Broser vs Palumbo - battle of the keto diet [Forum Archive]

Pages: 1 2 3

Broser vs Palumbo - battle of the keto diet

(CLICK HERE here to view the original thread with full colors/images)

Posted by: ZECH

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

I said the same thing in this thread already. We are not comparing the same things.
But this statement, "''You will lose more muscle mass following a keto diet than you will following a diet with higher carb consumption'' IMO is true.
I can't gain muscle or weight without a shitload of carbs. Did you not basically say the same thing, that it takes excess calories to build muscle?

Posted by: P-funk

Quote:

Originally Posted by dg806

Yes, i did say it takes excess calories to build muscle.

But, you made a statement about post workout nutrition which isn't relevant to the particular debate, which is what I didn't understand.

I also asked if anyone knows any studies looking at ketosis and muscle hypertrophy. Because you feel that "in your opinion you will lose muscle mass being in ketosis" is not a good enough answer and the fact that "you have to eat a shitload of carbs to gain muscle or weight" is pretty much worthless. n=1

It is the anecdotal crap that gets people in trouble. I am looking for the evidence to support such claims or the evidence to at least shed some light on were people have come up with their contentions on diet and exercise for muscle growth. That is all.

patrick

Posted by: juggernaut

Quote:

Originally Posted by P-funk

It is the anecdotal crap that gets people in trouble. I am looking for the evidence to support such claims or the evidence to at least shed some light on were people have come up with their contentions on diet and exercise for muscle growth. That is all.

patrick

Amen Patrick.

Posted by: Prince

Quote:

Originally Posted by P-funk

I also asked if anyone knows any studies looking at ketosis and muscle hypertrophy. Because you feel that "in your opinion you will lose muscle mass being in ketosis" is not a good enough answer and the fact that "you have to eat a shitload of carbs to gain muscle or weight" is pretty much worthless. n=1

if in ketosis and you're consuming adequate protein and fat I don't see any good reason why there would be muscle hypertrophy due to the lack of carbs.

Posted by: juggernaut

especially with the addition of fats.

Posted by: ZECH

ketosis - Doctors Lounge(TM)

MaryAnn RN - Sun Feb 26, 2006 8:33 pm

Low carb (carbohydrate), high protein diets are the latest dieting craze. However, before you jump on the band wagon, you may want to consider a few things:

Low carb (ketogenic) diets deplete the healthy glycogen (the storage form of glucose) stores in your muscles and liver. When you deplete glycogen stores, you also dehydrate, often causing the scale to drop significantly in the first week or two of the diet. This is usually interpreted as fat loss when it's actually mostly from dehydration and muscle loss. By the way, this is one of the reasons that low carb diets are so popular at the moment - there is a quick initial, but deceptive drop in scale weight.

Glycogenesis (formation of glycogen) occurs in the liver and muscles when adequate quantities of carbohydrates are consumed - very little of this happens on a low carb diet. Glycogenolysis (breakdown of glycogen) occurs when glycogen is broken down to form glucose for use as fuel.

Depletion of muscle glycogen causes you to fatigue easily, and makes exercise and movement uncomfortable. Research indicates that muscle fatigue increases in almost direct proportion to the rate of depletion of muscle glycogen. Bottom line is that you don't feel energetic and you exercise and move less (often without realizing it) which is not good for caloric expenditure and basal metabolic rate (metabolism).

Depletion of muscle glycogen leads to muscle atrophy (loss of muscle). This happens because muscle glycogen (broken down to glucose) is the fuel of choice for the muscle during movement. There is always a fuel mix, but without muscle glycogen, the muscle fibers that contract, even at rest to maintain muscle tone, contract less when glycogen is not immediately available in the muscle. Depletion of muscle glycogen also causes you to exercise and move less than normal which leads to muscle loss and the inability to maintain adequate muscle tone.

Also, in the absence of adequate carbohydrate for fuel, the body initially uses protein (muscle) and fat. the initial phase of muscle depletion is rapid, caused by the use of easily accessed muscle protein for direct metabolism or for conversion to glucose (gluconeogenesis) for fuel. Eating excess protein does not prevent this because there is a caloric deficit.

When Insulin levels are chronically too low as they may be in very low carb diets, catabolism (breakdown) of muscle protein increases, and protein synthesis stops.

Loss of muscle causes a decrease in your basal metabolic rate (metabolism). Metabolism happens in the muscle. Less muscle and muscle tone means a slower metabolism which means fewer calories burned 24 hours-a-day.

Some proponents of low carb diets recommend avoiding carbohydrates such as bread, pasta, potatoes, carrots, etc. because of they are high on the glycemic index - causing a sharp rise in Insulin. Certain carbohydrates have always been, and will always be the bad guys: candy, cookies, baked goods with added sugar, sugared drinks, processed / refined white breads, pastas, and rice, and any foods with added sugar. These are not good for health or weight loss. However, carbohydrates such as fruits, vegetables, legumes, whole grain breads and pastas, and brown rice are good for health and weight loss. Just like with proteins and fats, these carbohydrates should be eaten in moderation. Large volumes of any proteins, fats or carbohydrates are not conducive to weight loss and health.

The effect of high glycemic foods is often exaggerated. It's does matter, but to a smaller degree than is often portrayed. Also, the total glycemic effect of foods is influenced by the quantity of that food that you eat at a sitting. Smaller meals have a lower overall glycemic effect. Also, we usually eat several types of food at the same time, thereby reducing the average glycemic index of the meal, if higher glycemic foods are eaten. Also, glycemic index values can be misleading because they are based on a standard 50 grams of carbohydrate consumed. It wouldn't take much candy bar to get that, but it would take four cups of carrots. Do you usually eat four cups of carrots at a meal?

Regular exercisers and active people also are less effected by higher glycemic foods because much of the carbohydrate comsumed is immediately used to replenish glycogen stores in the liver and muscle.
By the way, if you're interested in lowering Insulin levels, there is a great way to do that - exercise and activity.

Much of the weight loss on a low carb, high protein diet, especially in the first few weeks, is actually because of dehydration and muscle loss.

The percentage of people that re-gain the weight they've lost with most methods of weight loss is high, but it's even higher with low carb, high protein diets. This is primarily due to three factors:

1. You have lost muscle. With that comes a slower metabolism which means fewer calories are burned 24 hours-a-day. A loss of muscle during the process of losing weight is almost a guarantee for re-gaining the lost weight, and more.

2. You re-gain the healthy fluid lost because of glycogen depletion.

3. It's difficult to maintain that type of diet long-term.

4. You have not made a change to a long-term healthy lifestyle.

Eating too much fat is just not healthy. I know you've heard of people whose blood levels of Cholesterol and triglycerides have decreased while on a low carb, high protein diet. This often happens with weight loss, but it doesn't continue when you're on a diet high in fat. There are literally reams of research over decades that clearly indicates that an increase in consumption of animal products and/or saturated fat leads to increased incidence of heart disease, Strokes, gall stones, kidney stones, arthritic symptoms, certain cancers, etc. For example, in comparing countries with varying levels of meat consumption, there is a direct relationship between the volume of meat consumption in a country and the incidence of digestive cancers (stomach, intestines, rectal, etc.).

Sorry to be so winded, but wanted to answer all of your questions.

MaryAnn RN

Posted by: P-funk

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prince

if in ketosis and you're consuming adequate protein and fat I don't see any good reason why there would be muscle hypertrophy due to the lack of carbs.

If you are eating hypercaloric, wouldn't the be adequate energy to have hypertrophy?

I don't know. I am not taking any side. I am merely saying that (a) it isn't as black and white as people are making it out to be and (b) science doesn't seem to have a great answer right now.

I'm just saying. Everyone is bickering in circles and nothing will ever be solved that way.

patrick

Posted by: Built

dg, I see you get your nutrition information from those pillars of nutritional wisdom: doctors.

I believe it was you that had asked me about a hundred posts ago if I was talking about "prep week" or "precontest diet". I was talking about the actual weeks and months precontest. Hell week isn't a diet - it's a water and glycogen manipulation. If you're still trying to drop fat that last week, you're too fat.

Posted by: danzik17

I also think that the information from that doctor can't apply to us, at least not without further info regarding her study.

Maybe the doctor is assuming that the person is eating a low carb/high protein/high fat diet while sitting on their ass at home because of being "tired". No duh they're going to lose muscle! But it's an entirely different story with an athlete or bodybuilder who maintains a specific exercise regimen that compliments whatever diet that they happen to be running at the time.

Not only that, but the doctor refer' back to weight regained on the diet. Has the doctor considered that the person recomposed? I know this is not the average person's diet, but I haven't lost a single pound on UD2.0, yet I'm (or was before vacation

) leaner than I had ever been. That's the best kind of fat loss and the scale barely moved. According to that doctor, I would have "failed" on the diet.

Posted by: juggernaut

Quote:

Originally Posted by dg806

Eating too much fat is just not healthy. I know you've heard of people whose blood levels of Cholesterol and triglycerides have decreased while on a low carb, high protein diet. This often happens with weight loss, but it doesn't continue when you're on a diet high in fat.

hmm...I'm extremely high in fat, eat tons of protein and minimal to no carbs on a prolonged, daily basis...My auras have stopped dead in their tracks, my BP is stellar, I got my cholesterol tested at 140; I'm a goddamn miracle of modern science.
What value does this post have dg? Other than you asking an RN for help?

Posted by: P-funk

Yea, that statement is very vague. I would love to see where she pulled that from. The last people I listen to on nutrition stuff are doctors and nurses. They have no training in that field (exercise too).

patrick

Posted by: Built

Put it this way dg - how about you go back to your source for training tips - I'm sure they'll be just as helpful.

Posted by: Yanick

Quote:

Originally Posted by P-funk

Yea, that statement is very vague. I would love to see where she pulled that from. The last people I listen to on nutrition stuff are doctors and nurses. They have no training in that field (exercise too).

patrick

Yeah, well...YOU'RE SHORT!

Honestly though, I don't know about MD's but RN's are taught quiet a bit about diet. It is just diet as it relates to the various pathologies and not so much as it relates to exercise/sports performance/body recomposition. There are a few caveats to the above statement, however.

Firstly, as with any profession, there are good and bad (or knowledgeable/willing and stupid/complacent). An RN I know, who just happens to being finishing up an MS degree (so obviously he must know more than me about everything

), once jumped in on a conversation I was having with a friend and teaching him about the importance on taking more than 1g of fish oil/day. So I'm telling him how its just a type of fat, not a drug/medicine, and that I take 8-10g/day, that it aids in everything from cardiovascular health to skin health to nutrient partitioning etc. This douche jumps in and says, "Listen man, do you eat steak?" My friend answers, "Yes." The douche then proceeds to explain that he is getting all the fat he needs by eating steak a couple of times a week. I was floored, I do not have the patience with these types of people anymore so I just sort of drifted away.

Second of all, the diet guidelines that are taught in the schools are the same ones that are taught to nutritionists...aka food pyramid (or the slightly improved version called MyPyramid). Basically the same old carb heavy, low fat crap they have been spewing for a long time, except now they are somewhat better at saying, eat whole/unprocessed carbs, lower saturated fat but keep in the mono/polyunsat's etc. I took a nutrition class in college (taught by an RD) for fun and I was taught all of this atrocious crap, cereal with milk is okay in the morning as long as its skim or semi-skim milk etc. So if the person does not take it upon themselves to stay ahead of the research, and this is the case with many people in every field from the medical to the health industry, they wind up making the whole field look stupid.

I was taught a lot of diet stuff as it relates to surgery (clear, full, soft diet), varying pathologies (the MD dx's celiac disease or PKU but the RN actually sits down and teaches by saying eat this, not that etc), side effects of meds (many diuretics lead to loss of potassium which may cause a fatal electrolyte imbalance, so once again the MD might say have some more potassium, but the RN will sit down and teach the client to have a cup of OJ or a banana or some salt substitute etc).

So we are taught quiet a bit about diets, the problems lies in the fact that many feel they are authorities on everything related to health when they are just taught about diets are they relate to the medical field. Hell when I had to perform a teaching exercise in front of my clinical group about diabetes diets, I went in there with the GI/II/GL stuff, portion control, activity, and importance of monitoring etc. My teacher's jaw dropped because we were taught such basics in class (carbs -> glucose -> rise in blood sugar, signs/symptoms, treatment, complications etc) that she was expecting me to come in stumble through a 5 min thing with the patient and be glad to get it over with, instead I went in there and just killed it. The patient said no one had ever spent the time and explained this stuff to her, all she was ever told was eat less sugar or whatever. The professor even took my GI charts and handed them out to other patients because they were so succinct, to the point and easy to understand.

Oh and this thread is one of the best threads to hit this place in a while. We haven't had a good old debate like this in a while. I say lets keep it going, everyone seems to be behaving and I think we can get into some interesting physiology stuff here.

Posted by: Hench

Good post.

