PDA

View Full Version : High fat meals for steroid production?



Bmxstrong
02-09-2011, 07:00 AM
I was sent this article in an email and I wanted to know what you guys thought of this?

by Elliott Hulse of Lean Hybrid Muscle Reloaded (http://leanhybridmusclereloaded.com)

Fats have gotten a really bad rap over the past 15-20 years. It seems like the day after food manufacturers figured out how to make ‘low-fat’ and ‘fat-free’ foods, the press started publishing stories about the dangers of fats, how they were responsible for the obesity epidemic and how bad they are for the body.

But here we are 20 years later and Americans are fatter than ever before, despite all the low-fat and fat-free foods they’re eating. Seems like fats weren’t the culprit after all and in reality, it turns out that fats actually play an important role building bigger, stronger muscles.

You know that the body produces steroid hormones (e.g., testosterone) that drive muscle growth and strength gains. The metabolic processes that trigger the production of steroid hormones are driven in large part by the foods we eat. Well, researchers have found that maintaining a low-fat, low-calorie diets appears to suppress the body’s production of steroid hormones.

So cutting fats of your diet is not only a mostly ineffective strategy for getting lean, but it’s also got some unwanted side effects such as reduced muscle mass and strength caused by diminished production of steroid hormones. Fortunately, we have a lot more knowledge today than we did in years past.

And what we know today is that an occasional high fat meal is not just tasty and satisfying, but it promotes natural steroid production as well. Normally, when planning what foods to eat as part of your get lean/build muscle diet, you should choose healthy, unsaturated fats over saturated fats, which have a lower thermic effect and in general are less healthy.

However, to really stimulate the production of steroid hormones, it’s perfectly acceptable—and recommended—to occasionally eat high fat foods such as a good juicy burger without being concerned about unsaturated versus saturated fat content. Do this from time to time and you’ll find that it’s good for both the mind and the body.

Now that you know how I feel about Dietary Fats there should be no surprise that I have included three days in the Hybrid Diet where you eat high protein and high fat foods. If you’d like to learn more about this weird nutrition rotation plan for fat burning and muscle building be sure to CLICK HERE to read a very controversial Lean Hybrid Muscle Reloaded (http://leanhybridmusclereloaded.com) follow up article.

Daniel Roberts
02-09-2011, 07:46 AM
Didn't read it all, but it's true enough. But you're not talking large amounts of testosterone, just maximising your output, if it's compromised. Similarly low fibre diets are correlated with elevated T.

Behemoth
02-09-2011, 09:50 AM
You need a certain amount of fat for optimal hormone production, yes. That doesn't mean going over that certain amount gives you steroid like results or even any more results. If you're eating the right amount of fat you shouldn't be inhibiting your natural production of androgenic hormones, no need to face big-mac's to raise your test 3ng/dl.

4g64fiero
02-09-2011, 09:59 AM
SPAM-(although not BMX's fault)

LOL at "natural steroid production".

If it was natural, it wouldnt be a steroid. :moon:

Hugol
02-09-2011, 10:40 AM
After reading this...I dont feel that bad eating 2 burgers for dinner last night :)

Dan Fanelli
02-09-2011, 10:58 AM
I would take Elliot Hulse's info with a 'grain of salt'. The concepts are sound to an extent, but he's an extremist guru going for shock value. High fat diets may have some viability but they aren't going to produce "steroid like effects".

cutter
02-09-2011, 12:01 PM
It is my understanding that testosterone production is governed by hormones and lifestyle, not diet.
Plus, I think I could do a study showing that eating live spiders and spinach increases testosterone....

Butcher
02-09-2011, 12:10 PM
Especially if that individual is suffering a nutrient deficiency that could be corrected by eating spinach and live spiders.

Sean S
02-09-2011, 12:24 PM
SPAM-(although not BMX's fault)

LOL at "natural steroid production".

If it was natural, it wouldnt be a steroid. :moon:

The word "steroid" refers to a class of naturally produced hormones that includes testosterone. You have to pay attention to the context of the conversation to determine if they are talking about natural production or exogenous use.
There has also been research that demonstrates that dietary fat intake does correlate to blood testosterone concentrations (within the normal physiological range) in men. Generally it's not an issue unless you are significantly restricting your fat intake. Going from an extremely low fat intake to a more "normal" fat intake may increase testosterone levels a bit, but beyond that more fat doesn't equal more testosterone. In the original post, I don't see anything too outlandish. He's is simply saying don't excessively restrict your fat intake.

Mercuryblade
02-09-2011, 01:09 PM
But here we are 20 years later and Americans are fatter than ever before, despite all the low-fat and fat-free foods they’re eating.

This is just a stupid, stupid, stupid, line, this is a generalization with no objective basis.

Just to elaborate on what others have said: steroids are a type of molecule, a series of linked carbon rings, but it isn't just limited to hormones, cholesterol, for example is a steroid, so are certain types of medications.
We do need fats in our diet for testosterone production and other hormones, but our bodies aren't just an simple put in (x) and get (y) output. Testosterone production is linked to a variety of factors beyond diet, including stress, sleep, activity, sexual activity etc. So just upping fat intake isn't going to make your body jump start test production, if only it were that easy.

Dan Fanelli
02-09-2011, 02:10 PM
This is just a stupid, stupid, stupid, line, this is a generalization with no objective basis.





