[quote]gregron wrote:
Your experiments aren’t working my man.[/quote]
Well actually that’s kind of impossible. I mean I think he’s painted a pretty clear picture that he honestly is only doing this as an experiment. He’s not doing this to achieve a goal; he is literally only doing this as an experiment. Scientifically speaking that is perfectly valid, and failure to achieve a certain result does not mean an experiment is a failure.
[quote]csulli wrote:
[quote]gregron wrote:
Your experiments aren’t working my man.[/quote]
Well actually that’s kind of impossible. I mean I think he’s painted a pretty clear picture that he honestly is only doing this as an experiment. He’s not doing this to achieve a goal; he is literally only doing this as an experiment. Scientifically speaking that is perfectly valid, and failure to achieve a certain result does not mean an experiment is a failure.[/quote]
I guess technically you’re right, but you wouldn’t do an experiment if you didn’t think you could achieve something. In this case that would be a bigger, stronger and leaner physique. I don’t see that happening.
But ya, you’re right 
[quote]gregron wrote:
[quote]csulli wrote:
[quote]gregron wrote:
Your experiments aren’t working my man.[/quote]
Well actually that’s kind of impossible. I mean I think he’s painted a pretty clear picture that he honestly is only doing this as an experiment. He’s not doing this to achieve a goal; he is literally only doing this as an experiment. Scientifically speaking that is perfectly valid, and failure to achieve a certain result does not mean an experiment is a failure.[/quote]
I guess technically you’re right, but you wouldn’t do an experiment if you didn’t think you could achieve something. In this case that would be a bigger, stronger and leaner physique. I don’t see that happening.
But ya, you’re right :)[/quote]
Yes, thank you.
With the exception of this current experiment which is only at the halfway point, all my other experiments have been focused around learning how diet impacts the body by isolating variables with extreme conditions.
For example, cholesterol was a big focus so one goal was to see how cholesterol behaved not only with different food but different conditions like caloric deprivation. I learned a great deal about cholesterol and how it behaves - complete success.
Again I’m at the halfway point. I don’t think any methodology can be accurately assessed after 40 days particularly when both my body composition and 1RMs have been all over the place in the last decade. The real assessment will be at the 90 day point to see how low I got my body fat and afterwards during the refeed to see if I can break some of my latest 1RMs.
[quote]gregron wrote:
Not trying to be a dick, just being blunt…
You’re 6 feet tall, 160lbs and look like this. Your experiments aren’t working my man.[/quote]
What are you talking about grrreg - it clearly is just the chest hair.
And just for reference (and potentially more holocaust and pathetic insults) here’s a current leg pic.
[quote]PureNsanity wrote:
[quote]gregron wrote:
[quote]csulli wrote:
[quote]gregron wrote:
Your experiments aren’t working my man.[/quote]
Well actually that’s kind of impossible. I mean I think he’s painted a pretty clear picture that he honestly is only doing this as an experiment. He’s not doing this to achieve a goal; he is literally only doing this as an experiment. Scientifically speaking that is perfectly valid, and failure to achieve a certain result does not mean an experiment is a failure.[/quote]
I guess technically you’re right, but you wouldn’t do an experiment if you didn’t think you could achieve something. In this case that would be a bigger, stronger and leaner physique. I don’t see that happening.
But ya, you’re right :)[/quote]
Yes, thank you.
With the exception of this current experiment which is only at the halfway point, all my other experiments have been focused around learning how diet impacts the body by isolating variables with extreme conditions.
For example, cholesterol was a big focus so one goal was to see how cholesterol behaved not only with different food but different conditions like caloric deprivation. I learned a great deal about cholesterol and how it behaves - complete success.
Again I’m at the halfway point. I don’t think any methodology can be accurately assessed after 40 days particularly when both my body composition and 1RMs have been all over the place in the last decade. The real assessment will be at the 90 day point to see how low I got my body fat and afterwards during the refeed to see if I can break some of my latest 1RMs.[/quote]
You are hellbent on wasting a quarter of the year to prove what exactly? That you’re an expert on wasting time? Every day you continue this absolutely ridiculous “experiment” is an extra day of digging. Better to startcclimbing outta that hole now bud.
