Meals

Page 7 of 8 First ... 5678 Last

  1. Do Pop Tarts count as breakfast?
    BOARD TYRANT | TEAM GET DIESEL | GETDIESEL.COM
    FeFiFo.com support
    DIESEL TEST = Underground Kings of Test elevation!



  2. Quote Originally Posted by Piston Honda View Post
    Do Pop Tarts count as breakfast?
    Breakfast, lunch and dinner...obviously. Now enough with absurd questions like this
    Purus labs Rep
    doin it mountain dog style in here come along for the shred fest-http://anabolicminds.com/forum/workout-logs/229302-danbs-mountain-dog.html
    •   
       


  3. Quote Originally Posted by Danb2285 View Post
    Breakfast, lunch and dinner...obviously. Now enough with absurd questions like this
    You shut your whore mouth!
    "Dynamic Trio's Superior Third"

  4. Quote Originally Posted by R3ACTION

    You shut your whore mouth!
    You're a slut Nathaniel does Jeff know about your escapades?!

  5. Quote Originally Posted by Danb2285

    That's foul dude I'm outta the trio...eat a hot pocket or something DAMN
    That's Christian bale lol before the batman movies.. I believe that movie was called the engineer or something like that.. Dunno
    •   
       


  6. Quote Originally Posted by bmftisftw View Post

    That's Christian bale lol before the batman movies.. I believe that movie was called the engineer or something like that.. Dunno
    Its from the machinist.
    "Dynamic Trio's Superior Third"

  7. Quote Originally Posted by bmftisftw View Post

    You're a slut Nathaniel does Jeff know about your escapades?!
    That's my government name!
    "Dynamic Trio's Superior Third"

  8. Quote Originally Posted by R3ACTION

    That's my government name!
    Well now you have stalkers !!!

  9. Quote Originally Posted by Celorza View Post
    I am not a bodybuilder lol , neither do I wanna be , sorry brah...but being a freak show ain't my thing.
    Are you a troll?

    I'm responding to your comment about my not regarding advanced gains when I was talking to you about your gains, while you were gaining, before your "subconcious mindset" told you not to get "too big" because you would look like a refrigerator and you're already stronger than a 6 foot, relatively lean (beach bod) 240 pound guy (legitimately lean at 225 or so) with 15+ years experience lifting anyways.

    Either you are a true genetic freak or an ignorant yet "know it all" noob who has read just enough to make fly by one liners that kinda, sorta make sense until you examine them in context and then instead of follow the conversation you start, you take people down some weird rabbit hole of CelorzaLand, where you then play the victim when you can't even keep that up.

    The bull**** disparities between your lifting totals and added lean mass "without much bodyfat" in a given beginner period, then the backsliding to water and glycogen, then the idea that somehow advanced limitations apply to you...

    Either you are flat out looking for a rise from people or you read more than you lift and are trying to write a book report on what you've learned while pretending to have some kind of lifting results and are failing at it as you are applying tidbits of training from all over the board to one single brag that doesn't even make any real world sense.

    I'm not even going to try and imagine what kind of delusional conclusions your quest for power "in all aspects of life" has led you to. Collectively they could be a Tim Burton movie, I have no doubt.

  10. Quote Originally Posted by bla55 View Post
    Can we please keep rambling to a minimum when posting? It gets so annoying to read something that just keeps hitting the same key over and over again and not responding to the topics, just answering questions with questions.
    Maybe because the original questions don't have a legitimate premise so the follow ups are setting one?

    Why, if leangains and warrior are optimal natural diets, are they trash on steroids when you believe it doesn't matter when a person eats his quota as long as he does?

    To use your example, 6,000 calories = 6,000 calories and they will have the same effect on your physique whether you eat them across 5-6 meals, three meals or one meal. But if you're on steroids, 6,000 calories does not equal 6,000 calories on all diets. 6,000 only equals 6,000 sometimes. When, how so and why?

    I can't asnwer someone asking me why grass is black, because it's not. There is no answer. Instead I would ask them why they would describe grass as black to begin with.

  11. Speaking of questions, I do have a couple:

    1) Can someone explain to me the significance of reputation points? I realize they play an integral role in relations around the boards but what are they, what do they do?

    2) What does the designation of Company Representitive mean? I get that they promote a company product line but are they actually employed sales reps, good customers receiving some kind of discount for waving the flag or something else altogether?

