And Just Remember

[Nelson Montana]

Bodybuilders shouldn't do cardio. You want to raise your heart rate, do twenty rep squats with 30 second rest in between sets and then tell me your heart rate isn't elevated.

Clomid blows. It works for some, not for others, and there are better options either way.

Nutrient timing is a tactic designed by book and magazine marketeers. For the most part, it's bullshit.

If you want to grow you must increase calories -- a lot! Yes, you'll get some fat, but after a certain point you can't grow muscle without getting bigger. You can't get bigger without eating more. As Dan Duchaine said, don't feel bad about eating a Big Mac. Feel bad that you didn't eat THREE of them!

If you want to cut, you must increase your workload. You can't train HIT, do some cario and mix your protein with skim milk and expect to get cut.

There is no such thing as a "cutting cycle." deal with it.

DNP is for idiots. No exceptions.

Unless you're over 6' 2", anthing over 275 pounds is unhealthy, I don't care how muscular you are, or think you are.

Big don't mean shit if you're fat.

Suplements only SUPPLEMENT. They give an added edge, that's all. None of them will perform miricles but some of them help. Learn which ones do and which ones dont.


All weight lost from stimulents will come back. Every time.

Visiting bodybuilding.com may result in the loss of brain cells.

The ketogenic diet is catabolic. It causes KETOSIS for Christfucking sakes. Don't take advice from informed fools. (Fat ones at that).

If you're a vegitarian beause you don't believe in taking a life, don't bath. It kills life forms. Just stay the fuck away from me.


Oral glutimine can not be absorbed. Stop wasting your money.

Whatever T-Mag says, dont believe it.

Weight belts are useless. Stop kidding yourself. Something wrapped around itself can not give support.

If you can't grow on a gram of gear a week, you suck. Take up golf.

Stop worrying about overtraining. Lift the fucking weights. It works.



That's for starters.

 

[Silent Method]

C-

I'll give you some time to correct your errors. Maybe I'll come back and grade you later.

 

[c3bodybuilding]

This is Nelson's board, if you don't like what he writes, why take up space?

 

[c3bodybuilding]

LOL@ the keto diet. I'm glad someone else see's Lyle for the fraud he is. Last time I was on misc.fitness.weights a few years ago, they had all turned on him after seeing his pic. So sad to see his pathetic online empire crumble.

 

[Nighthawkk]

Pretty much agree with most of what you said...although I still use clomid as part of my PCT regimen

 

[Silent Method]

This is Nelson's board, if you don't like what he writes, why take up space?

What's the point of Nelson's board if not discussion? I agree with some of what was posted, bu I don't like the opinions stated as unyielding fact nor the outright falshoods stated out of ignorance or a thirst for attention.

 

[Juice Authority]

What's the point of Nelson's board if not discussion? I agree with some of what was posted, bu I don't like the opinions stated as unyielding fact nor the outright falshoods stated out of ignorance or a thirst for attention.

There is so much misinformation in what he posted I don't know where to begin. It's late though. I'll have to start tomorrow morning when I'm fresh after I've had a couple of T-rex's and a cup of coffee.

 

[Nelson Montana]

Just remeber kids...

If you want to argue a point, give your reasoning and please try to use logic. I welcome it. And we all do that that, everyone learns. But just disagreeing or calling someone stupid or screaming for studies is all grade school bullshit. Present a cogent argument or shut the fuck up.

 

[ProtienFiend]

All weight lost from stimulents will come back. Every time.

Why?

 

[faller]

Only thing I want to comment on is the glutamine. I agree it's pretty much useless for bodybuilding, but it is generally absorbed pretty well. Most is used by the gut itself, and adding 10 grams of glutamine to a high-protien diet is a drop in the bucket- those are really the main reasons why it doesn't work.

 

[DANABOLIC55]

Getting cut by increasing workload?- do you mean increasing weight or reps? What's your opinion on Glutamine peptides like G-plenish?

 

[Juice Authority]

Bodybuilders shouldn't do cardio. You want to raise your heart rate, do twenty rep squats with 30 second rest in between sets and then tell me your heart rate isn't elevated.

Ok, Nelson. I got my coffee in me and now I am prepared to pick apart your ideas one by one. The effectiveness of cardio in bodybuilding has been argued at lenght. There is definitely a difference between doing enough cardio to maintain cardio fitness, and doing enough cardio to really get your body in a fat burning mode. It's near impossible to reach a target heart rate by lifting weights. I'm assuming you know why that's important. Here's why cardio is so important:


It's one way to burn calories and help you lose weight
It makes your heart strong so that it doesn't have to work as hard to pump blood
It increases your lung capacity
It helps reduce risk of heart attack, high cholesterol, high blood pressure and diabetes
It makes you feel good
It helps you sleep better
It helps reduce stress
I could go on all day, but you get the point

Bottom line: you need cardio if you want to get your weight under control and get your stress to a tolerable level.

Go ahead and tear these apart.

 

[Fina Junkie]

Weight belts are useless. Stop kidding yourself. Something wrapped around itself can not give support.

Is this your opinion or a fact ?

 

[Juice Authority]

Is this your opinion or a fact ?

Come on Bro, that's down at the bottom. We need to start at the top and work our way down. We'll get to that one.

 

[Bulldog_10]

Is this your opinion or a fact ?

They do provide support...however, they allow people to neglect their core musculature, which results in injury. So I agree with Nelson on this one...weight belts suck fuckin moose dick.

I disagree on the cardio issue because even though your heart rate will go up when doing squats (or any exercise for that matter) it doesn't result in the same increase in stroke volume. With cardio you get more of a rhythmic muscle contraction, which increases blood flow back to the heart (via the muscle pump...and respiratory pump), increasing end-diastolic volume, making the heart more efficient (higher stroke volume, lower heart rate as a result). You simply don't see this with strength training (at least not as pronounced an effect)...so cardio is MUCH better for the heart.

Any thoughts Nelson?

 

[Bulldog_10]

They do provide support...however, they allow people to neglect their core musculature, which results in injury. So I agree with Nelson on this one...weight belts suck fuckin moose dick.

I disagree on the cardio issue because even though your heart rate will go up when doing squats (or any exercise for that matter) it doesn't result in the same increase in stroke volume. With cardio you get more of a rhythmic muscle contraction, which increases blood flow back to the heart (via the muscle pump...and respiratory pump), increasing end-diastolic volume, making the heart more efficient (higher stroke volume, lower heart rate as a result). You simply don't see this with strength training (at least not as pronounced an effect)...so cardio is MUCH better for the heart.

Any thoughts Nelson?

LOL...But I MUST say...I agree with the rest (I didn't read the whole thing before my first post).

I applaud you Nelson.

 

[Nelson Montana]

They do provide support...however, they allow people to neglect their core musculature, which results in injury. So I agree with Nelson on this one...weight belts suck fuckin moose dick.

I disagree on the cardio issue because even though your heart rate will go up when doing squats (or any exercise for that matter) it doesn't result in the same increase in stroke volume. With cardio you get more of a rhythmic muscle contraction, which increases blood flow back to the heart (via the muscle pump...and respiratory pump), increasing end-diastolic volume, making the heart more efficient (higher stroke volume, lower heart rate as a result). You simply don't see this with strength training (at least not as pronounced an effect)...so cardio is MUCH better for the heart.

Any thoughts Nelson?

