[quote]fahd wrote:There are a few, but the biggest ones are:
necessity of high GI carbs in every single post-workout drink of the week for athletes
Various food combining and nutrition timing concepts
Fahd
[/quote]
I don’t recall anyone ever stating that either of these are necessary, they’re just strategies that can be employed for better results. I know they’ve helped me.
Obviously, people have gotten into great condition well before these recommendations ever came into play.
[quote]Dan Fouts wrote:
mcdonald’s is real food in the same way that budweiser is real beer. both are bottom most in quality … they are shite.
[/quote]
If you buy me a Bud in DC I’ll know exactly what you’re thinking…‘Here you go Will…drink this bottle of shite and shut up!’
[quote]ChrisKing wrote:
fahd wrote:There are a few, but the biggest ones are:
necessity of high GI carbs in every single post-workout drink of the week for athletes
Various food combining and nutrition timing concepts
Fahd
I don’t recall anyone ever stating that either of these are necessary, they’re just strategies that can be emplyed for better results. I know they’ve helped me.[/quote]
No shit they are not necessary, nothing is necessary. You don’t even need to use a supplement to achieve an impressive physique.
The problem is: there are people on this board who preach that these practices are ‘necessary’ for ‘optimal’ performance when they are not. For example, Charlie Francis pointed out:
‘I would only use the sugars after very intense work, which for most would only be sustainable (from a CNS perspective) once or twice a week. the rest of the time I would work to keep the blood sugar as level as possible. Continuous swings will have the opposite effect to the one you want in the long run.’
Now what does this mean for our favorite post-workout drink?
Fahd
[quote]fahd wrote:For example, Charlie Francis pointed out:
‘I would only use the sugars after very intense work, which for most would only be sustainable (from a CNS perspective) once or twice a week. the rest of the time I would work to keep the blood sugar as level as possible. Continuous swings will have the opposite effect to the one you want in the long run.’
Now what does this mean for our favorite post-workout drink?
Fahd
[/quote]
I’d have to say that I disagree with Charlie on this as it relates to bodybuilding as neither I nor anyone I’ve been around have experienced deleterious effects from insulin Spikes 4 to 5 times per week. In fact, my recovery has never been better.
However, I don’t know the context in which Charlie made this statement. As far as I know, he could be speaking in the context of working with elite sprinters for which he is well known.
[quote]ChrisKing wrote:
fahd wrote:For example, Charlie Francis pointed out:
‘I would only use the sugars after very intense work, which for most would only be sustainable (from a CNS perspective) once or twice a week. the rest of the time I would work to keep the blood sugar as level as possible. Continuous swings will have the opposite effect to the one you want in the long run.’
Now what does this mean for our favorite post-workout drink?
Fahd
I’d have to say that I disagree with Charlie on this as it relates to bodybuilding as neither I nor anyone I’ve been around have experienced deleterious effects from insulin Spikes 4 to 5 times per week. In fact, my recovery has never been better.
However, I don’t know the context in which Charlie made this statement. As far as I know, he could be speaking in the context of working with elite sprinters for which he is well known.[/quote]
It was in the context of athletes in general not bodybuilding; but thats the point, my previous post was about Hi GI Carbs for athletes. In this aspect, he agrees with poliquin, who also agreed that carb intake pwo should be a reflection of intensity.
Again, how many years have you been doing this? Have you read Scrawny to Brawny where Berardi recommends 3 servings of recovery drink which adds up to 135g of pure sugar in a 1 hour time frame?
Fahd
[quote]fahd wrote:
Again, how many years have you been doing this? Have you read Scrawny to Brawny where Berardi recommends 3 servings of recovery drink which adds up to 135g of pure sugar in a 1 hour time frame?
Fahd[/quote]
Keep in mind, this is for skinny “hardgainers”.
[quote]Nomancer wrote:
fahd wrote:
Again, how many years have you been doing this? Have you read Scrawny to Brawny where Berardi recommends 3 servings of recovery drink which adds up to 135g of pure sugar in a 1 hour time frame?
Fahd
Keep in mind, this is for skinny “hardgainers”.[/quote]
okay, that is an illustration, what about 90 g of sugar for an athlete, during one hour four times a week? Is it necessary? Do the benefits exceed the potential long term costs?
[quote]fahd wrote:
Nomancer wrote:
fahd wrote:
Again, how many years have you been doing this? Have you read Scrawny to Brawny where Berardi recommends 3 servings of recovery drink which adds up to 135g of pure sugar in a 1 hour time frame?
Fahd
Keep in mind, this is for skinny “hardgainers”.
okay, that is an illustration, what about 90 g of sugar for an athlete, during one hour four times a week? Is it necessary? Do the benefits exceed the potential long term costs?
