If there is one topic that gets people in the sports nutrition arena hot under the collar, is the age old " vegetarian versus meat eater" debate. In particu- lar, the debate is focused on whether or not vegetarian diets are adequate and equivalent to diets that include meat when it comes to adding muscle mass. Outlining the entire debate of both sides of the fence is beyond the scope of this discussion. I am going to stick to the debate regarding how a veg- gie diet vs. a meat-containing diet in uences muscle mass, rather than the larger picture of whether or not vegetarian diets are inherently healthier than diets that contain meat and vice versa.
In a nutshell, strict vegetarians (vegans) maintain that meat is not essential
for building muscle and a diet that mixes complimentary foods such as
beans and rice is adequate.
Lacto-ovo vegetarians ( vegetarians that include milk products and eggs)
further maintain that the inclusion of milk and eggs, as highly bioavailable
complete proteins, is more than adequate for athletes trying to build mus-
cle and maintain peak performance.
Omnivores (omnivore meaning people who eat a wide variety of foods in-
cluding meat) argue that meats such as chicken, beef and others are by
nature more anabolic for a variety of reasons.
So who's right?
This debate has not been adequately looked at in the research but we do
have some data that supports the omnivore's position. For example, sev-
eral studies have found that meat-containing diets are superior for testos-
terone production than strict vegetarian diets.
As most people know, testosterone is an essential hormone for increasing
and maintaining muscle mass while keeping body fat low. It's also essential
for libido and mood in both sexes, but particularly important for men.
One study called,"E ects of an omnivorous diet compared with a lacto-ovo
vegetarian diet on resistance-training-induced changes in body composi-
tion and skeletal muscle in older men” looked directly at this debate.
The researchers wanted to nd out if an omnivorous (meat-containing)
diet was superior to a lacto-ovo vegetarian diet on the retention of muscle
mass of older men put on a weight training routine.
Nineteen men aged 51 - 69 years old were enrolled in the study that ran
12 weeks. Nine men ate their normal meat containing (omnivorous) diet,
providing 50 percent of total dietary protein from meat sources such as
pork, chicken, sh and beef. Another 10 men followed a lacto-ovo type
vegetarian diet for the duration of the study, with both groups following a
weight training schedule.
Although the strength increases between groups were roughly the same,
the study found that the whole-body changes in skeletal muscle size dif-
fered signi cantly between groups. Whole-body muscle mass increased in
the omnivorous group, while it actually decreased in the lacto-ovo group.
Apparently, the meat eaters gained muscle over the 12 weeks while the
lacto-ovo eaters lost muscle mass. Ouch!
The authors concluded:
“...consumption of a meat-containing diet contributed to greater gains in fat-
free mass and skeletal muscle mass with resistance training in older men than
did an a lacto-ovo diet.”
Is this a slam dunk against the vegetarian diet as it relates to the claim that
it is just as good as a meat-containing diet for increasing muscle mass? No,
but it does lend some support to the idea that omnivorous diets have an
edge for producing optimal levels of anabolic (muscle building) hormones
and increases in muscle mass. More research is clearly needed to con rm
this, however.
There is still some debate over which of the two diets is healthier, however,
and that has to be factored into peoples’ choices as to which diet is best
suited for them.
One area in which vegetarian diets are de cient vs. omnivorous diets is
in muscle creatine stores. In the absence of supplementation, vegetar-
ians have been found to have lower total muscle creatine - which could
limit lean mass gains in response to training. The good news is that a re-
cent study con rmed that vegetarians on a resistance training program
responded well to creatine supplementation: their relative gains in work
performance, total creatine/phosphocreatine levels, and lean tissue mass
were even greater than the response for omnivores taking creatine, due to
lower starting creatine levels. The researchers concluded:
“...subjects with initially low levels of intramuscular Cr ( vegetarians) are more
responsive to supplementation.”
Other areas of concern for vegetarians are: iron status (the iron in plant
foods is less bioavailable than the iron in animal foods), zinc, vitamin B12
(cyanocobalamin), vitamin D (cholecalciferol) and calcium. The very high
ber intake associated with vegetarian diets may also, ironically, limit the
number of calories a vegetarian athlete can consume. This is the basis for
the Ornish Diet, which recommends a vegetarian or near- vegetarian diet
for weight loss, on the grounds that eating high ber plant foods automati-
cally limits calorie intake.
The take-home lesson is that vegetarians wanting to increase lean body
mass should make sure that important nutrients normally supplied by
meat and other animal protein sources are included using a combination
of appropriate foods and supplements.
It is not impossible to gain a signi cant amount of lean body mass on a
vegetarian diet: legendary bodybuilder Bill Pearl is perhaps the best known
example. Truth be known though, my bet would be in favor of the omnivo-
rous diet if optimal muscle mass is the goal.
->Read More
38 comments:
February 28, 2013 at 4:16 AM
If there is one topic that gets people in the sports nutrition arena hot under the collar, is the age old " vegetarian versus meat eater" debate. In particu- lar, the debate is focused on whether or not vegetarian diets are adequate and equivalent to diets that include meat when it comes to adding muscle mass. Outlining the entire debate of both sides of the fence is beyond the scope of this discussion. I am going to stick to the debate regarding how a veg- gie diet vs. a meat-containing diet in uences muscle mass, rather than the larger picture of whether or not vegetarian diets are inherently healthier than diets that contain meat and vice versa.
In a nutshell, strict vegetarians (vegans) maintain that meat is not essential
for building muscle and a diet that mixes complimentary foods such as
beans and rice is adequate.
Lacto-ovo vegetarians ( vegetarians that include milk products and eggs)
further maintain that the inclusion of milk and eggs, as highly bioavailable
complete proteins, is more than adequate for athletes trying to build mus-
cle and maintain peak performance.
Omnivores (omnivore meaning people who eat a wide variety of foods in-
cluding meat) argue that meats such as chicken, beef and others are by
nature more anabolic for a variety of reasons.
So who's right?
This debate has not been adequately looked at in the research but we do
have some data that supports the omnivore's position. For example, sev-
eral studies have found that meat-containing diets are superior for testos-
terone production than strict vegetarian diets.
As most people know, testosterone is an essential hormone for increasing
and maintaining muscle mass while keeping body fat low. It's also essential
for libido and mood in both sexes, but particularly important for men.
One study called,"E ects of an omnivorous diet compared with a lacto-ovo
vegetarian diet on resistance-training-induced changes in body composi-
tion and skeletal muscle in older men” looked directly at this debate.
The researchers wanted to nd out if an omnivorous (meat-containing)
diet was superior to a lacto-ovo vegetarian diet on the retention of muscle
mass of older men put on a weight training routine.
Nineteen men aged 51 - 69 years old were enrolled in the study that ran
12 weeks. Nine men ate their normal meat containing (omnivorous) diet,
providing 50 percent of total dietary protein from meat sources such as
pork, chicken, sh and beef. Another 10 men followed a lacto-ovo type
vegetarian diet for the duration of the study, with both groups following a
weight training schedule.
Although the strength increases between groups were roughly the same,
the study found that the whole-body changes in skeletal muscle size dif-
fered signi cantly between groups. Whole-body muscle mass increased in
the omnivorous group, while it actually decreased in the lacto-ovo group.
Apparently, the meat eaters gained muscle over the 12 weeks while the
lacto-ovo eaters lost muscle mass. Ouch!
The authors concluded:
“...consumption of a meat-containing diet contributed to greater gains in fat-
free mass and skeletal muscle mass with resistance training in older men than
did an a lacto-ovo diet.”
Is this a slam dunk against the vegetarian diet as it relates to the claim that
it is just as good as a meat-containing diet for increasing muscle mass? No,
but it does lend some support to the idea that omnivorous diets have an
edge for producing optimal levels of anabolic (muscle building) hormones
and increases in muscle mass. More research is clearly needed to con rm
this, however.
There is still some debate over which of the two diets is healthier, however,
and that has to be factored into peoples’ choices as to which diet is best
suited for them.
One area in which vegetarian diets are de cient vs. omnivorous diets is
in muscle creatine stores. In the absence of supplementation, vegetar-
ians have been found to have lower total muscle creatine - which could
limit lean mass gains in response to training. The good news is that a re-
cent study con rmed that vegetarians on a resistance training program
responded well to creatine supplementation: their relative gains in work
performance, total creatine/phosphocreatine levels, and lean tissue mass
were even greater than the response for omnivores taking creatine, due to
lower starting creatine levels. The researchers concluded:
“...subjects with initially low levels of intramuscular Cr ( vegetarians) are more
responsive to supplementation.”
Other areas of concern for vegetarians are: iron status (the iron in plant
foods is less bioavailable than the iron in animal foods), zinc, vitamin B12
(cyanocobalamin), vitamin D (cholecalciferol) and calcium. The very high
ber intake associated with vegetarian diets may also, ironically, limit the
number of calories a vegetarian athlete can consume. This is the basis for
the Ornish Diet, which recommends a vegetarian or near- vegetarian diet
for weight loss, on the grounds that eating high ber plant foods automati-
cally limits calorie intake.
The take-home lesson is that vegetarians wanting to increase lean body
mass should make sure that important nutrients normally supplied by
meat and other animal protein sources are included using a combination
of appropriate foods and supplements.
It is not impossible to gain a signi cant amount of lean body mass on a
vegetarian diet: legendary bodybuilder Bill Pearl is perhaps the best known
example. Truth be known though, my bet would be in favor of the omnivo-
rous diet if optimal muscle mass is the goal.
This design is wicked! You definitely know how to keep a reader entertained.
Between your wit and your videos, I was almost moved
to start my own blog (well, almost...HaHa!) Wonderful job.
I really loved what you had to say, and more than that, how
you presented it. Too cool!
my blog post ... diet plan to lose weight
April 28, 2013 at 3:30 PM
If there is one topic that gets people in the sports nutrition arena hot under the collar, is the age old " vegetarian versus meat eater" debate. In particu- lar, the debate is focused on whether or not vegetarian diets are adequate and equivalent to diets that include meat when it comes to adding muscle mass. Outlining the entire debate of both sides of the fence is beyond the scope of this discussion. I am going to stick to the debate regarding how a veg- gie diet vs. a meat-containing diet in uences muscle mass, rather than the larger picture of whether or not vegetarian diets are inherently healthier than diets that contain meat and vice versa.
In a nutshell, strict vegetarians (vegans) maintain that meat is not essential
for building muscle and a diet that mixes complimentary foods such as
beans and rice is adequate.
Lacto-ovo vegetarians ( vegetarians that include milk products and eggs)
further maintain that the inclusion of milk and eggs, as highly bioavailable
complete proteins, is more than adequate for athletes trying to build mus-
cle and maintain peak performance.
Omnivores (omnivore meaning people who eat a wide variety of foods in-
cluding meat) argue that meats such as chicken, beef and others are by
nature more anabolic for a variety of reasons.
So who's right?
This debate has not been adequately looked at in the research but we do
have some data that supports the omnivore's position. For example, sev-
eral studies have found that meat-containing diets are superior for testos-
terone production than strict vegetarian diets.
As most people know, testosterone is an essential hormone for increasing
and maintaining muscle mass while keeping body fat low. It's also essential
for libido and mood in both sexes, but particularly important for men.
One study called,"E ects of an omnivorous diet compared with a lacto-ovo
vegetarian diet on resistance-training-induced changes in body composi-
tion and skeletal muscle in older men” looked directly at this debate.
The researchers wanted to nd out if an omnivorous (meat-containing)
diet was superior to a lacto-ovo vegetarian diet on the retention of muscle
mass of older men put on a weight training routine.
Nineteen men aged 51 - 69 years old were enrolled in the study that ran
12 weeks. Nine men ate their normal meat containing (omnivorous) diet,
providing 50 percent of total dietary protein from meat sources such as
pork, chicken, sh and beef. Another 10 men followed a lacto-ovo type
vegetarian diet for the duration of the study, with both groups following a
weight training schedule.
Although the strength increases between groups were roughly the same,
the study found that the whole-body changes in skeletal muscle size dif-
fered signi cantly between groups. Whole-body muscle mass increased in
the omnivorous group, while it actually decreased in the lacto-ovo group.
Apparently, the meat eaters gained muscle over the 12 weeks while the
lacto-ovo eaters lost muscle mass. Ouch!
The authors concluded:
“...consumption of a meat-containing diet contributed to greater gains in fat-
free mass and skeletal muscle mass with resistance training in older men than
did an a lacto-ovo diet.”
Is this a slam dunk against the vegetarian diet as it relates to the claim that
it is just as good as a meat-containing diet for increasing muscle mass? No,
but it does lend some support to the idea that omnivorous diets have an
edge for producing optimal levels of anabolic (muscle building) hormones
and increases in muscle mass. More research is clearly needed to con rm
this, however.
There is still some debate over which of the two diets is healthier, however,
and that has to be factored into peoples’ choices as to which diet is best
suited for them.
One area in which vegetarian diets are de cient vs. omnivorous diets is
in muscle creatine stores. In the absence of supplementation, vegetar-
ians have been found to have lower total muscle creatine - which could
limit lean mass gains in response to training. The good news is that a re-
cent study con rmed that vegetarians on a resistance training program
responded well to creatine supplementation: their relative gains in work
performance, total creatine/phosphocreatine levels, and lean tissue mass
were even greater than the response for omnivores taking creatine, due to
lower starting creatine levels. The researchers concluded:
“...subjects with initially low levels of intramuscular Cr ( vegetarians) are more
responsive to supplementation.”
Other areas of concern for vegetarians are: iron status (the iron in plant
foods is less bioavailable than the iron in animal foods), zinc, vitamin B12
(cyanocobalamin), vitamin D (cholecalciferol) and calcium. The very high
ber intake associated with vegetarian diets may also, ironically, limit the
number of calories a vegetarian athlete can consume. This is the basis for
the Ornish Diet, which recommends a vegetarian or near- vegetarian diet
for weight loss, on the grounds that eating high ber plant foods automati-
cally limits calorie intake.
The take-home lesson is that vegetarians wanting to increase lean body
mass should make sure that important nutrients normally supplied by
meat and other animal protein sources are included using a combination
of appropriate foods and supplements.
It is not impossible to gain a signi cant amount of lean body mass on a
vegetarian diet: legendary bodybuilder Bill Pearl is perhaps the best known
example. Truth be known though, my bet would be in favor of the omnivo-
rous diet if optimal muscle mass is the goal.
You could certainly see your skills in the work
you write. The world hopes for more passionate writers like you who are
not afraid to say how they believe. All the time go after your heart.
Review my site: weight loss treatment
May 17, 2013 at 4:07 PM
If there is one topic that gets people in the sports nutrition arena hot under the collar, is the age old " vegetarian versus meat eater" debate. In particu- lar, the debate is focused on whether or not vegetarian diets are adequate and equivalent to diets that include meat when it comes to adding muscle mass. Outlining the entire debate of both sides of the fence is beyond the scope of this discussion. I am going to stick to the debate regarding how a veg- gie diet vs. a meat-containing diet in uences muscle mass, rather than the larger picture of whether or not vegetarian diets are inherently healthier than diets that contain meat and vice versa.
In a nutshell, strict vegetarians (vegans) maintain that meat is not essential
for building muscle and a diet that mixes complimentary foods such as
beans and rice is adequate.
Lacto-ovo vegetarians ( vegetarians that include milk products and eggs)
further maintain that the inclusion of milk and eggs, as highly bioavailable
complete proteins, is more than adequate for athletes trying to build mus-
cle and maintain peak performance.
Omnivores (omnivore meaning people who eat a wide variety of foods in-
cluding meat) argue that meats such as chicken, beef and others are by
nature more anabolic for a variety of reasons.
So who's right?
This debate has not been adequately looked at in the research but we do
have some data that supports the omnivore's position. For example, sev-
eral studies have found that meat-containing diets are superior for testos-
terone production than strict vegetarian diets.
As most people know, testosterone is an essential hormone for increasing
and maintaining muscle mass while keeping body fat low. It's also essential
for libido and mood in both sexes, but particularly important for men.
One study called,"E ects of an omnivorous diet compared with a lacto-ovo
vegetarian diet on resistance-training-induced changes in body composi-
tion and skeletal muscle in older men” looked directly at this debate.
The researchers wanted to nd out if an omnivorous (meat-containing)
diet was superior to a lacto-ovo vegetarian diet on the retention of muscle
mass of older men put on a weight training routine.
Nineteen men aged 51 - 69 years old were enrolled in the study that ran
12 weeks. Nine men ate their normal meat containing (omnivorous) diet,
providing 50 percent of total dietary protein from meat sources such as
pork, chicken, sh and beef. Another 10 men followed a lacto-ovo type
vegetarian diet for the duration of the study, with both groups following a
weight training schedule.
Although the strength increases between groups were roughly the same,
the study found that the whole-body changes in skeletal muscle size dif-
fered signi cantly between groups. Whole-body muscle mass increased in
the omnivorous group, while it actually decreased in the lacto-ovo group.
Apparently, the meat eaters gained muscle over the 12 weeks while the
lacto-ovo eaters lost muscle mass. Ouch!
The authors concluded:
“...consumption of a meat-containing diet contributed to greater gains in fat-
free mass and skeletal muscle mass with resistance training in older men than
did an a lacto-ovo diet.”
Is this a slam dunk against the vegetarian diet as it relates to the claim that
it is just as good as a meat-containing diet for increasing muscle mass? No,
but it does lend some support to the idea that omnivorous diets have an
edge for producing optimal levels of anabolic (muscle building) hormones
and increases in muscle mass. More research is clearly needed to con rm
this, however.
There is still some debate over which of the two diets is healthier, however,
and that has to be factored into peoples’ choices as to which diet is best
suited for them.
One area in which vegetarian diets are de cient vs. omnivorous diets is
in muscle creatine stores. In the absence of supplementation, vegetar-
ians have been found to have lower total muscle creatine - which could
limit lean mass gains in response to training. The good news is that a re-
cent study con rmed that vegetarians on a resistance training program
responded well to creatine supplementation: their relative gains in work
performance, total creatine/phosphocreatine levels, and lean tissue mass
were even greater than the response for omnivores taking creatine, due to
lower starting creatine levels. The researchers concluded:
“...subjects with initially low levels of intramuscular Cr ( vegetarians) are more
responsive to supplementation.”
Other areas of concern for vegetarians are: iron status (the iron in plant
foods is less bioavailable than the iron in animal foods), zinc, vitamin B12
(cyanocobalamin), vitamin D (cholecalciferol) and calcium. The very high
ber intake associated with vegetarian diets may also, ironically, limit the
number of calories a vegetarian athlete can consume. This is the basis for
the Ornish Diet, which recommends a vegetarian or near- vegetarian diet
for weight loss, on the grounds that eating high ber plant foods automati-
cally limits calorie intake.
The take-home lesson is that vegetarians wanting to increase lean body
mass should make sure that important nutrients normally supplied by
meat and other animal protein sources are included using a combination
of appropriate foods and supplements.
It is not impossible to gain a signi cant amount of lean body mass on a
vegetarian diet: legendary bodybuilder Bill Pearl is perhaps the best known
example. Truth be known though, my bet would be in favor of the omnivo-
rous diet if optimal muscle mass is the goal.
I'm not sure why but this blog is loading extremely slow for me. Is anyone else having this problem or is it a problem on my end? I'll check back later and see if the problem still exists.
My homepage :: http://puregarciniacambogiareview.net/
May 18, 2013 at 12:53 AM
If there is one topic that gets people in the sports nutrition arena hot under the collar, is the age old " vegetarian versus meat eater" debate. In particu- lar, the debate is focused on whether or not vegetarian diets are adequate and equivalent to diets that include meat when it comes to adding muscle mass. Outlining the entire debate of both sides of the fence is beyond the scope of this discussion. I am going to stick to the debate regarding how a veg- gie diet vs. a meat-containing diet in uences muscle mass, rather than the larger picture of whether or not vegetarian diets are inherently healthier than diets that contain meat and vice versa.
In a nutshell, strict vegetarians (vegans) maintain that meat is not essential
for building muscle and a diet that mixes complimentary foods such as
beans and rice is adequate.
Lacto-ovo vegetarians ( vegetarians that include milk products and eggs)
further maintain that the inclusion of milk and eggs, as highly bioavailable
complete proteins, is more than adequate for athletes trying to build mus-
cle and maintain peak performance.
Omnivores (omnivore meaning people who eat a wide variety of foods in-
cluding meat) argue that meats such as chicken, beef and others are by
nature more anabolic for a variety of reasons.
So who's right?
This debate has not been adequately looked at in the research but we do
have some data that supports the omnivore's position. For example, sev-
eral studies have found that meat-containing diets are superior for testos-
terone production than strict vegetarian diets.
As most people know, testosterone is an essential hormone for increasing
and maintaining muscle mass while keeping body fat low. It's also essential
for libido and mood in both sexes, but particularly important for men.
One study called,"E ects of an omnivorous diet compared with a lacto-ovo
vegetarian diet on resistance-training-induced changes in body composi-
tion and skeletal muscle in older men” looked directly at this debate.
The researchers wanted to nd out if an omnivorous (meat-containing)
diet was superior to a lacto-ovo vegetarian diet on the retention of muscle
mass of older men put on a weight training routine.
Nineteen men aged 51 - 69 years old were enrolled in the study that ran
12 weeks. Nine men ate their normal meat containing (omnivorous) diet,
providing 50 percent of total dietary protein from meat sources such as
pork, chicken, sh and beef. Another 10 men followed a lacto-ovo type
vegetarian diet for the duration of the study, with both groups following a
weight training schedule.
Although the strength increases between groups were roughly the same,
the study found that the whole-body changes in skeletal muscle size dif-
fered signi cantly between groups. Whole-body muscle mass increased in
the omnivorous group, while it actually decreased in the lacto-ovo group.
Apparently, the meat eaters gained muscle over the 12 weeks while the
lacto-ovo eaters lost muscle mass. Ouch!
The authors concluded:
“...consumption of a meat-containing diet contributed to greater gains in fat-
free mass and skeletal muscle mass with resistance training in older men than
did an a lacto-ovo diet.”
Is this a slam dunk against the vegetarian diet as it relates to the claim that
it is just as good as a meat-containing diet for increasing muscle mass? No,
but it does lend some support to the idea that omnivorous diets have an
edge for producing optimal levels of anabolic (muscle building) hormones
and increases in muscle mass. More research is clearly needed to con rm
this, however.
There is still some debate over which of the two diets is healthier, however,
and that has to be factored into peoples’ choices as to which diet is best
suited for them.
One area in which vegetarian diets are de cient vs. omnivorous diets is
in muscle creatine stores. In the absence of supplementation, vegetar-
ians have been found to have lower total muscle creatine - which could
limit lean mass gains in response to training. The good news is that a re-
cent study con rmed that vegetarians on a resistance training program
responded well to creatine supplementation: their relative gains in work
performance, total creatine/phosphocreatine levels, and lean tissue mass
were even greater than the response for omnivores taking creatine, due to
lower starting creatine levels. The researchers concluded:
“...subjects with initially low levels of intramuscular Cr ( vegetarians) are more
responsive to supplementation.”
Other areas of concern for vegetarians are: iron status (the iron in plant
foods is less bioavailable than the iron in animal foods), zinc, vitamin B12
(cyanocobalamin), vitamin D (cholecalciferol) and calcium. The very high
ber intake associated with vegetarian diets may also, ironically, limit the
number of calories a vegetarian athlete can consume. This is the basis for
the Ornish Diet, which recommends a vegetarian or near- vegetarian diet
for weight loss, on the grounds that eating high ber plant foods automati-
cally limits calorie intake.
The take-home lesson is that vegetarians wanting to increase lean body
mass should make sure that important nutrients normally supplied by
meat and other animal protein sources are included using a combination
of appropriate foods and supplements.
It is not impossible to gain a signi cant amount of lean body mass on a
vegetarian diet: legendary bodybuilder Bill Pearl is perhaps the best known
example. Truth be known though, my bet would be in favor of the omnivo-
rous diet if optimal muscle mass is the goal.
I simply could not go away your website prior to suggesting that I extremely enjoyed the usual info an individual supply to your guests?
Is going to be back often in order to investigate cross-check
new posts
Feel free to surf to my weblog; best supplements for muscle growth
May 30, 2014 at 3:44 AM
If there is one topic that gets people in the sports nutrition arena hot under the collar, is the age old " vegetarian versus meat eater" debate. In particu- lar, the debate is focused on whether or not vegetarian diets are adequate and equivalent to diets that include meat when it comes to adding muscle mass. Outlining the entire debate of both sides of the fence is beyond the scope of this discussion. I am going to stick to the debate regarding how a veg- gie diet vs. a meat-containing diet in uences muscle mass, rather than the larger picture of whether or not vegetarian diets are inherently healthier than diets that contain meat and vice versa.
In a nutshell, strict vegetarians (vegans) maintain that meat is not essential
for building muscle and a diet that mixes complimentary foods such as
beans and rice is adequate.
Lacto-ovo vegetarians ( vegetarians that include milk products and eggs)
further maintain that the inclusion of milk and eggs, as highly bioavailable
complete proteins, is more than adequate for athletes trying to build mus-
cle and maintain peak performance.
Omnivores (omnivore meaning people who eat a wide variety of foods in-
cluding meat) argue that meats such as chicken, beef and others are by
nature more anabolic for a variety of reasons.
So who's right?
This debate has not been adequately looked at in the research but we do
have some data that supports the omnivore's position. For example, sev-
eral studies have found that meat-containing diets are superior for testos-
terone production than strict vegetarian diets.
As most people know, testosterone is an essential hormone for increasing
and maintaining muscle mass while keeping body fat low. It's also essential
for libido and mood in both sexes, but particularly important for men.
One study called,"E ects of an omnivorous diet compared with a lacto-ovo
vegetarian diet on resistance-training-induced changes in body composi-
tion and skeletal muscle in older men” looked directly at this debate.
The researchers wanted to nd out if an omnivorous (meat-containing)
diet was superior to a lacto-ovo vegetarian diet on the retention of muscle
mass of older men put on a weight training routine.
Nineteen men aged 51 - 69 years old were enrolled in the study that ran
12 weeks. Nine men ate their normal meat containing (omnivorous) diet,
providing 50 percent of total dietary protein from meat sources such as
pork, chicken, sh and beef. Another 10 men followed a lacto-ovo type
vegetarian diet for the duration of the study, with both groups following a
weight training schedule.
Although the strength increases between groups were roughly the same,
the study found that the whole-body changes in skeletal muscle size dif-
fered signi cantly between groups. Whole-body muscle mass increased in
the omnivorous group, while it actually decreased in the lacto-ovo group.
Apparently, the meat eaters gained muscle over the 12 weeks while the
lacto-ovo eaters lost muscle mass. Ouch!
The authors concluded:
“...consumption of a meat-containing diet contributed to greater gains in fat-
free mass and skeletal muscle mass with resistance training in older men than
did an a lacto-ovo diet.”
Is this a slam dunk against the vegetarian diet as it relates to the claim that
it is just as good as a meat-containing diet for increasing muscle mass? No,
but it does lend some support to the idea that omnivorous diets have an
edge for producing optimal levels of anabolic (muscle building) hormones
and increases in muscle mass. More research is clearly needed to con rm
this, however.
There is still some debate over which of the two diets is healthier, however,
and that has to be factored into peoples’ choices as to which diet is best
suited for them.
One area in which vegetarian diets are de cient vs. omnivorous diets is
in muscle creatine stores. In the absence of supplementation, vegetar-
ians have been found to have lower total muscle creatine - which could
limit lean mass gains in response to training. The good news is that a re-
cent study con rmed that vegetarians on a resistance training program
responded well to creatine supplementation: their relative gains in work
performance, total creatine/phosphocreatine levels, and lean tissue mass
were even greater than the response for omnivores taking creatine, due to
lower starting creatine levels. The researchers concluded:
“...subjects with initially low levels of intramuscular Cr ( vegetarians) are more
responsive to supplementation.”
Other areas of concern for vegetarians are: iron status (the iron in plant
foods is less bioavailable than the iron in animal foods), zinc, vitamin B12
(cyanocobalamin), vitamin D (cholecalciferol) and calcium. The very high
ber intake associated with vegetarian diets may also, ironically, limit the
number of calories a vegetarian athlete can consume. This is the basis for
the Ornish Diet, which recommends a vegetarian or near- vegetarian diet
for weight loss, on the grounds that eating high ber plant foods automati-
cally limits calorie intake.
The take-home lesson is that vegetarians wanting to increase lean body
mass should make sure that important nutrients normally supplied by
meat and other animal protein sources are included using a combination
of appropriate foods and supplements.
It is not impossible to gain a signi cant amount of lean body mass on a
vegetarian diet: legendary bodybuilder Bill Pearl is perhaps the best known
example. Truth be known though, my bet would be in favor of the omnivo-
rous diet if optimal muscle mass is the goal.
On the positive side the purchaser could earn a quick and substantial profit
if they can quickly sell their option to a third party.
Today, more and more investors are looking toward the real estate
sector. But when everything just stopped - freelance assignments dried up, editors were fired,
Televisa slashed the production company, entire departments at my publishing houses were closed - when the world just stopped and I
tried to return to a steady job after freelancing for the past few years, all hiring had been frozen and everyone
was holding on to what they had with a cat-like
grip.
Also visit my page ... metropolitan south region real estate
June 8, 2014 at 11:18 AM
If there is one topic that gets people in the sports nutrition arena hot under the collar, is the age old " vegetarian versus meat eater" debate. In particu- lar, the debate is focused on whether or not vegetarian diets are adequate and equivalent to diets that include meat when it comes to adding muscle mass. Outlining the entire debate of both sides of the fence is beyond the scope of this discussion. I am going to stick to the debate regarding how a veg- gie diet vs. a meat-containing diet in uences muscle mass, rather than the larger picture of whether or not vegetarian diets are inherently healthier than diets that contain meat and vice versa.
In a nutshell, strict vegetarians (vegans) maintain that meat is not essential
for building muscle and a diet that mixes complimentary foods such as
beans and rice is adequate.
Lacto-ovo vegetarians ( vegetarians that include milk products and eggs)
further maintain that the inclusion of milk and eggs, as highly bioavailable
complete proteins, is more than adequate for athletes trying to build mus-
cle and maintain peak performance.
Omnivores (omnivore meaning people who eat a wide variety of foods in-
cluding meat) argue that meats such as chicken, beef and others are by
nature more anabolic for a variety of reasons.
So who's right?
This debate has not been adequately looked at in the research but we do
have some data that supports the omnivore's position. For example, sev-
eral studies have found that meat-containing diets are superior for testos-
terone production than strict vegetarian diets.
As most people know, testosterone is an essential hormone for increasing
and maintaining muscle mass while keeping body fat low. It's also essential
for libido and mood in both sexes, but particularly important for men.
One study called,"E ects of an omnivorous diet compared with a lacto-ovo
vegetarian diet on resistance-training-induced changes in body composi-
tion and skeletal muscle in older men” looked directly at this debate.
The researchers wanted to nd out if an omnivorous (meat-containing)
diet was superior to a lacto-ovo vegetarian diet on the retention of muscle
mass of older men put on a weight training routine.
Nineteen men aged 51 - 69 years old were enrolled in the study that ran
12 weeks. Nine men ate their normal meat containing (omnivorous) diet,
providing 50 percent of total dietary protein from meat sources such as
pork, chicken, sh and beef. Another 10 men followed a lacto-ovo type
vegetarian diet for the duration of the study, with both groups following a
weight training schedule.
Although the strength increases between groups were roughly the same,
the study found that the whole-body changes in skeletal muscle size dif-
fered signi cantly between groups. Whole-body muscle mass increased in
the omnivorous group, while it actually decreased in the lacto-ovo group.
Apparently, the meat eaters gained muscle over the 12 weeks while the
lacto-ovo eaters lost muscle mass. Ouch!
The authors concluded:
“...consumption of a meat-containing diet contributed to greater gains in fat-
free mass and skeletal muscle mass with resistance training in older men than
did an a lacto-ovo diet.”
Is this a slam dunk against the vegetarian diet as it relates to the claim that
it is just as good as a meat-containing diet for increasing muscle mass? No,
but it does lend some support to the idea that omnivorous diets have an
edge for producing optimal levels of anabolic (muscle building) hormones
and increases in muscle mass. More research is clearly needed to con rm
this, however.
There is still some debate over which of the two diets is healthier, however,
and that has to be factored into peoples’ choices as to which diet is best
suited for them.
One area in which vegetarian diets are de cient vs. omnivorous diets is
in muscle creatine stores. In the absence of supplementation, vegetar-
ians have been found to have lower total muscle creatine - which could
limit lean mass gains in response to training. The good news is that a re-
cent study con rmed that vegetarians on a resistance training program
responded well to creatine supplementation: their relative gains in work
performance, total creatine/phosphocreatine levels, and lean tissue mass
were even greater than the response for omnivores taking creatine, due to
lower starting creatine levels. The researchers concluded:
“...subjects with initially low levels of intramuscular Cr ( vegetarians) are more
responsive to supplementation.”
Other areas of concern for vegetarians are: iron status (the iron in plant
foods is less bioavailable than the iron in animal foods), zinc, vitamin B12
(cyanocobalamin), vitamin D (cholecalciferol) and calcium. The very high
ber intake associated with vegetarian diets may also, ironically, limit the
number of calories a vegetarian athlete can consume. This is the basis for
the Ornish Diet, which recommends a vegetarian or near- vegetarian diet
for weight loss, on the grounds that eating high ber plant foods automati-
cally limits calorie intake.
The take-home lesson is that vegetarians wanting to increase lean body
mass should make sure that important nutrients normally supplied by
meat and other animal protein sources are included using a combination
of appropriate foods and supplements.
It is not impossible to gain a signi cant amount of lean body mass on a
vegetarian diet: legendary bodybuilder Bill Pearl is perhaps the best known
example. Truth be known though, my bet would be in favor of the omnivo-
rous diet if optimal muscle mass is the goal.
On June 3, 2014 we leared our beloved Kapri has a mass on her brain. She suffered a seizure and was taken to
the emergency room. They determined she needed to be transferred to UCSF.
As we speak, she is under going surgery to remove the
mass. The surgery will last 6-8 hours.
As you all know know she is a sassy, spunky, loving, on the go little lady.
She is as good as it gets.
We are asking that you can donate whatever you can to
contribute to her medical costs and the long recovery she has
ahead of her.
We thank you from the bottom of our hearts and we will keep you
posted on her surgery and recovery ahead......
Take a look at my website :: cystic
June 11, 2014 at 6:00 PM
If there is one topic that gets people in the sports nutrition arena hot under the collar, is the age old " vegetarian versus meat eater" debate. In particu- lar, the debate is focused on whether or not vegetarian diets are adequate and equivalent to diets that include meat when it comes to adding muscle mass. Outlining the entire debate of both sides of the fence is beyond the scope of this discussion. I am going to stick to the debate regarding how a veg- gie diet vs. a meat-containing diet in uences muscle mass, rather than the larger picture of whether or not vegetarian diets are inherently healthier than diets that contain meat and vice versa.
In a nutshell, strict vegetarians (vegans) maintain that meat is not essential
for building muscle and a diet that mixes complimentary foods such as
beans and rice is adequate.
Lacto-ovo vegetarians ( vegetarians that include milk products and eggs)
further maintain that the inclusion of milk and eggs, as highly bioavailable
complete proteins, is more than adequate for athletes trying to build mus-
cle and maintain peak performance.
Omnivores (omnivore meaning people who eat a wide variety of foods in-
cluding meat) argue that meats such as chicken, beef and others are by
nature more anabolic for a variety of reasons.
So who's right?
This debate has not been adequately looked at in the research but we do
have some data that supports the omnivore's position. For example, sev-
eral studies have found that meat-containing diets are superior for testos-
terone production than strict vegetarian diets.
As most people know, testosterone is an essential hormone for increasing
and maintaining muscle mass while keeping body fat low. It's also essential
for libido and mood in both sexes, but particularly important for men.
One study called,"E ects of an omnivorous diet compared with a lacto-ovo
vegetarian diet on resistance-training-induced changes in body composi-
tion and skeletal muscle in older men” looked directly at this debate.
The researchers wanted to nd out if an omnivorous (meat-containing)
diet was superior to a lacto-ovo vegetarian diet on the retention of muscle
mass of older men put on a weight training routine.
Nineteen men aged 51 - 69 years old were enrolled in the study that ran
12 weeks. Nine men ate their normal meat containing (omnivorous) diet,
providing 50 percent of total dietary protein from meat sources such as
pork, chicken, sh and beef. Another 10 men followed a lacto-ovo type
vegetarian diet for the duration of the study, with both groups following a
weight training schedule.
Although the strength increases between groups were roughly the same,
the study found that the whole-body changes in skeletal muscle size dif-
fered signi cantly between groups. Whole-body muscle mass increased in
the omnivorous group, while it actually decreased in the lacto-ovo group.
Apparently, the meat eaters gained muscle over the 12 weeks while the
lacto-ovo eaters lost muscle mass. Ouch!
The authors concluded:
“...consumption of a meat-containing diet contributed to greater gains in fat-
free mass and skeletal muscle mass with resistance training in older men than
did an a lacto-ovo diet.”
Is this a slam dunk against the vegetarian diet as it relates to the claim that
it is just as good as a meat-containing diet for increasing muscle mass? No,
but it does lend some support to the idea that omnivorous diets have an
edge for producing optimal levels of anabolic (muscle building) hormones
and increases in muscle mass. More research is clearly needed to con rm
this, however.
There is still some debate over which of the two diets is healthier, however,
and that has to be factored into peoples’ choices as to which diet is best
suited for them.
One area in which vegetarian diets are de cient vs. omnivorous diets is
in muscle creatine stores. In the absence of supplementation, vegetar-
ians have been found to have lower total muscle creatine - which could
limit lean mass gains in response to training. The good news is that a re-
cent study con rmed that vegetarians on a resistance training program
responded well to creatine supplementation: their relative gains in work
performance, total creatine/phosphocreatine levels, and lean tissue mass
were even greater than the response for omnivores taking creatine, due to
lower starting creatine levels. The researchers concluded:
“...subjects with initially low levels of intramuscular Cr ( vegetarians) are more
responsive to supplementation.”
Other areas of concern for vegetarians are: iron status (the iron in plant
foods is less bioavailable than the iron in animal foods), zinc, vitamin B12
(cyanocobalamin), vitamin D (cholecalciferol) and calcium. The very high
ber intake associated with vegetarian diets may also, ironically, limit the
number of calories a vegetarian athlete can consume. This is the basis for
the Ornish Diet, which recommends a vegetarian or near- vegetarian diet
for weight loss, on the grounds that eating high ber plant foods automati-
cally limits calorie intake.
The take-home lesson is that vegetarians wanting to increase lean body
mass should make sure that important nutrients normally supplied by
meat and other animal protein sources are included using a combination
of appropriate foods and supplements.
It is not impossible to gain a signi cant amount of lean body mass on a
vegetarian diet: legendary bodybuilder Bill Pearl is perhaps the best known
example. Truth be known though, my bet would be in favor of the omnivo-
rous diet if optimal muscle mass is the goal.
Hi there everybody, here every person is sharing such familiarity, so
it's nice to read this weblog, and I used to visit this website daily.
Feel free to visit my homepage - termite Inspectors long island
June 12, 2014 at 11:04 AM
If there is one topic that gets people in the sports nutrition arena hot under the collar, is the age old " vegetarian versus meat eater" debate. In particu- lar, the debate is focused on whether or not vegetarian diets are adequate and equivalent to diets that include meat when it comes to adding muscle mass. Outlining the entire debate of both sides of the fence is beyond the scope of this discussion. I am going to stick to the debate regarding how a veg- gie diet vs. a meat-containing diet in uences muscle mass, rather than the larger picture of whether or not vegetarian diets are inherently healthier than diets that contain meat and vice versa.
In a nutshell, strict vegetarians (vegans) maintain that meat is not essential
for building muscle and a diet that mixes complimentary foods such as
beans and rice is adequate.
Lacto-ovo vegetarians ( vegetarians that include milk products and eggs)
further maintain that the inclusion of milk and eggs, as highly bioavailable
complete proteins, is more than adequate for athletes trying to build mus-
cle and maintain peak performance.
Omnivores (omnivore meaning people who eat a wide variety of foods in-
cluding meat) argue that meats such as chicken, beef and others are by
nature more anabolic for a variety of reasons.
So who's right?
This debate has not been adequately looked at in the research but we do
have some data that supports the omnivore's position. For example, sev-
eral studies have found that meat-containing diets are superior for testos-
terone production than strict vegetarian diets.
As most people know, testosterone is an essential hormone for increasing
and maintaining muscle mass while keeping body fat low. It's also essential
for libido and mood in both sexes, but particularly important for men.
One study called,"E ects of an omnivorous diet compared with a lacto-ovo
vegetarian diet on resistance-training-induced changes in body composi-
tion and skeletal muscle in older men” looked directly at this debate.
The researchers wanted to nd out if an omnivorous (meat-containing)
diet was superior to a lacto-ovo vegetarian diet on the retention of muscle
mass of older men put on a weight training routine.
Nineteen men aged 51 - 69 years old were enrolled in the study that ran
12 weeks. Nine men ate their normal meat containing (omnivorous) diet,
providing 50 percent of total dietary protein from meat sources such as
pork, chicken, sh and beef. Another 10 men followed a lacto-ovo type
vegetarian diet for the duration of the study, with both groups following a
weight training schedule.
Although the strength increases between groups were roughly the same,
the study found that the whole-body changes in skeletal muscle size dif-
fered signi cantly between groups. Whole-body muscle mass increased in
the omnivorous group, while it actually decreased in the lacto-ovo group.
Apparently, the meat eaters gained muscle over the 12 weeks while the
lacto-ovo eaters lost muscle mass. Ouch!
The authors concluded:
“...consumption of a meat-containing diet contributed to greater gains in fat-
free mass and skeletal muscle mass with resistance training in older men than
did an a lacto-ovo diet.”
Is this a slam dunk against the vegetarian diet as it relates to the claim that
it is just as good as a meat-containing diet for increasing muscle mass? No,
but it does lend some support to the idea that omnivorous diets have an
edge for producing optimal levels of anabolic (muscle building) hormones
and increases in muscle mass. More research is clearly needed to con rm
this, however.
There is still some debate over which of the two diets is healthier, however,
and that has to be factored into peoples’ choices as to which diet is best
suited for them.
One area in which vegetarian diets are de cient vs. omnivorous diets is
in muscle creatine stores. In the absence of supplementation, vegetar-
ians have been found to have lower total muscle creatine - which could
limit lean mass gains in response to training. The good news is that a re-
cent study con rmed that vegetarians on a resistance training program
responded well to creatine supplementation: their relative gains in work
performance, total creatine/phosphocreatine levels, and lean tissue mass
were even greater than the response for omnivores taking creatine, due to
lower starting creatine levels. The researchers concluded:
“...subjects with initially low levels of intramuscular Cr ( vegetarians) are more
responsive to supplementation.”
Other areas of concern for vegetarians are: iron status (the iron in plant
foods is less bioavailable than the iron in animal foods), zinc, vitamin B12
(cyanocobalamin), vitamin D (cholecalciferol) and calcium. The very high
ber intake associated with vegetarian diets may also, ironically, limit the
number of calories a vegetarian athlete can consume. This is the basis for
the Ornish Diet, which recommends a vegetarian or near- vegetarian diet
for weight loss, on the grounds that eating high ber plant foods automati-
cally limits calorie intake.
The take-home lesson is that vegetarians wanting to increase lean body
mass should make sure that important nutrients normally supplied by
meat and other animal protein sources are included using a combination
of appropriate foods and supplements.
It is not impossible to gain a signi cant amount of lean body mass on a
vegetarian diet: legendary bodybuilder Bill Pearl is perhaps the best known
example. Truth be known though, my bet would be in favor of the omnivo-
rous diet if optimal muscle mass is the goal.
It entices your fans to interact with you and give their
feedback. To extend your reach, use ads to reach outside your normal followers.
Thus, he then inhibits access to the people who are going to this
"proxy" site.
Also visit my webpage ... comment pirater Un compte facebook
June 13, 2014 at 10:18 PM
If there is one topic that gets people in the sports nutrition arena hot under the collar, is the age old " vegetarian versus meat eater" debate. In particu- lar, the debate is focused on whether or not vegetarian diets are adequate and equivalent to diets that include meat when it comes to adding muscle mass. Outlining the entire debate of both sides of the fence is beyond the scope of this discussion. I am going to stick to the debate regarding how a veg- gie diet vs. a meat-containing diet in uences muscle mass, rather than the larger picture of whether or not vegetarian diets are inherently healthier than diets that contain meat and vice versa.
In a nutshell, strict vegetarians (vegans) maintain that meat is not essential
for building muscle and a diet that mixes complimentary foods such as
beans and rice is adequate.
Lacto-ovo vegetarians ( vegetarians that include milk products and eggs)
further maintain that the inclusion of milk and eggs, as highly bioavailable
complete proteins, is more than adequate for athletes trying to build mus-
cle and maintain peak performance.
Omnivores (omnivore meaning people who eat a wide variety of foods in-
cluding meat) argue that meats such as chicken, beef and others are by
nature more anabolic for a variety of reasons.
So who's right?
This debate has not been adequately looked at in the research but we do
have some data that supports the omnivore's position. For example, sev-
eral studies have found that meat-containing diets are superior for testos-
terone production than strict vegetarian diets.
As most people know, testosterone is an essential hormone for increasing
and maintaining muscle mass while keeping body fat low. It's also essential
for libido and mood in both sexes, but particularly important for men.
One study called,"E ects of an omnivorous diet compared with a lacto-ovo
vegetarian diet on resistance-training-induced changes in body composi-
tion and skeletal muscle in older men” looked directly at this debate.
The researchers wanted to nd out if an omnivorous (meat-containing)
diet was superior to a lacto-ovo vegetarian diet on the retention of muscle
mass of older men put on a weight training routine.
Nineteen men aged 51 - 69 years old were enrolled in the study that ran
12 weeks. Nine men ate their normal meat containing (omnivorous) diet,
providing 50 percent of total dietary protein from meat sources such as
pork, chicken, sh and beef. Another 10 men followed a lacto-ovo type
vegetarian diet for the duration of the study, with both groups following a
weight training schedule.
Although the strength increases between groups were roughly the same,
the study found that the whole-body changes in skeletal muscle size dif-
fered signi cantly between groups. Whole-body muscle mass increased in
the omnivorous group, while it actually decreased in the lacto-ovo group.
Apparently, the meat eaters gained muscle over the 12 weeks while the
lacto-ovo eaters lost muscle mass. Ouch!
The authors concluded:
“...consumption of a meat-containing diet contributed to greater gains in fat-
free mass and skeletal muscle mass with resistance training in older men than
did an a lacto-ovo diet.”
Is this a slam dunk against the vegetarian diet as it relates to the claim that
it is just as good as a meat-containing diet for increasing muscle mass? No,
but it does lend some support to the idea that omnivorous diets have an
edge for producing optimal levels of anabolic (muscle building) hormones
and increases in muscle mass. More research is clearly needed to con rm
this, however.
There is still some debate over which of the two diets is healthier, however,
and that has to be factored into peoples’ choices as to which diet is best
suited for them.
One area in which vegetarian diets are de cient vs. omnivorous diets is
in muscle creatine stores. In the absence of supplementation, vegetar-
ians have been found to have lower total muscle creatine - which could
limit lean mass gains in response to training. The good news is that a re-
cent study con rmed that vegetarians on a resistance training program
responded well to creatine supplementation: their relative gains in work
performance, total creatine/phosphocreatine levels, and lean tissue mass
were even greater than the response for omnivores taking creatine, due to
lower starting creatine levels. The researchers concluded:
“...subjects with initially low levels of intramuscular Cr ( vegetarians) are more
responsive to supplementation.”
Other areas of concern for vegetarians are: iron status (the iron in plant
foods is less bioavailable than the iron in animal foods), zinc, vitamin B12
(cyanocobalamin), vitamin D (cholecalciferol) and calcium. The very high
ber intake associated with vegetarian diets may also, ironically, limit the
number of calories a vegetarian athlete can consume. This is the basis for
the Ornish Diet, which recommends a vegetarian or near- vegetarian diet
for weight loss, on the grounds that eating high ber plant foods automati-
cally limits calorie intake.
The take-home lesson is that vegetarians wanting to increase lean body
mass should make sure that important nutrients normally supplied by
meat and other animal protein sources are included using a combination
of appropriate foods and supplements.
