Keifer's Carb Backloading ebook: a discussion

extremely11

Oh I also forgot, last night I ate some Ben and Jerry's...thus it's a lot of fun to be able to eat again without being scared it will make me fat.

Chief_Rocka

Oh I also forgot, last night I ate some Ben and Jerry's...thus it's a lot of fun to be able to eat again without being scared it will make me fat.

So did I, and I didn't even workout yesterday. And Ice Cream has too much fat for a "carb load" anyway.

testease

Oh I also forgot, last night I ate some Ben and Jerry's...thus it's a lot of fun to be able to eat again without being scared it will make me fat.

So did I, and I didn't even workout yesterday. And Ice Cream has too much fat for a "carb load" anyway.

dude! you are not suppost to spike insulin on off days, thats rule #1!! You just gained a lot of fat.

jacksonpt

Nice theory, no evidence that it yields superior muscle gains/lean mass retention over a linear caloric and micronutrient intake.

Carb cycling, by the way, has been part of the bodybuilding world since at least the 80's.

I'm not interested in how it stacks up against other dietary approaches. I'm interested in whether or not there is merit to the points/concepts made in the book.

jacksonpt

It sounds much more like it is based on the idea of EVERYTHING lining up absolutely flawlessly... including the planets and stars.

It's definitely arguing more about what is ideal rather than simply what is effective.

jacksonpt

I'd be very surprised if you could manipulate your hormones enough to make any noteworthy changes to your body by changing your meal timing

This...

Its a good read, but none of it really matters. The body cannot produce enough GH or insulin for a noticable change in body composition no matter what meal timing protocol you use.

Does that then mean that cortisol and insulin levels have no meaningful impact on weight, body fat or LBM?

jacksonpt

From Alan Aragon

"I really don't buy any of the purported magic of avoiding carbs until night time. Try to recall history for a moment. A couple of decades back, someone decided that carbs after 6 pm will turn you into Jabba The Hutt. The idea caught on. Now someone decided that carbs after 6 pm will turn you into Superman. The idea caught on. The cycle will inevitably repeat itself... To me it's mostly hype, gimmickry, and cherrypicking the research to support a set of wistful preconceptions. Think about it; any time you have to work your schedule around a diet - instead of the opposite way around - you know there's some bullsh!t cooking. It reminds me of Dr. Dipasquale's adamance against postexercise carbs. Same lunacy, different direction. Having your carbs when you personally damn-well want them will result in the best long-term diet adherence. Those who favor carbs at night of course will love CBL, but telling those who prefer most of their carbs during the day (or an even spread across the meals) that they're compromising progress is... Hilarious. "

He's arguing adherence, I'm asking strictly about the validity of the approach. Ignore how easy or hard a plan is to follow long term... If someone followed Keifer's plan to the T, are his conclusions reasonable?

Yes, I know there are no studies to support his claims. I also know that there are always studies that oppose/disprove whatever "fact" your study illustrates.

jacksonpt

Well if somehow changing my eating protocol will illicit the same results as pumping exogenous GH/insulin into my body. Id listen.

However that is not possible.

Though its fun to believe that, and stuffing your face post workout with junk food. But right now, id rather eat my junk food pre-workout for the pumps.

What if I'd rather not stuff my face pre-workout?

Hendrix7

Nice theory, no evidence that it yields superior muscle gains/lean mass retention over a linear caloric and micronutrient intake.

Carb cycling, by the way, has been part of the bodybuilding world since at least the 80's.

I'm not interested in how it stacks up against other dietary approaches. I'm interested in whether or not there is merit to the points/concepts made in the book.

Which is exactly what we have been discussing,

Does that then mean that cortisol and insulin levels have no meaningful impact on weight, body fat or LBM?

I think the point made is not that cortisol, gh or insulin have no effect on your body. It is that the minor changes in natural levels of these hormones you can make by altering your meal patterns is not significant enough to have any benefit, those are 2 difference points.

