Meals

Page 2 of 8 First 1234 ... Last

  1. Post some of these ample studies.

    So many people have been brainwashed into believing the rhetoric purported by a myriad of supplement companies that you need X amount of meals and X grams of protein without any peer-reviewed data to back it up. Even the whole "nutrient timing" shenanigan is taken out of context and does not apply to 99% of the people that follow these principles. Regarding TEF, it doesn't matter if it's 1 meal or 10 meals, ~10% of calories will be burned via TEF (there is some variance depending on macros, but nothing huge) without a significant correlation in meal frequency and metabolic rate.
    M.Ed. Ex Phys



  2. My problem is affording all of the food when there are two boys and my lady in the house to feed too. I go through a lot of milk and peanut butter for calories and protein due to cost.

    Sent from my iPhone
    Remember why you started.
    •   
       


  3. Quote Originally Posted by Rodja View Post
    Post some of these ample studies.

    So many people have been brainwashed into believing the rhetoric purported by a myriad of supplement companies that you need X amount of meals and X grams of protein without any peer-reviewed data to back it up. Even the whole "nutrient timing" shenanigan is taken out of context and does not apply to 99% of the people that follow these principles. Regarding TEF, it doesn't matter if it's 1 meal or 10 meals, ~10% of calories will be burned via TEF (there is some variance depending on macros, but nothing huge) without a significant correlation in meal frequency and metabolic rate.
    Regarding protein synthesis, I'm not going to write a research paper on a common knowledge topic. If you're on this website you have access to google too. Start with essentially every body building diet before like two years ago and discount them. Discount absolutely everything I've written if you must, plus all of the bodybuilding community before like 2010 to cherry pick irrelevent discussions.

    Regarding the thermic effect of food and meal frequency though:

    Influence of Meal Pattern on the Thermic Effect of Food
    "An irregular meal pattern (i.e. 3 meals on one day, 9 meals the next day, 6 meals the next day, etc...) has been shown to induce a significantly lower thermic effect of food than a regular meal pattern (i.e. a consistent 6 meals per day) that has the same total amount of calories."

    Farshchi HR, Taylor MA, Macdonald IA. Decreased thermic effect of food after an irregular compared with a regular meal pattern in healthy lean women. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord. 2004 May;28(5):653-60.

    Now, this could potentially be good for a bulk but you called nutrient timing "just a myth anyways" which kinda discounts the whole entire premise of intermittent fasting; a diet based on meal timing at it's core. Can you make sense of that for me?

    It's not as simple as a standard rate across the board either:

    "Keep in mind that if you are trying to lose weight it does not make sense to increase your meal sizes to augment the thermic effect of food. Given that your weight is ultimately dependent on your caloric balance, increasing your meal sizes will ultimately result in an overall greater calorie consumption despite the slight increase in calories burned through the thermic effect of food. For example, if you were to eat a 500 calorie meal, 50 calories (or 10%) would be expected to be burned due to the thermic effect of food, so you would have a net calorie consumption of 500 - 50 = 450 calories. If you double the size of the meal to 1000 calories, 100 calories (or 10%) would be expected to be burned due to the thermic effect of food, so you would have a net calorie consumption of 1000 - 100 = 900 calories. In the end, you might have doubled the thermic effect of food from 50 calories to 100 calories, but you have also doubled your net calorie consumption from 450 calories to 900 calories, so you will still gain weight."

    Kinabo JL, Durnin JV. Thermic effect of food in man: effect of meal composition, and energy content. Br J Nutr. 1990 Jul;64(1):37-44.

    Now we are discussing nutrient absorption rates, another topic altogether. Will you argue that it doesn't matter how much one eats at a sitting either? Just stay hungry for a couple extra hours and go wild with the big macs?

    Not only that but there isn't a standard TEF value for every meal, when manipulated nutrient timing absolutely does make a difference to caloric expenditure. Not all meals are created equal and neither are their TEF values:

    "The thermic effect of food due to a meal will vary depending on the relative proportions of the macronutrients (i.e. fat, carbohydrates, and protein) that make up the meal. Without a doubt, protein is the macronutrient that induces the largest thermic effect of food response. Roughly 25% of the calories in pure protein will be burned after consumption due to the thermic effect of food. Fat and carbohydrates, on the other hand, each induce a burn of roughly 5% of the calories consumed due to the thermic effect of food. So, for example, if you consume 400 calories of pure protein you will burn 100 (or 25%) of those calories through the thermic effect of food. If you consume 400 calories of pure fat or pure carbohydrates, only 20 calories (or 5%) will be burned through the thermic effect of food."