Posted by: P-funk

don't encourage him...his head swells.

thanks yan!

patrick

Posted by: Hench

Quote:

Originally Posted by P-funk

don't encourage him...his head swells.

thanks yan!

patrick

lol, I had typed 'great post', but then decided that was a bit much.

Posted by: Built

Yanick, I don't know you but I think I want to.

Great post.

Now - after reading and participating in this thread since its inception, I find myself looking for clarity in the initial argument - that is to say, what is it in particular that we are arguing?

Eric's article, Palumbo's retort and the ensuing debate hinges upon some rather strict physiological definitions, but the diet that underlies these definitions so far remains rather vague.

We have established that ketosis is normal in healthy humans, and in fact its absence can be thought of as a diseased state. Surely a high-carb diet is not thought of as a ketogenic diet, so we'll relieve ourselves of this pedantic view and proceed.

We have also established that we are specifically talking about "cutting" diets, that is to say, the deliberate manipulation of diet and training so as to ensure as much fat loss and as little muscle loss as possible.

There are a plethora of diets which can be thought of - for this purpose - as ketogenic:

Complete starvation
Ketogenic epilepsy diet - VERY high in fat, modest protein, very low carb, used in children and some adults to reduce or eliminate epileptic seizures
Atkins induction - not a high protein diet as much as a high fat diet, but not as high as the one used to fight epilepsy
Protein sparing modified fast, Lyle's style (ie his book "rapid fat loss"), with macronutrient mix and refeeds set at specific intervals according to bodyfat, gender and activity level and type
CKD AKA cyclic ketogenic diet, wherein most days are in ketosis, but a period of hours or days is spent on a refeed of low fat, moderate protein and very high starchy carbs and glucose.
UD2.0, Lyle's love child from his affair with Dan Duschaine's BodyOpus
TKD AKA targeted ketogenic diet - where the only starchy carbs consumed are in the meal before and or immediately after a lifting workout

Eric, in the spirit of fairness and good sportsmanship, I am offering you the opportunity to clarify for me, for us, for this thread - hell, for all humanity (I couldn't resist going over the top, I need an echo chamber!) which of these do you have in mind when you assert that ketogenic diets are not optimal for fat loss for unassisted athletes?

If I've missed one, tell it to me and I'll tuck it into the list.

If we're going to argue something, let's at least know exactly what it is so we can argue well.

Posted by: P-funk

Quote:

Yanick, I don't know you but I think I want to.

Yanick is one of my good friends and one of my old training partners from NYC. He is a regular poster on my forum and we talk about the finer things in life like mitchondrial density, reciprocal inhibition, and phosphofructokinase. Truly exciting!

Patrick

Posted by: Built

Gaaah I love me a man who knows his way around mitochodrial density... <swoons>

Posted by: Marat

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yanick

I took a nutrition class in college (taught by an RD) for fun and I was taught all of this atrocious crap, cereal with milk is okay in the morning as long as its skim or semi-skim milk etc. So if the person does not take it upon themselves to stay ahead of the research, and this is the case with many people in every field from the medical to the health industry, they wind up making the whole field look stupid.

I'd just like to add to this. I'm about to get my R.D credential. My undergrad is from the University of Florida and would like to mention that we learn very little that would qualify us to give nutrition advice. We spend very little on actual nutrition education, and the time we do is based on MyPyramid type stuff. Aside from my Nutrition major, and despite specializing in Nutritional Science, almost everything I learned was from hours of personal research. If I do spend any time as an R.D, I couldn't imagine taking the information that we are learning at school and passing it along to clients.

Posted by: Built

Okay, that's frightening.

I had a girlfriend of mine set me up with a diet back in my "fat jogger" days. Low fat, frequent mini-meals, high carb, low protein. I've never felt like such shit in all my life - while dieting my way UP to 170 lbs and jogging 10k 3x a week with her. She was a stick. Her secret? She didn't follow her own advice. Oh and she's bulimic.

Posted by: juggernaut

Quote:

Originally Posted by Built

Okay, that's frightening.

I had a girlfriend of mine set me up with a diet back in my "fat jogger" days. Low fat, frequent mini-meals, high carb, low protein. I've never felt like such shit in all my life - while dieting my way UP to 170 lbs and jogging 10k 3x a week with her. She was a stick. Her secret? She didn't follow her own advice. Oh and she's bulimic.

Same here; I took up jogging, had a high carb/low fat diet-as recommended by a doctor, ballooned up to 300 lbs, also felt like lethargic shit.
Also, as a side note; I have a 54 year old cardiologist in my gym who drinks Muscle Milk during a workout, gets his routines from M&F, eats donut every morning to "carbup" before a workout...and just the other day, he asked me to write out a diet and compare to what he has been following in M&F. I took Builts advice and registered him online to fitday. I have yet to see one iota of healthy food go into his system.

And I am going to take advice about my heart-but NOT diet. Most Drs, it seems, know shit about diet.

Posted by: Yanick

Quote:

Originally Posted by Moondogg

Good post.

I try to contribute as much as I can. I haven't really read about nutrition, specifically, in so long (its been a few years now) that I don't feel qualified to argue with the big minds because research changes things so frequently that you really need to stay on top of your game or you begin to look foolish.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Built

Yanick, I don't know you but I think I want to.

Well I like horseback rides, classic rock and long walks on the beach on a breezy summer's eve. Oh and I like what Pat stated on the bottom, plus Metallica blaring in my headphones while I crush a 195lb power clean and dump it from my shoulders to scare the shit out of all the cardio bunnies.

Quote:

Originally Posted by P-funk

Yeah dude and my girl hates you. Says I'd rather read/write on the forum than spend time with her lol.

Quote:

Originally Posted by m11

Its truly a shame that they pass this type of information off as relevant to the general public. It was fun to get questions wrong on the exams, then bring in research to prove (or atleast shed light on the fact that there is plenty of research going the other way) and get the professor to give me the points. It became so that as soon as I would walk up to her, she would just give me the points because she knew I would make her read like 5-10 abstracts the next day lol.

Posted by: juggernaut

funny fuck!

Posted by: nkira

....Good one. So you like Nothing Else Matters when your sober?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yanick

Metallica blaring in my headphones while I crush a 195lb power clean and dump it from my shoulders to scare the shit out of all the cardio bunnies.

Posted by: juggernaut

I gotta blast Master of Puppets when I am hitting my peak...people look at me like I am insane.

Posted by: nkira

I like linkin park or sometimes evanescence - My Last Breath (Only the blasty guitar part)

Posted by: gopro

Hey ya'll...I have not read anything in this thread since I left, but I hope your discussion is going well.

Anyway, just found this little video interesting (but not suprising)...Evan Centopani, who just won the NY Pro yesterday, was once a client of Dave Palumbo (Mr. Keto), but decided to drop him as a coach because he felt the diet was leaving him in good condition, but flat and small. That it was holding him back from his potential. Through inside sources I used to hear all the time that even WHILE working with Dave, Evan would sneak some carbs into his diet (secretly) because he always felt like he was burning away muscle without them. And this is a guy who obviously uses a ton of anabolics and other drugs (as he is an IFBB pro).

Anyway, it just reflects back to exactly what I have said in this thread. Here is a bit of the interview in case you want to hear about it from HIS mouth (and I know he was just to be nice about it...I know the real story from Robbie over at MD).

Muscular Development Bodybuilding Videos - Evan Centopani - Road to the New York Pro - Words from the Heart

P.S. He is now working with Oscar Arden who uses a good amount of carbs in his diets. Oh, and Evan was fuller than ever last night and hard as rock!

Posted by: juggernaut

And again, you gave personal opinion but no true proof.
BFD you gave us an interview...last time I checked, people like to lie on interviews. So how do we know what he is saying is true? You say from inside resources...Woah...well, lets stop the debate, Eric Borser has inside resources + you know the real story. Damn good call. LEts call it a night.

By the way, didnt you say that you were through with this?

Quote:

Originally Posted by gopro

Hey ya'll...I have not read anything in this thread since I left, but I hope your discussion is going well.

Anyway, just found this little video interesting (but not suprising)...Evan Centopani, who just won the NY Pro yesterday, was once a client of Dave Palumbo (Mr. Keto), but decided to drop him as a coach because he felt the diet was leaving him in good condition, but flat and small. That it was holding him back from his potential. Through inside sources I used to hear all the time that even WHILE working with Dave, Evan would sneak some carbs into his diet (secretly) because he always felt like he was burning away muscle without them. And this is a guy who obviously uses a ton of anabolics and other drugs (as he is an IFBB pro).

Anyway, it just reflects back to exactly what I have said in this thread. Here is a bit of the interview in case you want to hear about it from HIS mouth (and I know he was just to be nice about it...I know the real story from Robbie over at MD).

Muscular Development Bodybuilding Videos - Evan Centopani - Road to the New York Pro - Words from the Heart

P.S. He is now working with Oscar Arden who uses a good amount of carbs in his diets. Oh, and Evan was fuller than ever last night and hard as rock!

Posted by: Built

Quote:

Originally Posted by gopro

Hey ya'll...I have not read anything in this thread since I left, but I hope your discussion is going well.

It is.

I requested clarification:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Built

Yanick, I don't know you but I think I want to.

Great post.

Now - after reading and participating in this thread since its inception, I find myself looking for clarity in the initial argument - that is to say, what is it in particular that we are arguing?

Eric's article, Palumbo's retort and the ensuing debate hinges upon some rather strict physiological definitions, but the diet that underlies these definitions so far remains rather vague.

We have established that ketosis is normal in healthy humans, and in fact its absence can be thought of as a diseased state. Surely a high-carb diet is not thought of as a ketogenic diet, so we'll relieve ourselves of this pedantic view and proceed.

We have also established that we are specifically talking about "cutting" diets, that is to say, the deliberate manipulation of diet and training so as to ensure as much fat loss and as little muscle loss as possible.

There are a plethora of diets which can be thought of - for this purpose - as ketogenic:

Complete starvation
Ketogenic epilepsy diet - VERY high in fat, modest protein, very low carb, used in children and some adults to reduce or eliminate epileptic seizures
Atkins induction - not a high protein diet as much as a high fat diet, but not as high as the one used to fight epilepsy
Protein sparing modified fast, Lyle's style (ie his book "rapid fat loss"), with macronutrient mix and refeeds set at specific intervals according to bodyfat, gender and activity level and type
CKD AKA cyclic ketogenic diet, wherein most days are in ketosis, but a period of hours or days is spent on a refeed of low fat, moderate protein and very high starchy carbs and glucose.
UD2.0, Lyle's love child from his affair with Dan Duschaine's BodyOpus
TKD AKA targeted ketogenic diet - where the only starchy carbs consumed are in the meal before and or immediately after a lifting workout

Posted by: juggernaut

pretty much sums it all up; but I can be a wiseass here and say that starvation is worse than a high carb diet.

Posted by: Built

LOL - I wanted to provide an exhaustive list.

Which one do you figure Eric meant - any idea? I can't tell from what he posted in this thread.

Posted by: BigPapaPump68

Quote:

Originally Posted by gopro

I didn't read this whole thread, but I can tell you from my own personal experience (I used steroids for years) that even when on an extreme cut, I had to eat atleast 35-45 grams of carbs because I felt that I was losing a lot of my lean muscle mass that I had put on.

There is a video that I will try finding that has Rob Cicherillo, and I can't remember what IFBB pro bodybuilder he was interviewing with after he got done training. But anyway that guy was 1 week out, and he said that he had to eat carbs in order for his muscles to not look flat during the competition, or something a long those lines. It was last year when I saw the video on BB.com, I'll find the video, and post it up.

Posted by: Built

See, 35-45g carbs is still very much a keto diet. That's why I want clarification.

Posted by: juggernaut

Quote:

Originally Posted by Built

LOL - I wanted to provide an exhaustive list.

Which one do you figure Eric meant - any idea? I can't tell from what he posted in this thread.

i dunno...something about 20 years and a refusal to post photos or names on who he has trained. Its really interesting that Dante (creator of DoggCrapp training) posted an entire paragraph of people that he has trained on a site and yet, eric refuses to cooperate. Why?

Posted by: Built

Quote:

Originally Posted by juggernaut

Now, now, it may be that he's not so sure anymore.

You got that doggcrapp link in your journal - post it up, I'll give it a read.

Posted by: juggernaut

Quote:

Originally Posted by Built

Now, now, it may be that he's not so sure anymore.

You got that doggcrapp link in your journal - post it up, I'll give it a read.

got quite a few; take a looksie...plenty of enticing information about it.

Posted by: gopro

Quote:

Originally Posted by juggernaut

And again, you gave personal opinion but no true proof.
BFD you gave us an interview...last time I checked, people like to lie on interviews. So how do we know what he is saying is true? You say from inside resources...Woah...well, lets stop the debate, Eric Borser has inside resources + you know the real story. Damn good call. LEts call it a night.

By the way, didnt you say that you were through with this?

