[quote]Proud_Virgin wrote:
I didn’t say that this gentleman was doing it wrong, I just asked why he was eating so much.
I guess I didn’t realize that 8,000 calories for a 180 lb individual was the norm on this site.
Also, no where did I say that a pregnant woman should eat as much as an active bodybuilder, but rather she only needs 500 more than her MAINTENANCE calories. Key word there.
[/quote]
Perhaps Franks maintenance is 7500 calories. For an active young male, that’s not unreasonable. Not to mention we’re only talking about 2 months here. No one’s saying YOU need to eat this way.
Are you one of those people who get all pissed off when you see people having fun?[/quote]
7500 is not unreasonable for an “active young male”? No wonder America has an obesity problem. LMFAO at that…jesus christ.
[/quote]
wow. now I’m really not sure if you’re a troll or not.
one of the posters a page or two back said he consumed 6000+ calories a day, while playing many different sports and lifting and weighed less than 160.
Michael Phelps and Manny Pacquiao eat upwards of 6000 calories a day while training. here’s a video of Manny and his nutritionist talking about his diet:
7-8000 calories and he doesn’t gain a pound. and he’s over 30.
Way to use 2 generational athletes as an example. These guys train 3-4+ hours everyday, harder than most of us have ever trained. 1-2 hours weight lifting isn’t even comparable.
But sure, if by “active young male” you mean 2 of the greatest athletes in their sports than I guess that statement isn’t as poorly thought-out as it seems.
Most of us lift 4-5x a week, maybe a couple hours of cardio if our heart is so lucky. Why would you relate this to the training of an Olympic athlete? “Jesus christ indeed” indeed.
[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:
There was a post a while back that PX made on the body adapting to calorie intake. I think a lot of people underestimate that. The body is miraculous in its ability to adapt to different stimuli. Peopel always talk about metabolic slow down when dieting but not many talk about it in the reverse. Metabolic increase as more calories are added. Some peoples body seem to be quite good at it. I know personally mine seems to be quite good at it. A large meal energizes me like crazy and I can feel my body tmep increase. This is my body expending these calories and upping my metabolism.
I tihnk many people either do not realize how the bodey can do these things or they just never push their body to the limit to find these things. The body can handle and adapt to so many things but mnay do not have to willpower or drive to push those limits and find where they are. This goes for training and eating and other aspects as well. Just some random thoughts[/quote]
I’m glad you brought this up. Assuming this is true, why would you want this? It just means you have to spend more time & money on food. If your metabolism were slower than you could likely make similar gains eating less, no?
The less I eat while still covering my nutritional requirements, the better I feel & look…the less energy your body has to expend to digest food, the more it can dedicate to other areas, such as building muscle. The less food you consume the less energy it has to expend to digest that food. That’s what I call eating smart, not hard.
I just dont understand the benefit of eating alot just to eat alot…even if you can get away with it, why?
[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:
There was a post a while back that PX made on the body adapting to calorie intake. I think a lot of people underestimate that. The body is miraculous in its ability to adapt to different stimuli. Peopel always talk about metabolic slow down when dieting but not many talk about it in the reverse. Metabolic increase as more calories are added. Some peoples body seem to be quite good at it. I know personally mine seems to be quite good at it. A large meal energizes me like crazy and I can feel my body tmep increase. This is my body expending these calories and upping my metabolism.
I tihnk many people either do not realize how the bodey can do these things or they just never push their body to the limit to find these things. The body can handle and adapt to so many things but mnay do not have to willpower or drive to push those limits and find where they are. This goes for training and eating and other aspects as well. Just some random thoughts[/quote]
I’m glad you brought this up. Assuming this is true, why would you want this? It just means you have to spend more time & money on food. If your metabolism were slower than you could likely make similar gains eating less, no?
The less I eat while still covering my nutritional requirements, the better I feel & look…the less energy your body has to expend to digest food, the more it can dedicate to other areas, such as building muscle. The less food you consume the less energy it has to expend to digest that food. That’s what I call eating smart, not hard.
I just dont understand the benefit of eating alot just to eat alot…even if you can get away with it, why?[/quote]
sorry dude but you have no understanding of how the body works
Never claimed to…I don’t know the details thats why I like to discuss this stuff. All I know is I’m living what I say. Tried it both ways, eating as little as you can is the way to go for many reasons.
