@calebminson I'm lucky to be living in England where all packages are in grams anyway, and recipes use both cup and gram measurements mostly. Even though I grew up with ounces in the US they kind of break my brain now, so I totally get what you mean.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
2.5 year calisthenics transformation from nothing
- Thread starter lamnhi
- Start date
-
- Tags
- bodyweight fitness
calebminson
New member
@sega On a tangent, one of the biggest level-ups I experienced in the kitchen was switching to baking by weight, not measurement. SO MUCH BETTER RESULTS! You can loosely scoop a cup of flour or really pack it in there & vastly change the weight added to your recipe.
For example, I spent a long time hunting down the perfect chocolate-chip cookie recipe. Once I got it, I had to experiment with the flour weight to get it just right, so that it wasn't overly-doughy, but also had enough flour to hold the cookie together. The magic number for this recipe in particular was 440 grams of flour:
I do all of my baking this way now, as well as weighing for macros. It sounds like a big hassle on the surface, but in practice, all you're doing is putting a scale underneath a bowl & reading the numbers...that's it lol. I don't know why we are so highly resistant to small changes like this, because they feel like big hassles, when in practice they're really not, and the benefits are so outstanding!
For example, I spent a long time hunting down the perfect chocolate-chip cookie recipe. Once I got it, I had to experiment with the flour weight to get it just right, so that it wasn't overly-doughy, but also had enough flour to hold the cookie together. The magic number for this recipe in particular was 440 grams of flour:
I do all of my baking this way now, as well as weighing for macros. It sounds like a big hassle on the surface, but in practice, all you're doing is putting a scale underneath a bowl & reading the numbers...that's it lol. I don't know why we are so highly resistant to small changes like this, because they feel like big hassles, when in practice they're really not, and the benefits are so outstanding!
@calebminson I was exactly the same. I still bake a lot of American recipes, so I was always too lazy to convert everything to grams. It took sourdough bread baking for me to fully make the switch. Just 20g of flour can totally throw off a recipe. All of my fav baking recipes have gram measurements written in pencil next to the dry measurements now.
I'll totally try that cookie recipe at some point. I love how you're an endless fountain of info.
I'll totally try that cookie recipe at some point. I love how you're an endless fountain of info.
calebminson
New member
@sega Yeah, I got really heavy into sourdough this year thanks to COVID. If you're into hardware, I got a Challenger bread pan & it's totally amazing:
It's sealed, so it keeps the steam, it has handles EVERYWHERE, so you can easily take off the lid for the last 15 minutes on a loaf, it has a nice shallow loading pan so you don't have to burn your fingers like with a Dutch oven, etc.
Fairly pricey, but it's also a lifetime investment that you can hand down to your grandchildren - I've been using it nearly every single day & it's just so fantastic for sourdough projects!
ADHD + the magic power of checklists lol. Once it clicks that literally everything in life boils down to a checklist, and all you have to do is setup some reminders to follow your checklist to get great results (bodyweight exercises, meal-prep system using macros, baking sourdough no-knead bread or the world's best chocolate-chip cookie, homework assignments, etc.), it opens a LOT of doors for you!
It's sealed, so it keeps the steam, it has handles EVERYWHERE, so you can easily take off the lid for the last 15 minutes on a loaf, it has a nice shallow loading pan so you don't have to burn your fingers like with a Dutch oven, etc.
Fairly pricey, but it's also a lifetime investment that you can hand down to your grandchildren - I've been using it nearly every single day & it's just so fantastic for sourdough projects!
I'll totally try that cookie recipe at some point. I love how you're an endless fountain of info.
ADHD + the magic power of checklists lol. Once it clicks that literally everything in life boils down to a checklist, and all you have to do is setup some reminders to follow your checklist to get great results (bodyweight exercises, meal-prep system using macros, baking sourdough no-knead bread or the world's best chocolate-chip cookie, homework assignments, etc.), it opens a LOT of doors for you!
@calebminson I’m using the free Lose It! App to track this and it’s awesome. Your post is more awesome though, thanks!
calebminson
New member
@mike22475 Lose It! is a very good app! Calorie management works for both gaining & losing weight because that's the key measurement tool for growth, loss, and maintenance. And the good news is, calories is a simple formula!
Granted, it requires a little more work because it's a minor hassle to count more stuff, but if you want to dip your toes in the macros water, you can do it right from the Lost It! app! Just open the app, go to Log, tap the down arrow on the Calories header, and it will show you protein/carbs/fats, where you can create a goal for one or more if you'd like:
My recommendation is to do what you're comfortable with, and chip away on learning & doing more over time (unless you just want to go whole-hog). For me, a big part of macros was the familiarity aspect, which means I just had to get used to doing it by becoming familiar with how it works in practice, so if you're already doing calorie-counting, that's a HUGE first step in taking control over your physical body & your internal energy.
Macros can be daunting because it appears to be more complex, but nearly every food you buy has the macros printed on the nutrition label, and the more natural stuff like eggs & chicken can either be weighed on a scale and/or looked up on an app. A couple other good apps are MyFitnessPal & MyMacros+.
Personally, at the moment, I just do it on paper, due to my meal-prep system. I like at cooking as a production job: if you eat 3 meals a day (breakfast, lunch, and dinner), then you're on the hook for 21 meals a week, every week for the rest of your life. That's over a thousand meals a year.
Because I'm on a budget (and because it's so easy to spend hundreds of dollars a month on fast food), I like to use meal-prepping as a tool to (1) hit my macros every day, (2) make delicious food, and (3) save money. So my current approach is:
Utilizing a simple meal-prep approach that spreads the work out over time, and then labeling the results, means that all I have to is do some simple math on a piece of paper in the morning, so I can grab some overnight outs out of my fridge for my morning snack, a breakfast burrito for breakfast, some carrots & hummus for my brunch snack, etc.
But I only got to this point after going through a lot of trial & error, which is why it kind of all boils down to familiarity - if you can ease yourself into tracking your calories, then add say protein, then do the other macros, then figure out a meal-prep system that works for you in terms of actually being useful, then the combination of macros + a meal-prep system basically gives you full control over your physique & really amps up your daily energy levels!
On a tangent, I also made the somewhat shocking discovery that food = mood. Food controls like 90% mood during a day. I didn't realize this growing up because there's a time delay between when you eat & how it makes you feel (have energy or not having energy, being lethargic, being moody, etc.).
I suspect most people will unfortunately never make this correlation because of that delay (usually impacts your mood a few hours after eating), especially because I was clueless until I had already been doing macros for awhile, so it's not readily apparent! What I found was that consistently hitting my macros throughout the day meant that I could keep both my mood & my energy elevated 24/7. I'm a very low-energy person by default, so this was a pretty big revelation that I could control my energy & also how I felt, mood-wise, through food.
Something like 90% of your neurotransmitters are generated in your stomach & set up to your brain, so it makes sense that what you eat has a strong impact on how you feel, and because hardly anyone reliably hits their macros on a daily basis, we have a huge culture of quick-fixes: drive-thru takeout, vending machines, 5-hour energy, energy drinks, energy bars, etc., because we all are looking for an easy boost to make us feel better, when we in reality we can have full control over how we feel by controlling how (not what) we eat.
With macros, we have the freedom & opportunity to feel good all day long! For me, this was a pretty life-changing tool to have in my life, because it meant that I could give myself the ability to have energy in the morning, afternoon, and evening, and be able to do more stuff with my life than just being a couch potato. Again, growing up with low energy (health issues), this was a pretty big deal for me. So it's not just about controlling your physique & bodyweight, but about your energy & your mood too!
Feeling good feels GOOD! And being able to consistently control feeling good is amazing!
- Protein + Carbs + Fats = Calories
Granted, it requires a little more work because it's a minor hassle to count more stuff, but if you want to dip your toes in the macros water, you can do it right from the Lost It! app! Just open the app, go to Log, tap the down arrow on the Calories header, and it will show you protein/carbs/fats, where you can create a goal for one or more if you'd like:
My recommendation is to do what you're comfortable with, and chip away on learning & doing more over time (unless you just want to go whole-hog). For me, a big part of macros was the familiarity aspect, which means I just had to get used to doing it by becoming familiar with how it works in practice, so if you're already doing calorie-counting, that's a HUGE first step in taking control over your physical body & your internal energy.
Macros can be daunting because it appears to be more complex, but nearly every food you buy has the macros printed on the nutrition label, and the more natural stuff like eggs & chicken can either be weighed on a scale and/or looked up on an app. A couple other good apps are MyFitnessPal & MyMacros+.
Personally, at the moment, I just do it on paper, due to my meal-prep system. I like at cooking as a production job: if you eat 3 meals a day (breakfast, lunch, and dinner), then you're on the hook for 21 meals a week, every week for the rest of your life. That's over a thousand meals a year.
Because I'm on a budget (and because it's so easy to spend hundreds of dollars a month on fast food), I like to use meal-prepping as a tool to (1) hit my macros every day, (2) make delicious food, and (3) save money. So my current approach is:
- Cook one small batch of food a day, such as a dozen homemade granola bars or three pounds of pulled pork, and then freeze or otherwise store it. I write the macro information on the packaging.
- I have a giant insulated lunchbox (pricey, but lifetime warranty!) & load up all of my meals for the day in it.
- I never have to do an overwhelmingly big meal-prep job. Just one recipe a day, usually after I get home from work, and usually using cheat tools like the Instant Pot to automate cooking, lol.
- I always have delicious, macro-friendly food available for my preferred eating times.
Utilizing a simple meal-prep approach that spreads the work out over time, and then labeling the results, means that all I have to is do some simple math on a piece of paper in the morning, so I can grab some overnight outs out of my fridge for my morning snack, a breakfast burrito for breakfast, some carrots & hummus for my brunch snack, etc.
But I only got to this point after going through a lot of trial & error, which is why it kind of all boils down to familiarity - if you can ease yourself into tracking your calories, then add say protein, then do the other macros, then figure out a meal-prep system that works for you in terms of actually being useful, then the combination of macros + a meal-prep system basically gives you full control over your physique & really amps up your daily energy levels!
On a tangent, I also made the somewhat shocking discovery that food = mood. Food controls like 90% mood during a day. I didn't realize this growing up because there's a time delay between when you eat & how it makes you feel (have energy or not having energy, being lethargic, being moody, etc.).
I suspect most people will unfortunately never make this correlation because of that delay (usually impacts your mood a few hours after eating), especially because I was clueless until I had already been doing macros for awhile, so it's not readily apparent! What I found was that consistently hitting my macros throughout the day meant that I could keep both my mood & my energy elevated 24/7. I'm a very low-energy person by default, so this was a pretty big revelation that I could control my energy & also how I felt, mood-wise, through food.
Something like 90% of your neurotransmitters are generated in your stomach & set up to your brain, so it makes sense that what you eat has a strong impact on how you feel, and because hardly anyone reliably hits their macros on a daily basis, we have a huge culture of quick-fixes: drive-thru takeout, vending machines, 5-hour energy, energy drinks, energy bars, etc., because we all are looking for an easy boost to make us feel better, when we in reality we can have full control over how we feel by controlling how (not what) we eat.
With macros, we have the freedom & opportunity to feel good all day long! For me, this was a pretty life-changing tool to have in my life, because it meant that I could give myself the ability to have energy in the morning, afternoon, and evening, and be able to do more stuff with my life than just being a couch potato. Again, growing up with low energy (health issues), this was a pretty big deal for me. So it's not just about controlling your physique & bodyweight, but about your energy & your mood too!
Feeling good feels GOOD! And being able to consistently control feeling good is amazing!
7harvester7
New member
@rob_aston Macros are protein, carbs and fat (macro nutrients).
Micro nutrients are vitamins and minerals.
Micro nutrients are vitamins and minerals.
calebminson
New member
carolsheats
New member
@calebminson Do you have a favorite of the plant based protein powders? The ones I’ve tried are always SO chalky and gross
@carolsheats Vega sport was pretty good, hemp based with frozen blueberries and strawberries is pretty good. I also used basic unflavored yellow pea protein powder which was super not great but extremely low calorie and high protein, so i just dealt with it. Ive never been one to complain about flavors or textures. It just had the protein i wanted and was cheap, the flavor was unimportant.
@calebminson
It matters a little. Animal proteins are better for increasing muscle protein synthesis. Some of those protein sources suck. IIRC collagen protein powder would really be stupid for building muscle. Peanut butter and hemp is also not very good. Oatmeal, watermelon, and pumpkin I'm not sure of but I'd assume they are bad too.
The key is to understand the idea that the food source itself doesn't matter; it's all about macros
It matters a little. Animal proteins are better for increasing muscle protein synthesis. Some of those protein sources suck. IIRC collagen protein powder would really be stupid for building muscle. Peanut butter and hemp is also not very good. Oatmeal, watermelon, and pumpkin I'm not sure of but I'd assume they are bad too.