Hello my friend! Yes, I am done with this...as in, I have nothing else to say or add. However, I added this interview because it is interesting that even some DRUG-USING bodybuilders have trouble with a keto diet and feel they lose muscle DESPITE the inclusion of steroids, GH, IGF-1, clen, etc.

As far as knowing what he is saying is true AND having inside resources, what you must accept and understand is that I am in a position in this industry that I regularly speak with other pro bodybuilders, supplement company owners, top nutritionists, magazine owners, writers, etc. I speak to Flex Wheeler almost daily and he is so dialed in to what is going on that he is like a human gossip column! You would also be very suprised to know what people like Gregg Valentino have told me about what goes on. As far as Evan specifically I know people that are extremely close to him, and have spoken with him myself.

So, that is what I mean when I say "on the inside."

Posted by: gopro

Quote:

Originally Posted by Built

It is.

I requested clarification:

I am sorry Built, I did not see this until now as I have stopped reading this thread...but came back to see if anyone watched the EC video.

What do I mean? Well, this thread was about me and Dave Palumbo, and OUR specific argument. Thus, it is HIS diet that I am talking about, which is basically medium to high protein, zero starches, small amounts of green vegetables, and high in fats, mostly from salmon, macadamia nut oil, natural PB, and what occurs naturally in meats, etc.

Dave does allow one cheat meal per week that can be pretty much all the carbs you want for one sitting.

Hope that clarifies.

Posted by: Built

Quote:

Originally Posted by gopro

Thank you, that helps actually. It does leave me with more questions - would you have a link to something that summarizes this plan and how he integrates it with training, how long he runs it and so on?

Your approach is to cycle periods of higher and lower carbs I think, right? How high and how low - or am I on the wrong track here?

Posted by: juggernaut

Quote:

Originally Posted by Built

Your approach is to cycle periods of higher and lower carbs I think, right? How high and how low - or am I on the wrong track here?

How UD2-ish of Eric to have that thinking.

Posted by: juggernaut

Quote:

Originally Posted by gopro

As far as knowing what he is saying is true AND having inside resources, what you must accept and understand is that I am in a position in this industry that I regularly speak with other pro bodybuilders, supplement company owners, top nutritionists, magazine owners, writers, etc. I speak to Flex Wheeler almost daily and he is so dialed in to what is going on that he is like a human gossip column! You would also be very suprised to know what people like Gregg Valentino have told me about what goes on. As far as Evan specifically I know people that are extremely close to him, and have spoken with him myself.

So, that is what I mean when I say "on the inside."

Oh, so you're a name-throwing gossip columnist. Ok, got it.

Posted by: gopro

Quote:

Originally Posted by juggernaut

Oh, so you're a name-throwing gossip columnist. Ok, got it.

Dude, seriously, what is your problem? You have issues bro.

Posted by: gopro

Quote:

Originally Posted by Built

Hmmm, there used to be a link on the MD boards, but when he was fired it might have been removed, but I will check. As far as how long he runs it...the entire diet...probably anywhere from 12-24 weeks depending on the initial condition of the athlete. With training I don't know how much control he has, but Dave trains like most bodybuilders do in terms of volume and days.

As for my diet...different for each individual. Progresses from week to week depending on how they look. Carbs higher on training days...lower on off/cardio days. Hard to pinpoint for you exactly because each client is different.

Posted by: juggernaut

Quote:

Originally Posted by gopro

Dude, seriously, what is your problem? You have issues bro.

I know I have issues. But I dooooont bullshit.

Posted by: gopro

Quote:

Originally Posted by juggernaut

I know I have issues. But I dooooont bullshit.

And what am I bullshitting about? Even if you think I am wrong about something I am saying, why does that mean I am bullshitting? If you disagree with my training or dieting methodologies that is fine, but it does not mean that I am bullshitting about anything.

Bro, the negativity you continue to spew is only going to come back to you three-fold. That is how the universe works. So, please try and be more peaceful....for your own sake.

Posted by: juggernaut

Quote:

Originally Posted by gopro

I think that Florida "zen" thing has gone to your head. Bro.

Posted by: gopro

Quote:

Originally Posted by juggernaut

I think that Florida "zen" thing has gone to your head. Bro.

Sorry bro, just a personal philosophy. Anyway, I really think you should look inward and try and figure out why you have so much hate, jealousy and negativity inside you.

Or, don't and carry on as is. But I promise it will hold you back.

Posted by: Built

Quote:

Originally Posted by gopro

Okay, so Palumbo's approach is to keep people in uninterrupted ketosis for periods of up to 24 weeks, where your approach is to cycle keto and non-keto days, coordinated with your clients' training.

Is that fairly close to the Cole's notes version?

Posted by: gopro

Quote:

Originally Posted by Built

Where are my keto days? There may be some days of very low carbs towards the end of the diet on off days, but 1) It may not result in ketosis, and 2) Even if it does, it is very temporary.

Posted by: Built

Quote:

Originally Posted by gopro

Where are my keto days? There may be some days of very low carbs towards the end of the diet on off days, but 1) It may not result in ketosis, and 2) Even if it does, it is very temporary.

The low days - especially with high volume - would put anyone training with any kind of intensity into ketosis until the higher carb day. No worries, we've already established that episodic ketosis is not only normal, it's healthy. The body gets VERY efficient at switching fuel tanks the more we do this, I'm sure you've noticed this yourself and in your clients. The first time I deliberately tried to hit ketosis (because I thought it was important) it took me three days. Now I can go into ketosis in a few hours if I want to.

The thing is, you aren't putting clients into ketosis as the goal, right? It's just incidental, if it happens it happens, if it doesn't, it doesn't. It's not the specific objective.

I'm thinking it's kinda like the difference between "occasionally hitting failure" and "always deliberately training to failure". The former just means you're pushing yourself. The latter will bite you in the ass when your CNS craps out to protect you from hitting muscular fatigue.

Posted by: juggernaut

Quote:

Originally Posted by Built

I'm thinking it's kinda like the difference between "occasionally hitting failure" and "always deliberately training to failure". The former just means you're pushing yourself. The latter will bite you in the ass when your CNS craps out to protect you from hitting muscular fatigue.

I'm sure one of his clients is about to hit the wall, as I have been reading his ongoing log.
Poor guy is damn near starving, has high volume workouts, minimal protein consumption and hes paying to have that done to him.

Posted by: Built

Rantorcha is a grown-up and I'm sure nobody's trying to hurt anyone. Running a marathon isn't good for you either, he'll recover.

I'm sure he'll be glad when it's all done and he has the pictures though.

Now, getting back to Palumbo. So he aims for - and keeps - his clients in ketosis with high volume training and no refeeds, for up to 24 weeks at a time?

Posted by: gopro

Quote:

Originally Posted by Built

First of all, I do not consider my training high volume. My clients do maybe 18-20 total sets per workout. Many bodybuilders will almost do that many sets for one large body part.

Second, "low days" only occur on non-training days.

Third, THE POINT is that episodic ketosis does not result in muscle loss, by chronic ketosis DOES.

Fourth, just because YOU can reach ketosis so easily does not mean everyone does. It take me DAYS of under 50 grams of carbs to even begin to hit ketosis.

Fifth, no "ketosis" is not normally ever the goal unless I feel it necesasary, safe for that particular client (meaning they have incredible propensity for retaining muscle OR is not a bodybuilder). or is on drugs.

Posted by: gopro

Quote:

Originally Posted by Built

Rantorcha is a grown-up and I'm sure nobody's trying to hurt anyone. Running a marathon isn't good for you either, he'll recover.

I'm sure he'll be glad when it's all done and he has the pictures though.

Now, getting back to Palumbo. So he aims for - and keeps - his clients in ketosis with high volume training and no refeeds, for up to 24 weeks at a time?

As for Palumbo, yes, that is about it.

Posted by: Built

Quote:

Originally Posted by gopro

I have NO clue what this post is about. If you are trying to infer that Rantorcha's prep is ill-conceived, that once again speaks to your complete lack of experience of prepping competitors and your naivety of what it takes to reach the top levels of bodybuilding competition. But that is not your fault, this is NOT your field.

As for Palumbo, yes, that is about it.

That wasn't directed to you, Eric, I was responding to Juggernaut:

Quote:

Originally Posted by juggernaut

Posted by: gopro

Quote:

Originally Posted by gopro

Then please allow me to apologize for my response to you, although that was not meant as a personal shot, I assure you.

Posted by: Built

Quote:

Originally Posted by gopro

First of all, I do not consider my training high volume. My clients do maybe 18-20 total sets per workout. Many bodybuilders will almost do that many sets for one large body part.

Where did I say you do high volume?

Quote:

Originally Posted by gopro

Second, "low days" only occur on non-training days.

I may have misread Rantorcha's prep - it seemed to me that he was doing cardio on what he called a zero carb day. (I do too, it's the best time to do it - cardio doesn't need carbs, unless it's something like HIIT)

If you do any kind of training on a very low carb day, you'll go into ketosis. You'll burn those ketones as fuel if you do cardio - and you won't test any in a keto strip, but that's because there's none left to burn. Unless you follow up with a carby meal, ketones will generally re-appear in the urine an hour or so afterward, though - however, with a very high water intake, they may be too dilute to be visible on the strip.

Quote:

Originally Posted by gopro

Third, THE POINT is that episodic ketosis does not result in muscle loss, by chronic ketosis DOES.

Which is why I needed a definition here. [/quote]

Quote:

Originally Posted by gopro

Fourth, just because YOU can reach ketosis so easily does not mean everyone does. It take me DAYS of under 50 grams of carbs to even begin to hit ketosis.

OH, I could give you a workout that would have you in ketosis, lol - a depletion workout or two really speeds things up. But without training, I'd take days at under 50g myself. Hell, I'd take days at under 20g. That's pretty normal, I think.

WE DO go into ketosis more easily while fat. You're too lean, and too muscular. (Sucks to be you, lol!)

Seriously, you have less fat to let go of in the first place, and you have so much lean mass, the ketones would burn off before you could measure them.

Quote:

Originally Posted by gopro

Fifth, no "ketosis" is not normally ever the goal unless I feel it necesasary, safe for that particular client (meaning they have incredible propensity for retaining muscle OR is not a bodybuilder). or is on drugs.

This is interesting. What do you see as the benefit of ketosis - not just very low carb, but specifically ketosis - for these people for whom you deliberately set it off. When do you feel it is warranted as a deliberate goal?

Posted by: gopro

Quote:

Originally Posted by Built

The low days - especially with high volume - would put anyone training with any kind of intensity into ketosis until the higher carb day.

That is where you said high volume.

Posted by: Built

Ah, sorry. This wasn't you in particular - it's a general statement.

Lyle does this, in UD2.0, on the low days. It's done to deplete glycogen.

Posted by: gopro

Quote:

Originally Posted by Built

Where did I say you do high volume?

I may have misread Rantorcha's prep - it seemed to me that he was doing cardio on what he called a zero carb day. (I do too, it's the best time to do it - cardio doesn't need carbs, unless it's something like HIIT)

If you do any kind of training on a very low carb day, you'll go into ketosis. You'll burn those ketones as fuel if you do cardio - and you won't test any in a keto strip, but that's because there's none left to burn. Unless you follow up with a carby meal, ketones will generally re-appear in the urine an hour or so afterward, though - however, with a very high water intake, they may be too dilute to be visible on the strip.

Which is why I needed a definition here.

Seriously, you have less fat to let go of in the first place, and you have so much lean mass, the ketones would burn off before you could measure them.

This is interesting. What do you see as the benefit of ketosis - not just very low carb, but specifically ketosis - for these people for whom you deliberately set it off. When do you feel it is warranted as a deliberate goal?[/QUOTE]

-Rantorcha does do cardio on zero-carb days, but he is not my "typical" client. He is one of the one's that forces me to go a bit outside the box to get into condition as he is very much an endomorph that retains muscle very well, but also stubbornly hold onto bodyfat. This is why I mention that I do not have a "cookie cutter" approach.

-I can do my normal intense weight training for 3 straight days at 50 grams carbs per day and still not be in ketosis. And I have had many clients like this as well. This is something that varies quite a bit amongst individuals.

-True about ketosis and being "fatter," but I have not always remained this lean. I have only done this in the last few years. I used to bulk with the best of them and still had trouble with ketosis. P.S....I have to work very hard to stay lean...this is no easy task, LOL.

-Ketosis, even when transient is gives you a great opportunity to burn bodyfat because it is physiologically the best state to do so. I do not worry much about muscle loss b/c 1) Again, it is transient, and 2) It is done on non-weight training days.

Posted by: Built

Is it the ketosis itself that is doing this?

Posted by: gopro

Quote:

Originally Posted by Built

Is it the ketosis itself that is doing this?

It is the ketosis in so much that there is a lack of carbs for fuel, and thus a shift to extreme low levels of insulin, and higher levels of glucagon, growth hormone, catecholamines, and glucocorticoid. This hormonal cascade is an ideal environment for fat loss.

