Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Show HN: No Bullsh*t Guide to Fitness (for Men)

andhart.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–17 of 17 posts

Re: Show HN: No Bullsh*t Guide to Fitness (for Men)

#11

Post by DrScump »

J-H wrote: post #9
DrScump wrote: post #8

I didn't see a single source referenced, which may be why so many of the claims are totally wrong. When I saw claims such as, "(low-carb diets) simply trick you into eating foods that are less calorically dense ", I gave up altogether.

Can you explain why you gave up? Low-carb diets cut out sugar, flour, etc which greatly reduce caloric intake. It's not a far stretch to call them a "trick" to reduce your calories, is it? Take a look at https://examine.com/nutrition/will-carbs-make-me-fat/ if you need more proof that carbohydrates are not what make people fat. What other claims did I get wrong? I don't disagree with you that I should put in some sou…

I gave up on the article because of its inaccuracies and lack of current sources. I've been a successful lowcarb dieter for over 17 years.

Re: Show HN: No Bullsh*t Guide to Fitness (for Men)

#12

Post by J-H »

DrScump wrote: post #11
J-H wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you explain why you gave up? Low-carb diets cut out sugar, flour, etc which greatly reduce caloric intake. It's not a far stretch to call them a "trick" to reduce your calories, is it? Take a look at https://examine.com/nutrition/will-carbs-make-me-fat/ if you need more proof that carbohydrates are not what make people fat. What other claims did I get wrong? I don't disagree with you that I should put in some sou…

I gave up on the article because of its inaccuracies and lack of current sources. I've been a successful lowcarb dieter for over 17 years.

I guess the key that I'm trying to get at here is find a diet approach that works for you.

Low-carb diets "trick" you (again, I'm going to use that phrase) into eating less calories. When you eat less calories, you will lose weight. So, sure, it's great that it worked for you, but there's easier ways for most people to lose weight.

What other inaccuracies were you talking about?

Re: Show HN: No Bullsh*t Guide to Fitness (for Men)

#14

Post by J-H »

JHof wrote: post #13

Change fitness to "bro-fitness".

Why is that? I realize I should probably provide my sources at the bottom, but everything was derived from personal experience and research.

If you have something specific to point out, I'd be happy to provide you a source for it.

Re: Show HN: No Bullsh*t Guide to Fitness (for Men)

#15

Post by bobrocket »

nostalgiac wrote: post #10
bobrocket wrote: post #4

A few recommendations. I have been working out with a few breaks for 7 years and will try to refrain from bro science (ironic as I have no sources) Diet: Telling people to not snack is counterproductive to what that section is saying if I am reading it correctly. Everyone is different. Some fast and have one huge ass meal. Some have two meals. Some more. I eat almonds as snacks throughout the day. Perhaps for simplic…

> Mention the dichotomy of strength vs muscle growth. Lower rep range focuses more on strength while higher rep range focuses on muscle growth. As far as I'm aware there's still no conclusive evidence for rep ranges affecting muscle growth vs strength. I'm well aware of all strength program routines and follow this method myself, but would love a source.

This study has some interesting findings backing the claim: http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00421-002-0681-6

Re: Show HN: No Bullsh*t Guide to Fitness (for Men)

#16

Post by nostalgiac »

bobrocket wrote: post #15
nostalgiac wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Mention the dichotomy of strength vs muscle growth. Lower rep range focuses more on strength while higher rep range focuses on muscle growth. As far as I'm aware there's still no conclusive evidence for rep ranges affecting muscle growth vs strength. I'm well aware of all strength program routines and follow this method myself, but would love a source.

This study has some interesting findings backing the claim: http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00421-002-0681-6

Honestly, the first 3 words ("untrained men") of that study make me instantly reject any validity of the study.

Re: Show HN: No Bullsh*t Guide to Fitness (for Men)

#17

Post by JHof »

J-H wrote: post #14
JHof wrote: post #13

Change fitness to "bro-fitness".

Why is that? I realize I should probably provide my sources at the bottom, but everything was derived from personal experience and research. If you have something specific to point out, I'd be happy to provide you a source for it.

I used to be quite into doing exactly what you've written here. Even wanted to compete in an NPC competition. Your guide is the exact same stuff that's written about ad nauseam everywhere. That's fine, because it works for achieving this type of "fitness". Just seems to me that this is a very narrow definition of that. I don't look great shirtless, but I'm becoming a decent trail runner and can do 25-ish pull-ups. My 70 year old dad can't run, but he walks 1500 miles per year. Are we not fit/healthy? This is a standard bodybuilding routine, and seems like a very 20-something, American college male, Instagram idea of fitness. No problem, it's a good, concise guide. There's just a lot more to fitness than bodybuilding.
Post reply on HN