Nate's rant, "Nutritionists" & "Toothologists"

[Milkey]

Nate,can you please break it down for the average Joe exactly what you are on about in this thread? It sounds as if you are just venting.

I don't have any quals when it comes to nutrition. And although this is a bobybuilding website there are many different goals with regards to the individual members. Some may be here for chucking on some beef with total disregard to health, others here with health/nutrition/fitness in mind and then theres everything in between.

I don't believe anyone can take just one source of info and run with it. I do a lot of reading,docos etc and have made my own mind up on things. One of the reasons I joined this site recently was to build on my 18 yrs of weight training knowledge and nutrition/supplementation.

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't that why most of us are here? No one joins to get berated or the pi$$ taken out of them. Would be nice if these boards didnt turn into a crap slinging forum.

[Roidzilla]

:-s the thread is titled 'nates rant', what were you expecting other than a rant? healthy debate is a much-needed thing in forums like these, it encourages people to back up what they say, and to see all angles. So either dont read it, or stop crying in your warm milk, FFS.

lets hope this site doesnt turn into a bullshit p.c site.

cool post nate, i saw have been seeing a nutritionist for about a year, she does my bf% etc, is cheaper than a pt, and we both learn off each-other. But agree with your viewpoint.

[rose]

No one was being berated. Nate posted an opinion. A couple of people got emotional about it.

Nate was not saying eat crap or be unhealthy. As he mentioned, his 4 pie example was extreme, to make a point. Rather, it's not rocket science.

Yeah a few things *might* help a top level athlete (strength or otherwise) gain an edge. Maybe. But there's very little new info out there that'll help anyone gain an edge. If you're not representing NZ in your chosen sport, then really? Most things are just a pointless distraction.

Most studies aren't relevant to real life, their results have been extracted and skewed to support an 'idea' so that someone can sell something. Yes research is interesting. In context.

Pman summed it up nicely with this:

We already know "what works", within certain boundaries, and trying to complicate it beyond that is pointless.

Worry about getting the basics down and training hard rather than the next big thing, until you're at a level that the next big thing might make a difference.

[rose]

the thread is titled 'nates rant', what were you expecting other than a rant? healthy debate is a much-needed thing in forums like these, it encourages people to back up what they say, and to see all angles. So either dont read it, or stop crying in your warm milk, FFS.

lets hope this site doesnt turn into a bullshit p.c site.

cool post nate

:nod:

[Grover]

Thanks Nate, good post, now I have justification for having a steak & cheese pie!

Been hanging out for one all year!

[steak]

Thanks Nate, good post, now I have justification for having a steak & cheese pie!

Been hanging out for one all year!

have 2 mate..they make you work a bit harder in the gym 8)

I went and brought a different brand of protein powder today (cos I dont have the resources to make my own and it helps supplement the mince in my pies) and I swear Im gonna grow bigger from just reading the label. Was chocolate icecream flavour...why dont they do a steak and kumara flavour or a chicken and brown rice

[ThePman]

While I agree with this thread to some degree I do believe that it is human nature to always look for the bigger, better, faster, more effective, more efficient way to do things. Of course the basics will always be the same and always be applicable to everyone but if you can do something better to get a better result then why not??

Here's the thing about this (and I'm not singling you out, it was just a good place to make the point):

When you're dealing with scientific data, there's a few factors you have to consider when determining applicability. A lot of people jump into the habit of seeing the conclusion of an abstract and then assuming that "the paper said" and applying it across the board.

It doesn't work that way.

In order to determine what the outcome of an experiment or trial really means, you have to look at the whole thing - who are the subjects? how was the trial carried out? how did they analyze and interpret the data? why did they draw the conclusions they made?

There's a whole lot of confounds in your average paper that puts a big hole in the idea of translating any given result to the average gym-goer. I know in exercise science, the big things is 'untrained subjects'. If you take the average uni student that's never touched a weight into a full-on strength training study, guess what's gonna happen? He's gonna grow and get stronger, regardless of what protocol you use.

Are the results of that study going to mean anything to a guy that's been a competitive powerlifter for 10 years? Of course not. A lot of the same goes down in the nutrition world. That's not really the focus of my interest, but some common trends there as related to sport performance:

- Comparing low-carb diets to other modes of eating. A lot of these show an advantage to low-carb diets. What they don't often do is control for protein intake and/or calorie intake. Or they'll do something stupid like relying on self-reported food intake.

Guess what happens if you take a lot of overweight people and have them self-report their food intake? They're going to leave things out. Go look at the low-carb studies on Pubmed and find how many rely on that.

