Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below 
blood_drinker
New member
I'm sorry - but here we're so happy I think it deserves a reply of its own. Brazil won 2-0. What a relief. I'm so happy I'll even try that one meal a day bulk 
eek !!!!
eek !!!!
.jpg "Research Chemical Sciences")
.png "Research Chemical Sciences")
The latest "theoretical" misconception
- Thread starter blood_drinker
- Start date
Well, I wanted to respond to the meal every 3 hr theory. The benefits to this routine, especially if one is placing a good protein with every meal, is that theoretically, protein requires a greater thermo effort from the body, thus burning more calories. I don't know if that would make a difference in eating 120 grams of protein vs 40 x 3. But I will say that 7 weeks ago, I started this meal every 3 - 3.5 hour thing. No simple sugars at all and low fat - 60-30-10 would be my guess here. I lost about an inch on my waist the first 4 weeks with no muscle loss. In fact, I've increased strength in some of the excercises since the meal pattern change. But thats it . I'm into my 7th week of a regimen that I really thought would yield substantial results in terms of adipose tissue in the abdomen area. I am probably 2 inches way from real good abs but I have not been able to lose anymore inches. I've added some HIT cardio - still nothing. My intake is about 1700 cals per day. But i'm only 5'6" and weigh 148 so I would be concerned about increasing cals. But preesntly, I'm not that convinced on the meal every 3 hour theory. But I definitely would not go to the 1 meal per day. I've done that and I have no energy and ended up taking naps when I got home.
Here is what I am convinced of. The body will adjust. It doesn't like having to tap into reserves especially as we get older. But here is real kicker. 15 years ago, I didn't have to worry about all this scientific crap. I had great genetics when it came to minimal bodyfat. All I had to do was just a few crunches and situps - that was it. So what has changed? What the hell has changed? AGE MAN!!! Cell division at 40 is not the same as cell division at 25. And cell divison contrinutes significantly in burning cals. You can preach METABOLIC INCREASING THEORIES until you are blue in the face but as you age, most people, even the ones who had great genetics during their youth, are going to find to difficult to rid adipose tissue. Lets not forget that in addition to cell division slow down, Testesterone and HGH output also change. IMO, All this stuff about meal frequency in terms of FAT loss and muscle gains is really not all that its cracked up to be as we age. Protein is another one. Who says we need 1.5 grams per lb bodyweight of protein? That would require me to get 225 grams per day!!! I've never seen that figure ever. During my 20's I made pretty good progress for someone without gifted genetics and during that time I was a vegetarian (I wised up since then). I was lucky if I saw 80 grams of protein a day! I'm consuming more protein now then I ever have and its done very little for me.
With that said, I'm curious about u guys consuming 4000 calorie a day diets. Okay, if you are an active bodybuilder and have the metabollically-active muscle densiy to require these cals, and are perhaps in your late 20's or mid 30's, thats fine. But that also implies you have great genetics and/or are introducing testesterone (and who knows what other drugs) into your system. The average individual trying to bulk up even at a young age doesn't require 4000 cals!!! Thats absurd!!! Sure, I've heard that you need cals to bulk but I just turned 40. I'm 5'6" and only weigh 150. Even 3000 cals would put some weight on me reall fast! There is no way I would increase calories to bulk up because I already know that I don't have the genetics for significant muscle density and growth and second, I'm convinced that excess cals will result in one thing - more cals in than out. Anyone beg to differ and explain to me why you would think otherwise? Why introducing 2500 or more cals would not make me gain weight? I'd sure like to hear this and a link scientifically supporting it would be nice too.
Here is what I am convinced of. The body will adjust. It doesn't like having to tap into reserves especially as we get older. But here is real kicker. 15 years ago, I didn't have to worry about all this scientific crap. I had great genetics when it came to minimal bodyfat. All I had to do was just a few crunches and situps - that was it. So what has changed? What the hell has changed? AGE MAN!!! Cell division at 40 is not the same as cell division at 25. And cell divison contrinutes significantly in burning cals. You can preach METABOLIC INCREASING THEORIES until you are blue in the face but as you age, most people, even the ones who had great genetics during their youth, are going to find to difficult to rid adipose tissue. Lets not forget that in addition to cell division slow down, Testesterone and HGH output also change. IMO, All this stuff about meal frequency in terms of FAT loss and muscle gains is really not all that its cracked up to be as we age. Protein is another one. Who says we need 1.5 grams per lb bodyweight of protein? That would require me to get 225 grams per day!!! I've never seen that figure ever. During my 20's I made pretty good progress for someone without gifted genetics and during that time I was a vegetarian (I wised up since then). I was lucky if I saw 80 grams of protein a day! I'm consuming more protein now then I ever have and its done very little for me.