That is, if looking like a bodybuilder is at all a concern…if you are just concerned with scale weight & strength, then this would of course not apply.
[quote]Proud_Virgin wrote:
Never claimed to…I don’t know the details thats why I like to discuss this stuff. All I know is I’m living what I say. Tried it both ways, eating as little as you can is the way to go for many reasons.
That is, if looking like a bodybuilder is at all a concern…if you are just concerned with scale weight & strength, then this would of course not apply.[/quote]
how many calories do you consider “as little as you can”
[quote]Proud_Virgin wrote:
Never claimed to…I don’t know the details thats why I like to discuss this stuff. All I know is I’m living what I say. Tried it both ways, eating as little as you can is the way to go for many reasons.
That is, if looking like a bodybuilder is at all a concern…if you are just concerned with scale weight & strength, then this would of course not apply.[/quote]
I agree with this.
To simply consume a ton of calories without determining how many you need to gain weight or just eating so many that you have no choice but to gain weight isn’t IMO a great way for someone that is past the beginner stage.
Find what you need, but I don’t see the practical need to eat more than you need to slowly gain weight if that’s your goal. If your preference is to get heavier, that’s a different issue.
Well i can only reply for myself. But no i would not rather have to eat less. I have already said a couple times on the thread that i enjoy eating and I have a very large apetite so if i had to eat like you did I would not enjoy life as much.
So by your reasoning you do not believe in Gflux or like to apply it? I know waylander is applying this for his diet for the exact reason of being able to eat more while still lose. People also use it for gaining. Gflux= more activity= better nutrient partioning, which should translate to a bette phyique and I would also bet this would optimize health as we are not made to be sedentary.
Also there are way more examples of non olympic athletes that eat a ton and barely gain. There have been multiple posters on Tnation, and even in this thread, that have to eat a large large amount to gain.
[quote]Proud_Virgin wrote:
Never claimed to…I don’t know the details thats why I like to discuss this stuff. All I know is I’m living what I say. Tried it both ways, eating as little as you can is the way to go for many reasons.
That is, if looking like a bodybuilder is at all a concern…if you are just concerned with scale weight & strength, then this would of course not apply.[/quote]
how many calories do you consider “as little as you can”[/quote]
It’s relative of course…3,000 give or take 10% for me at 5’9" 195. When I go much lower over a period of time, I stagnate in the weight room. Perhaps a better way to phrase it is, eat as little as will satisfy your goals.
I get the feeling that many people would be able to cut their calories down without compromising muscle gain.
Ryan, if you really like to eat that much than I am glad you have found a method that suits you. You mentioned eating clean like rice, potatoes & oats…do you jazz these up at all? Because that sounds ehhhh like that.
As far as G-Flux, no I kinda think that was a result of marketing by John Berardi…come up with a fancy name for it. I am not that familiar with it though, so maybe I should review the purported benefits.
RE: way, I don’t know how much he’s eating nor what his diet looks like…he’s actually competing, I’m just a gymrat. But in general, American competitors are heavier than their European & Arabian counterparts. Key word: heavier. Not better or more muscular, but heavier. Why? Because they gain & diet on more food than other bodybuilders…so they end up a bit plump.
In other parts of the world, bodybuilders suffer & starve for their diet, not eating much at all. And yet they look INCREDIBLE. Yes they weigh 20-40 pounds less then Olympia competitors, but look SO much better. Tight waists, incredible taper, shredded to the bone. Hearing about their methods is what sparked my interest in the matter
Google “IFBB Worlds” to see what I mean. Touri Mohammed & others blow the bodybuilders here out of the water
Berardi has a couple articles on here. Way and Tim i know both relaly like (those are the only other two off the top of my head that i have seen mention it out right)
Yes i certainly jazz them up lol. I consider myself a pretty damn good cook. Lots of different sauces and styles. I really like mexican food so rice and meat ends up spiced that way many times. Sometimes i just dump some pasta sauce on rice. Potatoes i normally just like some salsa on it or cut up baked with some spicy seasonings. Oats always the same way. Huge bowl + protein +cinnamon. Then I add in flax seed meal for some texture and PB or powdered PB depending on how many cals i want that day. But i am very much a creature of habit and routine so I have no problem and enjoy eating the same foods day in and out. But i do certianly use many different seasoning/marinating. Slow cooker is also a great way to cook meat then I use all the juice to cover the rice and thread the meat to make a large delcious bowl. Not pretty but amazing.
