Gaining on the 811 diet?

So I have been reading up on the 811 diet, which is where you consume 80% of your calories from carbs, 10% from protein, and 10% from fats. I was wondering if anyone that has participated in using this diet has managed to gain a considerable amount of lean mass. Currently I eat around 300 grams of protein a day, 350 carbs, and 90 grams of fat. Would I still be able to gain muscle while on an 811 diet. Also if I started doing 2 a days wouldn't my protein requirments rise?

I've never seen evidence of anyone gaining muscle on the diet and I would advise against it. Some people perform well on 811 if they eat 3000-5000 calories a day and do huge amounts of endurance athletics but at that point, you're lucky if you're getting 70 grams of low quality protein. Even the people who do the best on it like harley who runs 30bananasaday will admit that they have trouble keeping weight on even when consuming enormous amounts of fruit. Protein's necessary for muscle building. Period. Plant protein can work as well as animal, but a high fruit diet isn't going to work for building muscle.

Ok thanks a lot! I really wasn't sure about it, skeptical is a good word for that i guess. I was thinking the only way it could be possible is if you consumed tons and tons of food a day like 7000 or more calories. The reason I posted the question is because I saw an article on it, ill post the link, it seemed to have a decent amount good information: http://www.foodnsport.com/faq.php

It seems like a healthy diet for a non lifter, but def not for me lol

I think it is possible to build muscle on 811, and here is a thread on 30BAD with those that have: http://www.30bananasaday.com/forum/topics/811-gladiators

Read this and it will answer all your questions about the diet. It's well researched and a solid book:

http://www.amazon.com/Becoming-Raw-Essential-Guide-Vegan/dp/1570672385

I was a lifter, with some nice results, after just one year in a "healthy" cooked food diet. I wasnt into junk, but i was a omnivore.

I have being doing 811 for 4 years and a half now. Its unbelivable in terms of health results. I wish i could go back and eat a high protein diet, because i enjoyed the looks and getting every month bigger and bigger muscles, but my body wont let me. I fell so good and am so much more productive eating this way. But unfortunaly, i disagree with doug, that affirms that less then 10% protein is enough.

For this 4 years and a half, i kept lifting at least 3 times a week, but no improvements. No losses, but no improvements as well. And i look smaller then ever, had my own face and body look that i had at 16, and i am now 27. I rejuvenated and look like a kid . Its good to know and even see that i will live a lot longer, but for sure, hehehe i digged the old look because girls dig a lot, a more muscular and "men" looking body.

It has its pros and cons. I am still trying to figure out ways to get bigger and still be raw and a frugivore... but if i had to drop my raw fruit and veggie diet for muscles, i have to say i would prefer to be a small thin guy as i am today.

Thanks guys. Well ive decided to go mostly raw, at least I have been completely raw for the past two days, tomorow is not a guarantee though lol. Im still getting maybe 150 grams of protein a day at best. Thats counting from all sources, nuts, some in fruit and greens, and a few servings of Sun Warrior Protein each day. Im feeling decent on this diet, not worse, but not noticeably better than a cooked food diet. As for now im not 811, Im still taking in a somewhat decent amount of protein, no where near the 300 grams a day I used to get though, and keeping up my calories is somewhat difficult, but Im really hoping to see some gains in the gym. If nothing else I have noticed a bit more muscular endurance in the gym.

you should deffinitly check out the "811 Gladiators" thread on 30bananasaday.com

I'm a 21 year old female in body scultping training and doing almost 100% 811. Sometimes 90/5/5...

I'm gaining some muscle...triceps looking bigger, biceps good, i can flex legs now BUT I've been seeing some weight gain around my waist which is really putting me off....I did increase my calories from regular cooked vegan 2,000 to raw high fruit 2,500-3,000, and drinking almost 3 liters of water.

So...I dont know what's happening with my weight gain in my stomach. Some people say your weight will fluctuate at first on 811, but I think it's too many calories for my little self. I'm 5'2 and weight 115 with some lean muscle on me.