It is not impossible to gain a signi cant amount of lean body mass on a
vegetarian diet: legendary bodybuilder Bill Pearl is perhaps the best known
example. Truth be known though, my bet would be in favor of the omnivo-
rous diet if optimal muscle mass is the goal.
I enjoy what you guys tend to be up too. This kind of clever work and exposure!
Keep up the awesome works guys I've added you guys to
blogroll.
Feel free to visit my web site Toronto Music
June 14, 2014 at 12:00 PM
If there is one topic that gets people in the sports nutrition arena hot under the collar, is the age old " vegetarian versus meat eater" debate. In particu- lar, the debate is focused on whether or not vegetarian diets are adequate and equivalent to diets that include meat when it comes to adding muscle mass. Outlining the entire debate of both sides of the fence is beyond the scope of this discussion. I am going to stick to the debate regarding how a veg- gie diet vs. a meat-containing diet in uences muscle mass, rather than the larger picture of whether or not vegetarian diets are inherently healthier than diets that contain meat and vice versa.
In a nutshell, strict vegetarians (vegans) maintain that meat is not essential
for building muscle and a diet that mixes complimentary foods such as
beans and rice is adequate.
Lacto-ovo vegetarians ( vegetarians that include milk products and eggs)
further maintain that the inclusion of milk and eggs, as highly bioavailable
complete proteins, is more than adequate for athletes trying to build mus-
cle and maintain peak performance.
Omnivores (omnivore meaning people who eat a wide variety of foods in-
cluding meat) argue that meats such as chicken, beef and others are by
nature more anabolic for a variety of reasons.
So who's right?
This debate has not been adequately looked at in the research but we do
have some data that supports the omnivore's position. For example, sev-
eral studies have found that meat-containing diets are superior for testos-
terone production than strict vegetarian diets.
As most people know, testosterone is an essential hormone for increasing
and maintaining muscle mass while keeping body fat low. It's also essential
for libido and mood in both sexes, but particularly important for men.
One study called,"E ects of an omnivorous diet compared with a lacto-ovo
vegetarian diet on resistance-training-induced changes in body composi-
tion and skeletal muscle in older men” looked directly at this debate.
The researchers wanted to nd out if an omnivorous (meat-containing)
diet was superior to a lacto-ovo vegetarian diet on the retention of muscle
mass of older men put on a weight training routine.
Nineteen men aged 51 - 69 years old were enrolled in the study that ran
12 weeks. Nine men ate their normal meat containing (omnivorous) diet,
providing 50 percent of total dietary protein from meat sources such as
pork, chicken, sh and beef. Another 10 men followed a lacto-ovo type
vegetarian diet for the duration of the study, with both groups following a
weight training schedule.
Although the strength increases between groups were roughly the same,
the study found that the whole-body changes in skeletal muscle size dif-
fered signi cantly between groups. Whole-body muscle mass increased in
the omnivorous group, while it actually decreased in the lacto-ovo group.
Apparently, the meat eaters gained muscle over the 12 weeks while the
lacto-ovo eaters lost muscle mass. Ouch!
The authors concluded:
“...consumption of a meat-containing diet contributed to greater gains in fat-
free mass and skeletal muscle mass with resistance training in older men than
did an a lacto-ovo diet.”
Is this a slam dunk against the vegetarian diet as it relates to the claim that
it is just as good as a meat-containing diet for increasing muscle mass? No,
but it does lend some support to the idea that omnivorous diets have an
edge for producing optimal levels of anabolic (muscle building) hormones
and increases in muscle mass. More research is clearly needed to con rm
this, however.
There is still some debate over which of the two diets is healthier, however,
and that has to be factored into peoples’ choices as to which diet is best
suited for them.
One area in which vegetarian diets are de cient vs. omnivorous diets is
in muscle creatine stores. In the absence of supplementation, vegetar-
ians have been found to have lower total muscle creatine - which could
limit lean mass gains in response to training. The good news is that a re-
cent study con rmed that vegetarians on a resistance training program
responded well to creatine supplementation: their relative gains in work
performance, total creatine/phosphocreatine levels, and lean tissue mass
were even greater than the response for omnivores taking creatine, due to
lower starting creatine levels. The researchers concluded:
“...subjects with initially low levels of intramuscular Cr ( vegetarians) are more
responsive to supplementation.”
Other areas of concern for vegetarians are: iron status (the iron in plant
foods is less bioavailable than the iron in animal foods), zinc, vitamin B12
(cyanocobalamin), vitamin D (cholecalciferol) and calcium. The very high
ber intake associated with vegetarian diets may also, ironically, limit the
number of calories a vegetarian athlete can consume. This is the basis for
the Ornish Diet, which recommends a vegetarian or near- vegetarian diet
for weight loss, on the grounds that eating high ber plant foods automati-
cally limits calorie intake.
The take-home lesson is that vegetarians wanting to increase lean body
mass should make sure that important nutrients normally supplied by
meat and other animal protein sources are included using a combination
of appropriate foods and supplements.
It is not impossible to gain a signi cant amount of lean body mass on a
vegetarian diet: legendary bodybuilder Bill Pearl is perhaps the best known
example. Truth be known though, my bet would be in favor of the omnivo-
rous diet if optimal muscle mass is the goal.
What's up to every one, the contents present at this web site
are genuinely remarkable for people knowledge, well, keep up the good work fellows.
my blog post :: New Balance 420 Mens
June 16, 2014 at 8:20 AM
If there is one topic that gets people in the sports nutrition arena hot under the collar, is the age old " vegetarian versus meat eater" debate. In particu- lar, the debate is focused on whether or not vegetarian diets are adequate and equivalent to diets that include meat when it comes to adding muscle mass. Outlining the entire debate of both sides of the fence is beyond the scope of this discussion. I am going to stick to the debate regarding how a veg- gie diet vs. a meat-containing diet in uences muscle mass, rather than the larger picture of whether or not vegetarian diets are inherently healthier than diets that contain meat and vice versa.
In a nutshell, strict vegetarians (vegans) maintain that meat is not essential
for building muscle and a diet that mixes complimentary foods such as
beans and rice is adequate.
Lacto-ovo vegetarians ( vegetarians that include milk products and eggs)
further maintain that the inclusion of milk and eggs, as highly bioavailable
complete proteins, is more than adequate for athletes trying to build mus-
cle and maintain peak performance.
Omnivores (omnivore meaning people who eat a wide variety of foods in-
cluding meat) argue that meats such as chicken, beef and others are by
nature more anabolic for a variety of reasons.
So who's right?
This debate has not been adequately looked at in the research but we do
have some data that supports the omnivore's position. For example, sev-
eral studies have found that meat-containing diets are superior for testos-
terone production than strict vegetarian diets.
As most people know, testosterone is an essential hormone for increasing
and maintaining muscle mass while keeping body fat low. It's also essential
for libido and mood in both sexes, but particularly important for men.
One study called,"E ects of an omnivorous diet compared with a lacto-ovo
vegetarian diet on resistance-training-induced changes in body composi-
tion and skeletal muscle in older men” looked directly at this debate.
The researchers wanted to nd out if an omnivorous (meat-containing)
diet was superior to a lacto-ovo vegetarian diet on the retention of muscle
mass of older men put on a weight training routine.
Nineteen men aged 51 - 69 years old were enrolled in the study that ran
12 weeks. Nine men ate their normal meat containing (omnivorous) diet,
providing 50 percent of total dietary protein from meat sources such as
pork, chicken, sh and beef. Another 10 men followed a lacto-ovo type
vegetarian diet for the duration of the study, with both groups following a
weight training schedule.
Although the strength increases between groups were roughly the same,
the study found that the whole-body changes in skeletal muscle size dif-
fered signi cantly between groups. Whole-body muscle mass increased in
the omnivorous group, while it actually decreased in the lacto-ovo group.
Apparently, the meat eaters gained muscle over the 12 weeks while the
lacto-ovo eaters lost muscle mass. Ouch!
The authors concluded:
“...consumption of a meat-containing diet contributed to greater gains in fat-
free mass and skeletal muscle mass with resistance training in older men than
did an a lacto-ovo diet.”
Is this a slam dunk against the vegetarian diet as it relates to the claim that
it is just as good as a meat-containing diet for increasing muscle mass? No,
but it does lend some support to the idea that omnivorous diets have an
edge for producing optimal levels of anabolic (muscle building) hormones
and increases in muscle mass. More research is clearly needed to con rm
this, however.
There is still some debate over which of the two diets is healthier, however,
and that has to be factored into peoples’ choices as to which diet is best
suited for them.
One area in which vegetarian diets are de cient vs. omnivorous diets is
in muscle creatine stores. In the absence of supplementation, vegetar-
ians have been found to have lower total muscle creatine - which could
limit lean mass gains in response to training. The good news is that a re-
cent study con rmed that vegetarians on a resistance training program
responded well to creatine supplementation: their relative gains in work
performance, total creatine/phosphocreatine levels, and lean tissue mass
were even greater than the response for omnivores taking creatine, due to
lower starting creatine levels. The researchers concluded:
“...subjects with initially low levels of intramuscular Cr ( vegetarians) are more
responsive to supplementation.”
Other areas of concern for vegetarians are: iron status (the iron in plant
foods is less bioavailable than the iron in animal foods), zinc, vitamin B12
(cyanocobalamin), vitamin D (cholecalciferol) and calcium. The very high
ber intake associated with vegetarian diets may also, ironically, limit the
number of calories a vegetarian athlete can consume. This is the basis for
the Ornish Diet, which recommends a vegetarian or near- vegetarian diet
for weight loss, on the grounds that eating high ber plant foods automati-
cally limits calorie intake.
The take-home lesson is that vegetarians wanting to increase lean body
mass should make sure that important nutrients normally supplied by
meat and other animal protein sources are included using a combination
of appropriate foods and supplements.
It is not impossible to gain a signi cant amount of lean body mass on a
vegetarian diet: legendary bodybuilder Bill Pearl is perhaps the best known
example. Truth be known though, my bet would be in favor of the omnivo-
rous diet if optimal muscle mass is the goal.
Howdy! This is my 1st comment here so I just wanted to
give a quick shout out and tell you I genuinely enjoy reading through your articles.
Can you recommend any other blogs/websites/forums that deal with the same
subjects? Appreciate it!
Also visit my weblog; aptamil pre uk
June 17, 2014 at 1:06 AM
If there is one topic that gets people in the sports nutrition arena hot under the collar, is the age old " vegetarian versus meat eater" debate. In particu- lar, the debate is focused on whether or not vegetarian diets are adequate and equivalent to diets that include meat when it comes to adding muscle mass. Outlining the entire debate of both sides of the fence is beyond the scope of this discussion. I am going to stick to the debate regarding how a veg- gie diet vs. a meat-containing diet in uences muscle mass, rather than the larger picture of whether or not vegetarian diets are inherently healthier than diets that contain meat and vice versa.
In a nutshell, strict vegetarians (vegans) maintain that meat is not essential
for building muscle and a diet that mixes complimentary foods such as
beans and rice is adequate.
Lacto-ovo vegetarians ( vegetarians that include milk products and eggs)
further maintain that the inclusion of milk and eggs, as highly bioavailable
complete proteins, is more than adequate for athletes trying to build mus-
cle and maintain peak performance.
Omnivores (omnivore meaning people who eat a wide variety of foods in-
cluding meat) argue that meats such as chicken, beef and others are by
nature more anabolic for a variety of reasons.
So who's right?
This debate has not been adequately looked at in the research but we do
have some data that supports the omnivore's position. For example, sev-
eral studies have found that meat-containing diets are superior for testos-
terone production than strict vegetarian diets.
As most people know, testosterone is an essential hormone for increasing
and maintaining muscle mass while keeping body fat low. It's also essential
for libido and mood in both sexes, but particularly important for men.
One study called,"E ects of an omnivorous diet compared with a lacto-ovo
vegetarian diet on resistance-training-induced changes in body composi-
tion and skeletal muscle in older men” looked directly at this debate.
The researchers wanted to nd out if an omnivorous (meat-containing)
diet was superior to a lacto-ovo vegetarian diet on the retention of muscle
mass of older men put on a weight training routine.
Nineteen men aged 51 - 69 years old were enrolled in the study that ran
12 weeks. Nine men ate their normal meat containing (omnivorous) diet,
providing 50 percent of total dietary protein from meat sources such as
pork, chicken, sh and beef. Another 10 men followed a lacto-ovo type
vegetarian diet for the duration of the study, with both groups following a
weight training schedule.
Although the strength increases between groups were roughly the same,
the study found that the whole-body changes in skeletal muscle size dif-
fered signi cantly between groups. Whole-body muscle mass increased in
the omnivorous group, while it actually decreased in the lacto-ovo group.
Apparently, the meat eaters gained muscle over the 12 weeks while the
lacto-ovo eaters lost muscle mass. Ouch!
The authors concluded:
“...consumption of a meat-containing diet contributed to greater gains in fat-
free mass and skeletal muscle mass with resistance training in older men than
did an a lacto-ovo diet.”
Is this a slam dunk against the vegetarian diet as it relates to the claim that
it is just as good as a meat-containing diet for increasing muscle mass? No,
but it does lend some support to the idea that omnivorous diets have an
edge for producing optimal levels of anabolic (muscle building) hormones
and increases in muscle mass. More research is clearly needed to con rm
this, however.
There is still some debate over which of the two diets is healthier, however,
and that has to be factored into peoples’ choices as to which diet is best
suited for them.
One area in which vegetarian diets are de cient vs. omnivorous diets is
in muscle creatine stores. In the absence of supplementation, vegetar-
ians have been found to have lower total muscle creatine - which could
limit lean mass gains in response to training. The good news is that a re-
cent study con rmed that vegetarians on a resistance training program
responded well to creatine supplementation: their relative gains in work
performance, total creatine/phosphocreatine levels, and lean tissue mass
were even greater than the response for omnivores taking creatine, due to
lower starting creatine levels. The researchers concluded:
“...subjects with initially low levels of intramuscular Cr ( vegetarians) are more
responsive to supplementation.”
Other areas of concern for vegetarians are: iron status (the iron in plant
foods is less bioavailable than the iron in animal foods), zinc, vitamin B12
(cyanocobalamin), vitamin D (cholecalciferol) and calcium. The very high
ber intake associated with vegetarian diets may also, ironically, limit the
number of calories a vegetarian athlete can consume. This is the basis for
the Ornish Diet, which recommends a vegetarian or near- vegetarian diet
for weight loss, on the grounds that eating high ber plant foods automati-
cally limits calorie intake.
The take-home lesson is that vegetarians wanting to increase lean body
mass should make sure that important nutrients normally supplied by
meat and other animal protein sources are included using a combination
of appropriate foods and supplements.
It is not impossible to gain a signi cant amount of lean body mass on a
vegetarian diet: legendary bodybuilder Bill Pearl is perhaps the best known
example. Truth be known though, my bet would be in favor of the omnivo-
rous diet if optimal muscle mass is the goal.
What'ѕ Taking place i'm neա to this,I stumbled upon this I've found It positively useful and it has
helρed me out loads. ӏ'm hоping to contribute & aid ԁifferent customers like its helped me.
Great job.
my site: untethered jailbreak ipod 4.3.5
June 17, 2014 at 3:16 AM
If there is one topic that gets people in the sports nutrition arena hot under the collar, is the age old " vegetarian versus meat eater" debate. In particu- lar, the debate is focused on whether or not vegetarian diets are adequate and equivalent to diets that include meat when it comes to adding muscle mass. Outlining the entire debate of both sides of the fence is beyond the scope of this discussion. I am going to stick to the debate regarding how a veg- gie diet vs. a meat-containing diet in uences muscle mass, rather than the larger picture of whether or not vegetarian diets are inherently healthier than diets that contain meat and vice versa.
In a nutshell, strict vegetarians (vegans) maintain that meat is not essential
for building muscle and a diet that mixes complimentary foods such as
beans and rice is adequate.
Lacto-ovo vegetarians ( vegetarians that include milk products and eggs)
further maintain that the inclusion of milk and eggs, as highly bioavailable
complete proteins, is more than adequate for athletes trying to build mus-
cle and maintain peak performance.
Omnivores (omnivore meaning people who eat a wide variety of foods in-
cluding meat) argue that meats such as chicken, beef and others are by
nature more anabolic for a variety of reasons.
So who's right?
This debate has not been adequately looked at in the research but we do
have some data that supports the omnivore's position. For example, sev-
eral studies have found that meat-containing diets are superior for testos-
terone production than strict vegetarian diets.
As most people know, testosterone is an essential hormone for increasing
and maintaining muscle mass while keeping body fat low. It's also essential
for libido and mood in both sexes, but particularly important for men.
One study called,"E ects of an omnivorous diet compared with a lacto-ovo
vegetarian diet on resistance-training-induced changes in body composi-
tion and skeletal muscle in older men” looked directly at this debate.
The researchers wanted to nd out if an omnivorous (meat-containing)
diet was superior to a lacto-ovo vegetarian diet on the retention of muscle
mass of older men put on a weight training routine.
Nineteen men aged 51 - 69 years old were enrolled in the study that ran
12 weeks. Nine men ate their normal meat containing (omnivorous) diet,
providing 50 percent of total dietary protein from meat sources such as
pork, chicken, sh and beef. Another 10 men followed a lacto-ovo type
vegetarian diet for the duration of the study, with both groups following a
weight training schedule.
Although the strength increases between groups were roughly the same,
the study found that the whole-body changes in skeletal muscle size dif-
fered signi cantly between groups. Whole-body muscle mass increased in
the omnivorous group, while it actually decreased in the lacto-ovo group.
Apparently, the meat eaters gained muscle over the 12 weeks while the
lacto-ovo eaters lost muscle mass. Ouch!
The authors concluded:
“...consumption of a meat-containing diet contributed to greater gains in fat-
free mass and skeletal muscle mass with resistance training in older men than
did an a lacto-ovo diet.”
Is this a slam dunk against the vegetarian diet as it relates to the claim that
it is just as good as a meat-containing diet for increasing muscle mass? No,
but it does lend some support to the idea that omnivorous diets have an
edge for producing optimal levels of anabolic (muscle building) hormones
and increases in muscle mass. More research is clearly needed to con rm
this, however.
There is still some debate over which of the two diets is healthier, however,
and that has to be factored into peoples’ choices as to which diet is best
suited for them.
One area in which vegetarian diets are de cient vs. omnivorous diets is
in muscle creatine stores. In the absence of supplementation, vegetar-
ians have been found to have lower total muscle creatine - which could
limit lean mass gains in response to training. The good news is that a re-
cent study con rmed that vegetarians on a resistance training program
responded well to creatine supplementation: their relative gains in work
performance, total creatine/phosphocreatine levels, and lean tissue mass
were even greater than the response for omnivores taking creatine, due to
lower starting creatine levels. The researchers concluded:
“...subjects with initially low levels of intramuscular Cr ( vegetarians) are more
responsive to supplementation.”
Other areas of concern for vegetarians are: iron status (the iron in plant
foods is less bioavailable than the iron in animal foods), zinc, vitamin B12
(cyanocobalamin), vitamin D (cholecalciferol) and calcium. The very high
ber intake associated with vegetarian diets may also, ironically, limit the
number of calories a vegetarian athlete can consume. This is the basis for
the Ornish Diet, which recommends a vegetarian or near- vegetarian diet
for weight loss, on the grounds that eating high ber plant foods automati-
cally limits calorie intake.
The take-home lesson is that vegetarians wanting to increase lean body
mass should make sure that important nutrients normally supplied by
meat and other animal protein sources are included using a combination
of appropriate foods and supplements.
It is not impossible to gain a signi cant amount of lean body mass on a
vegetarian diet: legendary bodybuilder Bill Pearl is perhaps the best known
example. Truth be known though, my bet would be in favor of the omnivo-
rous diet if optimal muscle mass is the goal.
When I initially commented I appear to have clicked
on the -Notify me when new comments are added- checkbox and now every
time a comment is added I get 4 emails with the same
comment. There has to be an easy method you can remove me from that service?
Cheers!
Feel free to surf to my web page :: seo philippines services ()
June 17, 2014 at 1:39 PM
If there is one topic that gets people in the sports nutrition arena hot under the collar, is the age old " vegetarian versus meat eater" debate. In particu- lar, the debate is focused on whether or not vegetarian diets are adequate and equivalent to diets that include meat when it comes to adding muscle mass. Outlining the entire debate of both sides of the fence is beyond the scope of this discussion. I am going to stick to the debate regarding how a veg- gie diet vs. a meat-containing diet in uences muscle mass, rather than the larger picture of whether or not vegetarian diets are inherently healthier than diets that contain meat and vice versa.
In a nutshell, strict vegetarians (vegans) maintain that meat is not essential
for building muscle and a diet that mixes complimentary foods such as
beans and rice is adequate.
Lacto-ovo vegetarians ( vegetarians that include milk products and eggs)
further maintain that the inclusion of milk and eggs, as highly bioavailable
complete proteins, is more than adequate for athletes trying to build mus-
cle and maintain peak performance.
Omnivores (omnivore meaning people who eat a wide variety of foods in-
cluding meat) argue that meats such as chicken, beef and others are by
nature more anabolic for a variety of reasons.
So who's right?
This debate has not been adequately looked at in the research but we do
have some data that supports the omnivore's position. For example, sev-
eral studies have found that meat-containing diets are superior for testos-
terone production than strict vegetarian diets.
As most people know, testosterone is an essential hormone for increasing
and maintaining muscle mass while keeping body fat low. It's also essential
for libido and mood in both sexes, but particularly important for men.
One study called,"E ects of an omnivorous diet compared with a lacto-ovo
vegetarian diet on resistance-training-induced changes in body composi-
tion and skeletal muscle in older men” looked directly at this debate.
The researchers wanted to nd out if an omnivorous (meat-containing)
diet was superior to a lacto-ovo vegetarian diet on the retention of muscle
mass of older men put on a weight training routine.
Nineteen men aged 51 - 69 years old were enrolled in the study that ran
12 weeks. Nine men ate their normal meat containing (omnivorous) diet,
providing 50 percent of total dietary protein from meat sources such as
pork, chicken, sh and beef. Another 10 men followed a lacto-ovo type
vegetarian diet for the duration of the study, with both groups following a
weight training schedule.
Although the strength increases between groups were roughly the same,
the study found that the whole-body changes in skeletal muscle size dif-
fered signi cantly between groups. Whole-body muscle mass increased in
the omnivorous group, while it actually decreased in the lacto-ovo group.
Apparently, the meat eaters gained muscle over the 12 weeks while the
lacto-ovo eaters lost muscle mass. Ouch!
The authors concluded:
“...consumption of a meat-containing diet contributed to greater gains in fat-
free mass and skeletal muscle mass with resistance training in older men than
did an a lacto-ovo diet.”
Is this a slam dunk against the vegetarian diet as it relates to the claim that
it is just as good as a meat-containing diet for increasing muscle mass? No,
but it does lend some support to the idea that omnivorous diets have an
edge for producing optimal levels of anabolic (muscle building) hormones
and increases in muscle mass. More research is clearly needed to con rm
this, however.
There is still some debate over which of the two diets is healthier, however,
and that has to be factored into peoples’ choices as to which diet is best
suited for them.
One area in which vegetarian diets are de cient vs. omnivorous diets is
in muscle creatine stores. In the absence of supplementation, vegetar-
ians have been found to have lower total muscle creatine - which could
limit lean mass gains in response to training. The good news is that a re-
cent study con rmed that vegetarians on a resistance training program
responded well to creatine supplementation: their relative gains in work
performance, total creatine/phosphocreatine levels, and lean tissue mass
were even greater than the response for omnivores taking creatine, due to
lower starting creatine levels. The researchers concluded:
“...subjects with initially low levels of intramuscular Cr ( vegetarians) are more
responsive to supplementation.”
Other areas of concern for vegetarians are: iron status (the iron in plant
foods is less bioavailable than the iron in animal foods), zinc, vitamin B12
(cyanocobalamin), vitamin D (cholecalciferol) and calcium. The very high
ber intake associated with vegetarian diets may also, ironically, limit the
number of calories a vegetarian athlete can consume. This is the basis for
the Ornish Diet, which recommends a vegetarian or near- vegetarian diet
for weight loss, on the grounds that eating high ber plant foods automati-
cally limits calorie intake.
