By the way, three exchanges/servings of fruit provides a measly 45 grams of carbs for the day, which is a fraction of a percent of the total carbohydrates consumed by most athletes and bodybuilders (hundreds of grams per day).
â⊠grains that cause food allergies (gluten, celiac disease) and digestive disorders (sugar alcohol, lactose, high fructose corn syrup)â
How did sugar alcohols, HFCS, and dairy products get lumped into the grain category? Way to make a pointâgreat writing!
How am I not surprised that Bricknyce showed up and started to rantâŠ
Iâm not sure why youâd be surprised or not surprised, and I donât think I was ranting. This yet another example of favoring one food item over another, similar to one nutrient over another, which is so common these days in nutrition media and has been going on for several decades.
And by the way, when muscle glycogen is unavailable, the liver will supply glucose in the blood.
If my carbohydrate allotment for the day is 300+ grams, according to his logic, how will I be affected if 30 to 45 come from fruits if the rest are coming from starchy foods and vegetables?
[quote]Bricknyce wrote:
If my carbohydrate allotment for the day is 300+ grams, according to his logic, how will I be affected if 30 to 45 come from fruits if the rest are coming from starchy foods and vegetables? [/quote]
Aw câmon bro, you know the liver can only hold a finite amount of glycogen. Under 300g. The muscles (or I should say, depleted muscles), can hold a lot more. If youâre doing a major carbup, itâs going to pay off to hit the starches more heavily than the fructose, because âtoo muchâ fructose is going to spill over other channels⊠delay fat oxidation, de novo lipogenesis, murder babies, whatever.
The big problem is that most people, most of the time, arenât particularly glycogen depleted.
Rhino, itâs not like the second you eat more carbohydrates than your glycogen stores allow, you will become fat. There is also the following:
1)Normal carbohydrate oxidation for brain, organs, tissues.
2)Liver and Muscle glycogen stores
3)The fact that the more carbohydrates you eat, the more you will burn relative to fat.
4)The fact that if you are in a caloric deficit, no fat will be stored anyway.
And yes, eating EXCESSIVE amounts of fructose, which is definitely not the amount you get in 3-4 nutrient dense fruits, can possibly pose some issues. The average person would do well to eat moderate amounts of fruits as they are usually low in calories per portion size and usually contain a variety of health-promoting nutrients (different for different fruits). As for certain groups of athletes, there may be some benefits to intentional fructose consumption (not excessive ofcourse) at certain times of the day such as the workout period.
ââŠwhich is definitely not the amount you get in 3-4 nutrient dense fruitsâŠâ
Iâm still wondering why most havenât gotten this through their thick skulls.
[quote]EasyRhino wrote:
[quote]Bricknyce wrote:
If my carbohydrate allotment for the day is 300+ grams, according to his logic, how will I be affected if 30 to 45 come from fruits if the rest are coming from starchy foods and vegetables? [/quote]
Aw câmon bro, you know the liver can only hold a finite amount of glycogen. Under 300g. The muscles (or I should say, depleted muscles), can hold a lot more. If youâre doing a major carbup, itâs going to pay off to hit the starches more heavily than the fructose, because âtoo muchâ fructose is going to spill over other channels⊠delay fat oxidation, de novo lipogenesis, murder babies, whatever.
The big problem is that most people, most of the time, arenât particularly glycogen depleted.[/quote]
You misinterpreted my post. Maybe I should put it more directly: How is consuming 2 to 3 fruits per day going to negatively affect my health or performance? Actually, fruits offer health benefits (Why am I even saying this?) and most of the minutia of nutrition thatâs discussed doesnât amount to a hill of shit in the first place.
That is, even if some of the quibbling that goes on here makes sense, the application of MOST of the information most likely wonât result in discernible results anyway.
You know, some retard is going to try to consume 400g worth of carbs, every day, solely with watermelons.
And theyâre going to die.
THEIR BLOOD IS ON YOUR HANDS, BRICK!
[quote]dnlcdstn wrote:
I believe in the paleo diet and I will defend it to the death. The starches were sweet and regular potatoes and rice. Fruit is the preferred carb source imo. I do add in dairy though. I need the calories and extra protein or I wouldnât consider it.[/quote]
I think this quote sums it up nicely. Religious fervor over FOOD with a hearty dose of rationalizing away paleo sins like dairy.
Repent, all ye sinners. Place your transgressions at the feet of Paleo Jesus and go forth into the world without intestinal
permeation.
[quote]Stronghold wrote:
[quote]dnlcdstn wrote:
I believe in the paleo diet and I will defend it to the death. The starches were sweet and regular potatoes and rice. Fruit is the preferred carb source imo. I do add in dairy though. I need the calories and extra protein or I wouldnât consider it.[/quote]
I think this quote sums it up nicely. Religious fervor over FOOD with a hearty dose of rationalizing away paleo sins like dairy.