  12. Quote Originally Posted by TexasGuy View Post
    Speaking of questions, I do have a couple:

    1) Can someone explain to me the significance of reputation points? I realize they play an integral role in relations around the boards but what are they, what do they do?

    2) What does the designation of Company Representitive mean? I get that they promote a company product line but are they actually employed sales reps, good customers receiving some kind of discount for waving the flag or something else altogether?
    Rep points do nothing. They are solely for relations on the boards. Generally people with higher Rep power have shown themselves to.be helpful and knowledgeable and assist other members when they have questions.

    Company reps are people that have shown to be knowledgeable and because of this have been chosen by a company to represent them and help others. They answer questions regarding training, nutrition, and supplementation. Specifically those related to the company they represent. They are employed, generally they recieve product for free or monetary compensation for their ervices.

  13. Quote Originally Posted by TexasGuy View Post
    Maybe because the original questions don't have a legitimate premise so the follow ups are setting one?

    Why, if leangains and warrior are optimal natural diets, are they trash on steroids when you believe it doesn't matter when a person eats his quota as long as he does?

    To use your example, 6,000 calories = 6,000 calories and they will have the same effect on your physique whether you eat them across 5-6 meals, three meals or one meal. But if you're on steroids, 6,000 calories does not equal 6,000 calories on all diets. 6,000 only equals 6,000 sometimes. When, how so and why?

    I can't asnwer someone asking me why grass is black, because it's not. There is no answer. Instead I would ask them why they would describe grass as black to begin with.
    Because steroids completely alter the scenario of everything, including but not limited to: nutrients utilization, muscle recovery, calorie consumption, muscle strength, etc. A diet that is developed to be utilized under a specific scenario won't necessarily be optimal under another. Easy and simple explanation: IF starts from the premise that your body will be very insulin deficient, highly catabolic and glycogen free in the mornings / early afternoons. It also promotes big spikes of insulin, glycogen and decrease in cortisol later in the afternoon. That's the diet's premise and ground needed for it to work as designed. If someone is taking an anabolic that will trigger an insulin response early in the morning, or that will not allow for glycogen reserves to deplete, or any other way that steroids will affect your balance, the diet will not follow its own guidelines and therefore not be optimal.

    Simple as that.

    A ketogenic diet thrives in an environment that is glycogen free and with no sugar in the bloodstream, if one is to add outside sources that will cause unnatural spikes of these, the body will never produce Ketosterones, and therefore, the diet goes down the drain.

    Workout regimes also change in the presence of steroids as muscle recovery happens faster, allowing for people to do more sets and workout more often; under standard conditions, that person would be overtraining, but with the use of AAS that is no longer the case.

    All in all to sum it up, use of AAS =/= a control group environment and therefore holds no ground in a nutrition discussion as everything will be specific to the steroid being utilized, how it reacts and its particular peculiarities. Can we drop this now or will you keep beating this dead horse?
    Androhard + Andromass Log
    http://anabolicminds.com/forum/supplement-reviews-logs/182038-so-i-decided.html

  14. Quote Originally Posted by bla55 View Post
    Because steroids completely alter the scenario of everything, including but not limited to: nutrients utilization, muscle recovery, calorie consumption, muscle strength, etc. A diet that is developed to be utilized under a specific scenario won't necessarily be optimal under another. Easy and simple explanation: IF starts from the premise that your body will be very insulin deficient, highly catabolic and glycogen free in the mornings / early afternoons. It also promotes big spikes of insulin, glycogen and decrease in cortisol later in the afternoon. That's the diet's premise and ground needed for it to work as designed. If someone is taking an anabolic that will trigger an insulin response early in the morning, or that will not allow for glycogen reserves to deplete, or any other way that steroids will affect your balance, the diet will not follow its own guidelines and therefore not be optimal.

    Simple as that.

    A ketogenic diet thrives in an environment that is glycogen free and with no sugar in the bloodstream, if one is to add outside sources that will cause unnatural spikes of these, the body will never produce Ketosterones, and therefore, the diet goes down the drain.

    Workout regimes also change in the presence of steroids as muscle recovery happens faster, allowing for people to do more sets and workout more often; under standard conditions, that person would be overtraining, but with the use of AAS that is no longer the case.