    Segal KR, Gutin B, Albu J, Pi-Sunyer FX. Thermic effects of food and exercise in lean and obese men of similar lean body mass. Am J Physiol. 1987 Jan;252(1 Pt 1):E110-7.

    It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see how nutrient timing can be manipulated for a positive effect.


    And once again, the topic is helping the OP figure out a viable way to consume the calories and macros his goal requires, an issue he is struggling with. Are you suggesting the OP just forget about the macros he needs for his goal? How do you recommend he squeezes his needs in?

  4. Let's bring out the old knife for this one...

    On the topic on protein synthesis, you will notice that I did not touch upon this because it is a side topic and, in case you weren't aware, BCAAs are recommended during the fast. Your stance plays upon the ridiculous notion that you cannot store AAs and you must have a constant flow or your body will immediately shift into catabolism.

    Your first study is a poor example of the point you're trying to make. The meals and caloric consumption was not controlled amongst the subjects and, as your said, TEF varies by macronutrient breakdown. Per the results:

    "There were no statistical differences in body weight by meal pattern either at the premeal pattern period visits (visits 1 and 3) or the postmeal pattern visits (visits 2 and 4). Bodyweight did not change across the regular and irregular mealpatterns." So, what point is that supposed to prove outside of you solely went by the abstract? The main thing to take from this article is that the RMR will not change significantly based upon meal frequency, which actually disproves your position.

    You seem to have a high misunderstanding regarding the studies on nutrient timing and it's application to BB'ing (hint: there isn't any) and IF is in no way built around the canon that has been repeated ad nausem on Ivy's research on nutrient timing.

    I have no idea what point you're trying to prove with your second study that you posted. All that does is show the ~10% standard given to account for TEF in TDEE and, again, the third one repeats what I already said regarding macronutrient consumption and TEF
    M.Ed. Ex Phys


  5. Jesus, a guy goes away for 2 days due to 3 final exams and a trip to another country and voila bro-science at it's best, and Rodja helping prove a point.

    Now back on something I need to beat down once more...Do you have any studies that prove that RMR/BMR changes substantially (or relevantly) enough for it to be considered an actually scientific finding? I have not found one single study on RMR/BMR increase be it with 1 or 100 meals...so please do enlighten me if I have overseen something from this. That's the meaning of "speeding up metabolism" weather your body consumes more calories at rest by simply increasing meal count? I mean I know bmr or rmr is going to increase depending on BF and LBM and metabolically active tissue...but on meal timing or frequency?

    Like I said, please show me a study that proves your point...that it quantitatively varies RMR/BMR, when you do I'll get off this mentality of mine and go back to having 8 meals a day...for now, I'll keep just worrying about my net caloric intake and some relevance to my macronutrient intake (merely to fulfill essential values)...
    >SNS-Glycophase<
    Serious Nutrition Solutions Rep
    •   
       


  6. May I also point out that the second study is from 1990 and therefore 22 years removed?

    A lot has changed in 22 years in regards to our knowledge on Medicine and Nutrition; hence the updated notions and the more recent studies (see my previous post) that show that there is no significant increase or decrease of metabolic rate due to fasting if below 72-24 hours.

    Majority of "Health Magazines" tell people to eat every 3 hours is because majority of the US population knows nothing about portions or control when it comes to eating, if they are hungry they will more often than not over-eat, not the case with people who control their macros and daily caloric intake.
    Androhard + Andromass Log
    http://anabolicminds.com/forum/supplement-reviews-logs/182038-so-i-decided.html

  7. @Rodja, you are very good at dodging logic, I will give you that. You've effectively ignored 85% of my posts while contradicting yourself. I've never heard of your company but if I'm somehow disagreeing with a supplement protocol you are pushing based around intermittent fasting, my apologies. Fasting diets are a drop in the bucket though. If you legitimately don't believe nutrient timing can be manipulated to maintain anabolism, I have to say I will not be looking in to PES, but that's just me. As I've said, I don't argue that intermittent fasting ( a diet built on nutrient timing) doesn't work but it isn't the king of the hill or even the clear cut "winner". You've asked me to show you why not and I have. You are simply choosing to ignore the data presented that you requested instead of replying intelligently. Have fun. I'm done. You still haven't told the OP how skipping a meal will help him cram in the macros he's having a hard time eating though.

