• Hello, this board in now turned off and no new posting.
    Please REGISTER at Anabolic Steroid Forums, and become a member of our NEW community!
  • Check Out IronMag Labs® KSM-66 Max - Recovery and Anabolic Growth Complex

Better lifts without warm-up????

this is TOO funny. How can someone who never cut speak in absolutes about Cutting? Grain as a top carb source, you don't understand how you can feel full on a cut? Youre saying it could be dangerous to eat fat to lose fat?yea if youre dumb enough to eat nothing but sat and trans. Youre still on the "20 small meals a day" kick, arguing whats easier to do at home over what works, rebutting about your knowlege base from authors you can't remember doesnt exactly build credibility either. Built has more patience than me, I'm no going to repeat her except to say that you do appear to have just enough knowledge to be dangerous. Pay attention to some new authors, and maybe to the forum rules too! The true fitness community? With the administrator speaking of negative calorie foods, lol...NO THANKS!!!...HXC FITNESS • View topic - Negative Calorie Food


First of all lets get your shit straight, He posted that a part as interesting read on a new scientific study being done about, he just gave a tid bit about it, he clearly stated that this is in THEORY!!! Learn to fucking read. First of yall are some very dumbass fuckin people, everybody is diffrent in their genealogical make up and biological these factors play a major role in the way we build our bodies, every body responds to things in a different way, my way of things may not be best for you but might work for others. All yall responses had retorts back to my forum, yall cant stick on topic? obviously not if yall cant handle a debate when getting beat.
 
Buddy's 20% bodyfat. Let's see how he feels on his low-fat, high-complex carb diet eating grains, bars and shakes 6 times a day when he's dropped down to 10% bodyfat.

Plat, you sound like you're very invested in how you believe this process works, and you'll likely try VERY hard to make it work. Hell, at 19, with all that test and GH courtesy of your youth and male gender, you might even be able to pull it off.

"Yes I have. It's how I bulked." BULKING, you bet, eat lots of carbs, spread your meals out across the day. It's a good idea. It helps you eat more food without feeling bloated.

Cutting - it's a different story, and that's what I meant when I said "you've never dieted this way". I should have clarified to say "You've never CUT this way". (We were talking about cutting so that was the context I used)

Quite in fact, you've never cut at all - and you're arguing with people who have lived this lifestyle for many years. Among the posters in this thread you'll find published authors and competitive bodybuilders. Hell, have a look at Merkaba's pix - he's a natural bodybuilder whom I helped prep for his show last year. Ask him how he dieted down, and how he'll do it this time.
 
First of all lets get your shit straight, He posted that a part as interesting read on a new scientific study being done about, he just gave a tid bit about it, he clearly stated that this is in THEORY!!! Learn to fucking read. First of yall are some very dumbass fuckin people, everybody is diffrent in their genealogical make up and biological these factors play a major role in the way we build our bodies, every body responds to things in a different way, my way of things may not be best for you but might work for others. All yall responses had retorts back to my forum, yall cant stick on topic? obviously not if yall cant handle a debate when getting beat.

:roflmao: you aint winning shit kid.

You havent backed up any of your points, and you clearly havent read the info that Built posted for you.

Youve also never been on a cut, try one then tell us we know fuck all. And the reason people keep mentioning you other board is because its not allowed to be in your sig, take it down.
 
If you got a problem with any of those post on that forum keep it on their forum and there turf and bring a civil debate there, yall keep running back there for responses to my answers which is lame
 
Built said:
You want to be insulin resistant while cutting, to protect lean mass.

Source?

Not arguing, just want some edumacation :D
 
Source?

Not arguing, just want some edumacation :D

agreed
i want info

i dont understand the whole concept behind insulin resistance

i thought we wanted to be insulin sensitive..
never really gave it any thought or research though.
 
Built you bring up a excellent point and I commend you on keeping a civil debate however,

moondogg if all you can reply with is a lame retort and not providing actual information gtfo, I am no kid I am 19, If this board had a problem with my sig they would have taken it down. Ignorant people these days damn shame
 
Built you bring up a excellent point and I commend you on keeping a civil debate however,

moondogg if all you can reply with is a lame retort and not providing actual information gtfo, I am no kid I am 19, If this board had a problem with my sig they would have taken it down. Ignorant people these days damn shame

I do my best to help people, as long as they want my help. You want to shout your points at us and say were wrong even after Built gave you information to read. Your sig - read the rules, open chat forum I believe.

What the hell does gtfo mean? And as I said above the info was provided for you by Built, but you seem to have ignored it.
 
agreed
i want info

i dont understand the whole concept behind insulin resistance

i thought we wanted to be insulin sensitive..
never really gave it any thought or research though.

