How bad is chicken for you?

whirlpool

A personal trainer in a pretty famous chain of gyms once told me that chicken turns to sugar once it gets into your body. Discuss. :pac:

I'd actually just like clarification about the effect of chicken on our body. Is it very bad for body-fat loss? He told me to substitute it with turkey instead.

ConorCBS

Eh, I'm no expert but I'm pretty sure that is complete rubbish!

Hanley

whirlpool wrote: »

A personal trainer in a pretty famous chain of gyms once told me that chicken turns to sugar once it gets into your body. Discuss. :pac:

I'd actually just like clarification about the effect of chicken on our body. Is it very bad for body-fat loss? He told me to substitute it with turkey instead.

That trainer is either a complete f*cking moron who should not be allowed work with a single client. Or you misinterpreted him.

If he said that and meant it, he's a thick c*nt. And I'm getting agitated at that because it's poisonous, stupid and ignorant.

Theoretically, in the absence of sufficient blood glucose levels, your body can turn ingested protein into "sugar" via gluconeogenesis, BUT, unless you're eating abour 10-15g of carbs daily, you don't need to worry about any of that.

...and if that was the case, the exact same thing would happen with turkey.

F*cking moronic.

endacl

whirlpool wrote: »

A personal trainer in a pretty famous chain of gyms once told me that chicken turns to sugar once it gets into your body. Discuss. :pac:

This is why personal trainers are personal trainers. And why they are not scientists.

whirlpool

him: "What meats do you eat?"
me: "most meats. I don't eat much fish. but I do eat chicken."
him: "chicken won't be on your eating plan."
me: "oh?"
him: "chicken turns to sugar when it enters your body."
me: "oh."
him: "you'll be eating turkey instead."

I didn't carry on with his eating plan.

It was a PT in Educogym.

whirlpool

So, moving on from the PT's comment, are there any reasons chicken would be a particular hindrance in the pursuit of lower body fat?

endacl

whirlpool wrote: »

It was a PT in Educogym.

'nuff said...

double GG

whirlpool wrote: »

A personal trainer in a pretty famous chain of gyms once told me that chicken turns to sugar once it gets into your body. Discuss. :pac:

I'd actually just like clarification about the effect of chicken on our body. Is it very bad for body-fat loss? He told me to substitute it with turkey instead.

WHAT? Please tell me you made this up!

whirlpool

double GG wrote: »

WHAT? Please tell me you made this up!

No, it actually happened. I posted word for word the actual conversation that took place. It was only a few months ago. I was very surprised at the time, but I didn't really investigate it any further until now. I also didn't stop eating chicken.

Gummy Panda

Maybe he meant chickatees? :pac:

a5y

Gummy Panda wrote: »

Maybe he meant chickatees? :pac:

Chickatees: they turn to sugar in your body!

(Get Tayto's marketing department on the phone, this slogan's a winner).

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

you bastards.. meat isn't defrosted yet and i am absolutely starving

Frynge

Staring hurries it along

Victor

whirlpool wrote: »

So, moving on from the PT's comment, are there any reasons chicken would be a particular hindrance in the pursuit of lower body fat?

KFC

endacl

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar wrote: »

you bastards.. meat isn't defrosted yet and i am absolutely starving

First in with Sir Digby Turkey Caesar!

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

endacl wrote: »

First in with Sir Digby Turkey Caesar!

rofl

Chancer3001

Sir Digby Sugar Caesar

Mellor

whirlpool wrote: »

So, moving on from the PT's comment, are there any reasons chicken would be a particular hindrance in the pursuit of lower body fat?

Chicken in no hindrance at all.
It's pretty much just protein if it's not fried and skin is removed. Nutritionally, turkey is barely any different.

SunnyDub1

What a ridiculous comment!

I would ring the gym and report him and also ask the manger what qualifications he has exactly?

Paying money for these people help ( some ain't cheap either) and they give you false information. God only knows what other crap he's filling his clients with

endacl

Educogym. Wouldn't that be tony quinn's outfit? Is he selling a special form of turkey compound these days...?

Hanley

SunnyDub1 wrote: »

What a ridiculous comment!

I would ring the gym and report him and also ask the manger what qualifications he has exactly?

Paying money for these people help ( some ain't cheap either) and they give you false information. God only knows what other crap he's filling his clients with

It's the standard educo line. I've had clients say the same to me who used to train there.

...and when I asked them what the rational was, they never could explain it.

whirlpool

Hanley wrote: »

It's the standard educo line. I've had clients say the same to me who used to train there.

...and when I asked them what the rational was, they never could explain it.

They also never got me to warm up or cool down - which, to me, was ridiculous. And for the following days, very painful. That alone set off alarm bells for me, but I never followed up on the chicken query till now.

