- This topic has 15 voices and 73 replies.
-
Posts
-
this explains why for health purposes sugars may be better(in moderation) than starches but for the purposes of CBL i don't see how sugars would be ideal
fair call, if you buy the idea that higher physiological insulin is better for muscle growth and fat loss than just moderate increases. I mean the response from protein is enough for the anabolic/anticatabolic effect of insulin to be pretty much maximised. So you shouldnt need the highest GI/GL carbs for insulin to do its job effectively and maybe spiking higher for no real benefit and possibly detriment. Maybe theres a reason for higher insulin on less frequent carb feedings like CNS, but even there I dont know what the rationale is.
Glucose (and galactose if you drink milk) can be and is used to restore liver glycogen as well. So you must take that into account when using liver glycogen as the amount of fructose you want to limit. While I am not familiar about this, something tells me that there is a good chance that the triglycerides formed from fructose will be stored due to high insulin and blood sugar levels and the high energy surplus that occur while backloading.
which is why id be weary about loading up on fructose while doing CBL as many times people consume more than enough required to fill both liver and muscle glycogen.. sure some could burn right through it but others may not be as fortunate
Exactly. This is an interesting subject though. Fructose creates a minimal insulin response, so maybe used sparingly, it may be ok to use when you are ULC. Imagine the doors that would open, because remember fructose is 20% sweeter than sugar and while I never tasted pure fructose, I would imagine it to not taste all chemically like artificial sweeteners and stevia.
Glucose (and galactose if you drink milk) can be and is used to restore liver glycogen as well. So you must take that into account when using liver glycogen as the amount of fructose you want to limit.
Yeah that would be true if it wasnt for the timing of feeding. We are consuming this at a point where the TGlut translocation is sucking up glucose like mad. The fill rate between muscle glycogen and liver glycogen is probably pretty evenly split at this point. I mean theres probably no way to tell but this should insulate you from any spill over. I think even Kiefer himself said that liver glycogen (when topped off) can start to contribute to muscle glycogen if there levels are still low.
While I am not familiar about this, something tells me that there is a good chance that the triglycerides formed from fructose will be stored due to high insulin and blood sugar levels and the high energy surplus that occur while backloading.
Makes sense, but that would apply to the triglycerides formed from all food sources. It wouldnt be fructose specific.
Glucose (and galactose if you drink milk) can be and is used to restore liver glycogen as well. So you must take that into account when using liver glycogen as the amount of fructose you want to limit. While I am not familiar about this, something tells me that there is a good chance that the triglycerides formed from fructose will be stored due to high insulin and blood sugar levels and the high energy surplus that occur while backloading.
which is why id be weary about loading up on fructose while doing CBL as many times people consume more than enough required to fill both liver and muscle glycogen.. sure some could burn right through it but others may not be as fortunate
Exactly. This is an interesting subject though. Fructose creates a minimal insulin response, so maybe used sparingly, it may be ok to use when you are ULC. Imagine the doors that would open, because remember fructose is 20% sweeter than sugar and while I never tasted pure fructose, I would imagine it to not taste all chemically like artificial sweeteners and stevia.
I like your thinking.
this explains why for health purposes sugars may be better(in moderation) than starches but for the purposes of CBL i don't see how sugars would be ideal
fair call, if you buy the idea that higher physiological insulin is better for muscle growth and fat loss than just moderate increases. I mean the response from protein is enough for the anabolic/anticatabolic effect of insulin to be pretty much maximised. So you shouldnt need the highest GI/GL carbs for insulin to do its job effectively and maybe spiking higher for no real benefit and possibly detriment. Maybe theres a reason for higher insulin on less frequent carb feedings like CNS, but even there I dont know what the rationale is.
i agree which is why i changed up my routine:)
Ibob you may be interested in thishttp://suppversity.blogspot.com/2013/10/melato-cola-or-what-fructose-for.html
Glucose (and galactose if you drink milk) can be and is used to restore liver glycogen as well. So you must take that into account when using liver glycogen as the amount of fructose you want to limit.
