Quote:

Originally Posted by Built LMAO at throwing shit in the wind to see what sticks!

Quote:

Originally Posted by juggernaut so my point is, what the hell did MD think when hiring gobro bbing writers with absolutely no formal education. I noticed that when I do open a bbing shit mag, I jump right to the research pages. How do these people in this industry continue to do this? Dont they want to be taken seriously? Isnt there some type of filter on these things? Or do they not care and give every shit about money only? Where's the integrity?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prince YOU REALLY ARE NAIVE.

Quote:

Originally Posted by juggernaut so my point is, what the hell did MD think when hiring gobro bbing writers with absolutely no formal education. I noticed that when I do open a bbing shit mag, I jump right to the research pages. How do these people in this industry continue to do this? Dont they want to be taken seriously? Isnt there some type of filter on these things? Or do they not care and give every shit about money only? Where's the integrity?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tank316 Great to voice your opinion.. You remind alot of the guy I sat next to in typing class in high school.

Quote:

Originally Posted by juggernaut I see no indication that it was made "personal". People move on in life. Maybe he got sick of the bullshit that is ragmag journalism and took it seriously-no wonder he left. Dave has credentials...what are yours? I know you went to school for psychology, but how does that make you an authority on biochemistry-Dave's specialty? I'm also interested in this research that shows how muscle hypertrophy is compromised in this particular environment.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Built Ketosis is associated with improved outcomes in epileptics and migraineurs (this one is also true in my own case - I had migraines every twenty eight days from the age of 11 until the age of 38. They ended when I did Atkins, and at the time of writing, almost eight years in, have not returned); brain and prostate cancers respond favourably to ketosis, as does satiety.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prince Eric, is MD going back to being a "natural" magazine?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Balin I may be over simplifying or reading too much into this but I think that Gopro's opinion is based on individuals who train for contests who typically start at a 10-12% bf level and diet down to a 5-6% bf level. I think that Built and Jug are talking about individuals who start out as obese and diet down to the 10% bf range. In order for this discussion to be more meaningful I think we need to agree or even define the specifics of what we are debating here.

Quote:

Originally Posted by juggernaut youre wrong. It was only after hitting 12% bf that I went down further because of the higher fat and higher protein. Built started seeing better results after doing the same switch.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Built That's right, you told me about the epilepsy. I'm really glad the aura phenomenon has settled down. Many brain functions appear to improve in ketosis - even Alzheimer's.

Quote:

Originally Posted by juggernaut how low? I measured last contest close to 4%.I was 7% by the end of the following week. But, that was taking a three day break-after that, the carbs and bloating started kicking in and I had to stop. Went back to high protein and high fat and adjusted almost overnight.

Quote:

Originally Posted by juggernaut I snickered as I saw thumbing through the pages of MD about 4-6 steroid articles. They ARE needed, however, I dont think the magazine will ever go natty again-were they ever?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prince yes, they used to be an all natural bodybuilding magazine, some believe one of the main reasons for letting go of Dave Palumbo and John Romano was because they want to go back in the all natural direction. why do you always post crap when you have very little knowledge of what you're posting about?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prince yes, they used to be an all natural bodybuilding magazine, some believe one of the main reasons for letting go of Dave Palumbo and John Romano was because they want to go back in the all natural direction. why do you always post crap when you have very little knowledge of what you're posting about?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tank316 I'm sure he has some type of formal education Prince, play nice!

Quote:

Originally Posted by juggernaut I asked a real question. I thought it was comical and never saw their magazine in its natural state. I really didnt know this.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prince Eric, is MD going back to being a "natural" magazine?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Balin These threads drive me crazy. The argument, er discussion is flawed in that you are comparing apples to oranges. The arguments that I see are: Gopro asserts that ketogenic diets are not optimal for natural body builders to get lean and maintain LBM. He cites 20 years real world experience on himself and natural trainees and gave a study to support this view. Built and Jug assert that ketosis diets is the best way to get lean and maintain LBM. Both cite anecdotal evidence of why this is true and can produce numerous studies of the general population as to why this works. And both arguments are probably correct in their analysis depending on the subjects/population they are discussing. I may be over simplifying or reading too much into this but I think that Gopro's opinion is based on individuals who train for contests who typically start at a 10-12% bf level and diet down to a 5-6% bf level. I think that Built and Jug are talking about individuals who start out as obese and diet down to the 10% bf range. In order for this discussion to be more meaningful I think we need to agree or even define the specifics of what we are debating here.