A very valid disagreement. (I love those)

The one oversight I would contest is that high rep squats with litle rest between sets will maintain a constant elevated HR. (Not quite as stable as jogging, but with more peaks). It will also grow more muscle and muscle helps burn fat around the clock.

As far as the weight belts, that was always my opinion but recently it's been confirmed that they do not prevent injury and may actually cause injury either by tearing into the plurea or as BD mentioned by disallowing certain muscle (i.e.lower back and erector spinae) to become involved and properly developed. Hardly any Olympic lfters use them anymore. Get with the program.

 

[Fina Junkie]

You're right; I do need to get with the program.

FUCK FONZ

 

[Silent Method]

Bodybuilders shouldn't do cardio. You want to raise your heart rate, do twenty rep squats with 30 second rest in between sets and then tell me your heart rate isn't elevated.

I agree that "cardio" (and my god I wish people would define what the hell they are talking about with that term) is not ideal, nor necessary for body composition tweaking. However, used correctly it has a beneficial function for any athlete. "Bodybuilders should not do it" is blind sighted.

Clomid blows. It works for some, not for others, and there are better options either way.

This is a sketchy subject with little empirical data to back up your position. As it stand, clomid is a functional tools. "Better options" is a subjective statement.

Nutrient timing is a tactic designed by book and magazine marketeers. For the most part, it's bullshit.

Many marketers in the supplement industry lay a spin of bullshit on anything you can think of. Define what you are talking about by "nutrient timing." There are plenty of valid factors to consider regarding time frames and eating.

If you want to cut, you must increase your workload. You can't train HIT, do some cario and mix your protein with skim milk and expect to get cut.

First, an athlete CAN cut with diet alone. Secondly, adding HIT or other "cardio" (or increasing either one) IS increasing your workload.

There is no such thing as a "cutting cycle." deal with it.

If an athlete utilizes steroids and ancillary drugs for the purpose of preserving lean mass while simultaneously and deliberately tailoring training and diet toward fat loss, we call this a cutting cycle. This is a matter of linguistic nomenclature, not the pharmalogic action of the drugs. Please come to terms with this one.

All weight lost from stimulents will come back. Every time.

A rebound effect with stimulants use is a fact. However, assuming ALL weight lost using any given stimulant will ALWAYS comeback is crap.

Visiting bodybuilding.com may result in the loss of brain cells.

Yes, there is lots of crap on that board just like any other board - including this one. It's just funny you single them out because you didn't find a reliable crop of unquestioning subjugates. (I can't remember - was THAT the board where you made an alternate user name just to agree with yourself?)

Oral glutimine can not be absorbed. Stop wasting your money.

False. The fact that you've said in the past that "all the studies with glutamine were done IV" shows that you are ignorant on the subject. Oral glutamine is well absorbed in the gut. Oral supplementation and it's impact is widely used and studied in clinical settings and studies.

Weight belts are useless. Stop kidding yourself. Something wrapped around itself can not give support.

Good lord, you haven't a clue. Please enroll in a basic physics or biomechanics course (I'm serious by the way). So a belt cannot exert a force? (How in the world do they hold up our pants?)

Try this - balance two brand new pencils, blunt eraser ends in contact, on top of each other. Wave it around a bit and see what happens. Now wrap a piece of tissue around the pencil-to-pencil junction and observe the increase in stability. Throw some rubber tape around the tissue and see what happens. Bind that junction further with a sturdy band of leather. Get the idea?

 

[Juice Authority]

A very valid disagreement. (I love those)

The one oversight I would contest is that high rep squats with litle rest between sets will maintain a constant elevated HR. (Not quite as stable as jogging, but with more peaks). It will also grow more muscle and muscle helps burn fat around the clock.

As far as the weight belts, that was always my opinion but recently it's been confirmed that they do not prevent injury and may actually cause injury either by tearing into the plurea or as BD mentioned by disallowing certain muscle (i.e.lower back and erector spinae) to become involved and properly developed. Hardly any Olympic lfters use them anymore. Get with the program.

Nelson -

Once again you're wrong! Weight belts are worn to help you maintain proper alignment and protect your lower-back muscles. In general, the proper exercises for a belt are those that involve your legs or lower back. Weight belts can also be worn to reduce the mobility of your lower-back muscles and force you to use the muscles a particular exercise is designed to work out. Weight lifting is most effective when you isolate the muscle or muscle group you intend to work out.

 

[Silent Method]

I think wearing a weight belt is a poor idea except for the occasional maximal or near max lift. Juice, you're correct that worn correctly they help maintain proper alignment, but they may also bind some users into poor alignment or allow them to get away with poor form in other aspects.

Used in an exercise like squatting, it will remove some of the effort required by the abds and back and "isolate" other muscles. However, depending on how you look at it, this can be a very BAD thing.


One thing is certain. The notion that it cannot provide support is one that should be dropped by the time you make it out of 6th grade earth science.

 

[Silent Method]

P.S. I never use them. But I do not use false statement to dismiss them.

 

[Nelson Montana]

P.S. I never use them. But I do not use false statement to dismiss them.

You really must stop this "false staement" bullshit every time you disagree with something, or even the way something is said. It's very sophmoric.

Let me spell it for you.

Take a stick and wrap a belt around it. Then connect the belt to something that stationary, such as a fence or a support beam. The belt then acts as a brace with the stationary object providing stability and the stick will not fall. But if you were to just wrap the belt around the stick and NOT connect it to anything else -- it would fall down, no matter how tight the best is.


Of course, this is a simple example and you can argue this and that and pick apart the wording and the syntax, but, YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN. This imperious posture of ours that you so illuminant and you word is somehow the final decree on any givin topic is really obnoxious. Knock it off already.

Let's try and help each other and spark intesting debate. This non stop bickering over minutea is boring.

 

[Bulldog_10]

You really must stop this "false staement" bullshit every time you disagree with something, or even the way something is said. It's very sophmoric.

Let me spell it for you.

Take a stick and wrap a belt around it. Then connect the belt to something that stationary, such as a fence or a support beam. The belt then acts as a brace with the stationary object providing stability and the stick will not fall. But if you were to just wrap the belt around the stick and NOT connect it to anything else -- it would fall down, no matter how tight the best is.


Of course, this is a simple example and you can argue this and that and pick apart the wording and the syntax, but, YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN. This imperious posture of ours that you so illuminant and you word is somehow the final decree on any givin topic is really obnoxious. Knock it off already.

Let's try and help each other and spark intesting debate. This non stop bickering over minutea is boring.

The thing about that is...the stick is no compressable. When using a belt, it helps to compress the "fluid ball" in your gut area, which then surrounds and supports to the spine. Without the belt, this is the job of the core musculature...transversus abdominus in particular.

When using the belt however, you don't have to work those deep abdominal muscles, which obviously weakens them. Then when you're not in the gym, and you have to lift something without the belt, you're screwed. That's how injuries happen.

As an analogy, just think of using straps for all your upper body movements so you never have to grip anything. You're forearms are obviously going to get weak and atrophied...not a huge deal because it's just your forearms. But the same thing happens when using a belt, except now the musculature you're weakening is a whole helluva lot more important than your forearm flexors.

 

[Nelson Montana]

The thing about that is...the stick is no compressable. When using a belt, it helps to compress the "fluid ball" in your gut area, which then surrounds and supports to the spine. Without the belt, this is the job of the core musculature...transversus abdominus in particular.

