MB Madaera
Lost 31.7 lbs fat
Built 11.7 lbs muscle


Chris Madaera
Built 9 lbs muscle


Keelan Parham
Lost 30 lbs fat
Built 4 lbs muscle


Bob Marchesello
Lost 23.55 lbs fat
Built 8.55 lbs muscle


Jeff Turner
Lost 25.5 lbs fat


Jeanenne Darden
Lost 26 lbs fat
Built 3 lbs muscle


Ted Tucker
Lost 41 lbs fat
Built 4 lbs muscle

 
 

Determine the Length of Your Workouts

Evaluate Your Progress

Keep Warm-Up in Perspective


ARCHIVES >>

"Doing more exercise with less intensity,"
Arthur Jones believes, "has all but
destroyed the actual great value
of weight training. Something
must be done . . . and quickly."
The New Bodybuilding for
Old-School Results supplies
MUCH of that "something."

 

This is one of 93 photos of Andy McCutcheon that are used in The New High-Intensity Training to illustrate the recommended exercises.

To find out more about McCutcheon and his training, click here.

 

Mission Statement

H.I.T. Acceptable Use Policy

Privacy Policy

Credits

LOG IN FORUM MAIN REGISTER SEARCH
Fred Hahn's Results
1 | 2 | Next | Last
Author
Rating
Options

spud

Has anyone listened to Fred Hahn?s latest episode on the High Intensity Business podcast?

You can see Fred?s results can be seen here: https://drive.google.com/...4ts9Fr4p0ahrci_

Fred's results as shown by his InBody machine:

14 June 2016
* 29.3 pounds of fat
* 81.4 pounds of muscle
* 173.8 pounds of total weight

12 March 2019
* 5.7 pounds of fat
* 83.1 pounds of muscle
* 152.3 pounds of total weight

Difference
* 23.6 pounds of fat lost
* 1.7 pounds of muscle built
* 21.5 pounds lighter overall

He should weigh 151.9 pounds, so there is 0.4 pounds unaccounted for, which could be water, bone mass, reporting error etc. It's a trivial difference.

In summary from June 2016 to March 2019 Fred was minus 23.6 pounds of fat, plus 1.7 pounds of muscle according to the results from his InBody machine. Looking more closely at the InBody results, 1.3 of that 1.7 pounds was built somewhere between 2 February 2019 and 12 March 2019. Those results are a long way short of the claims made in the blog post of Fred building 14 pounds of muscle from January 2018 to July 2019.

You can clearly see that Fred built 1.7 pounds of muscle from June 2016 to March 2019. If the claims of a total of 14 pounds of muscle built are to be believed, then simple math suggests that he built another 12.3 pounds of muscle from somewhere between 12 March 2019 to 31 July 2019 at the latest.

A drug free trainee, who has been training and eating in the same way for 15 to 20 years simply increased his daily protein intake from some undisclosed amount to another higher undisclosed amount, stopped drinking alcohol and started intermittent fasting and gained 12.3 pounds of muscle in a little over 4 months. During the podcast we?re never told what Fred?s daily calorie intake was at any point, past or present. I can only assume that given his age and how lean he?s managed to get that he was in caloric deficit for a long time and at most he would have been at maintenance, or perhaps a very small caloric surplus. That?s not enough to build 12.3 pounds of muscle. Is it? What the podcast seems to be suggesting, is that the boost one gets in growth hormone from intermittent fasting, powers this crazy muscle growth, regardless of caloric intake and with training that doesn?t change at all to disrupt long standing homeostasis.

I?m not all surprised by the fat loss results (23.6 pounds) or the fat loss claimed (28 pounds), but it?s the discrepancy between the muscle building results (1.7 pounds) and muscle building claims (14 pounds) that has me seriously doubting it unless we can see the data sheet from the InBody machine.
Open User Options Menu

sirloin

spud wrote:
Has anyone listened to Fred Hahn?s latest episode on the High Intensity Business podcast?

You can see Fred?s results can be seen here: https://drive.google.com/...4ts9Fr4p0ahrci_

Fred's results as shown by his InBody machine:

14 June 2016
* 29.3 pounds of fat
* 81.4 pounds of muscle
* 173.8 pounds of total weight

12 March 2019
* 5.7 pounds of fat
* 83.1 pounds of muscle
* 152.3 pounds of total weight

Difference
* 23.6 pounds of fat lost
* 1.7 pounds of muscle built
* 21.5 pounds lighter overall

He should weigh 151.9 pounds, so there is 0.4 pounds unaccounted for, which could be water, bone mass, reporting error etc. It's a trivial difference.

