# Dr Scott Connelly video series on Insulin.



## Lois_Lane

Now this is interesting.

Most will not be able to understand all of it as it is very scientific but if you can take the take home message you will never think about "dieting" in the same way again.

http://journal.crossfit.com/2010/04/insulin-body-weight-and-energy-production.tpl

P.S. Scott C. is not just some Joe-Average-Talkalotof**** he is the man behind Met-Rx and has been on top of the sport nutrition world for years.................


----------



## sizar

thanks mate..


----------



## sizar

this guy's stuff is mind bogling lol is great im watching it. Yes i know how insulin works ..hence why we eat low gi carb .. thanks mate this is good stuff ..


----------



## Lois_Lane

sizar said:


> this guy's stuff is mind bogling lol is great im watching it. Yes i know how insulin works ..hence why we eat low gi carb .. thanks mate this is good stuff ..


Keep watching....


----------



## XJPX

im 3minutes in and hoenstly thts all gone over my head


----------



## hilly

im downloading them all then guna watch 2night at some point. saved me a trip to blockbuster


----------



## sizar

ah con i'm loving this video . this guy is great ..thanks still watching


----------



## sizar

XJPX said:


> im 3minutes in and hoenstly thts all gone over my head


starts off REALLY technical but it gets better keep watching


----------



## sizar

so interesting .. does make sense . . i'm gonna have to up my protein ..400 450 and i'll lower carb to 100 see what happens  ..

thanks con love it i'm saving these videos ..


----------



## Khaos1436114653

Lois_Lane said:


> Now this is interesting.
> 
> Most will not be able to understand all of it as it is very scientific but if you can take the take home message you will never think about "dieting" in the same way again.
> 
> http://journal.crossfit.com/2010/04/insulin-body-weight-and-energy-production.tpl
> 
> P.S. Scott C. is not just some Joe-Average-Talkalotof**** he is the man behind Met-Rx and has been on top of the sport nutrition world for years.................


I should "neg" you for sharing toooo much secret info:rolleyes:


----------



## pipebomb

Just watched all three  This guy knows his stuff very interesting. I will defo be keeping an eye on my carb intake in future lol 100-200g max from now on. Great thread btw


----------



## chrisj28

Great post con. Proves that the western diet and the food triangle is a load of bs.

Fructose and corn syrup should be banned.


----------



## Lois_Lane

Khaos said:


> I should "neg" you for sharing toooo much secret info:rolleyes:


Honestly i should neg my self for being one of those pricks that copies things from other sites, seeing that i found this over on another site yesterday:laugh:

Personally watching these videos made my day as this science behind bodybuilding is what really interests me. I am happy to read on this thread and via the reps that some of you also enjoyed it:thumbup1:

Jordan i should make some very smart **** comment about you taking a ton of various drugs but then struggling to understand this info which albeit is put across in a complex way (ie not down talked for average people rather straight up scientific talk) is not THAT complicated to grasp.......but i wont:lol:

The biggest take home message that i took from this is to keep your muscle glycogen only partially filled at all times. This will allow for slips in your diet/alterations in usual energy use without the gaining of excess body fat tissue. After my shows i intend on staying very lean for the rest of the year and by making sure that from the get go i don't over carb because once the stores are filled fat will follow rapidly.


----------



## dtlv

Awesome interview... is well worth taking the time to watch all the way through.

More reps coming for Lois (if it'll let me)!


----------



## nutnut

Thanks for sharing, Con.. reps as always

well would rep if it would let me, it says I gotta spread some 'reps' around lol....


----------



## sizar

Con can't rep you anymore lol


----------



## hilly

i think it should be a new rule every1 should have to read this.

main points i got were

carbs not important at all in huge amounts.

do not try and rebound from a diet by increasing ure carbs as the split for regaing was something like 80/20 or 60.40 the higher being fat gain. glad i watched this before i planed any form of rebound diet.

when increasing cals just keep increasing protein. he said hes been as high as 5 to 6g per lb of bodyweight.

as con said glycogen doesnt want to be super filled all the time. so for me training days more carbs, non training days low and possibly a day of 0 carbs per week would be a good addition.

many other points


----------



## Lois_Lane

It's ok guys......i can wait until tomorrow for the reps:laugh: :thumb:

If any one else has any of Scott's articles or whatever please feel free to post them up in here. I looked around for his thoughts on fats and protein only PWO but could not find them.....i am pretty much brain dead at the moment


----------



## Guest

I might rep you. I might not  xx


----------



## sizar

hilly said:


> i think it should be a new rule every1 should have to read this.
> 
> main points i got were
> 
> carbs not important at all in huge amounts.
> 
> do not try and rebound from a diet by increasing ure carbs as the split for regaing was something like 80/20 or 60.40 the higher being fat gain. glad i watched this before i planed any form of rebound diet.
> 
> when increasing cals just keep increasing protein. *he said hes been as high as 5 to 6g per lb of bodyweight.*
> 
> as con said glycogen doesnt want to be super filled all the time. so for me training days more carbs, non training days low and possibly a day of 0 carbs per week would be a good addition.
> 
> many other points


EXACTLY he said the more protein the better ..


----------



## dixie normus

hilly said:


> when increasing cals just keep increasing protein. he said hes been as high as 5 to 6g per lb of bodyweight.


You wouldn't expect a protein salesman to say anything else:confused1:


----------



## Lois_Lane

dutch_scott said:


> um iv been preaching this for freaking years since i graduated
> 
> i binge on cheat meals most days..
> 
> i dieted down on my fb to probably 4 weeks out eating chocolate etc every day as i never have full glycogen stores
> 
> which again is why i told tt and other cheats DAYS r ****..
> 
> imo
> 
> then wen u crave u can add in, muscles tissue turns excess, ur stores fill partially, then a few fasted sessions esp legs and back and boom ur down
> 
> jesus glad con showed it
> 
> the ferrari engine and the slow ford is how i was taught,,, keep lean ,, keep starve and re feed days and ull never DIET again


That's how i have done it this prep mate and never looked better or had an easier diet:beer:



dixie normus said:


> You wouldn't expect a protein salesman to say anything else:confused1:


Sure but the protein element is not the point behind this video.

Also i think he is getting confused with lb and kg because in another example he uses kg so that would be 500-600grams for a 100kg athlete which is easily possible....


----------



## dixie normus

Lois_Lane said:


> Sure but the protein element is not the point behind this video.
> 
> Also i think he is getting confused with lb and kg because in another example he uses kg so that would be 500-600grams for a 100kg athlete which is easily possible....


Wasn't saying it was. But the way bro logic works on the web before you now it noobs will be getting told that everyone must take 6g a Kg


----------



## Lois_Lane

dixie normus said:


> Wasn't saying it was. But the way bro logic works on the web before you now it noobs will be getting told that everyone must take 6g a Kg


Agreed mate but how i see it is if any one can keep that kind of protein intake up and not feel ill all day well then they probably benefit from it. Because i would feel like **** eating that much!



dutch_scott said:


> i stay away from huge science talk but i have said to many that the craving mechanism is linked to how carbed up you are due to how much insulin is produced when u cheat for a whole day,
> 
> so if you only stay partially carbed, the cheat in laymans does not matter, due to the metabolically active tissue working on calories over the whole day.
> 
> once you are in fat mode, which is where the body now realises that the 9 calorie dense fat stores give a higher yield than the lower 4 calorie carb , then a sugar laden chocolate bar the body disregards , your now using the fat stores. why on earth ud slow the metabolism down with a days cheating is beyond me. bbuilder say it works but id love them to drop the t3 and other stuff that day..
> 
> get in fat mode
> 
> keep glyco stores minimum for training and atp purposes and then u can eat the foods and not worry whilst burning fat as the body now knows its homestostis of energy is better at 9cals than 4.


This is how i have been all my life mate. I don't have a total set diet i just make sure i am in a calorie deficiet and then when i really feel like some junk i have some by doing this i never feel the need to go nuts. Now when i had it strict all week with only one cheat meal i would go so crazy i would gain 20lb of water and feel like death the next day, high BP leading to nose bleeds the works!


----------



## frowningbudda

Sorry if this is going to sound dumb, but...

Would this work for an pretty active ecto like me?

Im on around 500g carbs aday (mostly from oats) and staying quite lean,

but would it be beneficial for me to up the protein (250g) once I stop gaining, rather

than the fat?


----------



## essexboy

dixie normus said:


> You wouldn't expect a protein salesman to say anything else:confused1:


EXACTLY.Where are the double blind trials that support his opinions?

Thought not.


----------



## Lois_Lane

frowningbudda said:


> Sorry if this is going to sound dumb, but...
> 
> Would this work for an pretty active ecto like me?
> 
> Im on around 500g carbs aday (mostly from oats) and staying quite lean,
> 
> but would it be beneficial for me to up the protein (250g) once I stop gaining, rather
> 
> than the fat?


This is not really what the thread is about mate.

But if you are receiving results in performance and your physical appearance that you are happy with then why change it?

Personally i think you should eat more good fats and lower the carbs, also if you eat enough meals in the day up the protein a tad


----------



## essexboy

Is this any less valid? id say more so, as its unlikely the author has "interests" in the reader consumning carbohydrates.

3.1 Carbohydrates-Not Protein

Carbohydrates in their natural forms of fresh and dried fruits and some vegetables should always be used in preference to concentrated protein foods. People who consciously reduce the amount of complex carbohydrates in the diet and eat more protein foods instead in an attempt to lose weight or "improve" their health are playing a dangerous game. Listen to what Dr. Helen C. Kiefer of the Northwestern University Medical School has to say about the relative importance of carbohydrates and proteins in a well-balanced diet:

"Carbohydrates must not fall below a certain limiting amount in any diet, or we run the risk of ending up in an unhealthy metabolic state; or, perhaps worse over the long run, we may waste the body's protein stores from tissues such as muscle to prevent this unhealthy metabolic state."

"Proteins, unlike carbohydrates or fats, contain the element nitrogen. When we strip this nitrogen from the amino acid components of proteins in order to convert them to carbohydrates for energy, we run the risk of building up ammonia in our bloodstreams. Ammonia is highly toxic.

After detailing the dangers of ammonia and other protein by-products in the bloodstream, Dr. Kiefer gives this unqualified endorsement of a predominantly carbohydrate-based diet over the typical protein diet used for both weight loss and as a regular diet by so many people:

"An appropriate level of the oft-maligned carbohydrate is perhaps the best protection in any diet. It protects the need of the brain cells for carbohydrates; the need to metabolize fats for energy without increasing the acid load of the bloodstream; the protection of protein in tissue and the prevention of excess nitrogen excretion when protein components (amino acids) must be used for energy."

3.2 Sufficient Protein: It's Easy!

Protein needs and requirements are incredibly low for a healthy person. In fact, one measure of a person's health is how much protein they must consume to maintain their body weight. Sick and diseased people crave large amounts of protein for stimulation for their exhausted bodies. Healthy people, on the other hand, can function very well on about one-fifth of the protein the average American consumes.

