Low Carb Diet...Not Losing Weight

Nutrition
221

[quote]shffl wrote:
JMoUCF87 wrote:
I’m not hating on you or anything, just making a point that you essentially just summed up what I’ve been saying for the last 8+ pages.

i know, im merely telling the other people whos too into the science stuff. i dont know who but i recall a lot of posts showing scientific studies. useless imo. [/quote]

And you’re a biochem major? Better watch out, biochemistry is based on all dat dere “science stuff”. Without scientific research, you wouldn’t have a major. Don’t knock research just because you can’t comprehend or interpret it.

222

[quote]JMoUCF87 wrote:
shffl wrote:

i know, im merely telling the other people whos too into the science stuff. i dont know who but i recall a lot of posts showing scientific studies. useless imo.

sorry bud, but i gotta disagree with you there. sure, studies performed on populations cannot be directly prescribed to any one individual b/c of a myriad of confounding factors.

However, science is useful in helping disproving myths such as “you should never combine carbs and fat in the same meal” or “you’ll get fat if you eat ” or “don’t eat carbs before bed”.

it’s when people ignore the science and instead rigidly adhere to arbitrary rules like these (and many, many others) that causes people to not achieve their goals.[/quote]

Great points, broski. Science > arbitrary bropinion.

223

sorry. i think im being too unclear and was misunderstood. i am not discrediting the use of overall use of science. i guess i might have misworded my last post. what im trying to say is that it doesnt matter if theres a scientific study to a particular case or not, as long as there is results to be shown.

for example, in the case of F+C meals. lets say that there is no scientific studies have showing that its not optimal to combine both together in a meal. but people have shown from experience that F+C meals may inhibit progress in fat loss. even though there is no science to back it up in this theoretical case, people should not doubt it just because there is no scientific studies on it.

it might be kind of a bad example but what im trying to show is that u shouldnt have to base everything on science. there are a lot of things that cant be explained yet (but will probably be possible in the future) some people like to overanalyze too much, instead they should focus on consistent results rather than what a study might have shown.

yes science is useful and an important part of training i have no doubt about it but there are SOME cases where scientific studies pretty much contradict what a lot of people have been doing to get superb results. i have came across a couple of those cases but i cant come up with it right now, i will try posting them up sometime later though

i need to stop rushing through what i type lol i seem to express the wrong message

224

[quote]shffl wrote:

for example, in the case of F+C meals. lets say that there is no scientific studies have showing that its not optimal to combine both together in a meal. but people have shown from experience that F+C meals may inhibit progress in fat loss. even though there is no science to back it up in this theoretical case, people should not doubt it just because there is no scientific studies on it.
[/quote]

I can appreciate your intentions, but respectfully disagree.

Accepting conventional wisdom at face value is a mistake in any arena. For example, many coaches used to prohibit their athletes from drinking water throughout the duration of a sporting event. The conventional wisdom was that it was counterproductive and caused cramping. Imagine where we would be now if that ridiculous notion hadn’t been called into question.

In defense of the P + F crowd, if a certain diet or method of dieting is working for someone, then he should not feel compelled to make changes due to the conclusions drawn by the most recent study.

On the flip side, though, there’s no reason for him to needlessly suffer and blindly follow archaic bodybuilding dogma.

As far as Biosignature is concerned, my knowledge is too limited to comment. Personally, I can’t help but question the validity of a “science” with such clearly outlined ulterior motives (supplement line, pricey seminars, etc.) and no peer-reviewed studies under its belt.

Just my .02.

