Nutritional myths

[mattvdh]

Lol, have you ever watched most top level BBers train? Not a full ROM in sight.

No, the other Layne Norton with the Ph.D. who bodybuilds.

That's nonsense, they wouldn't be nearly as developed if they didn't understand the fundamentals of hypertrophy.

 

[jimbuick]

That special fattening property is called insulin, and sugar stimulates it's release, thereby influencing fat storage. Sugar in fruit is slightly different because it requires more digestive processing such as fibers and carbs, so the fructose isn't as easily absorbed, or blunts the insulin response.

Insulin is probably the most Anabolic hormone in the human body, there's a reason BBers supplement it via injection.

 

[jimbuick]

DAT FORM!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qz2OQQhF2Qo&sns=em

 

[Beau]

Insulin is probably the most Anabolic hormone in the human body, there's a reason BBers supplement it via injection.

JB,

Insulin is very anabolic, it is also very lipogenic.

"Insulin is an indicator of the blood sugar level of the body, as its concentration increases proportionally with blood sugar levels. Thus, a large insulin level is associated with the fed state. As one might expect, it increases the rate of storage pathways, such as lipogenesis. Insulin stimulates lipogenesis in two main ways: The enzymes pyruvate dehydrogenase (PDH), which forms acetyl-CoA, and acetyl-CoA carboxylase (ACC), which forms malonyl-CoA from acetyl-CoA, are obvious control points. These are activated by insulin. So a high insulin level leads to an overall increase in the levels of malonyl-CoA, which is the substrate required for fatty acids synthesis."

 

[jimbuick]

JB,

Insulin is very anabolic, it is also very lipogenic.

"Insulin is an indicator of the blood sugar level of the body, as its concentration increases proportionally with blood sugar levels. Thus, a large insulin level is associated with the fed state. As one might expect, it increases the rate of storage pathways, such as lipogenesis. Insulin stimulates lipogenesis in two main ways: The enzymes pyruvate dehydrogenase (PDH), which forms acetyl-CoA, and acetyl-CoA carboxylase (ACC), which forms malonyl-CoA from acetyl-CoA, are obvious control points. These are activated by insulin. So a high insulin level leads to an overall increase in the levels of malonyl-CoA, which is the substrate required for fatty acids synthesis."

I am aware.

But I'm also aware that insulin shouldn't be demonized like some in this thread are trying to do.

 

[bdcc]

We are talking about the same Layne Norton that writes articles for the top BB websites and we a guest host on the last Olympia, right?

Yes. He is an anomaly because he has an impressive academic background as well as successful bodybuilding background.

If you watch his YouTube videos you will regularly see him dispelling myths in the industry which other bodybuilders still abide by.

This is not to discredit other successful bodybuilders. They have reached that level due to immense dedication. It is more to say that if someone with good scientific knowledge went through their protocols with a fine tooth comb they will see that many methods are outdated.

That special fattening property is called insulin, and sugar stimulates it's release, thereby influencing fat storage. Sugar in fruit is slightly different because it requires more digestive processing such as fibers and carbs, so the fructose isn't as easily absorbed, or blunts the insulin response.

I once wrote an article about this.

Upon reflection, taking insulin and glucose ingestion as surrogate factors and extrapolating their effects on weight loss is walking across a bridge which appears to not exist.

Low sucrose vs high sucrose, isocaloric diets; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9094871

 

[JudoJosh]

 

[Jiigzz]

You should accept that science can be influenced money and politics, thus influencing the outcome of what that particular investor is looking for.

The top BB's have always been ahead of the pack in terms of intuition and understanding. Just because they express it in layman's terms,l doesn't mean they don't understand how it all works and how to build muscle and strength. That's the difference is that BB's are DOING it, labcoats are studying the theory of it.

I've never heard any BB say that squatting an inch is sufficient for muscle growth, that's absurd.