How can we make sure that we get enough protein, but not too much? Easy. Just eliminate all substandard, harmful, and processed foods from the diet and eat an abundance of fresh fruits with some vegetables, sprouts, and nuts or seeds (if desired). All of these foods can be eaten in their raw state, and (with the exception of nuts and seeds) are low in concentrated protein. Yet these foods do supply all the essential amino acids that we need for a healthy life. More importantly, the foods of the Life Science diet supply us with an abundance of natural carbohydrates-our body's number one nutrient need. In addition, we receive a full array of vitamins, minerals, enzymes, and yet undiscovered elements from these fresh and wholesome foods packaged by nature.

A true protein deficiency on a calorie-sufficient diet is a rarity. Cancers from a high-protein diet are all, too common. Say "No!" to the propaganda and misinformation that is circulating about any supposed benefits of a high-protein diet. Say "Yes!" to the health-promoting and nutrient-abundant diet of fresh raw fruits, vegetables, sprouts, and seeds.


----------



## Lois_Lane

^^^ You can always find an opinion to fit your own opinion EssexBoy you and I both know this so let us not make this thread into a big argument when there truly is no need .


----------



## essexboy

Lois_Lane said:


> ^^^ You can always find an opinion to fit your own opinion EssexBoy you and I both know this so let us not make this thread into a big argument when there truly is no need .


 Con. The guy is recommending a high protein diet.He SELLS protein.The post That I randomly found, is suggesting the opposite.Its author, has no commercial interest in the reader consuming a low protein diet, but cites the dangers of a high protein diet, based on research.Thats my final comment.


----------



## Lois_Lane

essexboy said:


> Con. The guy is recommending a high protein diet.He SELLS protein.The post That I randomly found, is suggesting the opposite.Its author, has no commercial interest in the reader consuming a low protein diet, but cites the dangers of a high protein diet, based on research.Thats my final comment.


Trust me i fully understand this but how much of the video had to do with protein content? I honestly remember like two comments the rest was about insulin and over dieting to destroy the metabolism.

This is very real my wife lost 70lb by crash dieting now 2 years after this she is about back to normal from this crash diet.

She still only eats under 1500cals and does 1 hour of cardio per day and weights she loses no weight but slowly she gains muscle and loses fat.

HONESTLY i think the protein thing is BS i would never tell any one to eat that much but i would tell people to be smart with their carb intake and what they do when they diet.

Why do you think BB's gain so much weight back after a diet with ease? They come down too fast basically starve them selves plus taking tons of fat burners and doing tons of cardio. Post contest they drop the fat burners stop the cardio and eat tons and voila 2 weeks later they are back to where they were 12 weeks ago!!!!!!!!


----------



## XJPX

Lois_Lane said:


> Honestly i should neg my self for being one of those pricks that copies things from other sites, seeing that i found this over on another site yesterday:laugh:
> 
> Personally watching these videos made my day as this science behind bodybuilding is what really interests me. I am happy to read on this thread and via the reps that some of you also enjoyed it:thumbup1:
> 
> *Jordan i should make some very smart **** comment about you taking a ton of various drugs but then struggling to understand this info which albeit is put across in a complex way (ie not down talked for average people rather straight up scientific talk) is not THAT complicated to grasp.......but i wont:lol:*
> 
> The biggest take home message that i took from this is to keep your muscle glycogen only partially filled at all times. This will allow for slips in your diet/alterations in usual energy use without the gaining of excess body fat tissue. After my shows i intend on staying very lean for the rest of the year and by making sure that from the get go i don't over carb because once the stores are filled fat will follow rapidly.


ehy i sed the first 3mins...tht by no means was basic scienctific talk....tht was crazy, iv listen to it three times and i now understand what he is tlkin about ther but jeesus he cud of broken tht bit down a little. the remsainging 27mins of the vid was gd tho


----------



## essexboy

dutch_scott said:


> why double blind?
> 
> why do sceptics use the well if no one know which test group had what and who gave it... :whistling:
> 
> look at the mice
> 
> the obviousness needs no double blind or blind .these arent depression drugs where u have a sympimatic psychological response!


Ok I would settle for any independent trials.Until then its an opinion.


----------



## Lois_Lane

dutch_scott said:


> much better , i too agree but this is about insulin and its mechica bro and not really protein at all.
> 
> and to con- yes yes which is why i feel im so successful with clients, i dont believe in cardio to deit weight off as wen it is ceased the metabolic rate suffers and then we r truelly at a stage where dealing with insulin and the normal non comp diet comes into play
> 
> the clients i have who build more metabolically active tissue, stay depleted but still re feed never gain weight back once goals r met as their bodies are now more fat mode than ever.
> 
> interesting scott talks about the cns
> 
> this i feel is genetic. but his points on diet vrs cns r great. something i touched upon when i talked about my training frquency


Mate any time you have the time/want to please make a thread about your thoughts. I truly think we are on the same page as far as our beliefs just you have a few more years behind you than I so i could learn a lot:beer:


----------



## essexboy

Lois_Lane said:


> Trust me i fully understand this but how much of the video had to do with protein content? I honestly remember like two comments the rest was about insulin and over dieting to destroy the metabolism.
> 
> This is very real my wife lost 70lb by crash dieting now 2 years after this she is about back to normal from this crash diet.
> 
> HONESTLY i think the protein thing is BS i would never tell any one to eat that much but i would tell people to be smart with their carb intake and what they do when they diet.
> 
> Why do you think BB's gain so much weight back after a diet with ease? They come down too fast basically starve them selves plus taking tons of fat burners and doing tons of cardio. Post contest they drop the fat burners stop the cardio and eat tons and voila 2 weeks later they are back to where they were 12 weeks ago!!!!!!!!