Posted by: Prince

is thread really going anywhere?

Posted by: Built

Quote:

Originally Posted by gopro

Define ideal.

Posted by: gopro

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prince

is thread really going anywhere?

No, it is not. Built is trying in some way to discredit me...I can tell by the tone of her questions, LOL.

I do not believe she is trying to "learn anything new."

I believe she is on a witch hunt, and can't seem to just let this go.

Posted by: Built

Now that's not very nice. I'm not calling you any names or accusing you of anything. I'm just trying to clear up some of this quandary.

Getting back to the question, can you define what you mean by "ideal" in this context?

Posted by: rantorcha

You are still arguing this?? Jeez woman! Here...le tme use a couple of these cute little emoticon-thingys to show everyone what I am feeling right now...

Posted by: Built

Hey dude.

Yeah, I honestly never really got a grip on the thesis of Eric's argument. I'm trying to define some terms so I can get some clarity on this.

How are you feeling? How's posing coming along?

Posted by: Hench

Quote:

Originally Posted by gopro

Gopro, would I be correct in saying that you are 100% confident in your methods/understanding of body building and human physiology?

If so can you please just answer the questions asked? Its not like you trying to hide anything, there is no witch hunt. Builts just trying to understand the situation better.

Posted by: Hench

Quote:

Originally Posted by rantorcha

You are still arguing this?? Jeez woman! Here...le tme use a couple of these cute little emoticon-thingys to show everyone what I am feeling right now...

Rant I dont know why you and Gopro see this as an argument/witch hunt. If it is just an exchange of questions and answers, back and forth then it can be fun, and a great learning tool for those who are following along.

Posted by: gopro

Quote:

Originally Posted by Built

Now that's not very nice. I'm not calling you any names or accusing you of anything. I'm just trying to clear up some of this quandary.

Getting back to the question, can you define what you mean by "ideal" in this context?

Now, now...I never said you were "name calling" or getting personal...that is different. However, I just do not see the quandry at all.

Ok, let's remove the word "ideal" because for some reason that has thrown you. Let me rephrase that sentence and say:

It is the ketosis in so much that there is a lack of carbs for fuel, and thus a shift to extreme low levels of insulin, and higher levels of glucagon, growth hormone, catecholamines, and glucocorticoid. This hormonal "cascade" creates an internal envronment wherein the fat burning "machinery" is in full swing and extremely efficient at this purpose.

Please do not ask me to define "full swing."

Posted by: Built

What I'm getting at in this context - and thank you for replying - is how is it that this is ideal, and yet not something you would generally try to aim for when dieting down an athlete - you do use it occasionally, at least I think that's what you said.

What is it that distinguishes between the kind of person for whom this is helpful, and for whom it will cause harm?

I swear I am not being confrontational - I absolutely know that there are some people who feel like GARBAGE on keto. You are one of them. My husband wasn't exactly delighted by the experience either. Jugg and I on the other hand, feel WONDERFUL in ketosis. I'd stay here all the time if it weren't for my damned sweet-tooth!

I'll throw you a bone, maybe this will help shape your answers. My approach hinges upon relative levels of comfort/discomfort. I say with full humility that contest prep isn't the apple of my eye. If I ever get on a stage, I'm sure I'll hire someone to prep me.

I find contest-prep academically interesting, but that's where my interest in it ends. I've prepped myself (for my profile and avatar shot), and I've prepped merkaba (for his second-place win, and avatar shot) - and two others who were NOT ready to get on a stage and I told them both, but they wanted to do it for themselves and they both looked their best - just too small to be considered.

The contest thing is the extreme end point of this sport, and it's there to give us all something to cheer for, but for most of us, we're not doing this to get on a stage. Still, it's useful to know anything that helps us achieve OUR goals, even if the stage isn't involved. Most of us in this culture will, in fact, never compete - but what we learn from watching the brave souls who venture onto a stage in their skivvies asking for judgment can do much to narrow the scope of our own personal searches.

I'm tying to get a handle on how YOU make the determination for who will do well on periods of keto dieting, and who won't.

Does this help?

Posted by: gopro

But Built...I actually said more than once that I feel just fine on keto diets! I can go without carbs for weeks at a time with no refeed and feel good with decent energy! That does not stop me from losing muscle tissue, however. Nor would it stop anyone.

I don't know...maybe we should remove the word keto and just say that extended zero carb diets are detrimental to muscle tissue...and not the "ketosis" itself. It is the lack of carbs/insulin/glycogen (and the resultant physiological enviroment that then manifests) that directly effects the mechanisms involved in muscle hypertrophy/retention...not the presence of ketone bodies.

Also, another MAIN point is that TRANSIENT periods of zero carbs...1-2 days...can be effective for fat loss, but is not enough time for the body to become catabolic to the point of real muscle loss. It is the EXTENDED/CHRONIC zero carb diet (like Palumbo, for example, champions) that is detrimental to the retention of muscle tissue during a diet.

I really don't think it needs to go any further than this.

Posted by: Built

I'm fine with that definition - I've never even MET anyone who has done a zero carb diet, much less tried it myself.

I honestly can't see why anyone would do zero carbs on purpose. How boring!

Okay, so how do you decide which of your clients to diet on periods of very low carb, and which not to?

Posted by: BigPapaPump68

Quote:

Originally Posted by gopro

But Built...I actually said more than once that I feel just fine on keto diets! I can go without carbs for weeks at a time with no refeed and feel good with decent energy! That does not stop me from losing muscle tissue, however. Nor would it stop anyone.

I don't know...maybe we should remove the word keto and just say that extended zero carb diets are detrimental to muscle tissue...and not the "ketosis" itself. It is the lack of carbs/insulin/glycogen (and the resultant physiological enviroment that then manifests) that directly effects the mechanisms involved in muscle hypertrophy/retention...not the presence of ketone bodies.

Also, another MAIN point is that TRANSIENT periods of zero carbs...1-2 days...can be effective for fat loss, but is not enough time for the body to become catabolic to the point of real muscle loss. It is the EXTENDED/CHRONIC zero carb diet (like Palumbo, for example, champions) that is detrimental to the retention of muscle tissue during a diet.

I really don't think it needs to go any further than this.

God bless you. When I go with no carbs for a week and a half, I want to go insane because my muscles look flat...Or at least that's what my body wants me to think just so i'll go and refeed on a ton of pasta, LOL.

Posted by: gopro

Quote:

Originally Posted by Built

I'm fine with that definition - I've never even MET anyone who has done a zero carb diet, much less tried it myself.

I honestly can't see why anyone would do zero carbs on purpose. How boring!

Okay, so how do you decide which of your clients to diet on periods of very low carb, and which not to?

Ok, now I need to define "zero-carb." I do not consider green veggies towards carbs. When I say "zero carbs" I mean no starches/fruit...rice, bread, pasta, potatoes, etc.

I decide on my clients first by looking at them and getting a good idea of their body type (which I have become quite good at). Getting a complete info profile on them. And most of all...working with them a bit and "learning their body/metabolism." As I have done this longer and longer I can learn people faster and faster.

Posted by: gopro

Quote:

Originally Posted by BigPapaPump68

Well, your body DOES go flat. Glycogen also keeps cells more hydrated. Without much glycogen your cells become "flat." Also, a well-hydrated cell is considered a more "anabolic cell."

Posted by: Built

Quote:

Originally Posted by gopro

Well, your body DOES go flat. Glycogen also keeps cells more hydrated.

True dat. I always have to look it up but I think it's something like 3g of water for every 1g of glycogen. The water's bound up with the glycogen though.

Quote:

Originally Posted by gopro

Without much glycogen your cells become "flat." Also, a well-hydrated cell is considered a more "anabolic cell."

Indeed, hence the reason why salt is such an underappreciated friend to the bodybuilder.

Surely you've noticed some trends in the clients you've worked with - for instance, I can usually spot which women are going to respond better to higher protein-and-fat than to lower-fat-and-higher-carbs, at least in terms of comfort and satiety. In my generally non-contest prep world, I've noticed nothing works if the individual can't stick to it.

However, this doesn't speak to the question of "who would win on a stage?"

From a physique-enhancing, "results" perspective, what broad trends have you noted with regard to carb intake and successful cutting?

Posted by: Prince

as far as being flat the only thing that matters in bodybuilding is how you look on stage the day of the show, I assume that DP is having them do a "carb load" the last few days?

Posted by: danzik17

Can definitely speak to the hydration thing....almost to the end of my zero/low carb period but holy crap I always feel thirsty no matter how much I drink of anything.

Posted by: Built

You may need salt. Are you salting your food?

Posted by: gopro

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prince

as far as being flat the only thing that matters in bodybuilding is how you look on stage the day of the show, I assume that DP is having them do a "carb load" the last few days?

Yes, and many have complained...and I have seen this too...that the body cannot make up for lost ground. There is actual MUSCLE LOSS during the diet, not just temporary flatness. THAT is the point here that I am so desperately trying to get across!!!

And some of his drug-using clients have even seen this...can you imagine naturals?

Posted by: gopro

Quote:

Originally Posted by Built

You may need salt. Are you salting your food?

By the way...I have all my competitors salt their food throughout their diet.

Posted by: Prince

Quote:

Originally Posted by gopro

the only issue I have is DP has produced so many top notch competitors that placed very well, and even win big shows.

Posted by: Built

Eric, doesn't Palumbo use refeeds with his clients?

Posted by: P-funk

Why not email Palumbo and get him on here for a discussion?
Everyone is speculating what he does, why not just get him on here and ask him?

patrick

Posted by: Built

There's a thought...

Posted by: Prince

Quote:

Originally Posted by P-funk

Why not email Palumbo and get him on here for a discussion?
Everyone is speculating what he does, why not just get him on here and ask him?

I found this:

The premise of the diet is high protein (about 1- 1 1/2 gram per pound), moderate fat (about 1/2 g per lb) and low low carbs (no direct sources of carbs). During this diet, the brain goes into ketosis (it uses ketone bodies for energy-- fats) and thus the energy requirements by the body can almost all be supplied by fats (which you'll be taking in plenty of). The only activity that uses carbs will be the weight workout which may use 40grams per workout. You will get these 40g indirectly through the foods you'll be eating. As a backup, the cheat meal you'll be having once per week will provide a storehouse of glycogen (glucose) in case of emergency. So, you see, very little gluconeogenesis in the liver will be occurring. If we keep cortisol low (by
restricting STIMULANTS) we'll ensure that muscle is spared!

HAVE YOUR CHEAT MEAL ON THE SAME DAY EVERY WEEK, last meal of the
day so you dont cheat again.

Fiber helps burn fat! Everyone should take fiber 2x per day. Fiber actually helps increase the absorption of calcium.
When following my diet plan (which includes getting your brain into ketosis), there can be NO starchy carbs eaten!

For a 200lb man:

MEAL #1
5 whole eggs (make sure to buy OMEGA-3 EGGS from the supermarket. They contain virtually NO saturated fat and tons of good OMEGA-3 fats); add another 4 egg whites to this (they don?t need to be the Omega-3 ones; you can use liquid egg whites)

MEAL #2
SHAKE: 50g Whey Protein with 1 ? tablespoon of All Natural Peanut butter (no sugar)

MEAL #3
"Lean Protein Meal": 8oz chicken with 1/2-cup cashew nuts (almonds, or walnuts)

MEAL #4
SHAKE: 50g Whey Protein with 1 ? tablespoons of All Natural Peanut butter (no sugar added)

MEAL #5
"Fatty Protein Meal": 8oz Salmon, Swordfish, or RED MEAT with a green salad (no tomatoes, carrots, or red peppers) with 1 tablespoon of Olive Oil or Macadamia nut oil and vinegar

MEAL #6
SHAKE: 50g Whey with 1 ? tablespoon all natural peanut butter or 4 whole (Omega-3) eggs and 4 extra whites

For a 250lb+ man:
Meal 1 6 whole Omega-3 eggs
Meal 2 8oz chicken with 1/2 cup raw almonds
Meal 3 50g whey with 2 tablespoons all natural peanutbutter
Meal 4 8oz salmon with 1 cup asparagus with 1 tablespoon macadamia nut oil
Meal 5 50 g whey with 2 tablespoon PB
Meal 6 6 whole eggs

Remember, it takes 3-4 days to get into a strong ketosis where your brain is using ketone bodies (fats), instead of carbs, for energy. Be patient.

Many times I'll switch to an alternatiing diet where one day it will be protein/fat......then another protein/vegetables (very little fat). The great thing about the body and fat is that ESSENTIAL FATTY ACIDS can be stored in the muscle for several days, up to 2 weeks......therefore, once an adequate storehouse of Essential Fats are built up, the body can be "tortured" a little and it still won't give up muscle (that's assuming you're still taking in adequate protein. Protein can't be stored).

1oz almonds equals 6g carbs (2 of those grams are fiber) and 2oz equals 12g of carbs.