Hanley

whirlpool wrote: »

They also never got me to warm up or cool down - which, to me, was ridiculous. And for the following days, very painful. That alone set off alarm bells for me, but I never followed up on the chicken query till now.

Cools downs after lifting do very little. Warms up are highly specific to the task at hand so something like lighter reps at a given exercise may have been sufficient

If you were being pushed to failure on resistance training, I'm not surprised you were sore!

Mellor

whirlpool wrote: »

They also never got me to warm up or cool down - which, to me, was ridiculous. And for the following days, very painful. That alone set off alarm bells for me, but I never followed up on the chicken query till now.

The warm up/cool down that most people do is about as useful as doing nothing.

What was a typical workout/progression

whirlpool

Mellor wrote: »

The warm up/cool down that most people do is about as useful as doing nothing.

What was a typical workout/progression

Actually, what I meant was stretches! I didn't mean to say warm-up/cool-down. We did absolutely zero stretching - neither before nor after exercising. And I don't know if you've ever attended an Educogym session but they work you pretty hard for half an hour. Stretching was an absolute must, but it wasn't even mentioned, not once.

Hanley

whirlpool wrote: »

Actually, what I meant was stretches! I didn't mean to say warm-up/cool-down. We did absolutely zero stretching - neither before nor after exercising. And I don't know if you've ever attended an Educogym session but they work you pretty hard for half an hour. Stretching was an absolute must, but it wasn't even mentioned, not once.

Stretching isn't a must...

Well, it is. But 90%+ of what you see ppl stretching in gyms is a waste.

--Kaiser--

Hanley wrote: »

Stretching isn't a must...

Well, it is. But 90%+ of what you see ppl stretching in gyms is a waste.

http://www.elitesoccerconditioning.com/Stretching-Flexibility/DynamicStretchingvsStaticStretching.htm

Dynamic stretching is better

Mellor

--Kaiser-- wrote: »

Dynamic stretching is better

I'm pretty certain that Hanley was referring to dynamic stretching and movement specific stuff.
And The useless stuff mentioned that 90% of people do would be generic static stretching.

Squiggle

Mellor wrote: »

Chicken in no hindrance at all.
It's pretty much just protein if it's not fried and skin is removed. Nutritionally, turkey is barely any different.

Is chicken skin not good for you? I read that it was a rich source of Palmitoleic acid, an omega-7 monounsaturated fatty acid, that has beneficial health effects.

Mellor

Squiggle wrote: »

Is chicken skin not good for you? I read that it was a rich source of Palmitoleic acid, an omega-7 monounsaturated fatty acid, that has beneficial health effects.

I said it it's pretty much just protein if the skin is removed. With the skin on its not just protein.

I didn't say it was unhealthy, choosing to eat the skin or not should prob depend of dietary goals.

Stench Blossoms

The skin is the nicest part.


"I'm only eating the skin, so the chicken's up for grabs''

Hanley

Mellor wrote: »

I'm pretty certain that Hanley was referring to dynamic stretching and movement specific stuff.
And The useless stuff mentioned that 90% of people do would be generic static stretching.

Correct.

whirlpool

Hanley wrote: »

Stretching isn't a must...

Well, it is. But 90%+ of what you see ppl stretching in gyms is a waste.

Precisely. I was in pain for days. It was a very intense workout, especially as they were treating me as a beginner, and stretching wasn't even mentioned. Not a word. It definitely was dodgy.

Hanley

whirlpool wrote: »

Precisely. I was in pain for days. It was a very intense workout, especially as they were treating me as a beginner, and stretching wasn't even mentioned. Not a word. It definitely was dodgy.

Ok, you don't know enough to know any better, but stretching would not have solved your problem.

If you're eating low kcal (as you do in educo) and training really hard to failure with resistance (as you do in educo), you WILL be sore. And stretching will not fix it.

I have many problems with Educo, but that isn't something I'd criticize them on.

whirlpool

Hanley wrote: »

Ok, you don't know enough to know any better, but stretching would not have solved your problem.

If you're eating low kcal (as you do in educo) and training really hard to failure with resistance (as you do in educo), you WILL be sore. And stretching will not fix it.

I have many problems with Educo, but that isn't something I'd criticize them on.

I'm not sure you know enough about me to say that. I usually do stretch when working out, and it alleviates much of the pain. I chose not to with Educo, because I wanted to follow their plan exactly and see how it worked out. It did not work out well, and I returned to stretching once I finished with Educo.

And I don't have many problems with Educo as I don't know much about them, but that is the one thing I do indeed criticise them on.

