[quote]Gunitgansta wrote:
I eat Carbs in the way JB does: seperated into P+C and P+F.
However, ALL carbs are bad for you according to Charles Poliquin.
“The best rule of thumb for athletes and non-athletes is to stay as much as possible with a caveman diet – if it doesn’t run, or swim or fly or if it’s not green, don’t eat it,” - Charles Poliquin."
Such words of wisdom.
when I don’t eat Carbs or eat in the manner of Massive Eating, I gain no fat despite consuming 5000-6000 calories[/quote]
If you expect to gain much muscle without ever gaining any body fat at all, you are not going to progress very far. The goal is limited fat gains, not some belief that any and all body fat will be avoided. If that were the case, not one bodybuilder would have an off season or need to diet at all.
[quote]jehovasfitness wrote:
Gunitgansta wrote:
I eat Carbs in the way JB does: seperated into P+C and P+F.
However, ALL carbs are bad for you according to Charles Poliquin.
“The best rule of thumb for athletes and non-athletes is to stay as much as possible with a caveman diet – if it doesn’t run, or swim or fly or if it’s not green, don’t eat it,” - Charles Poliquin."
[quote]Gunitgansta wrote:
“The best rule of thumb for athletes and non-athletes is to stay as much as possible with a caveman diet – if it doesn’t run, or swim or fly or if it’s not green, don’t eat it,” - Charles Poliquin."
[/quote]
That is why Chuck is a trainer and not a dietician
So tomatoes are bad, apples are bad, protein shakes are bad, supplements are bad?
Do you think you could be taking Chuck a little too literally?
[quote]MarcAnthony wrote:
jehovasfitness wrote:
Gunitgansta wrote:
I eat Carbs in the way JB does: seperated into P+C and P+F.
However, ALL carbs are bad for you according to Charles Poliquin.
“The best rule of thumb for athletes and non-athletes is to stay as much as possible with a caveman diet – if it doesn’t run, or swim or fly or if it’s not green, don’t eat it,” - Charles Poliquin."
[quote]Massif wrote:
Gunitgansta wrote:
“The best rule of thumb for athletes and non-athletes is to stay as much as possible with a caveman diet – if it doesn’t run, or swim or fly or if it’s not green, don’t eat it,” - Charles Poliquin."
That is why Chuck is a trainer and not a dietician
So tomatoes are bad, apples are bad, protein shakes are bad, supplements are bad?
Do you think you could be taking Chuck a little too literally?[/quote]
This is what happens when you base everything you know on only ONE source of knowledge. Some of these guys need some textbooks and a vacation from “all T-Nation reading” for a while.
[quote]Massif wrote:
Gunitgansta wrote:
“The best rule of thumb for athletes and non-athletes is to stay as much as possible with a caveman diet – if it doesn’t run, or swim or fly or if it’s not green, don’t eat it,” - Charles Poliquin."
That is why Chuck is a trainer and not a dietician
So tomatoes are bad, apples are bad, protein shakes are bad, supplements are bad?
Do you think you could be taking Chuck a little too literally?[/quote]
I think that what CP is saying is mistaken, or not worded properly.
Instead of just saying anything green, he might have meant things that come from the ground. Or maybe I’m mistaken…
[quote]MookJong wrote:
I’m sure cavemen probably ate their own faeces too … should I do be doing that as well? If so, would 0.9 faeces a day be enough?[/quote]
That was only on Caveman Feces Friday. The rest of the week, urine was on the menu. Yuuuuumy.
Carbs are not unnatural. What do you consider carbs? Krispy Kremes? Veggies and fruits are carbs. Cavemen ate them if it matters. There is a place for very low-carb diets when cutting. It is also certainly possible to get to a low bodyfat while still eating some vegetables, fruits, and whole grans.
[quote]MookJong wrote:
I’m sure cavemen probably ate their own faeces too … should I do be doing that as well? If so, would 0.9 faeces a day be enough?[/quote]
You are so clueless. You need .9267 to get into lypolysis. Gimme a break.
Oh goody, another retarded food hypothesis thread brought to us by the ignorant and the opinionated. I fit those qualities so I might as well jump right in!
At the very least, people are different, so if something works well for you, that doesn’t mean it is dogma and useful for the rest of us.
In particular, if you want to have energy for good workouts, the ones that are likely to make your muscles grow, it will probably be a lot easier if you are eating carbs.
I also suspect that eating carbs will help keep your body from firing up the gluconeogenesis furnaces.
Carbs and fiber are an important and natural part of a healthy diet. On the other hand, refined carbohydrates that dump assloads of sugar into the bloodstream can be considired a danger in some regards.
