Gainers vs solid food

[IFBBound]

I eat relatively clean and about 3,500 to 4,000 calories daily. In ADDITION to solid food calories my gainer of choice (mhp up you mass) I can get up to as high as 5,500 calories in a day. I have a super fast metabolism and I'm 6 ft 216lbs. I'm having a rough time putting on size. I actually just posted my diet for the day yesterday on my other thread "anabolic dreams." My question am I hindering my gains by getting these extra calories from liquid shakes as opposed to solid foods. Sometimes I think and have heard I eat so much food and meat a day it's actually healthier for your digestive track to get these nutrients in liquid since less work to digest. Why is it better to eat solid foods? Not that I want to drink gainers all day but I don't understand the theory behind this.

In my "gainer shakes" ill sometime add some or all of the following for extra calories
Natural peanut butter
Organic extra virgin cocoanut oil
Oats
Egg whites
Banana

 

[Powercage]

Solid foods often have cofactors or other important nutrients that premade gainers dont have.

Your custom gainer tho is perfectly fine to add in to supplement your food intake.

 

[R1balla]

Solid foods often have cofactors or other important nutrients that premade gainers dont have.

Your custom gainer tho is perfectly fine to add in to supplement your food intake.

agreed with this. try to increase your carbs. in my experiences, i gain when i have a high carb intake

 

[IFBBound]

Carbs before bed or not? What works best for lean mass building?

 

[Powercage]

Carbs before bed or not? What works best for lean mass building?

Overall macros > nutrient timing.


Id prefer to have carbs periworkout tho.

 

[Spaniard]

If you truly are having as hard of a time as you say and are actually getting the amount in that you think you are then yes, eat all the time whether before, after or during bed. Utilize high GI carbs as they're less filling than low Gi carbs.

- Valdez

 

[Powercage]

GI

 

[Spaniard]

GI

And the reason for scoffing at the glycemic index is...?

- Valdez

 

[R1balla]

for me, just eating carbs in general. before bed, lunch, morning, pre/post workout, snacks...etc

 

[Powercage]

And the reason for scoffing at the glycemic index is...?

- Valdez

It's flawed.

 

[Spaniard]

It's flawed.

How so?

The glycemic index is a ranking system based on blood glucose response in a series of tests to that of pure glucose powder. So if the glycemic index is a direct comparison of other carbohydrates to pure glucose where is your flaw?

Anything that produces more than a 70% rise in blood glucose levels in comparison to pure glucose powder is then considered 'high gi'. Then you have moderate and low categories.

The blood glucose test is flawed? The pure glucose used is flawed? I'm having trouble seeing where a flaw could be found when testing blood glucose levels...

- Valdez

 

[Powercage]

How so?

The glycemic index is a ranking system based on blood glucose response in a series of tests to that of pure glucose powder. So if the glycemic index is a direct comparison of other carbohydrates to pure glucose where is your flaw?

Anything that produces more than a 70% rise in blood glucose levels in comparison to pure glucose powder is then considered 'high gi'. Then you have moderate and low categories.

The blood glucose test is flawed? The pure glucose used is flawed? I'm having trouble seeing where a flaw could be found when testing blood glucose levels...

- Valdez

Elements Challenging the Glycemic Index - AlanAragon.com - Fitness Based on Science & Experience

 

[Spaniard]

http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/search/Glycemic+index/feed/muscle-gain/supplement-marketing-on-steroids-by-alan-aragon.html

The biggest noticed difference was in endurance athletes. And obviously the presence of other macros have an effect on glucose response. That article doesn't take away from using the GI as a general guide line on how different carbs will respond.

Who is Alan Aragon? Serious question

- Valdez

 

[Powercage]

The biggest noticed difference was in endurance athletes. And obviously the presence of other macros have an effect on glucose response. That article doesn't take away from using the GI as a general guide line on how different carbs will respond.

Who is Alan Aragon? Serious question

- Valdez

You highly underestimate the human body's ability to regulate blood glucose. Not to mention all of the other flaws in the GI. I wouldnt give GI more than a passing glance when structuring a diet. The GI itself just doesnt have much bearing on whether or not a diet will result in improvement in health markers or attainment of physique goals. It's more of a mental masturbation index in most cases.

Alan Aragon is one of the leading sports nutritionists in the world. Also note my edit to Post #12, I had posted an incorrect URL by accident. Hopefully that serves to alleviate any confusion you may have.

 

[R1balla]

Elements Challenging the Glycemic Index - AlanAragon.com - Fitness Based on Science & Experience

:fing02:

 

[Celorza]

Powercage is right actually...anyhow back to topic. Get in higher caloric content foods that occupy less mass if eating a lot is a problem. I'm not against gainers, but it is fairly cheap and simple to buy gallons of milk, peanut butter, egg whites, bananas and honey to topple up the extra calories .

For me the Combination of SNS Agmatine Powder and CGBE + AnaBeta gets me going hungry enough to eat for 3 regular citizens ! So maybe you should look into that for eating more whole foods with more micro nutrient content!

 

[Montego1]

Check out this guys log. He eats a ton.

 

[iForce Dave]

i think its shortsighted to completely dismiss the GI scale.

is it flawed? sure, but nothing in bodybuilding is set in stone

I really dont agree with the IIFYM outlook. Maybe if you dont want to put in the time and effort to do things 100%, but the idea that a can of pepsi and cup of brown rice dont matter if you eat it with a chicken breast or almonds just doesnt jive with me

 

[Powercage]

I dont believe the GI is very worthwhile. I do however think that IIFYM is flawed if you are taking it as a hard set rule as it doesnt account for micronutrients/cofactors etc.


People seem to have issues with taking the things that work from multiple ideals. There are big parts of IIFYM that are great.

 

[Lutztenways]

Ben and Jerry's is the ultimate gainer in my experience.

 

[Spaniard]

You highly underestimate the human body's ability to regulate blood glucose. Not to mention all of the other flaws in the GI. I wouldnt give GI more than a passing glance when structuring a diet. The GI itself just doesnt have much bearing on whether or not a diet will result in improvement in health markers or attainment of physique goals. It's more of a mental masturbation index in most cases.

Alan Aragon is one of the leading sports nutritionists in the world. Also note my edit to Post #12, I had posted an incorrect URL by accident. Hopefully that serves to alleviate any confusion you may have.

Then that's
where our differences in opinions are. I follow sports dieticians that train elite athletes, and Olympians where as it seems Alan is more bodybuilding, aesthetic concerned.

I'm not being argumentative, I'm just simply stating that I think complete dismissal of any tools we have is a mistake on both ends. A lot of the sports dieticians I have come into contact with are extremely narrow minded when it comes to even discussing new studies etc. I try to remain objective. However, I can understand the narrow minded thought process when diet fads continuously change over and over. They stick with what has worked for hundreds of years with their elite caliber, best in the world Athletes. My mentor always gives me **** on new studies I read.

Thank you for the study I'm always interested in new emerging evidence and how it pans out.

Powercage is right actually...anyhow back to topic. Get in higher caloric content foods that occupy less mass if eating a lot is a problem. I'm not against gainers, but it is fairly cheap and simple to buy gallons of milk, peanut butter, egg whites, bananas and honey to topple up the extra calories .

Lol classic Cel glad to see you haven't changed. You should read more books instead of constantly trying to ride the coattails of respected forum members.

i think its shortsighted to completely dismiss the GI scale.

is it flawed? sure, but nothing in bodybuilding is set in stone

I really dont agree with the IIFYM outlook. Maybe if you dont want to put in the time and effort to do things 100%, but the idea that a can of pepsi and cup of brown rice dont matter if you eat it with a chicken breast or almonds just doesnt jive with me

I dont believe the GI is very worthwhile. I do however think that IIFYM is flawed if you are taking it as a hard set rule as it doesnt account for micronutrients/cofactors etc.


People seem to have issues with taking the things that work from multiple ideals. There are big parts of IIFYM that are great.

These two posts definitely said it best. In my opinion, it's the utilization of all tools available to us to develop the best possible outcomes for our clients or athletes.

- Valdez

 

[SwolenONE]

Interesting debate, I know thats been a hot topic as of late re: how use the GI index really is.

A lot of good discussion in this thread.

 

[Powercage]

Then that's
where our differences in opinions are. I follow sports dieticians that train elite athletes, and Olympians where as it seems Alan is more bodybuilding, aesthetic concerned.

This is irrelevant. Aragon trains Olympians and professional athletes as well as bodybuilders. But Im no longer willing to continue this debate. Do what works for you

 

[Spaniard]

This is irrelevant. But Im no longer willing to continue this debate. Do what works for you

Good cuz neither am I

It's pretty relevant, bodybuilders are trend and fad dieters. They have been for years upon years. As soon as someone online posts pictures of himself and the new protocol he created based on "new emerging evidence" its the new fad.

Sports dieticians with clientele including the worlds best athletes aren't so quick to budge so they teach what works consistently. Not what yesterdays new emerging data said. Seems completely relevant.

Again I'm not arguing that it won't change in the future and that one way is the right way because that kind of approach in my opinion is not ideal.

- Valdez

 

[Powercage]

Good cuz neither am I

It's pretty relevant, bodybuilders are trend and fad dieters. They have been for years upon years. As soon as someone online posts pictures of himself and the new protocol he created based on "new emerging evidence" its the new fad.

Sports dieticians with clientele including the worlds best athletes aren't so quick to budge so they teach what works consistently. Not what yesterdays new emerging data said. Seems completely relevant.

Again I'm not arguing that it won't change in the future and that one way is the right way because that kind of approach in my opinion is not ideal.

- Valdez

Except Aragon also trains Olympians and elite athletes. But that isnt relevant to whether or not GI has actual application anyway.

Bodybuilders are absolutely trend dieters, lol

 

[Spaniard]

Except Aragon also trains Olympians and elite athletes. But that isnt relevant to whether or not GI has actual application anyway.

You're referring to the figure skater he constructed a diet for and the NBA basketball player?

The relevance is the way the two completely different groups offer nutrition advice. Bodybuilding and aesthetic minded people hop on the first new idea that pops up. Yes, he trained a few athletes but his mainstay is aesthetic minded.

On the other hand you have people that train Olympians during their quadrennial cycle who rely on what's been working for them to continually put out the best athletes they can. Why that is relevant is because that's what they teach. They don't just train an athlete here or there they are generating Olympians and do that their job.

You are a believer in what Aragon attests to.

I believe the sports dieticians with doctorates, masters degrees and years of producing the worlds top competitors over and over again.

Like I said I personally use it as a tool nothing more.

I'm doing this all from my phone and I had to restart this piece of **** once already resulting in texting all that twice. I may have missed a few parts lol

Either way, agree to disagree. You think GI is bull ****, I think its a tool. There will probably be 15 studies proving it right and wrong for the next five years. Which is why I keep an eye on trending and try to remain as open minded as possible.

- Valdez

 

[Powercage]

Aragon has a masters degree....


Seeing as we have degenerated to ad hominem arguments, Im out

 

[Celorza]

Lol I love seeing Valdez more upfront with his attitude. The fact that I agree with him that GI is not relevant is because I got schooled on an older thread by many members whom you suck up quite a lot fire buddy. The thing is, you never like being wrong and everyone knows you whine a lot !

Sometimes we are wrong sometimes we are right, why derail this thread and insult people Valdez? Cheer up!

 

[Distilled Water]

How many top level bodybuilders use the "IIFYM"?

thread/

Powerlifting is slightly different but just look at what Dave Tate did after starting to work with John Meadows and eating clean.

 

[Powercage]

I dont believe blind IIFYM is the best way to eat either.

How is that an /thread?


It's like we were discussing one thing and you slammed home a point of an argument you were having in another thread.

 

[R1balla]

I dont believe blind IIFYM is the best way to eat either.

How is that an /thread?


It's like we were discussing one thing and you slammed home a point of an argument you were having in another thread.

agreed. no need to / thread. im enjoying this

 

[Distilled Water]

I dont believe blind IIFYM is the best way to eat either.

How is that an /thread?

It's like we were discussing one thing and you slammed home a point of an argument you were having in another thread.

Just adding my input.

Take it however you would like, I'm simply pointing out the top tier of the sport don't follow IIFYM. There's a reason they do not.

Do track athletes speed train like Olympic athletes or do they just run around however they please? It's running so with the IIFYM, it should work, no?

 

[Distilled Water]

You guys are taking the /thread way to literal.

 

[R1balla]

You guys are taking the /thread way to literal.

well when you say / thread, how else do you expect everyone to take it?

 

[Distilled Water]

well when you say / thread, how else do you expect everyone to take it?

I'm not telling everyone to stop posting....

However, I made one point thats terribly hard to argue, top level guys don't use IIFYM.

 

[R1balla]

I'm not telling everyone to stop posting....

However, I made one point thats terribly hard to argue, top level guys don't use IIFYM.

in that case, / thread :laugh:

 

[Distilled Water]

in that case, / thread :laugh:

You hot dog :lol:

 

[jimbuick]

I'm not telling everyone to stop posting....

However, I made one point thats terribly hard to argue, top level guys don't use IIFYM.

I don't know. I'm pretty damn close to top level (Olympic weightlifter, PLer, WSM competitor, and Olympia finalist) and I always do IIFYM while bulking. Its science.

 

[Spaniard]

Lol I love seeing Valdez more upfront with his attitude. The fact that I agree with him that GI is not relevant is because I got schooled on an older thread by many members whom you suck up quite a lot fire buddy. The thing is, you never like being wrong and everyone knows you whine a lot !

Sometimes we are wrong sometimes we are right, why derail this thread and insult people Valdez? Cheer up!

I don't suck up to anyone here, never have, unlike the way you gained the little bit of notoriety you have through ass kissing of the RB's that can't stand you anymore. My reason for my being "upfront with my attitude" is because I don't have time for your non-sense and to be honest, I have zero idea how you're even a rep. Your business practices, general regards to people and condescending attitude do nothing positive. If you truly care about SNS, quit.

I'm not admitting I was wrong because there is no one TRUTH to nutrition. How about this you grab a sandwich and read a book instead of reading threads on an internet forum, then form your own opinion instead of dry humping everyone's opinion you think you can hide behind.

I'm cheery, don't worry about me

- Valdez

 

[R3ACTION]

Subbed!

 

[Randoja]

Flawed and irrelevant are two different things.

 

[02sixxer]

i am with Valdez on the use of the GI rating system. It's a base line for carbs, of course its not perfect but it can hlep a lot people. Currently I have a few clients with Diabetes adn the GI chart is great to help them with knowing carbs.

I think both low and high GI carbs have a place in a diet. As most athletes would agree.

To answer the original question though: Real Food vs Mass Gainer

my thoughts are this, if you are a hard gainer you probably have a hard time taking in enough cals through solid food to maximize your gains. Thats why you use weight gainer and custom gainers. They are easy fast and you can add two a day with minimum effort or cost.

Customizing with PB,Oats, Fruit, and other items is a good thing.

 

[Jiigzz]

Oohh i wanna weigh in. The G.I system is relevant, but only so when products are consumed indepedently but the 'rule' changes once you incorporate other foods (such as a protein or fat) which reduce the G.I load. Thus what was once a high G.I can actually have a low G.I. load which will impact blood sugar in a much different manner.

Its not so much 'flawed', as it does hold weighting when foods are consumed independent of others but it should be noted that the G.I. load decreases once you incorporate fats or proteins.

 

[criticalbench]

I can't answer your question, but up your mass IMO is one of the better gainers out.

Mike

 

[Spaniard]

The biggest noticed difference was in endurance athletes. And obviously the presence of other macros have an effect on glucose response. That article doesn't take away from using the GI as a general guide line on how different carbs will respond.

- Valdez

Oohh i wanna weigh in. The G.I system is relevant, but only so when products are consumed indepedently but the 'rule' changes once you incorporate other foods (such as a protein or fat) which reduce the G.I load. Thus what was once a high G.I can actually have a low G.I. load which will impact blood sugar in a much different manner.

Its not so much 'flawed', as it does hold weighting when foods are consumed independent of others but it should be noted that the G.I. load decreases once you incorporate fats or proteins.

Right which was noted, up there ^^^

- Valdez

 

[Celorza]

I don't suck up to anyone here, never have, unlike the way you gained the little bit of notoriety you have through ass kissing of the RB's that can't stand you anymore. My reason for my being "upfront with my attitude" is because I don't have time for your non-sense and to be honest, I have zero idea how you're even a rep. Your business practices, general regards to people and condescending attitude do nothing positive. If you truly care about SNS, quit.

I'm not admitting I was wrong because there is no one TRUTH to nutrition. How about this you grab a sandwich and read a book instead of reading threads on an internet forum, then form your own opinion instead of dry humping everyone's opinion you think you can hide behind.

I'm cheery, don't worry about me

- Valdez

Lol this post was professional and mature. Anyhow, in a little different stroke. Do you consider the carb source relevant Valdez? And also meal frequency and timing?

Just spiking discussion fire mate ;p you have to learn to take things calm, I am neither offending you or taking anything you say to matter unless it is about the subject .

 

[Jiigzz]

Lol this post was professional and mature. Anyhow, in a little different stroke. Do you consider the carb source relevant Valdez? And also meal frequency and timing?

Just spiking discussion fire mate ;p you have to learn to take things calm, I am neither offending you or taking anything you say to matter unless it is about the subject .

IMO meal timing has its place wrt pre + post meals. Not so much for energy as for activation of certain enzymes and preventing/ limiting protein degradation post w/o.

 

[LiveToLift]

Gainers and solid foods ftw! Problem solved.

 

[R3ACTION]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wuxa2FClKEk&feature=youtube_gdata_player

 

[R3ACTION]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ncCrrZvWn9o&feature=youtube_gdata_player