Cutting for the Six Pack

[P-funk]

There actually are no truths.

A true scientist does not admit to know the truth to anything, but rather keeps open the idea that there are other things out there that are not fully understood.

Science proves nothing. It suggest statical significance. It tells us what happens when a specific population is placed into a certain situation or given a certain variable under specific conditions. From there, we attempt to draw conclusions on how this may (or may not) affect the general population (or the population of individuals we are working with).

Those that say, "I just proved this" or "This is fact", have a limited understanding of science and research in general. Theories do not suggest fact. They suggest that based on what we know at the time, after years of evidence, this is what we believe to be true. This however does not slam the door to everything else. Science is always looking for ways to prove or disprove theories.

Skepticism, critical thinking and debate are the ways in which science and the profession advances.

Unfortunately in the fitness industry, there is not enough skepticism and people simply accept whatever it is they hear from those who write articles for magazines, or those who are the "big guy" in the gym or those who sell supplements or those who may have gotten good results for themselves doing some totally obtuse training/nutrition program. We are mesmerized by anecdotal reports (if this weren't true, people would never read those silly 6-page Muscle Tech "special reports" in the lame fitness magazines on the market) and personal accounts. Yet we fail to seek a deeper meaning for the things that we perceive to be true or hold our own bias's towards.

Some of this stuff is out of Carl Sagan's Baloney Detection Kit, where he talks about being critical/skeptical of things.

I am hoping to change that with my new podcast (we just recorded the first episode last night and will hopefully have it up soon) where we are going to critically evaluate these sorts of things in the world of training/strength and conditioning, nutrition/supplementation (I think people will be real interested if we can get some of the speakers we want on the show and open that can of worms), physical therapy/rehabilitation and bodywork/massage therapy.

patrick

 

[Built]

Go look up:

-insulin's effects on the body
-cortisol's effects on the body
-GH's effects on the body
-IGF-1's effects on the body
-Myogenin's effects on the body
-Akt's effects on the body

There you will find your answers.

Insulin's effect on the body is different in obesity than it is in lean individuals. I'd really like to know just how MUCH insulin is required to blunt catabolism, not to mention how much catabolism we're talking about. Surely this varies with the type and duration of training!

I mean, when you're prepping a competitor, you're using low-volume, low-rep training. Not exactly the monster catabolic load you'd get from the traditional "assisted" high-volume workout.

Unless you still use high reps for your contest prep, at which point I agree with you - keto would be nasty.

 

[Built]

Patrick, thank you for that. You have always been the voice of reason here, and I really appreciate you for that.

I am very much looking forward to your podcast.

 

[AKIRA]

Thank god an argument started back up. Now I have something to read later.

 

[P-funk]

Thank god an argument started back up. Now I have something to read later.

seriously. i wish i had a lap top so i can take it into the bathroom!

patrick

 

[P-funk]

Patrick, thank you for that. You have always been the voice of reason here, and I really appreciate you for that.

I am very much looking forward to your podcast.

Haha, the name of our podcast is Reality Based Fitness: The Voice Of Reason

patrick

 

[Hench]

I am hoping to change that with my new podcast (we just recorded the first episode last night and will hopefully have it up soon) where we are going to critically evaluate these sorts of things in the world of training/strength and conditioning, nutrition/supplementation (I think people will be real interested if we can get some of the speakers we want on the show and open that can of worms), physical therapy/rehabilitation and bodywork/massage therapy.

patrick

Keep us updated, sounds very interesting.

 

[juggernaut]

AGAIN...NOT ENOUGH OF A RESPONSE TO DERAIL THE CATABOLIC EFFECTS!

This is you being nice? Yelling in bold caps? You certainly have a way with words. Why are you so confrontational?

Also, since we are on the subject, you claim to have readied several in fact, hundreds, of clients for bodybuilding contests. What do they look like before you start training them? How do they fare in placings?

Finally, is your entire P/RR/S system based on any type of scientific literature? If so, can you site any proven, scientific claims behind your ideas?

 

[P-funk]

Keep us updated, sounds very interesting.

Oh I will!

It is a bit slow getting it up because Keats and I are computer idiots and we are pretty busy right now looking at places to set up our own facility - human performance and soft tissue therapy - here in the phoenix area.

patrick

 

[gopro]

First...I would base my beliefs on ANYTHING on personal experience of the type I have had over 20 years than on ANY study put before me. My past 20 years has been one big, scientific study using more type of populations, circumstances, goals, variables, etc than any study in existence on this subject.

