Part 2: What Naturals are Truly Capable Of

Training
201

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:
Fact naturals can only synthesis so much muscle in a time period
Fact only so many calories are needed for this
Fact eating more adds only bF that will need to be lost unless BF is of no concern

Anything others want to add to this list?[/quote]

Add to it?

Statement: Fact naturals can only synthesis so much muscle in a time period

Truth: All humans have variable rates at which they synthesize muscle and this is an adaptive ability as well. Increased training can increase protein anabolism…meaning synthesis of muscle tissue is not static but changes in rate due to many variables…like age, stress, overall conditioning, sleep, etc…

Statement:Fact only so many calories are needed for this

Truth: The amount of calories needed for this changes as the needs of the body change. It can not be predicted but you can try to feed it when it is most ready to grow.

Statement: Fact eating more adds only bF that will need to be lost unless BF is of no concern

Truth: Combined with intense training, adding muscular body weight even if fat is added could contribute to increased leverage which could increase the weight used for exercises…which alone could lead to more muscle growth. Joint lubrication and stability is also a factor as many notice a decrease in joint integrity with extremely lean body comps.

Hormonal fluctuations associated with age may also allow more muscle to be built from more intake. This is why it is often discussed that even obese people do NOT just gain body fat…they gain fat and muscle tissue…even if that muscle gain is minimal…it comes without training.[/quote]

Plz note I did not finite numbers there just because of this so…not sure what your argument is[/quote]

You did not “finite” numbers?

What are you talking about?

Are you the guy claiming to be in med school?

WTF?[/quote]

Please explain what you don’t understand [/quote]

Dude, your sentence isn’t even correct grammar so I don’t even know what you were trying to say.

None of what you wrote before was correct. I just showed you that. If you disagree, please disagree point by point.

It seems that once someone challenges you, you tend to give up.

202

[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]wramsey wrote:
X doesn’t seem to understand that you lose A LOT of water, fat and yes MUSCLE when you diet down. He’d be about 170 if he got in contest shape,[/quote]

Seriously…just stop. I need to lose nearly 90lbs to get into contest shape?

This has to be comedy.

You add nothing to this forum. You don’t even know how much I weigh right now…and even if I lost 50lbs or 70lbs I wouldn’t be under 180lbs. What the fuck are you talking about?[/quote]

Let’s see, you said you’d need to lose nearly 90 lbs to get to 170. I said you’d have to lose AT LEAST 75lbs to be in the 175-180 range, so… Seems the numbers about add up. Why so butthurt? Fatty need a cheeseburger?
[/quote]

I wouldn’t be in the 175-180 range if I lost 75lbs. Not to mention this is a pointless discussion.

No one has to get into contest shape to determine their lean body mass.

It seems some of you do this so you won’t ever admit someone gained more muscle than you.

I have seen your pictures, whiteflash. You need to be taking more advice than you give.

203

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:
Fact naturals can only synthesis so much muscle in a time period
Fact only so many calories are needed for this
Fact eating more adds only bF that will need to be lost unless BF is of no concern

Anything others want to add to this list?[/quote]

Add to it?

Statement: Fact naturals can only synthesis so much muscle in a time period

Truth: All humans have variable rates at which they synthesize muscle and this is an adaptive ability as well. Increased training can increase protein anabolism…meaning synthesis of muscle tissue is not static but changes in rate due to many variables…like age, stress, overall conditioning, sleep, etc…

Statement:Fact only so many calories are needed for this

Truth: The amount of calories needed for this changes as the needs of the body change. It can not be predicted but you can try to feed it when it is most ready to grow.

Statement: Fact eating more adds only bF that will need to be lost unless BF is of no concern

Truth: Combined with intense training, adding muscular body weight even if fat is added could contribute to increased leverage which could increase the weight used for exercises…which alone could lead to more muscle growth. Joint lubrication and stability is also a factor as many notice a decrease in joint integrity with extremely lean body comps.

Hormonal fluctuations associated with age may also allow more muscle to be built from more intake. This is why it is often discussed that even obese people do NOT just gain body fat…they gain fat and muscle tissue…even if that muscle gain is minimal…it comes without training.[/quote]

Plz note I did not finite numbers there just because of this so…not sure what your argument is[/quote]

You did not “finite” numbers?

What are you talking about?

Are you the guy claiming to be in med school?

WTF?[/quote]

Please explain what you don’t understand [/quote]

Dude, your sentence isn’t even correct grammar so I don’t even know what you were trying to say.

None of what you write before was correct. I just showed you that. If you disagree, please disagree point by point.

