[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:
The way i am reading glycogen doesnt matter as the body is using fat for fuel[/quote]
That is what I got out of it too. Wouldn’t that mean your muscles will always be empty and flat then? I am not sure how readily the body wants to fill glycogen stores, but if it is a high priority I would imagine the body would significantly increase gluconeogenesis, which is obviously not a good thing for people looking to build muscle.
[quote]schanz_05 wrote:
[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:
The way i am reading glycogen doesnt matter as the body is using fat for fuel[/quote]
That is what I got out of it too. Wouldn’t that mean your muscles will always be empty and flat then? [/quote]
This is the first thing that came to mind. Bodybuilding is about full-looking muscles.
Also, since we’re not storing glycogen, would our water intake requirements change?
[quote]Iron Dwarf wrote:
[quote]schanz_05 wrote:
[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:
The way i am reading glycogen doesnt matter as the body is using fat for fuel[/quote]
That is what I got out of it too. Wouldn’t that mean your muscles will always be empty and flat then? [/quote]
This is the first thing that came to mind. Bodybuilding is about full-looking muscles.
Also, since we’re not storing glycogen, would our water intake requirements change?
[/quote]
I would imagine so. For every 1g of glycogen stored we also store roughly 2g of water with it. 400-500g of glycogen storage seems to be about average for a person. So that is 800-1000g of water not being stored (almost 2 pounds worth).
Great posts!
I tried high-fat, high-protein, low carb. I could not gain weight and I could not get stronger. I went as high as 3500/day which was a lot back then when I was 155 pounds (5’10"). I tried it for about 2 months (can’t remember exactly). The lower the carbs, the more feeble I felt throughout the day as well. That never went away until I switched back to higher carbs.
If I were to try it again, what would be a recommendation so that history doesn’t repeat itself?
So glad I stumbled into this thread. As someone who has done IF before successfully (and again right now), I can attest to it’s legitimacy, but it mentions nothing about what Dr. Greg is discussing here. To me, it’s like the missing puzzle piece. I’m really blown away by this. I had been wondering why my progress was going so much slower this time around and Dr. Greg basically just told me why. I am reinvigorated.
[quote]Iron Dwarf wrote:
[quote]schanz_05 wrote:
[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:
The way i am reading glycogen doesnt matter as the body is using fat for fuel[/quote]
That is what I got out of it too. Wouldn’t that mean your muscles will always be empty and flat then? [/quote]
This is the first thing that came to mind. Bodybuilding is about full-looking muscles.
Also, since we’re not storing glycogen, would our water intake requirements change?
[/quote]
I’m not Dr. Ellis (nor am I an MD for that matter) but I’ve been eating less than 30 grams of net carbs per day for nearly a month now, so I feel like I can share my experience.
IMHO, I don’t look flat at all. I’m actually very happy with my physique as I’ve lost weight overall. That being said, I’m not a precontest bodybuilder, nor really concerned with the appearance of my muscle on a day-to-day basis.
Your water intake, on a low carb diet definitely has to change. You need much more water and most likely sodium supplementation as well. Eating low carb has a natiuresis effect and I have to make sure I get 5 grams of salt a day. It’s actually a challenge, especially since I’m not eating processed foods. If I ever feel a bit out of it, I know to up my salt intake and drink more water as well.
I hope that helps.
[quote]Dr. Pangloss wrote:
[quote]Iron Dwarf wrote:
[quote]schanz_05 wrote:
[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:
The way i am reading glycogen doesnt matter as the body is using fat for fuel[/quote]
That is what I got out of it too. Wouldn’t that mean your muscles will always be empty and flat then? [/quote]
This is the first thing that came to mind. Bodybuilding is about full-looking muscles.
Also, since we’re not storing glycogen, would our water intake requirements change?
[/quote]
I’m not Dr. Ellis (nor am I an MD for that matter) but I’ve been eating less than 30 grams of net carbs per day for nearly a month now, so I feel like I can share my experience.
IMHO, I don’t look flat at all. I’m actually very happy with my physique as I’ve lost weight overall. That being said, I’m not a precontest bodybuilder, nor really concerned with the appearance of my muscle on a day-to-day basis.