My opinion is you never want anyone to be insulin resistant, for any reason.

I don't know if the dieting gurus are pushing new methods now a days, but thats one that i'd be hesitant to get behind.
 
Plat, please get your board out of your sig. I could issue you an infraction for this, or ban you.

Re insulin resistance and why it's helpful while cutting - Lyle says it best:

...the thing to realize is what insulin resistance actually implies. Insulin is a storage hormone, stimulating nutrient uptake in many tissues (including liver, muscle, and fat cells). This is especially true for glucose.

So what happens when fat cells are insulin resistant? It means that insulin can't inhibit lipolysis (fat breakdown). Nor can it activate nutrient storage. This is part of why severely insulin resistannt individuals get increased blood levels of glucose, fatty acids and cholesterol, insulin is unable to either limit release from the cell or stimulate uptake. Since muscle is full (see below), they either get stored in inappropriate places (beta-cells of the liver) or float around in the bloodstream.

What about in muscle? An insulin resistant muscle cell is unable to uptake glucose. Without glucose to use for fuel, the cell has to find an alternative source. In this case, that alternative source is fatty acids.

So when fat cell insulin resistance is high, fatty acids are easier to mobilze. When muscle cell insulin resistance is high, glucose isn't used for fuel and fatty acids are. So in a caloric deficit, this means you use more fat for fuel b/c they are coming out of fat cells more easily and muscle is usingg them preferentially for fuel.

this is part of how things like Clenbuterol, EC and gh - growth hormone (somatropin) - work. By mobilizing fatty acids at a high rate and making the muscle cell insulin resistant, muscle has to forego glucose for fuel and use the mobilized fatty acids instead (note: this also spares protein in a carb insufficient state). A recent study on gh - growth hormone (somatropin) - found that the fatty acid mobilizing effect of gh - growth hormone (somatropin) - was THE key to its protein sparing effects: block the increase in fatty acids and you get the same amount of protein loss.

On that note, you should realize that studies examining predisoposition to obesity (for example, in the Pima indians) find that insulin sensitivity predicts weight gain and insulin resistance predicts weight loss or stability.

Insulin resistance develops with obesity and can be thought of as a way for the body trying to prevent further weight gain. Note that this is different in growing individuals such as children or pregnant women. More below....

To be even more accurate to what I wrote above you need to differentiate muscle insulin resistance from whole body insulin resistance. In general, the body will develop insulin resistance in this order:

liver then muscle then fat cell

There are some weird genetic exceptions but the above would be a typical progression with diet induced insulin resistance.

Now, when muscle becomes insulin resistant, this shuttles more calories to the fat cells preferentially. In that sense, localized (muscular) insulin resistance causes more fat to be gained for a given caloric load. It's negative calorie partitioning. Note that this isn't only local, there are central (brain effects) controlling these processes as well.

This makes perfect sense: if the muscle is plenty full of nutrients and there is still a surplus, they should get pushed into storage as effectively as possible. So the msucle stops accepting nutrients and the rest go to the fat cells. The best way to prevent this is not to overeat and to deplete muscular fuel stores with exercise. In modern society, we do both: eat too much and don't exercise often enough. So muscle gets full of nutrients, becomes insulin resistant, and the excess calroeis go to fat cells post haste.

But as fat cells get filled up, problems start. The fat cell starts releasing a lot of hormones such as leptin, TNf-alpha, resistin (may only be relevant in rats) and others that prevent further nutrient storage (you can also get an increase in fat cell number). Now you're developing full body insulin resistance.

Once full body insulin resistance develops (with obesity), this acts to LIMIT further weight gain. Note that insulin resistance also means higher basal levels of insulin (there are also higher levlels of leptin as you get this fat). Both insulin and leptin *should* act to signal the brain to make you stop eating but the system isn't very sensitive to that. Additionally, it serves to push nutrients towards oxidation when you diet for the reasons above.

It's interesting to note that individuals without fat cells (lipodystrophy), which mimicks full body insulin resistance are protected against weight gain. First their muscles and liver fill up with nutrients, then they develop severe hyperglycemia, hypercholesterolemia and all the rest. Individuals with severe genetic insulin resistance have the same effect occur: they don't gain weight. They get a bunch of other health problems if you overfeed them but the severe genetic insulin resistance makes it so tnutrients can't be stored in their cells.

Also consider that insulin sensitivity improves as you lose weight. And the single time you are most prone to gain wight is at the end of the diet: when you are most insulin SENSITIVE.

As above, insulin sensitivity predicts weight gain, insulin resistance (full body) weight/fat loss.