When using the belt however, you don't have to work those deep abdominal muscles, which obviously weakens them. Then when you're not in the gym, and you have to lift something without the belt, you're screwed. That's how injuries happen.

As an analogy, just think of using straps for all your upper body movements so you never have to grip anything. You're forearms are obviously going to get weak and atrophied...not a huge deal because it's just your forearms. But the same thing happens when using a belt, except now the musculature you're weakening is a whole helluva lot more important than your forearm flexors.

That's probably a better explanation than my simplistic one. But I would still agrue that the "compression" really doesn't do anything other than to give a sense of being secure.

As far as hand wraps, I see the comparson, but using wraps won't hurt you the way a belt can hurt you. I use wraps because as a musciian I need to take some pressure of my hands. (And besides, my forearms are my most developed bodypart). I actually find I get more of my lats when I do pull downs with straps because my hands don't tire before my back does.

Knee wraps , on the other hand, are really bad for the kness.

 

[Bulldog_10]

That's probably a better explanation than my simplistic one. But I would still agrue that the "compression" really doesn't do anything other than to give a sense of being secure.

As far as hand wraps, I see the comparson, but using wraps won't hurt you the way a belt can hurt you. I use wraps because as a musciian I need to take some pressure of my hands. (And besides, my forearms are my most developed bodypart). I actually find I get more of my lats when I do pull downs with straps because my hands don't tire before my back does.

Knee wraps , on the other hand, are really bad for the kness.

I agree, but I was thinking if you used straps for EVERYTHING...never having to grip. And the compression definitely does help support the lower back...that's why the abdominals are so important for lower back stability. They're not connected to the vertebrae...they just keep everything tight so the spine has nowhere to go. (You HAVE heard of the "fluid ball" right?)

I also think straps are a good idea for alot of back movements because if your grip is too tight, you might end up working your arms instead of concentrating on squeezing those back muscles.

 

[Silent Method]

You really must stop this "false staement" bullshit every time you disagree with something, or even the way something is said. It's very sophmoric.

You stated, "Something wrapped around itself can not give support" in regard to weight lifting belts. This, Nelson, is false.

Let me spell it for you.

Take a stick and wrap a belt around it. Then connect the belt to something that stationary, such as a fence or a support beam. The belt then acts as a brace with the stationary object providing stability and the stick will not fall. But if you were to just wrap the belt around the stick and NOT connect it to anything else -- it would fall down, no matter how tight the best is.


Of course, this is a simple example and you can argue this and that and pick apart the wording and the syntax, but, YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN. This imperious posture of ours that you so illuminant and you word is somehow the final decree on any givin topic is really obnoxious. Knock it off already.

Let's try and help each other and spark intesting debate. This non stop bickering over minutea is boring.

Nelson, I'm dead serious about enrolling yourself in a basic level biomechanics course (among others). You have such an interest in such topics, and the energy to write, yet your lack of understanding in many areas puts leads you to much misunderstanding.

Your stick example is irrelevant - and this has nothing to do with syntax or wording.

A person's back is not rigid like a stick. It flexes and extends. A spring is a better analogy (as was my two pencils example). Take a spring and wobble it around. Now bind a section of the spring with a semi-rigid belt. That bound section will be braced and stabilized to a given degree. How the hell do you think a back brace works? Lifting belts are small back braces that come in varying widths, thickness, and rigidities. A well-designed lifting belt is primarily a back brace focused in the lumbar region. A poorly designed lifting belt may be to narrow and/or to bendable to be an effective brace.

In addition, in a fluid encapsulated model such as the human abdomen, a belt can increase IAP (intra-abdominal pressure) as Bulldog_10 pointed out. If you think IAP "really doesn't do anything other than to give a sense of being secure" you've got quite alot to learn. You'd be a pile of jelly without it. IAP is a direct bracing force.

Follow this one - For any object that either A. has more than one segment, those segments articulating about an axis, OR B. simply bends, a rigid or semi-rigid band wrapped around that axis of articulation OR pliable section will act as a brace to a given degree. The torso qualifies as A and B. This alone refutes your false claim. Do you need me to go more in depth with IAP?

 

[Juice Authority]

You stated, "Something wrapped around itself can not give support" in regard to weight lifting belts. This, Nelson, is false.

Nelson, I'm dead serious about enrolling yourself in a basic level biomechanics course (among others). You have such an interest in such topics, and the energy to write, yet your lack of understanding in many areas puts leads you to much misunderstanding.

Your stick example is irrelevant - and this has nothing to do with syntax or wording.

A person's back is not rigid like a stick. It flexes and extends. A spring is a better analogy (as was my two pencils example). Take a spring and wobble it around. Now bind a section of the spring with a semi-rigid belt. That bound section will be braced and stabilized to a given degree. How the hell do you think a back brace works? Lifting belts are small back braces that come in varying widths, thickness, and rigidities. A well-designed lifting belt is primarily a back brace focused in the lumbar region. A poorly designed lifting belt may be to narrow and/or to bendable to be an effective brace.

In addition, in a fluid encapsulated model such as the human abdomen, a belt can increase IAP (intra-abdominal pressure) as Bulldog_10 pointed out. If you think IAP "really doesn't do anything other than to give a sense of being secure" you've got quite alot to learn. You'd be a pile of jelly without it. IAP is a direct bracing force.

Follow this one - For any object that either A. has more than one segment, those segments articulating about an axis, OR B. simply bends, a rigid or semi-rigid band wrapped around that axis of articulation OR pliable section will act as a brace to a given degree. The torso qualifies as A and B. This alone refutes your false claim. Do you need me to go more in depth with IAP?

It's pointless Bro. It's like talking to a wall. He's too stupid to realize how stupid he is.

 

[Bulldog_10]

It's pointless Bro. It's like talking to a wall. He's too stupid to realize how stupid he is.

I wouldn't go QUITE that far. Although Nelson's reasoning may be a little skewed, the point behind what he is saying is valid. Weight belts shouldn't be used 99% of the time.

 

[Juice Authority]

I wouldn't go QUITE that far. Although Nelson's reasoning may be a little skewed, the point behind what he is saying is valid. Weight belts shouldn't be used 99% of the time.

I agree on that. Weight belts are only necessary when lifting your maximum weight. If you can do at least five reps, you don't need a weight belt; it's really for weights you can only lift one to three times. His reasoning however makes little to no sense.

 

[Juice Authority]

If you want to grow you must increase calories -- a lot! Yes, you'll get some fat, but after a certain point you can't grow muscle without getting bigger. You can't get bigger without eating more. As Dan Duchaine said, don't feel bad about eating a Big Mac. Feel bad that you didn't eat THREE of them!
That's for starters.

Ok, let's focus on this one for a minute. The key to gaining "good" weight is to eat more, but eat smart. That doesn't entail pounding down a bunch of hamburgers! A nutritionally balanced weight-gain diet included larger amounts of wholesome, high-nutrient-density foods such as breads, cereals, pasta, rice, vegetables, fruits, legumes, meats and dairy products..

http://nsinte1.moe.edu.sg/project/wt/readroom.nsf/0/2584a93ffcecf3844825671200125558?OpenDocument

Spread out your meals. Eating three to six meals or snacks each day will help you gain weight - eating until you're stuffed won't.

Get more protein. Studies show that eating more than three times the usual RDA for protein is often needed to increase muscle mass.

