Lyle I very good even though his attitude and behavior in everything else is off the charts. Alan aragon and Brad Schoenfeld are probably my top two go to guys. Alan aragon has a 10$ monthly research review that's worth it's weight in gold.
MESO-Rx
Anabolic Steroids
No Iron for a month before cycle
- Thread starter Heisenberg
- Start date
Lyle I very good even though his attitude and behavior in everything else is off the charts. Alan aragon and Brad Schoenfeld are probably my top two go to guys. Alan aragon has a 10$ monthly research review that's worth it's weight in gold.
DestinedForGreatness
New Member
Thanks man. I really appreciate it. I plan on getting my masters in something physiology related and Im sure those guys will help when it comes time to do some more thesis/research related stuff after I complete undergrad.
Your grossly oversimplifying these COMBINED metabolic processes.
Bc what you seem to be implying is high intensity training is not an oxidative process when in fact it is or that for prolonged exercise does not involve the glycolytic pathway when it does.
Moreover conditioning can make a significant impact those physiologic processes involved.
Finally I too would like to hear what you mean that "glucose storage as fat is a myth"?
WTF is that supposed to mean?
This organ specific process is called GLUCONEOGENESIS, DOC.
This process is also used to convert protein into glucose. Thereafter either substrate may enter the glycolytic pathway and the Krebs cycle to produce energy.
Last edited:
Yes I am oversimplifying them for the purposes of the discussion here. Almost all energy needs come from a combination of both pathways.
Gluconeogenesis is the making of glucose from other substrates such as amino acids, pyruvate, lactate, etc. We are talking about de novo lipogenesis though please keep up Jim
Oh please doc give me a break. Tell me how such gross oversimplification aids this thread or it's discussants, excepting yourself.
Moreover have you ever heard of the term fatty acids, apparently NOT or they are one of the substrates you so conveniently OVERLOOKED as ECT, because it's impossible for you to openly admit YOUR WRONG!
So please take that De Novo nonsense and stick it where the sun doesn't shine.
Moreover have you ever heard of the term fatty acids, apparently NOT or they are one of the substrates you so conveniently OVERLOOKED as ECT, because it's impossible for you to openly admit YOUR WRONG!
So please take that De Novo nonsense and stick it where the sun doesn't shine.
Last edited:
DestinedForGreatness
New Member
Actually yeah adipocytes definitely convert excess glucose into triglycerides.
DestinedForGreatness
New Member
Never mind lol
I've admitted being wrong more than once. Try again to keep up Jim
Well here is another occasion where your WRONG, lol!
Jim, if this is above your head you should just let the EXPERTS like Lyle McDonald, Alan Aragon, Schoenfeld, et al do the talking.
Last edited:
Sure if they were here to speak for themselves rather than YOU.
Go ahead and make my day post a citation from any physiology text about the function of Gluconeogenesis, then openly admit YOUR WRONG!
Incidentally the RMR of muscle is irrelevant unless you believe those who have it (muscle) are couch potatoes.
The point that you overlooked ONCE AGAIN is that muscle is a MODIFIABLE factor that can and DOES influence BMR.
This organ also requires the burning of calories that far exceed 6 Kal/Kg to BUILD and maintain, exclusive of the RMR, especially during exercise.
Shit DIC if you knew anything about physiology you didn't have to misquote the meaning of from someone else's drivel, you would BE DANGEROUS, lol!
Go ahead and make my day post a citation from any physiology text about the function of Gluconeogenesis, then openly admit YOUR WRONG!
Incidentally the RMR of muscle is irrelevant unless you believe those who have it (muscle) are couch potatoes.
The point that you overlooked ONCE AGAIN is that muscle is a MODIFIABLE factor that can and DOES influence BMR.
This organ also requires the burning of calories that far exceed 6 Kal/Kg to BUILD and maintain, exclusive of the RMR, especially during exercise.
Shit DIC if you knew anything about physiology you didn't have to misquote the meaning of from someone else's drivel, you would BE DANGEROUS, lol!
Hey DOC before you cite someone as being "an expert" perhaps you should also post their RESEARCH and EDUCATIONAL background to support YOUR CLAIM!
Opinion "articles" like the one you posted does not define someone as being expert at anything, EXCEPT perhaps convincing others like yourself they are "EXPERTS".
Opinion "articles" like the one you posted does not define someone as being expert at anything, EXCEPT perhaps convincing others like yourself they are "EXPERTS".
Last edited:
JEALOUSY is not becoming of you Jim. Post your credentials and I'll post theirs or if you'd rather the information is out there. A quick google search will tell you their background and education.
You know better than to THINK the article makes the expert Jim but you've got to find some way to attack them so this must be it. The fact that the opinions are based on the RESEARCH as well as anecdotal experiences of the authors/researchers/etc is what makes the substance.
You're free to invite them over here....
What would make your day seems to be other men sticking things where the sun don't shine if your other post meant anything. There are pay sites for that Jim so to make your day I'd suggest you sign up for one of those sites or take advantage of the robust amount of free content out there.
