Protein?s Role ?n Building Muscle Mass Protein ?? necessary ?n order f?r muscles become stronger ?n? really grow. If ??? ?r? strength training, ??? w??? need plenty ?f ?t ?n ???r daily diet. Protein ?? found ?n many different foods including: eggs, dairy products ?n? lean meats. Th??? ?r? ??? foods th?t ?h???? b? ?n essential ??rt ?f a healthy diet.
Another ?r??t way t? build muscle f??t ?? t? ??? protein powder ?n between ???r main meals. Th?? protein supplement comes ?n several forms ?n? ??n b? added t? different foods ?n? drinks f?r consumption. Whey protein ?? one ?f th? best types f?r building muscle.
Whey protein ?? a very powerful supplement th?t builds muscle mass ?n a very b?? way. In fact, a high quality whey protein powder ?h???? b? ???r number one supplement. Th? best ??rt ?? ?t?s very affordable ?n? ??n b? ??r?h???? ?t ???r local supermarket.
Though ??? ?r? already eating six high protein meals each day t? ?? along w?th ???r intense weight training program, using a whey protein supplement w??? really amp up ???r muscle gaining capability. Protein powders m?k? ?t very easy t? eat six meals a day full ?f quality protein. Th?? ???? m?k?? consuming calories easy.
Weight gain drinks ?r? considered a ??rt ?f ???r meal ???n ?n? ??n b? used along w?th ?f a meal. One ?r??t protein drink ?? a smoothie. Y?? ??n ??? a small container ?f yogurt, a half cup ?f milk, a few pieces ?f fruit ?f ???r ?h???? ?n? a tablespoon ?f whey protein powder ??? blended together t? concoct a healthy alternative. Y?? w??? b? consuming both calories ?n? protein ??? ?t th? same time ?n? w??? feel full.
Another ?r??t drink ??? ??n consume throughout th? day ??n b? m??? ?? follows. Mix 100 grams ?f ???r favorite protein powder, two quarts ?f whole ?r two percent milk, two cups ?f skim milk powder, two cups ?f chocolate ice cream, four tablespoons ?f peanut butter ?n? one banana. Blend th?m together t? m?k? a t??t? shake th?t w??? ??f?n?t??? supplement ???r meal ???n, providing ??? th? additional protein ??? w??? need t? continue building strong muscles. Y?? ??n add ?r subtract ingredients based ?n ???r ?wn personal preferences ?n? calorie needs. If ??? h??? a particularly high metabolism, ??? w??? need ??? th? quality muscle building calories ??? ??n ??t. Y?? w??? want t? adjust th? ingredients t? meet ???r ?wn personal needs based ?n th? amount ?f activity ??? ?? throughout ???r day ?n? th? intensity ?f ???r workouts.
Related Articles:
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
UFC 161 wasn't the greatest of cards, but some fighters did stand out. Who stood out for you? Speak up on Facebook or Twitter.
No. 1 star -- James Krause: In 2009, Krause had two fights in the WEC. He lost to Donald Cerrone and Ricardo Lamas and missed his chance to get into the UFC when it merged with the WEC. Krause kept training and kept fighting, putting together a seven-fight win streak in promotions like Resurrection Fighting Alliance and Shark Fights.
He was ready when the UFC called and asked him to fill in at the last minute for a tough match-up with Sam Stout. He not only had an entertaining fight with Stout, he finished him with a guillotine with 13 seconds left in the fight. He won both a Fight of the Night bonus and a Submission of the Night bonus, totaling $100,000.* After years of training and fighting in smaller promotions, that money is an excellent reward for keeping the faith.