Quote:

Originally Posted by gopro I think you have the best of reading comprehension skills, LOL. First, my diet approach is LOW CARB, higher fat, higher protein. My diets are never medium or high carb. Second, I AM speaking specifically about what is OPTIMUM for DIETING BODYBUILDERS whose goal is a COMBINATION of maximum mass and the lowest bodyfat level. This is the only population I am referring to and the only one I have been referring to since the beginning. Keto diets WILL have you lose more muscle tissue than a "timed" low carb approach...especially if you are natural. For the general population keto plans work quite well.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Balin Awesome, I hope to get sub 10 at some point in my life, lol

Quote:

Originally Posted by juggernaut Balin, what BF are you at now?

Quote:

Originally Posted by gopro I think you have the best of reading comprehension skills, LOL.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Built Change is really a tough one. Especially when you've believed in what you absolutely KNEW for so long. It can be a very tough nut to crack. I know, I've been through it myself - I was SO SURE it was carbs and not calories that kept me fat. It was, of course, ONLY the calories. But I had a long hard chew on that one before I believed it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pirate! I graduated top of my class from a national top 3 Nutrition BS program with Sports Nutrition as my focus. I can tell you this without any doubt. Carbs play a very important role for sparing muscle during a natural cut. The right carbs at the right time. The key is manage blood sugar such that the body need not produce much insulin for an extended period of time. This shifts metabolic pathways and gene expresion in various ways I'm too lazy to delve into at this point. Rember, Glut-4 receptors in muscle open in the absence of insulin with the correct stimuli--physical activity. Carbs can be consumed and utilized with benefit without illiciting an inslulin increse that would thow off the ideal enzmatic balance that promotes leaness. A cheat meal throws the enzymes to hell and ruins a good weeks work.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Built Eric, I guarantee that you/your clients will hit ketosis while dieting the way you suggest. It's fine, really, you're SUPPOSED to hit ketosis, it's normal, we should all hit it at least once a day (barring festivals! Burp!). Why are you so afraid of that word?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Built Change is really a tough one. Especially when you've believed in what you absolutely KNEW for so long. It can be a very tough nut to crack. I know, I've been through it myself - I was SO SURE it was carbs and not calories that kept me fat. It was, of course, ONLY the calories. But I had a long hard chew on that one before I believed it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pirate! I graduated top of my class from a national top 3 Nutrition BS program with Sports Nutrition as my focus. I can tell you this without any doubt. Carbs play a very important role for sparing muscle during a natural cut. The right carbs at the right time. The key is manage blood sugar such that the body need not produce much insulin for an extended period of time. This shifts metabolic pathways and gene expresion in various ways I'm too lazy to delve into at this point. Rember, Glut-4 receptors in muscle open in the absence of insulin with the correct stimuli--physical activity. Carbs can be consumed and utilized with benefit without illiciting an inslulin increse that would thow off the ideal enzmatic balance that promotes leaness. A cheat meal throws the enzymes to hell and ruins a good weeks work.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DIVINITUS It's funny you bring this up...I was thinking about this subject the other day, since being back here (I haven't been on IM for a couple of years at least) I was surprised to see the almighty calorie is what's most important. I seem to recall the "calorie is not a calorie" belief was pretty highly regarded when I was last a regular member here. It's amazing how much changes, on the science side, in bodybuilding or fitness in general.

Quote:

Originally Posted by gopro It is most important according to some here, but not to others, however. A calorie is not a calorie. But, I only mention this to show that there is more than one opinion on this subject....not to get into this neverending debate again

Quote:

Originally Posted by DIVINITUS Sorry about that...wasn't trying to start something. I must say, it's nice to have the people I and others consider to be "heavyweights" on this site, all contributing to this thread. Gopro, Built, Prince, juggernaut, Cowpimp, Tank...I remember all of your names from a few years ago and it's nice to see a forum with dedication like this. It makes someone like myself respect your opinions while at the same time researching and working even harder to shape my own. To me, this thread is a nice snapshot of all of that... ...forgive the ego stroking, detour taking post. I work nights!!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Built You had your buddy rantorcha do cardio on a zero carb day. Wanna explain how he avoids ketosis doing that?

Quote:

Originally Posted by gopro I guarantee that they do not reach ketosis. And, even so...the point is to not remain in ketosis for any extended period. This is where muscle loss will occur. But Built, it is silly to discuss this with you, because you will not change your view anyway...whether it is based on years and years of experience...studies about muscle loss and extremely low carb diets...or both. Thus, I am not going to discuss this with you anymore and am happy to agree to disagree.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Built You had your buddy rantorcha do cardio on a zero carb day. Wanna explain how he avoids ketosis doing that?

Quote:

Originally Posted by gopro #1 He is a special case (like I mentioned before...there are minorities), as I know his body and what he needs to get lean. #2 You will not necessarily be able to reach ketosis in one 24 hour carb-free period. #3 There is a HUGE difference in being in ketosis for a single day VS. and entire precontest prep period.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Built You had your buddy rantorcha do cardio on a zero carb day. Wanna explain how he avoids ketosis doing that?

