Ultimate BB Knowledge (Spiderman+Alan and more) (GTFIH)

[Francis333]

Question:
Is a carb a carb? Why or why not?

Is a calorie a calorie? Why or why not?


Answer:

"Independent of micronutrients, all carbs end up as blood glucose. This applies only in moderation, don't eat 600g of fructose a day. Glycemic index matters very little because it is confounded by intake of protein or fats, it's really not worth the brain energy to think about.

A calorie is not a calorie, that violates the laws of thermodynamics. Protein and carbs are more 'expensive' nutrients than fat, ergo the body has to utilize more energy to process them."-Spiderman

A calorie is a calorie when you're talking about energy balance. If you eat below your maintenance and get all calories from carbs, you will lose fat. If you eat below maintenance and get all calories from fat, you will lose fat. However, either scenario would be horrible health-wise. In terms of health and body composition, a calorie is not a calorie.-Kanevskeet



Question:
Will you be able to use more calories for energy from a homemade hamburger vs a big mac from mcdonalds? (assuming they have the same macros)

Answer:

"It will be identical."-Spiderman

"If you're asking whether or not 2 diets of matched macronutrient composition but differing insulinogenic capacity will have different effects on body composition, then the answer is no."-Alan Aragon

On the topic of Glycemic Index

Gi is calculated using an isolated carb source during a fast. It isnt practical because of the way we eat, since we eat mixed meals and do not 99.99 percent of the time eat an isolated carb source (obviously not in a fast) then it is pointless to worry about. So you have meal timing which affects the content then you have meal content.

Ice cream technically would be a low gi food because of the fat content, pasta, a potato, white rice to name a few would be a high gi food. So would eating ice cream be the better choice because it is low gi? obviously not.
-Hyruliangoat

On the topic of clean+dirty foods

: Nope, you're missing the point. You simply can't judge or label foods in isolation. And, you certainly can't look at foods from a binary standpoint (ie, good vs bad, junk vs healthy), outside of the context of the rest of the diet. Doing so presupposes that this is the only food in the diet - which is obviously far-fetched & irrelevant to the real world. To give an example of erroneously judging foods out of context, let's assume that we call skinless chicken breast clean/healthy, and we call skin-on, fried chicken a junk/dirty food. Guess which food - if it was the only food in the diet besides water - would enable a longer survival period before disease & death would ensue? Funny enough, that "junk" in this case would keep you alive & healthy longer than the so-called clean stuff. But as you can see, that example is completely irrelevant to reality - as is the idea of judging foods in isolation from the rest of the diet. There are plenty more examples like this that can be made, but hopefully you get the point.-Alan Aragon



it's fallacious from the very start to judge any food in isolation from the the rest of the diet. The argument is dead before it even starts.The clean eating argument is a born from a combination of ignorance & the use of misleading terms. There is simply no such thing as a clean or dirty food. Everything is context-dependent, and that context is the diet as a whole, which will vary according to individual goals, preferences, & tolerances. To reiterate, foods cannot be judged in isolation from the rest of the diet. Add to this that the definition of 'clean' is all over the place (& always fails logically), then you have a good reason to avoid using such a misleading term.-Alan Aragon

On topic of high sodium=higher risk for CVD

Spiderman997:
I suspect it might be a case of assuming correlation = causation. A lot of people with high sodium intake ALSO have a high calorie intake, which is a greater risk factor for CVD and death.-Spiderman


On topic of size vs strength


Purely size;
moderate frequency, high volume per session, higher reps, moderately heavy weight.

Purely strength;
high frequency, low volume per session, lower reps, heavy weight.
-Martyn

Strength is, for the most part, neural, meaning strength is actually a function of brain efficiency rather than muscle mass. If you do one rep, you are building a lot of neural efficiency but very little to no muscle mass, because one rep isn't enough stress on the muscle tissue. Once you get into the higher rep ranges, the distinction between the two is a blur. Obviously you see small people who are strong, and big people who are weak, but that is more a function of genetics and diet than training style.-Gabe Da Gawd

On Topic of rep range for hypertrophy

There are too many variables to say 'X-Y is the optimal rep range for hypertrophy'. All I'm saying is that for most compound exercises, 5 reps is enough time under tension to have an adequate hypertrophic response, and you don't really get strictly neural development until you start doing < 3 reps. Will you have better results doing 8-12 reps? No idea, there are too many factors to consider to make a broad statement for either side of the argument.

