December 2nd, 2010 at 12:37 PM ^

Chocolate milk is the only recovery drink that should ever be consumed. It is so delicious, and it turns you into Mike Martin (well, not really, but its still awesome).

This was possibly the greatest determination science has ever stumbled upon. 

Michigan Shirt

December 2nd, 2010 at 2:19 PM ^

Well coming from someone who has done P90X, the P90X Recovery Drink is excellent (tastes like an orange julius) and is probably better for you than chocolate milk. The basic science behind it is a 4:1 ratio of carbs:protein within 5-60 minutes right after a workout to replenish your energy (insulin) stores which speeds up muscle recovery and therefore muscle soreness; chocolate milk just so happens to have this same ratio due to the sugar added. The only downside is it is around $2 per glass, where as chocolate milk is less than $.50 per glass. Also, they say to use simple sugars as they get turned into insulin fast enough where complex sugars/carbs take too long to break down leading to a decrease in effectiveness.

Michigan Shirt

December 2nd, 2010 at 2:38 PM ^

Well if you stick to the program it will. I started at a 6'1" 250 lbs. and got down to 208 lbs. I was fat and lazy and had some soreness the first few weeks, but that goes away after a while. I will say that the results really start to show about 7-8 weeks in the 13 week program, so just stick with it and it will pay off (Tony Horton the host said that during the initial test of the program the users were getting pissed at him for the first month and a half and then they started seeing big results).

Michigan Shirt

December 2nd, 2010 at 3:10 PM ^

It is an hour a day, except for Yoga X which is 1.5 hrs. I think what the videos do is give you a structured workout that uses specific moves to target specific muscle groups on certain days. Now if you are someone who has access to a trainer to create a workout guide than that is great, this is nice b/c I can do it in my living room and have a structered work out to perform. From personal experience, when I would go to the gym I would just workout with whatever I wanted too, using this program I noticed that my intensity level was vastly inferior to that of the program, creating a more intense routine that I would not have been able to create on my own. But it really is on personal preference.


December 2nd, 2010 at 3:26 PM ^

Anytime I see the phrase "lean muscle building workout" I dont buy in.  First of all its a misnomer because it's physically impossible to lose weight and build muscle at the same time.  Your body and muscles need massive amounts of calories, fat, and protein to build muscle which you cant intake when you're losing weight.  This is why all body builders for instance have a building up phase followed by a cutting up phase.  They will put on 30 pounds and then lose 25 and they just gained 5 pounds of muscle in the process.  That being said it's also not human to put on more than 10-15 pounds of muscle in a year unless you have some amazing "supplements" as I like to call them.  You can do P90x or any other workout routine and really lose alot of body fat, and it looks like u put on muscle, but in reality you just became more defined and started using your muscles therefore u can show slight increases.  There is no way in hell you're going to go from benching 135 to 315 with any amount of time spent doing p90x.  That being said its a great cutting up exercise routine from what ive seen.


December 2nd, 2010 at 3:31 PM ^

Lean building or toning is all a load of crapola. I wouldn't go as far to say it's impossible to drop fat and gain muscle, but it's damn near impossible unless circumstances are perfect and the diet is dialed in perfectly (for instance a carb cycling approach with varies caloric intake daily). Totally concur with everything you said.

Michigan Shirt

December 2nd, 2010 at 3:37 PM ^

I would say its more based on how much fat you are talking about dropping. I think I only had a caloric drop of about 300 calories a day (3500 burned and 3200 in), so I would not be dropping fat as quickly as say a 500-800 calorie diet would, but you can use programs like this in different ways to get different results.

Michigan Shirt

December 2nd, 2010 at 3:34 PM ^

I am not sure why you think it is physcally impossible to lose weight and build muscle at the same time because this is very much untrue. Muscle burns more calories than fat and when you increase you muscle mass it also increases your metabolism. If you burn 3000 calories a day but only take in 2500 you will be burning off fat. Building muscle just allows you to burn fat quicker. After finishing this program I definately built muscle because I could see substaintal gains in weight and reps, it's fine if you don't believe, but no need to say something will not work when you haven't tried it, I used to say the same thing.