[quote]Proud_Virgin wrote:
Never claimed to…I don’t know the details thats why I like to discuss this stuff. All I know is I’m living what I say. Tried it both ways, eating as little as you can is the way to go for many reasons.
That is, if looking like a bodybuilder is at all a concern…if you are just concerned with scale weight & strength, then this would of course not apply.[/quote]
how many calories do you consider “as little as you can”[/quote]
It’s relative of course…3,000 give or take 10% for me at 5’9" 195. When I go much lower over a period of time, I stagnate in the weight room. Perhaps a better way to phrase it is, eat as little as will satisfy your goals.
I get the feeling that many people would be able to cut their calories down without compromising muscle gain.
[/quote]
3000 calories isnt low at all. i can maintain on 2500 calories at 5’7 225lbs.
Prof X, or any one else, can you move the thread or start a new one in the T-Cell so this shit can stop? I can’t post there but I’d MUCH rather lurk and see all flaming be done with.
[quote]wannabebig250 wrote:
am i the only one who wishes he could eat like that…even for just a month.
entertaining video for sure, good luck on the bulk.
and since when does low calories = longevity. take that shit to bb.com[/quote]
The low calories = longevity idea is based on animal models and decreased free radical production and oxidative stress-derived damage to mitochondrial proteins with caloric restriction. Use of it in this conversation is a bit of a stretch imo[/quote]
AUTOPHAGY is believed to be a key to living longer, and you would have to have less calories to achieve it weekly.
[quote]wannabebig250 wrote:
am i the only one who wishes he could eat like that…even for just a month.
entertaining video for sure, good luck on the bulk.
and since when does low calories = longevity. take that shit to bb.com[/quote]
The low calories = longevity idea is based on animal models and decreased free radical production and oxidative stress-derived damage to mitochondrial proteins with caloric restriction. Use of it in this conversation is a bit of a stretch imo[/quote]
AUTOPHAGY is believed to be a key to living longer, and you would have to have less calories to achieve it weekly.
[/quote]
Maybe i need to read up a bit more but it depends on which type of autophagy that you are reffering to. There are 3 types (correct if if i am wrong) and each one is activated by different mechansims. So in theory you could still have high calories and have some if not all types of autophagy activated at some point. Also 1 type of autophagy you will not want active for long periods of time becuse it will end up canabilizing muscle
Realistic Rates of Lean Body Mass Gain Based on Training Status
Training Status Definition Monthly Gain (% of Total Body Weight)
Novice Less than 2 years consistent training 1.0-1.5% (1-5-2.0 lb. per month)
Intermediate 2-4 years consistent training 0.5-1.0% (0.8-1.5 lb. per month)
Advanced More than 4 years consistent training 0.25-0.5% (0.5-0.8 lb. per month)
*Women can expect to achieve the lower end of these ranges at best.
[quote]Proud_Virgin wrote:
Never claimed to…I don’t know the details thats why I like to discuss this stuff. All I know is I’m living what I say. Tried it both ways, eating as little as you can is the way to go for many reasons.
That is, if looking like a bodybuilder is at all a concern…if you are just concerned with scale weight & strength, then this would of course not apply.[/quote]
I agree with this.
To simply consume a ton of calories without determining how many you need to gain weight or just eating so many that you have no choice but to gain weight isn’t IMO a great way for someone that is past the beginner stage.
Find what you need, but I don’t see the practical need to eat more than you need to slowly gain weight if that’s your goal. If your preference is to get heavier, that’s a different issue. [/quote]
I think the point being lost is that there is no way in hell for you to predict even daily “what you need” exactly to only gain muscle mass with no extra body fat. What you can do is estimate based on your rate of weight gain and strength gain. There were many stages where I went through periods of making SURE my body was getting what it NEEDED when it needed it so that there would be no question. That is all bulking up is.
Purposely gaining “slower” instead of gaining at whatever rate allows the most muscle gain can’t logically produce the same amount of muscle mass over the same period of time.
Your gains are what should dictate your approach…just like Frank is apparently eating more than some here think he should yet has gained way more than the “exactly .8lbs of muscle a month” as a result. Doing anything other than feeding the machine as long as most of those gains are muscle mass can do nothing but decrease the rate of progress, not increase it.