Busting The Most DAMAGING Protein & Fitness Myths! | Menno Henselmans

Estimated read time: 1:20

Summary

In this deep dive discussion, Menno Henselmans and Dr. Mike Israetel tackle various myths surrounding protein intake, fitness training, and diet. They explore the optimal amount of protein needed for muscle growth, debunk common misconceptions about low-carb diets, and clarify the impact of rest intervals and exercise frequency on muscle development. The conversation is rich with scientific analysis and personal insights, making it both informative and engaging for fitness enthusiasts.

Highlights

Menno challenges the widely held belief that excessive protein boosts satiety beyond muscle synthesis. 🌟
The importance of tailored rest intervals in training to maximize results. 🎯
Debunking myths around low-carb diets and their influence on muscle gain. 🍽️
Re-evaluating the benefits of caffeine and the potential drawbacks of dependency. 🚀
Prioritizing exercise technique and volume over stereotypical training myths for biceps and triceps growth. 💪

Key Takeaways

Protein overconsumption doesn't increase satiety after exceeding muscle synthesis needs. 🍗
The right amount of rest between sets can optimize muscle growth and strength gains. ⏲️
Carb and fat intake should be personalized for comfort and effectiveness, not strictly limited. 🍚🥑
Longer rest intervals are more beneficial for strength training, while shorter ones, with adjusted sets, can work for hypertrophy. 💪
Caffeine, while providing a cognitive boost, may impair sleep quality and can become a dependency if not managed properly. ☕🛌

Overview

Menno Henselmans, along with Dr. Mike Israetel from Renaissance Periodization, delves into the depths of fitness and nutrition myths, debunking many with science-backed evidence. They begin by tackling the common misconceptions around protein intake, emphasizing the minimal gains once muscle synthesis needs are met and the myth of protein significantly affecting satiety levels.

The dialogue transitions into workout strategies, with Menno advocating for personalized rest intervals in training sessions. This tailored approach helps in maximizing both strength gains and muscle growth, rather than strictly adhering to fixed timeframes, which might not consider individual recovery rates and exercise types.

The conversation also touches on nutritional strategies, emphasizing a flexible approach to carb and fat intake. Menno stresses the need for balance depending on personal goals and lifestyle, alongside crucial insights into caffeine consumption, urging discipline in dosage to avoid sleep disturbances and potential dependency.

Chapters

00:00 - 07:30: Introduction and Protein Myths In the chapter titled 'Introduction and Protein Myths,' the discussion centers around the often misunderstood role of protein intake and its effects on the body. It is highlighted that increasing protein consumption beyond the requirements for protein synthesis—such as above point eight grams per pound—does not lead to additional benefits in terms of satiety or hunger management. Protein shakes, frequently consumed for their supposed satiating properties, are examined. Contrary to popular belief, they may not be satiating and could potentially increase appetite. Unlike foods that may leave one feeling full and less inclined to eat, protein shakes might not provide a compensatory response that curbs further eating. The content appears to reference insights from Dr. Mike, associated with RP (likely Renaissance Periodization, known for fitness advice).
07:31 - 15:00: Protein Intake Levels and Their Implications In this chapter, the host introduces the guest, Men Henselman, on a strength-focused YouTube channel. The interaction begins with a humorous exchange about appearances, and the host expresses genuine delight to have Men on the podcast. The host quickly transitions the conversation towards the main topic, which involves a detailed discussion on protein intake levels and their various implications, setting the stage for an in-depth analysis of dietary considerations in strength training.
15:01 - 18:00: Examining Meta-Analyses and Nutrient Timing The chapter begins by referencing a social media post where there was a controversial statement about if Milo wolf would recommend any amount of protein, there would be a confrontation. The post was meant to be humorous but highlighted the ongoing debate on protein recommendations. The conversation is likely centered around the optimal protein intake and nutrient timing, which are common topics in nutrition and fitness discussions.
54:01 - 63:00: Caffeine Use and Misuse The chapter discusses differing perspectives on protein intake in relation to body weight. It highlights a suggestion made by Milo on the channel that emerging data supports consuming about 1.25 grams of protein per pound of body weight for some individuals. In contrast, another viewpoint suggests that even as little as 0.75 grams per pound per day can meet almost all dietary needs. The narrator humorously positions themselves in-between these perspectives, consuming a gram per pound. The chapter portrays a balanced view amid varying expert opinions.
63:01 - 75:00: Rest Intervals for Strength and Muscle Hypertrophy This chapter discusses the debate between two perspectives on rest intervals for strength and muscle hypertrophy, drawing upon different sources and analyses. It particularly focuses on Milo's perspective, which is largely informed by a Japanese meta-analysis from 2020. The chapter uses an analogy of a heated argument escalating from yelling to throwing pillows, and possibly dishes, to illustrate the intensity of differing views on the subject.
75:01 - 90:00: Diet Myths and Carbohydrates vs. Fats The chapter explores the debate between carbohydrates and fats in diets, highlighting that a specific study found benefits above a protein intake of 1.3 grams per kilogram per day. However, the study did not conduct a breakpoint analysis to determine the maximum benefit point for muscle growth or lean body mass. The focus is on lean body mass as this is what most meta-analyses evaluate, but it is important to consider that these findings may not apply universally.
90:01 - 95:00: Biceps and Triceps Training Myths The chapter discusses the myths around biceps and triceps training and touches upon the complexities involved in understanding muscle growth data. It highlights that many studies have issues, particularly that they often don't specify whether benefits exist beyond a certain protein intake threshold. Although models suggest a positive association with higher intakes, these findings are not thoroughly validated beyond 1.3 grams of protein per pound per day.
95:01 - 105:00: Closing Remarks and Meno Henselmans PT Course This chapter discusses protein intake and its effects on hypertrophy in lifters and non-lifters. It mentions an observation by Milo about reaching 1.3 grams of protein per pound leading to more muscle growth. For lifters, increased protein correlated with more hypertrophy. However, in non-lifters, when accounting for body weight gained, the correlation was not as clear beyond 7 grams per pound.

Busting The Most DAMAGING Protein & Fitness Myths! | Menno Henselmans Transcription

