Revolutionary way of eating for hypertrophy

wannagrow

New Member
I'm sure a lot of you have heard of John Berardi. In short, he wrote an article about the subject of this thread. In that article he highlighted how many people don't eat enough and there is even a calculator here http://www.johnberardi.com/updates/july262002/na_masscalculator.htm

I did the calculation and it turns out that to gain mass, I need to eat 3300 calories even though I'm 5"7, 160 lbs at 13% bf. Thats a lot more than the conventional 18*bw (18*160= 2880 kcals). But thats not the main point of this post. The most interesting thing I learned from Berardi is that in order to gain mass and stay as lean as possible, you need to eat meals which don't contain high quantities of both carbs & fat. So you can only eat 2 types of meals, meals high in protein& fat and meals high in carbs & protein. The details are in the 2 part article.

http://www.johnberardi.com/articles/nutrition/masseating_1.htm
http://www.johnberardi.com/articles/nutrition/masseating_2.htm

Should I try this new approach to eating???
 
<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Should I try this new approach to eating??? </div>

Well, it told me I should eat over 4000 calories to gain mass when I know my BMR is about 2500 calories or so. Even if I burned 500 calories per day via exercise, that is 1000 calories over maintenance. That's two pounds a week - not optimal IMO when it comes to fat gain, but optimal when it comes to gaining mass. A general guideline is to have a change in mass between -2 and 2 lbs per week.
 
Without reading Berardi's article I can say that carbs with fat together are a fatbomb; the body just won't burn both, unless the amounts are low enough. I think the real problem here is just that it's really easy to go overcaloric with these as a combo.
 
<div>
(wannagrow @ Apr. 23 2008,7:53)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Should I try this new approach to eating???</div>
New approach?

Even when beercardi wrote these articles years ago, it wasnt a new approach.

It doesnt allow magic to occur, which is why beercardi doesnt promote it uqite the same way anymore.
 
Wannagrow,

Not a magic combo at all.

(Eat, lift, rest) + (repeat forever and ever) = muscle growth, assuming you do them right

Lifting right = easy! HST. Just lift heavier in time. Maybe this year you can only lift 160. Next year that might be 180. Then next year 210. That means you are doing good - your lifts are getting heavier in time.

Rest = enough sleep, space between your workouts, and even SD or deconditioning.

Eat = The biggest factor is number of calories you consume in the 24-48 hour period after you workout. That's the #1 factor.
Next is the macronutrient ratio. Usually, what really matters is if you get enough protein. You either are, or you aren't.
To a lesser degree, the ratio of fats and carbs come next. What's just important is that protein is more anabolic with carbs. But remember: even the best macronutrient ratio is useless if you aren't getting enough calories anyway.

The fat you gain? Pretty much up to your partitioning ratio (unless you go crazy with your calories). And the #1 factor there is genes, not really diet, despite all the hoopla about protein=&gt;thermogenesis.

In summary: eat, lift, rest. Know the right calorie range for yourself, get enough protein, don't go crazy on carbs or fat. Eat like a regular person would, just be eating more.

Regards,
-JV
 
<div>
(jvroig @ Apr. 23 2008,9:30)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Wannagrow,

Not a magic combo at all.

(Eat, lift, rest) + (repeat forever and ever) = muscle growth, assuming you do them right

Lifting right = easy! HST. Just lift heavier in time. Maybe this year you can only lift 160. Next year that might be 180. Then next year 210. That means you are doing good - your lifts are getting heavier in time.

Rest = enough sleep, space between your workouts, and even SD or deconditioning.

Eat = The biggest factor is number of calories you consume in the 24-48 hour period after you workout. That's the #1 factor.
Next is the macronutrient ratio. Usually, what really matters is if you get enough protein. You either are, or you aren't.
To a lesser degree, the ratio of fats and carbs come next. What's just important is that protein is more anabolic with carbs. But remember: even the best macronutrient ratio is useless if you aren't getting enough calories anyway.

The fat you gain? Pretty much up to your partitioning ratio (unless you go crazy with your calories). And the #1 factor there is genes, not really diet, despite all the hoopla about protein=&gt;thermogenesis.

In summary: eat, lift, rest. Know the right calorie range for yourself, get enough protein, don't go crazy on carbs or fat. Eat like a regular person would, just be eating more.

Regards,
-JV</div>
On the issue of lifting right:

I have been using HST for 4 weeks now (I'm about to finish the 2nd week of 10s) and I'm not getting stronger most my maxes have remained as they are) I just gained 1.32 lbs in bw thats all. I can't say I'm pleased but that's for another thread. Please check out my training log I would really appreciate it.

On the issue of rest:
Its kinda my fault but the past 3 workouts I trained to failure on 1 exercise: bench press ( should I therefore get another day of rest before I do my next workout as my next workout I will be using my 10RM?). Again I know this is for another thread. Sorry.

Last but not least, on the issue of nutrition:

I agree with what your saying its just nice to make your diet 99% if not 100% perfect.
Berardi was just talking about how to increase the ratio of muscle to fat gains when bulking even though as you said its mostly genetic. He said that one should never eat carbs &amp; fat together cos it will make you fatter. I was asking in my original post wether there is truth to this and if I should follow such an eating plan since it seems radical to eat 3 protein and fat meals and 3 protein and carb meals???
 
Fat and carb combining won't matter because if you are eating as often as he says you should, they will end up being combined inside you anyway. Unless you somehow digest food faster than any other human ever.
 
I believed this to be true for some time but the fact is that every time you eat fat it is stored in both muscle and fat cells. Even if you skip the carbs you will get an insulin rise from the protein that inhibits fat burning for a while, but it will strongly promote protein synthesis. Excess proteins will be converted to fat as well. If you eat carbs these will cause an insulin rise and store these as glycogen. This will also inhibit fat burning for a while. If you eat plenty of carbs, your metabolism will increase to burn these as fuel. A minor amount will be converted to fat. If you are not interested in lean gains (you didn't say that, but for the sake of the argument...) you can go for any (reasonable) mix of carbs, protein and fat and just eat above maintenance. As long as you are working out you can adjust your P-ratio some. Simply overeating will make your lean mass increase, but you will grow fat as well. If you want to loose fat, some kind of deficit of calories are needed. Otherwise the body will take the calories from the food you eat instead of the surplus energy stored inside the cells. Of course this is not the whole truth, but it is close.

In simple terms, most of the things you eat an excess amount of will be stored as fat when the needs of the active cells (muscle, brain, etc.) have been met. Some will fuel your metabolism some, but not much.
 
Oh, and btw, digestion takes a whole lot longer when it comes to protein and fats. Think 5-6 hours for fat, and a little less for protein. Carbs can be digested faster. The less complex the faster. If you eat every two-three hours there is no need for the cells to use their own stores of energy (read fat cells - muscle cells use the fuel that is stored - primarily fat, but more carbs when it gets more intense (type II muscles, that is)).
 
<div>
(nkl @ Apr. 24 2008,5:44)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">I believed this to be true for some time but the fact is that every time you eat fat it is stored in both muscle and fat cells. Even if you skip the carbs you will get an insulin rise from the protein that inhibits fat burning for a while, but it will strongly promote protein synthesis. Excess proteins will be converted to fat as well. If you eat carbs these will cause an insulin rise and store these as glycogen. This will also inhibit fat burning for a while. If you eat plenty of carbs, your metabolism will increase to burn these as fuel. A minor amount will be converted to fat. If you are not interested in lean gains (you didn't say that, but for the sake of the argument...) you can go for any (reasonable) mix of carbs, protein and fat and just eat above maintenance. As long as you are working out you can adjust your P-ratio some. Simply overeating will make your lean mass increase, but you will grow fat as well. If you want to loose fat, some kind of deficit of calories are needed. Otherwise the body will take the calories from the food you eat instead of the surplus energy stored inside the cells. Of course this is not the whole truth, but it is close.

In simple terms, most of the things you eat an excess amount of will be stored as fat when the needs of the active cells (muscle, brain, etc.) have been met. Some will fuel your metabolism some, but not much.</div>
So what is your main point exactly, nkl? That Berardi's diet produces almost the exact same effects as the standard diet consisting of P+F+C meals?

Btw what does everybody here think the ideal ratio is of PCF? I'm naturally neither fat nor skinny so I guess my insulin sensitivity is average.
 
I recently read that article by him too and he's grossly over estimating. If I took in the over 4000 cals a day he recommends I wouldn't be able to step out of my front door within a month, and it wouldn't be because of muscle!

The &quot;eating for mass&quot; article on this website is much better. I use it but still go under what it recommends and I still gain some fat...so I'm still tweaking it. But that's the one I recommend over anything, really.

I've done A LOT of reading on diet, and the one thing I've learned is that unless you naturally just don't put fat on anyway, you're going to add a little fat and water with your muscle gains. It doesn't have to be anything major but if you try and fight that little bit of fat gain every step of the way, you are not going to make much gains in lean mass. And its not just evident from what I've read, its evident from what I see with people.
 
<div>
(wannagrow @ Apr. 24 2008,10:33)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">it only takes 2 hours to digest something</div>
hahahhahahaha

1-8hrs maybe...

depending on the food
 
<div>
(Aaron_F @ Apr. 25 2008,7:43)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE"><div>
(wannagrow @ Apr. 24 2008,10:33)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">it only takes 2 hours to digest something</div>
hahahhahahaha

1-8hrs maybe...

depending on the food</div>
Are there digestion time tables out there?
 
Back
Top