No, science is not influenced by money or politics. Studies can be, as can interpretation of available data. But they are NOT the same. Can a politician or Corporation pay enough money to change the role of insulin in the body? Or can they merely pay somebody to interpret data on insulin differently to its actual function? I perform glucose and lactate testing all the time; I can manipulate the results by altering my data collection methods but I cannot prevent lactate from accumulating unless I physically change certain variables.

I lift 5 days a week, spend an hour and a half in the gym (1 hour doing my workout, half an hour stretching and doing rehab and prehab stuff) which is me practicing what I preach. But I also spend a great deal of my day either working with Degree, Masters or PhD students at my university gym or our Millenium institute observing elite and non-elite people and on top of that, a great deal of time studying. So if you are trying to say I spend to much time reading and not doing, you are quite incorrect.


I learn the theory, then watch it being performed and carry it out myself.

lol. I thought you would have weighed in by now

 

[mattvdh]

Insulin is probably the most Anabolic hormone in the human body, there's a reason BBers supplement it via injection.

Sure, doesn't mean it's healthy, same with injection of AAS. You know many BB's have killed themselves by using insulin improperly, also they usually use it during their bulking phase because they tend to get really fat and bloated during usage. They also tend to crash after taking it and have to have a nap.

 

[mattvdh]

I am aware.

But I'm also aware that insulin shouldn't be demonized like some in this thread are trying to do.

no, it's neither good or bad, insulin is merely a transporter and storage hormone. It can help feed your muscles with nutrients and also store fat. The confusing part about this hormone is that it reacts differently in everyone's body, so that's why there are countless studies which contradict one another. Hence why some groups favour carbs and others go to the opposite extreme with ketogenic dieting.

 

[mattvdh]

Yes. He is an anomaly because he has an impressive academic background as well as successful bodybuilding background.

If you watch his YouTube videos you will regularly see him dispelling myths in the industry which other bodybuilders still abide by.

This is not to discredit other successful bodybuilders. They have reached that level due to immense dedication. It is more to say that if someone with good scientific knowledge went through their protocols with a fine tooth comb they will see that many methods are outdated.



I once wrote an article about this.

Upon reflection, taking insulin and glucose ingestion as surrogate factors and extrapolating their effects on weight loss is walking across a bridge which appears to not exist.

Low sucrose vs high sucrose, isocaloric diets;

Yes but dedication is meaningless without proper execution. Even though they may be incorrect on some fronts, they must be doing most other things correctly in order to achieved their desired results.

I'm not sure what your trying to say in your last sentence, give it to me in plain English please. And what does that article have to do with this subject?

 

[mattvdh]

No, science is not influenced by money or politics. Studies can be, as can interpretation of available data. But they are NOT the same. Can a politician or Corporation pay enough money to change the role of insulin in the body? Or can they merely pay somebody to interpret data on insulin differently to its actual function? I perform glucose and lactate testing all the time; I can manipulate the results by altering my data collection methods but I cannot prevent lactate from accumulating unless I physically change certain variables.

I lift 5 days a week, spend an hour and a half in the gym (1 hour doing my workout, half an hour stretching and doing rehab and prehab stuff) which is me practicing what I preach. But I also spend a great deal of my day either working with Degree, Masters or PhD students at my university gym or our Millenium institute observing elite and non-elite people and on top of that, a great deal of time studying. So if you are trying to say I spend to much time reading and not doing, you are quite incorrect.


I learn the theory, then watch it being performed and carry it out myself.



lol. I thought you would have weighed in by now

Exactly, you could manipulate certain variables to achieve a certain result, or someone could pay you to perform a certain test and design the tests so you achieve a certain result. If there is enough money involved one could achieve which ever result they wanted. The tobacco industry is a prime example, they manipulated all kinds of data to their favour in the past.