00:00 - 00:30 we found uh no benefits above uh the requirements for protein synthesis so above like8 gram uh per pound un satiety for satiety hunger a li bitum energy intake like all measures waist shakes are not satiating at all a lot of people actually get hungry from a waist Shake if you're like fasted you're like oh no I'm not that hungry have a way Shake A lot of people actually that more triggers more appetite it doesn't have like a compensatory response where afterwards you're full and you don't eat anymore folks Dr Mike here for the RP
00:30 - 01:00 strength YouTube channel and today we have in the studio with us an esteemed colleague friend and person who I wish I looked more like every single day that I have to stare in the mirror at this disgusting ridiculous mangled face men henselman glad to be here uh do you just say that on every podcast or are you really glad to be here I say it's on every podcast but in this case it's true oh my God man it's good to have you let's get cracking right into to the meat and potatoes you earlier
01:00 - 01:30 made a social media post where you said if I ever see Milo wolf around any amount of protein we're going to be fist fighting each other MH and I want you to explain that I think I said fisting not fist fighting wow that really does change things but nonetheless still violent still very personal and still controversial about how much protein that YouTube recommend so just to put
01:30 - 02:00 this in perspective we had Milo on the channel a while ago he said some emerging data suggests that for some folks it might be a good idea to eat something like 1.25 grams of protein per pound of body weight and maybe even a little bit more in some cases you're typically of the perspective that for many cases if not most even as little as 75 grams per pound per day of protein can cover all almost all if not all of your bases and I'm like the coward that I am at a gram per pound right in the middle and it's like I have Mom and Dad
02:00 - 02:30 in this case two dads and you're in that sort of fight where you're at first yelling and then like you start throwing pillows but I'm just waiting for like you know the uh the dishes to start flying explain this to me in a way that with my limited intellect I can understand where do you think Milo is coming from where are you coming from and let's put some daylight between the two hit me from what I understand about Milo's perspective is that he relies primarily on the Japanese meta analysis from 2020 I believe
02:30 - 03:00 and that one found well technically all it found is that there are benefits above 1.3 gram per kilogram per day and they found that there wasn't really a um a cutoff point it seemed in the data but the analysis also didn't do an actual breakpoint analysis so they didn't actually check like what's the maximum point at which we find benefits for muscle growth or lean body mass lean body mass is what most of these met analysis you look at so that's also good to realize it's not necessarily even
03:00 - 03:30 muscle growth and these data have many many many problems with them so for one just the technical point that they technically didn't look at whether there are benefits above usually what I recommend is 08 gram per pound or 1.8 gram per kilogram per day they didn't actually look at if there are benefits above that they just found that the model said there is a positive Association essentially between higher intakes above 1.3 G per G per day and it seemed that
03:30 - 04:00 they went all the way up to what uh I think Milo said was 1.3 G per pound something like that when not adjusting for body weight gained both lifters and non-li saw more hypertrophy as they consumed more protein all the way to 1.3 G per pound however in non-li once you then controlled for body weight gained that relationship kind of went away like past like I think 7 G per pound then you no weight
04:00 - 04:30 doesn't really matter right however in lifters when even when adjusting for body weight gained higher protein intakes led to more growth all the way to 1.3 grams per pound it was there was still an element of diminishing returns wherein the slope was kind of Greater up until around that previous figure of 1.6 gr per kilogram or8 roughly and then afterwards it kind of the slope diminished but it was still positive you you could make that argument based on that data based on those data I think it's not entirely
04:30 - 05:00 unreasonable but looking at those data alone and not looking at the other data especially within with the many flaws of that met analysis to me doesn't make a lot of sense we can go into like Greg Knuckles Point as well later if you want I think that's a bit more compelling but you want to just list some of the major um limitations for the metal yes and I want you to list them in a way that attacks Milo's character personally right seriously let's get the let's get the flaw scientifically yeah so for one
05:00 - 05:30 they didn't really look at a breakpoint that's a big one and that's particularly problematic because they didn't report anything that was it was honestly just a bad analysis they didn't report model fit statistics r squared model fit they just showed the the line they didn't even show the effect sizes the data points like normally you show what the actual data points are and then you show what kind of what the line that your model Works through those data points right and they didn't even show the data
05:30 - 06:00 points they just showed the model fit line which doesn't tell you much at all and it's kind of like just trust me bro now going into the actual limitations of the data they got in in the first place is that they included weight loss studies and quite a lot of them were weight loss studies in fact they I think they said at some point in the paper five out of 104 something like five out of 105 papers were actually completely equal in conditions all the other papers had at least one confounding Factor so
06:00 - 06:30 very often the higher protein intake group had a higher energy intake group because the control group just didn't supplement protein so they looked at protein supplementation versus placebo basically nothing let me describe that to the folks listening what you're trying to say if you try to see which amount of protein will get me more jacked or get me less muscle loss but your study design is one group eats X and another group eats X Plus supplementary protein you're now comparing two conditions not just
06:30 - 07:00 protein differences but protein and calorie differences and so we have to ask the question of scientists is are they getting more jacked because they're eating more protein or is it the calories because then you would need a third group potentially that had extra protein uh uh for the first group regular second group extra protein third group extra carbs to equalize the calories and then you could really test is it the calories or is it the protein and so that wasn't done in many of the studies or I assume almost all of them and then thus it's very difficult to see as is it really the extra protein doing
07:00 - 07:30 the work yes another big factor was nutrient timing now a lot of people will say nutrient timing doesn't matter but there are actually a couple studies where they supplement additional protein so most of these studies all of them actually they look at habitual protein intake in one group habitual protein intake in the other group and then one of the groups supplements additional protein on top of that like a protein supplement whey protein or whatever usually they supplement that pre- or post-workout mhm or an additional meal
07:30 - 08:00 so you're increasing meal frequency or you have post-workout supplementation a lot of people in evidence-based Fitness will say that doesn't matter and largely I agree with that like at least total daily protein intake is more important than when you consume it but it's more of a spectrum to me than simply saying it doesn't matter and there are actually at least three studies where the additional protein intake group ended up not having a higher total protein intake but they did have the benefit of the nutrient timing like post-workout protein supplementation and they still
08:00 - 08:30 got better gains and that can happen because of these habitual intakes like you just get a bunch of people you tell half of them add some protein shake to your daily intake and it turns out yeah just because of life or whatever they their normal protein intake decreased and therefore or the other Pro other group had an increase in protein intake because it's it's not controlled in these studies it's just habitual intake and then it can happen that you do the study and as researchers you're often very sad to find out if also how it happen at the end oh the group that we
08:30 - 09:00 wanted to consume more protein didn't actually consume more protein which kind of invalidates your whole study but in some of these studies you find that still they got better gains so that's a pretty robust Way by accident to measure the fact that nutrin timing at least seen in one of two ways one Perry workout nutrition or to an additional meal maybe you eat two or three times a day now I eat three or four times a day we're unable to tell if it's like is it the extra calories is it the extra meal
09:00 - 09:30 frequency or is it the attention to the par workout window that is really doing the heavy lifting to actually make folks have better gains or less impactful muscle losses on a fat loss phase yep and if you look at the studies that have controlled for these things especially nutrient timing interestingly energy intake doesn't scream uh doesn't scream out to me like a a huge confounding variable if you look at the studies where nutrient timing was controlled so they just increased protein intake not like habitual intake plus protein shake
09:30 - 10:00 usually they actually just told them aim for this versus aim for this mhm in those studies and there are about 45 of them there is none not a single study that has found benefits over the 1.6 gram per kilogram per day okay so let's open that up super super quick that's a big problem because one of the accurate critiques of the meta analytic approach of meta analyses as a class of research exploration is that sometimes through
10:00 - 10:30 interesting processes of kind of statistical aggregation you can get a look from a men analysis that no one study actually found and it it wasn't even that oh well this is like a situation where if you look at one word at a time nothing makes sense but if you look at a whole sentence it makes sense it's not one of those it's actually just statistical uh uh anomaly that occurs and then you end up being like Oh there's something there but when there's a very well-designed 10 studies inside of a subset of 100 that are meta
10:30 - 11:00 analyzed and those 10 studies exactly ask the very rigorous question you're asking and all of them say it doesn't work is really difficult to figure out how that situation uh could actually play out and so maybe there is something emerging from the statistical noise that is true but we have to be guarded with the idea that like well actually man maybe there's not you know what I mean it's it's sort of similar to to kind of saying you know there are people that take multivitamins and don't and let's say the multivitamin people have like like a penis size that's 8 in
11:00 - 11:30 larger right but then you actually give people a multivitamin and measure their penis size for 8 weeks and just nothing happens to it that you got to be like man like we tested the exact thing we were asking that didn't work are we really comfortable in concluding for meta analytic which is kind of a rough proxy that This Thing Really Works that's a problem yes yes absolutely especially because since our original metaanalysis which also absolutely wasn't perfect but it confirmed simply
11:30 - 12:00 exactly what I expected from the the fact of that we had at least 45 studies showing okay none of these studies actually find the benefits over 1.6 gr per kilogram per day and then we did a breakpoint analysis which found exactly 1.6 gr per kilogram per day as the most likely break point so the point at which additional protein intake no longer further increased lean body mass gains then I was like oh okay that's exactly as expected so a lot of people have looked at like armat analysis versus the newer
12:00 - 12:30 met analysis I think both we our met met analysis so we I was part of a met analysis oh so it's fucking biased yes it's just me defending my original biases and Milo coming out and me not wanting to believe when the researchers were doing the test tube stuff do you walk into the lab and hand them a dollar bill and you're like more in this test tube yeah that's how science work for the meta we don't have to do that we just change the numbers in the spreadsheet even easier do you give yourself a dollar then so if it's like
12:30 - 13:00 1.6 um or they it's like maybe 2.2 and I'm just like 1.6 science that's it that's all there all right folks that's been fun all right yes okay uh heard loud and clear no I can play devil's advocate for um for my own views of course please for one the 1.6 I recommend 1.8 right to to be clear I think 1.6 is pretty much where the data show at this point we no longer see significant benefits but um to your point this is grams per kilogram
13:00 - 13:30 yes gr per Kil so for people in the Civilized world that use pounds and have American Eagles as pets at home that's 8 grams per pound per day 7 7 is where we no longer see significant benefits in uh randomized control trials that controlled for nutrient timing the very exact kind of studies you want to do to see if eating more protein will actually get you more jacked yeah but you could argue you could make a very reasonable argument GRE Knuckles just made that argument part that even though none of
13:30 - 14:00 these individual studies find a benefit some of the studies which didn't have nutrient timing they did find a benefit plus if we aggregate all of these studies together we do see some trends that the effect sizes tend to be greater in the higher protein groups even though individually none of the studies that's statistically significant okay they have pretty small sample sizes you know train lifters eight we study how much muscle growth are you going to get okay they get maybe a little bit more gains in one of the groups it's hard to detect yeah it's there's a lot of variant there so
14:00 - 14:30 it's like if you have a ruler that measures only in integer inches but something in increased by 2 cm which is uh 2.54 cm is one inch you would actually conclude from that study that like nothing happened but like 2 centimet is damn near almost an inch and so it you would be finding a result you basically your stud is not powered enough to detect the difference exactly and we already know the difference is quite small from eating plenty of protein to eating extra plenty like if you're eating it for years and you're training really hard it is worth to get an extra five or 10 percent gains which
14:30 - 15:00 is kind of a big deal especially if you're Advanced that's kind of how the understanding goes yeah yes yes so I probably want to do a new met analysis based on especially Greg Knuckles critique Milo wolfes studied not so much The Meta that he uh is there something you don't like about Japanese people that you want to tell us about on this channel I like uh I like the researchers I like the fact in particular that they essentially admitted that their methods were not so good and they did another meta analysis afterwards on strength development and they switched essentially to our method which excluded
15:00 - 15:30 weight loss studies and then they found that for strength development maximum gains occur at 1.5 gram per kilogram per day so even a little bit lower technically speaking than the 1.6 we we do know strength training probably on mechanistic grounds does not require as much protein to have the whole process go to maximum yes but at least theoretically if there was substantial additional muscle growth that should translate into greater strength development in the long term yeah again in short term you might not see that effect so again there is
15:30 - 16:00 some uh room for debate there but it's pretty striking that the number is almost exactly the same like 1.5 1.6 yeah so and again none of the individual studies find statistically significantly greater muscle growth or strength development or muscle growth when we control for nutrient timing and even when you don't control for nutrient timing there are again like 45 studies and there are three or four that find benefits of higher intakes now one additional major limitation of all these ual intake studies is basically what
16:00 - 16:30 people think happens is so protein intake 1.6 other group consumes 2.2 this group has more gains therefore 2.2 is better that is not the case in one of these studies with habitual intakes which all the Met analyses look at I don't know why that is I addressed it when we did The Meta analysis as well it's easier to study I guess but what we're interested in is look you target 1.6 I Target 2.2 and then we see who gets better results right and then with whole group of people not just one individual if I look at group of people consuming
16:30 - 17:00 1.6 habitually like at their normal intake that means 1.6 is the average that's usually normally distributed which means half the people in that study are consuming less than 1.6 gr per kilogram per day so if there are benefits of the 2.2 it could very well be the case that all of those benefits are from the 50% of people that weren't even consuming the average intake to begin with that makes sense so in essence what you're saying is it
