Protein/Carb meal

[bluecheese]

I need some ideas for the protein part of my protein/carb meal. This meal needs to have little to no fat in it. Any suggestions?

[ColoWayno]

Egg Whites
Non Fat Greek Yogurt (find the yogurt thread)
You can also use really lean meats, 90% ground beef and chicken breasts I think will fit the bill. Drain off as much from the beef as you can.

[homerj742]

Chicken Breast/Rice
Chicken Breast/Lentils
Chicken Breast/Peas

[78704]

Skim milk.

[Doug Jones]

yams/sweet potatoes with chicken breast/drained hamburger. Add a little honey and cinnamon. It's delicious.

[Eanderson]

Thread-jack removed.

[MazdaMatt]

I think summarily dismissing the advice of the board's nutrition rep as "dumb" may not go over well.

[foosion]

It's especially not likely to go over well if all you do is insult him rather than offering any real evidence for you view.

[Squatson]

I guess I should cancel my consult with Johnny P.

[Eanderson]

Thread-jack removed.

[foosion]

So provide some evidence. Putting expert in quotes or suggesting people think about it is not evidence or even rational argument.

[Eanderson]

Thread-jack removed.

[bluecheese]

Jesus fuck, man. All I wanted was a simple answer to a simple question. If you don't like Schaeffer's methods, start your own thread. Stop stinking up my thread.

[Mark Rippetoe]

Eanderson, come on up to my board and post your questions.

[Eanderson]

Sorry for the thread-jack, bluecheese. It really doesn't matter what your reasons were for wanting a protein/carbs meal.

Besides the meat/grain products...
I agree with Skim milk.
Nonfat Cottage cheese is another good one.

[Eanderson]

Will do, Mark.

[bluecheese]

Not a problem brah. I'll have to disagree with cottage cheese because that shit is nasty. I ate chicken breast today. I'll research some more, and hope I get some more replies here.

[Sami]

An interesting observation, and generalisation, but meh:

The more a person is an 'expert' on diet/nutrition, the smaller and weaker they are. Chances are, if you have a degree in any of this stuff, you're probably weak and small. I mean, I'm into the science and evidence very much, then 'dumb' bodybuilders and 'meathead' powerlifters are fucking jacked and strong, and not always because of drugs.

I mean, I look at JP. Then I look at Lyle, Alan, and/or Robb... And it's not like JP started out huge already, most of us have seen his before and after pics.

[obligatory] Just sayin'.

[Eanderson]

Sami, yeah, I get that the experts usually are weaklings. It's just odd that for the first umpteen years of this board, all Rip did was point people to Lyle for nutrition advice. Then, after they fight, he defers to someone who basically espouses all the stuff that Lyle constantly works to debunk. Makes you wonder.

[Sami]

I try not to concern myself with it too much. If both guys get results, more power to them. JP is pretty fucking cool, he's getting shit done and making it happen. He's getting lots of people bigger and stronger, as well as himself. And he gives us regular cool training vids.

Lyle sure can write a pretty mean article, though.

[Alan Aragon]

I need some ideas for the protein part of my protein/carb meal. This meal needs to have little to no fat in it. Any suggestions?Just curious as to why you're trying to avoid fat.

[Dastardly]

Just curious as to why you're trying to avoid fat.
This is something Id like to know too.

I see it mentioned in different parts of the forum, its seems like were already all supposed to know. But people seem keen to separate fat/protein/carbs in different combinations.

[Squatson]

If you give your body more than one energy source, it will use one and save the other one for later.

[Dastardly]

Rip just posted an explanation on his Q&A. It kinda makes sense now.

Basically, there should be protein in every meal. But carbs should only be included in the morning or directly post workout as thats when carbs are needed to replenish glycogen stores, and also when higher insulin can be useful.

In the evening, metabolism etc, is more slowed down. We have no immediate need for energy, carbs would spike insulin which would encourage storage of this excess dietary energy as fat.


That is what I understood from it.

[Alan Aragon]

Rip just posted an explanation on his Q&A. It kinda makes sense now.

Basically, there should be protein in every meal. But carbs should only be included in the morning or directly post workout as thats when carbs are needed to replenish glycogen stores, and also when higher insulin can be useful.

In the evening, metabolism etc, is more slowed down. We have no immediate need for energy, carbs would spike insulin which would encourage storage of this excess dietary energy as fat.


That is what I understood from it.Insulin response/speed of glycogen resynthesis can be of some concern to endurance athletes with multiple glycogen-depleting events in a single day. But, which athletic population are we discussing here? As for the "no carbs in the evening" thing, are you meaning to imply that no one trains in the evening? And even in the case that a morning trainee has carbs in the evening, I'd have to ask you why that really matters as long as he does not exceed his carb gram target for the day.

[Squatson]

It seems to me that John has spent a lot of time figuring out what the body actually does with different types of food. His recommendations are based on this understanding. If you give your body something that it doesn't have a need for, it will likely get stored as fat. The GOMAD/70's big approach is very effective because it makes sure the body has everything that it needs to recover. The problem is that it is also gettng a lot of what it doesn't need.

John's advice is to know what your body is going to do with the foods you give it, and to make sure that you give it what it needs, when it needs it.

To me, this is very sound reasoning, and I don't think we need studies to back it up.

