Awesome articles by John Berardi

[ozarkaBRAND]

First, 2 of my faves -
Massive Eating pt.1

G-flux Redux

Most all of the rest of his articles are in the following database: Berardi Article Database

 

[borobulker]

Dr. Berardi is one of the few well known guys that i agree with, on most points.

Great ideas and not trying to reinvent the wheel.

 

[ozarkaBRAND]

People should really read these!

 

[pinchharmonic]

i think this is making it way too simple than reality.

what accounts for the differences in endomorphs and ectomorphs then? We all know genetically, even with the same amount of muscle-mass, exercise, etc , endos and ectos have very different metabolisms...

even the x-factor he speaks of, is only 10%!!!

I just calculated my metabolic rate daily and it was 3200 not even counting the thermal effect of food...

i'm 5 7, at 161lbs with about 11.2% bodyfat... and he's telling me i burn 3200 calories a day, or potentially more?

my diet is around 2000 calories a day and I neither gain or lose weight. moreover, i neither gain nor lose strength either. I'm sure if i ate 3200 calories i'd add a bunch of fat really quickly.. so there must be other factors involved.

i mean can a few people calculate their metabolic rates and compare it with their average daily food intake to see if any of this makes sense?

the guy himself is 5% bodyfat at 200lbs (so he should be competing in the 202lb and under category at the pro shows), so i would assume he has otherwordly genetics and his metabolism is far better than most.

 

[Steveoph]

His caloric calculations do come in the high side I admit for many people. I like his fundamentals though.

 

[ozarkaBRAND]

His caloric calculations do come in the high side I admit for many people. I like his fundamentals though.

To be fair, the Massive Eating calculations are made with bulking in mind.

 

[hardknock]

i think this is making it way too simple than reality.

what accounts for the differences in endomorphs and ectomorphs then? We all know genetically, even with the same amount of muscle-mass, exercise, etc , endos and ectos have very different metabolisms...

even the x-factor he speaks of, is only 10%!!!

I just calculated my metabolic rate daily and it was 3200 not even counting the thermal effect of food...

i'm 5 7, at 161lbs with about 11.2% bodyfat... and he's telling me i burn 3200 calories a day, or potentially more?

my diet is around 2000 calories a day and I neither gain or lose weight. moreover, i neither gain nor lose strength either. I'm sure if i ate 3200 calories i'd add a bunch of fat really quickly.. so there must be other factors involved.

i mean can a few people calculate their metabolic rates and compare it with their average daily food intake to see if any of this makes sense?

the guy himself is 5% bodyfat at 200lbs (so he should be competing in the 202lb and under category at the pro shows), so i would assume he has otherwordly genetics and his metabolism is far better than most.

If you gain neither size or lose size then wouldn't you figure that your caloric intake is to low?

What Im saying is that the goal is to get bigger(more lbm) and leaner, not smaller and leaner, correct?

Also, 1200 more calories really is not that much more food. A few spoons of natural peanut butter, spoon of olive oil, chicken breast, and some eggs can garner that with ease.

 

[Nitrox]

I think he's a tool.

Sells articles, not good science.

 

[ozarkaBRAND]

I think he's a tool.

Sells articles, not good science.

Wow.

And what is he selling? These articles were free, ya know.

 

[pinchharmonic]

If you gain neither size or lose size then wouldn't you figure that your caloric intake is to low?

What Im saying is that the goal is to get bigger(more lbm) and leaner, not smaller and leaner, correct?

Also, 1200 more calories really is not that much more food. A few spoons of natural peanut butter, spoon of olive oil, chicken breast, and some eggs can garner that with ease.

I agree 1200 calories is a piece of cake. 2 tablespoons of peanut butter is 200 calories already, and I can eat that all day long without denting my appetite... and i do daydream about that sometmies.

 

[pinchharmonic]

his articles do seem very "men's fitness" ish

the most annoying thing is if you check out his website, he totally seems to plug biotest products, which IMO are completely crap as far as value is concerned. maybe he's choosing them not based on value, then that's ok..

but i agree with steveoph, some of the principles are interesting, especially g-flux. I will implement that next time around because lowering calories too much stalls the metabolism in an average person.

 

[Nitrox]

Wow.