"Generally accepted" means **** all. Trying to gauge hypertrophic response by number or repetitions is a flawed approach anyway. If I do 5 reps of a squat, I get a lot more tension on my quads than if I do 5 reps on a leg extension because I spent much more time going through the range of motion. I could do a 5 rep squat and make it 'pure hypertrophy' and do an 8 rep leg extension and make it 'pure strength' just by altering my form and pace slightly.
-Spiderman

On topic of cardio

For bodybuilding specifically, I'd have to reiterate that the best approach is to begin with the least amont of cardio to get the results you're looking for, in order to minimize interference with the goal of building muscle. -Alan Aragon

On topic of Diabetes


Diabetes is actually not caused by simple sugars. Even diabetes.org says this lol.
http://www.diabetes.org/diabetes-basics/diabetes-myths/
"Myth: Eating too much sugar causes diabetes.

Fact: No, it does not. Type 1 diabetes is caused by genetics and unknown factors that trigger the onset of the disease; type 2 diabetes is caused by genetics and lifestyle factors. Being overweight does increase your risk for developing type 2 diabetes, and a diet high in calories, whether from sugar or from fat, can contribute to weight gain. If you have a history of diabetes in your family, eating a healthy meal plan and regular exercise are recommended to manage your weight."

To a huge extent being overweight affects it, but really inactivity is the biggest factor in determining if you will be diabetic. After an exercise bout your insulin sensitivity improves for 24 hours or more. Even fatasses can have no risk for diabetes if they are moderately active.
-Spiderman

Will be updating with more

[Brenjam]

Where you getting this? Keen to hear more

[RugbyBro]

Glad you're back. Sticky worthy. Measlies

[Francis333]

Glad you're back. Sticky worthy. Measlies

Thanks m8, repped back. In for sticky

Where you getting this? Keen to hear more

My collection of knowledge that I've kept. Now sharing it

[Brenjam]

Thanks m8, repped back. In for sticky



My collection of knowledge that I've kept. Now sharing it

In for this!

[Francis333]

In for this!

chit's about to get srs

Knowledge through the roof

More advanced knowledge coming soon

[crazdave]

In. This is great stuff OP

apparently I've already repped you before lol

[Savanovic]

Great stuff!
Thanks for the helpful thread Francis, hope it becomes a sticky!

[Francis333]

In. This is great stuff OP

apparently I've already repped you before lol

Thanks m8

hehe i get that alot

Great stuff!
Thanks for the helpful thread Francis, hope it becomes a sticky!

Thanks protege, yea me too m8, it is definitely something useful to read when we refer noobs to the stickies.

[CzarSurg]

Very knowledgeable truly deserving of a sticky.

[Francis333]

Very knowledgeable truly deserving of a sticky.

Thank you very much for your kind words sir!

[NDW150]

I want to be in, sounds like a very respectable thread

[CzarSurg]

Thank you very much for your kind words sir!

Thank you for the knowledge, beginners need to read this.

[Francis333]

I want to be in, sounds like a very respectable thread

thanks m8

Thank you for the knowledge, beginners need to read this.

agreed

[Jericoe]

This one is really awesome to read, you see francis get owned and then suck spidermans dick lol: http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showth...hp?t=143092233

No hate to you i just stumbled on it and it was hilarious

lots of good posts by spidey

also this is wrong:

Purely strength;
high frequency, low volume per session, lower reps, heavy weight.
-Martyn

Not necessarily wrong but there are plenty of ways to go for pure strength.

high frequency, high volume, low-moderate reps, moderate-heavy weight
low frequency, moderate-high volume, low reps, really heavy weight

and there are many more, dont wanna go through it all though. It seems like a crime to have only that post represent what a strength routine is like. Thats just martyn's take on it and martyn isnt the strongest person in the world. But he is strong, so it proves his ways, it's just not the only way.

[LiftCore]

Francis just doing his thang.