With that said, I'm curious about u guys consuming 4000 calorie a day diets. Okay, if you are an active bodybuilder and have the metabollically-active muscle densiy to require these cals, and are perhaps in your late 20's or mid 30's, thats fine. But that also implies you have great genetics and/or are introducing testesterone (and who knows what other drugs) into your system. The average individual trying to bulk up even at a young age doesn't require 4000 cals!!! Thats absurd!!! Sure, I've heard that you need cals to bulk but I just turned 40. I'm 5'6" and only weigh 150. Even 3000 cals would put some weight on me reall fast! There is no way I would increase calories to bulk up because I already know that I don't have the genetics for significant muscle density and growth and second, I'm convinced that excess cals will result in one thing - more cals in than out. Anyone beg to differ and explain to me why you would think otherwise? Why introducing 2500 or more cals would not make me gain weight? I'd sure like to hear this and a link scientifically supporting it would be nice too.
You'll get no arguement from me. It somes down tho the realization not only that everyone is different in their dietary needs, but these needs are constantly changing in an individual throughout life. There is no doubt that metabolism slows down past a certain age and we either have to increase our activity level if we want to keep eating the same amount of foods, or eat less food (or get fat eeeeek).
And your point about the body adjusting is the main reason that most diets (bulking or cutting) only work for a limited time. You gotta change things up.
Another thing to keep in mind with people consuming huge amounts of food on bulking diets is that the body becomes that much less efficient at absorbing everything. Not meaning to be gross, but have any of you noticed the day after you've had a very large, fatty meal that your stools will often float? This is due to excess dietary fat getting excreted because you just couldn't cope with it all. So just because someone is eating 1500 cals a day above maintenance does not mean that they are absorbing 1500 extra cals. And of course most people expect to gain some fat on a bulking diet. I am 41, female, 5'5" and 165lbs and I bulk on 3000-3500 cals per day. This is not excessive for me (comes down to that individuality I guess) but I certainly gain some fat! And a nice amount of muscle too (which is the aim of the game).
I should also point out that nutrient absorption is also impaired on a once a day diet. Especially protein. You may only absorb 80% of the protein you eat if it's taken in all at once. Is this a problem? Not really since, as you sagely pointed out, almost all bodybuilders take in a large excess of protein to begin with.
Congratulation Brazil
Blood, I thought you were in Paris....confused
And your point about the body adjusting is the main reason that most diets (bulking or cutting) only work for a limited time. You gotta change things up.
Another thing to keep in mind with people consuming huge amounts of food on bulking diets is that the body becomes that much less efficient at absorbing everything. Not meaning to be gross, but have any of you noticed the day after you've had a very large, fatty meal that your stools will often float? This is due to excess dietary fat getting excreted because you just couldn't cope with it all. So just because someone is eating 1500 cals a day above maintenance does not mean that they are absorbing 1500 extra cals. And of course most people expect to gain some fat on a bulking diet. I am 41, female, 5'5" and 165lbs and I bulk on 3000-3500 cals per day. This is not excessive for me (comes down to that individuality I guess) but I certainly gain some fat! And a nice amount of muscle too (which is the aim of the game).
I should also point out that nutrient absorption is also impaired on a once a day diet. Especially protein. You may only absorb 80% of the protein you eat if it's taken in all at once. Is this a problem? Not really since, as you sagely pointed out, almost all bodybuilders take in a large excess of protein to begin with.
Congratulation Brazil
Blood, I thought you were in Paris....confused
blood_drinker
New member
Many bros experience lbm loss if they go below 1.5 g mark. However, at your teens practically anything works, as your body is primed for growth and metabolism is at its peak. Luck me. I bulk at 4000cals as this personally works best for me.
I am 5'5/165cms, 10%bf, 180lbs/82 kilos . I am currently in my bulking cycle. I will expect to go up to 15%bf probably, but it will look much better since Ill put on some nice mass. I hope to gain 10lbs of pure muscle in 12 weeks - which to me is very realistic - I will probably exceed that.
I am 5'5/165cms, 10%bf, 180lbs/82 kilos . I am currently in my bulking cycle. I will expect to go up to 15%bf probably, but it will look much better since Ill put on some nice mass. I hope to gain 10lbs of pure muscle in 12 weeks - which to me is very realistic - I will probably exceed that.
blood_drinker
New member
Many bros experience lbm loss if they go below 1.5 g mark. However, at your teens practically anything works, as your body is primed for growth and metabolism is at its peak. Luck me. I bulk at 4000cals as this personally works best for me.