[foosion]

It seems to me that John has spent a lot of time figuring out what the body actually does with different types of food. His recommendations are based on this understanding. If you give your body something that it doesn't have a need for, it will likely get stored as fat.
That doesn't really address Alan's point: "And even in the case that a morning trainee has carbs in the evening, I'd have to ask you what that really matters as long as he does not exceed his carb gram target for the day."


To me, this is very sound reasoning, and I don't think we need studies to back it up.
Lot's of things seem to make sense. Science advances through more than people sitting around and saying "that sounds good."

[Squatson]

Body needs carbs after workout.

If workout is at night, body needs carbs at night.

No workout at night, no carbs at night.

Carbs at night + no workout = insulin spike -> fat storage

[angrymonkey]

It seems to me that John has spent a lot of time figuring out what the body actually does with different types of food. His recommendations are based on this understanding. If you give your body something that it doesn't have a need for, it will likely get stored as fat. The GOMAD/70's big approach is very effective because it makes sure the body has everything that it needs to recover. The problem is that it is also gettng a lot of what it doesn't need.

John's advice is to know what your body is going to do with the foods you give it, and to make sure that you give it what it needs, when it needs it.

To me, this is very sound reasoning, and I don't think we need studies to back it up.


This post is full of 1000x awesomeness. Who needs studies when you can use buzz words?

Closing out information is a good way to learn nothing.

Alan's points stand, regardless of 'feeding the need', 'entering the zone', 'peaking the burn' or whatever random ish you want to hope to believe.


Did you know if the moon is out carbs turn to muscle? Who needs studies when the results are awesome.

[foosion]

Did you know if the moon is out carbs turn to muscle? Who needs studies when the results are awesome.
To me, this is very sound reasoning, and I don't think we need studies to back it up.

[Alan Aragon]

Body needs carbs after workout.

If workout is at night, body needs carbs at night.

No workout at night, no carbs at night.

Carbs at night + no workout = insulin spike -> fat storageWhether the body *needs* carbs after a workout depends on the athletic goal of the individual, which I already mentioned in my last post. As for the part of your quote that I bolded, would you say that since you're discussing the sciency mechanics of human physiology, wouldn't it be be fair to ask what scientific research evidence you have to back that statement up -- or is this just something you heard someone say & are taking it on faith?

[Squatson]

I think that I said that I felt that the logic was sound. To me, that is what is most important.

[Alan Aragon]

I think that I said that I felt that the logic was sound. To me, that is what is most important.There's a difference between something "sounding logical" and something being correct. Big difference. All I asked was for you to back up your statement. If you want to back out of the discussion, that's fine, no big deal.

[Squatson]

I'm getting a consult later this month, I'll let you know how it goes.

[ColoWayno]

When you erase your thread jack posts I miss out on half the fun, dammit.

[Squatson]

Eh, they were jus makin fun of me mostly....you prolly got the jist.

[LarsM]

I like how I'm getting the results I want by doing something completely different than Johnny Pain is recommending. That is, intermittent fasting.

Compare:
- Bigger picture: set cals, set protein
- Each meal can consist of whatever degree of fat/carbs, in addition to the obligatory protein
- 2-4 meals a day, very hassle free

To:
- Separate carbs and fat
- Many small meals each day
- Don't eat carbs in the evening
- Whatever other overly complicated stuff Johnny recommends


Hem hem.

[Sami]

There's a difference between something "sounding logical" and something being correct. Big difference. All I asked was for you to back up your statement. If you want to back out of the discussion, that's fine, no big deal.

Alan, I'm interested in the data you're waiting to show us. Most people here, that know who you are, are not about to challenge you on this stuff. At least not for long.

But I'd like to see what your holding.

[Sami]

This post is full of 1000x awesomeness. Who needs studies when you can use buzz words?

Closing out information is a good way to learn nothing.

Alan's points stand, regardless of 'feeding the need', 'entering the zone', 'peaking the burn' or whatever random ish you want to hope to believe.


Did you know if the moon is out carbs turn to muscle? Who needs studies when the results are awesome.

Lyle?





Anyway, I sure as fuck hope we don't get trolls battling each other on 'both' forums again. I saw some of the stuff the 'SS.com' guys were doing over at Lyle's... it was embarrassing.

[Sami]

Just saw this Alan/Lyle Interview:

LM: 'What about the worst piece of nutritional advice you've seen recently?'

AA:'"Don't ever eat carbs in the final meal of the day while cutting."
My response: When you stop to think about it, allocating carbs immediately pre-bed would potentially help with muscle retention, regardless of caloric balance. Purposely omitting or avoiding carbs pre-bed is like telling someone to avoid carbs immediately before starting their 8-hour shift sitting at a desk.'

[angrymonkey]

Lyle?





Anyway, I sure as fuck hope we don't get trolls battling each other on 'both' forums again. I saw some of the stuff the 'SS.com' guys were doing over at Lyle's... it was embarrassing.


No. I have never seen Lyle not blatantly use his name. Its not like he has issues giving comments.

Twas my attempt at pleading with him to push a little further and open his mind to discussion. Better to have the mindset to stay open about things, you just never know what you may learn.

For example, here you have Alan who is honestly trying to help. Alan knows his shit very much so... its foolish to ignore the info he is trying to provide. Its not like if you hear the information you have to use it or agree. Shockingly, you can just add it to the pile and then decide if you still believe your previous opinion (thats okay too) or you are now unsure.

Its like before you decided to read anything Rip has wrote you just said, "Nah, I would rather stick with this Flex mag... it seems to make sense to me."

Think of all the wasted time possible. Its worth anyone's time to stay open.

