Recommended fat burning supplement

[SociallyChallenged]

Originally posted by: The Sauce

Originally posted by: KoolDrew

Originally posted by: The Sauce
I am not in a calorie deficit and things have gone just fine.

LOL

So I take it you're a magician?

What you two are not taking into consideration is that the type of calories and timing of meals plays a critical role in metabolism and hormone regulation. Low glycemic, slow digesting carbs and high protein calorie meals will have greater effects on stimulating the metabolism and androgenic hormones, and suppressing cortisol and insulin. So ultimately you are correct, I guess there is a calorie deficit but not compared to my usual baseline metabolic rate. You can lose weight without becoming catabolic with regard to muscle mass by keeping your metabolism up with frequent, smaller meals and healthy foods. I have no reason to lie about this. I would be perfectly willing to post my diet for anyone to try out and confirm independently.

Except research has shown that there is no relationship between an increase in meal frequency and an increase in metabolic rate (quick reference). This correlation of less fat people eating more frequently is quite possibly a correct one. However, it is much more likely the effect of remaining satiated and therefore taking in a lower total amount of calories as a result. Also hormone responses are potentially important in the digestions and potential energy product of certain micronutrients, but you will never be at caloric maintenance while losing weight. It is thermodynamically impossible even with the involvement of enzymes, hormones, other cell modulators, etc.

Also, just to make sure you know this: GI isn't necessarily indicative of a healthy food. Fructose bypasses that system by utilizing the GluT2 protein rather than the GluT4 protein (the only insulin dependent sugar receptor) and therefore has no GI. However, as fructose enters the liver (if the liver is in a high-energy state), it is then exported to adipose tissue to contribute to fat creation. That results in fatty organs and the like, a very negative result with a 0 GI food. It is a technicality, but it is very true. Please be aware of that.

 

[Kipper]

Originally posted by: SociallyChallenged

Also, just to make sure you know this: GI isn't necessarily indicative of a healthy food. Fructose bypasses that system by utilizing the GluT2 protein rather than the GluT4 protein (the only insulin dependent sugar receptor) and therefore has no GI. However, as fructose enters the liver (if the liver is in a high-energy state), it is then exported to adipose tissue to contribute to fat creation. That results in fatty organs and the like, a very negative result with a 0 GI food. It is a technicality, but it is very true. Please be aware of that.

A couple additions/corrections:

Fructose is primarily absorbed through GLUT5, rather than GLUT2 (although it does pass through GLUT2). Neither is it exported directly after to adipose tissue for triglyceride (TG) synthesis. Fructose at high levels in the bloodstream would indicate some sort of liver failure. The reason why fructose is lipogenic is twofold: its biochemical pathway contains no metabolic regulation unlike glucose, and because its intermediates are the precursors to triglyceride synthesis. Conversion to TG, when and if it occurs, takes place in the liver, not in adipocytes.

I'm not sure where you get the idea that there will be fat buildup in organs, but I assure you that is absolutely not the case with ingestion of fructose under normal circumstances.. While there may be no insulin response, the body is perfectly capable of converting fructose to glucose intermediates for energy, if necessary, and if unnecessary converting the extra to TG and then dumping that into the blood stream.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with fructose whatsoever. That said, GI is a bunch of rubbish. Steamed carrots, for example, have a higher GI than pure glucose, so building a diet around GI alone is probably misguided.

 

[SociallyChallenged]

Originally posted by: Kipper

Originally posted by: SociallyChallenged

Also, just to make sure you know this: GI isn't necessarily indicative of a healthy food. Fructose bypasses that system by utilizing the GluT2 protein rather than the GluT4 protein (the only insulin dependent sugar receptor) and therefore has no GI. However, as fructose enters the liver (if the liver is in a high-energy state), it is then exported to adipose tissue to contribute to fat creation. That results in fatty organs and the like, a very negative result with a 0 GI food. It is a technicality, but it is very true. Please be aware of that.

A couple additions/corrections:

Fructose is primarily absorbed through GLUT5, rather than GLUT2 (although it does pass through GLUT2). Neither is it exported directly after to adipose tissue for triglyceride (TG) synthesis. Fructose at high levels in the bloodstream would indicate some sort of liver failure. The reason why fructose is lipogenic is twofold: its biochemical pathway contains no metabolic regulation unlike glucose, and because its intermediates are the precursors to triglyceride synthesis. Conversion to TG, when and if it occurs, takes place in the liver, not in adipocytes.