And what is he selling? These articles were free, ya know.

Do you think that he lets T-Nation/BB.com publish his articles out of the goodness of his heart or that he plugs Biotest products just because he likes them so much?

 

[hardknock]

Do you think that he lets T-Nation/BB.com publish his articles out of the goodness of his heart or that he plugs Biotest products just because he likes them so much?

Yeah, but its free to me, so it's no harm no foul ...

Give a damn what he's selling to the peanuts that are buying it.

 

[ozarkaBRAND]

Do you think that he lets T-Nation/BB.com publish his articles out of the goodness of his heart or that he plugs Biotest products just because he likes them so much?

Well, he gives them out for free at his own website, so I don't see any problems with him distributing them to T-Nation as well.

 

[Nitrox]

C'mon people! Get with the program.

My comment about his compensation was to highlight that many writers' output is motivated by financial gain. If they don't produce, they don't get paid. Because truly accurate and useful new info in sports nutrition is few and far between, writers have to get creative to make a living. Often this means developing new theories and implying that they are factual. These guys would have zero credibility in any formal scientific circles. You just don't make those kind of claims without appropriate experimentation or studies to back them up. Good studies cost a lot and can often take years to complete. And no, formulating a new theory off of other studies does not mean that it has been tested!

His whole fat and carbohydrate exclusion as well as spiking insulin is garbage. I even read somewhat recently that he is still preaching that there is no substitute for dextrose (e.g. Surge post-workout).

Massive eating is just calorie counting. Nothing new. As already mentioned his recommended intakes were really high. Yes it is for bulking but usually that means mostly muscle not slabs of fat to boot.

As for the posters that don't care because his articles are provided free to the end user, free garbage is still garbage. Worse yet is when one does not know that what they are being given is bad info.

I shouldn't pick on Berardi. He is not the only one pushing propoganda. This article Bodybuilding.com - Mauro Di Pasquale - Post-Exercise Carbohydrates May Be Counter-Productive. by Di Pasquale counters the whole post workout carb philosophy (so which one is right?) and guess what, he has just the right product for you...

Anyways, question everything you read (including what I am writing), especially in industries where the people behind the information have a lot to gain from you and your wallet.

/done

 

[Royd The Noyd]

C'mon people! Get with the program.

My comment about his compensation was to highlight that many writers' output is motivated by financial gain. If they don't produce, they don't get paid. Because truly accurate and useful new info in sports nutrition is few and far between, writers have to get creative to make a living. Often this means developing new theories and implying that they are factual. These guys would have zero credibility in any formal scientific circles. You just don't make those kind of claims without appropriate experimentation or studies to back them up. Good studies cost a lot and can often take years to complete. And no, formulating a new theory off of other studies does not mean that it has been tested!

His whole fat and carbohydrate exclusion as well as spiking insulin is garbage. I even read somewhat recently that he is still preaching that there is no substitute for dextrose (e.g. Surge post-workout).

Massive eating is just calorie counting. Nothing new. As already mentioned his recommended intakes were really high. Yes it is for bulking but usually that means mostly muscle not slabs of fat to boot.

As for the posters that don't care because his articles are provided free to the end user, free garbage is still garbage. Worse yet is when one does not know that what they are being given is bad info.

I shouldn't pick on Berardi. He is not the only one pushing propoganda. This article Bodybuilding.com - Mauro Di Pasquale - Post-Exercise Carbohydrates May Be Counter-Productive. by Di Pasquale counters the whole post workout carb philosophy (so which one is right?) and guess what, he has just the right product for you...

Anyways, question everything you read (including what I am writing), especially in industries where the people behind the information have a lot to gain from you and your wallet.

/done

Who is credible, iyo?

 

[Steveoph]

:goodpost:
I don't think we will ever come up with just one way to do pre and post-WO nutrition. There's always more than one way to get the job done; I've gone without pre and post-WO shakes for a long time now, and I've been having lots of success.

 

[Nitrox]

Who is credible, iyo?

Two guys that were here on AM that I thought were straight shooters are Bobo, the site's founder - now retired IIRC, and Alan Aragon.

Alan had a great comment in one of his posts. Something along the lines of 'the more you learn about nutrition, the more you appreciate the basics.'

