The Adonis Diet Principles, Open-Source

[wavelength]

yes when i didn't eat before/straight after a workout my gains froze for quite a while, as soon as i ate immediatley after the w/o i grew - calories were equal.

Although right now, the principles only apply to dieting down, I still have a hard time believing that.
When you say "grew" do you mean you only got stronger with the right timing or you only gained weight at all with the right timing?

no, as there is no way to acurately track the calories burned by cardio or weight without expensive hightec equipment, however as i said i am a endomorph, you clearly are an ectomorph. you can perhaps get leaner than me on higher calories, or perhps your body is more efficient at burning energy. where as i stalled at 9% despite only taking in 1000 cals a day + cardio+weights.

I gain fat very easily, so I'm not sure about my body type. I don't really believe in the ecto-meso-endo categorization. I do think there are differences to certain factors attempted to be described by such categories, but most of the time a certain person will have a combination of these factors not covered by one of the types.

In any way, the principles say nothing about the total amount of calories needed to follow them. Following them does not require any hightech equipment. I just watch the rate of weight loss and adjust calorie intake accordingly. I did that with and without cardio. Even if we take into account, that my body reacts differently than yours, the difference between the diets in my case was not just small, it was 0.

[Fatpanda]

Although right now, the principles only apply to dieting down, I still have a hard time believing that.
When you say "grew" do you mean you only got stronger with the right timing or you only gained weight at all with the right timing?

yes, muscle increased in size, strength increased too. I didn't stay at that calorie level long though, maybe only a month, then i increased them around the w/o and the gains kept on coming, which led to the bulk i went on.

we can agree to disagree about the cardio. i do not think it is possible for you to know with any great certainty how many calories you will burn doing weights or cardio to enable to acurately say it has zero impact over calorie restriction alone. as you lose weight, your buring less calories with every activity, so while yes you can increase cardio which will either maintain the original calorie defecit or you can reduce calories from meals, but to know which part is most responsible or even if it is optimal would take much study.

[wavelength]

yes, muscle increased in size, strength increased too. I didn't stay at that calorie level long though, maybe only a month, then i increased them around the w/o and the gains kept on coming, which led to the bulk i went on.

we can agree to disagree about the cardio. i do not think it is possible for you to know with any great certainty how many calories you will burn doing weights or cardio to enable to acurately say it has zero impact over calorie restriction alone. as you lose weight, your buring less calories with every activity, so while yes you can increase cardio which will either maintain the original calorie defecit or you can reduce calories from meals, but to know which part is most responsible or even if it is optimal would take much study.

Well I know one thing fo' sho', I'm not gonna run in a fockin' treadmill anymore, if I'm not 100% convinced that it makes any difference. I certainly need no study for that.

[mazrim]

Cardio just makes me weaker/more drained. Waste of time, imo.

[Alex23]

Cardio just makes me weaker/more drained. Waste of time, imo.

Spoken the truth.

[ASJChaotic]

That was not an answer to the question. The principles say nothing about the total amount of calories a certain individual would need to meet them. So again, did you follow P1-P5? Sorry to be obnoxious, but I'm really interested.

the whole principle is based on the fact that CALORIES are the only thing that matters not what type of food
so you're saying that I can eat 4000 calories and lose 1-3 pounds a week?
yes I followed but I wasn't eating enough
1500-1800 calories, that is no where near enough so I lose 30 pounds of muscle in a matter of months and my body fat % actually went higher
now I'm eating twice that amount and I'm leaner than ever before 

[tbombz]

Proper bodybuilding-style cardio shouldnt make you lose energy or strength. In fact quite the opposite. Just make sure your doing very light cardio. Walking on a zero incline at 2.6mph for 35 mins after your weight training for example. Its not so much a 'cals in vs. cals out" thing... but more of a hormone related thing.

[wavelength]

the whole principle is based on the fact that CALORIES are the only thing that matters not what type of food

Nopes, see P1 and P2.

so you're saying that I can eat 4000 calories and lose 1-3 pounds a week?

No, didn't say that.

yes I followed but I wasn't eating enough
1500-1800 calories, that is no where near enough so I lose 30 pounds of muscle in a matter of months and my body fat % actually went higher
now I'm eating twice that amount and I'm leaner than ever before 

OK, so what you're saying is that with cardio you are able to eat twice as much when you're on the same rate of weight loss as without cardio? I never heard that one. I don't think that's even physically possible, unless you are doing 5h of cardio each day. Are you sure you got your numbers right? No bash, maybe you're really a genetic freak, but that's unheard of, AFAIK.