    @bla, the findings in the study have not been refuted. The rest of your post is just made up garbage.

    Listen, I'm not dogging a plan if it's working for you. Understand intermittent fasting is not the first and won't be the last trendy new anabolic/weight loss magic diet. At best it will settle in to the time tested repertoire of effective diets as the future of nutrition develops new marketing angles and nutritionists develop ways to seperate themselves and their plans from the rest.

    @Celorza, give me break with the bro science. You've posted condensed versions of Rodja's contradictions. In a thread where a guy is asking for help in reaching his macros, please explain how eliminating breakfast will be helpful, bro.

    Anyways, it would be retarded for me to continue beating a dead horse when there are more OP's I can potentially give useable, helpful advice to. Especially when I provide the requested studies, explain the context and then am either ignored, taken out of context or have my posts quoting legitimate science labeled as "bro science". Lol.

  8. Quote Originally Posted by TexasGuy View Post
    @Rodja, you are very good at dodging logic, I will give you that. You've effectively ignored 85% of my posts while contradicting yourself. I've never heard of your company but if I'm somehow disagreeing with a supplement protocol you are pushing based around intermittent fasting, my apologies. Fasting diets are a drop in the bucket though. If you legitimately don't believe nutrient timing can be manipulated to maintain anabolism, I have to say I will not be looking in to PES, but that's just me. As I've said, I don't argue that intermittent fasting ( a diet built on nutrient timing) doesn't work but it isn't the king of the hill or even the clear cut "winner". You've asked me to show you why not and I have. You are simply choosing to ignore the data presented that you requested instead of replying intelligently. Have fun. I'm done. You still haven't told the OP how skipping a meal will help him cram in the macros he's having a hard time eating though.
    Exactly what topic did I dodge of yours? I responded directly to your claims regarding meal frequency, TEF, and the concept of nutrient timing as purported by Dr Ivy. Not only that, I showed the horrible flaws in the studies that you posted to try to support your position. The first completely showed the irrelevance regarding meal frequency on something much larger and that is RMR, but you actually have to read the study to find that and not just rely on the abstract. The second study just defines what TEF is, which no person is refuting, and the third has to do with macronutrient consumption and TEF, which is a completely separate topic than meal frequency and IF.

    What I love most by this whole post, though, is your attempt to besmirch PES when one of our products, Anabeta has been recommended several times to increase his hunger. So, in the end, the joke's on you in your attempt to use my posts as some form on discrediting the efficacy on PES as a company.
    M.Ed. Ex Phys


  9. Still have yet to see the scientific evidence that supports "eating more often will increase your metabolism"
    Androhard + Andromass Log
    http://anabolicminds.com/forum/supplement-reviews-logs/182038-so-i-decided.html

  10. Quote Originally Posted by Rodja View Post
    Exactly what topic did I dodge of yours? I responded directly to your claims regarding meal frequency, TEF, and the concept of nutrient timing as purported by Dr Ivy. Not only that, I showed the horrible flaws in the studies that you posted to try to support your position. The first completely showed the irrelevance regarding meal frequency on something much larger and that is RMR, but you actually have to read the study to find that and not just rely on the abstract. The second study just defines what TEF is, which no person is refuting, and the third has to do with macronutrient consumption and TEF, which is a completely separate topic than meal frequency and IF.

