- This topic has 62 replies, 14 voices, and was last updated 12 years, 2 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Does anyone else like alan aragon? On BB.com he calls cbl "comedic".What do you guys think of this?
Doesnt really matter, I could really give 2 shits about what Alan Aragon thinks. It's sad that these "experts" are so closed minded.
He usually digs into each study and picks apart sources.Have you read the sources for CBL yet? Like the individual studies?
What I would like to hear, is instead of people like Aragon, and Lyle McDonald saying Kiefers methods are “BS” or “Comedic” actually state why, with a little more specificity. At the end of the day I would love someone to run a double blind study putting Lyle's Rapid Fat Loss diet Against Kiefers CNS diet, and CBL against Martin Berkhans iteration of Intermittant Fasting.My suspicions is that what works will fall somewhere in the middle. I think Kiefer better at marketing, and I think a lot of his marketing efforts are being blown out of context, like "I can eat shit tons of icecream and pizza and get ripped." Then you have the unexperienced newbs reading CNS or CBL, and pounding back 2 quarts of ice cream and a pizza on a backload and wondering why 3 months have gone by and the scale hasn't moved.Again I think everyone is right to some degree and everyone can be construed as wrong in some areas. I tend to follow a little more conservative approach with Kiefers backloading and feel the fatter the person the less junk they should eat, i.e. stick to just white rice, pototoes, dextrose etc, cut out the fatty foods as much as possible; I still haven't read any good arguement from Kiefer about why one should include so much fat in a back load, other than because you can and it tastes good. Lyle McDonald seems to feel fat should be as little as possible on backloads. When I have time I will dig through his books and quote him directly and his sources.I know people that have followed Lyle's rapid fat loss diet and felt miserable and couldnt' stick to it. I personally found Lyle's UD 2.0 to be too brutal to stick for too long, and didn't really do much for me in terms of fat loss or muscle gain, but made me miserable as hell because it is such a rigid plan.One thing I will admit, though being new to Kiefers methods, but not to diets or excercise, is that it seems there are a lot of newbs on the forums who are not getting the results they are expecting. In all fairness maybe those who are successful just are not posting, maybe Kiefers stuff is still fairly new and has not had enough people use it to get a large enough sample pool, or as I suspect maybe his stuff is too easily open to interpretation, (one of my complaints) and leaves too much rom for for one to make mistakes; he just isn't very specific in a lot of key areas, some he is, but any other areas it's really open to interpretation.
Does anyone else like alan aragon? On BB.com he calls cbl "comedic".What do you guys think of this?
Can you post the link to BB.com so I can read the thread and get some context please?
What I would like to hear, is instead of people like Aragon, and Lyle McDonald saying Kiefers methods are "BS" or "Comedic" actually state why, with a little more specificity. At the end of the day I would love someone to run a double blind study putting Lyle's Rapid Fat Loss diet Against Kiefers CNS diet, and CBL against Martin Berkhans iteration of Intermittant Fasting.My suspicions is that what works will fall somewhere in the middle. I think Kiefer better at marketing, and I think a lot of his marketing efforts are being blown out of context, like "I can eat shit tons of icecream and pizza and get ripped." Then you have the unexperienced newbs reading CNS or CBL, and pounding back 2 quarts of ice cream and a pizza on a backload and wondering why 3 months have gone by and the scale hasn't moved.Again I think everyone is right to some degree and everyone can be construed as wrong in some areas. I tend to follow a little more conservative approach with Kiefers backloading and feel the fatter the person the less junk they should eat, i.e. stick to just white rice, pototoes, dextrose etc, cut out the fatty foods as much as possible; I still haven't read any good arguement from Kiefer about why one should include so much fat in a back load, other than because you can and it tastes good.I agree with Lyle. I am one of the person's that went overboard with the backloads and gained fat while gaining muscle. I don't have the research to back it but in my opinion, it just makes sense that if you eat fat with carbs, your going to get fat, which is why I'm changing the way I do my backloads. I plan on keeping them clean and keep fat to minimum. Things like white rice, bagels, potatoes,etc, and see how it goes. If you think about it, carbs are anabolic and they make everything grow, so if you ingest carbs with fat, everything is going to grow, including the fat cells. Anyways, that's my take on it. Lyle McDonald seems to feel fat should be as little as possible on backloads. When I have time I will dig through his books and quote him directly and his sources.I know people that have followed Lyle's rapid fat loss diet and felt miserable and couldnt' stick to it. I personally found Lyle's UD 2.0 to be too brutal to stick for too long, and didn't really do much for me in terms of fat loss or muscle gain, but made me miserable as hell because it is such a rigid plan.One thing I will admit, though being new to Kiefers methods, but not to diets or excercise, is that it seems there are a lot of newbs on the forums who are not getting the results they are expecting. In all fairness maybe those who are successful just are not posting, maybe Kiefers stuff is still fairly new and has not had enough people use it to get a large enough sample pool, or as I suspect maybe his stuff is too easily open to interpretation, (one of my complaints) and leaves too much rom for for one to make mistakes; he just isn't very specific in a lot of key areas, some he is, but any other areas it's really open to interpretation.I totally agree, Naomi use to call him out on this.
