EyeDentist, How Do You Train?

Training
281

[quote]MinusTheColon wrote:

I know this is Eye’s thread, but I just wanted to ask why the coffee/tea thing matters particularly? This seems like a really high degree of majoring in the minors unless you’re actually prepping for something.[/quote]

Agreed. It’s not something that is going to swing results one way or another. With his extensive detail regarding his approach and more specifically, the body chemistry associated with it, I’m just trying to pick his brain regarding some ‘minors’. He’s obviously very knowledgeable in that regard, and as I’m trying to piece together a routine both nutritionally and exercise-wise that work with my schedule, preferences, etc., some of these ‘minors’ may influence my routine structure. I feel like the more information I can gain, the better routine I can piece together for myself specifically.

This is his thread and by no means is he required to answer my questions or respond to my comments (things that I would love to also hear others’ opinions on), though I really appreciate his willingness to do so when he does.

282

[quote]smarterANDharder wrote:
In the mean time, you said that you sip on coffee throughout the day and sometimes at night… I assume this is creamer and sugar free so as to keep insulin levels from rising. Would green tea be an acceptable substitute to consume throughout the day? My cojones apparently haven’t dropped enough for me to be able to put away black coffee, but I can do the tea just fine, though I obviously don’t want it to hinder results for any reason.[/quote]

Coffee is a great appetite suppressant, and is critical for getting me through my daily pre-workout Fat phase–if it weren’t for coffee, I’d probably eat twice as much PB as I do. And decaf is vital to getting me through those long, hungry evenings on my low carb/cal days. As John Kiefer (the Carb Backloading guy) says, anyone trying to get lean should ‘Make coffee your bitch.’

As for creamer/sweetener: Like you, I am too much of a nancy to drink my coffee black. But you’re correct, it’s important not to tart it up so much that insulin release is triggered (more on this below). So with this in mind, I add just enough sweetener (I use Splenda) and just enough creamer (I use Coffeemate) to make the coffee tolerable (NOT tasty!).

Now you might ask, why the need to be sparing with the artificial sweetener? It’s because of a phenomenon called Cephalic Phase Insulin Release (CPIR). CPIR is a fancy way to say that a sweet taste in the mouth is enough to cause insulin release, even if the substance is non-nutritive (ie, calorie-free). For this reason, I don’t put enough sweetener in my Fat Phase coffee to make it taste sweet; rather, I use just enough to take it from Coffee-Bitter to Neutral.

OTOH, once I’ve ‘opened the insulin door’ by eating protein on my low-carb/cal days, I am free to make my evening decaf quite sweet and creamy (but still with as few carbs as possible, of course).

As for creamer: Again, during the pre-workout phase, I use just enough to offset the bitterness, but not enough to make it creamy. But I will use more in the evening’s post-protein decaf.

An aside re creamer: If you’d prefer to use an actual dairy creamer, heavy whipping cream is the way to go. Milk is to be avoided–it contains whey, and therefore leucine (which is highly insulinogenic). Even half-and-half should be shunned in favor of whipping cream (which is essentially pure milk fat, containing hardly any protein).

Re green tea: So long as it is calorie-free and doesn’t taste sweet (CPIR!), it’s fine.

283

MTC… THAT’S why I ask! :wink:

Thank you for the response EyeDentist. Informative and useful as usual.

[quote]EyeDentist wrote:

Now you might ask, why the need to be sparing with the artificial sweetener? It’s because of a phenomenon called Cephalic Phase Insulin Release (CPIR).
[/quote]

Do you find CPIR to be an issue with the Coke Zero you drink (stated in an earlier post that it was one of your ‘vises’ nutritionally)? I like my carb/sugar free energy drinks (mainly Xyience), but have been hesitant to partake…

284

ED, you and I have very similar diets. Like EXTREMELY similar in fact (jar of natty PB next to by bed as I type this). I’ve basically started CBL a few years ago and have never looked back, tweaking it how you have over that time.

From my understanding, though, the insulin spikes caused by the ingestion of protein is NOT the same as taking it in with carbs. I can’t remember what exactly it is (my knowledge of biology is limited to pretty much like 300 level undergrad level classes lol) but there is a hormone or mechanism that seems to not have the ‘fat-storing’ properties that carb-fueled insulin releases have. Something called glucagon if I remember correctly?

Also on the artificial sweetener subject, google “Does Acesulfame K Spike Insulin?” and click on the first link. I know Keifer discusses how Acesulfame-K and how it’s been shown to cause insulin spikes in studies without calories, like you said above. However, from what I’ve seen, the amount you’d have to take in to garner the response is equivalent to something like 10 liters of diet soda a day.

Just some topics I thought I’d throw your way to discuss or maybe look into.

285

ED:

This is still one of my favorite threads on TN. I also wanted to express my appreciation for your posts on the TRT forum a few weeks ago, and then again on the post where the guy had hazy vision after squatting. You have a way of organizing and communicating your thoughts that is very readable. I found myself completely taken in by intraoptical pressure, the anatomy of the eye, and the Goldmann equation.

Also, I recently sprained my ankle (minor) and have been following your KB/leg raise and LP/crunch workouts for conditioning. It’s a great, low-impact conditioning and ab workout and I appreciate you posting it.

Cheers.

286

[quote]smarterANDharder wrote:
MTC… THAT’S why I ask! :wink:

Thank you for the response EyeDentist. Informative and useful as usual.

[quote]EyeDentist wrote:

Now you might ask, why the need to be sparing with the artificial sweetener? It’s because of a phenomenon called Cephalic Phase Insulin Release (CPIR).
[/quote]

Do you find CPIR to be an issue with the Coke Zero you drink (stated in an earlier post that it was one of your ‘vises’ nutritionally)? I like my carb/sugar free energy drinks (mainly Xyience), but have been hesitant to partake…

[/quote]

Yep. I avoid all sweet drinks (including my beloved Coke Zero) during the Fat Phase.

287

Just curious: when you were in full-house mode, what were the heaviest lifts you ended up putting up?

288

[quote]Spidey22 wrote:

From my understanding, though, the insulin spikes caused by the ingestion of protein is NOT the same as taking it in with carbs. I can’t remember what exactly it is (my knowledge of biology is limited to pretty much like 300 level undergrad level classes lol) but there is a hormone or mechanism that seems to not have the ‘fat-storing’ properties that carb-fueled insulin releases have. Something called glucagon if I remember correctly?
[/quote]

Glucagon is one of the so-called counterregulatory hormones (along with cortisol, GH, eppy and noreppy). The term ‘counterregulatory’ refers to its effect on blood glucose (BG) in contrast to that of insulin; ie, insulin lowers BG, whereas the counterregulatory hormones raise it.

You are correct that the glucagon response differentiates between carb and protein meals: High-protein meals tend to cause glucagon release, whereas high-carb meals do not. The logic behind this is straightforward. A high-carb meal prompts insulin release, which causes BG levels to fall by driving BG intracellular. But a high-carb meal also causes BG to rise as the consumed carbs are absorbed. Note that these two events offset each other, allowing BG levels to remain within a fairly tight range. (BTW, I am talking about nondiabetic individuals. All of this goes out the window in DM.)

In contrast, while a high-protein meal also prompts insulin release, it does NOT concurrently cause BG to rise, because there are no carbs to be absorbed. And because there are no incoming carbs, there is nothing to offset the fall in BG that occurs in response to the protein-induced rise in insulin levels. The (potential) result is hypoglycemia–a lethal condition. So, in order to prevent hypoglycemia, the body counterregulates (see what I did there?) the BG-lowering effects of the protein-induced insulin spike by releasing endogenous (ie, stored) glucose into the bloodstream. This is accomplished primarily via a protein-induced rise in glucagon levels. Glucagon raises BG by causing its release from stores in the liver. Note that, once again, we have two BG-influencing events that offset each other, thereby allowing BG level to remain within range.