[rdp]

Anyway, I sure as fuck hope we don't get trolls battling each other on 'both' forums again. I saw some of the stuff the 'SS.com' guys were doing over at Lyle's... it was embarrassing.
Sarcasm does not equal trolling.

[Sami]

No. I have never seen Lyle not blatantly use his name. Its not like he has issues giving comments.

Twas my attempt at pleading with him to push a little further and open his mind to discussion. Better to have the mindset to stay open about things, you just never know what you may learn.

For example, here you have Alan who is honestly trying to help. Alan knows his shit very much so... its foolish to ignore the info he is trying to provide. Its not like if you hear the information you have to use it or agree. Shockingly, you can just add it to the pile and then decide if you still believe your previous opinion (thats okay too) or you are now unsure.

Its like before you decided to read anything Rip has wrote you just said, "Nah, I would rather stick with this Flex mag... it seems to make sense to me."

Think of all the wasted time possible. Its worth anyone's time to stay open.

Agreed.

[foosion]

Here's a nice article by Alan concluding that so long as you are aware of your macronutrient targets, combining fats and carbs in a meal is fine.
http://avidityfitness.net/2008/09/24/carbs-and-fat-friends-after-all/

[MAD9692]

Just curious as to why you're trying to avoid fat.

Is this the same dude that said it was impossible for Zach's deadlift to be lighter than his squat, unless his squat was high? And that Zach's coach (Rip) was full of shit............no wait, my mistake - that was Lyle McDonald.
From what I understand Alan is a popular nutritional guy, who knows his stuff, and has some pretty big (important) clients. It's funny that he's spending his time on a Starting Strength message board calling out the resident nutrional expert. Why not just send JP a PM and ask him what he thinks?
Bush League.

[Alan Aragon]

Is this the same dude that said it was impossible for Zach's deadlift to be lighter than his squat, unless his squat was high? And that Zach's coach (Rip) was full of shit............no wait, my mistake - that was Lyle McDonald.
From what I understand Alan is a popular nutritional guy, who knows his stuff, and has some pretty big (important) clients. It's funny that he's spending his time on a Starting Strength message board calling out the resident nutrional expert. Why not just send JP a PM and ask him what he thinks?
Bush League.I'd have to disagree with you here, MAD9692. I'm not calling anyone out, I'm simply asked 'bluecheese' a question, then proceeded with Socratic dialogue to lead him through a certain type of learning process. Mission accomplished, he's now more aware of what he doesn't know. When I saw Mark ask Eanderson to take the line of questioning to his Q/A forum, that's where I attempted to engage in discussion with Mark and/or JP. If I pm'd JP directly, it would be imposing & potentially burdensome for him. The way I did it leaves it open for him to take the discussion or leave it.

[MAD9692]

I'd have to disagree with you here, MAD9692. I'm not calling anyone out, I'm simply asked 'bluecheese' a question, then proceeded with Socratic dialogue to lead him through a certain type of learning process.

Wow. I guess we are all really lucky this week. Here we have a trainer of the Los Angeles Lakers, Los Angeles Kings, and a contributing editor to Men's Health magazine here – taking time out of his busy schedule- to help bluecheese and the rest of us with our macro nutrient questions. Thanks Alan.

[bluecheese]

I'd have to disagree with you here, MAD9692. I'm not calling anyone out, I'm simply asked 'bluecheese' a question, then proceeded with Socratic dialogue to lead him through a certain type of learning process. Mission accomplished, he's now more aware of what he doesn't know. When I saw Mark ask Eanderson to take the line of questioning to his Q/A forum, that's where I attempted to engage in discussion with Mark and/or JP. If I pm'd JP directly, it would be imposing & potentially burdensome for him. The way I did it leaves it open for him to take the discussion or leave it.

Alan, I just checked this thread after a busy day. I'm not sure where you lead me "through a certain type of learning process." Or where I'm much more aware of anything because of your posts on this thread. But, by all means, enlighten me. I'm always open to more input.

And, when everyone stops bickering, any more ideas on a protein/carb meal?

[Sami]

Alan, I just checked this thread after a busy day. I'm not sure where you lead me "through a certain type of learning process." Or where I'm much more aware of anything because of your posts on this thread. But, by all means, enlighten me. I'm always open to more input.

And, when everyone stops bickering, any more ideas on a protein/carb meal?

Why not start with post 21 where Alan asked why you're avoiding fats.





MAD, you're kinda being a dick. Maybe I'm a dick for saying that.

Obviously, the most important thing is going to be overall daily macros, just as Alan, and pretty much everyone, would agree with. You can go about that in many ways; shifting most of those to the earlier part of the day is one way. And it could simply just be easier and more effective in real people in practical terms (compliance). I don't know. There are many nuances to this, and some people may find it easier to get their carbs whilst out and about in the day. Having a larger window of opportunity to eat the carbs, may be enough to tip people over, especially if they're not weighing and measuring (and who would want to weigh and measure?).

Similar to the claims that low-carb has a metabolic/thermodynamic advantage, or whatever. Maybe it does, probably not. But looking at the bigger picture, eating mostly fat and protein will fill you up and significantly decrease appetite for most people, so they have little choice but to lose weight.

With some of these things, everyone ends up being kinda right in the end anyway.


*gets off soapbox*

[Grbrs]

Alan

I know you were just asking Bluecheese a question, but if you have looked around on this forum (and i'm guessing you have) you will have seen the advice given by the resident nutritionalist JP. You disagree with his methods of separating carbs and fat, you have written an article on it, this is fine. But coming onto this board and asking people provocative questions as to why they would want to follow the advice of the RESIDENT nutritionalist is a bit weak.

I understand you disagree and that your methods are based on science etc, but as has been said different things work for different people. As i have seen from your website you have many success stories, as does JP.

And as for also trying to call out Rip.....

[Alan Aragon]

Alan

I know you were just asking Bluecheese a question, but if you have looked around on this forum (and i'm guessing you have) you will have seen the advice given by the resident nutritionalist JP. You disagree with his methods of separating carbs and fat, you have written an article on it, this is fine. But coming onto this board and asking people provocative questions as to why they would want to follow the advice of the RESIDENT nutritionalist is a bit weak.

I understand you disagree and that your methods are based on science etc, but as has been said different things work for different people. As i have seen from your website you have many success stories, as does JP.

And as for also trying to call out Rip.....I have not read the work of JP. The very 1st time I did was what Rip quoted in his Q/A forum. And that was AFTER I asked bluecheese the initial question. So you're saying that I needed to find out who the rule-maker of the nutrition domain was before getting into any discussions here? Are you serious, man?

[Grbrs]

I have not read the work of JP. The very 1st time I did was what Rip quoted in his Q/A forum. And that was AFTER I asked bluecheese the initial question. So you're saying that I needed to find out who the rule-maker of the nutrition domain was before getting into any discussions here? Are you serious, man?

Yes, i think as a professional in the field, a field with many many different opinions, that that would have been wise

[Alan Aragon]

Yes, i think as a professional in the field, a field with many many different opinions, that that would have been wiseOn the contrary, in a field with many different opinions, one of the best ways to move the field forward is open discussion. And with that, I'm done with discussing who "owns the rights" to discussing nutritional information here or anywhere, for that matter. It's a very silly, silly topic in my opinion. Anyone is welcome to challenging me on any of my views. And that's how I'll keep it, as long as I'm open to learning and/or teaching - which will be for a long time to come.

[Alan Aragon]

Alan, I just checked this thread after a busy day. I'm not sure where you lead me "through a certain type of learning process." Or where I'm much more aware of anything because of your posts on this thread. But, by all means, enlighten me. I'm always open to more input.

And, when everyone stops bickering, any more ideas on a protein/carb meal?I meant to say "Squatson" re: the learning process. Not you. As for your original question, I still would pose the question back about why you would be worried about avoiding fat. This has already been hashed out pretty well in this thread, and the important thing is to hit your macro targets by the end of the day, and don't worry if there's fat in your meals that have carbs. Scroll up a bit, Foosion posted a link to an article I wrote a little while back that goes into the explanation of why hitting your macros for the day is the ticket - not any magical carb-fat separation tactics. I encourage you to read it carefully, it will save you a lot of dietary nit-picking. Hope that helps.

[gordonrumble]

Alan, I generally enjoy the articles you've put up, even when I disagree. Open discussion is great for progress, though tact can be nice too.

[LarsM]

Alan, I generally enjoy the articles you've put up, even when I disagree. Open discussion is great for progress, though tact can be nice too.
You can't be serious. Alan has been nothing but tactful, which can't be said for some of the responses.

[Grbrs]

On the contrary, in a field with many different opinions, one of the best ways to move the field forward is open discussion. And with that, I'm done with discussing who "owns the rights" to discussing nutritional information here or anywhere, for that matter. It's a very silly, silly topic in my opinion. Anyone is welcome to challenging me on any of my views. And that's how I'll keep it, as long as I'm open to learning and/or teaching - which will be for a long time to come.

Agreed Alan and i think it is great you have come here to offer advice, but Bluecheese was asking about ways to implement something JP advocates, it is not then down to you to ask him why he would do that.

Maybe i am being a dick about this (probably), but if i was a trainer who had found scientifically that working sets of 4 reps was more productive to novice strength gains i would probably not come onto this forum and ask people in the programming section why they want to do sets of 5.

[MAD9692]

Maybe i am being a dick about this (probably), but if i was a trainer who had found scientifically that working sets of 4 reps was more productive to novice strength gains i would probably not come onto this forum and ask people in the programming section why they want to do sets of 5.

This would make you a dick.

[HamptonMike]

Anybody who refers to himself as "Alan because he is the mack daddy bomb, seriously" , can only be here for the benefit of the community.

:mad:

[LimieJosh]

I understand you disagree and that your methods are based on science etc, but as has been said different things work for different people. As i have seen from your website you have many success stories, as does JP..

His approach is based on an understanding of the scientific literature, and that is different. "Science" is what happens when people follow the scientific method, which is all based on careful observations, modficiations and reobservations. This is the basis of all the good strength training programs we know of, and it doesnt require an understanding of the physiology that explains the observations. Not to suggest Rip doesnt know his physiology, but what mattered was the observation of what worked, not why it worked. He has written about how he played around with the rep and set scheme and consistently came back to the 3X5 structure. That is the scientific method in practice and infinitely more scientific than a dude in a lab coat compiling what he knows about endocrinology, muscle physiology and bioenergetics to develop a program not grounded in basics of "does it work".

What should be gleamed of Rip is that as much as he wants you to "do the program", he finds sweating the small stuff a waste of time and only is interested in whether it works. Bottom line is important, and as John's approaches were developed in the trenches with observations of what works and what doesnt, the only fair debate should be about the observations and experiences of others about the bottom line. Essentially, it is not right to question this bottom line with information from the scientific literature theorizing why it shouldn't work, because the appraoches, for the most part, seem to work. This is the basis for his "no studies here" approach. However, at times John's approach is only "no studies" in areas where it might argue against his approaches. As soon as he starts giving physiological rationales for why things work, as is the case with the insulins and the macro separations, then it should be fair game to discuss the theoretical underpinnings of the approach. If John doesnt want to do that on his board, then fair enough, but it is absolutely appropriate for others to do so on other parts of this forum.

Ultimately, John is big enough to answer for himself without having to have others jump to his defense over whether discussions on his approach is appropriate. I somehow cant see him being as put out by this discussion as some on here who have responded to Alan.

[HamptonMike]

I would like know how alan found this forum. Did he feel there was a flock being led astray and needed saving? It seems odd that the first thing he does on a strength forum is to start discussing nutrition advice.

[rdp]

We don't really know how careful John was in observation of what works. We certainly don't have any studies as to the efficacy of this program, or of Alan's for that matter.

In Rip's case, Rip has published books and his methods have been tried and debated by a large number of people. We gain some confidence in his methods from this.

Reading the scientific literature can only help shape a method, especially if the literature is read critically. It's possible there has been a good study done on something relevant, which should help advance the cause.

IME, refusing to discuss issues (or to provide data) is usually not a good sign. Attacking people's motivations (or other ad hominems) rather than their ideas is another bad sign.

http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/unscientific.png

[rdp]

I would like know how alan found this forum. Did he feel there was a flock being led astray and needed saving?
Who gives a fuck how he found this forum? How does that possibly affect the accuracy of what he posted?


It seems odd that the first thing he does on a strength forum is to start discussing nutrition advice.
This is a strength training forum with a section on Nutrion and another section titled "Food & Drink." We happen to be posting in the latter. Seems an appropriate place to discuss nutrition advise.

There is a relation between nutrition and strength training.

[Sami]

Guys, all you need to know about nutrition by EliteFTS. (as seen on Alan Aragon's blog)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7YmQyoUW3y0

[ColoWayno]

mmmmm, waffles.

[Sami]

mmmm... sugar free, fat free fish oil syrup....

[ColoWayno]

You are interrupting my fantasy.

[HamptonMike]

You're right, rdp. I'm so glad that he brings his degrees with top honors to the forum. His points are razor sharp and we are lucky to have someone of his caliber and pedigree on staff so to speak. ;)

[rdp]

Rip thought his point was "devastating." You say "razor sharp." Glad to see we all agree.

[tnumrych]

Alan has now posted a blog (http://www.alanaragonblog.com/2010/06/15/why-nutritional-dogma-dies-hard/) documenting his recent visit to our neck of the woods. Up until now I honestly believed his intent was innocuous and genuine. But to me this now suspiciously reeks of one bro defending his bro (http://www.alanaragonblog.com/2010/06/05/r-e-s-p-e-c-t/) or Lyle's meddling. Fucking lame.

[Rostam16]

u guys dont get it what does evidence based approach matter if science say that u dont have to eat 6 meals a day & science dont say u will get fat if u eat carbs n fat together?

it works but science says something else? or u aren't look at the probelm in the right way from step one?

maybe u need to think science is description of basic process, not a how-to guide lol

stay away from carbs n fat may work cause it gets u to do things that work, maybe not so improtant on its own

[imnotbncre8ive]

u guys dont get it what does evidence based approach matter if science say that u dont have to eat 6 meals a day & science dont say u will get fat if u eat carbs n fat together?

it works but science says something else? or u aren't look at the probelm in the right way from step one?

maybe u need to think science is description of basic process, not a how-to guide lol

stay away from carbs n fat may work cause it gets u to do things that work, maybe not so improtant on its own

lol u still fail-trolling?

[Sami]

http://survivingliverpool.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/gtfo_im_doing_science.jpg

[HamptonMike]

Alan has now posted a blog (http://www.alanaragonblog.com/2010/06/15/why-nutritional-dogma-dies-hard/) documenting his recent visit to our neck of the woods. Up until now I honestly believed his intent was innocuous and genuine. But to me this now suspiciously reeks of one bro defending his bro (http://www.alanaragonblog.com/2010/06/05/r-e-s-p-e-c-t/) or Lyle's meddling. Fucking lame.

and rdp wondered why i was questioning the motivation of such an expert on the board.:eek:

[Sami]

Hey, man's gotta blog.

[HamptonMike]

Sami

It's, Bro's gotta blog.

get it right

[Alan Aragon]

and rdp wondered why i was questioning the motivation of such an expert on the board.:eek:Hey Mike,

Ever thought of the possibility that I got the blog post idea as a result of comments like yours? I think I need to thank YOU for the motivation. Thanks Bro. :)

[nisora33]

Yesterday, I included fat w/my proteins and carbs postworkout and all my muscles (what few I have) started to shrink like a slug being salted. Shit sux bro. Only pwo protein and carbs for me from now on.

[rdp]

Human knowlege advances by open discussion of issues. It's absolutely vital. I've participated in internet discussions with a wide variety of people, including barely literate bodybuilders and nationally known economics professors. I've never heard anyone resist the notion that calm discussion and debate is useful, although obviously there are problems with discussing things with people who have little understanding or intelligence.

That's what has really disturbed me about John's forum: "I am not into arguing with people on the internet." The more I think about this the more fundamentally misguided it seems to me. It's just wrong. You don't learn or grow without discussion and argument, and the internet is an excellent medium for discussion and argument.

Calm discussion of issues is essential, but that's not what Alan's foes are doing. They're just throwing shit against the wall and hoping to distract everyone from substance.

[Campbell]

I totally agree. Reasonable discussion should be something every expert is prepared to do. How else are they going to continue to learn.

Unless they believe they already know everything of course.

I dont understand why everyone gets so pissy here when people question something John says. He is not prepared to show any evidence that his ideas are scientifically proven or or discuss studies that show the opposite position is true and many of his views are very different to those of other experts.

Edit: in fact, until the disagreement between Lyle and Rip, Lyle was the goto guy for nutrition and his views are VERY different than John.

[LimieJosh]

He is not prepared to show any evidence that his ideas are scientifically proven

Because they are not. However, to repeat my point, there is no scientific evidence that SS > Cross Fit at improving strength, but through a cummulative wealth of experience we all accept that to be the case.

I understand fully why John would not want threads on his forum, about his practical experiences, to get sidetracked by arm chair theorists with (usually) minimal understanding of what they have read and now regurgitate arguing why his "proven" techniques should not work. However, if he is going to comment about the reason certain practices should be followed (the macro separation and insulin) then he should be prepared to allow scientific theory into the discussion at that point.

[MAD9692]

Alan has now posted a blog (http://www.alanaragonblog.com/2010/06/15/why-nutritional-dogma-dies-hard/) documenting his recent visit to our neck of the woods. Up until now I honestly believed his intent was innocuous and genuine. But to me this now suspiciously reeks of one bro defending his bro (http://www.alanaragonblog.com/2010/06/05/r-e-s-p-e-c-t/) or Lyle's meddling. Fucking lame.

And I was being called a dick for calling this out?

[HamptonMike]

Easy MAD, you might give aragon more motivation.

[tnumrych]

And I was being called a dick for calling this out?

Are you referring to me, because I did not call you a dick at any point. I didn't touch this thread until Alan's blog entry. And I won't say the name of the only person deserving to be called a dick on this forum.

[MAD9692]

Are you referring to me, because I did not call you a dick at any point.

No.
Sami called me a dick for questioning Alan's intentions....and now my feelings are hurt. Thanks Sami.

Hey, do you guys remeber when Lyle made a public ass out of himself by questioning Rip's coaching ability. And how he acted like he knew more about lifting and coaching than Rip. That was funny.

[Sami]

Sorry bruh.

[Raleighwood]

It is mind blowing how far some of you have your heads up Rip's and JP's asses. Why not pull your head out and check the terrain every once in awhile to make sure you are being taken along the right path.

I am a HUGE fan of Rip and like to read JP's nutritional guidance. However, I know from experience that dogmatic kool-aid drinking is not the most intelligent way to go about life.

Aragon has been nothing but cordial, tactful and inquisitive. Yet, some of you on here act like little children, throwing a hissy-fit after someone in the sandbox said their favorite super-hero sucks.

Controversy and differences in opinion forge better understanding and new discovery. Dogmatically following a guru and dismissing any other counter information is a path to ignorance and stupidity.

[Mr.City]

Fruit is also a good source of carbs in a protein/carb meal.

[MAD9692]

Dogmatically following a guru and dismissing any other counter information is a path to ignorance and stupidity.
This is true, but you missed the point moron. It’s not about dickriding; it’s about calling out someone’s shitty intentions masked under a false pretense of “just trying to help”. If you couldn’t sniff this out from the beginning of the post then you’re an idiot. There’s a reason you don’t see any of the best strength coaches jumping onto each other’s forums disagreeing with what the other trainer thinks is correct.

Controversy and differences in opinion forge better understanding and new discovery
Better understanding? New discovery? You make me laugh, you tool. We are talking about carbs right?

Hey, do you guy’s remember when Lyle made a public ass out of himself by questioning Rip's ability to teach a squat. That was funny.

[Rostam16]

you guys really r lacking context in this whole discussion. it's not about science or discussion of studies but where the information comes from and how you evaluate the utility of the claims being made

correlation is not causation and advocating something 'because i said so' is just stupid. no u can't look to sicence for all the answers but thats not what this is about. studies are the starting point, not the final answer but thats not the issue here

this isn't about science per se but rather the abandonment of rational discussion in favor of largely unsupported anecdotes, i.e. 'i seen this work and i'm the guru so listen to me and oh you want to know how i arrived at this conclusion? fuck off'

u aren't using parsimony to figure out what is really the eseential axiom of nutrition i.e. do i really need to eat 6+ meals and separate carbs and fat, or by doing that are you just eating less + getting the right nutrients?

the broscience and stupidity is when u just repeat those axioms w/o scrutiny and w/o crticial thought. u want ur information to be testable and repeatable, otherwise its voodoo

if u cna get results from more flexable eating like only 3 meals a day or eating proteen n carbs n fats at the same meal, then teh above axioms are wrong and unnecessarily complicated

but teh broscience says 'fuk u do what i say'

[bluecheese]

Alan has now posted a blog (http://www.alanaragonblog.com/2010/06/15/why-nutritional-dogma-dies-hard/) documenting his recent visit to our neck of the woods. Up until now I honestly believed his intent was innocuous and genuine. But to me this now suspiciously reeks of one bro defending his bro (http://www.alanaragonblog.com/2010/06/05/r-e-s-p-e-c-t/) or Lyle's meddling. Fucking lame.

