Bodybuilding Forums

hi im trying to bulk up on the high fat low carb diet on the muscle hack website ,but it doesnt really state what amount of calories i need to be taking in ,im 5 foot 11 and in quite good shape as ive been going to the gym for about 10 months but im looking to put on a bit of size, im 17 years old, so does anyone have any idea of how many calories i need to be taking in daily? i workout monday to friday like mark does on the workout and have saturday and sunday off, but on mondays i also play soccer, so does anyone have any idea of how many calories i need to be taking in ,if u could say which type of calories aswell from fats,carbs,protein etc thanks

That's because on that particular diet, the calories don't matter very much. You need to be taking in as much as you need to get the results you want, plain and simple.

Start with 30 grams of net carbs, as much protein as you need for your lean body mass (which you didn't mention, nor even your whole body weight), and then eat the rest of your calories from fats. See how your weight has changed after a month, then use that weight change to determine if you need to add more calories because you lost weight or take some away because you're gaining too much fat.

You said "soccer", so you're probably an American. If that's the case, when you calculate your net carbs, be sure to subtract fiber grams from the total carbohydrate grams.

You can find calorie counting websites online that can estimate the calories burned while you're playing soccer too, if you're interested.

in my opinion, from experiance, has me to believe that it's FAR easier to gain total size ( fat/muscle) with a high calorie diet that includes copious amounts of carbs, protein and a little fat. HIGH calories. And then to taper off the carbs and calories some while keeping the protein high, carbs/fat moderate and then slowly convert to low carb.

Of course it's easier to gain total size (fat AND muscle), because all those carbs allow you to have a constant supply of insulin, which encourages fat storage at the same time you are banking muscle. But the point of MANS is to allow you to build muscle WITHOUT putting on the fat.

What you're suggesting is the typical bulk/cut phase diet. Yawn. We can get that anywhere. We're about "hacking" the diet here to circumvent that process and get straight to the lean muscle.

Ya but I think people need to learn how their own bodies react to different foods. I know you and Matt always say experiment and I think more people need to do that. I know for me I have been putting on more muscle and lifting better since adding carbs to my diet. I have gained little or no fat according to the mirror and that is what I go by. This diet works great for some people but people need to avoids just going along with the fads and learn their bodies.
When I first started I did MANS and it helped me lose some fat, but for bulking, FOR ME PERSONALLY, carbs are a must.

harryt43 wrote:Ya but I think people need to learn how their own bodies react to different foods. I know you and Matt always say experiment and I think more people need to do that. I know for me I have been putting on more muscle and lifting better since adding carbs to my diet. I have gained little or no fat according to the mirror and that is what I go by. This diet works great for some people but people need to avoids just going along with the fads and learn their bodies.
When I first started I did MANS and it helped me lose some fat, but for bulking, FOR ME PERSONALLY, carbs are a must.

I think if you review MANS, he says you should eat just enough carbs to allow you to continue getting great performance in the gym. For some, that's more than 30, and he admits as much. So I don't really see that as at odds with the MANS diet at all; all he says is, try starting with 30 and work from there. You absolutely should do what works. I have to eat more protein than it calls for. Yes, even the ridiculously huge recommendation of 2.75*lean body mass in kg is not enough to keep me satiated and energetic -- I seem to need upwards of 3. I was having issues with hypoglycemia-like symptoms, and doc told me to eat every 2.5-3 hours and to add more protein into each meal. I told her I already eat protein at every meal (witness the food diary printout I brought along) and she said that I might need more. So, gluconeogenesis or no, it's even more protein for the Spinach Assassin!

marochka_raduga wrote:Of course it's easier to gain total size (fat AND muscle), because all those carbs allow you to have a constant supply of insulin, which encourages fat storage at the same time you are banking muscle. But the point of MANS is to allow you to build muscle WITHOUT putting on the fat.

What you're suggesting is the typical bulk/cut phase diet. Yawn. We can get that anywhere. We're about "hacking" the diet here to circumvent that process and get straight to the lean muscle.

the total caloric value is much more important IMO then overall protein or carb intake when trying to gain ALOT of bulk/mass which sounds like what the op is trying to do. I have done both (high cal/mass gain vs high protein/low carb/mass gain) and the classic way to bulk up works amazingly well. Of course there are the negative side effects, HIGH constant insulin levels associated with very high daily carbs (upwards to 500 grams!lol) , fat gain, laziness, insulin resistance, possible health side effects; hyper/hypoglycemia. But then again, it's only for a short period of time so much of the negatives can be avoided or minimized. Not everyone want's the dry shredded lean muscle look, some folks have been rail thin all their lives and could appreciate some body fat along with their mass gains.. even for the sake of just size.

The benefit is to gain ALOT of size in a relatively short amount of time.. and it's easiest with a massive amount of nutrients, since protein by itself in large amounts doesn't build muscles on it's own.

Personally, I see many benefits of the classic bulk for some that REALLY wants to put on weight, in spite of gaining some fat along with it (minimal) and then going on a MANS type diet to retain the added mass while shedding body fat.

A 17 year-old who plays sports is definitely going to need carbs to gain a significant amount of weight. MANS is a good diet adults who want to shed fat and build some muscle at the same time but I agree for straight up weight gain, especially for an active teenager, ketogenic diets probably won't cut it.

SurferX wrote:A 17 year-old who plays sports is definitely going to need carbs to gain a significant amount of weight. MANS is a good diet adults who want to shed fat and build some muscle at the same time but I agree for straight up weight gain, especially for an active teenager, ketogenic diets probably won't cut it.

Hmm... I'm 20. Am I an adult?

triple wrote:Hmm... I'm 20. Am I an adult?

No. Get back in the playpen, Rookie.



My input on the discussion: Everybody so far is right.
* The older you are, the fewer carbs you can tolerate
* The fatter you are, the fewer carbs you can tolerate

If you're young, and lean, just eating plenty of everything will add more bulk to you (fat, muscle, or whatever). If you're old, and fat, eating a lot of carbs will just tend to make you bloated, tired, and unmotivated to even get to your workout.

My two cents. As with any rule of thumb, it's certainly not true for everybody, but from my research it sure seems like the human body has a pre-determined ability to deal with carbs that declines with age and weight. Also some of us -- me included -- have some genetic difficulties tolerating carbohydrates in general and certain foods (wheat!) in specific.

--Matt B.