Finally, as to your point…

The effects of glucagon on fat metabolism (both storage and breakdown) remain unsettled (to my knowledge). Research indicates that physiologic levels of glucagon don’t stimulate lipolysis to a clinically meaningful extent, so it seems unlikely that glucagon promotes fat loss directly. Perhaps it interferes in the creation and/or expansion of fat stores. More likely, glucagon exerts a CNS effect on feelings of satiety and/or hunger. Much work remains to be done on this subject.

One thing we know for certain is this: Insulin is a highly potent anabolic hormone, with the potential to produce astonishing changes in one’s physique (note that ‘astonishing’ cuts both ways). This is why I think it behooves all of us physique-conscious sorts to pay close attention to it.

289

[quote]MinusTheColon wrote:
Just curious: when you were in full-house mode, what were the heaviest lifts you ended up putting up? [/quote]

I was never very strong–or put another way, I wasn’t as strong as I looked. I never benched more than 350# for a single. I never did singles on squats; I recall going as high as the low 400s for 4-6 reps. Other than literally one or two workouts, I never DL’d. I had fairly strong arms; I remember curling an EZ curl bar with three 25# on each end for 6-8, and doing cheat-style skullcrushers with three 25s and a 10 on each end for 6-8. This was when I was ~25–a LONG time ago.

290

[quote]Dr. Pangloss wrote:
ED:

This is still one of my favorite threads on TN. I also wanted to express my appreciation for your posts on the TRT forum a few weeks ago, and then again on the post where the guy had hazy vision after squatting. You have a way of organizing and communicating your thoughts that is very readable. I found myself completely taken in by intraoptical pressure, the anatomy of the eye, and the Goldmann equation.

Also, I recently sprained my ankle (minor) and have been following your KB/leg raise and LP/crunch workouts for conditioning. It’s a great, low-impact conditioning and ab workout and I appreciate you posting it.

Cheers.

[/quote]

Hey DP, I’m flattered to hear you’re enjoying my comments. I’m a big fan of yours as well. Take care.

291

[quote]EyeDentist wrote:

One thing we know for certain is this: Insulin is a highly potent anabolic hormone, with the potential to produce astonishing changes in one’s physique (note that ‘astonishing’ cuts both ways). This is why I think it behooves all of us physique-conscious sorts to pay close attention to it.[/quote]

Ohh I definitely agree with this a ton. Thank you for clearing that up for me though, I really didn’t have the background to understand it before but that makes things clearer, so thank you!

Any opinions on the artificial sweetener content I posted? I know you’re busy, just curious as to your thoughts on the matter, because you have the ability to go much more in depth than I while still being articulate enough for me to understand lol

292

[quote]EyeDentist wrote:

As for creamer/sweetener: Like you, I am too much of a nancy to drink my coffee black. But you’re correct, it’s important not to tart it up so much that insulin release is triggered (more on this below). So with this in mind, I add just enough sweetener (I use Splenda) and just enough creamer (I use Coffeemate) to make the coffee tolerable (NOT tasty!).
[/quote]

Splenda has a GI of 80, while regular sugar is 65. Do you use splenda because it’s sweeter, so you use less overall?

Also, adding salt to coffee decreases bitterness. (picked that up from a chemist on America’s Test Kitchen).

293

[quote]1 Man Island wrote:

[quote]EyeDentist wrote:

As for creamer/sweetener: Like you, I am too much of a nancy to drink my coffee black. But you’re correct, it’s important not to tart it up so much that insulin release is triggered (more on this below). So with this in mind, I add just enough sweetener (I use Splenda) and just enough creamer (I use Coffeemate) to make the coffee tolerable (NOT tasty!).
[/quote]

Splenda has a GI of 80, while regular sugar is 65. Do you use splenda because it’s sweeter, so you use less overall?