Supplement your diet with key anabolic agents such as creatine, glutamine and fatty acids that help build muscle.

 

[Bulldog_10]

Juice...you got any links/refs to the 3x protein RDA?

 

[Juice Authority]

Nutrient timing is a tactic designed by book and magazine marketeers. For the most part, it's bullshit.

Why is it bullshit? Simply eating or drinking protein does not guarantee it will be directed toward muscle growth. From a physiological perspective, growing muscle mass is your body's last priority. Manipulating the body's secretion of the hormone insulin via nutrition is the cornerstone of channeling the body's metabolic pathways toward muscle growth. The timing of certain nutrients with this period triggers powerful muscle building effects that you must take advantage of. Any thoughts on this Nelson???

 

[Juice Authority]

Juice...you got any links/refs to the 3x protein RDA?

Of course I do. I dont pull shit out of my ass like Nelson does!

 

[Juice Authority]

Clomid blows. It works for some, not for others, and there are better options either way.

I wasn't going to go here but WTF...Yeah, clomid blows but the medical evidence definitively shows that clomid is effective in restoring hpta. What exactly are the better options you allude to? Could it be PCT, the herbal supplement you designed and endorse???

 

[Bulldog_10]

Why is it bullshit? Simply eating or drinking protein does not guarantee it will be directed toward muscle growth. From a physiological perspective, growing muscle mass is your body's last priority. Manipulating the body's secretion of the hormone insulin via nutrition is the cornerstone of channeling the body's metabolic pathways toward muscle growth. The timing of certain nutrients with this period triggers powerful muscle building effects that you must take advantage of. Any thoughts on this Nelson???

In defense of Nelson (for god knows why) I think the insulin issue is why he included "for the most part" in his statement. But in general, I think you can agree that as long as your getting the same amount of macros, two people who time their nutrient intakes differently will make similar gains. The one point when nutrient timing is key is obviously post-workout, which nelson has agreed with in the past.

 

[Juice Authority]

In defense of Nelson (for god knows why) I think the insulin issue is why he included "for the most part" in his statement. But in general, I think you can agree that as long as your getting the same amount of macros, two people who time their nutrient intakes differently will make similar gains. The one point when nutrient timing is key is obviously post-workout, which nelson has agreed with in the past.

huh? Ok, lets address the insulin issue. Your pancreas secretes insulin into the bloodstream in response to the food you eat. Insulin drives nutrients into muscles by stimulating the sodium/potassium pump located within the cell surface. Stimulating this pump is required for active transports of essential nutrients (carbohydrates and amino acids) into cells. The presence of insulin channels nutritional materials toward cell anabolism (growth) and prevents catabolism.

 

[Juice Authority]

Now, Regarding insulin manipulation for muscle growth, there are two aspects we need to concern ourselves with.

1) The first critical step is knowing when to consume foods that produce an insulin peak and how to maintain steady insulin levels throughout the day, everyday.

2) Timing your protein intake to provide an abundance of the right building material when muscle cells are depleted and insulin levels are high is the second step.

This is all a part of Nutrient Timing.

 

[Bulldog_10]

huh? Ok, lets address the insulin issue. Your pancreas secretes insulin into the bloodstream in response to the food you eat. Insulin drives nutrients into muscles by stimulating the sodium/potassium pump located within the cell surface. Stimulating this pump is required for active transports of essential nutrients (carbohydrates and amino acids) into cells. The presence of insulin channels nutritional materials toward cell anabolism (growth) and prevents catabolism.

LOL...thanks for the physiology lesson...I know how insulin works...which has nothing to do with the sodium-potassium (Na,K-ATPase) pump. Insulin actually causes glut-4 receptors to translocate to the muscle cell surface, which then allow glucose to enter the cell for glycolysis or glycogen synthesis. Exercise actually causes this glut-4 translocation to the cell surface, even though insulin levels decrease during exercise.

All I said was that Nelson agrees that nutrient timing is important at some points...but in general, it's bullshit.

And could you post those links/refs for the other thing i asked about?

 

[Juice Authority]

LOL...thanks for the physiology lesson...I know how insulin works...which has nothing to do with the sodium-potassium (Na,K-ATPase) pump. Insulin actually causes glut-4 receptors to translocate to the muscle cell surface, which then allow glucose to enter the cell for glycolysis or glycogen synthesis. Exercise actually causes this glut-4 translocation to the cell surface, even though insulin levels decrease during exercise.

All I said was that Nelson agrees that nutrient timing is important at some points...but in general, it's bullshit.

And could you post those links/refs for the other thing i asked about?

Ok, back to my point...knowing when to consume foods that produce an insulin peak is whole the purpose behind Nutrient timing. How is that bullshit?

 

[Bulldog_10]

Ok, back to my point...knowing when to consume foods that produce an insulin peak is whole the purpose behind Nutrient timing. How is that bullshit?

It's not bullshit. I said post-exercise, nutrient timing is important...very important. But other than that specific time, the insulin response isn't as important.

 

[Juice Authority]

It's not bullshit. I said post-exercise, nutrient timing is important...very important. But other than that specific time, the insulin response isn't as important.

Ok.
The article I was referring to is from Nutrition Science News March 1997 - Volume 2 No 3.

 

[Nelson Montana]

Silient: You have to learn that condesention does not equate to authority. Maybe someday when you have to deal with grown ups in the real world, you'll find that out. You can act like an asshole all day long it doesn't change the facts. As anticipated, you're picking apart my "stick" example by completely ignoring the point and choosing to make comments like "a stick isn't flexable" which has nothing to do with anything.


You then use the back brace as an example of your reasoning but braces are not meant to increase workload, they're used to limit movement so a person will not re-injure themself if they are recuperating from a propr injury. If someone wears them to do work, they're using it for the wrong reason. But you know what...this is boring -- just as everyone of your diatribes are. YOU DON'T EVEN DISAGREE YET YOU WANT TO ARGUE ANYWAY. It is unfuckingbelievaby obnoxious. Stop.

Juice: You're just being a jerk off now. I don't get you. One minute you're cool, the next you're looking to pick a fight. I can't take you seriously. So I guess I'll just have to ignore you and I guess you'll just have to keep following me around harrassing me. How sad.

 

[Juice Authority]

Juice: You're just being a jerk off now. I don't get you. One minute you're cool, the next you're looking to pick a fight. I can't take you seriously. So I guess I'll just have to ignore you and I guess you'll just have to keep following me around harrassing me. How sad.

Like I told you, it's all in good fun. Now why dont you address some of my points for a change.

 

[Naeblis]

He never addresses my points either.

 

[Mavy]

That's probably a better explanation than my simplistic one.

Nelson, I think that you have some logical points, but you just dont know how to, or know enough to explain yourself. You list the points, let bulldog explain whats going on behind them for you hahaha.

 

[Mavy]

Its like you know what to say ... you just dont know why you are saying it.

 

[Juice Authority]

He never addresses my points either.

It would be hard for anyone to address your points.

 

[jubei]

I'm kind of burnt out right now, but i'll get back to this one for sure.

 

[Silent Method]

You then use the back brace as an example of your reasoning but braces are not meant to increase workload, they're used to limit movement so a person will not re-injure themself if they are recuperating from a propr injury.

Same thing, same thing, same thing as a lifting belt. A lifting belt is a lumbar back brace.