The only reason I am where I am today is because of my careful attention to detail, and the ability to critically evaluate every single thing I do. I have experimented with just about any and every diet/training regimen ever heard of and have recorded and compared results.

That said...I have absolutely nothing to prove here. My track record speaks for itself, which GOD BLESS (I am so grateful) has led me to the successes I have had and continue to have in this industry.

However, just to satisfy some of you, when I get home later, I will give you a few key studies that support my "thoughts" about keto dieting not being optimal because they can lead to lean tissue loss (and you can avoid this by using well times carbs while still losing = amounts of bodyfat).

 

[P-funk]

Just curious what you would say to all the research backing intermittent fasting and the idea of performing a 24-hour fast once every 3-5 days. There are certainly a lot of people getting great results from this and this is way more extreme than ketogenic diets.

patrick

 

[gopro]

This is you being nice? Yelling in bold caps? You certainly have a way with words. Why are you so confrontational?

Also, since we are on the subject, you claim to have readied several in fact, hundreds, of clients for bodybuilding contests. What do they look like before you start training them? How do they fare in placings?

Finally, is your entire P/RR/S system based on any type of scientific literature? If so, can you site any proven, scientific claims behind your ideas?

1-That is not yelling...I made that point before and was ignored. I wanted to make sure it was seen.

2-I would not have the place in the industry I do if not for my track record and the results I get for clients.

3-Yes it is. And it has proved itself in the REAL WORLD over and over again, which is why it has garnered the attention it has.

Do you think for one second you can try to discredit my accomplishments in this industry?

 

[gopro]

Just curious what you would say to all the research backing intermittent fasting and the idea of performing a 24-hour fast once every 3-5 days. There are certainly a lot of people getting great results from this and this is way more extreme than ketogenic diets.

patrick

And I am sure there are many people would get shitty results too. But those cases will not be pointed out by those trying to prove their theory.

 

[P-funk]

And I am sure there are many people would get shitty results too. But those cases will not be pointed out by those trying to prove their theory.

There are people that will get shitty results doing anything for several reasons:

a) research is population specific, so they might not fall into the category that responds to this sort of thing.

b) other factors complicate things - biochemical, genetic, psychological, etc.


I was simply asking what your opinion was. Have you read any of the research supporting this? Have you checked it out?

patrick

 

[Hench]

1-That is not yelling...I made that point before and was ignored. I wanted to make sure it was seen.

2-I would not have the place in the industry I do if not for my track record and the results I get for clients.Of course you could, look at the millions of dollars that fitness magazines generate, yet they are mostly shit.

3-Yes it is. And it has proved itself in the REAL WORLD over and over again, which is why it has garnered the attention it has.

Do you think for one second you can try to discredit my accomplishments in this industry?

LOL, you really think a lot of yourself, dont you?

We all know how many years experience you have, how many millions of people youve trained and how much money youve made, but were not interested. FACTS! is what we would like, please.

 

[nkira]

Most of the Mods are here,

This thread is a ARENA!!!

 

[gopro]

There are people that will get shitty results doing anything for several reasons:

a) research is population specific, so they might not fall into the category that responds to this sort of thing.

b) other factors complicate things - biochemical, genetic, psychological, etc.


I was simply asking what your opinion was. Have you read any of the research supporting this? Have you checked it out?

patrick

No Pat...I have not checked out the research you are describing here. Is it being done on bodybuilders and athletes?

 

[gopro]

LOL, you really think a lot of yourself, dont you?

We all know how many years experience you have, how many millions of people youve trained and how much money youve made, but were not interested. FACTS! is what we would like, please.

Actually, I am quite proud of my accomplishments, yes. But I do not think I am "better" than anyone else...and I also consider myself very blessed.

I will post a few studies later for you guys. Then I will leave it in your hands from there.

 

[gopro]

LOL, you really think a lot of yourself, dont you?

We all know how many years experience you have, how many millions of people youve trained and how much money youve made, but were not interested. FACTS! is what we would like, please.

Oh, and my writing for magazines is not what I was talking about. If I did not get results for my clients I would not have clients, and especially not ones that have been with me for 6-7 years and going...

(that was my point)

 

[P-funk]

No Pat...I have not checked out the research you are describing here. Is it being done on bodybuilders and athletes?

I have to look at more of it. Up to now, I have not seen it done on bodybuilders or athletes - primarily due to the fact that those groups are highly specific and don't like to take the chances changing anything for the sake of science.