No. 2 star -- Shawn Jordan: Perhaps it's just that Shawn Jordan is a really busy guy. He has many items on his to-do list, and he doesn't have time to waste on knocking out a fighter. He quickly finished Pat Barry, earning the TKO in 59 seconds. Next item on the to-do list? Heading to the bank to cash his $50,000 Knockout of the Night bonus.*
No. 3 star -- Stipe Miocic: Does it actually take throwing a kitchen sink at Roy Nelson's head to knock him out? Because Miocic's strikes were just short of kitchen-sink-level, and Nelson remained standing. That Miocic was able to put such a beating on Nelson showed that he is back to being the striking stud he was before being knocked out by Stefan Struve.
*UFC bonuses are paid out after fighters have passed their post-fight drug tests.
Not everybody's into chemistry but you have to be a special kind of insane to not have a fondness for the Muppets. This periodic table of Muppetry is a wonderfully organized and colorful take on the history of the form than anyone (with a soul) can appreciate, chem-geek or not.
Designed by Mike BaBoon, the chart is more than just Muppet abbreviations in squares; it actually gets some real information across. The background color of each element/Muppet/muplement/elemupp represents its skin or fur, the border color stands in for any hat or hair, and the color of the abbreviation text matches its nose. On top of that, each box indicates the muppet's year of introduction, and the primary muppeteer. It's more data than you might expect, and all in a delightful form.
If this seems like something that belongs on your wall, you can find prints of various sizes for various prices at Redbubble and Society6. And study up; there will be a quiz. [Mike BaBoon Design via Buzzfeed]
Abnormal Returns?is hiatus this week. However that does not mean that we are content-free.?As we did last year, and the year before, we asked a panel of independent finance bloggers a series of (hopefully) provocative questions. We hope you enjoy these posts as much as we do putting them together. Feel free to jump in the comments with your own answers to the questions.
Question: This post argues that John Bogle, i.e. low-cost indexing, has already won. Has he? What comes next? (Answers in no particular order.)
David Merkel, Aleph Blog, @alephblog: No, Jack Bogle has not won yet, and I think he would agree with me. ETFs for the most part have low costs, but from my limited observations they lose in a bigger way than fees. People using them to aggressively trade end up losing far more than the difference in fees. Those in open-end mutual funds trade far less, and lose less as a result.? We need to look at dollar-weighted returns, not time-weighted returns. ETFs lose more than a buy-and-hold investor would experience.
Brian Lund, bclund, @bclund: Yes. What is next is the total and final destruction of the broker model and a move towards ?co-directed? investing, where the customers leverages the experience of an seasoned market participant to trade/invest.
Tom Brakke,tjb research, @researchpuzzler: Given the predominance of active management, it is hard to say that Bogle has won, but at the margin he is clearly winning.? As I noted in a recent piece on the investment management industry, active managers now have to step up, by offering truly differentiated methods and results (no more closet indexing, or playing the game in a way that effectively results in that), and, yes, lowering fees.
Bill Luby, VIX and More,? @VIXandMore: There is a general downward trend in all fees related to the investment world, as more firms are forced to compete on cost and as more investors become comfortable with a self-directed approach.? Index funds were the leaders in the area of low fees, with actively managed funds sticking more stubbornly to higher fees.? No load mutual funds began the revolution and more recently brokers have extended this war on fees to include commission-free exchange-traded products.? Asset management fees are also trending lower for both hedge funds and registered investment advisors.
With continued advances in technology as well as the breadth and depth of information available to retail investors, the rise of the self-directed investor should continue, but the size of this market segment has a limit, as many investors do not have the time, inclination, knowledge and confidence in their own ability to manage their investments.? Eventually, I see three customer segments being defined in a more distinct manner:? (1) self-directed investors; (2) investors who partner with an investment manager; and (3) investors who outsource the investment management process and often also the emotional and intellectual component of managing their assets.
Investors with a higher sensitivity to price and costs (particularly self-directed investors) will place a strong emphasis on cost and that should keep fees trending down.? There will be pockets where fees will be stickier, particularly those in alternative asset classes, complex strategies or more specialized areas of focus.? Ultimately, the ability to add value through a targeted focus or in dealing with increased complexity will be a requirement for maintaining higher fees, but the trend in this direction may be slow as short-term and intermediate-term performance and correlation data make it difficult to draw conclusions about the long-term value of these investment approaches.