That’s probably the weirdest leg progress picture I’ve ever seen.
Greg, I’m really glad you decided to contribute to this thread. That’s all.
[quote]gregron wrote:
That’s probably the weirdest leg progress picture I’ve ever seen.[/quote]
Just to clarify it’s a current pic just two angles. I was trying to get the quads and hams, it’s not a before and after.
What’s so weird about it?
[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:
You are hellbent on wasting a quarter of the year to prove what exactly? That you’re an expert on wasting time? Every day you continue this absolutely ridiculous “experiment” is an extra day of digging. Better to startcclimbing outta that hole now bud.[/quote]
I’m losing fat and improving my lifts in quality and numbers, how is that digging myself into a hole? Sure you can say over and over again it’s not optimal, but it’s still progress.
[quote]PureNsanity wrote:
[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:
You are hellbent on wasting a quarter of the year to prove what exactly? That you’re an expert on wasting time? Every day you continue this absolutely ridiculous “experiment” is an extra day of digging. Better to startcclimbing outta that hole now bud.[/quote]
I’m losing fat and improving my lifts in quality and numbers, how is that digging myself into a hole? Sure you can say over and over again it’s not optimal, but it’s still progress.
[/quote]
Are you losing fat? You’re the definition of “skinny fat”. You’re soft with no visible muscle. Your lifts also appear to be a 185lb deadlift and a 115lb bench, which if you’re a 17 high school softball player isn’t bad. But, you’re a grown man. Something’s obviously not working here. Wonder what it is…?
[quote]PureNsanity wrote:
[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:
You are hellbent on wasting a quarter of the year to prove what exactly? That you’re an expert on wasting time? Every day you continue this absolutely ridiculous “experiment” is an extra day of digging. Better to startcclimbing outta that hole now bud.[/quote]
I’m losing fat and improving my lifts in quality and numbers, how is that digging myself into a hole? Sure you can say over and over again it’s not optimal, but it’s still progress.
[/quote]
You’ve got quite a few variables in this experiment. Do you believe that your lifting improvements can be attributed to your diet? I don’t. Your lifting quality can be attributed in large part to implementing advice you’ve received on this board, and your numbers may be improving because the quality of your lifts have improved. That’s a problem, right? How are you going to evaluate the efficacy of this program at the end of the day when you have so much outside influence on the experiment?
[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:
Are you losing fat? You’re the definition of “skinny fat”. You’re soft with no visible muscle. Your lifts also appear to be a 185lb deadlift and a 115lb bench, which if you’re a 17 high school softball player isn’t bad. But, you’re a grown man. Something’s obviously not working here. Wonder what it is…?[/quote]
I’m 160 lbs I understand that I’m not huge, but no visible muscle is just trying to insult me for the sake of it. I’m using those weights in a technique that promotes exhaustion. My 1RMs are around 275/325/375 and yes plenty of high school kids can beat my lifts.
Everyone picks in their life what is most important for them, and I admire the people who devote as much time and efforts to their body and strength than me but that’s not what I’ve chosen. I’m not in here screaming “why am I not big” this is “hey check this out if you want, please critique my lifts.” And I still believe that at the end of this there will be marked improvement. In the end that’s what it’s about - improvement.
As stated numerous times though, this experiment is about much, much more than strength and physique.
[quote]PureNsanity wrote:
this experiment is about much, much more than strength and physique.[/quote]
Clearly.
S
I’ve been on-and-off checking out this thread, kinda the way you watch a few minutes of Die Hard 2 if you catch it flipping channels. You know it’s no good overall, but you’re only trading a couple of minutes for some mild entertainment, so it’s not a big deal.
[quote]PureNsanity wrote:
I don’t think any methodology can be accurately assessed after 40 days … [/quote]
You’re entirely incorrect about that. 6 weeks is absolutely plenty of time to determine if a given plan is or isn’t working and to take a quick step back and evaluate the results so far. Any experienced coach will agree on that.
So, comparing day one to today, what progress have you seen in bodyweight, fat loss, and strength in the basic lifts?
