I think you’d be surprised how many people need outlined parameters in order to eat properly. Many people are capable of eating by feel and do so successfully, most average people however, cannot seem to do this effectively. In the end I do agree with you though, many times overcomplicating something can make it unneccessarily more difficult.
[quote]Da Vinci wrote:
I think you’d be surprised how many people need outlined parameters in order to eat properly. Many people are capable of eating by feel and do so successfully, most average people however, cannot seem to do this effectively. In the end I do agree with you though, many times overcomplicating something can make it unneccessarily more difficult.[/quote]
Honestly, if someone takes that much time to figure out the basics, this may not be for them. This is an activity where your actions count more than your professed knowledge base. The ones who figure out the basics quickly and understand their efforts in the gym count just as much as their effort in the kitchen will be the ones who stand out in this. Those who need to have someone hold their hand through every step of the way will NOT.
This is not for everyone…which is why so many on this board seem to be unable to even get their arms over 15".
That is very true, however it is up to them to decide if it’s for them or not. Just because the learning curve is slower for some doesn’t mean they can’t get in the game eventually. Not to mention, if a beginner has the patience and their progress isn’t hindered by gaining an advanced understanding of concepts, in the long run they may be better off.
Still I realize that the majority doesn’t fall into the category I stated above, so I concede your point.
[quote]Da Vinci wrote:
<<< if a beginner… their progress isn’t hindered by gaining an advanced understanding of concepts, >>>[/quote]
You seem like an agreeable chap and my last post wasn’t directed at you as your post wasn’t up yet while I was typing mine.
However I am still waiting for the very first person who fits the description of the above to show up here. I’ve been around a little while now and Professor X a lot longer than me. I’m betting he will also say that “advanced concepts” are exactly what is holding armies of beginners back.
Advanced lifters MIGHT benefit from tons of technical knowledge where small details can make a difference. Newer lifters need to learn what hard, consistent, ball busting work feels like and how to eat like grown ups. The guys spouting the most erudite sounding crap are usually the ones who haven’t learned either of those, but do read a lot.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Da Vinci wrote:
<<< if a beginner… their progress isn’t hindered by gaining an advanced understanding of concepts, >>>
You seem like an agreeable chap and my last post wasn’t directed at you as your post wasn’t up yet while I was typing mine.
However I am still waiting for the very first person who fits the description of the above to show up here. I’ve been around a little while now and Professor X a lot longer than me. I’m betting he will also say that “advanced concepts” are exactly what is holding armies of beginners back.
Advanced lifters MIGHT benefit from tons of technical knowledge where small details can make a difference. Newer lifters need to learn what hard, consistent, ball busting work feels like and how to eat like grown ups. The guys spouting the most erudite sounding crap are usually the ones who haven’t learned either of those, but do read a lot.
[/quote]
Pictures would clear most of this right up in nearly all cases.
Most newbies need to AVOID advanced concepts until they learn what real hard work is in and out of the gym.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
There are people I like and respect who will disagree with this, but I see overall calories and being more important to making gains than several hundred grams of protein a day.
Strictly in terms of macronutrient intake, assuming your not getting a very small amount of, most people will make better gains on an overall surplus than simply eating tons of protein.
Especially if you proceed under the utterly erroneous assumption that you can get away with less calories if you simply jack up the protein intake.
Fat and carbs have a very real and complex role in anabolism.
In short, unless you’re getting a truly inadequate amount of protein, I don’t see any benefit in intentionally getting more at the expense of the other macros.[/quote]
Very true.
Though there are reasons why one would choose to up their protein intake and lower their carb intake for example. Or vice versa.
As you said, in the end it’s about a surplus of calories, but different macronutrients play different roles in terms of nutrition/anabolism and altering the ratios of each within that surplus of calories can be beneficial.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Da Vinci wrote:
<<< if a beginner… their progress isn’t hindered by gaining an advanced understanding of concepts, >>>
You seem like an agreeable chap and my last post wasn’t directed at you as your post wasn’t up yet while I was typing mine.
However I am still waiting for the very first person who fits the description of the above to show up here. I’ve been around a little while now and Professor X a lot longer than me. I’m betting he will also say that “advanced concepts” are exactly what is holding armies of beginners back.