17:00 - 17:30 could be that 2.2 is better on the average but mostly that's because when you compare to 1.6 a ton of those people that are eating like one in the 1.6 average are dragging down the curve and if you just eliminate the really nasty low intakes which most of the 2.2 people have that's where you get most of the benefits it's kind of like um if you take Runners of very different running speeds and you put like a rabid bear behind them that runs at like 10 m/ second um it's not that you need to run much faster than that it's that if you run any slower you get eaten and so much
17:30 - 18:00 much less than 1.6 could be the real problem bringing the 1.6 down potentially yes especially in these habitual intake studies yeah because you're not you're not looking at 1.6 versus 2.2 you're looking at a distribution of people with average 1.6 versus average 2.2 corre correct there's also multiple confounding factors or people who take in 2.2 typically are demographically more interested in optimizing hypertrophy and maybe sleeping better training better more attention to detail ta they've seen better gains and thus have jumped on the
18:00 - 18:30 wagon of gaining more protein because they have better genetics cuz you have shit gains either way you're kind of like fuck this um dope can you tell us a little bit more about Greg Knuckles recent articles excellent article Stronger by science everyone should go read it if you have 50 hours if not just read the first several paragraph where Greg is kind enough to summarize uh the article's findings in an awesome table I mean Stronger by science is just like just an amazing resource go check it out and so what did what did Greg do this slightly different than Milo well actually just what did what did the summary that you can give of of Greg's
18:30 - 19:00 insight and what do you think about it personally is Greg still one of these just totally stupid people that just can't reason about protein although he is real smart but about protein just dumb as rocks yeah so Milo's argument rested pretty much entirely on finding out there was another Japanese meta analysis that seemingly found benefits of higher inex which is good right it's good that he surfaced that because people were just to his point citing only exclusively the older meta and just never even recognize the new one exists which maybe for good reason but maybe like should be aware of it yes um then I
19:00 - 19:30 would say you know he didn't recognize the fact that the same researchers using better methods found at least for strength development that the um the earlier results of ours was were very neatly replicated sure and then what Greg Knuckles did funny enough is he looked at yet another met analysis that nobody looked at Nunes atal in 2022 if I'm not mistaken now where are they from Nunes at um I think it was a mixed group I think the lead offer is Brazilian if I'm not m do we really trust the Brazilians
19:30 - 20:00 as a people I mean um that's actually honestly not uh an entirely unfair point when it when it comes to exercise science studies because there have been multiple instances especially by the Matos barbalo and Pao gentil where those research groups have been implicated in um I think actually Greg Knuckles said that um what is it statistically improbable data patterns I call it statistical malf yes uh so but I mean uh Liv in Brazil Brazil is great they're
20:00 - 20:30 very dedicated very into fitness a lot of good researchers there love Fitness um and in this case a meta analysis it's not like one of those studies and none of these researchers were implicated in Anye whole thing people I'm just trying to stir the fucking pot for no reason so let's exactly let's uh assume that all the data were well done it was we have every reason to believe that it was all well done yeah actually one of the offers on the new met analysis new at all was also on armat analysis steart Phillips he's also great yes Ste Phillips uh um if he ever ceases to
20:30 - 21:00 exist I believe all protein will also cease to exist because he is connected to the protein force in such a deep way yeah so there was a a much better analysis but they didn't really perform a breakpoint analysis they looked at kind of categories and they found that the people that ended up with higher protein intakes than 1.6 get get better gains than the people that ended up with protein intakes in the range of 1.3 to 1.6 mhm but again you don't know if it's the benefits going up to 1.6 that make the difference or if there are benefits to higher intakes so Greg Knuckles took
21:00 - 21:30 the data from that mat analysis reanalyzed it in a much better manner really good very compelling math analysis I would argue I would even dare say it's the first time I've seen evidence that made me question like oh shit maybe actually there are really benefits of more than 1.8 gram per kilogram more than 0.8 gram per pound and I actually have no critiques at all on the way he did the analysis the only issue is that he took the data from the nunal Met analysis which again
21:30 - 22:00 is data where pretty much all the protein studies are lumped together no control for energy intake no control for nutrient timing and again looking only at these studies where they had habitual intake versus habitual intake plus protein intake and the data on those studies are a lot more positive than the data that controls as I said for nutrient timing and they looked at groups where it's you target this you target this so at this point I'm actually not entirely sure I'm working
22:00 - 22:30 on um like an updated met analysis where we specifically look at the controlled studies with 1.6 or higher intakes and see if there is some benefit that we can in a met analysis tease out showing that there are some benefits to higher intakes Greg Knuckles said based on his data analysis the break point is more likely to be two grams per kilogram and it's going to be somewhere in the range of I think 1.7 to 2.3 or 2.4 even um which is also quite a wide range but
22:30 - 23:00 he said the most likely break point is 2 gram per kilogram now breakpoint meaning eating any more than this almost certainly does not cause any better gains yes and again statistically that holds up entirely the only question is is that because in these studies they have better nutrient timing higher energy intakes or if it's really the protein intake there's actually an interesting it's not a formal subanalysis but it's a qualitative examination of data that you can do that I'm a real big fan of when you have lots of um studies examining a certain
23:00 - 23:30 subject what you can do is not not even not even formal subgroup analysis what you can do is take all the studies and at least heris rank them on the qualitative strength of their methods like which one of these are the best controlled most rigorous have the best internal validity at least and hopefully external yeah and then when you get a ranking like that then you actually rank out next to them their roughly the effect sizes or their findings and you try to ask the question of like as the studies get better better controlled in the sample of let's say 50 studies where
23:30 - 24:00 is the trend for the results cuz often times there is no Trend and then you're like Okay cool so like um we're actually whatever the meta analysis says is probably the directionality of the data it's really really unfortunate if you find that the um data gets uh you know less convincing the better control is that you're then you know you're dealing with very poor data quality analytic quality and then and that's when you say like this meta analysis is something we just just should probably not be looking at but sometimes and very often what ends up happening is when you have uh ranked uh Studies by how good the
24:00 - 24:30 studies are you have either a dissipation of the trend or an improvement in the trend if it's dissipation it really is like dude you guys this is probably statistical noise there's very unlikely to be anything here if it's Improvement of the trend it's like well the better the study the more we find that there's something there there's probably something there like if you think you see a needle in a hay stack and the closer you look you're like there's a needle versus the closer you look and you're like I think I don't see the needle anymore but when I back up I definitely think I see a need you ain't there ain't no needle there you're
24:30 - 25:00 just losing your mind that happens in a bunch of different sciences and so in this case if if we did one of those you're pretty confident that we would find that the higher formal controls we add to the study the less likely it's discover that higher protein is better yeah I'm certainly open to the possibility of higher intakes having like a marginal benefit but I would say that we should have found that more consistently in individual studies at least yeah and we have a lot of studies now on vegan diets finding surprisingly small effects like
25:00 - 25:30 much smaller effects than we anticipated say 10 years ago which also suggest that like even the 1.6 or 1.8 which I recommend is often already enough with vegetarian or vegan diets which again also suggests it's already pretty safe because if you were just if that was just like n kind of on a threshold and you significantly reduce the protein quality which happens in a vegan diet you would expect significantly worse gains yeah that's a very good way to go about it Mena what do your kind of summary take your current position on
25:30 - 26:00 protein recommendation um recognizing Milo's insights your own insights and Greg knuckle's recent um summary where do you tend to give like can you I would like two things from you how much protein do I need to eat if I just want to get awesome gains not have to worry and not have to turn my life into a giant protein feeding session and two if I'm like just have no friends no one cares about me at all all I have is the gym every gram of gains counts to me how
26:00 - 26:30 much protein should I be eating to know with good margin that there's no new meta that's going to come out and say look you kind of pissed away marginally the last year and a half of your training I would say that for almost all populations the 1.8 gram per kilogram 0.8 gr per pound is going to be sufficient so if I weigh 200 lb I eat 160 gr of protein or more and like that's your minimum daily intake minimum at least 50% of that has to come from
26:30 - 27:00 high quality sources and you have to distribute it across at least three meals with some reasonable nutrient timing the workout has to be you're not training fasted at least within a few hours after the workout or let's say within a 5H hour intermeal window uh you need to pre and the post-workout meals okay so that's the bottom end yes okay and if you consume that's not the Target no that's a minimum Target minimum Target yes so most people end up with higher intakes anyway yes which already buffers in some um there's
27:00 - 27:30 an automatic buffer essentially when you um formulate it that way yeah but you don't want to get into telling your like RP diet coach app like I'm going to I'm 200 lb I'm going to eat 160 uh you're going to want 160 to be like get better eat that every time and it had better be high quality and you had better get your timing right so what's a comfortable buffer that you're going to tell people that like look okay yes it's 160 for 200 lb people if I eat 180 and I get my neutrient time is okay and
27:30 - 28:00 I Zig when I should have zagged a couple times is that going to save me or do you need to go to 200 I would say if every gram counts you don't want to wait until there's another meta analysis looking at the effect of study quality on these met analyses like an Arbiter then I would go with the GRE Knuckles two gram per kilogram so which is almost a gram per pound yeah and you could go with a gr per pound if you're like even more like look I don't even want a chance uh that maybe some new study comes out as well and then there's a new math analysis and turns out yeah
28:00 - 28:30 actually that there was like a 5% increase in gains um it's it's possible so the thing with the range is that we're not just looking at the effect of okay the the optimal intake is likely here most most of the variance between these numbers comes from the uncertainty have that we have from the data like the data are limited yes right so it's not like gr and I come to a different number and it's it's either this or it's that number it's like we both come to to arrange essentially and Greg says I
28:30 - 29:00 think we should be here and I say I think this is most likely enough when you add when you account for all of these confounding factors but if you're like hey I don't care about any of that I just want to make absolutely sure I don't care about the data or for what reason if I absolutely want to maximize muscle growth I would probably go with the break points from gr current gr's current analysis which is two G per kilogram two gam per kilogram roughly a gram per pound and to be extra safe and then so eating more than a gram per
29:00 - 29:30 pound can you see a situation where drug-free bodybuilders in the last several weeks of contest prep on a very low calorie diet could benefit from more protein than that still or is that to you like really possible but stretching expectations very much stretching I would say the whole idea of higher energy intakes being necessary and energy deficit is really not well supported higher protein intakes necessary and low energy deficit yeah okay there's there's direct research and at least in untrained individuals showing it's not case yeah in trained individuals we don't have a good study
29:30 - 30:00 that essentially does a triple interaction effect right we're not just looking at is there a higher protein intake in trains versus or in training versus nontraining individuals but then also does that interact with the effect of energy intake as well so it's like if you're training and you're in energy deficit then it's there's a further increase that's very difficult to find in studies yeah and current data simply don't support it yet it's not an unreasonable hypothesis but it also doesn't really mechanistically follow like lot of people have some intuitive idea of like oh yeah makes sense because
30:00 - 30:30 it prevents uh muscle loss or like then your body doesn't have to oxidize protein protein oxidation and breakdown they don't actually normally increase much in energy deficit and if you're like woefully deficient it can but normally what happens is your body just Tunes down the protein symphysis yeah and if you think about it okay so there's less protein symphysis protein breakdown levels are the same then theoretically you could actually need less protein yeah sure we're not going to pull too much on that threat we're going to get cancelled for that one uh that is very insightful so basically you
30:30 - 31:00 would say sort of like 08 grams per pound if you're doing a pretty good job and you need to be sure you're doing fine and then uh roughly a gram per pound uh if you really just do not want to be on the wrong side of this yeah fright train of protein controversy there are a few categories which likely need the higher end of that maybe even more okay vegans uh people on gear I think actually funny enough I'm I'm known as the low protein guy but for
31:00 - 31:30 people on gear I'm actually I actually recommend very high I don't like the term people on gear and I'll tell you why we used to call them homeless people but now the politically correct term is people experiencing homelessness I don't like that because it irritates my right-wing Supremacy Vibe and so I actually do not like to call them people on gear I like to call them uh hopeless degenerate steroid addicts and I never abbreviate right okay so hopeless degenerate steroid addict probably needs
31:30 - 32:00 a little bit more protein in fact not a little bit a lot more but that's a personal hypothesis you have which has almost no support on the data um we have data on prote symphysis in people on gear okay and it goes up massively so it's uh data that's inferenced not for real world data but inferential data based on physiological understanding of cellular processes Plus in the absence of it data on how much protein intake is required to maximize
32:00 - 32:30 muscle growth in this case shocker Shocker from the evidence-based guy I actually think it makes sense to look at the protein the protein intakes of professional bodybuilders sure of course next best thing right you look at uh physiological rational you look at real world practices and since we don't have any direct data you're not going to be like well both of these are wrong and stupid you're going to be like ah just do the safe thing and eat more protein yes and so like uh for steroid people maybe 1.25 gram per pound or something like that is uh one of those insurance policy numbers I think some of the survey data on like high level
32:30 - 33:00 professional bodybuilders they're in the range of 2.3 to like 3.1 G per kilogram so that's actually kind of like more like Milos recommendations yes I think that makes sense are you saying Milos on steroids Scott that's the clip um very cool very cool thumbnail uh man that was very insightful So speaking of protein mhm I consume protein for specifically three reasons one well sorry more protein just more
33:00 - 33:30 whatever amount you think more for three reasons M reason one is that protein like mechanistically makes you jacked because it composes your muscles reason two is that I want people to see me consume a lot of protein they ask me if I'm Into Fitness so that I can just ramble about my macros to them until they show you're rich right awkwardly leave also yes I like because my value of wealth peaked in the 1920s I absolutely weigh higher protein just to tell people like I can do this and all of you have to like make mock ham
33:30 - 34:00 sandwiches and shit like that you care about inflation inflation must be something my servants are worried about the only thing inflating is my money supply but most importantly the reason I eat a lot of protein is because I often become hungry and want to eat snacks and Treats but protein crushes my appetite when I ate way more of it is anything about what I said wrong in your view I think protein is not inherently more satiating
