MR. BMJ said:
Very nice post/reply as always Par Deus!!! Damn, i'd love to read that Lyle thread...i'll have to dig it up if I can...or unless somebody else can post it here
BMJ
Okay, here is one post -- I am going to see if I can find the original critique that this one references:
"Someone forwarded me the following, I guess from Animal's webpage.
Apparently after I tore up his stupid animalbolics diet. Apparently
he's as shitty at reading as he is as writing. So here's what was sent
to me, followed by my original post.
If Animal would like to debate me here, he's welcome to come do so.
Lyle
***
> That's right, and you read it here first. They (keto diets) make you fat.
Considering how many folks got really lean/ripped on ketogenic diets,
this sentence alone should make you question things.
> Why not eat 5-6 small meals a day? Because it makes you fat!
And this one. How many thousands of folks have gotten lean eating that
many meals? Or is animal unaware that 5-6 meals of lower than
maintenance calories is different than 5-6 of above maintennace?
> Now we are going to use the ketogenic
> authors arguments against them. Insulin does what? It drives glucose and needed nutrients into the
> cells, including fat cells, AND it stops lipolysis!!!! It stops lipolysis!!!!! If I am eating 5-6
> times a day I am going to be stopping lipolysis every single time I eat again because I will get an
> insulin rise which, can you all say it? Stops lipolysis!! You cannot burn fat if you are eating all
> day!
Since keto meals don't raise insulin signigicantly, I'm not sure what
Animal is talking about here. And, of course, he seems to be ignoring
the thousands of folks who get ripped doing exactly what he says doesn't
work. Hrm....
> We will start our diet in the morning. The night before we replenished all our carbs before going to
> sleep. It is morning and we wake up and our body is in what mode? Fat burning mode!!! The first
> thing you usually learn is that if you want to burn the most fat off with aerobics you do it in the
> morning before you eat. Since we are in fat burning mode why would we want to ruin it with food that
> would raise insulin? And for what? What exercise are you going to do which you are going to need all
> that energy for? Remember you are fully carbed from last night. If you are fully carbed up and you
> eat carbohydrates then where are the carbs going? They can't go to muscle so they are going to FAT!
> Your morning meal makes you fatter!!
his ignorance of basic physiology is astounding.
>Fructose goes to fat automatically
Very, very wrong.
> What do I do for lunch? You want to stay in fat burning mode right? First let's look at what others
> recommend. Eat your largest meal at lunch! Absolutely and totally wrong. What happens about an hour
> later. You are so tired from the insulin that you can hardly think and it takes all you can do to
> stay awake. Not only that, but all the carbs you ate are going to fat! What did you do to deplete
> the liver or muscle of carbs from the morning until now? NOTHING.
apparently he's ignorant of the basic fact that liver glycogen empties
during the overnight fast.
>You sat at your desk and maybe
> walked across the street to buy lunch. Your muscles need nothing so it all goes to fat
Quick note: conversion of carbs to fat is quantiatively insnigificant
under most situations in humans. If you get 10 grams of fat per day
from carb conversion, that's a lot. Animal should try reading before he writes.
> Immediately after your workout you consume up to 400 calories in a glucose/protein drink. 2 hours
> later you hit the damaged muscle again with your regular meal. Your muscles are now loaded with
> glucose and protein and they are waiting for you to take some ghb and go to bed so they can get some
> GH.
>
> That's it!. No BS. No pain. Look at it again. You are all carbed up. In the morning you are in or
> near ketosis and you want to keep it there. Eating would ruin it so you don't eat and besides, the
> insulin and carbs from the meal have nowhere to go so any calories would just go to fat. You don't
> do anything strenuous in the morning so you don't eat a high carb lunch which keeps you in ketosis.
Apparently he's unaware that a keto meal (fat and protein) has a
different effect than a mixed meal on hormones and everything else.
> Study performed by Taylor and colleagues.
>
> Following ingestion of a test meal consisting of cereal, skim milk, scrambled eggs, French toast,
> apple juice, and a milk shake [200 g (60% or 800 calories) carbohydrate, 45 g (21% fat or 405
> calories), 80 g (19% or 320 calories) protein; 1,914 kcall] [The total calories and the breakdown of
> the intake is wrong because my scanner screwed it up and I don't have the original] by healthy
> subjects, muscle glycogen concentration did not start to rise until 1-2 hours after eating, and the
> increase was not statistically significant until 3 hours after eating. Seven hours following the
> meal, plasma insulin levels were still elevated threefold. Four hours following the meal, muscle
> glycogen began to fall, suggesting a flux of excess carbon out of the muscle and into storage as
> triglycerides (fat).
>
> Another argument for Animalobolics! I had been looking for this entry into my comp for 2 years and
> though I don't have the entire study, that last line is significant. This was a mixed meal
> containing fat. This is not what you want to do after a workout. Look how long it took glycogen
> levels in the muscle to rise. 1-2 hours and it wasn't important until 3 hours. You need no fat and
> simple carbs with protein after a workout. Seven hours following the meal, plasma insulin levels
> were still elevated threefold. Let's see, you want to eat small meals all day, still? The point is
> that eating mixed meals gets your insulin up and keeps it up for a long time. Hell, by 7 hours many
> would have eaten 2 more times and that would push your insulin up even higher and longer. Remember,
> if insulin is present, fat burning is negative! The magical last line!!! Four hours following the
> meal, muscle glycogen began to fall, suggesting a flux of excess carbon out of the muscle and into
> storage as triglycerides (fat).
