TRUTHS AND MYTHS ABOUT NUTRIENT TIMING

[kingdong]

Discuss!

 

[kingdong]

Ill throw a question out there. Is it true that eating your higher calorie meals near the start of the day will lead to less fat gain than if I ate them at the end of the day?

 

[RickRock13]

The Lean Gains and Intermittent fasting types of diets disprove a lot of nutrient timing myths it seems. I no longer believe that you must eat 6 meals a day spread out every 2-3 hours. That is a big myth

 

[xGenericx]

The Lean Gains and Intermittent fasting types of diets disprove a lot of nutrient timing myths it seems. I no longer believe that you must eat 6 meals a day spread out every 2-3 hours. That is a big myth

I never really believed it. However I still try to do it. I don't think it hurts either, as long as the meals are not too frequent.

 

[bossman523]

i seem to stay leaner when i eat 6 smaller meals per day as opposed to 3 larger ones. maybe it's just my imagination tho, idk.

 

[hvactech]

i eat when im hungry or when i need to finish off my calorie goal. some days i eat 2-3 big meals or a lot of small ones. i do try and consume most of my carbs around workouts pre/post

 

[bossman523]

i think pre-workout nutrition is the most important. just thought i'd add that little opinion in here. lol

 

[Jiigzz]

I think the post is; although the window is much larger than previously thought, deactivation of AMPK, activation of mTOR and affects of insulin on protein degradation are what interests me most.

 

[Tomahawk88]

I think the post is; although the window is much larger than previously thought, deactivation of AMPK, activation of mTOR and affects of insulin on protein degradation are what interests me most.

Agreed on the post. I think pre is only important when it comes to not messing things up.

 

[tnubs]

I'd say for maximum muscle gains, in my experience, having carbs before the gym and carbs + protein after are most important. Then worry about your calorie goal for the day. When cutting, IF and ADF has proven to me that timing is irrelevant. In for others answers. This may turn out interesting, although I think most of the theories have been debunked by various fasting protocols.

 

[TheSaiyan]

Honestly I eat 90% of my calories post workout. It's what works best for me hands down when bulking, when cutting I switch to having something in my stomach more frequently.

 

[AntM1564]

I get most of my cals pre workout (breakfast) and post workout. These two times are when I am most hungry. If I can't train first thing, my breakfast is still big and postworkout, whenever that is is big as well.

As far as timing, I have broke out of a lot of my "bro" tendencies. I think people take tming too far.

 

[The Solution]

Good Reads:

http://www.wannabebig.com/diet-and-nutrition/is-there-a-limit-to-how-much-protein-the-body-can-use-in-a-single-meal/

"Based on the available evidence, it’s false to assume that the body can only use a certain amount of protein per meal. Studies examining short-term effects have provided hints towards what might be an optimal protein dose for maximizing anabolism, but trials drawn out over longer periods haven’t supported this idea. So, is there a limit to how much protein per meal can be effectively used? Yes there is, but this limit is likely similar to the amount that’s maximally effective in an entire day. What’s the most protein that the body can effectively use in an entire day? The short answer is, a lot more than 20-30 g. The long answer is, it depends on several factors. In most cases it’s not too far from a gram per pound in drug-free trainees, given that adequate total calories are provided [8,9].

In terms of application, I’ve consistently observed the effectiveness of having approximately a quarter of your target bodyweight in both the pre- and post-exercise meal. Note: target bodyweight is a surrogate index of lean mass, and I use that to avoid making skewed calculations in cases where individuals are markedly over- or underweight. This dose surpasses the amounts seen to cause a maximal anabolic response but doesn’t impinge upon the rest of the day’s protein allotment, which can be distributed as desired. On days off from training, combine or split up your total protein allotment according to your personal preference and digestive tolerance. I realize that freedom and flexibility are uncommon terms in physique culture, but maybe it’s time for a paradigm shift.