I'll dig some stuff up and maybe post it here.

patrick

 

[juggernaut]

1-That is not yelling...I made that point before and was ignored. I wanted to make sure it was seen.
WRONG!
2-I would not have the place in the industry I do if not for my track record and the results I get for clients.
What place is that? Can I see the track record? The results you claimed to have given "hundreds"?
3-Yes it is. And it has proved itself in the REAL WORLD over and over again, which is why it has garnered the attention it has.
Proven where? In a gym? Research lab?
Who's attention?
Do you think for one second you can try to discredit my accomplishments in this industry?
Are you challenging me? I'm only asking for pure factual data. As a professional colleague in the same industry as you, your attitude is terrible. You have a god-complex. Everything I have given my clients and gym members is backed by substantial scientific data. Your one-size fits all mentality is dangerous and will get someone hurt.

 

[nkira]

Man.....erf777's first post and everything gets rolling, you see he hasn't returned for posting, I think we scared the poor guy.
God I need sleep!!! I just skipped 2.5 hours of my sleep for this thread

Hitting bed.....ZZZzzzZZZZzzzZZZzzzZZZZzz

 

[Arnold]

I already HAD this argument with Mr Keto himself Dave Palumbo...but we can't argue at MD anymore because, well, he was fired and I am still an MD columnist

I know, I listen to HMR and visit RxMuscle daily.

 

[Hench]

Oh, and my writing for magazines is not what I was talking about. If I did not get results for my clients I would not have clients, and especially not ones that have been with me for 6-7 years and going...

(that was my point)

I didnt say you couldnt get results, of course you can get results.

But we are getting into the finer points of dieting here, and just because it worked for some of your clients doesnt mean it is the best approach as a whole, or was even the best approach for them.

 

[P-funk]

Fasting

Some interesting research. What I like about this stuff (aside from the fact that the fasting helps to decrease markers of inflammation (C-reactive protein, Tumor Necrosis Factor, etc) it appears to not only be helpful for fat loss, and also attempts to dispels the idea that if we don't eat every three hours, our muscles will suddenly turn to dust or shrivel up.

Also, I take that back about not being on athletes. There was a paper just published in the journal of strength and conditioning research were they did 24-hour caloric restriction in pro-cyclists and measured their ability to perform; showing no drop in power output or fatigue following a 24-hour calorie restricted diet, which was preceded with a low calorie diet (for i think 3-weeks if i remember correctly) to help them loose weight.

Alternate-day fasting in nonobese subjects: effects on body weight, body composition, and energy metabolism.

Heilbronn LK, Smith SR, Martin CK, Anton SD, Ravussin E. Am J Clin Nutr. 2005 Jan;81(1):69-73.

BACKGROUND: Prolonged dietary restriction increases the life span in rodents. Some evidence suggests that alternate-day fasting may also prolong the life span. OBJECTIVE: Our goal was to determine whether alternate-day fasting is a feasible method of dietary restriction in nonobese humans and whether it improves known biomarkers of longevity. DESIGN: Nonobese subjects (8 men and 8 women) fasted every other day for 22 d. Body weight, body composition, resting metabolic rate (RMR), respiratory quotient (RQ), temperature, fasting serum glucose, insulin, free fatty acids, and ghrelin were assessed at baseline and after 21 d (12-h fast) and 22 d (36-h fast) of alternate-day fasting. Visual analogue scales were used to assess hunger weekly. RESULTS: Subjects lost 2.5 +/- 0.5% of their initial body weight (P < 0.001) and 4 +/- 1% of their initial fat mass (P < 0.001). Hunger increased on the first day of fasting and remained elevated (P < 0.001). RMR and RQ did not change significantly from baseline to day 21, but RQ decreased on day 22 (P < 0.001), which resulted in an average daily increase in fat oxidation of > or =15 g. Glucose and ghrelin did not change significantly from baseline with alternate-day fasting, whereas fasting insulin decreased 57 +/- 4% (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Alternate-day fasting was feasible in nonobese subjects, and fat oxidation increased. However, hunger on fasting days did not decrease, perhaps indicating the unlikelihood of continuing this diet for extended periods of time. Adding one small meal on a fasting day may make this approach to dietary restriction more acceptable.

Influence of a 3.5 day fast on physical performance.
Knapik JJ, Jones BH, Meredith C, Evans WJ. Eur J Appl Physiol Occup Physiol. 1987;56(4):428-32.

