quote:

ORIGINAL: theiopener

I aint debating things where health is at risk, there is no good point in doing so. If that was the case we would be recommending that people take loads of gear to bulk up even when they dont know how to train or eat and give them DNP cycles then they want to cut up if you want to throw health concerns out of the window and take the stance of "end result no matter what the cost"

What is so hard to understand, eat according to your lifestyle and get in adequate nutrition around your training, simple.

quote:

ORIGINAL: banksy1987
What about going catabolic in long periods without food? Will make little/no difference in weight, but in terms of body composition?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nigeepoo

quote:

ORIGINAL: Integra
Nige you may have missed this from a previous page: After 9 pages, I did!

quote:

How would the timings - apart from pre/post workout - affect an individual looking to lose bodyfat? Would the rules (for want of a better word) change?

For example if I was attempting to lose about 12kg in bodyweight for a fight in 4 months time what are your thoughts on the above questions? Assuming training and fuel/refuel are in order?

12kg is 26.5lbs. 4 months is 13 weeks, so you'd have to lose 2lbs/week. To do this, you need a deficit of 1,000kcals/day. As you lose weight, your BMR slowly falls in proportion to your weight, so you have to eat less as your weight decreases to maintain a deficit of 1,000kcals/day. As long as training is fuelled, what you eat and when you eat the rest of the time won't make any difference to your weight loss. WEIGHT LOSS, or FAT loss?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nigeepoo

quote:

ORIGINAL: banksy1987
What about going catabolic in long periods without food? Will make little/no difference in weight, but in terms of body composition?

It still makes no difference. You get bigger fluctuations between anabolism (storage) and catabolism (burning), but it all averages out to the same overall.

Appetite may be all over the place though (stuffed after a huge meal and starving hungry waiting for the next meal).

quote:

ORIGINAL: banksy1987

quote:

ORIGINAL: theiopener

I aint debating things where health is at risk, there is no good point in doing so. If that was the case we would be recommending that people take loads of gear to bulk up even when they dont know how to train or eat and give them DNP cycles then they want to cut up if you want to throw health concerns out of the window and take the stance of "end result no matter what the cost"

What is so hard to understand, eat according to your lifestyle and get in adequate nutrition around your training, simple.

Where do I not understand that I should eat according to my lifestyle? Very strange comment to make which has nothing to do with the debate.

Im not saying that people should do things that put there health at risk, i am simply saying that i just wish to find out the effect that the above would have on body compisition, if you were to exclude health.

quote:

ORIGINAL: makaveli1971 1996

quote:

ORIGINAL: banksy1987

quote:

ORIGINAL: theiopener

I aint debating things where health is at risk, there is no good point in doing so. If that was the case we would be recommending that people take loads of gear to bulk up even when they dont know how to train or eat and give them DNP cycles then they want to cut up if you want to throw health concerns out of the window and take the stance of "end result no matter what the cost"

What is so hard to understand, eat according to your lifestyle and get in adequate nutrition around your training, simple.

Where do I not understand that I should eat according to my lifestyle? Very strange comment to make which has nothing to do with the debate.

Im not saying that people should do things that put there health at risk, i am simply saying that i just wish to find out the effect that the above would have on body compisition, if you were to exclude health.

Ok ill list some scientific facts as to why going without food for a long period of time is no good for the body,it will course the following.....

Irritability
Low moral
Lethargy
Physical Weakness
Confusion and disorientation
Poor judgment
Weakened immune system
Inability to maintain body temperature which can lead to hypothermia, heat exhaustion, or even heat stroke.


These are pretty much the reasons as to why i dont see the point in discussing this debate.So as you can see by these reasons in terms of health and bodybuilding it would simply not work,going a few hours without food as opposed to going 6 days without food are completely different.

quote:

ORIGINAL: makaveli1971 1996

If you dont believe it then why bother posting it???

quote:

You have also stated in the past you have gone 6 days without food??

Correct?

quote:

You ask for facts and then dismiss it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: richsINS
WEIGHT LOSS, or FAT loss? See red text. As long as weight loss is at a reasonable rate, it's the same as fat loss.

Also, when does the body pick protein over converting glycerol and pyruvate and the others? If you do exercise that burns carbs at a high rate and there are no carbs to burn (because muscle glycogen has run out), that's when protein is converted into AAs for conversion into glucose. Turning protein into AAs doesn't start happening to sedentary people until they've starved for ~3 days.

