Any serious bodybuilder here?

[nubbey24]

Many training gurus advocate a tripod approach -- clean up the diet, cardio AND weights, all at once (not simultaneously, and not circuit training, but over the same months). It is asserted that you get superior weight loss (and ideally some muscle building or at least preservation) if you do all three together rather than cardio first, and then add weights. This is true whether you are just starting out or an old hand. Plus if you just do cardio, you reportedly tend to lose more muscle along with the fat than if you are doing some lifting over the same time period. Plus you can make better use of "off" days if you alternate forms of exercise -- you keep the body guessing. I'm just saying...

First off, I agree with you wholeheartedly except for the specifics of what I am speaking of.

I would argue that the average sendentary person does not need to worry about "losing muscle" from performing cardio so much as they do from doing nothing. I don't see how merely starting a cardio program after being sedentary will cause muscle loss. I do see this as being the case for an avid weight lifter who decided to train for long distance running. In this case it is possible as you say for the increased energy expenditure of long distance running to counteract the benifits of weightlifting. I do agree with you that a multi faceted approach is best. I am just talking about getting the average sedentary person (a 9-5 jobber) to get at least some negative caloric activity. And in my opinion, the best way to start this off ( not forever) is to start them off on doing some type of cardio activity. Again with the theory being they are not looking to gain a large amount of muscle. I don't think you need to worry about a sedentary person who starts a cardio program "losing muscle mass". They are sedentary, and therefore are much more at risk for losing muscle mass from not moving. I agree with you in the respect that a multi faceted approach is the best though.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Wizard of Oz]

Many training gurus advocate a tripod approach -- clean up the diet, cardio AND weights, all at once (not simultaneously, and not circuit training, but over the same months). It is asserted that you get superior weight loss (and ideally some muscle building or at least preservation) if you do all three together rather than cardio first, and then add weights.

Agreed. I'm off the OP's topic, but I somehow feel the need to defend my position since everyone keeps bringing up this point.

It's January. 500 people sign up for the health club. By March, more than 450 of them stop going and cancel. By spring break's end, nearly all have quit. This is actual data from my gym in 2006. If you just want to make money off of the cancellation fees, wonderful! The resolution craze has made you richer.

If you want the 500 to adopt a healthier lifestyle, however, do you think that planning a comprehensive workout is the way to go? Because that's what the gym does with all of these new sign-ups--weights plus diet counseling plus cardio. So they stop all three. Too much effort.

So I advocate the baby steps.

As for the protein, some say use it. Some say just focus on a balanced diet and a sound workout program. With all of the GNC-type products, the manufacturer will have some proof for you if you choose to believe their research, and the peer-reviewed literature is full of statistical correlations one way or the other.

Take home message: Everybody is different. If you want to engage in a certain behavior that you feel reinforcement for, continue. If you think that the end isn't worth the means for whatever reason, don't do it.

 

[Playmakur42]

X

 

[45408]

Journal of Undergraduate Research
Volume 5, Issue 2 - November 2003

Expiratory Muscle Training in Two Healthy Adults
Stephanie White

Muscles that receive an overload on a regular basis will respond with increases in muscle strength and hypertrophy. The increase in muscle strength is partly due to a larger muscle size and partly due to reactions of the central nervous system. In progressive resistance exercises, the central nervous system recruits more motor units in the muscle being conditioned, motor neuron firing rates are altered, the synchronization of motor units during a specific movement pattern is enhanced, and neural inhibition is lessened. Neural adaptations occur at the onset of training, but level off quickly. However, hypertrophy is slow to commence, occurs at a slower rate than neural adaptations, and levels off much later. It is important to note that muscle overloads are followed by adaptation, making it necessary to periodically increase the load.

link to the rest of the study, please?

 

[Timmythemic22]

I am not a competitive bodybuilder but my friends at NJMS did recruit me for flag football, but then again i am larger then most of those people which makes it so much fun lol

Being a med student does make it difficult sometimes to ingest the correct amount of protein and the previous posters covered a lot of information so there is no need for me to repeat any of that. What I personally do to try consume enough protein is I like to make my own protein powders online. This can be done at www.proteinfactory.com You can make your own blends. I like to do this and I try to have about 60grams of protein a day from those shakes. I am on a budget but buying chicken in bulk isnt very expensive. Chicken and beef are my two main whole sources of protein and Id say I eat one of those almost every night for dinner. My other main sources for protein are eggs, peanut butter, and tuna. All cheap.