34:00 - 34:30 than carbs or fats when you exceed the requirements for muscle protein symphysis so if I'm getting a gram per pound eating one and a half grams per pound of protein per day on a fat loss diet where I'm cutting my calories and taking that extra half gram per pound and cutting it out of my carbs and putting it into my protein I thought was best practice but you're here embarrassing me on my own I will say quite successful YouTube channel how dare you explain Yeah we actually did a study on exactly
34:30 - 35:00 this to test this you mean Wei you and that the computer mouse that has jizz stains on it yeah that too she participated she heavily yeah and uh we compared uh I believe it was 1.8 versus 2.9 so it's like a lot more protein 2.7 50% per kilogram all civilized people use that yes yes rule britania yeah it's funny because in science everybody uses the metric system but most of my audience also uses
35:00 - 35:30 imperial system yeah so can get confusing yeah anyway we found uh no benefits above uh the requirements for protein synthesis so above like 08 gram per pound untiy for satiety hunger ad lium energy intake like all measures lium energy intake means if we feed you some protein but then we say like eat whatever you want people who way more protein don't really eat any less food than you would expect yeah you give them a buffet and you're like d g bro hell yeah challenge accepted yeah like you
35:30 - 36:00 see those study manuscript like like an asterisk one person died of overeating you're like holy shit they really did push it okay so okay but like there has to be something to how this got started Can you steal man the idea is it a food palatability thing is it like the way protein hits the face because I know a lot of the protein studies the real smart researchers what they do is they go okay there may be something filling about chewing on a protein-like texture
36:00 - 36:30 and so if we give people like clear way protein shakes and they still experience a decrease in hunger well there something mechanistically with protein maybe but if we give them clearway protein shakes and they're like I'm just as hungry as I ever was we're like well this must not be the protein that it might be something about the food are there any studies that have looked at that specifically yes and that's precisely the point that protein per se is not inherently more satiating than carbs or fats research is quite clear on this there's also a met analysis that looked at the effect and you see that in at lower intakes there is an effect
36:30 - 37:00 protein is inherently more shating than carbs or F when you're not getting enough exactly it's very well demonstrated protein hunger is actually demonstrated in medical research across third world countries like if you don't get enough protein you actually start to dream and fantasize about meat at the very low Ends by the way Politically Incorrect please not politically incorrect it's just messed up so if you're a child or if you're watching this with a child mute the next several seconds uh very low protein intakes for populations you will get um autod development of cannibalism in many cases it's like the least least Politically Incorrect thing you've said
37:00 - 37:30 in a while it's true cannibalism is least wow I have hit a new low point in my life that was a direct quote from my psychotherapist cannibalism is like a three out of 10 on the mic scale oh my God it doesn't even make the mic scale Al if you think about it a lot quite disturbing okay so we already know that if you're not getting enough protein more protein is more satiating and also necessary for all the protein stuff that it does it's called protein leverage I love it so let's put that aside cuz like if you're undereating protein you're just like can you just like stop one of just like do better oh nice you're not
37:30 - 38:00 one of us yeah just turn off the turn off the channel just kidding don't don't we get ad re you're already out grou you don't belong you try to eat more protein like n it's too late um if you're eating enough protein like even a gram per pound per day so you're saying like just on protein alone if I eat more I'm not going to get more satiated than if I eat more fats or more carbs but are there any foods or food types of carbs or of fats or is it the fats and carbs themselves that have a bigger yield on
38:00 - 38:30 satiety what's your take yes so at that point it's no longer about the macronutrients it's about the food okay pause so that means if I eat more protein or more fats or more carbs they have roughly the same effect on satiety as macronutrients yes okay but the specific types of proteins or fats or carbs that I can eat that'll reduce my Hunger more they matter greatly so liquid ones that are I'm kidding liquids are known to cause a smaller decrease of satiety correct exactly and tell tell us the rest of the scale what kinds of foods come out in this like anti-
38:30 - 39:00 satiety thing So Pro satiety sorry Jesus Christ regardless of whether it's protein or not uh something that you have to chew on a lot with a harder texture that requires more oral processing as researchers say my God I expect it something no what did you do something sexual you know how many sexual things I had queued up in my brain to say that I'm desperately trying to shut up about on this channel disappointing don't encourage me yeah so I've done a bit of oral processing myself if you know what mean all right fine so things that you
39:00 - 39:30 have to chew on more and the like they they say shape more if it's um not so palatable it'll say Chase more yes okay so food that is hyper delicious you go through it you just want more exactly and then food that's not so tasty and you have to chew it on for a while like broccoli you're like uh and someone's like do you want more food you're like to be honest I'm just over food altogether y fiber is generally very satiating depends on the type of a nutrient or as a fiber that is present in highly voluminous foods like broccoli or melons or watermelon both dependently fiber has a satiating effect even a very
39:30 - 40:00 a Metamucil shake or something like that yes so supplements supplements don't have the same benefits but they still have benefits so we can still detect it wow so unlike protein fiber has a net positive yield into the the more you take until you start shitting blood the better and we know the mechanistic reasons it it's it's it swells up it slows down gastric emptying it just slows down the whole passage of food throughout the digestive tra especially the gastric site which is where you literally have pressure sensors that essentially measure how full is the stomach it's like a balloon in fact there's research where you you blow up a
40:00 - 40:30 balloon inside somebody's body highly invasive highly invasive and highly satiating when you have the balloon inside you you're no longer hungry it's true because there are literally pressure receptors that are like how full are we and the balloon presses on those and the body's like ah we good Scott are you hungry and your diet's going poorly yeah well here's our new invention palatable balloon do not breathe it in yeah so that's mostly the things that that really matter and certain protein
40:30 - 41:00 sources score really well on that in particular energy density so if something has very few calories per 100 grams it's inherently more satiating because it has basically the same food volume for fewer calories same pressure sensors less calories so you can let's say if it's half the calorie density you can eat double so you double the pressure sensor detection in the stomach double the hunger control roughly or whatever more and then you are like still eating the same number of calories uh and so like do you have any um sorry please continue more more more
41:00 - 41:30 information because I have follow questions here EX for example egg whites are incredibly satiating oh but meno they suck right that's why they're satiating that too but you can sweeten them and they're still very satiating so you can make for example pancakes with egg whites and you need the liquid egg whites otherwise you're GNA be breaking eggs the whole fucking day so you when you get the liquid egg whites you can make like pancakes reps or something with that they are surprisingly satiating but for me for example chicken doesn't do it at all and if it's tasty type of meat it's maybe a little bit
41:30 - 42:00 better but I I just get for I just get hungry from it if anything fish fish is pretty good but it depends a lot on the texture you have a lot of that white fish that just kind of like almost liquidly like yeah you just kind of swallow it exactly okay but that's just for you personally yeah okay but for most people it depends more on these types of factors like palatability and how much processing it requires energy density much more so than whether is protein so good example what you already gave way shakes are not satiating at all a lot of
42:00 - 42:30 people actually get hungry from a way Shake if you're like fasted you're like oh no I'm not that hungry have a way Shake A lot of people actually that more triggers more appetites rather than that it actually does anything brings down sympathetic nervous system activity it go you go postprandial bring a parasympathetic now you're in recovery mode but you the calories and your body's like I'm hungry now let's get it on yeah yeah and we see that in research that um there are a couple metth analyses where they show that protein shakes in particular they increase net energy intake for most people showing that it doesn't have like a compensatory response where afterwards you're full
42:30 - 43:00 and you don't eat anymore no it's just additive yes in the United States a lot of protein supplements like if you get a container of powder it says not a weight loss food which makes sense many of these protein snacks have that effect so especially the good ones like if you have the theut type of protein bar that it just takes you like 30 minutes to chew fruits like cardboard yeah maybe satiating because more more satiating in a sense of I don't want to eat anymore rather than ass satiating in the sense of like I'm satisfied right but if you have something like a really tasty protein bar you can Munch through those and it's like candy yeah hell yeah
43:00 - 43:30 anabar have you ever tried anabar mhm I can't I can't tolerate almost any of them due to default default Maps the sugar Al oh that's right you turn into a rocket ship yeah um so when we're trying to reduce our calories and not go insane from Hunger we want to lean into lots of uh high volume fresh veggies or veggies mixed into our food lots of high volume fresh fruits mhm lots of whole grains like oatmeal and things like that
43:30 - 44:00 especially if they're minimally flavored or unflavored like unflavored oatmeal is a motherfucker you're hungry you're going to find better most ing oh yeah and then egg whites and other things like that that can really help out and a really really big deal is to make sure we're not trying to make our food Ultra tasty the way I like to do it is kind of a sliding scale or a turn dial as you get deeper into your diet and you are more insane about Hunger you actually turn the tastiness of your food down but it always stays at roughly the same average of like uh perceptively oh like uh I like my food I love eating it and
44:00 - 44:30 then afterwards I don't want to eat it anymore as you're Mass gaining and you don't want to eat anymore you turn up the tastiness to food to keep you right in that middle sweet spot because if you turn your diet into like I hate eating I hate my life that sucks if you turn your diet into I want to eat way more than I can that sucks so shooting for that middle by modulating how many of these variables are changing like fiber intake fruits veggies whole grains um is there anything about fats are some kind of fats more satiating than others or it just once you um take out the variable of palatability it all kind of is
44:30 - 45:00 roughly the same yeah exactly the fat versus carbs in practice many foods typically considered high fat sources are not very satiating per unit of calories really what we're talking about like the ultimate satiating food is three pizzas but like you're doing some that's a mistake that many governments by the way use a lot they are like whole grains are the best source of fiber yeah per 100 grams they score pretty well but per calorie they're pretty bad yeah compared to like vegetables nothing beats like green veggies and stuff like that yeah so what was the question you were asking before I went off the tangents no
45:00 - 45:30 I think I think you answered almost all the questions protein at higher levels than what you need just to get jacked does not have an alternate Advantage for suppressing hunger fats and carbs also doesn't matter it's the foods for example avocado versus butter completely different story have you ever tried just eating a stick of butter like it's a candy bar actually one of the things that my dad taught me about how easy it is to make foods tasty if you just just tasty is by taking a stick of butter getting
45:30 - 46:00 some Dutch HL which is like chocolate sprinkles and then some sugar you just mix it and it looks grotesque and but it's actually super tasty super tasty one of my friends and actually the current COO of RP uh Yasha who you know well we've survived India several times together um uh he was uh a long time ago he was working as a waiter at a restaurant and uh he was starting to get into fitness and cuz he was little bit overweight and he didn't like that anymore and then he was like you know
46:00 - 46:30 because you could get like half off or basically free meals at a restaurant if you work there and you're like one of the waiters like the the guys in the back will cook whatever food for you as long as you're a long shift and he was like you know eating some of the food it was quite good and then at some point he like got more attention to macros and fitness and he realized that they begin the preparation of one person Scott you're going to die when you hear this one person serving of their rot take on fedini Alfredo which is quite good very good he the I I noticed that with the cooks do when the meal begins to be constructed is they put the frying pan
46:30 - 47:00 down and they put one stick of butter in the frying pan and he was likey how many people is that four and the guy's like one and he was like oh my God is that's like 900 calories or something just right off the bat and it was like oh oh I I eating at restaurants when I don't know the macros is a real good way to just go just get enormous so yeah the butter thing and I mean that's a huge thing in the lots of American Cuisine as well really all around the world Continental European Cuisine name a French food that doesn't start with a
47:00 - 47:30 stick of butter I'll wait like that's a thing yeah I tell most of my clients also when you eat out at a restaurant your calorie intake is simply X you can try to guesstimate it yeah but it's going to be a very rough estimate and even something like butter or just some more olive oil can mean that your lean chicken breast with veggies actually has 400 extra calories yeah Chipotle is amazing but their R slides down your throat with so much oil that you're like this is just rice but I but man I want to believe
47:30 - 48:00 every time Jared and I are hanging out Jared feather IB Pro I'm like uh meal he's like yeah clean meal he's like yeah I'm like Chipotle he's like come on Mike red lightsaber comes out and he usually chops off a part of my body because he's a mean man um yeah restaurant eating is tough I'm sure there are places like subway uh where you because you have total control over what's going in and there's not any oil application you really can like lean meats at Subway with whole grain bread or whatever like you can construct that but anytime you have ingredients that
48:00 - 48:30 were pre-prepared especially carbohydrate ingredients that have some amount of fat used in the cooking we just casually assume it's an amount of fat that is absurd for macro people to even consider because like if you make dude I had this experience fuck it I'll tell a story real quick really fancy steakhous in Austin Texas amazing experience and I'm just like I'm a giant waste of time Scott could tell you this of fancy food cuz I have like my pallet of a six-year-old a six-year-old with lots of behavioral issues and quirks and so uh you know I'm at this restaurant
48:30 - 49:00 and I I know I love pasta dishes um and I steak is fine it's okay it's not that great so I just wanted to order a pasta dish and I told them can you guys please do like one half of the normal sauce they brought me the dish they heard me loud this is like Elite tier steakhous they do exactly what you say like they don't forget in the kitchen they do what whatever you want they brought me this pasta and I took like three spoonfuls of it and ate it and I ran out of room my stomach because I swear to God there was more sauce than pasta and I was like Crystal and I were like what the fuck is
49:00 - 49:30 the real version like like people are using pasta as a vehicle for sauce it was wild wild stuff so eating out is real tough when you're on a diet in which you want to make the best gains possible and you've been struggling at that point probably eating at home is best yeah yeah I mean you can um you can indulge and if you are somewhat consistent with your eating out habits then all that what matters is that you know what your body composition change is on a certain type of intake even if