It seems that once someone challenges you, you tend to give up.[/quote]

Sorry for my iPad skills but I thought your dentist amazing trained super duper reading comprehension would take care of that

You should I was wrong how? I posted no finite numbers so again you are actually supporting my argument.

204

Pizza or Burgers? Or more vaguely: What’s your favorite cheatmeal? (Desperate attempt to get this thread going…)

205

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]wramsey wrote:
X doesn’t seem to understand that you lose A LOT of water, fat and yes MUSCLE when you diet down. He’d be about 170 if he got in contest shape,[/quote]

Seriously…just stop. I need to lose nearly 90lbs to get into contest shape?

This has to be comedy.

You add nothing to this forum. You don’t even know how much I weigh right now…and even if I lost 50lbs or 70lbs I wouldn’t be under 180lbs. What the fuck are you talking about?[/quote]

Let’s see, you said you’d need to lose nearly 90 lbs to get to 170. I said you’d have to lose AT LEAST 75lbs to be in the 175-180 range, so… Seems the numbers about add up. Why so butthurt? Fatty need a cheeseburger?
[/quote]

I wouldn’t be in the 175-180 range if I lost 75lbs. Not to mention this is a pointless discussion.

No one has to get into contest shape to determine their lean body mass.

It seems some of you do this so you won’t ever admit someone gained more muscle than you.

I have seen your pictures, whiteflash. You need to be taking more advice than you give.[/quote]

How long ave you been doing this? How long have the people you are reffering to been doing this?

206

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:

Sorry for my iPad skills but I thought your dentist amazing trained super duper reading comprehension would take care of that

You should I was wrong how? I posted no finite numbers so again you are actually supporting my argument.
[/quote]

Once again, you are the guy claiming to be in med school?

I just went through each statement made and showed you what was wrong. For you to even think like that concerning the human body makes me question your education.

Care to explain how not adding finite numbers erases the fact that you didn’t even acknowledge adaptability?

207

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:

How long ave you been doing this? How long have the people you are reffering to been doing this?[/quote]

What does that matter?

Unless you can show me all of the people on this site with shoulders like mine, it doesn’t seem like lifting longer alone causes more gains.

208

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:

Sorry for my iPad skills but I thought your dentist amazing trained super duper reading comprehension would take care of that

You should I was wrong how? I posted no finite numbers so again you are actually supporting my argument.
[/quote]

Once again, you are the guy claiming to be in med school?

I just went through each statement made and showed you what was wrong. For you to even think like that concerning the human body makes me question your education.

Care to explain how not adding finite numbers erases the fact that you didn’t even acknowledge adaptability?[/quote]

No you really didn’t. You added variables and complexity. Which I didn’t. Agree there are variables that affect it again hence why I didn’t use finite statements and made broad ones…your arguments really suck btw. Really not even fun any more

209

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]wramsey wrote:
X doesn’t seem to understand that you lose A LOT of water, fat and yes MUSCLE when you diet down. He’d be about 170 if he got in contest shape,[/quote]

Seriously…just stop. I need to lose nearly 90lbs to get into contest shape?

This has to be comedy.

You add nothing to this forum. You don’t even know how much I weigh right now…and even if I lost 50lbs or 70lbs I wouldn’t be under 180lbs. What the fuck are you talking about?[/quote]

Let’s see, you said you’d need to lose nearly 90 lbs to get to 170. I said you’d have to lose AT LEAST 75lbs to be in the 175-180 range, so… Seems the numbers about add up. Why so butthurt? Fatty need a cheeseburger?
[/quote]

I wouldn’t be in the 175-180 range if I lost 75lbs. Not to mention this is a pointless discussion.

No one has to get into contest shape to determine their lean body mass.

It seems some of you do this so you won’t ever admit someone gained more muscle than you.

I have seen your pictures, whiteflash. You need to be taking more advice than you give.[/quote]

how much lean body mass do you believe you’re holding?

210

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:

How long ave you been doing this? How long have the people you are reffering to been doing this?[/quote]

What does that matter?

Unless you can show me all of the people on this site with shoulders like mine, it doesn’t seem like lifting longer alone causes more gains.[/quote]

Your right time has nothing to do when comparing gains between two people…oh wait what

I have gotten dumber since coming back to this site after the semester

211

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:

Sorry for my iPad skills but I thought your dentist amazing trained super duper reading comprehension would take care of that

You should I was wrong how? I posted no finite numbers so again you are actually supporting my argument.
[/quote]

Once again, you are the guy claiming to be in med school?