    All in all to sum it up, use of AAS =/= a control group environment and therefore holds no ground in a nutrition discussion as everything will be specific to the steroid being utilized, how it reacts and its particular peculiarities. Can we drop this now or will you keep beating this dead horse?
    This certainly is a strong response, however "steroids" are comprised of multiple compounds, each having various effects on the body, kinda like diets. Picking one effect of one group of compounds and using it to sweepingly describe all of steroids and how they would interact with leangains is a false premise and leaves a can of worms open for literally thousands of arguments. Maybe millions as each compound and then stack is argued against each diet, like some kind of meathead tessellation or something.

    What I do find interesting is that in this post you are plain as day saying that nutrient timing, selection and intake protocols in general are important factors to consider in a diet, where you have previously suggested it doesn't matter when food is consumed as long as it is and inferred that protein synthesis can not be manipulated above certain levels by ingesting protein frequently (referencing Layne Norton's work referencing studies showing, in fact, this is the case), all of which brings me back to the initial point of the last eight or so pages of this thread.

    Don't suggest to the OP he should skip a meal when his diet plan doesn't call for it. Applying X protocols to Y diet is a recipe for failure.

    I think you just did put the dead horse to rest, even if inadvertently.




    Anyways, happy new years. I'm off to pick up a pretty little thing and get my penis kissed at midnight.

  15. What will be that guy's name?
    BOARD TYRANT | TEAM GET DIESEL | GETDIESEL.COM
    FeFiFo.com support
    DIESEL TEST = Underground Kings of Test elevation!


  16. Quote Originally Posted by Piston Honda View Post
    What will be that guy's name?


    Name:  tumblr_m7tj7vAfAV1raxu9to1_500.jpg
Views: 137
Size:  30.6 KB

  17. Quote Originally Posted by TexasGuy View Post
    I still want to know if your leangains were natural or if you use prohormones, test boosting supplements or steroids. Do you use PES products?

    Irrelevant to this discussion.

    Or why it's a good idea for some people to slam ingesting nutrients 5-6 times per day while they ingest nutrients 5-6 times per day but call half of them a fast.

    Keep reading more about LG before spouting off misinformation.

    Or how steroids nullify one diet for another when it shouldn't matter according to some when macros are ingested as long as they are.

    If you don't undertand the efficacy of AAS on gene transcription, protein synthesis, nutrient repartitioning, and how this changes EVERYTHING, then you should not be making recommendations.

    Or why people incessently compare the nutritional needs of bodybuilding and powerlifting as the same when they clearly know each training style induces completely different physiological responses.

    While there are differences, there is much crossover between the two. I could counter with why you adhere to protein recommendations that are based off of Olympic lifters, but I can see the similarities amongst the groups.

    And all the other evidently super logical bull**** that's been largely ignored for the sake of taking the conversation on a twist out of context or making personal attacks or snarky comments while altogether ignoring the content of the discussion.

    Actually, you're the one that has filled the thread with red herring and ad hominem.


    With a lack of double blind, controlled studies on protein synthesis on bodybuilders it's hilarious to watch people step on an invisible soap box and throw the importance of studies around when there isn't one to support their criticism. There is no logic to ignoring such wide reaching, consistent results the frequent meal, high protein diet plans at the center of bodybuilding provide and always have provided.

    There also isn't anything to support your position and there is this little thing called burden of proof that lies upon the original claim. In this case, that lies on your shoulders.


    The logical thing to do would be to default to the next best evidence for efficacy, empirical evidence. It is absolutely not logical to just act like the fact a specific diet on a specific population is lost in the twighlight zone because a university lab has not studied it explicitly.

    The problem with this is the incessant parroting of information that may, or may not, have any truth to it. How much BS is spewed in every gym? There isn't much of a consensus in the BB'ing community as is.


    And yeah, I did respond to chestcrack in kind. Probably shouldn't have but for the record I didn't deduct his internet points for making whimsical comments in a topic he doesn't know anything about while parading around like some kind of smart ass, worker ant hero. It's a real shame points don't actually indicate knowledge but some kind of web politics. It could be very misleading to a newb here who also happens to be a newb in the gym.

    And you accused me of straying off topic...

