The Smarter Sculpted Physique: Training | Nutrition | Muscle Gain | Fat Loss

Building on our discussion on goals and process, we dig into visualization, “vision quests,” and the roles of these things in (fitness) success. This discussion also turned towards pragmatism versus positive thinking. This included the need for more pragmatism and realism, but also the potential dangers of pragmatism when you’re in a position of authority (teacher, coach, expert) and have influence upon others. ♦ VISUALIZATION ♦ Scott thinks vision quests are ultimately process-related. Mike thinks the benefit of goals — and by extension visualization — is that they give you focus: goals help you reverse-engineer the process that will get you there, visualization gets you more fully invested into that process. Visualization is like the connective tissue between process and goals. A vision quest is about who am I being, who do I want to be, what kind of character do I want to show. Kevin: how you do or approach one thing will often map onto how you do other things. Mike mentioned, with respect meaning, Victor Frankl’s Man Search for Meaning, which describes Frankl’s time in Nazi concentration camps, and how some men and women were still able to retain meaning in their life, despite the horrific things being done to them. Positive thinking by itself, without meaning, won’t get you far, especially when life throws really, really unpleasant stuff at you — and it’s rare that someone won’t go through that, at some point in their lives. “Assuming” you’ll be able to deal with it easily isn’t positive thinking; it’s arrogance. For Scott it’s not about being cynical or positive, but pragmatic. Mike is big on “implementation intention,” which is pre-planning how to deal with life’s hiccups. You need to do this practically and concretely (“what will I do if I have to stay late at the office?”), and in more abstract forms, since you can’t predict everything. For Scott and Kevin you don’t need goals to go on real vision quests. You also have to be willing to let go of older goals, and “graduate” to a different point in your life. For example, if Scott hadn’t let go of his physique goals, he’d probably be dead right now. There are many others in the fitness industry who didn’t, and they did die before their time. A lot of the decisions you make will take you towards something or further away from it. Stagnation is always in some way a little worse than pure stagnancy. ♦ PRAGMATISM ♦ Comparing yourself to others can be okay if you’re trying to be humbled, yet not envious, and using that as leverage. But just throwing in the towel because “Oh I could never achieve that” is… less useful. Mike thinks, however, that pragmatism has limits — it can be very dangerous to impose limits on others, especially if you are in a role of a teacher, a coach, or something like that. Telling someone You can’t do ___ is — if there is ANY chance you’re wrong — actually a totally disgusting thing to say. Kevin notes that you can still overcome this if someone says this to you, but for Mike those are the exceptions, and they’re why we always focus on those stories when they do happen. How often is a person’s potential squashed because someone in a position of authority, who had their student’s or client’s (or whatever’s) respect, told that person, “You can’t do something” when — in fact — they could have? Sure, it’s great when that person overcomes this. But there will be people who don’t, and not because they are “weak,” but because they just plain trust the person who told them. Scott thinks Mike is being naive; Mike says yes, but that’s purposeful. The risk of being naive and wrong is usually all on the person being naive. Being pragmatic often puts the other person at risk. Of course,

What’s your gym training environment like? Is it serving you? What can you do to make it better, or to make the most of it? This episode dug into making the most of your gym training environment, whether you’re training at a huge commercial gym, a local small business, or even at home. Mike also discussed his dissertation research on metonymy, a figure of rhetoric, and its use in novels to figure things like networks and ecology. ♦YOUR GYM TRAINING ENVIRONMENT ♦ Scott began by discussing an email he received comparing the equipment in Pumping Iron to your modern gym machines. Don’t go too far though: you can’t build a great physique with… a jug of water. That’s limiting. Often this is sold for marketing reasons. Don’t ask “what can I get away with?” Ask “What are the really successful folks using?” They’re using a fairly well-stocked gym, whether that’s at home, a giant commercial gym, or whatever. A lot of what made the machines so “effective” in Pumping Iron was down to the trainees; they knew how to get the most out of them. And, back in those days, they would just flat-out modify them, or bring in a new version. Sometimes modern gym machines are perfectly good… but the little diagram is actually very poor. Don’t assume they’re always 100% bang on in terms of getting the most of the exercise, the range of motion, the mind-muscle connection. Scott’s favourite gym was the “gym” at Muscle Camp, in 1989. Here’s why: (1) it was basically just a giant gym floor with all the new, practically untouched machines from the big companies (Nautilus, Hammer, etc.) (2) Scott got keys and was able to come in at 5 a.m. before anyone else had come in, and (3) the other people there? Guys like Bill Pearl, or celebrities who wanted to just train without being bothered. Scott’s other favourite gym was the Chelsea Piers gym in New York. Scott really like World’s Gym over Gold’s Gym. Gold’s became kind of a party atmosphere later on, whereas World’s you were there to work, and Joe Gold (who, yes, was at World’s Gym by this point) didn’t put up with anything he didn’t like. Kevin’s favourite gym is his own! It’s extremely well-stocked because he also trains clients in there. Some gyms can be a bit of a spa, but the hardcore ones can be kind of unpleasant as well, with ridiculous macho posturing everywhere you go. Gyms attract the kind of clientele they supply themselves for: have a few stability balls and rooms for Bootcamps, you’ll get one kind of client, have ten squat racks and dumbbells going up to 150 lbs., and you’ll attract another. Some of the big gyms in larger cities have it all, and this means they get all sorts of clientele, and therefore there’s a big difference in the atmosphere of the gym depending on what time you’re there. Kevin’s seen gyms where it’s like going to two different gyms, depending on time of day. time-of-day Mike pointed out that a new feature on Google maps will actually let you see what time of day a local business is busiest. It’s not always what you might expect, and if you can in any way plan around that, it might be useful. Speaking of attitude and posturing: Scott recalls visiting a popular gym where a bunch of guys were posturing and such, very loudly, meanwhile Kevin — a world champion — calmly came in, did his thing, and left. But no one paid attention. They were paying attention to the guys making the most noise. A home gym needs various sets of dumbbells, or quick adjusting dumbbells like Power Blocks or Bowflex ones. Kevin’s home gym has three squat racks. Jealous much? You can see Kevin’s home gym on his YouTube Channel. In terms of scheduling, you do what you can, and you make do with what you can’t.