[/quote]
I honestly cannot remember the last time that one of my workouts lasted longer than an hour, or maybe an hour and five minutes, and depending on the routine - I go 4-6 days a week. I always have 75grams - 100 grams of high glycemic carbs with my protein immediately PWO, and I know my workout partner normally has at least 150g.
[quote]fahd wrote:
It was in the context of athletes in general not bodybuilding; but thats the point, my previous post was about Hi GI Carbs for athletes. In this aspect, he agrees with poliquin, who also agreed that carb intake pwo should be a reflection of intensity.
Again, how many years have you been doing this? Have you read Scrawny to Brawny where Berardi recommends 3 servings of recovery drink which adds up to 135g of pure sugar in a 1 hour time frame?
Fahd[/quote]
I think just about everyone agrees that post-workout nutrition should be a function of intensity and duration.
The differing opinions seem to come in when discussing whether there are any long-term negative effects to consuming high-GI carbs immediately after training.
I have to say that I have not seen any in healthy individuals engaged in regular training. I speak from personal experience with myself and my clients.
I’ve been involved in intense physical training in one way or another for the past 23 years. I’ve studied nutrition, including academically, for the past 20 years.
[quote]fahd wrote:
Nomancer wrote:
fahd wrote:
Again, how many years have you been doing this? Have you read Scrawny to Brawny where Berardi recommends 3 servings of recovery drink which adds up to 135g of pure sugar in a 1 hour time frame?
Fahd
Keep in mind, this is for skinny “hardgainers”.
okay, that is an illustration, what about 90 g of sugar for an athlete, during one hour four times a week? Is it necessary? Do the benefits exceed the potential long term costs?
[/quote]
Not being terribly familiar with Francis’s work… what does he foresee as being the potential long term cost to high GI carbs post workout? I see that being mentioned a lot on this thread, but without a lot of specifics as to what the problems may be.
By the way, I mentioned “athletes” so bare in mind it has nothing to do with bodybuilding. Quote from Lyle McDonald from Chalie Francis’ site:
"Previous work on glycogen restoration has suggested intakes of 1.5 g/kg immediately after and again 2 hours later. Protein at 1/3rd of that is a common suggestion. That’s where those numbers are coming from. Look up anything by John Ivy or Ed Coyle.
Note (this in reference to comments later in the thread) that these types of studies are looking at glycogen depletin exercise, exhaustive endurance stuff, high rep/high volume bodybuilding stuff. Their relevance to the types of low volume, CNS dominant work in many sprinting/maximal weight training methods is questionable.
That is ,a bodybuilding doing 20+ sets of high rep work is depelting lot of glycogen, stimulating protein synthesis; an endurance athlte doing 40 minutes at LT or 2+ hours aerobically is as well. A sprinter running short repeats on a full recovery is not.
Nutritional recommendations have to be based on the metabolic requirements of the athlete and the training being done.
I don’t think a high GI/protein drink is necessary or beneficial following pure CNS work. Restoration of fluids and maybe creatine or something.
Following extensive work in the glycolytic range, absolutely.
For bodybuilders wanting hypertrophy, absolutely.
For endurance athletes, absolutely.
It’s all about specificity.
Hyperinsulinemia + hyperaminoacidemia have syneergistic effects in terms of storing glycogen, inhibiting catabolism and promoting protein synthesis. Do a medline search on Biolo to get started. Hence the emphassis on high GI, insulin spiking compounds.
Again, this is more important for an athlete involved in training that depletes glycogen and strongly promotes protein synthesis, far less so for a CNS dominant athlete. As Charlie pointed out, save the high GI + protei nstuff for the extensive sprinting workouts, special endurance and that stuff."
Quote from Kelly Begett(sp?), T-Nation forum contributor:
"IMO, if one can’t voluntarily eat enough to replenish the glycogen depletion brought on by an activity such as sprinting and/or weight training, then you either too poor to buy food or there’s something wrong. If you ain’t losing weight from your activity then you’re not “too catabolic”. If you’re a marathon runner or a distance athlete then yeah.
But the amount burned during these anaerobic activities is so inconsequential anyway. To deplete even 100 grams of glycogen requires a fair bit of anaerobic volume. You’re talking 30-40 sets of bodybuilding training with each set 45-60 seconds long. And 100 grams of carbohydrate?? Hell, I can easily eat that much in a midnight snack getting up to take a piss. Same goes for protein intake. If you can’t get a gram per lb of bodyweight then you’re not eating.
And it’s not like quality isn’t made up for by quantity. Dextrose, glucose, sucrose, maltodextrin, potatoes, bread, cereal, oats, beans, rice…they all go to the same place. And if there were a huge advantage for a power/speed athlete to store more glycogen then they would be practicing carbohydrate depletion/loading.
