The Rule: 6 Meals/Day

Professor_X · September 27, 2013, 2:46pm

[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:
I really don’t think anyone needed you to save them from this information though.

S[/quote]

Great post!

It would really hit home, if I was trying to “save” someone. I, however, am just a guy who loves lifting weights, the effort it takes to get really big, the progress I see, and the discussion of it. That’s all.

Oh, but it wasn’t. It was stated early in the thread that there was evidence that eating several times a day put you at risk of “pre-diabetes” even in serious weight lifters.

The problem there is, this evidence does not exist apparently.

Let me know if it is ok with you if I discuss the current en vogue practice in the personal trainer world to act like everyone is one step away from getting a leg cut off from diabetes.

I personally see value in discussing that issue in some detail.

The alternative is newbs believing false “bro science”…and clearly you wouldn’t want that…would you?

Professor_X · September 27, 2013, 3:02pm

[quote]Majin wrote:
I’m all for promoting discipline and dedication that produces real transformations in people’s bodies. But I’d much rather show newbs how to measure what they eat, so that they know where they’re at and add more food as necessary. [/quote]

Measure their food?

I am all for counting macro nutrients as a newb and calories. I don’t think I have ever written otherwise. What I am against is this extreme minimalist approach in all cases. Telling newbs that no one can gain more than 2lbs of muscle in a month is fairly common here…when it is not true.

This can affect how someone “measures” their food. They start focusing more on the calculations than making sure their lifts are going up and their shirts fit tighter in the arms and chest. I truly think most beginners need to AVOID getting too precise and most damn sure don’t need to be micro-analyzing their food intake beyond those broad strokes.

Yes, count calories.

Yes, get a good idea in general of carb intake and even tolerance…but the truth is, it takes TIME before you bring out the microscope.

I see a lot of really small guys with calculators. They can explain the shit out of their food intake…and quote what the latest author has to say by heart.

They miss that that heart in the gym and the kitchen counts way more.

That is all I am discussing…take it or leave it.

gregron · September 27, 2013, 3:15pm

[quote]infinite_shore wrote:

[quote]gregron wrote:
Hell, I could take twice as much and would never be his size lol[/quote]

I disagree. Not the same shape/look of course, but overall size, yes. Why not?[/quote]
IMO, on of the genetic factors that heavily contributes to the top guys being the top guys is how their body responds to AAS (obviously) and, possibly even more importantly, their bodies ability to function properly and not shut down on them while pushing so much stuff.

Not everyone can do that.

infinite_shore · September 27, 2013, 3:23pm

[quote]gregron wrote:

[quote]infinite_shore wrote:

[quote]gregron wrote:
Hell, I could take twice as much and would never be his size lol[/quote]

I disagree. Not the same shape/look of course, but overall size, yes. Why not?[/quote]
IMO, on of the genetic factors that heavily contributes to the top guys being the top guys is how their body responds to AAS (obviously) and, possibly even more importantly, their bodies ability to function properly and not shut down on them while pushing so much stuff.

Not everyone can do that.[/quote]

Yeah, I get that and I certainly don’t rule out that line of reasoning. BUT I think the genetic card is played way too easily in this game. I bet in most cases other, simpler factors can be found to explain some people’s failures.

ps: Maybe you have the genetics to deal with insane amounts of AAS/PEDs. You don’t know until you tried it, yes? ha

gregron · September 27, 2013, 3:25pm

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]Majin wrote:
I’m all for promoting discipline and dedication that produces real transformations in people’s bodies. But I’d much rather show newbs how to measure what they eat, so that they know where they’re at and add more food as necessary. [/quote]

Measure their food?

I am all for counting macro nutrients as a newb and calories. I don’t think I have ever written otherwise. What I am against is this extreme minimalist approach in all cases. Telling newbs that no one can gain more than 2lbs of muscle in a month is fairly common here…when it is not true.

This can affect how someone “measures” their food. They start focusing more on the calculations than making sure their lifts are going up and their shirts fit tighter in the arms and chest. I truly think most beginners need to AVOID getting too precise and most damn sure don’t need to be micro-analyzing their food intake beyond those broad strokes.

Yes, count calories.

Yes, get a good idea in general of carb intake and even tolerance…but the truth is, it takes TIME before you bring out the microscope.

