BodyRecomposition Support Forums  

Go Back   BodyRecomposition Support Forums > My products > UD 2.0
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Unread 10-10-2009, 03:56 PM
shokat shokat is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 123
Question Theory of UD 2.0 in question?

I recently bought the UD 2.0 book and I plan on starting it this coming Monday after a 2 week diet break.

With my limited knowledge of the whole fat loss process everything seemed to make sense as laid out in the book. Although the approach does seem to be on the more extreme end of things rather then a more moderate approach. Which to me is fine as long as it achieves my desired results of getting sub 10%.

So today I read an article in Natrual Bodybuilding magazine titled "Dieting on the edge of insanity" written by Dr. Joe Klemczewski (aka The diet Doc). His approach to fat loss and dieting seems to fly in the face of the whole foundation of the UD 2.0. And this is why I get really confused and my head starts to spin. This is the conundrum I have dealt with for years when it comes to bodybuilding, strength, rehab and diet theory, science and their practical applications for the average person like myself. So many different opinions and theories you don't know what to believe. Then the only option becomes trial and error which becomes frustrating and time consuming.

The main point of his article was how to achieve maximum fat loss through carb restriction without consuming more protein then is necessary, without going overboard with carb restriction as to increase the liklihood of muscle loss, and without going nuts on carb loading to such a degree that you off set any fat loss gains you made prior by basically shooting yourself in the foot with a massive carb load that could take you 3-4 days to recover from and before you get back into fat burning again.

Here is are several exact excerpts that I think will give everyone the main point to his approach.... (please note I only am including the parts that are most relevant, my hand would get too tired form trying to type the entire article. If you want to read the article word for word it is in the NOV. issue.)

He States:

"Staying low on carbs can push you to the brink of insanity and destroy any chance of looking your best due to the potential of slowing fat loss while muscle loss escalates."

"But is there is a way to keep the massive fat loss humming along without crossing the line into these extreme levels? Most proponents of very low-carb dieting try to mitigate these negative effects by injecting carbs and overall calories in a specific or truckload fashion. There are those who cycle carbs in very specifically, such as one moderate starchy carb meal every three days. Then there are those who allow an entire day or even a weekend to include an unchecked amount of carbs. When avoiding starch for long periods of time, one serving every 3-4 days may not be enough to keep you from spiraling into metabolic suppression, but I hope it's obvious that the massive amounts can be counterproductive."

"Many errantly think that when the body is depleted of glycogen, it takes hundreds and hundreds of grams to refill. And if you pull in a colossal amount, your body simply replineshes the muscle. But when you consume more carbs then your body can assimilate at that very time, you don't just synthesize it as stored glycogen. You store some of it as fat immediatley Glucose then getd sucked into fat cells to be converted to fat and your liver converts much of it to cholesterol to be stored as bodyfat. But when you ingest substantial amounts of carbs you will store new fat and the glycogen stores themselves will set you back days of potential fat loss with that complete refilling. If it takes 2-3 days (or longer) to get back to the same fat loss pace you were at because you have to work through the newly-stored glycogen, is that meal, or day, worth a week of progress? As I mentioned, eating to low of a carb diet often leads to this kind cyclical carb binging even if by "accident." Don't go there.

"Let me conclude with the same stern warning I started with: Too aggressive of a low-carb diet will have horrible effects on your body and likely your behavior. Your metabolism will fall dramatically and you will lose muscle. Frequently used carb load techniques can range from doing little to stop the demise to compromising the entire fat loss process." END QUOTE.

So as you can see his approach seems to completely go against the whole foundation of the UD 2.0 diet which is complete depletion with massive calorie reduction/ restriction, and then a massive calorie /carb load repletion.

Now I must add without having had any actual experience getting under 12% bodyfat in my life I can't say what approach is best. I wouldn't have bought the UD 2.0 book and been willing to try it if I didn't think it might work. With that being said common sense tends to tell me that in life in general a well balanced approach to anything seems to usually yield the most beneficial and long lasting results. But maybe in cases extremeness is what is required, I am by far no where near experienced enough nor qualified be able to answer that question. I come from a point of view of exteme humility and open mindedness, just looking for what ever approach will help me reach my goal of sub 10% while preserving muscle if not gaining any.

As you can see these kinds of conflicting pieces of information lead to some real confusing especially when the information comes from highly respected people in the community.

I look forward to hearing all the different perspectives of this post.

Last edited by shokat : 10-10-2009 at 04:19 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Unread 10-10-2009, 04:21 PM
lylemcd's Avatar
lylemcd lylemcd is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 22,641
Default

Look at the results from people doing UD2, do they match any of his claims?

Muscle loss? Massive fat gain on the refeed.