Along the way, I expect that the trend toward ETPs and away from mutual funds will pick up steam.? ETPs that embrace the index fund approach will continue to lead the way, but the rise of actively-managed ETPs will begin to undermine mutual funds more dramatically going forward.? Whether investors continue to embrace an index-based approach or seek out active management products in an effort to beat the indices, it is just a matter of time before ETPs nudge aside mutual funds and rule the financial world.
Jared Woodard, Condor Options, @condoroptions: How many 40-something professionals still pick stocks? Bogle has definitely won, in that sense. People hate high fees, complex strategies, and hedge funds so much that they?d rather take cheap beta than reach for any alpha. What comes next is a quiet resurgence of alpha opportunities for smart managers.
Wesley R. Gray, Ph.D., TurnkeyAnalyst & Empiritrage, @turnkeyanalyst & @empiritrage: There are few broad category descriptions in my mind: passive, closet-passive, and active. Passive would be the S&P 500 index, closet-passive would be ?active? managers that have very little tracking error, and then there are genuine active managers that have more concentrated portfolios and are less concerned about tracking a passive benchmark (i.e., rare).
Bogle has certainly won the hearts and minds of the passive and closet-passive investors, as evidenced by fund flows and the data on the performance of active managers relative to passive benchmarks. That said, there are still large pools of capital allocated to genuine ?active? managers via mutual funds and other asset structures (hedge funds, SMA, and so forth). The next revolution will be transitioning these high-tracking error active portfolios into lower-cost and tax-efficient ETFs. Our firm is creating an active ETF platform to facilitate Vanguard 2.0 and transition the high-tracking error, high-cost active strategies into low-cost, low-tax drag investment vehicles. We?re excited about changing the industry.
Josh Brown, The Reformed Broker, @reformedbroker: What comes next, hilariously, is a flat market where the index does nothing ? once the last investment dollar is the world is finally thrown at a passive product. That?s when alpha strategies begin to gain some traction again ? precisely when no one is in them. This will, of course, frustrate the maximum amount of participants which is what the market has been designed to do.
Look for a boom as the pendulum swings back in hedge fund strategies adopting the mutual fund/ETF wrapper and other so-called ?Liquid Alts? coming out. They will have dramatically lower fees than these strategies typically have had in their hedge fund lives. Bogle will end up ?winning? all over again as the bulk of these disappoint circa 2015, 2017. Then we?ll all go back to indexing.
I can see for miles and miles.
Michael Kitces, Nerd?s Eye View & Pinnacle Advisory Group, @MichaelKitces: The caveat that this article misses is the rise of tactical asset allocation, overlay managers, and other portfolio management approaches that use passive pooled vehicles (e.g., ETFs) as a tool to implement what are actually active strategies (and for which there?s a separate active fee). Cerulli?s research notes that ETF managed portfolio providers are ?flourishing? (see http://www.financial-planning.com/news/advisors-to-ramp-up-etf-allocations-cerulli-2685079-1.html). You can believe that that trend is good or bad, but to say the least it?s not exactly the buy-and-hold indexing focus of Bogle, and suggestions that the growth of ETF index funds mean Bogle has won miss the point of how ETFs are being used by a large segment of investors. There?s a difference between the passive vs active debate ? a la Bogle ? and the strategic versus tactical implementation, which can be done with active OR passive funds, as I wrote a few years ago (see http://www.kitces.com/blog/archives/103-Is-The-Passive-Vs-Active-Debate-Different-Than-Strategic-Vs-Tactical.html).
Jeff Carter, Points and Figures, @pointsnfigures: Of course Bogle won. So did David Booth. He used a similar theory and returned billions-they even named the best business school in the world after him. Efficient Market Theory works. You can?t beat the market.
