Started by Andrew Long, July 28, 2012 · 60 Replies · 15,938 Views
Hmm, pretty cool Josh. I'm convinced now so I'm actually gonna start looking into this. I'm not sure I will do it myself or care to but it sounds fascinating...and a real pain in the ass. But in the effort for ultimate performance, quite possibly the way to go.
It also sounds a bit like what Bodybuilders kind of came across through trial and error. The whole 6 meals a day of chicken, rice and broccoli.
Blair, it does take a little more effort but not all that much.
There are only a few things you need to know, and I think I'll keep those a little proprietary for the moment. I just typed them all out, but I think that I will wait until I have written a book explaining in detail. No need for me to make other people rich.
One thing I will say to everyone here:
Make sure you find out how reputable the journal your references come from is. Not all journals are of the same quality, and that is something the general public is painfully unaware of.
Not everything is of the same quality as The New England Journal of Medicine.
Joshua Naterman said:I will wait until I have written a book explaining in detail. No need for me to make other people rich.
Good luck with the book!
What about the site you were planning to start? It is still on the todo list? I definitelo hope so 
.
I bought yesterday Advanced Sports Nutrition (2nd ed) by Dan Benardot hoping it is a good source of information that is compatible with what are you presenting here. I don't have time and knowledge to go through the published papers, filter the reputable ones and learn that way :oops: .
Joshua Naterman said:One thing I will say to everyone here:Make sure you find out how reputable the journal your references come from is. Not all journals are of the same quality, and that is something the general public is painfully unaware of.
Not everything is of the same quality as The New England Journal of Medicine.
QFT ! Even within the journals, remember to read everything with an open and questioning mind. Dissect it all if it really interests you. Find something you like look for comparative studies and research.
Josh, do you think the NT service will eventually be programmed to roughly predict how many carbs you need after a workout based on weight, BF percentage, and exercise type? That seems like something that would naturally develop from what it currently has. I would really appreciate that, too, because right now I'm just getting roughly 40-50g of carbs within an hour of finishing and then another 30-40g 2-3 hours after that.
Are you giving going to give full scale lectures on nutrition at future seminars?
Nic Branson said:Joshua Naterman said:One thing I will say to everyone here:Make sure you find out how reputable the journal your references come from is. Not all journals are of the same quality, and that is something the general public is painfully unaware of.
Not everything is of the same quality as The New England Journal of Medicine.
QFT ! Even within the journals, remember to read everything with an open and questioning mind. Dissect it all if it really interests you. Find something you like look for comparative studies and research.
Also, has been pointed out before, the type of study matters as well as the journal. For example what are called
population or epidemiological studies can be a bit like reading tea leaves. There is so much that can be read into them.
Most often they just suggest a relationship however what it is isn't clear cut.
Just for example, the the second and third listed on the PDF josh posted are both these type. The Metzner study
in the clinical journal of nutrition, a great publication at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/855813 describes a health survey that found people who ate more frequently had lower body fat, however it did not measure how much and what they ate in total. Also it found that people who ate once per day had the lowest body fat (although the number eating once per day were so few it didn't throw off the general trend). Were people who ate more frequently attempting to lose weight or did those who ate less frequently lay around all day? It suggests a relationship or association but doesn't quite nail it.
Also the Steen study, http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.asp ... eid=372663 in JAMA, a magazine I would sometimes read as a youngster as father was a doctor, describes how it found that wrestlers who regularly cut to lose weight for a match had more bodyfat than those who didn't. The question is, are kids losing weight before a match doing it because they needed to or want to take advantage of smaller opponents in a lower weight class? Is the fat the cause or the effect of cutting? Looking at fighters today who regularly cut I think there is reason to suspect it's often the reason for cutting and not the effect. The study doesn't go into this so its meaning isn't clear.
I suppose one can say, you need to look at the "preponderance of the evidence", however I would ask
can the "sum of the whole be greater than the parts" ? As Josh mentioned the studies needed to prove "nutritiming" beyond a shadow of a doubt probably haven't been performed yet. In the meantime, it is something that certainly could be tested
on oneself as one possible avenue.
Regarding Josh's book and website let's remember that he is still an undergraduate student.
He is very knowledgeable and may publish more than one book some day, but busy with school now, so lets not make him feel rushed about it
I want to make one other point with all this and it may seem controversial to some or even offensive. Everything shared here is also being shared for free. For some of us this is how we make a living. I do not want to say anyone holds back knowledge but to a point there is only so much time and knowledge to be put down in this format.
Nic Branson said:For some of us this is how we make a living....
Blogging or providing nutritional advice (which is "illegal" in some locales without RD type accrediation) ?
FutureisNow said:Nic Branson said:For some of us this is how we make a living....Blogging or providing nutritional advice (which is "illegal" in some locales without RD type accrediation) ?
In general as coaches, trainers etc...We come on here in our free time.
Nic Branson said:FutureisNow said:Nic Branson said:For some of us this is how we make a living....Blogging or providing nutritional advice (which is "illegal" in some locales without RD type accrediation) ?
In general as coaches, trainers etc...We come on here in our free time.