In summary from June 2016 to March 2019 Fred was minus 23.6 pounds of fat, plus 1.7 pounds of muscle according to the results from his InBody machine. Looking more closely at the InBody results, 1.3 of that 1.7 pounds was built somewhere between 2 February 2019 and 12 March 2019. Those results are a long way short of the claims made in the blog post of Fred building 14 pounds of muscle from January 2018 to July 2019.

You can clearly see that Fred built 1.7 pounds of muscle from June 2016 to March 2019. If the claims of a total of 14 pounds of muscle built are to be believed, then simple math suggests that he built another 12.3 pounds of muscle from somewhere between 12 March 2019 to 31 July 2019 at the latest.

A drug free trainee, who has been training and eating in the same way for 15 to 20 years simply increased his daily protein intake from some undisclosed amount to another higher undisclosed amount, stopped drinking alcohol and started intermittent fasting and gained 12.3 pounds of muscle in a little over 4 months. During the podcast we?re never told what Fred?s daily calorie intake was at any point, past or present. I can only assume that given his age and how lean he?s managed to get that he was in caloric deficit for a long time and at most he would have been at maintenance, or perhaps a very small caloric surplus. That?s not enough to build 12.3 pounds of muscle. Is it? What the podcast seems to be suggesting, is that the boost one gets in growth hormone from intermittent fasting, powers this crazy muscle growth, regardless of caloric intake and with training that doesn?t change at all to disrupt long standing homeostasis.

I?m not all surprised by the fat loss results (23.6 pounds) or the fat loss claimed (28 pounds), but it?s the discrepancy between the muscle building results (1.7 pounds) and muscle building claims (14 pounds) that has me seriously doubting it unless we can see the data sheet from the InBody machine.


Am with you on this one, I dont recall any gains of that magnitude when I was IFing. That being said, hes done a good job at leaning out and maintaining, looks great.
Open User Options Menu

Average Al

spud wrote:
Has anyone listened to Fred Hahn?s latest episode on the High Intensity Business podcast?

...

I?m not all surprised by the fat loss results (23.6 pounds) or the fat loss claimed (28 pounds), but it?s the discrepancy between the muscle building results (1.7 pounds) and muscle building claims (14 pounds) that has me seriously doubting it unless we can see the data sheet from the InBody machine.


The InBody numbers that he put into the slide presentation look reasonable for a guy his age who has been training a long time: He lost a lot of weight, most of it being fat, with a modest muscle gain.

What isn't in the slide show is a bunch of other Inbody measurements. If you look at the photos on his facebook page, you can see that he occasionally puts of photos of Inbody measurements. And he has mixed in some DEXA data. I considered trying to construct my own time line with these other measurements, and then decided not to bother.

In any case, I assume that he has some measurements at intermediate time points which, when compared, show a 14 lb muscle gain. But that is inconsistent with the overall trend shown by the slide show.

If overall he gained just 1.7 lbs muscle, and at some intermediate point, there was a 14 lb muscle gain, then at some other point, he must have experienced a 12 lb muscle loss (which he might not have wanted to point out).

I think, in reality, what you are seeing is fluctuations in muscle mass that come down to noise or measurement error in the Inbody and DEXA data.

DEXA is supposed to be the gold standard, but even that is not terribly precise. InBody is measured via bioimpedence, a method I thought had a poor reputation (based on some limited reading).

Both are influenced by hydration levels. I don't know if either is capable of detecting fluctuations in muscle glycogen. And if you are intermittent fasting, and following a ketogentic diet, your glycogen levels are likely all over the place. Who knows how consistent he is about taking that into account?

Finally, consider the InBody end point. It has him at 3.7% body fat. He looks lean, but that is the kind of number I associate with bodybuilders who end up with the look of paper thin skin. He doesn't look quite that ripped.




Open User Options Menu

Average Al

OK, I re-read your post and see that the 14 lb muscle gain came after the time period shown by the slide show, it didn't happen at an intermediate point. My bad: just didn't read carefully enough.

14 lbs muscle gain from 4 months of IF seems pretty incredible, especially given his age and prior training history.

My concerns about the accuracy of the body composition measurements remains, especially the InBody data.

Overall, Fred could do a much better job of explaining how his weight, muscle mass, and fat mass evolved if he constructed a more complete time line with all the data that he has, along with what he was doing diet-wise at the time. The way numbers were tossed around in that podcast was pretty confusing.