Quote:

Originally Posted by rantorcha SUCH animosity! So sad... Good news, though! I AM ERIC'S BUDDY!!!

Quote:

Originally Posted by gopro #1 He is a special case (like I mentioned before...there are minorities), as I know his body and what he needs to get lean. #2 You will not necessarily be able to reach ketosis in one 24 hour carb-free period. #3 There is a HUGE difference in being in ketosis for a single day VS. and entire precontest prep period.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Built You had your buddy rantorcha do cardio on a zero carb day. Wanna explain how he avoids ketosis doing that?

Quote:

Originally Posted by rantorcha SUCH animosity! So sad... Good news, though! I AM ERIC'S BUDDY!!!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Moondogg Its not animosity, its just a very good discussion that really gets into the finer points of dieting. There just isnt any room for half truths or generalisations.

Quote:

Originally Posted by nkira How about posting a keto test? Just make him piss on a keto-strip.....post a snap of it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Built Interesting. I have never gone that low - and I did Atkins.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Built Thanks. I'm wondering more and more if you have a different definition of low carb or ketogenic than I do, Eric. Humour me for a moment here - have you ever done a ketogenic diet yourself? I realize fully well that you came into this as an ectomorph, not a meso-endo like me. I'm just curious if you've ever gotten yourself into ketosis (if for no other reason than curiosity). If so, what macros did you run, and what are maintenance calories for you?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Built Okay, cool. I did PSMF (Lyle's "Rapid Fat Loss" for those of you about to ask) for the same reason - I saw people using it successfully and although it seemed incongruous that I could subsist on 50% of my maintenance without discomfort, I felt honour-bound to try it. I was floored. Getting back to you - when you ran your various keto versions, did you feel comfortable on any of them? Not everybody does.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Built Eric, did you ever feel good on any of the low-carb paradigms you tried on for size? And were your calories ever at maintenance or over, or did you only do this at sub-maintenance? The reason I'm so interested in your response to keto is because you are naturally lean - you're not a former fatty like so many of us are. There really aren't that many naturally lean people wandering around out there - fewer still who have actually tried keto as an experiment. I'm very interested to hear how it affected you, and what macros you ran while you did it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Built We live in a fascinating time, don't we jugg? I'm so glad there are scientists writing about the physiology of bodybuilding now, and not JUST people selling supplements (although certainly, some do both and sometimes that can be a good thing). I love the recent information that is challenging the old-school dogma. Some of the old stuff is still the best, and some of it needs to be retired. I love these fora for the real-time information sharing they facilitate. You just can't get that in a paper magazine.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Built Skinny fat or not, at 125 even if you were 20% bodyfat, we're only talking 25 lbs. I have 114 whopping pounds of lean mass, I LOST 50 lbs of fat, and I still carry over twenty pounds of fat when I'm LEAN. What macros did you run on keto?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Built Okay, so you weighed about what, 240 at the time, and were running something like this: Low end 360g protein 80g fat 50g carb 2400 calories High end 480g protein 120g fat 50g carb 3200 calories That look about right for the times you ran it?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Built Eric - thanks for your reply. Okay, so your calories were more like this: Low end 360g protein 100g fat 50g carb 2500 calories High end 480g protein 150g fat 50g carb 3500 calories That makes good sense - the high end is just around 14-15x bodyweight, roughly maintenance, and the low end is around 10-11x bodyweight, which you would have dropped to as your cut progressed. Cool. How were you training during this period, and did you do any carbups or refeeds during this period? If so, how often?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Built I can see how you would have had trouble and possibly lost muscle doing what you did. On very low carb diets, training is very, very low volume. For example, on Lyle's Rapid fat loss AKA PSMF - which for me is roughly what your "low" macros are - protein at about 2g per pound lean mass (1.5g per pound bodyweight-ish!) fat very low - under 50g for me is LOW - carbs only from green fibrous veggies. Calories for me on this at about 1100 - 1400. I am a category I dieter (leanest category) Diet is low for 12 days, then a 2-day low fat, modest protein, high-carb refeed. This is how I train while doing this (not counting modest, very low-volume dynamic warmup): Every three days: Workout 1 3x5 squats 3x5 T-bars 3x5 bench OR Workout 2 3x5 hang clean and press 3x5 RDL 3x5 weighted chins It's only 12 days so I treat this as a rest break while I drop fat. It's almost like a deload. The only cardio I do on this is, at most, an hour of walking throughout the day, and that's optional and recreational, not dedicated and certainly not on a treadmill. A 2x8-12 full-body tension workout preceeds the carbup. At category 1, unless you're assisted you don't do another cycle of PSMF. (Category 2 and 3, the "juicier" categories, have their own rules. Please see the book for more) When I've done keto at maintenance, protein is lower and fat is a LOT higher. Just over a gram of protein per pound LBM, and close to a gram of fat per pound LBM. I find my training volume can go up somewhat, but of course, no pumps. On TKD, where I take in pre and or post workout carbs, training volume is "normal" at maintenance, and of course cut back a bit on a cut. On lower calories, maybe it's different on a higher carb paradigm but on a lower-carb plan, training volume drops as the cut progresses. Cardio duration drops, but cardio intensity increases. That's how I do it anyway. You appear to have done something close to a PSMF with refeeds, but on a lot higher volume. I agree, this would have sucked eggs. Thanks for sharing that Eric. I can see why you hate this for cutting. I would too.

