Subject: My bodyopus experience Week 7 Copyright Lyle McDonald 1996 Date: 1996/06/17
Alright, continuing from last week, here's a further comparison of the Bodyopus (BO) diets and the Anabolic Diet (AD). What about the diets themselves as that's what people really want to know about? At their essence, both diets are identical. To use Dan's own words, they are "A cyclical ketogenic diet with 5 days of no carbs and 2 days of carbs." What this means is that you will enter ketosis during the low carb phase and then undergo glycogen supercompensation during the re-carb phase on the weekends. Both are an update of diets like the Rebound Diet, Dan's Ultimate diet and others like the Atkins diet which uses sustained ketosis wih no carb up (in BO, Dan gives an interesting history of these diets in BO but they are not really necessary except to establish precedence and hopefully convince those who are still in the "Ketosis is dangerous" mindset). Ketosis has several good things going for it as it spares protein during dieting (numerous studies of very low calorie diets have found that ketogenic diets cause greater fat loss and less muscle loss than a same calorie high carb diet). Also, you lose fat faster as ketones convert to energy inefficiently. By adding thermogenics and other compounds to the diet, you can possibly attain a fat loss of 2lbs/ week with no loss in muscle. Which is absolutely awesome but you have to get everything absolutely correct for it to happen. And have good thyroid levels which I don't. Also, ketones in the blood stream blunt hunger which is a nice bonus when you're trying to lose weight Somebody on m.f.w commented that he didn't like the Bodyopus diet since he was losing weight from lack of hunger. Umm, maybe I'm missing something but, isn't not being hungry while dieting generally a good thing? (he has since contacted me and said his concern was that he was eating too little to sustain muscle growth. I told him he was unlikely to gain much muscle while dieting if he's natural. BO shines in that it maximizes fat loss with minimal muscle loss or a slight gain). Strangely, as I mentioned before, this was the major criticism of the Atkins diet in the 70's: it kept dieters from being hungry all the time which they saw as a drawback. And you wonder why I think most RD's are full of shit. To be honest with you, the primary differences between BO and the AD are in calorie levels but I think this reflects the different goals of each. BO is set up as a maximal fat loss diet with minimal loss or maintanance of muscle mass. Hence calories are set at mainetanance or below to hasten fat loss. The AD has three different phases which set calorie levels for you. They are Induction with calories at 15-18 times bodyweight to allow you to adapt to the diet, Mass with calories at 20-25 times bodyweight per day for gaining maximal muscle with minimal fat gain, and Cutting where you cut calories from the mass phase. BO could become a mass diet if you increase calories to 20% above maintenance. It's tough to do unless you enjoy force feeding yourself. BO (the book, not the diet) specifies a training protocol that is supposed to maximize effects based on the metabolic state of the dieter. I discussed it and the problems I feel it may have a couple of weeks back so I won't reproduce it here. The AD does not really get into training structure. Pasquale just says to train heavy with minimal rest periods to maximize GH and testosterone release during training for mass gaining. Big fucking help, Mauro. The other big difference is in the carb-up phase on weekends. Dan has done his homework and gives very specific recommendations as to the amount and type of carbs to consume (and, no, I'm not going to reproduce them here. You can buy your own copy of the book). Sufficed to say, they are a pain in the ass requiring you to get up in the middle of the night to eat for truly maximal results. Additionally, you eat only 15% of your total calories as fat. Pasquale makes no recommendations on the weekends except that you maintain fat at 30-40% of total calories. This is, he says, to keep the fat burning pathways open. His only comment is that carbing should stop when you 'feel' the fat starting to come on, whatever that means. Basically, you start to feel bloated and retain water under the skin and it's time to stop. Past that, the rest is details. Duchaine gets into all the minutiae of dieting some of which probably has never been adressed before. Pasquale does not. Pasquale fills his book with sample diets and food lists (yawn). Dan fills his with 50 drugs that most of us will never use and a chapter on diuretics that won't apply to most of us anyhow (however, and I forgot to mention this last week, Bodyopus would make an extrememly complete dieting book for the natural bodybuilder in which case the chapters on dieting drugs and diuretics are applicable. My assumption, perhaps incorrect, is that most of us will never step on stage as bodybuilders). Dan discusses training although I'm not convinced his training structure is ideal for most of us. Pasquale says little about it. Dan gives lots of background information on low carb diets. Pasquale gives the history of high carb diets and why they are stupid. Neither really address the potential health problems of a high fat diet for some people. Dan makes reference to it but this is the typical complain about ketogenic diets by most nutrition 'experts' (i.e. the high levels of fat are unhealthy which is true if you have carbs in your diet but not if you don't.) and it would be nice to have some references or data to support the lack of health risks (I guess it's time for another trip to the library). Dan discusses cool toys like Ketostix and glucometers and tells us how to use them to chart progress. Pasquale mentions neither. However, before you run out to your pharmacy, let me tell you, even in deep ketosis, my glucometer has never shown me below about 70 blood glucose. And, you almost can't not be in ketosis after 3 days without carbs assuming you train even half-heartedly so the Ketostix are just something cool to piss on. (Don't get me wrong, I think ketostix are extrememely useful during the first few weeks of dieting as they will ensure that you are getting things right. At this point, I can more or less tell when I'm in ketosis as I do essentially the same things diet and training wise, more or less, each week. Of course, this week has been the exception but that's below). The Atkin's dieters have been doing this stuff for years. Dan has simply made the ketogenic diet much more workable and elegant for it's goal which is maximal fat loss with minimal muscle loss for bodybuilders and other athletes. By contrast, the Atkins diet is for generally sedentary people who can't lose weight with high carbs but it doesn't have the weekend carb up which has some specific metabolic effects (again, buy either the AD or BO for more details). Ok, here's what I think the biggest difference between the two diet plans are in a nutshell: BO is designed to achieve maximum fat loss with minimum muscle loss. The training design is structured to achieve maximal glycogen super-compensation during the weekends with no carbs going to tissue repair. Fat is minimized in the BO plan as it will limit recarb. Fat is not really limited in the AD. As I said last week, this simply screams pre-contest bodybuilder to me. For that person, the strict BO plan makes sense as it should get them into peak condition for the day of their contest. But, what about the rest of us? I'm not convinced that the high rep workout is critical. Ok, if you want to be pumped as hell for a pool party this summer, do the high rep workout instead of a normal high tension workout prior to the weekend carb-up. The AD, depending on the phase you're in, is geared towards weight maintenance, muscle gain with minimal fat gain, or fat loss with minimal muscle loss. So, in a sense, the AD could be said to encompass the BO diet. Recall that BO the book does get into a lot of other topics like details about food quality and the other more 'normal' diets as well as thyroid and thermogenics that the AD book doesn't. But, for most of us, both diet plans (as I've stated in another thread) can essentially be summed up by: 1.Mon-Fri: no carbs (or at least below 30 grams) 2. Sat-Sun: carbs. If 48 hours of carbs doesn't work for you, cut back to 36 and then 24 hours to minimize fat spillover. 3. Lift weights and do cardio as per your normal routine (hi AJ) Even Dan himself says (pg. 281): "While some dieters can follow BODYOPUS with the simplest of directions, such as 'no carbs for 5 days, then eat like crazy for 2 days', most of us yearn for more precision." If you want that precision or "All the plumbing" as well as Dan's strange idea of humor, buy Bodyopus. The AD book isn't nearly as entertaining. Just the facts. But not even all of them for that matter. This will probably get you 90% of the way to your goals IMHO. As pointed out to me in detail by, shall we say, an interested correspondent, the details in Bodyopus (i.e. glucose disposal agents, thermogenics, etc) are what make it work. If you want truly maximal fat loss, optimal muscle supercompensation, etc, follow BO to the letter. Otherwise just don't eat carbs for 5 days and then carb up. Make sure to train at least 3 days per week with weights. If a 48 hour carb up means you spillover, cut it back to 36 hours and then 24. The other details might maximize your results or might be useful for the contest bodybuilder but for the rest of us, the above distillation will work just fine. As I said in another thread, people have been losing fat with the Atkin's diet for years without most of this. Again, Dan has refined the ketogenic diet rather well and gotten into the details (to swipe a Colganism "God lives in the details.") When you need to get to 4% bodyfat and contest ready, buy Bodyopus and follow it's directions to the letter with no exceptions and I think Dan's genius will show through. Lyle McDonald, CSCS ----------------------------- Someone on m.f.w suggested I try a different format for my body composition measurements to avoid so much confusion as to what the changes have been. So, I've made two charts (one for the repeat Monday measurements and one for the Friday lower down). Let me know if this has too much information or could be better presented. I can only imagine how this will format to m.f.w. Day Date Weight Pec Abs SI Thigh Sum3 BF% FM FFM -------------------------------------------------------------- Mon 4/31 156 15.4% 24 132* Mon 5/6 153 13.6% 21 132* Mon 5/13 154 7 27 18 8 42 12.2% 18.8 135.2 Mon 5/20 151 6 27 17.5 9 42 12.2% 18.4 132.6 Mon 5/27 154 5 24 18 8.5 37.5 10.4% 16 138 Mon 6/3 149 5 25.5 15.5 8 38.5 10.4% 15.5 133.5 Mon 6/10 155 5 26 16 8 39 11.3% 17.5? 137.5 * These two measurement were taken with the one site home calipers. Therefore, they may or may not be directly comparable to the other measures. Key: BF% = body fat percentage FM = fat mass in lbs FFM = fat free mass (total weight - FM) Not much change this week but that was to be expected. I was not cutting calories or doing much in the way of aerobics. Reasons are given below. The 6/10 Monday measurement was at the end of this week. It appears that bodyfat is rebounding somewhat but it's hard to tell as small changes in caliper measurement moved me into the next bodyfat category. I guess it's time to start dieting down again and counting calories. Oh, goody. My week at a glance: ------------------- Sunday: I did 30' of mild cardio after returning to protein and fat eating. I definitely overate yesterday. Going to have to watch that from now on. Monday: As of this morning, it appears that I have regained some of my lost bodyfat (bummer). I think my eat all you can weekends may have been a bit over the top. I'm going to start keeping track of calories again this week (shooting for about 2000 per day) before I start restricting calories again next week. Did my normal light walking with clients. I have also decided to try even more frequent training than last week (three days per week). I want to try the Ironman Fat to Muscle workout system. It is a 5 day split routine working basically two bodyparts each day and each muscle gets hit directly once per week and indirectly once per week. Along with this, I will do a minimum of cardio. Diet: Ate about 2000 calories per day. I'm going to stay there all this week and see what happens (gain, lose, no change in bodyfat) before taking it any lower. Supplements: All the same. Strangely, I'm not yet in ketosis as of tonight so I took another dosage of vanadyl before bedtime. Perhaps all that junk food carbing this weekend is catching up with me. Also, a friend sent me a paper off of medline that found chronic use of vanadyl (100 mg/day) had effects as long as two weeks after stopping the supplements. So, as far as insulin sensitivity, I think a case could be made for daily use rather than just until I hit ketosis. The workout: As mentioned above, I'm giving the Ironman "Fat to Muscle" workout a try this week. It is a 5 day split routine with little to no cardio. Today was: warmup: 10' cardio chest: 4 sets flat bench, 4 sets flyes delts: 3 sets press, 3 sets lateral raise abs: crunches cool-down: 15' cardio Strength seemed good and constant (no big dropoff between sets as far as reps go) but I can't compare it to anything last week. I promise I'll stick with this workout long enough (next 3-4 weeks) to see what is happening as far as strength gains. I don't intend to do more than 10' cardio before and 10-15' cardio after any single workout (an idea stolen from Jeff Krabbe of Anabolic Diet fame). That should hopefully avoid any problems with protein breakdown from doing cardio for too long at one time while still getting some of the calorie/ketone burning benefits. Tuesday: Well, my pecs and delts are sore (no surprise) but I'm still not in ketosis which is very strange. I typically hit ketosis at about the 48 hour mark so I'm not sure what is going on. It could be that I did less activity on Sunday (my first day with no carbs), or ate far too much during the recarb, or that my weight workout last night wasn't extensive enough to lower blood glucose enough. In any case, I'm still taking vanadyl and other blood glucose disposal agents with meals. If I'm not in ketosis by tonight, I'll know something is very wrong. Diet: Same as yesterday. About 1700 calories or so. Workout: Today was lats and brachialis for training: Lats: 4 sets chins, 4 sets pullovers Brachialis: 3 sets hammer curls, 3 sets reverse curls Again, warmed up with 10' cardio and cooled down with another 15' of cardio. Supplements: Oh, yeah, back on ECA but only at 25 mg of ephedrine per dose. Dammit, I'm still not in ketosis as of this evening so something is definitely wrong. Several hypotheses: 1. Too much sucrose/fructose this weekend. Thing is, it didn't affect my descent into ketosis last weekend. Not likely, IMHO. 2. Training structure: This could be it. I got a mail from someone following Dan's Ultimate Diet and he told me that a Monday workout from hell (20 sets of chest of 10-20 reps, hmm that sounds familiar. can you say bodybuilder depletion workout) got him into ketosis almost immediately. Ok, theory time: I ate shit all weekend (processed sucrose and crap). This led to a fully recarbed liver (which, recall is a large determinant in how quickly one enters ketosis). So, what does dumbass me go do? A short, two bodypart workout on Monday followed by minimal cardio. Which made sense at the time but obviously didn't burn enough glycogen to empty the liver. Ok, I'm finally in ketosis (after 72 friggin hours). It took me 45 hard minutes on the Stairmaster (5X90" intervals and about 15' at anaerobic threshhold) to do it but I finally did. This seems to support my idea that I should have done more training on Mon and Tue as far as weights. Which means I'll probably switch my training structure back to what it was last week. Or, how about this idea: been reading more of the NFPT methodology. They suggest as a pre-contest thing to add sets of 20-25 reps to failure to deplete glycogen on top of normal training. Could this be the best way to do the early week workouts: do your normal sets of 6-8 reps to failure for the anabolic effect followed by one or two sets of 20-25 reps of the same exercise to deplete glycogen to hasten entry into ketosis. Hmmmmmm. Ok, something interesting. In private email, JR told me that melatonin keeps him from losing weight (recall that he's on the long term ketogenic diet for 4-6 weeks followed by 4-7 days of carbs). I was taking melatonin this week (in hopes of upregulating at least pineal gland 5'-D) so maybe that was the problem. Needless to say, I dropped this from my nightly pill stack tonight. He also told me that 4g/day of carnitine kept him out of ketosis. Which I find strange. Can anyone give a potential reason why? Perhaps it was causing too many ketones to be burned which cleared the urine out. Ok, what about this water thing? Again, JR tells me that the consensus on the low-carb mailing list is that extra water hastens weight loss. The theory being that it carries out the ketones before they can be burned for energy which necessitates creating more. Thing is, we want ketones in the blood for anti- catabolic effects, right?. He commented that perhaps the dieters he speaks of are losing muscle (he did say weight loss, not fat loss) as many of those on the lo-carb list don't seem to make the distinction between fat loss and weight loss. I tried to explain to them that the 4 lbs they gain when they carbo-binge is not real weight but water and glycogen. To gain 4 lbs in one day, you'd have to eat 14000 calories or more above maintenance which I don't think is physically possible without an intravenous glucose drip. I can pig out on the weekends but I'd bet 5-6000 calories is my limit before I get so full that I'm sick. Wednesday: Stranger and stranger. As of this morning, I'm back out of ketosis which has never happened before (No, baby, I mean it, this has never happened before. No, it's not you....it's me...) to me although it happens a lot to a friend of mine (he just can't seem to get into sustained ketosis no matter what he does). I'm starting to think that this week is basically a wash as far as results. Took me 72 hours to get into ketosis, can't even stay there. Aaaarrrrgggghhhh. And, I have the leg workout from hell to look forward to this afternoon. Double aaarrrgggghhh. On another note, a couple of interesting tidbits. Number one, I looked again at what the U Cal Berkelely Wellness letter had to say about ketogenic diets. There biggest complaint (referring to a recent study) was that it imparied mental functioning *during the first week* of ketogenic dieting (their words, my emphasis). Well, no shit. Again, this points out how desparate the mainstream still is to discredit a diet approach that works for many. If we were to do a supplement study that drew conclusions after one week, it would get laughed out of the journals. But, do some half-assed study on ketogenic diets for one week, and it's frigging gospel to the nutrition people. Give me a break. On a related note, I came across a book called "The Epilepsy Treatment Diet" at our biomed which details the long term (one year) ketogenic diets that the researchers keep epileptic kids on. So, the message seems to be that ketogenic diets are safe for use medically but unsafe as fat loss diets. Again, give me a friggin break. And, considering further that Bodyopus dieters only stay in ketosis for 4 of 7 days (or 2 of 7 days for me this week), the "ketosis is dangerous" argument just has to get thrown out the window. I only got a chance to glance at it but am looking for a copy to buy to see if I can glean any helpful details that might apply to Bodyopus. It gets into things like ketogenic ratios and starting calorie levels and such like that. To keep the length of this post down, I'll discuss the details of this book more next week. Ok, off to squat until I hurl. Where's that damn pail... The leg workout: Squats: 2 sets of 10 followed by 1 set of 20. Ouch. Leg extension: 3 sets of 10 to failure SLDL: 2 sets of 8 Leg curl: 1 set and then my calves cramped. Cardio: 30' to make sure I'm in ketosis. Also, tonight, out of frustration over this week, I did another 30' of aerobics at about 150 HR. Probably a bad idea but I was in a bad mood (getting stood up by a client didn't help any). And, to try to make up for not being in ketosis for 3 days of 6, I'm going to overdo cardio tomorrow (as well as train upper pecs and tris). Thursday: Something interesting to note today. Out of curiosity, I went to get my cholesterol checked. It's been about 3 years since my last test (at which point it was an awfully low 140 but I don't remember the HDL and LDL splits). In fact, I've been trying to raise it since blood cholesterol levels do show some correlation with testosterone (cholesterol is a steroid molecule and is involved in testosterone synthesis). In any case, the blood work showed me with a total cholesterol of 205 and a HDL (the good kind) of 49. This gave me a total cholesterol/HDL ratio above 4 (the ratio seems to be a bigger determinant of heart disease risk than the absolute numbers). I find this hard to believe. Even eating lots of fat (and lots of saturated fat), I find it strange that my numbers were this high. Many individuals report an improvement in lipid profile when they switch to a low carb diet but they are typically starting out with extrememly high levels (250+). There's another reason I think this reading may be wrong. I checked this morning and I'm still in ketosis. Yet, the blood glucose measurement they did with my cholesterol test showed me at 73. Ketosis isn't supposed to happen until blood glucose gets to 50 or lower. This leads me to believe that the machine they are using may or may not be entirely accurate. Ok, after that news, I went and spun on the Lifecycle (this is all pre-breakfast) for an hour at a HR of 120 (60% of my maximum) to try and make up for this week. I was definitely feeling shaky going out after that but I had left some string cheese in my car to eat afterwards. Yumm. I figure keeping the intensity that low (almost pitifully easy) should avoid catabolism. Observation: Recall that I decided to try a more extensive training structure this week (the Ironman 5 day Fat to Muscle split). I have reached the conclusion that it is bad news on this diet and I will not be continuing it. Paging through BO again, I came across the statement that soreness (which may or may not be indicative of both muscle damage as well as recovery) lasts longer with low carbs (no carbs to help repair damaged muscle fibers). My chest is still aching from Monday's workout and I never stay sore that long. Hence, I've opted out of another weight training day (today was to be upper pecs and triceps) until tomorrow. I'll be doing a semi-heavy full body workout prior to the carb up but I'm going back to last week's training structure (split body two ways on Mon/Tue and then work whole body on Friday) to minimize overall muscular trauma (not to mention soreness) next week. I'm slowly coming to the realization (as we say here in the south: "I may be dumb but I ain't stupid") that I should quit changing things so often. The first few weeks of this diet went the best as far as results. It's only since changing the training structure etc. that results have tapered off (we have another saying in the South: "If it ain't broke, don't fuck with it." Wise words from people who sleep with their cousins. On which note, I do have some 4th cousins I wouldn't mind...) On which note, a joke: If you get married in Tennessee and divorced in Kentucky, are you still brother and sister in Alabama? On a related note: For any who come down to the south, a bit of terminology: "Y'all" is singular. "All y'all" is plural. And, if someone offers "to carry you" to the gym, they don't mean it literally. For some reason, people down here use the phrase "to carry" to mean "to take". All they are offering is to take you to the gym. Hey, I don't come up with this shit, I just report it. Also, watch out for banjo players who don't talk much. This *is* the south, where the movie "Deliverance" is a love story. Where the men are men, the women are women, and the sheep are very, VERY nervous. (No, I've never been that desparate and I haven't ever gone cow tipping so don't bother asking me about it.) Squeal like a pig, boy. Oh, still in ketosis this evening although the color is definitely lighter. I know, I'm getting as pathological about checking ketones as my clients get about weighing themselves. But, considering how badly this week has gone ketosis wise, I'm not taking any chances. Friday: Here's the tabulated Friday changes in bodyfat: Day Date Weight Pec Abs SI Thigh Sum3 BF% FM FFM -------------------------------------------------------------- Fri 5/17 145 8 27 18 8 41 12.2% 17.7 129 Fri 5/24 144 5 24 19 8 37 10.4% 15 129 Fri 5/31 146 5 24.5 17 8 37 10.4% 15.1 130.9 Fri 6/7 146 5 25.5 15.5 7.5 38 11.3% 16.5 129.5 Fri 6/14 146 5.5 25 16 8 38.5 11.3% 16.5 129.5 Key: BF% = body fat percentage FM = fat mass in lbs FFM = fat free mass (total weight - FM) Notes: Well, comparing by Monday's measurements, I have gotten back on track (17.5 lbs of fat down to 16.5 today). I'm still higher than I was two weeks ago but I'm back on track and plan to make the final dieting plunge over the next two weeks. Also, had a talk with my director today about the above measurements. One thing that has not made sense to me is the rather major changes in lbs of bodyfat with no change in bodyfat percentage. Meaning this: let's say you have a person with 135 lbs of lean body mass and 15 lbs of fat mass. That is 15 lbs fat/150 lbs total = 10% bodyfat. And, his skinfolds come out to about 37. Now, feed him creatine and he gains 10 lbs of water (which, recall, is reflected as lean body mass). Now he's got 15 lbs of fat with 145 lbs of lean or 15/160 = 9.375% bodyfat. But, his skinfolds, if measured, most likely wouldn't have changed as far as total numbers. This leads me to think (this is what my director clued me in on) that the lookup charts and bodyfat prediction equations aren't that accurate in the short term. And that my Mon and Fri measurements aren't accurately reflecting changes in fat mass. I think simply using skinfold measures (which have gone up slightly this week) might give more accurate indications of what's going on. Does this make sense to anyone else out there? Friday: I had originally intended to do a light-heavy workout today before starting my carb. But, I am still sore from this week's training. So, feeling awfully lazy, I did 2 loops of a depletion workout, got too bored, and started carbing. Next week I go back to what worked earlier in this diet (heavy Mon,Tue, heavy Fri). I will lose this last 6 lbs of bodyfat within the next 3 weeks if it kills me. A funny: Before I went to work this afternoon, I was channel surfing and came across big Lou Ferigno on some inane talk show. He was demonstrating some exercises, etc. The host, of course asks "Ok, what about steroids." Big Louie, with a straight face even, responds: "Oh, I don't believe in them." Wow, I guess the Weider Anabolic Mega Paks are what brought him to the Masters Olympic at 300 lbs and 5% bodyfat. If I'd had time, I would have shit my pants laughing at this one. Saturday: Continued carbing with no work out. I had intended to go skating this afternoon but all that insulin put me in a serotonin coma as usual. Stopped the carb-up at about 9 pm which is around 26 hours after I started. Basically ate junk just like last weekend but it's back to fat and protein tomorrow. The HCA did the job keeping my hunger down and, although my stomach is physically full, I don't feel that water retentive, bloated feel that too many carbs and spillover to fat cells usually causes. For those who can't (or, like me, won't) follow Dan's carbing schedule to the letter, I highly recommend an abridged carb-load. Maybe next week I'll finally get the nerve to go the pharmacy and get some insulin (Duchaine assures me that it's not prescription and needles are not prescription items in Tennseess) to use while carbing and then again to get back into ketosis. Sunday: Nothing to report. Back to protein and fat today. Went for a long bike ride to help burn out glycogen, burn some fat, and get me into ketosis this next week. Once again, the goal is 6 lbs of fat loss in the next 3 weeks. It will be hard but I think I can do it. The key is not to lose any muscle. And, no, I'm not getting any clenbuterol although I'm still waiting for my first issue to arrive from Bodywise (they import non-scheduled items like Cytomel, etc) so I can look into what they've got. Next week: "The Epilepsy Diet Treatment" Book and Ketogenic ratios. Lyle McDonald P.S. I promise to keep the next one of these things shorter.