Ironcially people still get obsessed with the micro details and overlook what gives the best return on investment.

 

[Royd The Noyd]

...and Alan Aragon.

Alan had a great comment in one of his posts. Something along the lines of 'the more you learn about nutrition, the more you appreciate the basics.'

Ironcially people still get obsessed with the micro details and overlook what gives the best return on investment.

(see sig) I think we would agree on a lot of things. :cheers:

 

[Resolve]

Good thread, gentlemen. Alan Aragon holds a place of respect in my mind, but Bobo is new to me. I've got some searching to do!

 

[Nitrox]

(see sig) I think we would agree on a lot of things. :cheers:

Too funny. I should pay more attention.

 

[Nitrox]

Good thread, gentlemen. Alan Aragon holds a place of respect in my mind, but Bobo is new to me. I've got some searching to do!

I think Bobo has adopted a variety of Seinfeld character names to replace Bobo because searching under his old name yields nothing.

 

[hardknock]

C'mon people! Get with the program.

My comment about his compensation was to highlight that many writers' output is motivated by financial gain. If they don't produce, they don't get paid. Because truly accurate and useful new info in sports nutrition is few and far between, writers have to get creative to make a living. Often this means developing new theories and implying that they are factual. These guys would have zero credibility in any formal scientific circles. You just don't make those kind of claims without appropriate experimentation or studies to back them up. Good studies cost a lot and can often take years to complete. And no, formulating a new theory off of other studies does not mean that it has been tested!

His whole fat and carbohydrate exclusion as well as spiking insulin is garbage. I even read somewhat recently that he is still preaching that there is no substitute for dextrose (e.g. Surge post-workout).

Massive eating is just calorie counting. Nothing new. As already mentioned his recommended intakes were really high. Yes it is for bulking but usually that means mostly muscle not slabs of fat to boot.

As for the posters that don't care because his articles are provided free to the end user, free garbage is still garbage. Worse yet is when one does not know that what they are being given is bad info.

I shouldn't pick on Berardi. He is not the only one pushing propoganda. This article Bodybuilding.com - Mauro Di Pasquale - Post-Exercise Carbohydrates May Be Counter-Productive. by Di Pasquale counters the whole post workout carb philosophy (so which one is right?) and guess what, he has just the right product for you...

Anyways, question everything you read (including what I am writing), especially in industries where the people behind the information have a lot to gain from you and your wallet.

/done

You must read it all to have something to compare credibility to with garbage, not?

I've done some of the things that this guy speaks of before and gained muscle and strength, and i've done NONE of what he speaks of and gained size and strength...matters about the individual and that person's approach, not JUST what one reads from a website or peer reviewed journals.

So, I agree basically.

 

[ozarkaBRAND]

I think Bobo has adopted a variety of Seinfeld character names to replace Bobo because searching under his old name yields nothing.

He should write a book.. I mean, Aragon did (unfortunately I do not have it)..

get with it bobo!

 

[borobulker]

I think JBs info has a place. He paints a relatively accurate picture of what sound nutrition is and provides the means of achieving a healthy diet. In these terms, i think he is great.

If we are speaking on bodybuilding, powerlifting or other 'strength sports', even athletes in general; i will agree with the above posters.

I have adopted many of his principles when consulting 'lifestyle' type clients because that is where i believe JBs info is applicable. Have i personally used his methods, for myself? Nope.

I will also agree with the above parties with this notion of his 'profitable intentions' but i will argue that the other nutrition experts noted function with similar (varying however) priorities. If they do not, i question their motive...

 

[t-bone2]

C'mon people! Get with the program.

Agreed. Anyone bother to look at the three published research articles that Dr. B references in G-Flux Redux? There are several other (more prominent?) studies that discuss the impact of Total Energy Expenditure on RMR. Why did Dr. B decide to omit those...?

In addition to Alan, I'd throw in Lyle McDonald. Both seem to have done a better job of analytical research on the published studies than Dr. B.

 

[Hank Vangut]

anyone here subscribe to alan's monthly research review?
it's a good read.

 

[borobulker]

anyone here subscribe to alan's monthly research review?
it's a good read.

I have been getting it. Deff a good read.

Good call Hank...