@dawn16 I havent eaten meat in 8 years and I think I did pretty good. I think you are talking about how "bioavailable" a source of protein is. Yes there is a scale and yes some are better than others, but I don't think because I ate hemp seeds, oats, and pumpkin seeds that my physique or strength suffered.
calebminson
New member
@dawn16 It's one of those yes/no things: does the source of your macros matter for results? No. Does it matter what you eat? Of course. You can make ice cream milkshakes all day long with protein powder for breakfast, lunch, and dinner, but that's probably not going to be too much fun later in the bathroom lol.
Real food is arguably the best choice for our bodies. I've successfully done omni, paleo, keto, vegetarian, vegan, raw vegan, and even fruitarian over the years. Plus liquid meal replacements like Soylent, Sated, Super Body Fuel, etc. You can survive on pretty much anything; what you eat is far more of a personal choice. People all around the world survive on vastly different kinds of diets & still manage to stay in shape and have energy!
As far as foods being "bad" - 100% no. Macros are macros. Your body runs off macros; that's just basic science. Feed your body the right amount of macros, exercise against a plan that will get your the growth & physique results you're looking for, and results magically happen over time.
Foods aren't good or bad; they're just fuel sources. Your body downloads them through your mouth into your stomach, which blends them up into a pulp using acid. Your small intestine handles the bulk of the energy extraction, and then your large intestine pushes out the waste. It can't tell a Twinkie from a Steak - all it does is mushes it up, pulls out the energy, and pushes out the rest (mostly bacteria).
It's really hard to get away from emotionally mapping ideas to food & characterizing them as "good" or "bad", but the hardcore bottom line is that that's not really how things work in reality. Food contains invisible macro numbers, which get extracted by your body, which creates results: weight loss, maintenance, or gain, based on the total overall calories (protein + carbs + fats).
On a tangent, this is a really good video that explains the science of how we actually lose weight physically:
Real food is arguably the best choice for our bodies. I've successfully done omni, paleo, keto, vegetarian, vegan, raw vegan, and even fruitarian over the years. Plus liquid meal replacements like Soylent, Sated, Super Body Fuel, etc. You can survive on pretty much anything; what you eat is far more of a personal choice. People all around the world survive on vastly different kinds of diets & still manage to stay in shape and have energy!
IIRC collagen protein powder would really be stupid for building muscle. Peanut butter and hemp is also not very good. Oatmeal, watermelon, and pumpkin I'm not sure of but I'd assume they are bad too.
As far as foods being "bad" - 100% no. Macros are macros. Your body runs off macros; that's just basic science. Feed your body the right amount of macros, exercise against a plan that will get your the growth & physique results you're looking for, and results magically happen over time.
Foods aren't good or bad; they're just fuel sources. Your body downloads them through your mouth into your stomach, which blends them up into a pulp using acid. Your small intestine handles the bulk of the energy extraction, and then your large intestine pushes out the waste. It can't tell a Twinkie from a Steak - all it does is mushes it up, pulls out the energy, and pushes out the rest (mostly bacteria).
It's really hard to get away from emotionally mapping ideas to food & characterizing them as "good" or "bad", but the hardcore bottom line is that that's not really how things work in reality. Food contains invisible macro numbers, which get extracted by your body, which creates results: weight loss, maintenance, or gain, based on the total overall calories (protein + carbs + fats).
On a tangent, this is a really good video that explains the science of how we actually lose weight physically:
- Your body is a machine. An organic machine, but a machine.
- It operates off certain rules.
- Follow the rules, get results! Period.
@calebminson
I didn't mean "bad" as in good vs evil or in any philosophical way. I meant "bad" as in a poor choice if your goal is to build muscle. This is not an emotional response or argument. It's a reasonable conclusion based on currently available science. Research consistently shows that animal proteins, whey in particular is often used, increases muscle protein synthesis more than various plant based sources. Shit, even when they control for leucine, whey is still better than plant protein. More muscle protein synthesis (probably) means more hypertrophy. All protein is not the same. It differs in amino acid ratios and bioavailability.
The only thing I agree with is that macros determine whether you lose or gain weight.Calories in vs calories out determines weight gain or loss. If your goal is to gain muscle quickly or lose fat while trying to minimize muscle loss, then the sources matter.
Also, the idea your body treats a twinkle and a steak the same way is ridiculous and doesn't make sense at all. A twinkie which is primarily sugar (I assume, haven't seen one in years) will be digested differently than a steak which mostly protein and some fat. The way carbs, protein, and fat are digested are just so different it's clear you have no clue what you're talking about. Don't try to use basic physiology as evidence when you have no clue.
IIRC collagen protein powder would really be stupid for building muscle. Peanut butter and hemp is also not very good. Oatmeal, watermelon, and pumpkin I'm not sure of but I'd assume they are bad too.
As far as foods being "bad" - 100% no. Macros are macros. Your body runs off macros; that's just basic science. Feed your body the right amount of macros, exercise against a plan that will get your the growth & physique results you're looking for, and results magically happen over time.
Foods aren't good or bad; they're just fuel sources. Your body downloads them through your mouth into your stomach, which blends them up into a pulp using acid. Your small intestine handles the bulk of the energy extraction, and then your large intestine pushes out the waste. It can't tell a Twinkie from a Steak - all it does is mushes it up, pulls out the energy, and pushes out the rest (mostly bacteria).
It's really hard to get away from emotionally mapping ideas to food & characterizing them as "good" or "bad", but the hardcore bottom line is that that's not really how things work in reality. Food contains invisible macro numbers, which get extracted by your body, which creates results: weight loss, maintenance, or gain, based on the total overall calories (protein + carbs + fats).
I didn't mean "bad" as in good vs evil or in any philosophical way. I meant "bad" as in a poor choice if your goal is to build muscle. This is not an emotional response or argument. It's a reasonable conclusion based on currently available science. Research consistently shows that animal proteins, whey in particular is often used, increases muscle protein synthesis more than various plant based sources. Shit, even when they control for leucine, whey is still better than plant protein. More muscle protein synthesis (probably) means more hypertrophy. All protein is not the same. It differs in amino acid ratios and bioavailability.
The only thing I agree with is that macros determine whether you lose or gain weight.Calories in vs calories out determines weight gain or loss. If your goal is to gain muscle quickly or lose fat while trying to minimize muscle loss, then the sources matter.
Also, the idea your body treats a twinkle and a steak the same way is ridiculous and doesn't make sense at all. A twinkie which is primarily sugar (I assume, haven't seen one in years) will be digested differently than a steak which mostly protein and some fat. The way carbs, protein, and fat are digested are just so different it's clear you have no clue what you're talking about. Don't try to use basic physiology as evidence when you have no clue.
calebminson
New member
@dawn16 Thank you for clarifying, I went down the wrong tangent! Just to be clear, I'm not trying to fight here, so I just want to make sure I'm not coming off as a jerk, because being direct about a particular topic on the Internet can sometimes sound that way, and that's certainly not my intention, so I apologize if I came off wrong! Just walking through the basics, because they work:
There's always a more nuanced discussion to be had - we can get into phytonutrients, refeeding, carb cycling, fasting, adjusting total macros over multiple days instead of single days, LCHF, etc., but if you want specific, controllable results, the bottom line is always going to be this:
Personally, I haven't seen any physical changes between any macros-based ways of eating myself. I've cycled through various meal timings (3 meals, one meal, an eating window, 6 meals, and currently 7 meals). I've tried varies WoE's (omni, paleo, keto, junk food, vegan, raw vegan, vegetarian, etc.). As long as I'm hitting my macros, both my physique & my medical metrics have all stayed consistently the same over the years. I experienced zero loss on a maintenance diet switching to a plant-based diet.
I can only speak to my own experience. There's always a much deeper discussion to be had about the complexities of nutrition, but at some point people need to decide what they want their focus to be on: getting really consistent, solid, achievable results in the best (imo) & most controllable way possible simply boils down to eating according to your macros, regardless of what you eat. Case in point:
If your focus is to dive into the nitty-gritty of digestion, sub-components of macros & micros like amino acids, and so on, that's fine, but that's outside the bare-minimum scope of what's required to get maximum results, which is macros. I'm a huge fan of nutrition, but in any discussion, you have to identify what idea you're supporting, which in this case is controlling your body through macronutrient intake.
Learning about things like the gut microbiome, GMO's, FODMAP's, etc. are all really wonderful things to get educated on, but aren't directly relevant to the discussion of macros vs. getting results, because the focus is on setting a goal, generating your macro numbers, and setting up a plan to hit those target numbers consistently every day. It doesn't need to be complex for people to get results!
Sure, but the results are the same:
Here's a really excellent documentary testing CICO vs. seemingly sub-par food sources:
Arnold didn't have a PhD in nutrition, and the difference in available consumer knowledge about nutrition these days is vast, but was able to get fabulous, controllable results through a structured workout program & by paying attention to his food intake, and if he can do it, anyone can do it!
It doesn't need to be endlessly complex for people to implement it in their lives, and that also doesn't mean that we need to stop thinking just at the basics, because there's always another level of knowledge & appreciation to go down to in the world of nutrition, more bodyweight skills sets to master, more education on kinesiology & anatomy to learn, and so on.
So that's why I preach macros so often: it's easy & it works! There are many more layers & levels to the discussion, but if your core interest is in results, then it's worth giving the basics an honest shot for a few months to see how it changes your body!
- You eat, the food goes into your stomach, then your small intestine, then your large one, and then out.
- Total calories ingested determines whether you lose, maintain, or gain weight.
- Calories are made of macros, and eating according to your macros is the best way I've come across to get results & have the most energy available
There's always a more nuanced discussion to be had - we can get into phytonutrients, refeeding, carb cycling, fasting, adjusting total macros over multiple days instead of single days, LCHF, etc., but if you want specific, controllable results, the bottom line is always going to be this:
- Did you set a goal?
- Did you generate your macros for the goal?
- Are you strictly tracking (weighing & measuring 100% of your food & drinks) your macros every day & sticking with that approach, for real, over time?
Personally, I haven't seen any physical changes between any macros-based ways of eating myself. I've cycled through various meal timings (3 meals, one meal, an eating window, 6 meals, and currently 7 meals). I've tried varies WoE's (omni, paleo, keto, junk food, vegan, raw vegan, vegetarian, etc.). As long as I'm hitting my macros, both my physique & my medical metrics have all stayed consistently the same over the years. I experienced zero loss on a maintenance diet switching to a plant-based diet.
I can only speak to my own experience. There's always a much deeper discussion to be had about the complexities of nutrition, but at some point people need to decide what they want their focus to be on: getting really consistent, solid, achievable results in the best (imo) & most controllable way possible simply boils down to eating according to your macros, regardless of what you eat. Case in point:
If your focus is to dive into the nitty-gritty of digestion, sub-components of macros & micros like amino acids, and so on, that's fine, but that's outside the bare-minimum scope of what's required to get maximum results, which is macros. I'm a huge fan of nutrition, but in any discussion, you have to identify what idea you're supporting, which in this case is controlling your body through macronutrient intake.
Learning about things like the gut microbiome, GMO's, FODMAP's, etc. are all really wonderful things to get educated on, but aren't directly relevant to the discussion of macros vs. getting results, because the focus is on setting a goal, generating your macro numbers, and setting up a plan to hit those target numbers consistently every day. It doesn't need to be complex for people to get results!
Also, the idea your body treats a twinkle and a steak the same way is ridiculous and doesn't make sense at all. A twinkie which is primarily sugar (I assume, haven't seen one in years) will be digested differently than a steak which mostly protein and some fat. The way carbs, protein, and fat are digested are just so different it's clear you have no clue what you're talking about. Don't try to use basic physiology as evidence when you have no clue.
Sure, but the results are the same:
Here's a really excellent documentary testing CICO vs. seemingly sub-par food sources:
Arnold didn't have a PhD in nutrition, and the difference in available consumer knowledge about nutrition these days is vast, but was able to get fabulous, controllable results through a structured workout program & by paying attention to his food intake, and if he can do it, anyone can do it!
It doesn't need to be endlessly complex for people to implement it in their lives, and that also doesn't mean that we need to stop thinking just at the basics, because there's always another level of knowledge & appreciation to go down to in the world of nutrition, more bodyweight skills sets to master, more education on kinesiology & anatomy to learn, and so on.
So that's why I preach macros so often: it's easy & it works! There are many more layers & levels to the discussion, but if your core interest is in results, then it's worth giving the basics an honest shot for a few months to see how it changes your body!
sowingbird
New member
@horlait Legs need weights, upper body doesnt really depending on your goals, yes i do weighted chinups, but the vast majority of my training was the basics, just lots and lots of reps and sets to complete agonizing failure where my arms chest and back want to pop from the pump, and then keep going for a couple more, and then a couple extra after that.
Similar threads
- Replies
- 79
- Views
- 485
- Replies
- 66
- Views
- 441
- Replies
- 11
- Views
- 79
- Replies
- 33
- Views
- 267