Guest viewing limit reached
  • You have reached the maximum number of guest views allowed
  • Please register below to remove this limitation

Article: FASTED TRAINING = MORE ANABOLIC?

These studies needs to be built upon. They always fall short because they only account for a short acute response rather than looking at ultimate results over a far longer duration.
 
I would be interested to see if eating only P/F pre-WO and CHOs and fast digesting PRO source post-WO (a la CBL style) confers a similar anabolic benefit.
 
Gutterpump said:
True, it doesn't take adaptation into account - something the human body is notorious for
Click to expand...

Not even simply adaptation. More "what happens when ALL the pieces are in play rather than this single marker?"

For example, the anti-inflammatory data, acutely it's been demonstrated to work against adaptaption, but over a long period of chronic use, it appears to be beneficial for the end outcome.
 
Yes. So much conflicting data out there. I opt for longterm gain.

The 18 grams of whey before training was for optimal fat loss though, not for gains.
 
The article is a mess. First it states that some people take a protein shake before a workout then goes on to talk about a study that had people take a carb rich meal before a workou5. No comparison there at all. This articles is worth less than the paper it probably wasn't written on.
 
asooneyeonig said:
The article is a mess. First it states that some people take a protein shake before a workout then goes on to talk about a study that had people take a carb rich meal before a workou5. No comparison there at all. This articles is worth less than the paper it probably wasn't written on.
Click to expand...

From the article: After the sessions, they received during a four-hour recovery period, 6ml/kg per body weight per hour a solution containing carbohydrates (50g/l), protein hydrolysate (33g/l), and leucine (16.6g/l).

Basically what it says it´s that training on a fasted state you gotta have more anabolism in the post-workout. whereas consuming carbs before the training session blunts this "anabolic pulse".
Next time, try to read articles paying close attention
 
I need to consume carbs during my workouts in order to perform at my best. I think this would be the same for everyone and would outweigh everything else.
 
asooneyeonig said:
It is a myth. Your body is addicted to sugars as a fuel source. It will take 4 to 8 weeks but if you were to drop carb intake and up fat intake your body will switch to using fat from your diet and adipose tissue much more effectively.
Click to expand...

Not a myth. The Tampa lab has been doing research on keto diet. IIRC, performance did dip and most certainly body comp was not as favourable, this was easily corrected by re-introducing carbs into the diet.

It's been centuries upon centuries for which humans have been dependent on grains, essentially, carbs. You think 4-8 weeks is going to magically reset the course of human evolution?
 
kissdadookie said:
Not a myth. The Tampa lab has been doing research on keto diet. IIRC, performance did dip and most certainly body comp was not as favourable, this was easily corrected by re-introducing carbs into the diet.

It's been centuries upon centuries for which humans have been dependent on grains, essentially, carbs. You think 4-8 weeks is going to magically reset the course of human evolution?
Click to expand...

Yep, agreed. I am very familiar with keto diets and have ran them with great success in the past, but I am definitely beyond that stage now. There gets to be a point in your training where the intensity requires glycogen, and this is a fact. When you get over a certain size and/or intensity, glucose is a must.

I prefer to eat low carb most meals though and consume most of my carbs peri-workout. (TKD-type diet) - about 80-100 grams. On really heavy training days when I am not cutting, I will eat more like 300-400grams though.
 
Like right now, I am about to do some heavy squatting in about an hour, followed by a fullbody workout, so I'm eating office doughnuts and protein lol
 
asooneyeonig said:
I didn't mention a protein diet, I mentioned one I which you replace crabs with fat.

If you want to try and post facts about grains, here is one for you. If you were to take all of human history and compact it down to 1 year, agriculture, or our dependence on grain, started yesterday. Yes that means for the other 364 days this year we were not grain dependent in our food choices.
Click to expand...

Wtf are you rambling on about?
 
asooneyeonig said:
The broscience that is being used as a response to me is like saying eating high amounts of fat causes heart disease. This has never been proven to be true but has been proven to be false. What has been proven to be true is high dietary sugar intake can lead to heart disease.

Unless you can post the science from a peer reviewed research journal to back up your claims I would suggest reading more.

I may also come across as a jerk, but I don't carr. This is the internet. Put your big girl panties on and deal with it. You are free to post your opinions on a forum and you are free to have those opinions challenged. You are free to saw what you want but people are not forced to believe what you say.

Anyways a challenge is good. Being challenged from forums has been a big help in moving my understanding forward of anatomy and physiology and exercise. That is the great thing about science. It is alway a looking for a better answer. This is why theories are so important ad they can adapt to include new information.

Now, let's get back on track. My original point was this article is misleading and in my opinion like most of what the media spouts today. It is like saying cats are smart then do I get a study on dogs and saying we may be wrong.

What?!?!?!?! Exactly, like the saying apples and oranges. Or my favorite analogy, it is like changing a light in the bathroom and then the kitchen sink stops working and then blaming the bathroom light for it. Sure it is all part of the same house but by no means the same thing.
Click to expand...

Double wtf are you rambling on about?
 
asooneyeonig said:
Fact, your body can produce blood sugar from dietary fat and dietary protein which can be used for fuel just like blood sugar from dietary carbs/sugars.
Click to expand...

Fat will not fill glycogen stores, period. You want flat muscle and you want to burn out quick during very high intensity work, then be my guest!!
 
asooneyeonig said:
science lesson.

we know glycogen is stored in the liver and in the muscles. muscle glycogen is converted to glucose for the muscles to use. liver glycogen converts to glucose for use in the entire body. glucose is the primary fuel for the body and excessive amounts are stored in adipose tissue. excessive blood sugar occurs when you eat and all dietary macros are consumed. yes, that means protein and fat intake can also increase blood sugar. the body can only use so much protein at a time an only so much fat intake can be used as fatty acids. excessive amounts in a short time period are converted to fuel, or glucose, which increase blood glucose levels and therefore also store in adipose tissue. so once it becomes glucose, it does not matter the source, it is glucose.

glucose can also be pulled out of body fat stores. as we all know and science has shown this mechanism many times over and is not in doubt. we know that adipose tissue can increase from overabundance of calories, not just from carbs or any other one source of macronutrients. yes, carbs raise blood glucose faster in a set time period but the fact still remains that protein and fat taken in large enough amounts in a short time period can as well. therefore, all macronutrients can and will increase glucose.

glycogen is a readily mobilized storage form of glucose in the body. glycogen is mainly used to give the body a source of glucose between meals. it is used as a buffer to maintain a level and tight control of blood sugar levels, or glucose. on average a man can have about 500 grams of carbs, or glycogen and glucose in the body. that is about 2,000 calories. 80% of that in the muscles with about 5% in blood sugar. so we have at most times 1,500 calories available for usage by the muscles. oh and this is the muscles reserve energy source behind ATP. so do not fret thinking you will collapse after a 3 hour lifting session.

as we see above blood sugar and glycogen stores are affected by all food intake. sure, carbs raise it faster but other foods still raise it. it doesn't take much food, as low as 100 calories for some people, to raise blood sugar enough for insulin to be released and that extra blood sugar goes to adipose. that is ok as we know blood sugar can be pulled from adipose tissue.

to wrap this up. stop majoring in the minors. sure carbs have a place but they are not the end all be all of food intake. long before humans even thought of high carb foods to fuel a workout we ate whetever, including fatty meats, to fuel ourselves. humans still got stronger, bigger, and faster. they worked out without being flat, they got lean, the looked amazing. the human body is not so fragile as bodybuilding myths and the media would have you believe. if we were so fragile we would not have survived as a species.

unless of course you can show us the mechanisms backed by science to show that your statement is correct and how mine are wrong. FYI, mine were pulled from university level anatomy and physiology books. good luck. this is what a great discussion and debates are all about. thank you for the enjoyment and possible learning opportunity.
Click to expand...

Wtf 3x.
 
kissdadookie said:
Wtf 3x.
Click to expand...

Please refer to my first post to answer your repeated question. If you have any other questions, please reread my first post. If that doesn't help then it is time to read up on some science. Try some critical thinking followed by anatomy and physiology.

Clearly I am being trolled and I keep falling for it. You have tried to get a response and succeeded. Good job.
 
asooneyeonig said:
Please refer to my first post to answer your repeated question. If you have any other questions, please reread my first post. If that doesn't help then it is time to read up on some science. Try some critical thinking followed by anatomy and physiology.

Clearly I am being trolled and I keep falling for it. You have tried to get a response and succeeded. Good job.
Click to expand...

4th time's a charm?
 
asooneyeonig said:
yes, that means protein and fat intake can also increase blood sugar. the body can only use so much protein at a time an only so much fat intake can be used as fatty acids. excessive amounts in a short time period are converted to fuel, or glucose, which increase blood glucose levels and therefore also store in adipose tissue. so once it becomes glucose, it does not matter the source, it is glucose.
Click to expand...
Carbs are much MUCH MUCH easier to convert to glucose.
 
asooneyeonig said:
Please refer to my first post to answer your repeated question. If you have any other questions, please reread my first post. If that doesn't help then it is time to read up on some science. Try some critical thinking followed by anatomy and physiology.

Clearly I am being trolled and I keep falling for it. You have tried to get a response and succeeded. Good job.
Click to expand...

Stop giving bad "scientific" advice and attempting to bully people. You're wrong. Go far away.




Here's some actual science everybody: Invalid Link Removed
 
Olestra said:
Carbs are much MUCH MUCH easier to convert to glucose.
Click to expand...

Actually, unless you're ketogenic, the body essentially stores excess fat. So asooneyeonig has been posting essentially nonsense. Apparently the uni he learned his "basic anatomy" from was ill equipped for teaching nutrition and metabolism.
 
asooneyeonig said:
easier does not mean he others are not. try again.
Click to expand...

The others don't provide glycogen via conversion efficiently. If one eats an excess caloric diet with much of the surplus coming from protein, one really does not end up gaining much body fat if at all, due to how proteins metabolize (thus clearly proteins providing glycogen is more or less a non-starter).

Carbohydrates require conversion as well which leads to them having a far higher thermo cost compared to fat.

Fat either gets used or excess is stored. It's a poor source of energy unless one is ketogenic. If you're trying to use keto for bodybuilding though, you do tend to end up with flatter muscles, which is counterproductive to bodybuilding in the first place. Perhaps you're not a bodybuilder, I wouldn't know, but if that is the case, you're posting your ramblings on the wrong website.
 
Well it looks like asooneyeonig deleted his posts in which he quoted me. I really wonder what he could have possibly said. That whole "science" charade he tried to put on in this thread was one of the most asinine things I've ever seen, especially given the way he tried to bully people into believing.

Was hoping for the sake of humanity that he was a troll. I don't think he was.
 
kissdadookie said:
Fat either gets used or excess is stored. It's a poor source of energy unless one is ketogenic. If you're trying to use keto for bodybuilding though, you do tend to end up with flatter muscles, which is counterproductive to bodybuilding in the first place. Perhaps you're not a bodybuilder, I wouldn't know, but if that is the case, you're posting your ramblings on the wrong website.
Click to expand...

This is a great point. Keto/ cyclical keto diets / targeted keto diets are really great at times, and great in the longterm for certain people interested in overall fitness and health, but not a great sustained diet for bodybuilders.

I tend to feel great on a keto diet, and it really helps to control blood sugar throughout the day which results in sustained energy levels. I have noticed though that once becoming fairly lean and having decent size, the body utilizes carbs much better. I also perform much better with carbs during very intense activity. Can't really argue against practical experience.
 
kissdadookie said:
Actually, unless you're ketogenic, the body essentially stores excess fat. So asooneyeonig has been posting essentially nonsense. Apparently the uni he learned his "basic anatomy" from was ill equipped for teaching nutrition and metabolism.
Click to expand...

Why the reason we don´t just drop fat intake in a caloric deficit ? Test conversion from cholesterol ?
 
heybeavis1 said:
Why the reason we don´t just drop fat intake in a caloric deficit ? Test conversion from cholesterol ?
Click to expand...

This (testosterone), plus ketosis means the body switches from burning carbs for fuel to fat for fuel. Many people who are overweight also have blood sugar (insulin) issues, so a keto diet will help. But this process is not as efficient for high-intensity work, so high level athletes rarely are in ketosis, but instead focus more on nutrient timing.
 
heybeavis1 said:
Why the reason we don´t just drop fat intake in a caloric deficit ? Test conversion from cholesterol ?
Click to expand...

Some do but you can only drop fat by so much before it starts becoming an issue. As you have stated, dietary fats are needed for hormonal purposes. Not to mention that we need various types of fat for brain health, inflammation, etc.

Fat intake usually does not get dropped too much compared to carbs, because usually carbs makes up the bulk of ones diet thus the one with the most room to play around with.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top