    What I love most by this whole post, though, is your attempt to besmirch PES when one of our products, Anabeta has been recommended several times to increase his hunger. So, in the end, the joke's on you in your attempt to use my posts as some form on discrediting the efficacy on PES as a company.
    Ok, one last post and you can take it away. Every one of your "points" was countered by demonstrated research that you then pull out of the context that was the response to your question and go on to state that the studies I did post are simply wrong... because you said so. Sounds legit. In context you are not only off topic but rambling. The first quoted study is very clear, the second brings in to question the ability to absorb nutrients at various levels of intake which creates a larger equation than a simple ratio and as stated the third demonstrates that various foods yield varying net calories upon consumption. Altogether the studies show that consistent meals provide a significant thermal effect over fasting based diets and that when utilized intelligently nutritient timing absolutely can be used to manipulate the amount of net calories absorbed through the thermal effect of digesting the food itself.

    Secondly, as stated, I had never heard of your company though I have to take that back. I have heard of erase. I used Novadex XT while it was available a couple times but did hear a few good things about erase as well. Either way, I'm not trying to stab at PES. I have no interest in it. I do not represent any supplement companies and could care less. I do think you are off base and if you are chosen to represent a company but don't believe in nutrient timing, I don't believe in the principles you represent and wouldn't spend money with you, but again, that's just me and nothing personal.

    Thirdly and oddly, though you don't believe in nutrient timing or mainitaining a stream of aminos, the diet you are pushing is not only based on nutrient timing but recommends BCAA's during the fasting intervals. You make an interesting study in and of yourself. It's like you're arguing with your own diet. I don't get it. But hey, nutrient timing and keeping a stream of aminos running through you is working so...

    And in context, the OP shouldn't be skipping meals when his problem is fitting enough macros in. Even intermittent fasting relies on a pre-determined level of macros. And nutrient timing and a steady stream of aminos. Your whole premise arguing all of that is just weird and off base to begin with.

    Now for real, I'm out.

  11. Quote Originally Posted by bla55 View Post
    Still have yet to see the scientific evidence that supports "eating more often will increase your metabolism"
    I won't spell it out for you but I'll give you a hint, one such study was posted above. You will need to use some deductive reasoning of your own, but not really, it's pretty black and white.

    F*%&, I posted again! I hate the internet.

  12. Quote Originally Posted by TexasGuy View Post
    Ok, one last post and you can take it away. Every one of your "points" was countered by demonstrated research that you then pull out of the context that was the response to your question and go on to state that the studies I did post are simply wrong... because you said so. Sounds legit. In context you are not only off topic but rambling. The first quoted study is very clear, the second brings in to question the ability to absorb nutrients at various levels of intake which creates a larger equation than a simple ratio and as stated the third demonstrates that various foods yield varying net calories upon consumption. Altogether the studies show that consistent meals provide a significant thermal effect over fasting based diets and that when utilized intelligently nutritient timing absolutely can be used to manipulate the amount of net calories absorbed through the thermal effect of digesting the food itself.

    Secondly, as stated, I had never heard of your company though I have to take that back. I have heard of erase. I used Novadex XT while it was available a couple times but did hear a few good things about erase as well. Either way, I'm not trying to stab at PES. I have no interest in it. I do not represent any supplement companies and could care less. I do think you are off base and if you are chosen to represent a company but don't believe in nutrient timing, I don't believe in the principles you represent and wouldn't spend money with you, but again, that's just me and nothing personal.

    Thirdly and oddly, though you don't believe in nutrient timing or mainitaining a stream of aminos, the diet you are pushing is not only based on nutrient timing but recommends BCAA's during the fasting intervals. You make an interesting study in and of yourself. It's like you're arguing with your own diet. I don't get it. But hey, nutrient timing and keeping a stream of aminos running through you is working so...

    And in context, the OP shouldn't be skipping meals when his problem is fitting enough macros in. Even intermittent fasting relies on a pre-determined level of macros. And nutrient timing and a steady stream of aminos. Your whole premise arguing all of that is just weird and off base to begin with.

