For All Bodybuilders / Strenght Trainers On Here

DaveFoster

Member
Joined
Jul 23, 2015
Messages
5,027
Location
Portland, Oregon
"Intake of a 14-d ad libitum high-starch diet decreased energy intake and body weight compared with a high-fat or high-sucrose diet. The increased energy expenditure observed on the sucrose-rich diet can probably be explained both by the increased intake of energy and fructose (mainly from sucrose) on this diet."

Reference: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9347402

"The long-term impact of dietary carbohydrate type, in particular sucrose, on insulin resistance and the development of diabetes and atherosclerosis is not established. Current guidelines for the healthy population advise restriction of sucrose intake. We investigated the effect of high- versus low-sucrose diet (25 vs. 10%, respectively, of total energy intake) in 13 healthy subjects aged 33 +/- 3 years (mean +/- SE), BMI 26.6 +/- 0.9 kg/m(2), in a randomized crossover design with sequential 6-week dietary interventions separated by a 4-week washout. Weight maintenance, eucaloric diets with identical macronutrient profiles and fiber content were designed. All food was weighed and distributed. Insulin action was assessed using a two-step euglycemic clamp; glycemic profiles were assessed by the continuous glucose monitoring system and vascular compliance by pulse-wave analysis. There was no change in weight across the study. Peripheral glucose uptake and suppression of endogenous glucose production were similar after each diet. Glycemic profiles and measures of vascular compliance did not change. A rise in total and LDL cholesterol was observed. In this study, a high-sucrose intake as part of an eucaloric, weight-maintaining diet had no detrimental effect on insulin sensitivity, glycemic profiles, or measures of vascular compliance in healthy nondiabetic subjects."

Reference: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17130505

"Our findings suggest that reduction of fat intake results in a modest but significant reduction in body weight and body fatness. The concomitant increase in either simple or complex carbohydrates did not indicate significant differences in weight change. No adverse effects on blood lipids were observed. These findings underline the importance of this dietary change and its potential impact on the public health implications of obesity."

Reference: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11093293

"30 of 7895 trials and 38 of 9445 cohort studies were eligible. In trials of adults with ad libitum diets (that is, with no strict control of food intake), reduced intake of dietary sugars was associated with a decrease in body weight (0.80 kg, 95% confidence interval 0.39 to 1.21; P<0.001); increased sugars intake was associated with a comparable weight increase (0.75 kg, 0.30 to 1.19; P=0.001). Isoenergetic exchange of dietary sugars with other carbohydrates showed no change in body weight (0.04 kg, -0.04 to 0.13). Trials in children, which involved recommendations to reduce intake of sugar sweetened foods and beverages, had low participant compliance to dietary advice; these trials showed no overall change in body weight. However, in relation to intakes of sugar sweetened beverages after one year follow-up in prospective studies, the odds ratio for being overweight or obese increased was 1.55 (1.32 to 1.82) among groups with the highest intake compared with those with the lowest intake. Despite significant heterogeneity in one meta-analysis and potential bias in some trials, sensitivity analyses showed that the trends were consistent and associations remained after these studies were excluded.

Among free living people involving ad libitum diets, intake of free sugars or sugar sweetened beverages is a determinant of body weight. The change in body fatness that occurs with modifying intakes seems to be mediated via changes in energy intakes, since isoenergetic exchange of sugars with other carbohydrates was not associated with weight change."

Reference: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23321486

"A causal role of fructose intake in the aetiology of the global obesity epidemic has been proposed in recent years. This proposition, however, rests on controversial interpretations of two distinct lines of research. On one hand, in mechanistic intervention studies, detrimental metabolic effects have been observed after excessive isolated fructose intakes in animals and human subjects. On the other hand, food disappearance data indicate that fructose consumption from added sugars has increased over the past decades and paralleled the increase in obesity. Both lines of research are presently insufficient to demonstrate a causal role of fructose in metabolic diseases, however. Most mechanistic intervention studies were performed on subjects fed large amounts of pure fructose, while fructose is ordinarily ingested together with glucose. The use of food disappearance data does not accurately reflect food consumption, and hence cannot be used as evidence of a causal link between fructose intake and obesity. Based on a thorough review of the literature, we demonstrate that fructose, as commonly consumed in mixed carbohydrate sources, does not exert specific metabolic effects that can account for an increase in body weight. Consequently, public health recommendations and policies aiming at reducing fructose consumption only, without additional diet and lifestyle targets, would be disputable and impractical. Although the available evidence indicates that the consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages is associated with body-weight gain, and it may be that fructose is among the main constituents of these beverages, energy overconsumption is much more important to consider in terms of the obesity epidemic."

Reference: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24666553

"We examined the extent to which sugar, relative to other macronutrients, was associated with adiposity.

Fat is the largest contributor to overall energy. The proportion of energy from fat in the diet, but not sugar, is higher among overweight/obese individuals."

