The Body Weight Factor

Training
861

[quote]LankyMofo wrote:

Again, it is pretty easy to lose weight, it’s very difficult to get very lean (not even referring to contest condition). [/quote]

I do believe this thread and entire forum was primarily created for people who do NOT plan to discuss CONTEST SHAPE.

I don’t have to ever get “very lean” by your definition and I will still be leaner than the majority of the population just like I am right now.

Simply put, hell no, it doesn’t take that long after you get really muscular to lean down to “looking good with your shirt off” condition. It just doesn’t.

862

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]LankyMofo wrote:

Again, it is pretty easy to lose weight, it’s very difficult to get very lean (not even referring to contest condition). [/quote]

I do believe this thread and entire forum was primarily created for people who do NOT plan to discuss CONTEST SHAPE.

I don’t have to ever get “very lean” by your definition and I will still be leaner than the majority of the population just like I am right now.

Simply put, hell no, it doesn’t take that long after you get really muscular to lean down to “looking good with your shirt off” condition. It just doesn’t.

[/quote]

I just wanted to point out that for those with an end goal of getting “very lean”, the process is a lot harder than it is made out to be by those with no end goal of getting “very lean”.

You’ve apparently set your goals a little lower, good for you. :wink:

863

/le sigh

And we are back to it again.

Was fun while it lasted.

864

[quote]LankyMofo wrote:

I just wanted to point out that for those with an end goal of getting “very lean”, the process is a lot harder than it is made out to be by those with no end goal of getting “very lean”.

You’ve apparently set your goals a little lower, good for you. ;)[/quote]

These are subjective terms used arbitrarily. “Very lean” could be someone who is very muscular at 10% body fat. Since few people ever see someone like that, they would see that as “very lean”…even if he never competed or got leaner.

So again, my goal is to get leaner, STEELY’S goal is to get leaner…so what is with the attitude like anyone set goals “lower”?

I would say having a goal of 20" arms and lean is by no means a “low sited goal”…but to each his own.

I think what causes problems is this act as if the guys who bulked up are “PERMA BULKERS” or whatever who never plan to lose any body fat.

This isn’t true and some of us have lost fat right in front of everyone…so why the attitude?

865

[quote]cueball wrote:
I certainly think it benefits people differently. In the past, I’ve tried “letting loose” for a while and really trying to bring up my lifts and bodyweight. Every time though, My lifts just sorta stalled out and I could tell I wasn’t gaining much more than fat. I thought “eh, just hit a plateau, keep on truckin’ and you’ll push through it”. Never happened and I just got fatter.

I was up to 240 and finally said forget it. I just don’t think my body can go that route. So finally in my late 30’s, I’ve decided to try it the other way. I’ve slowly worked my way through 2 years of dropping the weight and trying to redo my whole approach. I have certainly noticed my body as a whole functions better without the bulk.

[/quote]

I think this quote right here contains a lot of valuable information for the people who choose to go down this road and follow a more “instinct” type training as opposed to tracking calories.

In my experience, as long as my numbers continued to increase, it justified the eating I was doing. I feel if you are bulking, and are not getting stronger, something is WRONG! Obviously to an extent, cuz you won’t just keep getting stronger forever, but if you are adding bodyweight, you SHOULD be getting stronger.

I mentioned my 3/4/5 B,S,D earlier in this thread. I did this at a bodyweight of about 210. I was bulking from 155, and was very happy with my progress, and never felt I added much bodyfat at all. My avi is roughly from around that time.

I then increased my bodyweight to 225-230, while not only getting stronger, but getting weaker!! I should have knew right then and there that something was wrong, and pumped the breaks.(Most of this tho was cuz of factors outside training, gf, partying, etc.)

We all know we dont gain in a linear fashion forever, and this is the perfect time to stop and re-assess the current plan, maybe focusing on a bit of recomp, or maybe even just maintaining, before continuing to bulk, and then realizing, uh-oh, I’m big/fat and still weak.

866

[quote]Ironfreak wrote:

[quote]cueball wrote:
I certainly think it benefits people differently. In the past, I’ve tried “letting loose” for a while and really trying to bring up my lifts and bodyweight. Every time though, My lifts just sorta stalled out and I could tell I wasn’t gaining much more than fat. I thought “eh, just hit a plateau, keep on truckin’ and you’ll push through it”. Never happened and I just got fatter.