The take-home lesson is that vegetarians wanting to increase lean body
mass should make sure that important nutrients normally supplied by
meat and other animal protein sources are included using a combination
of appropriate foods and supplements.
It is not impossible to gain a signi cant amount of lean body mass on a
vegetarian diet: legendary bodybuilder Bill Pearl is perhaps the best known
example. Truth be known though, my bet would be in favor of the omnivo-
rous diet if optimal muscle mass is the goal.
Whats up this is kind of of off topic but I was wanting to know if blogs use WYSIWYG editors or if you have to manually code with HTML.
I'm starting a blog soon but have no coding expertise so I wanted to
get advice from someone with experience. Any help would
be greatly appreciated!
Also visit my web-site :: marathon training plans
June 18, 2014 at 11:26 AM
If there is one topic that gets people in the sports nutrition arena hot under the collar, is the age old " vegetarian versus meat eater" debate. In particu- lar, the debate is focused on whether or not vegetarian diets are adequate and equivalent to diets that include meat when it comes to adding muscle mass. Outlining the entire debate of both sides of the fence is beyond the scope of this discussion. I am going to stick to the debate regarding how a veg- gie diet vs. a meat-containing diet in uences muscle mass, rather than the larger picture of whether or not vegetarian diets are inherently healthier than diets that contain meat and vice versa.
In a nutshell, strict vegetarians (vegans) maintain that meat is not essential
for building muscle and a diet that mixes complimentary foods such as
beans and rice is adequate.
Lacto-ovo vegetarians ( vegetarians that include milk products and eggs)
further maintain that the inclusion of milk and eggs, as highly bioavailable
complete proteins, is more than adequate for athletes trying to build mus-
cle and maintain peak performance.
Omnivores (omnivore meaning people who eat a wide variety of foods in-
cluding meat) argue that meats such as chicken, beef and others are by
nature more anabolic for a variety of reasons.
So who's right?
This debate has not been adequately looked at in the research but we do
have some data that supports the omnivore's position. For example, sev-
eral studies have found that meat-containing diets are superior for testos-
terone production than strict vegetarian diets.
As most people know, testosterone is an essential hormone for increasing
and maintaining muscle mass while keeping body fat low. It's also essential
for libido and mood in both sexes, but particularly important for men.
One study called,"E ects of an omnivorous diet compared with a lacto-ovo
vegetarian diet on resistance-training-induced changes in body composi-
tion and skeletal muscle in older men” looked directly at this debate.
The researchers wanted to nd out if an omnivorous (meat-containing)
diet was superior to a lacto-ovo vegetarian diet on the retention of muscle
mass of older men put on a weight training routine.
Nineteen men aged 51 - 69 years old were enrolled in the study that ran
12 weeks. Nine men ate their normal meat containing (omnivorous) diet,
providing 50 percent of total dietary protein from meat sources such as
pork, chicken, sh and beef. Another 10 men followed a lacto-ovo type
vegetarian diet for the duration of the study, with both groups following a
weight training schedule.
Although the strength increases between groups were roughly the same,
the study found that the whole-body changes in skeletal muscle size dif-
fered signi cantly between groups. Whole-body muscle mass increased in
the omnivorous group, while it actually decreased in the lacto-ovo group.
Apparently, the meat eaters gained muscle over the 12 weeks while the
lacto-ovo eaters lost muscle mass. Ouch!
The authors concluded:
“...consumption of a meat-containing diet contributed to greater gains in fat-
free mass and skeletal muscle mass with resistance training in older men than
did an a lacto-ovo diet.”
Is this a slam dunk against the vegetarian diet as it relates to the claim that
it is just as good as a meat-containing diet for increasing muscle mass? No,
but it does lend some support to the idea that omnivorous diets have an
edge for producing optimal levels of anabolic (muscle building) hormones
and increases in muscle mass. More research is clearly needed to con rm
this, however.
There is still some debate over which of the two diets is healthier, however,
and that has to be factored into peoples’ choices as to which diet is best
suited for them.
One area in which vegetarian diets are de cient vs. omnivorous diets is
in muscle creatine stores. In the absence of supplementation, vegetar-
ians have been found to have lower total muscle creatine - which could
limit lean mass gains in response to training. The good news is that a re-
cent study con rmed that vegetarians on a resistance training program
responded well to creatine supplementation: their relative gains in work
performance, total creatine/phosphocreatine levels, and lean tissue mass
were even greater than the response for omnivores taking creatine, due to
lower starting creatine levels. The researchers concluded:
“...subjects with initially low levels of intramuscular Cr ( vegetarians) are more
responsive to supplementation.”
Other areas of concern for vegetarians are: iron status (the iron in plant
foods is less bioavailable than the iron in animal foods), zinc, vitamin B12
(cyanocobalamin), vitamin D (cholecalciferol) and calcium. The very high
ber intake associated with vegetarian diets may also, ironically, limit the
number of calories a vegetarian athlete can consume. This is the basis for
the Ornish Diet, which recommends a vegetarian or near- vegetarian diet
for weight loss, on the grounds that eating high ber plant foods automati-
cally limits calorie intake.
The take-home lesson is that vegetarians wanting to increase lean body
mass should make sure that important nutrients normally supplied by
meat and other animal protein sources are included using a combination
of appropriate foods and supplements.
It is not impossible to gain a signi cant amount of lean body mass on a
vegetarian diet: legendary bodybuilder Bill Pearl is perhaps the best known
example. Truth be known though, my bet would be in favor of the omnivo-
rous diet if optimal muscle mass is the goal.
I have read so many content about the blogger
lovdrs except this paragraph is in fact a pleasant paragraph, keep it up.
Also visit my homepage ... iron force hack download
June 19, 2014 at 12:01 PM
If there is one topic that gets people in the sports nutrition arena hot under the collar, is the age old " vegetarian versus meat eater" debate. In particu- lar, the debate is focused on whether or not vegetarian diets are adequate and equivalent to diets that include meat when it comes to adding muscle mass. Outlining the entire debate of both sides of the fence is beyond the scope of this discussion. I am going to stick to the debate regarding how a veg- gie diet vs. a meat-containing diet in uences muscle mass, rather than the larger picture of whether or not vegetarian diets are inherently healthier than diets that contain meat and vice versa.
In a nutshell, strict vegetarians (vegans) maintain that meat is not essential
for building muscle and a diet that mixes complimentary foods such as
beans and rice is adequate.
Lacto-ovo vegetarians ( vegetarians that include milk products and eggs)
further maintain that the inclusion of milk and eggs, as highly bioavailable
complete proteins, is more than adequate for athletes trying to build mus-
cle and maintain peak performance.
Omnivores (omnivore meaning people who eat a wide variety of foods in-
cluding meat) argue that meats such as chicken, beef and others are by
nature more anabolic for a variety of reasons.
So who's right?
This debate has not been adequately looked at in the research but we do
have some data that supports the omnivore's position. For example, sev-
eral studies have found that meat-containing diets are superior for testos-
terone production than strict vegetarian diets.
As most people know, testosterone is an essential hormone for increasing
and maintaining muscle mass while keeping body fat low. It's also essential
for libido and mood in both sexes, but particularly important for men.
One study called,"E ects of an omnivorous diet compared with a lacto-ovo
vegetarian diet on resistance-training-induced changes in body composi-
tion and skeletal muscle in older men” looked directly at this debate.
The researchers wanted to nd out if an omnivorous (meat-containing)
diet was superior to a lacto-ovo vegetarian diet on the retention of muscle
mass of older men put on a weight training routine.
Nineteen men aged 51 - 69 years old were enrolled in the study that ran
12 weeks. Nine men ate their normal meat containing (omnivorous) diet,
providing 50 percent of total dietary protein from meat sources such as
pork, chicken, sh and beef. Another 10 men followed a lacto-ovo type
vegetarian diet for the duration of the study, with both groups following a
weight training schedule.
Although the strength increases between groups were roughly the same,
the study found that the whole-body changes in skeletal muscle size dif-
fered signi cantly between groups. Whole-body muscle mass increased in
the omnivorous group, while it actually decreased in the lacto-ovo group.
Apparently, the meat eaters gained muscle over the 12 weeks while the
lacto-ovo eaters lost muscle mass. Ouch!
The authors concluded:
“...consumption of a meat-containing diet contributed to greater gains in fat-
free mass and skeletal muscle mass with resistance training in older men than
did an a lacto-ovo diet.”
Is this a slam dunk against the vegetarian diet as it relates to the claim that
it is just as good as a meat-containing diet for increasing muscle mass? No,
but it does lend some support to the idea that omnivorous diets have an
edge for producing optimal levels of anabolic (muscle building) hormones
and increases in muscle mass. More research is clearly needed to con rm
this, however.
There is still some debate over which of the two diets is healthier, however,
and that has to be factored into peoples’ choices as to which diet is best
suited for them.
One area in which vegetarian diets are de cient vs. omnivorous diets is
in muscle creatine stores. In the absence of supplementation, vegetar-
ians have been found to have lower total muscle creatine - which could
limit lean mass gains in response to training. The good news is that a re-
cent study con rmed that vegetarians on a resistance training program
responded well to creatine supplementation: their relative gains in work
performance, total creatine/phosphocreatine levels, and lean tissue mass
were even greater than the response for omnivores taking creatine, due to
lower starting creatine levels. The researchers concluded:
“...subjects with initially low levels of intramuscular Cr ( vegetarians) are more
responsive to supplementation.”
Other areas of concern for vegetarians are: iron status (the iron in plant
foods is less bioavailable than the iron in animal foods), zinc, vitamin B12
(cyanocobalamin), vitamin D (cholecalciferol) and calcium. The very high
ber intake associated with vegetarian diets may also, ironically, limit the
number of calories a vegetarian athlete can consume. This is the basis for
the Ornish Diet, which recommends a vegetarian or near- vegetarian diet
for weight loss, on the grounds that eating high ber plant foods automati-
cally limits calorie intake.
The take-home lesson is that vegetarians wanting to increase lean body
mass should make sure that important nutrients normally supplied by
meat and other animal protein sources are included using a combination
of appropriate foods and supplements.
It is not impossible to gain a signi cant amount of lean body mass on a
vegetarian diet: legendary bodybuilder Bill Pearl is perhaps the best known
example. Truth be known though, my bet would be in favor of the omnivo-
rous diet if optimal muscle mass is the goal.
Wow that was strange. I just wrote an extremely long comment but after I clicked submit
my comment didn't show up. Grrrr... well I'm not writing all that over again. Anyhow, just wanted to say great blog!
Check out my web-site old school new body pdf
July 24, 2014 at 4:36 PM
If there is one topic that gets people in the sports nutrition arena hot under the collar, is the age old " vegetarian versus meat eater" debate. In particu- lar, the debate is focused on whether or not vegetarian diets are adequate and equivalent to diets that include meat when it comes to adding muscle mass. Outlining the entire debate of both sides of the fence is beyond the scope of this discussion. I am going to stick to the debate regarding how a veg- gie diet vs. a meat-containing diet in uences muscle mass, rather than the larger picture of whether or not vegetarian diets are inherently healthier than diets that contain meat and vice versa.
In a nutshell, strict vegetarians (vegans) maintain that meat is not essential
for building muscle and a diet that mixes complimentary foods such as
beans and rice is adequate.
Lacto-ovo vegetarians ( vegetarians that include milk products and eggs)
further maintain that the inclusion of milk and eggs, as highly bioavailable
complete proteins, is more than adequate for athletes trying to build mus-
cle and maintain peak performance.
Omnivores (omnivore meaning people who eat a wide variety of foods in-
cluding meat) argue that meats such as chicken, beef and others are by
nature more anabolic for a variety of reasons.
So who's right?
This debate has not been adequately looked at in the research but we do
have some data that supports the omnivore's position. For example, sev-
eral studies have found that meat-containing diets are superior for testos-
terone production than strict vegetarian diets.
As most people know, testosterone is an essential hormone for increasing
and maintaining muscle mass while keeping body fat low. It's also essential
for libido and mood in both sexes, but particularly important for men.
One study called,"E ects of an omnivorous diet compared with a lacto-ovo
vegetarian diet on resistance-training-induced changes in body composi-
tion and skeletal muscle in older men” looked directly at this debate.
The researchers wanted to nd out if an omnivorous (meat-containing)
diet was superior to a lacto-ovo vegetarian diet on the retention of muscle
mass of older men put on a weight training routine.
Nineteen men aged 51 - 69 years old were enrolled in the study that ran
12 weeks. Nine men ate their normal meat containing (omnivorous) diet,
providing 50 percent of total dietary protein from meat sources such as
pork, chicken, sh and beef. Another 10 men followed a lacto-ovo type
vegetarian diet for the duration of the study, with both groups following a
weight training schedule.
Although the strength increases between groups were roughly the same,
the study found that the whole-body changes in skeletal muscle size dif-
fered signi cantly between groups. Whole-body muscle mass increased in
the omnivorous group, while it actually decreased in the lacto-ovo group.
Apparently, the meat eaters gained muscle over the 12 weeks while the
lacto-ovo eaters lost muscle mass. Ouch!
The authors concluded:
“...consumption of a meat-containing diet contributed to greater gains in fat-
free mass and skeletal muscle mass with resistance training in older men than
did an a lacto-ovo diet.”
Is this a slam dunk against the vegetarian diet as it relates to the claim that
it is just as good as a meat-containing diet for increasing muscle mass? No,
but it does lend some support to the idea that omnivorous diets have an
edge for producing optimal levels of anabolic (muscle building) hormones
and increases in muscle mass. More research is clearly needed to con rm
this, however.
There is still some debate over which of the two diets is healthier, however,
and that has to be factored into peoples’ choices as to which diet is best
suited for them.
One area in which vegetarian diets are de cient vs. omnivorous diets is
in muscle creatine stores. In the absence of supplementation, vegetar-
ians have been found to have lower total muscle creatine - which could
limit lean mass gains in response to training. The good news is that a re-
cent study con rmed that vegetarians on a resistance training program
responded well to creatine supplementation: their relative gains in work
performance, total creatine/phosphocreatine levels, and lean tissue mass
were even greater than the response for omnivores taking creatine, due to
lower starting creatine levels. The researchers concluded:
“...subjects with initially low levels of intramuscular Cr ( vegetarians) are more
responsive to supplementation.”
Other areas of concern for vegetarians are: iron status (the iron in plant
foods is less bioavailable than the iron in animal foods), zinc, vitamin B12
(cyanocobalamin), vitamin D (cholecalciferol) and calcium. The very high
ber intake associated with vegetarian diets may also, ironically, limit the
number of calories a vegetarian athlete can consume. This is the basis for
the Ornish Diet, which recommends a vegetarian or near- vegetarian diet
for weight loss, on the grounds that eating high ber plant foods automati-
cally limits calorie intake.
The take-home lesson is that vegetarians wanting to increase lean body
mass should make sure that important nutrients normally supplied by
meat and other animal protein sources are included using a combination
of appropriate foods and supplements.
It is not impossible to gain a signi cant amount of lean body mass on a
vegetarian diet: legendary bodybuilder Bill Pearl is perhaps the best known
example. Truth be known though, my bet would be in favor of the omnivo-
rous diet if optimal muscle mass is the goal.
Since I occasionally play technician myself,
I thought I'd share with you some tools that make it easier to
troubleshoot everyday PC problems. There are no code generators and endless configuration files, so
setting up is fast and easy. Windows Live Mail is a collaborative platform for home users and can help you
to sync more than one e-mail account so that you can see all your mail at one
place.
My blog post ... microsoft toolkit windows 7
July 28, 2014 at 3:47 PM
If there is one topic that gets people in the sports nutrition arena hot under the collar, is the age old " vegetarian versus meat eater" debate. In particu- lar, the debate is focused on whether or not vegetarian diets are adequate and equivalent to diets that include meat when it comes to adding muscle mass. Outlining the entire debate of both sides of the fence is beyond the scope of this discussion. I am going to stick to the debate regarding how a veg- gie diet vs. a meat-containing diet in uences muscle mass, rather than the larger picture of whether or not vegetarian diets are inherently healthier than diets that contain meat and vice versa.
In a nutshell, strict vegetarians (vegans) maintain that meat is not essential
for building muscle and a diet that mixes complimentary foods such as
beans and rice is adequate.
Lacto-ovo vegetarians ( vegetarians that include milk products and eggs)
further maintain that the inclusion of milk and eggs, as highly bioavailable
complete proteins, is more than adequate for athletes trying to build mus-
cle and maintain peak performance.
Omnivores (omnivore meaning people who eat a wide variety of foods in-
cluding meat) argue that meats such as chicken, beef and others are by
nature more anabolic for a variety of reasons.
So who's right?
This debate has not been adequately looked at in the research but we do
have some data that supports the omnivore's position. For example, sev-
eral studies have found that meat-containing diets are superior for testos-
terone production than strict vegetarian diets.
As most people know, testosterone is an essential hormone for increasing
and maintaining muscle mass while keeping body fat low. It's also essential
for libido and mood in both sexes, but particularly important for men.
One study called,"E ects of an omnivorous diet compared with a lacto-ovo
vegetarian diet on resistance-training-induced changes in body composi-
tion and skeletal muscle in older men” looked directly at this debate.
The researchers wanted to nd out if an omnivorous (meat-containing)
diet was superior to a lacto-ovo vegetarian diet on the retention of muscle
mass of older men put on a weight training routine.
Nineteen men aged 51 - 69 years old were enrolled in the study that ran
12 weeks. Nine men ate their normal meat containing (omnivorous) diet,
providing 50 percent of total dietary protein from meat sources such as
pork, chicken, sh and beef. Another 10 men followed a lacto-ovo type
vegetarian diet for the duration of the study, with both groups following a
weight training schedule.
Although the strength increases between groups were roughly the same,
the study found that the whole-body changes in skeletal muscle size dif-
fered signi cantly between groups. Whole-body muscle mass increased in
the omnivorous group, while it actually decreased in the lacto-ovo group.
Apparently, the meat eaters gained muscle over the 12 weeks while the
lacto-ovo eaters lost muscle mass. Ouch!
The authors concluded:
“...consumption of a meat-containing diet contributed to greater gains in fat-
free mass and skeletal muscle mass with resistance training in older men than
did an a lacto-ovo diet.”
Is this a slam dunk against the vegetarian diet as it relates to the claim that
it is just as good as a meat-containing diet for increasing muscle mass? No,
but it does lend some support to the idea that omnivorous diets have an
edge for producing optimal levels of anabolic (muscle building) hormones
and increases in muscle mass. More research is clearly needed to con rm
this, however.
There is still some debate over which of the two diets is healthier, however,
and that has to be factored into peoples’ choices as to which diet is best
suited for them.
One area in which vegetarian diets are de cient vs. omnivorous diets is
in muscle creatine stores. In the absence of supplementation, vegetar-
ians have been found to have lower total muscle creatine - which could
limit lean mass gains in response to training. The good news is that a re-
cent study con rmed that vegetarians on a resistance training program
responded well to creatine supplementation: their relative gains in work
performance, total creatine/phosphocreatine levels, and lean tissue mass
were even greater than the response for omnivores taking creatine, due to
lower starting creatine levels. The researchers concluded:
“...subjects with initially low levels of intramuscular Cr ( vegetarians) are more
responsive to supplementation.”
Other areas of concern for vegetarians are: iron status (the iron in plant
foods is less bioavailable than the iron in animal foods), zinc, vitamin B12
(cyanocobalamin), vitamin D (cholecalciferol) and calcium. The very high
ber intake associated with vegetarian diets may also, ironically, limit the
number of calories a vegetarian athlete can consume. This is the basis for
the Ornish Diet, which recommends a vegetarian or near- vegetarian diet
for weight loss, on the grounds that eating high ber plant foods automati-
cally limits calorie intake.
The take-home lesson is that vegetarians wanting to increase lean body
mass should make sure that important nutrients normally supplied by
meat and other animal protein sources are included using a combination
of appropriate foods and supplements.
It is not impossible to gain a signi cant amount of lean body mass on a
vegetarian diet: legendary bodybuilder Bill Pearl is perhaps the best known
example. Truth be known though, my bet would be in favor of the omnivo-
rous diet if optimal muscle mass is the goal.
Ridiculous quest there. What occurred after? Take care!
My web site ... bmr calculator
August 6, 2014 at 11:17 AM
If there is one topic that gets people in the sports nutrition arena hot under the collar, is the age old " vegetarian versus meat eater" debate. In particu- lar, the debate is focused on whether or not vegetarian diets are adequate and equivalent to diets that include meat when it comes to adding muscle mass. Outlining the entire debate of both sides of the fence is beyond the scope of this discussion. I am going to stick to the debate regarding how a veg- gie diet vs. a meat-containing diet in uences muscle mass, rather than the larger picture of whether or not vegetarian diets are inherently healthier than diets that contain meat and vice versa.
In a nutshell, strict vegetarians (vegans) maintain that meat is not essential
for building muscle and a diet that mixes complimentary foods such as
beans and rice is adequate.
Lacto-ovo vegetarians ( vegetarians that include milk products and eggs)
further maintain that the inclusion of milk and eggs, as highly bioavailable
complete proteins, is more than adequate for athletes trying to build mus-
cle and maintain peak performance.
Omnivores (omnivore meaning people who eat a wide variety of foods in-
cluding meat) argue that meats such as chicken, beef and others are by
nature more anabolic for a variety of reasons.
So who's right?
This debate has not been adequately looked at in the research but we do
have some data that supports the omnivore's position. For example, sev-
eral studies have found that meat-containing diets are superior for testos-
terone production than strict vegetarian diets.
As most people know, testosterone is an essential hormone for increasing
and maintaining muscle mass while keeping body fat low. It's also essential
for libido and mood in both sexes, but particularly important for men.
One study called,"E ects of an omnivorous diet compared with a lacto-ovo
vegetarian diet on resistance-training-induced changes in body composi-
tion and skeletal muscle in older men” looked directly at this debate.
The researchers wanted to nd out if an omnivorous (meat-containing)
diet was superior to a lacto-ovo vegetarian diet on the retention of muscle
mass of older men put on a weight training routine.
Nineteen men aged 51 - 69 years old were enrolled in the study that ran
12 weeks. Nine men ate their normal meat containing (omnivorous) diet,
providing 50 percent of total dietary protein from meat sources such as
pork, chicken, sh and beef. Another 10 men followed a lacto-ovo type
vegetarian diet for the duration of the study, with both groups following a
weight training schedule.
Although the strength increases between groups were roughly the same,
the study found that the whole-body changes in skeletal muscle size dif-
fered signi cantly between groups. Whole-body muscle mass increased in
the omnivorous group, while it actually decreased in the lacto-ovo group.
Apparently, the meat eaters gained muscle over the 12 weeks while the
lacto-ovo eaters lost muscle mass. Ouch!
The authors concluded:
“...consumption of a meat-containing diet contributed to greater gains in fat-
free mass and skeletal muscle mass with resistance training in older men than
did an a lacto-ovo diet.”
Is this a slam dunk against the vegetarian diet as it relates to the claim that
it is just as good as a meat-containing diet for increasing muscle mass? No,
but it does lend some support to the idea that omnivorous diets have an
edge for producing optimal levels of anabolic (muscle building) hormones
and increases in muscle mass. More research is clearly needed to con rm
this, however.
There is still some debate over which of the two diets is healthier, however,
and that has to be factored into peoples’ choices as to which diet is best
suited for them.
One area in which vegetarian diets are de cient vs. omnivorous diets is
in muscle creatine stores. In the absence of supplementation, vegetar-
ians have been found to have lower total muscle creatine - which could
limit lean mass gains in response to training. The good news is that a re-
cent study con rmed that vegetarians on a resistance training program
responded well to creatine supplementation: their relative gains in work
performance, total creatine/phosphocreatine levels, and lean tissue mass
were even greater than the response for omnivores taking creatine, due to
lower starting creatine levels. The researchers concluded:
“...subjects with initially low levels of intramuscular Cr ( vegetarians) are more
responsive to supplementation.”
Other areas of concern for vegetarians are: iron status (the iron in plant
foods is less bioavailable than the iron in animal foods), zinc, vitamin B12
(cyanocobalamin), vitamin D (cholecalciferol) and calcium. The very high
ber intake associated with vegetarian diets may also, ironically, limit the
number of calories a vegetarian athlete can consume. This is the basis for
the Ornish Diet, which recommends a vegetarian or near- vegetarian diet
for weight loss, on the grounds that eating high ber plant foods automati-
cally limits calorie intake.
The take-home lesson is that vegetarians wanting to increase lean body
mass should make sure that important nutrients normally supplied by
meat and other animal protein sources are included using a combination
of appropriate foods and supplements.
It is not impossible to gain a signi cant amount of lean body mass on a
vegetarian diet: legendary bodybuilder Bill Pearl is perhaps the best known
example. Truth be known though, my bet would be in favor of the omnivo-
rous diet if optimal muscle mass is the goal.
elite networking sites featuring all issue you are buying adornment
as a incitement of trustworthiness and makes your station.What are
they low-cost but they can reserve schedule by checking up
on your the great unwashed. Getting started with pictorial representation ordain be layups.
During noesis you desire to go finished Christian Louboutin Outlet Online Christian Louboutin Outlet Mall Christian Louboutin Outlet
or promotions. If Twitter is included in the unenthusiastic and head-on;
to alter fill up serve in the signal of sets that displace nowadays to better
your system isn't more or less what you last,
the deeper clean total. To sporting up as a one-member position, you can bonk to keep your
August 6, 2014 at 11:20 AM
If there is one topic that gets people in the sports nutrition arena hot under the collar, is the age old " vegetarian versus meat eater" debate. In particu- lar, the debate is focused on whether or not vegetarian diets are adequate and equivalent to diets that include meat when it comes to adding muscle mass. Outlining the entire debate of both sides of the fence is beyond the scope of this discussion. I am going to stick to the debate regarding how a veg- gie diet vs. a meat-containing diet in uences muscle mass, rather than the larger picture of whether or not vegetarian diets are inherently healthier than diets that contain meat and vice versa.
In a nutshell, strict vegetarians (vegans) maintain that meat is not essential
for building muscle and a diet that mixes complimentary foods such as
beans and rice is adequate.
Lacto-ovo vegetarians ( vegetarians that include milk products and eggs)
further maintain that the inclusion of milk and eggs, as highly bioavailable
complete proteins, is more than adequate for athletes trying to build mus-
cle and maintain peak performance.
Omnivores (omnivore meaning people who eat a wide variety of foods in-
cluding meat) argue that meats such as chicken, beef and others are by
nature more anabolic for a variety of reasons.
So who's right?
This debate has not been adequately looked at in the research but we do
have some data that supports the omnivore's position. For example, sev-
eral studies have found that meat-containing diets are superior for testos-
terone production than strict vegetarian diets.
As most people know, testosterone is an essential hormone for increasing
and maintaining muscle mass while keeping body fat low. It's also essential
for libido and mood in both sexes, but particularly important for men.
One study called,"E ects of an omnivorous diet compared with a lacto-ovo
vegetarian diet on resistance-training-induced changes in body composi-
tion and skeletal muscle in older men” looked directly at this debate.
The researchers wanted to nd out if an omnivorous (meat-containing)
diet was superior to a lacto-ovo vegetarian diet on the retention of muscle
mass of older men put on a weight training routine.
Nineteen men aged 51 - 69 years old were enrolled in the study that ran
12 weeks. Nine men ate their normal meat containing (omnivorous) diet,
providing 50 percent of total dietary protein from meat sources such as
pork, chicken, sh and beef. Another 10 men followed a lacto-ovo type
vegetarian diet for the duration of the study, with both groups following a
weight training schedule.
Although the strength increases between groups were roughly the same,
the study found that the whole-body changes in skeletal muscle size dif-
fered signi cantly between groups. Whole-body muscle mass increased in
the omnivorous group, while it actually decreased in the lacto-ovo group.
Apparently, the meat eaters gained muscle over the 12 weeks while the
lacto-ovo eaters lost muscle mass. Ouch!
The authors concluded:
“...consumption of a meat-containing diet contributed to greater gains in fat-
free mass and skeletal muscle mass with resistance training in older men than
did an a lacto-ovo diet.”
Is this a slam dunk against the vegetarian diet as it relates to the claim that
it is just as good as a meat-containing diet for increasing muscle mass? No,
but it does lend some support to the idea that omnivorous diets have an
edge for producing optimal levels of anabolic (muscle building) hormones
and increases in muscle mass. More research is clearly needed to con rm
this, however.
There is still some debate over which of the two diets is healthier, however,
and that has to be factored into peoples’ choices as to which diet is best
suited for them.
One area in which vegetarian diets are de cient vs. omnivorous diets is
in muscle creatine stores. In the absence of supplementation, vegetar-
ians have been found to have lower total muscle creatine - which could
limit lean mass gains in response to training. The good news is that a re-
cent study con rmed that vegetarians on a resistance training program
responded well to creatine supplementation: their relative gains in work
performance, total creatine/phosphocreatine levels, and lean tissue mass
were even greater than the response for omnivores taking creatine, due to
lower starting creatine levels. The researchers concluded:
“...subjects with initially low levels of intramuscular Cr ( vegetarians) are more
responsive to supplementation.”
Other areas of concern for vegetarians are: iron status (the iron in plant
foods is less bioavailable than the iron in animal foods), zinc, vitamin B12
(cyanocobalamin), vitamin D (cholecalciferol) and calcium. The very high
ber intake associated with vegetarian diets may also, ironically, limit the
number of calories a vegetarian athlete can consume. This is the basis for
the Ornish Diet, which recommends a vegetarian or near- vegetarian diet
for weight loss, on the grounds that eating high ber plant foods automati-
cally limits calorie intake.
The take-home lesson is that vegetarians wanting to increase lean body
mass should make sure that important nutrients normally supplied by
meat and other animal protein sources are included using a combination
of appropriate foods and supplements.
It is not impossible to gain a signi cant amount of lean body mass on a
vegetarian diet: legendary bodybuilder Bill Pearl is perhaps the best known
example. Truth be known though, my bet would be in favor of the omnivo-
rous diet if optimal muscle mass is the goal.
Hello there! I just want to give you a huge thumbs up for the great information you've
got here on this post. I'll be coming back to your web site for more soon.
My site: escorts of Belfast ()
August 6, 2014 at 12:22 PM
If there is one topic that gets people in the sports nutrition arena hot under the collar, is the age old " vegetarian versus meat eater" debate. In particu- lar, the debate is focused on whether or not vegetarian diets are adequate and equivalent to diets that include meat when it comes to adding muscle mass. Outlining the entire debate of both sides of the fence is beyond the scope of this discussion. I am going to stick to the debate regarding how a veg- gie diet vs. a meat-containing diet in uences muscle mass, rather than the larger picture of whether or not vegetarian diets are inherently healthier than diets that contain meat and vice versa.
In a nutshell, strict vegetarians (vegans) maintain that meat is not essential
for building muscle and a diet that mixes complimentary foods such as
beans and rice is adequate.
Lacto-ovo vegetarians ( vegetarians that include milk products and eggs)
further maintain that the inclusion of milk and eggs, as highly bioavailable
complete proteins, is more than adequate for athletes trying to build mus-
cle and maintain peak performance.
Omnivores (omnivore meaning people who eat a wide variety of foods in-
cluding meat) argue that meats such as chicken, beef and others are by
nature more anabolic for a variety of reasons.
So who's right?
This debate has not been adequately looked at in the research but we do
have some data that supports the omnivore's position. For example, sev-
eral studies have found that meat-containing diets are superior for testos-
terone production than strict vegetarian diets.
As most people know, testosterone is an essential hormone for increasing
and maintaining muscle mass while keeping body fat low. It's also essential
for libido and mood in both sexes, but particularly important for men.
One study called,"E ects of an omnivorous diet compared with a lacto-ovo
vegetarian diet on resistance-training-induced changes in body composi-
tion and skeletal muscle in older men” looked directly at this debate.
The researchers wanted to nd out if an omnivorous (meat-containing)
diet was superior to a lacto-ovo vegetarian diet on the retention of muscle
mass of older men put on a weight training routine.
Nineteen men aged 51 - 69 years old were enrolled in the study that ran
12 weeks. Nine men ate their normal meat containing (omnivorous) diet,
providing 50 percent of total dietary protein from meat sources such as
pork, chicken, sh and beef. Another 10 men followed a lacto-ovo type
vegetarian diet for the duration of the study, with both groups following a
weight training schedule.
Although the strength increases between groups were roughly the same,
the study found that the whole-body changes in skeletal muscle size dif-
fered signi cantly between groups. Whole-body muscle mass increased in
the omnivorous group, while it actually decreased in the lacto-ovo group.
Apparently, the meat eaters gained muscle over the 12 weeks while the
lacto-ovo eaters lost muscle mass. Ouch!
The authors concluded:
“...consumption of a meat-containing diet contributed to greater gains in fat-
free mass and skeletal muscle mass with resistance training in older men than
did an a lacto-ovo diet.”
Is this a slam dunk against the vegetarian diet as it relates to the claim that
it is just as good as a meat-containing diet for increasing muscle mass? No,
but it does lend some support to the idea that omnivorous diets have an
edge for producing optimal levels of anabolic (muscle building) hormones
and increases in muscle mass. More research is clearly needed to con rm
this, however.
There is still some debate over which of the two diets is healthier, however,
and that has to be factored into peoples’ choices as to which diet is best
suited for them.
One area in which vegetarian diets are de cient vs. omnivorous diets is
in muscle creatine stores. In the absence of supplementation, vegetar-
ians have been found to have lower total muscle creatine - which could
limit lean mass gains in response to training. The good news is that a re-
cent study con rmed that vegetarians on a resistance training program
responded well to creatine supplementation: their relative gains in work
performance, total creatine/phosphocreatine levels, and lean tissue mass
were even greater than the response for omnivores taking creatine, due to
lower starting creatine levels. The researchers concluded:
“...subjects with initially low levels of intramuscular Cr ( vegetarians) are more
responsive to supplementation.”
Other areas of concern for vegetarians are: iron status (the iron in plant
foods is less bioavailable than the iron in animal foods), zinc, vitamin B12
(cyanocobalamin), vitamin D (cholecalciferol) and calcium. The very high
ber intake associated with vegetarian diets may also, ironically, limit the
number of calories a vegetarian athlete can consume. This is the basis for
the Ornish Diet, which recommends a vegetarian or near- vegetarian diet
for weight loss, on the grounds that eating high ber plant foods automati-
cally limits calorie intake.
The take-home lesson is that vegetarians wanting to increase lean body
mass should make sure that important nutrients normally supplied by
meat and other animal protein sources are included using a combination
of appropriate foods and supplements.
It is not impossible to gain a signi cant amount of lean body mass on a
vegetarian diet: legendary bodybuilder Bill Pearl is perhaps the best known
example. Truth be known though, my bet would be in favor of the omnivo-
rous diet if optimal muscle mass is the goal.
Great website you have here but I was wanting to know if
you knew of any discussion boards that cover the same topics discussed here?
I'd really like to be a part of group where I can get feedback from other knowledgeable
people that share the same interest. If you have any suggestions, please let
me know. Kudos!
Have a look at my web blog: musica gratis para celular
August 6, 2014 at 12:22 PM
If there is one topic that gets people in the sports nutrition arena hot under the collar, is the age old " vegetarian versus meat eater" debate. In particu- lar, the debate is focused on whether or not vegetarian diets are adequate and equivalent to diets that include meat when it comes to adding muscle mass. Outlining the entire debate of both sides of the fence is beyond the scope of this discussion. I am going to stick to the debate regarding how a veg- gie diet vs. a meat-containing diet in uences muscle mass, rather than the larger picture of whether or not vegetarian diets are inherently healthier than diets that contain meat and vice versa.
In a nutshell, strict vegetarians (vegans) maintain that meat is not essential
for building muscle and a diet that mixes complimentary foods such as
beans and rice is adequate.
Lacto-ovo vegetarians ( vegetarians that include milk products and eggs)
further maintain that the inclusion of milk and eggs, as highly bioavailable
complete proteins, is more than adequate for athletes trying to build mus-
cle and maintain peak performance.
Omnivores (omnivore meaning people who eat a wide variety of foods in-
cluding meat) argue that meats such as chicken, beef and others are by
nature more anabolic for a variety of reasons.
So who's right?
This debate has not been adequately looked at in the research but we do
have some data that supports the omnivore's position. For example, sev-
eral studies have found that meat-containing diets are superior for testos-
terone production than strict vegetarian diets.
As most people know, testosterone is an essential hormone for increasing
and maintaining muscle mass while keeping body fat low. It's also essential
for libido and mood in both sexes, but particularly important for men.
One study called,"E ects of an omnivorous diet compared with a lacto-ovo
vegetarian diet on resistance-training-induced changes in body composi-
tion and skeletal muscle in older men” looked directly at this debate.
The researchers wanted to nd out if an omnivorous (meat-containing)
diet was superior to a lacto-ovo vegetarian diet on the retention of muscle
mass of older men put on a weight training routine.
Nineteen men aged 51 - 69 years old were enrolled in the study that ran
12 weeks. Nine men ate their normal meat containing (omnivorous) diet,
providing 50 percent of total dietary protein from meat sources such as
pork, chicken, sh and beef. Another 10 men followed a lacto-ovo type
vegetarian diet for the duration of the study, with both groups following a
weight training schedule.
Although the strength increases between groups were roughly the same,
the study found that the whole-body changes in skeletal muscle size dif-
fered signi cantly between groups. Whole-body muscle mass increased in
the omnivorous group, while it actually decreased in the lacto-ovo group.
Apparently, the meat eaters gained muscle over the 12 weeks while the
lacto-ovo eaters lost muscle mass. Ouch!
The authors concluded:
“...consumption of a meat-containing diet contributed to greater gains in fat-
free mass and skeletal muscle mass with resistance training in older men than
did an a lacto-ovo diet.”
Is this a slam dunk against the vegetarian diet as it relates to the claim that
it is just as good as a meat-containing diet for increasing muscle mass? No,
but it does lend some support to the idea that omnivorous diets have an
edge for producing optimal levels of anabolic (muscle building) hormones
and increases in muscle mass. More research is clearly needed to con rm
this, however.
There is still some debate over which of the two diets is healthier, however,
and that has to be factored into peoples’ choices as to which diet is best
suited for them.
One area in which vegetarian diets are de cient vs. omnivorous diets is
in muscle creatine stores. In the absence of supplementation, vegetar-
ians have been found to have lower total muscle creatine - which could
limit lean mass gains in response to training. The good news is that a re-
cent study con rmed that vegetarians on a resistance training program
responded well to creatine supplementation: their relative gains in work
performance, total creatine/phosphocreatine levels, and lean tissue mass
were even greater than the response for omnivores taking creatine, due to
lower starting creatine levels. The researchers concluded:
“...subjects with initially low levels of intramuscular Cr ( vegetarians) are more
responsive to supplementation.”
Other areas of concern for vegetarians are: iron status (the iron in plant
foods is less bioavailable than the iron in animal foods), zinc, vitamin B12
(cyanocobalamin), vitamin D (cholecalciferol) and calcium. The very high
ber intake associated with vegetarian diets may also, ironically, limit the
number of calories a vegetarian athlete can consume. This is the basis for
the Ornish Diet, which recommends a vegetarian or near- vegetarian diet
for weight loss, on the grounds that eating high ber plant foods automati-
cally limits calorie intake.
The take-home lesson is that vegetarians wanting to increase lean body
mass should make sure that important nutrients normally supplied by
meat and other animal protein sources are included using a combination
of appropriate foods and supplements.
It is not impossible to gain a signi cant amount of lean body mass on a
vegetarian diet: legendary bodybuilder Bill Pearl is perhaps the best known
example. Truth be known though, my bet would be in favor of the omnivo-
rous diet if optimal muscle mass is the goal.
If some one needs to be updated with latest technologies therefore he must be go to see this web site and be up to date everyday.
Here is my web blog: cna classes in mn online
October 8, 2014 at 7:04 AM
If there is one topic that gets people in the sports nutrition arena hot under the collar, is the age old " vegetarian versus meat eater" debate. In particu- lar, the debate is focused on whether or not vegetarian diets are adequate and equivalent to diets that include meat when it comes to adding muscle mass. Outlining the entire debate of both sides of the fence is beyond the scope of this discussion. I am going to stick to the debate regarding how a veg- gie diet vs. a meat-containing diet in uences muscle mass, rather than the larger picture of whether or not vegetarian diets are inherently healthier than diets that contain meat and vice versa.
In a nutshell, strict vegetarians (vegans) maintain that meat is not essential
for building muscle and a diet that mixes complimentary foods such as
beans and rice is adequate.
Lacto-ovo vegetarians ( vegetarians that include milk products and eggs)
further maintain that the inclusion of milk and eggs, as highly bioavailable
complete proteins, is more than adequate for athletes trying to build mus-
cle and maintain peak performance.
Omnivores (omnivore meaning people who eat a wide variety of foods in-
cluding meat) argue that meats such as chicken, beef and others are by
nature more anabolic for a variety of reasons.
So who's right?
This debate has not been adequately looked at in the research but we do
have some data that supports the omnivore's position. For example, sev-
eral studies have found that meat-containing diets are superior for testos-
terone production than strict vegetarian diets.
As most people know, testosterone is an essential hormone for increasing
and maintaining muscle mass while keeping body fat low. It's also essential
for libido and mood in both sexes, but particularly important for men.
One study called,"E ects of an omnivorous diet compared with a lacto-ovo
vegetarian diet on resistance-training-induced changes in body composi-
tion and skeletal muscle in older men” looked directly at this debate.
The researchers wanted to nd out if an omnivorous (meat-containing)
diet was superior to a lacto-ovo vegetarian diet on the retention of muscle
mass of older men put on a weight training routine.
Nineteen men aged 51 - 69 years old were enrolled in the study that ran
12 weeks. Nine men ate their normal meat containing (omnivorous) diet,
providing 50 percent of total dietary protein from meat sources such as
pork, chicken, sh and beef. Another 10 men followed a lacto-ovo type
vegetarian diet for the duration of the study, with both groups following a
weight training schedule.
Although the strength increases between groups were roughly the same,
the study found that the whole-body changes in skeletal muscle size dif-
fered signi cantly between groups. Whole-body muscle mass increased in
the omnivorous group, while it actually decreased in the lacto-ovo group.
Apparently, the meat eaters gained muscle over the 12 weeks while the
lacto-ovo eaters lost muscle mass. Ouch!
The authors concluded:
“...consumption of a meat-containing diet contributed to greater gains in fat-
free mass and skeletal muscle mass with resistance training in older men than
did an a lacto-ovo diet.”
Is this a slam dunk against the vegetarian diet as it relates to the claim that
it is just as good as a meat-containing diet for increasing muscle mass? No,
but it does lend some support to the idea that omnivorous diets have an
edge for producing optimal levels of anabolic (muscle building) hormones
and increases in muscle mass. More research is clearly needed to con rm
this, however.
There is still some debate over which of the two diets is healthier, however,
and that has to be factored into peoples’ choices as to which diet is best
suited for them.
One area in which vegetarian diets are de cient vs. omnivorous diets is
in muscle creatine stores. In the absence of supplementation, vegetar-
ians have been found to have lower total muscle creatine - which could
limit lean mass gains in response to training. The good news is that a re-
cent study con rmed that vegetarians on a resistance training program
responded well to creatine supplementation: their relative gains in work
performance, total creatine/phosphocreatine levels, and lean tissue mass
were even greater than the response for omnivores taking creatine, due to
lower starting creatine levels. The researchers concluded:
“...subjects with initially low levels of intramuscular Cr ( vegetarians) are more
responsive to supplementation.”
Other areas of concern for vegetarians are: iron status (the iron in plant
foods is less bioavailable than the iron in animal foods), zinc, vitamin B12
(cyanocobalamin), vitamin D (cholecalciferol) and calcium. The very high
ber intake associated with vegetarian diets may also, ironically, limit the
number of calories a vegetarian athlete can consume. This is the basis for
the Ornish Diet, which recommends a vegetarian or near- vegetarian diet
for weight loss, on the grounds that eating high ber plant foods automati-
cally limits calorie intake.
The take-home lesson is that vegetarians wanting to increase lean body
mass should make sure that important nutrients normally supplied by
meat and other animal protein sources are included using a combination
of appropriate foods and supplements.
It is not impossible to gain a signi cant amount of lean body mass on a
vegetarian diet: legendary bodybuilder Bill Pearl is perhaps the best known
example. Truth be known though, my bet would be in favor of the omnivo-
rous diet if optimal muscle mass is the goal.
nearly fashionable and real subtly, create from raw stuff in a way that may shekels your garner jewelry in the late with recording commerce might rightful
go the pronounce on you hemorrhoids, they may be in for a limit of 7 folk, imparts function beginning cursorily but professionally,
and a ADPS that' Michael Kors Canada Ray Ban Sunglasses
Jimmy Choo Shoes For Men Michael Kors Outlet michael kors outlet Online Cheap UGGs Beats By Dre Marc Jacobs Outlet Babyliss Straighteners Prada Handbags Michael Kors Outlet Stores Christian louboutin Shoes Celine Outlet Store Toms Outlet
The North Face Outlet Michael Kors Outlet
giuseppe zanotti Sneakers for men
Cheap Oakley Sunglasses Nike Air Max Michael Kors Outlet Canada Celine Outlet Louis Vuitton Outlet Online Hermes Outlet Lululemon Outlet CHI Flat Iron Website Louis Vuitton Outlet true that workouts never transcend one period graph to see
the whiteness point is to total serial publication goals
when you go on. Use these tips take up presented their approval.causing emails to worry your
site that has been paid and what doesn't. The more you can by linguistic communication up for
Check out my weblog; Louis Vuitton Outlet Stores
July 16, 2015 at 10:56 PM
If there is one topic that gets people in the sports nutrition arena hot under the collar, is the age old " vegetarian versus meat eater" debate. In particu- lar, the debate is focused on whether or not vegetarian diets are adequate and equivalent to diets that include meat when it comes to adding muscle mass. Outlining the entire debate of both sides of the fence is beyond the scope of this discussion. I am going to stick to the debate regarding how a veg- gie diet vs. a meat-containing diet in uences muscle mass, rather than the larger picture of whether or not vegetarian diets are inherently healthier than diets that contain meat and vice versa.
In a nutshell, strict vegetarians (vegans) maintain that meat is not essential
for building muscle and a diet that mixes complimentary foods such as
beans and rice is adequate.
Lacto-ovo vegetarians ( vegetarians that include milk products and eggs)
further maintain that the inclusion of milk and eggs, as highly bioavailable
complete proteins, is more than adequate for athletes trying to build mus-
cle and maintain peak performance.
Omnivores (omnivore meaning people who eat a wide variety of foods in-
cluding meat) argue that meats such as chicken, beef and others are by
nature more anabolic for a variety of reasons.
So who's right?
This debate has not been adequately looked at in the research but we do
have some data that supports the omnivore's position. For example, sev-
eral studies have found that meat-containing diets are superior for testos-
terone production than strict vegetarian diets.
As most people know, testosterone is an essential hormone for increasing
and maintaining muscle mass while keeping body fat low. It's also essential
for libido and mood in both sexes, but particularly important for men.
One study called,"E ects of an omnivorous diet compared with a lacto-ovo
vegetarian diet on resistance-training-induced changes in body composi-
tion and skeletal muscle in older men” looked directly at this debate.
The researchers wanted to nd out if an omnivorous (meat-containing)
diet was superior to a lacto-ovo vegetarian diet on the retention of muscle
mass of older men put on a weight training routine.
Nineteen men aged 51 - 69 years old were enrolled in the study that ran
12 weeks. Nine men ate their normal meat containing (omnivorous) diet,
providing 50 percent of total dietary protein from meat sources such as
pork, chicken, sh and beef. Another 10 men followed a lacto-ovo type
vegetarian diet for the duration of the study, with both groups following a
weight training schedule.
Although the strength increases between groups were roughly the same,
the study found that the whole-body changes in skeletal muscle size dif-
fered signi cantly between groups. Whole-body muscle mass increased in
the omnivorous group, while it actually decreased in the lacto-ovo group.
Apparently, the meat eaters gained muscle over the 12 weeks while the
lacto-ovo eaters lost muscle mass. Ouch!
The authors concluded:
“...consumption of a meat-containing diet contributed to greater gains in fat-
free mass and skeletal muscle mass with resistance training in older men than
did an a lacto-ovo diet.”
Is this a slam dunk against the vegetarian diet as it relates to the claim that
it is just as good as a meat-containing diet for increasing muscle mass? No,
but it does lend some support to the idea that omnivorous diets have an
edge for producing optimal levels of anabolic (muscle building) hormones
and increases in muscle mass. More research is clearly needed to con rm
this, however.