Yeah that would be true if it wasnt for the timing of feeding. We are consuming this at a point where the TGlut translocation is sucking up glucose like mad. The fill rate between muscle glycogen and liver glycogen is probably pretty evenly split at this point. I mean theres probably no way to tell but this should insulate you from any spill over. I think even Kiefer himself said that liver glycogen (when topped off) can start to contribute to muscle glycogen if there levels are still low.
While I am not familiar about this, something tells me that there is a good chance that the triglycerides formed from fructose will be stored due to high insulin and blood sugar levels and the high energy surplus that occur while backloading.
Makes sense, but that would apply to the triglycerides formed from all food sources. It wouldnt be fructose specific.
Kiefer did mention that before.
this explains why for health purposes sugars may be better(in moderation) than starches but for the purposes of CBL i don't see how sugars would be ideal
fair call, if you buy the idea that higher physiological insulin is better for muscle growth and fat loss than just moderate increases. I mean the response from protein is enough for the anabolic/anticatabolic effect of insulin to be pretty much maximised. So you shouldnt need the highest GI/GL carbs for insulin to do its job effectively and maybe spiking higher for no real benefit and possibly detriment. Maybe theres a reason for higher insulin on less frequent carb feedings like CNS, but even there I dont know what the rationale is.
i agree which is why i changed up my routine:)
If you believe what Kiefer says, higher insulin spikes results in activation of Lipoprotein lipase, causing your body to start dumping fat stores. That's one of the reasons why he recommends supplements to increase the insulin response. I don't anything about this, it's just what Kiefer says.
and this to go with the last onehttp://suppversity.blogspot.de/2012/08/6x-bananas-day-meta-analysis-lower.html
If I remember right I've heard Kiefer mention of the biggest problems with fructose is it can create unlimited amounts of body fat and by the process it creates fat it has a great tendency to create new fat cells. Other types of carbs are “rate limited” and therefore not as potentially harmful especially in the short cyclic use of them.
If I remember right I've heard Kiefer mention of the biggest problems with fructose is it can create unlimited amounts of body fat and by the process it creates fat it has a great tendency to create new fat cells. Other types of carbs are "rate limited" and therefore not as potentially harmful especially in the short cyclic use of them.
This is going toward what I was trying to convey. Fructose in effect "turns on" the "fat storing switch" in the body. Which is not limited to just storing fructose. During the PWO window we are slamming food and taking advantage of the fact that resistance training has in effect- "dimmed the fat storing switch." Taking in fructose it would seem completely negatives this process by turning it right back on.
If I remember right I've heard Kiefer mention of the biggest problems with fructose is it can create unlimited amounts of body fat and by the process it creates fat it has a great tendency to create new fat cells. Other types of carbs are "rate limited" and therefore not as potentially harmful especially in the short cyclic use of them.
This is going toward what I was trying to convey. Fructose in effect "turns on" the "fat storing switch" in the body. Which is not limited to just storing fructose. During the PWO window we are slamming food and taking advantage of the fact that resistance training has in effect- "dimmed the fat storing switch." Taking in fructose it would seem completely negatives this process by turning it right back on.
No. This is only the case when:1. Liver Glycogen is full2. You are in a hypercaloric stateIn my opinion, backloads do have they characteristics, so fructose should be limited. Now, Gl;tche says (and Kiefer to an extent) that tGLUT translocation sort of negates this because glucose will be partitioned to glycogen storage in muscles. Since liver glycogen WILL be empty fructose will be partitioned to the liver. Furthermore, if I understand Gl;tche correctly, the muscle glycogen will start to "steal" glycogen from the liver so it is unlikely fructose will even be used for fat storage. Interesting concept and it may happen to an extent, but I still think fructose should limited.Nevertheless, fructose I think could be beneficial under the right circumstances. I've even ehard of situations where fructose is used before bedtime to refill liver glycogen when you are low carb. You will stay ketogenic, but you will provide the liver with some glycogen which the brain loves to use for glucose. Resulting in better sleep.
If I remember right I've heard Kiefer mention of the biggest problems with fructose is it can create unlimited amounts of body fat and by the process it creates fat it has a great tendency to create new fat cells. Other types of carbs are "rate limited" and therefore not as potentially harmful especially in the short cyclic use of them.