In a sense, AA has a point. I don't care how you manipulate the body, if you shove high fat foods when you are over whatever you maintenance is, you will store fat. It is that simple. And we can see that from the failures that people are having with carb backloading. I do, however, think that they should address the specifics, if just to give context to their criticism.But they are experts. AA has prepped people for contests, And many people have used Lyle's information to get into contest shape and change their bodies. Really, all methods are effective in the right context.
What I would like to hear, is instead of people like Aragon, and Lyle McDonald saying Kiefers methods are "BS" or "Comedic" actually state why, with a little more specificity. At the end of the day I would love someone to run a double blind study putting Lyle's Rapid Fat Loss diet Against Kiefers CNS diet, and CBL against Martin Berkhans iteration of Intermittant Fasting.My suspicions is that what works will fall somewhere in the middle. I think Kiefer better at marketing, and I think a lot of his marketing efforts are being blown out of context, like "I can eat shit tons of icecream and pizza and get ripped." Then you have the unexperienced newbs reading CNS or CBL, and pounding back 2 quarts of ice cream and a pizza on a backload and wondering why 3 months have gone by and the scale hasn't moved.Again I think everyone is right to some degree and everyone can be construed as wrong in some areas. I tend to follow a little more conservative approach with Kiefers backloading and feel the fatter the person the less junk they should eat, i.e. stick to just white rice, pototoes, dextrose etc, cut out the fatty foods as much as possible; I still haven't read any good arguement from Kiefer about why one should include so much fat in a back load, other than because you can and it tastes good.I agree with Lyle. I am one of the person's that went overboard with the backloads and gained fat while gaining muscle. I don't have the research to back it but in my opinion, it just makes sense that if you eat fat with carbs, your going to get fat, which is why I'm changing the way I do my backloads. I plan on keeping them clean and keep fat to minimum. Things like white rice, bagels, potatoes,etc, and see how it goes. If you think about it, carbs are anabolic and they make everything grow, so if you ingest carbs with fat, everything is going to grow, including the fat cells. Anyways, that's my take on it. Lyle McDonald seems to feel fat should be as little as possible on backloads. When I have time I will dig through his books and quote him directly and his sources.I know people that have followed Lyle's rapid fat loss diet and felt miserable and couldnt' stick to it. I personally found Lyle's UD 2.0 to be too brutal to stick for too long, and didn't really do much for me in terms of fat loss or muscle gain, but made me miserable as hell because it is such a rigid plan.One thing I will admit, though being new to Kiefers methods, but not to diets or excercise, is that it seems there are a lot of newbs on the forums who are not getting the results they are expecting. In all fairness maybe those who are successful just are not posting, maybe Kiefers stuff is still fairly new and has not had enough people use it to get a large enough sample pool, or as I suspect maybe his stuff is too easily open to interpretation, (one of my complaints) and leaves too much rom for for one to make mistakes; he just isn't very specific in a lot of key areas, some he is, but any other areas it's really open to interpretation.I totally agree, Naomi use to call him out on this.
i think people run into the problem with fat when they extend it too far into a backload, keep the fat within that 3 hour window and like kiefer says, its just way too hard for the body to be storing fat at that point.
In a sense, AA has a point. I don't care how you manipulate the body, if you shove high fat foods when you are over whatever you maintenance is, you will store fat. It is that simple. And we can see that from the failures that people are having with carb backloading. I do, however, think that they should address the specifics, if just to give context to their criticism.But they are experts. AA has prepped people for contests, And many people have used Lyle's information to get into contest shape and change their bodies. Really, all methods are effective in the right context.
mostly this, lotta ways to skin a cat, cn/cbl has been the easiet way for me to skin that cat, i did berkham IF and drank beer all the time, still dropped bf, didnt always feel the best but it worked. dropped some muscle too.at some point you have to get beyond science and say how easy it this on me. ud 2.0 and rapd fatloss diet all worked, but you have to be somewhat of a masochist to follow them.