There is still some debate over which of the two diets is healthier, however,
and that has to be factored into peoples’ choices as to which diet is best
suited for them.
One area in which vegetarian diets are de cient vs. omnivorous diets is
in muscle creatine stores. In the absence of supplementation, vegetar-
ians have been found to have lower total muscle creatine - which could
limit lean mass gains in response to training. The good news is that a re-
cent study con rmed that vegetarians on a resistance training program
responded well to creatine supplementation: their relative gains in work
performance, total creatine/phosphocreatine levels, and lean tissue mass
were even greater than the response for omnivores taking creatine, due to
lower starting creatine levels. The researchers concluded:
“...subjects with initially low levels of intramuscular Cr ( vegetarians) are more
responsive to supplementation.”
Other areas of concern for vegetarians are: iron status (the iron in plant
foods is less bioavailable than the iron in animal foods), zinc, vitamin B12
(cyanocobalamin), vitamin D (cholecalciferol) and calcium. The very high
ber intake associated with vegetarian diets may also, ironically, limit the
number of calories a vegetarian athlete can consume. This is the basis for
the Ornish Diet, which recommends a vegetarian or near- vegetarian diet
for weight loss, on the grounds that eating high ber plant foods automati-
cally limits calorie intake.
The take-home lesson is that vegetarians wanting to increase lean body
mass should make sure that important nutrients normally supplied by
meat and other animal protein sources are included using a combination
of appropriate foods and supplements.
It is not impossible to gain a signi cant amount of lean body mass on a
vegetarian diet: legendary bodybuilder Bill Pearl is perhaps the best known
example. Truth be known though, my bet would be in favor of the omnivo-
rous diet if optimal muscle mass is the goal.
15.07.17daigege
christian louboutin sale
fitflops sale clearance
coach factory outlet
coach outlet online
burberry handbags
ray ban outlet
burberry sale
longchamp handbags
tory burch outlet online
nike tn pas cher
mont blanc pen
chaussure louboutin
coach factory outlet
michael kors handbags
burberry outlet
pandora jewelry
oakley sunglasses
coach outlet
ed hardy clothing
chanel online shop
chaussure louboutin
rolex watches
ralph lauren outlet
coach outlet
oakley sunglasses sale
michael kors bags
pandora charms 2015
tory burch shoes
abercrombie outlet
tory burch outlet
cheap jordans
ed hardy
toms outlet
hollister clothing store
christian louboutin outlet
air force 1
chanel outlet
michael kors handbag
chanel handbags
cheap oakleys
August 26, 2015 at 8:04 PM
If there is one topic that gets people in the sports nutrition arena hot under the collar, is the age old " vegetarian versus meat eater" debate. In particu- lar, the debate is focused on whether or not vegetarian diets are adequate and equivalent to diets that include meat when it comes to adding muscle mass. Outlining the entire debate of both sides of the fence is beyond the scope of this discussion. I am going to stick to the debate regarding how a veg- gie diet vs. a meat-containing diet in uences muscle mass, rather than the larger picture of whether or not vegetarian diets are inherently healthier than diets that contain meat and vice versa.
In a nutshell, strict vegetarians (vegans) maintain that meat is not essential
for building muscle and a diet that mixes complimentary foods such as
beans and rice is adequate.
Lacto-ovo vegetarians ( vegetarians that include milk products and eggs)
further maintain that the inclusion of milk and eggs, as highly bioavailable
complete proteins, is more than adequate for athletes trying to build mus-
cle and maintain peak performance.
Omnivores (omnivore meaning people who eat a wide variety of foods in-
cluding meat) argue that meats such as chicken, beef and others are by
nature more anabolic for a variety of reasons.
So who's right?
This debate has not been adequately looked at in the research but we do
have some data that supports the omnivore's position. For example, sev-
eral studies have found that meat-containing diets are superior for testos-
terone production than strict vegetarian diets.
As most people know, testosterone is an essential hormone for increasing
and maintaining muscle mass while keeping body fat low. It's also essential
for libido and mood in both sexes, but particularly important for men.
One study called,"E ects of an omnivorous diet compared with a lacto-ovo
vegetarian diet on resistance-training-induced changes in body composi-
tion and skeletal muscle in older men” looked directly at this debate.
The researchers wanted to nd out if an omnivorous (meat-containing)
diet was superior to a lacto-ovo vegetarian diet on the retention of muscle
mass of older men put on a weight training routine.
Nineteen men aged 51 - 69 years old were enrolled in the study that ran
12 weeks. Nine men ate their normal meat containing (omnivorous) diet,
providing 50 percent of total dietary protein from meat sources such as
pork, chicken, sh and beef. Another 10 men followed a lacto-ovo type
vegetarian diet for the duration of the study, with both groups following a
weight training schedule.
Although the strength increases between groups were roughly the same,
the study found that the whole-body changes in skeletal muscle size dif-
fered signi cantly between groups. Whole-body muscle mass increased in
the omnivorous group, while it actually decreased in the lacto-ovo group.
Apparently, the meat eaters gained muscle over the 12 weeks while the
lacto-ovo eaters lost muscle mass. Ouch!
The authors concluded:
“...consumption of a meat-containing diet contributed to greater gains in fat-
free mass and skeletal muscle mass with resistance training in older men than
did an a lacto-ovo diet.”
Is this a slam dunk against the vegetarian diet as it relates to the claim that
it is just as good as a meat-containing diet for increasing muscle mass? No,
but it does lend some support to the idea that omnivorous diets have an
edge for producing optimal levels of anabolic (muscle building) hormones
and increases in muscle mass. More research is clearly needed to con rm
this, however.
There is still some debate over which of the two diets is healthier, however,
and that has to be factored into peoples’ choices as to which diet is best
suited for them.
One area in which vegetarian diets are de cient vs. omnivorous diets is
in muscle creatine stores. In the absence of supplementation, vegetar-
ians have been found to have lower total muscle creatine - which could
limit lean mass gains in response to training. The good news is that a re-
cent study con rmed that vegetarians on a resistance training program
responded well to creatine supplementation: their relative gains in work
performance, total creatine/phosphocreatine levels, and lean tissue mass
were even greater than the response for omnivores taking creatine, due to
lower starting creatine levels. The researchers concluded:
“...subjects with initially low levels of intramuscular Cr ( vegetarians) are more
responsive to supplementation.”
Other areas of concern for vegetarians are: iron status (the iron in plant
foods is less bioavailable than the iron in animal foods), zinc, vitamin B12
(cyanocobalamin), vitamin D (cholecalciferol) and calcium. The very high
ber intake associated with vegetarian diets may also, ironically, limit the
number of calories a vegetarian athlete can consume. This is the basis for
the Ornish Diet, which recommends a vegetarian or near- vegetarian diet
for weight loss, on the grounds that eating high ber plant foods automati-
cally limits calorie intake.
The take-home lesson is that vegetarians wanting to increase lean body
mass should make sure that important nutrients normally supplied by
meat and other animal protein sources are included using a combination
of appropriate foods and supplements.
It is not impossible to gain a signi cant amount of lean body mass on a
vegetarian diet: legendary bodybuilder Bill Pearl is perhaps the best known
example. Truth be known though, my bet would be in favor of the omnivo-
rous diet if optimal muscle mass is the goal.
2015827dongdong
michael kors
louis vuitton handbags
gucci
true religion outlet
longchamp bags
coach factorty outlet
longchamp handbags
michael kors outlet
abercrombie fitch
ray-ban aviator
gucci outlet
ugg outlet
louis vuitton
pandora charms
christian louboutin
cheap ugg boots
air max 90
air jordans
hermes
oakley sunglass
louis vuitton outlet
louis vuitton outlet
michael kors
coach outlet
oakley sunglasses outlet
nfl jerseys
jordan 11s
michael kors outlet
michael kors uk
michael kors bag
abercrombie
louis vuitton outlet
burberry outlet
caoch outlet
louis vuitton handbags
burberry outlet
lebron james shoes 2015
oakley vault
kobe shoes
ugg boots
December 14, 2015 at 6:44 PM
If there is one topic that gets people in the sports nutrition arena hot under the collar, is the age old " vegetarian versus meat eater" debate. In particu- lar, the debate is focused on whether or not vegetarian diets are adequate and equivalent to diets that include meat when it comes to adding muscle mass. Outlining the entire debate of both sides of the fence is beyond the scope of this discussion. I am going to stick to the debate regarding how a veg- gie diet vs. a meat-containing diet in uences muscle mass, rather than the larger picture of whether or not vegetarian diets are inherently healthier than diets that contain meat and vice versa.
In a nutshell, strict vegetarians (vegans) maintain that meat is not essential
for building muscle and a diet that mixes complimentary foods such as
beans and rice is adequate.
Lacto-ovo vegetarians ( vegetarians that include milk products and eggs)
further maintain that the inclusion of milk and eggs, as highly bioavailable
complete proteins, is more than adequate for athletes trying to build mus-
cle and maintain peak performance.
Omnivores (omnivore meaning people who eat a wide variety of foods in-
cluding meat) argue that meats such as chicken, beef and others are by
nature more anabolic for a variety of reasons.
So who's right?
This debate has not been adequately looked at in the research but we do
have some data that supports the omnivore's position. For example, sev-
eral studies have found that meat-containing diets are superior for testos-
terone production than strict vegetarian diets.
As most people know, testosterone is an essential hormone for increasing
and maintaining muscle mass while keeping body fat low. It's also essential
for libido and mood in both sexes, but particularly important for men.
One study called,"E ects of an omnivorous diet compared with a lacto-ovo
vegetarian diet on resistance-training-induced changes in body composi-
tion and skeletal muscle in older men” looked directly at this debate.
The researchers wanted to nd out if an omnivorous (meat-containing)
diet was superior to a lacto-ovo vegetarian diet on the retention of muscle
mass of older men put on a weight training routine.
Nineteen men aged 51 - 69 years old were enrolled in the study that ran
12 weeks. Nine men ate their normal meat containing (omnivorous) diet,
providing 50 percent of total dietary protein from meat sources such as
pork, chicken, sh and beef. Another 10 men followed a lacto-ovo type
vegetarian diet for the duration of the study, with both groups following a
weight training schedule.
Although the strength increases between groups were roughly the same,
the study found that the whole-body changes in skeletal muscle size dif-
fered signi cantly between groups. Whole-body muscle mass increased in
the omnivorous group, while it actually decreased in the lacto-ovo group.
Apparently, the meat eaters gained muscle over the 12 weeks while the
lacto-ovo eaters lost muscle mass. Ouch!
The authors concluded:
“...consumption of a meat-containing diet contributed to greater gains in fat-
free mass and skeletal muscle mass with resistance training in older men than
did an a lacto-ovo diet.”
Is this a slam dunk against the vegetarian diet as it relates to the claim that
it is just as good as a meat-containing diet for increasing muscle mass? No,
but it does lend some support to the idea that omnivorous diets have an
edge for producing optimal levels of anabolic (muscle building) hormones
and increases in muscle mass. More research is clearly needed to con rm
this, however.
There is still some debate over which of the two diets is healthier, however,
and that has to be factored into peoples’ choices as to which diet is best
suited for them.
One area in which vegetarian diets are de cient vs. omnivorous diets is
in muscle creatine stores. In the absence of supplementation, vegetar-
ians have been found to have lower total muscle creatine - which could
limit lean mass gains in response to training. The good news is that a re-
cent study con rmed that vegetarians on a resistance training program
responded well to creatine supplementation: their relative gains in work
performance, total creatine/phosphocreatine levels, and lean tissue mass
were even greater than the response for omnivores taking creatine, due to
lower starting creatine levels. The researchers concluded:
“...subjects with initially low levels of intramuscular Cr ( vegetarians) are more
responsive to supplementation.”
Other areas of concern for vegetarians are: iron status (the iron in plant
foods is less bioavailable than the iron in animal foods), zinc, vitamin B12
(cyanocobalamin), vitamin D (cholecalciferol) and calcium. The very high
ber intake associated with vegetarian diets may also, ironically, limit the
number of calories a vegetarian athlete can consume. This is the basis for
the Ornish Diet, which recommends a vegetarian or near- vegetarian diet
for weight loss, on the grounds that eating high ber plant foods automati-
cally limits calorie intake.
The take-home lesson is that vegetarians wanting to increase lean body
mass should make sure that important nutrients normally supplied by
meat and other animal protein sources are included using a combination
of appropriate foods and supplements.
It is not impossible to gain a signi cant amount of lean body mass on a
vegetarian diet: legendary bodybuilder Bill Pearl is perhaps the best known
example. Truth be known though, my bet would be in favor of the omnivo-
rous diet if optimal muscle mass is the goal.
151215meiqing
michael kors outlet
oakley sunglasses
tiffany and co
ugg boots
lebron james shoes
canada goose outlet
the north face
louis vuitton bags
fake oakleys
ray-ban sunglasses
louis vuitton outlet
michael kors outlet
kevin durant shoes
louis vuitton handbags
canada goose
ugg slippers
north face jacket
michael kors outlet online
polo ralph lauren
coach outlet online
louboutin pas cher
coach outlet
abercrombie & fitch
louis vuitton outlet
lebron james shoes 2015
ralph lauren outlet
jordans
swarovski jewelry
canada goose jackets
michael kors
oakley sunglasses
michaek kors handbags
ugg boots
cheap soccer shoes
hollister clothing
louis vuitton
michael kors outlet
p90x workouts
ugg boots clearance
air max 95
March 14, 2016 at 2:00 AM
If there is one topic that gets people in the sports nutrition arena hot under the collar, is the age old " vegetarian versus meat eater" debate. In particu- lar, the debate is focused on whether or not vegetarian diets are adequate and equivalent to diets that include meat when it comes to adding muscle mass. Outlining the entire debate of both sides of the fence is beyond the scope of this discussion. I am going to stick to the debate regarding how a veg- gie diet vs. a meat-containing diet in uences muscle mass, rather than the larger picture of whether or not vegetarian diets are inherently healthier than diets that contain meat and vice versa.
In a nutshell, strict vegetarians (vegans) maintain that meat is not essential
for building muscle and a diet that mixes complimentary foods such as
beans and rice is adequate.
Lacto-ovo vegetarians ( vegetarians that include milk products and eggs)
further maintain that the inclusion of milk and eggs, as highly bioavailable
complete proteins, is more than adequate for athletes trying to build mus-
cle and maintain peak performance.
Omnivores (omnivore meaning people who eat a wide variety of foods in-
cluding meat) argue that meats such as chicken, beef and others are by
nature more anabolic for a variety of reasons.
So who's right?
This debate has not been adequately looked at in the research but we do
have some data that supports the omnivore's position. For example, sev-
eral studies have found that meat-containing diets are superior for testos-
terone production than strict vegetarian diets.
As most people know, testosterone is an essential hormone for increasing
and maintaining muscle mass while keeping body fat low. It's also essential
for libido and mood in both sexes, but particularly important for men.
One study called,"E ects of an omnivorous diet compared with a lacto-ovo
vegetarian diet on resistance-training-induced changes in body composi-
tion and skeletal muscle in older men” looked directly at this debate.
The researchers wanted to nd out if an omnivorous (meat-containing)
diet was superior to a lacto-ovo vegetarian diet on the retention of muscle
mass of older men put on a weight training routine.
Nineteen men aged 51 - 69 years old were enrolled in the study that ran
12 weeks. Nine men ate their normal meat containing (omnivorous) diet,
providing 50 percent of total dietary protein from meat sources such as
pork, chicken, sh and beef. Another 10 men followed a lacto-ovo type
vegetarian diet for the duration of the study, with both groups following a
weight training schedule.
Although the strength increases between groups were roughly the same,
the study found that the whole-body changes in skeletal muscle size dif-
fered signi cantly between groups. Whole-body muscle mass increased in
the omnivorous group, while it actually decreased in the lacto-ovo group.
Apparently, the meat eaters gained muscle over the 12 weeks while the
lacto-ovo eaters lost muscle mass. Ouch!
The authors concluded:
“...consumption of a meat-containing diet contributed to greater gains in fat-
free mass and skeletal muscle mass with resistance training in older men than
did an a lacto-ovo diet.”
Is this a slam dunk against the vegetarian diet as it relates to the claim that
it is just as good as a meat-containing diet for increasing muscle mass? No,
but it does lend some support to the idea that omnivorous diets have an
edge for producing optimal levels of anabolic (muscle building) hormones
and increases in muscle mass. More research is clearly needed to con rm
this, however.
There is still some debate over which of the two diets is healthier, however,
and that has to be factored into peoples’ choices as to which diet is best
suited for them.
One area in which vegetarian diets are de cient vs. omnivorous diets is
in muscle creatine stores. In the absence of supplementation, vegetar-
ians have been found to have lower total muscle creatine - which could
limit lean mass gains in response to training. The good news is that a re-
cent study con rmed that vegetarians on a resistance training program
responded well to creatine supplementation: their relative gains in work
performance, total creatine/phosphocreatine levels, and lean tissue mass
were even greater than the response for omnivores taking creatine, due to
lower starting creatine levels. The researchers concluded:
“...subjects with initially low levels of intramuscular Cr ( vegetarians) are more
responsive to supplementation.”
Other areas of concern for vegetarians are: iron status (the iron in plant
foods is less bioavailable than the iron in animal foods), zinc, vitamin B12
(cyanocobalamin), vitamin D (cholecalciferol) and calcium. The very high
ber intake associated with vegetarian diets may also, ironically, limit the
number of calories a vegetarian athlete can consume. This is the basis for
the Ornish Diet, which recommends a vegetarian or near- vegetarian diet
for weight loss, on the grounds that eating high ber plant foods automati-
cally limits calorie intake.
The take-home lesson is that vegetarians wanting to increase lean body
mass should make sure that important nutrients normally supplied by
meat and other animal protein sources are included using a combination
of appropriate foods and supplements.
It is not impossible to gain a signi cant amount of lean body mass on a
vegetarian diet: legendary bodybuilder Bill Pearl is perhaps the best known
example. Truth be known though, my bet would be in favor of the omnivo-
rous diet if optimal muscle mass is the goal.
ugg slippers
timberland boots
toms shoes
coach outlet
jordan concords
michael kors outlet
michael kors handbags
ugg boots
longchamp bags
toms
true religion jeans
true religion outlet
louis vuitton outlet
vans shoes
louis vuitton outlet
canada goose
kate spade
louis vuitton handbags
kobe shoes 11
louboutin pas cher
louis vuitton
giuseppe zanotti sneakers
coach outlet
kobe bryant shoes
michael kors uk
nike sb shoes
toms shoes
rolex submariner
louis vuitton outlet
mont blanc pens
hollister clothing
hollister clothing store
asics shoes
abercrombie & fitch
louis vuitton handbags
timberland boots
2016314yuanyuan
May 8, 2016 at 5:45 PM
If there is one topic that gets people in the sports nutrition arena hot under the collar, is the age old " vegetarian versus meat eater" debate. In particu- lar, the debate is focused on whether or not vegetarian diets are adequate and equivalent to diets that include meat when it comes to adding muscle mass. Outlining the entire debate of both sides of the fence is beyond the scope of this discussion. I am going to stick to the debate regarding how a veg- gie diet vs. a meat-containing diet in uences muscle mass, rather than the larger picture of whether or not vegetarian diets are inherently healthier than diets that contain meat and vice versa.
In a nutshell, strict vegetarians (vegans) maintain that meat is not essential
for building muscle and a diet that mixes complimentary foods such as
beans and rice is adequate.
Lacto-ovo vegetarians ( vegetarians that include milk products and eggs)
further maintain that the inclusion of milk and eggs, as highly bioavailable
complete proteins, is more than adequate for athletes trying to build mus-
cle and maintain peak performance.
Omnivores (omnivore meaning people who eat a wide variety of foods in-
cluding meat) argue that meats such as chicken, beef and others are by
nature more anabolic for a variety of reasons.
So who's right?
This debate has not been adequately looked at in the research but we do
have some data that supports the omnivore's position. For example, sev-
eral studies have found that meat-containing diets are superior for testos-
terone production than strict vegetarian diets.
As most people know, testosterone is an essential hormone for increasing
and maintaining muscle mass while keeping body fat low. It's also essential
for libido and mood in both sexes, but particularly important for men.
One study called,"E ects of an omnivorous diet compared with a lacto-ovo
vegetarian diet on resistance-training-induced changes in body composi-
tion and skeletal muscle in older men” looked directly at this debate.
The researchers wanted to nd out if an omnivorous (meat-containing)
diet was superior to a lacto-ovo vegetarian diet on the retention of muscle
mass of older men put on a weight training routine.
Nineteen men aged 51 - 69 years old were enrolled in the study that ran
12 weeks. Nine men ate their normal meat containing (omnivorous) diet,
providing 50 percent of total dietary protein from meat sources such as
pork, chicken, sh and beef. Another 10 men followed a lacto-ovo type
vegetarian diet for the duration of the study, with both groups following a
weight training schedule.
Although the strength increases between groups were roughly the same,
the study found that the whole-body changes in skeletal muscle size dif-
fered signi cantly between groups. Whole-body muscle mass increased in
the omnivorous group, while it actually decreased in the lacto-ovo group.
Apparently, the meat eaters gained muscle over the 12 weeks while the
lacto-ovo eaters lost muscle mass. Ouch!
The authors concluded:
“...consumption of a meat-containing diet contributed to greater gains in fat-
free mass and skeletal muscle mass with resistance training in older men than
did an a lacto-ovo diet.”
Is this a slam dunk against the vegetarian diet as it relates to the claim that
it is just as good as a meat-containing diet for increasing muscle mass? No,
but it does lend some support to the idea that omnivorous diets have an
edge for producing optimal levels of anabolic (muscle building) hormones
and increases in muscle mass. More research is clearly needed to con rm
this, however.
There is still some debate over which of the two diets is healthier, however,
and that has to be factored into peoples’ choices as to which diet is best
suited for them.
One area in which vegetarian diets are de cient vs. omnivorous diets is
in muscle creatine stores. In the absence of supplementation, vegetar-
ians have been found to have lower total muscle creatine - which could
limit lean mass gains in response to training. The good news is that a re-
cent study con rmed that vegetarians on a resistance training program
responded well to creatine supplementation: their relative gains in work
performance, total creatine/phosphocreatine levels, and lean tissue mass
were even greater than the response for omnivores taking creatine, due to
lower starting creatine levels. The researchers concluded:
“...subjects with initially low levels of intramuscular Cr ( vegetarians) are more
responsive to supplementation.”
Other areas of concern for vegetarians are: iron status (the iron in plant
foods is less bioavailable than the iron in animal foods), zinc, vitamin B12
(cyanocobalamin), vitamin D (cholecalciferol) and calcium. The very high
ber intake associated with vegetarian diets may also, ironically, limit the
number of calories a vegetarian athlete can consume. This is the basis for
the Ornish Diet, which recommends a vegetarian or near- vegetarian diet
for weight loss, on the grounds that eating high ber plant foods automati-
cally limits calorie intake.
The take-home lesson is that vegetarians wanting to increase lean body
mass should make sure that important nutrients normally supplied by
meat and other animal protein sources are included using a combination
of appropriate foods and supplements.
It is not impossible to gain a signi cant amount of lean body mass on a
vegetarian diet: legendary bodybuilder Bill Pearl is perhaps the best known
example. Truth be known though, my bet would be in favor of the omnivo-
rous diet if optimal muscle mass is the goal.
coach outlet store
coach sale
michael kors handbags
2015 michael kors outlet
michael kors jet set tote
michael kors tote
michael kors uk
macys michael kors
kobe 9
kobe shoes
nike air max 1
nike air max 2015
nike free 5.0
nike free 5.0 womens
christian louboutin boots
louboutin outlet
mbt canada
mbt shoes outlet
fitflops sale
fitflop sandals
Nike Huarache Nm
Huaraches Nike
christian louboutin 2016
christian louboutin sale
cheap jordans for sale
jordan 13
Jordan 11 Concord
jordan 11
June 10, 2016 at 6:50 PM
If there is one topic that gets people in the sports nutrition arena hot under the collar, is the age old " vegetarian versus meat eater" debate. In particu- lar, the debate is focused on whether or not vegetarian diets are adequate and equivalent to diets that include meat when it comes to adding muscle mass. Outlining the entire debate of both sides of the fence is beyond the scope of this discussion. I am going to stick to the debate regarding how a veg- gie diet vs. a meat-containing diet in uences muscle mass, rather than the larger picture of whether or not vegetarian diets are inherently healthier than diets that contain meat and vice versa.