I was up to 240 and finally said forget it. I just don’t think my body can go that route. So finally in my late 30’s, I’ve decided to try it the other way. I’ve slowly worked my way through 2 years of dropping the weight and trying to redo my whole approach. I have certainly noticed my body as a whole functions better without the bulk.

[/quote]

I think this quote right here contains a lot of valuable information for the people who choose to go down this road and follow a more “instinct” type training as opposed to tracking calories.

In my experience, as long as my numbers continued to increase, it justified the eating I was doing. I feel if you are bulking, and are not getting stronger, something is WRONG! Obviously to an extent, cuz you won’t just keep getting stronger forever, but if you are adding bodyweight, you SHOULD be getting stronger.

I mentioned my 3/4/5 B,S,D earlier in this thread. I did this at a bodyweight of about 210. I was bulking from 155, and was very happy with my progress, and never felt I added much bodyfat at all. My avi is roughly from around that time.

I then increased my bodyweight to 225-230, while not only getting stronger, but getting weaker!! I should have knew right then and there that something was wrong, and pumped the breaks.(Most of this tho was cuz of factors outside training, gf, partying, etc.) We all know we dont gain in a linear fashion forever, and this is the perfect time to stop and re-assess the current plan, maybe focusing on a bit of recomp, or maybe even just maintaining, before continuing to bulk, and then realizing, uh-oh, I’m big/fat and still weak. [/quote]

Good post. Agreed.

867

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]LankyMofo wrote:

I just wanted to point out that for those with an end goal of getting “very lean”, the process is a lot harder than it is made out to be by those with no end goal of getting “very lean”.

You’ve apparently set your goals a little lower, good for you. ;)[/quote]

These are subjective terms used arbitrarily. “Very lean” could be someone who is very muscular at 10% body fat. Since few people ever see someone like that, they would see that as “very lean”…even if he never competed or got leaner.

So again, my goal is to get leaner, STEELY’S goal is to get leaner…so what is with the attitude like anyone set goals “lower”?

I would say having a goal of 20" arms and lean is by no means a “low sited goal”…but to each his own.

I think what causes problems is this act as if the guys who bulked up are “PERMA BULKERS” or whatever who never plan to lose any body fat.

This isn’t true and some of us have lost fat right in front of everyone…so why the attitude?[/quote]

That smiley face was there for a reason, I even almost put in a statement that I was just joking but figured you were keen enough to pick up on it.

You’re really on edge lately.

I’ve probably told you this several times over the years, but I wish you would just sack up and diet down one time, just once, to silence the naysayers (to very lean levels - all abs in). I know, I know, it’s not your goal and why should you have to do that for someone else, etc. etc., but taking the few months and just doing it (as anonym suggested) would save you thousands upon thousands of posts defending yourself.

Do what you want, but anonym was right on the money with his post. If I were you I’d read it again with a bit more of an open mind, without looking for insults (even if there are a couple subtle insults thrown in there).

868

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]LankyMofo wrote:

Again, it is pretty easy to lose weight, it’s very difficult to get very lean (not even referring to contest condition). [/quote]

I do believe this thread and entire forum was primarily created for people who do NOT plan to discuss CONTEST SHAPE.

I don’t have to ever get “very lean” by your definition and I will still be leaner than the majority of the population just like I am right now.

Simply put, hell no, it doesn’t take that long after you get really muscular to lean down to “looking good with your shirt off” condition. It just doesn’t.

[/quote]

Are you really leaner than the majority of the population or do you just look leaner?

The Dexa scan pics showed its fairly reasonable to assume you are 20 %+

I

869

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

LOL. sure. You are the one that jumped all over my post calling my own personal method stupid and bro science. This is a huge backtrack. Who exactly initially called you out for “doing it wrong”? Any quotes?[/quote]

I didn’t call your method “stupid”. I didn’t degrade you at all. I asked you specifically what proof you have that fat alone is directly related to insulin resistance because if there is none, the rigid belief that it has direct relation without proof is bro science.

Where did you read “stupid”?[/quote]

Wrong. I noted improved progress possible related to increased insulin sensitivity with leaning out.

But lets go back some:

You stating your way is better: “Over the years, it was more enjoyable and allowed way more progress overall.”

You bad mouthing other ways of doing it as inferior, literally referring to others as “putting on the breaks to keep his abs in check”: "Yes, he may be more impressive, but honestly, again this is about who is making the most progress in a given amount of time…the guy making sure he is feeding himself everything he needs to grow when ever his body is ready…or the guy putting on the breaks to keep his abs in check? "

Again being a righteous asshole to others: “Most of the guys shouting how lean they are not that big or muscular.”