BlueIsland

whirlpool wrote: »

I'm not sure you know enough about me to say that. I usually do stretch when working out, and it alleviates much of the pain. I chose not to with Educo, because I wanted to follow their plan exactly and see how it worked out. It did not work out well, and I returned to stretching once I finished with Educo.

And I don't have many problems with Educo as I don't know much about them, but that is the one thing I do indeed criticise them on.

Stretching had nothing to do with the soreness you felt. Therefore, Hanley is saying that is not a gripe he has with Educogym.
Eat low calories plus train till failure = soreness. Stretch all you want before or after you are gonna be sore. Thats the point being made (i think).

BlueIsland

whirlpool wrote: »

I'm not sure you know enough about me to say that. I usually do stretch when working out, and it alleviates much of the pain. I chose not to with Educo, because I wanted to follow their plan exactly and see how it worked out. It did not work out well, and I returned to stretching once I finished with Educo.

And I don't have many problems with Educo as I don't know much about them, but that is the one thing I do indeed criticise them on.

Also the chances are you are not sore after your own workouts because you are not pushing yourself as hard as you think you are. (not because of amount of static stretching you do).

Hanley

BlueIsland wrote: »

Stretching had nothing to do with the soreness you felt. Therefore, Hanley is saying that is not a gripe he has with Educogym.
Eat low calories plus train till failure = soreness. Stretch all you want before or after you are gonna be sore. Thats the point being made (i think).

Correct.

RacoonQueen

whirlpool wrote: »

So, moving on from the PT's comment, are there any reasons chicken would be a particular hindrance in the pursuit of lower body fat?

Its lack of fat.

S hall

whirlpool wrote: »

A personal trainer in a pretty famous chain of gyms once told me that chicken turns to sugar once it gets into your body. Discuss. :pac:

I'd actually just like clarification about the effect of chicken on our body. Is it very bad for body-fat loss? He told me to substitute it with turkey instead.

Chicken is low in saturated fat so it is healthier as comparison to other snacks. If you consume too much of chicken then it can lead to weight gain.The best option is sea food like salmon which have omega-3 fatty acids which contains very less calories.

Hanley

S hall wrote: »

Chicken is low in saturated fat so it is healthier as comparison to other snacks. If you consume too much of chicken then it can lead to weight gain.The best option is sea food like salmon which have omega-3 fatty acids which contains very less calories.

What the bloody hell are you talking about?!

Just because it's low in n3 doesn't make something else better. You haven't looked at anything else than one meat source at potentially one meal. You can't justify a sweeping comment like that with reference to salmons omega 3 levels.

And it's certainly not lower in calories.

And it's VERY hard to eat excessive amounts of kcals from lean protein sources.

gctest50

whirlpool wrote: »

A personal trainer in a pretty famous chain of gyms once told me that chicken turns to sugar once it gets into your body.

Just did experiment for you ...

@22:17 blood glucose 5.1 mmol

1 x chicken breast ( nuked ) , took no insulin

@23:26 blood glucose 3.7 mmol

Frogdog

S hall wrote: »

Chicken is low in saturated fat so it is healthier as comparison to other snacks. If you consume too much of chicken then it can lead to weight gain.The best option is sea food like salmon which have omega-3 fatty acids which contains very less calories.

1. Something being "low in saturated fat" does not mean it's healthy.
2. There is nothing wrong with saturated fat.
3. Yes, you are correct, if you consume too much chicken then it can lead to weight gain. Similarly, if you consume too much lettuce, it can lead to weight gain. And also, if you consume too many football boots, it can lead to weight gain.
4. Salmon is a great food, agreed. High in cholesterol and saturated fat also. But not low in calories (which still doesn't change it from being a healthy food).

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

how many football boots is too many though

i've been average 3-4 a day, they're just so delicious.

meijin

Frogdog wrote: »

Similarly, if you consume too much lettuce, it can lead to weight gain.

I seriously doubt it's physically possible to eat enough lettuce for any weight gain

15 kcal in 100g
3000 kcal = 20kg :eek:

Hanley

meijin wrote: »

I seriously doubt it's physically possible to eat enough lettuce for any weight gain

15 kcal in 100g
3000 kcal = 20kg :eek:

THat's such a "I'm a hardgainer" attitude :rolleyes:

metamorphosis

meijin wrote: »

I seriously doubt it's physically possible to eat enough lettuce for any weight gain

15 kcal in 100g
3000 kcal = 20kg :eek:

I dare you

Frogdog

Well I'm willing to give the lettuce a go, if you're willing to give the football boots a go?

Seriously though, if everyone ate 1 or 2 chicken breasts a day (preferably the free range, unprocessed, fresh type you can buy in a butchers) the health of the population would a lot better. You'd be sick of chicken, sure, but you'd be getting good quality protein and would remain fuller for longer.