In sum, view all information – especially gym folklore and short-term research – with caution. Don’t buy into the myth that protein won’t get used efficiently unless it’s dosed sparingly throughout the day. Hopefully, future research will definitively answer how different dosing schemes with various protein types affect relevant endpoints such as size and strength. In the mean time, feel free to eat the whole steak and drink the whole shake"

 

[The Solution]

http://www.wannabebig.com/diet-and-nutrition/the-dirt-on-clean-eating/

Applying Moderation: The 10-20% Guideline

For those hoping that I’ll tell you to have fun eating whatever you want, you’re in luck. But, like everything in life, you’ll have to moderate your indulgence, and the 10-20% guideline is the best way I’ve found to do this. There currently is no compelling evidence suggesting that a diet whose calories are 80-90% from whole & minimally processed foods is not prudent enough for maximizing health, longevity, body composition, or training performance. As a matter of fact, research I just discussed points to the possibility that it’s more psychologically sound to allow a certain amount of flexibility for indulgences rather than none at all. And just to reiterate, processed does not always mean devoid of nutritional value. Whey and whey/casein blends are prime examples of nutritional powerhouses that happen to be removed from their original food matrix.


Use the 10-20% discretionary intake rule and enjoy life a bit.
The 10-20% guideline isn’t only something I’ve used successfully with clients; it’s also within the bounds of research. Aside from field observations, there are three lines of evidence that happen to concur with this guideline. I’ll start with the most liberal one and work my way down. The current Dietary Reference Intakes report by Food & Nutrition Board of the Institute of Medicine lists the upper limit of added sugars as 25% of total calories [24]. Similarly, an exhaustive literature review by Gibson and colleagues found that 20% of total calories from added sugars is roughly the maximum amount that won’t adversely dilute the diet’s concentration of essential micronutrition [25]. Keep in mind that both of these figures are in reference to refined, extrinsic sugars, not naturally occurring sugars within whole foods like fruit or milk. Finally, the USDA has attempted to teach moderation with their concept of the discretionary calorie allotment, defined as follows [26]:

“…the difference between total energy requirements and the energy consumed to meet recommended nutrient intakes.”

Basically, discretionary calories comprise the margin of leftover calories that can be used flexibly once essential nutrient needs are met. Coincidentally, the USDA’s discretionary calorie allotment averages at approximately 10-20% of total calories [27]. Take note that discretionary calories are not just confined to added sugars. Any food or beverage is fair game. The USDA’s system is still far from perfect, since it includes naturally-occurring fats in certain foods as part of the discretionary calorie allotment. This is an obvious holdover from the fat-phobic era that the USDA clings to, despite substantial evidence to the contrary [28].

It’s important to keep in mind that protein and fat intake should not be compromised for the sake of fitting discretionary foods into the diet. In other words, make sure discretionary intake doesn’t consistently displace essential micro- & macronutrient needs, and this includes minimum daily protein and fat targets, which vary individually. This may be tough to accept, but alcohol is not an essential nutrient. Its risks can swiftly trump its benefits if it’s consumed in excess, so it falls into the discretionary category.

10% Versus 20%

Another legitimate question is why I’ve listed the discretionary range as 10-20% rather than just listing it as a maximum of 20%. This is because energy balance matters. In bulking scenarios, maintaining a 20% limit could potentially pose health risks that are already elevated by the process of weight gain, which in some cases involves a certain amount of fat gain. Conversely, weight loss tends to be an inherently cardioprotective process, independent of diet composition [29]. So, the 20% limit is more appropriate for those either losing or maintaining weight. Those who are gaining weight but want to play it safe should hover towards the lower & middle of the range (10-15%). Another factor that can influence the upper safe threshold is physical activity level. I’ll quote Johnson & Murray in a recent review [30]:

“Obesity and metabolic syndrome are rare among athletes, even though dietary fructose intake is often high, underscoring the robust protective role of regular exercise.”


In the above quote, you can substitute any controversial food or nutrient in place of the word fructose, and the same principle would apply. A greater range of dietary flexibility is one of the luxuries of regular training. Sedentary individuals do not have the same level of safeguarding from the potentially adverse effects of a higher proportion of indulgence foods. And just in case it wasn’t made clear enough, 10-20% indicates the maximum, not minimum discretionary allotment. If someone strives to consume 0% of calories from any food that’s been processed or refined from its original state, then that’s perfectly fine – as long as this is the person’s genuine preference, and not a painful battle of will. I’d also like to make it clear that there is still plenty of grey area in the study of dietary effects on health. As such, the nature and extent of the miscellaneous or rule-free food allotment is a delicate judgment call. In this case, it’s wise to keep scientific research at the head of the judging panel, but don’t ignore personal experience & individual feedback.