"This brings me to the duality of scientific research. We as “thinking” bodybuilders rely on research to mold our beliefs, support our stance on controversial issues, and ultimately, dictate our protocols. Science indeed is infinitely more reliable than random opinions of buff dudes with hyooge byceptz & rippt abz. But unfortunately, even science is puppeteered by money and politics. For example, whoever pays for the study is gonna get the results they want. That’s brutal but true. The best we can do in any given debate is see whether controlled research over time is able to produce counter-results from the opposition (which hasn’t yet occurred in the case of the anti-milk camp, HAH!), or whether relatively non-vested replication and further validation ensues. It goes without saying that all research must be scrutinized for strengths and weaknesses."

--Alan Aragon
(still unable to post links..3 more posts to go)

Why do you spend so much time stretching, are you trying to improve flexibility? Other than flexibility, and maybe if you're experiencing DOMS, stretching doesn't really serve any purpose, it could likely be detrimental and cause a tear, and at the very least consume precious energy that could be sparred for your lifts. Nobody cares about your credentials, quit bragging already haha

 

[Jiigzz]

Exactly, you could manipulate certain variables to achieve a certain result, or someone could pay you to perform a certain test and design the tests so you achieve a certain result. If there is enough money involved one could achieve which ever result they wanted. The tobacco industry is a prime example, they manipulated all kinds of data to their favour in the past.

"This brings me to the duality of scientific research. We as “thinking” bodybuilders rely on research to mold our beliefs, support our stance on controversial issues, and ultimately, dictate our protocols. Science indeed is infinitely more reliable than random opinions of buff dudes with hyooge byceptz & rippt abz. But unfortunately, even science is puppeteered by money and politics. For example, whoever pays for the study is gonna get the results they want. That’s brutal but true. The best we can do in any given debate is see whether controlled research over time is able to produce counter-results from the opposition (which hasn’t yet occurred in the case of the anti-milk camp, HAH!), or whether relatively non-vested replication and further validation ensues. It goes without saying that all research must be scrutinized for strengths and weaknesses."

--Alan Aragon
(still unable to post links..3 more posts to go)

Why do you spend so much time stretching, are you trying to improve flexibility? Other than flexibility, and maybe if you're experiencing DOMS, stretching doesn't really serve any purpose, it could likely be detrimental and cause a tear, and at the very least consume precious energy that could be sparred for your lifts. Nobody cares about your credentials, quit bragging already haha

Yes, Alan is talking about scientific research.

Stretching can help prevent an anteriorly pelvic tilt (i.e. increased lordosis) or a posterior pelvic tilt (i.e. increased kyphosis), it can prevent the sub acromial space getting crowded and thus reduce your chance of shoulder impingement, allows for increased ROM, can help maintain a neutral posture, prevent heels raising during squats, prevent lower back rounding during squats and deadlifts and the list goes on.

If you don't stretch, prepare for a lifetime of postural issues and subsequently a decreased quality of life. Please do not tell me it increases chance of muscle tear, that is false unless performed incorrectly. And I stretch post workout; so all my energy is used during lifting.

 

[bdcc]

Yes but dedication is meaningless without proper execution. Even though they may be incorrect on some fronts, they must be doing most other things correctly in order to achieved their desired results.

I'm not sure what your trying to say in your last sentence, give it to me in plain English please. And what does that article have to do with this subject?

Layne was used as an example of bodybuilders having knowledge. My point was that Layne continually points out how inadequate common bodybuilding beliefs are.

The last study supports the notion that under isocaloric conditions it doesn't matter if sugar is consumed in abundance as it won't significantly impact weight loss vs low sugar diets. This goes against several posts in this thread.

 

[JudoJosh]

lol. I thought you would have weighed in by now

I have been trying to avoid threads like this

 

[bolt10]

Layne's response to Ben's tweet today. :lol:

That is all...I ain't getting involved in this.

 

[bdcc]

So you don't think that science is or has been influenced by politics?

Both BB and boot camp are testaments to physical/mental strength and endurance, as well as discipline and motivation.

I think you'd be surprised how much the pro's know about the body. Layne Norton for example has several degrees and has won BB competitions.

