Sport Low carb, glycogen, protein breakdown questions
- Thread starter Karky
- Start date
Sport Fitness
I asked you this question earlier on this thread ( Post # 65 ) ...
" If you had to guess, and based on your knowledge of the claims of the anabolic diet , what do you ballpark ' significantly ' as being defined as - i.e as compared to a traditional macro profile ( other things being equal ) for example ..
- 10% less fat ?
- 20% less fat ?
- 50% less fat ? "
I checked that thread / link you gave me re CJK, and on this link, you make a post to their thread and ask CJK this exact same question as above .....as if it were your own........you asked CJK.....
If you're going to copy my question verbatim..........at least give me credit for it.
Yes. I did copy exactly the question you presented to me and posted it on the T-nation forums, is there a problem with that? I don't see a reason to give you credit for that, sorry.
Seems like when-ever someone posts something significant to counter your arguements, you counter with end-less questions you already know the answer to.
And you ignoring the quote i did give to you and cry to me that i didn't give you credit for a QUESTION proves that.
Last edited:
Hi Matt, still waiting for your response
"By the way, what are you stats?
Weight/BF, Strength training stats, and what kind of routine are you following and are you currently at maintenance or bulking?"
Calipers aren't " accurate " at the best of times - especially at accurately measuring changes to a degree of .1 % for example. But that is a debate for another thread.
Would you concede that after 3 weeks on a keto " cut " diet - in which you only consumed only 20-50g of carbs a day and you continued to train - your glycogen stores are almost completely depleted ?
Those calipers were just about as accurate as it was going to be. The trainer measured very precisely with a measuring tape (to find pinch locations) and was always consistent.
Sure, after 3 weeks on a keto diet with 20-50g of carbs per day you'd be pretty depleted on muscle glycogen..... only I carbed up, twice, AND always ate a lot of protein (which is roughly 50% ketogenic)
The amount of muscle glycogen that a person on a keto diet maintains is about 70 mmol, vs 110 mmol for a person eating a high carb diet.
It really isn't all THAT different. I always had a good 20g of carbs post workout and I think that helped me in keeping my glycogen at a good level. My training sessions didn't suffer one bit!
Last edited:
You posted my question on that forum ' verbatim '...... representing it ( passing it off ) as your own....that is the relevant issue IMO
It shows a certain lack of integrity IMO ......next time you want to quote me directly ' verbatim ', just send along the link to this thread that references my quote.
I guess I needn't ask you what your thoughts on plagiarism are eh Phate89 ? :yelrotflmao:
I'm not arguing that an anabolic diet doesn't work, I'm just trying to learn more about it from people like yourself who seem to be well versed on the topic.
I ignored it because it is out of context...I know nothing about who this CJK person is, his training regimen, diet regimen etc. etc.
Last edited:
Regarding your weight ( fat and muscle ) gain post keto bulk and the fact that prior to that you'd be " you'd be pretty depleted on muscle glycogen ".
Given an ' average person ' has somewhere around 400 +/- grams of glycogen in their muscles - which you would have depleted with your keto cut diet. And, given that 1 gram of glycogen is stored along with about 3 grams of water, presumably some of that weight gain you cited post keto bulk while on a more traditional macro nutrient profile is due - at least in part - to additional glycogen and water in your muscles as well isn't it ?
For example, since you are likely ' above average ' in your fitness and physique over the ' average person ' , it is not unlikely you might have closer to something like 500 grams of glycogen in your muscles instead of 400. If that was the case and incorporating the fact that 1 gram of glycogen is stored along with about 3 grams of water, then 500 x 4 would yield 2,000 grams of additional weight due to restoring your glycogen stores to normal ' topped up ' levels.
And 2,000 grams of glycogen / water is almost 4.5 pounds of weight just on it's own. Sort of the flip side of the early significant weight loss experienced on a keto diet ....a lot of it is simply glycogen / water.
My point being that if you combine that fact of a possible 4.5 lbs +/- confounding variable along with the normal weight fluctuations ( which could 2 lbs. +/- a day ) that occur when you step on any scale, the normal error rate inherent in repeated trials using calipers etc. etc. then the degree of accuracy and validity you're attributing to those alleged changes in fat and muscle tissue gain alone due to a diet with a traditional macro nutrient profile .......is suspect at best IMO.
Last edited:
Yes, some of the weight regained was glycogen (in fact I think all of the lean mass regained was glycogen 2 pounds or so, because I was doing a very low volume prime phase which only consisted of one set per bodypart per week, not enough for a person at my stage of fitness to build muscle from what I learned, read my journal if you are interested), but I said before that I was eating around 100g of carbs per day while keto bulking, so my diet was BARELY even considered a keto diet because of that. My glycogen levels were much fuller than a normal keto dieter.
Think what you will, but like I said before these tests were about as accurate as they could possibly be. I took the tests at the same time of day every single time (11:30 AM if you are wondering), I tried to keep everything consistent.
I am confident that these tests were accurate and it's the best I can do.
The point is, all of my skinfold measurements went up significantly while bulking with a non-keto diet. Besides that I could tell I was getting fatter everywhere.
What else do you want? Pictures? I took those too, it was obvious I regained a lot of fat.
Last edited:
Wrangell, how do you know his glycogen stores were completely filled?