I'm not sure where you get the idea that there will be fat buildup in organs, but I assure you that is absolutely not the case with ingestion of fructose under normal circumstances.. While there may be no insulin response, the body is perfectly capable of converting fructose to glucose intermediates for energy, if necessary, and if unnecessary converting the extra to TG and then dumping that into the blood stream.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with fructose whatsoever. That said, GI is a bunch of rubbish. Steamed carrots, for example, have a higher GI than pure glucose, so building a diet around GI alone is probably misguided.

I was very broadly summarizing what happens to the fructose (or rather the constituents of it, therefore the resulting TG). I apologize if I overspecified in some cases and didn't specify enough in others. Also, you are correct, it is the GluT5. Was reading up on GluT2 specifics today on exporting fructose into the bloodstream headed toward the Portal Vein.

I also stated that the liver (and therefore the body) were in high energy states (anabolic state), therefore I assumed that the excess fructose would be converted to TG and then stored, not freely floating in the bloodstream.

It actually depends on the source of fructose and the amount. I believe the nutrition PhD student with whom I've been talking is doing some research that involves the effects of high fructose intake during an anabolic state. Perhaps I misunderstood him in reference to where the fat is stored and that would've been my fault as well. However, I agree that the GI leaves a bit to be desired. Not all the high GIs are bad and not all the low GIs are good. That's pretty much what I was getting around to saying. Pardon if I bastardized/slurred the info.

 

[The Sauce]

Ok then. Well I guess that I have to concede that you guys know more about this than me. However, it has seemed to work nicely regardless.

Regarding the fructose thing. I have been advised to down a grape-juice with my whey after workouts to stimulate insulin response and muscle protein uptake. If I hear you correctly then this is the wrong thing to do since fructose is non-insulinogenic? They recommended the same thing in this month's M&F.

 

[Cattlegod]

Originally posted by: KoolDrew

something to help me burn more fat and still be able to build muscle like I am

It's not going to happen. Pick one goal and work towards it.

yes it can:
http://picasaweb.google.com/ga...sc#5223299240033173874

anyway, to the OP, a "pill" isn't going to work. take your body weight and get 2g of protein per lb of body weight through 6 servings per day. after you have your protein, you can eat whatever until you hit your calorie limit for the day. depending on your weight, you will want to go down to 1800 calories/day for 2 weeks, then 2000 for 1 week, then 2300 for 1 week, then about 2800 sustained. work out 5 days a week and do 20 min of cardio per day. you will make insane gains.

 

[SociallyChallenged]

Originally posted by: Cattlegod

Originally posted by: KoolDrew

something to help me burn more fat and still be able to build muscle like I am

It's not going to happen. Pick one goal and work towards it.

yes it can:
http://picasaweb.google.com/ga...sc#5223299240033173874

anyway, to the OP, a "pill" isn't going to work. take your body weight and get 2g of protein per lb of body weight through 6 servings per day. after you have your protein, you can eat whatever until you hit your calorie limit for the day. depending on your weight, you will want to go down to 1800 calories/day for 2 weeks, then 2000 for 1 week, then 2300 for 1 week, then about 2800 sustained. work out 5 days a week and do 20 min of cardio per day. you will make insane gains.

I see no change in overall body fat composition really. Like KoolDrew said, it only happens in the case of beginners. Also, your general program is horrendous. You can't generalize like that. Each person has different requirements and needs to calculate based off of their specifics. Working out 5 days a week will also often result in a burnout effect and adding cardio to a weightlifting program so soon will do the same. Find a resistance program. Figure out the calories required and adjust accordingly. The fat loss sticky says this all much more specifically and thoroughly.

 

[Cattlegod]

Originally posted by: SociallyChallenged

Originally posted by: Cattlegod

Originally posted by: KoolDrew

something to help me burn more fat and still be able to build muscle like I am

It's not going to happen. Pick one goal and work towards it.

yes it can:
http://picasaweb.google.com/ga...sc#5223299240033173874

anyway, to the OP, a "pill" isn't going to work. take your body weight and get 2g of protein per lb of body weight through 6 servings per day. after you have your protein, you can eat whatever until you hit your calorie limit for the day. depending on your weight, you will want to go down to 1800 calories/day for 2 weeks, then 2000 for 1 week, then 2300 for 1 week, then about 2800 sustained. work out 5 days a week and do 20 min of cardio per day. you will make insane gains.

