Martin Burkham (Leangains) Consult up for Grabs

Nutrition
161

[quote]fd24 wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]165StateChamp wrote:
You have said that every other time you’ve dieted down you’ve lost substantial lean mass. Does that sound like intelligent, informed dieting to you? You are doing better this time, according to you, but you have not gotten past mid-teens yet, and you’re still figuring out a process that works for you. Actually, you know what, go ahead and continue the argument. I couldn’t care less but I’ll still respond. [/quote]

Uh, most people do lose some muscle when dieting. In fact, the usual is half and half lean body mass to fat ratio. the only thing that changes that is how you train, your hormones, and your nutrition.

My mistake in the past was CARDIO, not diet. In fact, if you really were interested in anything like that, you would ask instead of jumping to all of these conclusions.

It was believed for years that everyone needed steady state cardio to lean up. Being in the military didn’t help this either.

I have never had a problem losing body fat. I simply never took it that far BECAUSE THE WHOLE GOAL WAS TO GET BIGGER.

Question…why is this so hard for some of you to understand? Some of you act like people are reaching my size everyday. They aren’t…and it is hilarious watching as some of you see to think otherwise.

That is why comments like I was “inefficient” are comedic. That could only be the case if reaching my size was a norm. It isn’t.

I am dieting now because I feel I am big enough now to be satisfied doing it. Why the hell would I have dieted down back when I only weighed 220lbs? That was NOT the goal.

To conclude that this means I can’t diet is just stupid.[/quote]

The reason you hate dieting down is because how can you fall back on “OMG IM BIGGER THAN YOU BECAUSE I WEIGH MORE, I HAD TO EAT TO GET HERE, WHO ELSE GAINED A LOT OF WEIGHT”…Like we have all said, congrats on gaining weight, some of us don’t share your same goals. Some of us don’t want to be 20% body fat. Clearly, because you were so skinny and small at a young age, it has a major impact on your psyche even today. Nobody cares that you gained a bunch of weight, you should be training for yourself. In my eyes, and apparently john meadows, skip harris, shelby (all guys who are much bigger than you) etc…getting too high of levels of body fat is not necessary to gain muscle. And so I would take that as far as saying gaining all the excess body fat is an INEFFICIENT way of gaining muscle. Once again, did you make progress? Yes. Did you gain weight? Yes. Are you a big guy? Yes. Did you possibly gain too much fat? I guess that’s a personal opinion and one that will be answered when you diet down completely. But why you act like everyone wants to reach your size or body fat is beyond me. Who cares if you are bigger than the norm? Some people want to have aesthetically pleasing physiques…athletic physiques…lean physiques.

Believe it or not but weighing as much as possible isn’t the key to life and I think you would have figured that out by now. I have a bunch of friends who love bulking up to 280 or 290 because then they can tell everyone how much they weigh, how big they are, and it makes them feel good because they are very insecure. And then they mature (some do), they learn, and they see how horrible their blood work is and things change. Before you go on a rant about your blood work I was making a statement about my personal friends so please read carefully so as not to misconstrue things as you often do. [/quote]

Are you saying that multiple steroid users are bigger than X? SHOCKING!

162

For some reason, my last post didn’t go through. The gist was this:

Mexacanus, no one’s saying that these guys at higher BF can’t get LEAN. I was just reflecting on the discussion (if you can call it that) about the most efficient way to gain muscle and in the context of John Meadows comment (a ripped, competing BB) that there’s an upper limit to how fat a body builder should get before that excess fat doesn’t help muscle growth. In other words, there’s a point of diminishing returns.

163

[quote]Mexecutioner wrote:

[quote]fd24 wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]165StateChamp wrote:
You have said that every other time you’ve dieted down you’ve lost substantial lean mass. Does that sound like intelligent, informed dieting to you? You are doing better this time, according to you, but you have not gotten past mid-teens yet, and you’re still figuring out a process that works for you. Actually, you know what, go ahead and continue the argument. I couldn’t care less but I’ll still respond. [/quote]

Uh, most people do lose some muscle when dieting. In fact, the usual is half and half lean body mass to fat ratio. the only thing that changes that is how you train, your hormones, and your nutrition.

My mistake in the past was CARDIO, not diet. In fact, if you really were interested in anything like that, you would ask instead of jumping to all of these conclusions.

It was believed for years that everyone needed steady state cardio to lean up. Being in the military didn’t help this either.