Open User Options Menu

sirloin

What i find more interesting, is that he now looks like a "bodybuilder" as hes stripped away the fat, yet he doesnt train like one, he still "powerlifts on machines" to coin a phrase. His workouts dont look like a vegan burger recipe, i.e., dozens of ingredients.

Open User Options Menu

BorisV

Maryland, USA

No doubt, very good results from fat reduction perspective, especially taking into account the age factor. I should say that the right pic does not look like 3.7% body fat to me. However, we are all different (including where our bodies deposit fat cells). The method itself (IF) is not a new one: notable mentions will include Serge Nubret (known steroid user) and, at some point, Vince Gironda recommended something similar (although he later thought that smaller frequent meals are better for b/b purposes). I am a bit skeptical whether consuming 150 grams of protein for a 150lbs person (and more for heavier guy) in one meal is achievable. That would mean about 2 lbs of ground meat in one sitting. Not everyone's stomach will take that much, not mentioning the issue of digestion & absorption. It is not how much you eat, it is how good you can digest and absorb that much food. Protein powders can definitely help in this respect, however, for me personally that is not a solution - I prefer food in its natural form.
Open User Options Menu

HeavyHitter32

I find it rather interesting that he has been doing low carb and HIT for quite a while (years?)...and suddenly at his age he has a "transformation" now looking like a bodybuilder doing mostly the same thing still? Hmmmm.
Open User Options Menu

sirloin

HeavyHitter32 wrote:
I find it rather interesting that he has been doing low carb and HIT for quite a while (years?)...and suddenly at his age he has a "transformation" now looking like a bodybuilder doing mostly the same thing still? Hmmmm.


Ya mean a wee bit of TRT?
Open User Options Menu

Average Al

sirloin wrote:
HeavyHitter32 wrote:
I find it rather interesting that he has been doing low carb and HIT for quite a while (years?)...and suddenly at his age he has a "transformation" now looking like a bodybuilder doing mostly the same thing still? Hmmmm.


Ya mean a wee bit of TRT?


That is ironic, because on Facebook he had a habit of accusing anyone with large muscles of being a steroid user. I suppose he would be flattered by your speculation.

While he looks good in the photos, he really isn't a very big guy. To me, he looks more like a triathlete.
Open User Options Menu

HeavyHitter32

sirloin wrote:
HeavyHitter32 wrote:
I find it rather interesting that he has been doing low carb and HIT for quite a while (years?)...and suddenly at his age he has a "transformation" now looking like a bodybuilder doing mostly the same thing still? Hmmmm.


Ya mean a wee bit of TRT?


:O
Open User Options Menu

HeavyHitter32

Average Al wrote:
sirloin wrote:
HeavyHitter32 wrote:
I find it rather interesting that he has been doing low carb and HIT for quite a while (years?)...and suddenly at his age he has a "transformation" now looking like a bodybuilder doing mostly the same thing still? Hmmmm.


Ya mean a wee bit of TRT?

That is ironic, because on Facebook he had a habit of accusing anyone with large muscles of being a steroid user. I suppose he would be flattered by your speculation.

While he looks good in the photos, he really isn't a very big guy. To me, he looks more like a triathlete.


He certainly looks dramatically better than his previously posted pictures around the internet when some asked whether he even trained.
Open User Options Menu

Nwlifter

I'm confused on the timeline, when (in reference to the photos on that linked PDF file) did he gain 14 lbs of muscle?
The before and after look like a lot of fat loss, but not muscle gain. Was the 14 lbs gain AFTER that final fat loss photo or before the 'before' photo?
Open User Options Menu

sirloin

Average Al wrote:
sirloin wrote:
HeavyHitter32 wrote:
I find it rather interesting that he has been doing low carb and HIT for quite a while (years?)...and suddenly at his age he has a "transformation" now looking like a bodybuilder doing mostly the same thing still? Hmmmm.


Ya mean a wee bit of TRT?

That is ironic, because on Facebook he had a habit of accusing anyone with large muscles of being a steroid user. I suppose he would be flattered by your speculation.

While he looks good in the photos, he really isn't a very big guy. To me, he looks more like a triathlete.


Personally I dont think hes on anything. Anyone who has gained a little muscle then strips away the fat looks like a "bodybuilder".
With regards to drug use and being big, theres many dopers who aren't big, heck Frank Zane wasnt that big and they called him "the chemist".
Open User Options Menu

spud

HeavyHitter32 wrote:
I find it rather interesting that he has been doing low carb and HIT for quite a while (years?)...and suddenly at his age he has a "transformation" now looking like a bodybuilder doing mostly the same thing still? Hmmmm.


