ccrow
old hand
Posts: 9420
Registered on 04-08-04
|
08-09-07 06:38 AM - Post#334622
When I heard about the Warrior Diet, something didn't sound right. The plan was basically eat very little all day and eat everything you want at night. We all know people who do this and this is usually an example of how not to diet. Still a couple things kept me from dismissing it completely: time savings, and a lot of positive testimonials.
So, I look into it a little more. The book sucks. Long on silly filler, short on science and specific instructions. But, it's a Dragon Door product, and that company has such a following that they could put out a Manure and Maggots diet and their devotees would be clamoring about how it cleared up their acne, cured their back problem, and made them taller. (PS, the Dragon Door crowd tends to be strong but skinny, not a real muscular crowd.)
Anyway, there's only one way to find out for sure, so I try it, and aside from saving time it did nothing good for me.
Now time goes by and here and there I start hearing about what people are calling intermittent fasting which the Warrior Diet is close to. The Fast Five book is in my opinion much better than the Warrior Diet - more science and practical instructions.
I have had some pretty good results doing the Fast Five thing Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays. I fast all day, then after work have a preworkout shake (Gatorade, whey, and BCAAs). Then I go to the gym, warm up, do some short intense cardio, then hit the weight pile - 60 - 90 minutes. Then afterwards a nice dinner - not junk, but not strict either - yes, I have a potato AND dessert 
Then the rest of the week I just eat a healthy balanced diet. If I don't work out on Saturday I might fast Sunday too. Doing this I have been able to hit some PRs in the gym (for cardio and weights), feel good, shed some fat, and save some time.
I don't think it would turn out so great when I'm working out more, or if I was focused on gaining weight. It's a good fit when time is short.
The most important test a lifter has to pass
is the test of time.
-John Cole
|
|
rosiec
Stronger Harder Faster Stronger
Posts: 4981
Age: 26
Loc: Blighty
Registered on 04-16-05
|
08-09-07 06:45 AM - Post#334626
THanks for that link Byron - although I like eating too much to push myself into the long fasts, I read through a lot of the book and there's loads of interesting, scientific explanations which are easy for a non-scientific person to understand (I like the parts on the different types of hunger, for example).
Maybe one day...
|
ccrow
old hand
Posts: 9420
Registered on 04-08-04
|
08-09-07 07:04 AM - Post#334634
Rosie, if you do try it at some point I think you may be pleasantly surprised that it isn't very hard.
I am one of those people that, if I skip breakfast, I am not as hungry when lunchtime rolls around. On the fast days I usually get hungry for a short while around 1:00 then it passes and I'm fine, even if work runs late that day.
The most important test a lifter has to pass
is the test of time.
-John Cole
|
|
Traveler
IOL rocks!
Posts: 501
Registered on 01-01-07
|
08-09-07 07:19 AM - Post#334638
Byron,
Interesting stuff.
I read a review, some time back on the "Warrior Diet". I never attempted it, nor did I buy the book.
I have been interested in fasting for some time, as a way of controlling weight and also for the health benefits. Notice, I said interested in, not a practitioner of.
I have read a lot of the writings of Paul Bragg and believe he makes a compelling case for fasting.
I have long planned to fast one day a week. The fast would begin, say, from Sunday after dinner to breakfast on Tuesday. It would be a water only fast. Assuming eating remained constant on the other days, I think this could be quite efficient. I do not think that it would interfere with my training.
I have never undertaken this program. Though I believe it would be worthwhile, at the moment of truth, I rationalize my way out of doing it. "I'll start this next year" I tell myself. That tomorrow has yet to come.
I have known two people who have done this sort of thing. One was a physical education professor in college. At around 50, she looked absolutely spectacular. The other person, also a woman, looked great and incredibly youthful as well. She was in her 40's.
I think for many of us - weight trainers that is -there is a fear of things like fasting, cardio, etc. I know that at times I have harbored those fears. There is that voice in the back of my head saying "you'll get small and weak".
Thinking rationally, I believe that after many years of weight training, lifting and looking as if I lift has become part of my identity. I don't want to cling to that identity to my detriment. I recall Dr. Ken saying something to the effect of -who cares how much you can bench if you are in the cemetery?
Do I want to maintain strength, even gain? Absolutely. However, if I can undertake a few things to safeguard my health, as best I can, I believe I should do it.
I simply have not started fasting one day a week out of weakness. I hope one day to overcome that. I believe the benefits would be worth the effort.
In any event, interesting stuff.
|
colleen
-
Posts: 3290
Age: 54
Loc: Oregon
Registered on 01-01-06
|
08-09-07 07:28 AM - Post#334648
I recently tried the Warrior Diet, more specifically his 'anti-estrogenic' diet and found that as the weeks went on my evening meal became larger and larger. I didn't have much energy or motivation for my workouts either.
Trying this for just a couple days per week sounds like it might be a better approach for me, may have to give it another try in Sept.
Thanks for the info and link.
|
h&t
At home here
Posts: 297
Age: 41
Loc: Toronto
Registered on 12-11-06
|
08-09-07 07:56 AM - Post#334676
they could put out a Manure and Maggots diet and their devotees would be clamoring about how it cleared up their acne, cured their back problem, and made them taller
ROTFLOL, I like your sense of humor, ccrow.
I read the fast five book when it was first posted here. I recall the author claims there's initial period of about 2 weeks for the body to settle in with kethosys. don't you diminish that affect with doing it 3 days/week rather than continuosly?
|
Pete-LV
It only laughs when I hurt!