Final Note: Linear Versus Nonlinear Distribution

A legitimate question is, what’s the best way to distribute discretionary calories? Should they be confined to a daily limit, or can it be a weekly limit? The best answer is to let personal preference decide. If we use a 2000 kcal diet as an example, a flat/linear approach would mean that 200-400 kcal per day can come from whatever you want, while meeting essential needs otherwise in the diet. Weekly, this translates to 1400-2800 kcal, depending on the factors I previously discussed. One nonlinear option would be to break the weekly allotment in half, where 2 days per week you indulge in 700-1400 kcal of whatever you want, keeping the remaining 5 days relatively Spartan. Again, there is no universally superior method of distributing the discretionary allotment. The same principle applies to the choice of foods to fulfill it. Honoring personal preference is one of the most powerful yet underrated tactics for achieving optimal health and body composition. And that’s the nitty-gritty as I see it.

 

[The Solution]

Lyle:

http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/research-review/meal-frequency-and-energy-balance-research-review.html

The take home of this paper should be fairly clear and I’m going to focus primarily on dieting and weight/fat loss here. I’m also going to assume that your protein intake is adequate in the first place; if you’re not getting sufficient protein during your diet, you have bigger problems than meal frequency can solve.
Before summing up, one last thing, from a practical standpoint, I sometimes wonder if the people who are adamant about 6 meals/day have ever worked with a small female athlete or bodybuilder. A 120 lb female may have a daily food intake of 1200 calories/day or less on a diet.
Dividing that into 6 meals gives her 200 calorie ‘meals’. More like a snack. 4 meals of 300 calories or even 3 meals of 400 calories is a much more livable approach than a few bites of food every 3 hours.
By the same token, a very large male with very high caloric requirements (for dieting or mass gaining for example) may find that fewer larger meals are difficult to get down or cause gut discomfort, eating more frequently may be the only way to get sufficient daily calories.
But again, these are all completely tangential to any (non-existent) impacts of meal frequency on metabolic rate or what have you.
So here’s the take home:
If eating more frequently makes it easier to control/reduce calories, it will help you to lose weight/fat.
If eating more frequently makes it harder to control/reduce calories, or makes you eat more, you will gain weight.
If eating less frequently makes it harder for you to control/reduce calories (because you get hungry and binge), it will hurt your efforts to lose weight/fat.
If eating less frequently makes it easier for you to control/reduce calories (for any number of reasons), then that will help your efforts to lose weight/fat
I personally consider 3-4 meals/day a workable minimum for most, 3 meals plus a couple of snacks works just fine too. High meal frequencies may have benefits under certain conditions but are in no way mandatory. And, in case you missed it the first time through: eating more frequently does NOT, I repeat DOES NOT, ‘stoke the metabolic fire’.

 

[The Solution]

Martin:

http://www.leangains.com/2010/10/top-ten-fasting-myths-debunked.html

My biggest frustration


Unfortunately, while this article might have opened a few people’s eyes, I fear that it might be for naught when it comes to the great majority. At least for the mainstream crowd who prefers anecdotes and muscle magazines over science-based articles such as this one. Just have a look at the comments in this thread on comedian Joe Rogan’s forum:

“He 'debunked' those ideas by his own logic and his interpretation of various studies. It wasn't very convincing.”

The only reason it wasn’t convincing enough for this clown was that he could not understand the abstracts my links pointed to. That’s assuming he even took the time to read the article (likelihood: 0.01%).

However, I’m not surprised. The Average Joe (or should I say "Average Bro"?) seems to think everything is up for “interpretation,” which is a load of bull****. There are objective truths to be found if you look for them. But finding them takes time, requires some effort. Most people shy away from it. Getting spoon-fed is more comfortable. That's OK, because not everyone wants to read some basic nutrition and physiology textbooks. But at least be humble enough to understand that your opinion is not one that you have formed on your own.