I have never had a problem losing body fat. I simply never took it that far BECAUSE THE WHOLE GOAL WAS TO GET BIGGER.

Question…why is this so hard for some of you to understand? Some of you act like people are reaching my size everyday. They aren’t…and it is hilarious watching as some of you see to think otherwise.

That is why comments like I was “inefficient” are comedic. That could only be the case if reaching my size was a norm. It isn’t.

I am dieting now because I feel I am big enough now to be satisfied doing it. Why the hell would I have dieted down back when I only weighed 220lbs? That was NOT the goal.

To conclude that this means I can’t diet is just stupid.[/quote]

The reason you hate dieting down is because how can you fall back on “OMG IM BIGGER THAN YOU BECAUSE I WEIGH MORE, I HAD TO EAT TO GET HERE, WHO ELSE GAINED A LOT OF WEIGHT”…Like we have all said, congrats on gaining weight, some of us don’t share your same goals. Some of us don’t want to be 20% body fat. Clearly, because you were so skinny and small at a young age, it has a major impact on your psyche even today. Nobody cares that you gained a bunch of weight, you should be training for yourself. In my eyes, and apparently john meadows, skip harris, shelby (all guys who are much bigger than you) etc…getting too high of levels of body fat is not necessary to gain muscle. And so I would take that as far as saying gaining all the excess body fat is an INEFFICIENT way of gaining muscle. Once again, did you make progress? Yes. Did you gain weight? Yes. Are you a big guy? Yes. Did you possibly gain too much fat? I guess that’s a personal opinion and one that will be answered when you diet down completely. But why you act like everyone wants to reach your size or body fat is beyond me. Who cares if you are bigger than the norm? Some people want to have aesthetically pleasing physiques…athletic physiques…lean physiques.

Believe it or not but weighing as much as possible isn’t the key to life and I think you would have figured that out by now. I have a bunch of friends who love bulking up to 280 or 290 because then they can tell everyone how much they weigh, how big they are, and it makes them feel good because they are very insecure. And then they mature (some do), they learn, and they see how horrible their blood work is and things change. Before you go on a rant about your blood work I was making a statement about my personal friends so please read carefully so as not to misconstrue things as you often do. [/quote]

Are you saying that multiple steroid users are bigger than X? SHOCKING![/quote]

I’m sorry, do you need me to post the natural ones that are bigger? Would that make you feel better? Plus, I have no idea what X takes, if he’s natural or not. It doesn’t matter, I was only stating that some of the most highly respected diet coaches agree that getting very high levels of body fat is not necessary. And guess what? They consult A LOT OF NATURAL PEOPLE and give them the same advice. Jim Cordova echoes the same principles of not gaining a ton of fat, feel better now?

164

[quote]ds1973 wrote:
It’s true, you can’t have a damn discussion on these boards without someone thinking it’s a personal attack on them.[/quote]

You mean how I was merely showing you another point of view besides John Meadows and you took it as a personal attack?

165

[quote]Mexecutioner wrote:

[quote]ds1973 wrote:
It’s true, you can’t have a damn discussion on these boards without someone thinking it’s a personal attack on them.[/quote]

You mean how I was merely showing you another point of view besides John Meadows and you took it as a personal attack?[/quote]

Uh, no. Because I understand that point of view already. I understand that you can get lean after being big. I was trying to understand if that’s really optimal.

If you believe all the claims on this site, then CT has made significant gains in muscle with very little fat gain through strategic supplement / meal timing and training methods.

166

So…

has anyone on this board hired Martin before and could share their experiences?

167

[quote]fd24 wrote:

[quote]Mexecutioner wrote:

[quote]fd24 wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]165StateChamp wrote:
You have said that every other time you’ve dieted down you’ve lost substantial lean mass. Does that sound like intelligent, informed dieting to you? You are doing better this time, according to you, but you have not gotten past mid-teens yet, and you’re still figuring out a process that works for you. Actually, you know what, go ahead and continue the argument. I couldn’t care less but I’ll still respond. [/quote]

Uh, most people do lose some muscle when dieting. In fact, the usual is half and half lean body mass to fat ratio. the only thing that changes that is how you train, your hormones, and your nutrition.

My mistake in the past was CARDIO, not diet. In fact, if you really were interested in anything like that, you would ask instead of jumping to all of these conclusions.

It was believed for years that everyone needed steady state cardio to lean up. Being in the military didn’t help this either.