Mr. Poliquin, originally from Ottawa, also works with players on a dozen National Hockey League teams, including Toronto Maple Leaf Gary Roberts, whose career was resurrected after a neck injury forced him into retirement. He changed Mr. Roberts’s training and, more important, revolutionized what he ate so his body could repair itself and run efficiently. Mr. Roberts is now considered a state-of-the-art fitness specimen in the NHL. Mr. Poliquin recalled the first time he sat at a dining table with Mr. Roberts. The player reached for a slice of white bread and Mr. Poliquin stabbed his hand with the dinner fork.
“Caveman didn’t eat bread, especially not with bleached white flour,” Mr. Poliquin said. “People have to distinguish between good and bad carbohydrates,” he added, recommending a carbohydrate intake that comes primarily from vegetables, to go along with proteins that come from fish and chicken. In the case of his hockey-player clients, many of them are also on a regimen that includes protein shakes after a workout or game that have a faster gastric uptake than solid foods.
And why is that? You think that your current bf% level has nothing to do with how much fat or LBM you gain (overall genetics aside), or that you can control your partitioning 100% with training & “food timing” regardless?
I think people like you who put so much focus into body percentage numbers will never force your body to accept a larger weight set point that significant beyond where you began in excess of 50lbs. No, I do not think that whether my body fat percentage is 14.3% or 15.9% has an ounce of difference as far as muscle gained over body fat. The entire process is much more complex than believing that no one should ever “bulk up” or work on gaining if they are 15% body fat. I think the entire focus on body fat percentage is largely a waste unless someone is truly “overfat”. I also seriously doubt I would have gained anywhere near the way I have had that been my primary focus.
There, was that enough info for you to understand why I am glad I never listened to information like what you stated? The human body is a very complex and adaptive machine. To believe that it operates under such constricted perimeters as to not gain much muscle simply because you are a certain body fat percentage is limited thinking. [/quote]
Re-read what I wrote. I said that the ratio of LBM to fat gains is more favorable the leaner you are. Sure, there are exceptions to this, but you’re talking about the ‘genetic elite’. And there’s a great difference, generally, between someone bulking when at 8% vs your 15.3.
[quote]Gunitgansta wrote:
Arbitro wrote:
So… if my diet consists of nothing but turkey & oats, for instance, and my maintenance is 2000 calories/day, and I eat 2500 calories of the turkey & oats… am I not going to gain weight because these are “clean” foods?
Ok, let’s say that the thermal effect of food (TEF) for turkey protein is 10%, so let’s say instead I eat another 10% calories over that 2500 (now at 2750) - as someone said, turkey calories vs doughnut calories - am I not going to gain the same amount of weight?
That was a pretty uneducated post.
Donuts contains high amount of fat and carbohydrates at the same time. Your insulin will be elevated and fat will be stored more readily.
Try read up on the nutrition articles here.[/quote]
What if I eat the doughnut while I’m hypocaloric? Will I still gain fat more readily if I eat it?
Obviously you are a proponent/believer of Berardi’s food combining stuff. Here’s one for you: did you know that when you eat a P+F meal, it will generally take 2-3 hours for the dietary fat you just ate to reach the fat cells. That’s right about the time you are eating your next P+C meal, which will jack up your insulin. What happens then?
Point being… your total calories (assuming adequate protein & EFAs are present) trumps all, including the magical food combining ‘stuff.’
[quote]Gunitgansta wrote:
Arbitro wrote:
So… if my diet consists of nothing but turkey & oats, for instance, and my maintenance is 2000 calories/day, and I eat 2500 calories of the turkey & oats… am I not going to gain weight because these are “clean” foods?
Ok, let’s say that the thermal effect of food (TEF) for turkey protein is 10%, so let’s say instead I eat another 10% calories over that 2500 (now at 2750) - as someone said, turkey calories vs doughnut calories - am I not going to gain the same amount of weight?
That was a pretty uneducated post.
Donuts contains high amount of fat and carbohydrates at the same time. Your insulin will be elevated and fat will be stored more readily.
Try read up on the nutrition articles here.[/quote]
Adding that I do not disagree in pricinple about combining carbs & fats, but this really is only applicable to HIGH levels of carbs & fats, akin to levels found in a 24-hour carb load, where you DO want to keep fats lower. But unless you are grossly overeating for an extended period it’s not going to be an issue.
[quote]Arbitro wrote:
Re-read what I wrote. I said that the ratio of LBM to fat gains is more favorable the leaner you are. Sure, there are exceptions to this, but you’re talking about the ‘genetic elite’. And there’s a great difference, generally, between someone bulking when at 8% vs your 15.3.[/quote]
No one misunderstood you. No one mis-read what you wrote. I am saying I disagree with the assumption that someone at 12% body fat will gain more lean mass when gaining than someone at 16%. It is theory, a theory I DISAGREE WITH and am very glad I didn’t listen to when I started training seriously 10 years ago. As soon as I start seeing people who approach training that way surpass my progress to a significant degree, then I will assume that my approach was wrong. Considering I am not seeing this, I will continue doing what has worked for me as most should do what works for them, not some overgeneralized concept as if everyone responds the same to the same stimulus. This is FALSE. Did you understand what I wrote that time?
Someone weighing 150lbs or less at 6’1" should NOT start dieting just because they are at 15% body fat. That is retarded.
[quote]jsbrook wrote:
I wish soft and overfat but undermuscled beginners would understand that they don’t need to bulk or cut. Just lifting hard and eating healthy for awhile will yield impressive and appreicalbe improvements and bring them to a place where they are well-advised to do some real bulking.
But no use crying over spilled milk.[/quote]
The first few responses (like the one above) were perfect. So, when, exactly, did this thread become a retardation celebration?
Here’s the thing. The initial questioner was and is a beginner.
As such, unless they are freakishly skinny or incredibly obese, they should be focused on:
Eating cleanly by making good food choices.
Working out regularly.
THAT IS IT. If you eat cleanly and work out regularly as a beginner, you will make good progress. Eventually, it will become obvious if you should bulk or cut. But starting from the average deskbound worker-bee skinny-fat physique, you usually can’t tell if you should bulk or cut because there’s just nothing there to work with. If you bulk you’re going to start carrying too much fat, and if you cut there’s not going to be anything left.
Just eat cleanly and work out regularly. You will add muscle mass and cut fat. Because of the whole “I eat a chicken and wash it down with whole milk” mentality, people get confused when they come on this board.
Ok, let’s say that the thermal effect of food (TEF) for turkey protein is 10%, so let’s say instead I eat another 10% calories over that 2500 (now at 2750) - as someone said, turkey calories vs doughnut calories - am I not going to gain the same amount of weight?
[/quote]
Are you kidding? Are you going to gain weight eating turkey or doughnuts? Are you suggesting that all we have to do is eat doughnuts, lift and sleep to grow muscles? Ah ha! That’s it! You may gain weight, but there’s no way you’ll gain LBM by eating serving after serving of doughnuts. That insinuation is about the most absurd thing I’ve ever read.
Yeah, if you want to gain weight, eat doughnuts. If you want to gain muscle, eat protein rich food - such as turkey, chicken, tuna, yoghurt, cottage cheese… don’t eat doughnuts.
Ok, let’s say that the thermal effect of food (TEF) for turkey protein is 10%, so let’s say instead I eat another 10% calories over that 2500 (now at 2750) - as someone said, turkey calories vs doughnut calories - am I not going to gain the same amount of weight?
Are you kidding? Are you going to gain weight eating turkey or doughnuts? Are you suggesting that all we have to do is eat doughnuts, lift and sleep to grow muscles? Ah ha! That’s it! You may gain weight, but there’s no way you’ll gain LBM by eating serving after serving of doughnuts. That insinuation is about the most absurd thing I’ve ever read.
Yeah, if you want to gain weight, eat doughnuts. If you want to gain muscle, eat protein rich food - such as turkey, chicken, tuna, yoghurt, cottage cheese… don’t eat doughnuts.
I’m stupefied.[/quote]
Genetics and overall caloric intake ARE the predominant factors. There are people who make significant gains in muscle mass who are not consuming very much protein at all. Your body BUILDS protein out of available resources. The only ones that it NEEDS are essential amino acids. That means, yes, at its most basic concept, someone could eat doughnuts and gain muscle mass. Is it ideal? No, it isn’t. You need to put things in context and it is truly a shame that this needs to be explained when you have people tossing around much larger words all of the time as if they truly know what they are speaking of.
If someone is trying to gain muscle mass, the first place you look is OVERALL DAILY CALORIC INTAKE, not protein. You won’t gain shit if you don’t eat more than your body needs to maintain body weight. Exceptions to that rule include training stimulus (especially in newbies) who may be able to cause their body to make adaptations to training by gaining muscle while decreasing body fat. This is also not the norm as far as body composition changes but it can happen. I suppose all of this needs to be stated before someone logs on with twice the ability to type than they have at understanding what was written.
