I find it pretty amazing the difference in the way nutrition is talked about at different sites, for instance… This site, for the most part, preaches 5-7 meals, meal timing, and type of food…bb.com preaches that meal timing and frequency are largely irrelivent, that a carb is carb is a carb (same for all macros) that macro intak by percentage is useless…etc…
why would two bodybuilding commmunities view nutrition so differently
[quote]coop817 wrote:
I find it pretty amazing the difference in the way nutrition is talked about at different sites, for instance… This site, for the most part, preaches 5-7 meals, meal timing, and type of food…Bodybuiling.com preaches that meal timing and frequency are largely irrelivent, that a carb is carb is a carb (same for all macros) that macro intak by percentage is useless…etc…
why would two bodybuilding commmunities view nutrition so differently[/quote]
Amazing? Really?
You find it amazing that different people carry differing opinions on something as broad as ‘nutrition’? (not to say that your gross generalization of the two sites is accurate, btw)
Get out more. There’s a whole world to see that’s full of things that actually are AMAZING.
sorry, maybe a poor description.
I guess i was making the point that two sites (comprised of many members on each end) have such differing views towards nutrition…as a whole.
It would be fair, i think, to say that the overwhelming view of the sites themselves differ drasticly.
My guess would be that TNation is geared “more” towards those that use gear, which throws a whole different curve on the subject…
Your generalization towards TNation doesn’t really hold at all
[quote]coop817 wrote:
I find it pretty amazing the difference in the way nutrition is talked about at different sites, for instance… This site, for the most part, preaches 5-7 meals, meal timing, and type of food[/quote]
I don’t think people on this site preach 5-7 meals, maybe some but certainly not a majority.
Meal timing - I am a big fan of peri-workout nutrition other then that I don’t care.
I will take your word for it.
[quote]
Why would two bodybuilding commmunities view nutrition so differently[/quote]
Different goals, different clientele, different contributing authors.
Just speculating but like Bonez said, nutrition is a vast subject.
I thought it was a fair comparison seeing as how one site does not allow discussion of gear at all.
didnt mean to offend, but gear changes the game so much that the idea of meal timing, frequency, etc…holds much more true for those that use gear, and since that is preached here, and gear is talked about, it just made sense
[quote]coop817 wrote:
I thought it was a fair comparison seeing as how one site does not allow discussion of gear at all.
didnt mean to offend, but gear changes the game so much that the idea of meal timing, frequency, etc…holds much more true for those that use gear, and since that is preached here, and gear is talked about, it just made sense[/quote]
BB.com doesnt talk about gear ANYMORE.
Until a few months (maybe a few years, I dont remember) ago they had a steroid board. But ran into issues when their online store was selling banned OTC hormones.
And the huge majority of posters on the forums here DONT use steroids.
i would guess, from reading comments over 3 years, that no more 30% (if that) of TNation posters are on gear.
But SO WHAT? these principles are just as relevant to a ‘natural’ guy
BB.com is comprised mostly of a younger, inexperienced audience, who will blindly repeat what they read, or cling religiously to anything spoken by one of the handful of Natural Pros who post there for the PR.
S
[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:
BB.com is comprised mostly of a younger, inexperienced audience, who will blindly repeat what they read, or cling religiously to anything spoken by one of the handful of Natural Pros who post there for the PR.
S[/quote]
I was once one in that herd. I got tired of listening to those Natural Pros talk about things like “the inner pectoral versus the outer pectoral” and “what rep range is best for definition.” Sheesh.
I think you pretty much summed it up here Stu; there are some people in great shape on BB, but TNation is where you can get the information without the bullshit if you’re willing to do some critical thinking.
I think another decent site is “simply shredded” (although more physique based), however, they carry just about identical nutritional ideals as do the pros/ams on here. Biologically/physiologically/whateveryouwanttocallit, the idea of neglecting nutrient timing makes no sense whatsoever.
[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:
BB.com is comprised mostly of a younger, inexperienced audience, who will blindly repeat what they read, or cling religiously to anything spoken by one of the handful of Natural Pros who post there for the PR.
S[/quote]
Well, I think many of those characteristics could describe T-Nation as well.
How many beginning lifters look up to and follow whatever you, PX, or MODOK say?
Sure there are serious lifters here that are making significant progress, but I would venture to say that over half of members here will not be in it ‘for the long haul’.
Don’t get me wrong, T-Nation is a good website with lots of information, but it is hardly a hardcore BBing website.
what would you consider a hardcore bodybuilding website?
Are we talking forum or articles?
[quote]JFG wrote:
Are we talking forum or articles?
[/quote]
both.
[quote]coop817 wrote:
why would two bodybuilding commmunities view nutrition so differently[/quote]
Digging deeper, you’ll even find that nutrition experts (let’s define that as having paid clientele) utilize strategies that are often very different.
And yet interestingly enough, they all work.
Point being: there’s few basic, fundamental truths re: nutrition, and TONS of wiggle-room based on individual genetics, response, compliance etc. It’s also why experimenting with various strategies and learning WHAT WORKS BEST FOR YOU is always sounds advice.
all good points. I guess i was just surprised at the difference in what seemed to be the “overall” feel of the site…
but good point about nutrionalists…
[quote]coop817 wrote:
what would you consider a hardcore bodybuilding website?[/quote]
Well, to be fair, advanced competitive bodybuilding is going to involve AAS and the like…any website that concentrates more on training and nutrition than drugs is going to have less advanced members.
IMO, course.
[quote]coop817 wrote:
all good points. I guess i was just surprised at the difference in what seemed to be the “overall” feel of the site…
but good point about nutrionalists…[/quote]
A retarded one of the blind leading the blind versus a group that is a bit more informed (yet still having plenty of blind leading the blind as well as the site gets bigger and bigger)?
Fact is bb.com is, as was said, comprised of mostly younger posters that simply haven’t put the time and experience into the iron game where T-Nation has drawn more experienced lifters from various aspects of lifting such as powerlifting, strongman, olympic lifting, and of course bodybuilding.
BB.com is a much larger site and thus draws in more idiots. I think many here would agree that as this site gets bigger, and more people join, more of the uninformed come here as well. Luckily the mods are pretty lenient here and allow the old folk to set them straight with a good kick to the ass.