Advanced lifters MIGHT benefit from tons of technical knowledge where small details can make a difference. Newer lifters need to learn what hard, consistent, ball busting work feels like and how to eat like grown ups. The guys spouting the most erudite sounding crap are usually the ones who haven’t learned either of those, but do read a lot.
[/quote]
Basically it’s information overload that keeps most newbies/beginners from advancing. Too much too soon leads to confusion.
AS I tell friends who are starting to get into lifting and dieting. Don’t try to do EVERYTHING right from day one. You’re body and your mind won’t accept nor appreciate the drastic change.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Alffi wrote:
How come people here often say 2 grams for a pounds of bodyweight while the literature I have read states 1.6-2 grams for a kilo/2.2 pounds? Although I once came across a book that said “at least” 2 grams for a kilogram,but it was not expertly. Besides,does the fat weight have to be fed too?
Let me ask you a question, do you think someone trying to gain the most muscle possible should follow a guideline written for athletes who do NOT have a goal of gaining the most muscle possible? Most athletes are not trying to gain another 20-30-50lbs of lean body mass. [/quote]
OK. But I have heard these guidelines rammed through over and over again,and they are for bodybuilders and athletes. The minimum protein for growth would be 1.6g/2.2 for a kilo and maintenance level would be slightly lower. Soon as I switch out of this forum and go on a national forum for example,the numbers change drastically.
[quote]Alffi wrote:
Professor X wrote:
Alffi wrote:
How come people here often say 2 grams for a pounds of bodyweight while the literature I have read states 1.6-2 grams for a kilo/2.2 pounds? Although I once came across a book that said “at least” 2 grams for a kilogram,but it was not expertly. Besides,does the fat weight have to be fed too?
Let me ask you a question, do you think someone trying to gain the most muscle possible should follow a guideline written for athletes who do NOT have a goal of gaining the most muscle possible? Most athletes are not trying to gain another 20-30-50lbs of lean body mass.
OK. But I have heard these guidelines rammed through over and over again,and they are for bodybuilders and athletes. The minimum protein for growth would be 1.6g/2.2 for a kilo and maintenance level would be slightly lower. Soon as I switch out of this forum and go on a national forum for example,the numbers change drastically.
[/quote]
Most guidelines you have heard have not been for bodybuilders. It is very difficult to fund a study that follows people around for YEARS as they gain muscle mass in excess of “average”.
Most of what you hear in the bodybuilding world comes from observing other bodybuilders and from experience. I personally think “2gr per pound” is a tad much and that most people are not lacking in the protein department if they are eating right overall unless they are far above 200lbs.
It should not be difficult at all for someone under 190lbs to get all of the protein they need from only food sources and no other supplements.
I personally have jacked up my protein intake lately because I dropped my carb intake drastically and I am in the process of dropping weight. It is that time that protein becomes even more important.
[quote]Alffi wrote:
Professor X wrote:
Alffi wrote:
How come people here often say 2 grams for a pounds of bodyweight while the literature I have read states 1.6-2 grams for a kilo/2.2 pounds? Although I once came across a book that said “at least” 2 grams for a kilogram,but it was not expertly. Besides,does the fat weight have to be fed too?
Let me ask you a question, do you think someone trying to gain the most muscle possible should follow a guideline written for athletes who do NOT have a goal of gaining the most muscle possible? Most athletes are not trying to gain another 20-30-50lbs of lean body mass.
OK. But I have heard these guidelines rammed through over and over again,and they are for bodybuilders and athletes. The minimum protein for growth would be 1.6g/2.2 for a kilo and maintenance level would be slightly lower. Soon as I switch out of this forum and go on a national forum for example,the numbers change drastically.
[/quote]
Probably because on a national forum you don’t have serious BB’ers discussing their nutritional practices. Even 1.6g per every 2.2 lbs would be a measly 160 g for a 220 lb bodybuilder, which would only be 640 kcals. That would mean that they’d have to take in 3,360 kcals (assuming a 4,000 kcal diet, which is probably a gross underestimation in most cases) from fats and carbs. No wonder obesity is such an epidemic if people are following guidelines like these.
You have to take into consideration that most of these “nutritionists” have never worked with serious BB’ers or athletes and are basically just making statements based completely on theory, with no real world evidence or practice to back them up.
[quote]Sentoguy wrote:
Alffi wrote:
Professor X wrote:
Alffi wrote:
How come people here often say 2 grams for a pounds of bodyweight while the literature I have read states 1.6-2 grams for a kilo/2.2 pounds? Although I once came across a book that said “at least” 2 grams for a kilogram,but it was not expertly. Besides,does the fat weight have to be fed too?
Let me ask you a question, do you think someone trying to gain the most muscle possible should follow a guideline written for athletes who do NOT have a goal of gaining the most muscle possible? Most athletes are not trying to gain another 20-30-50lbs of lean body mass.
OK. But I have heard these guidelines rammed through over and over again,and they are for bodybuilders and athletes. The minimum protein for growth would be 1.6g/2.2 for a kilo and maintenance level would be slightly lower. Soon as I switch out of this forum and go on a national forum for example,the numbers change drastically.
Probably because on a national forum you don’t have serious BB’ers discussing their nutritional practices. Even 1.6g per every 2.2 lbs would be a measly 160 g for a 220 lb bodybuilder, which would only be 640 kcals. That would mean that they’d have to take in 3,360 kcals (assuming a 4,000 kcal diet, which is probably a gross underestimation in most cases) from fats and carbs. No wonder obesity is such an epidemic if people are following guidelines like these.
You have to take into consideration that most of these “nutritionists” have never worked with serious BB’ers or athletes and are basically just making statements based completely on theory, with no real world evidence or practice to back them up.[/quote]
This is very true. Unless some “nutritionist” has actually worked with advanced bodybuilders, I wouldn’t listen to much of what they had to say as it pertains to myself and my goals.
[quote]Alffi wrote:
The minimum protein for growth would be 1.6g/2.2 for a kilo
[/quote]
Do you want minimum gains?
Is anyone else spending about $15 dollars a day on average just on meat? I’m talking groceries as well, not going out to eat. It’s becoming a little ridiculous. Anyone know if you can buy any meat in bulk and save a lot of money by doing so? I would prefer to buy it in bulk and then just freeze it all. I should have been a hunter and just killed a 200 pound buck this last season. Protein requirements fulfilled for months.
[quote]Da Vinci wrote:
Is anyone else spending about $15 dollars a day on average just on meat? I’m talking groceries as well, not going out to eat. It’s becoming a little ridiculous. Anyone know if you can buy any meat in bulk and save a lot of money by doing so? I would prefer to buy it in bulk and then just freeze it all. I should have been a hunter and just killed a 200 pound buck this last season. Protein requirements fulfilled for months.[/quote]
How big is your freezer?
http://www.crescentqualitymeats.com/bulk_meat.phtml
Half cow = $2.20/lb
Conveniently located in WI.
To help you utilize the whole animal:
http://www.beyondorganic.com/template/nst.php?id=031605&idy=2005&sn=sn2
[quote]Sentoguy wrote:
Tiribulus wrote:
There are people I like and respect who will disagree with this, but I see overall calories and being more important to making gains than several hundred grams of protein a day.
Strictly in terms of macronutrient intake, assuming your not getting a very small amount of, most people will make better gains on an overall surplus than simply eating tons of protein.
Especially if you proceed under the utterly erroneous assumption that you can get away with less calories if you simply jack up the protein intake.
Fat and carbs have a very real and complex role in anabolism.
In short, unless you’re getting a truly inadequate amount of protein, I don’t see any benefit in intentionally getting more at the expense of the other macros.
Very true.
Though there are reasons why one would choose to up their protein intake and lower their carb intake for example. Or vice versa.
As you said, in the end it’s about a surplus of calories, but different macronutrients play different roles in terms of nutrition/anabolism and altering the ratios of each within that surplus of calories can be beneficial.[/quote]
Yes, yourself and my ol buddy Scott were the 2 main guys I was thinking of =]
I refuse to tie a number or formula to it because I just don’t find it useful. Clearly a half gram per lb (1 gram per kilo) is not enough for the vast majority of people and at some finite point it’s overkill on the other end.