With the beef meal (any fatty protein meal), you should have the green salad with 1 tablespoon of Olive or Mac oil INSTEAD of the nuts. Only eat the nuts with the LEAN PROTEIN MEAL (chicken, turkey, lean fish)

The best fat sources come from the essential fatty acids-- Omega-6 and Omega-3's. Most of us get plenty of Omega-6s from cooking oils, ect..........however the Omega-3's are harder to get. I recommend WHOLE OMEGA-3 EGGS, FaTTY FISHS like SALMON and SWORDFISH and TUNA and MACKEREL, ALMONDS and WALNUTS have some OMEGA-3's (as well as OMEGA-6s). ANother great fat source is MONOUNSATURATES such as EXTRA VIRGIN OLIVE OIL and MACADAMIA NUT OIL.....they aren't essential but they are great for the metabolism (great source of energy) and they are extremely good for your heart.

You're not getting any indirect sources of carbs (just from the 1 spoonful of PB.... you may want to have at least one 1/3cup nuts meal. Remember, Olive or Macadamia nut oil is predominantly a MONOUNSATURATED FAT (good for the heart, but not essential)........ the nuts, and fish oil have the essential fats in them. Also, with regard to FLAX SEED OIL, the OMEGA-3 Fatty Acids found in them (alpha-linolenic acid) has a very poor conversion to DHA and EPA (Essential Omega-3 intermediates) in the HUMAN........therefore, you're much better off taking in FISH OILS (that already contain DHA/EPA) than FLAX SEED OIL.

Once fat loss slows, I always increase cardio first, then I increase the amount of fat burners (clen, Cytomel, lipolyze).........After those other methods are exhausted, only then, do I play with the diet.

Always eat BEFORE lifting........never BETWEEN lifting and cardio.
Artificial Sweetners:
The artificial sweetener itself (eg. aspartame, sucralose) wont cause a problem. It's what some companies complex it with. For example, EQUAL and SPLENDA combine their aspartame and sucrolose with 1g of maltodextrin........whereas, in diet drinks, they don't do that. So, diet drinks are okay, SPLENDA and EQUAL must be used in moderation (STEVIA BALANCE is fine though since they use inulin fiber instead of maltodextrin

Forget using:
-MCT's are a waste when you're dieting. If you're gonna use FATS for an energy source, they might as well serve a function in the body. MCTs are useless. They can only serve as a source of energy!
-Arginine is not going to do anything. It will DO something; just not dramatic.

Cardio:
CARDIO should be performed at a low intensity (under 120bpm heartrate). This will ensure that you use FAT as a fuelsource since as your heartrate increase, carbohydrates begin to become the preferred fuel of choice for the body. When on a low carb diet, you're body will break down muscle and turn that into carbs. Remember, Fat CANNOT be changed into carbs. Therefore, for bodybuilding, the rule of cardio should be LONG DURATION, LOW INTENSITY

never do less than 20 min per session

The BOTTOM LINE is that low intensity cardio (while you might need more of it) ensures that fat is utilized and muscle is spared (especially while on my high protein/moderate fat/low carb diety).

Do you feel the treadmill is better for cardio, or is the bike(stationary or recumbent) just as good? As long as the intensity is LOW, it doesn't matter which piece of equipment you use

Q&A:
Q: Is gluconeogenesis inevitable in your diet?
Dave Palumbo: NO

Q: If so do I need to consume more than 1.5 grams of protein per lb of LBM so as not to lose muscle?
Dave Palumbo: The fat spares the protein....when the brain is in ketosis, the carbohydrate requirements are very very low.

Q: How much (percentage) of my protein intake would be turned into glucose (gluconeogenesis)?
Dave Palumbo: Very little (maybe 10%)

Q: What do you think of submersion in cold water as a means of burning bodyfat (thermogenesis)?
Dave Palumbo: HOCUS POKUS!

Q: How about drinking lots of cold water (I think this was even suggested by Elligton Darden) to help lose bodyfat?
Dave Palumbo: RIDICULOUS

Q: Do you think drinking lots of Green Tea is beneficial to fat loss?
Dave Palumbo: Somewhat helpful.

Q: How much is the ideal dosage of Omega 3 for a 220 lb. individual ?
Dave Palumbo: Try to take in about 9g per day

Q: How many Tbs of peanut butter could I have instead of 1/2 cup of cashewnuts?
Dave Palumbo: 2 tablespoons, two tablespoons of Peanut Butter contains 190 calories and 16 grams of fat (so 1.5 tablespoon equals about 12 grams fat) ...whereas......... 2oz (1/3 cup) almonds (about 40 almonds) = 12g fat

Q: I want to add that if I cant find the omega eggs here locally. Can I use international egg whites and just take an omega supplement?
Dave Palumbo: You can get away with 5 whole eggs (regular ones) once a day........not a big deal. You'll be burning up all that fat anyway.

Q: Whats the max cups # of coffee ( no sugar ) can consume on Dave's diet ?
Dave Palumbo: Try to limit to 2 cups per day.......I realize that towards the end of the diet you may need more to help you get through the day.

Q: If you cook tilapia in macadamon nut oil?do you coun't the oil as your fat for that meal! Depends how much you use.
Dave Palumbo: If you just grease the pan with it, no!

Q: what is the protein,carb and fat ratio for offseason
Dave Palumbo: 50% Protein, 25% fat, 25% carbs

Q: and the ratio for contest prep.
Dave Palumbo:60% protein, 30% fat, 10% carbs

Posted by: danzik17

Quote:

Originally Posted by Built

You may need salt. Are you salting your food?

Should be getting plenty. The majority of my meals are liberally salted with Sea Salt.

Posted by: P-funk

just emailed him.

we'll see what happens!

patrick

Posted by: gopro

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prince

the only issue I have is DP has produced so many top notch competitors that placed very well, and even win big shows.

Please Rob, don't get the wrong idea. Dave is without a doubt one of the greatest minds in this industry. He has helped thousands, and is especially good at dispensing sane and solid information on the proper use and effects of performance enhancing drugs. I have total respect for him, despite the way we left off. Shit, we were getting ready to write a book together!

That said...yes, he has successfully dieted down MANY top competitors, but the majority of those are on drugs...a lot of drugs, and this can easily make up for most of the things I discuss about the pitfalls of keto diets. Thus, I base my discussion/thoughts more on those bodybuilders that compete drug free.

But still, it is my opinion that even drug users should keep some well-timed carbs in their diet. To just use Evan Centopani as an example. He won the Nationals on Dave's diet...and he deserved it. However, he won it no where near at his best (same with Mike Liberatore most recently)! Evan was ripped, but very flat. His muscle had no "pop." In the NYC Pro last weekend, he was back to eating carbs and not only was he ripped, but extremely full and vascular! His muscles were pushing hard through the skin. They were not on Dave's diet.

I think Dave should loosen his approach a bit, and look at each person individually...and not just go keto, keto, keto. I think he would be even MORE successful than he already is!

But anyway...let me again say, that I think Dave is a brilliant man.

Posted by: P-funk

Hopefully he responds to the thread so we can talk about the possibility of him "loosening his approach"!!

If he registers here and starts to comment in this thread, it will slowly work its way up to one of my favorite threads. I have to admit, the last two or three pages have gotten more into personal attacks and nonsense, so the thread has slipped a little from the top of my list.

Patrick

Posted by: gopro

Quote:

Originally Posted by P-funk

Hopefully he responds to the thread so we can talk about the possibility of him "loosening his approach"!!

If he registers here and starts to comment in this thread, it will slowly work its way up to one of my favorite threads. I have to admit, the last two or three pages have gotten more into personal attacks and nonsense, so the thread has slipped a little from the top of my list.

Patrick

Actually, if he comes here it will just end up to be the same "argument" we had over at MD (forum/mag), which I will not repeat. He disagrees with me...I disagree with him. Same sh%t different forum. Thus, I would stay out of it, and let him just say all he wants to.

Regardless, I think its been a cool thread overall, and I was glad to be a part of it. I honestly do not think there is anything else I could say on this topic, however.

Peace.

Posted by: Built

Quote:

Originally Posted by P-funk

just emailed him.

we'll see what happens!

patrick

I did too lol!

Posted by: nkira

And now I am waiting for the climax!!!! Cant wait to see the man himself has to say.

Good call Patrick & Built......

Posted by: juggernaut

Agreed. Personal opinions aside, this is a good thread with a ton of interesting views.

Posted by: DROS

I am here on Dave's behalf to answer any questions and clear up any misconceptions about his dietary recommendations.

I am not here to get into a pissing match with Eric or to disrespect him in anyway. Dave has the utmost respect for Eric and this is not personal.

Posted by: ZECH

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prince

I found this:

Q: and the ratio for contest prep.
Dave Palumbo:60% protein, 30% fat, 10% carbs

OK, so for a good sized guy getting ready for a comp, say 3k calories per day is still 300g carbs per day. This is not even close to being is ketosis.

Posted by: ZECH

Quote:

Originally Posted by DROS

I am here on Dave's behalf to answer any questions and clear up any misconceptions about his dietary recommendations.

I am not here to get into a pissing match with Eric or to disrespect him in anyway. Dave has the utmost respect for Eric and this is not personal.

Thank you for your time and the respectful comments.

Posted by: Built

Quote:

Originally Posted by DROS

DROS - thank you so much, and welcome!

This thread really took on a life of its own, for sure.

Part of the problem was just nailing down the definition of low carb and keto diet - there's a continuum of dieting strategies that can easily fit either or both of these formats.

Let me start off by saying I'm a big fan of higher fat, very low carb dieting for fat loss - if for no other reason than "it's comfortable!". Low fat, high carb diets make me so hungry I could chew my arm off.

Broser contends that comfortable or not, barring AAS use, this type of dieting catabolizes lean mass in all but the genetic elite. I use this strategy myself and as a former fatty who was on metformin for insulin resistance by the time I was 38 years old, I'm hardly elite. I'm just a middle aged broad who likes steak and hates starving. (The result of my first and so far only real cut are in my profile pic and my avatar. I'm 14% in those, confirmed by DEXA, 100% natural in those shots. I'm now on HRT)

Broser further contends that Palumbo's clients came in flatter and lost too much muscle on his programme - but we're not at all clear on Palumbo's protocol - only that it is low carb and leans heavily on protein and modestly high healthy fats, with emphasis on fish oil and monos, and only LISS cardio if cardio is used at all.

Prince returned with the fact that Palumbo has such an incredible track record of successful athletes.

Palumbo has criticized Broser's article based on inaccuracies pertaining to human physiologic responses to dietary interventions. Broser contends that without an insulin response, muscle will be lost.

Can you shed some light on Palumbo's methods and offer clarification?

Posted by: ZECH

Quote:

Originally Posted by Built

Let me start off by saying I'm a big fan of higher fat, very low carb dieting for fat loss - if for no other reason than "it's comfortable!". Low fat, high carb diets make me so hungry I could chew my arm off.

I just wanted to say that since you are a fan of lyle's, he once said that you could get ripped from table sugar given that calories were in check.

Posted by: Built

You bet. I agree completely.

Posted by: ZECH

Then if its all about calories, why the fight about carbs?

Posted by: Built

Quote:

Originally Posted by dg806

Then if its all about calories, why the fight about carbs?

Exactly.

Posted by: Prince

Quote:

Originally Posted by dg806

I just wanted to say that since you are a fan of lyle's, he once said that you could get ripped from table sugar given that calories were in check.

I would argue that, recent science is proving that a calorie is not just a calorie as once thought.

Posted by: Built

I am very much looking forward to reading more about this. Robert, you had mentioned something a while back about a study coming out. Any word?

Posted by: juggernaut

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prince

as far as being flat the only thing that matters in bodybuilding is how you look on stage the day of the show, I assume that DP is having them do a "carb load" the last few days?

this is the only time where I can truly say that carbs are beneficial. Other than that, if I could stay low carb forever, and compete as a keto bber, I would. But, salt and carbs do have their place. I will stay low carb until I die. I hate the days preceding a show, because I dread how I will feel carbed up.

Posted by: gopro

Quote:

Originally Posted by DROS

DROS...not sure who you are but thanks for coming by.

And I think your above comment was awesome. I will say over and over again that THIS IS NOT PERSONAL, just as you mention. I have sat in Dave's home, gone out to dinner with him, and spoken with him more than once about diet and such...I consider him a friend, colleague, and one of the most intelligent people involved in this industry. What happened between us at MD was unfortunate and I only hope he is thriving over at RX Muscle! Experts in this field disagree all the time, and this is nothing new. Give him my best.

Posted by: Prince

Quote:

Originally Posted by Built

I am very much looking forward to reading more about this. Robert, you had mentioned something a while back about a study coming out. Any word?

study has not been published.

Posted by: gopro

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prince

I would argue that, recent science is proving that a calorie is not just a calorie as once thought.

I would argue that as well.

