This guy went full retard.....

**BOB55555** · 04-09-2012, 08:44 PM

Amazing links! It's good to note points such as "3) alterations in the ratio of HDL:LDL and 4) inadequate fat soluble vitamin intake (i.e. vitamin E)."

I'll probably need to up my intake a little bit to prevent long term negative health issues - fortunately my recent consumption of Easter Eggs have met my fat macros with ease

**ArchangelEST** · 04-09-2012, 08:57 PM

Originally Posted by BOB55555

Amazing links! It's good to note points such as "3) alterations in the ratio of HDL:LDL and 4) inadequate fat soluble vitamin intake (i.e. vitamin E)."

I'll probably need to up my intake a little bit to prevent long term negative health issues - fortunately my recent consumption of Easter Eggs have met my fat macros with ease

Most people here get what you are saying 100% when it comes to statistical variance and outliers and whatnot. But you also have to consider that the recommendations we give are generally very heavily researched.
In some cases we have hundreds of studies on a given topic which makes for a MASSIVE test subject pool and a lot of evidence in total - even if it's not all Gold Standard perfect.

In the light of all that data, we usually put the recommendations in a very generous range where Outliers are already taken into account in terms of "getting enough".
Agreeably a lot of people fall on the other side of the spectrum and can get away with much less than what we recommend.

However this is where limited information issues arise. Ordinary individuals are not capable of adequately measuring the needs of their body to say with any certainty that they can get away with less, even if they actually can.
There is simply no point trying to borderline these things. You get no extra benefit by eating just the "right" amount vs eating "guaranteed sufficiency". So it makes infinitely more sense to play things safe.

Agreeably sometimes the recommended numbers are hard to meet and will not fit within personal preference and can cause problems with dietary adherence or even health or mentality. In such cases the individual has to take the time and think or to seek medical help to make sure if he really is the outlier and if not - will he sacrifice to win.

**Smileykunt** · 04-10-2012, 01:42 AM

best shape of his life.. sweats like a fat girl the entire vid

**greekmanman** · 04-10-2012, 01:45 AM

Originally Posted by Smileykunt

best shape of his life.. sweats like a fat girl the entire vid

who?

**NegatronPrime** · 04-10-2012, 01:48 AM

Originally Posted by greekmanman

who?

Cory

**NegatronPrime** · 04-10-2012, 01:55 AM

Originally Posted by SOJA

I thought we were talking about a manorexic Frenchman who thinks he's diced to the socks at 140 lb for 10% relative body fat. Who, by the way, has been training for over 20 years.

wish you wouldnt talk about me when im not here

**greekmanman** · 04-10-2012, 03:09 AM

Originally Posted by SOJA

I thought we were talking about a manorexic Frenchman who thinks he's diced to the socks at 140 lb for 10% relative body fat. Who, by the way, has been training for over 20 years.

I hate that man with a passion lolz

**BOB55555** · 04-10-2012, 10:09 AM

Originally Posted by ArchangelEST

Most people here get what you are saying 100% when it comes to statistical variance and outliers and whatnot. But you also have to consider that the recommendations we give are generally very heavily researched.
In some cases we have hundreds of studies on a given topic which makes for a MASSIVE test subject pool and a lot of evidence in total - even if it's not all Gold Standard perfect.

In the light of all that data, we usually put the recommendations in a very generous range where Outliers are already taken into account in terms of "getting enough".
Agreeably a lot of people fall on the other side of the spectrum and can get away with much less than what we recommend.

However this is where limited information issues arise. Ordinary individuals are not capable of adequately measuring the needs of their body to say with any certainty that they can get away with less, even if they actually can.
There is simply no point trying to borderline these things. You get no extra benefit by eating just the "right" amount vs eating "guaranteed sufficiency". So it makes infinitely more sense to play things safe.

Agreeably sometimes the recommended numbers are hard to meet and will not fit within personal preference and can cause problems with dietary adherence or even health or mentality. In such cases the individual has to take the time and think or to seek medical help to make sure if he really is the outlier and if not - will he sacrifice to win.

Great post! I think you wrapped it all up here! Thanks for that!

People can get back into dissing Cory now

**MTguyful** · 04-11-2012, 02:58 PM

Lol Ian's lovers ASSEMBLE!

I don't understand why you're saying that this guy is a retard. He's right. Lol Ian is preaching about eating poptarts. Cmon empty calories. Ok LB went over the board, prob pissed at Ian's vid, but cmon you're really gonna defend a fat biatch who's advocating eating simple carbs over complex carbs? Really? lol
Yea go listen to that fat c0ck looking pale a$$ *******, yea he knows what he's talking about! He has a degree in philosophy or some other shiet. Yeah that's right. Thau shalt eat your all protein in 1 meal. LOL
You're a bunch of ............
Peace

**ErickStevens** · 04-11-2012, 03:01 PM