Also, adding salt to coffee decreases bitterness. (picked that up from a chemist on America’s Test Kitchen).[/quote]

According to any research I have seen it doesn’t create an insulin spike or blip in blood glucose. Is there new solid research?

294

In my ignorance, I always assumed GI = insulin spike. Now that I’ve done a little bit of leg work, there’s this ( http://care.diabetesjournals.org/content/early/2013/04/30/dc12-2221 ), but all of the n’s were obese and consumed it with just water. It may very well be attributed to the taste, so I don’t know how relevant it is.

It’s funny to see how that research was spun here ( Splenda and sucralose proven to contribute to development of diabetes - NaturalNews.com ), though.

While looking it up, I also found that it can lead to poor gut bacteria (in rats): Splenda alters gut microflora and increases intestinal p-glycoprotein and cytochrome p-450 in male rats - PubMed… so folks w/ gut issues may want to steer clear.

I also found out that powdered splenda is cut w/ maltodextrin while liquid is not. Though, I don’t see such a small amount meaning anything.

295

[quote]1 Man Island wrote:

[quote]EyeDentist wrote:

As for creamer/sweetener: Like you, I am too much of a nancy to drink my coffee black. But you’re correct, it’s important not to tart it up so much that insulin release is triggered (more on this below). So with this in mind, I add just enough sweetener (I use Splenda) and just enough creamer (I use Coffeemate) to make the coffee tolerable (NOT tasty!).
[/quote]

Splenda has a GI of 80, while regular sugar is 65. Do you use splenda because it’s sweeter, so you use less overall?

Also, adding salt to coffee decreases bitterness. (picked that up from a chemist on America’s Test Kitchen).[/quote]

Splenda’s glycemic load (a better measure than GI, as it more accurately reflects the doses at which a food is consumed) is 30% that of sugar.

Not sure I have the guts to try salted coffee. (If someone does, please let us know what you think.)

Edit: I posted this prior to seeing the comment immediately above this one.

296

[quote]Spidey22 wrote:
Any opinions on the artificial sweetener content I posted? I know you’re busy, just curious as to your thoughts on the matter, because you have the ability to go much more in depth than I while still being articulate enough for me to understand lol[/quote]

I checked it out–very interesting, and a reminder of how important it is to be critical/skeptical when extrapolating from rat studies to humans. I wonder whether the same holds true for other sweeteners. Still, CPIR seems to be a reality in humans:

297

[quote]1 Man Island wrote:
I also found out that powdered splenda is cut w/ maltodextrin while liquid is not. Though, I don’t see such a small amount meaning anything.[/quote]

Actually, you may be onto something important here. After looking into it, it’s my understanding that whatever BG effect that accrues to Splenda owes entirely to the maltodextrin component. If this is true, it follows that the liquid version would be preferable. Thanks for bringing this to my attention!

298

[quote]EyeDentist wrote:

[quote]Spidey22 wrote:

From my understanding, though, the insulin spikes caused by the ingestion of protein is NOT the same as taking it in with carbs. I can’t remember what exactly it is (my knowledge of biology is limited to pretty much like 300 level undergrad level classes lol) but there is a hormone or mechanism that seems to not have the ‘fat-storing’ properties that carb-fueled insulin releases have. Something called glucagon if I remember correctly?
[/quote]

Glucagon is one of the so-called counterregulatory hormones (along with cortisol, GH, eppy and noreppy). The term ‘counterregulatory’ refers to its effect on blood glucose (BG) in contrast to that of insulin; ie, insulin lowers BG, whereas the counterregulatory hormones raise it.

You are correct that the glucagon response differentiates between carb and protein meals: High-protein meals tend to cause glucagon release, whereas high-carb meals do not. The logic behind this is straightforward. A high-carb meal prompts insulin release, which causes BG levels to fall by driving BG intracellular. But a high-carb meal also causes BG to rise as the consumed carbs are absorbed. Note that these two events offset each other, allowing BG levels to remain within a fairly tight range. (BTW, I am talking about nondiabetic individuals. All of this goes out the window in DM.)

In contrast, while a high-protein meal also prompts insulin release, it does NOT concurrently cause BG to rise, because there are no carbs to be absorbed. And because there are no incoming carbs, there is nothing to offset the fall in BG that occurs in response to the protein-induced rise in insulin levels. The (potential) result is hypoglycemia–a lethal condition. So, in order to prevent hypoglycemia, the body counterregulates (see what I did there?) the BG-lowering effects of the protein-induced insulin spike by releasing endogenous (ie, stored) glucose into the bloodstream. This is accomplished primarily via a protein-induced rise in glucagon levels. Glucagon raises BG by causing its release from stores in the liver. Note that, once again, we have two BG-influencing events that offset each other, thereby allowing BG level to remain within range.

Finally, as to your point…

The effects of glucagon on fat metabolism (both storage and breakdown) remain unsettled (to my knowledge). Research indicates that physiologic levels of glucagon don’t stimulate lipolysis to a clinically meaningful extent, so it seems unlikely that glucagon promotes fat loss directly. Perhaps it interferes in the creation and/or expansion of fat stores. More likely, glucagon exerts a CNS effect on feelings of satiety and/or hunger. Much work remains to be done on this subject.

One thing we know for certain is this: Insulin is a highly potent anabolic hormone, with the potential to produce astonishing changes in one’s physique (note that ‘astonishing’ cuts both ways). This is why I think it behooves all of us physique-conscious sorts to pay close attention to it.[/quote]

fantastic post!

299

[quote]EyeDentist wrote:

[quote]smarterANDharder wrote:
I’m trying a low intensity core workout, fasted, in the AM (don’t have much time in the morning to do a brisk walk for a significant amount of time), then the HIIT/Weight training in the evening. [/quote]

Gotcha. What specifically have you been doing as of late? (Lay it out day-by-day.)[/quote]

Let’s kick this pig!

*I hurt my back a few months ago (stabilizing muscles around my spine on the left side had tightened, clinging to my spine and shoulder blade, to the point that it hurt to pick up my 1yo son…) so I haven’t been able to do much other then conditioning/run-specific HIIT. Ready to go now though. Before that, a typical workout would look something like this…

Day 1
-DB squat (heels on a 1" board to drive focus to the quads)
-DB Press (alt between standard and neutral grip)
-Farmers walk

Day 2
-Pullups (max reps)
-SLDL
-Shrugs (alternating between standard and one-arm seated, 15 slow-10 fast)

*Both Day 1 and 2 would be 6 sets, 12-15 reps, moving from one exercise to the next before starting the next set. Last set was generally a burn out.
*Farmers walk was 1-1.5 min, with the last set being as long as I could hold the DB.

Day 3 (‘Pretty’ muscles- I would pick a different exercise for each set, trying to hit all aspects of the muscle.)
-Delts- Front/Lateral raise combo, neutral/standard grip press, bent over reverse raise, front raise (heavier), standard DB press (burnout)
-Biceps- Supp curls, bent-over DB preacher curls (hope that makes sense), cross-body curls, flaring (inner bicep) curls, seated concentration curls, 21s (7 top-half-ROM, 7 bottom-half-ROM, 7 FROM)
-Triceps- Over head extensions, lying ext (heavy), BO ext, lying ext (light), single-arm over head ext, dips (to failure)
-Forearms- seated curls, seated reverse curls, hammer curl… each would be done 2x
*8-15 reps, again super-setting.

Days 4 and 5 would be a derivative of 1 and 2, depending on what was still sore by then and how sore it was.

Day 6 would be day 3 all over again. Might also throw in sets of calf raises (15slow, 10fast, alt between inside, outside, and neutral foot placement) if I’m feelin froggy, though one of very few muscle related ‘gifts’ I was given was nice calves, so I don’t always include them… though I should because they can always get better.

Day 7- Rest

I would also alternate between HIIT(30/60s sprints) and situps/pushups (2 min of each because that’s what the Army tests us on) in the mornings.

The overall schedule also varies once a month due to drill weekends.

Now, before I get ripped to shreds on the workout (though I need/want it so I can benefit in the long run), please realize that I have some limitations given that this is all being done at home, with limited resources and weights. Was also trying to employ a ‘burn fat and gain muscle’strategy… My theory being, because I can’t load up on weight, I will hit every body part 2x a week and try for higher reps, keeping up the pace throughout. I would also try including more compound lift, esp in the back and legs, to recruit more muscle involvement. I’ve since learned the error of some of my ways (not doing’heavy’ compounds first for example) from this forum, along with a lot of tips from this sight in general.

Be gentle… :wink:

300

[quote]Yogi wrote:

[quote]EyeDentist wrote:

[quote]Spidey22 wrote:

From my understanding, though, the insulin spikes caused by the ingestion of protein is NOT the same as taking it in with carbs. I can’t remember what exactly it is (my knowledge of biology is limited to pretty much like 300 level undergrad level classes lol) but there is a hormone or mechanism that seems to not have the ‘fat-storing’ properties that carb-fueled insulin releases have. Something called glucagon if I remember correctly?
[/quote]

Glucagon is one of the so-called counterregulatory hormones (along with cortisol, GH, eppy and noreppy). The term ‘counterregulatory’ refers to its effect on blood glucose (BG) in contrast to that of insulin; ie, insulin lowers BG, whereas the counterregulatory hormones raise it.

You are correct that the glucagon response differentiates between carb and protein meals: High-protein meals tend to cause glucagon release, whereas high-carb meals do not. The logic behind this is straightforward. A high-carb meal prompts insulin release, which causes BG levels to fall by driving BG intracellular. But a high-carb meal also causes BG to rise as the consumed carbs are absorbed. Note that these two events offset each other, allowing BG levels to remain within a fairly tight range. (BTW, I am talking about nondiabetic individuals. All of this goes out the window in DM.)

In contrast, while a high-protein meal also prompts insulin release, it does NOT concurrently cause BG to rise, because there are no carbs to be absorbed. And because there are no incoming carbs, there is nothing to offset the fall in BG that occurs in response to the protein-induced rise in insulin levels. The (potential) result is hypoglycemia–a lethal condition. So, in order to prevent hypoglycemia, the body counterregulates (see what I did there?) the BG-lowering effects of the protein-induced insulin spike by releasing endogenous (ie, stored) glucose into the bloodstream. This is accomplished primarily via a protein-induced rise in glucagon levels. Glucagon raises BG by causing its release from stores in the liver. Note that, once again, we have two BG-influencing events that offset each other, thereby allowing BG level to remain within range.

Finally, as to your point…

The effects of glucagon on fat metabolism (both storage and breakdown) remain unsettled (to my knowledge). Research indicates that physiologic levels of glucagon don’t stimulate lipolysis to a clinically meaningful extent, so it seems unlikely that glucagon promotes fat loss directly. Perhaps it interferes in the creation and/or expansion of fat stores. More likely, glucagon exerts a CNS effect on feelings of satiety and/or hunger. Much work remains to be done on this subject.

One thing we know for certain is this: Insulin is a highly potent anabolic hormone, with the potential to produce astonishing changes in one’s physique (note that ‘astonishing’ cuts both ways). This is why I think it behooves all of us physique-conscious sorts to pay close attention to it.[/quote]

fantastic post![/quote]

I’ll second that! I generally get a full on knowledge-boner from this forum! :slight_smile: Thank you all for the excellent content!