Ok this is just my opinion.When we diet with severly restricted intake of calories, the alarm bells start ringing.The body believes this restriction may be permanent, and it begins to uses its reserves more efficently.

So, to combat this, I have followed the advice of Ell Darden who over 40 years has used a protocol to sliglhty reduce intake over a long period.It works.In three months ive dropped 29lbs.

A balanced diet of 1800 calories a day,1/2 workouts a week.No "cardio" (whatever that is meant to be, I mean I walk around , climb stairs etc  )no drugs. And more importantly Im getting stronger, on key movements,(squats, dip etc)And the ingestion of up to a gallon of iced water a day.(which the body has to heat)And im 25 years older than you.Im rarely hungry,and im up to 2/3am., cos I ve so much energy.(at least my guitar practice is benefiting)


----------



## Lois_Lane

essexboy said:


> Ok this is just my opinion.When we diet with severly restricted intake of calories, the alarm bells start ringing.The body believes this restriction may be permanent, and it begins to uses its reserves more efficently.
> 
> So, to combat this, I have followed the advice of Ell Darden who over 40 years has used a protocol to sliglhty reduce intake over a long period.It works.In three months ive dropped 29lbs.
> 
> A balanced diet of 1800 calories a day,1/2 workouts a week.No "cardio" (whatever that is meant to be, I mean I walk around , climb stairs etc  )no drugs. And more importantly Im getting stronger, on key movements,(squats, dip etc)And the ingestion of up to a gallon of iced water a day.(which the body has to heat)And im 25 years older than you.Im rarely hungry,and im up to 2/3am., cos I ve so much energy.(at least my guitar practice is benefiting)


Understood BUT what will you do if you ever want to eat more than 1800calories again with out gaining fat?


----------



## Lois_Lane

dutch_scott said:


> bastard i was just about to say this which is the crux of part one..ha ur bright con i like it!!


:laugh: Well it was the POINT of the videos!!!!

At this stage any increase in calories will lead to an increase in body fat sure you can do more cardio but at some point you will regain fat and quickly.


----------



## essexboy

Lois_Lane said:


> Understood BUT what will you do if you ever want to eat more than 1800calories again with out gaining fat?


Il increase my heroin intake.(that was a joke, not a good one ill admit)

Well i can because, ive built some muscle over the last 2 years which requires calories to survive.Ill up my intake gradually, so the survival mechanism,is less sensitised till i begin to gain fat.From there I can calculate my metabolic requirements for calories.Ill add a slight excess(say 200 a day)for muscle gains.Again, if I get fatter, ill cut back.I really didnt realise how much food i was eating.Plus all the incidentals that you forget.Im the typical victim of "bulk sydrome" The supprise is strength as been as good as when I was eating everything.Ive just checked my journal.

Jan 6th 2010 nautilus duo squat(right leg) 12 x 191lbs tul 1.39

april 5th as above 15x 240lbs tul 1.57.

Now bearing this in mind.Do you believe the strength has been facilitated by fat stores, or (limited) food intake? :confused1:


----------



## Lois_Lane

essexboy said:


> Il increase my heroin intake.(that was a joke, not a good one ill admit)
> 
> Well i can because, ive built some muscle over the last 2 years which requires calories to survive.Ill up my intake gradually, so the survival mechanism,is less sensitised till i begin to gain fat.From there I can calculate my metabolic requirements for calories.Ill add a slight excess(say 200 a day)for muscle gains.Again, if I get fatter, ill cut back.I really didnt realsie how much food i was eating.Plus all the incidentals that your forget.Im the typical victim of "bulk sydrome" The supprise is strength as been as good as when I was eating everything.Ive just checked my journal.
> 
> Jan 6th 2010 nautilus duo squat(right leg) 12 x 191lbs tul 1.39
> 
> april 5th as above 15x 240lbs tul 1.57.
> 
> Now bearing this in mind.Do you believe the strength has been facilitated by fat stores, or (limited) food intake? :confused1:


I would say its more due to the CNS up regulating to compinsate for the higher/harder work load you have put upon the body.


----------



## essexboy

dutch_scott said:


> bastard i was just about to say this which is the crux of part one..ha ur bright con i like it!!
> 
> and essex,...but u do realise the body will not heat the iced water the same and burn the same cals each time due to its diminishing fat stores and calorie deficit. it has more important things to do and as we know, shc or the bodies ability to heat a volume of water 1 degree may be calories the body doesnt have, then what do u think the body does?


Dutch.Im not familiar with the mechanism.However, its been used sucessfully for 30 plus years, and recent research has shown it to be a legitimate theory.Ill search it out.Besides, it really doesnt matter.Its only water, and pretty cheap!


----------



## essexboy

Lois_Lane said:


> I would say its more due to the CNS up regulating to compinsate for the higher/harder work load you have put upon the body.


Does that mean you believe that excessive calories(food) are not a prerequisite, and that an "attack" on the cns (lets call it life or death,syndrome)is more important? (i do)


----------



## dtlv

OK, on the topic of metabolic advantage of low carb (which is basically the result of what he;'s saying) here's my ten pence worth...