Reference: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/27407038/

"In response to evidence linking obesity and high amounts of dietary fat, the food industry has developed numerous reduced-fat and nonfat food items. These items frequently derive a relatively large percentage of their energy from sugars and the effect of these sugars on weight regulation is not well known. We studied the comparative effects of high- and low-sucrose, low-fat, hypoenergetic diets on a variety of metabolic and behavioral indexes in a 6-wk weight-loss program. Both diets contained approximately 4606 kJ energy/d with 11% of energy as fat, 19% as protein, and 71% as carbohydrate. The high-sucrose diet contained 43% of the total daily energy intake as sucrose; the low-sucrose diet contained 4% of the total daily energy intake as sucrose. Twenty women aged 40.6 +/- 8.2 y (mean +/- SD) with a body mass index (in kg/m2) of 35.93 +/- 4.8 consumed the high-sucrose diet; 22 women aged 40.3 +/- 7.3 y with a body mass index of 34.93 +/- 4.4 consumed the low-sucrose diet. Mixed-design analysis of variance showed a main effect of time (P < 0.01), with both diet groups showing decreases in weight, blood pressure, resting energy expenditure, percentage body fat, free triiodothyronine (FT3), urinary norepinephrine, and plasma lipids. Small but significant interactions were found between group and time in total cholesterol (P = 0.009) and low-density lipoprotein (LDL) (P = 0.01). Both groups showed decreases in depression, hunger, and negative mood, and increases in vigilance and positive mood with time (P < 0.01). Results showed that a high sucrose content in a hypoenergetic, low-fat diet did not adversely affect weight loss, metabolism, plasma lipids, or emotional affect."

Reference: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9094871

This studies shows more weight loss with added sugar, but the added sugar resulted in a reduced consumption of fat:

"Two energy-reduced diets were designed as a weight-reducing programme. A low-sugar diet (LSD) providing 5% of its energy from sucrose and a sugar-containing diet (SCD) providing 10% of its energy from sucrose incorporated as sweet foods were devised. Both diets were constructed to contain about 33% of the energy from fat.

Weight loss over the 8 weeks was 2.2 kg (LSD) and 3.0 kg (SCD). BMI changed from 29.2 on the LSD and 30.1 kg/m(2) SCD at baseline to 28.2 and 28.8 kg/m(2) at week 8 respectively. The actual prescribed commercially added sucrose intakes were 5% energy (LSD) or 10% energy (SCD). Reported percentage energy from fat was significantly lower on the SCD (and would seem to support the theory of an inverse relationship between fat and sugar) than on the LSD, where there was seen to be no significant reduction. There was no evidence of micronutrient dilution that could be directly attributed to the sucrose content of the diets."

Reference: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11477496

Reference for compilation of first four studies: http://peatarianreviews.blogspot.com/2015/02/starch-is-not-more-fattening-than-sugar.html

Originally posted on the Foster Your Health blog: https://fosteryourhealth.wordpress.com/2018/03/02/starch-does-not-make-you-fat/

Which starch are you talking about? I have never gotten endotoxin or inflammation from the starches I mentioned (White rice, potatoes etc).
Maybe wheat is an exception, that has given be some bloated feelings in the past.
Notice our conversation about membrane permeability and my link to Dr. Peat's article got deleted.

Here's his article: http://raypeat.com/articles/articles/leakiness.shtml
 
Last edited:

Anders86

Member
Joined
Feb 7, 2017
Messages
355
I have been back and forth on starches for a year now.

After I stopped starches I feel alot better, more calm, happy and it stopped my dandruff.

When I try to eat potatoes again my first meal makes me feel awesome. Great pump, energy and mood, but I crash with an estrogen surge 2-3 potato meals later. Making me feel down, low and makes my scalp very sore. I can get same symptoms from excessive alcohol.

I think it`s my liver crashing..

But I have great results with only sugar, and when I focus on "liver enhancing" drugs like Vitamin K, Milk Thistle, Caffeine etc. I get the pump I`m missing from Potatoes.

I do a 220kg/485pound deadlift and 160kg/352pounds bench without focusing on heavy lift. I want to go the professional bodybuilding/fitness route myself and then are focusing more on isolating muscles with more reps.

I usually do Diamant/Pansterone/Gonadin on weekdays and Pansterone/Androsterone on weekends. Skim milk, OJ and Gelating, I take some aminos some days but rarely. After I have lost some fat I will make fatty ice-cream my b****!
 

YourUniverse

Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2017
Messages
2,034
Location
your mind, rent free
I have been back and forth on starches for a year now.

After I stopped starches I feel alot better, more calm, happy and it stopped my dandruff.

When I try to eat potatoes again my first meal makes me feel awesome. Great pump, energy and mood, but I crash with an estrogen surge 2-3 potato meals later. Making me feel down, low and makes my scalp very sore. I can get same symptoms from excessive alcohol.

I think it`s my liver crashing..

But I have great results with only sugar, and when I focus on "liver enhancing" drugs like Vitamin K, Milk Thistle, Caffeine etc. I get the pump I`m missing from Potatoes.