I have never had a problem losing body fat. I simply never took it that far BECAUSE THE WHOLE GOAL WAS TO GET BIGGER.

Question…why is this so hard for some of you to understand? Some of you act like people are reaching my size everyday. They aren’t…and it is hilarious watching as some of you see to think otherwise.

That is why comments like I was “inefficient” are comedic. That could only be the case if reaching my size was a norm. It isn’t.

I am dieting now because I feel I am big enough now to be satisfied doing it. Why the hell would I have dieted down back when I only weighed 220lbs? That was NOT the goal.

To conclude that this means I can’t diet is just stupid.[/quote]

The reason you hate dieting down is because how can you fall back on “OMG IM BIGGER THAN YOU BECAUSE I WEIGH MORE, I HAD TO EAT TO GET HERE, WHO ELSE GAINED A LOT OF WEIGHT”…Like we have all said, congrats on gaining weight, some of us don’t share your same goals. Some of us don’t want to be 20% body fat. Clearly, because you were so skinny and small at a young age, it has a major impact on your psyche even today. Nobody cares that you gained a bunch of weight, you should be training for yourself. In my eyes, and apparently john meadows, skip harris, shelby (all guys who are much bigger than you) etc…getting too high of levels of body fat is not necessary to gain muscle. And so I would take that as far as saying gaining all the excess body fat is an INEFFICIENT way of gaining muscle. Once again, did you make progress? Yes. Did you gain weight? Yes. Are you a big guy? Yes. Did you possibly gain too much fat? I guess that’s a personal opinion and one that will be answered when you diet down completely. But why you act like everyone wants to reach your size or body fat is beyond me. Who cares if you are bigger than the norm? Some people want to have aesthetically pleasing physiques…athletic physiques…lean physiques.

Believe it or not but weighing as much as possible isn’t the key to life and I think you would have figured that out by now. I have a bunch of friends who love bulking up to 280 or 290 because then they can tell everyone how much they weigh, how big they are, and it makes them feel good because they are very insecure. And then they mature (some do), they learn, and they see how horrible their blood work is and things change. Before you go on a rant about your blood work I was making a statement about my personal friends so please read carefully so as not to misconstrue things as you often do. [/quote]

Are you saying that multiple steroid users are bigger than X? SHOCKING![/quote]

I’m sorry, do you need me to post the natural ones that are bigger? Would that make you feel better? Plus, I have no idea what X takes, if he’s natural or not. It doesn’t matter, I was only stating that some of the most highly respected diet coaches agree that getting very high levels of body fat is not necessary. And guess what? They consult A LOT OF NATURAL PEOPLE and give them the same advice. Jim Cordova echoes the same principles of not gaining a ton of fat, feel better now? [/quote]

And I was stating that some of the most impressive physiques were built by getting up to “too high” of bodyfat and then dieting down.

168

[quote]Mexecutioner wrote:

[quote]fd24 wrote:

[quote]Mexecutioner wrote:

[quote]fd24 wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]165StateChamp wrote:
You have said that every other time you’ve dieted down you’ve lost substantial lean mass. Does that sound like intelligent, informed dieting to you? You are doing better this time, according to you, but you have not gotten past mid-teens yet, and you’re still figuring out a process that works for you. Actually, you know what, go ahead and continue the argument. I couldn’t care less but I’ll still respond. [/quote]

Uh, most people do lose some muscle when dieting. In fact, the usual is half and half lean body mass to fat ratio. the only thing that changes that is how you train, your hormones, and your nutrition.

My mistake in the past was CARDIO, not diet. In fact, if you really were interested in anything like that, you would ask instead of jumping to all of these conclusions.

It was believed for years that everyone needed steady state cardio to lean up. Being in the military didn’t help this either.

I have never had a problem losing body fat. I simply never took it that far BECAUSE THE WHOLE GOAL WAS TO GET BIGGER.

Question…why is this so hard for some of you to understand? Some of you act like people are reaching my size everyday. They aren’t…and it is hilarious watching as some of you see to think otherwise.

That is why comments like I was “inefficient” are comedic. That could only be the case if reaching my size was a norm. It isn’t.

I am dieting now because I feel I am big enough now to be satisfied doing it. Why the hell would I have dieted down back when I only weighed 220lbs? That was NOT the goal.