I really put off lifting a lot my first semester at school but now I like to think i am managing my time better and hopefully I will be able to go more often now. I purchased an IPOD yesterday(first one ever) to listen to lectures while i workout.

Were you giving tours at the accepted students luncheon? I know the stereotypical male type for the med student, but I was SHOCKED at how much the scrawny, skinny, nerdy guy-type was present in next year's class! I am not huge by any means (5'7" and 170), but I've been lifting for about 4 years now, and your stats sound pretty crazy. Take me under your wing!!! I've been on a bulk for maybe 1 1/2 months now, and have only gained about 5 pounds (minus empty holiday-related fat). How are the gyms at NJMS by the way?

 

[Playmakur42]

link to the rest of the study, please?

http://www.clas.ufl.edu/jur/200311/papers/paper_white.html

Here's another: "Muscle hypertrophy is a volumetrical change in muscle tissues covered by fascia, and may be observed within 2 or 3 months after the onset of training."

http://66.218.69.11/search/cache?p=...pertrophy+weeks&d=fN5f60VuOBj2&icp=1&.intl=us

And another: "As an untrained individual begins a strength training program for the first time they will experience quite dramatic increases in muscular strength. These improvements in strength will continue almost linearly for about 8-12 weeks. The dominating mechanism of these initial strength gains are neurological in nature(Morianti,1979; Sale,1988). These adaptations take place with or without increases in muscle cross sectional area (CSA). Muscle hypertrophy usually begins after 4-6 weeks of training while the contributions of neural adaptations to increases in strength slowly diminish."

http://www.thinkmuscle.com/articles/haycock/training-01.htm

 

[gotgame83]

Were you giving tours at the accepted students luncheon? I know the stereotypical male type for the med student, but I was SHOCKED at how much the scrawny, skinny, nerdy guy-type was present in next year's class! I am not huge by any means (5'7" and 170), but I've been lifting for about 4 years now, and your stats sound pretty crazy. Take me under your wing!!! I've been on a bulk for maybe 1 1/2 months now, and have only gained about 5 pounds (minus empty holiday-related fat). How are the gyms at NJMS by the way?

haha, yes I was giving tours yesterday. I was running a little late but the first thing I asked was " I didnt miss the food yet right?!" I had the same gym question last year before I started school. As of right now there is not an adequate gym on campus. Ballys was supposed to build one in the on campus housing but I have no idea what ever happend to that. As for gyms in the surrouding area, I personally go to colosseum gym on irvington ave by south orange(109 for 4monthes if your a student). There are some BIG guys there. I know a few people like " cibaomd" who I believe go to a large gym in bloomfield and "asdic" just started going to a gym in newark. A lot of people in my class go to rutgers newark gym which is about a mile from campus. I would go there if it wasnt the opposite direction from my apartment, because Its only like 250 for the year.

Im not that large, Right now im 5'11 200lbs but thats because I havent seriously lifted or ate seriously since july. Sometimes you cant prevent slacking off in med school. Many days I planned on going to the gym but studying is just a lot more important. This semester I hope to be different. I always pack my own lunches but some days you are there a lot later than you plan so your diet goes downhill.

 

[eon462]

http://www.clas.ufl.edu/jur/200311/papers/paper_white.html

Here's another: "Muscle hypertrophy is a volumetrical change in muscle tissues covered by fascia, and may be observed within 2 or 3 months after the onset of training."

http://66.218.69.11/search/cache?p=...pertrophy+weeks&d=fN5f60VuOBj2&icp=1&.intl=us

And another: "As an untrained individual begins a strength training program for the first time they will experience quite dramatic increases in muscular strength. These improvements in strength will continue almost linearly for about 8-12 weeks. The dominating mechanism of these initial strength gains are neurological in nature(Morianti,1979; Sale,1988). These adaptations take place with or without increases in muscle cross sectional area (CSA). Muscle hypertrophy usually begins after 4-6 weeks of training while the contributions of neural adaptations to increases in strength slowly diminish."

http://www.thinkmuscle.com/articles/haycock/training-01.htm

I don't know if you're posting this in response to me or not... but I said they would see strength gains first, not muscle gains.