What I would like to hear, is instead of people like Aragon, and Lyle McDonald saying Kiefers methods are "BS" or "Comedic" actually state why, with a little more specificity. At the end of the day I would love someone to run a double blind study putting Lyle's Rapid Fat Loss diet Against Kiefers CNS diet, and CBL against Martin Berkhans iteration of Intermittant Fasting.My suspicions is that what works will fall somewhere in the middle. I think Kiefer better at marketing, and I think a lot of his marketing efforts are being blown out of context, like "I can eat shit tons of icecream and pizza and get ripped." Then you have the unexperienced newbs reading CNS or CBL, and pounding back 2 quarts of ice cream and a pizza on a backload and wondering why 3 months have gone by and the scale hasn't moved.Again I think everyone is right to some degree and everyone can be construed as wrong in some areas. I tend to follow a little more conservative approach with Kiefers backloading and feel the fatter the person the less junk they should eat, i.e. stick to just white rice, pototoes, dextrose etc, cut out the fatty foods as much as possible; I still haven't read any good arguement from Kiefer about why one should include so much fat in a back load, other than because you can and it tastes good.I agree with Lyle. I am one of the person's that went overboard with the backloads and gained fat while gaining muscle. I don't have the research to back it but in my opinion, it just makes sense that if you eat fat with carbs, your going to get fat, which is why I'm changing the way I do my backloads. I plan on keeping them clean and keep fat to minimum. Things like white rice, bagels, potatoes,etc, and see how it goes. If you think about it, carbs are anabolic and they make everything grow, so if you ingest carbs with fat, everything is going to grow, including the fat cells. Anyways, that's my take on it. Lyle McDonald seems to feel fat should be as little as possible on backloads. When I have time I will dig through his books and quote him directly and his sources.I know people that have followed Lyle's rapid fat loss diet and felt miserable and couldnt' stick to it. I personally found Lyle's UD 2.0 to be too brutal to stick for too long, and didn't really do much for me in terms of fat loss or muscle gain, but made me miserable as hell because it is such a rigid plan.One thing I will admit, though being new to Kiefers methods, but not to diets or excercise, is that it seems there are a lot of newbs on the forums who are not getting the results they are expecting. In all fairness maybe those who are successful just are not posting, maybe Kiefers stuff is still fairly new and has not had enough people use it to get a large enough sample pool, or as I suspect maybe his stuff is too easily open to interpretation, (one of my complaints) and leaves too much rom for for one to make mistakes; he just isn't very specific in a lot of key areas, some he is, but any other areas it's really open to interpretation.I totally agree, Naomi use to call him out on this.
i think people run into the problem with fat when they extend it too far into a backload, keep the fat within that 3 hour window and like kiefer says, its just way too hard for the body to be storing fat at that point.
I train first thing in the morning and do my backloads in the evenings. If I worked out in the evening then I could probably get away with it but I think, individually, you have to play around with the numbers.
mostly this, lotta ways to skin a cat, cn/cbl has been the easiet way for me to skin that cat, i did berkham IF and drank beer all the time, still dropped bf, didnt always feel the best but it worked. dropped some muscle too.at some point you have to get beyond science and say how easy it this on me. ud 2.0 and rapd fatloss diet all worked, but you have to be somewhat of a masochist to follow them.
+1000! Agree with this after testing UD2 during long long and miserable months
What I would like to hear, is instead of people like Aragon, and Lyle McDonald saying Kiefers methods are "BS" or "Comedic" actually state why, with a little more specificity. At the end of the day I would love someone to run a double blind study putting Lyle's Rapid Fat Loss diet Against Kiefers CNS diet, and CBL against Martin Berkhans iteration of Intermittant Fasting.My suspicions is that what works will fall somewhere in the middle. I think Kiefer better at marketing, and I think a lot of his marketing efforts are being blown out of context, like "I can eat shit tons of icecream and pizza and get ripped." Then you have the unexperienced newbs reading CNS or CBL, and pounding back 2 quarts of ice cream and a pizza on a backload and wondering why 3 months have gone by and the scale hasn't moved.Again I think everyone is right to some degree and everyone can be construed as wrong in some areas. I tend to follow a little more conservative approach with Kiefers backloading and feel the fatter the person the less junk they should eat, i.e. stick to just white rice, pototoes, dextrose etc, cut out the fatty foods as much as possible; I still haven't read any good arguement from Kiefer about why one should include so much fat in a back load, other than because you can and it tastes good.I agree with Lyle. I am one of the person's that went overboard with the backloads and gained fat while gaining muscle. I don't have the research to back it but in my opinion, it just makes sense that if you eat fat with carbs, your going to get fat, which is why I'm changing the way I do my backloads. I plan on keeping them clean and keep fat to minimum. Things like white rice, bagels, potatoes,etc, and see how it goes. If you think about it, carbs are anabolic and they make everything grow, so if you ingest carbs with fat, everything is going to grow, including the fat cells. Anyways, that's my take on it. Lyle McDonald seems to feel fat should be as little as possible on backloads. When I have time I will dig through his books and quote him directly and his sources.I know people that have followed Lyle's rapid fat loss diet and felt miserable and couldnt' stick to it. I personally found Lyle's UD 2.0 to be too brutal to stick for too long, and didn't really do much for me in terms of fat loss or muscle gain, but made me miserable as hell because it is such a rigid plan.One thing I will admit, though being new to Kiefers methods, but not to diets or excercise, is that it seems there are a lot of newbs on the forums who are not getting the results they are expecting. In all fairness maybe those who are successful just are not posting, maybe Kiefers stuff is still fairly new and has not had enough people use it to get a large enough sample pool, or as I suspect maybe his stuff is too easily open to interpretation, (one of my complaints) and leaves too much rom for for one to make mistakes; he just isn't very specific in a lot of key areas, some he is, but any other areas it's really open to interpretation.I totally agree, Naomi use to call him out on this.