Answer: no. He's simply wrong about everything.

but it's VERY simple: if you don't believe in the diet, don't do it.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Unread 10-10-2009, 04:32 PM
shokat shokat is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 123
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lylemcd View Post
Look at the results from people doing UD2, do they match any of his claims?

Muscle loss? Massive fat gain on the refeed.

Answer: no. He's simply wrong about everything.

but it's VERY simple: if you don't believe in the diet, don't do it.
Lyle,

I never said I don't believe in the diet, If I didn't I wouldn't have spent the money on the book and I wouldn't be planning on starting on monday. But as I am sure you would agree there is nothing wrong with a healthy debate when confronted with conflicting information. I was just posting it to hear peoples objective opinions about it. I was in no way trying to dispute whether your approach or his was better I was simply trying to hear objective views about two highly educated and well respected proffesionals' opposing approaches to fat loss. That is why I went out of my way to make it very clear that I am in NO way qualifed or experienced enough to be able to objectively give my own opinion about either, I was just hoping to add to the debate and discussion over the issue of fat loss in hopes of helping me understand everything more thoroughly.

I mus also say will.I.ams success is mind blowing.

I hope to achieve the same and I would be more then happy show my success pics as well.

Thanks for the great info.

Cheers!

Last edited by shokat : 10-10-2009 at 04:35 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Unread 10-10-2009, 06:23 PM
will.i.am13's Avatar
will.i.am13 will.i.am13 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 50
Default

I think that doctor is right and has good points.
I also think that Lyle has laid out some "rules" to the carb load, which I believe help stabilize/minimize/eliminate these effects that "would" have potentially happened. (ie. fat STORAGE b/c of overload of carb into glycogen synthesis)

I'll recap that we're going low carb for 3.5 days (or 4 days if you do the 8 day cycle). So that's not too long with little carbs.
Also, when you load, you're supposed to eat every 2-2 1/2 hours, and when you do the math is comes to AROUND 100g of carbs for most people, or more if you eat less frequently, etc.
I think your body would probably assimilate, or put glucose into storage as glycogen into your muscles in the amount of time it takes to finish them meal, then allow it to slowly pass through your stomach.
This would definitely be counterproductive and worthless if all your carbs were COMPLETE sugar, like candies, which also end up being high in fat typically.
THen you would approach your bodys limits in ability to process the carbs into glycogen, only b/c the sugars are almost bypassing your stomach beause they're absorbed through your mouth and intestinal linings really quickly.

We should also stop to think, (I think ) about the common sense behind all this food you're going to eat. It will be slowly moving through your stomach, churning all day, as you will be eating a lot of food. So for that I say that if done properly, it should work fine.
__________________
~the forgotten variable: HU (human)~
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Unread 10-11-2009, 12:59 AM
shokat shokat is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 123
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by will.i.am13 View Post
I think that doctor is right and has good points.
I also think that Lyle has laid out some "rules" to the carb load, which I believe help stabilize/minimize/eliminate these effects that "would" have potentially happened. (ie. fat STORAGE b/c of overload of carb into glycogen synthesis)

I'll recap that we're going low carb for 3.5 days (or 4 days if you do the 8 day cycle). So that's not too long with little carbs.
Also, when you load, you're supposed to eat every 2-2 1/2 hours, and when you do the math is comes to AROUND 100g of carbs for most people, or more if you eat less frequently, etc.
I think your body would probably assimilate, or put glucose into storage as glycogen into your muscles in the amount of time it takes to finish them meal, then allow it to slowly pass through your stomach.
This would definitely be counterproductive and worthless if all your carbs were COMPLETE sugar, like candies, which also end up being high in fat typically.
THen you would approach your bodys limits in ability to process the carbs into glycogen, only b/c the sugars are almost bypassing your stomach beause they're absorbed through your mouth and intestinal linings really quickly.

We should also stop to think, (I think ) about the common sense behind all this food you're going to eat. It will be slowly moving through your stomach, churning all day, as you will be eating a lot of food. So for that I say that if done properly, it should work fine.
Well I can't wait to start on monday, like I said before I wouldn't waste my time and energy if I didn't respect Lyles system and protocols. I think the guy is brilliant and the amount of stuff I have learned from his articles and this forum in such as short time is more then I have learned in the last 20 years of working out.

My whole point of posting the excerpts from the article wasn't to bash the diet protocol, I just wanted to provide for others to read and comment on the differing points of view. That is what makes learning fun when you can debate and discuss all the different opinions.


Bottom line I think you Will.I.am should be the freakin poster child for the UD 2.0 man!!! That is just incredible.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Unread 10-12-2009, 10:47 AM
LuckyDog LuckyDog is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 19
Default

If you actually read the end of Dr. Joe's article he articulates that low carb has a place. I didn't bother to read every detail of your initial post but interestingly enough Joe and Lyle make similar statements on diet through both of their literature and both can be quoted as saying that the key to diet success is what allows for adherence for the individual to their diet. Lyle has an article that clearly states keto doesn't beat carb based diets in effectiveness and as a Dr. Joe client he has dieted me low carb for decently long periods of time, but guess what? I had high carb days and so does UD 2.0.

