Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSutterDynasty
It doesn't matter what you eat for weight gain if they're the same caloric intake. Your health is based upon what you eat. Learn to read.
I can't believe people actually think this. If you eat 4000 calories of vegetables, monounsaturated fat, fruit, omega-3 fats, complex carbohydrates and a ton of fibre, you will gain the same amount of weight as if you ate 4000 calories of pizza and mcdonalds.
|
I'll let you do the experiment with this and you can report your results!
For what its worth (and I am sure you won't believe me), I have actually tracked different macro nutrient breakdowns for myself and have found that the same total cals of a higher fat diet 50 - 60% (good healthy fats of course) with protein 30% and the rest of the cals rounded out with carbs have me stay leaner than swapping the fat and carb ratios. If your theory of a calorie is a calorie than my body composition should have stayed the same at the same caloric intake no matter the souce of food. I never even changed the source of the food, just the macro breakdown and I saw differences.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSutterDynasty
Honestly, tell me something. Tell me exactly what you think a calorie is. It's a unit of measurement of energy. If we didn't utilize the amount of energy we say we do from calories, what the hell is the point?! No, not all macronutrients are equal, that's why we distinguish that 1 g of fat is 9 calories, 1g of protein is 4 calories, and 1g of carbohydrates is 4 calories! This takes into account the energy cost of metabolism.
Trust me, I don't.
|
I guess not everyone likes to continually learn and improve. Some people do still think the world is flat after all...
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSutterDynasty
First of all, I don't blindly prescribe exercise. I would need to know exactly what his goals are, what his exercise experience is, what he's capable of, etc. A program should be built for the individual. One program should not be shoved down everyone's throats like is so common in the ignorant weight lifting community.
|
Original Post:
Mark Rippetoe's Starting Strength
Anyone else used this workout program before? I've been going to the gym pretty steadily for a little over a year now but I have always mostly focused on doing isolation exercises (bench press being the main exception). Lately, however, I have been doing some research and I have come to the conclusion that this isn't the way that I should be going considering I want to put on mass.
Anyway, I started the Starting Strength program today, beginning with Workout A, and I have to say, I'm a bit underwhelmed considering that it is only 3 exercises and I was out of the gym in no time. For those that have had experience with it, should I add anything to it or should I just stay the course?
He states what his goal is, how long he has been going to the gym and mentions a very reputable program by name and is asking for anyone's opinion on it that has experience with it.
If you have not done the program, what exactly do you know about it?
No one is blindly prescribing anything.
Here is a link to some Mark Rippetoe info and pic of him competing - does he look fat to you?
http://startingstrength.wikia.com/wiki/Mark_Rippetoe
Some of his numbers from the link:
These are his previous PRs at a weight of 220:
Meet squat: 611, (622 got 2 reds, one depth and one politics)
Gym squat: 600 x 3 Both done in a single-ply Frantz suit.
Meet bench: 396 on an easy 3rd attempt after his foot slipped on the 2nd with that weight.
Meet deadlift: 633 on two separate occasions.
PR Total: 1643
Won the Greater Texas Classic at 198 in 1981.
Retired from PL competition in 1988.
What are your credentials and what program would you tell the Original Poster to follow?
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSutterDynasty
Second, I don't care what you've seen. Science and fact say that hypertrophy and strength gain are totally independent of caloric intake (assuming you're not in a negative balance). Hell, most of your strength gains on an intensity program are neural after the initial hypertrophy phase. Even your ridiculous logic won't be able to explain why you would need more calories for neural adaptations.
If someone needed to eat more to meet their caloric needs for protein synthesis (hypertrophy), that would mean they're malnourished. They aren't getting enough calories/protein/whatever for the body to build the amount of muscle that they should be. You honestly think that everyone who exercises except for the select few idiots who tell everyone to drastically increase their caloric intake is malnourished?!
|
Interesting that you don't care. I like hearing and seeing real examples of what a program etc has done for someone. It gives you perspective on what you may expect from it. I like learning from what people are actually doing and applying it. The guys competing know what works and what doesn't long before some scientist. Science has its place, but they can't explain everything.
This has been interesting...