It’s all a matter of perspective. The average athlete thinks that the special formulations contain magical substances that do stuff that foods don’t do. For example, they’ll think that dextrose and maltodextrin do something to the muscles or are stored in a certain way that regular foods aren’t. Which is bull and this is what irks me. Use a PWO formulation for convenience not necessity."
FYI, if you go down to York University where Charile Francis trains his clientelle, you’ll more often than not see him eating a Snickers bar and washing it down with a can of Coke.
[quote]Atlas Knox wrote:
FYI, if you go down to York University where Charile Francis trains his clientelle, you’ll more often than not see him eating a Snickers bar and washing it down with a can of Coke. [/quote]
how is this relevent to the discussion?
[quote]fahd wrote:
Atlas Knox wrote:
FYI, if you go down to York University where Charile Francis trains his clientelle, you’ll more often than not see him eating a Snickers bar and washing it down with a can of Coke.
how is this relevent to the discussion?[/quote]
It’s relevant because you introduced the topic of benefits vs. potential long term costs with respect to simple sugar consumption.
Is it just me or does it seem odd to anyone else that the proponents of “a calorie is a calorie” admonish the consumption of sugars peri-workout?
[quote]Atlas Knox wrote:
fahd wrote:
Atlas Knox wrote:
FYI, if you go down to York University where Charile Francis trains his clientelle, you’ll more often than not see him eating a Snickers bar and washing it down with a can of Coke.
how is this relevent to the discussion?
It’s relevant because you introduced the topic of benefits vs. potential long term costs with respect to simple sugar consumption.
[/quote]
Charlie Francis eating junk food does not make him less of an expert; just like Mel Siff could not bench press more than an average athlete does not make him less of a training expert.
By the way, Atlas, I find it rather odd that you posted your first post on this thread just a few minutes after you registered on T-Nation. It seems as if you’re someone who needs a double. Please post with your real account next time.
Fahd
[quote]Atlas Knox wrote:
Is it just me or does it seem odd to anyone else that the proponents of “a calorie is a calorie” admonish the consumption of sugars peri-workout? [/quote]
You did realize that the “proponents” were not talking about body composition, right?
Very much so. You’re missing the point. If a calorie is said to be a calorie and thus all macro nutrients are created equal, then how is it that one can make the distinction that there’s a difference between sugar and let’s starchy carbs? Meaning if all kcals are equal and all macros are equal then wouldn’t all carbohydrates be equal?
BTW you can be puzzled or suspicious with respect to my handle all you wish. The fact of the matter is that I saw an opportunity to provide info that otherwise likely wouldn’t have been made available. Up until this point, I haven’t bothered with the forums as I’d rather read what the experts have to say (i.e. the articles)rather than listen to the sycophants (forumites) of this world banter back and forth without actual primary knowledge - just secondhand regurgitation of their favorite author / researcher.
[quote]Atlas Knox wrote:
If a calorie is said to be a calorie and thus all macro nutrients are created equal,then how is it that one can make the distinction that there’s a difference between sugar and let’s starchy carbs? Meaning if all kcals are equal and all macros are equal then wouldn’t all carbohydrates be equal?
[/quote]
There is no difference in terms of body composition between sugar and starchy carbs provided that you consume enough EFA, Protein and calories.
The point Charlie Francis/Lyle Mcdonald made about sugar PWO is mainly beacause strength athletes do not require them after EVERY session; while it is extremely useful for endurance athletes and bodybuilders.
Charlie Francis advocates using high GI post workout drink only in 1 or 2 CNS-demanding workouts every week.
[quote]fahd wrote:
Atlas Knox wrote:
If a calorie is said to be a calorie and thus all macro nutrients are created equal,then how is it that one can make the distinction that there’s a difference between sugar and let’s starchy carbs? Meaning if all kcals are equal and all macros are equal then wouldn’t all carbohydrates be equal?
There is no difference in terms of body composition between sugar and starchy carbs provided that you consume enough EFA, Protein and calories.
The point Charlie Francis/Lyle Mcdonald made about sugar PWO is mainly beacause strength athletes do not require them after EVERY session; while it is extremely useful for endurance athletes and bodybuilders.
Charlie Francis advocates using high GI post workout drink only in 1 or 2 CNS-demanding workouts every week. [/quote]
So strength athletes don’t require carbohydrates post workout? If a calorie is a calorie, a macro is a macro and a carb is a carb then stating sugar post workout extends to all carbohydrates.
If it’s not advantageous to consume sugar post workout then by “a calorie is a calorie” it’s the same thing as stating it’s not advantageous to consume any carbohydrate post workout.
Furthermore, it extends to all food period since calories and thus macros and thus food are created equal.
Now are calories all equal or are carbohydrates all equal? It would seem that the case is being made that the latter is the case as the distinction is being made that fats are different and so too is protein. And if carbohydrates are equal then of course the Glycemic and insulin indices have no relevance.