I guess he missed the point where they gave them nearly 2000 calories at
that single meal. As if that has ANY relevance to the real world.
> ALL YOUR SUBSEQUENT MEALS ARE GOING TO BE NO GLYCEMIC MEALS! Except for 2-3 doses of 200calories
> worth of fruit for a total of 400-500calories in carbs to keep your liver converting T4-T3.
but he said above that fructose automatically goes to fat. Fructose is
found primarily in fruit. Hrm, almost as if he was making up this stuff
as he was going along.
> Q: How do you keep from loosing muscle mass while on this diet? And do you stay on it until you are
> happy with BF% or do you come of for one or two days a week or what? Is this a good diet to run with
> a cutting cycle.
And he can't even spell the word 'LOSE'.
But I can spell the word moron. And that's what Animal is.
****
Animal now writes:
>Maybe he can let us know how that warrior diet ripoff is going which
was gospel because somebody else made it up.
I have NO clue what animal is talking about here. Ori Homfelker is the
moron behind the Warrior diet, Animal is the moron behind teh
Animalbolics diet, I am the moron who wrote the ketogenic diet book.
> Let's just point out what a total stupid ass he is. Fructose carbs the liver 2 to 1 better than muscle. Fructose does not raise insulin, EVER. Fructose goes to
fat via pentose blah blah pathway if the liver is already fully carbed.
What Animal writes HERE is correct. Note what he wrote originally which was:
>Fructose goes to fat automatically
NOw he's saying it ONLY does so when liver glycogen is full.
Which is it Animal. Does fructose automaticaly go to fat, or does it
ONLy go to fat when liver glycogen is full? Or are you going to keep
changing your argument every other day?
>Oh yea, and 'hardly any carbs go to fat over the course of a day'
AHAHAHA! What a fucking dolt and look at the 50% obesity in the US where
they followed
the high carb diet for the last 25 years.
What Animal obviously fails to realize is that the American diet is high
calorie, high carbs AND high fat. To call it a high carb diet shows his
ignorance which is nearly absolute. Average Americna intake of
nutrients is in the range of 37% fat, somethng like 43% carbs, and the
rest protein. That's hardly high carbs by the normal definition. And
it's high calorie. Again, Animal is just spouting off nonsense.
> Damn he is stupid and doesn't even know elementary facts that extra
glucose in the blood is going to go into FAT CELLS when the muscles
can't take anymore and in fact,
This is true, the glycerol in fat cells can ONLY be made from dietary glucose.
> the muscles will leak back glucose if they are overcompensated, too!
Incorrect, muscles lack the enzyme necessary for this to occur. Basic
biochemistry, Animal. Once stored in muscle, glycogen can only go to
oxidation it can NOT get back into the bloodstream.
>Note how he pulled a CROCK and changed the
subject with that, too. 'Glucose can't go to fat' which entirely
ignores the glucose going into the fat cell. A true ass.
Glucose being stored as glycerol in fat cells is different than de novo
lipogenesis (DNL), which is the conversion of glucose to fat. The first
occurs, the second is quantiatively irrelevant. See work by Hellerstein.
> And king jackass does it again by claiming
the study listed demonstrating the affects of a mixed is meaningless
because HE SAYS SO! AHAH! I guess everybody eats one nutrient at a time
until it's digested, right fuck=up? The fact is that it demonstrates
what happens AFTER a meal regardless of caloric intake
The point in contention. animal cited the following study and I
commented:
> Following ingestion of a test meal consisting of cereal, skim milk, scrambled eggs, French toast,
> apple juice, and a milk shake [200 g (60% or 800 calories) carbohydrate, 45 g (21% fat or 405
> calories), 80 g (19% or 320 calories) protein; 1,914 kcall] [The total calories and the breakdown of
> the intake is wrong because my scanner screwed it up and I don't have the original] by healthy
> subjects, muscle glycogen concentration did not start to rise until 1-2 hours after eating, and the
> increase was not statistically significant until 3 hours after eating. Seven hours following the
> meal, plasma insulin levels were still elevated threefold. Four hours following the meal, muscle
> glycogen began to fall, suggesting a flux of excess carbon out of the muscle and into storage as
> triglycerides (fat).
My comment:
I guess he missed the point where they gave them nearly 2000 calories at
that single meal. As if that has ANY relevance to the real world.
My point wasn't about it being a mixed meal. It was about them giving
2000 calories at a given meal and him drawing conclusions about it
relative to anything. Nobody eats 2000 calories in a single meal.
Well, not if they have any sense.
>and in that article a didn't put up the study showing that every subsequent
meal raises insulin higher than the previous meal even if the calories
ARE THE SAME! Got it? Eat, insulin goes up, eat the same thing, insulin
goes up higher! I think I'll repeat that 4 more times because I love
insulin!
yeah, 4X2000 calorie meals/day will make you fat, that's for sure.
4X300 calorie meals, even high carb won't.
Unnerstasnd the math here, Animal?
>Hey liely, I guess insulin doesn't stop lipolysis in your world, right?
HAHA!
Insulin does stop lipolysis, at evne low concentrations.
yet people get ripped on lowcalorie, high carb diets. Please explain.
Your turn Animal, feel free to debate me here. Don't be a pussy and
just write bullshit on your little webpage where I can' ream you back.
Lyle
Post a follow-up to this message
Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below 