You referring to other methods as wasting time: “Why waste months dieting when my body is ready to grow?”

You being an asshole again, telling me I’m (and as it turns out guys like stu and CT) are wrong. Note you don’t call it unproved, but actually false: “I would back off of spreading the false idea that simply being leaner somehow enhances insulin sensitivity.”

You then proceeding to make a claim about what really dictates insulin sensitivity (entirely without evidence): " There are way more variables at play than this…the most important including your food choices."

Your response to my pointing out there are studies as evidence. Note that several studies were posted in response on non-obese populations rendering this statement either a lie or ignorant: “Yes…and those studies are done on OBESE people.”

You again making statements reporting to have it figured out after claiming about my post that it the science isn’t figured out yet: “20% is not obese and if someone is in the gym 5 to 6 days a week, I would NOT expect them to have some major problem with insulin sensitivity unless their diet was HORRIBLE.”

You completely contradicting earlier discussion that insulin sensitivity didn’t matter unless you were becoming obese by saying it’s all genetics: “Your ability to gain muscle is related to your genetics, not your body fat level.”

You continuing to insult the other side, even after studies, and corroborating individual blood testing was presented: " That is why some of us talk about “bro science”. There are tons of people simply willing to accept this as truth without any proof other than talk."

And that’s just from the first 3 pages of the 46 page thread.

870

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

LOL. sure. You are the one that jumped all over my post calling my own personal method stupid and bro science. This is a huge backtrack. Who exactly initially called you out for “doing it wrong”? Any quotes?[/quote]

I didn’t call your method “stupid”. I didn’t degrade you at all. I asked you specifically what proof you have that fat alone is directly related to insulin resistance because if there is none, the rigid belief that it has direct relation without proof is bro science.

Where did you read “stupid”?[/quote]

Wrong. I noted improved progress possible related to increased insulin sensitivity with leaning out.

But lets go back some:

You stating your way is better: “Over the years, it was more enjoyable and allowed way more progress overall.”

You bad mouthing other ways of doing it as inferior, literally referring to others as “putting on the breaks to keep his abs in check”: "Yes, he may be more impressive, but honestly, again this is about who is making the most progress in a given amount of time…the guy making sure he is feeding himself everything he needs to grow when ever his body is ready…or the guy putting on the breaks to keep his abs in check? "

Again being a righteous asshole to others: “Most of the guys shouting how lean they are not that big or muscular.”

You referring to other methods as wasting time: “Why waste months dieting when my body is ready to grow?”

You being an asshole again, telling me I’m (and as it turns out guys like stu and CT) are wrong. Note you don’t call it unproved, but actually false: “I would back off of spreading the false idea that simply being leaner somehow enhances insulin sensitivity.”

You then proceeding to make a claim about what really dictates insulin sensitivity (entirely without evidence): " There are way more variables at play than this…the most important including your food choices."

Your response to my pointing out there are studies as evidence. Note that several studies were posted in response on non-obese populations rendering this statement either a lie or ignorant: “Yes…and those studies are done on OBESE people.”

You again making statements reporting to have it figured out after claiming about my post that it the science isn’t figured out yet: “20% is not obese and if someone is in the gym 5 to 6 days a week, I would NOT expect them to have some major problem with insulin sensitivity unless their diet was HORRIBLE.”

You completely contradicting earlier discussion that insulin sensitivity didn’t matter unless you were becoming obese by saying it’s all genetics: “Your ability to gain muscle is related to your genetics, not your body fat level.”

You continuing to insult the other side, even after studies, and corroborating individual blood testing was presented: " That is why some of us talk about “bro science”. There are tons of people simply willing to accept this as truth without any proof other than talk."

And that’s just from the first 3 pages of the 46 page thread.
[/quote]

Best Post

871

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

LOL. sure. You are the one that jumped all over my post calling my own personal method stupid and bro science. This is a huge backtrack. Who exactly initially called you out for “doing it wrong”? Any quotes?[/quote]

I didn’t call your method “stupid”. I didn’t degrade you at all. I asked you specifically what proof you have that fat alone is directly related to insulin resistance because if there is none, the rigid belief that it has direct relation without proof is bro science.

Where did you read “stupid”?[/quote]

Wrong. I noted improved progress possible related to increased insulin sensitivity with leaning out.