In a nutshell, strict vegetarians (vegans) maintain that meat is not essential
for building muscle and a diet that mixes complimentary foods such as
beans and rice is adequate.
Lacto-ovo vegetarians ( vegetarians that include milk products and eggs)
further maintain that the inclusion of milk and eggs, as highly bioavailable
complete proteins, is more than adequate for athletes trying to build mus-
cle and maintain peak performance.
Omnivores (omnivore meaning people who eat a wide variety of foods in-
cluding meat) argue that meats such as chicken, beef and others are by
nature more anabolic for a variety of reasons.
So who's right?
This debate has not been adequately looked at in the research but we do
have some data that supports the omnivore's position. For example, sev-
eral studies have found that meat-containing diets are superior for testos-
terone production than strict vegetarian diets.
As most people know, testosterone is an essential hormone for increasing
and maintaining muscle mass while keeping body fat low. It's also essential
for libido and mood in both sexes, but particularly important for men.
One study called,"E ects of an omnivorous diet compared with a lacto-ovo
vegetarian diet on resistance-training-induced changes in body composi-
tion and skeletal muscle in older men” looked directly at this debate.
The researchers wanted to nd out if an omnivorous (meat-containing)
diet was superior to a lacto-ovo vegetarian diet on the retention of muscle
mass of older men put on a weight training routine.
Nineteen men aged 51 - 69 years old were enrolled in the study that ran
12 weeks. Nine men ate their normal meat containing (omnivorous) diet,
providing 50 percent of total dietary protein from meat sources such as
pork, chicken, sh and beef. Another 10 men followed a lacto-ovo type
vegetarian diet for the duration of the study, with both groups following a
weight training schedule.
Although the strength increases between groups were roughly the same,
the study found that the whole-body changes in skeletal muscle size dif-
fered signi cantly between groups. Whole-body muscle mass increased in
the omnivorous group, while it actually decreased in the lacto-ovo group.
Apparently, the meat eaters gained muscle over the 12 weeks while the
lacto-ovo eaters lost muscle mass. Ouch!
The authors concluded:
“...consumption of a meat-containing diet contributed to greater gains in fat-
free mass and skeletal muscle mass with resistance training in older men than
did an a lacto-ovo diet.”
Is this a slam dunk against the vegetarian diet as it relates to the claim that
it is just as good as a meat-containing diet for increasing muscle mass? No,
but it does lend some support to the idea that omnivorous diets have an
edge for producing optimal levels of anabolic (muscle building) hormones
and increases in muscle mass. More research is clearly needed to con rm
this, however.
There is still some debate over which of the two diets is healthier, however,
and that has to be factored into peoples’ choices as to which diet is best
suited for them.
One area in which vegetarian diets are de cient vs. omnivorous diets is
in muscle creatine stores. In the absence of supplementation, vegetar-
ians have been found to have lower total muscle creatine - which could
limit lean mass gains in response to training. The good news is that a re-
cent study con rmed that vegetarians on a resistance training program
responded well to creatine supplementation: their relative gains in work
performance, total creatine/phosphocreatine levels, and lean tissue mass
were even greater than the response for omnivores taking creatine, due to
lower starting creatine levels. The researchers concluded:
“...subjects with initially low levels of intramuscular Cr ( vegetarians) are more
responsive to supplementation.”
Other areas of concern for vegetarians are: iron status (the iron in plant
foods is less bioavailable than the iron in animal foods), zinc, vitamin B12
(cyanocobalamin), vitamin D (cholecalciferol) and calcium. The very high
ber intake associated with vegetarian diets may also, ironically, limit the
number of calories a vegetarian athlete can consume. This is the basis for
the Ornish Diet, which recommends a vegetarian or near- vegetarian diet
for weight loss, on the grounds that eating high ber plant foods automati-
cally limits calorie intake.
The take-home lesson is that vegetarians wanting to increase lean body
mass should make sure that important nutrients normally supplied by
meat and other animal protein sources are included using a combination
of appropriate foods and supplements.
It is not impossible to gain a signi cant amount of lean body mass on a
vegetarian diet: legendary bodybuilder Bill Pearl is perhaps the best known
example. Truth be known though, my bet would be in favor of the omnivo-
rous diet if optimal muscle mass is the goal.
2016-06-11keyun
coach factory outlet online
cheap air jordans
fitflop clearance
hollister clothing store
jordan 3 powder blue
toms wedges
toms outlet
louis vuitton outlet stores
michael kors outlet
hollister shirts
michael kors handbags
michael kors outlet clearance
michael kors outlet
louis vuitton handbags
ray ban outlet
lebron 11
oakley outlet
louis vuitton purses
louis vuitton outlet
pandora charms
michael kors purses
air jordan 8
michael kors outlet online
nike air max 90
air max 95
louis vuitton purses
timberland boots
coach outlet
reb christian louboutin
oakley sunglasses wholesale
celine outlet
supra shoes
ralph lauren outlet
coach factory outlet
christian louboutin sale
polo ralph lauren
ghd hair straighteners
louis vuitton handbags
michael kors outlet
October 19, 2016 at 3:16 AM
If there is one topic that gets people in the sports nutrition arena hot under the collar, is the age old " vegetarian versus meat eater" debate. In particu- lar, the debate is focused on whether or not vegetarian diets are adequate and equivalent to diets that include meat when it comes to adding muscle mass. Outlining the entire debate of both sides of the fence is beyond the scope of this discussion. I am going to stick to the debate regarding how a veg- gie diet vs. a meat-containing diet in uences muscle mass, rather than the larger picture of whether or not vegetarian diets are inherently healthier than diets that contain meat and vice versa.
In a nutshell, strict vegetarians (vegans) maintain that meat is not essential
for building muscle and a diet that mixes complimentary foods such as
beans and rice is adequate.
Lacto-ovo vegetarians ( vegetarians that include milk products and eggs)
further maintain that the inclusion of milk and eggs, as highly bioavailable
complete proteins, is more than adequate for athletes trying to build mus-
cle and maintain peak performance.
Omnivores (omnivore meaning people who eat a wide variety of foods in-
cluding meat) argue that meats such as chicken, beef and others are by
nature more anabolic for a variety of reasons.
So who's right?
This debate has not been adequately looked at in the research but we do
have some data that supports the omnivore's position. For example, sev-
eral studies have found that meat-containing diets are superior for testos-
terone production than strict vegetarian diets.
As most people know, testosterone is an essential hormone for increasing
and maintaining muscle mass while keeping body fat low. It's also essential
for libido and mood in both sexes, but particularly important for men.
One study called,"E ects of an omnivorous diet compared with a lacto-ovo
vegetarian diet on resistance-training-induced changes in body composi-
tion and skeletal muscle in older men” looked directly at this debate.
The researchers wanted to nd out if an omnivorous (meat-containing)
diet was superior to a lacto-ovo vegetarian diet on the retention of muscle
mass of older men put on a weight training routine.
Nineteen men aged 51 - 69 years old were enrolled in the study that ran
12 weeks. Nine men ate their normal meat containing (omnivorous) diet,
providing 50 percent of total dietary protein from meat sources such as
pork, chicken, sh and beef. Another 10 men followed a lacto-ovo type
vegetarian diet for the duration of the study, with both groups following a
weight training schedule.
Although the strength increases between groups were roughly the same,
the study found that the whole-body changes in skeletal muscle size dif-
fered signi cantly between groups. Whole-body muscle mass increased in
the omnivorous group, while it actually decreased in the lacto-ovo group.
Apparently, the meat eaters gained muscle over the 12 weeks while the
lacto-ovo eaters lost muscle mass. Ouch!
The authors concluded:
“...consumption of a meat-containing diet contributed to greater gains in fat-
free mass and skeletal muscle mass with resistance training in older men than
did an a lacto-ovo diet.”
Is this a slam dunk against the vegetarian diet as it relates to the claim that
it is just as good as a meat-containing diet for increasing muscle mass? No,
but it does lend some support to the idea that omnivorous diets have an
edge for producing optimal levels of anabolic (muscle building) hormones
and increases in muscle mass. More research is clearly needed to con rm
this, however.
There is still some debate over which of the two diets is healthier, however,
and that has to be factored into peoples’ choices as to which diet is best
suited for them.
One area in which vegetarian diets are de cient vs. omnivorous diets is
in muscle creatine stores. In the absence of supplementation, vegetar-
ians have been found to have lower total muscle creatine - which could
limit lean mass gains in response to training. The good news is that a re-
cent study con rmed that vegetarians on a resistance training program
responded well to creatine supplementation: their relative gains in work
performance, total creatine/phosphocreatine levels, and lean tissue mass
were even greater than the response for omnivores taking creatine, due to
lower starting creatine levels. The researchers concluded:
“...subjects with initially low levels of intramuscular Cr ( vegetarians) are more
responsive to supplementation.”
Other areas of concern for vegetarians are: iron status (the iron in plant
foods is less bioavailable than the iron in animal foods), zinc, vitamin B12
(cyanocobalamin), vitamin D (cholecalciferol) and calcium. The very high
ber intake associated with vegetarian diets may also, ironically, limit the
number of calories a vegetarian athlete can consume. This is the basis for
the Ornish Diet, which recommends a vegetarian or near- vegetarian diet
for weight loss, on the grounds that eating high ber plant foods automati-
cally limits calorie intake.
The take-home lesson is that vegetarians wanting to increase lean body
mass should make sure that important nutrients normally supplied by
meat and other animal protein sources are included using a combination
of appropriate foods and supplements.
It is not impossible to gain a signi cant amount of lean body mass on a
vegetarian diet: legendary bodybuilder Bill Pearl is perhaps the best known
example. Truth be known though, my bet would be in favor of the omnivo-
rous diet if optimal muscle mass is the goal.
It's the little changes that make the most significant changes
http://www.prokr.net/2016/09/furniture-transfer-companies-45_13.html
http://www.prokr.net/2016/09/furniture-transfer-companies-45.html
http://www.prokr.net/2016/09/furniture-transfer-companies-44.html
http://www.prokr.net/2016/09/furniture-transfer-companies-43.html
February 6, 2017 at 2:42 PM
If there is one topic that gets people in the sports nutrition arena hot under the collar, is the age old " vegetarian versus meat eater" debate. In particu- lar, the debate is focused on whether or not vegetarian diets are adequate and equivalent to diets that include meat when it comes to adding muscle mass. Outlining the entire debate of both sides of the fence is beyond the scope of this discussion. I am going to stick to the debate regarding how a veg- gie diet vs. a meat-containing diet in uences muscle mass, rather than the larger picture of whether or not vegetarian diets are inherently healthier than diets that contain meat and vice versa.
In a nutshell, strict vegetarians (vegans) maintain that meat is not essential
for building muscle and a diet that mixes complimentary foods such as
beans and rice is adequate.
Lacto-ovo vegetarians ( vegetarians that include milk products and eggs)
further maintain that the inclusion of milk and eggs, as highly bioavailable
complete proteins, is more than adequate for athletes trying to build mus-
cle and maintain peak performance.
Omnivores (omnivore meaning people who eat a wide variety of foods in-
cluding meat) argue that meats such as chicken, beef and others are by
nature more anabolic for a variety of reasons.
So who's right?
This debate has not been adequately looked at in the research but we do
have some data that supports the omnivore's position. For example, sev-
eral studies have found that meat-containing diets are superior for testos-
terone production than strict vegetarian diets.
As most people know, testosterone is an essential hormone for increasing
and maintaining muscle mass while keeping body fat low. It's also essential
for libido and mood in both sexes, but particularly important for men.
One study called,"E ects of an omnivorous diet compared with a lacto-ovo
vegetarian diet on resistance-training-induced changes in body composi-
tion and skeletal muscle in older men” looked directly at this debate.
The researchers wanted to nd out if an omnivorous (meat-containing)
diet was superior to a lacto-ovo vegetarian diet on the retention of muscle
mass of older men put on a weight training routine.
Nineteen men aged 51 - 69 years old were enrolled in the study that ran
12 weeks. Nine men ate their normal meat containing (omnivorous) diet,
providing 50 percent of total dietary protein from meat sources such as
pork, chicken, sh and beef. Another 10 men followed a lacto-ovo type
vegetarian diet for the duration of the study, with both groups following a
weight training schedule.
Although the strength increases between groups were roughly the same,
the study found that the whole-body changes in skeletal muscle size dif-
fered signi cantly between groups. Whole-body muscle mass increased in
the omnivorous group, while it actually decreased in the lacto-ovo group.
Apparently, the meat eaters gained muscle over the 12 weeks while the
lacto-ovo eaters lost muscle mass. Ouch!
The authors concluded:
“...consumption of a meat-containing diet contributed to greater gains in fat-
free mass and skeletal muscle mass with resistance training in older men than
did an a lacto-ovo diet.”
Is this a slam dunk against the vegetarian diet as it relates to the claim that
it is just as good as a meat-containing diet for increasing muscle mass? No,
but it does lend some support to the idea that omnivorous diets have an
edge for producing optimal levels of anabolic (muscle building) hormones
and increases in muscle mass. More research is clearly needed to con rm
this, however.
There is still some debate over which of the two diets is healthier, however,
and that has to be factored into peoples’ choices as to which diet is best
suited for them.
One area in which vegetarian diets are de cient vs. omnivorous diets is
in muscle creatine stores. In the absence of supplementation, vegetar-
ians have been found to have lower total muscle creatine - which could
limit lean mass gains in response to training. The good news is that a re-
cent study con rmed that vegetarians on a resistance training program
responded well to creatine supplementation: their relative gains in work
performance, total creatine/phosphocreatine levels, and lean tissue mass
were even greater than the response for omnivores taking creatine, due to
lower starting creatine levels. The researchers concluded:
“...subjects with initially low levels of intramuscular Cr ( vegetarians) are more
responsive to supplementation.”
Other areas of concern for vegetarians are: iron status (the iron in plant
foods is less bioavailable than the iron in animal foods), zinc, vitamin B12
(cyanocobalamin), vitamin D (cholecalciferol) and calcium. The very high
ber intake associated with vegetarian diets may also, ironically, limit the
number of calories a vegetarian athlete can consume. This is the basis for
the Ornish Diet, which recommends a vegetarian or near- vegetarian diet
for weight loss, on the grounds that eating high ber plant foods automati-
cally limits calorie intake.
The take-home lesson is that vegetarians wanting to increase lean body
mass should make sure that important nutrients normally supplied by
meat and other animal protein sources are included using a combination
of appropriate foods and supplements.
It is not impossible to gain a signi cant amount of lean body mass on a
vegetarian diet: legendary bodybuilder Bill Pearl is perhaps the best known
example. Truth be known though, my bet would be in favor of the omnivo-
rous diet if optimal muscle mass is the goal.
Lucky me I came across your website by chance
http://www.prokr.net/2016/09/water-leaks-detection-isolate-company-qassim.html
http://www.prokr.net/2016/09/water-leaks-detection-isolate-company-qassim.html
April 30, 2022 at 9:40 AM
If there is one topic that gets people in the sports nutrition arena hot under the collar, is the age old " vegetarian versus meat eater" debate. In particu- lar, the debate is focused on whether or not vegetarian diets are adequate and equivalent to diets that include meat when it comes to adding muscle mass. Outlining the entire debate of both sides of the fence is beyond the scope of this discussion. I am going to stick to the debate regarding how a veg- gie diet vs. a meat-containing diet in uences muscle mass, rather than the larger picture of whether or not vegetarian diets are inherently healthier than diets that contain meat and vice versa.
In a nutshell, strict vegetarians (vegans) maintain that meat is not essential
for building muscle and a diet that mixes complimentary foods such as
beans and rice is adequate.
Lacto-ovo vegetarians ( vegetarians that include milk products and eggs)
further maintain that the inclusion of milk and eggs, as highly bioavailable
complete proteins, is more than adequate for athletes trying to build mus-
cle and maintain peak performance.
Omnivores (omnivore meaning people who eat a wide variety of foods in-
cluding meat) argue that meats such as chicken, beef and others are by
nature more anabolic for a variety of reasons.
So who's right?
This debate has not been adequately looked at in the research but we do
have some data that supports the omnivore's position. For example, sev-
eral studies have found that meat-containing diets are superior for testos-
terone production than strict vegetarian diets.
As most people know, testosterone is an essential hormone for increasing
and maintaining muscle mass while keeping body fat low. It's also essential
for libido and mood in both sexes, but particularly important for men.
One study called,"E ects of an omnivorous diet compared with a lacto-ovo
vegetarian diet on resistance-training-induced changes in body composi-
tion and skeletal muscle in older men” looked directly at this debate.
The researchers wanted to nd out if an omnivorous (meat-containing)
diet was superior to a lacto-ovo vegetarian diet on the retention of muscle
mass of older men put on a weight training routine.
Nineteen men aged 51 - 69 years old were enrolled in the study that ran
12 weeks. Nine men ate their normal meat containing (omnivorous) diet,
providing 50 percent of total dietary protein from meat sources such as
pork, chicken, sh and beef. Another 10 men followed a lacto-ovo type
vegetarian diet for the duration of the study, with both groups following a
weight training schedule.
Although the strength increases between groups were roughly the same,
the study found that the whole-body changes in skeletal muscle size dif-
fered signi cantly between groups. Whole-body muscle mass increased in
the omnivorous group, while it actually decreased in the lacto-ovo group.
Apparently, the meat eaters gained muscle over the 12 weeks while the
lacto-ovo eaters lost muscle mass. Ouch!
The authors concluded:
“...consumption of a meat-containing diet contributed to greater gains in fat-
free mass and skeletal muscle mass with resistance training in older men than
did an a lacto-ovo diet.”
Is this a slam dunk against the vegetarian diet as it relates to the claim that
it is just as good as a meat-containing diet for increasing muscle mass? No,
but it does lend some support to the idea that omnivorous diets have an
edge for producing optimal levels of anabolic (muscle building) hormones
and increases in muscle mass. More research is clearly needed to con rm
this, however.
There is still some debate over which of the two diets is healthier, however,
and that has to be factored into peoples’ choices as to which diet is best
suited for them.
One area in which vegetarian diets are de cient vs. omnivorous diets is
in muscle creatine stores. In the absence of supplementation, vegetar-
ians have been found to have lower total muscle creatine - which could
limit lean mass gains in response to training. The good news is that a re-
cent study con rmed that vegetarians on a resistance training program
responded well to creatine supplementation: their relative gains in work
performance, total creatine/phosphocreatine levels, and lean tissue mass
were even greater than the response for omnivores taking creatine, due to
lower starting creatine levels. The researchers concluded:
“...subjects with initially low levels of intramuscular Cr ( vegetarians) are more
responsive to supplementation.”
Other areas of concern for vegetarians are: iron status (the iron in plant
foods is less bioavailable than the iron in animal foods), zinc, vitamin B12
(cyanocobalamin), vitamin D (cholecalciferol) and calcium. The very high
ber intake associated with vegetarian diets may also, ironically, limit the
number of calories a vegetarian athlete can consume. This is the basis for
the Ornish Diet, which recommends a vegetarian or near- vegetarian diet
for weight loss, on the grounds that eating high ber plant foods automati-
cally limits calorie intake.
The take-home lesson is that vegetarians wanting to increase lean body
mass should make sure that important nutrients normally supplied by
meat and other animal protein sources are included using a combination
of appropriate foods and supplements.
It is not impossible to gain a signi cant amount of lean body mass on a
vegetarian diet: legendary bodybuilder Bill Pearl is perhaps the best known
example. Truth be known though, my bet would be in favor of the omnivo-
rous diet if optimal muscle mass is the goal.
mmorpg oyunlar
instagram takipçi satın al
tiktok jeton hilesi
TİKTOK JETON HİLESİ
Antalya Sac Ekimi
referans kimliği nedir
İnstagram Takipçi Satın Al
Metin2 Pvp Serverlar
takipci
December 25, 2022 at 6:51 PM
If there is one topic that gets people in the sports nutrition arena hot under the collar, is the age old " vegetarian versus meat eater" debate. In particu- lar, the debate is focused on whether or not vegetarian diets are adequate and equivalent to diets that include meat when it comes to adding muscle mass. Outlining the entire debate of both sides of the fence is beyond the scope of this discussion. I am going to stick to the debate regarding how a veg- gie diet vs. a meat-containing diet in uences muscle mass, rather than the larger picture of whether or not vegetarian diets are inherently healthier than diets that contain meat and vice versa.
In a nutshell, strict vegetarians (vegans) maintain that meat is not essential
for building muscle and a diet that mixes complimentary foods such as
beans and rice is adequate.
Lacto-ovo vegetarians ( vegetarians that include milk products and eggs)
further maintain that the inclusion of milk and eggs, as highly bioavailable
complete proteins, is more than adequate for athletes trying to build mus-
cle and maintain peak performance.
Omnivores (omnivore meaning people who eat a wide variety of foods in-
cluding meat) argue that meats such as chicken, beef and others are by
nature more anabolic for a variety of reasons.
So who's right?
This debate has not been adequately looked at in the research but we do
have some data that supports the omnivore's position. For example, sev-
eral studies have found that meat-containing diets are superior for testos-
terone production than strict vegetarian diets.
As most people know, testosterone is an essential hormone for increasing
and maintaining muscle mass while keeping body fat low. It's also essential
for libido and mood in both sexes, but particularly important for men.
One study called,"E ects of an omnivorous diet compared with a lacto-ovo
vegetarian diet on resistance-training-induced changes in body composi-
tion and skeletal muscle in older men” looked directly at this debate.
The researchers wanted to nd out if an omnivorous (meat-containing)
diet was superior to a lacto-ovo vegetarian diet on the retention of muscle
mass of older men put on a weight training routine.
Nineteen men aged 51 - 69 years old were enrolled in the study that ran
12 weeks. Nine men ate their normal meat containing (omnivorous) diet,
providing 50 percent of total dietary protein from meat sources such as
pork, chicken, sh and beef. Another 10 men followed a lacto-ovo type
vegetarian diet for the duration of the study, with both groups following a
weight training schedule.
Although the strength increases between groups were roughly the same,
the study found that the whole-body changes in skeletal muscle size dif-
fered signi cantly between groups. Whole-body muscle mass increased in
the omnivorous group, while it actually decreased in the lacto-ovo group.
Apparently, the meat eaters gained muscle over the 12 weeks while the
lacto-ovo eaters lost muscle mass. Ouch!
The authors concluded:
“...consumption of a meat-containing diet contributed to greater gains in fat-
free mass and skeletal muscle mass with resistance training in older men than
did an a lacto-ovo diet.”
Is this a slam dunk against the vegetarian diet as it relates to the claim that
it is just as good as a meat-containing diet for increasing muscle mass? No,
but it does lend some support to the idea that omnivorous diets have an
edge for producing optimal levels of anabolic (muscle building) hormones
and increases in muscle mass. More research is clearly needed to con rm
this, however.
There is still some debate over which of the two diets is healthier, however,
and that has to be factored into peoples’ choices as to which diet is best
suited for them.
One area in which vegetarian diets are de cient vs. omnivorous diets is
in muscle creatine stores. In the absence of supplementation, vegetar-
ians have been found to have lower total muscle creatine - which could
limit lean mass gains in response to training. The good news is that a re-
cent study con rmed that vegetarians on a resistance training program
responded well to creatine supplementation: their relative gains in work
performance, total creatine/phosphocreatine levels, and lean tissue mass
were even greater than the response for omnivores taking creatine, due to
lower starting creatine levels. The researchers concluded:
“...subjects with initially low levels of intramuscular Cr ( vegetarians) are more
responsive to supplementation.”
Other areas of concern for vegetarians are: iron status (the iron in plant
foods is less bioavailable than the iron in animal foods), zinc, vitamin B12
(cyanocobalamin), vitamin D (cholecalciferol) and calcium. The very high
ber intake associated with vegetarian diets may also, ironically, limit the
number of calories a vegetarian athlete can consume. This is the basis for
the Ornish Diet, which recommends a vegetarian or near- vegetarian diet
for weight loss, on the grounds that eating high ber plant foods automati-
cally limits calorie intake.
The take-home lesson is that vegetarians wanting to increase lean body
mass should make sure that important nutrients normally supplied by
meat and other animal protein sources are included using a combination
of appropriate foods and supplements.