Posted by: P-funk

Some of Lyle's articles on the subject:

Hormonal Responses to a Fast-Food Meal Compared with Nutritionally Comparable Meals of Different Composition - Research Review | BodyRecomposition - The Home of Lyle McDonald

Is a Calorie a Calorie? | BodyRecomposition - The Home of Lyle McDonald

Enjoy,

Patrick

Posted by: Prince

Author Lyle_McDonald - Articles by Lyle_McDonald on Bodybuilding, Diet, Nutrition and Supplements

Posted by: DROS

Quote:

Originally Posted by gopro

Thank you Eric. To clarify for you and everyone, I am Dave's assitant (and sitting at his kitchen table right now). I am very well versed in his diet, supplement, and drug recommendations and have applied his dieting methods to myself and people I advise.

On Dave's behalf, I am sorry if you felt his MD response was personal. Nothing in that Q&A was meant to be more then a debate on diet.

I am here to talk theory, science, and results. Dave is stuck finishing up a lot of content we gathered at the NY Pro and preparing to leave in a couple days for the Jr. USA.

Posted by: DROS

Quote:

Originally Posted by Built

I am going to be fair (or at least try)...I have dieting both ways personally and had terrible hunger either way. I lose fat quickly and easily and I am sure I can get ripped with carbs, but I found that I am able to take in more calories and hold onto more muscle on Dave's diet plan.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Built

Broser contends that comfortable or not, barring AAS use, this type of dieting catabolizes lean mass in all but the genetic elite. I use this strategy myself and as a former fatty who was on metformin for insulin resistance by the time I was 38 years old, I'm hardly elite. I'm just a middle aged broad who likes steak and hates starving. (The result of my first and so far only real cut are in my profile pic and my avatar. I'm 14% in those, confirmed by DEXA, 100% natural in those shots. I'm now on HRT)

I dont know how to intelligently combat this statement...we all lose some muscle on the way to extreme contest condition. This is true for any diet and I have not seen any proof or even anecdotal evidence that a keto diet provides more muscle loss than a moderate carb diet. My opinion is that 90% of the people that think they lost a ton of muscle just never had as much as they hoped. When you lose 80lbs on the way to a show, instead of realizing you were fat, you say that you lost a lot of muscle.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Built

Broser further contends that Palumbo's clients came in flatter and lost too much muscle on his programme - but we're not at all clear on Palumbo's protocol - only that it is low carb and leans heavily on protein and modestly high healthy fats, with emphasis on fish oil and monos, and only LISS cardio if cardio is used at all.

The "flat" thing drives me nuts. Someone goes from a bloated 275 to 250 in the first week of the diet and the guy will tell you how flat he is. Stay on the diet for a few weeks, take in plenty of sodium, and once your body adjusts and water gets re-balanced you will have forgotten about being flat. Of course you could fill out with glycogen and water, but why is this necessary and what does it have to do with muscle loss. All it can do is slow fat loss, which is the goal. This is the equivilant to wondering why your max squat dropped after 12 weeks of dieting. Of course it did, that is part of the sacrifice to get ripped. You get a little weaker and you flatten out. It is part of the dieting process.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Built

Prince returned with the fact that Palumbo has such an incredible track record of successful athletes.

Sure does.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Built

Palumbo has criticized Broser's article based on inaccuracies pertaining to human physiologic responses to dietary interventions. Broser contends that without an insulin response, muscle will be lost.

Can you shed some light on Palumbo's methods and offer clarification?

Rather than do a homework essay and give all of the tenants of Dave's diet, here is a link to his Q&A answers at RxMuscle.com: DAVE'S Q&A. Check out the first few entries for his basic diet plans and then read on for tons of clarifications.

From there I will gladly answer any questions and clarify as I can.

A few key points:

Dave uses a meal plan and it is designed to be adjusted by him as a coach. Dont expect to pick this up and use it to perfection with his ability to modify and tweak.
This diet is proven to work for naturals and those using enhancements.
Low intensity cardio every day is integral to the diet.

Posted by: Built

Okay, I'll start:

Is there a modification of the plan for naturals, or is it the same assisted or not?

How does the training change from the start of the cut to the end of the cut?

Posted by: DROS

Quote:

Originally Posted by Built

Okay, I'll start:

Is there a modification of the plan for naturals, or is it the same assisted or not?

How does the training change from the start of the cut to the end of the cut?

The plan starts the same with or without drugs. Drugs are not a crutch, they are an enhancement to get you to the goal quicker and maybe better. The modifications for a natural is that you have to diet slower and make more subtle adjustments. You can force an enhanced athlete to take in far lower calories without worrying about muscle loss. In contrast, a natural athlete has to diet for a longer duration and deal with a slower progression of weight loss in order to spare muscle. So the answer is that the diet starts the same, but Dave needs to start a natural athlete further out from the show.

Weight training never changes. Intense, heavy, and relatively short durations (45-60min long weight training sessions).

Posted by: Built

Does the training volume drop back a bit as the cut progresses? I reduced my own training volume when I did the most successful "real" cut. For instance, for a split that had a 5x5, a 3x8 and a 2-3x12 for a given movement pattern (say, quad-dominant work) I first dropped the 12 rep stuff. Then I reduced the 5x5 to 4x5, then 3x5 - always doing what I could to keep the intensity high and to keep iron on the bar.

Does this sound in any way familiar, or does Mr. Palumbo prefer to lower the weights a bit in order to keep the volume the same throughout?

Posted by: juggernaut

Quote:

Originally Posted by DROS

This particular summary is of great interest to me. Can this happen to anyone who is particularly keto for medical reasons? I have epilepsy and found that a high fat, high protein diet is an outstanding way for me to live. I also compete, and hate the way I feel when adding carbs back into the glycogen loading process. Can this be done without carbing up all the way to the hellweek of a show?

Posted by: gopro

Quote:

Originally Posted by DROS

Cool stuff DROS! I don't want to rehash the MD thing, and why I felt he made it personal. I know Dave is a good guy, so I am sure I took it in a way he did not mean it.

I already know everything you will say to combat my thoughts, as Dave has already said them. All I will add is that there ARE researchers and research out there that helps explain why muscle loss can occur in the total absence of carbs for an extended period (as well as solid physiological reasons). However, more than that, I base my opinion on my work with clients over the last 20 years or so.

That said...we both know of Dave's success, and I will not debate that. I will not debate my own either. Nothing in extreme bodybuilding is black and white, and perhaps what is optimal falls somewhere in between what Dave and I suggest.

Anyway, I am now taking my leave and will allow you the floor for the remainder to answer the questions (and you will get a lot, LOL) about Dave's approach.

Posted by: ZECH

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prince

I would argue that, recent science is proving that a calorie is not just a calorie as once thought.

I have the same thoughts on this, but Built seems to think everything Lyle says is like God speaking and she agreed with the statement. Not saying he isn't a very smart man, just that everyone can't always be right about everything.

Posted by: Built

Hm... That's not quite right. I read the science that he draws from, and the conclusions are based upon sound principals. That being said, show me proof of your assertion and I'll be delighted to change my mind.

Recall, I started with Atkins. Atkins is a strong proponent of the "metabolic advantage" and I believed it - for the first three years I got into this - until I was forced to accept there was no evidence of this metabolic advantage.

I would actually be delighted to read evidence of its existence. It sure as shit FELT like a metabolic advantage.

I can't tell you how much I wish I had it to do over again. I would have tracked calories - not just carbs - and had a DEXA at the very beginning.

Posted by: Built

"They say we're young and we don't know
And won't find out unt-i-i-il we gr <SMASH!>"

Loved that movie.

Posted by: ZECH

Quote:

Originally Posted by gopro

And yes, I know...I do not look anywhere near 40 years old!

40 is the new 20!

Posted by: juggernaut

can we get back to topic this is stupid

Posted by: ZECH

Quote:

Originally Posted by juggernaut

hey Mod, think you need to go over your thread again, because she has in fact sited SEVERAL other sources. Anyway,

these comments are unnecessary.

So you can make unecessary comments, but I can't? I was just pointing out a fact. Oh, I forgot, you ignore facts

Posted by: gopro

Quote:

Originally Posted by dg806

40 is the new 20!

Hey, did you read the Iron Man article I wrote with that title?

Posted by: ZECH

Quote:

Originally Posted by gopro

Hey, did you read the Iron Man article I wrote with that title?

No, I was never able to get a copy. I looked and nobody around here carried it. Do you have any extra copies left?

Posted by: tucker01

You know what... Jugg or any of the Cronies not contributing to any discussion, drop it. There is a chance for some good learning and the arrogant remarks ruin any chance for an open discussion.

Posted by: nkira

I thought you loved movies where things blow up!!!!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Built

"They say we're young and we don't know
And won't find out unt-i-i-il we gr <SMASH!>"

Loved that movie.

Posted by: nkira

Ok, I agree back to topic.......

Posted by: Prince

Quote:

Originally Posted by juggernaut

can we get back to topic this is stupid

funny coming from you, you're the one that continues to personally attack gopro and post crap here, you're useless to this thread, you should just shut-up and read what is posted here as you obviously have NOTHING constructive or positive to contribute to it!

Posted by: Yanick

Okay if the children are done bickering, they can go back to the kiddie table now lol.

I started looking through research now to see what I might have missed in the past year or more that I've neglected this area of interest. As always its muddled up and you can barely ever find a free full text, and I'm broke as hell so don't be expecting me to pay $30 for this crap. So abstracts will have to do to stimulate further discussion.

Non-Equilibrium Thermodynamics and Energy Efficiency in Weightloss Diets

I have 1 question from the above article. What does a decreased serum TAG level have to do with regards to fatty acid oxidation/energy balance? I'm unaware of the biochemistry as it relates to this.

I'll see what else I can dig up, this abstract just struck me as interesting (plus it was done in my city, where I had done some clinical rotations so I wanted to pimp it a bit).

Full Text with with a nice overview of some issues that are pertinent to this discussion. Re-iterates some of the stuff from the Lyle McDonald articles Patrick posted.

Posted by: gopro

Quote:

Originally Posted by dg806

No, I was never able to get a copy. I looked and nobody around here carried it. Do you have any extra copies left?

dg...I do not have any copies, but if you want me to email the article to you I will.

Ok...go ahead and discuss the main topic!!

Posted by: ZECH

Quote:

Originally Posted by gopro

dg...I do not have any copies, but if you want me to email the article to you I will.

Ok...go ahead and discuss the main topic!!

If you can, that would be awesome! Thanks

Posted by: Yanick

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yanick

Okay if the children are done bickering, they can go back to the kiddie table now lol.

I started looking through research now to see what I might have missed in the past year or more that I've neglected this area of interest. As always its muddled up and you can barely ever find a free full text, and I'm broke as hell so don't be expecting me to pay $30 for this crap. So abstracts will have to do to stimulate further discussion.

Non-Equilibrium Thermodynamics and Energy Efficiency in Weightloss Diets

I have 1 question from the above article. What does a decreased serum TAG level have to do with regards to fatty acid oxidation/energy balance? I'm unaware of the biochemistry as it relates to this. EDIT; TAG=Triglyceride for all intents and purposes. Still don't understand if lower serum TAG is a good or bad thing in relation to dieting as we don't know if the TG's were taken up by muscle/liver (for energy production) or fat (for storage).

I'll see what else I can dig up, this abstract just struck me as interesting (plus it was done in my city, where I had done some clinical rotations so I wanted to pimp it a bit).

Full Text with with a nice overview of some issues that are pertinent to this discussion. Re-iterates some of the stuff from the Lyle McDonald articles Patrick posted.

Full Text of the first paper I posted is available here. Color me stupid.

Posted by: Prince

Quote:

Originally Posted by dg806

No, I was never able to get a copy. I looked and nobody around here carried it. Do you have any extra copies left?

the article is right on IronMagazine.com! 40 is the New 20

Posted by: Prince

Quote:

Originally Posted by Built

Hm... That's not quite right. I read the science that he draws from, and the conclusions are based upon sound principals. That being said, show me proof of your assertion and I'll be delighted to change my mind.

Recall, I started with Atkins. Atkins is a strong proponent of the "metabolic advantage" and I believed it - for the first three years I got into this - until I was forced to accept there was no evidence of this metabolic advantage.

I would actually be delighted to read evidence of its existence. It sure as shit FELT like a metabolic advantage.

I can't tell you how much I wish I had it to do over again. I would have tracked calories - not just carbs - and had a DEXA at the very beginning.

if a calorie is a calorie why don't you eat carbs?

Posted by: Hench

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prince

if a calorie is a calorie why don't you eat carbs?

Because they make her hungry. Protein and fat are much more satiating than carbs.

Posted by: tucker01

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prince

if a calorie is a calorie why don't you eat carbs?

Because when cutting, carbs don't give that satiety affect

Posted by: Prince

Quote:

Originally Posted by Moondogg

Because they make her hungry. Protein and fat are much more satiating than carbs.

oh, I bet there is more reason to it than that.

