Because eating once per day will slow the metabolism, thus reducing the energy costs.
No, that's not how things work. Thankfully.
Besides, if you eat 1000 kcal of tuna and vegetables covered with olive oil at a sitting, your insulin won't spike much at all and you won't feel too tired an hour later.
You realize there's an insulin response to protein, right?
On the other hand, if you eat 1000 kcal of pasta at a sitting, insulin will spike like hell, you will feel very tired an hour later, and 3 hours later you will be shaking and craving more carbs. There is a very big difference in how the body reacts to the macronutrient input... it's not about the kcal; it's about the insulin.
That's not the argument. Let's not shift goalposts. You said that we can gain mass regardless of whether there's an energy surplus or not. Put succinctly, you implied that we can increase tissue mass while being in a caloric deficit.
This is the point of contention.
One that's incorrect unless you're seriously implying you've found a way to bypass the law of conservation of energy. Which if this is the case, I genuinely have some people at a few universities that would love to get in contact with you.
That nutrients have different actions in the body (which I'm quite certain most anyone here understands) has no bearing on the above point.
OK, here is an example: a person eats nothing other than 3 packets of ramen noodles per day (morning, noon, and night) for a month.. At 1206 kcal, this is a calorie deficit for nearly anyone, but it is enough to get by on as the metabolism will slow way down. However, because the (simple) carb percentage is 61% of the total mass of food, it will significantly raise insulin after each meal. Weight will not drop because insulin puts a one-way valve onto fat cells: it allows deposits, but no withdrawals are possible.
Here's a test for you.
Calculate your calorie needs.
Cut that number by 75%.
Fill said intake with nothing but carbs for 3 weeks.
Come back and report what your weight did.
If you'd like, you could fill said intake with some protein too to preserve lean mass, keeping in mind protein also has an insulin response.
Also, and this is a serious suggestion, you might consider doing some research into acylation stimulation protein. Turns out you don't need insulin to store fat.
Anybody want to try this diet for a month, or even 1-2 weeks, and prove me wrong? It's really cheap. You can eat for less than 2 bucks a day.
Sorry, I'm replying as I read along.
Sure. Put some money on the line and I'll do the same. We can even up via paypal. I'll record myself eating the noodles each day with a newspaper dated.
If I win I get the money.
If you win, you get my money and fame for finding the resolution to the energy crises.
Before we play this game, please enlighten me on what exactly is creating mass in a negative energy state.
In case you are wondering, yes, I have tried this diet for a month at a time when I was in the army, out in the field. Why? Because it tasted a helluva lot better than the army food in plastic bags that I had already eaten for way too long. I was then about 185lbs and 21% body fat, and after 1 month of this diet I hadn't lost a single pound. I didn't have any other food or drinks, either, only ramen noodles and water.
No proof.
Not that I don't trust you. I simply don't know you.
My way would bear proof, so if you're serious... I'll play.
I realize that I can not stay on a 1200kcal diet forever - as my bodyfat percentage drops, there will be less fat available to burn to make up the daily kcal difference. As this happens, I will need to eat more. But for now, there is still plenty of fat on me to burn, and I keep my insulin low so that it can be burned. And it is being burned.
If you want to rely on anecdote... I do this for a living. Ya know... help people lose weight. Virtually all of my clients eat carbs. And lose weight.
***
In summary, I'd like for you to directly speak on these points:
1) How insulin establishes a violation of the conservation of energy.
2) How you factor in the insulin response to protein.
3) Your thoughts on acylation stimulation protein.