Layne is definitely an anomaly in the fitness industry.

Using Layne as an example though he regularly calls out the bad science which trainers and other bodybuilders parrot. He is very outspoken in this regard.

This would tend to support Hayden's point.

You should accept that science can be influenced money and politics, thus influencing the outcome of what that particular investor is looking for.

The top BB's have always been ahead of the pack in terms of intuition and understanding. Just because they express it in layman's terms,l doesn't mean they don't understand how it all works and how to build muscle and strength. That's the difference is that BB's are DOING it, labcoats are studying the theory of it.

I've never heard any BB say that squatting an inch is sufficient for muscle growth, that's absurd.

We are talking about the same Layne Norton that writes articles for the top BB websites and we a guest host on the last Olympia, right?

Yes. He is an anomaly because he has an impressive academic background as well as successful bodybuilding background.

If you watch his YouTube videos you will regularly see him dispelling myths in the industry which other bodybuilders still abide by.

This is not to discredit other successful bodybuilders. They have reached that level due to immense dedication. It is more to say that if someone with good scientific knowledge went through their protocols with a fine tooth comb they will see that many methods are outdated.


I once wrote an article about this.

Upon reflection, taking insulin and glucose ingestion as surrogate factors and extrapolating their effects on weight loss is walking across a bridge which appears to not exist.

Low sucrose vs high sucrose, isocaloric diets; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9094871

Layne was used as an example of bodybuilders having knowledge. My point was that Layne continually points out how inadequate common bodybuilding beliefs are.

The last study supports the notion that under isocaloric conditions it doesn't matter if sugar is consumed in abundance as it won't significantly impact weight loss vs low sugar diets. This goes against several posts in this thread.

Just for fun, I tweeted Layne to see what his opinion was.

Here was his reply;

 

[JudoJosh]

End thread

 

[jimbuick]

Hilarious.

 

[Beau]

Yah, but a smart 12 year old.

 

[mattvdh]

that's a funny response, however I was referencing pro's, not the average BB.

 

[jimbuick]

Don't almost all professional BBers have coaches (nutrition and training)?

If they knew so much, why hire someone else to tell them how to do it?

 

[Montego1]

Don't almost all professional BBers have coaches (nutrition and training)?

If they knew so much, why hire someone else to tell them how to do it?

The same reason we allow people to critique us in our training logs. Our own eyes and train of thought is not always what's really going on.

 

[mattvdh]

The same reason we allow people to critique us in our training logs. Our own eyes and train of thought is not always what's really going on.

Precisely... They can look at your body, training and diet more objectively and provide motivation.

 

[Montego1]

Average Joe = Doesn't know what he is doing

Intermediate Joe = Thinks he knows what he is doing but doesn't really know

Advanced Joe = Has a good grasp on nutrition but still has a huge learning curve

Professional Joe = Knows his stuff from learning from this next guy but still needs this next guy to keep him on point

Nutrition Coach Joe = Knows his stuff (mainly dealing with his preferred approaches but has overall knowledge of many different regiments)and tells all these other guys what they should do from an outside looking in point of view

 

[Beau]

Average Joe = Doesn't know what he is doing

Intermediate Joe = Thinks he knows what he is doing but doesn't really know

Advanced Joe = Has a good grasp on nutrition but still has a huge learning curve

Professional Joe = Knows his stuff from learning from this next guy but still needs this next guy to keep him on point

Nutrition Coach Joe = Knows his stuff (mainly dealing with his preferred approaches but has overall knowledge of many different regiments)and tells all these other guys what they should do from an outside looking in point of view

Joe Garagiola = Dead

 

[Jiigzz]

Just for fun, I tweeted Layne to see what his opinion was.

Here was his reply;


View attachment 89713

Lmao.

 

[bdcc]

that's a funny response, however I was referencing pro's, not the average BB.

I am pretty confident that if I had rephrased it to "your typical professional bodybuilder" his answer would have been similar if not identical.