Quote:

Originally Posted by gopro Well, all I need to do is add in some well-timed carbs and BOOM the whole story changes (calories the same)!

Quote:

Originally Posted by gopro And I know you will disagree and question this, but there is not a single bodybuilder on this planet that would prepare for competition using the type of program you mention...and with the exception of the high end of genetic superiors, they could not achieve a stage ready physique on such a program. Also, I do not look at you as anywhere near typical and think YOUR results would not apply to most. Whether you like it or not, you are obviously a genetic superior when it comes to building/maintaining muscle, AND believe it or not, losing bodyfat (once on a program to do so).

Quote:

Originally Posted by gopro Again, let me reiterate, that on my diet, ketosis is not reached.

"During an overnight fast, for instance, glucose levels are maintained through both glycogenolysis and gluconeogenesis, and the liver begins to generate ketone bodies (e.g. acetoacetate, β-hydroxybutyrate) from fatty acids released by adipose tissue (Cahill, 2006)." 1

"...glucose can be made from other things, notably protein. This is a normal process: when you wake up in the morning, between thirty and seventy percent of your blood glucose comes from gluconeogenesis."2

Quote:

Originally Posted by gopro Also, interestingly, you would have been on MY side of the argument with Dave in this case.

"Can exercise hurt?
But can exercise be detrimental to weight or fat loss? In the case of a crash diet (or any
extremely large deficit), the answer is a resounding yes. At least one study has found that
the addition of a large amount of aerobic activity (roughly 6 hours per week) to a protein
sparing modified fast increased the drop in metabolic rate that occurred. It didn’t increase
weight loss over the length of the study (4 weeks) either. Basically the caloric burn of the
exercise led to an adaptive decrease in metabolic rate. Of course, the exercise also burned
excess calories so the end result was the same.

As mentioned above, once you’ve generated a monster daily caloric deficit, burning a few
hundred more calories through aerobic activity is unlikely to have much of an impact. I
should mention that lighter dieters (usually women) often have to add some amount of
aerobic activity along with a caloric deficit to achieve reasonable weekly fat loss although
this generally shouldn’t be the case on the rapid fat loss program.

Weight training hasn’t been studied as extensively in this regards and I’m unaware of any
studies on interval training in terms of how it might interact with the rapid fat loss
program such as the one described in this booklet. Although I’ll make more specific
comments below, I’ll say this upfront: unless it helps with adherence to the diet, I don’t
see much of a point in doing anything but the mildest aerobic activity on the crash diet.
Thirty to forty minutes a few times per week (maybe daily) would be it.

Related to this, I’ve often seen what seems to be a thermodynamic impossibility, the
combination of extremely large caloric deficits with an extremely large amount of activity
(or a very high intensity of activity) often slows down or even stops fat loss completely.
Yes, I know, it seems impossible but I’ve seen it happen enough times (including in myself)
to know it happens.

Basically, if you want to create an extremely large caloric deficit through food restriction,
you absolutely must not do too much activity (folks who have followed the diet in this
book have found this out the hard way, by ignoring my recommendations below and
doing too much activity, they slowed their fat and weight loss). If you want to do a lot of
activity, you cannot cut calories too severely. Again, I know this doesn’t make much
sense and I’m still trying to pin down the mechanisms of why this happens. But the
simple fact is that it does and if you want to avoid problems, you must follow the
recommendations I’m going to give below in terms of how much exercise you can or
should do.

Frankly, weight training a maximum of 2-3 times per week is going to be the best form of
exercise on the rapid fat loss plan. A small amount of low intensity aerobic activity (I
mean brisk walking), if it helps with diet adherence is acceptable as well. Intervals are
inappropriate and should not be done, they simply can’t be recovered from on so few
calories, especially not if proper weight training is being performed. I’ll give more specific
recommendations below.

Why weight training? Well, outside of the reasons discussed above, the reason is that we
want to lose predominantly body fat. Maintaining (for experienced exercisers) or
increasing (for beginners) LBM on the rapid fat loss plan is the primary goal and nothing
will accomplish that more effectively than weight training. The massive daily caloric
deficit will take care of the fat loss, more calorie burning activity simply isn’t necessary or
useful; as discussed above, done in excess it can be detrimental."