i think people run into the problem with fat when they extend it too far into a backload, keep the fat within that 3 hour window and like kiefer says, its just way too hard for the body to be storing fat at that point.
Not sure about this since Kiefer recommended fat backloading later in the backload. Also, for those pointing out that its a universal fact that ingesting fat over maintenance will get you fat, there's Kiefer's clients they'll need to account for. That's exactly the reason why I asked what factors determine whether higher fat BLs are of benefit in the upcoming podcast 21 Q&A, would love to hear Kiefer elaborate on this.
I really don't care what these guys are saying about Kiefer's theories. I'm on CNS and I can literally see and feel my fat deposits disappearing AND I'm enjoying the process. Kiefer uses foods as drugs. The other guys just think of food as calories and building blocks. They're missing out.
What I would like to hear, is instead of people like Aragon, and Lyle McDonald saying Kiefers methods are "BS" or "Comedic" actually state why, with a little more specificity. At the end of the day I would love someone to run a double blind study putting Lyle's Rapid Fat Loss diet Against Kiefers CNS diet, and CBL against Martin Berkhans iteration of Intermittant Fasting.My suspicions is that what works will fall somewhere in the middle. I think Kiefer better at marketing, and I think a lot of his marketing efforts are being blown out of context, like "I can eat shit tons of icecream and pizza and get ripped." Then you have the unexperienced newbs reading CNS or CBL, and pounding back 2 quarts of ice cream and a pizza on a backload and wondering why 3 months have gone by and the scale hasn't moved.Again I think everyone is right to some degree and everyone can be construed as wrong in some areas. I tend to follow a little more conservative approach with Kiefers backloading and feel the fatter the person the less junk they should eat, i.e. stick to just white rice, pototoes, dextrose etc, cut out the fatty foods as much as possible; I still haven't read any good arguement from Kiefer about why one should include so much fat in a back load, other than because you can and it tastes good.I agree with Lyle. I am one of the person's that went overboard with the backloads and gained fat while gaining muscle. I don't have the research to back it but in my opinion, it just makes sense that if you eat fat with carbs, your going to get fat, which is why I'm changing the way I do my backloads. I plan on keeping them clean and keep fat to minimum. Things like white rice, bagels, potatoes,etc, and see how it goes. If you think about it, carbs are anabolic and they make everything grow, so if you ingest carbs with fat, everything is going to grow, including the fat cells. Anyways, that's my take on it. Lyle McDonald seems to feel fat should be as little as possible on backloads. When I have time I will dig through his books and quote him directly and his sources.I know people that have followed Lyle's rapid fat loss diet and felt miserable and couldnt' stick to it. I personally found Lyle's UD 2.0 to be too brutal to stick for too long, and didn't really do much for me in terms of fat loss or muscle gain, but made me miserable as hell because it is such a rigid plan.One thing I will admit, though being new to Kiefers methods, but not to diets or excercise, is that it seems there are a lot of newbs on the forums who are not getting the results they are expecting. In all fairness maybe those who are successful just are not posting, maybe Kiefers stuff is still fairly new and has not had enough people use it to get a large enough sample pool, or as I suspect maybe his stuff is too easily open to interpretation, (one of my complaints) and leaves too much rom for for one to make mistakes; he just isn't very specific in a lot of key areas, some he is, but any other areas it's really open to interpretation.I totally agree, Naomi use to call him out on this.
Kiefer has never said you must include fat in your backloads. Actually he says that if you are not carrying much muscle mass you benefit from having cleaner carbs. He also mentioned it is best to go low fat early in the backload. What you don't have to do is go radically low fat to the point you are only comsuming white rice. However, fat does increase the insulin response in the presence of high glycemic carbohydrates and fat is also used to refill Intra Muscular Triglyceride Stores.CBL and CNS are very heavily researched, there are thousands of peer reviewed studies that went into this. If you are a doubter, read the books and look at the citations.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.