Workout nutrition

[NightFaLL]

I was reading the free sample issue of Alan Aragon's newsletter (which I'd love to subscribe to) which reviews several exercise nutrition studies relating to peri exercise nutrition. He makes the point that one needs amino acids during and after workout to promote protein syntheses, but that one only needs a modest amount of carbs to prevent catabolysis. Larger amounts of carbs are needed to restore glycogen stores quickly only if you are planning on more exercise within the next day or so. Otherwise ordinary eating will restore glycogen adequately.

I do a protein shake pre-workout only if I haven't eaten for a few hours. I do a scoop of whey and a couple of teaspoons of table sugar (since that's all I have). I usually have supper within an hour of the workout. Otherwise, I try to grab some sort of snack, preferably high-prot, but that's not always around. Sometimes snag some of the partly-prepared supper!

His AARR newsletter is amazing. He's also a REALLY nice guy. I had to cancel my membership because I didn't want to forget about it and it take out another $10 (I'm a poor college kid).

When I did that, it automatically cancelled my membership, even though I had just paid 3 days prior to that for the month!

So, I emailed him and he said it was np and he set me up a temporary account to lat the remaining 27 days of my subscription.

As soon as I get my first paycheck or my student aid (I'm working for the school in the fall) I'm going to be subscribing to it - some of it is information I already knew/assumed, but it's good reading the actual RESEARCH behind it and layman's terms.

I'd recommend anyone who doesn't have a subscription go pay for one, $10/mo and you get ALL the back issues. There's something like 40 issues up there and they're all 5-10 pages long reviewing various studies and health issues in the press.

[ApolytonGP]

I am a subscriber too. I actually feel guilty for not reading it more. I think I will download and print all the issues and read them at leisure. Have a hard time reading on the puter.

I'll stay subscirbed...I don't want the dude to think I paid for a month and read 3 years worth.

But right now, I'm subscribed and not reading.

maybe I should just buy the dude's book? I'm leary of Lyle's books, based on his articles being kinda meandering and lacking reference notes...and overemphasizing minutia ad the expense of fundamnetals. But Alan gives a better impression...

[NightFaLL]

His book, girth control, has received a ton of great reviews - although I haven't read it.. I currently don't have the money to buy it, either.

[TimD]

Poly. Lyle can be a bit meandering and overcomplicated, but he did a lot of work with Duchaine on "Body Opus", which was a tweak on CKD's, and he is knowledgeable
Tim

[ApolytonGP]

Lyle has a lot of good info/insights. He's a touchy dude and doesn't play 100% fair...but he is very high signal to noise. I send people to look at his articles all the time.

I don't know so much about Duchaine in terms of his influence on sports science or on the network of bloggers I read. I found the description of how he cost his girlfriend her foot...chilling. I just keep thinking about some sweet, pretty girl who doesn't have a foot now.

http://www.amazon.com/Steroid-Nation-An ... 1933060379

[Jungledoc]

I agree about Lyle's writing. It's full of good info, but sometimes I get impatient for him to get to the point, and sometimes disappointed that he never really gets there, or at least that the real point is lost in the minutia. Aaragon, on the other hand, I find concise and clear. His interpretations and analysis seem clear and make sense to me. I'd subscribe to his newsletter, but $10 is a lot more now than it was when I was in private practice .

Poly, what's that about. The link was just for book sales, and I'm not going to buy it.

[ApolytonGP]

Page 165. He took his gf to Mexico to get calf implants for BB and the operation went wrong. She almost died and lost her foot.

[ApolytonGP]

The passage is on the web (the amputation comes at the end of the chapter):

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/st ... ael/071125

[nygmen]

Power belly is not the path to "freaky ripped".

You are not going to be able to touch BB'er type leanness without appreciable muscle mass or looking like a marathon runner.

Taking the "slow road" to muscle gain isn't wise for anyone, outside of those with amazing genetics or those using gear. It takes years to develop the density to look good dieted down to sub 10%. (If you have bones showing at that BF then you don't look good, IMO.) So taking 10 years to gain the muscle, and then another decade to get the density... Next thing you know someone is 45 before they look like they want to.

Fat gain is a means to an end.

Bulking works. Maybe not for you, but you can't say it doesn't just because it doesn't line up with your notion of how things work.

[ApolytonGP]

If someone says that he wants to get huge and doesn't care about weight, fine. Or if he says he is willing to try a bulk and cut cycle, fine. But when he's already said his goal is to get "freaky ripped" to tell him to add fat? That's like someone coming in here and saying that his goal is upper body strength for gymnastics and you advise him to bulk up his legs. Every problem is a nail, when all you have is a hammer.

Also Alan Aragon has written a lot about culking and about the idea that people can get immediate appearance benefits from dieting. That the double chin, GFH, look good twice a year contest cycle is not well suited to the average person lifting for appearance.

[nygmen]

But when he's already said his goal is to get "freaky ripped" to tell him to add fat? That's like someone coming in here and saying that his goal is upper body strength for gymnastics and you advise him to bulk up his legs. Every problem is a nail, when all you have is a hammer.

Also Alan Aragon has written a lot about culking and about the idea that people can get immediate appearance benefits from dieting. That the double chin, GFH, look good twice a year contest cycle is not well suited to the average person lifting for appearance.

Freaky ripped =/= average person lifting for appearance.

No one is talking about bulking and cutting in a one year cycle, until they are already at an advanced stage. Most people would be better served gaining for a long period of time, years, holding that weight for another 6 months or so, and then cutting down under 10%. If their goal is "freaky ripped".

Again, you can not get to the type of bodyfat levels implied with "freaky ripped" without muscle mass. If you don't have the muscle to begin with, you will look anorexic. If you are 140lbs with 14 inch arms and ripped, I hope you are 5'0", otherwise no one will even know you lift. You seem to be forgetting the most important part here, muscle.

This hobby takes time. So yes, someone looking to get ripped needs to worry about building muscle to see once they are ripped, first. So yes, someone needs to put on some fat, in order to gain the muscle, before they worry about cutting.

If someone starts out lifting obese, things are different to a degree, but they STILL need to worry about having muscle first.

The problem is, you are trying to nail the shingles onto the rafters. You haven't even put any plywood down yet. Your roof is going to cave in.

And BTW, stronger legs = ability to have a stronger upper body. Source = time under the bar.

Also, no one, ever, is condoning going out and eating yourself into a disgusting mess. You can bulk without looking like you are implying everyone must look to get big.

[ApolytonGP]

I still maintain that you are hammering screws when people asked for screwing. But, if you do my taxes for free, I will say you are right.

P.s. I'm lifting legs tonight.