My whole thing is that if you’re eating a solid diet with plenty of calories for growth I don’t buy that A LOT more protein will get you anything more. That doesn’t mean some guys won’t do better with more protein than somebody else. By all means if somebody is eating a lot and thinks more protein would benefit them, give it a shot, maybe it will.
The trouble is we usually have these guys who try to make good gains with lower calories to avoid fat on the mistaken theory that simply eating astronomical amounts of protein will make that happen.
I am leery of getting enough protein for the metabolism to get real comfortable using it for energy instead of repair.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Da Vinci wrote:
Is anyone else spending about $15 dollars a day on average just on meat? I’m talking groceries as well, not going out to eat. It’s becoming a little ridiculous. Anyone know if you can buy any meat in bulk and save a lot of money by doing so? I would prefer to buy it in bulk and then just freeze it all. I should have been a hunter and just killed a 200 pound buck this last season. Protein requirements fulfilled for months.
How big is your freezer?
http://www.crescentqualitymeats.com/bulk_meat.phtml
Half cow = $2.20/lb
Conveniently located in WI.[/quote]
Man, that is exactly what I was hoping to see, thank you.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Sentoguy wrote:
Tiribulus wrote:
There are people I like and respect who will disagree with this, but I see overall calories and being more important to making gains than several hundred grams of protein a day.
Strictly in terms of macronutrient intake, assuming your not getting a very small amount of, most people will make better gains on an overall surplus than simply eating tons of protein.
Especially if you proceed under the utterly erroneous assumption that you can get away with less calories if you simply jack up the protein intake.
Fat and carbs have a very real and complex role in anabolism.
In short, unless you’re getting a truly inadequate amount of protein, I don’t see any benefit in intentionally getting more at the expense of the other macros.
Very true.
Though there are reasons why one would choose to up their protein intake and lower their carb intake for example. Or vice versa.
As you said, in the end it’s about a surplus of calories, but different macronutrients play different roles in terms of nutrition/anabolism and altering the ratios of each within that surplus of calories can be beneficial.
Yes, yourself and my ol buddy Scott were the 2 main guys I was thinking of =]
I refuse to tie a number or formula to it because I just don’t find it useful. Clearly a half gram per lb (1 gram per kilo) is not enough for the vast majority of people and at some finite point it’s overkill on the other end.
My whole thing is that if you’re eating a solid diet with plenty of calories for growth I don’t buy that A LOT more protein will get you anything more. That doesn’t mean some guys won’t do better with more protein than somebody else. By all means if somebody is eating a lot and thinks more protein would benefit them, give it a shot, maybe it will.
The trouble is we usually have these guys who try to make good gains with lower calories to avoid fat on the mistaken theory that simply eating astronomical amounts of protein will make that happen.
I am leery of getting enough protein for the metabolism to get real comfortable using it for energy instead of repair.
[/quote]
Yeah, I completely agree with you.
There could be other reasons for upping protein though, than thinking that it will all convert to muscle, or to use to fuel exercise.
For instance, raising your protein and fat intake, while lowering your carb intake (on off days/or light(er) training days) could be beneficial in order to avoid having excess carb calories spilling over into bodyfat (which could happen if one were to try to eat large amounts of carbs every day,
As there is a limit to how much glycogen the body can store, and any excess glycogen floating around in the blood will be converted to adipose tissue). It would also allow the body to naturally deplete it’s glycogen stores and improve it’s insulin sensitivity.
This is the basic theory behind carb rotation/cycling. And there is certainly evidence that this can be beneficial for allowing one to continue to gain mass while managing adipose tissue accumulation, or for contest prep reasons (different topic though).
It’s obviously more complicated than most people need to get with their diets though. So again I agree with your general sentiments.
I definately agree with that. I’ve found it very important, especially when in a surplus of calories to manage a huge spill over into adipose by cycling my carbs and increase my protein and fats on off days to keep myself in a surplus yet keep my insulin spikes lower as they’re less needed if I’m not being as active.