I do agree there is definitely some validity to the theory of metabolic advantage from keeping carbs in check... but I don't believe it's anything like as significant as many other people who believe it suggest. It's valid and important, but not the only factor to consider - calories do matter.

One of the problems with the metabolic advantage idea is that when it actually comes to studies with very tight control of calories and energy expenditure, high fat/low carb diets and low fat/higher carb diets compared to one another show exactly the same result - that bodyfat loss responds entirely to calorie manipulation only and not at all to macronutrient manipulation.

In more loosely controlled comparative studies however the lower carb diets normally show more fat loss, but one of the effects of lower carb is reduced appetite and meta analysis of such studies suggests there are likely to be many cases of over estimation of calories in the low carb groups on these diets as they often leave more of their portions uneaten (but record calories for the whole meal) and are possibly selecting less than they realise also.

It's not so much a case that people cheat on the carb diets, it's more a case that they under eat on the low carb ones. People also uniformly tend to under estimate carbohydrate calories as well as over estimate fat calories (carbs are 4kcals a gram so people worry less about counting them, whereas fat at 9kcals a gram makes people worry more) even when they have had nutritional training.

There are however differeing effects on various markers of health (including insulin dynamics) between different macronutrient splits and I think this is where the real advantage from moderating carb intake lies. A typical western diet at 60-70% carbs for a sedentary person is, imo, definitely excessive, and the effects that Dr Connelly was talking about of excessive carb intake on insulin sensitivity is very valid.

All IMO and i admit that my opinion could be wrong... as i think we all should with our opinions on this topic as so far the science of metabolism is concerned we are a long way from having a complete understanding of all the dynamics involved.

Far too many factors to know anything with total certainty


----------



## essexboy

dutch_scott said:


> ill let u google it lol
> 
> and strength can be seen in calorie deficient weightlifters on the eastern block for years but for bb gainins muscle mass its a useless variabel. fat free mass would be a better success factor.


Sure muscle growth is the goal.My point was to highlight no real difference in progress, despite the deficet.


----------



## essexboy

dutch_scott said:


> i do.
> 
> which is why i dont believe in bulking.
> 
> and i dont believe in many cns threads on overtraining. inregards to the above.


Ok great.However are you saying that overtraining is a fallacy,and its more a case of not recovering?


----------



## essexboy

dutch_scott said:


> define progress.
> 
> if strength was your goal.-yes
> 
> if muscle- id need to see ur pictures and hydrostat results. id imagine based on what your thought on total body protein were it would be minimal muscle more an increase in training , tendon and ligament strengthening before hypertrophy of muscle tissue. imo.


Lets put it this way.My progress on 2500+ cals, was not superior to 1800.


----------



## dtlv

dutch_scott said:


> speak for urself! :lol:
> 
> its the implication of theory vrs ones own genetics and affinity for certain protocals im dealing with daily
> 
> i majored in the science aspect. what he said is not alkanes or quantum physics. so to end a debate saying we dont understand , well i do.


Lol, funny man :lol:

Gald you understand all the factors in metabolism... you should go and tell them to the experts and people who do all the studies so as to save them the effort. :tongue:

Where you from in the Netherlands mate?


----------



## essexboy

dutch_scott said:


> yes. and i believe palumbo, ronnie coleman and pscarb to name a few also agree. its undereating, improper nutrition, stims, aas, peps and other factors.
> 
> many more tests show muscles regress after 96hrs of underuse if above those normally found on a subject


Ok thanks for the view.


----------



## dtlv

Overtraining, in a genuine sense (becoming physically ill from excessive training) is actually very rare... much more common is training improperly, not gettign good gains, and labelling it overtraining.

Genuine overtraining is just that though, over-training (doing more exercise than you body can adapt positively too). It's not under-eating and no amount of food can mitigate it.


----------



## dtlv

dutch_scott said:


> Ah ive not come across a "you" in a while, allow me to stretch my brains bfore the birst of intelligence tears my head apart...
> 
> please ignore my spelling as , frankly, i cant be assed to spell on an internet forum.
> 
> Just so we ascertain the factors of metabolic rate which you, me and the said experts you mention use on the main,,,
> 
> 
> Gender: Due to their larger size and greater muscle mass, men's rates are 25 to 30 percent higher than women's. *is this hard topic to understand? nope.*
> 
> Race: Black people have a slower metabolism than white people. *simple*
> 
> Size: Heavy people have higher metabolic rates. *simple*
> 
> Age: Young people burn calories faster. The RMR in girls (15 to 18) peaks earlier than in boys (18 to 21). It then drops by about 3 percent per year. *did at gcse*
> 
> Physical Condition: fit people have a faster metabolism due to their leaner body composition. 1 pound of muscle burns 6 times as much energy as 1 pound of fat. *my job is that of an elite athlete conditioning coach*
> 
> Conscious State: Metabolic rate slows down when you sleep and rises when you wake up. *simple*
> 
> Stimulants: Metabolic rate rises temporarily with caffeine and nicotine, which raise the heartbeat, and also with alcohol, which causes internal temperature changes that have an impact on RMR. *i have advanced knowledge of stims *
> 
> Hormones: Some surveys have found that metabolism dips just before ovulation, and at menstruation, then it starts to rise when the body temperature climbs. Menopause causes the metabolism to slow down. *an exctensive use of peptides allows me to know a little more on real life apllication than said esk bound experts*
> 
> Climate: As the weather gets warmer, RMR drops slightly as less energy is expended on keeping warm. *threw this in*
> 
> 
> done.,  :thumb: :thumb : :thumb:
> 
> *ps. i was born in haarlem, netherlands, hence the dutch bit.*
> 
> *lol find me an expert under 30 who deals in the world of bodybuilding id love a few days with them. * :beer:


Good list of individual factors... you missed two big things though; thyroid health/thyroxin output, and also mass-to-surface-area ratio too (has a big effect on metabolism with taller folk having more surface area-to-mass than those of shorter stouter frame but equal bodyweight so lose body heat more quickly and have a faster basal metabolic rate).