Robert Seawright, Above the Market, @rpseawright: Despite the enormous growth of passive investing, Jack?s arguments have been much more successful within the marketplace of ideas than in the markets themselves.? Based upon the supporting data, I have consistently argued that those in the active management business ought to be able to defend their processes with more than just a sales pitch ? y?know, with data and stuff. Sadly, that isn?t often attempted much less achieved. While I don?t think that Jack?s argument extends nearly as far as he does (I think that active management is a valuable and appropriate tool), I also think that passive management is the appropriate investment default and that the situations of the majority of individual investors would be improved by their using passively managed investments. I don?t think Jack has won or even that his position is like that of the Allies after D-Day (the outcome seems decided but there is still a lot of work to do).? That said, Jack is clearly ahead.
Morgan Housel, The Motley Fool, @TMFHousel: He?s clearly won.
Josh Brown once quipped that the definition of a hedge fund is ?a vehicle that turns investor capital into Greenwich real estate.? That?s as relevant to mutual funds as it is hedge funds. The evidence is overwhelming that the vast majority of active managers can?t beat an index, which is actually a certainty given the size of the industry. Their justification of fees is now that they offer risk management and lower volatility, but that?s questionable, too ? and no one asked investors if they signed up for such an arrangement.
Active managers can hide during a 1990?s boom when their fund earns 30% while the S&P returns 32%. No one cares about underperformance when they?re still getting rich. But when investors realize they paid a manager 150 basis points a year for a lost decade, they wake up.
Individual investors have gotten the message. The next to move will be company 401(k) administrators. My guess is that ten years from now there will be a third fewer actively managed equity funds, 2-and-20 will become 1-and-5, Vanguard will gain another $1 trillion in AUM above market returns, and most investors will be better off because of it.
??
Thanks to everyone for their participation. Stay tuned for another question tomorrow.
Abnormal Returns is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. If you click on my Amazon.com links and buy anything, even something other than the product advertised, I earn a small commission, yet you don't pay any extra. Thank you for your support.
The information in this blog post represents my own opinions and does not contain a recommendation for any particular security or investment. I or my affiliates may hold positions or other interests in securities mentioned in the Blog, please see my Disclaimer page for my full disclaimer.
Apple introduced new MacBook Airs at WWDC today. The new MacBooks Air are faster, more power efficient, and in some cases, cheaper than their predecessors. And they're shipping now, so if you've been waiting to get one, now's the time.
It's been a year since Apple refreshed the MacBook Air, so Apple's smallest and lightest laptop was certainly due for some improvements. The new systems still come in the familiar 11 and 13-inch form factors, with 1366 x 768 and 1440 x 900 pixel resolutions respectively. That's unchanged from last year, and bound to disappoint some forward-thinking Mac users who were hoping to see a Retina Display-equipped MacBook Pro join the ranks.
Weight and dimensions remains virtually unchanged: the 11-inch MacBook Air weighs a scant 2.38 pounds, measuring 0.11 x 11.8 x 7.56 inches when the lid is closed. The 13-inch model still weighs 2.96 pounds, measuring 0.11 x 12.8 x 8.94 inches.
Despite the same display resolutions, same sizes and same weights, under the hood there are a lot of differences. The new MacBook Airs are the first Mac models to use Intel's fourth generation Core processor - the chips known as "Haswell." The new MBAs have lower CPU clock speeds than their predecessors - 1.3 GHz across the board, compared to 1.7 GHz for the 2012 11-inch and 1.8 GHz for the 2012 13-inch - but they also feature Intel HD Graphics 5000, an integrated graphics processor that Apple says is up to 40 percent faster than what was in last year's model.
All of the new MacBook Airs come equipped with 4GB of RAM standard (configurable to 8GB), and the base 11-inch model now doubles storage capacity from 64GB to 128GB. The higher-end 11-inch also doubles capacity from 128GB to 256GB. 13-inch models remain unchanged, with 128GB and 256GB as standard issue for the low and high-end, respectively.