I lurked and occasionally posted on his now defunct forum (I'm assuming it's defunct) from 2005 to 2007. Fred was locked in constant battles with a powerlifter/grip strength guy named "BLOBERT", and Olympic Lifter named "Lincoln" and a lightweight strongman enthusiast from the UK named "Sumo".

They would go back and forth on all the traditional arguments:

Single set vs multiple sets
Failure vs not to failure
Machines vs free weights
Slow reps vs fast reps

During this time Fred trained pretty much as he trains now (he favoured twice a week on about 7 to 10 exercises from what I remember, alternating two different routines on say Monday and Thursday.

He was very much a low carb guy at that point. He was already associated with Michael and Mary Eades and their writings.

His physique however, was no better than the before picture featured here. Possibly slightly worse.

At that point he was not doing intermittent fasting and WAS drinking wine.

To me this shows that calories in vs calories out is still king, even with low carb diets. The difference between 2007 and 2019? Fred has done a bunch of things that have allowed him to adhere to a consistently lower calorie intake.

He's still got fantastic results, taking nothing away from him, I just don't like they way a bunch of stuff isn't really talked about in any detail.

==========

Fred Hahn's podcast with Lawrence Neal:

7:40 Fred talks about the fact he didn't really change anything, he just started fasting. He knew how much lean body mass he had and so knew how much protein to eat. That statement tells us nothing, but who needs details right?

spud's thoughts:
Fasting works as a weight loss or weight maintenance tool if it helps to you regulate your overall daily calorie intake. There's nothing more to it than that. One of the main advantages of fasting is that it removes decision fatigue and agonising about what you should eat a small amount of something that is potentially viewed as bad or not allowed. Many people find it far easier to stick to a diet where they know they aren't allowed to eat ANYTHING, "good", "bad" or otherwise until a certain time of day. Being on a diet that says you can have one square of dark chocolate a day might sound cool, but what if a momentary lapse in willpower means you end up eating half a bar of dark chocolate in one sitting? It's cases like this where fasting can really help if it greatly increases someone's dietary adherence, consistently putting that person in a caloric deficit, leading to weight loss.

Fred's assertion that he didn't really change anything is potentially very misleading. If Fred was eating 2700 calories per day and then it dropped to 2000 calories per day thanks to fasting, then that is going to have a significant, positive effect on fat loss. Of course, we don't yet know how many calories per day Fred was eating before the fat loss and what he reduced it to in order to start seeing some fat loss. The worst thing is that Fred still probably thinks that fasting boosts fat loss because of hormonal manipulation. No, it's the consistent reduction in daily calorie intake. I don't see how anyone can be fasting for at least 16 hours a day and still eat enough calories to build 14 pounds of muscle.



8:40 Fred fasted daily for somewhere between 16 and 20 hours. Feeding window was somewhere between 15:00 and 20:00 every day.
He'd just have coffee in the morning with a little bit of cream and then just eat animal protein and protein shakes in the feeding window.
Under 30 grams of carbs a day with his main carb source being salad.

11:10 Still not clear which year this is happening in.

11:39 He didn't experience Keto flu or the feelings of hunger that many people get.

14:00 Fred started to lose about a pound or so of fat mass per week, although he wasn't overly fat in the first place. Also acknowledged that he wasn't acknowledged as being lean when he attended conferences. People would comment on his condition (or lack thereof) despite the low carbohydrate eating.

15:40 In about 3 and a half months, Fred had lost 14 pounds on the scale going from 175 to 160. DEXA showed that he had lost 14 pounds of at and gained 6 pounds of lean including bone mass. This was over a 3 month period April 2017 to July 2017. Fred attributes the increase in lean mass to growth hormone released as a result of fasting. Did Fred mean 2019 instead of 2017? Because the InBody results sheets that are shown in the PDF contradict this completely. They say he gained 1.7 pounds of skeletal muscle mass from June 2016 to March 2019.

20:30 - If Fred kept his carb intake the lowest, he got the leanest with no scarifice in lean tissue unless he underate his protein. There is a level of protein that you must not go under in order not to lose protein. This isn't specified, just know that Fred knows this level of protein exists. Again, details are irrelevant. Protein, muscle, something, protein, protein. Great. There's no usable information given here.