    We have results and we have dogma. I will logically take results, all day.
    It's extremely ironic that you use the word dogma in a derogatory sense here when it is the "traditional" BB'ing dogma that is the core of the discussion.
    For someone that has made it their sole parade to "prove" the merits of constant feedings a la typical BB'ing diets, you haven't shown much outside of non-applicable studies and seeking to besmirch individual members. Using the pros in an attempt as some of anecdotal evidence is a very bad argument as no person on here has the ability and/or resources to have similar lives.
    M.Ed. Ex Phys


  18. Quote Originally Posted by Rodja View Post
    For someone that has made it their sole parade to "prove" the merits of constant feedings a la typical BB'ing diets, you haven't shown much outside of non-applicable studies and seeking to besmirch individual members. Using the pros in an attempt as some of anecdotal evidence is a very bad argument as no person on here has the ability and/or resources to have similar lives.
    Whether or not you used steroids or specific supplements while on a particular diet is absolutely relevent to a discussion defending that particular diet. Your results from the diet would be severely skewed.


    Which steroid compound and specific effect correlating to which diet are you referring to?

    I've mentioned crossover between various training styles. Irregardless, the physiological effects of one style over another certainly are weighted heavily in one direction or another.

    The burden of proof is a tricky one to place as the whole conversation has been off topic. So far, the traditional bodybuilding diet has been put on the defensive, with no legitimate offensive to take except to default to calling it BS because leangains says to something different and it's easier to just ignore decades of empirical evidence for the trendy new diet. And this has essentially been the conversation. It would seem to me burden of proof is on the people flinging poo at traditional diets to prove they aren't effective beyond a doubt and any limitation.

    And again, empirical evidence with such broad and consistent results can not be discounted entirely as gym floor bs, not without proving otherwise beyond any limitation or doubt in the face of so much success from the pros on down to the lean bros with decent looking bumps on their arms.

    Dogma is a system of belief or doctrine held by a group or organization. The leangains camp is certainly a group spewing dogma while choosing to ignore decades worth of real world results for dogma.

    As far as a "sole parade" I've posted outside of this conversation, but within the conversation I do reply to the conversation.
  19. Re: Meals


    Someone tag me in!

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I727 using Tapatalk 2
    PESCIENCE.COM

    "The only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance." - Socrates
  20. Re: Meals


    Quote Originally Posted by JudoJosh View Post
    Someone tag me in!

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I727 using Tapatalk 2
    Tag your it.
  21. Re: Meals


    Quote Originally Posted by vidapreta View Post
    Tag your it.
    YES!

    Now let's see if I can keep up with the thread.

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I727 using Tapatalk 2
    PESCIENCE.COM

    "The only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance." - Socrates

  22. Quote Originally Posted by TexasGuy View Post
    Whether or not you used steroids or specific supplements while on a particular diet is absolutely relevent to a discussion defending that particular diet. Your results from the diet would be severely skewed.


    Which steroid compound and specific effect correlating to which diet are you referring to?

    I've mentioned crossover between various training styles. Irregardless, the physiological effects of one style over another certainly are weighted heavily in one direction or another.

    The burden of proof is a tricky one to place as the whole conversation has been off topic. So far, the traditional bodybuilding diet has been put on the defensive, with no legitimate offensive to take except to default to calling it BS because leangains says to something different and it's easier to just ignore decades of empirical evidence for the trendy new diet. And this has essentially been the conversation. It would seem to me burden of proof is on the people flinging poo at traditional diets to prove they aren't effective beyond a doubt and any limitation.

    And again, empirical evidence with such broad and consistent results can not be discounted entirely as gym floor bs, not without proving otherwise beyond any limitation or doubt in the face of so much success from the pros on down to the lean bros with decent looking bumps on their arms.

    Dogma is a system of belief or doctrine held by a group or organization. The leangains camp is certainly a group spewing dogma while choosing to ignore decades worth of real world results for dogma.

    As far as a "sole parade" I've posted outside of this conversation, but within the conversation I do reply to the conversation.
    Nice contradiction about AAS and diet efficacy. Didn't you just say that it wouldn't change the effects, but now you're saying it skews effects? If you review the thread, you will find that the first shot about diet was the need for breakfast to kickstart the metabolism and that's when it all started. That is where the burden of proof lies and nothing has yet to be provided to suport that position. Beyond that, you really need to brush up on what actually qualifies as empirical evidence and the differences between anecdotal and semi-empirical. We've already covered the fallacy of using anything used at the IFBB/national NPC level as any sort of proof as the drug cocktails do a tremendous amount of work for them and we're already dealing with genetically inclined individuals.