December 2nd, 2010 at 3:43 PM ^

Thats my point though.  Your muscles burn alot more calories and in order for them to grow they need alot more calories.  With your 3000 to 2500 example there is no way you can have substantial muslce increases.  You will just lose weight, which I think is your goal so you're still ahead of the game.  You seem to have a grasp of your body and your goals and uve shown success so good for you.  We are just debating two different things.  Big difference in trying to bench 405 vs losing weight and becoming more defined.  I agree with your caloric statements as long as youve spread them out over 5-6 meals a day.  Best of luck to you.

Michigan Shirt

December 2nd, 2010 at 3:54 PM ^

Yeah I agree, this is definately not a program to use if you want to look like Arnold Schwarzenegger. I would say that you could use this program to gain some muscle mass after you reach a weight that you are comfortable with especially if you want to stay at a somewhat normal size, but you will not get astronomically bigger with just this program. A good example is to look at Tony Horton the host and you can get close to what he looks like, but he definately does extra workouts to get as big as he is.


December 2nd, 2010 at 4:26 PM ^

Tony Horton is not what I would call "big" by any means. Is he very lean? Hell yeah! But not big, at all. This guy is "big" and lean. I'm sure you'll see a massive difference between him and Horton. It's also an example of what I mean by looks being deceiving. Mind you this guy lost in the ballpark of 50-60 pounds. In which pic does he look "bigger"?



December 2nd, 2010 at 4:33 PM ^

Finally.  Its like when you pick up some jug of protein powder or some weight loss pill from GNC and they show these before and after pics claiming how much muscle he put on from this product.  So if i lose 40 pounds ill have 20 more pounds of muscle somehow?  Sweet sign me up.

Michigan Shirt

December 2nd, 2010 at 4:42 PM ^

That's cool if you want to be that big, I do not but to each his own. I never said anywhere that you can get that big from P90X. I also never said Tony Horton was big, I said look at what he looks like and that is a semi-accurate target of what you could look like (however he does extra workouts to get "bigger"), but it would take multiple rounds to get close.

 I would think most people would prefer his look to big dude above, but that is just an opinion.


December 2nd, 2010 at 4:49 PM ^

A good example is to look at Tony Horton the host and you can get close to what he looks like, but he definately does extra workouts to get as big as he is.

This is beside the point though, I was just illustrating the deception of looking "bigger" when you get leaner and I think those two pictures show it very nicely.


December 2nd, 2010 at 3:54 PM ^

First, let me start off by saying I've walked the walk, so to speak. I've added 50 pounds to my frame and I've lost 15 pounds here and there in dieting stints (where I've hit single digit BF%), so I have some basis.

Yes, muscle burns more calories than fat, but I think you're confusing two different things. What you're saying in the next statement doesn't make sense. If you burn 3000 cals in a day and only take in 2500, how do you expect your body to have enough energy to synthesize new muscle tissue? It doesn't, bottom line. Now, the more muscle you have, the more cals your body need to maintain a weight (higher BMR), so losing weight would be "easier", I guess. That doesn't necessarily mean the weight coming off will be fat, but I digress.

The only way to tell if you had gained muscle was to have a before and after weight and bodyfat measurement. "looks" are very deceiving, especially in a cut cycle. Increased strength certainly does not mean increased muscle mass. Strength adaptions are namely neural adaptions and CAN have nothing to do with muscle cross sectional area.

I hope this clears some things up.

Michigan Shirt

December 2nd, 2010 at 4:14 PM ^

I am not a doctor, but just asking a question here. Isn't fat created when you have a buildup of insulin in your blood stream that has no where to go so it goes to your fat stores. Now I agree that weight coming off will be fat, but fat is stored energy so you could make an argument that when you burn 3000 cals a day but only take in 2500, the energy needed to synthesize new muscle tissue can come from these fat stores. Now what you are talking about is building volume and yes, this program probably will not build huge volumes of muscle, but new muscle is formed by creating micro-tears in the current muscle and when it heals, it adds mass. This will happen no matter what just maybe not in the vast quantities you are talking about. Again, this program will not make you look like Arnold, but you can build muscle from it.


