Spotlight Fitness Club
- Thread starter diver
- Start date
kimajy
Well-Known Member
Sooooooooooo when are you guys hooking up?
. (Tho' possibly the easiest wind-up for many a long month lolz) 
Er ... no .... I think you're seeing ghosts and undertaking "transference" Germaine. Discuss ? I've asked you to explain observed results - no lies, absolute fact. You cannot with your calorie counting recommendation. So I must be a lier. If that isn't complete blind arrogance and idiocy I don't know what is. I haven't got the answer so the question must be wrong. LOL... and no substantive replies to the points I've fed you to comment constructively on just defensive firing missiles because you don't know and don't want to be exposed for what you are. Remember I'm not the one making themselves out to be an expert. You are ! So .... I think you are full of soundbites and hiding behind practices geared at athletic sporty people pre-disposed to respond in the ways your principles suggest they should. Not at the general population or people with other factors influencing the simplistic generalizations you've postulated.
Still no comment on the hormones and the natural life cycle of the average individual as far as this affects their body's metabolism and responses to nutritional intake in the context of their activities. Hmmm .... there are endless interesting lines of thought I could propose on here to discuss. But I've no interest in doing that with "computer says no" Germaine.
Calorie counting being bound to give the results you suggest principally. Noooooooo ..... real life experience proves otherwise for me. You've no other tricks to pull out of your pack by the looks of it. Plus if you say this is one approach and there are others then pray tell us all, what are they ? Can we have the details so people can choose from a range of clinically proven strategies backed by controlled trials ? Otherwise I think nutritionists are largely a waste of space. If all your studying has resulted in your being able only to give the recommendations you've made on here I'd find something more useful to do with your life ... if it were me. Which thankfully it is not lol.
You've asked me to explain some random, hypothetical, elaborated BS story you told. I did. Go read through the posts and stop lying.
I have replied refuting your points, you just choose to ignore and overlook them.
Again, more lies. Where did I say I was an expert? I am however a lot more knowledgeable on the subject than you, as you have repeatedly shown you lack even basic knowledge.
Think what you like. You're wrong, again.
I did comment on hormones. Why you lying again? Still waiting to see what exactly about hormones you are referring to....
Natural life cycle? Hormones? Are you just throwing around words in an attempt to sound smart? You're an idiot....
True, there are endless topics regarding nutrition, but I highly doubt you have the knowledge to the discuss them.
Calories In vs Calories Out is a LAW. Are you saying the LAWS of Thermodynamics are crap? Lol...
What recommendations would you make? You're full of crap and haven't an iota about nutrition or science. It's simple. If you are losing weight, you are in a calorie deficit. Period. That's a LAW. If you are gaining weight, you are in a surplus. Period. That is a LAW. If you are maintaining weight, you are at caloric maintenance. Period. This is a LAW. See where this is going? There are individual differences in a sense that some people respond better to high carb, more energy for them, while others may prefer high fat. Same with pre-workout nutrition. Some enjoy fasted training, others need a meal. But the basic nutrition principles apply across the board.
Seriously, why continue discussing a topic, in which every post you make, you display a serious lack of knowledge. An educated chimp could discuss nutrition better than you.
I have replied refuting your points, you just choose to ignore and overlook them.
Again, more lies. Where did I say I was an expert? I am however a lot more knowledgeable on the subject than you, as you have repeatedly shown you lack even basic knowledge.
Think what you like. You're wrong, again.
I did comment on hormones. Why you lying again? Still waiting to see what exactly about hormones you are referring to....
Natural life cycle? Hormones? Are you just throwing around words in an attempt to sound smart? You're an idiot....
True, there are endless topics regarding nutrition, but I highly doubt you have the knowledge to the discuss them.
Calories In vs Calories Out is a LAW. Are you saying the LAWS of Thermodynamics are crap? Lol...
What recommendations would you make? You're full of crap and haven't an iota about nutrition or science. It's simple. If you are losing weight, you are in a calorie deficit. Period. That's a LAW. If you are gaining weight, you are in a surplus. Period. That is a LAW. If you are maintaining weight, you are at caloric maintenance. Period. This is a LAW. See where this is going? There are individual differences in a sense that some people respond better to high carb, more energy for them, while others may prefer high fat. Same with pre-workout nutrition. Some enjoy fasted training, others need a meal. But the basic nutrition principles apply across the board.