Posted by: Prince

it's clinically proven that a low carb diet is the fastest and most effective way to lose bodyfat, there have been controlled studies to prove this, and it had nothing to do with satiety.

Posted by: Built

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prince

if a calorie is a calorie why don't you eat carbs?

I do eat carbs. Just not a lot of 'em.

I don't generally eat starches and sugars because they make me hungry.

No other reason.

Posted by: Built

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prince

oh, I bet there is more reason to it than that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prince

it's clinically proven that a low carb diet is the fastest and most effective way to lose bodyfat, there have been controlled studies to prove this, and it had nothing to do with satiety.

Robert, I'd be delighted to read anything you have that proves this.

For the record - I'd eat this way even if it didn't work as well as higher-carb plans because it's so damned comfortable! Every single metric of my health improved when I switched over to reduced carbs and higher fats - and I have the photographs, DEXA scans and blood work to prove it.

I know, n=1

But n=1 is nice when that 1 is you!

Posted by: nkira

Try this.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bricklayer85

what does a dexa scan do?

Posted by: ZECH

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prince

if a calorie is a calorie why don't you eat carbs?

Thanks. Thats the point I was trying to make.

Posted by: ZECH

Quote:

Originally Posted by Built

For the record - I'd eat this way even if it didn't work as well as higher-carb plans because it's so damned comfortable! Every single metric of my health improved when I switched over to reduced carbs and higher fats - and I have the photographs, DEXA scans and blood work to prove it.

I know, n=1

But n=1 is nice when that 1 is you!

IMO, it seems you are hung up on carbs and ketosis because you are so concerned about fat loss. Now I will agree that a lower carb diet is better for insulin control and health like you mentioned, but you also need to be concerned with what type of carbs you are eating. Brocolli for example is almost half fiber which can be digested and you don't have as many carbs as you think. Those types of carbs will make you hungry. But IMO stuff like rice and pasta are much more filling, but are very high on the glycemic index which can be bad if you need to watch stuff like that. It is very easy to fall into a routine that you are comfortable with. I would be very interested to see what happended in your case if you switch diet plans for say 6 months that included carbs, but still stayed in your calorie range.

Posted by: Built

Quote:

Originally Posted by dg806

Dg, you bring up some interesting points with regard to fat loss, and also with regard to satiety.

I am not concerned with fat loss. I have no problem dropping fat. I know how to do it, and I do it every year, after my Christmas bulk.

Broccoli is something I eat because it helps with satiety. Pasta and rice to me are not satiating - but that's partially because I'm a former fatty, partially because I'm a chick and partially because I have gluten intolerance - at least with regard to the pasta. Broccoli contains soluble and insoluble fibre. Soluble fibre promotes satiety.

I'll expand upon this last point. In "normal", lean, never-fat individuals, the insulin response that accompanies foods like rice and pasta promotes satiety. In insulin resistant folks (often obese, or dieted-down former fatties), insulin is overproduced and satiety is suppressed. If you're one who feels satiety from "slow" carbs, this seems incongruous. If you're one who feels hungry from "slow" carbs, you can't imagine feeling anything but freakish hunger for the rest of the day if you eat this way. For me, eating anything starchy in the AM turns on appetite for the whole day. It's like saying "Okay, cheat day. Let 'er rip!".

I feel hungrier on 2500 calories with substantial carb intake, than I do on 1200 calories and <50g total carb intake.

I was a fat jogger eating low fat, no white ANYTHING, no sugar. I could NOT control my hunger.

It gets more complicated than this. Males and females may respond to different satiety cues. Males often respond well to "volume" - so a diet high in bulky foods, brown rice, slow carbs, veggies, lean protein - is often very satiating for males, particularly if they've never been obese.

Females - particularly fat, estrogen-dominant females - may be more sensitive to the postprandial satiety that is due to cholecystokinin, which is generated the most by protein and fat and the least by carbohydrate. Oh - the gluten intolerance thing I mentioned above? Turns out that in Celiac, postprandial CCK production is suppressed. Explains why a lot of people lose weight when they ditch grains.

So… If you're a fat or formerly fat woman with a big ass and you want to feel satiety after your meals, eat protein and fat.

If you are a formerly fat woman with a big ass and you want to feel freakishly hungry all the time, eat a diet that is low in fat, eat only lean protein and eat filling, bulky foods such as brown rice, whole grain pasta and loads of low-fat veggies. Enjoy berating yourself about your lack of willpower every time you cave in and eat walnuts.

I can't comfortably stay in my maintenance calorie range if I go to a higher-carb diet because I have to pay for it with protein and or fat. Satiety is compromised when I do this. The best I can manage and still feel comfortable is carb-cycling, where I eat a little glucose or glucose polymer (starch) near the workout window. I train at night, so I eat what carbs I must consume near bedtime. And NEVER in the AM.

Posted by: DROS

Quote:

Originally Posted by Built

Does the training volume drop back a bit as the cut progresses? I reduced my own training volume when I did the most successful "real" cut. For instance, for a split that had a 5x5, a 3x8 and a 2-3x12 for a given movement pattern (say, quad-dominant work) I first dropped the 12 rep stuff. Then I reduced the 5x5 to 4x5, then 3x5 - always doing what I could to keep the intensity high and to keep iron on the bar.

Does this sound in any way familiar, or does Mr. Palumbo prefer to lower the weights a bit in order to keep the volume the same throughout?

You will find on Dave's diet plan that you maintain that low end strength, but your endurance goes to hell. As the diet wears on you need to reduce volume in order to keep the same high intensity day in and day out. You spend a ton of time buring calories on the treadmill. When you hit the weights you want to break down the muscles as quick as possible.

Posted by: DROS

Quote:

Originally Posted by gopro

Eric has made some great contributions to this discussion and I hope everyone appreciates him coming on here.

I like what you said above but I would re-phrase it: I think the optimal strategy is different for everyone and your method might work here and his there. Then a combination of the two might work for a third person.

I want to help explain why Dave's diet works and that is independent of Eric's methods - it is not a competition. Both can and do work. I hope that I might say or explain something that could really hit home and help someone find a new way to reach his/her goals. And I am sure Eric already convinced a few people to try his way.

Posted by: DROS

Quote:

Originally Posted by juggernaut

We use a very moderate carb-up before a show. Add about 30g (of course it depends on the person) of rice to each meal on Thursday and Friday and there is your carb up. Nothing crazy and no risk of over-doing it. And if the person is really sensitive to carbs Dave might start adding them in Friday.

Some people just cant process and utilize carbs effectivly and there is a small space between depleted and spilled over. In that case the person has to take in very little and rely on supreme conditioning.

Posted by: ZECH

Quote:

Originally Posted by Built

This was interesting. Even though I have never heard the "formerly fat" therory, I find this thought interesting. Like you said, I suspect it has alot to do with insulin response. Luckily, I don't have that problem. If I gain weight and want to loose some, I just cut back in general, not just carbs.

Posted by: Built

Quote:

Originally Posted by DROS

Quote:

Originally Posted by DROS

Ooooh, do I hear you on the spillover. <cries>

What do you think of "shitloading"? I get SUCH wicked pumps the day after a poutine-fest! (Poutine, for those of you who are unfamiliar with my guilty Eastern Canadian pleasure, is a greasy pile of fries topped with cheese curds and what they call bbq sauce - really just a somewhat thin gravy that melts the curds into the fries and creates a tangle of greasy, French-Canadian Heaven!)

Posted by: Built

Quote:

Originally Posted by dg806

Thank you dg - I found it very interesting myself. As I've mentioned many times, as vain as I am, I can NOT deal with freakish hunger. My focus starts at satiety and ends with body composition - not the other way around. I have to at least be able to feel sated for PART of the day or I can't do this.

With regard to "former fatties", my cursory understanding is that Leptin is involved. Fat cells grow and shrink, but they never leave. Diet down a fatty and leptin drops. When leptin drops, you feel hungry. There's a LOT more to this and I'm only just scratching the surface, but in my mind, it's like the movie Little Shop of Horrors, you know, "FEED ME SEYMOUR"!!! All those hungry fat cells, BEGGING me to feed them. IT'S SO LOUD!!! LOL!

Posted by: DROS

Quote:

Originally Posted by Built

Very similar to how I do things. The higher rep stuff I just ditch, and try to keep the iron on the bar with the low-rep stuff that doesn't really depend on glycogen. Helps convince the muscle I need it to stick around while I ride out the self-imposed "famine".

I do like to incorporate a few short bursts of HIIT (about five or six minutes worth of 20:40 work:rest intervals) before some of my steady-state cardio though. Not every time, and not every day, but I liked what happened when I did this twice a week after weights.

Ooooh, do I hear you on the spillover. <cries>

What do you think of "shitloading"? I get SUCH wicked pumps the day after a poutine-fest! (Poutine, for those of you who are unfamiliar with my guilty Eastern Canadian pleasure, is a greasy pile of fries topped with cheese curds and what they call bbq sauce - really just a somewhat thin gravy that melts the curds into the fries and creates a tangle of greasy, French-Canadian Heaven!)

First of all, that sounds gross

This is like the competitor who says how great he looks the day after a show...he might look great in a tank top, but on stage his glutes arent as tight. The sodium and influx of calories from "shit loading" will give you a huge pump after a long diet and depleted state, but it will also be short lived and blur some condition.

Posted by: Prince

Quote:

Originally Posted by Built

if a calorie is just a calorie I would LOVE to see you replace half of your protein and fats with Hershey's candy bars and report back to us in 2 months, by your assertions there would be NO change in your body composition providing that you can control your appetite and keep your calories the same.

Posted by: Hench

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prince

This is silly, its not a real world example.

It has been said all along that minimum protein and fat requirements had to be met first and foremost, before you start playing around with the rest of your calories.

Posted by: gopro

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prince

This is absolutely correct, and would give a real world answer to the "is a calorie a calorie" debate.

Of course if your diet is 50% protein (for example), it will likely not make much difference if the remainder is 35% carbs and 15% fats or vice versa...until we go into the land of low single digit bodyfat. But there are many who need to venture here so...

Posted by: Prince

Quote:

Originally Posted by Moondogg

no, actually it would be a great real world example!

why wouldn't minimum protein/fat intake be met?

Posted by: danzik17

So here's a question that I've been wondering about for a while and Lyle/Dave seems to have completely opposite viewpoints:

Given the research surrounding the EC stack, what does Dave think of it for fat loss? I know that Dave is a big proponent of no stimulants since they increase cortisol, so what is his stance on the stack?

Posted by: Hench

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prince

no, actually it would be a great real world example!

why wouldn't minimum protein/fat intake be met?

I suppose they could be met, but this isn't what the discussion is about. We're trying to figure out if very low carbs diets cause excessive muscle loss, how did we get onto chocolate bars?

Anybody who considers themsevles to be a bodybuilder and follow the lifestyle will not fill the rest of their calories by eating chocolate bars. They would miss out on too many nutrients and their health would suffer because of it.

Posted by: Prince

Quote:

Originally Posted by Moondogg

there has been more going on here besides just the keto debate.

really, I don't see why not, if a calorie is just a calorie and they have met their protein and fats requirements, what is wrong with using candy bars? cheap, good tasting and satisfying calories.

Posted by: Hench

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prince

Have a read through this:

What's Inside Chocolate Bars?

Posted by: Prince

Quote:

Originally Posted by Moondogg

Have a read through this:

What's Inside Chocolate Bars?

okay, I will change it to a all natural, healthy chocolate, would that be better?

btw and this is not bullshit, straight from Tom Plat's mouth at a seminar, he used to train with IFBB Pro bodybuilder Lee Priest, in the off season Lee used pure chocolate (among other calorie rich foods) to get in his necessary daily calorie requirements, however I don't recall him saying anything about Lee eating the chocolate when preparing for a show.

Posted by: P-funk

Quote:

Originally Posted by Moondogg

Have a read through this:

What's Inside Chocolate Bars?

I would like to know what study they got the statement "high fructose corn syrup blocks leptin from reaching the brain" from. that would be an interesting study to read.

patrick

Posted by: Built

Quote:

Originally Posted by P-funk

I would like to know what study they got the statement "high fructose corn syrup blocks leptin from reaching the brain" from. that would be an interesting study to read.

patrick

Patrick, I was just writing about this a few weeks ago. See if you can get the full version of this article:

ScienceDirect - Regulatory Peptides : Effects of sucrose, glucose and fructose on peripheral and central appetite signals

Quote:

Effects of sucrose, glucose and fructose on peripheral and central appetite signals
Andreas Lindqvist, a, , Annemie Baelemansa and Charlotte Erlanson-Albertssona
Department of Experimental Medical Science, Lund University, Lund, Sweden

Received 30 October 2007; revised 27 May 2008; accepted 19 June 2008. Available online 26 June 2008.