I do a 220kg/485pound deadlift and 160kg/352pounds bench without focusing on heavy lift. I want to go the professional bodybuilding/fitness route myself and then are focusing more on isolating muscles with more reps.

I usually do Diamant/Pansterone/Gonadin on weekdays and Pansterone/Androsterone on weekends. Skim milk, OJ and Gelating, I take some aminos some days but rarely. After I have lost some fat I will make fatty ice-cream my b****!
Nice, I'd be interested in hearing your progress - I feel the same. Also, my bench is 285x1, squat 365x5, and deadlift 500x2, so we seem to be built with slightly different proportions but overall strong, likely large muscle mass... And I'd agree, rays advice is spot on - feel much better with sucrose
 

poilochio

Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2015
Messages
130
Starch is irreplaceable is post workout nutrition imo, fructose promotes too much insulin resistence to be useful for muscle anabolism. Better to use it before workouts.

I kinda not agree ....I'm a typ 1 Diabetic and since going very low fat max 30 grams a day and very high Carb only fruit and some beets ca.500-800 grams a day ..my insulin requirements have gone down drastically. So i believe Fat will make you Insulin resistant not fructose
 
Joined
Feb 1, 2016
Messages
384
Location
NY
Dave: My point is in terms of mechanisms, glucose/starch is anabolic to a cell, whether eating starch is anabolic to the whole body is dependent on many factors. Nothing changes the basic fact of glucose being anabolic. You have to look at the mechanisms to see the differences between fructose and glucose.
 
Joined
Feb 1, 2016
Messages
384
Location
NY
I kinda not agree ....I'm a typ 1 Diabetic and since going very low fat max 30 grams a day and very high Carb only fruit and some beets ca.500-800 grams a day ..my insulin requirements have gone down drastically. So i believe Fat will make you Insulin resistant not fructose
Fruits are definitely a lot easier on the liver compared to sucrose, because of the fiber and antioxidants. When fructose turns to fat it causes insulin resistance.
 
Joined
Feb 1, 2016
Messages
384
Location
NY
When I try to eat potatoes again my first meal makes me feel awesome. Great pump, energy and mood, but I crash with an estrogen surge 2-3 potato meals later. Making me feel down, low and makes my scalp very sore. I can get same symptoms from excessive alcohol.
This sounds very similar to my experience with low fat high potato, I believe the allergens in the potatoes overwhelmed my liver after a couple of days, as white rice/ good sourdough doesn't lead to the same symptoms for me. Now potatoes are somewhat off-putting to me and I only have them sporadically.:2cents:
 

Syncopated

Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2017
Messages
234
Location
Canada
He eats whole eggs, half the protein and almost all the nutrition is in the yolk, the whites are also the allergenic part.
If he is eating the whole eggs raw blended with orange juice then he is still eating the egg whites. How is that different from separating out the yolks and eating just the white?

The polyunsaturates in the yolks cancels them in my opinion and Ray should know better than to recommend them. Most body builders eat up to a dozen whole raw eggs everyday and are getting way too much polyunsaturates.
 

cyclops

Member
Joined
May 30, 2017
Messages
1,636
If he is eating the whole eggs raw blended with orange juice then he is still eating the egg whites. How is that different from separating out the yolks and eating just the white?

The polyunsaturates in the yolks cancels them in my opinion and Ray should know better than to recommend them. Most body builders eat up to a dozen whole raw eggs everyday and are getting way too much polyunsaturates.

Bruh, I was just saying that Peat likes egg yolk in general, he doesn't completely avoid them because of the PUFA, he just limits the amounts of whole eggs he eats. I don't think he thinks the whites alone are a great food, but maybe they are ok. I don't think he's whipping up any kind of egg & juice shakes.
 
Last edited:

Vinero

Member
Joined
Feb 20, 2013
Messages
1,551
Age
32
Location
Netherlands
If he is eating the whole eggs raw blended with orange juice then he is still eating the egg whites. How is that different from separating out the yolks and eating just the white?

The polyunsaturates in the yolks cancels them in my opinion and Ray should know better than to recommend them. Most body builders eat up to a dozen whole raw eggs everyday and are getting way too much polyunsaturates.
Ray recommends eating up to two eggs a day maximum. Egg yolk is very rich in nutrients but also rich in linoleic acid. That's why he eats only 1 or 2 eggs a day. I agree bodybuilders eat way too much eggs and egg whites by themselves taste pretty bad.
 

YourUniverse

Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2017
Messages
2,034
Location
your mind, rent free
Theres a thread floating around these forums about egg whites and their inducing inferior muscle protein synthesis as compared to equivalent protein of whole egg
 

Syncopated

Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2017
Messages
234
Location
Canada
Ray recommends eating up to two eggs a day maximum. Egg yolk is very rich in nutrients but also rich in linoleic acid.

The linoleic acid is suppressing his thyroid and degrading his protein digestion.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom