Keifer's Carb Backloading ebook: a discussion

jacksonpt
jacksonpt Posts: 10,413 Member
in Food and Nutrition
For those of you who have read it... thoughts?

The big points I took away from it are that you can use/manipulate the body's natural cycles to take advantage of high cortisol levels for fat burning and high insulin levels for muscle growth. With the correct timing and supplements, you can burn fat with virtually no muscle loss and build muscle with virtually no fat gain.

Basically, you use intermittent fasting for fat loss and carb backloading for muscle growth (assuming a whole bunch of things).

I don't know enough to question the science behind his points, but he's pretty consistent throughout.
«13

Replies

  • drmerc
    drmerc Posts: 2,603 Member
    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
  • testease
    testease Posts: 220
    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.
  • DanaDark
    DanaDark Posts: 2,187 Member
    It sounds much more like it is based on the idea of EVERYTHING lining up absolutely flawlessly... including the planets and stars.
  • Chief_Rocka
    Chief_Rocka Posts: 4,710 Member
    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.
  • professorRAT
    professorRAT Posts: 690 Member
    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

    Why? I have read the book and it appears well documented and is certainly internally consistent. Have you read it? What, specifically, do you think he has wrong? He is a physicist and there is at least one biochemist out there who thinks he has the biology right (I don't recall his name, but I heard an interview between the two).

    I am not sure what I make of it yet, but I have the same question as jackson; I would like to hear WHY you think he is wrong.
  • testease
    testease Posts: 220
    It takes massive amounts of these hormones to make an impact on body comp. Meal timing cannot produce this amount.

    The reason for success on this diet, adherence, Not hormone manipulation.
  • SideSteel
    SideSteel Posts: 11,068 Member
    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.

    ^ Agreed.
  • Hendrix7
    Hendrix7 Posts: 1,903 Member
    I have only read the fist half of it so far........ Can't say I'm blown away.

    From other discussions I have seen some of the studies referenced aren't as convincing as the main text makes them appear. There is certainly a fair amount of hyperbole in it.

    I would need to read it in full and actually try it before I say anything conclusive.
  • professorRAT
    professorRAT Posts: 690 Member
    Part of his hypothesis is based on this evidence: http://www.unm.edu/~lkravitz/Article folder/diabetes.html

    specifically "The researchers reported that the rate of blood glucose entry into the working muscles increased after training." and "The researchers found that circuit weight training was responsible for improvements in blood glucose level control and that these improvements were significantly related to training-induced muscle hypertrophy. "

    Granted, the groups studied were diabetics, but couldn't this result possibly be exploited in non-diabetics via timing of high GI carbs (like right after heavy lifting)?
  • Chief_Rocka
    Chief_Rocka Posts: 4,710 Member
    Part of his hypothesis is based on this evidence: http://www.unm.edu/~lkravitz/Article folder/diabetes.html

    specifically "The researchers reported that the rate of blood glucose entry into the working muscles increased after training." and "The researchers found that circuit weight training was responsible for improvements in blood glucose level control and that these improvements were significantly related to training-induced muscle hypertrophy. "

    Granted, the groups studied were diabetics, but couldn't this result possibly be exploited in non-diabetics via timing of high GI carbs (like right after heavy lifting)?

    Maybe, but until you have a study showing that such a protocol actually yields superior muscle gains or lean mass retention in the long term compared to a linear carb intake, then all you have is hypothesis.
  • professorRAT
    professorRAT Posts: 690 Member
    Part of his hypothesis is based on this evidence: http://www.unm.edu/~lkravitz/Article folder/diabetes.html

    specifically "The researchers reported that the rate of blood glucose entry into the working muscles increased after training." and "The researchers found that circuit weight training was responsible for improvements in blood glucose level control and that these improvements were significantly related to training-induced muscle hypertrophy. "

    Granted, the groups studied were diabetics, but couldn't this result possibly be exploited in non-diabetics via timing of high GI carbs (like right after heavy lifting)?


    Maybe, but until you have a study showing that such a protocol actually yields superior muscle gains or lean mass retention in the long term compared to a linear carb intake, then all you have is hypothesis.

    Yep. That is why I called it a hypothesis.
  • testease
    testease Posts: 220
    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. "
  • SideSteel
    SideSteel Posts: 11,068 Member
    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. "

    Additionally, in one of the Roundtable vids, he specifically mentions that there's no research that he is aware of that shows that you can successfully manipulate GH through nutrient mediated means to a significant enough degree to make jack shyt of a difference. I'm paraphrasing.
  • professorRAT
    professorRAT Posts: 690 Member
    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. "

    Yeah, I was aware of Aragon's thoughts on this. Still, he does not cite any evidence to refute it. I am not saying I buy Kiefer's hypothesis and I certainly want evidence to sort it out, but I would sure like to hear a more compelling argument against it than the one above.
  • SideSteel
    SideSteel Posts: 11,068 Member
    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. "

    Yeah, I was aware of Aragon's thoughts on this. Still, he does not cite any evidence to refute it. I am not saying I buy Kiefer's hypothesis and I certainly want evidence to sort it out, but I would sure like to hear a more compelling argument against it than the one above.

    I'm pretty certain he's not seen anything compelling enough to refute. Speculation on my part.
  • Hendrix7
    Hendrix7 Posts: 1,903 Member
    Layne has touched on this, coming to the same conclusion essentially

    http://broscience.com/broscience-com-approved-articles/561-growth-hormone-great-expectations.html
  • testease
    testease Posts: 220
    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.
  • SideSteel
    SideSteel Posts: 11,068 Member
    Layne has touched on this, coming to the same conclusion essentially

    http://broscience.com/broscience-com-approved-articles/561-growth-hormone-great-expectations.html

    Thanks, checking this out.
  • professorRAT
    professorRAT Posts: 690 Member
    Layne has touched on this, coming to the same conclusion essentially

    http://broscience.com/broscience-com-approved-articles/561-growth-hormone-great-expectations.html

    Thanks for this!
  • extremely11
    extremely11 Posts: 14 Member
    I've been doing it for 2 months now and seen pretty amazing results (managed to loose a lot of scale weight while putting on major muscle mass). While I don't know (or care) about all the science behind it. My results are good enough to keep me doing it.

    I'd say instead of speculating, just jump in and see if it works for you.
  • extremely11
    extremely11 Posts: 14 Member
    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
    Chief_Rocka Posts: 4,710 Member
    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
    testease Posts: 220
    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
    jacksonpt Posts: 10,413 Member
    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
    jacksonpt Posts: 10,413 Member
    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
    jacksonpt Posts: 10,413 Member
    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
    jacksonpt Posts: 10,413 Member
    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
    jacksonpt Posts: 10,413 Member
    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
    Hendrix7 Posts: 1,903 Member
    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
    jacksonpt Posts: 10,413 Member
    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?

Categories