One more question, does fasted 'slow paced' cardio not have any real merits then (sure we'll use some fat, but then when we eat we'll store energy afterwards. Where as if we eat before we'd use the food we eat, then once thats used move onto fat stores). SO whats the benifit to fasted cardio? Seems theres a risk of muscle loss, but no other reward?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nigeepoo

quote:

ORIGINAL: richsINS
WEIGHT LOSS, or FAT loss? See red text. As long as weight loss is at a reasonable rate, it's the same as fat loss.

Also, when does the body pick protein over converting glycerol and pyruvate and the others? If you do exercise that burns carbs at a high rate and there are no carbs to burn (because muscle glycogen has run out), that's when protein is converted into AAs for conversion into glucose. Turning protein into AAs doesn't start happening to sedentary people until they've starved for ~3 days.

One more question, does fasted 'slow paced' cardio not have any real merits then (sure we'll use some fat, but then when we eat we'll store energy afterwards. Where as if we eat before we'd use the food we eat, then once thats used move onto fat stores). SO whats the benifit to fasted cardio? Seems theres a risk of muscle loss, but no other reward?

Low Intensity CV exercise burns almost entirely fat (but not at a very high rate) so there's no risk of muscle loss. See http://forums.lylemcdonald.com/showthread.php?t=79

quote:

ty for link, so its just a % thing which is unimportant.
The risk of potential muscle loss on fasted vs no other benifits to weigh it against seems to make fasted cardio worthless. Specially when the intensity can be raised by carbs, burning more total calories (the important part of weight loss).
Edit: Yeah i read fat % is high, but leaner we get i assume this may change so the risk becomes higher perhaps?

quote:

ORIGINAL: banksy1987

quote:

ORIGINAL: makaveli1971 1996

If you dont believe it then why bother posting it???

I think i have explained this.

quote:

You have also stated in the past you have gone 6 days without food??

Correct?

Yes.

quote:

You ask for facts and then dismiss it.

Im not dismissing anything.

Another useful post.

quote:

Ok so I reckon I could eat 5000 cals in a meal (made partly of shakes and oils).
Would me eating that meal once every 40 hours yield different gains to me eating the same macros in 20 meals of 250 cals over the same 40 hours?

quote:

ORIGINAL: R3261

quote:

ty for link, so its just a % thing which is unimportant.
The risk of potential muscle loss on fasted vs no other benifits to weigh it against seems to make fasted cardio worthless. Specially when the intensity can be raised by carbs, burning more total calories (the important part of weight loss).
Edit: Yeah i read fat % is high, but leaner we get i assume this may change so the risk becomes higher perhaps?

. no real merits fasted over non-fasted. overall calories matter most unless you're already ripped and looking to be uber lean, at which point what fuel source is used becomes more important.you won't lose any muscle in one session IME. if it's a concern take some pro at the start of your session

quote:

Low Intensity CV exercise burns almost entirely fat (but not at a very high rate) so there's no risk of muscle loss. See http://forums.lylemcdonald.com/showthread.php?t=79

quote:

ORIGINAL: makaveli1971 1996

quote:

ORIGINAL: banksy1987

quote:

ORIGINAL: makaveli1971 1996

If you dont believe it then why bother posting it???

I think i have explained this.

quote:

You have also stated in the past you have gone 6 days without food??

Correct?

Yes.

quote:

You ask for facts and then dismiss it.

Im not dismissing anything.

Another useful post.

Well as you seem to have gone without food for 6 days,you should know the effects of what it does and be able to answer your own question,and i will say it again your question was stupid no matter if you were being realistic or not.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Integra
If pre and post workout are in place, and if there are large gaps without food through the day would this present any other problems apart from hunger/mental issues? Assuming total calories and food intake is consistent with a solidly constructed 'cutting' diet?

For example, I wake up, do a little light cardio, eat a big breakfast, rush to work and not eat until early afternoon, train, eat, rush to work and not eat until late at night, but everything I eat/drink is consistent with what could be classed as a 'solid 'cutting' diet'?

Would the end product in terms of bodyweight/performance be any different than following the traditional protocol of eating small and frequently every 2-3 hours? I don't know. But I know a man who probably does! Have you registered with Lyle's forums?