I see a lot of really small guys with calculators. They can explain the shit out of their food intake…and quote what the latest author has to say by heart.

They miss that that heart in the gym and the kitchen counts way more.

That is all I am discussing…take it or leave it.[/quote]
If I understand your general premis correctly, which I think I do, then I have to agree.

What I think you’re basically saying is “don’t major in the minors.” That is a solid approach for newbies but I don’t think that a new lifter is doomed to only being able to focus and kick ass at either the kitchen OR the gym. Why can’t a smart new lifter do both?

The part of your post which I’m confused about is where you say you are all for counting calories and macros but then say to “AVOIDgetting to precise and damn sure don’t need to be micro-anylizing their food intake.”

That part threw me off a little bit. What do you mean by that?

Anyway… “Don’t major in the minors” and new lifters who “can’t see the Forest through the trees” seems to be the sentiment of your last post and I agree.

gregron · September 27, 2013, 3:28pm

[quote]infinite_shore wrote:

[quote]gregron wrote:

[quote]infinite_shore wrote:

[quote]gregron wrote:
Hell, I could take twice as much and would never be his size lol[/quote]

I disagree. Not the same shape/look of course, but overall size, yes. Why not?[/quote]
IMO, on of the genetic factors that heavily contributes to the top guys being the top guys is how their body responds to AAS (obviously) and, possibly even more importantly, their bodies ability to function properly and not shut down on them while pushing so much stuff.

Not everyone can do that.[/quote]

Yeah, I get that and I certainly don’t rule out that line of reasoning. BUT I think the genetic card is played way too easily in this game. I bet in most cases other, simpler factors can be found to explain some people’s failures.

ps: Maybe you have the genetics to deal with insane amounts of AAS/PEDs. You don’t know until you tried it, yes? ha[/quote]
Ya that’s true. But I can tell you this much… I don’t have the bank account to deal with insane amounts of AAS/PED’s lol

I agree that genetics does get blown way out of proportion but there are freaks out there and until you’ve seen them first hand and dealt with them it’s hard to fathom TBH.

I’ve been around 2 genetic freaks extensively in my life and it was crazy man.

Iron_Made · September 27, 2013, 3:33pm

[quote]gregron wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]Majin wrote:
I’m all for promoting discipline and dedication that produces real transformations in people’s bodies. But I’d much rather show newbs how to measure what they eat, so that they know where they’re at and add more food as necessary. [/quote]

Measure their food?

I am all for counting macro nutrients as a newb and calories. I don’t think I have ever written otherwise. What I am against is this extreme minimalist approach in all cases. Telling newbs that no one can gain more than 2lbs of muscle in a month is fairly common here…when it is not true.

This can affect how someone “measures” their food. They start focusing more on the calculations than making sure their lifts are going up and their shirts fit tighter in the arms and chest. I truly think most beginners need to AVOID getting too precise and most damn sure don’t need to be micro-analyzing their food intake beyond those broad strokes.

Yes, count calories.

Yes, get a good idea in general of carb intake and even tolerance…but the truth is, it takes TIME before you bring out the microscope.

I see a lot of really small guys with calculators. They can explain the shit out of their food intake…and quote what the latest author has to say by heart.

They miss that that heart in the gym and the kitchen counts way more.

That is all I am discussing…take it or leave it.[/quote]

The part of your post which I’m confused about is where you say you are all for counting calories and macros but then say to “AVOIDgetting to precise and damn sure don’t need to be micro-anylizing their food intake.”

That part threw me off a little bit. What do you mean by that?
[/quote]

When you see newbs debating whether they need to take waxy maize or dextrose post workout or worrying about insulin spikes or making sure that they get in 8,43267 grams of leucine every 2.456 hours. That is what I think he means. And yes you damn sure don’t have to do that.

Professor_X · September 27, 2013, 3:41pm

[quote]Iron_Made wrote:
When you see newbs debating whether they need to take waxy maize or dextrose post workout or worrying about insulin spikes or making sure that they get in 8,43267 grams of leucine every 2.456 hours. That is what I think he means. And yes you damn sure don’t have to do that. [/quote]

Bingo.

It is new age nitpicking…and it was born on the internet.

Here, you can be tiny with no muscles…and sound like a genius by quoting everything a “guru” has to say and acting like because you know this, it means you are above other people.