As i see it, the problem is twofold in the sense that outliers, the majority of which have severe methodological flaws, often get all of the attention (i.e. the boxers study). The other problem is that many accepted “truths” are based on the conclusions drawn from correlational studies (i.e. meal frequency and breakfast skipping). This is what trickles down and is presented to the mainstream and they swallow it; hook, line, and sinker.

And even then, when the mass media for once debunks a myth, some people just cover their ears and go "lalalala," saying things like:

“I just read it. I'm still not buying it though.”

From the Joe Rogan forum thread, in response to the New York Times article that debunked the meal frequency myth. What a sheep.

There are plenty of more comments along those lines. Makes for some half-decent entertainment. For someone stranded on an abandoned island that is. Note that no one presented evidence that contradicted this article and the conclusions I have presented. Critique is fine but not when it cannot be backed by anything else than gym lore. Fortunately, some people are smarter than that.

This is my biggest frustration with this industry. Those that scream loud enough win - the supplement companies, mass media "health experts" and diet gurus with Magic Pills and Secret Methods to sell.

Someone who is unfamiliar with my background may easily mistake me and my writings for the latter and believe I have presented evidence that would somehow favor my methods, which I have not. This is unfortunate but understandable since almost everyone else in this industry tends to do it. It leads to much confusion as laypersons think everyone is trying to sell them something. For them, finding objective facts is like looking for a needle in a haystack.

But remember: never once have I said, or claimed, that I believe everyone needs to convert to intermittent fasting - or even that it is proven to be superior to a regular healthy diet. The research surrounding intermittent fasting is very interesting but it's too early to draw any definitive conclusions.

I am still of the opinion that the best diet is the one you can stick to in the long term. However, the decision should be based on personal preference and not neurotic adherence to a diet built on faulty and bad science.

 

[The Solution]

Borge:

http://www.reactivetrainingsystems.com/vforums/content.php?108-The-Biorhythm-DietConclusions: The implications of the present research are important for human dietary recommendations. Humans seldom eat a uniform diet throughout the day, thus requiring the ability to respond to alterations in diet quality. Currently, a typical human diet consists of a high carbohydrate morning meal followed by higher fat and/or more calorie-dense meals later in the day.
Consumption of a high fat waking meal is associated with increased ability to respond appropriately to carbohydrate meals ingested later in the waking period, while a high carbohydrate morning meal appears to “fix” metabolism toward carbohydrate utilization and impair the ability to adjust metabolism toward fat utilization later in the waking period.”

My observations, in a bullet-point format, also drawing upon other related studies – forming my basic recommendations for the BioRhythm Diet:
-- By ingesting high-fat meals in the evening, you induce "metabolic inflexibility" – effectively disrupting metabolic rate and increasing fat storage, risk of obesity, elevated insulin levels and a reduction in insulin sensitivity.

-- By ingesting high-fat meals in the morning and afternoon, you increase metabolic flexibility – setting the metabolism for higher fat oxidation throughout the day. As LPL enzyme (splits up circulating fatty acids and makes them available for storage) is higher in muscle in the AM, fats are more likely to be burned off as energy or stored as lipid droplets within the muscle (IMTG).

-- By ingesting high-carb meals in the morning, the same “metabolic inflexibility” occurred, and the metabolism is fixed towards glucose oxidation instead of fat oxidation. This also increases fat storage from meals eaten during the day, and higher-fat meals eaten in the evening in particular.
-- By ingesting high-carb meals in the evening, you get a bump in the natural leptin signal (occurring 3-6hrs after going to sleep), essentially increasing fat burning through the night and the rest of the following day.

-- Insulin sensitivity is higher in all cells early in the day, including fat cells, but decreases towards the afternoon and evening, thus partitioning carbs ingested at this time more efficiently into muscle vs. fat. This is obviously further improved by training the muscle that day.

