New Warrior Diet Thread

Nutrition
21

[quote]JamesBrawn007 wrote:

[quote]bud moody wrote:
jamesbrawn, assuming you are using the WD for fat loss, im just woindering if you’ve ever calculated roughly how much under maintenance you end up eating when eating freely on the WD?
am i right in thinking that one naturally eats under maintenance when they structure their feeding like this…[/quote]

Short answer: No mate.

I did want to lose a few lbs around the mid-section (who doesn’t) but also wanted to add as much to the upper body as possible.
I didn’t want to focus on calorie consumption, as Ori recommends. Sure sometimes I’m certain I am eating below maintenance, but I have also put away 1000kcals worth of nuts shortly after my main dinner so reckon I could be above the level on such occasions.

I also wanted to focus less on nutrient partitioning, although Ori does recommend P+F dominant meals for fat loss. Personally I love boiled rice, and Chinese food in general, so I feel it allows me to eat these while still achieving good body comp.
As other posters have noted, hormone manipulation largely determine progress on the WD. [/quote]

So what does your over-feeding period look like? Im trying to get a grasp of this diet. I like CT’s Pulse Feast idea fo far, but with BCAA’s and extra Leucine about 3x’s a day instead of MAG-10

22

[quote]MODOK wrote:

[quote]facko wrote:

[quote]inkcreep wrote:

[quote]facko wrote:

…It’s STILL calories in vs calories out. I get what you’re trying to say, but either you are not understanding it entirely or you are mis-wording things. You said yourself that your body becomes much more efficient at partitioning and utilizing nutrients due to hormonal changes or w.e. the explanation is. The point is…this is still calories in vs calories, your body just has become much more efficient and can operate at a LOWER level of caloric intake/macronutrient intake. Again…this is still calories in vs calories out. Thermodynamics doesn’t change just because your hormonal profile does…[/quote]

Maybe you misunderstood me. When your hormones are effected as, we all know, the body utilizes nutrients differently and reacts differently to what it is given. Insulin and leptin being perfect examples, which are two hormones that are greatly effected through IF. Gaining muscle and losing fat IS NOT just calories in calories out. The simplest argument that I’ve ever heard to prove this is to go eat 3000 calories a day of carbs or go eat 3000 calories a day of protein and see how your body looks in a few weeks. It is possible for one to gain muscle while eating under maintenance calories and it is also possible for one to lose fat while eating above, so how does that happen if it’s as simple as calories in/calories out. There is something else at work here. How can I take someone and replace all the grains in their diet with healthy fats while keeping their caloric intake exactly the same and they finally begin to lose body fat? Even things like gluten allergies keep people from losing BF, regardless of their calories. If it was just calories in/calories out then why when someone is dieting and they keep dropping their calories further does their weight loss eventually come to a stop. If it was calories in/calories out then weight loss should continue , right?? Doing intermittent fasting really opened my eyes to how wrong I was for so many years thinking that I had to have so many calories to gain, or so many calories to lose or, the worst of all, having to eat every 3 hours or my metabolism would slow and my body would eat itself without ever giving though to how my body was using what I was giving it and the effects the nutrients were having. Think about this, if you take two people and give them the same exact meal containing the same exact amount of calories and nutrient ratios, the only difference is that one person is completely insulin resistant and the other has fantastic insulin sensitivity. Are these calories going to be used the same way in these two people’s body?? No , not at all. So here we have the same amount of calories and nutrients but the only difference is hormonal. [/quote]

I agree with much of what you’re saying. Problems only arise when someone chooses to STRICTLY say calories in vs calories out is EVERYTHING or…that calories in vs calories out means nothing in the presence of manipulated hormones. Hormones undoubtedly play a role in how nutrients are used/stored. Again… hormones are important. I think these concepts are much more clearly examined in the case of legitimate caloric defecit. Here’s what I mean:

If I am in legitimate caloric deficit on a daily basis, I will lose body weight. This could be fat, muscle, water …combination etc…but I will lose bodyweight. Now…the key here is, if I make sure my protein req is in place FIRST…then I adjust my energy macros around this set in stone protein req…as long as I stay in deficit, in the long run it will NOT matter. In other words… As long as I make sure that my protein intake is first spot on…I could eat all fats for the remainder of my caloric intake (while staying in the deficit range) or all carbs or both…it would not mean shit in the long run. The only time it WILL mean something to restrict carbs when ALREADY in deficit is to manipulate water levels, or to reach levels of bodyfat % that a pro would reach on stage. Now…if you ONLY ate fats…or ONLY ate carbs as opposed to ONLY eating protein…well the same logic adds up…when the protein req are not accounted for properly…then things appear to happen much differently. Btw, if all those instances are in deficit, bodyweight will be lost over time…but they will probably look, feel and have health like shit.

In the case of surplus…macronutrients, IMO become much more important. Now that you are in surplus, your body is going to want to store nutrients…in this case hormone manipulation is more of an issue because weight is going to be put on…it’s best to utilize your hormones in order to put quality weight on as opposed to just bodyfat. I have personally noticed little to no difference in regards to deficit and energy macros. As long as my caloric deficit is achieved and my protein requirements are accounted for…I have not noticed any difference in fatloss whether I ate the remainder as carbs, or as fats, or as both. In a surplus…I’m sure that if I ate all my energy macros (after protein is accounted for) by way of carbs all the time…things would be different because insulin will be ALLOWED to work its storage magic due to the surplus.
[/quote]

This is simply just not true. You are completely misunderstanding this “Calories in, calories out” mantra that you guys constantly wield like a sword. You can definitely eat a below maintenance level of calories and remain at the same weight or even gain. I’ve talked about this numerous times, but there is always someone new popping on the scene. The cliff notes is:

The human body is not the simple machine everyone is making it out to be. It has the capacity NOT to operate at X metabolic rate, but at X - if its environment dictates. This is far from simple biochemically. If your body is placed in the right hormonal environment (hyperinsulinemia), the fat cells can take energy substrate from the bloodstream, turn it into triglyceride, and store it EVEN WHILE IN A NEGATIVE CALORIC BALANCE. The fat cell is essentially acting in the capacity of a substrate competitor with the rest of the body and not synergistically in that environment. What does the body do to compensate? It LOWERS the metabolic rate further, makes the organism slow down and do very little activity, and increases the hunger signal to the person’s brain. There you have it; below maintenance calories, weight GAIN, and Newtonian Physical Laws preserved. There is about a billion examples of this in the world- very obese people with ZERO energy who cannot lose weight on a hypocaloric high carb diet and are stuck in hyperinsulin hell. So it is the hormonal environment, not the kcal level, that is the foundational problem for many of the obese in our society. Only after the hormonal environment is fixed do kcal levels come to the forefront.

Check out “Zucker rats” for more info on the research on this issue.
[/quote]

1.) “It has the capacity NOT to operate at X metabolic rate, but at X…” ?

2.) Yeah, I love those Zucker Rats. You can starve them TO DEATH and … they’re still fat. So, whenever someone insists “a calorie is a calorie” or “it still calories in/calories out”, I just remember “FAT DEAD RAT.”

23

John meadows must have been reading this thread. He just did a spill yesterday with the first line being “a calorie is not just a calorie” Lol.

24

[quote]MODOK wrote:

[quote]facko wrote:

[quote]inkcreep wrote:

[quote]facko wrote:

This is simply just not true. You are completely misunderstanding this “Calories in, calories out” mantra that you guys constantly wield like a sword. You can definitely eat a below maintenance level of calories and remain at the same weight or even gain. I’ve talked about this numerous times, but there is always someone new popping on the scene. The cliff notes is:

The human body is not the simple machine everyone is making it out to be. It has the capacity NOT to operate at X metabolic rate, but at X - if its environment dictates. This is far from simple biochemically. If your body is placed in the right hormonal environment (hyperinsulinemia), the fat cells can take energy substrate from the bloodstream, turn it into triglyceride, and store it EVEN WHILE IN A NEGATIVE CALORIC BALANCE. The fat cell is essentially acting in the capacity of a substrate competitor with the rest of the body and not synergistically in that environment. What does the body do to compensate? It LOWERS the metabolic rate further, makes the organism slow down and do very little activity, and increases the hunger signal to the person’s brain. There you have it; below maintenance calories, weight GAIN, and Newtonian Physical Laws preserved. There is about a billion examples of this in the world- very obese people with ZERO energy who cannot lose weight on a hypocaloric high carb diet and are stuck in hyperinsulin hell. So it is the hormonal environment, not the kcal level, that is the foundational problem for many of the obese in our society. Only after the hormonal environment is fixed do kcal levels come to the forefront.

Check out “Zucker rats” for more info on the research on this issue.
[/quote]

Damn, it’s good to hear somebody finally talk some sense on this issue. How do people not get this?

25

[quote]inkcreep wrote:
Hey JB, sorry we kinda hijacked there and got off into another discussion. But anyways check out theiflife.com/
It’s Mike O’Donnel’s blog on IF and while the WD is a more laid out program I really learned a lot through correspondence with Mike about Intermittent fasting.[/quote]

It’s cool mate. Comes with the territory! And will check out O’Donnell.

26

[quote]cutthoat25 wrote:
So what does your over-feeding period look like? Im trying to get a grasp of this diet. I like CT’s Pulse Feast idea fo far, but with BCAA’s and extra Leucine about 3x’s a day instead of MAG-10
[/quote]

Check out the link to Waterbury’s site at my opening post for a synopsis of the WD.

As for the overfeeding thing, the WD is designed to be instinctive. It’s like autoregulation for diet. Ori only mentions calories once in the entire book, where he states he eats between 1500 - 2500 for his evening meal (a 1000 kcal differential based on instinctive eating); he also recommends not jumping straight into 3000kcal meals when commencing the WD system. The use of probiotics and digestive enzymes aid how the body handles this amount of food (I personally have seen improved bowel regularity since using the WD).

I used the pulse fast but feel happier on the WD. Instead if I feel the need to compensate for a binge/cheat I would try and keep the following evning meal less calorie dense.
Interestingly, Ori suggests IF loses it’s potency if the fast exceeds 24 hours. He suggests somewhere closer to 20 hours as the optimal fast period.
Regarding a pulse style feast, the WD principles are similar, i.e. consuming whey in the daytime is acceptable.

27

[quote]JamesBrawn007 wrote:

[quote]cutthoat25 wrote:
So what does your over-feeding period look like? Im trying to get a grasp of this diet. I like CT’s Pulse Feast idea fo far, but with BCAA’s and extra Leucine about 3x’s a day instead of MAG-10
[/quote]

Check out the link to Waterbury’s site at my opening post for a synopsis of the WD.

As for the overfeeding thing, the WD is designed to be instinctive. It’s like autoregulation for diet. Ori only mentions calories once in the entire book, where he states he eats between 1500 - 2500 for his evening meal (a 1000 kcal differential based on instinctive eating); he also recommends not jumping straight into 3000kcal meals when commencing the WD system. The use of probiotics and digestive enzymes aid how the body handles this amount of food (I personally have seen improved bowel regularity since using the WD).

I used the pulse fast but feel happier on the WD. Instead if I feel the need to compensate for a binge/cheat I would try and keep the following evning meal less calorie dense.
Interestingly, Ori suggests IF loses it’s potency if the fast exceeds 24 hours. He suggests somewhere closer to 20 hours as the optimal fast period.
Regarding a pulse style feast, the WD principles are similar, i.e. consuming whey in the daytime is acceptable.[/quote]

which book would you recommend? the first Warrior Diet book or Maximum Muscle Minimum Fat? I’ve read that Max Muscle Min Fat is a revised edition and goes more into detail on guidelines for athletes, have you read both? I train more than once a day for boxing so Im trying to figure out the underfeeding part. Ive actually started the warrior diet 3 days ago and I like it so far.

28

I like the idea of the diet because I have little self-control once I start eating. Putting off the food until the end of the day sounds great to me. However, it reminds me of this:

29

[quote]cutthoat25 wrote:
which book would you recommend? the first Warrior Diet book or Maximum Muscle Minimum Fat? I’ve read that Max Muscle Min Fat is a revised edition and goes more into detail on guidelines for athletes, have you read both? I train more than once a day for boxing so Im trying to figure out the underfeeding part. Ive actually started the warrior diet 3 days ago and I like it so far.[/quote]

I have only read the original WD so can’t comment on that to be honest.

The WD is apparently geared towards evening workouts, so you begin the eating cycle after training. However, Hofmekler states small recovery meals post-workout should be consumed when training through the day. Typically this is a quality whey (25-30g PRO), with a natural low GI carb source (10-25g CHO), e.g. oatmeal. This can repeated 2-3 times after the session in hourly intervals. By my calculation that’s 140-220 kcal per meal, so perhaps up to around 660kcals could be consumed after the day training session.

I personally think it’s only until you’ve experimented with traning on empty you realise it’s no great thing. I first noticed this when I used to do the pulse fast and train at normal intensity in the evening despite having only ingested around 500kcals.

30

[quote]doogie wrote:
I like the idea of the diet because I have little self-control once I start eating. Putting off the food until the end of the day sounds great to me. However, it reminds me of this:

The WD shouldn’t be thought of as an authorised binge-fest! On the contrary, this is a quality versus quantity argument. The argument goes your body is primed for optimum nutrient uptake following a fasted period. In addition, Hofmekler believes we should try to avoid polluting our bodies with processed food, sweeteners, alcohol, sauces, even some bottled water, etc. Everything should be natural and preferably organic. The exception of course is certain supplements, e.g. whey, vits, etc.

Therefore, I don’t see the sumo cross-over to be honest. As previously stated, if we’re talking calories, which Hofmekler seldom does, 2500-3000kcals may be sufficient to achieve your body comp goals - not exactly sumo material.

31

How have strength levels been on the diet? Up,down,same? I’m very curious to know it’s all about performance for me so if I was slower,weaker or had less endurance on the Warrior Diet I couldn’t do it but if it didn’t affect those aspects at all or even improved them I would definitely give it a go.

32

[quote]claybear wrote:
How have strength levels been on the diet? Up,down,same? I’m very curious to know it’s all about performance for me so if I was slower,weaker or had less endurance on the Warrior Diet I couldn’t do it but if it didn’t affect those aspects at all or even improved them I would definitely give it a go. [/quote]

Strength/performance has been increasing on the whole. I think you need to give it a fair trial. In my opinion 7-10 days is enough to form a good idea whether it would work for you.

33

I think the name - WARRIOR diet - is confusing and misleading; should be called the HUNTER-gatherer diet.

A typical day for our hunter-gatherer ancestors:

can’t carry much food with you while hunting; some walking, some running, some stop and rest, while hunting the herd; killing one of the animals involves a burst of activity (high intensity cardio).

Probably eat some organ meats raw right then and there (pro fat, low/no carb). Then drag the animal back to the village (your weight-lifting session).

Then cook animal w/ plants gathered by womenfolk while you were hunting; FEAST, sex, sleep.

SO, to replicate internal hormonal environment of our ancestors: small low-carb breakfast, cardio, small low-carb lunch, lift, feast at dinner (pro fat carbs), sex, sleep.

34

That’s quite a theory!

Actually the diet is aptly named, as its author explains, as it takes inspiration from the ancient Greeks and Romans. Not quite hunter-gatherer times!!!

35

about a week now on a modified warrior diet. I train 2-3 times a day so fasted cardio in the morning, about noon down some BCAA’s and superfood/greens drink or handful of berry’s then on to boxing practice. S&C is directly after boxing so I take 1 scoop of SWF and BCAA’s before and 20-30g whey + 30-40g Oats(higher end on strength days, lower on conditioning days)after, about 1.5 to 2 hours later I start my feast. So far I notice I sleep MUCH better now, and no strength loss. Im pleased.