Or unless you're too hardheaded to accept that muscle tissue burns relatively few calories in the big picture.
Maybe reading isn't your strong suit and if that's the case then I apologize, but if you actually spent time reading what was posted instead of trying to attack me you'd see this was already brought up. lyle mentioned this that more calories would be consumed from the training to get the muscle than the muscle itself burns.
Shit JIM I'm not quite sure what it would take to make you dangerous, maybe the realization that there are people who know more about this than you would suffice, but listening to your mindless drivel is getting old. Lighten up a little, all that cortisol can't be good for anyone's health.
My credentials were posted long ago on my Meso profile, but I never said I was an "expert" which is why whenever controversial topics of this nature arise I cite evidence.
Now focus Doc bc the topic of discussion is you stating; the "CONVERSION OF FATS INTO GLUCOSE IS A MYTH"
And you are WRONG but just refuse to admit it. So to prove your wrong I'll cite supportive evidence. (When I have access to a computer rather than an IPhone)
But once again DOC the metabolic process whereby non-carbohydrate substrates including FATS as fatty acids, proteins as amino acids OR intermediate substrates such as glycerol and lactate are converted into GLUCOSE is called GLUCONEOGENESIS.
And that fella is NO "MYTH", LMAO.
Now focus Doc bc the topic of discussion is you stating; the "CONVERSION OF FATS INTO GLUCOSE IS A MYTH"
And you are WRONG but just refuse to admit it. So to prove your wrong I'll cite supportive evidence. (When I have access to a computer rather than an IPhone)
But once again DOC the metabolic process whereby non-carbohydrate substrates including FATS as fatty acids, proteins as amino acids OR intermediate substrates such as glycerol and lactate are converted into GLUCOSE is called GLUCONEOGENESIS.
And that fella is NO "MYTH", LMAO.
Aka your version of a cop out Jim. Either post your credentials or kindly sit down and keep quiet about the credentials of others. You never said you were an expert? No you simply claim to be a doctor and since doctors are supposed to be trained In biology and you ask for credentials....put up or shit up
Jim I'm not sure if you're truly this retarded, you're doing a good job of fooling me, or you simply can't comprehend the English language, which is fine bc it is a complicated language and it may not be your first language but I DARE you to point me to where I said conversion of fats into glucose is a myth
^^^youre so busy trying to stroke your internet ego you misread my posts you egotistical wannabe. I said the storage of glucose as fat is largely a myth. there's a big difference between the two and I said the latter not be former.
Now, I'll kindly wait for your admittance on how wrong you were....remember, how you asked me to do so? Well guess what little Jimmy? You were wrong here simply bc reading comprehension took you to school here.
99% of the posts I make on here are done on an iphone. If this is an excuse, please go and tell CBS on my behalf.
And since you so eloquently explained how you can't read and allowed me to quote you for posterity:
One last time, go back and re-read my posts. Quote me where I said GNG or fats being converted to glucose is a myth. I realize you may have to retire by the time you're able to do so and baby Jimmy will have competed med school as well but I'll gladly give you all the time you require Jimbo. Now please go back and read bc as I said BEFORE and I'll say AGAIN, THE STORAGE OF GLUCOSE AS FAT IS LAREGLY A MYTH BC IT IS BASED ON RAT NOT HUMAN MODELS AND THEY OROCESS CARBOHYDRATES DIFFERENTLY THAN HUMANS DO. IN HUMANS, DE NOVO LIPOGENESIS IS NOT A COMMIN OCCURENCE AKA THE STORAGE OF GLUCOSE INTO FAT OR THE SYNTHESIS OF OF FATTY ACIDS FROM DIETARY CARBOHYDRATES OR THE ENZYMATIC PROCESS FOR CONVERTING DIETARY CARBOHYDRATES INTO FAT IN HUMANS IS LAREGLY A MYTH. THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH GNG JIMBO......
Oh but you sid converting glucose into fat WAS A MYTH rather than an uncommon occurrence. And "rats" use both CNG and DE NOVO LIPOGENESIS and the processes by how this is done is almost identical to humans, with the primary difference being the anatomy of the rat liver rather than any respective differences in glucose/lipid metabolism.
(Oh but fear not I heard you argue this bullshit earlier so HUMAN STUDIES WILL ALSO BE INCLUDED)
Nonetheless DD I was waiting for this form of a foolish rebuttal and NOW I will post the ARTICLES CLOWN. Let your lame excuses continue thereafter. Shit next up you will argue the moon is made of CHEESE, LMAO!
(Oh but fear not I heard you argue this bullshit earlier so HUMAN STUDIES WILL ALSO BE INCLUDED)
Nonetheless DD I was waiting for this form of a foolish rebuttal and NOW I will post the ARTICLES CLOWN. Let your lame excuses continue thereafter. Shit next up you will argue the moon is made of CHEESE, LMAO!
I'd never argue the moon is made of ch**se, I HATE ch**se Jim.
I'm waiting for an apology Jimbo....tick tock tick tock
Then your truly a pathological fool, who will and has NEVER admitted to being wrong about substantive issues on this forum!