It is not impossible to gain a signi cant amount of lean body mass on a
vegetarian diet: legendary bodybuilder Bill Pearl is perhaps the best known
example. Truth be known though, my bet would be in favor of the omnivo-
rous diet if optimal muscle mass is the goal.
Success Write content success. Thanks.
canlı slot siteleri
betmatik
kralbet
betpark
betturkey
deneme bonusu
canlı poker siteleri
December 26, 2022 at 12:05 PM
If there is one topic that gets people in the sports nutrition arena hot under the collar, is the age old " vegetarian versus meat eater" debate. In particu- lar, the debate is focused on whether or not vegetarian diets are adequate and equivalent to diets that include meat when it comes to adding muscle mass. Outlining the entire debate of both sides of the fence is beyond the scope of this discussion. I am going to stick to the debate regarding how a veg- gie diet vs. a meat-containing diet in uences muscle mass, rather than the larger picture of whether or not vegetarian diets are inherently healthier than diets that contain meat and vice versa.
In a nutshell, strict vegetarians (vegans) maintain that meat is not essential
for building muscle and a diet that mixes complimentary foods such as
beans and rice is adequate.
Lacto-ovo vegetarians ( vegetarians that include milk products and eggs)
further maintain that the inclusion of milk and eggs, as highly bioavailable
complete proteins, is more than adequate for athletes trying to build mus-
cle and maintain peak performance.
Omnivores (omnivore meaning people who eat a wide variety of foods in-
cluding meat) argue that meats such as chicken, beef and others are by
nature more anabolic for a variety of reasons.
So who's right?
This debate has not been adequately looked at in the research but we do
have some data that supports the omnivore's position. For example, sev-
eral studies have found that meat-containing diets are superior for testos-
terone production than strict vegetarian diets.
As most people know, testosterone is an essential hormone for increasing
and maintaining muscle mass while keeping body fat low. It's also essential
for libido and mood in both sexes, but particularly important for men.
One study called,"E ects of an omnivorous diet compared with a lacto-ovo
vegetarian diet on resistance-training-induced changes in body composi-
tion and skeletal muscle in older men” looked directly at this debate.
The researchers wanted to nd out if an omnivorous (meat-containing)
diet was superior to a lacto-ovo vegetarian diet on the retention of muscle
mass of older men put on a weight training routine.
Nineteen men aged 51 - 69 years old were enrolled in the study that ran
12 weeks. Nine men ate their normal meat containing (omnivorous) diet,
providing 50 percent of total dietary protein from meat sources such as
pork, chicken, sh and beef. Another 10 men followed a lacto-ovo type
vegetarian diet for the duration of the study, with both groups following a
weight training schedule.
Although the strength increases between groups were roughly the same,
the study found that the whole-body changes in skeletal muscle size dif-
fered signi cantly between groups. Whole-body muscle mass increased in
the omnivorous group, while it actually decreased in the lacto-ovo group.
Apparently, the meat eaters gained muscle over the 12 weeks while the
lacto-ovo eaters lost muscle mass. Ouch!
The authors concluded:
“...consumption of a meat-containing diet contributed to greater gains in fat-
free mass and skeletal muscle mass with resistance training in older men than
did an a lacto-ovo diet.”
Is this a slam dunk against the vegetarian diet as it relates to the claim that
it is just as good as a meat-containing diet for increasing muscle mass? No,
but it does lend some support to the idea that omnivorous diets have an
edge for producing optimal levels of anabolic (muscle building) hormones
and increases in muscle mass. More research is clearly needed to con rm
this, however.
There is still some debate over which of the two diets is healthier, however,
and that has to be factored into peoples’ choices as to which diet is best
suited for them.
One area in which vegetarian diets are de cient vs. omnivorous diets is
in muscle creatine stores. In the absence of supplementation, vegetar-
ians have been found to have lower total muscle creatine - which could
limit lean mass gains in response to training. The good news is that a re-
cent study con rmed that vegetarians on a resistance training program
responded well to creatine supplementation: their relative gains in work
performance, total creatine/phosphocreatine levels, and lean tissue mass
were even greater than the response for omnivores taking creatine, due to
lower starting creatine levels. The researchers concluded:
“...subjects with initially low levels of intramuscular Cr ( vegetarians) are more
responsive to supplementation.”
Other areas of concern for vegetarians are: iron status (the iron in plant
foods is less bioavailable than the iron in animal foods), zinc, vitamin B12
(cyanocobalamin), vitamin D (cholecalciferol) and calcium. The very high
ber intake associated with vegetarian diets may also, ironically, limit the
number of calories a vegetarian athlete can consume. This is the basis for
the Ornish Diet, which recommends a vegetarian or near- vegetarian diet
for weight loss, on the grounds that eating high ber plant foods automati-
cally limits calorie intake.
The take-home lesson is that vegetarians wanting to increase lean body
mass should make sure that important nutrients normally supplied by
meat and other animal protein sources are included using a combination
of appropriate foods and supplements.
It is not impossible to gain a signi cant amount of lean body mass on a
vegetarian diet: legendary bodybuilder Bill Pearl is perhaps the best known
example. Truth be known though, my bet would be in favor of the omnivo-
rous diet if optimal muscle mass is the goal.
Good content. You write beautiful things.
sportsbet
korsan taksi
hacklink
sportsbet
mrbahis
vbet
hacklink
taksi
mrbahis
July 29, 2023 at 10:36 AM
If there is one topic that gets people in the sports nutrition arena hot under the collar, is the age old " vegetarian versus meat eater" debate. In particu- lar, the debate is focused on whether or not vegetarian diets are adequate and equivalent to diets that include meat when it comes to adding muscle mass. Outlining the entire debate of both sides of the fence is beyond the scope of this discussion. I am going to stick to the debate regarding how a veg- gie diet vs. a meat-containing diet in uences muscle mass, rather than the larger picture of whether or not vegetarian diets are inherently healthier than diets that contain meat and vice versa.
In a nutshell, strict vegetarians (vegans) maintain that meat is not essential
for building muscle and a diet that mixes complimentary foods such as
beans and rice is adequate.
Lacto-ovo vegetarians ( vegetarians that include milk products and eggs)
further maintain that the inclusion of milk and eggs, as highly bioavailable
complete proteins, is more than adequate for athletes trying to build mus-
cle and maintain peak performance.
Omnivores (omnivore meaning people who eat a wide variety of foods in-
cluding meat) argue that meats such as chicken, beef and others are by
nature more anabolic for a variety of reasons.
So who's right?
This debate has not been adequately looked at in the research but we do
have some data that supports the omnivore's position. For example, sev-
eral studies have found that meat-containing diets are superior for testos-
terone production than strict vegetarian diets.
As most people know, testosterone is an essential hormone for increasing
and maintaining muscle mass while keeping body fat low. It's also essential
for libido and mood in both sexes, but particularly important for men.
One study called,"E ects of an omnivorous diet compared with a lacto-ovo
vegetarian diet on resistance-training-induced changes in body composi-
tion and skeletal muscle in older men” looked directly at this debate.
The researchers wanted to nd out if an omnivorous (meat-containing)
diet was superior to a lacto-ovo vegetarian diet on the retention of muscle
mass of older men put on a weight training routine.
Nineteen men aged 51 - 69 years old were enrolled in the study that ran
12 weeks. Nine men ate their normal meat containing (omnivorous) diet,
providing 50 percent of total dietary protein from meat sources such as
pork, chicken, sh and beef. Another 10 men followed a lacto-ovo type
vegetarian diet for the duration of the study, with both groups following a
weight training schedule.
Although the strength increases between groups were roughly the same,
the study found that the whole-body changes in skeletal muscle size dif-
fered signi cantly between groups. Whole-body muscle mass increased in
the omnivorous group, while it actually decreased in the lacto-ovo group.
Apparently, the meat eaters gained muscle over the 12 weeks while the
lacto-ovo eaters lost muscle mass. Ouch!
The authors concluded:
“...consumption of a meat-containing diet contributed to greater gains in fat-
free mass and skeletal muscle mass with resistance training in older men than
did an a lacto-ovo diet.”
Is this a slam dunk against the vegetarian diet as it relates to the claim that
it is just as good as a meat-containing diet for increasing muscle mass? No,
but it does lend some support to the idea that omnivorous diets have an
edge for producing optimal levels of anabolic (muscle building) hormones
and increases in muscle mass. More research is clearly needed to con rm
this, however.
There is still some debate over which of the two diets is healthier, however,
and that has to be factored into peoples’ choices as to which diet is best
suited for them.
One area in which vegetarian diets are de cient vs. omnivorous diets is
in muscle creatine stores. In the absence of supplementation, vegetar-
ians have been found to have lower total muscle creatine - which could
limit lean mass gains in response to training. The good news is that a re-
cent study con rmed that vegetarians on a resistance training program
responded well to creatine supplementation: their relative gains in work
performance, total creatine/phosphocreatine levels, and lean tissue mass
were even greater than the response for omnivores taking creatine, due to
lower starting creatine levels. The researchers concluded:
“...subjects with initially low levels of intramuscular Cr ( vegetarians) are more
responsive to supplementation.”
Other areas of concern for vegetarians are: iron status (the iron in plant
foods is less bioavailable than the iron in animal foods), zinc, vitamin B12
(cyanocobalamin), vitamin D (cholecalciferol) and calcium. The very high
ber intake associated with vegetarian diets may also, ironically, limit the
number of calories a vegetarian athlete can consume. This is the basis for
the Ornish Diet, which recommends a vegetarian or near- vegetarian diet
for weight loss, on the grounds that eating high ber plant foods automati-
cally limits calorie intake.
The take-home lesson is that vegetarians wanting to increase lean body
mass should make sure that important nutrients normally supplied by
meat and other animal protein sources are included using a combination
of appropriate foods and supplements.
It is not impossible to gain a signi cant amount of lean body mass on a
vegetarian diet: legendary bodybuilder Bill Pearl is perhaps the best known
example. Truth be known though, my bet would be in favor of the omnivo-
rous diet if optimal muscle mass is the goal.
salt likit
salt likit
E64
August 14, 2023 at 9:08 AM
If there is one topic that gets people in the sports nutrition arena hot under the collar, is the age old " vegetarian versus meat eater" debate. In particu- lar, the debate is focused on whether or not vegetarian diets are adequate and equivalent to diets that include meat when it comes to adding muscle mass. Outlining the entire debate of both sides of the fence is beyond the scope of this discussion. I am going to stick to the debate regarding how a veg- gie diet vs. a meat-containing diet in uences muscle mass, rather than the larger picture of whether or not vegetarian diets are inherently healthier than diets that contain meat and vice versa.
In a nutshell, strict vegetarians (vegans) maintain that meat is not essential
for building muscle and a diet that mixes complimentary foods such as
beans and rice is adequate.
Lacto-ovo vegetarians ( vegetarians that include milk products and eggs)
further maintain that the inclusion of milk and eggs, as highly bioavailable
complete proteins, is more than adequate for athletes trying to build mus-
cle and maintain peak performance.
Omnivores (omnivore meaning people who eat a wide variety of foods in-
cluding meat) argue that meats such as chicken, beef and others are by
nature more anabolic for a variety of reasons.
So who's right?
This debate has not been adequately looked at in the research but we do
have some data that supports the omnivore's position. For example, sev-
eral studies have found that meat-containing diets are superior for testos-
terone production than strict vegetarian diets.
As most people know, testosterone is an essential hormone for increasing
and maintaining muscle mass while keeping body fat low. It's also essential
for libido and mood in both sexes, but particularly important for men.
One study called,"E ects of an omnivorous diet compared with a lacto-ovo
vegetarian diet on resistance-training-induced changes in body composi-
tion and skeletal muscle in older men” looked directly at this debate.
The researchers wanted to nd out if an omnivorous (meat-containing)
diet was superior to a lacto-ovo vegetarian diet on the retention of muscle
mass of older men put on a weight training routine.
Nineteen men aged 51 - 69 years old were enrolled in the study that ran
12 weeks. Nine men ate their normal meat containing (omnivorous) diet,
providing 50 percent of total dietary protein from meat sources such as
pork, chicken, sh and beef. Another 10 men followed a lacto-ovo type
vegetarian diet for the duration of the study, with both groups following a
weight training schedule.
Although the strength increases between groups were roughly the same,
the study found that the whole-body changes in skeletal muscle size dif-
fered signi cantly between groups. Whole-body muscle mass increased in
the omnivorous group, while it actually decreased in the lacto-ovo group.
Apparently, the meat eaters gained muscle over the 12 weeks while the
lacto-ovo eaters lost muscle mass. Ouch!
The authors concluded:
“...consumption of a meat-containing diet contributed to greater gains in fat-
free mass and skeletal muscle mass with resistance training in older men than
did an a lacto-ovo diet.”
Is this a slam dunk against the vegetarian diet as it relates to the claim that
it is just as good as a meat-containing diet for increasing muscle mass? No,
but it does lend some support to the idea that omnivorous diets have an
edge for producing optimal levels of anabolic (muscle building) hormones
and increases in muscle mass. More research is clearly needed to con rm
this, however.
There is still some debate over which of the two diets is healthier, however,
and that has to be factored into peoples’ choices as to which diet is best
suited for them.
One area in which vegetarian diets are de cient vs. omnivorous diets is
in muscle creatine stores. In the absence of supplementation, vegetar-
ians have been found to have lower total muscle creatine - which could
limit lean mass gains in response to training. The good news is that a re-
cent study con rmed that vegetarians on a resistance training program
responded well to creatine supplementation: their relative gains in work
performance, total creatine/phosphocreatine levels, and lean tissue mass
were even greater than the response for omnivores taking creatine, due to
lower starting creatine levels. The researchers concluded:
“...subjects with initially low levels of intramuscular Cr ( vegetarians) are more
responsive to supplementation.”
Other areas of concern for vegetarians are: iron status (the iron in plant
foods is less bioavailable than the iron in animal foods), zinc, vitamin B12
(cyanocobalamin), vitamin D (cholecalciferol) and calcium. The very high
ber intake associated with vegetarian diets may also, ironically, limit the
number of calories a vegetarian athlete can consume. This is the basis for
the Ornish Diet, which recommends a vegetarian or near- vegetarian diet
for weight loss, on the grounds that eating high ber plant foods automati-
cally limits calorie intake.
The take-home lesson is that vegetarians wanting to increase lean body
mass should make sure that important nutrients normally supplied by
meat and other animal protein sources are included using a combination
of appropriate foods and supplements.
It is not impossible to gain a signi cant amount of lean body mass on a
vegetarian diet: legendary bodybuilder Bill Pearl is perhaps the best known
example. Truth be known though, my bet would be in favor of the omnivo-
rous diet if optimal muscle mass is the goal.
resimli magnet
resimli magnet
çerkezköy çatı ustası
silivri çatı ustası
dijital kartvizit
8ZRJİ
August 29, 2023 at 5:21 PM
If there is one topic that gets people in the sports nutrition arena hot under the collar, is the age old " vegetarian versus meat eater" debate. In particu- lar, the debate is focused on whether or not vegetarian diets are adequate and equivalent to diets that include meat when it comes to adding muscle mass. Outlining the entire debate of both sides of the fence is beyond the scope of this discussion. I am going to stick to the debate regarding how a veg- gie diet vs. a meat-containing diet in uences muscle mass, rather than the larger picture of whether or not vegetarian diets are inherently healthier than diets that contain meat and vice versa.
In a nutshell, strict vegetarians (vegans) maintain that meat is not essential
for building muscle and a diet that mixes complimentary foods such as
beans and rice is adequate.
Lacto-ovo vegetarians ( vegetarians that include milk products and eggs)
further maintain that the inclusion of milk and eggs, as highly bioavailable
complete proteins, is more than adequate for athletes trying to build mus-
cle and maintain peak performance.
Omnivores (omnivore meaning people who eat a wide variety of foods in-
cluding meat) argue that meats such as chicken, beef and others are by
nature more anabolic for a variety of reasons.
So who's right?
This debate has not been adequately looked at in the research but we do
have some data that supports the omnivore's position. For example, sev-
eral studies have found that meat-containing diets are superior for testos-
terone production than strict vegetarian diets.
As most people know, testosterone is an essential hormone for increasing
and maintaining muscle mass while keeping body fat low. It's also essential
for libido and mood in both sexes, but particularly important for men.
One study called,"E ects of an omnivorous diet compared with a lacto-ovo
vegetarian diet on resistance-training-induced changes in body composi-
tion and skeletal muscle in older men” looked directly at this debate.
The researchers wanted to nd out if an omnivorous (meat-containing)
diet was superior to a lacto-ovo vegetarian diet on the retention of muscle
mass of older men put on a weight training routine.
Nineteen men aged 51 - 69 years old were enrolled in the study that ran
12 weeks. Nine men ate their normal meat containing (omnivorous) diet,
providing 50 percent of total dietary protein from meat sources such as
pork, chicken, sh and beef. Another 10 men followed a lacto-ovo type
vegetarian diet for the duration of the study, with both groups following a
weight training schedule.
Although the strength increases between groups were roughly the same,
the study found that the whole-body changes in skeletal muscle size dif-
fered signi cantly between groups. Whole-body muscle mass increased in
the omnivorous group, while it actually decreased in the lacto-ovo group.
Apparently, the meat eaters gained muscle over the 12 weeks while the
lacto-ovo eaters lost muscle mass. Ouch!
The authors concluded:
“...consumption of a meat-containing diet contributed to greater gains in fat-
free mass and skeletal muscle mass with resistance training in older men than
did an a lacto-ovo diet.”
Is this a slam dunk against the vegetarian diet as it relates to the claim that
it is just as good as a meat-containing diet for increasing muscle mass? No,
but it does lend some support to the idea that omnivorous diets have an
edge for producing optimal levels of anabolic (muscle building) hormones
and increases in muscle mass. More research is clearly needed to con rm
this, however.
There is still some debate over which of the two diets is healthier, however,
and that has to be factored into peoples’ choices as to which diet is best
suited for them.
One area in which vegetarian diets are de cient vs. omnivorous diets is
in muscle creatine stores. In the absence of supplementation, vegetar-
ians have been found to have lower total muscle creatine - which could
limit lean mass gains in response to training. The good news is that a re-
cent study con rmed that vegetarians on a resistance training program
responded well to creatine supplementation: their relative gains in work
performance, total creatine/phosphocreatine levels, and lean tissue mass
were even greater than the response for omnivores taking creatine, due to
lower starting creatine levels. The researchers concluded:
“...subjects with initially low levels of intramuscular Cr ( vegetarians) are more
responsive to supplementation.”
Other areas of concern for vegetarians are: iron status (the iron in plant
foods is less bioavailable than the iron in animal foods), zinc, vitamin B12
(cyanocobalamin), vitamin D (cholecalciferol) and calcium. The very high
ber intake associated with vegetarian diets may also, ironically, limit the
number of calories a vegetarian athlete can consume. This is the basis for
the Ornish Diet, which recommends a vegetarian or near- vegetarian diet
for weight loss, on the grounds that eating high ber plant foods automati-
cally limits calorie intake.
The take-home lesson is that vegetarians wanting to increase lean body
mass should make sure that important nutrients normally supplied by
meat and other animal protein sources are included using a combination
of appropriate foods and supplements.
It is not impossible to gain a signi cant amount of lean body mass on a
vegetarian diet: legendary bodybuilder Bill Pearl is perhaps the best known
example. Truth be known though, my bet would be in favor of the omnivo-
rous diet if optimal muscle mass is the goal.
silivri çatı ustası
fal baktır
indirmeden oynanan oyunlar
ünye veteriner
https://yoltransfer.com.tr/
1P63K
August 30, 2023 at 8:59 AM
If there is one topic that gets people in the sports nutrition arena hot under the collar, is the age old " vegetarian versus meat eater" debate. In particu- lar, the debate is focused on whether or not vegetarian diets are adequate and equivalent to diets that include meat when it comes to adding muscle mass. Outlining the entire debate of both sides of the fence is beyond the scope of this discussion. I am going to stick to the debate regarding how a veg- gie diet vs. a meat-containing diet in uences muscle mass, rather than the larger picture of whether or not vegetarian diets are inherently healthier than diets that contain meat and vice versa.
In a nutshell, strict vegetarians (vegans) maintain that meat is not essential
for building muscle and a diet that mixes complimentary foods such as
beans and rice is adequate.
Lacto-ovo vegetarians ( vegetarians that include milk products and eggs)
further maintain that the inclusion of milk and eggs, as highly bioavailable
complete proteins, is more than adequate for athletes trying to build mus-
cle and maintain peak performance.
Omnivores (omnivore meaning people who eat a wide variety of foods in-
cluding meat) argue that meats such as chicken, beef and others are by
nature more anabolic for a variety of reasons.
So who's right?
This debate has not been adequately looked at in the research but we do
have some data that supports the omnivore's position. For example, sev-
eral studies have found that meat-containing diets are superior for testos-
terone production than strict vegetarian diets.
As most people know, testosterone is an essential hormone for increasing
and maintaining muscle mass while keeping body fat low. It's also essential
for libido and mood in both sexes, but particularly important for men.
One study called,"E ects of an omnivorous diet compared with a lacto-ovo
vegetarian diet on resistance-training-induced changes in body composi-
tion and skeletal muscle in older men” looked directly at this debate.
The researchers wanted to nd out if an omnivorous (meat-containing)
diet was superior to a lacto-ovo vegetarian diet on the retention of muscle
mass of older men put on a weight training routine.
Nineteen men aged 51 - 69 years old were enrolled in the study that ran
12 weeks. Nine men ate their normal meat containing (omnivorous) diet,
providing 50 percent of total dietary protein from meat sources such as
pork, chicken, sh and beef. Another 10 men followed a lacto-ovo type
vegetarian diet for the duration of the study, with both groups following a
weight training schedule.
Although the strength increases between groups were roughly the same,
the study found that the whole-body changes in skeletal muscle size dif-
fered signi cantly between groups. Whole-body muscle mass increased in
the omnivorous group, while it actually decreased in the lacto-ovo group.
Apparently, the meat eaters gained muscle over the 12 weeks while the
lacto-ovo eaters lost muscle mass. Ouch!
The authors concluded:
“...consumption of a meat-containing diet contributed to greater gains in fat-
free mass and skeletal muscle mass with resistance training in older men than
did an a lacto-ovo diet.”
Is this a slam dunk against the vegetarian diet as it relates to the claim that
it is just as good as a meat-containing diet for increasing muscle mass? No,
but it does lend some support to the idea that omnivorous diets have an
edge for producing optimal levels of anabolic (muscle building) hormones
and increases in muscle mass. More research is clearly needed to con rm
this, however.
There is still some debate over which of the two diets is healthier, however,
and that has to be factored into peoples’ choices as to which diet is best
suited for them.
One area in which vegetarian diets are de cient vs. omnivorous diets is
in muscle creatine stores. In the absence of supplementation, vegetar-
ians have been found to have lower total muscle creatine - which could
limit lean mass gains in response to training. The good news is that a re-
cent study con rmed that vegetarians on a resistance training program
responded well to creatine supplementation: their relative gains in work
performance, total creatine/phosphocreatine levels, and lean tissue mass
were even greater than the response for omnivores taking creatine, due to
lower starting creatine levels. The researchers concluded:
“...subjects with initially low levels of intramuscular Cr ( vegetarians) are more
responsive to supplementation.”
Other areas of concern for vegetarians are: iron status (the iron in plant
foods is less bioavailable than the iron in animal foods), zinc, vitamin B12
(cyanocobalamin), vitamin D (cholecalciferol) and calcium. The very high
ber intake associated with vegetarian diets may also, ironically, limit the
number of calories a vegetarian athlete can consume. This is the basis for
the Ornish Diet, which recommends a vegetarian or near- vegetarian diet
for weight loss, on the grounds that eating high ber plant foods automati-
cally limits calorie intake.
The take-home lesson is that vegetarians wanting to increase lean body
mass should make sure that important nutrients normally supplied by
meat and other animal protein sources are included using a combination
of appropriate foods and supplements.
It is not impossible to gain a signi cant amount of lean body mass on a
vegetarian diet: legendary bodybuilder Bill Pearl is perhaps the best known
example. Truth be known though, my bet would be in favor of the omnivo-
rous diet if optimal muscle mass is the goal.
https://saglamproxy.com
metin2 proxy
proxy satın al
knight online proxy
mobil proxy satın al
ENA
Post a Comment