This of course is a stupid question. I’m asking because there are guys in prison who are huge and shredded. They get 3 small meals of the shittiest least nutritious food available, and I doubt they have PWO shakes.
Also some of the guys on ‘Survivor’ go on looking huge and come off looking huge and more shredded after a month with hardly any food. I’m sure they’ve lost muscle, but not noticeably. What’s the deal with this?
So basically, how well does optimum nutrition build muscle compared to average nutrition? [/quote]
This has been discussed quite a bit. As far as the prisoner topic, it has a lot to do with the fact that you have all the time in the world and most guys will workout to kill time. They may be eating like shit but they workout constantly and sleep a lot. Steroids can also be a factor. I think nutrition is highly over rated, that being said I do eat healthy, and eat frequently but it’s the guys (except the extremely dedicated bodybuilders) that have super strict diets that often fail. It’s all to easy to write out the “perfect” diet but fail because it’s to complex. Lets put it this way, I have never seen a person with a really good diet who never trains have a muscular body meanwhile I have seen plenty of guys who train there ass off and eat like shit and have made decent progress. It may not be optimal, but to say nutrition is more important then training is total BS