Basically insulin resistance isn't always BAD. Quite in fact, it can be adaptive.

Now, in the context of excess calories/carbs and no activity (i.e. weight gain), insulin resistance is a bad thing to have. If you have muscular insulin resistance, more calories go to fat cells. If you have ful lbody insulin resistance, excess calories either sit in the bloodsream or get stored in the wrong spots, causing cell death.

Actually, if the goal is muscle gain with limited fat gain, it'd be wonderful to have fat cells resistant to nutrient storage and locally increase muscular insulin sensitivity. This would cause preferential nutrient partitioning to muscle. The question is how to do it. I have an idea but it's not fully fleshed out. For fatter individuals who begin an exercise program, this occurs naturally which is (IMO) one reason they can lose fat and gain muscle at the same time. The exercise preferentially improves muscular insulin sensitivity, the fat cells are releasing fat like nobody's business and you get calorie partitioning until the point that it all starts to balance out.

When you're dieting and not eating enough carbs (by definition, on a diet, carbs are reduced), insulin resistance is adaptive. By making muscle rely on fatty acids for fuel, glucose is spared for the brain and other tissues which require it.

Note that most of the current insulin sensitizing medications (especially the TZD drugs) cause further weight gain. Obesity docs don't care becuse they just want to see blood glucose and the rest levels go down.

As above, whole body insulin resistance develops in an effort to both limit further fat/weight gain and ensure that the body burns the fat off (sparing muscle) when you diet. This would have been adaptive in the context of our evolutionary dieting pattern, it's maladptive in our current environment."

-Lyle McDonald
 
Muscle Gelz Transdermals
IronMag Labs Prohormones
Great read. Brought things together that I didnt realise were related.
 
Okay Built, good read. I hope you don't mind me prying a bit, i tend to look at things from a medical stand point (where insulin resistance is considered pre-diabetes->high blood sugar->microvascular changes etc).

So what Lyle says make sense theoretically. My question is how would one go about creating an insulin resistant state while eating none or low insulinogenic foods such as low carb diets advise? It seems to entail making yourself obese and then going into a calorie deficit.

I see what he's getting at, but the problems with insulin resistance isn't only the obesity and high serum insulin, the hyperglycemia is what leads to all of the negative sequelae surrounding diabetes complications. And you can't become insulin resistant without chronic episodes of hyperglycemia (unless, once again i missed something).
 
Isn't it interesting?

I was particularly chamed when I read this, because every other time I dieted, I had tried "low fat with cardio". When I did Atkins back in 2001, my body just LOOKED different. I now realize this is because I maintained more lean mass. Low carb dieters tend to lose more fat and less muscle than high carb dieters. http://www.nutritionandmetabolism.com/content/pdf/1743-7075-3-9.pdf

I felt redeemed for all the naysayers who told me my muscles would disappear (while my bones melted and my brain turned to goo).
 
Let's put a smile on that face! 20 percent body fat vs the ripped avatar. I've seen significant results. Plus 1 for built! I'm ready for mcdonalds ud2.0 in March!
 
Okay Built, good read. I hope you don't mind me prying a bit, i tend to look at things from a medical stand point (where insulin resistance is considered pre-diabetes->high blood sugar->microvascular changes etc).
Not at all, this is a good point to bring up. My knowledge on this is cursory at best, but I'll share what little I know.
So what Lyle says make sense theoretically. My question is how would one go about creating an insulin resistant state while eating none or low insulinogenic foods such as low carb diets advise? It seems to entail making yourself obese and then going into a calorie deficit.

I see what he's getting at, but the problems with insulin resistance isn't only the obesity and high serum insulin, the hyperglycemia is what leads to all of the negative sequelae surrounding diabetes complications. And you can't become insulin resistant without chronic episodes of hyperglycemia (unless, once again i missed something).

This is diet-induced IR, and it's reversible.

Put it this way - when I was obese, I took Metformin.

Now that I'm no longer obese, I can tolerate carbs a lot better, and without Metformin, particularly when I'm not dieting but rather eating at maintenance.

On a cut, nobody's going hypercaloric - nobody's storing ANYTHING, outside of refeeds, and if you do these right, most of that goes to muscle glycogen.

You gotta remember that a depletion workout sets you up to supercompensate. Look at the research surrounding GLUT4 and exercise - with movement, GLUT4 translocate to the muscle cell surface, and you become preferentially insulin sensitive during this time. That's why a) the post workout window is a good time to get in glucose and glucose polymers (ie starches) and b) why a walk after dinner is, indeed, good for you - it helps "work in" the glucose into the muscles.
 