I suppose if there was something better to do, you would be doing it, no? I would be. And was until 15 mins ago.
Not sure what you're getting at...
And I think that sums up some things. 
Nic Branson said:And I think that sums up some things.
Being a trainer or coach doesn't have to mean you're against contributing to an academic discussion does it?
I'm not sure this is an academic discussion, at least not any longer.
Nic made a perfectly reasonable point, for many reasons, no one is going to be able to fully address these questions. It's still an internet forum with all of the formats inherent limitations.
Certainly no need to imply that anyone here is engaged in illegal activities, that goes way beyond the scope of this discussion.
It is actually against the law in some jurisdictions to dispense nutritional advice without an RD.
Not just for medical conditions, but period. There is a lawsuit about that, which I think is relevant to know about.
http://reason.com/blog/2012/08/07/paleo ... w-york-tim
http://www.thefreemanonline.org/headlin ... licensing/
Hopefully it will be tossed out since ...
Violating licensing law can lead to fines, court gag orders, and even jail. According to the government’s logic, countless websites, Internet forums, Facebook, and so much more where people share information and offer each other advice on topics such as diet, parenting, and pregnancy are illegal.
Not sure what Nic's original point was. He said there are trainers/coaches who do this as a full time job.
Is he suggesting that one comment on the question or the OP go see one, or that only coaches/trainers are
qualified to comment? I'm not sure. Experience is often the best teacher for sure.
As I understood, for those who make their living Coaching or Training others for a living, there is a built in dilemma giving information away on a forum that others pay for. As such, these topics will be incomplete. And of course as you mentioned, people are posting in their 'free' time. It's not always going to be suitable for publication.
Personally I think Josh has gone above and beyond on many of his posts. Hats off to Mr Naterman.
Interesting about the legal implications, since I don't currently live in the US I will with hold comment.
Daniel, Coach Sommer is not the only expert on this board.
Especially when there have been some other very knowledgeable people on this board.
Robb Wolf for one, I'm sure more are registered that lurk or rarely post. Jeff out of Tacoma has a lot of knowledge and experience but rarely posted when he was here and hasn't been around for awhile.
Kit Carson is another.
I dunno but Cole could be expert in Yoga for all I know. Not exactly sure how much of a Yogi he is/was.
Daniel Nowell said:This is a public forum - not a roundtable of "experts"...The only expert here is Coach.
Coach is the expert in training gymnasts to safely and effectively build the bodies that they need to perform at a national level. He is also the expert in teaching them the skills they compete with.
He is also, I must say, the expert in creating a community that is incredibly civil and has an unparalleled number of members who are highly competent in various areas and freely dispense advice and knowledge that in many cases no amount of money could buy unless you somehow randomly ran into one of us, started a conversation that led to us revealing our competence, and then you somehow made us an offer that we accepted.
You cannot buy what you cannot find, and much of what we share here is not in any book or video.
For example, neither Coach nor any of his gymnasts is 200+ lbs or 6'6. We have members who are one or the other, and their experiences have made them something of an expert when it comes to the unique challenges that a larger, or heavier, or older body runs into with lower leverage strength training. Myself, Erik Sjolin, Big Paul up in NY, FritsMB (over 70 and doing all kinds of awesome stuff), and Billy (who you would know if you go to the seminars as the ~60 year old man who has built a full lay FL from scratch)
Others have a uniquely high level of knowledge in both applied strength training and the science behind what happens as well as the nutritional support needed to realize the full potential of physical adaptation to the program. Myself and Nic Branson come to mind.
Others are specialists in handbalancing and other circus arenas, and they have provided the program with new drills and more efficient ways to achieve certain skills. Yuri and Handbalancer come to mind.
Others are specialists in flexibility training and tissue reconditioning. Kit Laughlin comes to mind, as does Cole Dano.
And still others, like RatioFitness, FutureIsNow, RikdeKort, and others I am forgetting to name all have consistently asked questions and presented scenarios and additional information that require the rest of us to re-examine and refine what we have learned without being jerks in the process. This has certainly helped me fill in many holes in what I have known and has led to the enrichment of my own knowledge and understanding due to everything I had to go read and integrate in order to adequately answer the questions and respond correctly to statements made. It's not just me either, I know that several of our regulars have learned many new things in the course of answering these questions and responding to these statements.
These members, all in their own way, have enriched the entire program and have been instrumental in the evolution of the program as a whole. Coach could have turned out to be someone that has "his way" and doesn't care what others have to offer, but he is a much bigger person than that. He is demanding, I mean he wants to see real results and not just some half-thought out idea based off of some research but no practical application, but when we bring him solid stuff he looks at his current process and when he finds something new is better than what has been in place for 15 years he makes the change. That is virtually unheard of at his level... many people are simply too prideful to do this. Because Coach is who he is, this community and the program as a whole has continually improved and become something truly exceptional. You can expect that this trend will continue.
There are a number of experts in many different areas here, and the magic of this forum is that we all recognize each other's strengths and don't try to be "the man" or try to take over. We simply try to help every member get what they want. There isn't another place, online or offline, that I have ever heard of that has this level of useful and civil community interaction. I just haven't ever seen or heard of even half of these things happen in one place, much less all of that.