To conclude that this means I can’t diet is just stupid.[/quote]

The reason you hate dieting down is because how can you fall back on “OMG IM BIGGER THAN YOU BECAUSE I WEIGH MORE, I HAD TO EAT TO GET HERE, WHO ELSE GAINED A LOT OF WEIGHT”…Like we have all said, congrats on gaining weight, some of us don’t share your same goals. Some of us don’t want to be 20% body fat. Clearly, because you were so skinny and small at a young age, it has a major impact on your psyche even today. Nobody cares that you gained a bunch of weight, you should be training for yourself. In my eyes, and apparently john meadows, skip harris, shelby (all guys who are much bigger than you) etc…getting too high of levels of body fat is not necessary to gain muscle. And so I would take that as far as saying gaining all the excess body fat is an INEFFICIENT way of gaining muscle. Once again, did you make progress? Yes. Did you gain weight? Yes. Are you a big guy? Yes. Did you possibly gain too much fat? I guess that’s a personal opinion and one that will be answered when you diet down completely. But why you act like everyone wants to reach your size or body fat is beyond me. Who cares if you are bigger than the norm? Some people want to have aesthetically pleasing physiques…athletic physiques…lean physiques.

Believe it or not but weighing as much as possible isn’t the key to life and I think you would have figured that out by now. I have a bunch of friends who love bulking up to 280 or 290 because then they can tell everyone how much they weigh, how big they are, and it makes them feel good because they are very insecure. And then they mature (some do), they learn, and they see how horrible their blood work is and things change. Before you go on a rant about your blood work I was making a statement about my personal friends so please read carefully so as not to misconstrue things as you often do. [/quote]

Are you saying that multiple steroid users are bigger than X? SHOCKING![/quote]

I’m sorry, do you need me to post the natural ones that are bigger? Would that make you feel better? Plus, I have no idea what X takes, if he’s natural or not. It doesn’t matter, I was only stating that some of the most highly respected diet coaches agree that getting very high levels of body fat is not necessary. And guess what? They consult A LOT OF NATURAL PEOPLE and give them the same advice. Jim Cordova echoes the same principles of not gaining a ton of fat, feel better now? [/quote]

And I was stating that some of the most impressive physiques were built by getting up to “too high” of bodyfat and then dieting down.
[/quote]

What does that mean? Nobody ever said that you can’t get to 20% body fat and then diet down. Hell, you can get to 30% and diet down to a good physique if that’s what you want. But is that the best way to do it? That’s what the question is. I said it wasn’t efficient and necessary. I then named some of the most reputable diet coaches who share that same view and your response is “some of the most impressive physiques were built by getting up to too high bf”…Cool man…and some people eat mcdonalds and maintain huge ripped physiques, so does that mean it’s the best way to achieve that goal?

169

[quote]fd24 wrote:

[quote]Mexecutioner wrote:

[quote]fd24 wrote:

[quote]Mexecutioner wrote:

[quote]fd24 wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]165StateChamp wrote:
You have said that every other time you’ve dieted down you’ve lost substantial lean mass. Does that sound like intelligent, informed dieting to you? You are doing better this time, according to you, but you have not gotten past mid-teens yet, and you’re still figuring out a process that works for you. Actually, you know what, go ahead and continue the argument. I couldn’t care less but I’ll still respond. [/quote]

Uh, most people do lose some muscle when dieting. In fact, the usual is half and half lean body mass to fat ratio. the only thing that changes that is how you train, your hormones, and your nutrition.

My mistake in the past was CARDIO, not diet. In fact, if you really were interested in anything like that, you would ask instead of jumping to all of these conclusions.

It was believed for years that everyone needed steady state cardio to lean up. Being in the military didn’t help this either.

I have never had a problem losing body fat. I simply never took it that far BECAUSE THE WHOLE GOAL WAS TO GET BIGGER.

Question…why is this so hard for some of you to understand? Some of you act like people are reaching my size everyday. They aren’t…and it is hilarious watching as some of you see to think otherwise.

That is why comments like I was “inefficient” are comedic. That could only be the case if reaching my size was a norm. It isn’t.

I am dieting now because I feel I am big enough now to be satisfied doing it. Why the hell would I have dieted down back when I only weighed 220lbs? That was NOT the goal.