-- Eating carbs will increase the feel-good neurotransmitter serotonin and make you sleepy. What better time to have your carbs than a couple of hours before bedtime so you can fall into a deeper, higher-quality sleep

 

[The Solution]

Borge:

http://www.reactivetrainingsystems.com/vforums/content.php?108-The-Biorhythm-Diet

Conclusions: The implications of the present research are important for human dietary recommendations. Humans seldom eat a uniform diet throughout the day, thus requiring the ability to respond to alterations in diet quality. Currently, a typical human diet consists of a high carbohydrate morning meal followed by higher fat and/or more calorie-dense meals later in the day.
Consumption of a high fat waking meal is associated with increased ability to respond appropriately to carbohydrate meals ingested later in the waking period, while a high carbohydrate morning meal appears to “fix” metabolism toward carbohydrate utilization and impair the ability to adjust metabolism toward fat utilization later in the waking period.”

My observations, in a bullet-point format, also drawing upon other related studies – forming my basic recommendations for the BioRhythm Diet:
-- By ingesting high-fat meals in the evening, you induce "metabolic inflexibility" – effectively disrupting metabolic rate and increasing fat storage, risk of obesity, elevated insulin levels and a reduction in insulin sensitivity.

-- By ingesting high-fat meals in the morning and afternoon, you increase metabolic flexibility – setting the metabolism for higher fat oxidation throughout the day. As LPL enzyme (splits up circulating fatty acids and makes them available for storage) is higher in muscle in the AM, fats are more likely to be burned off as energy or stored as lipid droplets within the muscle (IMTG).

-- By ingesting high-carb meals in the morning, the same “metabolic inflexibility” occurred, and the metabolism is fixed towards glucose oxidation instead of fat oxidation. This also increases fat storage from meals eaten during the day, and higher-fat meals eaten in the evening in particular.
-- By ingesting high-carb meals in the evening, you get a bump in the natural leptin signal (occurring 3-6hrs after going to sleep), essentially increasing fat burning through the night and the rest of the following day.

-- Insulin sensitivity is higher in all cells early in the day, including fat cells, but decreases towards the afternoon and evening, thus partitioning carbs ingested at this time more efficiently into muscle vs. fat. This is obviously further improved by training the muscle that day.

-- Eating carbs will increase the feel-good neurotransmitter serotonin and make you sleepy. What better time to have your carbs than a couple of hours before bedtime so you can fall into a deeper, higher-quality sleep

 

[Sean1332]

The Solution just ****ed our faces with knowledge.

Thanks for the links.

 

[TexasGuy]

This can only boil down to "best practice" for optimal results the same as it always does with methods being challenged for science and then discarded as junk science in an off topic tangent.

TEF, protein synthesis, futile turn over et cetra studies are available en masse to read. Do you have to eat 6 meals every 3 hours for gains? No, nobody says you do. What is best practice for a specific goal? Read the studies, not the articles playing in the grey area of conclusions between studies (leangains).

 

[JudoJosh]

Nothing has really been debunked or disproven.

We were presented with an idea and was told it was mandatory but now we are finsing situations where it might not be. This isnt debunking, it is painting a better picture. Eating 6 meals a day or immediately slamming carbs post workout or whatever OG protocol you have heard still holds some truth to it because it has worked and continues to work.

 

[The Solution]

Nothing has really been debunked or disproven.

We were presented with an idea and was told it was mandatory but now we are finsing situations where it might not be. This isnt debunking, it is painting a better picture. Eating 6 meals a day or immediately slamming carbs post workout or whatever OG protocol you have heard still holds some truth to it because it has worked and continues to work.

http://www.wannabebig.com/diet-and-nutrition/is-there-a-limit-to-how-much-protein-the-body-can-use-in-a-single-meal/
http://www.leangains.com/2011/04/critique-of-issn-position-stand-on-meal.html
http://www.machinemuscle.com/interview-with-nutrition-expert-alan-aragon/
http://fitnfly.com/learn-about-food/nutrition-facts
http://www.biolayne.com/wp-content/uploads/Norton-J-Ag-Food-Ind-Hi-Tech-2008.pdf

 

[mcc23]

Taking advantage of glut-4 translocation post workout is always a good strategy. Orienting carb intake pre/peri/post workout has always been my strategy.