Repent, all ye sinners. Place your transgressions at the feet of Paleo Jesus and go forth into the world without intestinal
permeation.[/quote]
Good advice. It definitely hasnât helped the quoted poster get lean.
-
I hope I donât get lumped in with the preacher types, thatâs not my intent. We have a few of those at our training studio (one certification in particular) and I canât fucking stand them. I only presented this as another way of thinking about things. Iâm not saying its the one and only way, obviously people have found many ways that worked for them to get ripped. I donât go around telling people they are wrong if they follow something different, this is just what I believe is the most efficient way when people ask my opinion. And I do think there is plenty of scientific and anecdotal evidence to back it up.
-
I donât think 1-2 pieces of fruit would be detrimental to physique development, but I donât think you should be eating fruit all day either due to limitations in liver glycogen storage. Almost every bodybuilder I know or have read about, natural or otherwise, makes starch the basis of their carbohydrate consumption. Lets say you are supposed to eat 1.5g cho/1lb LBM. You shouldnât fucking eat 300g of carbohydrate all from fruit. 2 pieces of fruit would give you 30-40g, which is cool, but my personal opinion is that the rest should come from starch. Read some of Scott Abel and Chris Acetoâs stuff.
-
With starch, its been my experience in my own diet and ten years working with people, that some choices are better than others. I think one of the reasons carb-based diets get a bad name is because of negative reactions to certain foods (like wheat/gluten, dairy/lactose, etc.). If people would switch to more optimal choices â like rice and potatoes mentioned by a few in this forum â they might get rid of bloat/digestive ailments and not feel the need to go low-carb to get results.
-
I submitted an article that goes more in depth into this stuff, maybe TC will run it at some point.
1 Like
[quote]EasyRhino wrote:
You know, some retard is going to try to consume 400g worth of carbs, every day, solely with watermelons.
And theyâre going to die.
THEIR BLOOD IS ON YOUR HANDS, BRICK![/quote]
[quote]Spartiates wrote:
[quote]Nate Miyaki:
Starchy carbs (rice and potatoes) are better than fruits for physique athletes because fruits are sugars, natural sugar, but sugar nonetheless. They are preferentially stored as liver glycogen whereas starch is preferentialy stored as muscle glycogen (which is what we want as physique athletes).[/quote]
[quote]Nate Miyaki:
Rice is also a good choice for most people. It is a "Ă??Ă??cultural"Ă??Ă?? carbohydrate that has been around in our evolutionary chain for thousands of years and is less problematic than other grains that cause food allergies (gluten, celiac disease) and digestive disorders (sugar alcohol, lactose, high fructose corn syrup).[/quote]
http://natemiyaki.com/nutrition/
What do people thing about this?
If this is true, whatâs the âPaleo Friendlyâ starch? Or is there no way to specifically refile muscle glycogen on a strict paleo diet?
[/quote]
This is extremely oversimplified and is not something to worry about. First of all, starches are complex chains of glucose which the body breaks down into sugar. Fruit contains fructose, a sugar. Table sugar is sucrose, a disaccharide with an even amount of fructose and glucose. Sugar isnât preferentially stored in the liver, but fructose is. There isnât anything magical about glucose. If there was, then eating 10 lbs of Gummy Bears (usually made with corn syrup which is pure glucose) would be better than eating 10 lbs of fruit.
Anyway when you work out, your muscles use stored glycogen AND the liver releases itâs glycogen stores into the bloodstream via glucose. You use BOTH when youâre working out, and liver glycogen helps replenish muscle glycogen. Itâs not like your body is retarded and will have a nervous breakdown if you workout with a banana in your stomach as opposed to a piece of bread.
And no, there isnât really a paleo friendly starch because they are always cooked. I donât know if sprouted grains/breads count as paleo or not. You could try those, but they are extremely similar nutritionally to plain baked bread.
[quote]njmiyaki23 wrote:
-
I hope I donât get lumped in with the preacher types, thatâs not my intent. We have a few of those at our training studio (one certification in particular) and I canât fucking stand them. I only presented this as another way of thinking about things. Iâm not saying its the one and only way, obviously people have found many ways that worked for them to get ripped. I donât go around telling people they are wrong if they follow something different, this is just what I believe is the most efficient way when people ask my opinion. And I do think there is plenty of scientific and anecdotal evidence to back it up.