 

[Playmakur42]

I don't know if you're posting this in response to me or not... but I said they would see strength gains first, not muscle gains.

no, i was responding to a request for more info. from someone else. sorry for the confusion.

 

[Uniq]

Hi, I don't mean to barge in on the allopathic section but I'm a recreational bodybuilder and I do have much experience with this. I'd like to give my two cents. A lot of the posts reflect statements that I commonly hear from people who don't have much experience with weight lifting.

Protein supplementation is indeed unnecessary if there is adequate protein in the diet without supplementation. The whole point is to SUPPLEMENT.

Protein powder is just fine to take and won't hurt you unless you take an enormous amount which, if that's the case, is no worse than taking an insane amount from food in the first place.

Also, 1 gram of protein per pound of bodyweight is well within the realm of possibility. 200 grams, for example, is not pounds of steak and gallons of milk, that's just ridiculous. If you take the time to plan a diet containing 200 grams of protein, you'll see that it's not much at all.

Protein supplementation is not a waste of money, and if you do the math, you'll see that it is often much more cost efficient than relying solely on food if you are on a budget. True that most of the protein should come from the diet.

In response to the post that said that creatine users are unnatural: Creatine is found in foods (red meat) just like protein. That's like saying protein, or vitamin supplementation is unnatural which is ridiculous.

To those expecting protein supplementation to be some sort of magic muscle-building powder, that's ridiculous too. That's like saying you'll see gains from a multivitamin. It's just diet supplementation, not steroids.

For most people, body composition/size is about 10% genetics, 30% gym time, and 60% diet."

I don't totally agree with this quote. Weightlifting, just like any other activity, is all passion. Not including that, diet is 60%, then genetics 30%, with a little leftover for actual gym time 10%. I fully agree with the "Eat big, Lift big, Get big" mantra. And it irritates me when people talk about the latest in supplementation but can't even eat a normal amount of food. Regardless of all the research and other stuff out there, this is the absolute bottom line and secret to weight lifting to get big. I place diet above genetics because if you don't have genetics you can still get big by eating a ton and lifting hard. It's just that you probably won't be able to reach the level of genetic freak.

In response to the post that said you'd need to be on steroids to gain 30 lbs: If you're talking about in a year, it's totally possible depending on your genetics and determination. I can point out people who'd be able to gain easily just by looking at them, this is more than the people who have actually optimized their potential. Most people can't achieve such gains becuase they lack the passion to be that devoted; and rightfully so. Not everyone is that passionate about weight lifting.

Eat big. Lift big. Get big. Period.

 

[Wizard of Oz]

"Natural" is a personal definition. Creatine is a "natural" chemical, but so is pure androstenedione. In fact, I think that the FDA yanked andro off of the market after it had been "just a supplement" for some time. I highly doubt that creatine will see the same fate, but I simply don't want to augment my natural amount of a given metabolite with a pill or powder. That's why I stick to whole foods that aren't pre-weighed or chemically-defined.

If I referred to something being "unnatural," it was how I (not necessarily anybody else) feel about it. I don't want to take something that the NCAA deems schools cannot provide for their players. I believe that this is the case for creatine.

 

[iwantneurosurg]

this thread is way too long to read, so i'll just share my story:

i entered college in 2003; 5'9-ish and about 123 lbs. this was just ridiculous.

...ridiculous to the point that my dad bought two dumbells and a book called Essential Arms to build my biceps. this was late high school.

...going into college, i had some pretty nice bi's. but given my body proportions, the baggy t-shirts and pants covered it (a 30 waist was big on me, but i had 42" leg while standing...for comparison's sake, julia roberts in pretty woman said her legs are 44" hip to toe, making mine, and i'm a guy, longer than hers)

i lifted on and off. one year later, i grew a little bit, just under 5-10 but still barely 130. end of fall semester maybe about 133. spring, i started lifting more regularly, took protein religiously after lifting.

then summer came before medical school and i wanted to get big. i hated being the little guy. i slept a lot, ate a lot, lifted a solid one hour every day, took protein and creatine (I believe the NCAA does not outlaw creatine, so i decided to try it a while). Lifted 5 days a week. I took weight gainer at night (about another 1000) calories. I walked into med school 143 pounds, 5-10.

I'm now a second year, just under 5'11, 150, no fat. About a 30" waist, maybe less, but...last i checked, 39.5" chest, now i think its closer to 40 or 41. My goal is to hit a target weight of 170.

I've never done cardio. Unfortunately, my BP went up a bit since the beginning of med school, so i added some running into the mix.

does creatine work? i sure think so. (i stopped creatine before med school) so i used creatine for about three months, took three months off, another three on, like this for about a year.

eat big, lift big, get big. i agree totally. but that's hard as hell in medical school, and i lift to maintain.

 

[D30417995]

when ppl say creatine, do they mean phosphocreatine? if so, i think PCr only lasts for the inital 10 seconds or so of high intensity workout?

my biochem prof keeps emphasising to us that BCAA supplementation is of no use at all in terms of improving athletic performance..

how come there are so many conflicting findings?

 

[Hayden2102]

Not necessarily phosphocreatine, more likely creatine monohydrate or a stack.

 

[Wizard of Oz]

how come there are so many conflicting findings?

It's actually quite common to have so many conflicting findings. It's an absolute bear to control for variables with these sorts of studies since I think that we can all agree that not everybody is the same.

I'm sure that there are well over 1000 creatine studies in the literature. Most say that strength gains can be noticed by supplementing with it.

 

[Uniq]

"Natural" is a personal definition. Creatine is a "natural" chemical, but so is pure androstenedione. In fact, I think that the FDA yanked andro off of the market after it had been "just a supplement" for some time. I highly doubt that creatine will see the same fate, but I simply don't want to augment my natural amount of a given metabolite with a pill or powder. That's why I stick to whole foods that aren't pre-weighed or chemically-defined.

If I referred to something being "unnatural," it was how I (not necessarily anybody else) feel about it. I don't want to take something that the NCAA deems schools cannot provide for their players. I believe that this is the case for creatine.

I don't see how not being able to provide it to their players indicates that it is unnatural. It is found in food; you could get creatine from a slab of steak. Is that altering a metabolite? Andro, however, is not found in food. Creatine is simply used in the phosphocreatine mechanism that increases ATP levels in muscles. Andro actually alters hormone levels causing them to be thrown off.

 

[iwantneurosurg]

i think the bigger fear with creatine supplementation is its lack of studying the long-term effects. ppl poo-poo andro because it shrinks balls, mood swings, zits, and basically screws your body up.
protein supplementation doesn't do any of that. is it natural? not as natural as loading up on steaks, but it doesn't shrink testicles, form zits, etc...so people don't have as big a problem with it.

physiologically speaking, it can clearly be seen why steroids cause so many problems. creatine, if you look at the physio, the only foreseeable possible effect might be renal damage. that's why i don't use it now, and that's why i take long breaks from it when i do decide to go back on it (3 months on, 3 months off); but i was brave enough to try it, and i'm very conservative when it comes to supplements.

its been around long enough and most, if not all, collegiate and sports organizations don't condemn creatine. so i figured i'd give it a shot. i'm still careful and cycle even more fastidiously than the most cautious of trainers, but i can confidently say it worked for me.

 

[Wizard of Oz]

I don't see how not being able to provide it to their players indicates that it is unnatural. It is found in food; you could get creatine from a slab of steak. Is that altering a metabolite? Andro, however, is not found in food. Creatine is simply used in the phosphocreatine mechanism that increases ATP levels in muscles. Andro actually alters hormone levels causing them to be thrown off.

D-I schools are allowed to give players housing and all of the meals they want. By singling out creatine as a substance that they can't give, they are both suggesting that is a performance enhancer and that it might not be such a good idea to encourage its use. I'm not saying that it's bad for you, I'd just rather not use it. Truth be told, I don't see how you could test for it any which way.

Call it a personal mindset. I'd rather just eat the steak with no conscious effort applied to what I'm eating other than that it assists me in a balanced meal plan. With the steak, I get all sorts of minerals in addition, but I know not of the bioavailable creatine from cooked muscle.

