"The Great Bodybuilding Debate" - Ian McCarthy and Dave Pulcinella

[TTimmerman]

i don't care if it's scientifically proven or not, and neither should anyone

post a pic of your physique and the amount of meals per day

this thread will be over very fast

[SupaaJ]

Its better to have tried then to have always wondered what could have been.

I agree.

I think Ian has valid points, but he loses me with his crusade at saving people from trying to be body builders. It is solely their choice. Not to mention the "type" that go overboard on body building would never listen to a YouTube video fella.

[CaseySmithBB]

1-3 meals a day = same results as 6-8 meals a day, so long as you adhere to your caloric deficit/surplus, your macronutrient requirements, and incorporate foods that have a good amount of micronutrients.

Nobody should argue that 6-8 meals doesn't give positive results.

Nobody should argue that 1-3 meals doesn't give the same positive results.

The ONLY argument that should be made is that you DON'T have to eat ANY set number of meals a day in order to succeed as a bodybuilder in an attempt to change your body composition. Calories, macros, micros! That's it!!!

Find what is optimal for YOU. When you find success, share your knowledge, but don't push your experience on other impressionable people that will take your word as law. If people ask you for advice, you should ALWAYS be willing to negotiate their daily schedule, current meal frequency preference, food choices, and social life, before ever just blatantly telling them, "Bro, eat 8 meals a day, boiled chicken, veggies, brown rice, potatoes, and oatmeal. Live 2 hours at a time out of your tupperware or you won't achieve what I have."

[SupaaJ]

i don't care if it's scientifically proven or not, and neither should anyone

post a pic of your physique and the amount of meals per day

this thread will be over very fast

That would be a slaughter.

Anyone ever get the feeling the die hard IIFYM and eat less times per day people need a hobby. Ruining what was perfectly fine before they entered the conversation.

Before the **** storm I have done both and done well on both. At the end of the day though, my optimal is 5 meals per day. Well over the 2 I've done okay with.

So if the main point all the low meal, macro fitting folks are getting at is you can be 90% of what you would be if you spent more EFFORT at the task, then I'd agree. If one feels a tangible difference between eating 2-3 meals and 5, then this world truly is fit for the lazy. Do your damn work people. 5-6 meals is a joke. Easy.

[xbayrockx]

Ian says eating 1 meal, 2 meal 3 meals all the way to 10 meals or whatever is exactly the same if you are eating the exact macros in the end. But I highly doubt someone consuming 3 days worth of macros and then taking 2 days of no eating will result in the same body composition. Basically meaning if a difference can be made by changing the way you intake food then a difference can be made even if it becomes exponentially smaller and smaller of a difference (1 meal compared to 10 meals would have a bigger difference then 10 meals compared to 20).

Dumb ass detected.

Straight from wiki BRAH

"When food protein intake is periodically high or low, the body tries to keep protein levels at an equilibrium by using the "labile protein reserve", which serves as a short-term protein store to be used for emergencies or daily variations in protein intake.[4] However, that reserve is not utilized as longer-term storage for future needs.[4]" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protein...ss_consumption

[detrimental]

Step 1) Eat food

Step 2) STFU and train

(Both of which I don't do enough of)

[Devils]

Did





Not






Read


Calm down mates, you're getting TOO scientific and TOO broscience

[Clean]

That would be a slaughter.

Anyone ever get the feeling the die hard IIFYM and eat less times per day people need a hobby. Ruining what was perfectly fine before they entered the conversation.

Before the **** storm I have done both and done well on both. At the end of the day though, my optimal is 5 meals per day. Well over the 2 I've done okay with.

So if the main point all the low meal, macro fitting folks are getting at is you can be 90% of what you would be if you spent more EFFORT at the task, then I'd agree. If one feels a tangible difference between eating 2-3 meals and 5, then this world truly is fit for the lazy. Do your damn work people. 5-6 meals is a joke. Easy.

Whats funny is that the IIFYM crowd like Ian Mccarthy preach so much about their lifestyle and science and make vids about it, that they don't see they are spending and dedicating all their time to a pointless cause. Which is basically making Ian and the IIFYM crowd the biggest hypocrites there are with respects to dedicating time to something.

Tell people not to dedicate time to bodybuilding cus its a waste.....but dedicates wasteful time to making vids to tell people not to bodybuild.....logic....not even once....

[RoroCwalker]

If you're not weighing your food, then there's no need to calculate by meals ; ''3 meals left'', you don't even know what amount your separating by 4, 5, etc. ''5 meals'' has no meaning without macros couting.
It'd be proper to say I have ''800g of cooked white rice, 800g of chicken breast, 100g of brocoli, 60g of olive oil, etc.'' to eat throughout the day.
That's just personal organization though.

[gamebred26]

You're not stronger in exercises that consist of only your own bodyweight. It only improves leverages up to a point in exercises where you move additional weight only.

Herp derp sumo wrestlers can do 350 pullups because of fat if that logic was true.

