ChiefsPlanet

ChiefsPlanet (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/index.php)
-   Nzoner's Game Room (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=1)
-   -   Poop The "I just got back from the gym" and this is what I have eaten thread. (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=218990)

The Franchise 05-10-2010 04:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by keg in kc (Post 6749695)
I think I've dropped all the way from a 43 inch waist to a 42.5 inch waist.

That's right. I'm 6'0, weight can be anywhere from 216 to 224 on any given day (today was 219). And somehow I have a 43 inch waist.

Of course, the automatic thought that comes to mind is "Well, duh, Kyle. That's what a diet of fast food and sugar bombs does for you...", except that when I was 175 pounds and rail thin 10 or 12 years ago...I still had a 38 inch waist. And 38s were tight. Not an ounce of fat on me anywhere. But still a 38 inch waist.

WTF.

I'll be stunned if I ever get below 40 now.

Hell, I'll probably be stunned if I ever get to 40.

Maybe you've just got wide hips?

Even when I got down to around 185.....I was still wearing 36s.....and those 36s weren't loose. I'm comfortable wearing a 36 or 38 inch waist.....if I know that I'm in good shape.

Buck 05-10-2010 04:39 PM

that's crazy I wear 42s and am 6'1 and now over 300.

Stupid iPod. I have to reply before your quote.
Quote:

Originally Posted by keg in kc (Post 6749695)
I think I've dropped all the way from a 43 inch waist to a 42.5 inch waist.

That's right. I'm 6'0, weight can be anywhere from 216 to 224 on any given day (today was 219). And somehow I have a 43 inch waist.

Of course, the automatic thought that comes to mind is "Well, duh, Kyle. That's what a diet of fast food and sugar bombs does for you...", except that when I was 175 pounds and rail thin 10 or 12 years ago...I still had a 38 inch waist. And 38s were tight. Not an ounce of fat on me anywhere. But still a 38 inch waist.

WTF.

I'll be stunned if I ever get below 40 now.

Hell, I'll probably be stunned if I ever get to 40.


keg in kc 05-10-2010 04:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pestilence (Post 6749727)
Maybe you've just got wide hips?

Even when I got down to around 185.....I was still wearing 36s.....and those 36s weren't loose. I'm comfortable wearing a 36 or 38 inch waist.....if I know that I'm in good shape.

Yeah, it's my frame. Not so much wide hips, so to speak, though - it's the same if you measure at my belly button. Just have a slightly larger (around) torso than "normal". Although I'm told I don't even look big. People are usually surprised when I tell them my waist. At least they used to be. Might not be as much the case now. Once I got significantly far above 200, I began to look fat.

I don't really care about my waist in any case. The part of body I'm most self-conscious about is my face and chin(s). And the calorie reduction should take care of that. Eventually. I hope.

Simply Red 05-10-2010 04:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by keg in kc (Post 6749749)
Yeah, it's my frame. Not so much wide hips, so to speak, though - it's the same if you measure at my belly button. Just have a slightly larger (around) torso than "normal". Although I'm told I don't even look big. People are usually surprised when I tell them my waist. At least they used to be. Might not be as much the case now. Once I got significantly far above 200, I began to look fat.

I don't really care about my waist in any case. The part of body I'm most self-conscious about is my face and chin(s). And the calorie reduction should take care of that. Eventually. I hope.

it will, to reinforce your last comment/concern, there.

keg in kc 05-10-2010 05:00 PM

That was the frustration that I let derail me last year. I looked exactly the same at 215 as I did at 250 and finally said "**** it".

Of course I never actually changed-up my diet, I lost all that weight from running, and nothing else. Once I stopped running, the weight went right back on, very quickly (although fortunately I only got back up to 230, and not 250...)

This is the longest I've ever sustained anything even remotely close to a "healthy" diet. All of 9 days. I'm curious to see what differences, if any, there will be after 30 and 45 days. Assuming I can keep it going that long. I still can't seem to get myself to go more than 3 or 4 days without a bag of chips or a candy bar, but even with some of that stuff, I'm down around 1k calories/day from where I was 2 weeks ago, or more. Hopefully it will get easier as I go along.

I think the best thing of all for me would be returning to sleeping from midnight to 8 am, but I haven't been able to do that yet.

Silock 05-10-2010 05:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RedThat (Post 6749326)
Okay how are they different? Glucose serves as an immediate energy source and glycogen serves as a reserve energy source. One is front line, the other is a backup. Thats the only difference I can see. It's just a matter of the roles they play.

One is storage form, one is not. Why are we talking about this? They're different parts of the same system, but they are different. There are different kinds of glycogen and different kinds of glucose. This is completely irrelevant.

Quote:

So with that being said, how can one expect it to be high the next day? Sorry brother, you are wrong.
Your body has plenty of time to digest the food you eat and convert it to glucose. Fats and proteins are both converted to glucose via gluconeogenesis. This is the same kind of glucose you get from carbs, and thus, may be used to replenish glycogen stores. It comes from the glycerol in fatty acids and from the amino acids in proteins. It's a slow process, but overnight is long enough to get them replenished. Now, if you were going to exercise again that day, you'd want carbs to replenish the stores because it's faster. But for doing exercise many hours away (like 24), you don't HAVE to have carbs.

Quote:

I understand muscles store glycogen but it doesn't come from fats. Fats DO NOT produce glycogen.
Not directly, no, but the capability for the body to replenish glycogen stores from fat exists via gluconeogenesis.

Quote:

*snip*Ketones are the breakdown of fatty acids and are used purposely as a secondary source of energy once the body is low on both glucose and glycogen, and are, I REPEAT, NOT USED TO PRODUCE GLYCOGEN!*snip*
Never said they were /shrug

Quote:

This is why I believe Glycogen, glucose can act as an obstacle for one who wishes to get nice and lean, ripped!
Without these things, you would be DEAD. Although, you are certainly nice and lean and ripped when you're rotting in the ground, I suppose.

Quote:

I can see this as truth because bodybuilders do this all the time. They don't eat carbs for weeks before a contest, and right before the contest they load up on carbs so they give their muscles a chance to restore/refill them with glycogen.
Most of that is water pumping up the muscles. When you go on a low-carb diet for a while, and then eat a bunch of carbs after that, you carbo-load. That's been scientifically shown to stuff more glycogen into muscle cells than a consistent, normal diet would. And since the body does that, the muscles pump up with fluid as the glycogen bonds with water.

Quote:

Lol...Again, you are wrong. Sorry I refuse to acknowledge what you are saying.
If the second part of what you say is true, then why are we even having a discussion? If you refuse to acknowledge what I say, then what's the point?

Quote:

Your assertion is true only in the case scenario of a low carb diet. Otherwise, it is false. Do they mention that in any of the articles you read? It wouldn't surprise me if they didn't.
No, it's not! Read the study. The diets were NOT low-carb.

Quote:

Blah, blah...sorry no offense but I don't agree with this. I believe they have the power to publicize sh*tty information that can mislead and deceive the people. Don't believe everything you read.
Read the study. The methodology is all right there, laid out plain as day. If you don't believe science, that's not the fault of the study.

Quote:

There is increased fat utilization in a fasted state. You know why? Because your body has LESS nutrients to work with. Think about it? Screw some of these scientific articles you've read, that I can see your mind is so fixated on, lets rely on some common sense. Please. This is not rocket science nor should it be complicated. Your body consumes a lot of nutrients the day before at night when you rested. In the morning, fasted, it's on empty! It has no fuel. So when you workout, your body is pretty much running on "empty". What do you think it's gonna do? It has to look for other ways to fuel itself, so it's going to break down bodyfat and use that as energy source to compliment and meet the physical demands of activity. Remember, exercise creates a demand for nutrients, and if your body is not getting any from food, it'll look for other ways to fuel itself. Ketones can come from either the fats in your diet or from your bodyfat.
What is your body doing at night while you rest? Why would it consume these nutrients? To rebuild and refuel the body so that it is ready to go the next day.

Quote:

Why would they say have breakfast in the morning? It's the most important meal of the day. Because you replentish that emptiness, and deprivation of nutrients right away first thing in the morning. And you also kick start your metabolism right away. But, by having breakfast first thing in the morning, you give your body other ways to fuel itself w/ energy. Suppose you workout an hour after breakfast, all your body is going to do is use up those very nutrients that you supplied it w/ from breakfast to fuel you during your workout. It'll use that first, and then look for other ways to fuel itself.
No one is arguing this. But you again are not looking at the 24-hour energy balance. By keeping the total calories the same, your body will use whatever it needs to for energy.

Quote:

Yes I know that. That is basic stuff to me. Im at a more complex stage right now. Im discussing about other ways to increase fat utilization. Im focusing on how the body burns fat more efficiently.
You acknowledge my scenario is true, while simultaneously saying that I'm wrong? I don't get it.

Quote:

That's nice and all. Thank you. But, Im going to go with experience, and what I believe, feel and see as truth.
Let's not confuse belief with facts.

stlchiefs 05-10-2010 06:44 PM

Silock,

Getting ready to order the creatine you linked to and saw this: http://www.bodybuilding.com/store/creatine.html

Is this decent stuff or would I be better off shelling out the additional $10 on the stuff you recommended?

Not sure if you answered this before or not, but am I cool taking NOXplode with Creatine?

Thanks again man.

keg in kc 05-10-2010 06:55 PM

80 push-ups today (12, 13, 10, 10, 35). Exhaustion test either tomorrow or Wednesday. Going to try for 40. My first exhaustion test after two weeks (back in mid-March, shortly before I gave up), was only 25, so I'm way, way ahead of where I was then (no idea why, I'm actually doing an easier tier now). I would have laughed at anybody a couple of months ago who suggested I'd ever be closing in on 40. I had trouble doing 15 in late February.

Really glad I ran earlier today, because it's ****ing pouring outside right now.

SenselessChiefsFan 05-10-2010 07:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Silock (Post 6749646)
There's a few, yes, but it largely depends on the volume you do. Total volume = more, you need more recovery.



Please don't do this. 48-72 hours is more than enough. Most people gain the most in strength and hypertrophy by training a muscle three times per week. There's only so much beneficial work a muscle can do in one training session without the aid of drugs. And then it needs to rest so it can repair itself, but most muscles are ready after 48 hours.

If you go to a one-day per week routine, you're not going to reach your benching goal any time soon, and will completely hinder your progress.

So, if I am going to do Steroids, it's once a day? Cool, once a day it is.

Mr. Flopnuts 05-10-2010 07:34 PM

Man, I get hungry at work. I didn't eat breakfast and my stomach was growling pretty much from 10am to lunch time at 1pm. I ate 2 turkey sandwiches for lunch. 45 calorie bread, 500 calories total. My stomach was growing again by 4pm and all the way until I got home and ate a small salad.

I don't think it's any less mental than it was when I was working from home, but I'm concentrating more on it and I'm going to have to fix that. Fasting will be difficult but I'm still going to probably give it a shot sometime this week.

Lifted this morning and ran a couple of miles. Achilles was good all day for the most part. I think it's healing up. I'm pretty sure it was just a minor, minor strain but it's still been dogging me for a week now.

Silock 05-10-2010 07:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stlchiefs (Post 6749977)
Silock,

Getting ready to order the creatine you linked to and saw this: http://www.bodybuilding.com/store/creatine.html

Is this decent stuff or would I be better off shelling out the additional $10 on the stuff you recommended?

Not sure if you answered this before or not, but am I cool taking NOXplode with Creatine?

Thanks again man.

Which product? There's a list of product on that link.

You're fine taking them together, but NOXplode is a waste of money.

Silock 05-10-2010 07:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SensibleChiefsfan (Post 6750069)
So, if I am going to do Steroids, it's once a day? Cool, once a day it is.

You can do anything you want if you're on steroids. You could sit on the couch and do nothing and still be stronger than if you weren't on the cycle.

LetsSignRussell 05-10-2010 07:57 PM

which creatine did you recommend?

Silock 05-10-2010 08:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LetsSignRussell (Post 6750157)
which creatine did you recommend?

Any creatine mono works just fine. I personally use the tub of Optimum Nutrition Creatine, because you get over a year's worth of servings for $60. It's made with Creapure, which means it has absolutely no taste whatsoever, so you can put it with anything.

I just got back from the gym and put 5g in my mouth and took it with water. Literally no taste.

LetsSignRussell 05-10-2010 08:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Silock (Post 6750163)
Any creatine mono works just fine. I personally use the tub of Optimum Nutrition Creatine, because you get over a year's worth of servings for $60. It's made with Creapure, which means it has absolutely no taste whatsoever, so you can put it with anything.

I just got back from the gym and put 5g in my mouth and took it with water. Literally no taste.

http://www.bodybuilding.com/store/pl/creatine.html
-take only after workout?

whey protein and simple carbs after? or just protein?

protein and carbs before?


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:27 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.