Scott has often written about the dangers of cardio and the “aerobic myth,” but let’s not throw the baby out with the bathwater: when is “cardio” still viable? We got an excellent question from a listener who knows Scott still uses it, and was wondering about what goes into determining whether or not it can or should be used. As a couple side notes: Kevin broke the national bench press record (!) in Kamloops, Canada. This will very likely qualify him for the bench press worlds in Texas if he decides to go, but it’s not a sure thing... yet. And, for anyone interested, Mike has posted his before and after pictures of his weight loss here: ▸▸ http://thehabit.space/pics ♦ NOTES ♦ This episode began with a comment from a reader: "I’m a bit confused about Scott’s views on “typical” cardio/aerobics for fat burning purposes. Scott speaks and writes often “against” it, for the most part. However, I know of some of his clients that are prescribed cardio for extended periods of time (months and months on end; several days a week; 30/45/60 minutes a time), and not just to individuals that are massively overweight." Scott wants to avoid over-simplifying his views in this way. [Mike: I actually think the listener’s comment that Scott has written “against” cardio is pretty fair, all things considered, and given the sheer volume of content Scott has written about the dangers of too much cardio; that content generally doesn’t have a lot of, “Okay, and given these dangers I have just outline, here is where I would use it.” Leave a comment if you agree, disagree, or have questions! – M] Pretty much all training is cardiorespiratory, but not all training is aerobic. Most people by cardio mean the stair master, the elliptical, or boot camps, but depending on what you’re doing, the energy pathways might be entirely different. The proper use of cardio is NOT just about “burning calories” (or “burning fat”) Other things going on under the surface: enhancing biochemical pathways, nurturing optimum biochemical and hormonal function… and strength training and resistance training just tends to be better at this for the most part. Scott really liked Mike’s comment: “You can’t just math your way thin!” Scott would adjust it, though, to say, “You can’t math your way to sustainable leanness.” [Mike: “You can’t ____ your way ____!” is a common turn of phrase. A quick google tells me I haven’t stolen this, but if someone’s heard it before, please let me know! – M] Mike wonders not just what the formulas are on the calorie counts on things like ellipticals, but about what the regulations are. On things like nutrition labels, the FDA only forces companies to be within 20% accuracy. Also, a 2010 study found that the numbers on “healthy” foods skew lower than the actual caloric content of the food. In the study, some dishes were off by as much as 200%! [Found the study in Dr. Sandra Aamodt’s new book, Why Diets Make Us Fat – M] Kevin points out that it doesn’t need to be black and white. And you don’t need to do cardio on a machine. Sometimes he just… wait for it… goes for a walk! Scott pointed out that as a strength athlete, the form of cardio Kevin does — aerobic, meaning “at a pace where the muscles are oxygenated (as opposed to e.g. anaerobic, i.e. “NOT-oxygenated” like hockey or sprints) — is perfect, considering his goals and the complete picture. Mike pushed for Kevin and Scott to discuss where the difference is between “going for a walk” and flat-out sprints. There’s a big difference. Is there a grey area? What gives? Short answer: It’s called the anaerobic threshold. If you can’t keep talking while walking / jogging, you’ll pass that threshold. If you do sprints, you’ll pass it quite quickly.

The disadvantages of calorie counting as a strategy is something we’ve discussed in past episodes, so in this one we discussed alternatives. To begin, we summarized a few of our previous arguments against calorie counting (see episode 15 on IIFYM in particular), but from there we moved to discussing what portion control and listening to your body looks like: Do you have to eyeball everything? When are calories useful (since, of course, they are) as starting points? How much variability should your diet have? What should you focus on, and what doesn’t matter? ♦DISADVANTAGES OF CALORIE COUNTING♦ Scott says that calorie counting is based on the fitness industry’s love of complicating what’s simple, and simplifying what’s complicated. Calorie counting, for Scott, offers the illusion of control, not actual control. (E.g., food labels can’t be accurate, your body won’t burn the same number of calories each day.) Calorie counting is most popular in North America. North America is also the most overweight continent. Correlation is not causation, etc., blah blah. But that’s not pure coincidence. Scott calls it the North American Diet Mentality. Scott: “Calories don’t measure metabolism.” (They’re a unit of heat energy. Metabolism is more than just “energy”; it is the sum total of the biochemical processes in your body.) Scott: listen to your own biofeedback. (Mike’s post-show translation: the problem with calories is they can lead you down a path of thinking, “Argh, but this should work!” when you should have been focusing on what was actually happening right in front of you from the first.) Counting can also, over time, induce a sense of guilt and shame and other self-judgments, partly because of our evolved psychologies connection to food and eating. When you use an outside-in approach, you force yourself to ignore these things (whereas biofeedback has you listening to them). Mike: of course, the difficulty with “listening to your body” is that you need to be real, and you need to be honest. ♦ PORTION CONTROL AND LISTENING TO YOUR BODY ♦ Can calories be used as “starting points”? Yes! of course. You just have to realize they are an exchange value, not a perfect indicator of metabolism. Scott includes calories as starting points in several of his books, basically, to make sure they don’t get into giant deficit because they go “too far.” One of the “roadblocks” Scott’s clients often encounter, when first trying to learn to listen to their body, is trying to play it “safe.” So they always want to be hungry to ensure they’re in a deficit, but this puts them in too much of a deficit. To combat this, Scott will tell them it’s okay to start “too high.” If you get to a point where you’re thinking, Oh no, I’m not hungry enough, that’s actually a sign of progress, because you’re getting back in touch with hunger and learning about the value and use of tolerable hunger. Different foods can require different tools to measure. Examples: Apples and oranges come pre-portioned. Have three or four (or whatever). Pineapple can usually be eye-balled. Many of Scott’s diets include a meal that, alongside the protein source, just says “As much fresh fruit as you want” for the carb source. (This is a way of getting them in touch with hunger, so they’re asking things like “How much do I want? Do I feel like 3 pieces or 4?) Oatmeal and cream of wheat (etc.) is easy to under-estimate. A scale is a useful tool for this. (Mike: A food scale is also sweet for ensuring it’s never too watery.) In Beyond Metabolism Scott talks about tolerable hunger. This is super important. Mike has called this the “sweet spot” of hunger. Mike thinks a good rule for new dieters,

We’ve talked a lot on this show about what happens when fitness becomes the opposite of what it should be — when fitness gets perverted and starts subtracting things from your life instead of adding to your life. This episode was about going the other way: looking at fitness as a positive force in your life, and what that looks like, and how to get there. This was based, in part, on several comments we got (many about episode 18) from listeners. This was our attempt to address them more directly. Here are the comments: "This society is long overdue to hear, and be taught by example, a very different message – that weight training and bodybuilding can be very much at the heart of spiritual health and growth. I explained to my wife recently that when some people look at me they might think “I’d like to get into that kind of shape”. But, I told my wife, they don’t understand that, to me, the physical manifestation is the bonus after the payload. The actual payload is the training itself. Now, it’s a world of cause and effect and so the physical transformation certainly inspires me also. But when I am doing the training itself I am simply happy to be doing it." The next person wanted to here more about… "...things like visualization, meditation, positive reinforcement, maintaining focused, deliberate and progressive mindset; perhaps explore these in different scenarios: eg when reaching a really high goal, when not really having any goals, when overcoming setback or injury and so on. And of course, from a critical perspective also – what people experience when they don’t tap into these aids. I get much more out of these podcasts when people are talking more from a personal, experiential place." And finally, this person… "would like to hear Scott talk on something he briefly mentioned about not having any goals at this point for his training. Am not sure exactly what he meant, if it was exclusive to training or if it had broader meaning. Things like – what his experience in this mode has been like, what took him there, what changes he’s noticed in mindset, in quality of training, in residual life effect, in connecting more with his motivators or perhaps changing or altering motivators, what his goals are (haha)." So here we go! ♦ NOTES: ♦ How do you know when fitness is positive? It’s not all-consuming; you’re not just consuming it; you’re part of it, and it’s part of you. Scott mentioned internal (I-Factor) versus external (X-Factor) motivation. I-Factor Motivation (internal) is much, much more powerful. In fact, as research in Daniel Pink’s Drive shows, external rewards can actually hurt motivation! Now compare this to fitness. Is it internally motivating? Or are you doing it only for the external reward. Fitness should be self-connecting, so that you enjoy the process and it’s part of you and who you are. Scott’s files this under spiritual fitness, as well as being character-driven. There is a big difference between mastery and obsession. When you’re obsessed, the object of your obsession owns you; when you’ve achieved mastery, you own it. Scott’s advice: make it about who you’re being; make it about a reflection of who you are. If you say you are going to do something, do it. (Scott even tries to avoid saying he is “going” to do something. He just says, present-tense, “I am doing ____.”) How do you know if you’re taking it too far? Look at your life. Eventually, it will start to be a reflection of the choices you’re making, whether positive or negative. Mike suggested that a good “test” in terms of who are you being is to think about your death bed, which is one of Stephen Covey’s Seven Habits of Highly Effective People (“begin with the end in mind”).