Quote:

Originally Posted by juggernaut Doesn't ketosis take a maximum of 50g of carbs per day to reach the ketogenic stage? Or am I mistaken?

Quote:

Originally Posted by gopro Built, you need to stop being so literal and focus more on what my main point is about all of this: reaching a state of ketosis for a couple of hours once in a while will have no effect on loss of lean tissue, but a constant state of ketosis (weeks at a time) WILL cause a loss in muscle for someone looking to drop large amounts of bodyfat.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Built First of all, this is the first time I have heard you say that a constant state of ketosis is your definition of a keto diet. Thank you. And actually, no. Extended ketosis is how the body protects itself from losing muscle during starvation. In fact, the longer you starve, the greater the reliance on free fatty acids for fuel - and this happens even under conditions of total starvation. I'm not making this up, I swear! The body adapts in this way to enhance survival. This trick of metabolism is the basis of how diets such as PSMF work so well for fat loss - and cycling through periods of protein-supplemented starvation, glycogen depletion and then the anabolic benefit of supercompensation forms the basis of UD2.0, which IS ideal for precontest prep. My friend Steve Holt is a natural vegetarian bodybuilder over fifty who uses UD2.0 to prep for his contests, and his results speak for themselves. http://ksteveh.tripod.com/The_Vegeta...08_Article.jpg

Quote:

Originally Posted by gopro Ok Built...I am not going to argue this point with you anymore. There are mechanisms within our body that regulate genes, certain hormones, and nutrient deposition that rely on carbs/ENOUGH insulin to work properly, which in this case means to build/RETAIN muscle mass. You are ignoring these major pieces of the puzzle. And again...you do not have the experience that I have preparing hundreds of athletes for contests/sports where muscle mass and low bodyfat are needed to succeed, and it is only through this experience that theories prove to be reality or not. THIS is where my true belief comes from...not from a book or research studies.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Moondogg Humour us, could you please give a brief explination of what you stated above?

Quote:

Originally Posted by gopro I already posted an article with references in regard to all of this in that other thread and also posted the articles I wrote about all of this. And please, please do not think I am trying to be rude in any way to Built. I understand she has her beliefs and she is committed to them. I am perfectly happy to agree to disagree. Besides, none of us has all day to spend on these boards!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Moondogg Im not worried about you being rude to Built, she can handle herself. Oh and im a student, which means my life is all about exploring things that I love....such as BB/biology. I have all the time in the world to debate things like this.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Built Oh I know - isn't it just fascinating?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Built Extended ketosis is how the body protects itself from losing muscle during starvation.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Moondogg Im not worried about you being rude to Built, she can handle herself. Oh and im a student, which means my life is all about exploring things that I love....such as BB/biology. I have all the time in the world to debate things like this.

Quote:

Originally Posted by juggernaut Its interesting: here we have two different views. One is researched based, the other goes by personal experience. Research based is much more cross-sectional, deals with a wider array of people and really gets points hit home. On the other hand of the spectrum, we have the "throw shit into the wind and see what sticks" approach. Or, personal experience. I'd go with the research based intelligent answers.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Built Listen, instead of the studies - they seem to bore you anyway, how about you show us the bodies? I'd love to see some of your "befores" with ripped to shreds "afters". The only one I can offer up is Merkaba - I don't do this professionally. (Oh, and I guess me - but I didn't get contest-lean and I don't compete)

Quote:

Originally Posted by dg806 So this is why all the ethiopians have so much muscle mass.

Quote:

Originally Posted by RoosterTX Ridiculous.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dg806 So this is why all the ethiopians have so much muscle mass.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Built It's why they don't die. Remember, said starving Ethiopians didn't start with much muscle mass to begin with. I don't make this stuff up, dg - a quick google search will show this to you. Eric, why do you keep asking me to "end this"? You claim your results speak for themselves. Okay, cool. Show me.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Built It's why they don't die. Remember, said starving Ethiopians didn't start with much muscle mass to begin with. I don't make this stuff up, dg - a quick google search will show this to you. Eric, why do you keep asking me to "end this"? You claim your results speak for themselves. Okay, cool. Show me.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Built I gained muscle in my first 8 months of ketosis.

Quote:

Originally Posted by gopro Do not post up personal experience. It does not count.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Moondogg Wow! Im sorry but you cannot say that Built cant talk about personal experience. Your ENTIRE agrument is based on personal experience and that of those you have trained.