Today after very long time i had the best workout :thumb:.....bit confused, later it came to me that I missed the warm-up completely :hmmm:!!

But I was able to do complete sets with higher weights. :) Got the best pumped feeling after very long time.

So is it ok if i skip the warm-up and directly move on to weights?

Also other change was that after almost 2 months (I gave up coffee but sometimes I take it :loser:, but never exceed 1 cup per day previously it was 4 - 6 cups a day) I has a strong coffee before leaving for gym. I am considering adding instant coffee to my pre-workout drink...if its OK i mean.

My pre-workout drink is, (1 Hour prior to gym)

Creatine 5 Grams (Super Creatine - APN Brand)

Glutamine 5 Grams (All Max)

Electral (Oral Hydrating Salts mainly Sodium + Potassium + Chloride + Citrate + Dextrose) It says based on W.H.O. Formula

Reason for "Electral" - I sweat a lot while working out and if don't get hydrated good enough then next day I get ugly cramps, since I strated Electral, almost zero cramps.

So what should I do?

You reduce the function of the golgi tendon organ when you statically stretch before exercises, this reduction lessens the stretch reflex of a muscle. The stretch reflex is the elastic quality that exists in muscle tissue, in simple terms - if the stretch reflex is reduced, the muscles don't "snap" back as quickly when stretched out, and this can have a significant affect on strength and power training.

Similar to what Yanick alluded to, if you take a rubber band and hold it in a stretched position for a long time it will not snap back as forcefully if you stretch it and immediately let go.

Also, I wouldn't worry about warming up too much and "wasting energy". You want to prepare the muscles for work by warming them and increasing blood flow (they go hand-in-hand). Dynamic warm ups also prepare the central nervous system for the mechanical stress put on the body through exercise.

Intensive warm ups should help you to increase your performance, if your warm ups are affecting your performance negatively, then there are probably more important underlying factors affecting you.
 
Nice post fufu - I'll be hanging onto this one.
 
Built, i guess i see what you're saying. I gotta get to work now and can't read the review you posted, but i'll let this simmer in the ole' noggin for a few hours and see what will come of this. Maybe tomorrow i'll hit up pubmed/medscape and see what i can come up with.

Re: the GLUT4 receptor, its been a while since i've read the literature but isn't it necessary to pass a certain intensity threshold to elicit the translocation? I was under the impression that training with weights would do it, but not something like walking. I do like, and encourage, walks after dinner but not for the reason you stated.

Oh and Fufu knocked that one out of the ball park, he said it way better than me. Good job big guy.
 
Last edited:
Yanick, that's a good question. If you have anything for me on thresholds, I'm all ears.
 
I could have sworn that I have read stuff on exercise intensity and GLUT4 translocation. I believe Yan and I have had that conversation many moons ago when we used to work together and post on the old avant labs site.

Anyhoo, this is all I could find at the moment:

Exercise regulation of glucose transport in skeletal muscle

Am J Physiol. 1997 Dec;273(6 Pt 1):E1039-51.

Tatsuya Hayashi1, Jørgen F. P. Wojtaszewski2, and Laurie J. Goodyear1

Full text here.


To test the hypothesis that the translocation of glucose transporters is a major mechanism by which physical exercise increases glucose uptake, initial experiments studied skeletal muscles obtained from rats that were exercised by running on a motorized rodent treadmill. By use of either the Hirshman/Grimditch or Klip fractionation technique, in all but one study (113) exercise has consistently been reported to increase the number of glucose transporters in the plasma membrane fraction (Table 1) (23-25, 29, 36-38, 49, 102, 106). In addition, sciatic nerve stimulation, resulting in contraction of hindlimb skeletal muscles in situ, also increases plasma membrane glucose transporter number in the rat (9, 27, 31, 39). The exercise-induced translocation of glucose transporters is due to an increase in the plasma membrane content of the GLUT-4 isoform, because a single bout of exercise does not alter the abundance of plasma membrane GLUT-1 (23, 36, 38) or GLUT-5 (66). Exercise-induced GLUT-4 translocation occurs in both red and white skeletal muscle fibers (38) and also apparently occurs in response to swim exercise in rats (16). In addition to subcellular fractionation methods, sarcolemmal giant vesicles have been prepared and used to study the effects of exercise on GLUT-4 translocation in skeletal muscle (94). Although the use of these giant vesicles is limited because of very low protein recoveries and a failure to respond to insulin stimulation (94), this technique has recently been used to demonstrate that both maximal (67) and submaximal (68) bicycle exercise significantly increases sarcolemmal GLUT-4 protein in human vastus lateralis muscle.

patrick
 
Ooooh, thank you for this.