49:30 - 50:00 you don't know what the intake is correct if you know that you're losing fat you're good y if you're gaining weight okay you need to uh sitm down in terms of energy two burritos a day usually Chipotle now it's one now I lose weight yeah that makes sense um anything we're missing about the protein satiety discussion that you want to add in before we sign off no that's it I can give you uh you set three reasons to consume protein usually the reasons that are given is it's more satiating it helps build muscle and fmic advance there's actually a new meta analysis
50:00 - 50:30 just published that came out in this thermic advantage means that when you eat more protein the protein um requires more energy for digestion or other processing and that uh energy is actually coming at the expense of some of the protein and potentially even boosting the overall metabolism of your body such that protein turns into like a Junior League fat burning food that seems like one of those Women's Health magazines in the grocery store title Scott do you want to do a video called 20 burning foods you didn't know that you didn't know that you didn't know
50:30 - 51:00 about that'll be the title of this video great so that's the thing that works right thermic effect with protein it works there's more energy required in the digestion absorption and Metabolism of protein than that of carbohydrates and fats however the new met analysis they compared like 28 studies on low and high protein intakes they found that on average the effect is statistically insignificant in longer duration studies because much of the effect likely comes from increased protein symphysis if you go up to really high protein intakes you
51:00 - 51:30 also have some fmic Advantage from increased oxidation but the symphysis is short lift you can't eat your way to the Olympia right you need to actually train as well yes so the there's something called the muscle full effect you only get a little bit of protein synthesis if you were undernourished and you didn't get enough protein before even untrained individual you give them more protein they'll gain some muscle right but maybe one or two kilos and after that you the protein synthesis stops that's their new Baseline muscle mass and at that point the increase in protein synthesis that or increase in energy expenditure total
51:30 - 52:00 daily energy expenditure or fmic effect of food basically disappears in these studies so we see that in acute studies the effects are overblown compared to the longer duration effects and it's like 50 calories 100 if you're really lucky and really like drastically higher protein intakes so yeah that's a nice bonus but it's not like oh if I'm on a cut I have to consume like you know 200 gram extra protein and I'm going to consume protein shakes to be make sure that I get that in and knowing that they're actually not inherently more
52:00 - 52:30 satiating protein shakes aren't very satiating and yeah you're burning off maybe 00 extra calories but you're consuming 500 plus calories to get those yeah if you don't fact that and you're just like losing a plot um yeah that stinks it's similar to the kind of effect sizes we see with how many more calories per day you burn on average having much more muscle mass but less fat mass at the same body weight and it's that scien are still debating whether it's 50 to 100 calories or whether it's a question mark that maybe is zero so yeah a lot of myths busted
52:30 - 53:00 today meno um there is a problem ravaging America people with beautiful homes and families is it the imperial system Mano you're going to insult the imperial system on someone else's irrelevant metric podcast you're one inch away from violence you wouldn't even know what that means huh that's why you've been so Curt caffeine abuse is killing all of us now not just
53:00 - 53:30 Americans get out of here there are other people in this world I think caffeine is other than water uh well coffee other than water I think the most consumed beverage in the world maybe tea first but it's it's up there water coffee tea alcohol diet soda I want it to be diet soda at the top but uh Coca-Cola still has not returned my calls or emails or has mailed me back any pictures of them because I've emailed Coca-Cola and
53:30 - 54:00 actually uh snail mailed physical mailed pictures of myself in various positions with kind uh words about their product nothing met nothing yeah not even a fucking phone call um caffeine abuse tell us about what it is is it a real thing are people getting in trouble for it how bad is it please caffeine is a drug and what commonly abused that doesn't mean it's like oh my God you're all her addicts but it does mean but you're all caffeine addicts yeah caffeine addiction is also
54:00 - 54:30 debated if it's like should should it really be called an addiction I think it should because there's withdrawal when you stop taking it there's tolerance to it chuse and those are exactly the problems yeah so and negative downsides the the there's a couple of cat catalogues of what they call an addiction versus not the quintessential Central defining factor of an addiction is does this thing screw up your life in a wish that in a way that if you could step back away would you just turn off if the answer is yes but you can't stop taking it you might be addicted to it like a net negative that's really gnarly
54:30 - 55:00 uh so how many people are in that situation with caffeine I suppose quite a few right because of sleep disturbances what's the problem here man I think most people end up in a more of a neutral situation where the caffeine doesn't do nearly as much positive as they think it does and they overestimate the positive effects of the caffeine because it reduces the withdrawal symptoms and it compensates for the sleep deprivation which is partly caused by the excessive caffeine in yeah so there's a met analysis from last year which found that if you don't want to
55:00 - 55:30 have an objective decrease in your sleep quality even a single cup of coffee like 100 milligrams caffeine you have to consume that on average depends on the how fast you metabolize it on average you have to consume that N9 hours before bedtime and a pre-workout 13 hours I'm not even awake for that long during the day um that is like something very many billions of caffeine intake do not do like I remember when um
55:30 - 56:00 huberman started talking about this kind of situation a lot of people thought that he was on some old humorin bullshit again because you know he like he's great and he gets a lot of shit right but you we say enough you get some shit wrong um and we were like oh Hughes is at it again and then we all looked at the data and we're like ah fucking God damn it he's right um and nobody wanted to hear that because like how many people meno do you know that at like 300 p.m. they get a little slump at work they hit the espresso machine and then they're going to bed at 10: I mean like that's in in my you know Mal develop
56:00 - 56:30 brain is 7 hours I mean we're not even clear yet like that's a bad deal um a lot of people I know like consume caffeine well into the evening hours and can go to sleep but you're saying there Sleep Quality is worse yeah so there are multiple factors to Sleep Quality one of them is called Sleep latency which is how long it takes you to fall asleep but then you have all of these other metrics like the time spent in deep sleep sleep efficiency how much REM sleep are you getting and some of these metrics they deteriorate with caffeine and they deteriorate long past the point at which
56:30 - 57:00 you subjectively feel that you still have a positive effect of the caffeine and that's important because many people will say 13 hours at that point I don't feel anything anymore it's like yeah you don't that's right but your brain's still affected yeah there's still activity on these receptors there's still a difference in how your brain functions and it's in generally in general more aroused which is not conducive to sleep Scott did you hear that what did he say aroused oh my God I didn't mean to look at your dick fine I
57:00 - 57:30 did uh damn dude damn that sucks okay so that's a big downside of caffeine is there anything else with excessive caffeine intake we'll get to what that means in just a second is there any are there any other problems because like okay let's say we have a magic drug developed with AI Revolution coming up in three or four years that's like the ultimate it does two things one it puts you into hypers sleep as soon as you take it 20 minutes later you're getting the highest quality sleep of your life for eight hours period like you could somebody could be poking you with a prob you wouldn't wake up and two it does some kind of magical thing where it completely clears out all caffeine
57:30 - 58:00 metabolites instantly upon taking it is that like that's problem solved we can all do a th000 milligrams an hour of caffeine or are there other downsides to high caffeine intake the clearing out the metabolites probably actually not enough there seem to be Downstream effects for of caffeine be beyond that point but let's say I get your point on the nervous system is activity yeah okay let's say it does Undo those two godamn exactly I knew you were going to say that so let's say it unds all of that are there still downsides well yeah yes caffeine is like to be clear caffeine is nothing like heroin or cocaine or
58:00 - 58:30 anything like that it's just a very commonly abused drug that people think is positive and I think is often more neutral sometimes negative so I think that more rational strategic use people can benefit from that management exactly some of the downsides two big ones basically first anxiety cortisol Rises and I think a lot of people underestimate that my experience with clients is very much when you ask them do you have any side effects they're like nope nope nothing at all and they don't realize that Sleep Quality suffers so they're like oh no
58:30 - 59:00 nothing I ask him okay any you know any Vis any visual effects any physical effects maybe like Trembling Hands they're like oh yeah my hands tremble a lot and like that's that's a significant side effect like that they just like yeah I see that all the time and bodybuilders in particular when um yeah bodybuilders taste gnarly do they're used to a lot especially people on Gad that they're used to a lot more side effects so like a answer TR that's fine whatever yeah still alive yeah so but I think the anxiety is a big deal and I
59:00 - 59:30 also notice it for certain types of tasks and research shows is that your performance is you're more energized so it seems like everything is better on caffeine but performance on certain tasks is actually worse some tasks improve for sure yeah but performance can deteriorate for a because of the anxiety and over stimulation for example for certain types of um work like or chess chess has been studied performance on um performance on a chess match does not improve for caffeine because you
59:30 - 60:00 canot get lost in the details and over Focus yes and you spend too much time per move yes so it's like you get better at things that require intense Focus but the kind of more big picture type reasoning like time management and creativity yes and the creativity can go both ways on caffeine there are several types of creativity I'll be more specific um novel generator creativity for me in my experience goes down substantially because if you take like your neural networking patterns as kind of like uh they've done some computation modeling with this where it looks like a funnel and it's like a funnel like
60:00 - 60:30 threedimensional funnel shape and if you're highly stimulated you're closer to the base of the funnel like very specific subset of thoughts is occurring which is cool because that's what focus is and if you have schizophrenia you're actually not in the funnel at all you're distributed attention everywhere so you actually can't even coales to like say where you are in space right now but if you are optimally creative it's usually somewhere on the borderline between those two um and so if you are very very caffeinated and you have high anxiety it ends up uh being like just one fine focused point in your creativity I
60:30 - 61:00 didn't even think one step ahead of what I am now but if you are not sufficiently caffeinated you might be ultra hyper creative which makes you you write down tons of great ideas but some okay this idea seed is insanely creative there's something there now develop it like you ain't developing shit unless you have three cups of coffee in you so kind there's kind of a time and a place like deep deep focused work amazing brainstorming sessions probably not ideal to have a ton of caffeine in you such that you're like laser focused and you're just like I'll just take notes during this meeting yeah you for c for creativity indeed you get that trade-off where you do get the the energy and you
61:00 - 61:30 do get a positive mood effect and positive mood in itself usually does improve creativity but the effect itself of focus is antagonistic to creativity creativity requires more of a loose unfocus you will and then there's the second effect which is negative of creatine some research shows that caffeine yeah caffeine okay what did I say creatine creatine right how dare you I will not have you dispar creatine H that's another actually interaction with creatine for some people potentially but the cognitively speaking some research
61:30 - 62:00 shows that the impairment in memory functioning with prolonged high dosage usage like I think in the in the last study it was um 450 milligrams per day so that's like four cups of coffee or so and they showed that working memory performance uh decreased and it was associated with some impairments in the hippoc campus as well over what time scale couple weeks do we suspect that that's directly causally entirely EXP L by the degradation of Sleep Quality because I know sleep was critical to memory formation quite possible quite
62:00 - 62:30 possible at least in part very likely candid hypothesis um so caffeine is safe no doubt about that I'm just saying it has downsides that people probably don't fully acknowledge when they go for the short-term Buzz the short-term energy hit yeah so there are some downsides and um in particular tolerance is a really big one because like I said you get into this negative spiral where your sleep suffers and you just need more caffeine to feel the same and you think that the caffeine makes you feel better but objectively what happens is it just brings you back to Baseline yes if you
62:30 - 63:00 you just need caffeine to function yeah so you wake up you feel terrible you need the caffeine to feel normal it seems like every time you take caffeine you feel better that's true but it brings you back to the Baseline where which you didn't need to do if you were well rested and you weren't using any caffeine at all Scott didn't you live through some shit like this a few months back yes I quit caffeine and it was very very difficult I was fantasizing about energy drinks for like three weeks you switch to Prime drinks just to have something colorful to drink right yes um and I started drinking element in
63:00 - 63:30 the morning I fool myself that it was C it's that there really is a little bit of a placebo of like I'm taking something that's G to zaz me um did you on the other end of it now do you feel like you're performance cognitively Etc is like pretty good or do you miss caffeine better better not just the same but without the shit sleep wow less anxiety wow I mean obviously now some people okay so so so far what I've learned and please tell me if this is
63:30 - 64:00 wrong is like caffeine can be a net positive and often is but you have to understand that it has some negatives and it's up to you to manage the dosage and the and the time of application and to see which negatives you have to try to make sure to wiggle around those um so that all being the case is there anything where there's a large variation of how people candle caffeine um genetically can you speak to that like are some people just not for caffeine whereas others they're like really the ROI even at quite high doses is still very positive yeah there's substantial
64:00 - 64:30 variation in in particular in how fast we metabolize caffeine which determines how much we need to get a certain effect and for me if I have one Red Bull I really feel it and that's partly because of my brain and partly because I'm very sensitive to caffeine I can I don't have tolerance or very little just because you don't consume much yes most most research finds that most like the average individual can consume like a Red Bull per day or a coffee per day you don't really get substantial tolerance I actually do notice that I get a little bit L effect and it's very easy to tell you just don't use it for a couple days and then you use it and you're like w is
64:30 - 65:00 this what one one can does yeah and it's funny because some research says you don't develop tolerance and the research they site for that is research where they consume a very large bows of caffeine usually like six cups of coffee or three cups of coffee the equivalent of that like 300 to 600 milligrams and they say oh look even in habitual users they still get an effect of that it's like yeah if your total daily intake is normally 300 Mig like three cups of coffee spread throughout the day with meals so you don't get these big spikes
65:00 - 65:30 in in activity and then one time you consume three cups at once you do get an effect sure but if you look at the studies where you consume a certain dosage of caffeine over time and you see how much effect there is of that that aligns perfectly with people's anecdotal experience you feel the effect less yes of course I don't just there's no point debating that cuz just drink coffee for a while and see if it still has the same effect it won't exactly Okay so different genetics I I imagine because genetic variability is so multifactorial