What rep range is best for muscle building? Do you have to “train heavy”? (And what does that even mean?) Is 1-RM strength the ultimate arbiter of your muscle gain and hypertrophy? Scott and Mike discuss a new study published in the Journal of Applied Physiology that directly addressed some of these questions: “Neither Load Nor Systemic Hormones Determine Resistance Training-Mediated Hypertrophy or Strength Gains in Resistance Trained Young Men.” ♦ LOAD, REP RANGES, AND THE RESEARCH ♦ A common critique of studies like this is that they are on un-trained young men. This one wasn’t. One of the key findings of the study: “Our data show that in resistance-trained individuals, load, when exercises are performed to volitional failure, does not dictate hypertrophy or, for the most part, strength gains” (p. 129). Examples of this in the real world: Scott new guys with way better world-class physiques than he had… and they were doing dumbbell bicep curls with 20 lb. dumbbells when Scott was using 50s. And Scott was never known as a “strong” guy. It’s more about ranges and planes of motion than “load.” For Scott, this supported a few of the most important tenets of Innervation Training — far more than load, what is important is the angles of contraction, the excitation thresholds of the CNS, the intensity of the contraction, etc. An earlier study that Scott cites in The Abel Approach (regarding intensity) is Behm 1995, which shows a few things: “Movement speed is not essential as long as the intent of the contraction is explosive” (p. 270). “Maximal strength training methods with their high intensity resistance but low volume of work do not elicit substantial muscle hypertrophy. Therefore a higher volume of work […] is needed to ensure a critical concentration of intracellular amino acids to stimulate protein synthesis” (p. 271) The study compared high reps versus low reps, to failure. Interestingly, the “high reps” was 20-25 reps (the weight at ~30-50% of the subjects’ 1-RM) and the so-called “low reps” was ~8-12 reps (with the weight at about ~75-90% of the subjects’ 1-RM). Scott read out this bit: “In congruence with our previous work, acute post-exercise systemic hormonal rises are not related to or in any way indicative of RT-mediated gains in muscle mass or strength” (p. 129). …and interprets it as a knock against the supplement industry (i.e. pre, peri and post-workout stuff). Scott and Mike went through a few key terms: Motor Units, Excitation Thresholds, Functional Differentiation, Segmented Utilization of Muscles in Action, and so on. See SSP Episode 2 for more on these, and the innervation primer. ♦ LINKS / RESOURCES ♦ Behm, David G. “Neuromuscular Implications and Applications of Resistance Training.” Journal of strength and conditioning research / National Strength & Conditioning Association 9.4 (1995): 264–274. Web. Morton, Robert W et al. “Neither Load nor Systemic Hormones Determine Resistance Training-Mediated Hypertrophy or Strength Gains in Resistance-Trained Young Men.” Journal of Applied Physiology 121.1 (2016): 129–138. Web. The Abel Approach Some of the research of Ralph Carpinelli The Innervation Training Primer

Scott and Mike go through 10 (plus a few) questions that will help you understand, first, if you have food issues, and second, what the nature of the issue is for you, or how it manifests for you. This is what Scott calls awareness training. It’s about digging deep into your own cravings, beliefs, thoughts, and so on. The questions come from a questionnaire that was originally in Scott’s book, Beyond Metabolism. However, the complete questionnaire can also be downloaded from: scottabelfitness.com/foodissues ♦THE TEN FOOD ISSUES QUESTIONS:♦ (Note that each question in the questionnaire was also accompanied by an “intensity scale.” This is just to remind you to think about which questions resonate more or less with you, and help you note which areas should be your focus. 1. Are your waking thoughts consumed or dominated by issues that deal with how you eat, why you eat, resisting the urge to eat, or equating any of the above to how you feel about yourself? – and note the intensity scale as well 2. Is food or diet never far from your conscious mind? 3. Are you easily distracted or even upset by having indulgent food (goodies) in your presence? 4. Do you have an emotional conception of right and wrong foods? (Note that in the full questionnaire this is a two-part question.) 5. Do you ever participate in post-indulgent guilt practices like ‘guilt-cardio’ the day after an indulgence, or cutting carbs and restricting food the day after an indulgence? 6. Address honestly how you respond to a food cue. If your favourite food is put in front of you, do you find it hard to resist no matter if you are not even hungry? Does such a scenario create an inner struggle with you? 7. Do you wake up each day and start a battle of ‘food is my enemy? 8. Do you stick to a diet for a few days then always blow it? 9. Do you feel remorse, shame or guilt after a diet sabotage? If so, rate that emotional state on a scale of 1-10, 10 being the highest? 10 A. If someone says something hurtful to you, do you often react by thinking about or taking part in a food indulgence? 10 B. Similarly, if you have a bad day do you find yourself reacting to this by thinking about or taking part in a food indulgence? ♦Final Conclusion Question:♦ Do you find yourself tired or even exhausted over your inner emotional reactions to your thoughts and feelings about food/diet/weight? In other words do the related feelings of fear, guilt, anger, shame, exhaust you? ♦LINKS / RESOURCES MENTIONED♦ Scott’s Book, Beyond Metabolism. Scott’s Questionnaire.