To conclude that this means I can’t diet is just stupid.[/quote]

The reason you hate dieting down is because how can you fall back on “OMG IM BIGGER THAN YOU BECAUSE I WEIGH MORE, I HAD TO EAT TO GET HERE, WHO ELSE GAINED A LOT OF WEIGHT”…Like we have all said, congrats on gaining weight, some of us don’t share your same goals. Some of us don’t want to be 20% body fat. Clearly, because you were so skinny and small at a young age, it has a major impact on your psyche even today. Nobody cares that you gained a bunch of weight, you should be training for yourself. In my eyes, and apparently john meadows, skip harris, shelby (all guys who are much bigger than you) etc…getting too high of levels of body fat is not necessary to gain muscle. And so I would take that as far as saying gaining all the excess body fat is an INEFFICIENT way of gaining muscle. Once again, did you make progress? Yes. Did you gain weight? Yes. Are you a big guy? Yes. Did you possibly gain too much fat? I guess that’s a personal opinion and one that will be answered when you diet down completely. But why you act like everyone wants to reach your size or body fat is beyond me. Who cares if you are bigger than the norm? Some people want to have aesthetically pleasing physiques…athletic physiques…lean physiques.

Believe it or not but weighing as much as possible isn’t the key to life and I think you would have figured that out by now. I have a bunch of friends who love bulking up to 280 or 290 because then they can tell everyone how much they weigh, how big they are, and it makes them feel good because they are very insecure. And then they mature (some do), they learn, and they see how horrible their blood work is and things change. Before you go on a rant about your blood work I was making a statement about my personal friends so please read carefully so as not to misconstrue things as you often do. [/quote]

Are you saying that multiple steroid users are bigger than X? SHOCKING![/quote]

I’m sorry, do you need me to post the natural ones that are bigger? Would that make you feel better? Plus, I have no idea what X takes, if he’s natural or not. It doesn’t matter, I was only stating that some of the most highly respected diet coaches agree that getting very high levels of body fat is not necessary. And guess what? They consult A LOT OF NATURAL PEOPLE and give them the same advice. Jim Cordova echoes the same principles of not gaining a ton of fat, feel better now? [/quote]

And I was stating that some of the most impressive physiques were built by getting up to “too high” of bodyfat and then dieting down.
[/quote]

What does that mean? Nobody ever said that you can’t get to 20% body fat and then diet down. Hell, you can get to 30% and diet down to a good physique if that’s what you want. But is that the best way to do it? That’s what the question is. I said it wasn’t efficient and necessary. I then named some of the most reputable diet coaches who share that same view and your response is “some of the most impressive physiques were built by getting up to too high bf”…Cool man…and some people eat mcdonalds and maintain huge ripped physiques, so does that mean it’s the best way to achieve that goal? [/quote]

You taught me that it’s just macros when you’re doing IF. So yes, you can be huge and ripped while eating all the mcdonalds you want(as long as your macros are in order).

170

[quote]Mexecutioner wrote:

[quote]fd24 wrote:

[quote]Mexecutioner wrote:

[quote]fd24 wrote:

[quote]Mexecutioner wrote:

[quote]fd24 wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]165StateChamp wrote:
You have said that every other time you’ve dieted down you’ve lost substantial lean mass. Does that sound like intelligent, informed dieting to you? You are doing better this time, according to you, but you have not gotten past mid-teens yet, and you’re still figuring out a process that works for you. Actually, you know what, go ahead and continue the argument. I couldn’t care less but I’ll still respond. [/quote]

Uh, most people do lose some muscle when dieting. In fact, the usual is half and half lean body mass to fat ratio. the only thing that changes that is how you train, your hormones, and your nutrition.

My mistake in the past was CARDIO, not diet. In fact, if you really were interested in anything like that, you would ask instead of jumping to all of these conclusions.

It was believed for years that everyone needed steady state cardio to lean up. Being in the military didn’t help this either.

I have never had a problem losing body fat. I simply never took it that far BECAUSE THE WHOLE GOAL WAS TO GET BIGGER.

Question…why is this so hard for some of you to understand? Some of you act like people are reaching my size everyday. They aren’t…and it is hilarious watching as some of you see to think otherwise.

That is why comments like I was “inefficient” are comedic. That could only be the case if reaching my size was a norm. It isn’t.

I am dieting now because I feel I am big enough now to be satisfied doing it. Why the hell would I have dieted down back when I only weighed 220lbs? That was NOT the goal.