This is just how I judge my own appearance. I'd rather have a Hugh Jackman-like appearance and know that I didn't take any pills or powders than to look more Arnold with something I had to buy in the supplement aisle. If I know that I HAD to supplement to put that extra muscle on, then I'd rather not have it. Like I said, I'm not looking to win any bodybuilding contests. I exercise to reduce stress, improve my self image, and delay heart disease. I've never felt like I needed bigger muscles than I have been able to obtain by lifting and eating a balanced diet.

If you'll excuse me, I need to go eat a foxglove plant to obtain some more natural compounds.

 

[Law2Doc]

I highly doubt that creatine will see the same fate, but I simply don't want to augment my natural amount of a given metabolite with a pill or powder.

I would actually bet that creatine does go the way of andro. The problem is not that it is necessarilly unsafe but that it is relatively unstudied, and is being used by a surprising number of grade school athletes, often in off-label quantities. The average lay public confuses it with steroids and often lumps them together.

 

[Fermata]

This is just how I judge my own appearance. I'd rather have a Hugh Jackman-like appearance and know that I didn't take any pills or powders than to look more Arnold with something I had to buy in the supplement aisle. If I know that I HAD to supplement to put that extra muscle on, then I'd rather not have it. Like I said, I'm not looking to win any bodybuilding contests. I exercise to reduce stress, improve my self image, and delay heart disease. I've never felt like I needed bigger muscles than I have been able to obtain by lifting and eating a balanced diet.

The ignorance over genetic ability for size, anabolic steroids, and nutrition is laughable even amongst future physicians.

It's also funny because Hugh Jackman has personal trainers and dieticians that get him to look like he does for certain movie roles. This is in addition to his genetic bone frame, muscle insertions, and so on that give him a particularly asthetic look.

Most people don't understand just how genetically elite the really big bodybuilders are. No amount of creatine, anabolic steroids, HGH, or (laugh) whey protein powder is gonna get you there.

"than to look more Arnold with something I had to buy in the supplement aisle. "

Arnold grew up poor in Austria and was bigger at age 17 than you will probably ever be. Even if there was something to the argument about the fear of getting too big then the solution would be to stop lifting or to move onto less strenous strength training.

Your goals are commendable but I don't understand why everyone wants to crap on other people's goals, especially when they don't affect you, and especially when they are so grossly misinformed.

 

[Uniq]

D-I schools are allowed to give players housing and all of the meals they want. By singling out creatine as a substance that they can't give, they are both suggesting that is a performance enhancer and that it might not be such a good idea to encourage its use. I'm not saying that it's bad for you, I'd just rather not use it. Truth be told, I don't see how you could test for it any which way.

Call it a personal mindset. I'd rather just eat the steak with no conscious effort applied to what I'm eating other than that it assists me in a balanced meal plan. With the steak, I get all sorts of minerals in addition, but I know not of the bioavailable creatine from cooked muscle.

This is just how I judge my own appearance. I'd rather have a Hugh Jackman-like appearance and know that I didn't take any pills or powders than to look more Arnold with something I had to buy in the supplement aisle. If I know that I HAD to supplement to put that extra muscle on, then I'd rather not have it. Like I said, I'm not looking to win any bodybuilding contests. I exercise to reduce stress, improve my self image, and delay heart disease. I've never felt like I needed bigger muscles than I have been able to obtain by lifting and eating a balanced diet.

If you'll excuse me, I need to go eat a foxglove plant to obtain some more natural compounds.

I totally respect your choice to not take it, but to label it as unnatural is wrong. You're still doing that even though you've stopped saying it explicitly.

I highly doubt that you looked at NCAA rules and used that as your reason not to use creatine. It's convenient to gather up such info, after your choice not to take creatine, and then label creatine as unnatural or "not such a good idea."

Sure, the NCAA may not encourage creatine, but what exactly do they encourage then? I mean, isn't it obvious that players would be given food and shelter? Anything else would be up to the player and that doesn't suggest anything about creatine. Conversely, the fact that it is not prohibited suggests that the NCAA feels it is just fine as opposed to "not a good idea." Although it may not be distributed, its use is totally allowed (unlike steroids). What exactly do they distribute anyway? I'd like to see a comparison of the "distribution-allowed" list vs the "use-allowed" list.