    Now for real, I'm out.
    Did you actually read the entire studies that you posted or just portions of them? The first study actually disproves the main premise of the importance of increased meal frequency, which is an increase in actual metabolism and RMR. The second just shows the ratio of TEF and the third is a COMPLETELY different topic altogether of macros, not meal frequency. Your feeble attempt to stitch them together even though there isn't any similarity between them other than nutrition to support your position is very weak. I'm not sure where you learned how to decipher research, but you either need to request your money back or didn't pay attention. The concept of nutrient timing based upon Ivy's research is done of endurance athletes with protocols of intentional glycogen depletion. Is that relevant to your training at all? I didn't think so. At no point did I promote the idea of IF for the OP, which further demonstrates your inability to derive information. I merely pointed out the dogmatic rhetoric that is constantly, and ignorantly, pounded over and over again. Now, if you actually want to post something showing a favorable shift in body composition based upon increased meal frequency, the go ahead and do so. Nothing that you posted demonstrated this effect and/or promotes the idea of increasing meal frequency as a means of metabolic boosting.
    M.Ed. Ex Phys


  13. Quote Originally Posted by TexasGuy View Post
    I won't spell it out for you but I'll give you a hint, one such study was posted above. You will need to use some deductive reasoning of your own, but not really, it's pretty black and white.

    F*%&, I posted again! I hate the internet.
    You posted earlier that the OP should eat breakfast because he is trying to get in more macros; yet ive always read that missing meals is the cause for overeating and therefore leads to obesity.

    In all seriousness listen to what Rodjas saying; new research shows us that as long as macro goals are met (in however many meals this takes), the outcome will invariably be the same.

  14. Quote Originally Posted by Jiigzz View Post
    You posted earlier that the OP should eat breakfast because he is trying to get in more macros; yet ive always read that missing meals is the cause for overeating and therefore leads to obesity.

    In all seriousness listen to what Rodjas saying; new research shows us that as long as macro goals are met (in however many meals this takes), the outcome will invariably be the same.
    A diet based on Macro-Nutrient and/or kCaloric allotment (depending on the goal, strength or physique) = win.

    'Nuff said.
    >SNS-Glycophase<
    Serious Nutrition Solutions Rep

  15. Quote Originally Posted by Jiigzz View Post
    You posted earlier that the OP should eat breakfast because he is trying to get in more macros; yet ive always read that missing meals is the cause for overeating and therefore leads to obesity.

    In all seriousness listen to what Rodjas saying; new research shows us that as long as macro goals are met (in however many meals this takes), the outcome will invariably be the same.
    Yeah well in that case IF is the fast track to fata$$!

    As I said a few times, I don't discount the research or anecdotal evidence that IF can help people achieve physiques they want, I'm also not going to discount time tested methods. As far as research is concerned, there is basically all of bodybuilding prior to 2010 or so. Call it dogma but sitting down and eating 300 grams of protein in one meal won't have the same effect as eating the same amount over 5-6 meals. Most of it would just turn to poo. But nutrient absorption is another topic so we can't talk about that even though many facets tie in together where nutrition and physiques are concerned.


    Speaking of anecdotal, how many fad diets with purported research have turned belly up? Oodles. I have high hopes for IF but as mentioned, at best it will find it's permanent resting place among a smattering of other tried and true diets as time moves on. Plus it totally utilizes nutrient timing and a constant barrage of aminos so I'm still not sure what all the fuss is about. Or how it pertains to the OP.

  16. Quote Originally Posted by TexasGuy View Post
    Yeah well in that case IF is the fast track to fata$$!

    As I said a few times, I don't discount the research or anecdotal evidence that IF can help people achieve physiques they want, I'm also not going to discount time tested methods. As far as research is concerned, there is basically all of bodybuilding prior to 2010 or so. Call it dogma but sitting down and eating 300 grams of protein in one meal won't have the same effect as eating the same amount over 5-6 meals. Most of it would just turn to poo. But nutrient absorption is another topic so we can't talk about that even though many facets tie in together where nutrition and physiques are concerned.