65:30 - 66:00 that there are definitely some people that experience much less and much more sleep disruption from caffeine um how do you know if you're doing caffeine wrong and what do you change to improve yes we always know you can just quit that's the last time we'll mention it I don't drink caffeine for the record I'm not a caffeine sh I just don't drink almost ever um because I'm quite awake enough by my fucking self arguably too much however just on the
66:00 - 66:30 management side how do I know like right now people are listening to this and they're like am I doing too much can you tell me more best practices of how to figure out if I'm doing too much and also how to fix my caffeine thing or maybe by reduction or maybe by dosing arrangement I can do better I think there are a couple good questions to ask yourself which are the same questions that any addict should ask himself if if they are an Jesus Christ we're leaning into this I love it yeah for one are you using it with a specific goal in mind like I use caffeine as a pre-workout or for specific work bouts like a specific
66:30 - 67:00 type of work that I need a focused energy session for so I know exactly what I'm going to do in the hours after the caffeine use to take advantage of the pharmaceutical effect of the drug if you're using it just to take it that's an indication that's a lot now maybe you consume coffee for the taste I would say at least try decaf coffee it's fucking amazing people like oh no I I never that's terrible it doesn't taste and then in blind research you see a lot of people actually do kind of like it or they can't even tell right yeah so
67:00 - 67:30 certainly some people can tell um but yeah something for you to consider for yourself another consideration is if you don't get your caffeine do you function normally because if you in the morning you wake up and you're just a fucking zombie until you have your shots of caffeine in there that to me doesn't sound particularly ergogenic like you're not really improving much you've become dependent on it almost per definition and uh very likely it's either that you are dependent on caffeine and or your
67:30 - 68:00 sleep is so degraded that really the problem should be fixing is a Sleep Quality some people like like you said earlier the caffeine destroys the Sleep Quality and then they need it to overcome that but if you pull back on the caffeine your sleep quality improves you're actually like oh wow I actually don't need any more coffee than a cup in the morning because now that I'm getting really good sleep it's all much better yep so I think those are questions that are very important uh the effect you get from a serving as well if you notice it's decreasing it's probably good to just take a few days off the good thing about caffeine addiction tolerance
68:00 - 68:30 however you want to call it is it even in extreme cases N9 days is enough for full resensitization of your receptors Who full in nine days and if it's less if you're used to maybe two cups of coffee just three days is enough for most of the effect so if someone is on holiday MH and at work they're cranking caffeine because they have to whatever job they do uh one week vacation you would say like don't consume any caffeine and if you have to consume caffeine on a vacation you just really Mis architected the idea of vacation and
68:30 - 69:00 if you have a headache from withdrawal symptoms just take headache medicine yeah and for example if I have an international flight I'm not going to take caffeine to watch movies on the plane right right the I'm going to use that day to resensitize to make sure I get the full pre-workout effect on my other days one thing about for pre-workout usage by the way is um so we've talked about the negatives and I think a lot of people argue well the positives outweigh the negatives but the positives are not nearly Asar large as many people think long-term research shows no effect on strength development muscle growth fat loss in large part
69:00 - 69:30 because of the tolerance there's no increase in energy expenditure it's too short Liv to tolerance engage pretty much all of it so the effect on performance is something that is a bit more consistent but it's mostly psychological in fact most of the effect of caffeine is Placebo there have been studies where they look at how much of an effect people get either on cognitive tasks like mental tasks or physical tasks and then you see that people that think they are on caffeine but got a placebo they got more effect than the
69:30 - 70:00 people that got caffeine but didn't know they were on it yeah and it's it's crazy how much caffeine you can give people especially people used to caffeine without them being able to tell if they were in the caffeine or placebo group holy [Music] shit it's crazy last question for you meno how many milligrams per if I'm my sleep is good um I've tried taking less caffeine no big of um I like caffeine I like drinking coffee or Monsters or whatever the hell
70:00 - 70:30 what is the milligram per day dose and the time of cut off that you're like it doesn't matter how you feel don't go this much caffeine per day MH and probably stop drinking caffeine at the latest XYZ hours before you go to sleep even if everything seems fine if you really want to be safe I would go with the meta analysis of like 9 hours for a couple of coffee 13 hours for a pre-workout with like 200 milligram caffeine and other than that one
70:30 - 71:00 milligram per kilogram of body weight is kind of the safe dosage which is about 100 milligram per day like one cup of coffee one energy drink like a normal energy drink not like a red like a monster XXL that's about the dosage where we know that the average individual doesn't develop tolerance we know that from cognitive tasks as well as a one long-term study for an exercising individuals some people can certainly handle more if you're the typee of individual where you have a Red Bull and just don't feel anything not because
71:00 - 71:30 you're tolerant because you just process it super fast after n days you have a Red Bull and you still can't feel shit exactly in that scenario see how much you need to get a robust effect that's basically the equivalent of 100 milligrams for you and that's probably the dosage you can sustainably use sorry for the bad news folks all right met for most people it's indeed a bit of a downer but um I would see it as an opportunity for improvement because how you feel now how your life is now you can improve on that yes at the very
71:30 - 72:00 least you can get the same results with less Reliance on caffeine yeah and it's we're not talking about life and death type of stuff like optimiz you can keep cranking caffeine and you'll be totally fine you could be a very productive caffeine addict 100% And it's not going to screw up your life or take years off your life but if you want to like consume less caffeine get exactly the same effects and even some better sleep and Recovery consider doing less caffeine okay man how long should we rest between sets in order to get jacked and in order to get strong been many many opinions over the years it swayed from like you know 3 to four minutes
72:00 - 72:30 really get full recovery between sets all the way down to seconds as long as you get the total reps you need over the workout like whatever however you get 70 reps whether it's very very tiny little micro my rep sets or tons of big sets it doesn't matter um what is your take on this what literature informed it tell us a story so rather than give you an exact number I think it's much more important to understand the principle because there's something that people hate to hear and it's called
72:30 - 73:00 context and don't bother telling us we hate to hear it yes so I could tell you you know two to basically two to three minutes for muscle hypertrophy and full recovery for strength something like that that's probably a good General guideline but what you really need to know is that when you rest longer your nerve system recovers your muscles recover you can do more work in the next set that extra work will transl into greater muscle hypertrophy provided you can recover from it for strength development it's almost always a net
73:00 - 73:30 positive especially energy substrate depletion and the like they have to fully recover the creatine phos fit system has to recover which takes a couple minutes to three minutes because you want maximal performance you want maximum muscle activity to train for strength it's actually the muscle activity that's more indicative or it's more stimulatory for strength development as it teaches the nervous system how to coordinate the movement how to maximize muscle activity that's what you want want for strength development maximum performance so for strength basically the longer you rest the better your results res until you
73:30 - 74:00 cool down or something yeah yeah you don't five minutes is pretty much uh what most people need after that you get really sharp diminishing returns at best but some people don't fully recover so you know some people say rest until you're literally fully recovered for some people that would mean okay rest three days yeah right not five minutes right um but in 5 minutes you get vast majority of the effect your reps are maybe one lower than the previous set or something so for strength it it is generally good to try to plan in Long rest intervals for mus hypertrophy it
74:00 - 74:30 really doesn't matter if you rest long it's about how much total work you get in like with strength you just can't get the same quality of work and you cannot compensate for that by just doing myor reps or as B sets or all of that stuff so for strength it's a bit more non-negotiable but for muscle hypertrophy you have a lot more leeway and you can either do and research quite clearly shows this and some studies you can either do fewer sets with more rest or you can do more more sets with less rest and the efficiency of that is actually higher so there's here is where context matters if you want to do a
74:30 - 75:00 certain amount of sets and you do for example like I do mostly full body workouts and I do them as a combo set which is like a circuit where I do rest in between sets it's extremely time efficient because I can do say four exercises that are unrelated I rest only one minute in between those exercises but that means that by the time I get back to the same exercise so by the time I get back to training my biceps again after chin-ups I've rested probably six plus minutes and in every EX in between every exercise I've only rested one minute that's extremely time efficient
75:00 - 75:30 so if you're doing it like that then yeah increasing your rest interval for in between exercising the same muscle group is generally positive but if you're on say the leg extension machine and nothing else is available and you just have to do another set of leg extensions and you only have an hour to work out you probably don't want to rest six minutes in between your sets of lag extensions because it's very in efficient so you're better off doing maybe 2 minutes and then doing an additional set if needed CU your total
75:30 - 76:00 rep count is going to be higher mhm and that's what really matters that's what matters it's tension multipli by time under tension that's roughly the the thing that drives muscle growth like to the total area under the curve or the integral for the mathematicians of uh tension mechanical tension on the muscle that's the primary stimulus for muscle growth that makes sense and even if it's um metabolite situation you just secrete more metabolite the more tension you apply so that scales if it's a pump situation it scales roughly the same
76:00 - 76:30 it's also trippy because people say well you get a better pump if you do short rest breakes like I don't know if you've ever trained that hard because if you get short enough rest breakes you gas out before you can really pump the muscle and take it really close to its own local failure but if you take longer rest breaks but you take every set real close to failure for decent reps you get crazy pumps you actually get a better pump between sets over a couple of minutes and then you get an even bigger pump after and after and after so even for all those other variables even if we're saying there's other things involved in growth than than tension as
76:30 - 77:00 long as you're not limited by things that don't have to do with a local muscle producing Force you can rest as little time as you like yeah so what that means is this if you are doing calf raises and after 15 seconds of rest after the last set your calves feel great and you can do another five to 10 reps at least you can go and you'll miss you'll basically miss out on nothing but if you're doing squats for sets of 15 and after one set of squats you rest 30
77:00 - 77:30 seconds and you go again you actually won't reach muscular failure on the next set in many cases you'll reach lung failure you just can't breathe anymore and you have to rack and then we're actually not training close to failure at the local level and potentially those reps aren't junk volume but they're more junky volume thoughts yeah because this those reps will probably not achieve the same level of muscle activity and tension right especially FIB yes the faster fiber tension is much less exposed because the faster fibers recover less quickly between sets and
77:30 - 78:00 then you'll have a situation where you're only using your slower fibers for squats which is why instead of 15 reps on the second you got five but even though there are five reps your faster fibers are smoking a cigarette the whole time they're like the fuck we can't even turn on for this shit and then you actually are costing yourself so if the Lo if you feel like you can use the local muscle to generate lots of force you've rested long enough and if you feel like I need more time because psychologically need to clue in better uh my cardio needs to be better maybe a limiting factor so for example should
78:00 - 78:30 you go and do another set of pull Downs well how do your lats feel back feels pretty good what about your forearms like my forearms are still kind of Pumped and kind of burning like well you should take more time because you don't want to reach failure in your forums if you've checked all those boxes and you can do another five to 10 reps on the next set you can easily condense your workout to have much shorter rest which tends to work better in like um isolating biceps and triceps and delts and forms and calves less well for things like the back and the chest it'll get get you out of breath and for legs
78:30 - 79:00 hamstrings in a machine you can get away with quads in extensions you can get away with a the leg extensions taken close to failure for 15 to 20 reps can really fuck you up cardio wise too but things like squats and bent rows and cleans you're going to want a longer break to just have the higher quality of sets yeah yeah for most individuals it's going to be at least a minute just the local fatigue is going to require some time but varies so much per individual that I agree that's Auto regulating your rest interval so going by feel in this case and thinking when you feel ready
79:00 - 79:30 for maximal performance again or at least to give it maximum effort again is a good guideline because great distinction yeah most people women recover a lot faster than men people that are not as strong recover faster than people that are much stronger you see some differences with age the exercise is a huge effect as you said so because of all these factors it's very hard to give like a guideline plus it's super imp practical nobody wants to walk around the gym with a fucking stopwatch right even the people I know people that do that and they they love it because it
79:30 - 80:00 keeps them on track yeah but even people cool they often don't really go by it you see the alarm go off and then they like take a sip and why is that even on I think a lot of people do it um because I so I've heard from people and there are people that like that and massive respect to them for figuring this out they like they if I don't have a stopwatch I'll dilly dally for like IGN amount of time and so the stopwatch just basically punts me in the dick and says hey shut up and go lift that's actually supported by some research that
80:00 - 80:30 people Del that a little bit too much like it's it's good to rest until you feel ready for maximal performance but you can probably push yourself a little bit more than that uh so it's it's already quite safe to rest until that point people rest a little bit excessively on average on average so what you're saying is if you feel like you're resting enough you're probably resting enough um that makes a ton of sense um strength training obviously the workout quality gets much better faster fiber
80:30 - 81:00 recuitment much better and so there for hypertrophy training like if you're not gassed out and your local muscles feel like they're ready to go and you feel psychologically strong feel free to hit it again thing you can always rest longer your gym session is going to take longer for no extra benefit whereas for strength training you want to figure out when you're feeling pretty damn good and give yourself another maybe 30 seconds uh extra just to really collect yourself to make sure you're doing a good job job yeah yeah and really think of your performance like don't aim for 10 reps instead of 15 from the last set really
81:00 - 81:30 try to go for the 15 again for strength probably more like five and go for five again well the thing with strength is if you're doing squats or you're doing deadlifts and You underr by 30 or 40 seconds it can take what you're supposed to do another set of five and turn it into a set of two and a half and then you're like oh shit I this actually does not work in this case so strength training takes a longer time yes in inherently never mind that the warm-ups take a longer time and everything yeah that makes a ton of sense exercise intensity also has a big effect like higher rep work is easier to recover
81:30 - 82:00 from in terms of acute uh fatigue it's actually harder to recover from in the long term interestingly but if you do squats you have a few things going for you one you're training uh very big part of your body at the same time second you're using a very high intensity if you're training for strength like usually one to five reps is more like strength work so both of these factors work against you in terms of requiring a longer period and then on top of that you want very good recovery in between set not just like okay recovery but actually going for almost the same level of performance again so yeah then you need a lot more rest yeah hypertrophy
82:00 - 82:30 work beats the body into submission and as long as it's awake enough for the beating you're good uh strength work is better seen as showing off every set you're showing off quality versus quantity yes yes yes anything else to say about uh rest intervals that folks are maybe Mis understanding out there that they could use a better insight for him I think there there was some confusion with the latest meta analysis that that seem to find like uh 990 seconds being optimal but I think that's a misunderstanding from the literature
82:30 - 83:00 that uh for one the the dates are really were not very clear on what the analysis showed they basically showed benefits over 60 seconds and then beyond that point it was kind of unclear so I would say that 90 seconds is more like an average Sweet Spot in terms of time efficiency for people rather than that actually there's any benefit of resting less Long like mechanistically longer rest can only be good the only question is time efficiency time efficiency and from time efficiency standard we know that especially for hypertrophy work if you're getting in the Reps and the target muscle is a limiting factor
83:00 - 83:30 cutting your rest times substantially improves your efficiency um so for strength work a little bit extra is usually good for hypertrophy work if you're still get in the Reps in and you feel the muscle getting limited and you don't have a ton of time to spend in the gym you can kind of get cracking yeah and get really really good gains without having to spend you know minutes and minutes and minutes between exercises Y and people don't want to get in like the Gran earlier details wrote a a review on this like a scientific paper you can check that out we also did a study together with Brad shonfeld where we we
83:30 - 84:00 were one of the first to quite decisively show or at least show very strong data in support of the fact that three minutes is better than one on average for muscle growth and then subsequent research also founds greater protein synthesis and then the best study probably you have is by Longo at all where they show that it's the total volume regardless of the rest period so they had a lot of different groups where they really show compellingly like it's the total reps that you end up with for the workout that's the driver of muscle growth muscle growth I got it that makes perfect sense all right next
84:00 - 84:30 question when we talked before you came here and we arranged all the questions in advance the we're gonna flip the script on you we're going to show you a video that was taken you didn't know and I'm just kidding maybe diet myths is the only clue I have in my brain about what we're talking about there are no doubt dozens and dozens of diet Mists but meno you have a knack for
84:30 - 85:00 being the first if not one of the first people to question myths and assumptions in practice that almost nobody else has ever questioned and many times you end up correct sometimes you end up marginally making a good point on the net balance not overall super a big point but it's always incredibly awesome to have you in the industry because in the industry
85:00 - 85:30 like with any social group a lot of people start to nod their heads and everyone's friends and evidence-based guys are all cool people you don't want to like call people out or disagree with them but you have the Dutch side of you which is 100% of you that uh will raise your hand and call out inconvenient uncomfortable truths so I'm these diet myths that you're going to share with us uh no doubt are going to probably insult me and my intellect earlier you punch Scott the video guy in the face just for sport tell us things that will upset us about diet myths one um thing which people should
85:30 - 86:00 be familiar with on the RP channel is carbs and fats doesn't really matter it's Just Energy intake um I think it's pretty established now in evidence-based Fitness but there are still like a huge Camp of people with the insulin model and all that stuff and research is just very clear that total energy intake is what drives whether you're losing fat or not if you're in energy deficit your body has its thermodynamic law it's phys pH your body has to get rid of some of the energy from its own body if you're strength training they should be fat so
86:00 - 86:30 whether you're keto dieting or high carb dieting fat loss is dictated by your energy intake versus energy expenditure not by whether you're doing keto by your insulin levels by whether you eat clean by whether you eat paleo vegan none of that stuff matters independent of energy intake if you get enough protein carbs and fats are more of a how you feel and how you perform question than a mechanistically what's going to let you lose more fat question yes what about muscle gain can I keto my way up
86:30 - 87:00 to tons and tons of muscle on a very low carbohydrate diet and why don't we see in the real world almost anybody doing this it's a good question I'm currently probably in the minority of people in evidence based Fitness that thinks you can actually get maximum muscle growth on low carbohydrate intakes there's a previous met analysis from Vargas at all which found exactly this that keto diets on average result in similar fat-- free mass accretion as non-keto diets I'm currently performing a met analysis
87:00 - 87:30 which is more broad not just keto versus non- keto but like literally every study that we have on higher versus lower carbohydrate intakes and we have a randomized control trial going um live this summer where we look at this in more detail but the current literature shows that you typically get similar gains when you control for energy intake now why don't people do this why don't we see more people like keto indiv ual getting super jacked well actually there's one in my team Lu filor he's super jacked can't keep bringing it up
87:30 - 88:00 Luis he's the only Jack dude that does keto pretty much yeah I'm kidding but so yeah but there are not many people doing keto in the first place right so the base rate's already very low sure and high carb is kind of the popular thing these days whereas actually up until the what 50s or so low carb diets were more popular sure so natural bodybuilders have by and large done more low carb than high carb diets in any case what we do see clearly in the research is that when you try to mass as you would say I would say lean bulk or bulk it's very difficult on a keto diet you're you just have a very limited restriction a very
88:00 - 88:30 limited set of food choices there's the appetite suppression that for some people comes with a ketogenic diet and especially when your fat intake has to exceed your protein intake you just get into crazy diets or you have to like consume you have to do crazy stuff like put butter in your coffee like things nobody would ever think of doing yeah right so uh we see that in research even when you in a research study we tell people like hey you have to consume this many calories but you have to do with keto and they're like okay no got it and then they're like 400 calories short and you're like bro and I like I tried
88:30 - 89:00 yeah I want you to address a specific subsection of this myth obviously there's a lot of inference and conjecture which is totally fine that's our best model until we have really good data the big thing I see this impacting is of course we're not going to tell people to do keto bulk that's fucking stupid I mean if you want tock out but good luck there are lots and lots of people that when they're bulking they're trying to keep their
89:00 - 89:30 carbohydrates as the main driver of caloric load and their fats to roughly minimum levels so we're talking about someone who's eating 250 grams of protein a day Jack bodybuilder guy 600 grams of carbs per day and 75 to 100 grams of fat at the highest intake sometimes 50 to 75 grams of fat for extra bonus points something something insulin mhm I found some of those hypotheses with insulin Drive compelling in the past nowadays I still find them
89:30 - 90:00 compelling but no longer particularly swaying I think maybe there's something there maybe there's not I if I'm doing a diet where I'm trying to get 75 grams of fat for every 600 grams of carbs it limits my ability to be flexible and to enjoy my life to a substantial degree I'm not saying for me uh for the average human mhm because holy shit there's only so much chicken rice you can eat on your bulk until you're like I'm never bodybuilding ever again yes um and at the very least it
90:00 - 90:30 sour your mood daily and it loves less flexibility and if you have more fun living the bodybuilding life then you just get more jacked this is kind of universally accepted standard in Lifting for the Bro communities a lot of pro bodybuilders very good bodybuilders you'll tell them like it science says you're lifting like in a way that's slightly suboptimal they're like this is how how I love to do it and this is what keeps me in the game respect total respect but then you tell them like you don't need to eat very few grams of fat on your ballock and they're like you just don't know things and this is the suffering that is required is there a contradiction in terms there is this totally baseless menow and if I'm telling you look if I
90:30 - 91:00 eat 500 grams of carbs instead of 600 but now instead of 100 grams of fat per day I'm eating 150 the amount of variety and tastiness of food that I can accommodate is like infinitely higher I can even go out a few every few days and eat roughly normal like clean-ish um my wife and I have been um bullshitting to each other that might make a stupid cookbook in the future called halfway healthy which is you take normal recipes
91:00 - 91:30 like mac and cheese and you just cut the fat by half which means there's still a shitload of fat in there but they're way better macros but still really good halfway healthy recipes all of a sudden are super easy chicken thighs all kinds of cuts of beef all sorts of stews are totally fine to eat if you can eat 150 grams of fat per day but at 75 or 100 you're like this is mostly just like fish and rice at this point is there anything in your mind that if someone's like look meno you're an esteemed guy you know your shit do I just
91:30 - 92:00 not eat fats almost at all on my bulk or if I eat like 150 grams of fat and adjust for calories same calories a little bit less carb a bit more fat am I missing out on anything what would you say to that no absolutely not I think it's extremely unlikely that there there was any effect on with those intakes like in research we're really looking at the very low carb intakes whether those are detrimental we did a systematic review on the amount of carbohydrate intake that's required to maximize strength development earlier now we're
92:00 - 92:30 working on muscle growth and it's 17 out of 17 studies essentially not finding any effect on strength development so the evidence is really sparse it's the the potential benefits of carbohydrates are really a distant extrapolation from research showing acute effects on performance and again often in studies of kind of like what we see with protein now with the Met analyses carbs versus nothing just like protein versus nothing well of course the carbs do better in many of the scenarios it's literally overnight fasted workout versus one
92:30 - 93:00 group at breakfast they got carbs one group got food yeah exactly or even in sometimes in some of the studies you see that it doesn't even have to be food or it can be food like a placebo breakfast use yes Scott who do we have on that was saying that kind of jazz uh dat stength I believe it wase yes the data different strength guys were saying that they're amazing guys highly recommended they were saying that like actually what determines your workout performance is do you psychologically feel empty or feel full if you're full you'll perform
93:00 - 93:30 really well if you feel empty even if technically speaking you're all loaded with everything you might not do so well because your stomach's like hey idiot stop lifting weights and go eat something that makes a ton of sense um so to you uh basically like if someone tried eating 600 grams of carbs per day and only 75 fats and their bul is really fucking miserable and the think of quitting bodybuilding to to you where there is the only point at which you would tell them eat more carbs is the point at which carbohydrates have just more advantages for performance and overall feel so you would tell them look
93:30 - 94:00 try go down to 500 grams of carbs eat 50 roughly 50 grams more fats see how you feel then try uh you know 450 or 400 grams of carbs and eat a lot more fats see how you feel and kind of go from there would that be your recommendation yeah and the chance of needing carbohydrates is very L very low if you're not doing strength training with at least 10 sets per muscle group per session so if you're doing a bro split ironically and we actually also see this anecdotally I think you actually need a
94:00 - 94:30 higher carbohydrate carbohydrate intake because your glycogen depletion procession might actually get to the point of critical levels for neuromuscular performance that makes sense so if you're uh doing a bro split you're doing 20 sets of chest the last few sets of chest you had better be on a high carb diet otherwise they start to suck yes which is kind of funny right because most people attribute like a full body workout with more like cardio type properties yeah but you don't don't deplete that much glycogen per muscle group that's what matters it's the glycogen that's stored in a certain muscle group that's available to that
94:30 - 95:00 muscle group and the enzymes are lacking in the body to transfer that on a an acute basis to another muscle group yeah so it's just how much glycogen is in there and it's also not how much glucose is in your blood right now is really how much glycogen is already stored in there before you go into the workout that's like the reservoir the vat of energy that the muscle has to pull into for glycolytic energy production which is like high intensity energy production I think most of the super high carb stuff from prob bodybuilding comes from a use of uh exogenous insulin which has some
95:00 - 95:30 Necessities for higher carbohydrate intake and some really cool synergistic Pathways that simply just don't yield much in normal amounts and also maybe the Bro split is one of them in addition to that and of course there's I would never discount status quo bias as a reason why people do things like some people just do things because people did them this way and then you tell them a new way and they're like nah but then everyone else is doing it they're like oh that's the new way and now they do it yeah and the status quo bi is particularly large for people that have for trends that show fashion effects or cyclical effects and that's the case
95:30 - 96:00 with a lot of things in Fitness like a lot of people think everybody thinks this way it's like yeah now they do yeah four years ago that was not the case at all yes and four years later that might not be the case anymore either yes I actually have uh a few folks in the comment sections will sometimes say like everything we needed to know about lifting we already knew in the 90s and I just I just want to tell them like you you need someone to talk to that'll hold you real tight and explain the world to you but they do sometimes have a really excellent point that because some of these things are cyclical like Scott and
96:00 - 96:30 I did a review of luo's workout and legitimately like almost everything he said was like better than shit today he just happened to be in one of those waves of like knowledge and understanding he's like you got to control the weight you got to do any Ecentric everything's meaningful like Focus blah blah and we were like man Lou had it figured out so sometimes you're just cherry-picking right of whatever decade you likeed before meno is there any problem so okay with carbohydrates bodybuilders no they're already they're supposed to be healthy carbs like no one saying eat a bunch of fucking lowfat
96:30 - 97:00 cheesecake and that's how you get 600 grams of carbs but fats if I'm saying okay fine metah henselman he's got excellent hair I love his accent I'll try to do what he says I'm going to reduce my carbs a little bit increase my fats when I'm bulking is there a kind of source of fats priority that you would say is probably better for health and maybe performance and maybe muscle growth and is there maybe because like obviously I'm just going to go to like Hardies and eat five triple cheeseburgers though that might be fun for the soul maybe not as good for the muscles what do you think interestingly there's some research that certain fatty acids are indeed more conducive towards
97:00 - 97:30 muscle growth and it seems to be largely the same ones that are good for health so that's that's nice that's a positive Omega 3es are a big one that stands out not massive effects but we do have multiple studies showing increased muscle protein synthesis sometimes lead Mass accretion strength gains recovery so lots of good stuff there again effect sizes small stuff but a wide range of potential benefits plus the health benefits some cognitive benefits so I would say Omega 3es are a really good one and then mostly monounsaturated
97:30 - 98:00 fatty acids have some promising effects um also for fat loss interestingly I was on this train decades ago and people shat on me that now look who's good they have some benefits for fat loss progenic effects again small stuff but compared to saturated fats there are some studies finding benefits yeah and poly unsaturated fats in general or unsaturated fats in general unsaturated fats both mono and poly yeah have trended in some research even in
98:00 - 98:30 acute studies where people are not lifting they give them polyunsaturated fats versus saturated fats and they actually gain more lean lean body mass I've seen those studies yeah that's crazy stuff because we don't really see that in the exercise science studies yeah so it's um yeah hard to hard to explain but we do have we actually have multiple studies showing that people that consume more poly unsaturated fats gain more lean body mass yeah so and also some associative data I wouldn't put too much talk into those but yeah combined with the potential health benefits versus like just going all in
98:30 - 99:00 on saturated fat which is like the carnivore approach for people that just want to consume meat and eggs and you just have a lot of manhood energy and I feel that um so things like um nuts nut natural nut Butters olive oil canola oil and um avocado avocado oil things like like that the the Hipster fats the you know like Whole Food fats those are pretty good for getting Jack ironically because you're not going to find a lot of Jack people at Whole Foods yeah mostly because they're not wild stupid
99:00 - 99:30 animals like us and piss away their time lifting weights yeah and then there's there's a little bit of basis to not completely neglect saturated fat intake of course because it's helpful for cholesterol and testosterone production yes so theoretically over the long run you might get some small benefits from that couple eggs a day probably will was well on the way to do that two actually will already pretty much get you the maximum cholesterol intake that's is uh beneficial for muscle Grove in some research cholesterol actually improves muscle Grove in some studies if you're very low on cholesterol at will yeah
99:30 - 100:00 mostly mostly that's indeed um and the research is not super clear but um yeah potentially some benefits of you know an egg or two a day yeah so basically tldr try to experiment with higher fats and slightly lower carbs when you're bulking you may you may discover that you get even better gains or similar gains with way more diet flexibility you can go out to eat with your friends more often and even sticking to healthy foods you can have just better food tastier food and even some better health outcomes because of the pretty decent health effects of those really high
100:00 - 100:30 quality monounsaturated some polyunsaturated and omega-3 kind of fats yeah omega-3 and monounsaturated fats in particular have a really good record for health benefits yes yes I love it all right our last topic for today many myths that we've run into maybe the most painful myths are the ones that hit the closest to home like if you thought Dragons Were were real but they weren't that one hurt it did hurt when you were eight but as an adult for me it was more like last week actually last week yeah
100:30 - 101:00 you looked at the phog gentic record and you were like six slimmed animals are almost entirely missing damn it however however probably the most painful myths are the ones that impact our gains directly and the most painful of those are the ones that leave us with less jacked arms than we could have had I mean damn and recently I've been talking to a few people and they keep telling me that shoulders are more important to have than arms for like sex appeal and I would love to hear them but my arms are
101:00 - 101:30 so big I just don't care what they're saying so please help me not have skinny loser arms that get me pushed into the locker at school what myths are out there about bicep and tricep training that we really want to attend to and not have to commit ourselves so that we get bigger arms finally for once in our life something will work I think for biceps training the way many people go about it to they have like their dumble curls their barble curls and then a bunch of compound movements and what they really neglect is the lengthen position so you
101:30 - 102:00 do a really good job of that with your exercise selection of doing exercises which can be with a dumble like incline curls where you make sure that there's still tension in the bottom basan curls cable curls If You Preach your curls can be pretty good the biceps is a bit shortened but you do get high tension in the bottom position so concentration curls and then leaning back that's also really good you can get pretty high you need a combination of high muscle lengths and high tension at long lengths those seem to be kind of equally important and it's kind of like you can
102:00 - 102:30 think of them as a multiplier effect you can either have very high tension in the bottom and then even if the muscle's not that lengthened you get a pretty good effect you get the probably the best effect at least in theory if you get both like long lengths and then high tension there for the biceps this is quite well demonstrated including a meta analysis that on average at longer lengths there was more muscle growths at least with isometric contractions than at shorter lengths and that's exactly what you're not doing with most compound exercises dumble curls bble curls in the bottom position with a dumble or a bble curl because of gravity there's no
102:30 - 103:00 tension on the biceps functionally close to zero now you can do it like like Jarett where you push up the elbows to the to the font I like that lipstick on a pig you're just like have you ever heard that term that's right you're not American putting lipstick on a pig something is already ugly you put lipstick on it makes it a little bit better but it doesn't matter like as much as you would like uh obviously like four curls like that it definitely makes barell dou Coss better but if you could do them at a different angle and have maximum tension instead of just a little bit more tension you'd be even better still yeah yeah I think that's in
103:00 - 103:30 general you can't you can't really go wrong with it and it might be beneficial so length and biased exercises for the biceps are probably very underrated and underused underused what are your favorites I like Beijing curls a lot because you can basically adopt the resistance curve exactly to how you want it and you can let your elbows come back further if you want just move yourself further to the front um the incline curls that you do where you're not just on a bench and the arm is straight down you actually go so far down that the um so far down that the arm is still kind
103:30 - 104:00 of diagonal in the bottom position so that you still have tension right because if the arm is vertical in the bottom position with any free weight there's no more tension on the biceps right at least there's a big stretch but not a ton of tension whereas if just withstanding curls instead of incline curls there's neither tension nor a stretch exactly and so incline curls are better but flat bench curls are even better and technically speaking even though it's really annoying although if you have a decline ab machine where you can hook in your legs that's probably one of the best places to do dumbbell curls in because at the very bottom it's
104:00 - 104:30 both maximally stretched and very close to the highest Force you'll experience yeah I like those some people get um the shoulders don't like it as much in that case just reduce the stretch a little bit yeah or just start lighter with higher reps and work in I I like now I'm doing like sometimes I even use the 30s but when I started I was doing the 15s and getting excellent stuff I tried the 20s and I was like my delts are like nah you're good bro Glen aoral joint was like we're good but now I do the 20s uh sorry do the 25s on one day and the 30s on another and I feel great so a lot of
104:30 - 105:00 times when people say oh this this bothers my XYZ joint one of the problems they're usually committing is they just like went right into crazy loading and if they just worked into it your body gets used to almost everything yeah another myth um myth common mistake I see is in how people count the volume for the biceps so some people will go so far as to say compound work doesn't count and and then other people are like yeah no compound work is all you need and the truth is somewhere in the middle both equally wrong yeah and equally right yeah and it also depends on the
105:00 - 105:30 type of exercise because we see in research that if you have a fixed Implement like a barble something that not like a dumble where you can move both arms independently you get much more biceps activity and that's because of horizontal forces so if you do a pull-up even a wide grip pull-up biceps activity is actually quite substantial because what your body essentially does is if you Flex the biceps it's like bending the bar in powerlifting that's Q mhm that horizontal Force technically speaking reduces the moment arm for shoulder reduction more intuitively put the since the bar cannot bend the force
105:30 - 106:00 that you're putting into bending the bar essentially kind of helps pull you up yep so the biceps and the lats they work as a force pair to to get you up now you can do that with um like a pullup bar or a barble with a barble row but if you're doing like a dumble row we see in research that dumble rows they grow the biceps like half as much as um biceps curls and you can actually still count them but half so and you probably also don't want to get all your volume from that because again no tension in the length of position and stuff but if
106:00 - 106:30 you're doing 10 sets of rows that counts for something sure so I would count that as five sets of biceps work on average um so that's that's a big one you you do count the compounds work but maybe not fully depending on the exercise and especially not if it's like a dumble or a non-fixed Implement and then what you want is the total weekly set volume per week that's what you want to optimize for for triceps it's a similar thing where people neglect the specifically the long head they don't they do like push downs and then a bunch of horizontal or
106:30 - 107:00 vertical presses kind of like for the biceps and again you're neglecting the stretched position so you want either overhead triceps extensions or Skull Crushers skull overs something where the elbow is more elevated either completely overhead or at least somewhat over your body not like a push down if you only do the dips push Downs exercise like that then the long head cannot fully activate because the long head also assists the lats in bringing the elbow back to the body so um if
107:00 - 107:30 anything you train the long head a bit with something like chinups but it cannot fully activate there because it would sabotage the biceps so muscle can only contract or not contract right and the body will activate it and make it contract if it it's not beneficial for the movement and with something like a bench press if the Long Heads were to contract it would pull the elbow back down so it it helps in extending the elbow but it also pulls the elbow back down so in research we see that uh at least the available research bench presses grow the triceps about half as well as they grow the packs and the
107:30 - 108:00 growth difference seems to come primarily from the long head so the long head is really not well trained at all by horizontal pressing type exercises even if you're using a barble because the same thing applies as with the biceps fixed Implement you get horizontal forces much higher activity in the arms so again you want to you know dumble um dumble bench press count at not even half I would say man if I'm doing lots of push downs and Skull Crushers but I'm also doing lots of
108:00 - 108:30 straight arm pullovers it's a great combination is that a good long head hit and do I then not so much need to worry about overhead extensions for triceps yes and I think something like La prayers or pullovers in general straight arm pullovers are a really great exercise to balance out the triceps involvement because many people like triceps or elbow are very common in lifting and if you just train the medial and the lateral head with all of the pressing all of the push Downs you don't do anything for the long head and you
108:30 - 109:00 want to get that volume for the long head you have to do a lot of other isolation work and then your total volume for the medial and the lateral head they is is way too much kind of like the front Els where many people have more of an overtraining problem than an under trining problem yeah and um exercises that specifically hit the long hat but not the lateral and the medial head that's basically just pullover type movements yes so you really want those exercises to balance out the triceps involvement and it's an
109:00 - 109:30 intended target of the exercise many people will complain like oh I feel my triceps my pullovers it's like great great you can train the lots and the triceps long because they're an excellent lat exercise and an excellent tricep exercise and an excellent rear delt exercise as well because like how could it not be it's maximum stretch and tension at the same time I love it anything from a PR progamming perspective and a frequency perspective that you think people are missing from biceps and triceps training to kind of round out this discussion because excellent exercise critiques but like
109:30 - 110:00 one of my things and maybe we can agree or disagree on this um I think that you know muscles like the back the chest depending on the person the legs can take like a long time to recover if you're training them either bro split style or sort of normal style but to me it's like a lot of times biceps and triceps can recover quite quickly and if you're like sitting around half the week and your biceps trips are neither going to be trained soon nor are they tired shouldn't you be training them maybe a little bit more often potentially than you train other larger muscle groups
110:00 - 110:30 what do you think n that's stupid bro okay and man of hens has been great no um I do actually disagree with that or at least let me put it this way I don't think there's compelling evidence to show a difference let's say if you in your own experience can train bis orasms more often but aren't are you missing out I don't think so I think it's they respond the same way as other muscle groups like total weekly volume is what matters um if for volume people probably especially type bro individuals men they
110:30 - 111:00 they will ER on the side of overtraining the arms versus other muscle groups because then they have like a back day and then they have also arm day but they neglect the fact that you hit arms on the back day as well yeah maybe independent of volume they can handle higher frequency but I'm a big frequency proponent anyway right so you would say more frequency is probably good anyway whether you're talking about one muscle or the other exactly yeah excellent meno this has been awesome thank you which is unusual because usually I fucking hate talking to you yeah usually our
111:00 - 111:30 conversations are like at best oh yeah at best usually like outright infuriating very mid very mid mid whatever the kids are saying bet um before we sign you off I want to make a public service announcement uh against your will and not on but on your behalf um every now and again folks ask ask what is like a good personal training certification to get and a good uh personal training course to take and I used to say a bunch of different ones and there's tons of different really
111:30 - 112:00 good ones but my absolute number rank one is the Mano hanselman's PT course um there are many I'm actually very good friends with meno in real life and so you think this maybe that's biasing me and maybe it is but I'm also able to see meno's ideas in various regards and some of them I just quite frankly disagree with you on with all total due respect frequency and training I think we disagree protein int I think we disagree but your PT course is so godamn in-depth and so Broad in addition to
112:00 - 112:30 that and so complete and so meticulous and takes so damn long to get through that you really will be receiving what I consider a halfway to Master's level education in how to train people and how to control their diets if you get through the metah hm's PT course so if you guys are interested in really upgrading your skills and you really want to certification and let's say you work for a gym that's like you know we want you to have a CT but we don't care which one I just can't recommend the manah PT course enough uh of course
112:30 - 113:00 where can people go to find more about that course where can they go to find more of your insights I love your Instagram page because that's kind of how I learn half the shit I know I just scroll through like you usually have really awesome slides where like the first thing is some bombastic claim but then it's followup very good detailed nuance and then a summary of literature at the end what I like to do is just um just go through the first and then I just get bored and I just stop scrolling but for folks that want to learn a lot following you on Instagram is an excellent place where else can people get a taste of the menow as I've learned to call it mostly these days I'm indeed
113:00 - 113:30 on Instagram and YouTube at men. Hansons for both and on my website meno hanson.com you can see the the CH website you can also get a free email course if you're not familiar with my contents you get like a tour of my most popular contents and then see if you like that excellent I love it to thank you so much my pleasure all right peace [Music] [Applause]