[wavelength]

Cardio just makes me weaker/more drained. Waste of time, imo.

Exactly. If anything, it eats away muscle. Completely unnecessary in my experience.

[wavelength]

Proper bodybuilding-style cardio shouldnt make you lose energy or strength. In fact quite the opposite. Just make sure your doing very light cardio. Walking on a zero incline at 2.6mph for 35 mins after your weight training for example. Its not so much a 'cals in vs. cals out" thing... but more of a hormone related thing.

Is this from experience? Did you try to follow P1-P5 with and without very light cardio? I tried different forms of cardio, including very light cardio for 1h a day. Zero difference.

IMO, the hormone related thing is easily achived by the "cardio" you automatically get from weight training and normal daily activity.

[Fatpanda]

Exactly. If anything, it eats away muscle. Completely unnecessary in my experience.

nonsense, why do you think westside put so much emphasis on gpp - it improves overall fitness and allows their athletes to get stronger.

in my example my fat loss was stalled on 1000cals a day with cardio and weights, if i ate any less, i'd be starving, my protein levels would be far too low to maintain my lean body mass, and i'd have virtually zero energy, in fact at 1000 i already felt that way. cardio was my only option to increase calorie expenditure without imacting my already baseline diet. in the end i said fvck this, and started eating like a real man again.

[wavelength]

nonsense, why do you think westside put so much emphasis on gpp - it improves overall fitness and allows their athletes to get stronger.

Maybe it's nonsense for you, I'm only talking from experience.

in my example my fat loss was stalled on 1000cals a day with cardio and weights, if i ate any less, i'd be starving, my protein levels would be far too low to maintain my lean body mass, and i'd have virtually zero energy, in fact at 1000 i already felt that way. cardio was my only option to increase calorie expenditure without imacting my already baseline diet. in the end i said fvck this, and started eating like a real man again.

You kept your weight at 1000kcals a day? What was your weight then?
I'm around 150-155lbs right now and I need 2000kcals to maintain.

[Fatpanda]

i was around 210, i was weak as a kitten, constantly tired, was eating virtually no fat 5g max a day. 200g protein, very low carb, 30-40g a day. i lasted around a month with no change in weight. and gave i gave up and started eating again.

so it proves to me we are all different, 2000-2500 cals is maintenence for me.

looking at your pictures it sems to me you are ripped to the bone, have you ever been over 20% body fat? over 15%? have you ever tried a bulk?

[wavelength]

i was around 210, i was weak as a kitten, constantly tired, was eating virtually no fat 5g max a day. 200g protein, very low carb, 30-40g a day. i lasted around a month with no change in weight. and gave i gave up and started eating again.

so it proves to me we are all different, 2000-2500 cals is maintenence for me.

I don't understand. You say that 2000-2500 cal is maintenence yet you couldn't lose weight on half of that? How is that even possible?

I agree that we're all different, but if you can't lose weight on 1000 cals weighing 210 (which would be your maintenance intake in this case), that means I would need almost 3 times the cals/lb bodyweight you need to maintain. That sounds like a stretch to me. Are you absolutely sure these numbers are correct? Again, no bash, I'm just curious.

looking at your pictures it sems to me you are ripped to the bone, have you ever been over 20% body fat? over 15%? have you ever tried a bulk?

I'm not ripped to the bone yet. In my current diet I want to find out how far I can go with the principles, and if they hold true until contest condition. The small avatar pics are somewhat misleading, full pics are in my progress thread: http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=222371.0

Yes I bulked. My heaviest was about 185 lbs, where I probably had about 17% BF.

[mazrim]

I'm not ripped to the bone yet. In my current diet I want to find out how far I can go with the principles, and if they hold true until contest condition. The small avatar pics are somewhat misleading, full pics are in my progress thread: http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=222371.0

Looking good in those pics, Wave.

[wavelength]

Looking good in those pics, Wave.

Thanks! Unfortunally, Deicide is right, chicken legs











... all the way puny, actually

My next quest will be to bulk on the Adonis Principles.
I'm gonna be a monster.

