If you go into any gym nowadays, you'll be inundated with thousands of different ways to train, numerous peripherals to use to aid your training, hundreds of different diet plans, etc. One doesn't need to be a logician to realize that not all of these concepts can be equally valid. Something either works or it doesn't. It's as simple as that.
Let's briefly tackle nutrition: you have high-protein and low-fat, high-carbohydrate and low-protein, carb-cycling, high-protein/high-fat, etc. The list is almost endless. To make matters worse, there is a constant flood of new diet books on the market. Apparently our attention spans must be incredibly short because we gobble up these books like there's no tomorrow. Does it follow that the human body is so incredibly complex and our science is so wrong that every week the human body requires some sort of different eating plan?
Of course not. The human body, while not completely understood in its entirety, and I may add - may never be, is not so infinitely complex that we don't have a firm grasp on nutrition. It's just a question of who you listen to. I ask: do you you listen to the gym guru who is more than willing to sell you his/her meal plan for a month, a muscle magazine who is, in fact, owned by a supplement company, or do you listen to the latest research that comes out of laboratories conducted by scientists? I know what my answer is. What is yours?
One has to understand with all things physical comes a large genetic component. Every human being has certain genetic components that allow them to do things easier than other people. For instance, one individual may have the genetic predisposition to gain muscle at an easier rate than someone else. Additionally, it appears that there are a very, very small amount of people that may have a gene that allows for unusual muscle expression, i.e., abnormaly high amount of muscle and muscle growth.
Where am I going with this, you ask? Okay, let's take the guy in your gym who is very large. Of course you would ask him advice on how to build strength and size but what if this individual is blessed with phenomenal genetics? Would his advice necessarily work for you? If his arms were truly impressive and he said that he got arms that way by doing 20 sets of bicep curls three times a week, do you you really think that would work equally as well for you? Of course not. Everyone has varying levels of development they can obtain and everyone responds somewhat differently to a training stimulus. Point being: don't seek out the biggest guy in the gym and ask for advice; likely he would've been that size regardless of what kind of regimine he used.
That's not to say that if you have poor genetics you can't make progress. You most certainly can. Can you obtain the physique of a champion bodybuilder? Probably not, but you can damn sure improve upon what you have.
You have to look at things from your own perspective. Don't be dissuaded if you cannot achieve the physique of someone like Arnold Schwarzenegger or Dorian Yates. You're making the mistake of comparing yourself to someone else. All you can do is to compare yourself to YOURSELF.
Have you improved upon your size, strength, or leanness in the last year? Don't concern yourself with what other people are doing or what they have achived. They're not you.
While I'm on this subject something needs to be discussed that rarely surfaces - drug use. Unfortunately, many of they physiques that you see in today's muscle/fitness/health magazines are built with the use of drugs. Comparing yourself to someone in those magazines, frankly, is not a rational nor healthy objective to have. Think it's just the super-shredded bodybuilders that take drugs? Think again. Many females in figure and fitness do (as evidenced by their extreme leaness coupled with unusual amounts of muscle) and many pro athletes do as well. Once again, don't compare yourself to someone who is taking growth drugs. These chemicals allow for a large amount of mistakes to be made that would otherwise derail a normal individual.
The latest science clearly shows that a diet comprised of mainly vegetables, fruits, and nuts is the most beneficial way to eat. Should you cut out all meat? No one knows the answer to that question but science clearly does show that people who consume meat on a regular basis clearly have higher levels of heart disease. The evidence suggess little to no meat in a diet is perhaps the healthiest plan to follow.
What does "a little amount" consist of? Well, I can tell you that it would mean that meat is never your main course. It would essentially be something that is a topping or a something that would add flavor to a dish. Think of meat as a flavoring agent; something to be used sparingly to flavor your main dish.
What about protein, you ask? Simple. Eat grains and beans. Drink skim or soy milk. Eat bread that is fortified with protein (e.g., Ezekiel Bread). The list is endless but obtaining adequate protein is certainly not a problem. If you're ingesting adequate amounts of calories then it's probably safe to say that you're also eating enough protein.
Second question: how do I get 250 grams of protein a day from a diet like this? My answer would be: what evidence is there that the human body needs more than 100 grams of protein a day? None! One may choose to bury their head in the sand and believe what they will, but the belief that taking copious amounts of protein will build muscles has absolutely no basis in science.
What we're talking about is pre-historic illogic here. I'm sure everyone has heard of the ancient warrior who thought that to win battles and develop strength, he had to eat a bull or the meat of some ferocious animal. Well, science has developed quite a bit in the last 3,000 years. But don't tell the muscle magazines that. They discovered long ago in the 1950's that if they sold you a barbell set, then you weren't going to come back as a repeat customer. Your barbells will last a lifetime. The fledgling industry realized that if they sold customers food products then you would come back for more when you consumed all of their product. Hence, the protein industry was born.
If you doubt any of my claims, simply find any scientific nutrition/athletic journal and find studies related to muscle development and protein intake. Several studies have been done and they have all concluded virtually the same thing. An average male who weighs 180 lbs., needs about 60 to 80 grams of protein a day. Sixty grams for the average male and closer to eighty for the hard-training athlete. These amounts are easily obtained through a diet of natural, unprocessed foods. Supplements are not necessary.
What you say? You want to lose weight? Reduce your daily caloric intake. It's as simple as that. You doubt me? If so, then you doubt the immutable law of thermodynamics. It's very simple really - if you want to gain weight then you need to eat in excess of what your body requires to maintain its weight (what kind of weight you gain is directly influenced by your exercise program). If you want to lose weight then you need to have a caloric deficit, i.e., you need to eat fewer calories than what your body requires to maintain its weight. Once again, what kind of weight you lose is influenced by your exercise program or lack thereof. If you engage in anaerobic training, you're likely to maintain or stave off muscle loss. If you engage in aerobic training - or no training at all - then you're likely to lost a substantial amount of muscle alongside any fat that you lose.