But lets go back some:

You stating your way is better: “Over the years, it was more enjoyable and allowed way more progress overall.”

You bad mouthing other ways of doing it as inferior, literally referring to others as “putting on the breaks to keep his abs in check”: "Yes, he may be more impressive, but honestly, again this is about who is making the most progress in a given amount of time…the guy making sure he is feeding himself everything he needs to grow when ever his body is ready…or the guy putting on the breaks to keep his abs in check? "

Again being a righteous asshole to others: “Most of the guys shouting how lean they are not that big or muscular.”

You referring to other methods as wasting time: “Why waste months dieting when my body is ready to grow?”

You being an asshole again, telling me I’m (and as it turns out guys like stu and CT) are wrong. Note you don’t call it unproved, but actually false: “I would back off of spreading the false idea that simply being leaner somehow enhances insulin sensitivity.”

You then proceeding to make a claim about what really dictates insulin sensitivity (entirely without evidence): " There are way more variables at play than this…the most important including your food choices."

Your response to my pointing out there are studies as evidence. Note that several studies were posted in response on non-obese populations rendering this statement either a lie or ignorant: “Yes…and those studies are done on OBESE people.”

You again making statements reporting to have it figured out after claiming about my post that it the science isn’t figured out yet: “20% is not obese and if someone is in the gym 5 to 6 days a week, I would NOT expect them to have some major problem with insulin sensitivity unless their diet was HORRIBLE.”

You completely contradicting earlier discussion that insulin sensitivity didn’t matter unless you were becoming obese by saying it’s all genetics: “Your ability to gain muscle is related to your genetics, not your body fat level.”

You continuing to insult the other side, even after studies, and corroborating individual blood testing was presented: " That is why some of us talk about “bro science”. There are tons of people simply willing to accept this as truth without any proof other than talk."

And that’s just from the first 3 pages of the 46 page thread.
[/quote]

Bestust postus that will be ignored.

872

I would quite like to see a rebuttal to all that fancy science stuff anonym threw out if anyone has one. Otherwise, surely that’s the end of this thread?

873

[quote]RATTLEHEAD wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]LankyMofo wrote:

Again, it is pretty easy to lose weight, it’s very difficult to get very lean (not even referring to contest condition). [/quote]

I do believe this thread and entire forum was primarily created for people who do NOT plan to discuss CONTEST SHAPE.

I don’t have to ever get “very lean” by your definition and I will still be leaner than the majority of the population just like I am right now.

Simply put, hell no, it doesn’t take that long after you get really muscular to lean down to “looking good with your shirt off” condition. It just doesn’t.

[/quote]

Are you really leaner than the majority of the population or do you just look leaner?

The Dexa scan pics showed its fairly reasonable to assume you are 20 %+

I[/quote]

I don\t care. That is the point. This is a SUBJECTIVE activity we are involved in. No one cares about your “numbers”.

It isn’t like someone is going to see some really built guy at “11%” and then see another at “10” and start nitpicking. The ONLY people who do that are guys on the internet outside of a literal bodybuilding comopetition.

874

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]RATTLEHEAD wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]LankyMofo wrote:

Again, it is pretty easy to lose weight, it’s very difficult to get very lean (not even referring to contest condition). [/quote]

I do believe this thread and entire forum was primarily created for people who do NOT plan to discuss CONTEST SHAPE.

I don’t have to ever get “very lean” by your definition and I will still be leaner than the majority of the population just like I am right now.

Simply put, hell no, it doesn’t take that long after you get really muscular to lean down to “looking good with your shirt off” condition. It just doesn’t.

[/quote]

Are you really leaner than the majority of the population or do you just look leaner?

The Dexa scan pics showed its fairly reasonable to assume you are 20 %+

I[/quote]

I don\t care. That is the point. This is a SUBJECTIVE activity we are involved in. No one cares about your “numbers”.

It isn’t like someone is going to see some really built guy at “11%” and then see another at “10” and start nitpicking. The ONLY people who do that are guys on the internet outside of a literal bodybuilding comopetition.[/quote]

lol

875

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

Wrong. I noted improved progress possible related to increased insulin sensitivity with leaning out.
[/quote]

Wait…so now it is “possibly” related? I have no problem with you saying it is “possibly related” since no one knows how fat you were without pictures.

Stating that it IS without facts supporting this was questioned.

[quote]

You stating your way is better: “Over the years, it was more enjoyable and allowed way more progress overall.”[/quote]

My way was better FOR ME. Not sure what you mean here. I have never written that all people should do what I did or that my way is the best for all people. Not once.