Seriously, why continue discussing a topic, in which every post you make, you display a serious lack of knowledge. An educated chimp could discuss nutrition better than you.
kimajy
Well-Known Member
I am not saying anything of the sort. I am asking why the huge boost in calories I took in did not wind up stored as extra weight ... if this is by itself a sufficient approach to weight management as you keep insisting it is. The obvious answer within the framework you have outlined is that if the calories are not stored they must be getting burned. Which leads to the next line of exploration and that is - in what way and what is driving the body to burn the extra put in rather than storing it. So ... for example you haven't asked me about sleep patterns accompanying the calorie change (did I wind up going from 12 hour active waking day to 18 hour waking for example ... 50% more time awake and active probably needs more calories than 12). That's an example by the way. The point is that there are a whole host of factors which affect calorie needs and calories used and it seems clear that one or more of these is likely influencing the actual observed results I reported.
Nutrition as applied to real peoples' lives is about more than a relationship in a science text book. Your approach has been to completely fail to engage with what someone has told you about their own experiences and spout off a narrowly focused general law that isn't in itself necessarily enough. What I demonstrated to you with an ACTUAL example (not some made-up fairy tale) is that working out calorific needs to determine what increase or decrease is likely to be appropriate can be very hard to do in practice.... since the daily needs can vary a lot depending on how predictable and regular a person's lifestyle is. All of this clearly passed you by in your bid to prove you are right on something and be argumentative rather than constructive.
In my own case, clearly some other factors must be at work to ensure what went in did not get stored. Also whilst in periods of 1200 calories a day the body adapted to stave off weight loss of more than 1-2kg over considerable periods. I asked you to postulate reasons outside your simplistic mantra that might shed some light. You have come up with jack sh*t that's actually useable in practice. Very often when you change one variable it has an effect on the overall result. There are many variables in some peoples' daily activities and these can make adopting a calorie counting approach to weight management extremely difficult to implement as a solution in practice.
What you've really demonstrated is that you have no interest in or care about others, merely tannoying what you've been taught for webside credibility. Nutritionists are supposed to help others and helping others is about more than citing an isolated law that is no more complicated than A-B = C. You don't need a diploma to understand that. I've talked to people like you in both the medical and nutritionist professions and found what they have to say of very limited use.
You still haven't given us the other approaches you said above are alternatives to calorie counting by the way lol. Are they in Chapter 2 ? (Sorry ... genuinely ... but you really are asking for it).
Firstly I am not here to make any recommendations. When have I ever suggested that I am. I have only asked questions and raised other issues around your comments which have been aimed at me in the same unhelpful way as others on this thread. My point of issue is with your own approach having set your stall out very early on in a bid to command credibility. What's ultimately come out of it has to be examined for what it is.
The last sentence of your penultimate paragraph in preceeding post is the first bit of sense I have read in your posts for a long long time and finally you have given me something even vaguely worthy of commenting on constructively. The point is that the basic nutrition principle of calorie in-calorie out is not necessarily sufficient to be prescriptive enough for individuals to be capable of putting into practice to yield predictable and consistent results. And therefore is of limited practical value alone. Since you can;t generalize about much else, the rest of the package requires some proper engagement with the individual, their lifestyle, the type of energy source that's appropriate for them along with their age and goals. Only then would you start to get to something of any value. But since one size doesn't fit all you're stumped when asked to step outside the calorie counting box.
You really have displayed such a total inability to engage with other individuals meaningfully, a complete inability to think laterally about what's been reported to you and comment meaningfully. You seem to be only interested in bending others to your mantra and being thanked and acknowledged for doing so. Well, Germaine, you are going about it all the wrong way. So (and I mean this kindly) if you want to get any sort of positive response for what you've set out to develop as a special interest area, perhaps start with just opening your own mind beyond the very narrow sphere in which you operate and understand that an ability to rubbish most of what's on-line in this area (and rubbish it really is) isn't going to get you very far. Non-scientists are not interested in scientists throwing stones at each others' claims. But they also deserve more than being restricted to a basic one size fits all principle that you seem unwilling to step outside of just because it's harder to back up.
The insults don't get under my skin by the way - they are amusing at worst and merely serve to illustrate the deficits in your interactions. I've thrown a few back at you - as you don't seem to be open to listening to other people without superimposing yourself. If you can't take positively from what I've said here then I can only conclude you have an attention-seeking disorder that no amount of well-meaning interactions with you will overcome.... and merely wish to prolong the thread in case it dies and you lose another outlet. A psychologist would have a field day with your responses. But I'm not going to play games any longer. I think you've reached the wire now !
