Jump to content

Sorry!

This site is in read-only mode right now. You can browse all our old topics (and there's a lot of them) but you won't be able to add to them.

Bulking/Cutting protocol refuted.

perpetual_injuries

By perpetual_injuries
in Diet & nutrition

 Share

Recommended Posts

perpetual_injuries Junior member

perpetual_injuries

Posted
Posted

Hey, here's another article that i've found that's pointed out the negative effects of the bulking/cutting style of weight gain.

It's pretty categorical about how bad this style is. Having seen a lot of people on this site apparently following this method I thought it would be interesting to post and get other peoples perspectives.

http://www.simplyshredded.com/the-top-1 ... to-do.html

You'll want number 3 for the bulking bit.

p.s. I've run this past my Nutrition lecturer at uni and the sports medicine specialist (doctor) and both fully agree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Optimalisation Junior member

Optimalisation

Posted
Posted

Haven't exactly 'bulked' successfully myself but here's my 2 cents on the article.

Anti bulking fact #1 says you should get the ideal amount of nutrients and that anything more is too much.

The rest of what they list reads more like "anti being fat" facts rather than anti-bulking. (Possibly with the exception of the insulin stuff which I don't know much about)

A bulking diet can be a good strategy for getting in the ideal amount of nutrients referred to in fact #1 for a number of reasons:

- You could probably be meticulous and try to nail 'ideal' perfectly and cleanly but it's damn hard. Losing the fat inadvertently gained while overeating is easier.

- What is ideal anyway? You might not know exactly what you need but by getting in more than you need you know you've had enough.

- Being scared of eating more than the ideal probably means you will end up eating less than that - and thus not make ideal gains.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
perpetual_injuries Junior member

perpetual_injuries

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I think you make a really good point Optim.

I do however think a lot of the junk bulk diets tend to rely on getting shit loads of useless things.

Carbs in high quantities are generally pretty useless. They're an effective way to replenish glycogen stores rapidly after depletion (normally from a workout). Beyond this, I don't see much use in them. Fat can be easily metabolised into glucose and thus provide the energy you require at a far more stable and even rate, while at the same time providing the essential fatty acids and nutrients you need.

Vegetables will be able to give you many of the micronutrients as well as the dietary fibre you need. Eat as many vegetables as you can!

Protein is pretty much the only thing that there is a fair amount of debate regarding on this one. But, even having said this, if you're managing over 2g/kg of body weight/day in protein, it would be a pretty extreme case that this would not prove sufficient.

Having analysed the macro and micro nutrient breakdown of my diet, (only averaging 11,500kJ/day) I get more than enough in all areas with very minimal carbs (centred mostly post workout), and a low energy intake relative to my exercise load.

I don't think it's as thin a tight rope as many people seem to believe. If you're hungry, make sure you're hydrated enough (dehydration can often present as hunger), and then eat a bit more. Don't exceed your BMR x 2.0 (see below for BMR + PAL) as a general rule (exceptions being people who are going completely mental exercise wise, Phelps' Olympic training schedule for example), 2 hours at the gym can be more than made up for within this. Then so long as you've got plenty of vegetables and good fats with protein mixed in you'll be sweet to gain muscle without fat gain.

BMR Calculation:

10-18years = 74 x (total weight in kilos) + 2,754

18-30years = 63 x (total weight in kilos) + 2,896

30-60years = 49 x (total weight in kilos) + 2,653

This will give you your Basal Metabolic Rate (BMR), the energy you need just to survive. Multiply is by between 1.5 and 1.7 (this is your Physical Activity Level PAL)to add you generic activity levels, + another 0.03 for your gym work, add a further 0.03 if you're involved in extremely strenuous general work during your daily life (construction workers, forest workers or professional athletes).

For me this would look like: (63 x 81.4 + 2,896) x (1.7 + 0.3) = 16,048kJ/day.

I run on a 11,500 average and get more than enough macro and micronutrients.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Phedder Veteran member

Phedder

Posted
Posted

So many people perceive a bulk in different ways. I'd agree there's no need to eat say 6000 calories a day instead of 4000 when your maintenance is 3000. Putting on huge amounts of fat is unnecessary and can be detrimental when your main goal is just to increase muscle mass, but generally people need to gain a little bit of fat to optimise the muscle growth. Would you rather go from 80kgs at 10% to 85kgs at 10% or to 90kgs at say 12% over a year? - arbitrary numbers but you get my point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ThePman Senior member

ThePman

Posted
Posted

I think most people are going to put on most of their muscle weight within the first 6-12 months of dedicated training. You'll keep on squeezing out more as long as you train/eat right, at least until sarcopenia catches up with you, but I don't see the point in continuing to eat yourself fat past that first bump or two.

Unless you're on a cycle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
perpetual_injuries Junior member

perpetual_injuries

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I get your point Phedder. However, what i know of the science behind a lot of it says that you don't need to go up to 12% to get from 80 to 90. Provide your body with the appropriate level or nutrients (not a thin tight rope) and you can manage just a good a gains as someone who ate more (too much) and subsequently gained weight.