If someone wears them to do work, they're using it for the wrong reason.

AGREED! But this is a side step from what you said: "Weight belts are useless. Stop kidding yourself. Something wrapped around itself can not give support." This is false.

You started this with a comment regarding lifting belts and a bracing effect, and now your going to argue force over distance (i.e. work)? Well no shit, a lifting belt dosen't move. I'll be.

But you know what...this is boring -- just as everyone of your diatribes are. YOU DON'T EVEN DISAGREE YET YOU WANT TO ARGUE ANYWAY. It is unfuckingbelievaby obnoxious. Stop.

What's obnoxious is you posing like an expert, making incorrect statements, and reacting this way when your mistakes are pointed out.

 

[Nelson Montana]

Same thing, same thing, same thing as a lifting belt. A lifting belt is a lumbar back brace.


AGREED! But this is a side step from what you said: "Weight belts are useless. Stop kidding yourself. Something wrapped around itself can not give support." This is false.

You started this with a comment regarding lifting belts and a bracing effect, and now your going to argue force over distance (i.e. work)? Well no shit, a lifting belt dosen't move. I'll be.


What's obnoxious is you posing like an expert, making incorrect statements, and reacting this way when your mistakes are pointed out.

How old are you?

 

[Juice Authority]

What's obnoxious is you posing like an expert, making incorrect statements, and reacting this way when your mistakes are pointed out.

Nelson can't handle it when people prove that he wrong. Instead of discussing the points raised he dsicredits any all information (including controlled medical studies) that contradicts his statements of fact, which are nothing more than his personal opinion backed by pure speculation. The funny thing is I dont even think Nelson believes half the shit that comes out of his mouth.

How old are you?

Case in point. You owned him in your argument and he comes back with this feeble response. Pathetic..

 

[Nelson Montana]

Nelson can't handle it when people prove that he wrong. Instead of discussing the points raised he dsicredits any all information (including controlled medical studies) that contradicts his statements of fact, which are nothing more than his personal opinion backed by pure speculation. The funny thing is I dont even think Nelson believes half the shit that comes out of his mouth.



Case in point. You owned him in your argument and he comes back with this feeble response. Pathetic..

Thanks for contributing....nothing.

You do realize that if this board goes under it will be because of you. I guess that gives you a feeling of power. You have nothing else going on in your life, so why not, right?

I'm telling you right now Juice, you can argue, disagree, debate, and discuss, but I will not tolerate senseless badgering, character assasination and downright lies, just because you think it's fun. I'll take this this entire fucking forum if it's going to be nothing but that. I'm giving everybody to speak their mind without intervention and you are abusing it. Grow up already.
Fonz is an egomaniac, and Naeblis is mentally disturbed. They can't be reasoned with. But I'm hoping you can be. If all you can contribute is to pile on insults, please don't post. Please.

 

[Ganryu]

Nelson, on the overtraining subject:

I understand that the volume used by bbers of days before us was MUCH larger than what most today do. But what kind of volume would you suggest for today? I mean, I simply don't have the time to do 40 sets of anything. Just wondering what your thoughts are.

 

[Fonz]

Bodybuilders shouldn't do cardio. You want to raise your heart rate, do twenty rep squats with 30 second rest in between sets and then tell me your heart rate isn't elevated.

Clomid blows. It works for some, not for others, and there are better options either way.

Nutrient timing is a tactic designed by book and magazine marketeers. For the most part, it's bullshit.

If you want to grow you must increase calories -- a lot! Yes, you'll get some fat, but after a certain point you can't grow muscle without getting bigger. You can't get bigger without eating more. As Dan Duchaine said, don't feel bad about eating a Big Mac. Feel bad that you didn't eat THREE of them!

If you want to cut, you must increase your workload. You can't train HIT, do some cario and mix your protein with skim milk and expect to get cut.

There is no such thing as a "cutting cycle." deal with it.

DNP is for idiots. No exceptions.

Unless you're over 6' 2", anthing over 275 pounds is unhealthy, I don't care how muscular you are, or think you are.

Big don't mean shit if you're fat.

Suplements only SUPPLEMENT. They give an added edge, that's all. None of them will perform miricles but some of them help. Learn which ones do and which ones dont.


All weight lost from stimulents will come back. Every time.

Visiting bodybuilding.com may result in the loss of brain cells.

The ketogenic diet is catabolic. It causes KETOSIS for Christfucking sakes. Don't take advice from informed fools. (Fat ones at that).

If you're a vegitarian beause you don't believe in taking a life, don't bath. It kills life forms. Just stay the fuck away from me.


Oral glutimine can not be absorbed. Stop wasting your money.

Whatever T-Mag says, dont believe it.

Weight belts are useless. Stop kidding yourself. Something wrapped around itself can not give support.

If you can't grow on a gram of gear a week, you suck. Take up golf.

Stop worrying about overtraining. Lift the fucking weights. It works.



That's for starters.

dot dot dot

 

[Singleton]

The thing about that is...the stick is no compressable. When using a belt, it helps to compress the "fluid ball" in your gut area, which then surrounds and supports to the spine. Without the belt, this is the job of the core musculature...transversus abdominus in particular.

When using the belt however, you don't have to work those deep abdominal muscles, which obviously weakens them. Then when you're not in the gym, and you have to lift something without the belt, you're screwed. That's how injuries happen.

As an analogy, just think of using straps for all your upper body movements so you never have to grip anything. You're forearms are obviously going to get weak and atrophied...not a huge deal because it's just your forearms. But the same thing happens when using a belt, except now the musculature you're weakening is a whole helluva lot more important than your forearm flexors.

Now that's something that makes sense. I think TVA and core strength is highly overlooked. In fact, I think it should be trained specifically, which is why I do pilates.

And for the record, I squat up to 465 for sets of 5.

 

[Ganryu]

which is why I do pilates.QUOTE]
I LOVE drinking those.

 

[Singleton]

...and I don't use a belt!

 

[Singleton]

It would be hard for anyone to address your points.

He had a point??

 

[Singleton]

which is why I do pilates.QUOTE]
I LOVE drinking those.

Drink? No no, Pilates. Not drink.
http://www.findarticles.com/cf_0/m0675/1_22/112408512/p1/article.jhtml

 

[Singleton]

Nelson, I think that you have some logical points, but you just dont know how to, or know enough to explain yourself. You list the points, let bulldog explain whats going on behind them for you hahaha.

LOL you're funny Mavy

 

[jubei]

ouch.

 

[Fonz]

It's not bullshit. I said post-exercise, nutrient timing is important...very important. But other than that specific time, the insulin response isn't as important.

Really........

What pushes nutrients into cells?

INSULIN.

In the morning...... liver glycogen is empty. Can only hold 125g of glucose.

At this moment in time, insulin levels are low and glucogenesis has already started.

i.e. Amino-acids are being used for fuel by your body, by the breakdown of protein into glucose.

Muscle is being lost..................

So, you really want to stand by Nelson's banter, or would you like the vets and co. The SCIENTIFIC ones, to reduce Nelson's and your explanations to rubble?

Nutrient-timing theory has always been morning and Post-Wo. With some morning and Pre-wo,Post-Wo, and pre-sleep variants depending on cutting or bulking.

But never have I seen that nutrient timing is NOT important in the morning. Thats a recipy for catabolism.

 

[Juice Authority]

Thanks for contributing....nothing.

You do realize that if this board goes under it will be because of you. I guess that gives you a feeling of power. You have nothing else going on in your life, so why not, right?

I'm telling you right now Juice, you can argue, disagree, debate, and discuss, but I will not tolerate senseless badgering, character assasination and downright lies, just because you think it's fun. I'll take this this entire fucking forum if it's going to be nothing but that. I'm giving everybody to speak their mind without intervention and you are abusing it. Grow up already.
Fonz is an egomaniac, and Naeblis is mentally disturbed. They can't be reasoned with. But I'm hoping you can be. If all you can contribute is to pile on insults, please don't post. Please.

Nelson -

You strike me as an individual with half a brain, sometimes anyway. I have tried to disagree, debate and discuss several of your opening remarks but you have yet to address any of the points I raised, which comes as no surprise. Face it Nelson, you will NEVER admit you were wrong about something. You expect people to take what you say as gospel without challenging your views. When contrary evidence is provided as both Silent Method and I have done on this very thread you ignore it and discredit it as some sort of personal attack. So, the only conclusion one can reach with this is that you are incapable of expanding on you views in an intelligent manner. You make statements that you expact people to take as fact when most of them are nothing more than uninformed opinions that hold very little merit.

 

[Nelson Montana]

Nelson -

You strike me as an individual with half a brain, sometimes anyway. I have tried to disagree, debate and discuss several of your opening remarks but you have yet to address any of the points I raised, which comes as no surprise. Face it Nelson, you will NEVER admit you were wrong about something. You expect people to take what you say as gospel without challenging your views. When contrary evidence is provided as both Silent Method and I have done on this very thread you ignore it and discredit it as some sort of personal attack. So, the only conclusion one can reach with this is that you are incapable of expanding on you views in an intelligent manner. You make statements that you expact people to take as fact when most of them are nothing more than uninformed opinions that hold very little merit.

Juice: Admit the fact that you concocted lies about me on another thread and then I'll address this.


jubi: Ouch? Didn't hurt ME bro.

Fonz; Steven Hawkings called. He wants to know how much ALA he should take.

 

[Juice Authority]

Juice: Admit the fact that you concocted lies about me on another thread and then I'll address this.

Lies????

It's a well known fact to those that know that YOU STOLE THE SHORT CYCLE IDEA FROM BILL ROBERTS AND PASSED IT OFF AS YOUR OWN!!!!

You should be ashamed of yourself Nelson. Here you are accusing Fonz of the very thing you're guilty of yourself - Plagiarism

 

[Biter]

Now that's something that makes sense. I think TVA and core strength is highly overlooked. In fact, I think it should be trained specifically, which is why I do pilates.

And for the record, I squat up to 465 for sets of 5.

I do pilates as well. Really helped my back and my squats.

 

[Nelson Montana]

Lies????

It's a well known fact to those that know that YOU STOLE THE SHORT CYCLE IDEA FROM BILL ROBERTS AND PASSED IT OFF AS YOUR OWN!!!!

You should be ashamed of yourself Nelson. Here you are accusing Fonz of the very thing you're guilty of yourself - Plagiarism

Put up or shut up asshole.


Your'e so sure of this that you're willing to call me a plagerist. Okay, you're on.

Show me the earliest printing of Bill Roberts short cycle method. If I can show you an earlier published version written by me will you leave the board?


Let's see you back up your words now jerk off.

I'm not trying to go tit for tat over this issue. I'm just sick of this deluded imbecile thinking that whatever he decides to concoct in his their little mind is a KNOWN FACT. You're embarrassing yourself. Have some pride man.

 

[Juice Authority]

Put up or shut up asshole.


Your'e so sure of this that you're willing to call me a plagerist. Okay, you're on.

Show me the earliest printing of Bill Roberts short cycle method. If I can show you an earlier published version written by me will you leave the board?


Let's see you back up your words now jerk off.

I'm not trying to go tit for tat over this issue. I'm just sick of this deluded imbecile thinking that whatever he decides to concoct in his their little mind is a KNOWN FACT. You're embarrassing yourself. Have some pride man.

Pride? You plagiarize someone else's work, get caught and then deny it of course. Nelson, you're a joke. Go re-read this thread again to put things in proper perspective...

http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=158363&perpage=30&pagenumber=2

 

[Juice Authority]

Here you go Nelson...

http://www.mesomorphosis.com/articles/pharmacology/steroid-case-study-01.htm

Now when was that book of yours published??? Hmmmmmmm.....

 

[Nelson Montana]

Here you go Nelson...

http://www.mesomorphosis.com/articles/pharmacology/steroid-case-study-01.htm

Now when was that book of yours published??? Hmmmmmmm.....

Steroids For Health was published in T-Mag sept of 1998 you stupid fucking retard. That Meso thread is from Feb 1999.

And what the hell does that BB.com have to do with anything? Or are you so void of a life and obsessed with me that you need to track down everything that every nit wit ever argued with me about?

You are wrong. You have been proven wrong. It's over. Let it go.

 

[Juice Authority]

Steroids For Health was published in T-Mag sept of 1998 you stupid fucking retard. That Meso thread is from Feb 1999.

And what the hell does that BB.com have to do with anything? Or are you so void of a life and obsessed with me that you need to track down everything that every nit wit ever argued with me about?

You are wrong. You have been proven wrong. It's over. Let it go.

I'll let it go when you finally admit you plagiarized Bill's idea. Come on Nelson, fess up!

 

[Nelson Montana]

I'll let it go when you finally admit you plagiarized Bill's idea. Come on Nelson, fess up!

It's exhausting trying to reason with an imbecile.

I give up.

 

[Juice Authority]

It's exhausting trying to reason with an imbecile.

I give up.

You took the words right out of my mouth. I couldnt agree more.

 

[Singleton]

Juice: Admit the fact that you concocted lies about me on another thread and then I'll address this.

That's a red herring. It's totally unrelated; has nothing to do with the discussion. Whether you intended it to or not, that statement has led us astray from the matter at hand: Nutrient Timing.

 

[Nelson Montana]

Really........

What pushes nutrients into cells?

INSULIN.

In the morning...... liver glycogen is empty. Can only hold 125g of glucose.

At this moment in time, insulin levels are low and glucogenesis has already started.

i.e. Amino-acids are being used for fuel by your body, by the breakdown of protein into glucose.

Muscle is being lost..................

So, you really want to stand by Nelson's banter, or would you like the vets and co. The SCIENTIFIC ones, to reduce Nelson's and your explanations to rubble?

Nutrient-timing theory has always been morning and Post-Wo. With some morning and Pre-wo,Post-Wo, and pre-sleep variants depending on cutting or bulking.

But never have I seen that nutrient timing is NOT important in the morning. Thats a recipy for catabolism.

Nutrient timing (which I know you invented) is important in the morning? You say that not eating in the morning is a recipe for catabolism? Yet you recommend morning cardio on an empty stomach. Which is it? Actually, never mind, you don't have to answer. I forgot. You're an idiot.

 

[Bulldog_10]

Nutrient timing (which I know you invented) is important in the morning? You say that not eating in the morning is a recipe for catabolism? Yet you recommend morning cardio on an empty stomach. Which is it? Actually, never mind, you don't have to answer. I forgot. You're an idiot.

Exactly. And I don't know who these "scientifici vets" are, but I'd have to claim that I am one of them.

You can hold all the in-home experiments you want, it doesn't make you a scientist.