You have people who don’t look like they ahve ever lifted a weight in their life thinking they need to have their “macros” sorted out to the 10th power and maybe…MAYBE…if they can get over that fear of “insta-diabetes” they may add 200.5 calories to their diet and wait another month to see if they gained exactly “1.9lbs” so none of it was body fat.

That mentality creates a ton of little people who think their value is in what they can parrot.

Once again, telling all newbs that no one can gain more than “xlbs” in a month will affect these extreme calculations.

People start thinking they need steroids just to gain 20lbs because no one can ever gain that much in less than a year.

What is strange is that this mentality is being missed lately. I mean, they are everywhere acting like that lately…tons of people telling everyone what they can’t do and then telling them to base all calculations on that.

Is that making people huge?

Is it?

gregron · September 27, 2013, 4:05pm

[quote]Iron_Made wrote:
When you see newbs debating whether they need to take waxy maize or dextrose post workout or worrying about insulin spikes or making sure that they get in 8,43267 grams of leucine every 2.456 hours. That is what I think he means. And yes you damn sure don’t have to do that.
[/quote]
Like I said “don’t major in the minors”… So I agree BUT… As far as I can tell from what I did sift through in this thread, a major point of contention between the two sides was counting calories and that new fad word of macros (which also apparently means calories)

That was a big sticking point and now it seems that counting calories and fad macros is a good thing.

That’s the part that was a bit off putting.

84,000+ grams of leucine is a lot.

JFG · September 27, 2013, 4:32pm

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]Iron_Made wrote:
When you see newbs debating whether they need to take waxy maize or dextrose post workout or worrying about insulin spikes or making sure that they get in 8,43267 grams of leucine every 2.456 hours. That is what I think he means. And yes you damn sure don’t have to do that. [/quote]

Bingo.

It is new age nitpicking…and it was born on the internet.

Here, you can be tiny with no muscles…and sound like a genius by quoting everything a “guru” has to say and acting like because you know this, it means you are above other people.

You have people who don’t look like they ahve ever lifted a weight in their life thinking they need to have their “macros” sorted out to the 10th power and maybe…MAYBE…if they can get over that fear of “insta-diabetes” they may add 200.5 calories to their diet and wait another month to see if they gained exactly “1.9lbs” so none of it was body fat.

That mentality creates a ton of little people who think their value is in what they can parrot.

Once again, telling all newbs that no one can gain more than “xlbs” in a month will affect these extreme calculations.

People start thinking they need steroids just to gain 20lbs because no one can ever gain that much in less than a year.

What is strange is that this mentality is being missed lately. I mean, they are everywhere acting like that lately…tons of people telling everyone what they can’t do and then telling them to base all calculations on that.

Is that making people huge?

Is it?[/quote]

True, and I agree.

But on the other side of the coin, a lot of questions that are asked: “I eat clean” and “I get enough calories”. Most of them (if not all) have no idea what 3500 calories look like.

Measuring and knowing your macro is not a life long thing (at least, it should not, I believe that is called obsession), but they should have at least a basic understanding of measurement and calories breakdown.

Professor_X · September 27, 2013, 4:34pm

[quote]gregron wrote:
BUT… As far as I can tell from what I did sift through in this thread, a major point of contention between the two sides was counting calories and that new fad word of macros (which also apparently means calories)[/quote]

Then maybe you should read through it again.

All of the complaining being done about me starting the thread must have obstructed your view.

Have a great day!

…and don’t let the DIABETES FAIRY get you.

Professor_X · September 27, 2013, 4:40pm

[quote]JFG wrote:
True, and I agree.

But on the other side of the coin, a lot of questions that are asked: “I eat clean” and “I get enough calories”. Most of them (if not all) have no idea what 3500 calories look like.

Measuring and knowing your macro is not a life long thing (at least, it should not, I believe that is called obsession), but they should have at least a basic understanding of measurement and calories breakdown.[/quote]

No doubt. But what seems to be happening is NOT just getting a general idea.

It is bickering about how no one can gain “x amount” in a month…or how eating several times a day puts you at risk of diabetes.

ALL of these things factor into how a newb would go about making these calculations and how they would eat.

It all results in a bunch of bro science with a calculator.

The basics always meant having a basic understanding of calories and carbs, fats and protein. This is how you learn more.