I am 5'5/165cms, 10%bf, 180lbs/82 kilos . I am currently in my bulking cycle. I will expect to go up to 15%bf probably, but it will look much better since Ill put on some nice mass. I hope to gain 10lbs of pure muscle in 12 weeks - which to me is very realistic - I will probably exceed that.
MS- 5'5 165lbs, female. You must be pretty muscular. Whats your current bf%?
BTW, I live in france, but I am brazilian.
I am 5'5/165cms, 10%bf, 180lbs/82 kilos . I am currently in my bulking cycle. I will expect to go up to 15%bf probably, but it will look much better since Ill put on some nice mass. I hope to gain 10lbs of pure muscle in 12 weeks - which to me is very realistic - I will probably exceed that.
MS- 5'5 165lbs, female. You must be pretty muscular. Whats your current bf%?
BTW, I live in france, but I am brazilian.
I believe it does boil down to
Calories and calories only ( although It isn't ideal)-
Muscle can be gained on a near starvation diet. Look for the studys - you will find some interesting ones.
To say you can't buid muscle eating 2 bigmacs and a snickers, is incorrect. However inappropriate that may sound to us people of the iron game, it is fact.
The question shouldn't be; Can I gain muscle and lose fat? But what is OPTIMAL for gaining muscle and losing fat.
We all know that .9 grams per pound of LBM is the low optimal number for protein- so start there.
We all know that too many simple sugars and starches can slow fat loss progress - so limit them
Fats (3-6-9) are essential to a healthy body and endocrine system- so ensure you get enough in your diet.
Saturated fats are horrible for your body so limit them.
Everyone knows the correct answer- but most seem to want the easy way out- you didn't put that 20 pounds of fat on in two weeks, so don't expect to lose it in that amount of time.
Lifestyle choices are made everyday, if, more often than not- you make the correct ones- you will no doubt improve your physique.
Nugg
Calories and calories only ( although It isn't ideal)-
Muscle can be gained on a near starvation diet. Look for the studys - you will find some interesting ones.
To say you can't buid muscle eating 2 bigmacs and a snickers, is incorrect. However inappropriate that may sound to us people of the iron game, it is fact.
The question shouldn't be; Can I gain muscle and lose fat? But what is OPTIMAL for gaining muscle and losing fat.
We all know that .9 grams per pound of LBM is the low optimal number for protein- so start there.
We all know that too many simple sugars and starches can slow fat loss progress - so limit them
Fats (3-6-9) are essential to a healthy body and endocrine system- so ensure you get enough in your diet.
Saturated fats are horrible for your body so limit them.
Everyone knows the correct answer- but most seem to want the easy way out- you didn't put that 20 pounds of fat on in two weeks, so don't expect to lose it in that amount of time.
Lifestyle choices are made everyday, if, more often than not- you make the correct ones- you will no doubt improve your physique.
Nugg
L
Lumbuss
Guest
MS, explain please how having workouts in the evening is better than morning or mid-day. Im not disagreeing with you, i really haven't seen any studies. But keep in mind that if you work out early you will be eating carbs/protien every 3 hrs (unless you follow Fonz' method, something i am going to look into because i have never heard that before). So if you workout early, you will be constantly eating throughout the day and restoring glycogen and giving your muscles material to repair and supercompensate all day. On the other hand, if you workout late you are most likley going to get your pw meal in, maybe two more.
So i guess it comes down to what is more important, sleep or food. Like cackerots said, GH can't build muscle on its own. So can you explain a little further how an evening workout would be better, im not disagreeing i just want to hear what you think.
So i guess it comes down to what is more important, sleep or food. Like cackerots said, GH can't build muscle on its own. So can you explain a little further how an evening workout would be better, im not disagreeing i just want to hear what you think.
WTF...how did I ever miss this thread?
This is a damn good thread with a lot of great info being put out! Without, regurgitating what everyone else has mentioned, I am pretty much in agreement to what has been stated by MS, gy, and FONZ!
Bottom line is that everyone will react differently to every diet. There are so many factors involved between individuals, that there just is NO PERFECT DIET FOR EVERYONE! However, there are perfect diets at certain times of need.
Over the years, I have been a big fan of CKD diets as a way to shed off the last bit of fat. However, with the latest scientific data on Leptin, etc...I do not feel that it is really necessary to go to such extremes. I am a huge fan of CARB Refeeding! Simply, a calorie deficit followed by a few days of dieting (2-4...individual differences of course) followed by a refeed is NOW a better alternative for myself. This is not saying that all other diets don't work...I have pictures to prove otherwise that they do. I just think most people make it harder than it is...at least those with no hormonal problems.