Eight young men were tested for strength, anaerobic capacity and aerobic endurance in a post absorptive state and after a 3.5 day fast. Strength was tested both isokinetically (elbow flexors, 0.52 rad x s-1 and 3.14 rad x s-1) and isometrically. Anaerobic capacity was evaluated by having subjects perform 50 rapidly repeated isokinetic contractions of the elbow flexors at 3.14 rad x s-1. Aerobic endurance was measured as time to volitional fatigue during a cycle ergometer exercise at 45% VO2max. Measures of VO2, VE, heart rate, and ratings of perceived exertion were obtained prior to and during the cycle exercise. The 3.5 day fast did not influence isometric strength, anaerobic capacity or aerobic endurance. Isokinetic strength was significantly reduced (approximately 10%) at both velocities. VO2, VE and perceived exertion were not affected by fasting. Fasting significantly increased heart rate during exercise but not at rest. It was concluded that there are minimal impairments in physical performance parameters measured here as a result of a 3.5 day fast.

Effects of caloric restriction and overnight fasting on cycling endurance performance.

Ferguson LM, Rossi KA, Ward E, Jadwin E, Miller TA, Miller WC. J Strength Cond Res. 2009 Mar;23(2):560-70.

In addition to aerobic endurance and anaerobic capacity, high power-to-weight ratio (PWR) is important for cycling performance. Cyclists often try to lose weight before race season to improve body composition and optimize PWR. Research has demonstrated body fat-reducing benefits of exercise after fasting overnight. We hypothesized that fasted-state exercise in calorie-restricted trained cyclists would not result in performance decrements and that their PWR would improve significantly. We also hypothesized that substrate use during fasted-state submaximal endurance cycling would shift to greater reliance on fat. Ten trained, competitive cyclists completed a protocol consisting of baseline testing, 3 weeks of caloric restriction (CR), and post-CR testing. The testing sessions measured pre- and post-CR values for resting metabolic rate (RMR), body composition, VO2, PWR and power-to-lean weight ratio (PLWR), and power output, as well as 2-hour submaximal cycling performance, rating of perceived exertion (RPE), and respiratory exchange ratio (RER). There were no significant differences between baseline and post-CR for submaximal trial RER, power output, VO2, RMR, VO2max, or workload at VO2max. However, RPE was significantly lower, and PWR was significantly higher post-CR, whereas RER did not change. The cyclists' PWR and body composition improved significantly, and their overall weight, fat weight, and body fat percentage decreased. Lean mass was maintained. The cyclists' RPE decreased significantly during 2 hours of submaximal cycling post-CR, and there was no decrement in submaximal or maximal cycling performance after 3 weeks of CR combined with overnight fasting. Caloric restriction (up to 40% for 3 weeks) and exercising after fasting overnight can improve a cyclist's PWR without compromising endurance cycling performance.

Effect of intermittent fasting and refeeding on insulin action in healthy men.

Nils Halberg, Morten Henriksen, Nathalie Söderhamn, Bente Stallknecht, Thorkil Ploug, Peter Schjerling, Flemming Dela. J Appl Physiol 99: 2128-2136, 2005.

Insulin resistance is currently a major health problem. This may be because of a marked decrease in daily physical activity during recent decades combined with constant food abundance. This lifestyle collides with our genome, which was most likely selected in the late Paleolithic era (50,000–10,000 BC) by criteria that favored survival in an environment characterized by fluctuations between periods of feast and famine. The theory of thrifty genes states that these fluctuations are required for optimal metabolic function. We mimicked the fluctuations in eight healthy young men [25.0 ± 0.1 yr (mean ± SE); body mass index: 25.7 ± 0.4 kg/m2] by subjecting them to intermittent fasting every second day for 20 h for 15 days. Euglycemic hyperinsulinemic (40 mU·min–1·m–2) clamps were performed before and after the intervention period. Subjects maintained body weight (86.4 ± 2.3 kg; coefficient of variation: 0.8 ± 0.1%). Plasma free fatty acid and {beta}-hydroxybutyrate concentrations were 347 ± 18 and 0.06 ± 0.02 mM, respectively, after overnight fast but increased (P < 0.05) to 423 ± 86 and 0.10 ± 0.04 mM after 20-h fasting, confirming that the subjects were fasting. Insulin-mediated whole body glucose uptake rates increased from 6.3 ± 0.6 to 7.3 ± 0.3 mg·kg–1·min–1 (P = 0.03), and insulin-induced inhibition of adipose tissue lipolysis was more prominent after than before the intervention (P = 0.05). After the 20-h fasting periods, plasma adiponectin was increased compared with the basal levels before and after the intervention (5,922 ± 991 vs. 3,860 ± 784 ng/ml, P = 0.02). This experiment is the first in humans to show that intermittent fasting increases insulin-mediated glucose uptake rates, and the findings are compatible with the thrifty gene concept

And another interesting study, not on fasting, but definitely interesting because it looks at a common dogma in the fitness industry:

Meal frequency and energy balance.