Posts: 2543
Loc: Las Vegas, Nevada
Registered on 04-25-05
|
08-09-07 08:33 AM - Post#334701
Hey anybody that wants the Warrior Diet book, I'm selling' it real cheap, for say... fitty cent! I'm not kidding, I actually boneheaded it and bought this paperweight some years back!
The only thing "Warrior" abut it is you could fling it at someone if you were really desperate to defend yerself and it might give you a chance to run for the hills!! But then, that wouldn't make you much of a Warrior would it?! ;>)
|
Wicked Willie
The mouth of the South
Posts: 13390
Age: 53
Loc: Gainesville, FL., USA
Registered on 03-31-04
|
08-09-07 08:44 AM - Post#334704
On the intermittent fasting and meal order note:
Charles Atlas (Angelo Siciliano) used to have a very light breakfast...something like a lemon squeezed in hot water. Lunch was be light, also...a salad, maybe? Dinner would be his big meal...where he would eat things like steak or chops and a soup, salad or both.
This apparently, worked well for him...until he was older. To be blunt...he got fat (comparatively speaking.) He blamed his love of Italian foods. The meal order may have had something to do with it.
The old adage is to have breakfast like a king, lunch like a prince and dinner like a pauper.
Regarding fasting...fasting for a day once a month or even once a week, certainly doesn't hurt you. It may even benefit you - if only to exercise the self-discipline necessary to do it.
Wicked
| "I'm in good shape for the shape I'm in." |
|
DanMartin
Sancta Simplicitas
Posts: 13345
Age: 55
Registered on 04-04-04
|
08-09-07 08:47 AM - Post#334706
Portion control will always matter.
|
Yeti
abomination
Posts: 6785
Age: 25
Loc: Austin, TX
Registered on 03-18-05
|
Intermittant Fasting
08-09-07 08:56 AM - Post#334715
The old adage is to have breakfast like a king, lunch like a prince and dinner like a pauper.
The only problem with that adage in practice is that you'll want to go back to bed after breakfast, take a nap after lunch and probably drink yourself to death after dinner...which I guess is fine if you really are royalty.
I think it's better to eat heavy when you have a lot of time to devote to rest. That's why the old European style of eating a light breakfast and spending several hours at the dinner table with good company always appealed to me.
| "When [defeat] comes, I won't even notice. I'll be too busy looking good." |
Edited by Yeti on 08-09-07 09:00 AM. Reason for edit: No reason given.
|
Traveler
IOL rocks!
Posts: 501
Registered on 01-01-07
|
08-09-07 09:17 AM - Post#334722
Yeti,
I too find it appealing to eat heavy and then rest. I resist doing it because I believe it is not healthful. This study may shed some light:
http://www.cbass.com/Everymealcounts.htm#And
It is probably best to get in some activity - light activity, after a meal.
Additionally, eating a heavy meal and then lying down my exacerbate acid reflux.
I have to go with the adage Wicked stated. I think it is probably the most healthful approach. Maybe not the most pleasurable, but the most healthful.
|
DanMartin
Sancta Simplicitas
Posts: 13345
Age: 55
Registered on 04-04-04
|
08-09-07 09:18 AM - Post#334724
When bulking keep this in mind: Eat until sleepy, sleep until hungry.
|
Yeti
abomination
Posts: 6785
Age: 25
Loc: Austin, TX
Registered on 03-18-05
|
08-09-07 10:22 AM - Post#334744
It is probably best to get in some activity - light activity, after a meal.
I'll agree with that. I usually eat a pretty hearty breakfast every day, even though I can only down so much food in the morning. About two hours later i've already logged in a couple miles of walking, from commuting to work to doing my daily duties at the office, which doesn't involve sitting at a desk. This is light activity. What I wouldn't advocate is exercising right after a meal, when the body's chief concern is digestion. The body can't multitask; start exercising and you put the body in sympathetic mode, your body starts using stored energy; whatever you ate thirty minutes ago is useless. That's why I've never understood why some people will carb up before a workout. Eat, wait a couple hours before exercising. Looking at that study you posted, the subjects did wait 2 hours before exercising.
For me, it's impossible to get enough total calories for the day by making breakfast the biggest meal of the day. The body just isn't particularly hungry in the morning. If I were overweight, this might be the best appoach, but I'd rather feel satisfied after a long day of activity by eating heartily in the evening rather than starving myself.
I've read that in Roman times people would often only eat bread in the mornings (that's all they could afford), then work long hours. At night they would eat a big dinner (though probably not as big as today's average meal) where they would replenish their stores for the next day. I'm willing to bet nobody had heart disease back then, except the rich who ate frequently.
| "When [defeat] comes, I won't even notice. I'll be too busy looking good." |
|
Barney
Get Strong or Die Trying
Posts: 7608
Age: 53
Loc: Apopka, FL
Registered on 03-30-04
|
Re: Intermittant Fasting
08-09-07 03:11 PM - Post#334963
My late FIL use to eat just like that. He would get up and be at work by 5am .. work to 6pm without eating a thing .. be home by 7pm and eat non stop til bedtime. And he never weighed more then 160 lb soaking wet.
Facebook
Myspace
Twitter
"down the shore everything's alright, you with your baby on a saturday night ..."
-Tom Waits
"The Truth Will Set You Free but First It Will Piss You Off."
-Seen on a Bumper Sticker. 
"I'm the High Plains Heavy Metal Iron Master, boy."
-Steve Justa
|
|
Jamie(IRL)
Grand Pooh-Bah
Posts: 1671
Loc: Cork Ireland
Registered on 05-24-06
|
08-09-07 03:13 PM - Post#334970
Barney, was he "skinny fat" or toned/muscular?
|
|