Also, regarding the collection of your pics, I have to repeat that you have absolutely no business calling yourself an “expert dieter.” Again, there’s a bit more to dieting than simply sticking to a difficult diet to prove you can stick to a difficult diet. I literally LOLd when I saw you have another ebook out titled “Do you want to get better at dieting?: Dieting perspectives and training for success.”
Your other book, with “100 FAQs and a Beginner’s Guide”, is everything that’s wrong with Internet-based fitness advice. Proving that anybody can write a book and put it out there, regardless of the content’s quality or author’s background.
You described it: “This book is meant for beginners and occasional dieters who haven’t spent a lot of time researching basic diet, nutrition, and health topics. It’s meant to provide a one stop shop for basic knowledge and guidance.”
But from this thread, you’ve shown us that you’re still essentially a beginner who actively avoids implementing basic nutrition and training advice. Rationalize it however you have to. That you’re a scientist, that the traditional stuff simply never worked for you. Whatever. You’re doing your thing and trying to somehow make money. Good luck with that.
[quote]flipcollar wrote:
[quote]PureNsanity wrote:
[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:
You are hellbent on wasting a quarter of the year to prove what exactly? That you’re an expert on wasting time? Every day you continue this absolutely ridiculous “experiment” is an extra day of digging. Better to startcclimbing outta that hole now bud.[/quote]
I’m losing fat and improving my lifts in quality and numbers, how is that digging myself into a hole? Sure you can say over and over again it’s not optimal, but it’s still progress.
[/quote]
You’ve got quite a few variables in this experiment. Do you believe that your lifting improvements can be attributed to your diet? I don’t. Your lifting quality can be attributed in large part to implementing advice you’ve received on this board, and your numbers may be improving because the quality of your lifts have improved. That’s a problem, right? How are you going to evaluate the efficacy of this program at the end of the day when you have so much outside influence on the experiment?[/quote]
Great questions! Something worthwhile!
Now there could be problems differentiating diet from exercise contributions, but those would have to have a separate experiments to determine individual (if any) contributions. Even with diet there are two main factors being the all meat aspect and the eating pattern. How would the results differ if I ate every day? How would the results differ if I ate a more standard diet? If I kept the same diet and switched to a standard methodology how would the results differ?
I’m looking for are obvious changes. Regarding body composition I’ve never been able to get under 8% body fat and every time I’ve approached that number I’ve lost significant lean mass. Now in these prior experiments I was using more standard approaches to weight loss exercise particularly cardio + Westside methodologies. Since fat loss isn’t dependent on quality of repetition I can fairly confidently say if I achieve this it has contributions from the experiment conditions.
There’s no good way to tell contributions to strength though except if this program does, or doesn’t contribute to increases. If I up my 1RMs by 20 lbs each you’re right I can’t identify the contributing cause; however, I think a good estimate would be comparing the increases of my bench versus squat/deadlift. I don’t have near the problems (although you can always get better) at bench than the other two. Squat was by far what I needed the most work on.
So let’s say my bench max doesn’t increase but my deadlift does… This would be an obvious sign it was corrections to form and not this program. If all increase I think it’s a good indication that the program (however big or small) was positively contributing. My PR for bench is 295 and my PR for deadlift is 415 so until I break those numbers though I can’t say I’m doing anything much better.
My wife is tired of my eating patterns though so after this one I promised to eat semi-normally for a while. One thing I want to try next is eating every day but only eating after I workout. Fruits, veggies, milk, eggs, meat, etc. But to get a really clear picture with n=1 you have to do a lot of experiments to isolate all the different variables.
After this I’m probably going to pick up one of CT’s hypertrophy routines. Even then though I can’t isolate my rebound from the effects of the changes. During rebounds I haven’t been able to keep the fat down so that’s going to be my goal afterwards.
[quote]PureNsanity wrote:
Again I’m at the halfway point. I don’t think any methodology can be accurately assessed after 40 days particularly when both my body composition and 1RMs have been all over the place in the last decade. The real assessment will be at the 90 day point to see how low I got my body fat and afterwards during the refeed to see if I can break some of my latest 1RMs.[/quote]
This statement is fascinating to me.
What’s so magical about 90 days that isn’t reflected in 40 days? I literally could say “this is a lifestyle change, I don’t think the methodology can be assessed after 10 years, the real assessment will be how I look before I die” and it would be the same as what you just said.
