories from fats? Is there a particular reason I hear of people cutting out bread to reduce fat around their stomach or is this just in vain when all they need is a caloric deficit?

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    The Observable Universe
    Posts
    270
    Quote Originally Posted by Fig50 View Post
    250 calories from sugars and or starch would be the same as 250 calories from fats? Is there a particular reason I hear of people cutting out bread to reduce fat around their stomach or is this just in vain when all they need is a caloric deficit?
    You can't choose where to lose fat. To lose fat, wherever it may be, you have to be in a deficit.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Portland
    Posts
    5,426
    Quote Originally Posted by Fig50 View Post
    About the fat vs carb question.. the requirements for muscle is protein and water. Whatever doesn't get used by muscle, organs, or isn't used for energy, etc is stored as fat. My question is do equal amount of calories from fat or carb both end up with the same result?
    The issue is that the "3500 calories per pound" bit assumes that equal weights of muscle mass and fat mass represent the same number of calories. But they don't.

    A pound of human body fat contains fewer than 3500 calories, given that it contains some protein and fluid weight. To transform dietary intake into body fat is an inherently inefficient process. There is energy loss. So is it likely that it might require a total of 3500 calories in energy to complete the process? Sure.

    A pound of lean muscle mass (as round roast) contains 660 calories. Let's say you eat that as a 1 pound steak in addition to your normal equilibrium diet, having put in the killer exercise your body needs to stimulate muscle gain. You have already given your body the building blocks it needs to create a pound of muscle mass. All that is needed is the energy input to transform it from raw materials to muscle. 2840 calories of energy would be necessary? Likely not.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    9,490
    To the first question, I agree with Darz. Once you eliminate seed oils and focus on better fat just eat some fish each week (about a pound) and let the chips fall where they may.

    On the second... I kinda disagree. Macros will affect composition. Calories will affect weight. The macro bit seems to be quite individual though and even sometimes changes for the same individual at times.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    The Observable Universe
    Posts
    270
    Well, it's true, macros will vary depending on the individual, as well as type of training but a calorie surplus or deficit will determine whether you get fat / muscle or the opposite.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •