old school diets need not apply

[Dball]

what is going on with all the comparisons with old school bbers and their diets like zane and arnold?  i think arnold was simply amazing and what he and others did with the knowledge of nutrition is a testament to each of them.  the thing is, this is not the 70's, 80's or even the 90's.  in the last thirty years we have developed the internet, cell phones, air bags and there have been huge advances in nutrition, dieting and bodybuilding, which make the diets of arnold, franco and zane obsolete.  did they work?  hell yes.  but we know more now, and that knowledge gives us advantages arnold didnt have. do you think if arnold had access to whey protein hydrolysate he would have stuffed himself with 2 pounds of red meat a day?  no way!  think or how they would have looked if they knew about meal timing and absorption rates and creatine, etc.  some guys need to get with the program.  the knowledge we have gives us an advantage, take it.

[MidniteRambo]

All these advances . . . . and yet we still have people on this board advising us to eat sticks of butter and that ice cream is better than oat meal.  Go figure.

[Dball]

thats exactly what i am talking about.  idiots talking about the glycemic indexes of ice cream over oatmeal or brown rice, creatine is "worthless", crap like that.  we know too much now to buy this nonsense.

[mental_masturbator]

I mildly disagree.  Sure protein powders are much, much better than the crap that was available back in-the-day which certainly makes it easier to get one's daily quota without the fat and sugar that used to be associated with higher protein consumption.  However, is a whey hydrosylate or micellar casein or hydrolyzed casein peptides or whatever really any better than a standard milk/egg/whey powder for putting on musle.  Some of these powders sell for over $10 a pound!  There exists an incredible variety of supplements today that promise alot in terms of muscle gain and fat loss...I can only think of a precious few that actually delivered.  When it comes to bodybuilding there really isn't anything new under the sun.  The exercises are the same; the principles behind gaining mass and losing fat have been known for along time.  Sure we know more now about what actually happens at the cellular and even molecular level today but I've gotta ask does such knowledge really change anything in how we approach training?  For me, anyways, the answer is no.  To get bigger, I've got to get stronger and eat a bit more.  To lose some fat, I cut back a bit on calories.  I like to cycle my training/eating in a wave pattern but other approaches are equally valid.  I've have to hand it to magazine/internet gurus...they have alot of people convinced that they have to spend mucho dinero on supplements and micromanage every aspect of their training to see results.

[dontknowit]

What kind of advantages have been made.
The industrie is selling us all kind of shit and makes us believe that it works,

in the meantime Internet and especially fora tells us that they're selling bogus. So yes some kind of advantages has been made,
but the basics are still the same.

Eat clean, eat a signifacant kind of vegetables, eat a significant kind of proteine, eat good fats.
If you don't have enough proteine, use a supplement to complete your diet and that is the biggest problem.

A lot of companies try to convince us that the supplement is the basis and your main meals complete the diet.