December 2nd, 2010 at 4:51 PM ^

it be great if that's how the body worked? Unfortunately, it's not. The only way your body goes to tap stores of energy is if you're in a caloric deficit. Why would the body convert stores of energy (tissue) when it can use free(er) energy (food)? Your body uses those 2500 cals, but you're still in a deficit, so the body unwillingly taps into tissue for the extra 500 cals of energy. Survival instinct man! If the body used fat stores for energy to synthesize muscle, dude, we would all be jacked! Nobody really knows the specifics of what your body decides to use as fuel or else we would all know how to get super lean by now!

Not trying to rain on your parade or anything so don't take it that way, just trying to correct your misconceptions.

Michigan Shirt

December 2nd, 2010 at 5:11 PM ^

I actually meant to agree with you about not all weight coming off will be fat (fingers were lagging behind my brain). To say that the body burns tissue to get those extra 500 calories is a little misleading because if you are on a healthy diet your body should be burning fat stores as energy before muscle tissue at least for the most part (you could potentially burn percentages of both, but fat is burned first) thats is why when people go on a workout routine don't lose all of their muscle. I wasn't trying to imply that fat stores are used to synthesize muscle, just that the body can burn fat for energy and that energy will get put into repair the torn muscle fibers. I don't have any misconceptions about using a 500 calorie diet to get "big", just that you can go on a healthy diet and workout routine to burn fat and build muscle. It is possible, just maybe not as much as you think I am implying (I am not), Anyway it is a good discussion and I am not trying to antagonize anyone.


December 2nd, 2010 at 6:12 PM ^

If you're doing things correctly, then yes, you'll burn fat tissue, but to think the body won't catabolize muscle is, well, just wrong. Look at endurance runners and tell me they haven't used muscle tissue as fuel. There is much debate in the bodybuilding community about what practice will catabolize muscle tissue and what won't, so it isn't as clear cut as you're portraying.

I think the problem is that you're confused between repair/maintenance and synthesizing. It takes a certain amount of energy to repair a "damaged" (you keep saying torn/damaged, but I wouldn't consider it damaged) muscle. Synthesizing new tissue takes a whole lot more energy, which you don't have while in a caloric deficit. That's about as simple as I can make it. You can think whatever you wish, but we'll certainly agree to disagree. You can ask anybody who has walked the walk and gained a substantial amount of muscle and they will say the same thing as I have. By your assertions, you are claiming that the people who do this for a living (bodybuilders) are doing it all wrong. I mean, after all, why would you go through gain/cut phases when you can just go two polar opposite ways at the same time (lose fat/gain muscle)? I will continue doing what I absolutely know works (b/c I have taken scale weights and bf% numbers) and you can do what you believe or "feel" works. Bottom line is, without hard evidence, you're pissing in the wind.


Either way, good luck with your training.

Michigan Shirt

December 2nd, 2010 at 8:30 PM ^

Did you read anything I wrote or are you just arguing to argue. You seem to keep thinking that I am saying you can be a body builder while going through a calorie deficient diet, I have never said this. I have been saying all along (while talking about P90X) that you can gain a small muscle mass while doing a workout like P90X if you stay around 300 calories, more and you will basically just be burning fat and getting a leaner look while not really building muscle, just toning. Also, I never said anything was clear cut, actually I was making the same point as you and stating that it's not clear as to what you will use for energy, just that during a healthy diet, most of it will be fat. I never said bodybuilders were doing it wrong, in fact, in a couple of posts I have stated that if you want to build muscle using P90X you need to be eating about 500 calories more than you are burning, so we are agreeing with each other, you just keep seeming to think that I am disagreeing with you.

Steve Lorenz

December 2nd, 2010 at 2:41 PM ^

I just started a hybrid of the two a couple weeks ago (link to the chart since it won't copy right):

I was 60 days through the p90x in January when I snapped my wrist and was in better shape than I've ever been. It's great to have a solid workout program but you gotta be committed to see results; the diet is arguably more important than the workout. The hybrid has been excellent so far and while it's only been a couple weeks I'd recommend it. 