To conclude that this means I can’t diet is just stupid.[/quote]

The reason you hate dieting down is because how can you fall back on “OMG IM BIGGER THAN YOU BECAUSE I WEIGH MORE, I HAD TO EAT TO GET HERE, WHO ELSE GAINED A LOT OF WEIGHT”…Like we have all said, congrats on gaining weight, some of us don’t share your same goals. Some of us don’t want to be 20% body fat. Clearly, because you were so skinny and small at a young age, it has a major impact on your psyche even today. Nobody cares that you gained a bunch of weight, you should be training for yourself. In my eyes, and apparently john meadows, skip harris, shelby (all guys who are much bigger than you) etc…getting too high of levels of body fat is not necessary to gain muscle. And so I would take that as far as saying gaining all the excess body fat is an INEFFICIENT way of gaining muscle. Once again, did you make progress? Yes. Did you gain weight? Yes. Are you a big guy? Yes. Did you possibly gain too much fat? I guess that’s a personal opinion and one that will be answered when you diet down completely. But why you act like everyone wants to reach your size or body fat is beyond me. Who cares if you are bigger than the norm? Some people want to have aesthetically pleasing physiques…athletic physiques…lean physiques.

Believe it or not but weighing as much as possible isn’t the key to life and I think you would have figured that out by now. I have a bunch of friends who love bulking up to 280 or 290 because then they can tell everyone how much they weigh, how big they are, and it makes them feel good because they are very insecure. And then they mature (some do), they learn, and they see how horrible their blood work is and things change. Before you go on a rant about your blood work I was making a statement about my personal friends so please read carefully so as not to misconstrue things as you often do. [/quote]

Are you saying that multiple steroid users are bigger than X? SHOCKING![/quote]

I’m sorry, do you need me to post the natural ones that are bigger? Would that make you feel better? Plus, I have no idea what X takes, if he’s natural or not. It doesn’t matter, I was only stating that some of the most highly respected diet coaches agree that getting very high levels of body fat is not necessary. And guess what? They consult A LOT OF NATURAL PEOPLE and give them the same advice. Jim Cordova echoes the same principles of not gaining a ton of fat, feel better now? [/quote]

And I was stating that some of the most impressive physiques were built by getting up to “too high” of bodyfat and then dieting down.
[/quote]

What does that mean? Nobody ever said that you can’t get to 20% body fat and then diet down. Hell, you can get to 30% and diet down to a good physique if that’s what you want. But is that the best way to do it? That’s what the question is. I said it wasn’t efficient and necessary. I then named some of the most reputable diet coaches who share that same view and your response is “some of the most impressive physiques were built by getting up to too high bf”…Cool man…and some people eat mcdonalds and maintain huge ripped physiques, so does that mean it’s the best way to achieve that goal? [/quote]

You taught me that it’s just macros when you’re doing IF. So yes, you can be huge and ripped while eating all the mcdonalds you want(as long as your macros are in order).[/quote]

Actually, I said that you still need the right amount and type of food…just that you utilize different feeding windows. But nice try jackass :). And I have seen genetically gifted guys eat one crappy meal a day (which is not what IF is about, but you have no idea what it’s about so it’s pointless to argue with you) and stay big and lean. Not the norm and definitely not the best way to approach nutrition.

171

[quote]MODOK wrote:

Here is a way to think about it that may help. Food itself is a pharmaceutical. Everything you eat, and any time you eat it, you elicit a powerful hormonal and physiological response. What you eat, when you eat it, and how many times you eat are all very important variables. Every time you introduce food, drug, or foreign object into your body, you push the closed biological system that is your body OUT of homeostasis (dynamic equilibrium for you chemistry people). Your body then spends resources in the form of energy and hormones to store and burn the food you just ingested to return your body to equilibrium. Ok, so thats a little background to get the thinking in the right plane.

Now, not only is when you eat important, but when you DON’T eat is important also. When you skip breakfast, you have no means of blunting the already high levels of cortisol floating around in your body. Cortisol is a powerful catabolic hormone which increases blood glucose, prevents bodyfat loss in stubborn areas, causes large increases in catecholamines, and takes glucose and other nutrients from your muscle cells and liver for energy. I don’t have to tell you that that isn’t good for a bodybuilder. Also, as the body is now starving for 12+ hours, it sees the event as a significant stressor, and maintains a stress response. Catecholamines are high, mineralocorticoids are high, ( which lead to water retention). Glucagon is also high, which is a good thing in a fat loss diet, but it has a tendency to run into an issue at a certain bodyfat level in dealing with the cortisol and mineralocorticoids. Puffiness and “thick skin” are often seen due to this interaction and is one reason why many folks who try IF never can seem to break through the 10% barrier. In addition, I do not believe the body can partition nutrients as efficiently. It is likely that the body will be less efficient due to the hypercortisolemia, higher blood glucose, and mild to moderate insulin resistance that would entail. More carbs would be diverted to de novo lipogenesis instead of being stored as glycogen, leading to the “flat muscle” look.