Interesting to see you quoting Eric, considering you had some beef with him on these forums before you were banned lol.

[Francis333]

This one is really awesome to read, you see francis get owned and then suck spidermans dick lol: http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showth...hp?t=143092233

No hate to you i just stumbled on it and it was hilarious

lots of good posts by spidey

also this is wrong:


Not necessarily wrong but there are plenty of ways to go for pure strength.

high frequency, high volume, low-moderate reps, moderate-heavy weight
low frequency, moderate-high volume, low reps, really heavy weight

and there are many more, dont wanna go through it all though. It seems like a crime to have only that post represent what a strength routine is like. Thats just martyn's take on it and martyn isnt the strongest person in the world. But he is strong, so it proves his ways.

Lol that's less than 3 months of me into lifting with no prior research before starting. Going to read tho for the lols

I don't think Martyn was implying thats the only way to train for strength.

[Francis333]

Francis just doing his thang.

Interesting to see you quoting Eric, considering you had some beef with him on these forums before you were banned lol.

I actually really like that quote. It's great for the beginner and very easy to understand.

That was more jimmy rustling/trolling than beef. He's changed alot

[Jericoe]

Lol that's less than 3 months of me into lifting with no prior research before starting. Going to read tho for the lols

I don't think Martyn was implying thats the only way to train for strength.

Its funny as fuk when spidey posts a pic of his legs, best ****ing part.

And probably some of his posts you could add to the OP cause they are really good.

And i know he wasnt implying that, its just the way you had it as the only comment for pure strength.

[Francis333]

Like he said 2 times/month is too much for me. I havent had MCDICKS in years and dont plan on doing so anytime soon. This is exactly the reason America is extremely fat and lazy. ****s think it tastes good and dont care about their health. Mcdonalds is ****in garbage with chemicals, dipped in salt and cow poop! Why are you eating heavily processed crap?! You are trying to be healthy no? Since when is mcDonalds even SLIGHTLY good for bodybuilders/healthy people? AND YOU ARE ON A CUT?

If you have this mentality you will fail. Put down the **** food and pick up some REAL chicken!

/end rant

phuckin ded

brb Maccas all the time now

[Francis333]

I get fcuking stomach cramps and diarrhea after eating a friggin junior cheeseburger. Imagine what would happen when I ate a big mac............................................... ...........................

I am dying. brb eat 6 junior cheeseburgers now and I'm fine.

[NZninja101]

Francis just doing his thang.

Interesting to see you quoting Eric, considering you had some beef with him on these forums before you were banned lol.

Eric and Fran had what you might call sibling conflict. Like English and Scots. Or Welshmen and Scots. Or Japanese and the Scots. Or Scots and other Scots. Damn Scots... They ruined Scotland!

[GabeGSF]

Strength is, for the most part, neural, meaning strength is actually a function of brain efficiency rather than muscle mass. If you do one rep, you are building a lot of neural efficiency but very little to no muscle mass, because one rep isn't enough stress on the muscle tissue. Once you get into the higher rep ranges, the distinction between the two is a blur. Obviously you see small people who are strong, and big people who are weak, but that is more a function of genetics and diet than training style.-unknown

Lolwut, that was a quote from me fran. srs

Good thread, spreading da informations as always

[NewbieX2]

Is Spiderman still around? Haven't been on this section in a very long time..

[Francis333]

Here's an old leg shot:

Current squat is around 610lbs for a single, 5'6" bodyweight of 190lbs.

I liked that part where that verified my opinion.

[Francis333]

All hail spidey.

Nice job on the squats mayne. Surprised you have not negged me yet. GJDM You natty?

I should shut up now.

strong 180 ITT

TY jericoe for finding this gold

[Jericoe]

strong 180 ITT

TY jericoe for finding this gold

lmao its hilarious right

now you see i wasnt kidding about the dick sucking, there is no other way to put it lol.

[Francis333]

Is Spiderman still around? Haven't been on this section in a very long time..

no, banned on here and not on GSF due to personal reasons

[Francis333]

bump

[Basketball22]

Alan will forever be da gawd! Lol at your old rant. I think most of us started out thinking that way.