    Speaking of anecdotal, how many fad diets with purported research have turned belly up? Oodles. I have high hopes for IF but as mentioned, at best it will find it's permanent resting place among a smattering of other tried and true diets as time moves on. Plus it totally utilizes nutrient timing and a constant barrage of aminos so I'm still not sure what all the fuss is about. Or how it pertains to the OP.
    unless you are 300 lbs or you are on a really good AAS c0cktail, why in the hell would you eat 300g of protein? Worse...why in the almighty-lord-of-iron's name would you think you absorb 300g of protein over 6 meals!? 1g/lb of LBM is more than enough...please just stop discussing this subject, you are just dig a deeper grave of disbelief upon your posts !!!
    >SNS-Glycophase<
    Serious Nutrition Solutions Rep

  17. Quote Originally Posted by Celorza View Post
    unless you are 300 lbs or you are on a really good AAS c0cktail, why in the hell would you eat 300g of protein? Worse...why in the almighty-lord-of-iron's name would you think you absorb 300g of protein over 6 meals!? 1g/lb of LBM is more than enough...please just stop discussing this subject, you are just dig a deeper grave of disbelief upon your posts !!!
    Because steak is delicious.

    When I want bulking advice from a 146 lb dude, I'll ask for it. I don't know anybody with any appreciable mass that eats 1 or less gram of protein per pound of bodyweight.

    Speaking of studies, every study I've read showing proteins effect on building mass doesn't come close to mimicing the effort bodybuilding requires in the gym.

    When you break the buck fifty club with all this nonsense, let me know.

    "Yeah, but I'm short..." Still small.

    Maybe this website is not quite the collection of anabolic minds as it seems, yuppie minds sounds more accurate after this thread.

  18. Quote Originally Posted by TexasGuy View Post
    Yeah well in that case IF is the fast track to fata$$!

    As I said a few times, I don't discount the research or anecdotal evidence that IF can help people achieve physiques they want, I'm also not going to discount time tested methods. As far as research is concerned, there is basically all of bodybuilding prior to 2010 or so. Call it dogma but sitting down and eating 300 grams of protein in one meal won't have the same effect as eating the same amount over 5-6 meals. Most of it would just turn to poo. But nutrient absorption is another topic so we can't talk about that even though many facets tie in together where nutrition and physiques are concerned.


    Speaking of anecdotal, how many fad diets with purported research have turned belly up? Oodles. I have high hopes for IF but as mentioned, at best it will find it's permanent resting place among a smattering of other tried and true diets as time moves on. Plus it totally utilizes nutrient timing and a constant barrage of aminos so I'm still not sure what all the fuss is about. Or how it pertains to the OP.
    I didn't realize that BB'ing counts as peer-reviewed research...

    Fasting protocols have been around for well over a decade, which is far from a fad. You sure as hell make a lot of claims without anything to back them up.
    M.Ed. Ex Phys


  19. The reading comprehension is strong ITT.

  20. Ok fine, you win the whole internet Rodja.

    It still doesn't make any sense at all to tell a guy struggling to hit his macros to skip meals but you can be the winner. All while you time your nutrients and keep the aminos flowing against the best advice of modern research.

  21. Quote Originally Posted by TexasGuy View Post
    Ok fine, you win the whole internet Rodja.

    It still doesn't make any sense at all to tell a guy struggling to hit his macros to skip meals but you can be the winner. All while you time your nutrients and keep the aminos flowing against the best advice of modern research.
    Where did I tell the OP to skip meals and where is this "modern research?"
    M.Ed. Ex Phys


  22. Quote Originally Posted by TexasGuy View Post
    Because steak is delicious.

    When I want bulking advice from a 146 lb dude, I'll ask for it. I don't know anybody with any appreciable mass that eats 1 or less gram of protein per pound of bodyweight.

    Speaking of studies, every study I've read showing proteins effect on building mass doesn't come close to mimicing the effort bodybuilding requires in the gym.

    When you break the buck fifty club with all this nonsense, let me know.

    "Yeah, but I'm short..." Still small.

    Maybe this website is not quite the collection of anabolic minds as it seems, yuppie minds sounds more accurate after this thread.
    Lol post up your totals, real please and vids if possible...if I am lb for lb stronger than you maybe you will learn the difference between training for aesthetics and size, and training for strength and powerlifting. Anyhow, I am still waiting for your research and articles proving me wrong, when you post them and prove me wrong (if possible, on this matter I mean) then come to me with your higher than thou attitude...
    >SNS-Glycophase<
    Serious Nutrition Solutions Rep

  23. Quote Originally Posted by Celorza View Post
    Lol post up your totals, real please and vids if possible...if I am lb for lb stronger than you maybe you will learn the difference between training for aesthetics and size, and training for strength and powerlifting. Anyhow, I am still waiting for your research and articles proving me wrong, when you post them and prove me wrong (if possible, on this matter I mean) then come to me with your higher than thou attitude...
    I don't give a piss about your ratios. My lifts are in my profile and no, I won't go to the trouble of planning out max lifts on film for you, sorry. And in B4 "you're probably BSing then"... I realize that gives you room to win some of the internets from Rodja in your mind.