Don't almost all professional BBers have coaches (nutrition and training)?

If they knew so much, why hire someone else to tell them how to do it?

One of the professional bodybuilding coaches who trains many top pros likes delaying their post workout shake to take advantage of extended GH release for fat loss properties. Layne would have a field day with this.

 

[Jiigzz]

Average Joe = Doesn't know what he is doing

Intermediate Joe = Thinks he knows what he is doing but doesn't really know

Advanced Joe = Has a good grasp on nutrition but still has a huge learning curve

Professional Joe = Knows his stuff from learning from this next guy but still needs this next guy to keep him on point

Nutrition Coach Joe = Knows his stuff (mainly dealing with his preferred approaches but has overall knowledge of many different regiments)and tells all these other guys what they should do from an outside looking in point of view

This about sums it up.

Of course, people in our industry will always learn new things and therefore should always be open to new things. I'm currently writing a schematic plan for a client with Coronary Artery Disease and need to talk with him about how to manage his risk. The guidelines we are given are that high carbs (esp. grains) and low fat is the way to manage this condition.

I would argue this would make it much, much worse considering all the new data linking higher carb lower fat diets with higher triglycerides and thus smaller, denser LDL particles which are more susceptible to oxidation and forming plaque on the arteries. Now, if this diet makes the condition worse, why are universities and other 'health' organization's recommending it?

Surely I am not the only one who knows that the particle size of LDL makes a difference.

In short, be open to new ideas

 

[mattvdh]

I am pretty confident that if I had rephrased it to "your typical professional bodybuilder" his answer would have been similar if not identical.

Yeah probably, whateves.

 

[JudoJosh]

Nutrition knowledge in athletes: a systematic review.

Abstract
CONTEXT: Nutrition education aims to enhance knowledge and improve dietary intake in athletes. Understanding athletes' nutrition knowledge and its influence on dietary intake will inform nutrition-education programs in this population.

PURPOSE: To systematically review the level of nutrition knowledge in athletes, benchmark this against nonathlete comparison groups, and determine the impact of nutrition knowledge on dietary intake.

METHODS: An extensive literature search from the earliest record to March 2010 using the terms nutrition knowledge or diet knowledge and athlete or sport was conducted. Included studies recruited able or physically disabled, male or female, competitive (recreational or elite) athletes over the age of 13 yr. Quantitative assessment of knowledge and, if available, diet intake was required. Because of variability in the assessment of nutrition knowledge and dietary intake, meta-analysis was not conducted.

RESULTS: Twenty-nine studies (17 published before 2000) measuring nutrition knowledge (7 including a nonathlete comparison group) met inclusion criteria. Athletes' knowledge was equal to or better than that of nonathletes but lower than comparison groups including nutrition students. When found statistically significant, knowledge was greater in females than males. A weak (r < .44), positive association between knowledge and dietary intake was reported in 5 of 9 studies assessing this. Common flaws in articles included inadequate statistical reporting, instrument validation, and benchmarking.

CONCLUSION: The nutrition knowledge of athletes and its impact on their dietary intake is equivocal. There is a need for high-quality, contemporary research using validated tools to measure nutrition knowledge and its impact on dietary intake

 

[Jiigzz]

I thought this was interesting; touches on what we talked about regarding the validity of studies:

Science | From AAAS

The authors conducted several studies with VERY flawed study designs and sent them out to various journals to see if they would be accepted or rejected..

 

[mattvdh]

I thought this was interesting; touches on what we talked about regarding the validity of studies:

Science | From AAAS

The authors conducted several studies with VERY flawed study designs and sent them out to various journals to see if they would be accepted or rejected..

that's hilarious, however it makes me question if THAT article is in fact credible.

 

[Jiigzz]

that's hilarious, however it makes me question if THAT article is in fact credible.

Haha, who knows

 

[bdcc]

I am starting to even doubt if Hayden is credible.

Has he been peer reviewed?