I see no change in overall body fat composition really. Like KoolDrew said, it only happens in the case of beginners. Also, your general program is horrendous. You can't generalize like that. Each person has different requirements and needs to calculate based off of their specifics. Working out 5 days a week will also often result in a burnout effect and adding cardio to a weightlifting program so soon will do the same. Find a resistance program. Figure out the calories required and adjust accordingly. The fat loss sticky says this all much more specifically and thoroughly.

the beginner thing isn't true. it is all a matter of how much effort you put in. you can increase your workout frequency or increase the duration of your existing workouts. i had been lifting for 3 days a week for 3 years prior to that. when i kicked it up to 5 days a week, i shot through the roof like i did when i first started lifting. if you set up your workout properly, you will not get burnt out going 5 days a week. regarding the fat loss, most of it came from the spare tire region, there wasn't a ton of loss, but there was muscle gain and fat loss at the same time (to disprove the claim that it can't happen).

 

[SociallyChallenged]

Originally posted by: Cattlegod

Originally posted by: SociallyChallenged

Originally posted by: Cattlegod

Originally posted by: KoolDrew

something to help me burn more fat and still be able to build muscle like I am

It's not going to happen. Pick one goal and work towards it.

yes it can:
http://picasaweb.google.com/ga...sc#5223299240033173874

anyway, to the OP, a "pill" isn't going to work. take your body weight and get 2g of protein per lb of body weight through 6 servings per day. after you have your protein, you can eat whatever until you hit your calorie limit for the day. depending on your weight, you will want to go down to 1800 calories/day for 2 weeks, then 2000 for 1 week, then 2300 for 1 week, then about 2800 sustained. work out 5 days a week and do 20 min of cardio per day. you will make insane gains.

I see no change in overall body fat composition really. Like KoolDrew said, it only happens in the case of beginners. Also, your general program is horrendous. You can't generalize like that. Each person has different requirements and needs to calculate based off of their specifics. Working out 5 days a week will also often result in a burnout effect and adding cardio to a weightlifting program so soon will do the same. Find a resistance program. Figure out the calories required and adjust accordingly. The fat loss sticky says this all much more specifically and thoroughly.

the beginner thing isn't true. it is all a matter of how much effort you put in. you can increase your workout frequency or increase the duration of your existing workouts. i had been lifting for 3 days a week for 3 years prior to that. when i kicked it up to 5 days a week, i shot through the roof like i did when i first started lifting. if you set up your workout properly, you will not get burnt out going 5 days a week. regarding the fat loss, most of it came from the spare tire region, there wasn't a ton of loss, but there was muscle gain and fat loss at the same time (to disprove the claim that it can't happen).

You are trying to say that it DOES happen when there is research after research that says it doesn't happen. The research is done under conditions that control most everything and involve a specificity that is deadly. You're saying that your body did something... without recording each calorie taken in and without controlling a lot of factors. Also, I am talking about the burnout effect, which is a psychological problem - not a physiological one. They get tired of something after not doing anything and then making it their life. Also, it really depends on how heavy you lifted before. If your body takes a break and get back to working out or you shock it into a state (much like the beginner starting immediately), it will initially go through the same first stage. You didn't get your body fat % measured before and after (while taking overall weight into mind) and you didn't calculate your lean muscle mass before and after. Your "evidence" is anecdotal at best and there are many other clear cut reasons and research articles that say that you're just plain wrong. Everyone likes to think they're the exception. They're not.

 

[Kipper]

Originally posted by: Cattlegod

Originally posted by: KoolDrew

something to help me burn more fat and still be able to build muscle like I am

It's not going to happen. Pick one goal and work towards it.

yes it can:
http://picasaweb.google.com/ga...sc#5223299240033173874

anyway, to the OP, a "pill" isn't going to work. take your body weight and get 2g of protein per lb of body weight through 6 servings per day. after you have your protein, you can eat whatever until you hit your calorie limit for the day. depending on your weight, you will want to go down to 1800 calories/day for 2 weeks, then 2000 for 1 week, then 2300 for 1 week, then about 2800 sustained. work out 5 days a week and do 20 min of cardio per day. you will make insane gains.

Wow, talk about protein overload. 2g/lb? That's about 50% of calories from protein. People recovering from major surgery don't need that much. Absolutely unnecessary.

 

[Kipper]

Originally posted by: The Sauce
Ok then. Well I guess that I have to concede that you guys know more about this than me. However, it has seemed to work nicely regardless.

Regarding the fructose thing. I have been advised to down a grape-juice with my whey after workouts to stimulate insulin response and muscle protein uptake. If I hear you correctly then this is the wrong thing to do since fructose is non-insulinogenic? They recommended the same thing in this month's M&F.