[Fatpanda]

I don't understand. You say that 2000-2500 cal is maintenance yet you couldn't lose weight on half of that? How is that even possible?

I agree that we're all different, but if you can't lose weight on 1000 cals weighing 210 (which would be your maintenance intake in this case), that means I would need almost 3 times the cals/lb bodyweight you need to maintain. That sounds like a stretch to me. Are you absolutely sure these numbers are correct? Again, no bash, I'm just curious.

yes, positive, i couldn't believe it myself, however for some reason i have a unique bodychemisty. for instance i have taken 300-400mcg t3 with no effect( different brands), 360-480mcg clen, with no effect, i have taken up to 800mg of dnp with little if any fat loss - certainly no scale change, and no visable fat loss - plenty of sides though.

but ephedrine, caffeine always works 

i am an asthmatic, and think my salbutamol inhaler has something to do with it, but i can't be sure.

i simply believe i need to hammer the cardio for at least an hour a day if i intend to get back to single digit bf.

[wavelength]

yes, positive, i couldn't believe it myself, however for some reason i have a unique bodychemisty. for instance i have taken 300-400mcg t3 with no effect( different brands), 360-480mcg clen, with no effect, i have taken up to 800mg of dnp with little if any fat loss - certainly no scale change, and no visable fat loss - plenty of sides though.

but ephedrine, caffeine always works 

i am an asthmatic, and think my salbutamol inhaler has something to do with it, but i can't be sure.

i simply believe i need to hammer the cardio for at least an hour a day if i intend to get back to single digit bf.

Strange. So without cardio, you can't lose weight on 1000cal. If you do the 1h cardio a day, how many cals can you take in then and lose weight (and at what rate can you lose weight)?

Sorry to hear about your asthma, I certainly know nothing about the effects that would have on dieting.

[Fatpanda]

Strange. So without cardio, you can't lose weight on 1000cal. If you do the 1h cardio a day, how many cals can you take in then and lose weight (and at what rate can you lose weight)?

Sorry to hear about your asthma, I certainly know nothing about the effects that would have on dieting.

no with cardio, i did not lose weight on 1000cals a day. i was only doing 15 mins a day, as i couldn't stand anymore with eating so few calories, i was craving food non stop, i was so weak and tired. every weight workout felt like the hardest ever. with the cardio every leg movement felt like i was climbing a mountain.

what i'm saying is i believe i can/could lose more fat if i added cardio at a higher calorie range, and increased it there to increase calorie expenditure if needed, thus keeping my metabolism higher, rather than drop calories  via food reduction thus slowing metabolism down, which i did in the past, and which i feel was the cause of me stalling at 1000cals.

don't worry about the asthma, it barely has any effect on my life.

[ASJChaotic]

no with cardio, i did not lose weight on 1000cals a day. i was only doing 15 mins a day, as i couldn't stand anymore with eating so few calories, i was craving food non stop, i was so weak and tired. every weight workout felt like the hardest ever. with the cardio every leg movement felt like i was climbing a mountain.

what i'm saying is i believe i can/could lose more fat if i added cardio at a higher calorie range, and increased it there to increase calorie expenditure if needed, thus keeping my metabolism higher, rather than drop calories  via food reduction thus slowing metabolism down, which i did in the past, and which i feel was the cause of me stalling at 1000cals.

don't worry about the asthma, it barely has any effect on my life.

you were eating 1000 calories a day?
dude how the fuck did you live?
you would lose 90% muscle with that amount of calories

[ASJChaotic]

I don't understand. You say that 2000-2500 cal is maintenence yet you couldn't lose weight on half of that? How is that even possible?

I agree that we're all different, but if you can't lose weight on 1000 cals weighing 210 (which would be your maintenance intake in this case), that means I would need almost 3 times the cals/lb bodyweight you need to maintain. That sounds like a stretch to me. Are you absolutely sure these numbers are correct? Again, no bash, I'm just curious.

