Originally Posted by BendtheBar
Excuse my self-indulgence but I had to post a thought that came to mind this morning:
Diet is only 90% of the equation if you are training hard enough. If your workouts are sub-par diet is approximately zero percent of the equation.
This statement is false when left by itself.
Diet and Training are forever the married couple; One or the other can effect the "state of progress" on ones personal goal.
However, I have some trouble with this quoted statement--when left on its own merit, when not considering some individual particulars, and how "equation is being defined and what context "equation" is being utilized.
1. Beginner and Novice:
Subpar in what context as it relates to the position of the person (for example, a beginner, novice) and their goal?
A beginner can get away with a subpar program because the stimulus being applied (even subpar) is new, and the stimulus threshold rises of above what the body has grown accustomed to-dependent on the state of the subpar program (or effort being applied).
In some cases, even a subpar diet and a subpar training program (combined, dependent), can bring results (albeit short lived) to the novice or beginner.
This thought process is only inline with defining "equation" as one's personal goal. Its sort of like the body says "Oh, sh@t!", and over compensates, for a short period of time. Though, the aforementioned comments are very short
in relation to one's long term goals, it does, nonetheless, make the quoted statement false--to a degree.
2. Individual Particulars.
For example: Some individuals have a medical necessity to lose tissue, combined with the inability to exercise (or exercise strenuously), but are still put on weight loss induced dietary perimeters--from some educated professionals (assuming quality profressionals here).
Though the exercise activity can be subpar (as it relates to bringing more optimal results if allowed to work harder/more strenuous), "tissue" loss will be seen even with subpar training being applied. Again, this personal particular can make the quoted statement, false. In this limited example, we see that diet (keeping things equal) is still bringing in potential "tissue" loss, though activity is subpar because of medical limitations.
3. If the context is: "Equation of life"
A certain quantity of calories (and not necessarily pointing to the quality/contents of these calories) are needed to sustain certain life properties, daily life activities, whether one adds in a training program or not.
Out of the two, only two are required: Food and water. Training is not required in life
(to the average healthy), but may be required for improvement in health/strength in others (but still is personally optional), and added in by others due to personal goal wants (but still is optional).
We should always strive to work hard in the gym. We should always try understand what we need (personally for our diets), but its not "neccessarily" these that prevent us from reaching our goals. It actually comes from the beast within
and (IMO) NEEDS MORE ATTENTION THAT IT RECEIVES ON FORUMS:
The battle in our heads as we live life that that prevents us from being conistent in the things we are educated in, but prevents us from performing them.
And, understanding how (diet) and (training) effects our attitude/personal internal feelings--dependent on how these are carried out.