But when I see newbs with NO muscle acting like have their percentages down like a pro bodybuilder, it is almost a given that the guy doing it doesn’t have the muscle to back that action up.

If you are a newb who isn’t seeing progress and you only increase calories by 150 because you fear getting too fat because you heard no one can gain more than 2lbs of muscle in a month ever, you will not be one of the ones building really big muscles.

That’s just reality…at least in my perspective.

Professor_X · September 27, 2013, 4:55pm

THE DIABETES FAIRY

He’s waiting.

He will get you.

You thought you were safe in the gym.

Bro Science considers him a CODE RED threat against the health of all lifters.

Beware.

You have been warned.

The_Mighty_Stu · September 27, 2013, 4:59pm

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]JFG wrote:
If you are a newb who isn’t seeing progress and you only increase calories by 150 because you fear getting too fat because you heard no one can gain more than 2lbs of muscle in a month ever, you will not be one of the ones building really big muscles.

That’s just reality…at least in my perspective.[/quote]

^This. And other people have theirs as well. Every thread that turns to shit comes complete with a few folks pointing out that there are different approaches.

No one will argue that your beliefs are based upon what you’ve seen and belive. To other people out there with their own results and experiences (I know I’ve listed Yates, Klemzewksi, Norton, Aceto and others in various threads), they’ve got their own view points that may differ considerably.

Still, no one can ever speak with 100% certainty for every single person out there. For every newb who’s overly concerned with dumbass details, there are those who do have to go out of their way and obsess about the little things.

Always two sides to every coin.

Have a great day.
(I think I like “tweet tweet” better. At least it sounds jovial and not condescending)

S

browndisaster · September 27, 2013, 5:18pm

[quote]Professor X wrote:
That’s just reality…at least in my perspective.[/quote]
As always

my friend just came up in exactly 1 year of lifting. He started the day he turnee 29. His whole approach was 5/3/1 BBB and counting his macros. He used some calculator and then just increased or lowered fat and carbs when he wanted to gain or lose. He got from benching the bar to 225 fir 4 in a year, and is looking good.

I asked him why he did what he did, and he responded "I didn’t trust myself or others’ broscience, so I just stuck with what counts. In hindsight I would recommend exactly what he did to everyone. If you disagree please find a stock image proving me wrong.

Professor_X · September 27, 2013, 5:02pm

[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:
^This. And other people have theirs as well. Every thread that turns to shit comes complete with a few folks pointing out that there are different approaches.[/quote]

My guess is threads turn to shit because guys like you would rather fuss about my “ego” than the thread topic.

Uhm, ok.

[quote]Still, no one can ever speak with 100% certainty for every single person out there. For every newb who’s overly concerned with dumbass details, there are those who do have to go out of their way and obsess about the little things.

Always two sides to every coin.

Have a great day.
(I think I like “tweet tweet” better. At least it sounds jovial and not condescending)

S[/quote]

I’m sorry…was there something you were disagreeing with?

If so, please discuss it.

Telling me there are two sides to every coin doesn’t explain why people are spreading false information about diabetes and why you are upset because I am addressing some of that.

Please explain, sir.

Professor_X · September 27, 2013, 5:07pm

[quote]browndisaster wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:
That’s just reality…at least in my perspective.[/quote]
As always

my friend just came up in exactly 1 year of lifting. He started the day he turnee 29. His whole approach was 5/3/1 BBB and counting his macros. He used some calculator and then just increased or lowered fat and carbs when he wanted to gain or lose. He got from benching the bar to 225 fir 4 in a year, and is looking good.

I asked him why he did what he did, and he responded "I didn’t trust myself or others’ broscience, so I just stuck with what counts. In hindsight I would recommend exactly what he did to everyone. If you disagree please fund a stick image proving me wrong.[/quote]

Just a small point…but I am directing this thread at people who have goals of far more than 225lbs on a bench press.

I am glad for his progress, but I hope I made it clear that this was directed at people who had more extreme goals.

A 225lbs bench press is fairly average for a weight lifter today.

This is about long term progress and what keeps people in the gym for years.

if you are only in your 20’s or haven’t even graduated yet, you may be missing the point trying to be made.

I started this thread discussing lifestyle for a reason.

Tons of people lifting in their 20’s.

WAY less keeping that up til 35 without a long break or extended lay off and actually reaching extreme development.

browndisaster · September 27, 2013, 5:22pm