I'm not ripped to the bone yet. In my current diet I want to find out how far I can go with the principles, and if they hold true until contest condition. The small avatar pics are somewhat misleading, full pics are in my progress thread: http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=222371.0

Yes I bulked. My heaviest was about 185 lbs, where I probably had about 17% BF.

you obviously don't know anything about metabolism and starvation mode 
and you obviously don't know this simple principle
eating less = slowing metabolism
doing cardio = increasing metabolism
you can eat 500 calories a day and I bet you, you won't lose anyfat week after week, and all you'll lose will be muscle
yes I eat 3,500 calories when I'm cutting
and I eat around 5,000 when I want to maintain
I eat 14,000 calories once in a while just for fun 

[wavelength]

you obviously don't know anything about metabolism and starvation mode 
and you obviously don't know this simple principle
eating less = slowing metabolism
doing cardio = increasing metabolism

Again, this thread is about experience. I know what works for me and what does not, regardless of nutrition science, which is NOT an exact science (yet), because there are just too many interwoven and unknown factors. Scientific papers in nutrition science go against each other all the time.

Yes I know there are theories which say that (let's take 1h of daily) cardio (in addition to cardio from weight training and normal activities) significantly increases metabolism. In my experience it doesn't.

you can eat 500 calories a day and I bet you, you won't lose anyfat week after week, and all you'll lose will be muscle

The principles say nothing about the absolute ratio of fat loss vs. muscle loss at a certain rate of weight loss. They only say that the myths have no influence on it, as long as P1-P5 are met. Of course one would be stupid not to choose the appropriate amount of weekly weight loss acording to his caloric needs so that he can still meet P1-P5 and keep the aforementioned ratio as high as possible.

yes I eat 3,500 calories when I'm cutting
and I eat around 5,000 when I want to maintain
I eat 14,000 calories once in a while just for fun 

The total amount of calories is not important to the principles.

But as I said, if you really can eat twice the amount of calories (for mainenance resp. same rate of weight loss) by changing nothing else than adding 1h of cardio, you must be a genetic freak unheard of until now.

[ASJChaotic]

Again, this thread is about experience. I know what works for me and what does not, regardless of nutrition science, which is NOT an exact science (yet), because there are just too many interwoven and unknown factors. Scientific papers in nutrition science go against each other all the time.

Yes I know there are theories which say that (let's take 1h of daily) cardio (in addition to cardio from weight training and normal activities) significantly increases metabolism. In my experience it doesn't.

The principles say nothing about the absolute ratio of fat loss vs. muscle loss at a certain rate of weight loss. They only say that the myths have no influence on it, as long as P1-P5 are met. Of course one would be stupid not to choose the appropriate amount of weekly weight loss acording to his caloric needs so that he can still meet P1-P5 and keep the aforementioned ratio as high as possible.

The total amount of calories is not important to the principles.

But as I said, if you really can eat twice the amount of calories (for mainenance reps. same rate of weight loss) by changing nothing else than adding 1h of cardio, you must be a genetic freak unheard of until now.

I get what you're saying but it's retarded
the ONLY thing that matters besides getting a minimum of .5 grams of protein per pound is the calories
where the fuck is Adonis so I can tell this to him
it's retarded fatloss is all about calories in vs calories out
and I wasn't born with sixpack abs, I'm not from sparta 

[wavelength]

I get what you're saying but it's retarded

How can it be retarded if it works for me? It's the best diet I ever had. I've never been that ripped and managed to preserve as much muscle.

the ONLY thing that matters besides getting a minimum of .5 grams of protein per pound is the calories
where the fuck is Adonis so I can tell this to him
it's retarded fatloss is all about calories in vs calories out
and I wasn't born with sixpack abs, I'm not from sparta 

I didn't understand that part. I never claimed that cardio doesn't burn calories. I just choose to eat a little less instead. Takes 1h less time. The principles just say that cardio has no significant influence, if you are still following P1-P5 without it (in effect meaning, eating a little less).

[ASJChaotic]

How can it be retarded if it works for me? It's the best diet I ever had. I've never been that ripped and managed to preserve as much muscle.

I didn't understand that part. I never claimed that cardio doesn't burn calories. I just choose to eat a little less instead. Takes 1h less time. The principles just say that cardio has no significant influence, if you are still following P1-P5 without it (in effect meaning, eating a little less).

how many calories do you eat in a typical day? if you dont know just give me a guess estimate
yes eating less is easier, takes 2 minutes to eat 600 calories and an hour of cardio to burn it 
but you gotta to what you gotta do to look the way you gotta look 
even if that means "running on a treadmill like a fockin hamster"