Abstract
In the Western world, consumption of soft drinks has increased the last three decades and is partly responsible for the epidemic-like increase in obesity. Soft drinks, originally sweetened by sucrose, are now sweetened by other caloric sweeteners, such as fructose. In this study, we investigated the short-term effect of sucrose, glucose or fructose solutions on food intake and body weight in rats, and on peripheral and central appetite signals. Rats received water containing either of the sugars and standard rat chow for two weeks. Rats receiving water alone and standard chow were controls. All rats offered the sugar solutions increased their total caloric intake. The increased caloric intake occurred despite the fact that the rats offered either of the sugar solutions consumed less chow. As a consequence of the increased caloric intake, the sugar-drinking rats had elevated serum levels of free fatty acids, triglycerides and cholesterol. In addition, consuming sugar solutions resulted in increased serum leptin, decreased serum PYY and down-regulated hypothalamic NPY mRNA. Serum ghrelin was increased in rats receiving fructose solution. Moreover, consumption of sucrose or fructose solution resulted in up-regulated hypothalamic CB1 mRNA. Hypothalamic POMC mRNA was down-regulated in rats receiving glucose or fructose.

In conclusion, consumption of glucose, sucrose or fructose solution results in caloric overconsumption and body weight gain through activation of hunger signals and depression of satiety signals as well as activation of reward components. The weight-promoting effect of these sugar solutions may possibly be ameliorated by the down-regulation of NPY mRNA and increased serum leptin.

Posted by: Built

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prince

<stamps tiny foot in rage>
But I CAN'T perform this experiment!!! I'll get too hungry!!!
<whines like a three year old>

Seriously, not without some crystal meth to control my appetite. As I mentioned above:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Built

I can't comfortably stay in my maintenance calorie range if I go to a higher-carb diet because I have to pay for it with protein and or fat. Satiety is compromised when I do this.

Besides, please, Robert, show some compassion and at least offer me Lindt.

Hershey's is the worst tasting crap out there.

Quote:

Originally Posted by gopro

Eric, I realize you do this for a living, but outside of your highly specialized corner of the industry, there are relatively few who ever bother to do this.

Most of us just want to look good in a bathing suit.

A few of us take it farther, and fewer still take it far enough to make it onstage.

But I hear you - and you won't get an argument from me that eating more carbs might work better for some than for others with regard to satiety, and carbups.

However, even if I could manage my hunger and the ensuing migraines, it would do nothing but give an n=1 deliverable to you, something you have repeatedly said wouldn't count because of my apparently remarkable genetics.

Furthermore, what are you hoping it would reveal - that I keep MORE muscle doing this? Recall, your concern was that I lose too much muscle because of ketosis.

Do you realize you are now arguing that I'd keep MORE muscle if I managed to tolerate cutting-calories on sufficient protein and fat, with the remaining calories coming from chocolate bars?

Moondogg spotted the logic:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Moondogg

We're trying to figure out if very low carbs diets cause excessive muscle loss, how did we get onto chocolate bars?

Thanks Moondogg.

Posted by: gopro

Quote:

Originally Posted by Built

Hershey's is the worst tasting crap out there.

What I am asserting is quite simple really.

When dieting you must be in a negative caloric balance. If you are a hard training athlete that is required to retain as much muscle mass as possible while losing as much bodyfat as possible you will be able to do this more efficiently with the inclusion of (some) carbs in your diet, especially if timed properly...meal 1, pre-training meal (early on in diet), post training meal. In other words, the eventual fat loss will be the same, but there will be more lean tissue left on the athlete that is utilizing carbs properly.

Also, I am asserting that "a calorie is not a calorie" in the strictest sense. 3000 calories of sweet potato (I won't even go so far as using candy) will bring about a different body composition than 3000 calories of eye of round steak.

It is that simple Built. This conversation was never pointed towards the average sedentary person, but athletes and bodybuilders seeking low and very low bodyfat (10 down to about 3-4%).

Posted by: Built

See the muscle-loss thing keeps getting me. I don't see it, not with the kind of training I do to cut. Low volume - toward the end, my leg workouts are 3x5, 3x8 agonist, 3x8 antagonist and my uppers are 3x5, 3x8 pull and 3x5, 3x8 push. You just don't need all that much carb for this type of training - although you know, I usually do take in carb pre and or post workout.

Not always though. Really depends how hungry I'm feeling. If I'm really hungry, I blow off the carbs and just do more protein and fat - and of course, if I'm doing PSMF, my workouts are 9 sets of 5-8 reps, and that's it. No other training other than some walking.

Now if I kept calories low and did high volume workouts such as your P/RR/S, I'd need to eat more carbs, I'm sure. Higher rep range work, higher volume, you really need the carbs to top up glycogen stores. Different story.

I still think I keep more muscle with low volume workouts than I would on higher carb with higher volume workouts.

What kind of training volume do you use with your female nattys, Eric?

Posted by: nkira

Here you go,

Lindt Lindor Milk ones are the BEST!! Love the way they melt in your mouth.....mmmmmm.....

By the end of this thread I hope we get some summary which outlines which diet is good for what, i mean possibly with all the if's & then's.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Built

show some compassion and at least offer me Lindt.

Hershey's is the worst tasting crap out there.

Posted by: ZECH

Quote:

Originally Posted by nkira

By the end of this thread I hope we get some summary which outlines which diet is good for what, i mean possibly with all the if's & then's.

I think this is an impossible task. Everyone's body reacts differently to diet and training and what works for one person may not work for the next. You can make generalizations about diet, but I would not venture to specifics. That's why we don't do individualized diets here. We give guidelines and the poster can go from there and dial in what they specifically need.
If you want one on one guiding, you need to contact somone who is willing to work with you. Eric does this.

Posted by: ZECH

Quote:

Originally Posted by Built

With regard to "former fatties", my cursory understanding is that Leptin is involved. Fat cells grow and shrink, but they never leave. Diet down a fatty and leptin drops. When leptin drops, you feel hungry.

When Leptin drops, it is a signal to the body that it is going into starvation mode. When that happens, the body slows or all but stops fat loss. How do you raise leptin levels? You eat alot of Carbs, slow and fast burning kinds.

Posted by: nkira

Thanks dg for info, but I am already in Builts group & I am doing very well with her advice.

Thanks again.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dg806

Posted by: Built

Quote:

Originally Posted by dg806

The thing is, in former fatties, we don't get satiety from carbs. We get it from protein and fat. Our postprandial satiety after a protein and fat meal is similar to our former postprandial satiety after a mixed meal when we were fat.

The problem is that the satiety signals are impaired. In obesity, not only is the postprandial satiety due to insulin suppressed (in fact, it may be reversed), with insulin resistance comes leptin resistance. We have HIGH leptin while we're fat. We're ravenous anyway when we eat carbs. It's brutally unfair, but the signals don't respond the way they should. We may have to change the way we eat FOREVER to favour protein and fat in order to maintain the loss - unless we're cool being hungry a lot. Go to a mall sometime. Most aren't.

Posted by: nkira

So thats why I can't stop myself after the 1st slice of pizza hut pizza......With chicken or fish or eggs I feel fuller much early.....but with high carbs it's out of my control!!

Posted by: Built

Quote:

Originally Posted by nkira

So thats why I can't stop myself after the 1st slice of pizza hut pizza......With chicken or fish or eggs I feel fuller much early.....but with high carbs it's out of my control!!

It's entirely possible. Do all carbs do this - have you had this experience with foods that don't contain gluten?

Posted by: P-funk

Quote:

Originally Posted by nkira

So thats why I can't stop myself after the 1st slice of pizza hut pizza......With chicken or fish or eggs I feel fuller much early.....but with high carbs it's out of my control!!

The fasting has really helped me with this! I have much better control of portions when I eat stuff like that.

patrick

Posted by: danzik17

It could also just be a trigger food for you. I have the same issue with Olive Garden breadsticks. Doesn't matter if I'm stuffed full, I like the things SO much that I'll just keep going.

Posted by: nkira

Not all carbs do that to me only pizza & burgers.....Could it be the refined flour? Here in India pizza n burger mostly maida flour. I don't feel the same thing with whole wheat bread or oats biscuits. There were time when I could finish a whole medium size pizza & top that up with a personal size pizza gulp that down with 500ml coke.......phew I am glad I am in control now.

Whats Maida?---->We get maida (flour) from wheat after the outer layer is removed. Atta is whole wheat flour.
The outer brownish layer is removed from the wheat and the inner white portion is used to make maida flour.
That is the reason whole wheat flour(includes the brown outer layer) is considered healthier than maida flour as it contains fiber which maida flour is missing.
Maida is a refined product of wheat - meaning it is obtained after processing the wheat, which makes it less nutritious. The less a grain or vegetable is processed, the more nutrients it retains.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Built

It's entirely possible. Do all carbs do this - have you had this experience with foods that don't contain gluten?

Thats possible to, I HAVE to control the pizza eating now too but it's not like old times when I JUST could not stop.

Quote:

Originally Posted by danzik17

It could also just be a trigger food for you. I have the same issue with Olive Garden breadsticks. Doesn't matter if I'm stuffed full, I like the things SO much that I'll just keep going.

Posted by: jordyb

Ok now this is an interesting topic, but i think the third image you pasted is fake .... Mannnn that guy would be holding a record of strongest man on earth....

Posted by: stephenpaul6557

Quite interesting! I have heard a few people say that its not safe to go without Carbs. This thread just confirmed what I have been hearing.

Posted by: Built

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephenpaul6557

Quite interesting! I have heard a few people say that its not safe to go without Carbs. This thread just confirmed what I have been hearing.

Not "safe"? Howso?

Posted by: HOOPIE

Man after reading this thread i just want to eat and get fat...LOL

Posted by: MCx2

Quote:

Originally Posted by HOOPIE

Man after reading this thread i just want to eat and get fat...LOL

Hah, I'm glad you bumped this thread, work is slow as shit today. I just read the entire thing (minus all the links to studies) and it's chock-full of information. Awesome read if anyone has the time.

Posted by: HOOPIE

Quote:

Originally Posted by ReproMan

Agree it was a good read

Posted by: Max-Power

Quote:

Originally Posted by Built

Not "safe"? Howso?

Has there been an answer to the "safe"/"not safe" debate of no carb diets?

Posted by: Prince

Quote:

Originally Posted by Max-Power

Has there been an answer to the "safe"/"not safe" debate of no carb diets?

as long as you get your veggies and fiber in I don't see any reason why keto diets are not safe, personally they just don't work for me, I need my carbs!

Posted by: DaMayor

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robert

as long as you get your veggies and fiber in I don't see any reason why keto diets are not safe, personally they just don't work for me, I need my carbs!

So, do they not work for you? Or do you not like them?

Posted by: Prince

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaMayor

So, do they not work for you? Or do you not like them?

both.

Posted by: DaMayor

Well, I don't know of anybody who loves the low carb thing.

Except Built......That's one fat~lovin' woman, lol.

Posted by: ZECH

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaMayor

So, do they not work for you? Or do you not like them?

Listen to your body. As you go along, you can tell weather or not it works for you.

Posted by: JaketheSnake0413

sounds like Broscience to me!

Posted by: lancs

Hi Guys..please can anyone help me with a Ketogenic eating plan? there is so much information about it i am just so confused! i'm 149lb and a massive 30% bodyfat!
the info i found i got that i have to eat 44-55g of fat per meal and 26g of protein that is a 4 meal a day plan.
thanks eveyone id really appreciate any help or advice

Posted by: juggernaut

It took me 3 days to read through this thing (again)...what a great thread. I still love keto so screw everyone.

Posted by: Prince

Keto works, but I need my carbs.

Posted by: juggernaut

Marianne and I were having this discussion this morning; yes keto works, but there are individuals like yourself that need carbs. But I wonder, is your need psychological, or physiological? I ask because whenever I tried carb rotation, it made me bind up, stay fat, and feel really horrible. After the first few days of keto/PSMF I'm bound with energy and feeling like a machine.

Posted by: Prince

Quote:

Originally Posted by juggernaut

Marianne and I were having this discussion this morning; yes keto works, but there are individuals like yourself that need carbs. But I wonder, is your need psychological, or physiological? I ask because whenever I tried carb rotation, it made me bind up, stay fat, and feel really horrible. After the first few days of keto/PSMF I'm bound with energy and feeling like a machine.

I have always been a little hypoglycemic, if I cut my carbs I get dizzy spells, cannot work-out very long, and just have no energy.

Posted by: juggernaut

Ever try carb rotation?

Posted by: Prince

Quote:

Originally Posted by juggernaut

Ever try carb rotation?

when I used keto in the past I had carb days (every 3rd or 4th) to reload, is that what you mean?

Posted by: juggernaut

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prince

when I used keto in the past I had carb days (every 3rd or 4th) to reload, is that what you mean?

thats one variation. Marianne's high/low is another. I tried both and I just dont lose the weight I can with PSMF and keto.

(CLICK HERE here to view the original thread with full colors/images)

Broser vs Palumbo - battle of the keto diet

Article Archives

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60