So even moderate activity increases GLUT-4 expression, am I reading this correctly?
 
That's what it says. Honestly, I know this will sound bad, but I have so much fucking shit to read regarding soft tissue work and biomechanics, that I don't have time to look at the references. Go to the original study link and check the references they site for maximal (67) and sub-maximal (68) intensity and give those a look as far as what they came up with.

patrick
 
No, that's fine, I don't expect you to do my reading for me.

It's here:
AJP - Endocrinology and Metabolism, Vol 272, Issue 3 E385-E389, Copyright © 1997 by American Physiological Society

Progressive increase in glucose transport and GLUT-4 in human sarcolemmal vesicles during moderate exercise
S. Kristiansen, M. Hargreaves and E. A. Richter
Copenhagen Muscle Research Centre, University of Copenhagen, Denmark.

Muscle glucose uptake increases progressively during moderate-intensity exercise. To elucidate whether this is due to a progressive increase in sarcolemmal glucose transport capacity, nine men exercised for 40 min at 75% maximal oxygen uptake on a bicycle ergometer. Muscle biopsies were obtained from the vastus lateralis at rest (0 min) and after 5 and 40 min of exercise and used for production of sarcolemmal giant (SG) vesicles. SG vesicle glucose transport at 5 mM increased (P < 0.05) by 38 and 93% after 5 and 40 min of exercise, respectively, compared with glucose transport at rest. The SG vesicle GLUT-4 protein content increased (P < 0.05) by 36 and 91% after 5 and 40 min of exercise, respectively, compared with rest. Thus the increase in vesicle glucose transport was accompanied by a similar increase in SG vesicle GLUT-4 protein content. Muscle glucose and glucose 6-phosphate were low at rest, increased (P < 0.05) 2.2- and 2.3-fold, respectively, after 5 min of exercise, and returned to resting values after 40 min of exercise. It is concluded that the progressive increase in muscle glucose uptake during moderate-intensity exercise may be due at least in part to a progressive increase in sarcolemmal glucose transport and GLUT-4 protein content.

This jives with what I had read last year when I first started to investigate methods to improve carb loading in insulin-resistant folks (okay, ME. It's ALWAYS about ME!). When type I diabetics do moderate activity, their blood sugar drops because GLUT-4 translocate. In non-type-I diabetics, pancreatic insulin secretion is dialled back, but diabetics have to do this pre-emptively by injecting less insulin pre-exercise - or they have to ward off the crash with some strategic glucose.

Intense activity RAISES blood glucose through a pre-emptive stress response - since the body is anticipating a sudden dramatic increase in muscular activity, catecholamine is generated, mediating gluconeogenesis and subsequent hepatic glucose release.

I think. ;)
 
First of all lets get your shit straight, He posted that a part as interesting read on a new scientific study being done about, he just gave a tid bit about it, he clearly stated that this is in THEORY!!! Learn to fucking read. First of yall are some very dumbass fuckin people, everybody is diffrent in their genealogical make up and biological these factors play a major role in the way we build our bodies, every body responds to things in a different way, my way of things may not be best for you but might work for others. All yall responses had retorts back to my forum, yall cant stick on topic? obviously not if yall cant handle a debate when getting beat.

People are talking about that weak ass forum in your sig because of what Built is recommending to you now.

New scientific study? :roflmao: Man don't screw with me!

Everyone does have different makeups but you still digest and process food the same way. Based on your logic, why argue any point, why not just shut up and say everyone has different bodies, wah wah... The truth is you can't come on this forum and start spouting off without knowing your shlt. Sorry you found out the hard way. Maybe you could throw your weight around on that other weak ass forum but not around here kiddo! Obviously you're realizing this and you feel backed into a corner and threatened now you lash out. All too typical. Grow up.
 
the amount of good knowledge is absolutely mind boggling


yet the guy was still arguing his point...
wtf?
 
People are talking about that weak ass forum in your sig because of what Built is recommending to you now.

New scientific study? :roflmao: Man don't screw with me!
Negative calorie food - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The only sources in wikipedia point to urban legends and a book that exposes health myths.

So I tried google: first hit (I'm FAMOUS for those!)
Negative Calorie Foods
Doesn't look promising.

Pubmed provided no love for the negative calorie food, either.

So sad. :(
 
Best thread in training for a while, nice going all :)

Plateau, Built already told you but i'll just re-iterate in case it got lost in the posts - unless you're a board sponsor or similar, you're not allowed links to other forums/sites in your sig.

Try to learn from this thread, also. And check your sources before making points.
 
Gazhole's right rules are rules. Plateau, did you read the forum rules?

I feel as if my thread is hijacked...:paddle:
 
Back
Top