    This has turned in to a weird pissing contest though, with two dudes who should seem to know better than to discount methodologies that have been building impressive physiques and aiding strength athletes for decades.

    Anyways, here is a link to an article by Dr. John Berardi, I assume you've heard of him. If not, you can learn about him on the site.

    No, this is not a peer reviewed study straight out of pubmed, but if you can read an article on the merits of high protein intake from an author much more accomplished and knowledgeable than you with an open mind, you might learn something. Remove the unnecessary spacing.

    Well, AM says I have to have 150 posts before I can post links. Google "precision nutrition limit protein to 20 grams per meal?" Or I can try PMing the link if you aren't just being a smartass know it all.

    Interestingly, it touches on a handful of talking points in this thread.

  24. Quote Originally Posted by TexasGuy View Post
    I don't give a piss about your ratios. My lifts are in my profile and no, I won't go to the trouble of planning out max lifts on film for you, sorry. And in B4 "you're probably BSing then"... I realize that gives you room to win some of the internets from Rodja in your mind.

    This has turned in to a weird pissing contest though, with two dudes who should seem to know better than to discount methodologies that have been building impressive physiques and aiding strength athletes for decades.

    Anyways, here is a link to an article by Dr. John Berardi, I assume you've heard of him. If not, you can learn about him on the site.

    No, this is not a peer reviewed study straight out of pubmed, but if you can read an article on the merits of high protein intake from an author much more accomplished and knowledgeable than you with an open mind, you might learn something. Remove the unnecessary spacing.

    Well, AM says I have to have 150 posts before I can post links. Google "precision nutrition limit protein to 20 grams per meal?" Or I can try PMing the link if you aren't just being a smartass know it all.

    Interestingly, it touches on a handful of talking points in this thread.
    You started it with the know it all attitude, and brought no real studies to the table. I'll read the article don't worry, for now just know that you come here trying to bash something we respect here in AM...SCIENCE. Say what you want about me, in the end Idc at all, but dude...messing with Rodja, who does nothing but help people? Who actually brings articles to the table, who has a career on this and who is a competitive power lifter? Bro you are kinda out of line. I don't doubt you are a someone in your community, but if you wanna be someone here at least just post up some articles and real science before doing blatant claims...
    >SNS-Glycophase<
    Serious Nutrition Solutions Rep

  25. Quote Originally Posted by Celorza View Post
    You started it with the know it all attitude, and brought no real studies to the table. I'll read the article don't worry, for now just know that you come here trying to bash something we respect here in AM...SCIENCE. Say what you want about me, in the end Idc at all, but dude...messing with Rodja, who does nothing but help people? Who actually brings articles to the table, who has a career on this and who is a competitive power lifter? Bro you are kinda out of line. I don't doubt you are a someone in your community, but if you wanna be someone here at least just post up some articles and real science before doing blatant claims...
    I've said from the beginning IF works, though I doubt its dominance. You have been denying essentially every lifting accomplishment achieved outside of a lifter utilizing IF protocols for peer reviewed science, which I did post.

    Rodja came out of left field, off topic and pretty well self contradictory. His own diet utilizes nutrient timing and a steady stream of aminos and he spent two pages tellimg me diets based on nutrient timing are inferior because he doesn't feel enough peer reviewed studies exist to legitimize them.

    I'm not going to kowtow bull**** to fit in to a forum. I will read, post and take legitimately helpful advice and insight to heart though.