This is going toward what I was trying to convey. Fructose in effect "turns on" the "fat storing switch" in the body. Which is not limited to just storing fructose. During the PWO window we are slamming food and taking advantage of the fact that resistance training has in effect- "dimmed the fat storing switch." Taking in fructose it would seem completely negatives this process by turning it right back on.
No. This is only the case when:1. Liver Glycogen is full2. You are in a hypercaloric stateIn my opinion, backloads do have they characteristics, so fructose should be limited. Now, Gl;tche says (and Kiefer to an extent) that tGLUT translocation sort of negates this because glucose will be partitioned to glycogen storage in muscles. Since liver glycogen WILL be empty fructose will be partitioned to the liver. Furthermore, if I understand Gl;tche correctly, the muscle glycogen will start to "steal" glycogen from the liver so it is unlikely fructose will even be used for fat storage. Interesting concept and it may happen to an extent, but I still think fructose should limited.Nevertheless, fructose I think could be beneficial under the right circumstances. I've even ehard of situations where fructose is used before bedtime to refill liver glycogen when you are low carb. You will stay ketogenic, but you will provide the liver with some glycogen which the brain loves to use for glucose. Resulting in better sleep.
Both of these will be in effect if your CBL and trying to gain mass. Your liver will fill up, then start going to muscle. Once those are full, if there fructose+excess calories, (which their will be if your taking in fructose during a BL) its going to be stored- as fat.
kiefer put out a tubecast last year about fructose on cns and cbl. i thibk the main takeaway, or at least what i got from it, was it's not something to “avoid at all costs”, but don't try to load up on it. me, i avoid it if at all possible; however, if i really really want an apple pie from publix, im not going to let HFCS stand in my way.i have noticed that when i avoid fructose on my carbnites, i don't wake up wanting to take a .44 magnum to chest.
If I remember right I've heard Kiefer mention of the biggest problems with fructose is it can create unlimited amounts of body fat and by the process it creates fat it has a great tendency to create new fat cells. Other types of carbs are "rate limited" and therefore not as potentially harmful especially in the short cyclic use of them.
This is going toward what I was trying to convey. Fructose in effect "turns on" the "fat storing switch" in the body. Which is not limited to just storing fructose. During the PWO window we are slamming food and taking advantage of the fact that resistance training has in effect- "dimmed the fat storing switch." Taking in fructose it would seem completely negatives this process by turning it right back on.
No. This is only the case when:1. Liver Glycogen is full2. You are in a hypercaloric stateIn my opinion, backloads do have they characteristics, so fructose should be limited. Now, Gl;tche says (and Kiefer to an extent) that tGLUT translocation sort of negates this because glucose will be partitioned to glycogen storage in muscles. Since liver glycogen WILL be empty fructose will be partitioned to the liver. Furthermore, if I understand Gl;tche correctly, the muscle glycogen will start to "steal" glycogen from the liver so it is unlikely fructose will even be used for fat storage. Interesting concept and it may happen to an extent, but I still think fructose should limited.Nevertheless, fructose I think could be beneficial under the right circumstances. I've even ehard of situations where fructose is used before bedtime to refill liver glycogen when you are low carb. You will stay ketogenic, but you will provide the liver with some glycogen which the brain loves to use for glucose. Resulting in better sleep.
Both of these will be in effect if your CBL and trying to gain mass. Your liver will fill up, then start going to muscle. Once those are full, if there fructose+excess calories, (which their will be if your taking in fructose during a BL) its going to be stored- as fat.
Yes, that's what I think, but if Gl;tche is correct that will not happen. You must realize that post workout, with tGLUT already translocated, glucose will be partitioned to muscle mass, not the liver.
kiefer put out a tubecast last year about fructose on cns and cbl. i thibk the main takeaway, or at least what i got from it, was it's not something to "avoid at all costs", but don't try to load up on it. me, i avoid it if at all possible; however, if i really really want an apple pie from publix, im not going to let HFCS stand in my way.i have noticed that when i avoid fructose on my carbnites, i don't wake up wanting to take a .44 magnum to chest.
Exactly. I get better results from limiting fructose intake myself. However, others have stated that they have no issues with consuming 150+ grams of sucrose/HFCS.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.