The rest of what you wrote just shows your own perspective may not show the entire truth.

876

[quote]RATTLEHEAD wrote:

It isn’t like someone is going to see some really built guy at “11%” and then see another at “10” and start nitpicking. The ONLY people who do that are guys on the internet outside of a literal bodybuilding comopetition.[/quote]

lol
[/quote]

Serious question…what was funny here?

People respond to muscular size all day long. Unless there are very visible differences, no one is looking at really built people who are NOT fat and saying they all need to diet down to contest shape.

Contest shape isn’t necessary to look good.

877

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

Wrong. I noted improved progress possible related to increased insulin sensitivity with leaning out.
[/quote]

Wait…so now it is “possibly” related? I have no problem with you saying it is “possibly related” since no one knows how fat you were without pictures.

[/quote]
Always was. I also point out several times later that I was only suggesting reasons and didn’t know for sure.
“I’m not saying you think that. I’m saying the opposite may be true.”

Well, my sensitivity has drastically increased, so unless you are contradicting my blood work, it is a fact that in my leaning out I increased my sensitivity. (along with others posting similar results)

But again, you called it false, not unproven. Bro science much?

[quote]

[quote]

You stating your way is better: “Over the years, it was more enjoyable and allowed way more progress overall.”[/quote]

My way was better FOR ME. Not sure what you mean here. I have never written that all people should do what I did or that my way is the best for all people. Not once.

The rest of what you wrote just shows your own perspective may not show the entire truth.[/quote]

Nice way to skip addressing all your other hypocritical ignorant arrogant bullshit.

878

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

Wrong. I noted improved progress possible related to increased insulin sensitivity with leaning out.
[/quote]

Wait…so now it is “possibly” related? I have no problem with you saying it is “possibly related” since no one knows how fat you were without pictures.

[/quote]
Always was. I also point out several times later that I was only suggesting reasons and didn’t know for sure.
“I’m not saying you think that. I’m saying the opposite may be true.”

Well, my sensitivity has drastically increased, so unless you are contradicting my blood work, it is a fact that in my leaning out I increased my sensitivity. (along with others posting similar results)

But again, you called it false, not unproven. Bro science much?

[quote]

[quote]

You stating your way is better: “Over the years, it was more enjoyable and allowed way more progress overall.”[/quote]

My way was better FOR ME. Not sure what you mean here. I have never written that all people should do what I did or that my way is the best for all people. Not once.

The rest of what you wrote just shows your own perspective may not show the entire truth.[/quote]

Nice way to skip addressing all your other hypocritical ignorant arrogant bullshit.[/quote]

He asks for examples of him being an asshole, and when provided to him by you or SS…he just ignores them.

As predicted.

879

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

Always was. I also point out several times later that I was only suggesting reasons and didn’t know for sure.
“I’m not saying you think that. I’m saying the opposite may be true.”[/quote]

Once again, the scientific point was being made that NO, we dio not have proof tyhat body fat alone directly affects insulin resistance.

If you do have that proof, then show it and discuss it.

Wouldn’t this depend on HOW FAT YOU WERE TO START WITH???

That is the point. Could you show pictures of you at your start where you are NOT obese? Because if you were, I would EXPECT BETTER BLOOD WORK.

[quote]

Nice way to skip addressing all your other hypocritical ignorant arrogant bullshit.[/quote]

That is because there is no arrogant hypocritical bullshit here and the only one insulted someone is YOU in this post and others.

Why can’t you see your own actions?

880

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

Always was. I also point out several times later that I was only suggesting reasons and didn’t know for sure.
“I’m not saying you think that. I’m saying the opposite may be true.”[/quote]

Once again, the scientific point was being made that NO, we dio not have proof tyhat body fat alone directly affects insulin resistance.

[/quote]

I never claimed bodyfat alone directly affects insulin resistance.

Why should I try to prove something I didn’t claim.

Yes and no. It continued to increase throughout. even from 205 to 200, where I was far from fat.

My starting point for the bloodwork was actually about halfway during leaning out, NOT from my fattest. And no, at that point I was not obese.

[quote]

[quote]

Nice way to skip addressing all your other hypocritical ignorant arrogant bullshit.[/quote]

That is because there is no arrogant hypocritical bullshit here and the only one insulted someone is YOU in this post and others.

Why can’t you see your own actions?[/quote]

lol, okay chief.