It's also not just a case of knowing these things exist but about understanding all the interactions between them and the things that contribute to them... in other words it's impossible to prescribe a formula for how much to eat, how much to exercise, how much to sleep etc that would be optimum for everyone. There is no absolute equation for this as the variables are too big.

So, since you missed a few things we'll just say that you know most of it but not all :laugh:

I like Haarlem...but I like all of the country, one of my favourite places to go. I've several dutch freinds (including a crazy ex, lol) and some family scattered over there so visit several times a year... always a great time.


----------



## dtlv

dutch_scott said:


> can can can can can can can can can:tongue: :tongue: :tongue:


 :lol: :lol: :lol: can't.


----------



## Lois_Lane

Ok nice replies here guys this is why i made the thread.......

Here is a question aimed at Scott and DTLV.

How would you go about "fixing" the metabolism after a harsh diet.

Lets say client A used all the usual means to get into unnatural bodybuilder contest condition how would you then deal with his diet and training in order for him to get back to a reasonable level of calories in taken WHILE at the same time dropping all of the PED's?

My personal opinion is that there is a critical stage lets call it 2-3 weeks after a contest. During this time the thyroid comes back on line as T3 has been dropped and the body generally makes its first adaptations to the now drug free environment. During this stage i would allow no "cheat" food at all but rather the Sunday after the show i would have the client perform HIIT in order to deplete glycogen stores from the carb up for the show. Then for the following weeks i would have him follow a high protein, high fat, lower carb diet (enough carbs to see him through the morning and/or mid day meal lets say 100 grams total all the while keeping him from spilling over with full glycogen stores). The higher fats would increase calories from the before low levels while in turn boosting the metabolism (EVOO for instance). Obviously you can not keep the body at ultra low levels of body fat but i see no reason that the athlete can not stay far leaner than is usually common. THEN after his break from PED's however long this may be he restarts them, his body is very lean muscle memory kicks back in and in no time he is bigger and leaner than he was last time with less effort. Also by staying this lean he is performing the point of coming of drugs by giving his body a rest, a true rest for a body does not only mean no drugs it also means a lower body weight as this is less stress.


----------



## dtlv

Lois_Lane said:


> Ok nice replies here guys this is why i made the thread.......
> 
> Here is a question aimed at Scott and DTLV.
> 
> How would you go about "fixing" the metabolism after a harsh diet.
> 
> Lets say client A used all the usual means to get into unnatural bodybuilder contest condition how would you then deal with his diet and training in order for him to get back to a reasonable level of calories in taken WHILE at the same time dropping all of the PED's?
> 
> My personal opinion is that there is a critical stage lets call it 2-3 weeks after a contest. During this time the thyroid comes back on line as T3 has been dropped and the body generally makes its first adaptations to the now drug free environment. During this stage i would allow no "cheat" food at all but rather the Sunday after the show i would have the client perform HIIT in order to deplete glycogen stores from the carb up for the show. Then for the following weeks i would have him follow a high protein, high fat, lower carb diet (enough carbs to see him through the morning and/or mid day meal lets say 100 grams total all the while keeping him from spilling over with full glycogen stores). The higher fats would increase calories from the before low levels while in turn boosting the metabolism (EVOO for instance). Obviously you can not keep the body at ultra low levels of body fat but i see no reason that the athlete can not stay far leaner than is usually common. THEN after his break from PED's however long this may be he restarts them, his body is very lean muscle memory kicks back in and in no time he is bigger and leaner than he was last time with less effort. Also by staying this lean he is performing the point of coming of drugs by giving his body a rest, a true rest for a body does not only mean no drugs it also means a lower body weight as this is less stress.


In all honesty Dutch Scott (and several others on here) can answer this better than me due to having far more experience... I have no practical experience of PEDs and how the effects of coming off them might change a 'diet recovery' phase.

Will have a go at the question though as it's a real thought provoker for me, and what I get wrong you guys can help me with in explaining why. Please do critique this!

Assuming the state of someone just after a competition is this: bodyfat levels are low single figures, metabolism low, insulin sensitivity high, testosterone and thyroid levels low. Glycogen stores high due to the immediate pre-show carb up, but assuming a low carb approach prior to that.

Agree on the idea of keeping diet clean as in this state the body is primed to store fat, although if the athlete wants a binge let them do so, but only for one or two days.

Restrict carbs initially to avoid the sudden bloating and rapid fat storage that would come from eating too many in a carb sensitive state, but allow them a few. 100g daily sounds fine initially, focused in the morning and pre workout.

Keep the cardio going but far less than pre contest - cut it in half.

Building up calories again would happen gradually over the next month or so, and would be in small gradual steps (100-200kcal increase each week).

Initially increase fats primarily to make up the calories (mostly monounsaturated), protein should still be high from the pre contest diet and high BCAA content.

Carbs I may well have them continue to cycle but to only gradually and slowly increase the number of higher and medium carb days compared to the pre contest carb cycling.