-
I donât think 1-2 pieces of fruit would be detrimental to physique development, but I donât think you should be eating fruit all day either due to limitations in liver glycogen storage. Almost every bodybuilder I know or have read about, natural or otherwise, makes starch the basis of their carbohydrate consumption. Lets say you are supposed to eat 1.5g cho/1lb LBM. You shouldnât fucking eat 300g of carbohydrate all from fruit. 2 pieces of fruit would give you 30-40g, which is cool, but my personal opinion is that the rest should come from starch. Read some of Scott Abel and Chris Acetoâs stuff.
-
With starch, its been my experience in my own diet and ten years working with people, that some choices are better than others. I think one of the reasons carb-based diets get a bad name is because of negative reactions to certain foods (like wheat/gluten, dairy/lactose, etc.). If people would switch to more optimal choices â like rice and potatoes mentioned by a few in this forum â they might get rid of bloat/digestive ailments and not feel the need to go low-carb to get results.
-
I submitted an article that goes more in depth into this stuff, maybe TC will run it at some point.
[/quote]
I know I just disagreed with 2 quotes of yours, but that was obviously out of context because I actually agree with your overall viewpoint about what people should be eating.
I agree that 30-40g of fructose a day is a reasonable upper limit, but I would just like to add some info. The carbs in fruit come from a variety of sourcesâthe ratio of which changes depending on the fruitâincluding fiber, sucrose, fructose, and glucose. So 2 larger apples would probably give 30g of fructose, but it would take more than 4 peaches to reach 30g. Also, if someone is working out hard enough, this becomes less of a concern. As I mentioned in my previous post, liver glycogen stores need to be replenished as well.
I agree that carb based diets are awesome too. My favorite part is that they allow you to workout much harder and longer. Additionally, people on balanced diets have less intense junk food cravings IME.
Yeah, Iâm with you bro, there are various ratios of sucrose, fructose, and glucose in fruit. There are detailed charts available (just google fructose) if you are interested in learning about specific fruits. Iâm not trying to demonize fruit or anything like that, I think 1-2 pieces a day is fine. My main point is that I believe that the majority of an anerobic athleteâs carbohydrate intake should come from specific starches.
[quote]Josh Rider wrote:
And yes, eating EXCESSIVE amounts of fructose, which is definitely not the amount you get in 3-4 nutrient dense fruits, can possibly pose some issues. The average person would do well to eat moderate amounts of fruits as they are usually low in calories per portion size and usually contain a variety of health-promoting nutrients (different for different fruits). As for certain groups of athletes, there may be some benefits to intentional fructose consumption (not excessive ofcourse) at certain times of the day such as the workout period. [/quote]
I would say vegetables, and not fruits, are healthy. Vegetables are a good way to get the recommended daily intake of vitamins. However, compared to vegetables, fruits arenât very ânutrient denseâ.
As to whether whether fruits are helpful for overall diet, compare a bottle of fruit juice to a bottle of soda. Both are almost all sugar, regardless of nutrients.
[quote]Lover95 wrote:
[quote]Josh Rider wrote:
And yes, eating EXCESSIVE amounts of fructose, which is definitely not the amount you get in 3-4 nutrient dense fruits, can possibly pose some issues. The average person would do well to eat moderate amounts of fruits as they are usually low in calories per portion size and usually contain a variety of health-promoting nutrients (different for different fruits). As for certain groups of athletes, there may be some benefits to intentional fructose consumption (not excessive ofcourse) at certain times of the day such as the workout period. [/quote]
I would say vegetables, and not fruits, are healthy. Vegetables are a good way to get the recommended daily intake of vitamins. However, compared to vegetables, fruits arenât very ânutrient denseâ.
As to whether whether fruits are helpful for overall diet, compare a bottle of fruit juice to a bottle of soda. Both are almost all sugar, regardless of nutrients.[/quote]
So fruits arenât healthy? Where the fuck did you get this info from? So the nutrition industry has gone to demonizing fats, now its grains, legumes, dairy, ânightshade vegetablesâ, and now its fruit? Are you serious??
And you meant to say âenergy denseâ not ânutrient denseâ as nutrient dense foods tend to have more NUTRIENTS for less ENERGY.
Yutz.
[quote]WestCoast7 wrote:
How am I not surprised that Bricknyce showed up and started to rantâŠ[/quote]
Dude - why are you incapable of accepting a different point of view?
[quote]njmiyaki23 wrote:
Yeah, Iâm with you bro, there are various ratios of sucrose, fructose, and glucose in fruit. There are detailed charts available (just google fructose) if you are interested in learning about specific fruits. Iâm not trying to demonize fruit or anything like that, I think 1-2 pieces a day is fine. My main point is that I believe that the majority of an anerobic athleteâs carbohydrate intake should come from specific starches. [/quote]
Mostly roots and brown rice⊠right?