Bellisle F, McDevitt R, Prentice AM. Br J Nutr. 1997 Apr;77 Suppl 1:S57-70.

Several epidemiological studies have observed an inverse relationship between people's habitual frequency of eating and body weight, leading to the suggestion that a 'nibbling' meal pattern may help in the avoidance of obesity. A review of all pertinent studies shows that, although many fail to find any significant relationship, the relationship is consistently inverse in those that do observe a relationship. However, this finding is highly vulnerable to the probable confounding effects of post hoc changes in dietary patterns as a consequence of weight gain and to dietary under-reporting which undoubtedly invalidates some of the studies. We conclude that the epidemiological evidence is at best very weak, and almost certainly represents an artefact. A detailed review of the possible mechanistic explanations for a metabolic advantage of nibbling meal patterns failed to reveal significant benefits in respect of energy expenditure. Although some short-term studies suggest that the thermic effect of feeding is higher when an isoenergetic test load is divided into multiple small meals, other studies refute this, and most are neutral. More importantly, studies using whole-body calorimetry and doubly-labelled water to assess total 24 h energy expenditure find no difference between nibbling and gorging. Finally, with the exception of a single study, there is no evidence that weight loss on hypoenergetic regimens is altered by meal frequency. We conclude that any effects of meal pattern on the regulation of body weight are likely to be mediated through effects on the food intake side of the energy balance equation.

patrick

 

[gopro]

I have to look at more of it. Up to now, I have not seen it done on bodybuilders or athletes - primarily due to the fact that those groups are highly specific and don't like to take the chances changing anything for the sake of science.

I'll dig some stuff up and maybe post it here.

patrick

I would be interested to see that...based on the fact that my opinions here are on only bodybuilders/athletes.

 

[danzik17]

Oh I will!

It is a bit slow getting it up because Keats and I are computer idiots and we are pretty busy right now looking at places to set up our own facility - human performance and soft tissue therapy - here in the phoenix area.

patrick

Off topic but if you need tech assist just let me know, you've helped me out plenty in the past.

 

[P-funk]

Off topic but if you need tech assist just let me know, you've helped me out plenty in the past.

I'll PM you so that this thread doesn't get off topic. Any sort of trouble shooting you could tell us would be greatly appreciated, as we are still amazed at the fact that when we speak into the microphone, the audacity program records us!

patrick

 

[P-funk]

I would be interested to see that...based on the fact that my opinions here are on only bodybuilders/athletes.

posted some up above. some of that athlete stuff is up there.

bodybuilders are much harder to get research on because they are creatures of habit and typically ascribe to long standing dogma's in the bodybuilding community which often times fly in the face of science and are based more on anecdotal reports. you can disagree with me if you want on my views here but that just seems to be what i see when i listen to the speak about what they do.

patrick

 

[gopro]

Like I said, when I get home later I am going to post a few pertinent studies on what I have been discussing. Hopefully that will satisfy your desire for some "proof." And even if it does not, well, at least I tried to do it your way.

As for the rest of the stuff being said. I do not feel most of you are truly absorbing what I am saying here. My point is this...and it goes for everything in the fitness industry (training-diet-supplements)...there is NOTHING important than experience and in the trenches data. This in my opinion blows away research studies because 1) For most studies out there, there is one to disprove it, 2) Very often they are poorly designed and/or do not use a relevant population, 3) They do not play out in the real world like they do in "the lab, " (and these are VERY different places) 4) Many of them are biased because the researchers have an agenda (this happens time and again).

Agree with me or not, that is how I feel based on what I have seen and also because I have been able to have many discussions with some of the most brilliant researchers in the industry.

I consider my experiences and all that I have done over the past 20 years one huge scientific study, and I will point to that before anything I read in any journal. And so far, it has rarely ever disappointed me or any one I have worked with.

I do not want any negativity or bad blood with anyone on this board b/c I do not accept negativity into my life. I respect everyone here and none of this stuff is personal. What you mods have done for this board speaks for itself!

So, I will post some studies. I have stated all I need to state. Then I gracefully bow out of this particular discussion wishing all of you the best with whatever approach you wish to take.