I just went through each statement made and showed you what was wrong. For you to even think like that concerning the human body makes me question your education.

Care to explain how not adding finite numbers erases the fact that you didn’t even acknowledge adaptability?[/quote]

No you really didn’t. You added variables and complexity. Which I didn’t. Agree there are variables that affect it again hence why I didn’t use finite statements and made broad ones…your arguments really suck btw. Really not even fun any more [/quote]

But…your “broad statements” make the statement incorrect or implies that you can not change how fast muscle is synthesized.

I just showed you that you can to some degree through very known methods.

Care to explain why you still don’t seem to understand this?..med school guy?.

212

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:

How long ave you been doing this? How long have the people you are reffering to been doing this?[/quote]

What does that matter?

Unless you can show me all of the people on this site with shoulders like mine, it doesn’t seem like lifting longer alone causes more gains.[/quote]

Your right time has nothing to do when comparing gains between two people…oh wait what

I have gotten dumber since coming back to this site after the semester [/quote]

It has nothing to do with comparing gains.

It has everything to do with people with way less muscle than me somehow acting like what I am writing is so incorrect.

213

Did I give advice? I’m 5’9" 175 with a LEGIT 12% bodyfat. I can dunk a basketball, do a couple of reps on the bench with 1.5 times my bodyweight, run a sub 4.6 40 yard dash all with two major knee injuries under my belt and 31 years of age. I can also take my shirt off without a pump and ideal lighting and camera tricks and get complimented on my build. I could care less about being massive and so out of shape I couldn’t do a single bodyweight lunge. I’d be so embarrassed and ashamed of myself I’d probably crawl into a bucket of haggen daas and hibernate for the summer.

214

[quote]TheDon12 wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]wramsey wrote:
X doesn’t seem to understand that you lose A LOT of water, fat and yes MUSCLE when you diet down. He’d be about 170 if he got in contest shape,[/quote]

Seriously…just stop. I need to lose nearly 90lbs to get into contest shape?

This has to be comedy.

You add nothing to this forum. You don’t even know how much I weigh right now…and even if I lost 50lbs or 70lbs I wouldn’t be under 180lbs. What the fuck are you talking about?[/quote]

Let’s see, you said you’d need to lose nearly 90 lbs to get to 170. I said you’d have to lose AT LEAST 75lbs to be in the 175-180 range, so… Seems the numbers about add up. Why so butthurt? Fatty need a cheeseburger?
[/quote]

I wouldn’t be in the 175-180 range if I lost 75lbs. Not to mention this is a pointless discussion.

No one has to get into contest shape to determine their lean body mass.

It seems some of you do this so you won’t ever admit someone gained more muscle than you.

I have seen your pictures, whiteflash. You need to be taking more advice than you give.[/quote]

how much lean body mass do you believe you’re holding?
[/quote]

CT believed over 210lbs. I personally do not care about the exact number…but I sure as hell know that dieting down to below 180lbs doesn’t make sense when that avatar pic is taken a few days ago.

I see guys with shoulders way smaller than that somehow telling me I need to weigh less than them? When they don’t even know how much I weigh now?

215

[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:
Did I give advice? I’m 5’9" 175 with a LEGIT 12% bodyfat.[/quote]

I am not impressed.
Please post “impressive” picture of yourself.

[quote]

I… get complimented on my build.[/quote]

Yes, I have seen those blue haired old ladies in the gym at 7am also.

[quote]

I could care less about being massive and so out of shape I couldn’t do a single bodyweight lunge. I’d be so embarrassed and ashamed of myself I’d probably crawl into a bucket of haggen daas and hibernate for the summer.[/quote]

LOL. Sucks to be you then…because I can do a hell of a lot more than a fucking lunge and can be pretty sure that I have helped more people today then your “wannabe lunging” ass has this past week.

You suck, flash…and you are not that bright.

216

X, I’d be really interested in hearing your take on how to maximize muscular gain during a bulking phase, given your experience and your medical training. Ideally I’d like something a little more specific than “eat more” and “have above average genetics”. Which foods, when to eat them, your take on peri-workout nutrition approaches, etc.

I created a new thread for it if you hadn’t seen it.

217

[quote]LoRez wrote:
X, I’d be really interested in hearing your take on how to maximize muscular gain during a bulking phase, given your experience and your medical training. Ideally I’d like something a little more specific than “eat more” and “have above average genetics”. Which foods, when to eat them, your take on peri-workout nutrition approaches, etc.