I have really not read ANYTHING worthwhile in the muscle mags. A lot of what they allegedly promote is just that - junk science perpetuated precisely by their advertisers, which are mostly supplement companies that make unregulated, extravagant claims that overpromise and underdeliver.

That said, working the "insulin spike" seems to be dogma on physique boards. If you are intent on working with your "insulin spike" theory, you should know that grapes actually do have a fair amount of glucose in them.

I, on the other hand, just eat food.

 

[Cattlegod]

Originally posted by: SociallyChallenged

Originally posted by: Cattlegod

Originally posted by: SociallyChallenged

Originally posted by: Cattlegod

Originally posted by: KoolDrew

something to help me burn more fat and still be able to build muscle like I am

It's not going to happen. Pick one goal and work towards it.

yes it can:
http://picasaweb.google.com/ga...sc#5223299240033173874

anyway, to the OP, a "pill" isn't going to work. take your body weight and get 2g of protein per lb of body weight through 6 servings per day. after you have your protein, you can eat whatever until you hit your calorie limit for the day. depending on your weight, you will want to go down to 1800 calories/day for 2 weeks, then 2000 for 1 week, then 2300 for 1 week, then about 2800 sustained. work out 5 days a week and do 20 min of cardio per day. you will make insane gains.

I see no change in overall body fat composition really. Like KoolDrew said, it only happens in the case of beginners. Also, your general program is horrendous. You can't generalize like that. Each person has different requirements and needs to calculate based off of their specifics. Working out 5 days a week will also often result in a burnout effect and adding cardio to a weightlifting program so soon will do the same. Find a resistance program. Figure out the calories required and adjust accordingly. The fat loss sticky says this all much more specifically and thoroughly.

the beginner thing isn't true. it is all a matter of how much effort you put in. you can increase your workout frequency or increase the duration of your existing workouts. i had been lifting for 3 days a week for 3 years prior to that. when i kicked it up to 5 days a week, i shot through the roof like i did when i first started lifting. if you set up your workout properly, you will not get burnt out going 5 days a week. regarding the fat loss, most of it came from the spare tire region, there wasn't a ton of loss, but there was muscle gain and fat loss at the same time (to disprove the claim that it can't happen).

You are trying to say that it DOES happen when there is research after research that says it doesn't happen. The research is done under conditions that control most everything and involve a specificity that is deadly. You're saying that your body did something... without recording each calorie taken in and without controlling a lot of factors. Also, I am talking about the burnout effect, which is a psychological problem - not a physiological one. They get tired of something after not doing anything and then making it their life. Also, it really depends on how heavy you lifted before. If your body takes a break and get back to working out or you shock it into a state (much like the beginner starting immediately), it will initially go through the same first stage. You didn't get your body fat % measured before and after (while taking overall weight into mind) and you didn't calculate your lean muscle mass before and after. Your "evidence" is anecdotal at best and there are many other clear cut reasons and research articles that say that you're just plain wrong. Everyone likes to think they're the exception. They're not.

care to show any links to research that says you can't gain muscle and lose fat at the same time?

 

[KoolDrew]

care to show any links to research that says you can't gain muscle and lose fat at the same time?

I already said it is possible. I've seen it in beginners (mainly fat beginners). However, it's not going to last long and eventually you're going to have to pick one goal and work towards it. This is why bodybuilders do cutting and bulking cycles. During the bulk they try to gain muscle by being in a calorie surplus. Ideally fat gain would be kept to a minimum, but for an optimal rate of muscle growth some fat will be gained. They then switch to a cutting phase (calorie deficit) to cut off the fat they gained during the bulk, while trying to minimize LBM loss. The only time doing both is possible with trained individuals is by following some sort of cyclical diet, where they are frequent shifts between a calorie deficit and surplus.

The main reason fat beginners can gain LBM while being in a calorie deficit is because by being fat their body has gone through adaptions to make them more effectively use fat for fuel. The fat cells are resistant to insulin, which means insulin cannot be anti-lipolytic. Given the role of insulin in muscle growth, a fat individual even during a state of high insulin can still mobilize fatty acids for fuel. Another part of this also has to do with being untrained. Everybody knows when you first start gains come very easy since they are far from their genetic potentials. Often times even crappy training will give great results at first. Since they are in a situation where muscle can easily be gained and fat can easily be lost, fatty acids are being burned even during an anabolic hormonal state. If you don't have both factors going for you it's usually not going to happen, not to a large degree anyway.

That's why I always tell people to pick one goal and work towards it. A fat individuals goal will mainly be to lose weight, thus he should be in a calorie deficit. If he happens to gain some muscle while being in a calorie deficit, then that's great.