A debate! Scott, Kevin and Mike debated the relative values of process-focused goals versus ends-focused goals. They all acknowledged that you obviously need “both,” but the debate surrounded where the emphasis should be placed, or how the relationship between the two worked. Scott argued that many clients need to “let go” of their end-results goals, and instead embrace process-focused goals. In his four decades of experience, many clients cannot embrace process goals until they finally stop focusing so much on their end-results goal (e.g. “lose 50 lbs”), and indeed “letting go” is precisely what allows them to finally achieve those end results. He argued that there is a difference between people who are born with or socialized into an emphasis on the process, and they can get away with end-results goals, but for those who don’t have that experience or upbringing, their needs to be a much, much greater emphasis on process than the result. By contrast, Mike argued that part of the value in end-results goals is having the ability to work backwards from them, to figure out your process goals based on what you want the result to be; then, as you move forward with your plan or roadmap, you can use that end-goal as a personal heuristic or test: “Are my actions taking me towards my goal?” “If I have to choose between A or B, which choice will take me closer to my goal?” Moreover, creating your own process or roadmap instills a sense of self-efficacy (which creates motivation, and makes it possible for you to see how this whole thing will work, which in turn makes the goal seem more realistic, especially if at first it seems like a particularly ambitious goal or stretch goal. Both Scott and Mike agreed that most people do need to dig deeper on their goals, and understand why they want to achieve them (…to summarize a much more complex theme that emerged in the episode). Kevin fell in the middle, acknowledging that he had both types of goals, but that on a day-to-day level, he had to be focused more on the process goals: what does he need to do today? Next week? The week afteR? And, indeed, many of clients in his experience do need to focus more on the process and be more realistic in their expectations, both in terms of what’s possible for an end goal and in terms of what it will take to get there. ♦ LINKS / RESOURCES MENTIONED ♦ Scott’s book, The Mindset of Achievement. It’s free! http://scottabelfitness.com/achieve/

Scott received a few excellent questions over email about one of his training programs, as well as the Cycle Diet, with respect to fitness over the age of 50, lifestyle, and more. Since they were so good, and because they were fairly representative, Scott cut and pasted a few of them and sent them to Mike, and together they turned that into an episode. The questions were specifically about Hardgainer Solution and Scott’s Cycle Diet, but they are by no means specific only to those things. ♦ Notes for Hardgainer Training, Overtraining, and Physique After 50 ♦ Hardgainer Solution doesn’t need to be tweaked necessarily just because you are over 50, but being over 50 might very well make you a “hardgainer,” and that is very much a consideration when prescribing training protocol. With any program, it’s important to “condition into” the program. So for example, HGS contains 80 different workouts, but to get acclimated to the program, yeah, you can just do the first workout over and over (since it’s whole body, you can get away with this). Mike mentioned the five-part training model: Effort, Training Strategy, Workload Capacity, Recovery Capacity, Internal Hormonal and Biochemical Environment. The trick with hardgainers, and also with anyone over 50, is avoiding overtraining. It is absolutely better to UNDER train than to over train. You can make progress while undertraining. When you hit overtraining, you burn out. No, HIIT is not a good fit with a hardgainer-specific training program, since HIIT is a) not very muscle building, and b) is a form of cardio that more easily invites overtraining. At the end of a workout you should feel invigorated, not exhausted. In the words of Lee Haney, stimulate, don’t annihilate. ♦ Reading Biofeedback ♦ Sleep and work stress will absolutely sap your vitality and energy. It can be harder to read your biofeedback as this happens. It isn’t necessarily “harder” to read biofeedback because you are over 50, but as more and more factors “might” be affecting you, yes, that can complicate things. Also, not “knowing” if you’re eating or training optimally can make things more difficult (and this is the advantage of having a coach). ♦ Cycle Diet and Biofeedback ♦ Reaching supercompensation mode is hard to read if you have mindset issues, and — as above — it can be harder to read if you’re also experiencing work stress, lack of sleep, etc., again, that makes things difficult. Here is an example: one of the key indicators of supercompensation is increased hunger.But lack of sleep can increase hunger by as much as 30%. So: are you in supercompensation, or are you lacking sleep? You need to be real. Try seeing if you a “catch up” day of sleep takes care of hunger. Supercompensation mode *can* be tricky over 50 just because of hormonal changes. It can be a great fit, but not always. Regarding the compatibility of the Cycle Diet and HGS: yes, they are compatible, but as with all training and nutrition, BOTH should be individualized. It might be the case that neither of them is right for someone, or just one, or both. ♦ Links / Resources mentioned ♦ The Cycle Diet The Hardgainer Solution

Steroids. Everyone knows, on some level, that there are those who use them, and that at the highest levels of bodybuilding they’re just part and parcel of the culture. But how rampant is it? How much are people really taking, and how has that changed over the years? Scott spent years in the fitness and bodybuilding industry’s, and witnessed all of these things — indeed, it was one of the reasons he eventually left that world and turns down such clients; things were getting out of control. We’re now at a point where Scott has read the stacks of female figure competitors who are taking more drugs than Arnold would have been! This episode was all about giving you a truthful, inside look at what really goes on, so that you can be a more informed consumer. ◆BODYBUILDING STEROIDS SUBCULTURE NOTES ◆ Scott read out a huge contest prep diet with lots of sugary foods (syrup and so on) that, in Scott’s words, “I would have been happy to have in a bulking diet!” The diet also included the injection of 10 IUs of insulin before, during and after the workout. A lot of what you read about pre- peri- and post-workout nonsense is only useful if you’re actually shooting insulin (plus other stuff, during other parts of the day) in order to affect where the sugars are going. The litany of the huge stack or steroids cycle included: • Test Enanthate • Trenbolone Enanthate • Equipose • Anadrol (one of the more toxic androgens) • GH, or Growth Hormone • Tamoxifin • Proviron For the contest diet cycle, some of the above was adjusted, and the following was added: • Winstrol • Testosterone Propionate • Testosterone Enanthate • Trenbolone Acetate • Primobolan • Masteron • T3 • Clenbuterol • Insulin The physiological changes going on in the above cannot be reproduced naturally. In addition to the anabolic steroids, synthol is now used a lot. People see the pictures where it’s gone wrong and looks absurd… but it’s also used in more subtle ways. In addition to the aging of the cells, side effects include things like enlarged hearts, which is partly why you see a lot of bodybuilders dying young of heart attacks. Steroids are also a gateway drug, at least in the subculture that Scott saw. There is a huge identity surrounding these. A lot of people can’t stop BECAUSE they can’t stand seeing themselves small after, because no, you can’t keep all the gains. Scott was actually told he wouldn’t be able to let go. As with other eating disorders, one of the big problems is when body image just is your self-image, and your self image is “reduced” to your body image. People will often take steroids without knowing what they’re taking, yet the coaches telling them what to take are by no means doctors, and even doctors know very little about what this kind of stuff will do to the human body, at least not in the doses bodybuilders are taking. In addition to the natural competitors who just lie about what they take, there’s a new trend of claiming one is “drug free” even when taking nolvadex, proviron, clomid, cytomel, and so on. A similar but related kind of thing that goes on, on the flip side, is that supplement manufacturers have dosed their protein powders or creatine with steroids in their first batch in order that their early adopters get good results, testimonials, before and afters, and so on. (Of course, this is not to paint the whole industry with the same brush, but it does go on.) Scott was given a chance to private label a well-known protein powder… but with a special “proprietary blend” they would add “no questions asked.” Hint: they were suggesting he add steroids.

