[Deluge]

(11-19-2012 01:56 PM)Menace Wrote:  

This article in the NYT is full of concern trolling about men, especially young men, getting to the gym and working out. It claims that only genetics can give you a good body.

Underlying this article is the idea that all of this is a big waste of time for young men, they should be doing something else...I wonder what though. Working hard and getting married? There's just something subtly sinister about the whole thing, but you would never know it unless you are unplugged/red pill/etc.

Also the usual steroid scare tactics.

Here's the article: link

[Basil Ransom]

(11-19-2012 11:41 PM)Sonsowey Wrote:  

I constantly notice the most jacked guys with pretty busted girls. Here in NYC, I feel like you see meathead Italians with fat ugly guidas and jacked black dudes with fat ugly girlfriends all the time. Much more common to see some sharply dressed slim dude with a cute girl than some jacked guy with one.

Yeah, I hear a lot of guys saying shit like, 'blue collar guys / black guys / latinos are more alpha' but I'm sorry bro, if you're dating fat chicks, or your bitch has you on a leash, you're a pussy. Don't matter how gangster fabulous or blue collar hard you are. I'll take the pencil-necked Mormon with a cute little wife and three kids over Essay, Tyrone and Cletus with dem thick gurlz.

[Handsome Creepy Eel]

Hilarious but very sad article. I can't believe that those people are trying to shame teenagers into not living healthy (only 6% take steroids, for god's sake!) and not caring about your attractiveness. NYT has really gone the way of the Dodo Beta...

[Enigma]

(11-19-2012 11:01 PM)jammer Wrote:  

(11-19-2012 08:36 PM)Enigma Wrote:  



An adequate amount of protein? The human body can only use approximately 25 grams of protein after a workout. A 2 lb container of protein will provide that 5 days a week for a month. The rest will come from their food.

Most schools have gyms and many offer weight lifting as an elective class.

Thats broscience dude. Your body can definitely handle way more than 25 G of protein at once.

Plus you probably are going to need more than scoop a day of protein if you want to build serious muscle. If the kid is on average 180-200 lbs, he is going to need around 180-200 G of protein. How many teens do you know that get that much protein from their food sources? You know how hard and expensive that is?

No, it's not broscience, it has been proven in clinical trials. Just because you cram vitamins and minerals down your throat doesn't mean your body uses all of them. You don't have to get on a full-blown bodybuilding routine and load up on supplements to build muscle.

[Strictly Professional]

(11-20-2012 07:33 PM)Enigma Wrote:  

(11-19-2012 11:01 PM)jammer Wrote:  

(11-19-2012 08:36 PM)Enigma Wrote:  



An adequate amount of protein? The human body can only use approximately 25 grams of protein after a workout. A 2 lb container of protein will provide that 5 days a week for a month. The rest will come from their food.

Most schools have gyms and many offer weight lifting as an elective class.

Thats broscience dude. Your body can definitely handle way more than 25 G of protein at once.

Plus you probably are going to need more than scoop a day of protein if you want to build serious muscle. If the kid is on average 180-200 lbs, he is going to need around 180-200 G of protein. How many teens do you know that get that much protein from their food sources? You know how hard and expensive that is?

No, it's not broscience, it has been proven in clinical trials. Just because you cram vitamins and minerals down your throat doesn't mean your body uses all of them. You don't have to get on a full-blown bodybuilding routine and load up on supplements to build muscle.

Regarding clinical trials and limits on protein absorption, that is simply not true. A little time spent poking around on PubMed says quite the opposite.

[Neo]

(11-20-2012 12:14 AM)thedude3737 Wrote:  

But that was on the west coast in Tuscany. From what I understand it's different in other regions..

Yup, I think darker girls in different parts of the country.

[Neo]

(11-20-2012 12:47 AM)basilransom Wrote:  

(11-19-2012 11:41 PM)Sonsowey Wrote:  

I constantly notice the most jacked guys with pretty busted girls. Here in NYC, I feel like you see meathead Italians with fat ugly guidas and jacked black dudes with fat ugly girlfriends all the time. Much more common to see some sharply dressed slim dude with a cute girl than some jacked guy with one.

Yeah, I hear a lot of guys saying shit like, 'blue collar guys / black guys / latinos are more alpha' but I'm sorry bro, if you're dating fat chicks, or your bitch has you on a leash, you're a pussy. Don't matter how gangster fabulous or blue collar hard you are. I'll take the pencil-necked Mormon with a cute little wife and three kids over Essay, Tyrone and Cletus with dem thick gurlz.

Definitely. Hot girls are hot girls and on average are much more difficult to get. I see guys much better looking than myself with very chubby/busted chicks, but then I wonder that their effort to get those girls (I hope) is next to zero.

[MrXY]

What do you expect from the NYT? It is the bible for SWPL types.

[iknowexactly]

I lift weights regularly. The guy who sells fish in my grocery got a hernia at 17 doing curls. I got one from being overweight, sort of the opposite.

There is definitely benefit is rational weightlifting. But doing {close to}your absolute max R1 carries some real risks. There's no cure for hernia except surgery. Good luck if you don't have health insurance. Squats in particular seem risky.

Let's bring out the broscience doctors...

[iknowexactly]

(11-22-2012 01:36 AM)Strictly Professional Wrote:  

Regarding clinical trials and limits on protein absorption, that is simply not true. A little time spent poking around on PubMed says quite the opposite.

Here you go, McMaster U in Canada, posted on the USA National Institute of Health web site, "consensus" = ROUGHLY about 1 gram per pound of lean body mass per day.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22150425

So if you weight 150 with 20% body fat; 120 grams a day. It's kind of hard but not impossible to get that with regular food, eggs have about 7 grams each, a chicken breast about 30 I think, a cup of yogurt maybe 8-9.

So if you're REALLY CAREFUL, you could do it-- but would tend to get too many calories.

[Basil Ransom]

(11-22-2012 01:03 PM)iknowexactly Wrote:  

(11-22-2012 01:36 AM)Strictly Professional Wrote:  

Regarding clinical trials and limits on protein absorption, that is simply not true. A little time spent poking around on PubMed says quite the opposite.

Here you go, McMaster U in Canada, posted on the USA National Institute of Health web site, "consensus" = ROUGHLY about 1 gram per pound of lean body mass per day.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22150425

So if you weight 150 with 20% body fat; 120 grams a day. It's kind of hard but not impossible to get that with regular food, eggs have about 7 grams each, a chicken breast about 30 I think, a cup of yogurt maybe 8-9.

So if you're REALLY CAREFUL, you could do it-- but would tend to get too many calories.

22 ounces (1.4 lbs) of 85% ground beef - 150+ grams of protein, ~1450 calories. I can eat that for a meal, easily. It's really not hard to get enough protein from meat.

Standard meat portions are usually served alongside some huge starchy dish, like pasta or bread. Downsize or eliminate that, and eating enough protein is easy. Prepare your own food and ditch the restaurant filler. I never eat less than a pound of meat at a home cooked meal, if I have a choice. Good quality meat, like some nice marbled steak, and 1.5-2 lbs hits the spot.

[kosko]

The Fibre and the Water to properly digest all the protein is the hard part. If I am getting all my protein from flesh that day I try to get 35-55 Grams of Fibre/Day in me also. So all day I am munching on vegetables to make sure I process all that meat.

IMO the body has its levels of how it takes in energy. Protein is at the bottom of utilized energy sources and is taking in more slowly. There would always be a steady stream of protein being released from a big steak, the body does not requite instant fuel from it when it has Carbs and Fats as a more easy option to break down. I don't see how the body can take in 55G+ of protein in one shot/20min with a big protein shake, your body is pissing out the majority of that so don't let the Bodybuilding Industry fool you. You eat 55-75 Grams of protein in flesh and your body is taking many many hours to break that all down. Only Carbohydrates are digested and utilized that quickly. The threshold for that is much much higher.

[Enigma]

(11-19-2012 08:36 PM)Enigma Wrote:  

An adequate amount of protein? The human body can only use approximately 25 grams of protein after a workout. A 2 lb container of protein will provide that 5 days a week for a month. The rest will come from their food.

Most schools have gyms and many offer weight lifting as an elective class.

(11-22-2012 01:03 PM)iknowexactly Wrote:  

(11-22-2012 01:36 AM)Strictly Professional Wrote:  

Regarding clinical trials and limits on protein absorption, that is simply not true. A little time spent poking around on PubMed says quite the opposite.

Here you go, McMaster U in Canada, posted on the USA National Institute of Health web site, "consensus" = ROUGHLY about 1 gram per pound of lean body mass per day.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22150425

So if you weight 150 with 20% body fat; 120 grams a day. It's kind of hard but not impossible to get that with regular food, eggs have about 7 grams each, a chicken breast about 30 I think, a cup of yogurt maybe 8-9.

So if you're REALLY CAREFUL, you could do it-- but would tend to get too many calories.

PubMed:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19056590

CONCLUSIONS:

Ingestion of 20 g intact protein is sufficient to maximally stimulate MPS and APS after resistance exercise. Phosphorylation of candidate signaling proteins was not enhanced with any dose of protein ingested, which suggested that the stimulation of MPS after resistance exercise may be related to amino acid availability. Finally, dietary protein consumed after exercise in excess of the rate at which it can be incorporated into tissue protein stimulates irreversible oxidation.

Where did I state anything in this thread about the total amount of protein needed throughout the day? The trials you are citing are completely irrelevant in disproving anything I've said. I commented on the need for protein consumption immediately after lifting which is easiest to achieve through a protein shake (containing essential amino acids). The rest of your daily protein requirements can and should be supplied by your diet. My point being that teenagers don't need to spend a fortune monthly on whey or casein protein and other supplements to promote muscle growth. Of course, a professional bodybuilder is going to utilize supplements to a greater degree but that's not what this article is talking about.

(11-22-2012 03:32 PM)basilransom Wrote:  

22 ounces (1.4 lbs) of 85% ground beef - 150+ grams of protein, ~1450 calories. I can eat that for a meal, easily. It's really not hard to get enough protein from meat.

Standard meat portions are usually served alongside some huge starchy dish, like pasta or bread. Downsize or eliminate that, and eating enough protein is easy. Prepare your own food and ditch the restaurant filler. I never eat less than a pound of meat at a home cooked meal, if I have a choice. Good quality meat, like some nice marbled steak, and 1.5-2 lbs hits the spot.

[kosko]

So what's the word then on Protein needs? The word is that you need a gram per Lb of body weight. This never made sense to me either because it should really be a a gram of protein per LB of mass/muscle you actually have. The body is mostly water and goop. I'm 90-95Lbs in water, why the hell would it make sense for me to justify taking in those 90grams in protein when only about 70lbs of my body is actual mass (with fat in their too. Would it not be more logical to get a baseline of 70-80lbs of protein and add a modest amount for a good surplus. Lets say 95lbs.

This I suspect is another bullshit myth from the Bodybuilding/Supplements Industry? They make tons of coin off us pissing out their refined powders. When you try to take in these marco amounts in real hard food you will burst your gut trying to keep up. You need the surplus but IMO I think there is a disconnect on what that real number is (someplace in the middle). I do not believe I need 160 grams of protein per day. I have been hitting my protein targets lately but not my calorie/energy targets and I have been loosing mass. In the world of Body building this should not be the case.

Like Basil noted above its not hard to munch down that food but something tells me that long term you do more harm then good to yourself. If your not cleaning your guts out with fibre that meat will stick around in your guts for a long time. On my mostly protein diet as of late my skin has been getting bad and I'm getting body odour - These are signs that shit inside is not ideal.

I gained my most strength lifting heavy with good amount of carbs and fibre from oats and about 100gr of protein per day from shakes, meatballs, cottage cheese, and eggs. This was when I was dirt poor and rotated these meals daily. While to contrast I was getting the most fit while I was paying attention to getting all my Micro numbers and making sure I had dense nutrient rich meals like Sardines, eggs, Steak, Sweet potato, Avacado, Blueberries etc.

[Enigma]

I have seen mostly something in the .4-.8 g/lb range recommended by legitimate sources, the high-end being for serious athletes.

I personally count calories while managing micros and the quality of the food itself. I pay attention to protein but as long as you're eating meat, fish, dairy, nuts, etc. it's not hard to get a good amount through your diet. I worry more about getting too much protein than I do about getting too little.

[iknowexactly]

(11-22-2012 07:17 PM)Enigma Wrote:  

I have seen mostly something in the .4-.8 g/lb range recommended by legitimate sources, the high-end being for serious athletes.

I personally count calories while managing micros and the quality of the food itself. I pay attention to protein but as long as you're eating meat, fish, dairy, nuts, etc. it's not hard to get a good amount through your diet. I worry more about getting too much protein than I do about getting too little.

What 's you impression of what's bad about too much protein? I think I read it turns into glucose, basically I guess fat if you have too many calories overall?

[Enigma]

(11-22-2012 08:51 PM)iknowexactly Wrote:  

What 's you impression of what's bad about too much protein? I think I read it turns into glucose, basically I guess fat if you have too many calories overall?

It can become fat, like you said. The article I posted claims it can cause tissue oxidation. Some believe it can cause permanent liver damage. Also, high-protein diets can be heavy in fat and cholesterol while neglecting other essential nutrients. Anything can be bad for you in excess so I just try to be wary of not overdoing it.

[reaper23]

(11-22-2012 08:51 PM)iknowexactly Wrote:  

(11-22-2012 07:17 PM)Enigma Wrote:  

I have seen mostly something in the .4-.8 g/lb range recommended by legitimate sources, the high-end being for serious athletes.

I personally count calories while managing micros and the quality of the food itself. I pay attention to protein but as long as you're eating meat, fish, dairy, nuts, etc. it's not hard to get a good amount through your diet. I worry more about getting too much protein than I do about getting too little.

What 's you impression of what's bad about too much protein? I think I read it turns into glucose, basically I guess fat if you have too many calories overall?

if you're going for ketosis, too much protein does in fact turn into glucose. lyle mcdonald says that anything over 150 grams per day does in fact do so.

[Dr. Howard]

How did this turn into a workout thread?

Anyway, i read the article and one unmentioned point weirded me out. In the same survey 5 percent of girls reported using steroids...it was only 6 percent of guys. Thats a fucking teenage weight lifting crisis.

[Faust]

Quote:

In what world do you live in where you can last on 2 lbs of protein for 2 months? You are barely going to last 2 weeks, if that, with 2 lbs of protein.

Yeah, I don't know anything about professional bodybuilders, so I assumed we were talking about kids hitting the gym after school to lift (In which case you don't have gym costs). You sound like you know a lot more about it than me, so I'll defer to you there.

If that's the case, then my bottle of Casein says it has 28 scoops, and recommends 1 scoop after workout. If you work out 3x a week, which is pretty standard, that's 3x8 weeks, which is 24 scoops in two months.

Quote:

Anyway, i read the article and one unmentioned point weirded me out. In the same survey 5 percent of girls reported using steroids...it was only 6 percent of guys. Thats a fucking teenage weight lifting crisis.

It sounded like a self-reporting survey, which is probably crap data to begin with. Throw in kids who are taking some kind of steroid for a medical problem and you'll find the number of girls who are taking steroids to grow muscle is probably negligible.

[Basil Ransom]

The steroids figure is bullshit:

NYT:

Quote:

In a study to be published on Monday in the journal Pediatrics, more than 40 percent of boys in middle school and high school said they regularly exercised with the goal of increasing muscle mass. Thirty-eight percent said they used protein supplements, and nearly 6 percent said they had experimented with steroids.

Study:

Quote:

Steroid use (boys):
94.1% Never
2.8% Rarely
2.3% Sometimes
0.8% Often
...

The current study found reports of muscle-enhancing behaviors (ie, steroids and other substances) to be higher than other recent research with US youth. 20,21,37 These differences could be due to the demographic makeup of the different samples. The current study was almost 20% Asian youth (primarily Hmong), who reported higher rates of use of the muscle enhancing behaviors examined here (compared with other racial groups in this study), but had lower representation in other recent studies. 20,21,37

Similarly, our sample was largely of lower economic status, a group that has not been separately reported on in earlier work. Future research including a wider variety of muscle enhancing behaviors and using a more diverse and nationally representative sample of young people is needed to replicate the current study’s findings.

Cliffs: Our study's sample population was not representative of American teens, and probably has above average steroid use.

Study link: http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/co...l.pdf+html

[Faust]

Wait, what? It included 20% of an obscure sub-demographic that loves weightlifting and steroid use?

Wiki says there are 250,000 hmong in the US. The US has a population of 300 million. 250k/300 million gives Hmong's making up .086 % of the US population. If they're 20% of the study, that means they're overrepresented by a factor of 232 times!

So the whole study is crap then. Completely useless for any purpose whatsoever.

[kbell]

Protein shouldn't be intended as a fuel source. Its better for repairing broken up muscle, making some enzymes and rebuilding cells. Fats and carbs work better for fuel depending on the type of workout.

[Surreyman]

(11-22-2012 12:56 PM)iknowexactly Wrote:  

The guy who sells fish in my grocery got a hernia at 17 doing curls

No offense, but he sounds like the faggots at my gym who only train their upper body. Sometimes they come in with their hair gelled, in designer trainers. It's the sorriest excuse for masculinity I've ever seen.

[Basil Ransom]

(11-23-2012 08:27 PM)Faust Wrote:  

Wait, what? It included 20% of an obscure sub-demographic that loves weightlifting and steroid use?

Wiki says there are 250,000 hmong in the US. The US has a population of 300 million. 250k/300 million gives Hmong's making up .086 % of the US population. If they're 20% of the study, that means they're overrepresented by a factor of 232 times!

So the whole study is crap then. Completely useless for any purpose whatsoever.

Also, I bet some of these kids think certain non-steroids are steroids. Many people see creatine and NO and think 'OMG STEROIDS!' Plus, what does 'rarely' take steroids mean - don't you have to cycle it for some time to have an effect?