  26. Quote Originally Posted by TexasGuy View Post
    I've said from the beginning IF works, though I doubt its dominance. You have been denying essentially every lifting accomplishment achieved outside of a lifter utilizing IF protocols for peer reviewed science, which I did post.Rodja came out of left field, off topic and pretty well self contradictory. His own diet utilizes nutrient timing and a steady stream of aminos and he spent two pages tellimg me diets based on nutrient timing are inferior because he doesn't feel enough peer reviewed studies exist to legitimize them.I'm not going to kowtow bull**** to fit in to a forum. I will read, post and take legitimately helpful advice and insight to heart though.
    Funny how you somehow inferred my dietary protocol out of all of this as you obviously have ZERO clue as to how I actually eat for my goals. You have been spouting off about how the science supports your position, but have yet to produce a single article showing such. Your etiolated attempts to straw man my position are entirely asinine as you have failed miserably to understand my entire premise that meal frequency has an insignificant impact upon metabolism.
    M.Ed. Ex Phys


  27. Quote Originally Posted by TexasGuy View Post
    Yeah well in that case IF is the fast track to fata$$!

    As I said a few times, I don't discount the research or anecdotal evidence that IF can help people achieve physiques they want, I'm also not going to discount time tested methods. As far as research is concerned, there is basically all of bodybuilding prior to 2010 or so. Call it dogma but sitting down and eating 300 grams of protein in one meal won't have the same effect as eating the same amount over 5-6 meals. Most of it would just turn to poo. But nutrient absorption is another topic so we can't talk about that even though many facets tie in together where nutrition and physiques are concerned.


    Speaking of anecdotal, how many fad diets with purported research have turned belly up? Oodles. I have high hopes for IF but as mentioned, at best it will find it's permanent resting place among a smattering of other tried and true diets as time moves on. Plus it totally utilizes nutrient timing and a constant barrage of aminos so I'm still not sure what all the fuss is about. Or how it pertains to the OP.
    I do IF, I eat it all in 2 meals a day and I poop way less than when I made 6 meals a day. N=1, but don't see how my "nutrient" absorption has gone down.
    Androhard + Andromass Log
    http://anabolicminds.com/forum/supplement-reviews-logs/182038-so-i-decided.html

  28. Quote Originally Posted by TexasGuy View Post
    Yeah well in that case IF is the fast track to fata$$!

    As I said a few times, I don't discount the research or anecdotal evidence that IF can help people achieve physiques they want, I'm also not going to discount time tested methods. As far as research is concerned, there is basically all of bodybuilding prior to 2010 or so. Call it dogma but sitting down and eating 300 grams of protein in one meal won't have the same effect as eating the same amount over 5-6 meals. Most of it would just turn to poo. But nutrient absorption is another topic so we can't talk about that even though many facets tie in together where nutrition and physiques are concerned.


    Speaking of anecdotal, how many fad diets with purported research have turned belly up? Oodles. I have high hopes for IF but as mentioned, at best it will find it's permanent resting place among a smattering of other tried and true diets as time moves on. Plus it totally utilizes nutrient timing and a constant barrage of aminos so I'm still not sure what all the fuss is about. Or how it pertains to the OP.
    You misinterpret my post; bodybuilding in of itself and the practices taught within the pro community, particulary those referenced inb BB magizines are by no means legitimate sources for you to base your diet off; how can you be certain that they actually practice what they preach? And, had they known about IF or that meal frequency is of no concern, would there results reflect this new approach? Yes, of course 6 meals/ day with a steady stream of aminos works, simply because they are reaching their macronutrient goals. But that is not a means to an end.

    http://www.leangains.com/2011/01/bet...ower-meal.html

  29. Sub'd for ppl ridin coat tails

    Finally caught up and what a debate!

    .....as you all were...
    Psalms 62:1-62:2
  •   

      
     

Similar Forum Threads

  1. Frequent Meals Better?
    By YellowJacket in forum Weight Loss
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 02-11-2003, 08:54 PM
  2. great bulking meal for ecto
    By drfly in forum Weight Loss
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 02-08-2003, 12:00 PM
  3. Meal Builder
    By Biggs in forum Weight Loss
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-27-2003, 03:20 PM
  4. Homebrew Meal Replacement Shake
    By YellowJacket in forum Weight Loss
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 01-26-2003, 12:33 PM
  5. Favorite Cheat Meals/Unhealthy Foods
    By Biggs in forum Weight Loss
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 01-12-2003, 09:18 PM
Log in
Log in