Everything that goes into the body is used, stored or excreted. Protein, and fats will be used for their nutrient values until you have enough and then be turned into energy (glucose). Carbs just go straight to glucose. Glucose is used for energy in the body, fuels pretty much everything. It's the wood you burn (can come from carbs, fat or protein). If you don't need the glucose for energy you body will first replenish you glycogen stores (easily accessible energy) then store the remaining glucose as fat.

So simply put. If you're gaining fat, you're giving you body more energy than it needs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
perpetual_injuries Junior member

perpetual_injuries

Posted
  • Author
Posted
p.s. I've run this past my Nutrition lecturer at uni and the sports medicine specialist (doctor) and both fully agree.

Have they done a bit of bulking/cutting?

I'm sorry, but I don't subscribe to the rationale that the only person you should take advice from when building is the biggest guy in the room. I'm far more concerned with people who have actually studied, in a scientific manner, how the body functions. They know, empirically what works. Not just a random n of 1 study, someone has done on themselves at the gym.

Also just for your information, the sports med specialist worked as the dedicated physician for an Aussie Rules Football team for a number of years. I'd say he's got a fairly good idea what he's talking about. That and the 15+ years of study to be a consultant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Phedder Veteran member

Phedder

Posted
Posted
I get your point Phedder. However, what i know of the science behind a lot of it says that you don't need to go up to 12% to get from 80 to 90. Provide your body with the appropriate level or nutrients (not a thin tight rope) and you can manage just a good a gains as someone who ate more (too much) and subsequently gained weight.

Of course you don't need to go up to to 12% to get from 80 to 90. I'm saying you could potentially be gaining muscle faster if you let yourself gain a little fat as well. Your diet has to be extremely on point and consistent to gain lean mass, that person gaining lean mass with little to no fat gain may be gaining at a slightly slower rate than they could. The person who's allowing themselves to put on a little bit of fat, could be maximising their muscle gain.

If you're not gaining any fat, how can you be sure you're not eating slightly under what you could be? Whereas the person gaining a little bit of fat is probably eating slightly over what they need, but at least they're likely maximising the muscle gain. Personally I'd rather maximise the muscle gain while I can and then cut a few kgs later. It's a lot quicker dropping fat than gaining muscle.

I'd be careful with that science over everything else view point as well. I've been there, and I'm realising more and more every day how much experience does matter, especially when it's your own body. Everyone reacts differently, that n = 1 study might not hold much strength to the rest of the population, but if it holds true for you then that's what matters most. I'm not saying those guys preaching what worked for them must work for everyone else as well, but appreciate that the science doesn't take into account individual differences and preferences.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tinytraps Veteran member

tinytraps

Posted
Posted
p.s. I've run this past my Nutrition lecturer at uni and the sports medicine specialist (doctor) and both fully agree.

Have they done a bit of bulking/cutting?

I'm sorry, but I don't subscribe to the rationale that the only person you should take advice from when building is the biggest guy in the room. I'm far more concerned with people who have actually studied, in a scientific manner, how the body functions. They know, empirically what works. Not just a random n of 1 study, someone has done on themselves at the gym.

Also just for your information, the sports med specialist worked as the dedicated physician for an Aussie Rules Football team for a number of years. I'd say he's got a fairly good idea what he's talking about. That and the 15+ years of study to be a consultant.

ha, thats like my 50 odd kg marathon runner nutrition lecturer telling me what to eat to get bigger and stronger. Just cos someone has studied for a long time doesnt mean they know what theyre talking about. Ive heard masters/phd candidate in exercise sci tell me that squats are bad. Man no wonder im so weak and small shouldve checked up on my ex sci 101 book :doh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ThePman Senior member

ThePman

Posted
Posted
p.s. I've run this past my Nutrition lecturer at uni and the sports medicine specialist (doctor) and both fully agree.

Have they done a bit of bulking/cutting?

I'm sorry, but I don't subscribe to the rationale that the only person you should take advice from when building is the biggest guy in the room. I'm far more concerned with people who have actually studied, in a scientific manner, how the body functions. They know, empirically what works. Not just a random n of 1 study, someone has done on themselves at the gym.

You've got the right idea behind you.

The down side is, while you're right in spirit, there's a great big fuzzy area between empirical peer-reviewed journals and What Works inasmuch as bodybuilding and strength sports go.

Science is descriptive. It watches and tells you what happens under (very) specific conditions. Science isn't proscriptive, telling you what to go do for an effective program.

As far as I'm concerned, the best people to listen to are the ones who get results, but approach the matter with a scientific mind. This isn't the same as being able to quote Pubmed from memory. It means that you try things out, and if they work, you keep them. If not, you toss them out.

Science backing is great, but it's only useful if you can apply it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rookie Senior member

Rookie

Posted
Posted
p.s. I've run this past my Nutrition lecturer at uni and the sports medicine specialist (doctor) and both fully agree.