Macronutrients, get your macronutrients here! This episode was all about dieting (mostly for fat loss) and macros, and If It Fits Your Macros (IIFYM). The guys are mostly against IIFYM, for various reasons that maybe aren’t obvious at first. Also, Scott gets messages from people doing insane things based on their understanding of the rules of IIFYM. The guys talked about the differences between doing a diet (such as vegetarianism) for ethical or personal reasons, versus doing it because it’s “a diet.” Scott calls this the difference between a diet strategy (good) and doing “a diet” (bad), or the differences doing it from the top down (following this or that name) versus doing it from the ground up (doing it based on personal strategic or ethical reasons). ◆ MACROS AND IIFYM NOTES: ◆ Which macros should you focus on? Scott and Kevin actually do things backwards a bit, insofar as they emphasize the protein SPARING nutrients (carbs and fats). Their recommendations for protein are still in the ballpark of what 99% of the fitness industry recommend. The Twinkie Diet by Dr. Mark Haub came up. Scott clarified that Dr. Haub didn’t eat just Twinkies, but foods you could get in a gas station (and he had a protein shake and multivitamin). Scott mentioned “honeymooning,” and that more often than not, diet trends gain legs because of people “honeymooning” at something making the most supportive comments. There was talk about when and how the metabolic compensation would come into effect. I.e. most people aren’t doing the insane things that Biggest Loser contestants are, and honestly, they just won’t experience the same kinds of metabolic compensation. Scott is against IIFYM because it can breed obsession, and it also (counter-intuitively) can emphasize what you “can” or “can’t” have. Although Mike is “less” against counting calories or macros than Kevin or Scott, he mentioned 3 key reasons why he personally doesn’t *really* like it, nor does he prefer an IIFYM diet. ● Ego Depletion: Having to make decisions all day saps willpower. this is true whether it’s deciding what to wear or… what to eat. ● Bright Lines: Having a meal plan makes it easy to say what is or is not on the meal plan. Either it is or it isn’t. Having macros to “fill in” is more blurry. Sure, substituting one potato for a sugary snack? No problem. But what about another… and another… and another… At some point your brain things, Hmm, this isn’t absolutely, positively 100% “optimal,” which could have you second-guessing yourself, and that’s when you are susceptible to… ● The “What-the-Hell” Effect: After you have one cookie, “what-the-hell,” just have the whole box. Our brains are bad at this. If we’re not doing things absolutely, 100% perfectly, its instinct is to say, “Oh what the hell.” (This one’s in McGonigal’s book.) All of these stack up. Maybe you don’t give in and have the whole box, but nonetheless, just experiencing all three of these effects will drain your willpower. If this happening constantly, that makes dieting harder. ◆ Links / Resources Mentioned ◆ Willpower: The Greatest Human Strength by Roy Baumeister and John Tierney The Willpower Instinct by Kelly McGonigal