In order to look your best, you need full muscle bellies (low cortisol, timely and frequent insulin), thin skin (low mineralocorticoids), combined with a sizable portion of time each day where glucagon and the SNS does dominate to release FA for energy. What I believe is detrimental is leaving that stress response running rampant in the body through the day. If anything, if you are going to IF it makes MUCH more sense physiologically to eat the first part of the day and fast through the end. Cortisol is much lower at the end of the day, many of these concerns would be addressed. Its a tricky thing for many of us (obviously not ectos…as you can see), which is why there is all this confusion and not very many big, ripped people walking the earth.
[/quote]

Interesting. So Modok, what about fasted cardio? What’s the difference between say, 12 hours of no food, waking up and doing fasted cardio, then eating, vs just extending your overnight fast by 4 or 5 hours (16-17 total hours) if all you do is sit at a desk all day? In both case, you have stressors to the body (cardio vs no food for 4 hrs). Isn’t that essentially the same?

It also seems by your comment on cortisol, that IF may be better implemented as a night-time fast (eg 4 PM to 8 AM vs 8 PM to 12 PM).

Interested to hear your thoughts on those two comments. Thanks!

172

[quote]fd24 wrote:
you still need the right amount and type of food[/quote]

Revolutionary! IF is the greatest diet ever! Totally worth $1500/month!

173

[quote]fd24 wrote:
But back to Martin’s clients, YOU DON’T KNOW WHAT THEIR GOALS WERE, A MAJORITY OF PEOPLE WANT THAT LEAN SKINNY LOOK.
[/quote]

Can we keep this shit off T-Nation please?

Thanks.

174

[quote]solidkhalid wrote:

[quote]fd24 wrote:
But back to Martin’s clients, YOU DON’T KNOW WHAT THEIR GOALS WERE, A MAJORITY OF PEOPLE WANT THAT LEAN SKINNY LOOK.
[/quote]

Can we keep this shit off T-Nation please?

Thanks.[/quote]

At 15% bf maybe you should try to attain that lean look instead of criticizing it. Just saying.

175

[quote]MODOK wrote:

[quote]ds1973 wrote:

[quote]MODOK wrote:

Here is a way to think about it that may help. Food itself is a pharmaceutical. Everything you eat, and any time you eat it, you elicit a powerful hormonal and physiological response. What you eat, when you eat it, and how many times you eat are all very important variables. Every time you introduce food, drug, or foreign object into your body, you push the closed biological system that is your body OUT of homeostasis (dynamic equilibrium for you chemistry people). Your body then spends resources in the form of energy and hormones to store and burn the food you just ingested to return your body to equilibrium. Ok, so thats a little background to get the thinking in the right plane.

Now, not only is when you eat important, but when you DON’T eat is important also. When you skip breakfast, you have no means of blunting the already high levels of cortisol floating around in your body. Cortisol is a powerful catabolic hormone which increases blood glucose, prevents bodyfat loss in stubborn areas, causes large increases in catecholamines, and takes glucose and other nutrients from your muscle cells and liver for energy. I don’t have to tell you that that isn’t good for a bodybuilder. Also, as the body is now starving for 12+ hours, it sees the event as a significant stressor, and maintains a stress response. Catecholamines are high, mineralocorticoids are high, ( which lead to water retention). Glucagon is also high, which is a good thing in a fat loss diet, but it has a tendency to run into an issue at a certain bodyfat level in dealing with the cortisol and mineralocorticoids. Puffiness and “thick skin” are often seen due to this interaction and is one reason why many folks who try IF never can seem to break through the 10% barrier. In addition, I do not believe the body can partition nutrients as efficiently. It is likely that the body will be less efficient due to the hypercortisolemia, higher blood glucose, and mild to moderate insulin resistance that would entail. More carbs would be diverted to de novo lipogenesis instead of being stored as glycogen, leading to the “flat muscle” look.

In order to look your best, you need full muscle bellies (low cortisol, timely and frequent insulin), thin skin (low mineralocorticoids), combined with a sizable portion of time each day where glucagon and the SNS does dominate to release FA for energy. What I believe is detrimental is leaving that stress response running rampant in the body through the day. If anything, if you are going to IF it makes MUCH more sense physiologically to eat the first part of the day and fast through the end. Cortisol is much lower at the end of the day, many of these concerns would be addressed. Its a tricky thing for many of us (obviously not ectos…as you can see), which is why there is all this confusion and not very many big, ripped people walking the earth.
[/quote]

Interesting. So Modok, what about fasted cardio? What’s the difference between say, 12 hours of no food, waking up and doing fasted cardio, then eating, vs just extending your overnight fast by 4 or 5 hours (16-17 total hours) if all you do is sit at a desk all day? In both case, you have stressors to the body (cardio vs no food for 4 hrs). Isn’t that essentially the same?

It also seems by your comment on cortisol, that IF may be better implemented as a night-time fast (eg 4 PM to 8 AM vs 8 PM to 12 PM).

Interested to hear your thoughts on those two comments. Thanks!
[/quote]

You are extending your fast by 4-5 hours in the latter scenario and only 1 hour in the former. Once you eat, cortisol levels begin to drop, and your bodies parasympathetic NS takes over.

Yes, I mentioned in the long post that fasting through dinner would be much better than fasting through breakfast when taking these things into account.
[/quote]

I think we can all agree that with any diet there may be some drawbacks. Cortisol may be an issue but then again high blood glucose levels can certainly be an issue in the 6-8 meal a day plan. I think the key is finding which one’s benefits outweigh the drawbacks.

176

Hmm, I don’t have access to the full texts of the pubmed articles Martin links to, but in his top ten fasting myths debunked page, he addresses the cortisol issue. From his web site:

177

[quote]fd24 wrote:

[quote]solidkhalid wrote:

[quote]fd24 wrote:
But back to Martin’s clients, YOU DON’T KNOW WHAT THEIR GOALS WERE, A MAJORITY OF PEOPLE WANT THAT LEAN SKINNY LOOK.
[/quote]

Can we keep this shit off T-Nation please?

Thanks.[/quote]

At 15% bf maybe you should try to attain that lean look instead of criticizing it. Just saying. [/quote]

I’ve been skinny most of my life and am gaining muscle and strength at a good rate. Why would I want to go back to being skinny? I’ll build my muscle first and cut later. Just saying.

178

[quote]solidkhalid wrote:

[quote]fd24 wrote:

[quote]solidkhalid wrote:

[quote]fd24 wrote:
But back to Martin’s clients, YOU DON’T KNOW WHAT THEIR GOALS WERE, A MAJORITY OF PEOPLE WANT THAT LEAN SKINNY LOOK.
[/quote]

Can we keep this shit off T-Nation please?

Thanks.[/quote]

At 15% bf maybe you should try to attain that lean look instead of criticizing it. Just saying. [/quote]

I’ve been skinny most of my life and am gaining muscle and strength at a good rate. Why would I want to go back to being skinny? I’ll build my muscle first and cut later. Just saying.[/quote]

Well let us know how 18 and 20% bf feel. Then come back and show us how you look at 7% and how much muscle you gained.

179

[quote]MODOK wrote:

Glucagon is also high, which is a good thing in a fat loss diet, but it has a tendency to run into an issue at a certain bodyfat level in dealing with the cortisol and mineralocorticoids. Puffiness and “thick skin” are often seen due to this interaction and is one reason why many folks who try IF never can seem to break through the 10% barrier.

[/quote]

Now this is interesting. So let’s say instead of fasting past breakfast, we have fasted cardio followed up with a P+F meal, and the only time we ingest carbs are PWO; thereby keeping insulin low until periods around PWO. So that means we keep glucagon high throughout the day (except the time after PWO) and we eliminate the problem of glucagon’s issue with cortisol and mineralocorticoids.

180

[quote]ds1973 wrote:
Hmm, I don’t have access to the full texts of the pubmed articles Martin links to, but in his top ten fasting myths debunked page, he addresses the cortisol issue. From his web site:

[/quote]

That was to debunk the myth of thinking fasting increases cortisol. But I think the topic at hand is not the increase in cortisol but rather the effects of the interplay between chronically high glucagon and cortisol…I think