Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Gossip & Opinions => Topic started by: The True Adonis on March 06, 2007, 09:50:07 AM
-
Can someone provide ANY photographical evidence of a physique "going flat" or "spilling over" due to glycogen.
I would like to see a before and and an after. I think neither exist and it is not logical at all to think that they do exist.
Due to the body's ability to hold no more than around 2,000 kcal of glycogen, marathon runners commonly experience a phenomenon referred to as "hitting the wall" around the 20 mile (32 km) point of a marathon. (Approximately 100 kcal are utilized per mile, depending on the size of the runner and the race course.) When experiencing glycogen debt, runners often experience fatigue.
Only the glycogen stored in the liver can be made accessible to other organs, and these hepatocytes have the highest concentration of it - up to 8% of the fresh weight in well fed state, or 100–120 g in an adult. In the muscles, glycogen is found in a much lower concentration (1% of the muscle mass), but the total amount exceeds that in liver. Small amounts of glycogen are found in the kidneys, and even smaller amounts in certain glial cells in the brain and white blood cells.
-
Only 1 PERCENT of muscle is made up of glycogen.
So therefore if your Glycogen levels are Full, around 2000 calories THIS IS NOT ENOUGH TO PRODUCE ANY DIFFERENCE!
-
adam, I'm gonna ask you an honest question: Do you believe that there is no change in anyone's individual body chemestry? By this do you mean that my body chemestry is exactly like that of...well, say...you?
-
This is all a myth a lot of you have been following and giving credence too for a VERY, VERY long time.
-
adam, I'm gonna ask you an honest question: Do you believe that there is no change in anyone's individual body chemestry? By this do you mean that my body chemestry is exactly like that of...well, say...you?
Yours is not far off at all. Humans do not vary much. We are just like any other animal in the animal kingdom. Little Variance, save for some slight mutations in DNA.
-
Blah blah blah, blah blah blah blah blah.
Blah blah. Blah blahblah blah blah.
-
adonis.... why dont you just go and jump off a cliff or something?
-
Can someone provide ANY photographical evidence of a physique "going flat" or "spilling over" due to glycogen.
I would like to see a before and and an after. I think neither exist and it is not logical at all to think that they do exist.
Due to the body's ability to hold no more than around 2,000 kcal of glycogen, marathon runners commonly experience a phenomenon referred to as "hitting the wall" around the 20 mile (32 km) point of a marathon. (Approximately 100 kcal are utilized per mile, depending on the size of the runner and the race course.) When experiencing glycogen debt, runners often experience fatigue.
Only the glycogen stored in the liver can be made accessible to other organs, and these hepatocytes have the highest concentration of it - up to 8% of the fresh weight in well fed state, or 100–120 g in an adult. In the muscles, glycogen is found in a much lower concentration (1% of the muscle mass), but the total amount exceeds that in liver. Small amounts of glycogen are found in the kidneys, and even smaller amounts in certain glial cells in the brain and white blood cells.
I certainly hope you're not correlating marathon running to bodybuilding!
-
Can someone provide ANY photographical evidence of a physique "going flat" or "spilling over" due to glycogen.
I would like to see a before and and an after. I think neither exist and it is not logical at all to think that they do exist.
Due to the body's ability to hold no more than around 2,000 kcal of glycogen, marathon runners commonly experience a phenomenon referred to as "hitting the wall" around the 20 mile (32 km) point of a marathon. (Approximately 100 kcal are utilized per mile, depending on the size of the runner and the race course.) When experiencing glycogen debt, runners often experience fatigue.
Only the glycogen stored in the liver can be made accessible to other organs, and these hepatocytes have the highest concentration of it - up to 8% of the fresh weight in well fed state, or 100–120 g in an adult. In the muscles, glycogen is found in a much lower concentration (1% of the muscle mass), but the total amount exceeds that in liver. Small amounts of glycogen are found in the kidneys, and even smaller amounts in certain glial cells in the brain and white blood cells.
from a weight cutting perspective, when you drop a gram of carbs you drop 3(or 4?) of water
i think this would make the lions hsare of the visible difference
-
Organisms survive and thrive through efficiency. The more adept at survival, the smaller the variance. The longer timeline genus of organism exists in a given enviroment, the smaller the variance.
-
spilling over has more to due with osmotic pull rather than repleting glycogen. And as you know TA, for every one gram of glycogen stored there are 3 grams of water stored too... So if you go from no glycogen or relatively low glycogen to having some - you will also get a change in the appearance of the muscle due to the effects of water shifts...
-
I certainly hope you're not correlating marathon running to bodybuilding!
Of course not.
Are you not intelligent enough to realize that this was an example of the amount of glycogen storage?
Marathon runners represent the PEAK of gylcogen storage. Due to their activity, they would have the ability to store the MOST GLYCOGEN.
A bodybuilder would be less. Not much less, but it would be even less.
-
Organisms survive and thrive through efficiency. The more adept at survival, the smaller the variance. The longer timeline genus of organism exists in a given enviroment, the smaller the variance.
Your not making sense!
-
from a weight cutting perspective, when you drop a gram of carbs you drop 3(or 4?) of water
i think this would make the lions hsare of the visible difference
That doesn`t make any sense if you are at a low, low bodyfat.
-
Your not making sense!
That is because you are an idiot creationist who rejects science.
-
Of course not.
Are you not intelligent enough to realize that this was an example of the amount of glycogen storage?
Marathon runners represent the PEAK of gylcogen storage. Due to their activity, they would have the ability to store the MOST GLYCOGEN.
A bodybuilder would be less. Not much less, but it would be even less.
Then whats the point of this thread?
-
That doesn`t make any sense if you are at a low, low bodyfat.
So there's no water in muscles then?
Ha.
-
spilling over has more to due with osmotic pull rather than repleting glycogen. And as you know TA, for every one gram of glycogen stored there are 3 grams of water stored too... So if you go from no glycogen or relatively low glycogen to having some - you will also get a change in the appearance of the muscle due to the effects of water shifts...
20 calories of Glycogen are stored in the muscles of your body when your Glycogen stores are full.
So that would equate to only 5 grams.
read that again.
5 GRAMS! Hardly enough to cause ANY variance.
-
This is all a myth a lot of you have been following and giving credence too for a VERY, VERY long time.
Adam talk is cheap....Push your theories onto some slow competitive bodybuilders, so you can prove your point with physical evidence...Also, don't use yourself, because we all seen what happened when you dieted down....You looked like you just got out of a POW camp or something.....
-
That doesn`t make any sense if you are at a low, low bodyfat.
why not?
-
adonis.... why dont you just go and jump off a cliff or something?
hahaha my thoughts exactly LMAO
-
At max you ONLY hold 20 calories or so worth of Glycogen in your muscles at any given time for your ENTIRE body. This equates to 5 grams.
So there will not be a visual difference.
...on second thought, nevermind.
-
I am 100 percent Positive that NOBODY can provide me ANY Photographical evidence of this myth.
I want to see a picture of someone "LOOKING FLAT" and not "LOOKING FLAT".
Preferably the same person.
Or the same person before and after.
I have a feeling NOBODY can show this to me as it is a huge myth a lot of you have been subscribing to for a VERY long time.
-
one of the best threads ever
-
Who cares?
Why do we have to do stuff to 'prove' you wrong when no one gives a rats ass what you think?
-
You need to take a cold, hard look at the myths you have been subscribing to.
In fact, this should benefit you. However, if you like to remain ignorant, that is your choice.
-
Only 1 PERCENT of glycogen is stored in the muscles.
So therefore if your Glycogen levels are Full, around 2000 calories, Just one percent is in the muscles around 20 calories.
THIS IS NOT ENOUGH TO PRODUCE ANY DIFFERENCE!
you're not reading your own statistics correctly. your statistic says that 1% of muscle weight is glycogen, not 1% of glycogen is stored in the muscle.
stay in school
-
That is because you are an idiot creationist who rejects science.
Most of my nutrition and training is based on science not magazines, when I work with people I usually work with the best and the best have proven scientific case studies to back their claims, another words, If I don't have the answer, I find the answer, either by reading (or what I usually do) go to seminars around the country to the people I respect most, that being said I have worked side by side with guys like Cressy, Boyle, Chu, Berardi, DeFranco and even got to spend a few days with Chirs Charmichael who can teach me the most about my area of training, science changes almost everyday so I keep up when I can.
I can appriciate you trying to find out answers, but don't come off with your own therories without careful study and scientific backing and think you're right and everyone else is wrong!
-
Only 1 PERCENT of glycogen is stored in the muscles.
So therefore if your Glycogen levels are Full, around 2000 calories, Just one percent is in the muscles around 20 calories.
THIS IS NOT ENOUGH TO PRODUCE ANY DIFFERENCE!
Are you sure only 1 percent of glycogen is stored in the muscle?
http://www.ironman.com/training/nutrition/fueling-during-training-how-much
For example, a 150-pound triathlete can store approximately 1800 calories of glycogen as carbohydrate: 78% stored in the muscle, 18% in the liver and 4% in the form of blood glucose. This fuel source can support up to two hours of high-intensity or four hours of moderate-intensity training. Our body can also utilize fat and protein as fuel (in very small amounts) to support the moderate-intensity workouts at the heart of Ironman training, but our stores are clearly inadequate to support the energy demand of 4+ hour training days.
Perhaps this is wrong...
-
Are you sure only 1 percent of glycogen is stored in the muscle?
http://www.ironman.com/training/nutrition/fueling-during-training-how-much
For example, a 150-pound triathlete can store approximately 1800 calories of glycogen as carbohydrate: 78% stored in the muscle, 18% in the liver and 4% in the form of blood glucose. This fuel source can support up to two hours of high-intensity or four hours of moderate-intensity training. Our body can also utilize fat and protein as fuel (in very small amounts) to support the moderate-intensity workouts at the heart of Ironman training, but our stores are clearly inadequate to support the energy demand of 4+ hour training days.
Perhaps this is wrong...
the whole basis of this thread was based upon poor reading comprehension and a mistake from the second post. read my post a couple up above. your research is accurate.
-
you're not reading your own statistics correctly. your statistic says that 1% of muscle weight is glycogen, not 1% of glycogen is stored in the muscle.
That's what I thought...plus only 20 calories stored in your muscles...that wouldn't make any sense...or it wouldn't to me and the biology I can remember from 14 years ago...
-
I am 100 percent Positive that NOBODY can provide me ANY Photographical evidence of this myth.
I want to see a picture of someone "LOOKING FLAT" and not "LOOKING FLAT".
Preferably the same person.
Or the same person before and after.
I have a feeling NOBODY can show this to me as it is a huge myth a lot of you have been subscribing to for a VERY long time.
-
your research is accurate.
Thank google for that :P
-
You need to take a cold, hard look at the myths you have been subscribing to.
In fact, this should benefit you. However, if you like to remain ignorant, that is your choice.
I don't subscribe to any myths like that, actually. I think you're trying too hard to... I don't know, sound intelligent? Unless you have a doctorate or a M.D. after your name, why don't you shut the fuck up?
-
you're not reading your own statistics correctly. your statistic says that 1% of muscle weight is glycogen, not 1% of glycogen is stored in the muscle.
stay in school
BADA BING!!!!!!!!!!!!
-
Are you sure only 1 percent of glycogen is stored in the muscle?
http://www.ironman.com/training/nutrition/fueling-during-training-how-much
For example, a 150-pound triathlete can store approximately 1800 calories of glycogen as carbohydrate: 78% stored in the muscle, 18% in the liver and 4% in the form of blood glucose. This fuel source can support up to two hours of high-intensity or four hours of moderate-intensity training. Our body can also utilize fat and protein as fuel (in very small amounts) to support the moderate-intensity workouts at the heart of Ironman training, but our stores are clearly inadequate to support the energy demand of 4+ hour training days.
Perhaps this is wrong...
Yes it is wrong if Apenis didn't say it first. He is on another Cut & Paste rage. For some reason after getting slammed he always comes up with something else to debate over so we forget about all the other shit he has said and proved wrong. Another sad day in Apenis's life. It's going to be a long day
-
Are you sure only 1 percent of glycogen is stored in the muscle?
http://www.ironman.com/training/nutrition/fueling-during-training-how-much
For example, a 150-pound triathlete can store approximately 1800 calories of glycogen as carbohydrate: 78% stored in the muscle, 18% in the liver and 4% in the form of blood glucose. This fuel source can support up to two hours of high-intensity or four hours of moderate-intensity training. Our body can also utilize fat and protein as fuel (in very small amounts) to support the moderate-intensity workouts at the heart of Ironman training, but our stores are clearly inadequate to support the energy demand of 4+ hour training days.
Perhaps this is wrong...
I am agreeing with it, I think you are mistaking what I said! My wording may not have been initially clear.
-
Are you sure only 1 percent of glycogen is stored in the muscle?
http://www.ironman.com/training/nutrition/fueling-during-training-how-much
For example, a 150-pound triathlete can store approximately 1800 calories of glycogen as carbohydrate: 78% stored in the muscle, 18% in the liver and 4% in the form of blood glucose. This fuel source can support up to two hours of high-intensity or four hours of moderate-intensity training. Our body can also utilize fat and protein as fuel (in very small amounts) to support the moderate-intensity workouts at the heart of Ironman training, but our stores are clearly inadequate to support the energy demand of 4+ hour training days.
Perhaps this is wrong...
EVEN IF it was around 80 percent...........
That would mean, 1600 Calories of 2000
1600. Not EVEN a half of a LB!
-
The topic you just posted is wrong.
Keith wins.
-
I don't subscribe to any myths like that, actually. I think you're trying too hard to... I don't know, sound intelligent? Unless you have a doctorate or a M.D. after your name, why don't you shut the fuck up?
He does have M.D. after his name. The only thing though is it means Mentally Disabled. He has no education in this stuff. He is a cut & Paste expert. Thats all he does. He'll Google something and then go with it. Complete waste of air.
-
The topic you just posted is wrong.
Thanks...I'll inform that website they are spreading lies ::)
-
Hahahaha Looking flat, looking full....WHATEVER.
Mr. Intenseone....LOOKING HOT!!!!! :o
-
Only the glycogen stored in the liver can be made accessible to other organs, and these hepatocytes have the highest concentration of it - up to 8% of the fresh weight in well fed state, or 100–120 g in an adult. In the muscles, glycogen is found in a much lower concentration (1% of the muscle mass), but the total amount exceeds that in liver. Small amounts of glycogen are found in the kidneys, and even smaller amounts in certain glial cells in the brain and white blood cells.
-
I figured something out about Apenis. He is the type of guy who used ot get beat up in school allot. Now he is out of school and all the kids who used to pick on him have moved on. APenis has not. He is so used to getting beat up that with the internet he can get beat up in a sense but without getting the bruises. I think he likes all this debate about him being wrong in every subject. He has grown up this way.
-
Adonis is right here, he is doing what this board is about, debunking myths and getting to the truth of an industry making so much money based on our ignorance. Why are so many of you guys threatened by that. If you know the answer tell us if you don't then dont' get in the way.
I for one am glad he is asking this question. This whole idea of looking flat is so subjective and meaningless. Adonis is trying to find science behind it. If it exists lets find out what it is. The more knowledge in our hands the more control we have on our bodies and the less reliant we are on supplement companies and so called "gurus" who are taking our money.
Some of you guys are afraid of change and are comforted with your myths. But some of us are passionate about the truth.
-
you're looking great there mr midget
-
Adonis is right here, he is doing what this board is about, debunking myths and getting to the truth of an industry making so much money based on our ignorance. Why are so many of you guys threatened by that. If you know the answer tell us if you don't then dont' get in the way.
I for one am glad he is asking this question. This whole idea of looking flat is so subjective and meaningless. Adonis is trying to find science behind it. If it exists lets find out what it is. The more knowledge in our hands the more control we have on our bodies and the less reliant we are on supplement companies and so called "gurus" who are taking our money.
Some of you guys are afraid of change and are comforted with your myths. But some of us are passionate about the truth.
Great, but you can't compare marathon runners to bodybuilders, I do agree, there is very little science involved in bodybuilding!
-
Only the glycogen stored in the liver can be made accessible to other organs, and these hepatocytes have the highest concentration of it - up to 8% of the fresh weight in well fed state, or 100–120 g in an adult. In the muscles, glycogen is found in a much lower concentration (1% of the muscle mass), but the total amount exceeds that in liver. Small amounts of glycogen are found in the kidneys, and even smaller amounts in certain glial cells in the brain and white blood cells.
the liver weighs about 3lbs. 8% of that is glycogen, or roughly .25 lbs.
1% of the muscle mass is going to be much higher than .25 lbs.
even in a man with 100lbs of lean body MUSCLE mass, that would be 1 lb, four times as much as the liver.
and that would be a seriously small individual.
-
Adonis is right here, he is doing what this board is about, debunking myths and getting to the truth of an industry making so much money based on our ignorance. Why are so many of you guys threatened by that. If you know the answer tell us if you don't then dont' get in the way.
I for one am glad he is asking this question. This whole idea of looking flat is so subjective and meaningless. Adonis is trying to find science behind it. If it exists lets find out what it is. The more knowledge in our hands the more control we have on our bodies and the less reliant we are on supplement companies and so called "gurus" who are taking our money.
Some of you guys are afraid of change and are comforted with your myths. But some of us are passionate about the truth.
try reading the thread before singing such praises, his mistaken premise is glaring
-
Adonis is right here, he is doing what this board is about, debunking myths and getting to the truth of an industry making so much money based on our ignorance. Why are so many of you guys threatened by that. If you know the answer tell us if you don't then dont' get in the way.
I for one am glad he is asking this question. This whole idea of looking flat is so subjective and meaningless. Adonis is trying to find science behind it. If it exists lets find out what it is. The more knowledge in our hands the more control we have on our bodies and the less reliant we are on supplement companies and so called "gurus" who are taking our money.
Some of you guys are afraid of change and are comforted with your myths. But some of us are passionate about the truth.
Exactly.
The actual MUSCLE only stores around 1 percent of Glycogen. Its hillarious to think that they THINK their appearance will be any different.
-
Exactly.
The actual MUSCLE only stores around 1 percent of Glycogen. Its hillarious to think that they THINK their appearance will be any different.
I gave you an example of flat Vs. not flat!
-
I gave you an example of flat Vs. not flat!
I don`t see a difference. Only a different Pose, some visible gyno possibly and a tan and different lighting.
Furthermore what is the time frame of the pictures?
Were you the same Bodyfat?
-
Exactly.
The actual MUSCLE only stores around 1 percent of Glycogen. Its hillarious to think that they THINK their appearance will be any different.
you're not reading your own statistics. what you posted says 1% of the muscle is glycogen, not 1% of glycogen is in the muscle. do you understand this?
-
are u talking looking flat in contest shape?... as it is very noticable, especialy when u find u cant get a pump whatever u do, i dont beleive u can spill over if your down to the bones of your arse, usualy an excuse for not dieting down hard enough imo
-
you're not reading your own statistics. what you posted says 1% of the muscle is glycogen, not 1% of glycogen is in the muscle. do you understand this?
What he stated was wrong at the start by saying only one percent of glycogen is stored in the muscle but because only one percent of the muscles mass is made of glycogen he is arguing that because this percentage is so small there would be no visible difference. The second bit makes sense.
-
you're not reading your own statistics. what you posted says 1% of the muscle is glycogen, not 1% of glycogen is in the muscle. do you understand this?
AND you are being unreasonable.
Lets say that you are right and it is indeed 80 percent.
THAT STILL MEANS ONLY 1600 CALORIES MAX! if you are talking in entirety.
Not even a half of a lb.
Yes! 1 Percent of the muscle IS GLYCOGEN! 20 calories of glycogen as I stated!
-
What he stated was wrong at the start by saying only one percent of glycogen is stored in the muscle but because only one percent of the muscles mass is made of glycogen he is arguing that because this percentage is so small there would be no visible difference. The second bit makes sense.
Exactly.
I think people got confused with the wording.
-
I don`t see a difference. Only a different Pose, some visible gyno possibly and a tan and different lighting.
Furthermore what is the time frame of the pictures?
Were you the same Bodyfat?
I'm kinda thinking you can see the difference and just don't want to admit it, the pic on the bottom was taken several years PRIOR to the one on top.....BF% is irrelavant unless for health purposes only then BMI is done.
-
Where is Glycogen Found in the Body?
Most glycogen is found in the liver (comprising about 10 percent of the liver), with muscles containing a relatively small amount. Liver-glycogen is more readily available for energy and blood glucose maintenance, while muscle-glycogen is used primarily for muscle-energy. A third glycogen location is the brain, where small amounts of glycogen are found in the glial cells.
-
Exactly.
I think people got confused with the wording.
No, people got confused as you said one percent of glycogen is stored in the muscle, and said only 20 calories are stored in the muscle - this makes no sense...but because glycogen makes up such a small percent of the mass of muscle then your argument holds some credence.
-
A Carbup is utterly USELESS.
You are just restoring glycogen to the liver for the most part. It WILL NOT MAKE A VISUAL DIFFERENCE.
-
the human body always has a tendency to remain in homeostasis if it can, usually through negative feedback cycles. when it is severely depleted in one way or another for an extended period of time, it is perfectly reasonable that it will overcompensate and a contest ready bodybuilder could replenish much more glycogen over a binge period than he would if he just ate a much bigger lunch on any given day during the offseason.
anyone who's ever dieted hard knows this. chick says he has a cheat day every sunday when dieting, ask him if theres a more than 1% difference. just cause someone hasn't scientifically photographed it at the exact moment you demand proof doesnt mean its not true. theres 1000's of anecdotal corroborations on this.
-
the human body always has a tendency to remain in homeostasis if it can, usually through negative feedback cycles. when it is severely depleted in one way or another for an extended period of time, it is perfectly reasonable that it will overcompensate and a contest ready bodybuilder could replenish much more glycogen over a binge period than he would if he just ate a much bigger lunch on any given day during the offseason.
anyone who's ever dieted hard knows this. chick says he has a cheat day every sunday when dieting, ask him if theres a more than 1% difference. just cause someone hasn't scientifically photographed it at the exact moment you demand proof doesnt mean its not true. theres 1000's of anecdotal corroborations on this.
You are missing it.
The first place Glycogen will go is the liver. The muscles ONLY store 1 percent. It is NOT going to exceed this amount greatly. The muscle are not meant for adequate Glycogen storage.
Even if we doubled a high estimate, we would stil be under a LB. It would make NO VISUAL DIFFERENCE.
-
What you also have to realize is that muscles store different rates of Glycogen 20 calories or so for each muscle being the norm.
Different muscles even store less depending on their type.
This study is interesting.
Glycogen synthesis in human gastrocnemius muscle is not representative of whole-body muscle glycogen synthesis.Serlie MJ, de Haan JH, Tack CJ, Verberne HJ, Ackermans MT, Heerschap A, Sauerwein HP.
Academic Medical Centre, Department of Endocrinology and Metabolism (F5-169), Meibergdreef 9, 1105AZ Amsterdam, The Netherlands. m.j.serlie@amc.uva.nl
The introduction of 13C magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS) has enabled noninvasive measurement of muscle glycogen synthesis in humans. Conclusions based on measurements by the MRS technique assume that glucose metabolism in gastrocnemius muscle is representative for all skeletal muscles and thus can be extrapolated to whole-body muscle glucose metabolism. An alternative method to assess whole-body muscle glycogen synthesis is the use of [3-(3)H]glucose. In the present study, we compared this method to the MRS technique, which is a well-validated technique for measuring muscle glycogen synthesis. Muscle glycogen synthesis was measured in the gastrocnemius muscle of six lean healthy subjects by MRS and by the isotope method during a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp. Mean muscle glycogen synthesis as measured by the isotope method was 115 +/- 26 micromol x kg(-1) muscle x min(-1) vs. 178 +/- 72 micromol x kg(-1) muscle x min(-1) (P = 0.03) measured by MRS. Glycogen synthesis rates measured by MRS exceeded 100% of glucose uptake in three of the six subjects. We conclude that glycogen synthesis rates measured in gastrocnemius muscle cannot be extrapolated to whole-body muscle glycogen synthesis.
PMID: 15855310 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
-
You also have to consider that Glycogen amounts in a time period.
You don`t have FULL stores at all times. You constantly USE glycogen. It does not stop!
-
You've been playing tennis or squash, or riding a bicycle, running, swimming, or rowing for an extended period of time without any trouble, when suddenly your muscles begin to feel tired and you're not sure how much longer you can continue. Without a doubt, low muscle glycogen is the culprit behind your sudden fatigue. Your muscles are running so low on carbohydrate fuel that they are no longer able to function normally.
Your muscles aren't machines, after all. Although your car engine can race along full-tilt until the last drop of petrol is exhausted, your muscles begin slowing down well before the glycogen is gone. Perhaps muscles work this way for purposes of self-preservation; even the most compulsive, highly driven athletes can never destroy their muscle cells by totally wiping out their energy stores, because fatigue stops them first.
But even when muscle glycogen dips to low levels, there's still plenty of carbohydrate available to the muscles. The trouble is that it's not actually inside the muscle cells - it's floating by in the bloodstream in the form of blood glucose, or 'blood sugar'. So, as muscles grow tired, shouldn't they simply step up their intake of the fuel wafting along in the nearby blood? Wouldn't pulling extra glucose into the muscles help you avoid fatigue and keep you exercising for longer periods of time?
Well, yes - except it hasn't been clear that muscles are actually 'smart' enough to do that. Many scientists have speculated that the extraction of glucose from the blood is fairly constant during exercise, even when glycogen levels get low and muscles should know enough to pull in glucose in augmented amounts.
To find out whether muscles can actually increase their intake of blood glucose in a time of need, scientists at the University of Limburg in the Netherlands asked six subjects to deplete muscle glycogen in one leg by engaging in prolonged, one-legged exercises. As a result, each subject ended up with one leg with normal glycogen levels and one glycogen-poor leg.
The following morning, each subject exercised one leg for 90 minutes at 60 per cent of maximal workload and did the same with the other leg two hours later (the order of leg exercise was random; some subjects used the glycogen-poor leg first, while others started with the normal limb).
The normal leg had more than twice as much glycogen as the impoverished leg at the beginning of exercise and still had 73-per cent more glycogen after 90 minutes. As you might expect, blood-glucose levels were the same in each leg, and when the subjects were at rest the glycogen-depleted leg muscles were extracting over three times as much glucose from the blood as the glycogen-rich muscles (the glycogen-poor fibres were obviously attempting to take in glucose in order to build back their glycogen concentrations).
However, once exercise started the story was different. The rate of glucose uptake from the blood did increase during exercise, but it increased by about the same amount for glycogen-poor and glycogen-rich leg muscles. As a result, after 10, 30,60, and 90 minutes of exercise, both glycogen-poor and glycogen-rich muscles were taking in about the same amount of glucose. The glycogen-famished muscles weren't 'smart'.
So if your muscles take up about the same amount of glucose during exercise, whether they're glycogen-depleted or not, why should you bother to consume a carbohydrate-containing sports drink during exertions which last for an hour or longer, as sports nutritionists are always advising? Obviously, using a sports drink during exercise is no substitute for carbo-loading prior to your exertions, but the drink does ensure that your blood-sugar levels won't drop too low as you train or compete. If blood glucose falls too far, your muscles can get into 'double trouble' - no glycogen fuel in the 'tank' and no glucose fuel from the 'pump' (the blood).
('Use of Glucose during Prolonged Exercise in Muscle with a Normal and Low Glycogen Content, ' Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, vol. 26(5), Supplement, # 1144, 1994)
-
Exactly.
The actual MUSCLE only stores around 1 percent of Glycogen. Its hillarious to think that they THINK their appearance will be any different.
Doesn't the water that is taken up with the glycogen have a bigger impact than the actual glycogen level? Assuming that 4x as much water is taken up as glycgoen, it seems that would have a bigger impact on appearance.
-
You are missing it.
The first place Glycogen will go is the liver. The muscles ONLY store 1 percent. It is NOT going to exceed this amount. The muscle are not meant for adequate Glycogen storage.
Even if we doubled a high estimate, we would stil be under a LB. It would make NO VISUAL DIFFERENCE.
During the transition from the fasted-exercised state to the glycogen restored condition, the liver plays a key role in directing the supply of ingested glucose to skeletal muscle for its deposition.
Although glucose deposition takes place predominantly in muscle cells, the extent to which muscle glycogen is derived via direct uptake and phosphorylation of glucose, and from non-glucose sources such as lactate and pyruvate may vary depending on metabolic conditions.
It is known that glucose absorbed by the gut leads to restoration of glycogen in muscle much sooner than in liver.
The delay in liver glycogen synthesis despite glucose availability is referred to as the "glucose paradox", since glucose absorbed by the gut is preferentially stored in skeletal muscle, despite the depleted state of the liver.
this is fun, lets keep going
-
Evidence of spilling over is in the 2nd place finisher of the Mr. GetBig contest.......
-
During the transition from the fasted-exercised state to the glycogen restored condition, the liver plays a key role in directing the supply of ingested glucose to skeletal muscle for its deposition.
Although glucose deposition takes place predominantly in muscle cells, the extent to which muscle glycogen is derived via direct uptake and phosphorylation of glucose, and from non-glucose sources such as lactate and pyruvate may vary depending on metabolic conditions.
It is known that glucose absorbed by the gut leads to restoration of glycogen in muscle much sooner than in liver.
The delay in liver glycogen synthesis despite glucose availability is referred to as the "glucose paradox", since glucose absorbed by the gut is preferentially stored in skeletal muscle, despite the depleted state of the liver.
this is fun, lets keep going
Again.
Muscles are ONLY made of 1 percent Glycogen. To replenish ALL THE MUSCLES takes not many calories to do so.
We are looking around 1400 calories or so. The muscle are NEVER in a completely full state either.
-
You are missing it.
The first place Glycogen will go is the liver. The muscles ONLY store 1 percent. It is NOT going to exceed this amount greatly. The muscle are not meant for adequate Glycogen storage.
Even if we doubled a high estimate, we would stil be under a LB. It would make NO VISUAL DIFFERENCE.
LOLOLOLOLOL ;D
Oh, adonis, I know you're here for only one purpose, to rustle everyone's feathers, but this was too much man ;)
Just out of curiosity, I just want to know if you would know as much as a 9th grade bio student....
How much glycogen is found in the blood???? Simple question, come on
-
LOLOLOLOLOL ;D
Oh, adonis, I know you're here for only one purpose, to rustle everyone's feathers, but this was too much man ;)
Just out of curiosity, I just want to know if you would know as much as a 9th grade bio student....
How much glycogen is found in the blood???? Simple question, come on
About 70 calories or 4 percent.
-
During the transition from the fasted-exercised state to the glycogen restored condition, the liver plays a key role in directing the supply of ingested glucose to skeletal muscle for its deposition.
Although glucose deposition takes place predominantly in muscle cells, the extent to which muscle glycogen is derived via direct uptake and phosphorylation of glucose, and from non-glucose sources such as lactate and pyruvate may vary depending on metabolic conditions.
It is known that glucose absorbed by the gut leads to restoration of glycogen in muscle much sooner than in liver.
The delay in liver glycogen synthesis despite glucose availability is referred to as the "glucose paradox", since glucose absorbed by the gut is preferentially stored in skeletal muscle, despite the depleted state of the liver.
this is fun, lets keep going
I think you are missing what I am saying again!
My whole point is in your VERY post.
-
About 70 calories or 4 percent.
1. LOL
2. I won't post on this thread again, I'll let you dangle the carrot in front of everyone else's face ;) That answer summed it up for me bro.
3. You should pick up a physio book and learn the basics before spouting off and quoting these studies man.
4. LOL
5. Who said the "spilling over" phenomenon seen in bodybuilding is due to glycogen? ??? And what would a picture of a smooth bodybuilder prove, biochemically speaking ::) :P
6. For the record, glycogen is NOT found in the blood man! It's the S-T-O-R-A-G-E form of glucose! So, "glycogen" doesn't "GO" anywhere....thought you knew foo! Better "aks" somebody!!!!
7,8,9 LOL! ;)
-
i would have brought up troponins point earlier but the only studies we are looking at are comparing glycogen levels and not water weight which we know composes 80% of muscle. so is there a scientific study that weighed people in severely carb depleted states and then again 3 days after a carb loading phase with restricted sodium while taking photographs at each point in time along with bodyfat levels, where it could then be accurately determined what muscle weight was gained for the carb load?
there obviously isnt going to be such a study. scientific studies attempt to prove something worthwhile, and we all know no one invests money into bodybuilding related studies, they just make up studies to sell pills.
so again as i said before, all there is is anecdotal evidence, which for some reason you are trying to disprove despite overwhelming opinion otherwise.
-
Doesn't the water that is taken up with the glycogen have a bigger impact than the actual glycogen level? Assuming that 4x as much water is taken up as glycgoen, it seems that would have a bigger impact on appearance.
Water molecules do stick to Glycogen, but would not create a visual difference as the amounts are not enough to warrant a change, especially from a "Carb-up".
-
A Carbup is utterly USELESS.
You are just restoring glycogen to the liver for the most part. It WILL NOT MAKE A VISUAL DIFFERENCE.
@ You are wrong. Its just too easy. Breyers Ice Cream + anti gravity suits. ::)
***@All rights reserved The True Adonis (2002), The Heckler, Count Grizknash and 247 other gimmick accounts
-
I am 100 percent Positive that NOBODY can provide me ANY Photographical evidence of this myth.
I want to see a picture of someone "LOOKING FLAT" and not "LOOKING FLAT".
Preferably the same person.
Or the same person before and after.
I have a feeling NOBODY can show this to me as it is a huge myth a lot of you have been subscribing to for a VERY long time.
Thing is Adam....when you look good the day before the show you are trying to hold that condition....sometimes you take pics because you are really happy with it. Then, the next morning you do what you have to do with regard to food and if you start to notice the 'spill', your thoughts are NOT on "Gee, lets get a camera and get some photographic evidence of this." All you're thinking is "how in the fuck do I correct this???" Guys using 'extra' supps can do it with relative ease.....but natties....shit, we generally are screwed!!!!
-
@ You are wrong. Its just so easy. ::) Breyers Ice Cream + anti gravity suits.
***@All rights reserved The True Adonis (2002), The Heckler, Count Grizknash and 247 other gimmick accounts
Ice Cream DOES work, anyone can eat.
My Gravity Suit, while purely theroetical, WOULD WORK.
Your ULTRA-HIGH PROTEIN diet does nothing.
-
Thing is Adam....when you look good the day before the show you are trying to hold that condition....sometimes you take pics because you are really happy with it. Then, the next morning you do what you have to do with regard to food and if you start to notice the 'spill', your thoughts are NOT on "Gee, lets get a camera and get some photographic evidence of this." All you're thinking is "how in the fuck do I correct this???" Guys using 'extra' supps can do it with relative ease.....but natties....shit, we generally are screwed!!!!
Define "Spill" and please show me some evidence of what a "Spill" is.
I still have no clue what a Spill is.
-
True Adonis when are you going to post your deadlifting clip?
-
Ice Cream DOES work, anyone can eat.
My Gravity Suit, while purely theroetical, WOULD WORK.
Your ULTRA-HIGH PROTEIN diet does nothing.
meltdown.
-
Ice Cream DOES work, anyone can eat.
My Gravity Suit, while purely theroetical, WOULD WORK.
Your ULTRA-HIGH PROTEIN diet does nothing.
Start with doing searches on the
Thermic effect of feeding or Thermic effect of food (TEF)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermic_effect_of_food
---------------------------------
Dr. Lonnie Lowery: Now might be a good time to discuss the potential for protein over-consumption. As you both know, there's no consensus (or even a single study to my knowledge) that excess protein (> 0.8 g/kg) does any measurable damage to healthy kidneys. Most of the scare tactics stem from the data on renal patients.
These patients end up with rapid loss of kidney function on normal high protein diets. Interestingly, the very professionals who point out every mistaken extrapolation in the dietary supplement world conveniently forget that they're doing the same "leap of faith" bullshit by applying this patient data to healthy athletes.
Having said that, I think there are real body composition advantages to eating upwards of 1.5 g/ lb. That's right, overfeed protein! First off, overeating protein, within reason, will not make you fat. A calorie is not a calorie! That is, excess protein calories aren't as likely to be stored as body fat compared to carbs and most fats.
This is because protein has to have its nitrogen ripped off in the liver (the urea cycle), which is an energy costly process. To boot, protein kicks up glucagon secretion and glucagon antagonizes the lipogenic (fat storage) effects of insulin.
Carbs don't lend people the same favor; they just jack insulin levels sky high. The net result is that the thermic effect of food is about 30% of the intake for proteins, while it's just 4 to 6% for fats and carbohydrates. This means that for a 100 calorie meal, protein will require a full 30 calories just to process it, compared to a mere 4 to 6 calories expended to process those yummy gut-expanding carbs and fats.
The bottom line is that it appears better to overeat than to under-eat protein when you're trying to add muscle mass while keeping the body fat off.
--------------------------------------------------
http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/abstract/52/1/72
-------------------------------------------------
Welle et al. (1981) and Robinson et al (1990) demonstrated that during a normal six hour period of rest and fasting (basal metabolism), subjects burn about 270kcal. When eating a single 400kcal meal of carbs alone (100g) or fat alone (44g), the energy burned during this six hour period reached 290kcal (an additional 20kcal). Interestingly, when eating 400kcal of protein alone (100g) the subjects burned 310kcal during this six hour period (an additional 40kcal). Therefore, protein alone had double the thermogenic power vs. fat or carbs alone!
---------------
Doggcrapp::You add exercise into the mix of this equation and the results are greatly enhanced.
-
Lets not get off the subject though
please continue on Adam with the topic at hand and (insert foot in mouth)
-
Start with doing searches on the
Thermic effect of feeding or Thermic effect of food (TEF)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermic_effect_of_food
---------------------------------
Dr. Lonnie Lowery: Now might be a good time to discuss the potential for protein over-consumption. As you both know, there's no consensus (or even a single study to my knowledge) that excess protein (> 0.8 g/kg) does any measurable damage to healthy kidneys. Most of the scare tactics stem from the data on renal patients.
These patients end up with rapid loss of kidney function on normal high protein diets. Interestingly, the very professionals who point out every mistaken extrapolation in the dietary supplement world conveniently forget that they're doing the same "leap of faith" bullshit by applying this patient data to healthy athletes.
Having said that, I think there are real body composition advantages to eating upwards of 1.5 g/ lb. That's right, overfeed protein! First off, overeating protein, within reason, will not make you fat. A calorie is not a calorie! That is, excess protein calories aren't as likely to be stored as body fat compared to carbs and most fats.
This is because protein has to have its nitrogen ripped off in the liver (the urea cycle), which is an energy costly process. To boot, protein kicks up glucagon secretion and glucagon antagonizes the lipogenic (fat storage) effects of insulin.
Carbs don't lend people the same favor; they just jack insulin levels sky high. The net result is that the thermic effect of food is about 30% of the intake for proteins, while it's just 4 to 6% for fats and carbohydrates. This means that for a 100 calorie meal, protein will require a full 30 calories just to process it, compared to a mere 4 to 6 calories expended to process those yummy gut-expanding carbs and fats.
The bottom line is that it appears better to overeat than to under-eat protein when you're trying to add muscle mass while keeping the body fat off.
--------------------------------------------------
http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/abstract/52/1/72
-------------------------------------------------
Welle et al. (1981) and Robinson et al (1990) demonstrated that during a normal six hour period of rest and fasting (basal metabolism), subjects burn about 270kcal. When eating a single 400kcal meal of carbs alone (100g) or fat alone (44g), the energy burned during this six hour period reached 290kcal (an additional 20kcal). Interestingly, when eating 400kcal of protein alone (100g) the subjects burned 310kcal during this six hour period (an additional 40kcal). Therefore, protein alone had double the thermogenic power vs. fat or carbs alone!
---------------
Doggcrapp::You add exercise into the mix of this equation and the results are greatly enhanced.
I have ALREADY BEEN THROUGH this with you!
The THERMIC EFFECT of 6-8 meals is minimal!
This is because protein DOES have a thermogenic effect on the body...........but not enough to make an impact! Here's where everyone is missing the point. Sure, protein causes the body to work harder to digest it, which causes the body's internal temperature to rise, but it is NOT enough to really make a dent in burning fat or preserving muscle mass.
Researchers at Arizona State University examined individuals that ate a high protein diet and compared them to another group that ate a high carb diet. What they found was that eating a high protein diet resulted in an average of 30 calories per meal being burned in digestion.
Read that again.......30 calories per meal. Whoop-tee, doo!!! 30 calories! Okay, then let's say you eat 5 meals a day. 30 calories per meal, 5 meals a day, that equals 150 calories. So, you would only be burning an extra 150 calories a day if you were to go on a high protein diet. Big deal!!!! 150 calories is 1 cup of milk. It's 2 eggs. It's half a candy bar. 150 calories isn't going to make any difference whatsoever in helping you gain weight, build muscle mass, or burn fat.
Everyone keeps saying, "Oh, but you can eat more protein and not gain any fat because of the thermogenic effect". Give me a break........150 calories.....I rather just cut out 1 can of soda a day and get the same effect!
Don't be fooled by the "high-protein" fans. They just want you to go out and spend your hard-earned money on their bucket of protein. If you are looking to gain weight and build muscle, concentrate on the overall calories.
-
I have ALREADY BEEN THROUGH this with you!
The THERMIC EFFECT of 6-8 meals is minimal!
This is because protein DOES have a thermogenic effect on the body...........but not enough to make an impact! Here's where everyone is missing the point. Sure, protein causes the body to work harder to digest it, which causes the body's internal temperature to rise, but it is NOT enough to really make a dent in burning fat or preserving muscle mass.
Researchers at Arizona State University examined individuals that ate a high protein diet and compared them to another group that ate a high carb diet. What they found was that eating a high protein diet resulted in an average of 30 calories per meal being burned in digestion.
Read that again.......30 calories per meal. Whoop-tee, doo!!! 30 calories! Okay, then let's say you eat 5 meals a day. 30 calories per meal, 5 meals a day, that equals 150 calories. So, you would only be burning an extra 150 calories a day if you were to go on a high protein diet. Big deal!!!! 150 calories is 1 cup of milk. It's 2 eggs. It's half a candy bar. 150 calories isn't going to make any difference whatsoever in helping you gain weight, build muscle mass, or burn fat.
Everyone keeps saying, "Oh, but you can eat more protein and not gain any fat because of the thermogenic effect". Give me a break........150 calories.....I rather just cut out 1 can of soda a day and get the same effect!
Don't be fooled by the "high-protein" fans. They just want you to go out and spend your hard-earned money on their bucket of protein. If you are looking to gain weight and build muscle, concentrate on the overall calories.
TA when are you going to post your deadlifting video?
-
Define "Spill" and please show me some evidence of what a "Spill" is.
I still have no clue what a Spill is.
Once again Adam....you wont find PROOF as in "here is me looking good, here is me spilled over". If you want an example, follow a traditional deplete/load routine as done for a competition. Keep an eye on your condition. Now, keep eating.....and keep eating...thinking you will keep looking better. At some point you will cease to look better. In fact, you will most likely look smoother. With all due respect, you will never do this though. You will never subject yourself to it because you do feel that your way of dieting down is so superior to everyone elses. Thats fine. You're entitled to it. The thing to keep in mind is that if you want your proof, simply follow what I just outline to you.
You see Adam...it DOES happen. You look AWESOME the night before a show. You get up in the morning...go through your meals thinking your body will continue to pull water in for digestion....thus tightening you up....but at some point it stops. By the time you step on stage...you look like shit. Remember Adam, I dont have a problem with you...and you with me....but there are some things you wont see or recognize unless you actually go through with it....like a show. The Mr. Get Big thing is bullshit as far as I am concerned. Seriously...do a natural show...the NANBF....the NGA.....the INBF...something. Stand up there for 30 mins under the lights.....holding everyting....sweating your ass off.
Instead of thinking its a myth....put yourself through the paces. Remember the whole thing about "before you say anything, walk a mile in my shoes"??
-
TA when are you going to post your deadlifting video?
... or VVV steroid cycle
...or the proof he sell ssteroids over the internet
...or the proof for your ridiculous claims that bodybuilders are funding the el quaida
...
the list is endless. TA is full of shit.
-
Once again Adam....you wont find PROOF as in "here is me looking good, here is me spilled over". If you want an example, follow a traditional deplete/load routine as done for a competition. Keep an eye on your condition. Now, keep eating.....and keep eating...thinking you will keep looking better. At some point you will cease to look better. In fact, you will most likely look smoother. With all due respect, you will never do this though. You will never subject yourself to it because you do feel that your way of dieting down is so superior to everyone elses. Thats fine. You're entitled to it. The thing to keep in mind is that if you want your proof, simply follow what I just outline to you.
You see Adam...it DOES happen. You look AWESOME the night before a show. You get up in the morning...go through your meals thinking your body will continue to pull water in for digestion....thus tightening you up....but at some point it stops. By the time you step on stage...you look like shit. Remember Adam, I dont have a problem with you...and you with me....but there are some things you wont see or recognize unless you actually go through with it....like a show. The Mr. Get Big thing is bullshit as far as I am concerned. Seriously...do a natural show...the NANBF....the NGA.....the INBF...something. Stand up there for 30 mins under the lights.....holding everyting....sweating your ass off.
Instead of thinking its a myth....put yourself through the paces. Remember the whole thing about "before you say anything, walk a mile in my shoes"??
How about this.
I AM WILLING to do it under your guidance with a plan you lay out.
I would be willing to take pictures, videos etc.
-
Let me clarify.
I will do a Carb Load and deplete under your guidance.
-
Let me clarify.
I will do a Carb Load and deplete under your guidance.
Will you post your deadlift vid please??
-
Will you post your deadlift vid please??
Not right now. I am busy.
-
TA is asking for proof, to say there is none because no one can be bothered is a piss poor reason to expect him to stop seeking the truth. WHy are you guys so defensive. If this phenomoenon occurrs as you say then there must be a scientific explanation behind it. To expect someone to accept it just because you say so is arrogant to say the least.
-
I am somewhat impressed with TA.
Nobody has come up with any pics to prove him wrong.
-
Muscle glycogen storage and its relationship with water.Sherman WM, Plyley MJ, Sharp RL, Van Handel PJ, McAllister RM, Fink WJ, Costill DL.
This study examined the relationship between muscle glycogen and muscle water content. Exercise dietary manipulations were used to vary skeletal muscle glycogen levels in four groups of rodents: (1) eight animals were sedentary controls (SC); (2) ten animals were treadmill familiarized and allowed to recover 24 h before sacrifice (F); (3) ten animals were treadmill familiarized and exercised to exhaustion (E); (4) ten animals were treadmill familiarized, exercised to exhaustion, and allowed to recover with food and water ad libitum for 72 h (ER). All animals were sacrificed in a resting state to normalize intracellular, extracellular, and interstitial water compartments; thus, the E group was sacrificed 45 m in following their run. The treatments altered skeletal muscle glycogen to values ranging from 10.0 to 30.2 mumol glucosyl units/g wet tissue weight. Neither muscle triglyceride nor protein levels were affected by the treatments. Muscle water content expressed as mumol H2O lost/g wet tissue weight or made relative to protein content showed no consistent relationship to the glycogen content. These data, therefore, do not support the commonly accepted muscle glycogen-to-water ratio of 1.0:2.7 (g:g). Further work is necessary to quantify the exact amount of water that is actually associated with the glycogen complex.
PMID: 7068293 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
-
How about this.
I AM WILLING to do it under your guidance with a plan you lay out.
I would be willing to take pictures, videos etc.
Videos....Is it just me or does this sound familiar? :o
Maybe you want to make another bet about the video? :o
-
How much abuse can Apenis take. This guy is proven time in and time out to be wrong yet he persists. Is he really this stupid. YES! But, it is comical to see a guy bury himself everyday.
-
I have ALREADY BEEN THROUGH this with you!
The THERMIC EFFECT of 6-8 meals is minimal!
This is because protein DOES have a thermogenic effect on the body...........but not enough to make an impact! Here's where everyone is missing the point. Sure, protein causes the body to work harder to digest it, which causes the body's internal temperature to rise, but it is NOT enough to really make a dent in burning fat or preserving muscle mass.
Researchers at Arizona State University examined individuals that ate a high protein diet and compared them to another group that ate a high carb diet. What they found was that eating a high protein diet resulted in an average of 30 calories per meal being burned in digestion.
Read that again.......30 calories per meal. Whoop-tee, doo!!! 30 calories! Okay, then let's say you eat 5 meals a day. 30 calories per meal, 5 meals a day, that equals 150 calories. So, you would only be burning an extra 150 calories a day if you were to go on a high protein diet. Big deal!!!! 150 calories is 1 cup of milk. It's 2 eggs. It's half a candy bar. 150 calories isn't going to make any difference whatsoever in helping you gain weight, build muscle mass, or burn fat.
Everyone keeps saying, "Oh, but you can eat more protein and not gain any fat because of the thermogenic effect". Give me a break........150 calories.....I rather just cut out 1 can of soda a day and get the same effect!
Don't be fooled by the "high-protein" fans. They just want you to go out and spend your hard-earned money on their bucket of protein. If you are looking to gain weight and build muscle, concentrate on the overall calories.
Do you actually read the studies you talk about?
http://www.jacn.org/cgi/content/abstract/21/1/55
Ten healthy, normal weight, non-smoking female volunteers aged 19-22 years
change that to ten 230lb plus hard training offseason bodybuilders eating 6-7 meals a day and the (daily) thermic effect would be equal to roughly 45 minutes on a treadmill calorie wise PLUS thermogenesis at 2.5 hours post-meal averaged about twofold higher on the high protein diet versus the high carbohydrate diet
-
Adam....there are a TON of resources out there that tell you how to do it. Just try it. The thing that I have was given to me by someone who preps people for shows....so me giving that out would not be fair to them.
Ask Layne for his article on final week.....then, one the last day dont follow it....
-
Videos....Is it just me or does this sound familiar? :o
Maybe you want to make another bet about the video? :o
ahahahaahaa, TA is a total idiot.
Do you actually read the studies you talk about?
http://www.jacn.org/cgi/content/abstract/21/1/55
Ten healthy, normal weight, non-smoking female volunteers aged 19-22 years
change that to ten 230lb plus hard training offseason bodybuilders eating 6-7 meals a day and the (daily) thermic effect would be equal to roughly 45 minutes on a treadmill calorie wise PLUS thermogenesis at 2.5 hours post-meal averaged about twofold higher on the high protein diet versus the high carbohydrate diet
Thanks Dante!!
TA, you just got owned.
Again.
-
Do you actually read the studies you talk about?
http://www.jacn.org/cgi/content/abstract/21/1/55
Ten healthy, normal weight, non-smoking female volunteers aged 19-22 years
change that to ten 230lb plus hard training offseason bodybuilders eating 6-7 meals a day and the (daily) thermic effect would be equal to roughly 45 minutes on a treadmill calorie wise PLUS thermogenesis at 2.5 hours post-meal averaged about twofold higher on the high protein diet versus the high carbohydrate diet
The amount is still minimal.
You can get the same effect by cutting protein by about 40 grams,since we CLEARLY do not NEED or USE the protein amount you purportedly recommend, this would be an easier and more efficient approach at no sacrafice to anything.
Seriously, your High Protien diet recommendations are pointless and inefficient. You can`t argue with that.
-
Muscle glycogen storage and its relationship with water.Sherman WM, Plyley MJ, Sharp RL, Van Handel PJ, McAllister RM, Fink WJ, Costill DL.
This study examined the relationship between muscle glycogen and muscle water content. Exercise dietary manipulations were used to vary skeletal muscle glycogen levels in four groups of rodents: (1) eight animals were sedentary controls (SC); (2) ten animals were treadmill familiarized and allowed to recover 24 h before sacrifice (F); (3) ten animals were treadmill familiarized and exercised to exhaustion (E); (4) ten animals were treadmill familiarized, exercised to exhaustion, and allowed to recover with food and water ad libitum for 72 h (ER). All animals were sacrificed in a resting state to normalize intracellular, extracellular, and interstitial water compartments; thus, the E group was sacrificed 45 m in following their run. The treatments altered skeletal muscle glycogen to values ranging from 10.0 to 30.2 mumol glucosyl units/g wet tissue weight. Neither muscle triglyceride nor protein levels were affected by the treatments. Muscle water content expressed as mumol H2O lost/g wet tissue weight or made relative to protein content showed no consistent relationship to the glycogen content. These data, therefore, do not support the commonly accepted muscle glycogen-to-water ratio of 1.0:2.7 (g:g). Further work is necessary to quantify the exact amount of water that is actually associated with the glycogen complex.
PMID: 7068293 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
although I am all behind your quest for scientific truth. Animal studies rarely provide it. Extrapolating animal studies to humans is a fools game. I believe it is in fact is slowing down progress for human beings.
-
Adonis, normally i don't answer to your posts, but lately you're just to dumb to be ignored !
Do you recognise that changing the topic of your statement doesn't change the fact that what you just said is wrong!!!
Please just stop it ....
-
although I am all behind your quest for scientific truth. Animal studies rarely provide it. Extrapolating animal studies to humans is a fools game.
Not at all.
Rats are VERY similar to humans in a lot of areas. Humans and rats have the same basic physiology, similar organs, and similar body plans. We both control our body chemistry using similar hormones, we both have nervous systems that work in the same way, and we both react similarly to infection and injury.
You have to realize also that actual Glycogen in rats, and the actual muscle tissue in rats is the same as we have.
No difference.
-
1400 Cal (350 g) of glycogen would have 1050 g of water hanging out with it. that is over a quart of water
do you really think that you could not tell the difference between a quart of water being under your skin (smoothing out muscle definition, striations, veins, graininess, etc) and that same quart of water being inside your muscles (making your muscles take up that much more space, pushing your muscles against the skin increasing definition, striations, etc.) ??
and that is assuming that your body will not store more muscle glycogen than normal after being depleted.
Again.
You are not correct. Your Glycogen stores can never be full as energy is always in motion. That is nitpicking so to speak, but I won`t even address that.
There is no standard for the binding of water molecules to Glycogen and furthermore you are ignoring the Liver all together and figuring that in with your above equation.
You need to rethink your approach a bit.
-
1400 Cal (350 g) of glycogen would have 1050 g of water hanging out with it. that is over a quart of water
do you really think that you could not tell the difference between a quart of water being under your skin (smoothing out muscle definition, striations, veins, graininess, etc) and that same quart of water being inside your muscles (making your muscles take up that much more space, pushing your muscles against the skin increasing definition, striations, etc.) ??
and that is assuming that your body will not store more muscle glycogen than normal after being depleted.
Also, you have to realize the water content of muscles and you are not.
-
Do you actually read the studies you talk about?
http://www.jacn.org/cgi/content/abstract/21/1/55
Ten healthy, normal weight, non-smoking female volunteers aged 19-22 years
change that to ten 230lb plus hard training offseason bodybuilders eating 6-7 meals a day and the (daily) thermic effect would be equal to roughly 45 minutes on a treadmill calorie wise PLUS thermogenesis at 2.5 hours post-meal averaged about twofold higher on the high protein diet versus the high carbohydrate diet
Interesting... so you don't spend all your time rinsing your beef then?
-
Can Adonis post video evidence of his 225lbs. 112 rep deadlift? ???
