View Full Version : Q's about James F's April PM article

Neal Winkler
04-01-2008, 11:47 AM
Ok James, you've got my attention, why the tease? One-month is a long ways away!

I've seen Poliquin mention such things before, but haven't been able to learn more.

So, let me see if I'm understanding you thus far (he doesn't post here does he?):

Places were you store more fat than others give you a picture of your hormone profile and determines the best training/nutrition style for you.

Adrenal: High adrenal sites (umbilical) means people will respond better to insulin management (low-carb paleo style), good sleep, recovery (they have poor recovery), and skill based/ME style workouts with little metcon (5-10 minutes or regular length but say only 1 times per week?). I take it that people who have high adrenal sites need to be slow about developing work capacity before hitting the hard metcons. This is related to the poor recovery of their catabolic selves.

Insulin: High insulin sites obviously means too much insulin secretion. So, we're looking at paleo eating, "pre- and post workout allotment of proper nutrients" (does that mean BCAA's pre, and high-carb/protein post to take advantage on non-insulin mediated glucose uptake?), and ME only workouts (why don't metcons work for insulin resistant individuals?). What does "daily energy patterns" mean?

Note: In the 8 on 12 off study (http://www.library.unsw.edu.au/%7Ethesis/adt-NUN/uploads/approved/adt-NUN20061102.140229/public/02whole.pdf) all the women who didn't respond to intervals were insulin resistant.

Androgen: High androgen sites (pecs/triceps) are the guys that build muscle easily. They respond best to ME, hypertrophy rep ranges, and short metcons (<5 min.).

GH and Estrogen: High GH (calves) and estrogen (thigh) sites both respond well to traditional crossfit/metcon training.

Question: do people with high GH and estrogen sites show themselves to be more carb-tolerant than adrenal/insulin people? Where does the androgen fit in?

Tom Rawls
04-01-2008, 12:36 PM
High-insulin sites????

High-estrogen (thighs)--does that mean fatty thighs?

Lots of shorthand in the piece, which may mean something to the cognoscenti, but is perplexing to me.

Clarification and elaboration would be welcome.

Neal Winkler
04-01-2008, 12:45 PM
Ok, I think I may have found the answer to my next question.

I was wondering if having a high reading meant it was higher relative to the other readings, or if there was a different standard. But I'm reading from Poliquins site now that it's relative to the tricep skinfold.

Based upon this and just having my fingers to test, it's seems that I have a higher adrenal/insulin hormone profile, with my lowest relative skinfold being the pec and calf(explains why I'm a hardgainer, no T or GH).

Neal Winkler
04-01-2008, 12:49 PM
Tom, high-insulin sites means when using sinfold calipers you have more fat in the sub-scapular and iliac region relative too.... (see above post) either triceps or the other skinfold sites.

Yes, high-estrogen means fat thighs.

Did you read James Fitzgeralds article yet?

Tom Rawls
04-01-2008, 01:23 PM
Yes, I read the article. I was glad to see your post, because I had difficulty understanding the article. It seemed telegraphic to me, and I didn't fully understand the code. I'm deciphering bit by bit.

Jane Michel
04-02-2008, 05:21 AM
Sorry to hijack - thought we might keep questions about James' article in one thread... will this article be sold by itself? Or will it be kept and sold as part the journal issue?

Neal Winkler
04-02-2008, 07:36 AM
I will actually pay James $10 if he has already written the rest of the article to send it my way.

I've been wanting to know about this stuff but havn't been able to gather enough useful information from the net to use it in real life. I don't feel like waiting another month.

Robb Wolf
04-02-2008, 10:34 AM
James is a genius on this stuff. Ido Portal also.

Neal Winkler
04-02-2008, 11:04 AM
Do you know anything about it, Robb? Have I got the gyst right thus far?

Also, if there's anyway that my message can be relayed to James, I will seriously pay $10 bucks for the rest of the article if he's finished it already. It will be the 10 easiest bucks anyone has ever made. Well, except for that one time in Tijuana when....