We looked at the “custom” in custom workout. Both Scott and Kevin sell one-time workouts to on their websites, and for their ongoing clients, progressive personal programming and program design is a big part of what they provide. This episode was about what program design looks like: what kind of thinking goes into a program (and what kind of thinking should be avoided), what kinds of principles tend to stay consistent, and what needs variation, that kind of thing. ♦ALL ABOUT PROGRAM DESIGN:♦ Consumers want to change programs every 4-6 weeks, but that’s missing the point of programming; 4-6 weeks is just not long enough to get accustomed to a program, in terms of the physical changes and adaptations that go on in the body. It takes about 6, 7, or 8 weeks to reach the “Mastery Phase” of a program, and usually that’s the phase you really want to milk for all its worth. You start with broad strokes (“this program is a 5-day program to sculpt a balanced physique” or “this is a 10-week powerlifting peaking program”) and then from there you can get more specific, and then tweak from there for individual clients. If your goal is building muscle and a sculpted physique, you tend to need more variation in your programs than you would if, say, you were a powerlifter. Strength is always built on the backbone of hypertrophy, and that’s one reason why both types of training have to be done in phases. A lot of times Scott gets the biofeedback, “I’m not getting stronger” from clients, but that’s actually a great sign on a lot of programs. “Strength” is often not the goal of a program. Scott has about 700 templates, but he probably consistently uses about 70 of them. Kevin has several hundred templates that apply to certain situations. There is a huge difference between “cookie-cutter programs” and what Scott calls, “template formatted needs-state considerations.” For Kevin, what gets adjusted the most is simply the manipulation of volume and intensity. The basic principles stay the same. Scott really likes Vern Gambetta’s term, “Planned Performance Training” over the usual term periodization. This is because you can’t fully, 100% predict in a linear way how someone’s body will respond to a program. Some flexibility has to be built in to account for this. Tweak based on how the body responds, not how it “should” respond. An example of what Scott’s talking about is the base hit strategy. With his increased focus on strength, Kevin uses more periodization in his programming. But even then, there’s *some* flexibility build in. Kevin gives the example of writing out his plan on one sheet of paper, and then writing out “reality” on the other sheet of paper, and going back and forth, back and forth, adjusting based on the numbers he’s actually hitting in the gym. Scott hates “tempo training.” (No really. He hates it.) A program is alive. There is a constant back ’n forth between the program and trainee as the trainee keeps the program alive. Sometimes there’s active recovery. Sometimes it’s time to press on the gas. This is true of both strength and hypertrophy. Mike read out the programs he’d received from Scott when he was a client: ● 5-Day Hypertrophy ● 6-Day Hybrid with Strength Focus ● 5-Day Hybrid (Innervation and MET) ● 6-Day Strength and Hypertrophy ● 5-Day MET/Olympic Hybrid ● & then his sixth program was again the 6-Day Hybrid with Strength Focus. Although the program was “the same,” it was very different because Mike was more developed. His workload capacity was way up, and therefore his recovery needs were affected, and so on and so forth. So it was the “same program,” but it was the right program for him for different...

The reward centers of your brain are involved in your cravings and hunger. For a dieter in our modern world of food abundance, this is extremely important. The best strategy is to acknowledge this, then deal with it intelligently and calmly. This is all about awareness training—knowing what your specific cravings are, being aware of what your triggers are, learning your own thought patterns. ♦ BRAIN REWARD CENTERS NOTES:♦ Scott mentioned his rubber band exercise. It’s as simple as this: put a rubber band on your write (like the kind you might find in the grocery store around veggies) and every time you catch yourself with a specific sabotaging thought, snap yourself. Again, Mike reverted to examples from dog training and B.F. Skinner’s work. Another exercise Scott sometimes (though rarely, only if a client is really adamant that they physically can’t go without it) assigns, is letting a client eat *only* their rewarding food: chocolate, pasta, whatever it may be. This teaches that the food in question isn’t actually that amazing—it just takes on that power when you tease yourself with it. You don’t get “rid” of habits. You can in a sense overwrite or modify them, but not erase. Scott loves Michael Pollan’s quote, eat food, not too much, mostly plants. The food industry is ahead of the game in all of this. They are aware of how your brain chemistry works, and they are using that to sell you more and more products. Again: this is why awareness training is so important. The food industry also co-opts count-cultural idea and movements. Think marketing “organic” and things like. How to Deal With It: 1. Accept it. You still have that animal brain that responds on a very basic instinctual level to food rewards. Accept it, and begin awareness training. 2. Meal timing and structure. This doesn’t mean PWO or anything. It means keep structured meal times. It entrains the circadian rhythms of your hunger hormones. 3. Get a variety of tastes, textures, and colours. Multiple macronutrients, a variety in your meal plan. 4. Have a meal plan. Don’t get lost counting calories. The structure will help with habits for a variety of reasons. 5. Control your environment as best you can. Also, identify what your triggers are, then modify the habit loop. If you find yourself getting caught, a cognitive shit. ♦ Links / Resources Mentioned ♦ Babies first chocolate – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SoTqa23fV_c Homer being “force fed” donuts: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7NpVDwFYDZc Homer the Donut Junkie: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UzhIagCwUUc The Pavlok band: http://pavlok.com/