    What I love the absolute most is that you fling dogmatic adherence on the LG community, yet they provide peer-reviewed data along the way. Not only that, but there is also recognition amongst the entire IF community that many different methods of IF exist and each has their own merits. Even Berardi has his own ebook on IF, so it is extremely ironic that you brought his name into the fold when he recognizes that there is merit to the many protocols of IF on body composition.
    M.Ed. Ex Phys


  23. Quote Originally Posted by JudoJosh View Post
    YES!

    Now let's see if I can keep up with the thread.

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I727 using Tapatalk 2
    Op is having trouble hitting macros in a given day on his chosen diet plan.

    Celorza suggests OP just skips breakfast. Due to a lack of explanation, this was interpreted initially as if the OP should just skip his macros altogether.

    It was stated this is a horrible idea. People on the leangains diet puffed up defensively.

    The conversation then shifted to applying Diet Y to Diet X while defending Diet Y on Diet Y's terms and scattered across multiple threads in multiple forums.

    Celorza came back and let everyone know that he does not, in fact, bulk or ever want to outside of his intial "amazing" newb gains where he started looking too much like a refrigerator at almost 150 pounds, yet he continued to give bulking advice to Diet X using Diet Y principles.

    Other people chimed in with various angles along the way, whether on topic or not.

    And here you are!

  24. welcome to the big show!
    Nutraceutical Innovations
    AMINDS15 - 15% code
    nutra-innovations.com

  25. Quote Originally Posted by Rodja View Post
    Nice contradiction about AAS and diet efficacy. Didn't you just say that it wouldn't change the effects, but now you're saying it skews effects? If you review the thread, you will find that the first shot about diet was the need for breakfast to kickstart the metabolism and that's when it all started. That is where the burden of proof lies and nothing has yet to be provided to suport that position. Beyond that, you really need to brush up on what actually qualifies as empirical evidence and the differences between anecdotal and semi-empirical. We've already covered the fallacy of using anything used at the IFBB/national NPC level as any sort of proof as the drug cocktails do a tremendous amount of work for them and we're already dealing with genetically inclined individuals.

    What I love the absolute most is that you fling dogmatic adherence on the LG community, yet they provide peer-reviewed data along the way. Not only that, but there is also recognition amongst the entire IF community that many different methods of IF exist and each has their own merits. Even Berardi has his own on IF, so it is extremely ironic that you brought his name into the fold when he recognizes that there is merit to the many protocols of IF on body composition.
    I love how you are dodging the question! Clearly you are taking my comment out of context. Of course steroids will skew results, this is why they are used. There is a difference between steroids skewing results and nullifying a diet altogether, which was the inference from Bla.

    Yes, LG proponents have been providing peer reviewed information to support their claims while ignoring the same when it doesn't apply though the conversation spilled over to multiple threads and it's hard to keep it all organized. I realize Berardi has an IF protocol out there. As the conversation morphed from an evident miscommunication over Celorza's post to a defense of LG and attack of frequent, high protein meals, my stance was that multiple diets work through various metabolic pathways, including IF protocols and I said so many times in many threads on this topic.

    The problem is that people attacking a diet that has been shown to be effective for decades from the pros to the joes argued one diets principles as if they are the universal dietary guideline. And they are not.

    Let me state directly, IF protocols work. Applying Diet Y principles to Diet X isn't a good idea and neither is arguing from that stand point. You can not prove frequent, high protein meals are ineffective because they are, even if a white coat hasn't put it on paper.

    And yes, nutrient timing and TEF are applicable to metabolism and fat loss within the right diet plan. 1000lories, whether split up in to two meals or one will wind up as 900 calories. We then have to discuss nutrient aborption rates and storage but this was ignored completely. While a fasting diet may prime the body to absorb more nutrients in a sitting given hormonal responses, a frequent meal plan will not. That said, various macros ellicit different TEF responses and this is one angle of high protein ingestion.You can eliminate total calories by choosing the right foods to stoke your metabolism through TEF. And studies were posted to show this. You simply ignored the context to disregard them.

    And ftr I edited your post for the Berardi link. I can't post them yet.