Quote:

Originally Posted by gopro I provided research studies as to why this happens, but what proved it to me is seeing it with my own eyes over and over for the last 20 years. End scene : )

Quote:

Originally Posted by Built Okay. <cancels delts, quads, lats> Listen, Eric, so far I've posted up peer-reviewed journal articles and direct quotes from McDonald's work (which is based upon peer-reviewed research). I've prepped Merkaba, whose pictures are on this site (his avatar is one) and posted up his starting and ending weight, and his results. I posted up my friend, natural bodybuider Steve Holt as a champion competitive bodybuider who used UD2.0 to prep for contests, and I've posed up my own pics. I do at least TRY to back up MY claims. So far you've made a lot of noise about your 20 years of experience. Surely you have SOME clients you would like to show off! I mean hell, my hairdresser has pix of her clients. Put it this way - if I were to hire a professional online coach, I'd like something other than "Oh you can trust me, I've done this for 20 years, I don't need to prove anything". Surely you'd need more than this, too!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Moondogg Wow! Im sorry but you cannot say that Built cant talk about personal experience. Your ENTIRE agrument is based on personal experience and that of those you have trained.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Moondogg TOO fascinating. There are times where I would rather be reading than spending time with my friends...which is strange.lol

Quote:

Originally Posted by gopro Wrong...just had to point that out. You are a student...do some research (on what I already posted about)...the role in muscle growth of: -cortisol -IGF-1 -myogenin -akt -insulin -carbs That should give you some answers. Now, see ya!

Quote:

Originally Posted by gopro I just want you all to know...I love you guys! You are so much fun! Now, carry on!

Quote:

Originally Posted by gopro I just want you all to know...I love you guys! You are so much fun! Now, carry on!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Moondogg You can love me as much as you want.... ....but I still think you're full of shit.

Quote:

Originally Posted by juggernaut Eric, that's an incredibly professional reply to all of the researched information that we've just received. Way to show professional integrity and respect to your peers.

Quote:

Originally Posted by gopro Awww, they have formed a little anti-bullshit gang! Crap, this is terrible for me. Guess I will have to go back to the drawing board again and start my life over.

Quote:

Originally Posted by gopro Dave Palumbo has a huge stake in keto-diets because that is what his whole supplement line is based on....

Quote:

Originally Posted by Moondogg There we go, I fixed that for you.

Quote:

Originally Posted by juggernaut Because the man has an educational background in dealing with WHAT WORKS.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Moondogg You also described how you dieted and trained when you were trying out keto diets. And I think most people came to the conclusion that you were overtraining, so I went and found a good article listing some of the negative effects of overtraining, check it out: Bodybuilding.com - Eric Broser - Overtrain If You Don't Want To Gain! Did you see the parts about loss of strength, increased recovery time and muscle loss? Pretty interesting stuff, I sure as hell wouldn’t want to overtrain on a cut. So you lost more muscle mass than you would have like during keto because your volume was too high for the amount of calories you were taking in.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bradicallyman Didn't Gopro write that article? Another interesting thread to read!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Moondogg Yes, it was meant slightly tongue in cheek.

Quote:

Originally Posted by nkira Man...he keeps coming back with that 20 years thing...I think he is obsessed with it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by gopro Uh huh! Yup! So when he gives keto diets and lets his clients do 3 hours of cardio per day and also train with massive volume that is his education coming into play? So, you would agree with that approach? Juggs...I really want to meet you. Do you ever go to any of the bodybuilding shows like the Arnold or Olympia?

Quote:

Originally Posted by gopro Ok, let me put it this way... If I wanted to learn to pilot a plane and had the choice between someone that has been successfully piloting planes for the last 20 years...and in fact has been so successful that people seek him/her out to write articles about it, coach others, has a great reputation, etc But refuses to post examples of their work and can have a bad attitude at times VS. Someone that posts up all kinds of studies on flying, took some courses on it, has a nice handle on all of it, but works as a plumber... But shows examples of their work, will answer ANY question put to them and has a great attitude at all times I would choose the first person.

Quote:

Originally Posted by gopro Ok, let me put it this way... If I wanted to learn to pilot a plane and had the choice between someone that has been successfully piloting planes for the last 20 years...and in fact has been so successful that people seek him/her out to write articles about it, coach others, has a great reputation, etc VS. Someone that posts up all kinds of studies on flying, took some courses on it, has a nice handle on all of it, but works as a plumber... I would choose the first person.

Quote:

Originally Posted by nkira Here we go...Back with 20 years again!! Do you have some thing with number 20? Is it numerology? I don't understand why it has to be 20, every time that is. Even in your example you couldn't let go of the 20.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tank316 Just a quick question? Whats the fastest way to shuttle nutrients into your system pre/post/intra?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tank316 Just a quick question? Whats the fastest way to shuttle nutrients into your system pre/post/intra?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Built Bodybuilders have been getting themselves ripped to shreds for a loooong time, long before we had any studies about Akt pathways, gene expression, or catecholamine-induced overshoots of free fatty acids. For some, they just had such amazing genetics that ANYTHING worked. For others, they happened to hit upon the right combination of parlour tricks in the right sequence, much like the proverbial room full of monkeys with typewriters. Trying to reverse-engineer what worked in these circumstances is fraught with difficulty - not only because the typewriter in question might have been... "enhanced", but the monkey-keyboardist in question ain't talking. And alot of bodybuilders miss their peak also.This is not a guessing game. Look at Jay Cutler. He missed his timing last year on his diet and it lost him the Olympia. These pros know exactly what to do, it is the timing of it that is important. None of this is of any particular interest to me though, because for some of us, "ordinary" bodybuilder-type diet and training protocols are so miserable as to be unlivable. Are you talking regular diet or comp ready diet? Two different things While operating under a significant deficit, the best you can hope for is to somehow convince the body to risk-manage existing resources. The strategy changes from that of muscle-growth, to that of muscle-retention. Wait, weren't you arguing before that ketosis was best for building muscle?? Now you are saying the best to hope for is to maintain? The fact that Broser doesn't like keto diets for natural bodybuilders because he trained inappropriately on them, and then went on an abstract-hunt to prove his point is simply a flawed methodology. No he didn't. He just stated that an extended time on a Keto diet was not ideal for preparing for a comp because of potential muscle loss. You have twisted this.

Quote:

Originally Posted by P-funk Just listened to the interview. This is the researcher discussing the second study I talked about above from the research that was posted previously in the old thread. I don't disagree that carbohydrates are extremely important. In fact, I hate low-carb eating and I tell people to set their calorie requirements, establish protein requirements, establish fat intake and then the rest of the diet is whatever the hell you want (carbs or whatever...as long as calories are maintained sufficiently and it doesn't matter about 4 meals or 5 meals or 6 meals a day, as research has looked at that as well). Anyhow, in the interview, Hawley gets grilled a little by the second interviewee and does state: "This 3-hour window is still not indicative of what may happen after 3-months of time (like I state above, there may be adaptations that take place) so it is hard to extrapolate that. Also, with the small sample size, not everything was statistically significant, which is a limitation (which I also talked about above)." My main thing comes back to....when you are dieting (as in trying to lose body fat), you are not worried about putting on muscle. It doesn't happen. It can't happen since adequate calories are not being consumed to facilitate growth. Not that I am advocating low-carb dieting or ketosis, but isn't the point moot because you are defending someone dieting for a show, which isn't an anabolic period of training anyway? Anyway, the study is interesting and I do agree that carbohydrates are needed in a diet. But, I do not think that eating low-carbs necessarily means you cannot put on muscle size (provided adequate calories are consumed), as the excess calories come from somewhere - either from excess protein which gets turned into glucose when needed or from excess fat, which the body then goes into ketosis as a means of adapting to dietary changes and energy output. So again, it is that adaptation that is the critical part (like he said - a 3-hour window is hardly indicative of what happens long term) and the training that an individual would be doing does not include totally destroying themselves the day prior to lifting in order to deplete glycogen (duh), so things are not totally equal here. As far as what the gains would be if they did a long term study comparing the two dietary methods, who knows...that would be something they would have to design. Anyway, take home message: Eat Carbs, they are good. Ketosis sucks, it gives me a headache. Patrick

Quote:

Originally Posted by gopro Patrick...I am just popping in here to say one quick thing to you because I find you to be somewhat reasonable. The same mechanisms responsible for hypertrophy are the same that will RETAIN muscle in a calorie deficit. Carbs are needed in either case. Period.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Built Interesting discussion. The problem with attempting to build proof on the basis of existing studies is that it doesn't prove your assertion - it only provides fuel for your own research. Now, I'm all for using something that works and proving it later. I'm not the first to do this - Newton did the same damned thing with Calculus (some would say Leibniz. These would be Germans - I am a Scot by ancestry and so I'll continue to claim it was Newton). There's a whole branch of mathematics that is concerned with proving the methodology Newton just went ahead and used, despite criticism from his contemporaries. Two hundred years later, Weierstrass, Cauchy and others developed the formal language required - the Real Analysis - to add rigour to the Calculus that came so long before them. So yeah, I'm jiggy with "proof by real world observation". Sometimes, it's all we got. Thing is, sometimes there's more than one way to get across the river, yanno? Bodybuilders have been getting themselves ripped to shreds for a loooong time, long before we had any studies about Akt pathways, gene expression, or catecholamine-induced overshoots of free fatty acids. For some, they just had such amazing genetics that ANYTHING worked. For others, they happened to hit upon the right combination of parlour tricks in the right sequence, much like the proverbial room full of monkeys with typewriters. Trying to reverse-engineer what worked in these circumstances is fraught with difficulty - not only because the typewriter in question might have been... "enhanced", but the monkey-keyboardist in question ain't talking. None of this is of any particular interest to me though, because for some of us, "ordinary" bodybuilder-type diet and training protocols are so miserable as to be unlivable. For example, my own board fell out of this problem. You can find a paradigm that is technically perfect on paper, but if I can't stick to it, it ain't optimal FOR ME, now, is it? Kinda like broccoli - it's only good for you IF YOU EAT IT. So while Broser may find as many ways to define and then slag keto diets as he does to say he's "finished with this discussion", his point has been rendered moot by the type of training he did at the time - hypertrophy relies on a surplus of calories to ensure muscle-growth follows training-induced microtrauma. While operating under a significant deficit, the best you can hope for is to somehow convince the body to risk-manage existing resources. The strategy changes from that of muscle-growth, to that of muscle-retention. Do this while you undereat a little, you'll starve off the fat because the body can't afford NOT to. Drop protein too low and/or overtrain while you do this, and you'll increase the cost of doing muscle. Where is that magic point? Ah, now that's the tricky question. It varies. The genetic freaks get a way with a LOT more then the rest of us. Add steroids to the mix and the universe changes. But to me, all of this is moot if it's too uncomfortable. I managed to get down to my profile pic without being more than peckish for parts of the day. I didn't overtrain and I didn't feel starved. If I could have kept more muscle on me some other way but felt like crap while I did it, I wouldn't have done it. Kinda nice that I didn't have to. Ward doesn't like keto diets because they don't feel comfortable to him. To me, THAT is a very good reason not to do something. The fact that Broser doesn't like keto diets for natural bodybuilders because he trained inappropriately on them, and then went on an abstract-hunt to prove his point is simply a flawed methodology. I mean, if you're going to slag something because you tried it, at least try it on the right way! It's like durian. You know, the weird looking fruit that stinks like hell, tastes like heaven? Well, that's what I hear because I've never tried one. I'm waiting for someone who loves durian to get a really good one and then share it with me. If I still don't like it, at least I'll know I don't like it. If I pick one up at random and it's rotten, I might think I don't like it when in fact I just don't like rotten durian. Broser tried a rotten durian. He then went looking for proof that durian isn't healthy for natural bodybuilders. Ward just doesn't like fruit.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gazhole Jumping in late. Everybody in this thread is FAT. Discuss.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gazhole Jumping in late. Everybody in this thread is FAT. Discuss.

Quote:

Originally Posted by danzik17 Fair enough, but it still seems like on a diet like UD 2.0 you get the best of both worlds. The improved FFA mobilization on a ketogenic diet AND the health/physiological benefits of superglycogenation(is that even a word?) and massive insulin spikes. Correct me if I'm wrong, but Lyle never says that you won't lose muscle during the ketogenic phase of the diet. One of the main points of the massive refeed is to put your body into an anabolic state to rebuild at least a portion of what you have lost muscle wise. That's why it's deemed a recomposition diet and not just a fat loss diet.

Quote:

Originally Posted by danzik17 Oh screw you buddy. Now I'm depressed. I'm going to go dig in a gallon of chocolate ice cream AND ITS ALL YOUR FAULT!

Quote:

Originally Posted by dg806 If there was any bullying going on, it was because he was ganged up on because of his posts. All three disagreed and would not let it die. How did you expect Eric to act? I think he did a great job considering how his opinions and thoughts were questioned and lambasted. As far as Eric's reputation goes, he has worked with some of the biggest names and companies in this industry. How do you think that came about? It surely wasn't from his lack of knowledge or experience.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gazhole Jumping in late. Everybody in this thread is FAT. Discuss.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Moondogg Main argument: ''You will lose more muscle mass following a keto diet than you will following a diet with higher carb consumption''

Quote:

Originally Posted by dg806 I don't see how this is even an arguement. Someone please answer Tank's question and I think you will have the answer to this statement.

Quote:

Originally Posted by juggernaut This should help

Quote:

Originally Posted by dg806 I don't see how this is even an arguement. Someone please answer Tank's question and I think you will have the answer to this statement. HINT:I just ate a whole plate of rice and hibachi chicken with carrots after my workout.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dg806 I don't see how this is even an arguement. Someone please answer Tank's question and I think you will have the answer to this statement. HINT:I just ate a whole plate of rice and hibachi chicken with carrots after my workout.

Quote:

Originally Posted by P-funk Um, what you are arguing has very little (nothing really) to do with the original argument of this thread. It is like people are talking about apples and you keep saying ham sandwich....They aren't the same thing. Patrick

Quote:

Originally Posted by Moondogg I thought the whole insulin response thing was covered in the threat before this?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tank316 Ha Ha jugg.. Yes, its a loaded question. I'm not to worried about it btw. The google thing made my day though! And enjoy your two gallons of butter ripple.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Moondogg I thought the whole insulin response thing was covered in the threat before this?

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.