It could also be water weight?

Anyway, that's my progress so far on 811 lol. I am getting stronger lifting heavy weights 8-10 reps.

I'm still going strong on fruit...but the past week I've been adding SunWarrior protein some days. Just 1 serving.

Yeah, the 811 Diet is geared towards people who do endurance activities and (bodyweight) routines; as with bodyweight resistance you can only tear your muscles to a minute degree and you tend to burn the muscles out more, thus that person will only need a small percentage of their total calories to come in the form of proteins and fats for the minutely damaged tissue and they would need more carbs to prevent them from burning out.

On the other hand, someone who is lifting weights (more than bodyweight is tearing their muscles to an extreme degree, hence, they need to supply their bodies with larger quantities of proteins and fats and usually less carms unless if they incorporate cardio into their routine or train for a longer duration than say an hour per session.

Also, genetice is a huge factor in some cases (i.e. Ectomorph, Mesomorph, Endomorpph).

Great Avatar by the way!

However, Building muscle mass is still possible on a raw diet you just need to down large quantities of sprouted legumes and grains.

Also a Raw Vegan proetin powder like Sunwarrior (which doesn't taste half bad) would assist greatly!

Hi guys, I am new to the vegan bodybuilding site but thought I should throw in my $.02. I have been vegetarian for 11 years, vegan for 9 years, raw for 3.5, and 811 for the better part of a year. I can easily gain muscle mass on a 811 diet. I just need to consume 3000-5000 calories of fruit a day depending on my weight goals and workout regime. Organic fruit can be cheap (if you go to farmers markets and or buy in bulk). The best part is that you feel incredible every day and very high endurance levels.

Mate no offence because you look great & are ripped etc, but you don't have much mass. What do you squat for example?

Thanks mate. But, keep in mind that I could have more mass if I wanted to. I don’t train for that. I do more cross training. Plus, I am just an average bloke with a very busy work schedule. I don’t get to the gym as much as I would like.

Also, I think it is un-natural and un-healthy to have a lot of mass. I am 6’1” and currently weigh 180lbs. I can comfortably go 10lbs in either direction. If I tried, I could be 230+ on a cooked vegan diet and be massive, but I wouldn’t be as healthy so I don’t see the point. Having a ridiculous squat max isn’t worth the increased risk of diabetes, cancer, heart disease, etc.

squats give you diabetes and cancer???

I think at a certain point a lot of guys want more mass just to look big and feed ego and its not about optimal health...veganfilmaker has got pretty good mass without overdoing it and looking like marshmellow man if you ask me. A lot of men are striving to have the mass he's got...

Also, I think it is un-natural and un-healthy to have a lot of mass. I am 6’1” and currently weigh 180lbs. I can comfortably go 10lbs in either direction. If I tried, I could be 230+ on a cooked vegan diet and be massive, but I wouldn’t be as healthy so I don’t see the point. Having a ridiculous squat max isn’t worth the increased risk of diabetes, cancer, heart disease, etc.

Any mass that you have to work hard to gain and/or maintain is pretty well "unnatural" whether it's 10 lbs. of added mass or 40 lbs., so it's a negligable point to infer that having a bit of added lean mass is truly much different than having a fairly sizeable amount (so long as it's mass that has been added without chemical enhancement) Anything your body will gladly get rid of when you don't continually work to keep it is not truly "natural", which is why I think that discussing mass in quantitative terms where one is put in higher health regard than another is fairly meaningless.

Simply being stronger or having more lean mass doesn't necessarily mean one is on a road to sub-optimal health unless they're getting that way from taking things/eating things that are obviously detrimental. Lots of big guys out there (vegan, omni or otherwise) that have carried around loads of extra muscle, sometimes lean other times with excess fat, who are in exceptional physical shape and health regardless of carrying far more mass than the average non-lifter. Having a particular amount of extra lean mass or choosing to eat a cooked food diet automatically condemns one to a life of sub-optimal health and disease, so it's misleading to infer that either one is guaranteed to be detrimental to one's overall well-being. Just as how people who are 100% raw aren't guaranteed to be at 100% optimal health and disease-proof forever, it gets a little bit dangerous to make too many inferences that can't truly be backed up with solid factual evidence.

