jjefferies7

and what is your opposition to processed sugar? if she has hit her macro/micro nutrients and her calorie goal how would processed sugar make a difference? it won't. even if the nutrients were to absorb faster what would it matter? the results are insignificant and it matters much more about the daily intake as a whole than…

if you fit it into your macros/cals drink it, it's fine. also your body is NOT going to absorb it differently because it's after exercise as some posters have stated. its daily intake not what you have within 45 minutes of your workout.

there arent really good or bad fats they all have their place. should be roughly 33% of fat intake for each.

it is bs. the "window" is more like 24-36 hours. just get your protein after or when it is convenient

um no ^ and just letting you know, compound movements can be done with a dumbbell how significant is the imbalance.

lolwut. dumbbells and any isolateral movements. don't work any harder with one side than the other.

why go on any of those diets. just eat at a caloric deficit.

how is this proof on this topic? I see absolutely no actual cited studies in this article. and "a new study by so and so" is not proof when the study is not even shown or cited.

insulin spikes aren't really relevant in terms of body composition.

ignore sugar intake. meet macro/micronutrient goals. by the way sugars that aren't "natural" are not dangerous. and theres no good and bad sugar it's just sugar.

naturally occuring sugars are going to be no different compared to other added sugars. sugar is sugar. sugars a carb and carbs are carbs. disregard tracking sugar intake. focus more on hitting your macro and micronutrient goals. its not mandatory to do a light exercise after having fruit or any sugar for that matter, its…

you dont need casein, its more expensive than whey and is no more effective. Whey, creatine, multi

comparing eggs to smoking?

yes

agreed. sorry if what i was saying was unclear.

How is stating calories in vs. calories out while meeting your macro and micronutrient goals(which would be balancing your nutrients) needs ignoring that fact? I did say while meeting those goals. it is true that generally in terms of healthy(key word) individuals their bodies are not much different in many aspects.…

obviously if you have some ailment or illness then you may have to work around things in your diet. but for the majority of people without those problems it simply calories in vs. calories out while meeting your macro and micronutrients. i thought it was a given i was talking about healthy individuals. everyone claims…

sugar isn't bad or good, its just sugar. and sugar is a carb and carbs are carbs.

a calorie is a calorie.

dont listen to this guy, please. knows nothing.

so carbs go straight to your waist? :noway:

you will lose weight if you are in a calorie deficit. so if that's the case, yes

yes, your body is magically different from everyone elses. biochemistry must not apply to you

a calorie is a calorie. if you hit your macro and micronutrients you'll be healthy.

sodium isn't the devil. your sodium intake is already low.

having soy is perfectly fine for men. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20378106 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12094627?dopt=Abstract http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11880595?dopt=Abstract

its not bad for you to eat and go to bed. so it doesnt matter

do one million side crunches immediately its the only way

you don't need to do what bodybuilders do. 100-200 is fine. Aim for a 1-2lb gain each month since training is not a new stimulus to you. Most likely much more than that will just be fat you will have to lose later. EDIT: You will have to cut eventually anyway but at least most of your gain will be muscle with little fat

Pretty much the ONLY way you can gain muscle while not in a deficit is if strength training is a new stimulus. After the newbie stage I would only recommend gaining about 1-2lbs per month to minimize fat gain, any more than that and it will mainly be fat that you will have to lose later.