He only ate 100g carbs per day, what makes you think those 100g carbs stored up 400-500g of glycogen? if ALL his carbs (something I seriously doubt) were converted to muscle glycogen it would take 4-5 days, and 4-5 days without any activity that required muscle glycogen (such as weight training). That is, presuming he had 0 glycogen from the start of the bulk, which is unlikely, I admitt, but even if he had half of his glycogen it would take 2-3 days without heavy activity if ALL of his carbs went to glycogen, something that is highly unlikely as some of it will probably have been used for energy.
What I'm trying to say is, you can't calculate some of the weight gain as 2000g of glycogen and water because for that to be true he would have had to have had 0g glycogen at the start of the bulk and those 100g a day would have had to have been enough to completely fill the stores. I'm not saying none of the weight gain was from glycogen, but I don't think it was a lot.
RWS: When did you do the weighing on your cut compared to your carb ups (if you had any, that is)
He only ate 100g carbs per day, what makes you think those 100g carbs stored up 400-500g of glycogen? if ALL his carbs (something I seriously doubt) were converted to muscle glycogen it would take 4-5 days, and 4-5 days without any activity that required muscle glycogen (such as weight training). That is, presuming he had 0 glycogen from the start of the bulk, which is unlikely, I admitt, but even if he had half of his glycogen it would take 2-3 days without heavy activity if ALL of his carbs went to glycogen, something that is highly unlikely as some of it will probably have been used for energy.
What I'm trying to say is, you can't calculate some of the weight gain as 2000g of glycogen and water because for that to be true he would have had to have had 0g glycogen at the start of the bulk and those 100g a day would have had to have been enough to completely fill the stores. I'm not saying none of the weight gain was from glycogen, but I don't think it was a lot.
RWS: When did you do the weighing on your cut compared to your carb ups (if you had any, that is)
Perhaps, but even at 70 - 100 grams, they would be much less full than if you were on a relatively ' normal ' diet profile of nutrients I would think.
For example, during your keto bulk you were consuming about 35 calories per pound of body weight in order to add muscle - " on a keto bulk eating 5500 calories per day. " Let's say you were to just to be in maintain mode ( and not bulking ) at say 20 calories per pound at 156 lbs, using a normal diet profile as an example. That alone is 3,100 calories and at 1 gram per pound of bodyweight for protein, that's 625 protein calories. Keep fat at 25%, that's another 775 calories which leaves carbs at 1,700 calories or about 425 grams of carbs.
Now, I'm not saying you took 425 grams of carbs, but am just pointing out that given your training regimen, even at 100 grams, your glycogen stores would likely still have been very low compared to a more normal diet.
Well, I'm sure you did your best, but caliper measurement is inherently a more subjective a test ( i.e as compared to dexa for example ). Primarily due to the fact it relies much more on the skill and experience of the person locating the sites to pinch and doing the pinching exactly the same way each time etc. etc. and that these be performed exactly the same successive test after successive test after successive test.
So to say that a method as subjective and prone to error as calipers are can precisely pick up changes of .1 % and .2 % in as short a span of 2 weeks - and that these changes are 100% accurate - is simply a bit of stretch at best IMO.
That's all I'm saying.
I'm sure you feel that way.
Do they ' accurately ' reflect your changes in body composition to a degree as low as of .1 % in only a few short weeks ? I doubt it.
That certainly is possible I suppose.
btw - this " keto bulk " of yours that was 5,500 calories.
I assume only about 400 calories of that was from carbs ( 100 grams ).....i.e " that during this keto bulk ...... I was eating around 70-100g of carbs "
- How much of the remaining 5,100 calories came from fat ?
- How much of the remaining 5,100 calories came from protein ?
- How much of the remaining 5,100 calories came from protein ?
Last edited:
I don't think they do.
That is my point.
I'm not discussing the rate of glycogen replenishment.
My point about the weight of glycogen is that it would play a factor in assessing the success of fat and muscle gain after a keto bulk. Because, gains in body weight stemming from more glycogen / water may have an adverse impact on interpreting the relative changes in body fat % calculations correctly / accurately.
My comments were in the context of post keto bulk ..." Regarding your weight ( fat and muscle ) gain post keto bulk "
Last edited:
oh sorry, then I misunderstood your post
No problem......you're not alone.
When I proof read my posts, I still can't understand 90% of what I've written at the best of times.
Last edited:
Surely " one set per bodypart per week " doesn't require 5,500 calories a day does it ?
curious, once you got beyond this " prime phase ", can I assume you cranked things up and hit the weights pretty hard in order to put on as much mass as you could in order to bulk up ....as quickly as you could ?
How long would one of your really intense weight training sessions typically last ?
I assume you hit the weights 3X a week ?
Last edited:
I still don't see the point in giving you credit for a question, now if it was a answer or theory i was passing off as my own then yes, it would be wrong for me not the link the thread. I was just acting as a messenger and posting the question on another forum, which i see nothing wrong with.
All I want YOU to see is not to judge a program you haven't been through yourself or haven't researched extensively.
Science and book smarts can only get you so far Matt and Wrangell.
It doesn't matter if the body fat tests weren't accurate, if they weren't accurate then they were precise. There is a difference.
You are wise beyond your years, Phate.
Continue to be a wise young man,
Chillen
lol chillen, thanks. You always know how to put a smile on my face... P.S check out my journal interesting story there hehe...
Glad to do it! This is my purpose on the forum. Goodwill, and adequate feedback for all to encourage their fitness and diet desires.
You are strong. You are stong with opinion. And, you are strong with common sense and appropriate sense of when to FLEX your own perception on your own opinion, and is one reason (among many), you will self prosper.
Peace and prosper, my dear friend.
Chillen