If not carb cycling, carbs would be increased only very gradually over a month or two, eventually reaching 200-300g max per day.

....

With the gradual increases in calories the body shouldn't go crazy and rebound too hard. As kcals go up, so should the metabolism, testosterone and thyroid, but the body needs to be out of immediate rebound danger before getting lots of carbs due to how easily it will store them.

The changes in calories from an extreme cut to a gaining diet shouldn't be rushed i think if excessive fat gain is something that the individual wants to avoid (some people don't care off season) - I'd take six weeks to two months to make the whole shift.

Am possibly being too cautious in the time taken to switch the diet back - most people seem to do it quicker than two months, but I think that this way the body gets protected pretty fully from fatty rebound.

Have probably missed something but it's 3.40am, am tired and I need to go to bed


----------



## hilly

this thread turned even more interesting while i slept.

to add to the above what about using higher doses on things like iodine or adding them in if not used. some like NOW foods thryoid now tablets etc and anything else you can take to boost ure own metabolism naturally.

Im currently not taking any kelp/iodine or anything similar. my thoughts were after the show i would drop what ever fat burners currently on and run the now foods tabs, higher doses green tea as well as keeping carbs low with a gradual increase and cardio 4-5 x per week for 30 mins. then progressing and making adjustments.

after watching the video i was thinking along the lines of 150-200g carbs training days and 100g carbs on training days which is pretty similar to my diet at 6 weeks out when average it out altho i would bump good fats up initially from 40g to around 60-80g


----------



## UKWolverine

Sorry to break up the convo guys it's all interesting stuff.

I thought there was a lot of good info in the video especially relating to the effect of aggressive dieting and carb sensitivity.

However just read an interesting article on Aron Aragon's blog and thought I'd share for a counter viewpoint. It kind of debunks a lot of Conelly's theories with regards to CHO being the main culprit for western societies obesity epidemic.

http://www.alanaragonblog.com/2010/01/29/the-bitter-truth-about-fructose-alarmism/


----------



## dtlv

UKWolverine said:


> Sorry to break up the convo guys it's all interesting stuff.
> 
> I thought there was a lot of good info in the video especially relating to the effect of aggressive dieting and carb sensitivity.
> 
> However just read an interesting article on Aron Aragon's blog and thought I'd share for a counter viewpoint. It kind of debunks a lot of Conelly's theories with regards to CHO being the main culprit for western societies obesity epidemic.
> 
> http://www.alanaragonblog.com/2010/01/29/the-bitter-truth-about-fructose-alarmism/


Some important points raised in that link, especially about quantities. The metabolic advantage theories are very elegant, and imo they do hit on a partial truth, but they miss a lot of factors and do tend to paint carbs in a far worse light than they deserve (whilst also forgetting potential negatives of replacing carbs with other macros).

IMO (and you should be able to find me saying this on many threads on this forum already) the metabolic 'problems' with carbs are not the carbs themselves, it's misuse of them, and problems with weight gain relate to overeating all macros and any macro, not just carbs.


----------



## Dazzaemm2k7

bump for later 

i studyed a little bit of nutrition in college so was KINDA understanding some bits and bobs but feck me its like master level nutrition this guys is speaking fs lol !!

great vids for future reference.


----------



## LittleChris

dutch_scott said:


> Ah ive not come across a "you" in a while, allow me to stretch my brains bfore the birst of intelligence tears my head apart...
> 
> please ignore my spelling as , frankly, i cant be assed to spell on an internet forum.
> 
> Just so we ascertain the factors of metabolic rate which you, me and the said experts you mention use on the main,,,
> 
> 
> Gender: Due to their larger size and greater muscle mass, men's rates are 25 to 30 percent higher than women's. *is this hard topic to understand? nope.*
> 
> Race: Black people have a slower metabolism than white people. *simple*
> 
> Size: Heavy people have higher metabolic rates. *simple*
> 
> Age: Young people burn calories faster. The RMR in girls (15 to 18) peaks earlier than in boys (18 to 21). It then drops by about 3 percent per year. *did at gcse*
> 
> Physical Condition: fit people have a faster metabolism due to their leaner body composition. 1 pound of muscle burns 6 times as much energy as 1 pound of fat. *my job is that of an elite athlete conditioning coach*
> 
> Conscious State: Metabolic rate slows down when you sleep and rises when you wake up. *simple*
> 
> Stimulants: Metabolic rate rises temporarily with caffeine and nicotine, which raise the heartbeat, and also with alcohol, which causes internal temperature changes that have an impact on RMR. *i have advanced knowledge of stims *
> 
> Hormones: Some surveys have found that metabolism dips just before ovulation, and at menstruation, then it starts to rise when the body temperature climbs. Menopause causes the metabolism to slow down. *an exctensive use of peptides allows me to know a little more on real life apllication than said esk bound experts*
> 
> Climate: As the weather gets warmer, RMR drops slightly as less energy is expended on keeping warm. *threw this in*
> 
> 
> done., :thumb: :thumb : :thumb:
> 
> *ps. i was born in haarlem, netherlands, hence the dutch bit.*
> 
> *lol find me an expert under 30 who deals in the world of bodybuilding id love a few days with them. * :beer:


Link to main article: http://www.xyroth-enterprises.co.uk/metabrat.htm :whistling:


----------



## stow

Can't believe I only just found this.

Watched all 3 tonight, pausing only occasionally to give the wife an abridged version of the most interesting bits.

V Good.

Stow


----------



## Ninja

very very very good lecture:thumbup1: :thumbup1: :thumbup1: Want some more...