Additionally, I understand that you wouldn't "apply conscious effort into what you're eating" but that is indeed a personal choice because clearly some people do so meticulously. To take that personal choice and project it onto things that other people do would be wrong. Just because someone does count their calories etc doesn't make them any less creditable in their weight training endeavors. Just because you don't use creatine doesn't suddenly make it unnatural and its users less creditable.

And, also, what is meant when you say that you don't see how you could test either way? It's quite easy to say that about anything. What do you see as being testable either way? There are plenty of researchers who can see and have seen ways to test either way.

Also, this is another myth about weight lifting: there's no magic pill, whether it's creatine or even steroids that will have you looking like Arnold if you don't have the genetics for it. Supplementation is NOT the difference between Jackman and Arnold. The difference is genetics, passion and devotion. To suggest that someone who looks like Arnold with supplements did not work as hard as someone who looks like Jackman without is both wrong and disrespectful to someone who worked hard to look like Arnold. Chances are, they'd still be bigger than Jackman even without supplementation.

 

[Wizard of Oz]

Since we're talking about a physician's stance on the issue, here's my advice to any patient who asks me this question. "Patient, taking protein supplements won't hurt you, and right now we have no evidence that creatine will either. My advice, however, is to simply maintain a well balanced diet and exercise using proper form." Is that bad advice? Because that's exactly what ALL of my GP's have told me since I was 16 when I asked them this question.

I never said "look like Arnold." I intended to say "look more like Arnold." I just meant bulkier.

Here is the beginning and end of my Arnold/Jackman analogy. I (without respect to anybody esle) can look like Jackman without supplements (complete with body hair). I used him as an example because he's lean but not bulky (IMHO). I'm never going to look like a world-class bodybuilder; maybe it's because I'm not interested enough to put in the work, maybe it's because I'm not willing to try supplements or steroids. It's probably because I'm not predisposed to look like that. Don't know, don't care, but I think that having a lean body is what is important for somebody who is not trying to make a living off a physique. This excludes professionals (as indicated in the OP).

All of my statements have made reference to my personal philosophy and how I would relate it to patients.

Fermata, your assertions do not contradict anything I've said (genetics, size, etc.). I agree with you. I am saying that I am not pre-disposed to be a monster. I am not crapping on anybody else's goals, I'm just stating my opinion, which is the whole point of SDN. The OP asked about protein and asserted that it has no use. I offered my opinion about it as well as some other comments about improving fitness for lay people and improving gym compliance and how this may or may not be related to resistance training.

Then (as is common on SDN), I got jumped by a bunch of posters, most of whom took what I was saying the wrong way.

As for the natural argument, again, IN MY VIEW, natural is what my body makes, excretes, and turns over if I don't supplement with pills or powders. There are TONS of chemicals that doctors prescribe that are natural and found in foods or other organic material, but the FDA still calls them drugs when you use them to replace components that you don't have or augment levels that you do have because the body doesn't seem to be working right. The FDA does not regulate supplements until they appear to start working like drugs (e.g. andro).

Creatine has been on the market long before sports considered banning it, and NO, I've never considered taking it. While I referenced the NCAA specifically, I believe that you cannot even buy it in France. Not only do I not want to risk finding out years from now that maybe it isn't the best thing for me to be eating, but I just have a greater self image if my body is not enhanced by exogenous pills or powders. TO ME, it ceases being natural if I use pills or powders; I don't care if they are just placebo sugar pills. If somebody else thinks that they look better than I do and needs pills or powders to do it, then I fail to agree with their conclusion.

 

[MossPoh]

Back in the day when I was lifting I was on so many supplements it was almost exhausting. Creatine, ZMA, protein (mainly becaue it was the quickest way to get protein after a workout since I never got real meals) used to carry around food too..not to mention the fish oil, multi-vitamins, and all sorts of crap. I was 6'5" 250 lbs at about 8.5 to 9 % bf......it was really difficult for me though because I was on the swim team...and it is very difficult to do bulk phases during that time with 3 hours of swimming on top of regular weight lifting.

 

[Playmakur42]

Since we're discussing creatine:
Creatine - Cramps, pulled hamstrings, loss of body weight/stength when you stop using.

 

[Fermata]

All of my statements have made reference to my personal philosophy and how I would relate it to patients.