Haswell processors also introduce dramatically improved power management. This is one area where MacBook Air owners are going to see huge improvements: Apple estimated the battery run-time of the 2012 11-inch model at up to five hours, and that jumps up to nine hours for the new one. The 13-inch, which packs more battery capacity inside its larger case, jumps from nine hours to 12.
Other accouterments remain unchanged, for the most part - stereo speakers, FaceTime HD cameras, two USB 3.0 ports, headphone jack and MagSafe 2 adapter; one Thunderbolt port (and yes, it's the original Thunderbolt, not the Thunderbolt 2 that will be featured on the Mac Pro later this year).
There's one other modest change: all MacBook Airs now come equipped with dual microphones, a carryover first introduced on the MacBook Pros with Retina Display. Dual mics produce better sound quality for voice chats via Skype, Messages, FaceTime and other services.
The price of the base 11-inch model remains unchanged from last year: $999. The higher-end 11-inch model jumps up $100, however, from $1099 to $1199 (likely explained by the double SSD capacity). There's better news for 13-inch buyers - both machines see a $100 price drop, to $1099 and $1299 respectively.
All told, a solid enhancement to Apple's popular lightweight laptops. Apple took the "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" approach while incorporating solid enhancements that promise better performance and better power management - always welcome news for road warriors who depend on the nimble MacBook Air to get their work done.
Remember the wave of pundit insanity over the death of Trayvon Martin two Februaries ago? Well, get ready for round two. The trial of George Zimmerman, who stands accused of second degree murder, began today in Sanford, Florida, and immediately inspired one of the most baffling comments ever uttered by a talking head about Martin's late-night confrontation with Zimmerman, even for a story already so loaded with race, death, lawyers, Florida, and inevitably Nancy Grace. ...
(Reuters) - A former Bristol-Myers Squibb Co finance executive on Monday pleaded guilty to an insider trading charge, admitting to buying stock options in a biotechnology company that the drugmaker was preparing to buy.
Robert Ramnarine, 46, admitted to one count of securities fraud for trading in Amylin Pharmaceuticals Inc options before Bristol-Myers agreed to buy that company last June for $5.3 billion, U.S. Attorney Paul Fishman in New Jersey said.
Federal prosecutors had last August charged Ramnarine with three counts of securities fraud.
They said he made $311,361 of illegal profit from August 2010 to July 2012 from options trading in Amylin and two other companies that Bristol-Myers sought to buy - Pharmasset Inc and ZymoGenetics Inc.
The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission filed a parallel civil fraud case against Ramnarine.
Investigators said Ramnarine learned about the takeovers while working as a director and later as an executive director in Bristol-Myers' pension and savings investments office in Princeton, New Jersey.
They also said the East Brunswick, New Jersey resident did Internet searches on insider trading detection prior to some of his trades, including a review of an article titled "Ways to Avoid Insider Trading."
Ramnarine entered his plea before U.S. District Judge Anne Thompson in Trenton, New Jersey.
He faces a maximum of 20 years in prison and $5 million fine when he is sentenced on September 26. Ramnarine agreed to forfeit $311,361, and Fishman said the sentence can take into account his trades in Pharmasset and ZymoGenetics, as well as Amylin.
Douglas Jensen, a lawyer for Ramnarine, did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
Ramnarine had worked for Bristol-Myers for 15 years, the last of which as assistant treasurer for capital markets. His employment with the New York-based company ended last August after criminal charges were announced, court records show.
Bristol-Myers bought ZymoGenetics for $885 million in October 2010. Gilead Sciences Inc bought Pharmasset for about $11.2 billion in January 2012 after Bristol-Myers dropped out of talks.
The cases are U.S. v. Ramnarine, U.S. District Court, District of New Jersey, No. 12-mj-08121; and SEC v. Ramnarine in the same court, No. 12-04837.
(Reporting by Jonathan Stempel in New York; Editing by Bernard Orr)
