Discussion in 'Hypertrophy-Specific Training (HST)' started by HST_Rihad, Mar 11, 2013.
BTW, I'm so happy Brad's book confirms this:
What research? What research confirms that no extra calories go to lean mass?
Prove Brad is correct ... any savage can print their opinions ...
Oh yeh, the body still doesn't grow-cut-grow-cut on a 3-1-2-1 day basis ... please please PLEASE learn more about hormone pathways and the timing involved for muscle building and fat loss.
"While the common belief that you need to ‘eat big to get big’, recent research has shown that
any extra calories above your estimated daily needs does not contribute to muscle
gain. In fact, almost every single extra calorie can be accounted for in fat mass
gains . "
 Bray GA, Smith SR, De Jonge L, Xie H, Rood J, Martin CK, Most M, Brock C, Manscuso S,
Redman LM. Effect of Dietary Protein Content on Weight Gain, Energy Expenditure, and Body
Composition During Overeating. JAMA. 2012;307(1):47-55
It's actually quite simpler than that. According to Brad, our body is always in either one of two states: fed or fasted. When we eat, we store glycogen & fat in their respective depots. When we fast, we start burning the fats from the adipose tissue. It occurs as soon as after 4-8 hours after last meal:
Come on. Did you even read that study? You do realize that the study does NOT say what this idiot Brad is claiming it says. Don't believe me? Read the abstract. The study is about the effect of protein intake when you are overeating and deals with SEDENTARY individuals.
Not only does this NOT say what Brad claims it says, in reality, the study determined that eating more protein resulted in significantly more lean mass gained compared to the low protein group. Here is the url to the abstract and I quoted it below.
Totentanz, he later goes on to say adequate protein is important for mass gains, however, this quote above talked about caloric surplus alone, which the study confirmed:
Of course a person's metabolic rate (energy expenditure) goes up with training, so we need to cover that too, but not by too much.
That does not mean that all calories above excess go to bodyfat. Reread the abstract.
What it is saying is that macronutrients are not what determine fat storage, calories are.
It is pretty obvious in the abstract.
Still that's pretty damn huge. The rest were probably used for digesting the food itself (thermic effect).
He didn't say every calorie.
Exacly what he said, calories. He's (intentionally?) careful not to talk much about nutrients, partitioning and such, as such things are better addressed in specialized literature, and fasting does its thing irrespective of what they are.
He did. He said "In fact, almost every single extra calorie can be accounted for in fat mass gains"
In reality, the high protein groups gained more lean mass than the low protein group. So fat mass gains may have been similar but due to the gains in lean mass, the change in body fat percentage would have been different in the higher protein groups.
Have you read the abstract instead of just blindly trying to hold on to what Brad states in his book? You do know that it is ok to be wrong and that this is not a competition to see who can be more correct, right?
Uh... how did he not talk about partitioning?
He says pretty much all extra calories go into fat stores. That is partitioning.
What do you think partitioning is?
Sorry, I thought partitioning referred to protein/carbs/fats/vits/minerals composition of a diet, which he doesn't go into much detail about.
There's a difference between "every" calorie and "almost every", which he used
Quite frankly I did not, but with the data presented I don't see anything wrong. Almost every calorie above daily needs accounts for fat loss? Sure.
I know excess protein probably doesn't somehow get converted to fat and stored, it's either broken into AAs and utilized in muscles, or oxidized for energy in the gut itself. But carbs and fats do. That's probably one of the reasons he said "almost every".
Maybe you should read the abstract, seeing as how it basically does nothing to support his statement. The only thing that the study supports is that it is calories in vs calories out that effect weight gain and that increased protein intake results in a gain in lean mass.
Not really sure how that supports "almost every extra calorie goes into fat" seeing as how it doesn't.
Totentanz, he was probably saying that calorie surplus alone isn't what contributes to muscle gain. After the paragraph referencing the study, he mentions the importance of "adequate" protein for muscle gains at maintenance caloric levels.
What he's saying, and what the research says are entirely different things. He's grossly misinterpreting the research to fit his ideas.
Unfortunately, that's not what he said or else he would have elaborated and said that instead of saying that almost all excess calories go to fat, then linking a study that proves that if protein is high enough, that you will gain significant lean mass when you eat extra calories. Keep in mind that the study was on sedentary subjects, not people who lift, so that increase in lean mass was from DIET ALONE. What this study seems to be suggesting is that one who is lifting, eating over maintenance and keeping protein high could gain quite a lot of lean mass.
The fact is, making a statement and then linking to a study as proof that does not support what you said is dishonest. I hate it when authors try to add credibility to what they say by linking to studies, then when you read the studies you find that it has nothing to do with what they said. Where is the integrity in that?
Guys, it's quite easy to nitpick about someone's words. He said that caloric surplus above daily needs can cause fat gains. That much is obvious from reading the abstract, although he most probably read the whole study from where it could be concluded that it wasn't surplus per se contributing to muscle gains (for example, note weight-stabilizing diet for 13 to 25 days), the fact which wasn't reflected in the abstract. Without having access to the paper we cannot say that he's outrightly wrong or dishonest.
Separate names with a comma.