The grown hormone argument is a non factor IMO.

jacksonpt

Does that then mean that cortisol and insulin levels have no meaningful impact on weight, body fat or LBM?

I think the point made is not that cortisol, gh or insulin have no effect on your body. It is that the minor changes in natural levels of these hormones you can make by altering your meal patterns is not significant enough to have any benefit, those are 2 difference points.

The grown hormone argument is a non factor IMO.

What about all those people who talk about stress increasing cortisol levels which can make it more difficult yo lose weight? More bioscience?

SideSteel

Does that then mean that cortisol and insulin levels have no meaningful impact on weight, body fat or LBM?

I think the point made is not that cortisol, gh or insulin have no effect on your body. It is that the minor changes in natural levels of these hormones you can make by altering your meal patterns is not significant enough to have any benefit, those are 2 difference points.

The grown hormone argument is a non factor IMO.

What about all those people who talk about stress increasing cortisol levels which can make it more difficult yo lose weight? More bioscience?

I think there's merit to chronically elevated levels of cortisol being potentially harmful.

professorRAT

Does that then mean that cortisol and insulin levels have no meaningful impact on weight, body fat or LBM?

I think the point made is not that cortisol, gh or insulin have no effect on your body. It is that the minor changes in natural levels of these hormones you can make by altering your meal patterns is not significant enough to have any benefit, those are 2 difference points.

The grown hormone argument is a non factor IMO.

What about all those people who talk about stress increasing cortisol levels which can make it more difficult yo lose weight? More bioscience?

I think there's merit to chronically elevated levels of cortisol being potentially harmful.

As a person who took low doses of cortisol for a chronic illness for 3 years I can certainly tell you it alters metabolism and causes fat gain. I am not speaking anecdotally, but I am aware of this via scientific evidence that I read extensively and information I received from numerous MD's specializing in autoimmune diseases and their treatment. It is a well known and well documented side effect of cortisol, and it doesn't take very high levels (chronically elevated, yes.). Chronic stress can elevate cortisol levels and do the same.

ArroganceInStep

I haven't read the book yet but plan to. My thoughts going into it are that the benefits of meal timing are largely outweighed by the practitioner's ability to follow their diet (and of course the level of not-suck of the diet). That being said, I think that managing those kinds of things when you're already very lean can be beneficial. They will not match pharma of course, but I do think it would make sense for someone trying to get in the best shape genetically possible, fiddling with them is worth trying.

What I'm most interested in is cbl's impact on performance. Anecdotally, I've heard it can help a lot with the next day's workout (and off the cuff it makes sense that it would). Any thoughts on that?

SideSteel

I haven't read the book yet but plan to. My thoughts going into it are that the benefits of meal timing are largely outweighed by the practitioner's ability to follow their diet (and of course the level of not-suck of the diet). That being said, I think that managing those kinds of things when you're already very lean can be beneficial. They will not match pharma of course, but I do think it would make sense for someone trying to get in the best shape genetically possible, fiddling with them is worth trying.

What I'm most interested in is cbl's impact on performance. Anecdotally, I've heard it can help a lot with the next day's workout (and off the cuff it makes sense that it would). Any thoughts on that?

I think the performance related aspects of nutrient timing will vary from person to person, however I tend to eat most of my carbs at night, and train fasted, for performance reasons.

ArroganceInStep

I think the performance related aspects of nutrient timing will vary from person to person, however I tend to eat most of my carbs at night, and train fasted, for performance reasons.

Which would be in line with (as I understand it, anyway) the basic premise of the book. I'm certainly looking forward to giving it a go.

jacksonpt

I haven't read the book yet but plan to. My thoughts going into it are that the benefits of meal timing are largely outweighed by the practitioner's ability to follow their diet (and of course the level of not-suck of the diet). That being said, I think that managing those kinds of things when you're already very lean can be beneficial. They will not match pharma of course, but I do think it would make sense for someone trying to get in the best shape genetically possible, fiddling with them is worth trying.

What I'm most interested in is cbl's impact on performance. Anecdotally, I've heard it can help a lot with the next day's workout (and off the cuff it makes sense that it would). Any thoughts on that?

Well said.

This book, and it's principles, are intended for people in good shape looking to get into better shape. It's not for someone looking to lose 50lbs because they can't stay away from the refrigerator. Clearly if you can't control yourself and sustain an appropriate diet for your goals, you have no business thinking about CBL.

Additionally, I didn't mean to suggest that I believe this book/plan can yield holy grail-ish results. But I am curious about the merit of Keifer's principles. 1) If cortisol is catabolic by nature, and if cortisol is naturally higher in the mornings, are you more apt to burn more fat during that cortisol high? And if so, why wouldn't you want to take advantage of that? 2) If insulin is anabolic by nature, and if muscle cells/tissue are crying for nutrients post workout, why wouldn't you want to spike insulin and maximize it's benefits? Especially if the ability to "feed" fat cells is reduced post-workout. 3) If CBL is an effective way to boost/fuel your workouts, why wouldn't you?

I get that there is little to no evidence supporting these claims outside of Keifer's research. But is there any evidence to disprove it?

Chief_Rocka

1) If cortisol is catabolic by nature, and if cortisol is naturally higher in the mornings, are you more apt to burn more fat during that cortisol high? And if so, why wouldn't you want to take advantage of that? 2) If insulin is anabolic by nature, and if muscle cells/tissue are crying for nutrients post workout, why wouldn't you want to spike insulin and maximize it's benefits? Especially if the ability to "feed" fat cells is reduced post-workout. 3) If CBL is an effective way to boost/fuel your workouts, why wouldn't you?

I get that there is little to no evidence supporting these claims outside of Keifer's research. But is there any evidence to disprove it?

1-Cortisol is one piece of a much larger puzzle. The big picture is net calorie balance over time
2-MPS is elevated for 24-48 hours after a workout. Again, the big picture is intake over time.
3-What "boosts" your workout is high variable based on persona preference

And the burden of proof lies with the individual making the claim. If he writes a book claiming that this method is super-awesome, he needs to either 1) be able to prove it or, 2) admit that there is nothing special about his protocol, outside of personal preference

jacksonpt

1-Cortisol is one piece of a much larger puzzle. The big picture is net calorie balance over time
2-MPS is elevated for 24-48 hours after a workout. Again, the big picture is intake over time.
3-What "boosts" your workout is high variable based on persona preference

I'm not questioning the big picture, I'm questioning the finer points that make up that big picture. Is there benefit to "fine tuning" the details once you have the basics down?

professorRAT

1-Cortisol is one piece of a much larger puzzle. The big picture is net calorie balance over time
2-MPS is elevated for 24-48 hours after a workout. Again, the big picture is intake over time.
3-What "boosts" your workout is high variable based on persona preference

I'm not questioning the big picture, I'm questioning the finer points that make up that big picture. Is there benefit to "fine tuning" the details once you have the basics down?

I am wondering the very same. Especially considering the fact that I have learned lots of "conventional wisdom" about diet that most people just assume is true (including myself) turns out to have no real evidence to back it up. There seems to be a lack of evidence on nutrition in general and we really don't know as much as many people think we do.

JasonDetwiler

It's worked for me. I did Carb Nite for a few weeks after the prep phase and then CBL for a few months (still doing it). 6/2012 I was 215 and my maxes were 450, 345, and 475. I got down to 185 by the beginning of October and 11/3/2012 put up 475, 355, and 525 at 190. So I got stronger and significantly reduced my body fat in four months using the principles in the book. I am but one anecdotal data point.

I don't remember the finer points about amplifying GH production in the book. I think if anything that effect is minimal. Breaking the day into two blocks of fat burning and muscle building makes sense. Others in this thread have called foul on drastic manipulation of the hormone levels, but the book talks about using your natural cycles to your advantage.

So, it worked for me. I'm sticking around 190 right now and increasing my intake for a hypertrophy phase. After Christmas I'll probably do a few more weeks of hypertrophy and then cut with CNS again.