Fermata, your assertions do not contradict anything I've said (genetics, size, etc.). I agree with you. I am saying that I am not pre-disposed to be a monster. I am not crapping on anybody else's goals, I'm just stating my opinion, which is the whole point of SDN. The OP asked about protein and asserted that it has no use. I offered my opinion about it as well as some other comments about improving fitness for lay people and improving gym compliance and how this may or may not be related to resistance training.

Then (as is common on SDN), I got jumped by a bunch of posters, most of whom took what I was saying the wrong way.

Then I apologize for misinterpreting where you were trying to go with what you were saying. I applaud the effort of anyone who is trying to become healthier and maybe serve as a role model for others. The supplement industry is a booming business full of many falsehoods. That's really what gets my goat.

 

[Wizard of Oz]

The supplement industry is a booming business full of many falsehoods. That's really what gets my goat.

 

[45408]

Then I apologize for misinterpreting where you were trying to go with what you were saying. I applaud the effort of anyone who is trying to become healthier and maybe serve as a role model for others. The supplement industry is a booming business full of many falsehoods. That's really what gets my goat.

maybe they do mislead people, but at least you can use a Bowflex and look like this!

 

[Playmakur42]

Who would really want to look like this?

 

[thebeatblitz]

5'9 185 lb. 14% BF DEXA analysis
BP (raw) = 245x8
Squat (olympic) = 315x8
Deadlift (sumo) = 345x8

To the OP, it's best to determine what you wish to realistically accomplish. Do you want to rapidly add mass and strength? Do you want to lean out and become more athletically fit?

Legal supplements are a huge market because it's human tendency to search for the easy way to out. The average person looking to maintain good cardiovascular/physical health does not need to supplement with anything if their diet is superb.

However, if you want to train for hypertrophy, you will need protein. The standard for heavy training is approximately 1g of protein/lb of LBM. It is extremely difficult for the average person to eat anywhere close to the ~170g of protein I like to see on a daily basis. That's where protein supplementation comes into play. If not, you better love the taste of tuna because that's all you'll be eating, every waking moment of the day.

If your goal is to lose weight, don't just blindly jump into a cardio routine. The #1 reason (and gym's like Ballys, Planet Fitness, etc. know this and thrive off this) people burn out is because they're impatient and want immediate results. They hit the treadmill their first day and think running 5 miles after sitting on a couch all day is going to get them fit.

All that will do is give you shin splints, sore legs, and a sour attitude. Diet is the most critical component to weight loss. Log what you eat religiously into diet planners like www.Fitday.com and see how off your diet truly is. Steady-state running is great for feeling good and maintaining good heart health, but if you're targeting rapid weight loss, HIIT or powerlifting will create a greater caloric deficit without the boredom or tediousness of the treadmill.

Getting huge is really, really simple. Eat alot, lift heavy things, sleep.
Losing weight is really, really simple. Correct your diet.

 

[D30417995]

Do you want to rapidly add mass and strength?

Getting huge is really, really simple. Eat alot, lift heavy things, sleep.

i want to rapidly add mass; i've been exercising and weight lifting for many years now for general fitness, but now I'd like to add mass ASAP so I've started doing heavy squats and also learning how to do deadlifts properly

eating a lot and lifting heavy are very easy to do, but sleeping 7-8 hours a night is quite challenging.

 

[thebeatblitz]

Sounds like you're on the right track. If you keep with the heavy deadlifts and squats, you'll notice substantial changes in less than a month. Those two movements are critical in building overall LBM.

The sleep part is tough. Just remember, competitive bodybuilders and powerlifters are the ones on strict regimens of 8+ hours of sleep. If you can't do it, no worries. I usually get ~6, but I train caffeine assisted .

 

[45408]

i want to rapidly add mass; i've been exercising and weight lifting for many years now for general fitness, but now I'd like to add mass ASAP so I've started doing heavy squats and also learning how to do deadlifts properly

eating a lot and lifting heavy are very easy to do, but sleeping 7-8 hours a night is quite challenging.

sleep is always a good thing, but I think that if you get 6 hours, you'll still see gains. Good luck. Make sure your form is good with squats before you start going heavy. Don't be "that guy" doing 500 pound "knee bends" in the Smith machine and telling girls in clubs that you squat 500.

 

[scoobymd]

Try www.bodybuilding.com