There’s a point where the signal to noise ratio is low, due to daily fluctuations of strength, water retention, neural activity, etc. Usually after a few weeks, it’s pretty clear whether what you’re doing is working or not. A little bit of statistics can help make some sense of it too.
[quote]Chris Colucci wrote:
You’re entirely incorrect about that. 6 weeks is absolutely plenty of time to determine if a given plan is or isn’t working and to take a quick step back and evaluate the results so far. Any experienced coach will agree on that.[/quote]
If you want to tell if a particular change is helping build mass, for example, a good gain is 1 - 2 lbs per month but this is well within the margin of error for a DXA scan even no changes were from water and glycogen. For my particular case it’s complicated because I’ve gone from 143 lbs @ 8% body fat to 187 lbs @ 15.8% body fat within the last 2 years. My current 1RM is not at my prior PRs. IMHO if I really want to know a change is working I have to beat my prior bests and that’s going to take a lot more than 40 days for me.
[quote]Chris Colucci wrote:
So, comparing day one to today, what progress have you seen in bodyweight, fat loss, and strength in the basic lifts?[/quote]
Since I’ve made corrections to several lifts it’s hard to assess overall. My rotation covers 9 days so it’s only been 4 workouts for each. Since I started going ATG in squats I went from 155x1x20, 135x1x10, 135x2x5 to 155x1x28, 155x1x8, 155x1x7 in around 3 weeks. I’ve dropped 12 lbs so far and this is fasting weight to fasting weight so minimal (if any) water/glycogen fluctuation. Without a DXA though I can’t see lean mass retention.
[quote]Chris Colucci wrote:
Also, regarding the collection of your pics, I have to repeat that you have absolutely no business calling yourself an “expert dieter.” Again, there’s a bit more to dieting than simply sticking to a difficult diet to prove you can stick to a difficult diet. I literally LOLd when I saw you have another ebook out titled “Do you want to get better at dieting?: Dieting perspectives and training for success.”[/quote]
I hear what you’re saying but there’s more to dieting than attaining an elite physique. I don’t know maybe things like insulin resistance, nutrition, and overall health.
[quote]Chris Colucci wrote:
Your other book, with “100 FAQs and a Beginner’s Guide”, is everything that’s wrong with Internet-based fitness advice. Proving that anybody can write a book and put it out there, regardless of the content’s quality or author’s background.
You described it: “This book is meant for beginners and occasional dieters who haven’t spent a lot of time researching basic diet, nutrition, and health topics. It’s meant to provide a one stop shop for basic knowledge and guidance.”
But from this thread, you’ve shown us that you’re still essentially a beginner who actively avoids implementing basic nutrition and training advice. Rationalize it however you have to. That you’re a scientist, that the traditional stuff simply never worked for you. Whatever. You’re doing your thing and trying to somehow make money. Good luck with that.[/quote]
You’re literally judging a book by it’s cover and again there’s much more to nutrition and health than trying to be an advanced/elite lifter.
Buy the book, read it, then start knocking the content if you choose but do so with scientific credibility and not assumptions.
[quote]PureNsanity wrote:
[quote]Chris Colucci wrote:
Also, regarding the collection of your pics, I have to repeat that you have absolutely no business calling yourself an “expert dieter.” Again, there’s a bit more to dieting than simply sticking to a difficult diet to prove you can stick to a difficult diet. I literally LOLd when I saw you have another ebook out titled “Do you want to get better at dieting?: Dieting perspectives and training for success.”[/quote]
I hear what you’re saying but there’s more to dieting than attaining an elite physique. I don’t know maybe things like insulin resistance, nutrition, and overall health.
[/quote]
And… what do you know about those things? Quantifiably, I mean.
Are you healthier today because of what you’ve learned? How have you quantified that?
Did you test any maxes, whether it be 1rm or 10rm, or something similar, right before you started the program? Specifically on bench, since as you mentioned, you haven’t really changed your form there? 20 rep sets aren’t particularly telling of actual strength IMO, since conditioning ends up being a more mitigating factor. Just curious how you’re going to assess progress at the end.