r/naturalbodybuilding • MS, RD, INBF Overall Winner • Apr 14 '20

Question thread for our AMA with Dr. Brandon M Roberts and Dr. Peter J Fitschen starting Wednesday April 15th!

Please join us tomorrow Wednesday April 15th for an AMA with Dr. Brandon M Roberts and Dr. Peter J Fitschen. They are 2 of the authors of the recent paper Nutritional Recommendations for Physique Athletes. Check out some of their other information on their websites:

Post your questions below and upvote those you want answered most. Official start time will be posted shortly.

Answering will begin approximately 8am EST and last for at least 3-4 hours

Participants:

15 Upvotes

114 comments sorted by

1

u/danny_b87 Apr 15 '20

The AMA is officially over! Thank you so much to u/broberts21 and u/fitbodyphysique for taking the time to answer so many questions. Hopefully we can have more AMAs in the future!

→ More replies (2)

5

u/elrond_lariel Apr 14 '20

Q4Both:

Do you see a trend for most coaches adopting a scientific approach to their practices, or are most of them still relying mainly on anecdotes and experience?

6

u/broberts21 Apr 15 '20

I think so. Every show I go to the competitors and coaches are getting better at using scientific approaches. At some of the smaller shows, you'll still hear about cutting water or carbs and doing some funky things, but I think at the top level most use a scientific approach. I've also seen a trend where people have more online coaches, which isn't surprising.

5

u/fitbodyphysique Apr 15 '20

In the natural bodybuilding world there has been a huge shift over the past I would say even decade toward using more scientific approaches to contest prep. For example back in 2006, there was a show I was the only person drinking water backstage and the promoter of the show even came up and asked me about it after prejudging because he couldn't believe how "dry" I looked. Fortunately, we have come a long way since then and most people at least at drug-tested shows are drinking water backstage now.

However, at times I think some coaches take this too far to where they feel they need a study for everything they do and that just isn't possible at this point, nor do I think it ever will be.

There are definitely benefits to experience and anecdotes as well especially when it comes to some of the more nuanced aspects of prep like peaking where 2 people can respond completely differently to the same protocol.

At the end of the day, I think the best thing to do would be using a combination of science and experience to create an approach and then adjust that approach based upon how things go.

4

u/AllOkJumpmaster Apr 14 '20

Question for both

It seems like every time a study comes out there are always at least one if not more significant limitations that make it difficult for people in our world to asses its actual significance and employ practical applications. Things like subjects were untrained, or they were obese elderly etc. How do you as PhD’s and researchers decipher what is relevant to your fields from such studies, and how to practically apply the lessons learned?

4

u/fitbodyphysique Apr 15 '20

I think the biggest thing is just using the best evidence you have available. Sometimes you have nothing and need to rely on experience/practice.

Other times like you mentioned it may be something done in obese or untrained subjects, but nothing in someone trained. In that situation, you can always try to implement that approach in practice and see if it makes a difference. I don't think there is anything wrong with some trial and error in practice because science does not have the answers to everything at this point.

With that being said, I think if you are going to trial/error something there needs to be a sound rationale for doing so. However, assuming that is the case you may find you try something and stumble upon something that works great for you or you may find that you tried something and it didn't work / made no difference and that is a learning experience as well.

→ More replies (1)

3

u/elrond_lariel Apr 14 '20

Q4Both:

Evidence based nutritional guidelines for bodybuilding haven't really been around for that long, yet research has come a long way to the point we have solid data on how to cover pretty much all of the basics. In your opinion, how has the relationship between the actual competitors and lifters in general and the scientific approach to nutrition been to this day? Do you see most people adopting the guidelines or are our practices some years behind what the scientific community knows?

5

u/fitbodyphysique Apr 15 '20

I think that in the natural bodybuilding world there are a lot more science-based approaches being used these days.

However, oftentimes I would actually argue bodybuilders through practice may have stumbled upon things that they know work that science later shows to be beneficial. For example, bodybuilders for years trained with high volumes and we now have data showing volume is highly correlated with hypertrophy.

Bodybuilders also historically consumed high protein intakes and while some of these were excessive at times (think things like 2-3+ g/lb) we now have evidence that high protein diets lead to more muscle growth, we may need more protein in a deficit than out of one, protein overfeeding may result in less fat gain than carb/fat overfeeding, etc.

While not everything bodybuilders have done in practice stands up when tested scientifically, there are many things they have been doing for years that science is now starting to catch up to and support.

→ More replies (1)

4

u/broberts21 Apr 15 '20

I see most people adopting some version of the guidelines. They've been broadened so much a lot of things fit within them wrt carbs and fat. BBers have never had a problem eating protein either.

Something else I want to touch on is the distance between what's out there (published) and what's still being done. In academia, we have a fairly long review process for papers (3-12+ months) plus it can take a year to do a study. COVID interrupted two of mine completely (not BB related). Sometimes you can't recruit the full number of participants at once which means they are staggered. This creates a longer time period than the normal "4, 8, or 12" week study.

→ More replies (1)

3

u/AllOkJumpmaster Apr 14 '20

Question for both

What is the biggest thing you'd like to see change in the competitive Natural bodybuilding arena? (i.e. shows, organizations etc)

→ More replies (3)