Author Topic: Perma-Bulkers: Attention - Good News  (Read 22468 times)

War-Horse

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6490
Re: Perma-Bulkers: Attention - Good News
« Reply #175 on: June 28, 2007, 10:01:05 AM »
AHAHAAHAH!!!  30-50 lbs.....you're outta your embittered natty bb'ing mind.   That man looks just fine with those bf levels....looks very healthy.....there's not question he works out......woman love his look.    If he chooses to go lighter so be it.   With embittered natties, once you crush their "he looks like crap" arguement then they shoot for the "he could look SOOOOO much better".  Says who?  An embittered natty....the most biased, unrelenting of physique opinions?   If he lost 50lbs he'd look like nothin.....I don't give a shit if his size is combo of muscle and fat........natties can't accept that some people don't care about being less than 10% bf.




Thanks MOS.     Im going down to 210lbs to sub 10% fat level.   In that pick i was at 18%.    feel good now at 12-13%.           In a tank top, i cause some staring and pointing.....my wife laughs. 8)


The women seem to like a little bulkier running back look....its less offensive, more approachable.  In all its better to be a little heaviar than be a skeleton with abs and hating bigger guys..... 8)

Man of Steel

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 19404
  • Isaiah40:28-31 ✝ Romans10:9 ✝ 1Peter3:15
Re: Perma-Bulkers: Attention - Good News
« Reply #176 on: June 28, 2007, 10:10:20 AM »
what's the quote about easy tiger?  Well whatever it is apply it here, you seem to be in a frenzy.

Warhorse himself just said that he lost 25lbs already so he obviously agrees with me.

As far as how he looks now, yeah no one would say he's fat, and he does look big.  However, if he was lean he would be a lot healthier, and would actually look a lot more muscular.  Seems like the right choice is obvious to both me and war horse.  What is your investment in keeping him bulked, do you need reassurance that you are making the right choice by being pudgy?

AHAAHAHAAH on the first line....spare me.

As far as the rest is concerned, as I said, if he chooses to get lighter so be it....personal choice.   My continued gripe is that the only people that are ever concerned about those bigger than them are natties.....embittered, unrelenting, "my opinion is all that matters" natties.   I'm perfectly content being pudgy/fat/bloated/replete with subcutaneous fat/what have you......others on this board cave when it's suggested that "they're fat".   If a person wants to get lean then fine.   If they wanna stay heavier and (heaven forbid) carry "unneccesary" bf then fine.    And always using this "I'm lighter than you with less bf therefore I'm healthier" crutch is pure garbage.   I've known 170lb guys that were shredded on the outside and who's insides resembled a diseased cadaver.   All the while the fat guy next door has healthy levels in his blood, two and a half times the bf and is perfectly content.

You may wanna look like you can rock climb all day long, but I prefer to look like I can lift the rock.   The difference will always be that folks like me don't care what you choose to look like, but embittered natties will always be concerned with how everyone else looks.

Man of Steel

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 19404
  • Isaiah40:28-31 ✝ Romans10:9 ✝ 1Peter3:15
Re: Perma-Bulkers: Attention - Good News
« Reply #177 on: June 28, 2007, 10:11:47 AM »



Thanks MOS.     Im going down to 210lbs to sub 10% fat level.   In that pick i was at 18%.    feel good now at 12-13%.           In a tank top, i cause some staring and pointing.....my wife laughs. 8)


The women seem to like a little bulkier running back look....its less offensive, more approachable.  In all its better to be a little heaviar than be a skeleton with abs and hating bigger guys..... 8)

And brother, that's totally cool.....I respect that.   You wanna trim down cool.   You wanna stay thicker cool.

shiftedShapes

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 3828
Re: ATTENTION PERMA BULKERS
« Reply #178 on: June 28, 2007, 10:12:30 AM »
well, maybe that's where we differ because i'm not about just appearing like. i am big, muscular and strong and i wouldn't have it any other way.

nothing would be more depressing for me than to kill my funtionality and power in the name of an illusion. gives me shivers just thinking about it.

have/can you provide pics of your shredded 150lb self to illustrate your point and in relation to jeffries?

leaner is most definitely more functional if we are talking about bw to strenght ratio which is ultimately the primary determinant of agility and speed.

Also I have gotten stronger as I lost weight so I don't think it is necessarily the case that you will lose power (although some people, who probably slack on their training, do report getting weaker).

I don't have any current pics, but I did post some from a few months ago when I was fattier and less muscular.  Look through my posts and you will find them.


Man of Steel

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 19404
  • Isaiah40:28-31 ✝ Romans10:9 ✝ 1Peter3:15
Re: Perma-Bulkers: Attention - Good News
« Reply #179 on: June 28, 2007, 10:13:59 AM »
leaner is most definitely more functional if we are talking about bw to strenght ratio which is ultimately the primary determinant of agility and speed.

Also I have gotten stronger as I lost weight so I don't think it is necessarily the case that you will lose power (although some people, who probably slack on their training, do report getting weaker).

I don't have any current pics, but I did post some from a few months ago when I was fattier and less muscular.  Look through my posts and you will find them.



And here's the thing.....I agree with everything you posted here.   

shiftedShapes

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 3828
Re: Perma-Bulkers: Attention - Good News
« Reply #180 on: June 28, 2007, 10:20:08 AM »
And here's the thing.....I agree with everything you posted here.   

yeah I thought we came to an agreement which is why I was suprised when you got so agro.

btw here's the pic from earlier this winter. 


BEAST 8692

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 3545
Re: ATTENTION PERMA BULKERS
« Reply #181 on: June 28, 2007, 10:39:08 AM »
leaner is most definitely more functional if we are talking about bw to strenght ratio which is ultimately the primary determinant of agility and speed.

Also I have gotten stronger as I lost weight so I don't think it is necessarily the case that you will lose power (although some people, who probably slack on their training, do report getting weaker).

I don't have any current pics, but I did post some from a few months ago when I was fattier and less muscular.  Look through my posts and you will find them.



leaner, yes, but not shredded or trying to create illusions.

i don't have any interest in being a powerlfifter (exclusively interested in lifting the most amount of weight possible at the expense of condition) but i'm not interested in walking around looking like a shredded contest ready bber either (again, at the expense of condition and strength).

there is a point where you are lossing too much muscle mass whilst attempting to maintain shredded condition.

btw, i need to see more pics, but i don't see shredded in that pic. no offence, you appear to be in excellent shape, just not shredded. it's pretty hard to tell though with the visual, etc.

you don't have to post pics, but you're making some pretty bold statements there ie that you're in 'shredded' condition.

shiftedShapes

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 3828
Re: ATTENTION PERMA BULKERS
« Reply #182 on: June 28, 2007, 10:43:17 AM »
leaner, yes, but not shredded or trying to create illusions.

i don't have any interest in being a powerlfifter (exclusively interested in lifting the most amount of weight possible at the expense of condition) but i'm not interested in walking around looking like a shredded contest ready bber either (again, at the expense of condition and strength).

there is a point where you are lossing too much muscle mass whilst attempting to maintain shredded condition.

btw, i need to see more pics, but i don't see shredded in that pic. no offence, you appear to be in excellent shape, just not shredded. it's pretty hard to tell though with the visual, etc.

you don't have to post pics, but you're making some pretty bold statements there ie that you're in 'shredded' condition.

no I'm not shredded by any means in that pic.  I have lost a good bit of fat since then, and have seen no drop in energy or strength.  So I figure, as an athlete, the less deadweight I carry the better.

I will take some more pics soon, and I hope that they show the progress that I imagine that I have made.

BEAST 8692

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 3545
Re: ATTENTION PERMA BULKERS
« Reply #183 on: June 28, 2007, 10:45:15 AM »
no I'm not shredded by any means in that pic.  I have lost a good bit of fat since then, and have seen no drop in energy or strength.  So I figure, as an athlete, the less deadweight I carry the better.

I will take some more pics soon, and I hope that they show the progress that I imagine that I have made.

well, it depends on what type of athlete you are and what event you plan on competing in.

shiftedShapes

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 3828
Re: ATTENTION PERMA BULKERS
« Reply #184 on: June 28, 2007, 10:56:38 AM »
well, it depends on what type of athlete you are and what event you plan on competing in.

I'm using the word athlete in the general sense of athleticism, not 350lb athlete that plays left guard.  I get your point though.

BEAST 8692

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 3545
Re: ATTENTION PERMA BULKERS
« Reply #185 on: June 28, 2007, 11:17:08 AM »
I'm using the word athlete in the general sense of athleticism, not 350lb athlete that plays left guard.  I get your point though.

thankyou

if you were competing in a 100 metre sprint, maybe. a marathon, you would probably keel over and die from over heating and exhaustion.

there are many variables with different sports and that's what i'm getting at with functionality. being in shredded contest condition would be stupid in just every sport not involving...well, competing in a bbing contest. :-\

shiftedShapes

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 3828
Re: ATTENTION PERMA BULKERS
« Reply #186 on: June 28, 2007, 11:25:38 AM »
thankyou

if you were competing in a 100 metre sprint, maybe. a marathon, you would probably keel over and die from over heating and exhaustion.

there are many variables with different sports and that's what i'm getting at with functionality. being in shredded contest condition would be stupid in just every sport not involving...well, competing in a bbing contest. :-\

I think contest BBers are at a highly functional level of BF the problem is that they take it further and drop water.  That is the unhealthy function compromising part.

Also you are right I am interested in explosive movement.  I'm not really into long distance endurance.  I can see how a slightly higher BF level would be good for that.

BEAST 8692

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 3545
Re: ATTENTION PERMA BULKERS
« Reply #187 on: June 28, 2007, 11:37:42 AM »
I think contest BBers are at a highly functional level of BF the problem is that they take it further and drop water.  That is the unhealthy function compromising part.

Also you are right I am interested in explosive movement.  I'm not really into long distance endurance.  I can see how a slightly higher BF level would be good for that.

shredded probably does apply to water levels, true, but if you were a true shredded natural that matter is solved within hours.

i think maybe you're talking about 'ripped' condition which is a great way to be if you can manage it and maintain it. trying to get your body fat lower and lower while your weight keeps shooting south sounds like a recipe for anorexia nervosa imo.

shiftedShapes

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 3828
Re: ATTENTION PERMA BULKERS
« Reply #188 on: June 28, 2007, 11:57:17 AM »
shredded probably does apply to water levels, true, but if you were a true shredded natural that matter is solved within hours.

i think maybe you're talking about 'ripped' condition which is a great way to be if you can manage it and maintain it. trying to get your body fat lower and lower while your weight keeps shooting south sounds like a recipe for anorexia nervosa imo.

my weight has been stable for a while, partially I think because my metabolism has gotten a lot slower.  i would also like to think that I'm gaining muscle whilst losing fat, but that may or may not be the case.

BEAST 8692

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 3545
Re: Perma-Bulkers: Attention - Good News
« Reply #189 on: June 28, 2007, 12:05:30 PM »
in terms of maximum bbing potential and presenting the most shredded muscle on stage, yes you're right, you are going to find it far more difficult than someone using hormones.

however, what guys like you and adonis are doing is being minimalistic.

your body WILL add more muscle with more calories in a natural state, but there does come a point of diminishing returns and, yes, if you plan on presenting that extra muscle you will have to reduce calories.

when you start shedding body fat, depending on how you train, etc while you're doing it, you'll obviously start getting smaller and this can cause the insecure to panic and start feeding again ie perma bulkers. the food acts to gain weight and to fulfill their psychological need to feel full, especially if they started bbing in the first place because they were underweight.

however, the body's natural primary focus is maintaining body fat levels at a certain point. it still operates on the system of feast or famine. in other words, you're stuck in your cave while a hungry saber tooth tiger is sitting waiting outside for you and hunting and gathering is off the to do list today. what's your body going to do? preserve fat and burn up useless stuff for energy like that extra muscle you don't need for a typical day of hunting and gathering.

this is the critical opponent you have to overcome, your body's natural homeostatis. to get as big and ripped as possible you need to convince your body that you need that extra muscle to live.

the problem with simply losing weight until you get ripped without serious attention to preserving muscle is that your body will naturally shed muscle until you are at minimum levels. in other words you've gained nothing but a ripped up body, not dissimilar to a junky that takes a lot of speed and doesn't eat much. yes you will be very low body fat but you won't retain your potentially highest ratio of muscle mass.

shiftedShapes

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 3828
Re: Perma-Bulkers: Attention - Good News
« Reply #190 on: June 28, 2007, 12:46:15 PM »
preserve fat and burn up useless stuff for energy like that extra muscle you don't need for a typical day of hunting and gathering.

This is where you are wrong.  The fat is what's useless, it's function is exactly to serve as an energy reserve in times of famine, and that is when it gets burned.  the muscle is what you absolutely need to succeed as a hunter and your body will preserve it to ensure that you can get food when the opportunity presents itself.  This should make intuitive sense to you, and if you're looking for empiracle data there is plenty out there.  More accessable proof can be found in the program Survivor.  Watch it and you will see that everyone loses fat without any apparent loss of muscle, even though they are on close to starvation diets.

BEAST 8692

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 3545
Re: Perma-Bulkers: Attention - Good News
« Reply #191 on: June 28, 2007, 12:59:48 PM »
This is where you are wrong.  The fat is what's useless, it's function is exactly to serve as an energy reserve in times of famine, and that is when it gets burned.  the muscle is what you absolutely need to succeed as a hunter and your body will preserve it to ensure that you can get food when the opportunity presents itself.  This should make intuitive sense to you, and if you're looking for empiracle data there is plenty out there.  More accessable proof can be found in the program Survivor.  Watch it and you will see that everyone loses fat without any apparent loss of muscle, even though they are on close to starvation diets.

not a good example.

the ones that have large trained muscle mass lose muscle also. it may not look like it though because their definition will obviously improve.

the thing is, how do you know who's losing what? visual appearance is deceiving and the same applies to you, how do you know how much actual muscle you've retained?

if you're talking about retaining/building muscle while calorie restricted how do you assess the net loss vs gain?

Man of Steel

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 19404
  • Isaiah40:28-31 ✝ Romans10:9 ✝ 1Peter3:15
Re: Perma-Bulkers: Attention - Good News
« Reply #192 on: June 28, 2007, 01:16:16 PM »
yeah I thought we came to an agreement which is why I was suprised when you got so agro.

btw here's the pic from earlier this winter. 



C'mon brother you know better than that.....I ain't mad at ya!   I get tired of the arguement and the side of "fat guys" is rarely defended....people try and cave....not sure why.   Now, I don't support obesity, but obesity within the cult of bb is something altogether different than the clinical term.   Ain't anyone we call obese technincally obese....far from it.   Still, my position is simple, I don't believe bigger is better or that leaner is superior.    I just get tired of natties with superlow levels of bf thinkin their shit don't stink and whatever they spew is gospel.   

shiftedShapes

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 3828
Re: Perma-Bulkers: Attention - Good News
« Reply #193 on: June 28, 2007, 01:24:24 PM »
not a good example.

the ones that have large trained muscle mass lose muscle also. it may not look like it though because their definition will obviously improve.

the thing is, how do you know who's losing what? visual appearance is deceiving and the same applies to you, how do you know how much actual muscle you've retained?

if you're talking about retaining/building muscle while calorie restricted how do you assess the net loss vs gain?

really it's tough to know exactly short of a biopsy.

I go by the mirror, scale, and my strength.

When I lost the weight, my muscles appeared to be as big or bigger, my strenght went up, and my weight went down...So I deduced that I was losing fat and water but not muscle.

BEAST 8692

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 3545
Re: Perma-Bulkers: Attention - Good News
« Reply #194 on: June 28, 2007, 01:48:22 PM »
really it's tough to know exactly short of a biopsy.

I go by the mirror, scale, and my strength.

When I lost the weight, my muscles appeared to be as big or bigger, my strenght went up, and my weight went down...So I deduced that I was losing fat and water but not muscle.

how do you know your strength went up? were you lifting heavier weights in the same form?

shiftedShapes

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 3828
Re: Perma-Bulkers: Attention - Good News
« Reply #195 on: June 28, 2007, 02:07:54 PM »
how do you know your strength went up? were you lifting heavier weights in the same form?

yep this held for singles and higher rep ranges.

climber

  • Getbig III
  • ***
  • Posts: 501
Re: Perma-Bulkers: Attention - Good News
« Reply #196 on: June 28, 2007, 02:25:07 PM »
CRON is bullshit... it's not possible to get a good enough insulin response and maintain high enough levels of insulin for enough time to maintain maximum anabolism. You will grow better and be stronger if you over eat a bit... That is why bulking works and why it will always work.
Hrmmm

shiftedShapes

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 3828
Re: Perma-Bulkers: Attention - Good News
« Reply #197 on: June 28, 2007, 02:28:39 PM »
CRON is bullshit... it's not possible to get a good enough insulin response and maintain high enough levels of insulin for enough time to maintain maximum anabolism. You will grow better and be stronger if you over eat a bit... That is why bulking works and why it will always work.

bald assertion.

climber

  • Getbig III
  • ***
  • Posts: 501
Re: Perma-Bulkers: Attention - Good News
« Reply #198 on: June 28, 2007, 02:37:37 PM »
It would be a bald assertion if Sevastase had said it, but I'm not a bald witch...

It's also neither a bold assertion. If you were to read a bit more, then maybe you would understand the science.

BTW, I have a masters degree in food science, as an undergrad my major was Biochemistry. What do you have?

Hrmmm

shiftedShapes

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 3828
Re: Perma-Bulkers: Attention - Good News
« Reply #199 on: June 28, 2007, 02:39:40 PM »
It would be a bald assertion if Sevastase had said it, but I'm not a bald witch...

It's also neither a bold assertion. If you were to read a bit more, then maybe you would understand the science.

BTW, I have a masters degree in food science, as an undergrad my major was Biochemistry. What do you have?



I have enough education to know the difference between a bald assertion and a "bold assertion"