Disaster after following the TA principles.

[WhiteCastle]

TA is correct moreso correct on this protein thing.  Just looking at the abstracts of studes isn't really all that helpful.  At best, you get an incomplete picture of what the study is saying and who (and how) the sample was collected.  The only thing an abstract should be used for is to see if the research is applicable to whatever particular problem you are studying.  A lot of these studies use very small samples; we're talking under 20 total including treatment & control groups.  There are no visual data plots in abstracts and they often don't show uncertainty in estimates very well.  You're better of searching for a meta-analysis.  It's basically a study of the coefficients in other studies, or a way to quantify a large number of studies on the same topic.  It controls for different sample sizes and statistical power, methodology, etc.  In other words, it's a study of multiple studies.  The last meta-analysis on this did not find any additional significant strength or muscle gains from the extra protein.  Overall, only 4 studies using the protein supplementation made inclusion due to methodology, but meta-analysis does pretty well with pooled variance even when the number of studies is this size.  The full text pdf is available here.

http://jap.physiology.org/cgi/content/full/94/2/651

A pretty good overview of the protein research is available here. 
http://healthpsych.psy.vanderbilt.edu/proteinWeightLifting.htm

I don't think this will apply well if you are on gear.  Also, something you will often see in the research is that increased protein consumption does have an effect for people just beginning to lift.  It doesn't seem to hold up for those who have been training for awhile.  This makes sense with relation to gear; when you first start lifting you make very big gains and the extra protein could be used.  When you're on gear you make big gains and the extra protein can be used.  The gains that most people make naturally after a year or so are really modest.  How much is protein really going to matter if your big gain for the month is benching 300 for 8 reps vs 310 for 8 reps?

[onlyme]

Technically it is...but Adam prefers the latter source...tells everyone the extra DNA helps regenerate worn tissues (specifically the sphincter).

Are you saying Apenis gets his protein from an actual penis.

[Hedgehog]

TA is correct moreso correct on this protein thing.

Abeles claims you can eat whatever you want.

Try this:

Get your caloric need by eating sucrose only for 30 days.

Then try a balanced, healthy diet, with various foods, also your caloric need. Also for 30 days.

Then report back the results.

Good luck.

-Hedge

[Camel Jockey]

guys try a diet of corona and coco-cola!

[dr.chimps]

I wasn't intentionally following them, but I was subconsciously following them.  For instance, I would calorie restrict due to being busy and so on and while I would previously catch myself and force myself to eat, I would let it slide thinking doing so would actually get me leaner (albeit smaller, but leaner).

LOL. You usually come across as intelligent, Matt. This confession/admission tends to belie that. Hope this is as far you go into the spiritual realm.   

[The Master]

Layne Norton recommends above 1 grams of protein per grams of bodyweight while dieting for the natural bodybuilder.

Some people might claim it is a lot, but Layne sure knows his shit, he's currently earning a Ph.D in protein metabolism or something (think he specializes on the amino acid Lucine).

Funny how nobody have made a comment regarding Layne Nortons advices on protein intake, which is 1g/per lb of bodyweight or more (especially while dieting).

Layne sure knows his shit (PhD candidate in nutritional science with a specialization in skeletal muscle protein metabolism at the University of Illinois , and an experienced BB), perhaps this is why certain pseudo scientists here won't comment on his recommendations

[natural al]

Funny how nobody have made a comment regarding Layne Nortons advices on protein intake, which is 1g/per lb of bodyweight or more (especially while dieting).

Layne sure knows his shit (Ph.D. candidate in the area of protein synthesis, and an experienced BB), perhaps this is why certain pseudo scientists here won't comment on his recommendations

but...but....TA is walking around at 2%BF and has gained 8lbs of muscle all while in a constant caloric deficiet ....whatever.

[Matt C]

LOL. You usually come across as intelligent, Matt. This confession/admission tends to belie that. Hope this is as far you go into the spiritual realm.   

Yes it will be.

What annoys me is how TA is still proclaiming that he is being serious when behind his computer screen he is laughing.  Then when somebody who is actually being doubted is telling the truth, I will be less likely to believe them after life experiences like this.  He makes honest people look bad.  He also makes real scientists look bad by proclaiming his data is backed by science when it is nothing of the sort.

[The True Adonis]

Abeles claims you can eat whatever you want.

Try this:

Get your caloric need by eating sucrose only for 30 days.

Then try a balanced, healthy diet, with various foods, also your caloric need. Also for 30 days.

Then report back the results.

Good luck.

-Hedge

That is not possible to do and that is not what I advocate.  I advocate getting the RDI, RDA.

[The True Adonis]

Yes it will be.

What annoys me is how TA is still proclaiming that he is being serious when behind his computer screen he is laughing.  Then when somebody who is actually being doubted is telling the truth, I will be less likely to believe them after life experiences like this.  He makes honest people look bad.  He also makes real scientists look bad by proclaiming his data is backed by science when it is nothing of the sort.

Did you not read the Studies I posted or what Whitecastle posted?

I NEVER make a judgement without scientific evidence.  You on the other hand, are swayed by supplement companies and myths.  The truth eludes you because you choose to be ignorant.

[shiftedShapes]

My genetics are such where I lose mass of any kind very quickly, including muscle.  I just feel I look like a smaller version of myself but with no added definition.  I admit I can't tell exactly.

I followed the TA principles basically perfectly well.

from about 12-20% BF you will show approximately the same amount of muscle seperation, so when you lose size you assume that it was muscle.  that is until you hit 12% from there when you lose more fat you will start showing more muscle seperation and actually looking BIGGER.

Stick with the diet, you have a ways to go.

[The Master]

Funny how nobody have made a comment regarding Layne Nortons advices on protein intake, which is 1g/per lb of bodyweight or more (especially while dieting).

Layne sure knows his shit (PhD candidate in nutritional science with a specialization in skeletal muscle protein metabolism at the University of Illinois , and an experienced BB), perhaps this is why certain pseudo scientists here won't comment on his recommendations

TA, please comment on Layne Nortons recommendations, and why you believe he is wrong although he's a Ph.D candidate specializing in the protein metabolism area.

[shiftedShapes]

TA, please comment on Layne Nortons recommendations, and why you believe he is wrong although he's a Ph.D candidate specializing in the protein metabolism area.

he specializes in metabolizing protein, LOL




rich creamy protein.

[Matt C]

Did you not read the Studies I posted or what Whitecastle posted?

I NEVER make a judgement without scientific evidence.  You on the other hand, are swayed by supplement companies and myths.  The truth eludes you because you choose to be ignorant.

And you are laughing behind the computer screen right now.  I think hurting others is a very insecure way to be entertained.

[shiftedShapes]

And you are laughing behind the computer screen right now.  I think hurting others is a very insecure way to be entertained.

please read what I wrote above before you go back to your unhealthy diet and your bloated fatty physique.

[The Master]

he specializes in metabolizing protein, LOL




rich creamy protein.

To put it into simple terms:

1: He's got more know how than almost every poster here put together
2: His physique blows most people here (including roidheads) out of the water, hands down
3: His advice contradicts what many pseudo scientists here preach as a new religion


4: None of the low protein preachers adresses Laynes principles, yet claims they are men of science (while sometimes implying that they have more expertice than Layne)

It will be interesting seeing a real answer for once.

[Matt C]

please read what I wrote above before you go back to your unhealthy diet and your bloated fatty physique.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/True-believer_syndrome

[The True Adonis]

TA, please comment on Layne Nortons recommendations, and why you believe he is wrong although he's a man of science.

I don`t think he is wrong.  He doesn`t say 1g per lb is a requirement. He has been wrong on a lot of things in the past and has changed his views which is a good thing.  These things include: High Protein,(Now says more is meaningless and used to believe otherwise) Meal Frequency,(He now knows, like I do, that the number of meals is meaningless, more is not better), Overall Caloric intake is the most important thing and there is no such thing as a cheat meal or bad food.

I do think he got into his area of study looking for a "golden egg" and came up VERY short as his body of work and area of expertise on Leucine is not significant at all, as it is applied, is meaningless and has already been thoroughly researched.  He was searching for something that is not there and he will still be searching which is what any person of science would do.

I also have to question his motives as he takes Testosterone Boosters from Scivation, the company he whores around with, and appears in their ads, promoting the use of products that have no Scientific backing, never have been in a peer-reviewed journal and certainly do not work.  You have to wonder about his validity at that point.

Lastly, I take what he says sometimes with a grain of salt, due to the fact he may be religious. He did attend a religiously backed school, ECKERD college. I suspect he is religious as his fiance` is.  I have to question any religious person as they believe without evidence.  If that is not the case, then I can take him more seriously.

[The True Adonis]

And you are laughing behind the computer screen right now.  I think hurting others is a very insecure way to be entertained.

Please provide EVIDENCE, peer-reviewed journals or research studies, where I am wrong.  If you cannot do that, then you should gag your mouth, tie yourself to a wooden cross, and have your training partner toss live grenades at your feet.

[Big Worm]

what is recommended for homosexuals who still have 75lbs of fat to lose?

Ask your boyfriend to google,cut and paste ,,then send you a p.m of the answer..

[The Master]

I don`t think he is wrong.  He doesn`t say 1g per lb is a requirement. He has been wrong on a lot of things in the past and has changed his views which is a good thing.  These things include: High Protein,(Now says more is meaningless and used to believe otherwise) Meal Frequency,(He now knows, like I do, that the number of meals is meaningless, more is not better), Overall Caloric intake is the most important thing and there is no such thing as a cheat meal or bad food.