No I haven't. I have given you facts about myself and trials I have done. If you were my weight over the number of years I've been trying various things you'd have had plenty of time to test many recommendations and see whether they made sense.
You refuse to believe reported facts about the person writing them, won't accept them and have no answers. No matter how many times you call me a liar I am not. At least many doctors have an open mind and are willing to investigate things like that further to try to get an explanation. You put yourself forward as being in a position to help people understand and the minute you get presented with REAL LIFE facts out of your comfort zone you call the person who raises them a liar. Thank f*ck you aren't qualified in the medical profession. However if you were you might have been trained to deal with issues in a reasonable and exploratory way rather than the amateurish way you have just demonstrated.
So if you wish to delude yourself and believe that part is a wind-up to make yourself feel better go ahead. However, what I posted on my calorie uplift is true. I.e. the 1800 calories / day increase - close to the average guy's regular daily intake by way of quality mass gainer ON TOP OF a consistent 1700+ calorie 3 meals + consistent additional snacks / day over a sustained 6 week non-lifting cycle. This resulted in a lack of any observed increase in weight before and after. The professional thing to do is say you can't explain that unless there were other factors which changed and seek to identify them or refer to a more competent authority as a recommendation. But fact is also my calorie intake has varied wildly and my weight has remained within a 4kg window of a median for nearly 20 years unless boosted a couple more kgs with lifting - which I lose in a week to 10 days if I stop. That's just the way it is !
I do reiterate (like a broken record now) ... you have no answers so you conclude the results are a lie. Seriously, Germaine ? You don't know and can't explain - so perhaps it's something a real expert capable of a holistic approach to providing answers should look into.
Missed that amongst the abuse. More cells = more energy burned. Get older and drop testosterone levels without decreasing food intake and it probably winds up stored as fat. Enter middle age.
I've made my over-riding points above and am going to leave you alone now as I genuinely don't think there's anything I'm going to learn from you. I really do think you'd be far more at home and far better placed on a technical forum where you can discuss technical principles with other ******-academics and rubbish each others' theories to your heart's content (unless you done them all and just want a new forum to be argumentative on). But please spare a thought for the general population who frankly deserve better.
Last edited by a moderator:
WeLuvIbiza
Active Member
Germaine, Newtonian physics is dead, or are you a flat earther?
The Laws of thermodynamics are not dead. Go back to school.
That's exactly what you're saying.
Ever hear of thermogenesis? Ever hear of glycogen?
I never refuted that. There are a host of things that can caloric needs. Agreed.
Research is also applied to real people's lives. This is where we get our recommendations from. Test theories in the real world.
I didn't fail to engage. If you scroll back, you'll notice the advice I gave you to follow. Read more carefully in future. You seem to have selective reading.
Nope. I never refuted or said daily needs change. Never. Why are you lying again?
So you did in fact still lose weight? And how long is considerable length of time? Going as low as 1,200kcal for a male for a considerable length of time is just retarded. Anyway, you would still lose weight. Look up the Minnesota Starvation study. A 6 month study where they cut calories by 50% and after 6 months there was only a 40% drop in metabolism and they didn't stop losing weight until they hit 5% BF. If the scale is not moving, it is much more likely down to cortisol. Your body is under stress and cortisol shoots through the roof. This leads to A LOT of water retention, which can give the appearance of weight loss stalling.
I don't care about others, yet I've listed all my helpful posts. I think they considerably outnumber you 0 informative posts.... Read my posts more carefully and you might actually learn something. Your selective reading acting up again.
Easy. If you eat the same things everyday, simply reduce portions to lose weight. Or you could cut out a meal. Any way that will create an energy deficit will result in weight loss. Counting calories is merely the most accurate and easiest way.
Yes it is. Do you have any idea how the human body works? Obviously not.
Wrong again. You are not a special snowflake. Your body works the same way as all bodies, to a certain degree.
I don't care about praise or acknowledgement over the internet. I give out accurate information that will get people results. Take it or leave. No skin off my back. But if I see others posting nonsense, I'll call them on it. I'm a no BS kind of guy and won't watch others be led astray by uneducated people.
You say I'm narrow minded, but that is just because you don't understand. Creating an energy deficit is the only way to lose weight. That's it. You can't lose weight without an energy deficit. It's impossible. Period.
Lol. A psychologist is probably intelligent enough to see there is no emotion or personality in my posts. Just clear, concise messages.