21:55 - About a month ago (so that's September 2019 if we go on the release date of the YouTube video version of this podcast episode) Fred says that he was able to get his muscle mass up to 90 pounds according to the InBody machine. That's an increase of 8.6 pound since June 2016, and an increase of 6.9 pounds since March 2019. He did this by increasing his protein intake by another 60 grams. No mention of what his protein intake was before this, and no mention of overall calorie intake at any point.

23:15 - Fred now believes that many people might be training just fine but not eating enough protein and not getting the increased growth hormone from fasting.

24:12 bodybuilders "under eat their calories" that's why they lose lean tissue when they diet for a contest. So what is Fred saying? He lost fat in a caloric surplus? Or is he saying that he built 6 pounds of muscle in a caloric deficit? Without knowing what Fred's overall calorie intake was, or even his overall protein intake was, it's impossible to tell what's going on. Fred thinks bodybuilders under eat their protein when dieting. Great. That's not revelatory or useful.

25:20 - Lawrence asks if Fred had a calorie target or if he just had a protein target. Fred said just a protein target, but then doesn't say what that target was or is.

spud's thoughts:
At this point Fred rambles on about calories. Zero calories will kill you and a billion calories will make you fat. 2000 calories of meat per day will make you look amazing, lean, muscular, and 2000 calories a day from coca cola, cheese doodles and pop tarts will kill someone. This is the typical straw man argument posed by almost any low carb zealot. Nobody in the non-low carb world is actually advocating 2000 calories a day of candy, ice cream, chocolate and soda as healthy or as a way to lose fat. Nobody sane and rational on the non-low carb side of the fence is saying that dietary content isn't important. They're just saying that calories in vs. calories out is the bottom line when it comes to losing fat regardless of what diet you're following, even if you don't count calories. That's all any diet is - glorified calorie restriction. Fred's argument is a bit like me, as someone who doesn't drink any alcohol, saying that anyone who does drink alcohol is a full blown alcoholic. In actual fact, there is a huge spectrum of drinking habits with most people, you guessed it, falling somewhere in the middle of bell curve. To make a statement like that isn't, umm, normal.


28:41 - Lean mass gains were 10 pounds, total fat loss 15 pounds. Not clear on what the date range is here for the before and after numbers or how they relate to the results in the PDf or the claims made in the blog post. It's not really clear all the way through this podcast when the start of this change was, and exactly what the change was. 10 and 15 is different from the 14 and 28 quoted in the blog post and is very different from the 1.7 and 23.6 that are documented in the PDF I linked to in my original post.

spud's thoughts:
Did Fred halve his calorie intake whilst doubling his protein intake? What was the old protein intake per day? What was new protein intake per day? How did Fred track the protein intake? How does he know how many grams of protein per day he's actually eating? Were their any other dietary changes? How did the carb levels change? What kind of portion control does Fred implement if he's not actually counting calories? There has also been no mention of the amount of fat Fred is eating each day. There are so many things that aren't mentioned. Not even briefly. Does Fred, if he's aware of his macronutrient intake, ever calculate the calories from that using the figures of 1g of protein or carbohydrate = 4 calories, 1g of fat = 9 calories?


1:07:26 - Fred says that alcohol is the killer of the fat loss dream and thwarts the muscle building process because it is "damaging to your liver" and "isn't good for your testosterone".

spud's thoughts:
Once again there is no mention of calories. I may be wrong but I always thought that alcohol prevented fat loss because, very simply, it's calorie dense, addictive, requires very little preparation (just open a bottle or can), quick to consume, offers not satiation, and it stimulates your appetite. But yeah, liver something something, muscle building something something. This really is proof that Fred and low carb advocates are borderline allergic to saying the word calories out loud. Their entire way of eating is predicated on the fact that calories don't matter, so to say otherwise would suddenly remove the mystique from it all and reduce their guru status to simple "Guy that ate a fewer calories on a consistent basis".
Open User Options Menu

sgb2112

The secret is fewer calories. He is right about the drinking.

Open User Options Menu

HeavyHitter32

sgb2112 wrote:
The secret is fewer calories. He is right about the drinking.



Yes, I think the fat loss was the biggest key. It really does make what muscle you have look differently.
Open User Options Menu

Average Al

spud,

Great analysis!
Open User Options Menu

entsminger

Virginia, USA

==Scott==
So this guy loses some fat by whatever method and looks a little more ripped. Yea if you lose some blubber your muscles will pop out more.I see no evidence of any actual size gain, just improved looks. All this discussion over this so what claim?
Open User Options Menu

ATP 4 Vitality

Questions,

1) is turning on growth hormone and subsequently IGF wise at his age?

2) why the partial use of the World Health Organization guidelines (BMI) and ignore WHO guidelines on protein(5 percent)?


3) Why high protein? A corresponding high carbohydrate diet will fill glycogen storage in the muscles for even better body composition results, and insulin is the primary anabolic hormone. The nitrogen molecule on excessive protein can not be stored in the body and must be excreted.
Open User Options Menu

entsminger

Virginia, USA

He's still got fantastic results, taking nothing away from him, I just don't like they way a bunch of stuff isn't really talked about in any detail.

==Scott==
I guess I'm missing something here? What fantastic results? The guy loses some weight and looks better. Where is the fantastic part?
Open User Options Menu

spud

entsminger wrote:
==Scott==
So this guy loses some fat by whatever method and looks a little more ripped. Yea if you lose some blubber your muscles will pop out more.I see no evidence of any actual size gain, just improved looks. All this discussion over this so what claim?


The claims made would not be impressive if he was a 23 year old kid who had only just started training. The novice effect would be huge. The stimulus would be so alien to his body. It would be easy to understand how he could gain 14 pounds of muscle.

But when you make a claim of that level when you're in the 55-60 age group, drug free and you have at least 20 if not 35 years of training under your belt and your eating a significant caloric deficit in order to get very lean but you still ALLEGEDLY gain 14 pounds of muscle, something isn't right.

Especially when all the ay through a 2 hour podcast interview you fail to give any hard and fast numbers and the stats you provide on paper fall well short of the numbers quoted.

If he'd been more open and honest and said that he'd I managed to get lean and even gained a pound or two of muscle the process by going from A protein intake, to B protein intake, and X calorie intake to Y calorie intake, I wouldn't have a problem with it.

Instead it's all smoke and mirrors.
Open User Options Menu

Nwlifter

ATP 4 Vitality wrote:
Questions,

1) is turning on growth hormone and subsequently IGF wise at his age?


I would more question if it really significantly did increase it. Transient small rises in GH really don't do much...


3) Why high protein? A corresponding high carbohydrate diet will fill glycogen storage in the muscles for even better body composition results, and insulin is the primary anabolic hormone. The nitrogen molecule on excessive protein can not be stored in the body and must be excreted.


Yes true, BUT, if his muscles were using the protein, then it's not 'excess'.

Insulin is anabolic with respect to hypertrophy for the muscles via increases in protein accretion, not via glycogen. Insulin shuttles amino acids into the muscle cells as well as glucose. But what's odd, is fasting keeps insulin super low, it's why eating helps people gain muscle.

Open User Options Menu

Nwlifter

ATP 4 Vitality wrote:
guidelines on protein(5 percent)?




Oh yeah and we talked about that before, that's not right, remember I went to their website .
And even if it were, 5% would be like 2.5 grams of protein a day for 2000 calories lol. Like 'how to be sick and die' would be the result of that!

Open User Options Menu

Nwlifter

ATP 4 Vitality wrote:
Questions,

1) is turning on growth hormone and subsequently IGF wise at his age?

2) why the partial use of the World Health Organization guidelines (BMI) and ignore WHO guidelines on protein(5 percent)?


3) Why high protein? A corresponding high carbohydrate diet will fill glycogen storage in the muscles for even better body composition results, and insulin is the primary anabolic hormone. The nitrogen molecule on excessive protein can not be stored in the body and must be excreted.


Went through that huge bloated WHO protein PDF..
they say for a healthy stable person
"0.83 g/kg per day of protein with a protein digestibility-corrected amino acid score value of 1.0"
So a 180 lb guy that'd be 68 grams a day and they point out, that's high quality protein (PDCA of 1.0, lots in that long paper about digestion and quality of proteins)
Of course, we know now for sure from many studies that more protein than that, WILL for SURE increase muscle mass gains.


Open User Options Menu

entsminger

Virginia, USA

You can clearly see that Fred built 1.7 pounds of muscle from June 2016 to March 2019. If the claims of a total of 14 pounds of muscle built are to be believed, then simple math suggests that he built another 12.3 pounds of muscle from somewhere between 12 March 2019 to 31 July 2019 at the latest.

==Scott==
I don't understand this thinking that he added 14 pounds of muscle at any time? He lost some blubber and the muscles show better. There is no evidence whatsoever that he gained any muscle at all in that time and 4% body weight?? I think he'd need to be alot more shredded to be 4%.
Open User Options Menu
1 | 2 | Next | Last
H.I.T. Acceptable Use Policy