Aside from that...what is glucogenesis?

 

[Singleton]

I'll handle that one

Cardio first thing AM is anti-catabolic because it reduces cortisol. Cortisol makes you fat, so the benefit is twofold.

Cardio reduces cortisol by increasing dopamine and noradrenaline. Since cortisol is hightest first thing in the morning, lowering it at this time will inhibit muscle breakdown.

Blood sugar is low in the morning, so you'll burn fat. Replenishing the lost glycogen immediately after that is crucial. You must eat after the AM cardio. You also need protein to fill the amino acid pool in your blood stream.

Does AM Cardio contradict the need for early morning nutrition? When do you eat?

You need to eat immediately afterward. If you rise at 6:45 AM, exercise from 7-8, and have your shake at 8:15, your amino acid pool will be refilled, provided there's some good quality protein in your shake.


Now I'm no big advocate of cardio, but I do the yoga and pilates first thing AM and it really does make a difference. I can get ripped by doing this without using any drugs and without losing size. I believe this is mainly due to cortisol reduction and systemic stimulation (digestive, circulatory, et c).

There's a guy at my gym who trains natty. He's been running 9 mi ED at 4:30 (on an empty stomach). The guy isn't super ripped, but he's lost a lot of fat. He hasn't lost any size, he's looking solid and lean.

He may be helping his GPP by stimulating the RBC production, and enhancing effifiency in glycolytic pathways.

 

[Bulldog_10]

I'll handle that one

Cardio first thing AM is anti-catabolic because it reduces cortisol. Cortisol makes you fat, so the benefit is twofold.

Cardio reduces cortisol by increasing dopamine and noradrenaline. Since cortisol is hightest first thing in the morning, lowering it at this time will inhibit muscle breakdown.

Blood sugar is low in the morning, so you'll burn fat. Replenishing the lost glycogen immediately after that is crucial. You must eat after the AM cardio. You also need protein to fill the amino acid pool in your blood stream.

Does AM Cardio contradict the need for early morning nutrition? When do you eat?

You need to eat immediately afterward. If you rise at 6:45 AM, exercise from 7-8, and have your shake at 8:15, your amino acid pool will be refilled, provided there's some good quality protein in your shake.


Now I'm no big advocate of cardio, but I do the yoga and pilates first thing AM and it really does make a difference. I can get ripped by doing this without using any drugs and without losing size. I believe this is mainly due to cortisol reduction and systemic stimulation (digestive, circulatory, et c).

There's a guy at my gym who trains natty. He's been running 9 mi ED at 4:30 (on an empty stomach). The guy isn't super ripped, but he's lost a lot of fat. He hasn't lost any size, he's looking solid and lean.

He may be helping his GPP by stimulating the RBC production, and enhancing effifiency in glycolytic pathways.

I didn't read the whole thing...but cortisol most definitely does NOT make you fat. If anything, it doesn't the EXACT opposite.

 

[wnt2bBeast]

I didn't read the whole thing...but cortisol most definitely does NOT make you fat. If anything, it doesn't the EXACT opposite.

But if cortisol eats away at muscle arent you left with a higher % BF?
thus making you fatter..

 

[Silent Method]

Aside from that...what is glucogenesis?

Fonz misspoke. Glucogenesis is the formation of gycogen from glucose. He was refering to neoglucogenesis.

Your body needs carbohydrate. If you don't eat it, you body will make it from it's own tissue. Neoglucogenesis is primarily the breakdown of your body's amino acids for the formation of protein.

 

[Bulldog_10]

But if cortisol eats away at muscle arent you left with a higher % BF?
thus making you fatter..

Quick review before I leave for work...

Cortisol increases fat lypolysis and protein catabolism (in order to increase blood glucose levels).

So while it is catabolic, it also stimulates fat breakdown (more than protein breakdown). And why do you think cortisol is high in the morning? Because you've been fasting for 8+ hours! So you don't need to run 9 miles to reduce cortisol levels (running 9 miles would actually INCREASE cortisol levels because the body needs to supply energy for that run)...you simply need to eat so your body doesn't feel it is in an emergency, and doesn't feel the need to break down protein.

 

[Ganryu]

I thought Glucogenesis was a Phil Collins tribute band.

 

[Bulldog_10]

Fonz misspoke. Glucogenesis is the formation of gycogen from glucose. He was refering to neoglucogenesis.

Your body needs carbohydrate. If you don't eat it, you body will make it from it's own tissue. Neoglucogenesis is primarily the breakdown of your body's amino acids for the formation of protein.

I was just messing around...but a scientist should know it's actually gluconeogenesis...I mean, come on, he's been studying it for 3 years and he invented nutrient partitioning!

Also, gluconeogenesis is the breakdown of ANY form of stored energy into glucose, not just protein. Most of the time gluconeogenesis comes from the break down of glycogen (glycogenolysis).

 

[wnt2bBeast]

Quick review before I leave for work...

Cortisol increases fat lypolysis and protein catabolism (in order to increase blood glucose levels).

So while it is catabolic, it also stimulates fat breakdown (more than protein breakdown). And why do you think cortisol is high in the morning? Because you've been fasting for 8+ hours! So you don't need to run 9 miles to reduce cortisol levels (running 9 miles would actually INCREASE cortisol levels because the body needs to supply energy for that run)...you simply need to eat so your body doesn't feel it is in an emergency, and doesn't feel the need to break down protein.

Ahhhh thanks bro

 

[Silent Method]

I was just messing around...but a scientist should know it's actually gluconeogenesis...I mean, come on, he's been studying it for 3 years and he invented nutrient partitioning!

Missed that.

Also, gluconeogenesis is the breakdown of ANY form of stored energy into glucose, not just protein. Most of the time gluconeogenesis comes from the break down of glycogen (glycogenolysis).

Glycogenolysis is the breakdown of glycogen into glucose and glucose 1-phosphate.

Gluconeogenesis is NOT glycogenolysis (this is a common misconception). Gluconeogenesis is the synthesis of glucose from noncarbohydrate only. Lactate, pyruvate, amino acids, glycerol and, to a lesser degree, propionate, are the substrate for gluconeogenesis.

Yes, gluconeogenesis is not just the breakdown of protein, but we are not so concerned with its scavenging of metabolic intermediates and lipid components. Thus, its catabolic effect on amino acids is our primary concern.

 

[Singleton]

Bulldog, I may be misinformed, but I've heard from a variety of sources that cortisol contributes to fat gain. Here's a sample:
http://stress.about.com/cs/cortisol/a/cortweight_2.htm

 

[Bulldog_10]

Missed that.

Glycogenolysis is the breakdown of glycogen into glucose and glucose 1-phosphate.

Gluconeogenesis is NOT glycogenolysis (this is a common misconception). Gluconeogenesis is the synthesis of glucose from noncarbohydrate only. Lactate, pyruvate, amino acids, glycerol and, to a lesser degree, propionate, are the substrate for gluconeogenesis.

Yes, gluconeogenesis is not just the breakdown of protein, but we are not so concerned with its scavenging of metabolic intermediates and lipid components. Thus, its catabolic effect on amino acids is our primary concern.

LOL...oops. I was wrong...sorry. I guess in the world of metabolic scientists, anything that leads to increased blood glucose is considered gluconeogenesis...even glycogenolysis. My professor always speaks of glycogenlolysis as a gluconeogenic process...so I just got used to it.

