Tom Treutlein
New Member
What if you eat only when hungry? I was considering listening to my body to get through my training and add size. Would this work. I know diet is a key part to growth, and training is the other piece of the puzzle.
The thing is, eating on a schedule can sometimes be hard, and while I could do it, I was wondering what would happen if one were to follow their bodies.
I would think the body is intelligent enough to be designed to tell us when it wants to eat. Isn't the enitre idea of "force-feeding" to grow bigger just like going to failure and beyond with training? It's something frowned upon. The body will tell you when it needs sustinence, won't it?
If you train, you get hungrier. We've all experienced this. Your appetite generally goes down when you SD, right? It also begins to rise as you train. My issue is going against the body. If it's advanced enough to partition nutrients (remember the carbs + fats issue?) without our manipulating it, could it not also sustain itself and even grow without being forced to eat?
If I'm not hungry, should I have to eat? Does my body require much else? I'd say if one wishes to pass the level of enormity achieved by today's bodybuilders (which requires the use of drugs, usually) then they must force feed. That is understandable. It is also going against the body, is it not?
Does the body not wish to stay at a rather comfortable, easy-enough-to-maintain level reflecting its goal of dynamic equilibrium?
If you're a construction worker and are constantly forced to do labor, you grow naturally. Your body adapts. Those people can eat when they feel the need to. Obviously proper nutrition will push the body in the right direction. That much is undetstood.
So long as there is a stimulus (training) and the building blocks (nutrition) for growth, will it not occur without having to force one's self beyond what the body craves?
I can understand people thinking 'Well, the body only eats when it needs the food to function with daily activities, not the excess to induce hypertrophy'. I would normally support that but doesn't training count as a daily activity? When you train, and the muscle tissue needs to recouperate, doesn't the body tell you it needs something? Yes it does. I don't even want to hear it doesn't. It's not so primitive that it can't signal us when it needs nutrients.
I've rambled a lot, but that's okay. I honestly feel that force-feeding yourself a set amount of calories is a bad thing, unless you're trying to break phenomenal levels of musculature. If you train and eat, you will grow. Maybe not to an enormous size, but to one that can be appreciated and respected without the hindrance of force-feeding calories.
On a final note: experience is what usually dictates reliability for people. I'm sure many people here know family memebers or older acquaintences who used to workout 'back in the day' and ate a solid square three meals a day, maybe a shake, and lifted weights. They weren't carrying 20" arms, but I know my dad and his three brothers had 16" through 18" arms, and were squatting 400-500. That was eating when they were hungry, training a bodypart once a week with no effective science behind it (i.e., HST or WSB type research and methodolgy), and just following what their bodies told them.
Science has its place, but so does instinct. Just food for thought, people. It's all my opinion, and I'd like to get a friendly debate going on this subject. Don't be afraid to agree just because you've been hell-bent on being on a schedule for eating for so long. Maybe it's time people listen to their bodies just a bit more. You listen when you strength train, right? I know that's what WSB is all about. Same as HST. If your CNS isn't recovered, your body will let you know. If you're overtraining, you'll find out through your body. Why should eating be any different? It shouldn't.
<~~I bet everyone who reads up to this point is ready to do that. Aww well. 
The thing is, eating on a schedule can sometimes be hard, and while I could do it, I was wondering what would happen if one were to follow their bodies.
I would think the body is intelligent enough to be designed to tell us when it wants to eat. Isn't the enitre idea of "force-feeding" to grow bigger just like going to failure and beyond with training? It's something frowned upon. The body will tell you when it needs sustinence, won't it?
If you train, you get hungrier. We've all experienced this. Your appetite generally goes down when you SD, right? It also begins to rise as you train. My issue is going against the body. If it's advanced enough to partition nutrients (remember the carbs + fats issue?) without our manipulating it, could it not also sustain itself and even grow without being forced to eat?
If I'm not hungry, should I have to eat? Does my body require much else? I'd say if one wishes to pass the level of enormity achieved by today's bodybuilders (which requires the use of drugs, usually) then they must force feed. That is understandable. It is also going against the body, is it not?
Does the body not wish to stay at a rather comfortable, easy-enough-to-maintain level reflecting its goal of dynamic equilibrium?
If you're a construction worker and are constantly forced to do labor, you grow naturally. Your body adapts. Those people can eat when they feel the need to. Obviously proper nutrition will push the body in the right direction. That much is undetstood.
So long as there is a stimulus (training) and the building blocks (nutrition) for growth, will it not occur without having to force one's self beyond what the body craves?
I can understand people thinking 'Well, the body only eats when it needs the food to function with daily activities, not the excess to induce hypertrophy'. I would normally support that but doesn't training count as a daily activity? When you train, and the muscle tissue needs to recouperate, doesn't the body tell you it needs something? Yes it does. I don't even want to hear it doesn't. It's not so primitive that it can't signal us when it needs nutrients.
I've rambled a lot, but that's okay. I honestly feel that force-feeding yourself a set amount of calories is a bad thing, unless you're trying to break phenomenal levels of musculature. If you train and eat, you will grow. Maybe not to an enormous size, but to one that can be appreciated and respected without the hindrance of force-feeding calories.
On a final note: experience is what usually dictates reliability for people. I'm sure many people here know family memebers or older acquaintences who used to workout 'back in the day' and ate a solid square three meals a day, maybe a shake, and lifted weights. They weren't carrying 20" arms, but I know my dad and his three brothers had 16" through 18" arms, and were squatting 400-500. That was eating when they were hungry, training a bodypart once a week with no effective science behind it (i.e., HST or WSB type research and methodolgy), and just following what their bodies told them.
Science has its place, but so does instinct. Just food for thought, people. It's all my opinion, and I'd like to get a friendly debate going on this subject. Don't be afraid to agree just because you've been hell-bent on being on a schedule for eating for so long. Maybe it's time people listen to their bodies just a bit more. You listen when you strength train, right? I know that's what WSB is all about. Same as HST. If your CNS isn't recovered, your body will let you know. If you're overtraining, you'll find out through your body. Why should eating be any different? It shouldn't.