-C10

225

[quote]shffl wrote:
sorry. i think im being too unclear and was misunderstood. i am not discrediting the use of overall use of science. i guess i might have misworded my last post. what im trying to say is that it doesnt matter if theres a scientific study to a particular case or not, as long as there is results to be shown.

for example, in the case of F+C meals. lets say that there is no scientific studies have showing that its not optimal to combine both together in a meal. but people have shown from experience that F+C meals may inhibit progress in fat loss. even though there is no science to back it up in this theoretical case, people should not doubt it just because there is no scientific studies on it.

it might be kind of a bad example but what im trying to show is that u shouldnt have to base everything on science. there are a lot of things that cant be explained yet (but will probably be possible in the future) some people like to overanalyze too much, instead they should focus on consistent results rather than what a study might have shown.

yes science is useful and an important part of training i have no doubt about it but there are SOME cases where scientific studies pretty much contradict what a lot of people have been doing to get superb results. i have came across a couple of those cases but i cant come up with it right now, i will try posting them up sometime later though

i need to stop rushing through what i type lol i seem to express the wrong message [/quote]

What you have to understand is that many trainees succeed inspite of what they do, not because of it.

226

Alan,

I agree that while dieting, a kcal deficit is the overriding factor in fat loss. However, What is your take on C+F meals while not in a kcal deficit assuming protein consumption is adequate. Also, what is your take on glucose levels and fat gain while trying to add muscle? I appreciate your input, thank you.

227

[quote]CoQ10 wrote:
shffl wrote:

for example, in the case of F+C meals. lets say that there is no scientific studies have showing that its not optimal to combine both together in a meal. but people have shown from experience that F+C meals may inhibit progress in fat loss. even though there is no science to back it up in this theoretical case, people should not doubt it just because there is no scientific studies on it.

I can appreciate your intentions, but respectfully disagree.

Accepting conventional wisdom at face value is a mistake in any arena. For example, many coaches used to prohibit their athletes from drinking water throughout the duration of a sporting event. The conventional wisdom was that it was counterproductive and caused cramping. Imagine where we would be now if that ridiculous notion hadn’t been called into question.

In defense of the P + F crowd, if a certain diet or method of dieting is working for someone, then he should not feel compelled to make changes due to the conclusions drawn by the most recent study.

On the flip side, though, there’s no reason for him to needlessly suffer and blindly follow archaic bodybuilding dogma.

As far as Biosignature is concerned, my knowledge is too limited to comment. Personally, I can’t help but question the validity of a “science” with such clearly outlined ulterior motives (supplement line, pricey seminars, etc.) and no peer-reviewed studies under its belt.

Just my .02.

-C10[/quote]

Hey man,

As I mentioned earlier in this tread I recently had my biosig test done and with the protocols recommended thus far, have gained muscle and lost fat(I also mentioned, I am not a newbie, AND have already been dieting following past procedures for 10 weeks before the test).

I have yet to spend much money on supps and the guy I am working with would rather make changes in other areas, before making me spend my money, unless I really need to, which I really do appreciate. The only things I have spent money on, that I dont already buy, is Zinc and HCL(digestive enzymes), which aren’t badly prices at all.

I guess there would be some coachs who would throw all the supps required to fix certain issues, rather than save you the money, making lifestyle changes.

GJ

228

[quote]latenight_lifter wrote:
Alan,

I agree that while dieting, a kcal deficit is the overriding factor in fat loss. However, What is your take on C+F meals while not in a kcal deficit assuming protein consumption is adequate. Also, what is your take on glucose levels and fat gain while trying to add muscle? I appreciate your input, thank you.[/quote]

I have no issues with having C+F meals, regardless of caloric balance. Carb timing can make a difference in some cases, but for the most part fat timing has much less specific application. If you haven’t already, read the opening article (p. 2-5):

http://user210805.websitewizard.com/files/unprotected/AARR-Jan-2008.pdf

The second part of your Q I believe is answered on p.17.

229

Thanks Alan. I really appreciate it.

230

Hello Coach: I hope all is well. Just a quick question, I have been following your targeted carb approach for a nice lean gain (only using mainly malto/dextrose during and postworkout max 75 grams), how would I use a targeted carbs approach for losing weight? Thank you sir.