Fat Adapted?

Diet and Nutrition
21

[quote]giograves wrote:
Nate Myaki talks about this alot…

Analogy. Carbs are like Gasoline for a car, if you keep it in a garage and don’t drive it much trying to full the tank all the time will lead to a major spill over.

Basically his point was that for the Athlete and the Physique enthusiast, carbs are conditionally essential. While we can live and be quite healthy on meat and plants, that doesn’t mean we can THRIVE and be bad asses and take names on that sort of diet.

Also, over spilled fat will most easily be added to your adipose tissue sure, BUT your fat (and muscle) are being remodeled all day long. Just like the concept of nitrogen balance for muscle gains/atrophy, same concept applies to fat. Are you dipping into that stored fat for energy later in the day?? [/quote]

This is a gross oversimplification of fat regulation. Fat acts as a short term energy buffer. Fat stores are in constant flux, they are not a simple repository for calories. There are also countless things that effect the rates of exchange completely unrelated to dietary calories.

22

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
I’m getting pretty damn lean eating this way.[/quote]

Not the point. I lost weight like that to get into the military…but a ton of muscle left with it.

It was stated that not many people actually get really swole on a low carb diet.

Dieting for a few months is not the same…and even then, you still need to find what works for you.

I will never diet like that again because of the muscle loss I experienced.

I have just learned that there is no need to cut out all carbs to diet down.[/quote]

I haven’t had the same experience. Everyone’s metabolic processes are different. I now get a mental fog from eating carbs. I feel like I’m sucking down red bulls without them. Not saying everyone should do the same thing. I think people should find what works, even if it’s against conventional wisdom.

23

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
I’m getting pretty damn lean eating this way.[/quote]

Not the point. I lost weight like that to get into the military…but a ton of muscle left with it.

I will never diet like that again because of the muscle loss I experienced.
[/quote]

My experiance (which seems to be fairly common) has been the opposite. When on a deficit; high protein, high fats, & low carbs(starches) always perseves more LBM than the other way around. Many really ‘big’ guys overestimate the amount of muscle and underestimate BF levels when ‘beefy’.
Disclaimer: Not saying that is the case with you.

24

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
I’m getting pretty damn lean eating this way.[/quote]

Not the point. I lost weight like that to get into the military…but a ton of muscle left with it.

It was stated that not many people actually get really swole on a low carb diet.

Dieting for a few months is not the same…and even then, you still need to find what works for you.

I will never diet like that again because of the muscle loss I experienced.

I have just learned that there is no need to cut out all carbs to diet down.[/quote]

Not only have I not lost muscle I have gained some too.

When you lost all that muscle were you also doing tons of cardio because of training for the military?

…just wondering.

25

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
I’m getting pretty damn lean eating this way.[/quote]

Not the point. I lost weight like that to get into the military…but a ton of muscle left with it.

It was stated that not many people actually get really swole on a low carb diet.

Dieting for a few months is not the same…and even then, you still need to find what works for you.

I will never diet like that again because of the muscle loss I experienced.

I have just learned that there is no need to cut out all carbs to diet down.[/quote]

Not only have I not lost muscle I have gained some too.

When you lost all that muscle were you also doing tons of cardio because of training for the military?

…just wondering.[/quote]

…But we don’t know what level of development you are at.

I was dropping weight from 270lbs to get in.

26

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]solidkhalid wrote:
Studies show that the human brain works more efficiently in a glucose-environment.[/quote]

The brain requires glucose. That isn’t the same as saying the diet does. I’ve actually seen studies that say the opposite.[/quote]

A fat adapted person makes glycogen from triglyceride leftovers

“The last point Iâ??ll make on the starving patient is that, as you can see in the figure below, the glucose level normalizes at about 65-70 mg/dL (about 3.7 mM) within days of fasting, despite no sources of exogenous glucose. Why? Because with so much fat being converted into B-OHB and acetoacetic acid by the liver, a significant amount of glycerol (the 3-carbon backbone of triglycerides) is liberated and converted by the liver into glycogen. As an aside, this is why someone in nutritional ketosis â?? even if eating zero carbohydrates â?? still has about 50-70% of a normal glycogen level, as demonstrated by muscle biopsies in such subjects.”