Please elaborate on this. I think it clearly illustrates that high fat foods were NOT the culprit, and that the promotion of a diet based around carbohydrates was certainly a large part of the problem.

Behemoth
02-09-2011, 02:22 PM
This is just a stupid, stupid, stupid, line, this is a generalization with no objective basis.

Just to elaborate on what others have said: steroids are a type of molecule, a series of linked carbon rings, but it isn't just limited to hormones, cholesterol, for example is a steroid, so are certain types of medications.
We do need fats in our diet for testosterone production and other hormones, but our bodies aren't just an simple put in (x) and get (y) output. Testosterone production is linked to a variety of factors beyond diet, including stress, sleep, activity, sexual activity etc. So just upping fat intake isn't going to make your body jump start test production, if only it were that easy.

I love it when you post in this forum and wish you would do so more often.

Mercuryblade
02-09-2011, 03:08 PM
Please elaborate on this. I think it clearly illustrates that high fat foods were NOT the culprit, and that the promotion of a diet based around carbohydrates was certainly a large part of the problem.

He's using a sledgehammer to put a thumbtack into a cork board.

He has no objective basis to declare just exactly how Americans are eating low fat foods or to what degree they have decreased the amount of fats in their diets. Yes, it's obvious that the availability of increased low-fat products available could decrease the amount of dietary fat in some people's diets, but there he presents no data that suggest a substantial amount of obese people are consuming low fat diets. He then uses his broscience hypothesis draw a conclusion.
It's also simply not true that Americans are consuming less fat. Therefore the foundation for his argument that he had no factual basis to draw upon in the first place is already false. Dietary trends have indicated that we are consuming more calories on average, and also increased fat. It should be noted that although the percentage of our calories derived from carbohydrates has increased, absolute fat intake has also increased.*

Whether or not his conclusions has truths to it is irrelevant, as the methods he used to arrive at the decision aren't proper.
His argument is this:

Low fat food availability has increased.
Obesity has increased

Therefore: low fat food has no impact on obesity.

He's oversimplifying things immensely to make a point, albeit a point with snippets factual information. My problem is with his methodology.

* http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5304a3.htm

bradley
02-09-2011, 03:13 PM
This is just a stupid, stupid, stupid, line, this is a generalization with no objective basis.

Just to elaborate on what others have said: steroids are a type of molecule, a series of linked carbon rings, but it isn't just limited to hormones, cholesterol, for example is a steroid, so are certain types of medications.
We do need fats in our diet for testosterone production and other hormones, but our bodies aren't just an simple put in (x) and get (y) output. Testosterone production is linked to a variety of factors beyond diet, including stress, sleep, activity, sexual activity etc. So just upping fat intake isn't going to make your body jump start test production, if only it were that easy.

Cholesterol is a precursor to "steroid" hormones. That article does have some truth to it, but it really seems like something that would be on an Atkin's diet page. If you are on a super low fat diet then it might hinder natural test production, but I doubt many have to worry about this.

bradley
02-09-2011, 03:18 PM
Please elaborate on this. I think it clearly illustrates that high fat foods were NOT the culprit, and that the promotion of a diet based around carbohydrates was certainly a large part of the problem.

Calorie excess = gain weight
Calorie deficit = lose weght

First Law of Thermodynamics (aka Law of Energy Conservation).

4g64fiero
02-09-2011, 03:27 PM
The word "steroid" refers to a class of naturally produced hormones that includes testosterone. You have to pay attention to the context of the conversation to determine if they are talking about natural production or exogenous use.
There has also been research that demonstrates that dietary fat intake does correlate to blood testosterone concentrations (within the normal physiological range) in men. Generally it's not an issue unless you are significantly restricting your fat intake. Going from an extremely low fat intake to a more "normal" fat intake may increase testosterone levels a bit, but beyond that more fat doesn't equal more testosterone. In the original post, I don't see anything too outlandish. He's is simply saying don't excessively restrict your fat intake.

I was under the impression that the mere implification that something is a steroid would insinuate that it is synthetic. That is not that case. Thanks for the correction.

Dan Fanelli
02-09-2011, 04:10 PM
Thanks Mercury that clears some things up.

Those dietary trends might shed some light on the situation, but they are pretty limited as the authors point out. Also, these values are looking at the population as a whole group. Its hard to say, but maybe if it focused on overweight and obese groups these results woud be different.

Furthermore, there WAS an increase in caloric intake, carbohydrates, and a decrease in fat (relative). These changes were small, but did potentially have an effect on the increased rate of obesity. If these changes were larger, could we expect an even greater increase in obesity? Im not sure.

Im not saying low fat is the problem, im just saying it isn't a good solution. The market is clearly flooded with low-fat products that are consumed regularly and have not reversed obesity trends.

Dan Fanelli
02-09-2011, 04:13 PM
Calorie excess = gain weight
Calorie deficit = lose weght

First Law of Thermodynamics (aka Law of Energy Conservation).

And none of that makes any mention of body fat %. Part of obesity trends can be misleading, because BMI is used to diagnose overweight and obesity. But since the general population isn't very athletic, we are assuming that an increase in bodyweight = and increase in fatness.

In the link posted by Mercury, we'd only need to look at the average increase in daily energy intake to know what the outcome would be in terms of WEIGHT increase. The macronutrient ratios make no difference when you aren't actually measuring body fat %. For all we know, the low fat, high carbohydrate diets have increased the populations lean mass and decreased fat mass. Its doubtful though.