  26. Quote Originally Posted by Piston Honda View Post
    What will be that guy's name?
    Piston Honda

  27. Oh for crying out loud, we are back to this?

    Jesus... Either prove one needs breakfast or move on. Macros to be hit don't require a breakfast to be accomplished. Suggesting he skips breakfast in no way shape or form infers that he should reduce caloric intake.
    Androhard + Andromass Log
    http://anabolicminds.com/forum/supplement-reviews-logs/182038-so-i-decided.html

  28. Quote Originally Posted by bla55 View Post
    Oh for crying out loud, we are back to this?

    Jesus... Either prove one needs breakfast or move on. Macros to be hit don't require a breakfast to be accomplished. Suggesting he skips breakfast in no way shape or form infers that he should reduce caloric intake.
    For crying out loud! We are back to suggesting one diets protocols for another diets application?

  29. Quote Originally Posted by TexasGuy View Post
    I love how you are dodging the question! Clearly you are taking my comment out of context. Of course steroids will skew results, this is why they are used. There is a difference between steroids skewing results and nullifying a diet altogether, which was the inference from Bla.

    Yes, LG proponents have been providing peer reviewed information to support their claims while ignoring the same when it doesn't apply though the conversation spilled over to multiple threads and it's hard to keep it all organized. I realize Berardi has an IF protocol out there. As the conversation morphed from an evident miscommunication over Celorza's post to a defense of LG and attack of frequent, high protein meals, my stance was that multiple diets work through various metabolic pathways, including IF protocols and I said so many times in many threads on this topic.

    The problem is that people attacking a diet that has been shown to be effective for decades from the pros to the joes argued one diets principles as if they are the universal dietary guideline. And they are not.

    Let me state directly, IF protocols work. Applying Diet Y principles to Diet X isn't a good idea and neither is arguing from that stand point. You can not prove frequent, high protein meals are ineffective because they are, even if a white coat hasn't put it on paper.

    And yes, nutrient timing and TEF are applicable to metabolism and fat loss within the right diet plan. 1000lories, whether split up in to two meals or one will wind up as 900 calories. We then have to discuss nutrient aborption rates and storage but this was ignored completely. While a fasting diet may prime the body to absorb more nutrients in a sitting given hormonal responses, a frequent meal plan will not. That said, various macros ellicit different TEF responses and this is one angle of high protein ingestion.You can eliminate total calories by choosing the right foods to stoke your metabolism through TEF. And studies were posted to show this. You simply ignored the context to disregard them.

    And ftr I edited your post for the Berardi link. I can't post them yet.
    Let's see...

    You already had ad hominem, red herring, and burden of proof. Now, you can add straw man and arguing in a circle to your list of BS arguments.

    However, I'll start with a simple science lesson for you since you really seem to be struggling in this department. AAS will skew results; this is not a point of debate, but you fail to realize that this skewing of results completely nullifies any application to the lay population as they push the boundaries beyond what is possible under non-PED usage conditions. My personal usage or non-usage has absolutely nothing to do with this thread.

    You also seem to think that meal frequency has something to do with macronutrient breakdown as evidenced by your linking of meal frequency and high protein consumption, which, again, is not something that has been said along the way. High protein consumption is not the same thing as frequent feedings despite your attempts to link them. This protein consumption and subsequent TEF has absolutely NOTHING to do with this thread. At no point was macronutrient breakdown ever discussed until you decided to throw the thread in that direction in an attempt to use that to prove the merits of frequent feedings. In addition, you seem to really misunderstand nutrient timing and it's application to the non-endurance athlete population and how using these principles as attestation for your position actually works against you, but insulin sensitivity, GLUT-4, etc. would again steer the conversation into a different direction beyond the scope of the thread.
    M.Ed. Ex Phys

  •   

      
     

Similar Forum Threads

  1. Frequent Meals Better?
    By YellowJacket in forum Weight Loss
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 02-11-2003, 09:54 PM
  2. great bulking meal for ecto
    By drfly in forum Weight Loss
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 02-08-2003, 01:00 PM
  3. Meal Builder
    By Biggs in forum Weight Loss
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-27-2003, 04:20 PM
  4. Homebrew Meal Replacement Shake
    By YellowJacket in forum Weight Loss
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 01-26-2003, 01:33 PM
  5. Favorite Cheat Meals/Unhealthy Foods
    By Biggs in forum Weight Loss
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 01-12-2003, 10:18 PM
Log in
Log in