Not trying to attack anyone's particular beliefs to start a conflict, just trying to be reasonable and keep things based on facts rather than assumption.

While I appreciate your comment veganessentials, I am not quite sure what you are getting at. I never said raw foodists are disease-proof. No-one would make that statement. However, there is plenty of empirical evidence that proves eating a low-fat high-carb vegan diet reduces the risk of developing many diseases to a much greater degree than a cooked vegan diet. So, yes, it is proven fact that having a cooked food diet would automatically condemn one to a life of sub-optimal health and disease in relation to an 811 raw food diet. I can PM you many different sources on various aspects of how an 811 raw food diet has been scientifically proven to be healthier. It is a wide-ranging topic, so let me know specifically which aspects you are interested in. 811 is about science, history, and nature. An easy intro to the diet is the book the ‘80-10-10 diet’ by Dr. Douglas Graham.

I would like to give the 811 another shot this spring, I did experiment with it following it 100% a couple years ago for 6 months... results weren't good but I think if I try it again and keeping track of everything I eat I could make it work.. tweaking it slightly too and not following it 100%. I like the idea and it does make sense in some ways.

....there is plenty of empirical evidence that proves eating a low-fat high-carb vegan diet reduces the risk of developing many diseases to a much greater degree than a cooked vegan diet. So, yes, it is proven fact that having a cooked food diet would automatically condemn one to a life of sub-optimal health and disease in relation to an 811 raw food diet. I can PM you many different sources on various aspects of how an 811 raw food diet has been scientifically proven to be healthier. It is a wide-ranging topic, so let me know specifically which aspects you are interested in. 811 is about science, history, and nature. An easy intro to the diet is the book the ‘80-10-10 diet’ by Dr. Douglas Graham.

I'm sorry, but this is not true. Dr. Graham is a well-meaning person I am sure, but he quite often cherry-picks the data to help support his theories, as well as ignoring data that contradict what he wants to believe.

If you would like to read a strongly researched book on the subject, I highly recommend Becoming Raw, by Melino and Davis. It is well-sourced, thoughtful, and comes to an unbiased conclusion about raw foods versus cooked foods.

http://www.amazon.com/Becoming-Raw-Essential-Guide-Vegan/dp/1570672385

From the (limited) research available, some foods are healthier when cooked and some are healthier when raw, but what it ultimately comes down to is getting plenty of fruits and vegetables in your diet. That, no one will disagree with.

Interesting point Fallen Horse. But, I didn't say the sources about 811 were from Dr. Graham..I only said his book was a good introduction to the diet. I actually have 'Becoming Raw'. It is a great book. Cheers.

i would suggest that you guys check out Brian clement and Hippocrates health institute. (they are non profit)

They probably have the most evolved diet on the planet--it revolves around raw food. Its all backed by at least 50 years of clinical trials and scientific research.

they have a really good dvd set which ive seen, but im sure most of it is on youtube as well.

check out this 3 part interview

all sorts of interesting info in this diet, check it out!

edit: gotta throw this out there too!

multipass,

They probably have the most evolved diet on the planet--it revolves around raw food. Its all backed by at least 50 years of clinical trials and scientific research.

What would an athlete eat for say 5000 calories on the diet suggested by Brian Clement?

Fallen Horse,

veganfilmmaker wrote:

....there is plenty of empirical evidence that proves eating a low-fat high-carb vegan diet reduces the risk of developing many diseases to a much greater degree than a cooked vegan diet. So, yes, it is proven fact that having a cooked food diet would automatically condemn one to a life of sub-optimal health and disease in relation to an 811 raw food diet. I can PM you many different sources on various aspects of how an 811 raw food diet has been scientifically proven to be healthier. It is a wide-ranging topic, so let me know specifically which aspects you are interested in. 811 is about science, history, and nature. An easy intro to the diet is the book the ‘80-10-10 diet’ by Dr. Douglas Graham.

I'm sorry, but this is not true.

You quoted quite a bit. What do you find to be untrue? Would not raw food be considered whole food? And therefore cooked food, due to its refinement, heating, destruction and depletion of vitamins and minerals, derangement of protein, loss of water, caramelizing of carbohydrates, and heated fats, be less than optimal in comparison to the exact same foods, but in their raw, whole state?

What would an athlete eat for say 5000 calories on the diet suggested by Brian Clement?

Well that's a interesting thing--this diet discards the idea of calories.

Its not about how much you eat--it becomes.. of what you eat, what can your body actually absorb, and how nutrient dense and beneficial is it.

If you are eating very nutritional food, all of which your body wants to and can use, it digests easily without much effort, and then you don't have to eat as much.

If you are eating some not-so nutritional food, you have to eat a lot of it, your body has to work much harder to digest it, and wont use very much of it.

Essentially this diet becomes a body cleanse/detoxification..resulting in your body being able to absorb the food you eat fully and correctly.

I'd suggest looking into it more, I can only explain it so well from what I remember.

You quoted quite a bit. What do you find to be untrue? Would not raw food be considered whole food? And therefore cooked food, due to its refinement, heating, destruction and depletion of vitamins and minerals, derangement of protein, loss of water, caramelizing of carbohydrates, and heated fats, be less than optimal in comparison to the exact same foods, but in their raw, whole state?

I did quote a bit; sorry for that.

Raw food is a 'whole food', meaning nothing has been extracted from the food. However, cooked food is just as 'whole', since nothing has been extracted. Some vitamins and minerals are destroyed, depending on the type of cooking, and some vitamins and minerals are actually made more accessible by cooking. In 'Becoming Vegan' there is a handy chart of all the recent studies on the subject, including which foods have decreased vitamin availability when cooked and which foods have increased availability when cooked. I should mention the type of cooking also has a great effect, with steaming generally being a good method, as well as microwaving. Frying is almost always the least desirable, since it burns the food and creates more carcinogens. This would the be carmelizing you referred to.

Jack Norris has a page about raw food diets. It's not nearly as comprehensive as 'Becoming Raw', but it's worth a read. http://www.veganhealth.org/articles/cooking

While I appreciate your comment veganessentials, I am not quite sure what you are getting at. I never said raw foodists are disease-proof. No-one would make that statement.

You'd actually be surprised - we had some raw folks here once who actually had the audacity to make claims along the lines of "a raw diet makes you disease-proof, and will reverse the symptoms of any/all diseases, including HIV" I'm simply stating that, just as a non-raw diet doesn't guarantee sub-optimal health (I can go outside any day and find lots of ominvores who eat terribly and are still in great health), and I can also find raw foodists who will still be capable of coming down with many of the same health issues that cooked foodists of any diet can develop. Just trying to keep things factual from both sides, because you can be healthy on just about any diet, and you can be terribly ill on any diet. I've just seen too many people here over the years that have made some outlandish claims about raw being the ONLY way to optimal health, I just like to clear the air that it doesn't offer any guarantees, and while some may thrive on it, some might find it is not the diet best suited for them

However, there is plenty of empirical evidence that proves eating a low-fat high-carb vegan diet reduces the risk of developing many diseases to a much greater degree than a cooked vegan diet.

I wish it were true for all, but a low fat/high carb vegan diet only makes me gain fat quickly, feel sluggish and bloated, and feel worse overall. Done it cooked, done it while 80% raw, neither one as a high carb diet felt good for me at any point. Some people, myself included, do MUCH better on moderate to high protein, moderate fat, and moderate carbs, not allowing any one macronutrient to be excessively higher than another. 17 years of trial-and-error have taught me one thing - there's so much variance from person to person in how we may respond to the same diet, I'm always reluctant to promote any specific type of vegan diet or macronutrient ratio as being best for everyone, as it just isn't the case. Would be nice, though, if there was a set way we could all achieve optimal health and fitness on a single diet plan!