Your water intake, on a low carb diet definitely has to change. You need much more water and most likely sodium supplementation as well. Eating low carb has a natiuresis effect and I have to make sure I get 5 grams of salt a day. It’s actually a challenge, especially since I’m not eating processed foods. If I ever feel a bit out of it, I know to up my salt intake and drink more water as well.
I hope that helps.
[/quote]
Wait… you’re NOT a DOCTOR? lol
Good points. I hadn’t considered the salt part of the equation. I use sea salt in damn near every meal. I haven’t checked to see how much 5 grams actually comes to by volume.
Thanks “Dr”.
I basically disagree with almost everything “Dr” Gregg has stated…
Dr. Greg. Excellent info man.
What are your thoughts on fruits, vegetables, beans and fiber?
Are fruits,veges and beans over rated as foods for health? Do you see a massive need for them? I do love beans though, I eat them everyday.
And what about fiber? Is it an over rated nutrient for health?
[quote]facko wrote:
I basically disagree with almost everything “Dr” Gregg has stated…[/quote]
Just because you disagree with him I don’t think it is necessary to put parenthesis around Dr and question his legitimacy as one. It is refreshing to see someone with his credentials challenging standard thoughts/knowledge. That is how progress is made. He is putting different ideas out there and backing them up with studies. I am not sold on everything he is saying, but it is making for good discussions and helping me learn in the process.
Ehh, this thread is interesting.
But I think it’s important to reiterate that different people have drastically different goals to go with drastically different physiology’s.
Some people, myself included, thrive off carbohydrates, others do not.
It’s all very interesting, and none of it is ever absolute.
That’s why it’s so damn fascinating!
[quote]iVoodoo wrote:
Ehh, this thread is interesting.
But I think it’s important to reiterate that different people have drastically different goals to go with drastically different physiology’s.
Some people, myself included, thrive off carbohydrates, others do not.
It’s all very interesting, and none of it is ever absolute.
That’s why it’s so damn fascinating!
[/quote]
Every human has drastically different physiologies? How so? Aren’t we all HUMAN?
[quote]
Forbes wrote:
Every human has drastically different physiologies? How so? Aren’t we all HUMAN?[/quote]
Are you trying to say that people don’t have unique genetics?
Are you also denying the existence of phenotypic plasticity?
Not to mention the infinite variation in lifestyle choices…
[quote]iVoodoo wrote:
Im not denying these but you said DRASTICALLY. Nobodies physiology is DRASTICALLY different. just slightly.
It really comes down your definition of drastic. I would agree that there is a drastic difference between many peoples physiology ie the people on opposite ends of the spectrum but for most people physiology wont vary a ton. But i know people who react to medicine in the exact opposite that the medicine is supposed to work. For examble you take a sedative and they get hyperactive. There are variations in metabolism that have already been discussed. There are quite a few differences when you start actually looking into things. Every single person has a slightly different physiology and some that difference is quite large.
[quote]forbes wrote:
Nobodies physiology is DRASTICALLY different. just slightly. [/quote]
… Which is why many of us are STILL WAITING for the OP’s comments re: muscle glycogen replenishment in the absence of carbohydrate intake.
paging DrEllis - pls address that point
[quote]forbes wrote:
[quote]iVoodoo wrote:
Im not denying these but you said DRASTICALLY. Nobodies physiology is DRASTICALLY different. just slightly. [/quote]
[quote]chillain wrote:
[quote]forbes wrote:
Nobodies physiology is DRASTICALLY different. just slightly. [/quote]
… Which is why many of us are STILL WAITING for the OP’s comments re: muscle glycogen replenishment in the absence of carbohydrate intake.
paging DrEllis - pls address that point
[/quote]
Carbs aren’t the only way of replenishing glycogen. It just so happens to be the fastest way. And speed isnt really of much concern if you are only training once a day.
[quote]forbes wrote:
[quote]iVoodoo wrote:
Im not denying these but you said DRASTICALLY. Nobodies physiology is DRASTICALLY different. just slightly. [/quote]
Well, I am betting there is a large difference between how you gain muscle and how Vic Richards gained muscle at the exact same stage.
In fact, I would call that a “drastic difference”.
for some reason this seems fitting
http://video.adultswim.com/check-it-out-with-dr-steve-brule/doctor-to-doctor-with-dr-boden.html