Most of these statements are contradicted in this article: http://www.bodybuilding.com/fun/layne36.htm

He also wrote an article in a nutrition journal not that long ago where he concluded that certain foods ARE better than other foods (which was the topic of a thread posted here that you never wrote an answer to).

I agree that he does not say 1g/lb is a requirement, but he sure says that it's optimal.

I do think he got into his area of study looking for a "golden egg" and came up VERY short as his body of work and area of expertise on Leucine is not significant at all, as it is applied, is meaningless and has already been thoroughly researched.  He was searching for something that is not there and he will still be searching which is what any person of science would do.

His general expertice in protein metabolism is very relevant, as the body of knowledge needed to even start working on a Ph.D. is massive. At the same time, his lucine research does have direct and indirect links to knowledge very relevant for this discussion (and lucine is somewhat relevant itself).

I also have to question his motives as he takes Testosterone Boosters from Scivation, the company he whores around with, and appears in their ads, promoting the use of products that have no Scientific backing, never have been in a peer-reviewed journal and certainly do not work.  You have to wonder about his validity at that point.

This is not relevant to his expertice at all, the supplements are not illegal to use in the organizations he competes in, thus, you are attempting to discredit his integrity. Bad attempt.

Lastly, I take what he says sometimes with a grain of salt, due to the fact he may be religious. He did attend a religiously backed school, ECKERD college. I suspect he is religious as his fiance` is.  I have to question any religious person as they believe without evidence.  If that is not the case, then I can take him more seriously.

Another attempt at discrediting him. Lots of people have gone to a religiously backed school (including myself, and I'm not religious at all), but this does not mean that he's religious. (and if he is, it won't help you discredit his integrity when he has his credentials anyway)

His recommendations and articles do contradict your statements (even his recent ones), and his objectivity as a research scientist and decorated competitor does in my opinion makes him very able to give valid and educated advices.


You have still not given any real counterarguments to his statements and recommendations. (the simple point is that his views seriously contradicts yours.)

[shiftedShapes]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/True-believer_syndrome

you are the True believer, cowed by years of reading Flex magazine.  Face facts, you don't have nearly as much muscle as you think you do.  The plus is that you will look a lot better than you could have ever imagined if you shed the fat


hey genius I was advocating a low calorie diet while Adonis was still a Puff Ball thinking that he was carrying 200lbs of shredded beef under his fat suit.  In fact if you care to you can go back through my posts and see me trying to prod him towards realism (I was unsucessful).

I came across the performance benefits of eating less myself.  I went on a 1 month trip to Asia and had to switch from 6 clean meals a day to 2 or 3 "junk" meals.  I lost weight throughout the trip

The way I know I didn't lose muscle is that as I lost weight I actually gained strength (not relative strength mind you, absolute strength).

[The True Adonis]

Most of these statements are contradicted in this article: http://www.bodybuilding.com/fun/layne36.htm

He also wrote an article in a nutrition journal not that long ago where he concluded that certain foods ARE better than other foods (which was the topic of a thread posted here that you never wrote an answer to).

I agree that he does not say 1g/lb is a requirement, but he sure says that it's optimal.

His general expertice in protein metabolism is very relevant, as the body of knowledge needed to even start working on a Ph.D. is massive. At the same time, his lucine research does have direct and indirect links to knowledge very relevant for this discussion (and lucine is somewhat relevant itself).

This is not relevant to his expertice at all, the supplements are not illegal to use in the organizations he competes in, thus, you are attempting to discredit his integrity. Bad attempt.

Another attempt at discrediting him. Lots of people have gone to a religiously backed school (including myself, and I'm not religious at all), but this does not mean that he's religious. 

His recommendations and articles do contradict your statements (even his recent ones), and his objectivity as a research scientist and decorated competitor does in my opinion makes him very able to give valid and educated advices.


You have still not given any real counterarguments to his statements and recommendations. (the simple point is that his views seriously contradicts yours.)

That is the article I am referring to.  That is an old one and he no longer subscribes to much of what he wrote in the Layne36 Precontest article. It is a few years old.  Go to Muscular Development and read what he wrote this year and a few months ago and you will find that he totally contradicts what he wrote.  There is nothing wrong with doing that. It is what all Intelligent people do.  Science is ammendable.

[The Master]

That is the article I am referring to.  That is an old one and he no longer subscribes to much of what he wrote in the Layne36 Precontest article. It is a few years old.  Go to Muscular Development and read what he wrote this year and a few months ago and you will find that he totally contradicts what he wrote.  There is nothing wrong with doing that. It is what all Intelligent people do.  Science is ammendable.

Do you have any links? (If I was wrong regarding the age of that precontest bible, then: my mistake)

[The True Adonis]

Do you have any links?

Go to the Natural Section on MD.

There is a thread titled Layne Norton.  Should be a sticky.  Start reading the whole thing.  You will find that he has changed his views, which is a good thing.