You are a liar. You have lied about me and things I have said several times. Thus, you are a liar. I have given you possible reasons as to why you won't gain weight, even though I can't make a 100% judgement based on self-reported, uncontrolled information which could have a host of variables. Bottom line, eat more.
I have explained in several posts. I suggest you go back and read through all of my posts more thoroughly, twice.
Again, your selective reason has got the better of you. I never said you lied about your weight change. Another lie on your part. Just like the several other lies about what I said. Keep on lying.
You seem to miss an awful lot. That's probably the 3rd/4th time I asked.
Now, you will have to go into A LOT more detail than that half-arsed nonsense. More what cells?
Yes, testosterone starts to decline with age. What's your point? I thought it was very well understood that youths gain muscle more efficiently than elders. You're just taking guesses now. Do you actually have anything worth while to say about hormones.
Your argument was that it's not just about calories, it's about hormones. Well, c'mon then. Explain. I'm still waiting.
I do post on a more technical forum. We don't argue. Everyone is pretty much in agreement with everything I just said. That's why I find it so bewildering how little knowledge you have. And I haven't mentioned any theories. How many times do I have to mention this, seriously. Are you that slow? Theories are tested and researched in a controlled, real world, practical environment, and then conclusions are drawn, peer-reviewed and discussed. This is where recommendations come from. This is how cures for diseases are found.
I have given the general population some of the best advice they will get on the web. No nonsense, no BS advice that will get results. You have nothing of worth to say. Lies, upon lies, upon stupidity, upon ignorance.
"Creating an energy deficit is the only way to lose weight. That's it. You can't lose weight without an energy deficit. It's impossible. Period." Can't weight loss sometimes be attributable to factors such as an overactive Thyroid, or other factors which affect your ability for your body to absorb the calories you are consuming? So in these circumstances increasing your calorie consumption would be ineffective? Of course this would create the energy deficit you are talking about, but this may explain why consuming extra calories for some people is ineffective. I know Kimajy has mentioned on this forum numerous times the struggle he's had over the years with maintaining his weight, so it's not as if he's manufactured this idea for the sake of this thread?
Thyroid hormones regulate metabolism. If you have an overactive thyroid disorder then that means you will have a crazy high metabolism, meaning your body will need a lot more calories to maintain. It doesn't affect the calories you absorb, more the fact you need a lot more calories to maintain weight. Under active thyroids can be treated via medication. Not too sure about over active but who doesn't like to eat loads
By the way, I never said he lied about his situation. I called him a liar because he was saying I said things which I clearly never said or insinuated.
We've all heard the term "hard gainer". 99% of the time the solution is to just eat more. These people probably don't have big appetites and think they are eating a lot but are actually eating sweet FA. I personally consume ~4,000kcal a day to gain weight at a rate of 2-3lb a month. If I ate 3,500kcal, I'd probably start to drop weight slowly.
Last edited by a moderator:
diver
Well-Known Member
FAO:Germaine
I started this thread a while back as an alternative to the Spotlight running club thread which you may or may not have seen?
I'm not a runner, never will be so as a bit of a change I thought a general fitness thread might be in order. My particular goal was/is to lose some body fat, ie lower my BF %.
It was intended just for general chat/advice between spotlighters but sadly it has gone astray and I blame you. You are probably a decent person deep down, but online your are nothing but antagonistic in your manner, right from your first post on the thread.
It takes some time to gain the trust of fellow posters on here, and any other public forum for that matter. You are a newbie and you have not gained this trust nor respect from anyone, with only a handful of posts forum wide to your name.
I have made some mistakes in the past with a couple of my posts and corrected matters. Please quit (this post) whilst you still can and maybe recoup some losses. Stop trying to "shoot down" very well respected, liked and valuable members of the spotlight community.
I started this thread a while back as an alternative to the Spotlight running club thread which you may or may not have seen?
I'm not a runner, never will be so as a bit of a change I thought a general fitness thread might be in order. My particular goal was/is to lose some body fat, ie lower my BF %.
It was intended just for general chat/advice between spotlighters but sadly it has gone astray and I blame you. You are probably a decent person deep down, but online your are nothing but antagonistic in your manner, right from your first post on the thread.
It takes some time to gain the trust of fellow posters on here, and any other public forum for that matter. You are a newbie and you have not gained this trust nor respect from anyone, with only a handful of posts forum wide to your name.
I have made some mistakes in the past with a couple of my posts and corrected matters. Please quit (this post) whilst you still can and maybe recoup some losses. Stop trying to "shoot down" very well respected, liked and valuable members of the spotlight community.
Last edited by a moderator:
WeLuvIbiza
Active Member
Clearly, you are not a fraction as intelligent as you tell yourself, get a grip man. You are clueless, literally clueless, yet convince yourself your classroom education over rides everything!!
kimajy
Well-Known Member
^^ That pretty much sums up. As promised above I'm not posting any more responses to Germaine on this thread either ... it would go on in a futile circle forever otherwise
. Really sad to see what Germaine has done to your thread, deepseadiver. Done my best to try to pull it back on course using the "other method" but even this doesn't work. I expect nothing will work to short of "Thread Closed". I'd hazard Germaine may prefer to have started the thread so as to be in control of its ultimate destiny (as everything else most likely) ... but he/she didn't. However, I hope you might still recover what was an interesting and promising start.Actually did try to take the time to make some constructive comments above to show Germaine a different way as everyone deserves a chance but I'd be a liar if my feelings and inclinations were simply to reply "**** off you stupid ignorant poisonous ****"
... and having read the latest, regrettably, that pretty much sums up my feelings ! I do however take issue with being called a liar. Missing something in a post is not lying. To quote an oft-cited phrase "go and do some research". Not asking for an apology as having read the latest tirade I really don't care enough about the person saying it to care ! All I can hope is that some day Germaine will develop into a better character but I'm not holding my breath. Let the wheels of fortune and fate revolve and maybe, just maybe, at some stage in the future there will be positive changes.
By the way I wouldn't assume you're dealing with a bloke in Germaine. What I've just witnessed here, and being ever open-minded leads me to speculate that we may be dealing with a "modern gal". But I know not - and to be completely honest do not care.
^^ That pretty much sums up. As promised above I'm not posting any more responses to Germaine on this thread either ... it would go on in a futile circle forever otherwise
Actually did try to take the time to make some constructive comments above to show Germaine a different way as everyone deserves a chance but I'd be a liar if my feelings and inclinations were simply to reply "**** off you stupid ignorant poisonous ****"
I do however take issue with being called a liar. Missing something in a post is not lying. To quote an oft-cited phrase "go and do some research". Not asking for an apology as having read the latest tirade I really don't care enough about the person saying it to care ! All I can hope is that some day Germaine will develop into a better character but I'm not holding my breath. Let the wheels of fortune and fate revolve and maybe, just maybe, at some stage in the future there will be positive changes.
By the way I wouldn't assume you're dealing with a bloke in Germaine. What I've just witnessed here, and being ever open-minded leads me to speculate that we may be dealing with a "modern gal". But I know not - and to be completely honest do not care.
Wow. Hormonal much? You gonna cry? Seriously, grow a pair lol
Passive aggressive posts. Showing your maturity
A psychologist would have a field day with this post
I seriously doubt I'm clueless. In fact, I can say with almost certainty that I have the most knowledge on sports nutrition and nutritional science than everyone in this thread. Also, to add, exercise science too.
And all this who says The Laws of Thermodynamics are dead...
I guess gravity is also dead? Is it?
Last edited by a moderator:
Couple of things.
My first post was quoting another member and agreeing with what they had said. I fail to see how that was antagonistic.
Secondly, you want to lower BF %. Great. But general chat isn't going to achieve that. Useful information will help you not only achieve that but also maintain that and improve. I'm in this post to give out accurate information and dispel any myths or unnecessary eating rituals.
I never shot down members, with exception being Kimajy, only due to his ongoing lying and lack of knowledge, but rather I shot down their information. There's a difference. People react so sensitively because they can't actually back it up when I call BS.
"Science is not always intuitive, that's why there are scientists...in other words just because you can't understand a concept, that doesn't make it false."
~ Jeremy Loenneke PhD(c)
The good thing about science, is that is is right, wether you believe or not, and if one cannot grasp a basic concept, then the ignorance lies solely with them, not with the evidence
~ Jeremy Loenneke PhD(c)
The good thing about science, is that is is right, wether you believe or not, and if one cannot grasp a basic concept, then the ignorance lies solely with them, not with the evidence
Last edited by a moderator:
Moondust
Active Member
I seriously doubt I'm clueless. In fact, I can say with almost certainty that I have the most knowledge on sports nutrition and nutritional science than everyone in this thread. Also, to add, exercise science too.
And all this who says The Laws of Thermodynamics are dead...
I couldn't agree more, your knowledge is wasted on us. Im sure there are various forums out there where you would be much more appreciated..