Or they'll do something like comparing low-carb/high-fat diets to high-carb/low-protein diets.

The conclusions, of course, will be that low-carb diets are magic - when in reality, it's the result of poor research methods.

- Post-workout protein intake. This is a big favorite. Everybody knows that when you drink fast-digesting protein after a workout, it sets off protein synthesis and increase anabolic recovery by at least 30000%, right?

Check how many of those papers are done in subjects that fasted overnight and came in the next morning for the trial. Considering that fasting (and low levels of circulating aminos) is one of the biggest triggers there is for protein loss, it's no surprise that these guys will be in a bad ('catabolic') state after a workout (which is the second biggest trigger of protein loss).

It turns out that when your subjects are well-fed, as most of our 8-meal per day bodybuilders are prone to be, they don't have a problem with low circulating levels of amino acids. It also happens that meals actually have to spend time digesting in your gut - so that big clot of protein you ate two hours ago is still sitting there releasing amino acids while you're working out.

Suddenly, this magical "anabolic post-workout window" goes away. In fact, there was a trial done not too long ago showing that whole milk did a better job stimulating PWO muscle protein synthesis than whey. Funny that - when your body has available amino acids (esp. leucine, which tends to trigger anabolic chemistry locally, in the muscles), you don't see the sudden spike in MPS rates as compared to a fasting group.

The research isn't wrong in either case; they're just reporting what was observed. The problem is the people that just scan the conclusions, don't actually analyze the paper to develop context and figure out confounds, and then figure "oh look 3000% more anabolism lol!". That's not bad research, that's bad interpretation of research.

What's worse is that even people going through degree tracks and post-grad work can fall into the trap of appealing to tradition, instead of using an evidence-based approach and critical analysis of research. Things are said, taken as truth, and then never thought about again.

And I haven't even touched on the limitations of what we can measure accurately, even if you get rid of the context and interpretation problems. That's a whole different rant - let it suffice to say that there's a very real limit to how much relevant data we can derive even from large sample sizes.

Which is what I meant in my earlier statement about how it's useless to obsess over details - it won't affect your results precisely because we don't actually understand things in depth enough for exact values to be relevant.

We have an idea of the basic shape - i.e., eat less food and keep protein intake high for dieting - but that's about it. Anybody looking for exact, optimal values is just out of luck; and if scientific measures in the lab can't provide it, what makes you think that a scoop of protein and a scale you bought for 15 bucks at the Warehouse is going to give you that kind of accuracy?

I'm all for drawing on research to establish basic guiding principles, but a lot of what goes on in the performance world is well beyond the threshold of usefulness.

[rose]

I once saw a qualified nutritionist who told me I should stop eating oranges :toilet:

[Optimass]

nice rant Pman ... :pfft:

I know I have read that milk works faster somewhere too ... not sure though.

IME I have found most competant body builders still don't get 80% of the thier nutritional needs balanced. this is why I'm not a big fan of supplements > if you cant get the basics right ... you're probably spend money on product that is not going to work well due to this > and if it's going to only achieve a 5% increase at its best ... whats the point.

Although not bagging anyone that does use them as everyone can make their own assesments. One of my previous training partners was about 115kg and had an open budget for supplements > taking every new product to come through the mags ... $500 - $700 per month > used to frustrate him that I could maintain the same lifts and more body weight. (My arms were bigger too :grin:)

I don't think anyone is getting on anyones case. I think Nate was just pointing out that we tend to over complicate nutrition by reading into the detail too much, by buying into anecdotal research and in doing so fail to maintain the basics.

... and that dieticians are better than nutritionists :pfft:

TRUE STORY ....

I had a new client come in the gym once that was following sure slim. She had gone into the local clinic that day and had confessed to the 20 year old girl managing her plan that she had eaten 4 grapes with her salad, at lunch that day. This young girl had told her she had stuffed her whole day and was wasting her time. This is where nutritionist (or consultant) gets a bad rap and I get a membership and a PT package :nod:

... I told her on my plan she could have a couple of cheat meals at McDonalds if it made her happy :pfft: SOLD!!

[nate225]

Great comments in the above posts (PMan, Rose, Optimass etc).

Whoever asked it was a bit of a rant, hence the title! No apologies! :grin:

Main points:

1) I felt too much analysis paralysis trend at the mo, without many peeps having the 'building blocks' of nutrition sorted first.

2) Due to the plethora of people given nutrtional advice I thought I'd say beware of what you believe! An internet yoda shouldn't be the basis of your dietary habits.

3) Clarifying the term nutritionist, not bagging all that operate under that title.

Milkey - I have no formal quals in nutrition either. In reality BBing nutrition is reasonably simple, until you start reaching towards elite level (and then I'm way out of my league! As would most dietitians, nutritionists & lay persons). In saying that the guy I would be putting my faith in at that level has no formal quals either, he's been there and taken several others to international level. Nutritionists like Dean Geddes seem to have a good rapt (I've never met the guy, but a good friend knows him well & I notice Mike K uses his services). Glen Kearny was the AB's nutritionist, not a dietitian as most of the current NZRFU nutritionists are now, you can bet he knows his shit!

Summary - know who you're dealing with before taking their word as gospel! Otherwise call Team Reset! :grin:

[Roidzilla]

call Team Reset! :grin:

AHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!

thats the best reponse yet!!!! i lol'd

[HumanPerformance]

Some good intelligent input Pman and optimass,interesting reading.

I can see nates point to a certain extent as well. Nutritional requirements are so individualistic that sometimes giving advive on a forum is almost impossible and one can only give advice in terms of broad generalizations.

Nate is correct that when one is dealing with competitive bodybuilders on a high level things do become extremely complex as the slightest miscalculation can mean the difference between 1st place and 5th place (have learned this the hard way myself sometimes ).

When I first started working with competitive bodybuilders (have trained dozens of national and international competitors over the years) I used to exclusively send them to nutritionist I knew (Ciff Harvey). He was the only nutritionist who shared the same dietary principles that I did myself, and a nutritionist who was truly ahead of his time. I think this is because he had lifted himself for many years (was an all around world weightlifting champion). I still used to write eating programs for my other clients but for my competive bodybuilders I would refer them onto Cliff.

I soon realised that my clients who would see Cliff once every couple of weeks (when coming up to a comp) for a change of diet ,were going through visable conditional changes during that short period of time that I had to address them or risk them missing thier peak alltogether! So i would consatantly have to tweak his diet to keep them on track. This escalated to the point that over many comps I would doing thier diets exclusively. I just found it alot easier as I could change thier diet from one day to the next if need be. I still colaborate with Cliff and other dieticians when I get a particular difficult client who comes to me for an eating regieme (had one the othe day who had crohns disease and oseoparosis), but for my competitive clients I just do it all myself. As I mentioned earlier the ways different bodies respond to exactly the same comp preperations is unbeleivable. For example alot of people will quote the classic carb loading regieme that suggests an individual start loading on wednesday, for some I have found this woefully inadequite and I even have one client who takes takes 14 days at 700g carbs a day to fully load and other clients (particularly females) who can "spill over in 48hrs".

So while the suggestion that starting your carb load on wednesday isnt exactly incorrect, its just a ballpark figure that could be completely inaccurate. Like Pman has said though that is the point of discussion forums like this though, for everyone to explain what they have experienced in thier own self experimentation.

[musclenz]

Undoubtedly, Life has become more complicated. I guess Nate's provocative dive into Nutrition does not fit with every-BODY on here, but it certainly has prompted some good discussion on the topic. I'm tempted to put up a similar thread on "Training"

Being another "Old Schooler" I think we can learn to unravel & simplify our lives by going "Back to Basics". This can apply to many things in our life including Nutrition. Great thread.

[steak]

I'm tempted to put up a similar thread on "Training"

Being another "Old Schooler" I think we can learn to unravel & simplify our lives by going "Back to Basics".

DO IT :nod: 8) I for one would be very keen to hear that.

[rose]

Undoubtedly, Life has become more complicated... I think we can learn to unravel & simplify our lives by going "Back to Basics". This can apply to many things in our life

I vote we all run away and join the circus. We could be gypsies or better yet, start a commune and have wild sex with whomever we like, whenever we like, inbetween hunting and gathering our own food and avoiding teh dinosaurs. We could also lift rocks and stuff to stay strong. Um, I vote that the women not be forced to stay in the kitchen cos, well, there are sharp implements and I might decide to go psycho with one if oppressed :grin:

[ThePman]

Ha, most of my long-ass rant applies just as well to training-related subjects, only I've got a lot more research to bitch about. :grin:

Though I already do most of my bitching on that subject elsewhere.

[cycomiko]

I am just glad my five years of undergrad and postgraduate research at the same tertiary education that nates better half has been through (well if we wanted to split hairs - the dietetics is a postgrad diploma, where as I have a postgrad diploma and a masters - with a greater emphasis on research than the dietetics course has) has given me the ability to be involved in a non-profession.

sweet

I should have gotten a real profession like dietetics, but I guess i didnt want to be a kitchen manager.