It's like the saying "fat" doesnt lift weight. Did I say .."It's like the saying "fat" doesnt do pull ups or push ups???"

Slow down READ. Instead of looking to argue all the time. You may learn something.

[gamebred26]

I dont understand why its a great debate. Do any pro bbers eat just 3 meals a day??? No.


Debate over. Next.

[Big Slim DaDDy]

I dont understand why its a great debate. Do any pro bbers eat just 3 meals a day??? No.


Debate over. Next.

I think Mike P. named it that for dramatic effect. So more people would view it. Marketing so to speak.

[Groggery]

Did I say .."It's like the saying "fat" doesnt do pull ups or push ups???"

Nah, this is precisely what you said

where is the science ?? but it's true. carry more bodyfat and youre stronger. i dont know why. but it just is.

And the point still stands, ye be retarded.

[gamebred26]

Nah, this is precisely what you said



And the point still stands, ye be retarded.

lol not really..shoosh.

its a bbing website. throw a pic up in your avy of yourself. or dont speak. you have no credibility otherwise. you just troll around and try to argue. but yet cant make a real point. piss off.

[Groggery]

lol not really..shoosh.

its a bbing website. throw a pic up in your avy of yourself. or dont speak. you have no credibility otherwise.

Mate you really make americans look bad with that kind of reasoning.

[gamebred26]

Mate you really make americans look bad with that kind of reasoning.

Bro or sheela? Are you an attention whore? Argue about the thread. Stop changing the subject.

I made a point saying carrying extra BODYFAT makes you able to lift more weight. There is no science behind it as to WHY. Not saying eating more fat...not saying being in a caloric surplus.

Carrying more FAT period you will be stronger. I honestly think it has to do with the ratio of bodyweight to the amount being lifted. Whether that is called "leverage" I dont know...

But if I am 185..I cant squat, DL or bench the same as when I am 195-200...and its not like I am shredded or dieting hard to be 185..its just being bigger makes **** lighter.

[Lvisaa2]

Bro or sheela? Are you an attention whore? Argue about the thread. Stop changing the subject.

I made a point saying carrying extra BODYFAT makes you able to lift more weight. There is no science behind it as to WHY. Not saying eating more fat...not saying being in a caloric surplus.

Carrying more FAT period you will be stronger. I honestly think it has to do with the ratio of bodyweight to the amount being lifted. Whether that is called "leverage" I dont know...

But if I am 185..I cant squat, DL or bench the same as when I am 195-200...and its not like I am shredded or dieting hard to be 185..its just being bigger makes **** lighter.

I already addressed this and yes, there is science to help explain why.

[Groggery]

I honestly think it has to do with the ratio of bodyweight to the amount being lifted. Whether that is called "leverage" I dont know...

It is, and you can stop freaking out about it. For all i care i could be a herm, but you won't catch me trying to spew broscience.

[FAN0FdaSport]

lol not really..shoosh.

its a bbing website. throw a pic up in your avy of yourself. or dont speak. you have no credibility otherwise. you just troll around and try to argue. but yet cant make a real point. piss off.

look at you becoming defensive and pathetic because you cant win a meaningless arguement...

[Forum]

Wow. Pulcinella completely owns Ian!!! BAsically, Pulcinella argued that "if I do something and it works but the research hasnt been produced yet, does it mean it doesnt work?" Ian McCarthy's answer "Yes". Srsly, someone please return Ian's brain to him. Pulcinella, if you are reading this, had reps to you man! You have completely owned a 19 year old geek who thinks that if there is no research to show that "running against a wall at high speeds at 3 pm in California on a sunny day will lead to a very painful death", therefore science does not support that, that its broscience and its safe to run against a wall. According to Ian's way of thinking, real world examples of running against a wall at high speed isnt enough, and that it constitutes broscience. Apparently, you need a published paper to prove that. SMH...

[Loctus]

Wow. Pulcinella completely owns Ian!!! BAsically, Pulcinella argued that "if I do something and it works but the research hasnt been produced yet, does it mean it doesnt work?" Ian McCarthy's answer "Yes". Srsly, someone please return Ian's brain to him. Pulcinella, if you are reading this, had reps to you man! You have completely owned a 19 year old geek who thinks that if there is no research to show that "running against a wall at high speeds at 3 pm in California on a sunny day will lead to a very painful death", therefore science does not support that, that its broscience and its safe to run against a wall. According to Ian's way of thinking, real world examples of running against a wall at high speed isnt enough, and that it constitutes broscience. Apparently, you need a published paper to prove that. SMH...

I think that you are missing the *slight* detail here; that the research HAS been done on this topic and it pretty much conclusively shows that meal frequency has no effect on BMR or TEF

[spamy]

Oh brother....

For those who ingest huge amounts of calories daily, yes, it's true that more meals are needed for this since otherwise it's impossible to eat every day 3000 kcal in one meal.