I created a new thread for it if you hadn’t seen it.[/quote]

+1

218

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:
Did I give advice? I’m 5’9" 175 with a LEGIT 12% bodyfat.[/quote]

I am not impressed.
Please post “impressive” picture of yourself.

[quote]

I… get complimented on my build.[/quote]

Yes, I have seen those blue haired old ladies in the gym at 7am also.

[quote]

I could care less about being massive and so out of shape I couldn’t do a single bodyweight lunge. I’d be so embarrassed and ashamed of myself I’d probably crawl into a bucket of haggen daas and hibernate for the summer.[/quote]

LOL. Sucks to be you then…because I can do a hell of a lot more than a fucking lunge and can be pretty sure that I have helped more people today then your “wannabe lunging” ass has this past week.

You suck, flash…and you are not that bright.[/quote]

Actually, you can’t do more than a lunge. There’s video proof of that. “You suck” and “you’re not that bright”, huh? You ol’ honeydripper you. You’re an out of shape, delusional, middle aged man who’s spent over a decade yelling at people on an internet forum. That’s so comically sad I’d actually feel bad for you if you weren’t such a world class douche. Good luck with the bulk.

219

[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:

Actually, you can’t do more than a lunge. There’s video proof of that. “You suck” and “you’re not that bright”, huh? You ol’ honeydripper you. You’re an out of shape, delusional, middle aged man who’s spent over a decade yelling at people on an internet forum. That’s so comically sad I’d actually feel bad for you if you weren’t such a world class douche. Good luck with the bulk.
[/quote]

If you really knew me, you would be pissed off. You are just a casual hater. I am not in my 40’s so LOL at “middle aged”. Also at “out of shape”…because I have damn sure heard the exact opposite lately from most people.

Like I said, flash, I have helped more people today than you have all week…and that is jus at work. Don’t feel sorry for me…my life is just hitting its stride…

220

[quote]MassiveGuns wrote:

[quote]LoRez wrote:

[quote]LoRez wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]LoRez wrote:
I know I basically just asked the same question twice to MassiveGuns and BlueCollarTr8n, but I’m also interested in your opinion too.

What kind of a modern “bulking diet” would you advocate in order to optimize muscle gains and take advantage of hormonal fluctuations, insulin response, etc.?

I’m assuming that your additional training in biology and the human body has given you some insight into how to optimize those processes, so I’m interested in how you would approach it.[/quote]

Ideal situation:

New trainer under the age of 25 with above average genetics who does no gain fat easily. For someone like that with a goal of being really big, those insulin responses to food intake will aid more muscle growth. It is only recently that many people seem to act as if insulin spikes should be avoided. They should if you are trying to lose body fat and retain muscle. That is not ideal for gaining the most muscle possible.

You may want to start another thread. I have a feeling this one will be screwed by the same nonsense that has been happening.[/quote]

Good call.[/quote]

Well, I tried creating a new thread but it seems to be in limbo somewhere. If that thread ever gets created, I’ll copy things over.

Unfortunately I don’t represent the ideal situation there with the “under 25 and above average genetics”.

What sort of dietary approach would you suggest for someone who has the genetics of a distance runner and an appetite that self-regulates to 135lbs @ 5’10?[/quote]

It sounds like you are one of those people that will have a hard time putting on weight. Do you find that you can eat whatever you want and you can still see your abs? If you are one of those people, how you should start depends on your lifting experience. If you are a total noob, just make sure you have protein covered for you weight, and eat a little bit more than your current intake, say an extra 300cal. Once you have a solid foundation in Squats, Deads, Military press, Bench, Dips and rows (as in your technique is solid) then its time to push it.

You need to buy a body fat monitor, Train your ass off, and just keep bumping calories till the scale starts to move. If its all fat, back off calories and up the training. Once you know wha your gaining level is, then you have something to work with. I have a feeling you will find the number you need to gain is going to be more than you are used to eating.

Dairy IMO is best for peri-post workout. Yoghurt is actually a great one, just add 500g low fat natural yoghurt to your post workout shake and drink it up. That will spike insulin to a massive exent.

The best foods to maintain glycogen are healthy carb sources. Oats IMO are the best. For some reason oats don’t seem to bloat you or make you gain as much fat. And I am personally of the opinion that you should have a high to moderate carb meal at night, it helps you sleep and night time is when the protein switches kick into overdrive, you don’t want to be dehydrated or carb depleted at that time, and you want insulin shuttling nutrients to the cells that need them.[/quote]

I actually lol’d IRL at the broscience in this post. Holy shit. ahhaha