Singleton...I that link has a novel idea, but it's just not based in true science.
I mean, it says that exercise leads to fat loss because it raises levels of endorphins...I'm pretty sure it's a little more complicated than that.

But cortisol definitely leads to the breakdown of fat (lypolysis).

 

[Nelson Montana]

I'll handle that one

Cardio first thing AM is anti-catabolic because it reduces cortisol. Cortisol makes you fat, so the benefit is twofold.

Cardio reduces cortisol by increasing dopamine and noradrenaline. Since cortisol is hightest first thing in the morning, lowering it at this time will inhibit muscle breakdown.

Blood sugar is low in the morning, so you'll burn fat. Replenishing the lost glycogen immediately after that is crucial. You must eat after the AM cardio. You also need protein to fill the amino acid pool in your blood stream.

Does AM Cardio contradict the need for early morning nutrition? When do you eat?

You need to eat immediately afterward. If you rise at 6:45 AM, exercise from 7-8, and have your shake at 8:15, your amino acid pool will be refilled, provided there's some good quality protein in your shake.


Now I'm no big advocate of cardio, but I do the yoga and pilates first thing AM and it really does make a difference. I can get ripped by doing this without using any drugs and without losing size. I believe this is mainly due to cortisol reduction and systemic stimulation (digestive, circulatory, et c).

There's a guy at my gym who trains natty. He's been running 9 mi ED at 4:30 (on an empty stomach). The guy isn't super ripped, but he's lost a lot of fat. He hasn't lost any size, he's looking solid and lean.

He may be helping his GPP by stimulating the RBC production, and enhancing effifiency in glycolytic pathways.

Sorry bro, but you're a little off base on this one. How can cardio, which is a form of stress, be ANTI catabolic?!?!

Maybe if you absolutely LOVE cardio it will release dopimine and that will make it less catabolic, but even that is a stretch.

Bottom line; Catabolism and fat loss go hand in hand. You must lose some muscle to lose fat. The key is to get the ratio most favorable. Nutrient timing has very little to do with it, except in cases where you're in starvation mode. (And that isn't really "timing").

.........................................................

It isn't the nervous system that burns fat. It's the thyroid. Make it work for you.

Read more: ZIP! www.proteinfactory.com

 

[Bulldog_10]

Sorry bro, but you're a little off base on this one. How can cardio, which is a form of stress, be ANTI catabolic?!?!

Maybe if you absolutely LOVE cardio it will release dopimine and that will make it less catabolic, but even that is a stretch.

Bottom line; Catabolism and fat loss go hand in hand. You must lose some muscle to lose fat. The key is to get the ratio most favorable. Nutrient timing has very little to do with it, except in cases where you're in starvation mode. (And that isn't really "timing").

.........................................................

It isn't the nervous system that burns fat. It's the thyroid. Make it work for you.

Read more: ZIP! www.proteinfactory.com

Yep.

 

[Singleton]

Singleton...I that link has a novel idea, but it's just not based in true science.
I mean, it says that exercise leads to fat loss because it raises levels of endorphins...I'm pretty sure it's a little more complicated than that.

It doesn't say that, does it?

It does say that cortisol causes fat gain (they call it weight gain). It also says that exercise releases endorphins which are antagonistic to cortisol. Effectively reducing cortisol will minimize fat gain and minimize muscle loss.

Can we agrree on that?

 

[Bulldog_10]

It doesn't say that, does it?

It does say that cortisol causes fat gain (they call it weight gain). It also says that exercise releases endorphins which are antagonistic to cortisol. Effectively reducing cortisol will minimize fat gain and minimize muscle loss.

Can we agrree on that?

No...I don't agree. Cortisol breaks down fat and muscle...so decreasing cortisol levels decreases both protein loss and fat loss. If you want to minimize fat gain, cortisol is good...it just has the side effect of also burning protein. I will say that minimizing cortisol is a good thing...if your goal is to grow...but for fat loss, cortisol is a good thing.

 

[Bulldog_10]

Oh...and if I sound like a dick...I don't mean to. This is a good debate we got going on...don't let it break down to the usual flame fest

 

[Juice Authority]

Oh...and if I sound like a dick...I don't mean to. This is a good debate we got going on...don't let it break down to the usual flame fest

Gee, that's ironic. That's the equivalent of saying,"Do as I say but not as I do."

 

[Bulldog_10]

don't let it break down to the usual flame fest

 

[Singleton]

Cortisol raises insulin and insulin is highly anabolic to fat and muscle cells. This puts the body in the state where it CAN store fat (and it will, given the chance) quite readily.

Cortisol lowers dopamine and testosterone. Testosterone is anabolic and preserves lean muscle tissue; it builds muscle via protein synthesis and inhibits catabolism by blocking cortisol.

 

[Bulldog_10]

Cortisol raises insulin and insulin is highly anabolic to fat and muscle cells. This puts the body in the state where it CAN store fat (and it will, given the chance) quite readily.

Cortisol lowers dopamine and testosterone. Testosterone is anabolic and preserves lean muscle tissue; it builds muscle via protein synthesis and inhibits catabolism by blocking cortisol.

Where are you getting this information from?! Insulin is a regulatory hormone, cortisol is a counter-regulatory hormone...they are complete opposites, opposite things activate them, and opposite things inhibit them. Cortisol most definitely does NOT raise insulin levels.

 

[Big Bad Buff]

Where are you getting this information from?! Insulin is a regulatory hormone, cortisol is a counter-regulatory hormone...they are complete opposites, opposite things activate them, and opposite things inhibit them. Cortisol most definitely does NOT raise insulin levels.

Actually cortisol increases in response to emotional or physical stress, including lack of sleep. Then, cortisol raises insulin levels, and that promotes fat storage and inhibits fat loss. A drop in growth hormone with poor sleep also favors fat storage and loss of muscle mass.

 

[Bulldog_10]

Actually cortisol increases in response to emotional or physical stress, including lack of sleep. Then, cortisol raises insulin levels, and that promotes fat storage and inhibits fat loss. A drop in growth hormone with poor sleep also favors fat storage and loss of muscle mass.

Bro...cortisol BREAKS DOWN fat. It doesn't promote fat storage. In stressful situations, the body says "I need energy, and I need it now...I don't care where it comes from." So the body does what it needs to do to increase glucose...it breaks down fat and protein.

Insulin does the EXACT opposite. Insulin is secreted in response to increased blood glucose. It activates glycogen synthase, promotes triglyceride and protein synthesis, and it promotes cellular uptake of glucose...it also activates glycolysis.

 

[Big Bad Buff]

Bro...cortisol BREAKS DOWN fat. It doesn't promote fat storage. In stressful situations, the body says "I need energy, and I need it now...I don't care where it comes from." So the body does what it needs to do to increase glucose...it breaks down fat and protein.

Insulin does the EXACT opposite. Insulin is secreted in response to increased blood glucose. It activates glycogen synthase, promotes triglyceride and protein synthesis, and it promotes cellular uptake of glucose...it also activates glycolysis.

Hmmm. Cortisol is an essential fight-or-flight hormone released when your body is under stress. Cortisol's role is to prepare your body for action, and to accomplish this, it increases blood pressure and heart rate, mobilises stored fat, breaks down muscle and bone, suppresses the immune system, increases the appetite, and decreases sensitivity to insulin, so that more fat is stored.