CrossFit Discussion Board  

Go Back   CrossFit Discussion Board > CrossFit Forum > Nutrition
CrossFit Home Forum Site Rules CrossFit FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Nutrition Diet, supplements, weightloss, health & longevity

Thread Tools
Old 09-14-2004, 09:26 AM   #1
Paul Kayley
Member Paul Kayley is offline
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: York  North Yorkshire
Posts: 195 ct&list_uids=10367332

Here The Zone principles are called into question. My personal findings are that complete, rather than partial partitioning have the most noticable effect upon performance.
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2004, 12:51 PM   #2
Paul Symes
Member Paul Symes is offline
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: London  Croydon
Posts: 299
So what would you recommend, something like massive eating?

I'm suprised that so many people here can do such a demanding form of training on so few carbs and so few calories. I'm keeping an open mind though, I'm trying to forget everything I thought I knew and leap into this
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2004, 01:38 PM   #3
Larry Lindenman
Affiliate Larry Lindenman is offline
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Chicago  Illinois
Posts: 2,769
CF athletes have a tendency to use the Zone 40 30 30 until their body fat levels drop below 6% and then institute the "athletes zone" which ups the amount of healthy fat blocks (nuts, seeds, flax oil, Udo's choise, fish oil, etc.). They up the fat blocks until bodyfat stabilizes with no weight gain. The extra fat really ups the Kcals for the week. There is a lot of experimentation with the method. I look at it as you should know what your consuming and should have a base line (40 30 30); once you know that, experiment with one macronutrient at a time (raising and lowering) until you get the results your looking for.
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-2004, 05:49 PM   #4
Barry Cooper
Member Barry Cooper is offline
Barry Cooper's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Louisville  KY
Posts: 2,188
That study is from 2000. It isn't at all clear what the actual evidence is upon which it is based. Rhetorically, they use a lot of scientific language to in effect say "according to what we've read, this shouldn't work". That is a BS approach.

Additionally, as Larry says, Barry Sears' recommendation is to increase fat intake to meet actual caloric requirements, which fact is ignored. In effect, they are jousting at an imaginary windmill.

I am consistently amazed at the lack of attention to the details of the Zone diet. People imagine some sort of image of it, then burst the bubble they have imagined, which has no actual referent in reality.

Adequate protein, adequate carbs, tons of vegetable and fruit phytonutrients, and sufficient calories for performance. What's not to like?
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-16-2004, 05:02 PM   #5
Robert Wolf
Member Robert Wolf is offline
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Chico  CA
Posts: 2,669
This can be a bit frustrating.

Barry Sears does not make it clear that once one has achieved a low bodyfat level one MUST increase caloric intake, ideally with monounsaturated fat. Virtually every critique of the zone involves Pinheads disecting his program (they inevitably forget to factor in the 1/2 block of fat associated with most protiens) and finding it woefully lacking in calories. Which, over time, it would be for a hard training athlete. This is damn silly and I think I will write to their website and request that they give this fact a bit more airplay.

John Berardi (I really like his work BTW) just re-vamped his Massive Eating articles with Massive Eating:Reloaded. It loooks a whole bunch like the Athletes Zone with the main differences being that he recomends more protien overall and he has one shift more carbs to the post work-out period. Likely not bad ideas! How much of a difference would this make? I'm really not sure, but I can build a great arguement either way. The distinction boarders on hairsplitting IMO but it is a place for easy experimentation.
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-16-2004, 05:56 PM   #6
Roy Taylor
Member Roy Taylor is offline
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Rowlett  TX
Posts: 146

In MTZ, Sears DID mention that once one's abdominals are clearly visible(i.e. low body fat) then it is time to start adding fat to the diet.

Do you have a link to Massive Eating: reloaded??


  Reply With Quote
Old 09-16-2004, 07:02 PM   #7
Jonathon Edward
Member Jonathon Edward is offline
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Orlando  FL
Posts: 288

  Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-2004, 11:01 AM   #8
Shane Andrews
Posts: n/a
Hi all,

Here is another study from Entez-PubMed, disagreeing with Zone protocols. Noted the study is only tested over a week's time. FYI... st _uids=11834107
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-2004, 11:49 AM   #9
Larry Lindenman
Affiliate Larry Lindenman is offline
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Chicago  Illinois
Posts: 2,769
Sad that the authors are making sweeping recommendations based upon such a limited study, 8 people for 7 days, endurance testing (they recommend the zone diet is not good for "athletes").
  Reply With Quote

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Zone Question Kelsie Scheeler Nutrition 3 06-05-2007 05:52 PM
Another Zone question Joe Gasparre Nutrition 2 05-10-2007 06:37 PM
Zone Question re: WAM Keith Wittenstein Nutrition 4 05-22-2006 05:06 PM
Zone question Todd Learn Nutrition 1 06-27-2005 02:45 PM
Yet another Zone question Eric Keller Nutrition 18 03-15-2005 12:01 PM

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:23 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
CrossFit is a registered trademark of CrossFit Inc.