Steve Lorenz

December 2nd, 2010 at 2:50 PM ^

What Michigan Shirt says is pretty much spot on; the Insanity workout will beat the shit out of you but get you into shape quickly while the p90x will do the muscle building. The best part of the hybrid workout is that all the workouts stay relatively close to an hour; I hated the p90 yoga because it was almost two hours long and was a thorn in my side when I was working a lot. 

Michigan Shirt

December 2nd, 2010 at 2:49 PM ^

I should have mentioned the diet as it is extremely important. Make sure you eat a lot of lean protein and healthy carbs and fats. I usually just eat chicken breasts and turkey tacos with whole wheat bread. I will say that you don't need to follow the programs diet, just that you understand what it is telling you. Do not eat more calories than you burn, which can be fairly hard with these programs, due to each workout burning somewhere between 600-800 calories depending on weight. Just eat healthy and you should see gains. Also a tip, try to eat 5-6 smaller meals instead of 3 big meals, I usually snack on pistachios and almonds as large snacks and then eat a smaller meal (3 meals and 2 snacks).

Michigan Shirt

December 2nd, 2010 at 3:18 PM ^

I have heard the same thing, but that's only because ground turkey usually has added fat to keep it from falling apart which usually makes it higher in fat than extra lean ground beef. I actually found a 99/1 protein to fat ground turkey (Jennie-O's I believe) at my grocery store that I use, so if you can find that you may want to try it, otherwise extra lean beef is good too (I will occasionally use this to switch it up).


December 2nd, 2010 at 3:36 PM ^

eat both? Just because someone told you one is better than the other doesn't mean its necessarily true, right? That's the beauty of diet/exercise! You have to find out how your body responds to different exercise and dietary intakes. I had a "dietician" tell my friend that eating almonds was equivalent to depositing fat on your body. take what you hear with a handful of salt.

Michigan Shirt

December 2nd, 2010 at 3:40 PM ^

I definately said that I eat both and I agree that you can mix it up as long as you are smart about it. I spend a lot of time researching different types of food and how to eat healthy and there is definately a lot of misleading info out there (like your almond story). Best advice is to just read a lot of health articles (some will differ) and use your own judgment.


December 2nd, 2010 at 3:15 PM ^

Diet isn't really an issue.  I don't drink soda or eat sweets (except on holidays), and I don't consume white bread (for the most part).  I mainly eat chicken, drink milk, eat whole grain tortillas, lots of fruit and vegetables, drink protein shakes, etc.  I eat healthier than most people I know. 

But the gym I use (which is right next door) is full of old people, and it's hard to challenge myself every day.  They all think it's awesome that I can stand on one foot.

Michigan Shirt

December 2nd, 2010 at 3:22 PM ^

That was my main thing when starting this workout was just to start eating healthier and quantity control. I will say that a good source of information is the free BeachBody forum where they talk about all the supplements and food items that are beneficial to this program.…

Michigan Shirt

December 2nd, 2010 at 2:44 PM ^

I first completed P90X and the main goal is definately resistance training, so basically replacing fat with muscle. INSANITY is a crazy difficult aerobic training course that will cut fat quickly, but you will not see the muscle growth that you would see in P90X. INSANITY is more about creating a lean, defined body than P90X which will build more muscle. It depends on what your looking for, but thats a quick summary. Also, INSANITY is only 2 months, while P90X is 3 months, you work out for 6 days in both and take the 7th day as a recovery day (which you will need). My main problem with INSANITY is that it is almost too difficult, but if you watch the people working out on the screen you will notice that they cannot make it through a workout with out stopping either, so it is meant to push you as hard as possible. If you have access to torrents I would suggest doing a hybrid with swithcing out the aerobic training in P90X with INSANITY, but this may be difficult if you are out of shape. If you haven't worked out in a while, P90X is definately easier, but INSANITY will show quicker results. I am up for answering any more questions if you have them.