36

[quote]cutthoat25 wrote:
about a week now on a modified warrior diet. I train 2-3 times a day so fasted cardio in the morning, about noon down some BCAA’s and superfood/greens drink or handful of berry’s then on to boxing practice. S&C is directly after boxing so I take 1 scoop of SWF and BCAA’s before and 20-30g whey + 30-40g Oats(higher end on strength days, lower on conditioning days)after, about 1.5 to 2 hours later I start my feast. So far I notice I sleep MUCH better now, and no strength loss. Im pleased.[/quote]

Interesting, mate. If you stick it for another week or so perhaps you can update us on body composition?
Hofmekler also prioritises vits/mins around training times. Might be worth considering this for your own set up as mineral depletion could be a potential issue with such a taining programme.

37

[quote]JamesBrawn007 wrote:

[quote]cutthoat25 wrote:
about a week now on a modified warrior diet. I train 2-3 times a day so fasted cardio in the morning, about noon down some BCAA’s and superfood/greens drink or handful of berry’s then on to boxing practice. S&C is directly after boxing so I take 1 scoop of SWF and BCAA’s before and 20-30g whey + 30-40g Oats(higher end on strength days, lower on conditioning days)after, about 1.5 to 2 hours later I start my feast. So far I notice I sleep MUCH better now, and no strength loss. Im pleased.[/quote]

Interesting, mate. If you stick it for another week or so perhaps you can update us on body composition?
Hofmekler also prioritises vits/mins around training times. Might be worth considering this for your own set up as mineral depletion could be a potential issue with such a taining programme.[/quote]

Would you add the vitamins/minerals after each training session? full servings or half? I also noticed this in the book, but Ori didnt really say serving amounts so I figured I was good with the greens alone. It actually makes sense now that I think about it

38

Btw glad to have a place Im familiar with to ask questions about Warrior Diet or IF.

39

[quote]cutthoat25 wrote:
Would you add the vitamins/minerals after each training session? full servings or half? I also noticed this in the book, but Ori didnt really say serving amounts so I figured I was good with the greens alone. It actually makes sense now that I think about it
[/quote]

I would consider dividing doses so you are taking some in the AM (before and/or after training) and some in the PM (again before and/or after training as well as some with the evening meal, e.g. fish oil, digestive enzymes, probiotics, etc).

I know someone may put forth an argument for NOT using any antioxidants around training periods (some research has actually suggested it’s COUNTER-PRODUCTIVE at this time). But personally if I had to choose I would err on the side of caution and take them.

IMO, given your training, you should at the very least be getting essential minerals through supps to combat excess fluid loss. I personally add an electrolyte powder to my workout shake for this purpose.

PS regarding your other comment, I’m no WD expert - I’ve just read the book and am inspired by Hofmekler’s theory. As I said at the start of this thread, if it’s good enough for Waterbury it’s probably good for a large chunk of folks on this forum.

40

[quote]JamesBrawn007 wrote:

[quote]cutthoat25 wrote:
Would you add the vitamins/minerals after each training session? full servings or half? I also noticed this in the book, but Ori didnt really say serving amounts so I figured I was good with the greens alone. It actually makes sense now that I think about it
[/quote]

I would consider dividing doses so you are taking some in the AM (before and/or after training) and some in the PM (again before and/or after training as well as some with the evening meal, e.g. fish oil, digestive enzymes, probiotics, etc).

I know someone may put forth an argument for NOT using any antioxidants around training periods (some research has actually suggested it’s COUNTER-PRODUCTIVE at this time). But personally if I had to choose I would err on the side of caution and take them.

IMO, given your training, you should at the very least be getting essential minerals through supps to combat excess fluid loss. I personally add an electrolyte powder to my workout shake for this purpose.

PS regarding your other comment, I’m no WD expert - I’ve just read the book and am inspired by Hofmekler’s theory. As I said at the start of this thread, if it’s good enough for Waterbury it’s probably good for a large chunk of folks on this forum.[/quote]

what time of day do you take your probiotics? I understood Ori suggests during the fasting portion of the day to help detox the body and prime the digestive system for the evening meal.

Im also pretty inspired by Hofmekler’s Warrior theory