But let's say that you take less calories every day: 3000-3500 for example. Even if you split them in 3 or 5-6 meals, it's not going to make such a huge difference on long term. it's not like the body will magically pull out of its ass more muscles to build with one method or another, the daily calorie intake remains the same.

Is the same with the "multi-joint exercises are better to build muscles than the isolation ones". Both can be effective if you apply the right stimuli.

[stealth_swimmer]

Dumb ass detected.

Straight from wiki BRAH

"When food protein intake is periodically high or low, the body tries to keep protein levels at an equilibrium by using the "labile protein reserve", which serves as a short-term protein store to be used for emergencies or daily variations in protein intake.[4] However, that reserve is not utilized as longer-term storage for future needs.[4]" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protein...ss_consumption

Does that have anything to do with what the person you quoted said?

Oh brother....

For those who ingest huge amounts of calories daily, yes, it's true that more meals are needed for this since otherwise it's impossible to eat every day 3000 kcal in one meal.

But let's say that you take less calories every day: 3000-3500 for example. Even if you split them in 3 or 5-6 meals, it's not going to make such a huge difference on long term. it's not like the body will magically pull out of its ass more muscles to build with one method or another, the daily calorie intake remains the same.

Is the same with the "multi-joint exercises are better to build muscles than the isolation ones". Both can be effective if you apply the right stimuli.

It's possible (though I'm not saying this actually is the case) that higher meal frequency affects body composition rather than body weight. Body weight is about calories, and calories only. Body composition is affected by multiple things.

[PillClinton]

Mate you really make americans look bad with that kind of reasoning.

We are a "spread out" people.

I'm embarrassed by my own fellow citizens at times. You should see us traveling internationally.... oh god...

[Jfern689]

1-3 meals a day = same results as 6-8 meals a day, so long as you adhere to your caloric deficit/surplus, your macronutrient requirements, and incorporate foods that have a good amount of micronutrients.

Nobody should argue that 6-8 meals doesn't give positive results.

Nobody should argue that 1-3 meals doesn't give the same positive results.

The ONLY argument that should be made is that you DON'T have to eat ANY set number of meals a day in order to succeed as a bodybuilder in an attempt to change your body composition. Calories, macros, micros! That's it!!!

Find what is optimal for YOU. When you find success, share your knowledge, but don't push your experience on other impressionable people that will take your word as law. If people ask you for advice, you should ALWAYS be willing to negotiate their daily schedule, current meal frequency preference, food choices, and social life, before ever just blatantly telling them, "Bro, eat 8 meals a day, boiled chicken, veggies, brown rice, potatoes, and oatmeal. Live 2 hours at a time out of your tupperware or you won't achieve what I have."

One meal a day is just play insane in my opinion. For example, I eat 250 grams of protein a day. You expect someone to eat that in one meal? Add carbs and healthy fats and is just sounds more ridiculous to eat one meal per day. Three to Four is a nice balance in my opinion. Some people eat 6 plus meals but if that's what gives them results good for them but I can't wrap my head around one meal.

[Milone79]

1-3 meals a day = same results as 6-8 meals a day, so long as you adhere to your caloric deficit/surplus, your macronutrient requirements, and incorporate foods that have a good amount of micronutrients.

Nobody should argue that 6-8 meals doesn't give positive results.

Nobody should argue that 1-3 meals doesn't give the same positive results.

The ONLY argument that should be made is that you DON'T have to eat ANY set number of meals a day in order to succeed as a bodybuilder in an attempt to change your body composition. Calories, macros, micros! That's it!!!

Find what is optimal for YOU. When you find success, share your knowledge, but don't push your experience on other impressionable people that will take your word as law. If people ask you for advice, you should ALWAYS be willing to negotiate their daily schedule, current meal frequency preference, food choices, and social life, before ever just blatantly telling them, "Bro, eat 8 meals a day, boiled chicken, veggies, brown rice, potatoes, and oatmeal. Live 2 hours at a time out of your tupperware or you won't achieve what I have."

repped for truth!!!!

Ian is just a phaggot little parrot that memorizes and repeats what other "real" intelligent people have stated in the industry...he has no post secondary education himself, doesn't look like he lifts and needs a slap in the head IRL for talking chit about so many people.

[Milone79]

One meal a day is just play insane in my opinion. For example, I eat 250 grams of protein a day. You expect someone to eat that in one meal? Add carbs and healthy fats and is just sounds more ridiculous to eat one meal per day. Three to Four is a nice balance in my opinion. Some people eat 6 plus meals but if that's what gives them results good for them but I can't wrap my head around one meal.

not insane at all...I did it for years... I.F. bra....no better and no worse than 6 meals a day all comes down to personal preferance...

[Jfern689]

not insane at all...I did it for years... I.F. bra....no better and no worse than 6 meals a day all comes down to personal preferance...

And how did you hit all your macros in that one meal?

[cjowns76]

[mmaoz]

lol'd at this comment.