So, yes, it is proven fact that having a cooked food diet would automatically condemn one to a life of sub-optimal health and disease in relation to an 811 raw food diet.

Not going to get too much into this, but I've never seen the actual science behind those sort of statements, primarly just a lot of guru gibberish from authors who are out to sell you a book and use anecdotal evidence over hard data. There just isn't anything conclusive to show that a cooked food diet means that you will live a less healthy life than one all-raw. If that were the case, people like Jack LaLanne wouldn't have been eating partially cooked/partially raw diets and performing amazing feats well into his 80s. Nor would there be bodybuilders like Bill Pearl who have physiques better than men half their age who can still lift heavy heading into their golden years. To make something conclusive and without discussion as far as fact, it would have to be overwhelmingly evident that people were all getting sick and dying sooner on a cooked diet than a raw one, but we've all heard of normal folks living into their 100s on cooked diets, and I've heard about people dying younger than expected or coming down with grave illnesses on raw diets. That's the reason why I say that no general diet based on quality foods (not processed garbage) guarantees a person to sub-optimal health, and it still is possible to have a diet that's "flawless" and still be unhealthy.

I can PM you many different sources on various aspects of how an 811 raw food diet has been scientifically proven to be healthier. It is a wide-ranging topic, so let me know specifically which aspects you are interested in. 811 is about science, history, and nature. An easy intro to the diet is the book the ‘80-10-10 diet’ by Dr. Douglas Graham.

Thanks, but no thanks (not meaning to be rude, but honestly, no thank you). Dr. Graham has been a topic of discussion here many times regarding the fact that he's not a physician (he is a chiropractor), is not a licensed nutritionist, and it has been difficult to really find out much about his actual instruction regarding nutriton from decades ago. There seems to be as much in the way of natural mysticism as there is fact-based approach in much of what I've heard about his writings, though I admit, I've gone primarily on what science-based nutrition writers have said as I don't have any desire to read about 80/10/10 as it's a plan that I would not follow. I do appreciate the offer to steer toward info, but having already experimented with a mostly raw diet and the lack of "feeling better" for doing so, I've learned that some things just aren't for me, particularly anything that is high in carbohydrates and low in fat and protein.

I certainly do wish anyone who goes with a raw or 80/10/10 approach the best and that they can thrive on it, I just know that it is not for everyone based on my own experimentations. That's why I'm often seen chiming in regarding the diet as there have been no shortage of people here over the years who made some pretty outlandish claims, got extremely upset when people wanted evidence and they couldn't provide it - things often went south in a hurry with hurt feelings and people getting mad over a simple difference of opinion on what the "best" diet was. Again, more power to those who choose a raw path and do well with it, I just prefer to not see blanket statements that infer it's always superior and offers guaranteed benefits over cooked food diets that may not actually be true.

I just prefer to not see blanket statements that infer it's always superior and offers guaranteed benefits over cooked food diets that may not actually be true.

I will agree to this. I went raw, the 80-10-10 way, for 7 months. I felt fine, and it was all good. Then I went for my routine check-up, and my blood came back severely anemic. I will not say that the raw diet made me anemic. But whatever was making me anemic, the raw food diet did not 'cure' it.

I could even theorized that the green smoothies with the spinach emulsified with the fruit, could have caused the oxalic acid in the spinach to totally ravage any metallic ion in my blood stream (oxalic acid chelates many metals - iron, magnesium, manganese, etc.). I still love my raw vegan smoothies (without the spinach), while bulking with cooked whole grains right now.

Blanket statements where everything is excluded except for the one true way, is never a good idea. People's bodies are each individually different, and have separate instructions to go along with each genetic predispositon, lifestyle, and goals in mind.