[agent86]

The fact is that bodybuilding nutrition is not absolutely definite. People believe facts from some study years ago and pass it on to others. The fact is many of these so called "facts" are just theories.

There is a new study out saying Post workout shakes are not that important as long as adequate food is consumed for the rest of the day. Another top bodybuilder eats less meals per day but eats more at eac meal.

Nate is correct in saying that things can become too complicated. Having water instead of milk seems strange when you consider protein powder is made from milk anyway.

I do many things diet wise that are contrary to popular belief but I always come in ripped.

Just because someone has a qualification does not mean they are gospel as if there was a set of rules that worked for everyone we would all be doing the same.

Nate was just saying that things may be too complicated and it is funny how some people have become upset at him challenging these ideas especially nutritionists who consider they are gospel.

[nate225]

I am just glad my five years of undergrad and postgraduate research at the same tertiary education that nates better half has been through (well if we wanted to split hairs - the dietetics is a postgrad diploma, where as I have a postgrad diploma and a masters - with a greater emphasis on research than the dietetics course has) has given me the ability to be involved in a non-profession.

sweet

I should have gotten a real profession like dietetics, but I guess i didnt want to be a kitchen manager.

The jibe at the end re: Kitchen Manager was a cheap shot bro, but not applicable if aimed at me (she's private practice & specialises in Sports Nutrition (mainly NZRFU & Academy), bariatric surgery stuff as well as the usual weight loss/gain stuff. Is also looking at doing further work in the allergy/intollerance areas, which means more study :roll: ).

Before you think I was having a crack at nutrtionists for being a "non profession" (hard to if you read my later posts) I'll clarify that I'm technically in a non profession too (was in the teaching profession, but had to be a non-professional to near double my salary :pfft: ).

Was just clarifying a point.

Anyway that aside, can't wait to hear some of the relevant stuff you've come across in your research?

Just as an aside I am aware of another sports nutritionist starting a masters research project on protein role in strength training - that will be of interest to me & others no doubt.

Nate

[nate225]

I am just glad my five years of undergrad and postgraduate research

Just thinking about this more cycomiko,

What are your thoughts on the fact you've done five years of hard slog at tertiary level, (not to mention the cost, $40+K I'm guessing and 5 years lost earning ability), and that anyone can then do a two week course (or do nothing at all) and call themselves a nutritionist and earn what you can? (funded positions where education is recognised aside).

Personally I reckon it's shithouse!

And to be fair an unscrupulous person trading as a nutritionist could probably earn more than a well educated one - wildly fabulous claims seem to attract people willing to part with their money much moreso than scientifically valid nutritional advice. Snakeoil anyone?! :grin:

Nate

[ThePman]

Anyway that aside, can't wait to hear some of the relevant stuff you've come across in your research?

This should be good :pfft:

[nate225]

Anyway that aside, can't wait to hear some of the relevant stuff you've come across in your research?

This should be good :pfft:

I was being genuine PMan! Do you know something that I don't? :?

Funny how a lot of people seem to have got all uptight about this topic? Was titled as a rant, and raised some valid points. I'm always up for a good debate without throwing my toys :nod:

I read your comment re: a similar thread about training, now that would be a blinder! I have a very good anecdote about this, will share it if the thread ever arises! I won't start it for fear of being critisized and told I'm just an old school idiot :grin:

[nznomis]

Awesome thread, the essence of it is great, there is no quick fix, no magic pill for anything diet related. But it is so easy to get caught up with the flashy marketing of fad products, Broccoli should come in a shiny package with a ripped celeb on the front lol.

Was just thinking about this sort of thing this morning when I saw this article about fad diets.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/lifestyle/new ... d=10610958

[ThePman]

Anyway that aside, can't wait to hear some of the relevant stuff you've come across in your research?

This should be good :pfft:

I was being genuine PMan! Do you know something that I don't? :?

Just ribbing cyco more than anything, Nate. No worries

I read your comment re: a similar thread about training, now that would be a blinder! I have a very good anecdote about this, will share it if the thread ever arises! I won't start it for fear of being critisized and told I'm just an old school idiot :grin:

hahaha

I can't be bothered at the moment myself, but you're right it would ruffle some feathers. People get into habits, they hear a few things they're told, and then never think twice about it - until somebody brings it up on The Internet and says it might be wrong.

Then it's time to battle!

Maybe another day.

[nate225]

Awesome thread, the essence of it is great, there is no quick fix, no magic pill for anything diet related.

What no anger?! :grin: Good call Simon.

Broccoli should come in a shiny package with a ripped celeb on the front lol.

Brilliant! Only one problem, the price would quadruple over night!