27

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Your brain needs glucose. It prefers it.
[/quote]

No, in fact, it does not prefer it.

Ketogenic diets have been shown to be therapeutic for brain disorders.[/quote]

We got into talking about building big muscles. I don’t see many people doing this on a low or no carb diet.
[/quote]

x2. The only “brain disorder” ketogenic diets have been used as a treatment for is epilepsy, which is not relevant to this thread. The topic is body composition: large amount of muscle mass, low amount of body fat. Sure, you may get to low body fat using a ketogenic diet, but will you gain a large amount of muscle mass? Yeah, right. Carb cycling is a much more effective route to achieving both goals.

28

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:

[quote]Spidey22 wrote:

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:

[quote]The Greek wrote:

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
I would say burning glucose for energy in the human body is more like burning ethanol in a gasoline engine.

It can be done but it comes with all sorts of negative consequences to the machinery.
[/quote]

You do realize that glucose is your body’s preferred method of fuel, right? [/quote]

You do realize you are wrong, right?

Fat is the preferred fuel in my body because I store it really easily.[/quote]

LOL Yeah fuck this noise[/quote]

I got pictures too.

[/quote]

And this implies that glucose isn’t ‘preferred’ as a fuel source, how exactly?

29

[quote]The Greek wrote:
Yeah, right. Carb cycling is a much more effective route to achieving both goals.
[/quote]

In terms of rate of weight gain? maybe. In terms of overall efficacy? I remain skeptical.

30

[quote]Spidey22 wrote:

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:

[quote]Spidey22 wrote:

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:

[quote]The Greek wrote:

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
I would say burning glucose for energy in the human body is more like burning ethanol in a gasoline engine.

It can be done but it comes with all sorts of negative consequences to the machinery.
[/quote]

You do realize that glucose is your body’s preferred method of fuel, right? [/quote]

You do realize you are wrong, right?

Fat is the preferred fuel in my body because I store it really easily.[/quote]

LOL Yeah fuck this noise[/quote]

I got pictures too.

[/quote]

And this implies that glucose isn’t ‘preferred’ as a fuel source, how exactly?

[/quote]
It doesn’t - it is just further evidence that glucose is not a necessary element of the electron transport chain.

I imply preference by what the body has the capacity to store more of. Clearly it is not glucose - though it can derive some energy in an anaerobic state from it it is not necessary.

Human beings, having adapted to utilize every energy pathway possible just found a way to non-toxically store and use glucose. That does not mean it is a preferred fuel source.

31

[quote]The Greek wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Your brain needs glucose. It prefers it.
[/quote]

No, in fact, it does not prefer it.

Ketogenic diets have been shown to be therapeutic for brain disorders.[/quote]

We got into talking about building big muscles. I don’t see many people doing this on a low or no carb diet.
[/quote]

x2. The only “brain disorder” ketogenic diets have been used as a treatment for is epilepsy, which is not relevant to this thread. The topic is body composition: large amount of muscle mass, low amount of body fat. Sure, you may get to low body fat using a ketogenic diet, but will you gain a large amount of muscle mass? Yeah, right. Carb cycling is a much more effective route to achieving both goals.

[/quote]

I don’t personally know anyone who’s ever tried. The average diet is like 50% carbs. I don’t even personally know anyone else that’s eating like I am or would ever even consider giving up their breads and sugar. All the big guys may be that way because pretty much the whole population is.

And low carb and ketogenic aren’t the same thing. Just a very few carbs will keep you out of that zone.

32

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:

[quote]Spidey22 wrote:

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:

[quote]Spidey22 wrote:

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:

[quote]The Greek wrote:

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
I would say burning glucose for energy in the human body is more like burning ethanol in a gasoline engine.

It can be done but it comes with all sorts of negative consequences to the machinery.
[/quote]

You do realize that glucose is your body’s preferred method of fuel, right? [/quote]

You do realize you are wrong, right?

Fat is the preferred fuel in my body because I store it really easily.[/quote]

LOL Yeah fuck this noise[/quote]

I got pictures too.

[/quote]

And this implies that glucose isn’t ‘preferred’ as a fuel source, how exactly?

[/quote]
It doesn’t - it is just further evidence that glucose is not a necessary element of the electron transport chain.

I imply preference by what the body has the capacity to store more of. Clearly it is not glucose - though it can derive some energy in an anaerobic state from it it is not necessary.

Human beings, having adapted to utilize every energy pathway possible just found a way to non-toxically store and use glucose. That does not mean it is a preferred fuel source.[/quote]

Fair enough. That’s an interesting theory, but I haven’t seen many be successful with it to gain an ample deal of muscle mass, minus a few who have used the Anabolic Diet (which obviously still utilizes Carbs).

You said you’ve had success recomping with this method. Any pictures?

33

I have asked John Berardi himself this question:

I was reading your Get Shredded Diet which from the T-Nation website. My question to you is regarding the diet being 55-60% fat , 35% protein and 10-15% carbs. Is this the best way to get really lean? What i mean is if you we’re to compare this diet to a diet more traditional along the lines of 40% Protein, 40% Carbs, 20% Fats would the get shredded diet be more effective EVEN if the caloric deficits we’re the same? Thanks.

John:

if you’re training hard, eating the right foods, and get your calories right, the difference between what you posted and the GSD macros probably wouldn’t matter all that much. The only X factor is carb tolerance. Some people get markedly leaner when they cut carbs down to below 10-15% of total calories. Others, it doesn’t matter so much. Typically those who are more endomorphic are those that need fewer carbs.

John is pretty much on point. I am an ecto/meso. I typically do well with higher protein, higher carbs and low fats all that changes are calories.

34

Its hard to truly go Keto with a high protein diet. >>> Gluconeogenosis

And for me protein keeps me satisfied managing food portions. Keto is a no go for me.

35

The body prefers stored fat to stored glucose because adipose tissue contains ~6 times more energy than glycogen on a “per gram” basis. It is simply a more efficient means of storing energy.

However, we can conclude that our bodies “prefer” carbohydrates as an energy source because they are "prefer"entially burned when mixed meals are consumed. We can experiment with this using the ketards on this forum as test subjects: simply have them start eating C+F meals while in ketosis and see how long that metabolic state lasts.

My guess?

Not very long.

36

[quote]MetalMX wrote:
"The book isn’t just important for what it says about fat storage. It also is a ruthless expose of the current system of the peer reviewed research system. I have never read any book with as many scientific references or which goes to so much trouble to explain why the science underlying current heart/obesity research is wrong.

Whenever you read any research press release the IMMEDIATE need is to check what is in the press release bears any resemblance to what is the conclusion of the paper and then you NEED to check that what the paper discusses and found from the research is related to what is claimed in the conclusions and is accurately reflected in BOTH the abstract and the press release. Far too often the idea that initiated the research is not proven by the subsequent research but those ideas permeate both the press release and the conclusions despite the fact that the actual findings did not support that idea."[/quote]

This is pretty hysterical coming from someone lauding the stringent research methods behind the work of Gary Taubes.

37

anonym, you’re a pretty switched on dude, am I right in thinking then that you think low-carb is overrated? Or unnecessary?

I’d love to hear your opinion on this, as I’m sure would many others

38

[quote]rds63799 wrote:
anonym, you’re a pretty switched on dude, am I right in thinking then that you think low-carb is overrated? Or unnecessary?

I’d love to hear your opinion on this, as I’m sure would many others[/quote]

I suppose that it depends on the individual and their goals.

In what context are you thinking? Some people here seem to want to talk about health, while others want to talk about getting swole (or losing fat).

39

are there any examples of guys who got big without carbs? It seems like the best looking large guys manage their carbs in some sort of way, but regardless are taking them in at the very least 1-2x a week.

40

[quote]anonym wrote:

[quote]rds63799 wrote:
anonym, you’re a pretty switched on dude, am I right in thinking then that you think low-carb is overrated? Or unnecessary?

I’d love to hear your opinion on this, as I’m sure would many others[/quote]

I suppose that it depends on the individual and their goals.

In what context are you thinking? Some people here seem to want to talk about health, while others want to talk about getting swole (or losing fat).[/quote]

Swoleness/fatlossness.

The reason I ask is I’ve seen you defend the calories in - calories out model a few times in the past