 

[Jiigzz]

I am starting to even doubt if Hayden is credible.

Has he been peer reviewed?

I get all my information from you, so if your wrong, im wrong

 

[bdcc]

I get all my information from you, so if your wrong, im wrong

Do yourself a favour and don't read any of my old articles then lol.

 

[Jiigzz]

Do yourself a favour and don't read any of my old articles then lol.

It's funny what we considered bro-science back then, even though it was 'science' to us. As our understanding grows, nutritional concepts become less complex

 

[mattvdh]

It's funny what we considered bro-science back then, even though it was 'science' to us. As our understanding grows, nutritional concepts become less complex

Yeah Alan Aragon pretty much set me straight. I use to come up with these really complex theories on dieting and burning fat and 98% of his answers boiled down to ''it's simply a matter of calories in, calories out''. Normally I challenge any user, but with Aragon there's really no point, he's proven and credible--a walking encyclodpedia. The only thing he says that I'm not 100% on is that he thinks that keto people are carbaphobes, and doesn't seem to recognize that insulin resistance can play a big role. Aside from that, I do agree with his calories in/out stance.

 

[Jiigzz]

Yeah Alan Aragon pretty much set me straight. I use to come up with these really complex theories on dieting and burning fat and 98% of his answers boiled down to ''it's simply a matter of calories in, calories out''. Normally I challenge any user, but with Aragon there's really no point, he's proven and credible--a walking encyclodpedia. The only thing he says that I'm not 100% on is that he thinks that keto people are carbaphobes, and doesn't seem to recognize that insulin resistance can play a big role. Aside from that, I do agree with his calories in/out stance.

Yeah, this is exactly it. It can become complex if you try to micromanage everything but in the end, everything can be made simple

eating less than the body needs = weight loss
eating at what the body needs = maintenance
eating more than the body needs = weight gain

It is really that simple lol

 

[JudoJosh]

Aaragon is just as biased as everyone else and his IIFYM movements contains just as many fanatics as the ones he vilifys

 

[mattvdh]

Aaragon is just as biased as everyone else and his IIFYM movements contains just as many fanatics as the ones he vilifys

If he's biased it's because he's been doing it for like 25 years and training some of the top athletes in America, so I guess he just knows what works at this point. He and Layne Norton share pretty much the same views on IIFYM. That term/acronym IIFYM is a bit too sexy sounding though, some people think they can just eat whatever you want, but in reality if you're cutting on like 1,800cals /day you have to meet your protein, fat and fiber needs--then a bit of carbs for energy/glycogen, and that really only leaves you maybe a few hundred calories left. Personally I don't really think about filling up that remaining amount with any desserts or snacks simply because they make me more hungry, I try to eat things like broccoli or greens because they're super low in calories and fill you up longer. When cutting you want to be able to eat as much as possible just to have that feeling of chewing and digesting. If you eat a 500cal piece of pie you'll be super hungry by bed time and it's a real bummer.

 

[mattvdh]

Yeah, this is exactly it. It can become complex if you try to micromanage everything but in the end, everything can be made simple

eating less than the body needs = weight loss
eating at what the body needs = maintenance
eating more than the body needs = weight gain

It is really that simple lol

Yeah pretty much haha... All you gotta remember is to consume about a gram per pound of LBM to spare you muscle wasting when cutting, and consume about 0.5g per pound of LBM for fat so that you can absorb your fat soluble vitamins and for hormonal balance, the remaining calories should come from carbs and are pretty the variable.

 

[Jiigzz]

Yeah pretty much haha... All you gotta remember is to consume about a gram per pound of LBM to spare you muscle wasting when cutting, and consume about 0.5g per pound of LBM for fat so that you can absorb your fat soluble vitamins and for hormonal balance, the remaining calories should come from carbs and are pretty the variable.

Oh yes; I very over-simplified it. Whilst weight loss will occur at a deficit, playing around with macros will help manage how much LBM is lost (or saved) etc. etc.