Lyle McDonald has stated for awhile now that any macronutrient ratio will work as long as you have the necessary basics of the diet along with a deficit in calories and exercise. I tend to more and more think this is true. MS has been saying for awhile as well.
I don't really know what else to say that hasn't already been stated.
I wonder if gy still lurks on this board? If so, let me know, I have a few questions regarding research you mentioned being a part of.
BMJ
This is a damn good thread with a lot of great info being put out! Without, regurgitating what everyone else has mentioned, I am pretty much in agreement to what has been stated by MS, gy, and FONZ!
Bottom line is that everyone will react differently to every diet. There are so many factors involved between individuals, that there just is NO PERFECT DIET FOR EVERYONE! However, there are perfect diets at certain times of need.
Over the years, I have been a big fan of CKD diets as a way to shed off the last bit of fat. However, with the latest scientific data on Leptin, etc...I do not feel that it is really necessary to go to such extremes. I am a huge fan of CARB Refeeding! Simply, a calorie deficit followed by a few days of dieting (2-4...individual differences of course) followed by a refeed is NOW a better alternative for myself. This is not saying that all other diets don't work...I have pictures to prove otherwise that they do. I just think most people make it harder than it is...at least those with no hormonal problems.
Lyle McDonald has stated for awhile now that any macronutrient ratio will work as long as you have the necessary basics of the diet along with a deficit in calories and exercise. I tend to more and more think this is true. MS has been saying for awhile as well.
I don't really know what else to say that hasn't already been stated.
I wonder if gy still lurks on this board? If so, let me know, I have a few questions regarding research you mentioned being a part of.
BMJ
Just for the sake of things, I need to be more clear on something. I stated that any macronutrient will do, and for some that is true. BUT, for others, they will perform better on a certain macronutrient profile, BUT I do feel that eventually they will still have to change up their ratios to keep the body primed. I tend to do better on a lower/reduced carb diet, but eventually have to switch up to an isocaloric, or high carb diet to keep "things" going smoothly.
There is just toooo many topics being discussed here in this thread.
BMJ
There is just toooo many topics being discussed here in this thread.
BMJ
MR BMJ, you prolly missed this thread becasue it's ancient! I dunno where Lumbuss dug this one up from??? Oh well, it was too long for me to reread it all.
Lumbuss, training in the morning, afternoon or evening doesn't make any difference UNLESS you're only eating one main meal per day post workout to 'bulk'. In this case it is probably better to have that one meal within a few hours of going to bed since this is when most anabolism takes place, therefore training in the afternoon/evening would be better. If you're eating lots of meals throughout the day then it doesn't really matter when you train.
You're right MR BMJ, there's an aweful lot of topics touched upon here. One thing I don't think I brought up in these threads was how important I believe it is to change your diet (training etc...) regularly. No matter what kind of diet you follow, your body will adapt to it and progress (mass gain or fatloss) will stall if you keep doing the same old same old. I'm certainly not eating one meal per day at the moment and if I ate that way all my life I suspect I would have some hormonal imbalances by now! I can't think of any time in the history of our species when we would have taken in the same foods/vitamins/minerals in the same ratios day after day and season after season. There is also plenty of evidence that our bodies get pretty lazy and "tune out" when they are constantly bombarded with the same stuff all the time....just like our brains LOL.
Lumbuss, training in the morning, afternoon or evening doesn't make any difference UNLESS you're only eating one main meal per day post workout to 'bulk'. In this case it is probably better to have that one meal within a few hours of going to bed since this is when most anabolism takes place, therefore training in the afternoon/evening would be better. If you're eating lots of meals throughout the day then it doesn't really matter when you train.
You're right MR BMJ, there's an aweful lot of topics touched upon here. One thing I don't think I brought up in these threads was how important I believe it is to change your diet (training etc...) regularly. No matter what kind of diet you follow, your body will adapt to it and progress (mass gain or fatloss) will stall if you keep doing the same old same old. I'm certainly not eating one meal per day at the moment and if I ate that way all my life I suspect I would have some hormonal imbalances by now! I can't think of any time in the history of our species when we would have taken in the same foods/vitamins/minerals in the same ratios day after day and season after season. There is also plenty of evidence that our bodies get pretty lazy and "tune out" when they are constantly bombarded with the same stuff all the time....just like our brains LOL.