-
Can Adonis post video evidence of his 225lbs. 112 rep deadlift? ???
No he's busy sucking his boyfriend's cock.
-
No he's busy sucking his boyfriend's cock.
Hahaha.............that's an integral part of the "Adonis Principles"
-
Hahaha.............that's an integral part of the "Adonis Principles"
Yes, protein straight from the tab.
When True Gaydonis sucks off heroin addicts behind the main station, he calls that 'junk food'.
-
Yes, protein straight from the tab.
When True Gaydonis sucks off heroin addicts behind the main station, he calls that 'junk food'.
HAHAHAHHAH
-
Not at all.
Rats are VERY similar to humans in a lot of areas. Humans and rats have the same basic physiology, similar organs, and similar body plans. We both control our body chemistry using similar hormones, we both have nervous systems that work in the same way, and we both react similarly to infection and injury.
You have to realize also that actual Glycogen in rats, and the actual muscle tissue in rats is the same as we have.
No difference.
Hell, all animals are similiar to humans, we are all flesh and blood. However studies on rats are becoming more and more disregarded as offering any help to humans. For example Valium, and flouride cause cancer in rats, and cola causes renal failure. Yet Arcenic is perfectly safe for rats.
The New York Times has even listed animal studies as the least reliable data to extrapolate to human beings. In a recent article Dr. Oldens the Director of the Health Science Institute recommends that the government should no longer rely on animal studies...that animal research, by itself, should no longer be accepted as a reliable means of judging risks for humans. and that two thirds of substances that proved to be cancerous in animals are safe in humans.
So if animal testing is so unreliable I think it is safe to assume that glycogen studies are just as unreliable.
You can try but I doubt you will find any answers in a rat cage. If that were the case we would have had cures for cancer and many other life dibilatating diseases years ago.
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9F0CE2DC153FF930A15750C0A965958260&sec=health&spon=&pagewanted=1
-
Only 1 PERCENT of glycogen is stored in the muscles.
So therefore if your Glycogen levels are Full, around 2000 calories, Just one percent is in the muscles around 20 calories.
THIS IS NOT ENOUGH TO PRODUCE ANY DIFFERENCE!
20 calories equals roughly 5 grams of carbs.
What makes you think muscles can only store a total of 5 grams of carbs?
From what I know, elite level athletes can store approx 1.8-2 lbs of glycogen in their muscles.
-Hedge
-
20 calories equals roughly 5 grams of carbs.
What makes you think muscles can only store a total of 5 grams of carbs?
From what I know, elite level athletes can store approx 1.8-2 lbs of glycogen in their muscles.
-Hedge
You didn`t read correctly.
Elite Athletes, marathon runners, can store 1800-2000 calories worth of Glycogen. That is less than half of a 1 LB.
That is on the high end of the spectrum and including Liver Glucose, Brain Glucose and "Blood" Glucose.
Muscles are made up of about 1 percent of Glucose.
Also, different muscles store different amounts of Glycogen so its is indeterminable regarding caloric storage amounts for each muscle, unless measured.
-
20 calories equals roughly 5 grams of carbs.
What makes you think muscles can only store a total of 5 grams of carbs?
From what I know, elite level athletes can store approx 1.8-2 lbs of glycogen in their muscles.
-Hedge
I fixed it.
IT should read:
Only 1 PERCENT of muscle is made up of glycogen.
So therefore if your Glycogen levels are Full, around 2000 calories THIS IS NOT ENOUGH TO PRODUCE ANY DIFFERENCE!
Sorry for the confusion.
-
Not right now. I am busy.
hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahaha
-
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahaha
meltdown
-
I am agreeing with it, I think you are mistaking what I said! My wording may not have been initially clear.
No, I wasn't mistaking anything. You were mistaken at the start but your theory still holds credence.
-
1. LOL
2. I won't post on this thread again, I'll let you dangle the carrot in front of everyone else's face ;) That answer summed it up for me bro.
3. You should pick up a physio book and learn the basics before spouting off and quoting these studies man.
4. LOL
5. Who said the "spilling over" phenomenon seen in bodybuilding is due to glycogen? ??? And what would a picture of a smooth bodybuilder prove, biochemically speaking ::) :P
6. For the record, glycogen is NOT found in the blood man! It's the S-T-O-R-A-G-E form of glucose! So, "glycogen" doesn't "GO" anywhere....thought you knew foo! Better "aks" somebody!!!!
7,8,9 LOL! ;)
lol can't let this one slip under the radar ppl....
-
Not at all.
Rats are VERY similar to humans in a lot of areas. Humans and rats have the same basic physiology, similar organs, and similar body plans. We both control our body chemistry using similar hormones, we both have nervous systems that work in the same way, and we both react similarly to infection and injury.
You have to realize also that actual Glycogen in rats, and the actual muscle tissue in rats is the same as we have.
No difference.
This is the most truthful post you have made beside the one you admit being a bisexual.
-
And you are seriously claiming to have degrees in molecular biology and chemics, yet you are not even able to understand the concepts behind osmosis and molarity (as witnessed on another thread).
You must have skipped the lectures in your first semester as this is basic stuff..... ::) ::)
-
At max you ONLY hold 20 calories or so worth of Glycogen in your muscles at any given time for your ENTIRE body. This equates to 5 grams.
So there will not be a visual difference.
please prove this
-
And you are seriously claiming to have degrees in molecular biology and chemics, yet you are not even able to understand the concepts behind osmosis and molarity (as witnessed on another thread).
You must have skipped the lectures in your first semester as this is basic stuff..... ::) ::)
It doesn't even appear he got a diploma in high school. He yet to prove anything he says. He is full of shit and is the master at cut & paste. Other than that and working at Wendys he has nothing except gimmic accounts supporting him. It has been proven.
-
It doesn't even appear he got a diploma in high school. He yet to prove anything he says. He is full of shit and is the master at cut & paste. Other than that and working at Wendys he has nothing except gimmic accounts supporting him. It has been proven.
Keith, your words are saturated with the bile of hatred.
Why?
-
dum de doo...
At max you ONLY hold 20 calories or so worth of Glycogen in your muscles at any given time for your ENTIRE body. This equates to 5 grams.
So there will not be a visual difference.
For example, a 150-pound triathlete can store approximately 1800 calories of glycogen as carbohydrate: 78% stored in the muscle, 18% in the liver and 4% in the form of blood glucose.
-
Reread my posts.
It was a misunderstanding of semantics.
-
Reread my posts.
It was a misunderstanding of semantics.
What do YOU understand of semantics?
TO you semantics is a town in africa, you fucking loser.
-
You didn`t read correctly.
Elite Athletes, marathon runners, can store 1800-2000 calories worth of Glycogen. That is less than half of a 1 LB.
That is on the high end of the spectrum and including Liver Glucose, Brain Glucose and "Blood" Glucose.
Muscles are made up of about 1 percent of Glucose.
Also, different muscles store different amounts of Glycogen so its is indeterminable regarding caloric storage amounts for each muscle, unless measured.
-
please prove this
Different muscles store different amounts of glycogen (calories).
There are roughly 640 muscles in the Human body.
Some will store less than 20 calories, some more.
Its pretty simple.
Muscle is made up of 1 percent Glycogen.
-
Can someone explain why i put on 20 pounds of water weight(is this glycogen)when i use a 100grams of gatorade and 20 grams of creatine loading for 2 weeks when i start weight training after a layoff.
Just a point.i do not put on any excess bodyfat.
-
Can someone explain why i put on 20 pounds of water weight(is this glycogen)when i use a 100grams of gatorade and 20 grams of creatine loading for 2 weeks when i start weight training after a layoff.
Just a point.i do not put on any excess bodyfat.
SHHHHh, not so loud.
Until you haven't a 5 minute vid (that's TA's attention span) of you putting on 20 pounds of water and losing them again, nothing is proven!!
-
WOW GETBIGGERS REALLY CHERISH THEIR MYTHS. IT IS AMAZING HOW FOREIGN CRITICAL THINKING IS TO MOST PEOPLE. THEY ARE ONLY EQUIPPED TO ABSORB INDOCTRINATION.