|
-
06-30-2013, 02:11 AM #121
-
06-30-2013, 02:12 AM #122
For the past 6 months:
Ate whatever I wanted, keeping cals at 2.5k getting at least 40g fiber and 180g protein. Felt great, gained a **** ton of strength, maintained ~10% bf while doing ZERO CARDIO.
All of last year:
Ate 2.5k of "clean" foods. Felt great, gained a **** ton of strength, maintained ~10% bf while doing ZERO CARDIO.
My conclusion:
Our bodies are very simple machines. We are made to digest whatever the **** we put in our bodies. Eating "clean" vs not "clean" doesn't matter.
My disclaimer:
Can you loose fat, maintain leaness eating clean? Yes. Is IYFYM superior to eating "clean" FUUUUUUARK no. They're equal. One of them is just being less anal than the other.
thoughts?FAQ for ICF 5X5 (Credit to iBeastMode207 and Charlie581)
http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=148036063&p=1063632501&viewfull=1#post1063632501
-
06-30-2013, 02:12 AM #123
Is that the chit Melisandre has been feeding you?
I agree.
Did you do TRUE IIFYM?
The whole argument between both sides comes from the retards saying they can fill out their macros with McDonalds and Pizza and still have the same body comp after 3 months as someone who ate good nutritious clean foods.
Most people who follow IIFYM and actually get results are the types who fill out their macros with nutritious clean foods then fill out whatevers left with foods they enjoy, in moderation. Which isn't really the IIFYM that everyone without avi's preaches, its just sensible common sense.Starting weight - 220lbs 23/08/09
*Always gets fukked over by 6, even though I know 1 will be best crew*
*Negs on sight for HighHurdler by request*
-
06-30-2013, 02:16 AM #124
-
-
06-30-2013, 02:17 AM #125
-
06-30-2013, 02:17 AM #126
Fantastic summary. Right to the point.
Main reason for argument, in my opinion, is a lot of "clean eaters", for some reason, lack the intelligence to understand such a simple concept. Hence: "IIFYM doesn't work, you have to eat clean bro, don't even have 1mg of chocolate if you want dat 6 pack brah"
-
06-30-2013, 02:24 AM #127
Thats not the "clean eaters" argument brah. Everyone is arguing from the same fukking perspective. Everyone here knows that most of your main meals should be nutritious clean foods with the occasional meal out with friends or for occasions etc.
What they are arguing against is that you can't make up your diet entirely from the McDonalds menu and have a good body comp. I can get all of my Protein fats and carbs from a triple quarter pounder and chocolate shakes, it'll produce a chitty physique, but nobody with any sense is arguing that its a good way to go about things. Both sides agree you should eat well most of the time and indulge in moderation.Starting weight - 220lbs 23/08/09
*Always gets fukked over by 6, even though I know 1 will be best crew*
*Negs on sight for HighHurdler by request*
-
06-30-2013, 02:26 AM #128
-
-
06-30-2013, 02:28 AM #129
-
06-30-2013, 02:29 AM #130
-
06-30-2013, 02:29 AM #131
-
06-30-2013, 02:32 AM #132
-
-
06-30-2013, 02:36 AM #133
-
06-30-2013, 02:38 AM #134
-
06-30-2013, 02:43 AM #135
-
06-30-2013, 02:45 AM #136
-
-
06-30-2013, 02:47 AM #137
-
06-30-2013, 02:47 AM #138
-
06-30-2013, 02:48 AM #139
Lol at people who hate on sweet potatoes, yams, oats, grass fed steak, fish, eggs, chicken breast, plantains, bananas, apples, broccoli, kale, spinach, and carrots. Then have the audacity to call us anal and less effective than pizza, poptarts, refined grains, and sugars. They will see when they are old with their inflamed and disease ridden bodies.
-
06-30-2013, 02:49 AM #140
-
-
06-30-2013, 02:49 AM #141
-
06-30-2013, 02:50 AM #142
-
06-30-2013, 02:50 AM #143
-
06-30-2013, 02:51 AM #144
-
-
06-30-2013, 02:53 AM #145
-
06-30-2013, 02:54 AM #146
-
06-30-2013, 02:54 AM #147
-
06-30-2013, 02:57 AM #148
-
-
06-30-2013, 02:57 AM #149
Detailed pdf on the effect of grains:
http://www.direct-ms.org/pdf/Evoluti...al%20Sword.pdf
edit: "Generally, in most parts of the world, whenever cereal-based diets were first adopted as a staple food replacing the primarily animal-based diets of hunter-gatherers, there was a characteristic reduction in stature [4, 17–19], an increase in infant mortality [19, 20], a reduction in lifespan [19, 20], an increased incidence of infectious diseases [19–22], an increase in iron deficiency anemia [19, 20, 22], an increased incidence of osteomalacia, porotic hyperostosis and other bone mineral disorders [4, 19, 20, 22] and an increase in the number of dental caries and enamel defects [19, 20, 23]."
-
06-30-2013, 02:59 AM #150
Bookmarks