Have they done a bit of bulking/cutting?

I'm sorry, but I don't subscribe to the rationale that the only person you should take advice from when building is the biggest guy in the room. I'm far more concerned with people who have actually studied, in a scientific manner, how the body functions. They know, empirically what works. Not just a random n of 1 study, someone has done on themselves at the gym.

Also just for your information, the sports med specialist worked as the dedicated physician for an Aussie Rules Football team for a number of years. I'd say he's got a fairly good idea what he's talking about. That and the 15+ years of study to be a consultant.

Bro I'm studying sports science too.. The nutrition advice my lecturer gave me was very counterproductive to my end goals (strength/size). He told me there is no point in having carbs at any other time of day besides AFTER training because "that is the only time the body will make use of them".. Funnily enough, the best results I got were when I had small amounts of carbs/protein throughout the day and had more around training (before and after).

I got help from a guy who is no nutritionist etc etc, hasnt done any studies but has good practical experience and with that advice I got my best strength gains.

Don't over think it, just stick to something that works for you!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dr Squat Senior member

Dr Squat

Posted
Posted
p.s. I've run this past my Nutrition lecturer at uni and the sports medicine specialist (doctor) and both fully agree.

Have they done a bit of bulking/cutting?

I'm sorry, but I don't subscribe to the rationale that the only person you should take advice from when building is the biggest guy in the room. I'm far more concerned with people who have actually studied, in a scientific manner, how the body functions. They know, empirically what works. Not just a random n of 1 study, someone has done on themselves at the gym.

Also just for your information, the sports med specialist worked as the dedicated physician for an Aussie Rules Football team for a number of years. I'd say he's got a fairly good idea what he's talking about. That and the 15+ years of study to be a consultant.

A balance of views is always best. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bob26 Senior member

bob26

Posted
Posted

Have they done a bit of bulking/cutting?

I'm sorry, but I don't subscribe to the rationale that the only person you should take advice from when building is the biggest guy in the room. I'm far more concerned with people who have actually studied, in a scientific manner, how the body functions. They know, empirically what works. Not just a random n of 1 study, someone has done on themselves at the gym.

Also just for your information, the sports med specialist worked as the dedicated physician for an Aussie Rules Football team for a number of years. I'd say he's got a fairly good idea what he's talking about. That and the 15+ years of study to be a consultant.

Bro I'm studying sports science too.. The nutrition advice my lecturer gave me was very counterproductive to my end goals (strength/size). He told me there is no point in having carbs at any other time of day besides AFTER training because "that is the only time the body will make use of them".. Funnily enough, the best results I got were when I had small amounts of carbs/protein throughout the day and had more around training (before and after).

I got help from a guy who is no nutritionist etc etc, hasnt done any studies but has good practical experience and with that advice I got my best strength gains.

Don't over think it, just stick to something that works for you!

I learnt the other day at my "Learning institute" where i am doing my level 3 certificate the following things.

a) A glass of orange juice with special K for breakfast will give you sufficient protein at that meal.

b) I need between 1g of protein per KG of bodyweight (92g per day :pfft: )

c) Low carb diets don't work.

d) RDI for alcohol for men is 3 std drinks per day. No this isn't a allowance it is your RDI.

WTF?!?

Needless to say i haven't taken any of it on board & will continue to do what i have been doing ! These bloody experts..... :pfft:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cameron_R Senior member

Cameron_R

Posted
Posted

a)...

b)...

c)...

d)...

WTF?!?

Needless to say i haven't taken any of it on board & will continue to do what i have been doing ! These bloody experts..... :pfft:

Sounds like they giving you a prescription for the average, at risk of being over weight and getting diabetes, person without telling you the reason behind it all! I hate that - they're treating you like you are not smart enough or responsible enough to be trusted with the full story :x

That said Bob, don't forget or ignore it all - you'll need it to pass any tests/exams they give :nod: !

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bob26 Senior member

bob26

Posted
Posted

a)...

b)...

c)...

d)...

WTF?!?

Needless to say i haven't taken any of it on board & will continue to do what i have been doing ! These bloody experts..... :pfft:

Sounds like they giving you a prescription for the average, at risk of being over weight and getting diabetes, person without telling you the reason behind it all! I hate that - they're treating you like you are not smart enough or responsible enough to be trusted with the full story :x

That said Bob, don't forget or ignore it all - you'll need it to pass any tests/exams they give :nod: !

lucky the assessmets have been done all the way through bit by bit.... so it doesn't have to hang around to long :grin:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cameron_R Senior member

Cameron_R

Posted
Posted

That said Bob, don't forget or ignore it all - you'll need it to pass any tests/exams they give :nod: !

lucky the assessmets have been done all the way through bit by bit.... so it doesn't have to hang around to long :grin:

:lol::lol: Information - Last in, first out. :pfft:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


  • Popular Contributors

    Nobody has received reputation this week.

×
×
  • Create New...