Greg Everett
04-02-2008, 02:35 PM
Neal! What happens in TJ stays in TJ!

James is still working on the rest of the articles. I'm going to ask him to break the info down a bit more in the next installments.

Jonathan Reik
04-03-2008, 10:36 AM
This was a table I made for myself to summarize (what I think) James is saying in the article. I apologize and take full responsibility for things I may have misinterpreted, but this was helpful for me and might be helpful for others.


P.S. Not sure if all hormones were really in priority order, I think he just mentioned that the HPA axis was most important.

Dave Paton
04-03-2008, 12:00 PM
I may be mistaken, but is this the same stuff that a T-Nation article a week or so ago talked about "skinny-fat/hard gainers"? It sounds eerily familiar. Of course, they may not be related.


Derek Weaver
04-05-2008, 12:59 AM
Isn't this kind of the stuff that Poliquin talks about as well?

All interesting, but a bit confusing too.

Neal Winkler
04-05-2008, 09:57 AM
Yeah, this is Poliquin stuff. Some more questions would be: when James talks about supplementation and detox for the estrogen profile, what is he referring to? Detox from enviromental extrogens? What supplements does he recommend?

Robb Wolf
04-08-2008, 08:30 AM
Poliquins biosignature stuff is one my "to-do" list at some point. Some are not so keen on P-daddy but if you take some of his analysis techniques for nutrition and hormaonal status and couple that to a CF regime...you get folks like OPT and AFT. Interesting, no?

Gant Grimes
04-08-2008, 09:59 AM
but if you take some of his analysis techniques for nutrition and hormaonal status and couple that to a CF regime...you get folks like OPT and AFT.

One could certainly do worse. I look forward to his future installments.

Steven Low
04-08-2008, 07:27 PM
Poliquins biosignature stuff is one my "to-do" list at some point. Some are not so keen on P-daddy but if you take some of his analysis techniques for nutrition and hormaonal status and couple that to a CF regime...you get folks like OPT and AFT. Interesting, no?
Well, I think most aren't too keen on some of Poliquin's training advice rather than his biosignature stuff (although I could see that as well... -_-).

Neal Winkler
04-09-2008, 08:37 AM
I just can't wait for the new installments.

Derek Weaver
04-13-2008, 05:59 PM
I've been looking around the 'net at some of Poliquin's biosignature stuff and am fascinated. Can't wait for the next installments of James' articles.

I agree with Steven. I am fine and pretty much in agreement (with the limited, yet expanding knowledge I have) with most of Poliquin's nutritional ideas. The training though... not so much.

For anyone interested, there is some stuff on T-Nation that touches on this subject.

Neal Winkler
04-13-2008, 07:15 PM
Why would indivduals that have millions of dollars and glory to protect keep going back to Poliquin if his training was ineffecive?

He's trained hundreds of professional and olympic athletes.

Mike ODonnell
04-13-2008, 08:35 PM
He's trained hundreds of professional and olympic athletes.

I like Poloquin, nothing to take away from him at all....but just that statement alone is not going to help his case....as most professional athletes are clueless as to what good training is....and usually just hire a bodybuilder to get huuuuge and want to work the "core" once in a while....seen it.....but then again, they usually have enough raw talent at that point that even a bad trainer isn't going to screw up their career....unless you give them HGH or something....

Derek Weaver
04-14-2008, 12:50 AM
I also wonder about Poliquin when he says that dumbbell snatches will destroy your shoulder, or that box squatting is useless and will never translate to sport... yet he advocates body part splits and isolation training (hardly used in sport).

Of course, he's got entire centers and seminars and I... don't.

I do think that he's a genius in nearly 100% of his nutrition comments/advice. And as said, the Biosignature stuff is fascinating.

James FitzGerald
04-14-2008, 11:12 AM
Neil, re: 8 of 12 study...my data with insulin dependant individuals and those who are medically insulin resistant respond better at supra and sub scap sites with resistance training - probably due to increased sex hormone and GLUT 4 release with weights as opposed to cardio only...and i mean chin ups, dips, lunges, squats, deads...not 20 sec bike sprints, 30 sec rest x 6 (not sure what "intervals" meant in the study)...these create different responses even though energy systems similar

Tom Rawls
04-14-2008, 03:06 PM
As part of his Biosignature program, Poliquin sells supplements that he claims will boost testosterone levels.