I don't mean to be defensive but I find both Lyle and Joe to be very well articulated and far more educated on the balance between dieting, nutrition, metabolism and psyche then most and would hate to see either bashed unnecessarily when their approaches are just different in starting point.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Unread 10-12-2009, 01:06 PM
shokat shokat is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 123
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LuckyDog View Post
I didn't bother to read every detail of your initial post.
If you had read every detail of my original post you would have noted that I was neither for or against either Joe or Lyle, I was presenting the excerpts from the article for an objective discussion of the differing view points. You would have also noted from my original post that I went out of my way to make it very clear that I was not biased toward either way and was just hoping to add the debate and discussion.

And in my opinion although in actual experience Dr. Joe may have had you on a similar diet to the UD2, in the article I feel he goes out of his to way to articulate that massive carb loading a la UD2 is something he does not advocate. Now in actually working with him he may very well have had you do that but I can only discuss what is presented in the article.

I have read both Lyles and Dr. Joes stuff and I feel both contribute great things to the community and it's always interesting to hear different points of view from people have tons of experience applying their knowledge in the real world even if they don't always agree.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Unread 10-12-2009, 05:10 PM
LuckyDog LuckyDog is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 19
Default

I've talked to Joe about this specifically in the past so I know that he isn't talking specifically about UD 2.0. There are a lot of less tactical ketogenic strategies being used for contest prep and with out siting any specific programs/diets/coaches just know that I am certain Joe is referencing the more generic less thought through approaches.

I meant no specific attack I just hate it when things are taken out of context and can be easily misinterpreted by the message board reading masses.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Unread 10-12-2009, 06:13 PM
PlankIt PlankIt is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 953
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LuckyDog View Post
I've talked to Joe about this specifically in the past so I know that he isn't talking specifically about UD 2.0. There are a lot of less tactical ketogenic strategies being used for contest prep and with out siting any specific programs/diets/coaches just know that I am certain Joe is referencing the more generic less thought through approaches.

I meant no specific attack I just hate it when things are taken out of context and can be easily misinterpreted by the message board reading masses.
doesn't he utilize the idea that people respond differently to different proteins (chicken v turkey v beef v fish) and carbs ( potato v rice v pasta)? I recall seeing some journals with really funky peak weeks....
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Unread 10-12-2009, 07:18 PM
shokat shokat is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 123
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LuckyDog View Post
I've talked to Joe about this specifically in the past so I know that he isn't talking specifically about UD 2.0. There are a lot of less tactical ketogenic strategies being used for contest prep and with out siting any specific programs/diets/coaches just know that I am certain Joe is referencing the more generic less thought through approaches.

I meant no specific attack I just hate it when things are taken out of context and can be easily misinterpreted by the message board reading masses.
Here is the quote from my OP that seems to be the whole gist of what contradicts the approach in UD2 that made me decide to post it here for analysis and discussion..

Begin QUOTE: "Many errantly think that when the body is depleted of glycogen, it takes hundreds and hundreds of grams to refill. And if you pull in a colossal amount, your body simply replineshes the muscle. But when you consume more carbs then your body can assimilate at that very time, you don't just synthesize it as stored glycogen. You store some of it as fat immediatley Glucose then getd sucked into fat cells to be converted to fat and your liver converts much of it to cholesterol to be stored as bodyfat. But when you ingest substantial amounts of carbs you will store new fat and the glycogen stores themselves will set you back days of potential fat loss with that complete refilling. If it takes 2-3 days (or longer) to get back to the same fat loss pace you were at because you have to work through the newly-stored glycogen, is that meal, or day, worth a week of progress? As I mentioned, eating to low of a carb diet often leads to this kind cyclical carb binging even if by "accident." Don't go there." End QUOTE.

I am not implying that he is referring to UD2 but his basic premise is saying that you would be wrong to think you need 100's and 100's of grams of glucose to refill glycogen stores. Which in the case of UD2 is exactly what one is supposed to do. Now based on all the people who I have seen so far following UD2 it seems in the case Dr. Joe might be wrong at least in the context of UD2. But it's pretty hard to say that he is being general when he gives a very specific approach he disagrees with, i.e. carb loading with a masssive amount of carbs.

I'd be curious to see how Dr. Joe would defend his article in the context of UD2. And I want to add that I have just as much respect for Dr. Joe as I do for Lyles information. If everyone always agreed on their theories it would make for much less interesting discussions and decreased learning.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:33 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.