GymnasticBodies is one of the few places where there is this type of community. For some reason, though, all BW training sites on the net I've run into are kind of like this. Not with the huge amount of knowledgeable people walking around, but everyone's civil and willing to listen to what the other has to say in general.
Pretty bloody amazing for the internet.
That is a long-winded response saying in most respects the same thing. As a public forum, and to a large degree of Coach's reasonable openness to competing ideas, this place has flourished with information. This is a unique forum, with good people and excellent training information. There are a lot of smart and knowledgeable people here with new minds arriving daily I am sure; however and in all due respect to anyone offended by my posting, there is a define line between a knowledgeable person and an expert.
Joshua Naterman said:Hell no, you need calories to maintain what you have. No calories = rapid lean tissue loss.
So you're not a proponent of intermittent fasting? Seems to work very well for some people.
Going by the whole paleo/ancestral theory, isn't it likely that our ancestors went very long periods of time without eating? I guess I can't prove that no muscle was lost during this period, but wouldn't it be quite detrimental to the species in terms of survival if lean tissue was lost so easily? Plus isn't that what fat is for?
Anyone here follow the Hodge/Fasting twins?
IF = fine for regular people. Probably dumb for athletes, unless they need to cut weight.
By athletes, I'm talking about people seriously training for a sport. Not NancyBob CrossFitter/Primal fitness/GB BW enthusiast. Not some crossfit gym that calls all their members working out 3-5 times a week, an athlete.
Blairbob said:IF = fine for regular people. Probably dumb for athletes, unless they need to cut weight.By athletes, I'm talking about people seriously training for a sport. Not NancyBob CrossFitter/Primal fitness/GB BW enthusiast. Not some crossfit gym that calls all their members working out 3-5 times a week, an athlete.
Bingo!
Most are great exercisers though. 
Do you think that most GBers are gymnasts though?
I'm ok calling myself that among this group, because we know it means striving towards a level of gymnastic strength and capability. However most people "out there" think it means being able to do Olympic games maneuvers, or at least compete in the sport. Really I'm just a recreational gymnastic strength trainee!
M K Mossop said:Joshua Naterman said:Hell no, you need calories to maintain what you have. No calories = rapid lean tissue loss.So you're not a proponent of intermittent fasting? Seems to work very well for some people.
Going by the whole paleo/ancestral theory, isn't it likely that our ancestors went very long periods of time without eating? I guess I can't prove that no muscle was lost during this period, but wouldn't it be quite detrimental to the species in terms of survival if lean tissue was lost so easily? Plus isn't that what fat is for?
Anyone here follow the Hodge/Fasting twins?
Depends. The only IF protocol that is possibly safe or intelligent is leangains. It's nothing but 3 meals of specific foods per day, over an 8 hour period. It isn't incredibly different from a normal 3 meal per day eating pattern. It requires very, very specific rules to really do well with, and that includes activity restriction.
It's not terribly likely that our ancestors went horribly long without eating, no. They lived where there was water, and where there is water there is plant life if nothing else. Don't get caught up in pseudoscience hype.
We absolutely have many layers of mechanisms for minimizing lean mass loss, but it will still happen if you don't have the calories you need.
There are also potentially very bad long term medical consequences of a number of diets, but the vast majority of those negative consequences are a direct result of insufficient carbohydrate intake.
If you think our ancestors were carb deprived, you should look at what modern hunter-gatherers eat. Plants. They eat meat too, when they can get it, but plants are the staple.
I am not questioning whether or not ancient man ate lots of meat when it was around, because our ancestors probably did. They also learned to cook the meat, which allows you to eat a lot more and also access more of the nutrition in the meat.
You're looking for a yes/no answer but it doesn't work like that. As a general rule, no I do not think IF is a smart way to go. There is an enormous amount of medical evidence linking IF to all sorts of problems. Search intermittent fasting on pubmed if you want to satisfy your curiosity.
If you WERE to go IF, I would recommend you go leangains.
Do you think that most GBers are gymnasts though?
Generally no but technically yes. If you do gymnastics, you technically are a gymnast. Now you can further classify this to competitive gymnast or recreational gymnast or a gymnastic fitness enthusiast.
For those working the GymnasticBodies program, you'll be doing more gymnastics than say a CrossFitter who does a lot of CrossFitGymnastics (L's, MU, HSPU, pistols, floor kips, standing back tucks). For those doing Carl Paoli's program, they actually call for more gymnastic skill work possibly than the GB WOD I'd say but OTOH, Carl's program is more of something done in addition to CF as an assistance program not a primary workout program such as GymnasticBodies, CrossFitGymnastics ala Rusty/Tucker, or GoldMedalBodies, or the DragonDoor gymnastic programs (ConvictConditioning and RaisingTheBar) or OvercomingGravity.
By skill work, I mean stuff beyond gymnastics strength feats and progressions. Bar kips, handsprings, cartwheels, HS balancing, uprises, etc.