True? Anyone have any experience with his stuff or know anyone who has?

Kalen Meine
04-14-2008, 04:23 PM
Wait, Poliquin sells an untested supplement to correct abnormalities in a test he devised (and will only teach others to perform for an outlandish amount of money?) Does he also sell liver tabs and brewer's yeast?

I'm sorry, but hardly an article goes by over at T-Nation where Poliquin doesn't set off the majority of my baloney detectors. His roster of client seem mostly to have consulted for a few days or a program here and there, and where already at exceptional levels of performance, and probably just needed some variety thrown their way to get unstuck. In the meantime, he tosses out enough curl variations to keep up with the ghost of Joe Weider. He mixes in a few bits of nutritional mumbo jumbo without citations, claims to have diagnostics that find problems with a majority of those tested, and then sells the solution for a few dozen times the cost of the ingredients.

And yes, I am not as strong as Poliquin. I have not trained as many people by a factor of some hundreds or thousands, and none of them were as strong as his clients. There is a possibility that his every word is truth from on high, and I, a weakling of little faith, should listen. But he's going to have to give me better reasons and reasoning before I lower my shields and empty my cup.

Gittit Shwartz
04-15-2008, 02:07 PM
Poliquin was a strength coach BEFORE he was an "exercise scientist". His theories are not predictions but conclusions drawn from recorded experience - every rep performed by every one of his athletes logged obsessively. Citations? The man gives results. I wouldn't so flippantly dismiss them as arising merely from the athletes' "needing some variety".
Poliquin does train elite athletes, and I think most people who fall within the range of genetically "normal", should probably be cautious about trying to train like an elite athlete. One should keep in mind all the factors these athletes have supporting their training, from precise nutrition to supplements to genetically superior recovery ability. Not to mention having no jobs or obligations outside of training. So many of his "tricks" may not be of much value to even the t-nation readers.

Garrett Smith
04-15-2008, 02:38 PM
He works with naturopathic doctors...that can't be a good sign, right? :p

Tom Rawls
04-15-2008, 03:53 PM
Kalen's response strikes me as reasoned skepticism, and neither of the subsequent posts address the issue of the efficacy of the supplements (need I add "expensive"?) that he peddles.

He doesn't say the potions are only for NHL guys and not ordinary rink rats. He'd be glad to sell me his stuff, and using pros as an example is part of his sales pitch.

The question is simple: Do his supplements work?

Steven Low
04-15-2008, 05:50 PM
Poliquin's ideas on actual training (splits if you didn't know) are actually good... for elite athletes where the CNS will generally become the limiting factor as opposed to muscles with the most of us who don't have superior genetics as elite athletes. On the other hand, he peddles splits for *everyone* which I think is just flat out wrong and often contributes to slower progress (and most people do disagree with him on this point I believe). Anyway.. yeah. His actual training implementaion for elite athletes might be good, but not really so much for t-nation where I highly doubt most of the people that read it are in the "elite" category.

And yeah, let's not get started on the supplements, lol.

Tom Rawls
04-16-2008, 09:16 AM
And yeah, let's not get started on the supplements, lol.

I take this to mean you too are skeptical of the effectiveness of Poliquin's (and others') supplements.

Steven Low
04-16-2008, 02:12 PM
I take this to mean you too are skeptical of the effectiveness of Poliquin's (and others') supplements.
I can get near the same performance from optimizing my sleep, diet and workouts as opposed to randomly adding in supplements like most people do (although probably not many of the people on here). Supplements are just that.. supplements. They can help but they're not going to be world beaters. I think most people rely on them too much to be as such.

To be fair, I may or may not have the necessary physiology for certain supplements to be effective given I haven't tried any of them... so I can't really criticize or praise specifically. Kind of like how some people are just creatine non-responders or some fine it works very effectively.