Cheat days are about resetting metabolism. If you’re on a caloric deficit, the “anti-catabolic phase” of the diet only lasts for so long. After while, the breakdown of not just fat but also muscle begins. Spike days help prevent this, while resetting metabolism and hunger hormones (leptin, ghrelin, etc.). There are also side benefits related to digestion and giving your enzymes variety. Scott’s “Cycle Diet” is actually a maintenance and muscle-building diet, where the trainee eats in a caloric deficit throughout the week, and then has a big cheat day. People who are deep into “Supercompensation Mode” may get more or less spike days, from only a single weekly cheat meal, to weekly half-day cheats, weekly full-day cheats, and full day plus half day cheats every week. Scott’s Cycle Diet is a bit different from other similar ideas out there for two big reasons. 1. Namely, he doesn’t restrict the intake of fats on your spike. You eat what you crave, and let your body and cravings dictate what you “need.” You don’t each such-and-such number of carbs and such-and-such grams of fats. (It is, after-all, a mental break as well!) 2. Also, you don’t just begin spiking all willy nilly. You don’t just add in a cheat day because your’e on the diet, nor do you eat low carb and do glycogen depleting workouts or anything like that. You deplete glycogen and so on over time, and you read your biofeedback to determine when your body needs a spike. Assuming you’re not just playing head-games with yourself (which is very possible) being totally depleted of glycogen feels unique. You can tell when it happens. ♦ Cheat Day Key Terms: ♦ Supercompensation Mode: This is a state where your body will take in a huge influx of calories and “supercompensate” in terms of its energy stores. It won’t store towards fat, but energy stores like glycogen and intracellular fats (different from your “fat stores”). Note that it takes weeks or months to enter this state… not “a week.” Relative Deficit: A caloric deficit that is relative to your maintenance calories. (Good.) Absolute Deficit: A huge caloric deficit that is low in an absolute sense; it ignores what the body needs. Usually we’re talking less than 1,000 calories per day. (Bad.) Tolerable Hunger: A reasonable, normal level of hunger, that just frankly comes with the territory if you’re on a relative deficit and you’re losing fat. Mike calls it the “Sweet Spot” of hunger, because there are other benefits to it, in terms of concentration, overall readiness and energy levels, and so on. This is NOT the same as intolerable hunger, or just starving yourself. ♦ Cheat Day Assorted Terms: ♦ Don't add a cheat day just because. Do it when your body needs it. You need to be “real.” Don’t quantify your spike days or cheat days. No grams of this, grams of that. Just refeed. Engage your hunger and appetite. Mostly it’s the intake of calories that does it. This means don’t focus on carbs or fats. Yes, spike days involve “junk” food. And yes, it really is junk. It’s filled with processed crap. But we live in the real world, and these foods are enjoyable. Also, they’re much easier to digest when you need lots of food. (Good luck getting a huge number of calories if it’s all very fancy, fine dining.) One of the big signs of supercompensation is hunger. You’re no longer satisfied after each meal. Five minutes after eating you’re like, “Was that it? I’m still just as hungry!!” and then when you start eating on a spike, you feel like a bottomless pit. If you’re hyper-aware of hunger, you’re attuning yourself to each and every possible food cue. You’re not truly listening to your body. You have to "lower the volume," psychologically speaking.

NOTE: Download a PDF of the Meal Plans Scott mentioned at smartersculptedphysique.com/011 What does successful bulking look like in the real world? What are the key success factors in a successful bulk? WHO is a good candidate for bulking, and — perhaps more importantly — who isn’t? ♦ BULKING NOTES ♦ Scott and Kevin emphasized the timelines. Building a significant amount of muscle does not happen overnight. It just doesn’t. A corollary of this is that mentally, you have to be prepared to bulk, and to keep bulking, and then to stay bulked up for not just weeks or a few months, but a year and longer. Scott compares building a body to building a house: you need to bring in the workers, you need to have enough material, and you need to keep them there. If you send them home, it’ll take awhile to bring them back. ♦The ABCs of Bulking ♦ If in doubt, eat. That said, avoid big meals. Eat a bunch of small meals. This isn’t magically stoking the metabolic fire, but it is stoking things like subjective hunger. Never stop listening to your biofeedback. Protein and other macro needs for bulking? Protein needs not *that* huge. Your body can only build so much muscle. If you take in excess protein, what happens is deamination: it’s broken down and used for glucose. That’s expensive physiologically and actually, in terms of your wallet. The “building blocks” of the house are the protein-sparing nutrients (carbs and fats)? 16-20 X BW in calories is a good starting point for total calories. After that starting point, it’s about biofeedback: elimination, digestion, energy, etc. ♦Other Notes:♦ Don’t ignore biofeedback. If your’e not hungry, don’t force feed. Stoke your hunger and build your way up. Bulking is one of those situations where you can “drink your calories” (as opposed to dieting, when you don’t want something that won’t fill you up). Don’t load up on veggies if you’re bulking. Don’t cut them out entirely, but by virtue of your increased total intake, you’ll get what you need, and overdoing it can be…. unpleasant. Bulking is not that complicated. Stick to the basics. Cosmetically, bulking is not pleasing. But if you quit too soon you’ll be gaining fat for no reason! We’re talking at least 6 months, and more likely something like 2 years, if you’re doing a real, serious bulk. But you can’t give an exact timeline. The body will take the time it takes. AND once you get up to a certain point, you need to stay there. Signs things are going well: • You’re doing well in the gym. Stronger, good energy, etc. If suddenly you can’t perform because you’re so out of breath, you’re not doing your physique goals any favours. • Some of what you gain is clearly muscle. • Hunger is still up. Who should NOT bulk? • Someone who puts on fat very easily. This might mean endomorphs, or people who’ve lost a significant amount of fat previously and are pre-disposed to put it back on. • Anyone over 50 years old. Gaining a lot of weight is a form of stress on the body that you shouldn’t be applying to it at that age. • Anyone not able to mentally make the long-term commitment. It is a mental game too. ♦ LINKS / RESOURCES MENTIONED ♦ The Sh*tter: A Cautionary Tale About Biofeedback: http://scottabelfitness.com/the-shtter-cautionary-tale-about-biofeedback-metabolism-and-diet-cults/ Andy Sinclair’s Bulking Photos: https://www.instagram.com/p/BDoG3b2Ihel/ Download a PDF of the Meal Plans Scott mentioned at smartersculptedphysique.com/011