Heb,
First kudos to you and I would like to research more on fat storage and water storage (concomittant) which i will certainly do. I am not saying that anything is illegal in this case (certainly not what you are using) and its just my personal opinion that “juice–i.e., real juice” is cheating. Again, sometimes i get real fired up about stuff like this due to all the infomericals promising all that bullshit weight loss…perhaps everybody needs to be specific about “fat loss”. Also, During cut, i use Met-rx thermicore which as you know contains ephedra, although i dose at the recommended levels, which i am sure contributes to my feelings of hunger not necessarily being blunted…i got from maintain at 3100 to 2100 or less (never lower than 1800).
As for me being spokesperson of this forum, no, but i will offer my opinions and do it loudly, although i realize that opinions are like assholes and everyone has them…I appreciate getting ripped into, and you will be damn sure that I will know exactly HOW fat is stored, and what percentage of it is water. The journal research will start tonight, and I want to take this opportunity to thank you for stimulating the fires.
I needed some new stuff to get into.
Good luck cutting
VAIN
–if you put your mind to it, you should attain the 6%–just stay disciplined.
All right, I’ve gotta be fair and not take sides. Vain68 is correct on this one. We do store fat because it is a more efficient way for long term energy storage. Of course we store glycogen also, but Vain68’s assertion that if we stored an equivalent amount of energy as glycogen it would cause mobility problems is correct. McArdle,Katch,Katch (1996) Exercise Physiology 2nd Ed. - “The addition of 2.7g of water stored with each gram of muscle glycogen makes it a heavy fuel compared to equivalent calories stored as lipid. The added body mass may make the athlete feel ‘too heavy’ and uncomfortable.” This was a direct quote relating to the negative aspects of carbohydrate loading on endurance exercise performance. It is true that we can store a lot of glycogen, but McArdle et al. also state that the upper limit of glycogen storage is about 15g glycogen per kg of body weight. Fat is the preferred long term storage of energy because it is calorically denser than glycogen.
Fuck yeah POWER, amen brother. Thats the kinda shit Im talking about. Shit, anothers man’s gain is someones else’s loss, whose loosing right now? shit this topic aint worth loosing sleep over Vain… If another dude claims that, well than believe it or not. 1.5lbs a week is the reasonable and what us knowledgeable, muscle saving, food craving t-dudes shoot for to keep our muscle. But you can loose more by dieting hardcore and outworking the body while having the assistance of a thermogenic and a thyroid agent, so don’t call anyone a liar just cuz you think so. Weight will be lost but its not neccesarily fat.
Jason - your point on fat storage vs glycogen storage for long term energy is well taken and I was aware of that but thanks for clarifing. I had just wanted to point out that it isn’t just that simple though and other conditions do apply. The point I was really trying to make is that glycogen is used for short term energy for anaerobic needs which by definition are short term energy needs and as such, don’t need to store large quantities of glycogen for those short term needs while fat is used for aerobic needs which by definition are long term energy needs. For these reasons, the preferred fuel of choice for bodily needs to sustain long term daily life is fat and as such we preferredly store fat for long term survival as bodily survival depends more on aerobic needs than anaerobic needs (just your heart beating is aerobic and heart prefers to burn fat). The exception of course being fuel for the brain which is provided by liver glycogen. I also do understand the implications of storing massive quantities of glycogen but just wanted to point out that storage is not the ONLY consideration. Vain was trying to say that we ONLY store fat because fat is more energy dense because it doesn’t require as much water to store but in fact fat is more energy dense than carbs even when carbs aren’t stored and that was the point I was atempting to make but acknowledge I did a poor job of making my point. I was a little fired up over being made out a liar on reporting my diet results and was just attemting to clarify all misinformation to the best of my ability. I must admit though, I’m not college educated and as such do have occasional misunderstandings of all the nuts and bolts but than again, I find some professors don’t have all the correct answers either and sometimes what was considered “fact” yesterday is disproved by research today and we can be assured that more contradictory research will occur tomorrow. Thanks again Jason for all the enlightenment you’ve provided to the forum. I’ve gotta run - tonite is lifting nite followed by another killer cardio session.
Heb - Glad I can be of service. I see your point and it is well taken. Hey, regarding that college educated thing; I have seen many threads where it is clear that you are very well educated and informed. Most of the exercise science students that I have had in my classes (when I was a graduate TA) don’t even understand the fundamentals of exercise physiology, much less the complicated issues that we delve into on this forum. Keep up the good work! I am always happy when I see that you answer some of my posts. I can count on getting a well thought out answer.
Did I miss something? I respond to your original post with my explanation. I provide some information about other questions that you ask on this thread and I even back up some of your statements. I’m not trying to flame, but you basically said I was making stuff up. Is it still your assertion that myself and several others on the “Getting Ripped Support Group” thread are making up our body composition changes. I can see that you are extremely intelligent and have a well-defined plan in the gym, which is why I would like to hear your opinion, now that myself and Heb have tried to support our claims.
Jason,
No, don’t get me wrong here…i am not saying anyone is a liar…I will admit, my post was made within a zeigeist of infomercials that promote absurd “Fat” loss claims without any scientific validity whatsoever. I would like to believe that those who post on this site (and i am sure not all those that do) are very very aware of the science behind what we as amateure bb’s (competing or not) or fitness buff’s do. When i say weight loss, as i assume most other posters on this site do, i refer to “fat loss.” From my perspective, 1.5lbs of fat/adipose tissue per five-to seven days is about right, but i realize individually we deviate (standard deviation) and with all the supps out there, this will be even more pronounced. Nonetheless, just like the metric system is used as a common system of measurement, maybe we on this site (at least the regulars who have done some reading) should adopt a standard system of jargon…any thoughts?
again, sorry to offend anyone but it was more a reaction to the endless plethora of commercials and then i happened to see that post.
btw, I am nowhere near intelligent, i just read the shit out of journals and keep good data…pretty much anyone with a passion for what they do or research can get there–but either way, thanks for the kudos
Vain68
Regarding the jargon, I’m not quite sure what you mean. I know that since I have a lot of experience with body composition measurements, I will denote all of my changes in terms of lean body mass (LBM) and fat mass (FM). This obviously won’t work for people without access to body composition tools, although I have tried extensively to provide information about these tools. Anyway, it is nice to have someone on the forum who is willing to call people out to back up their statements.