----------



## Lois_Lane

chilisi said:


> Bump for later


 I have been on forums for a long time but i never understood this.

What does bump for later mean? Is there a way that posting in a thread makes it easier to find again.......serious question.


----------



## flynnie11

Lois_Lane said:


> I have been on forums for a long time but i never understood this.
> 
> What does bump for later mean? Is there a way that posting in a thread makes it easier to find again.......serious question.


i do it so i dont have to look for the thread later when i go back on if i dont have time to read it.. so all u have to do is look at your last post to find it


----------



## God

Lois_Lane said:


> I have been on forums for a long time but i never understood this.
> 
> What does bump for later mean? Is there a way that posting in a thread makes it easier to find again.......serious question.


If you have your settings so that you subscribe when you post, it's handy but why you can't just click thread tools and subscribe I don't know...


----------



## stl

God said:


> If you have your settings so that you subscribe when you post, it's handy but why you can't just click thread tools and subscribe I don't know...


Thanks i hadn't noticed that - wondered if there was an easier way!


----------



## Substrate

The interesting thing to me, http://www.ascottconnelly.com

is what Scott Connelly actually looks like physically and why he has been sued for fraud and lost those lawsuits so often?

I almost fell over when I went to www.ascottconnelly.com


----------



## stl

Substrate said:


> The interesting thing to me, http://www.ascottconnelly.com
> 
> is what Scott Connelly actually looks like physically and why he has been sued for fraud and lost those lawsuits so often?
> 
> I almost fell over when I went to www.ascottconnelly.com


Firstly - he was in good shape when he was younger and he's old now, secondly those videos posted really have nothing to do with his business conduct and are filled with little gems of information for the trainer.


----------



## stow

It is worth mentioning that it was more Phil Connelly that was behind the original Met-Rx, they worked together and are not related btw.

Phil Connelly is the protein guru behind CNP's Pro Peptide and Pro-Mr.

Stow


----------



## Substrate

stow said:


> It is worth mentioning that it was more Phil Connelly that was behind the original Met-Rx, they worked together and are not related btw.
> 
> Phil Connelly is the protein guru behind CNP's Pro Peptide and Pro-Mr.
> 
> Stow


Agreed and it is Phil Connolly whom is a legitimate genius when it comes to protein.

In regards to Dr. Scott Connelly he was on a program here on in the US called Date Line NBC which told the truth about his false claimed clinical research. Then the National Council Against Consumer Health Fraud also wrote numerous reports about the fraud of MET-Rx.

The attached files are from a book called Muscles, Speed and Lies and it details Connelly's false science and his lies to the public.

Just because you are talented at computer enhancing your photos via photo shop does not mean you are in great shape.

I believe this is all detailed on http://www.ascottconnelly.com


----------



## stow

Substrate said:


> Agreed and it is Phil Connolly whom is a legitimate genius when it comes to protein.


Could not AGREE MORE


----------



## BenderRodriguez

so................ is the video and knowledge from it rendered useless?


----------



## Wasp

I need to watch the rest of this tomorrow but so far its brilliant.


----------



## Wevans2303

If only my SH!T net could buffer more than 2 seconds at a time.


----------



## Guest

this was very interesting and i know that dave palumbo works with scott connelly alot (maybe thats where dave got alot of his keto ideas from?) but i think this was meant more for the masses and regular people who consume way too many carbs, i do think that carbs are seriously over emphasized and over eaten.

but in terms of bb and contest prep or just losing bf, how many keep carbs moderate-high and get excellent condition? alot of people, i think everyone reacts differently and its important to know your body - i dont think these videos apply to everyone in a sense and i dont think theres a one size fits all approach - dorian yates said he kept atleast 200-300 maybe more carbs when dieting and if you look at john hodgson's diary for BGP hes keeping carbs at almost 400g i think and his conditioning looks second to none. the more muscle you carry the more energy you need to support it, also im no expert and please tell me if im getting the wrong end of the stick but scott connelly mentions nothing of efa's and said that he ate 6g of protein per lb? surely this would result in gluconeogenesis which kind of defies the point of low carbs?

i agree though that for most people keeping carbs in check is important and i keep carbs moderate as well and i like the points mentioned earlier by scott and others of keeping glycogen stores partially filled to avoid spills - but again everyones different and some might do well from higher carbs and lower fats.


----------



## Guest

Substrate said:


> Agreed and it is Phil Connolly whom is a legitimate genius when it comes to protein.
> 
> In regards to Dr. Scott Connelly he was on a program here on in the US called Date Line NBC which told the truth about his false claimed clinical research. Then the National Council Against Consumer Health Fraud also wrote numerous reports about the fraud of MET-Rx.
> 
> The attached files are from a book called Muscles, Speed and Lies and it details Connelly's false science and his lies to the public.
> 
> Just because you are talented at computer enhancing your photos via photo shop does not mean you are in great shape.
> 
> I believe this is all detailed on http://www.ascottconnelly.com


while scott connelly is obviously very intelligent i did think while watching the vid that he was abit eccentric in his approach but if im honest i had put that down to his age. find it disturbing though that apparently theres doubt on his educational background and the authenticity of his clinical studies (not sure if its true so im taking it with a pinch of salt, trying to keep an open mind) that website mentions that he photoshops his pics! i saw something similar in the steroid film/documentary bigger faster stronger that alot of pics in mags are photoshopped and enhanced! but again not sure it his are photoshopped (the website doesnt really give solid proof that it is, although id does look it abit!)


----------