Really? He felt the need to write a whole blog post regarding, what has become, a highly amusing thread? I just wanted some ideas on meal planning. I don't really care what other's opinions are concerning why I would plan my meals that way. What is fucking hilarious is that not once did I mention that I recieved any nutritional advice from John Sheaffer. I guess its true, what happens when you assume. I never even heard of this Aragon guy until he popped up in this thread. I don't mind him dispensing advice in this thread; I am always open to hearing new ideas (and to answer your question Alan, I am not avoiding fats entirely, but I am partitioning my macros a certain way throughout the day.) But, his blog post makes me wonder about his motives in coming here in the first place. And his use of the word "bro" is kind of grating. Down here we prefer the word "brah."

[Alan Aragon]

Really? He felt the need to write a whole blog post regarding, what has become, a highly amusing thread? I just wanted some ideas on meal planning. I don't really care what other's opinions are concerning why I would plan my meals that way. What is fucking hilarious is that not once did I mention that I recieved any nutritional advice from John Sheaffer. I guess its true, what happens when you assume. I never even heard of this Aragon guy until he popped up in this thread. I don't mind him dispensing advice in this thread; I am always open to hearing new ideas (and to answer your question Alan, I am not avoiding fats entirely, but I am partitioning my macros a certain way throughout the day.) But, his blog post makes me wonder about his motives in coming here in the first place. And his use of the word "bro" is kind of grating. Down here we prefer the word "brah."Fair enough brah ;)

First let's get something straight. For anyone questioning my motives for being here, they are probably the same as anyone else's here: I'm taking a break from work, & I actually enjoy posting at forums like this. How hard is that to understand? As for Rip & Lyle's falling-out, that's their own damn business & no one else's, IMO. I haven't discussed a word of it with Lyle, and as far as I'm concerned that's long done with. But apparently, some of you enjoy dragging it out by giggling & gossiping over it. My suggestion: get the fuck over it, ladies.

Also, rest assured that I wouldn't have even gotten the idea to blog about this place until some of you turned this simple discussion into a matter of (supposedly) violating the house rules. And by the way, I stand by every word in my blog post, so if anyone wants to challenge me on any of it, be my guest.

Back to topic. Bluecheese -- since I know now that you're not trying to follow anyone's program in particular, I'd simply reiterate my previous response about hitting your fat target for the day & don't worry about which points in the day it falls with respect to your protein & carb intake. If, as you say, you're "partitioning the macros a certain way throughout the day", I'm just making sure that it's not for the typical folklore-based reasons that compel folks to separate their macros.

[Raleighwood]

This is true, but you missed the point moron. It’s not about dickriding; it’s about calling out someone’s shitty intentions masked under a false pretense of “just trying to help”. If you couldn’t sniff this out from the beginning of the post then you’re an idiot. There’s a reason you don’t see any of the best strength coaches jumping onto each other’s forums disagreeing with what the other trainer thinks is correct.

Better understanding? New discovery? You make me laugh, you tool. We are talking about carbs right?


You seem to be the master of ad hominems and straw men. Keep up the good work. What other logical fallacies can you respond with?

It seems you would prefer a forum that just "dick rides" the gurus, rather than questioning ideas and stirring the pot.

What's wrong with questioning an idea; especially when that idea is flawed by evidence?

[bluecheese]

Fair enough brah ;)

First let's get something straight. For anyone questioning my motives for being here, they are probably the same as anyone else's here: I'm taking a break from work, & I actually enjoy posting at forums like this. How hard is that to understand? As for Rip & Lyle's falling-out, that's their own damn business & no one else's, IMO. I haven't discussed a word of it with Lyle, and as far as I'm concerned that's long done with. But apparently, some of you enjoy dragging it out by giggling & gossiping over it. My suggestion: get the fuck over it, ladies.

Also, rest assured that I wouldn't have even gotten the idea to blog about this place until some of you turned this simple discussion into a matter of (supposedly) violating the house rules. And by the way, I stand by every word in my blog post, so if anyone wants to challenge me on any of it, be my guest.

Back to topic. Bluecheese -- since I know now that you're not trying to follow anyone's program in particular, I'd simply reiterate my previous response about hitting your fat target for the day & don't worry about which points in the day it falls with respect to your protein & carb intake. If, as you say, you're "partitioning the macros a certain way throughout the day", I'm just making sure that it's not for the typical folklore-based reasons that compel folks to separate their macros.

Yeah, I didn't know who Lyle was until I read about it on these boards. I really don't care either way. I don't see a problem with questioning the advice given by the experts on this board, and I'm not really sure how things went downhill so quickly in this thread.

And, to be fair, I didn't say that I'm not following anyones program, and I didn't say that I wasn't following John's program. Aloofness is a gift. Anyway, since you're being so forthcoming with your advice, what are you recommendations for fat/carb/protein targets? Just in general.

[Alan Aragon]

Yeah, I didn't know who Lyle was until I read about it on these boards. I really don't care either way. I don't see a problem with questioning the advice given by the experts on this board, and I'm not really sure how things went downhill so quickly in this thread.

And, to be fair, I didn't say that I'm not following anyones program, and I didn't say that I wasn't following John's program. Aloofness is a gift. Anyway, since you're being so forthcoming with your advice, what are you recommendations for fat/carb/protein targets? Just in general.
This differs with the individual situation. What's your goal for the diet?

[bluecheese]

This differs with the individual situation. What's your goal for the diet?

Look good naked. But really, just lose some of the fat around the mid section.

[Alan Aragon]

Look good naked. But really, just lose some of the fat around the mid section.Keep protein relatively high since you'll be at a caloric deficit, and this tends to preserve LBM better than lowballing it, plus your appetite will be better controlled & you'll get a little bit more thermic magic. Anywhere in the range of 1-1.5g/lb target bodyweight (TBW is just a surrogate measure of LBM plus a slight surplus) should suffice. Set fat at anywhere from 0.4-0.5g/lb TBW, fill in the rest with carbs according to your total caloric intake target. Depending on just how much weight/fat you need to lose is how you should set your expectations for rate of loss. Moderately overweight? 1-2 lbs/week is generally a good comfy target, depending on how militant you want to be. Only a little weight to lose? Well, then the scale will tend to deceive you. Cut that target in half. Better yet, to avoid complicating things or kidding yourself, go mainly be monthly or bi-monthly pics rather than just the scale, tape or [insert favorite BF measuring device here]. With that said, it really can be as simple as keeping your protein up & eating less overall. I like simplicity; don't get too wrapped up in the minutia. Combine that with a solid training program, and you will soon walk on water & keep the girls wet.

[bluecheese]

I already knock the ladies dead, but that's mainly because of my elephantine genitals.

Another question, where should my fats be coming from? Just from the meats that I eat, or should I be adding olive oil and other fats?

[gordonrumble]

Keep protein relatively high since you'll be at a caloric deficit, and this tends to preserve LBM better than lowballing it, plus your appetite will be better controlled & you'll get a little bit more thermic magic. Anywhere in the range of 1-1.5g/lb target bodyweight (TBW is just a surrogate measure of LBM plus a slight surplus) should suffice. Set fat at anywhere from 0.4-0.5g/lb TBW, fill in the rest with carbs according to your total caloric intake target. Depending on just how much weight/fat you need to lose is how you should set your expectations for rate of loss. Moderately overweight? 1-2 lbs/week is generally a good comfy target, depending on how militant you want to be. Only a little weight to lose? Well, then the scale will tend to deceive you. Cut that target in half. Better yet, to avoid complicating things or kidding yourself, go mainly be monthly or bi-monthly pics rather than just the scale, tape or [insert favorite BF measuring device here]. With that said, it really can be as simple as keeping your protein up & eating less overall. I like simplicity; don't get too wrapped up in the minutia. Combine that with a solid training program, and you will soon walk on water & keep the girls wet.

Those are solid basics I can agree with.

I like the idea of having more than one person who's dealt with clients on a nutrition basis offering what's worked for them. Real-world results to me are the important factor here. I don't agree with Johnny Pain's nutritional basis at all from what I've read, but if his clients have achieved their training and body composition results then it works. I read Alan's stuff, and hope he hangs around here as his input would be great to have.

[imnotbncre8ive]

you guys really r lacking context in this whole discussion. it's not about science or discussion of studies but where the information comes from and how you evaluate the utility of the claims being made

correlation is not causation and advocating something 'because i said so' is just stupid. no u can't look to sicence for all the answers but thats not what this is about. studies are the starting point, not the final answer but thats not the issue here

this isn't about science per se but rather the abandonment of rational discussion in favor of largely unsupported anecdotes, i.e. 'i seen this work and i'm the guru so listen to me and oh you want to know how i arrived at this conclusion? fuck off'

u aren't using parsimony to figure out what is really the eseential axiom of nutrition i.e. do i really need to eat 6+ meals and separate carbs and fat, or by doing that are you just eating less + getting the right nutrients?

the broscience and stupidity is when u just repeat those axioms w/o scrutiny and w/o crticial thought. u want ur information to be testable and repeatable, otherwise its voodoo

if u cna get results from more flexable eating like only 3 meals a day or eating proteen n carbs n fats at the same meal, then teh above axioms are wrong and unnecessarily complicated

but teh broscience says 'fuk u do what i say'

Thank you for regurgitating the contents of this thread in such a convoluted manner. I disagree with your consistent neglect of punctuation and spelling. Thus, I regret to inform you that I will not be subscribing to your newsletter.

[Ian Kovtunovich]

Thank you for regurgitating the contents of this thread in such a convoluted manner. I disagree with your consistent neglect of punctuation and spelling. Thus, I regret to inform you that I will not be subscribing to your newsletter.

Nicely done.

I, however, was amused and delighted at the use of the "word" "u" in the same sentence as the word "parsimony," the latter of which I had to look up.

This thread is kind of like opening a door in a tall building while looking for a vending machine or something, only to discover that the door just exits right out the building, and then falling through the air until you collide with the roof of a library, and proceeding to fall, Wile E. Coyote-style through each of the floors, getting wildly unrelated but nonetheless fascinating fragments of information jammed into your skull until you hit the basement, and then you drag your battered body out of the smoldering, perfectly you-shaped hole in the concrete, and wander back out into the daylight, blinking in confusion and slightly the worse for wear, but nonetheless slightly better off than when you walked out that door in the first place.

Weird.

[Chewie_jrc]

Who gives a fuck?

Seriously, if John doesn't want to disect studies, big deal. Go post them in "Ends & Pieces" and we can all circle-jerk to Pudmed links.

This Aragorn guy has a different method. Great. Johnny Pain has a way that works for his clients. Cool.