Article: Skipping meals linked to abdominal weight gain

warpyfunch

warpyfunch

Member
Awards
1
  • Established
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/05/150519141508.htm

Saw this article on the front page, and not sure what to make of it. They had mice basically doing intermittent fasting, with a 4 hour eating window and a 20 hour fast each day, and they ended up getting more belly fat as a result. This seems contrary to most people's experiences with intermittent fasting, no? Am I misinterpreting this?



A new study in animals suggests that skipping meals sets off a series of metabolic miscues that can result in abdominal weight gain.

In the study, mice that ate all of their food as a single meal and fasted the rest of the day developed insulin resistance in their livers -- which scientists consider a telltale sign of prediabetes. When the liver doesn't respond to insulin signals telling it to stop producing glucose, that extra sugar in the blood is stored as fat.

These mice initially were put on a restricted diet and lost weight compared to controls that had unlimited access to food. The restricted-diet mice regained weight as calories were added back into their diets and nearly caught up to controls by the study's end.

But fat around their middles -- the equivalent to human belly fat -- weighed more in the restricted-diet mice than in mice that were free to nibble all day long. An excess of that kind of fat is associated with insulin resistance and risk for type 2 diabetes and heart disease.

"This does support the notion that small meals throughout the day can be helpful for weight loss, though that may not be practical for many people," said Martha Belury, professor of human nutrition at The Ohio State University and senior author of the study. "But you definitely don't want to skip meals to save calories because it sets your body up for larger fluctuations in insulin and glucose and could be setting you up for more fat gain instead of fat loss."

The research is published online in the Journal of Nutritional Biochemistry.

Belury and colleagues were able to tie these findings to the human tendency to skip meals because of the behavior they expected to see -- based on previous work -- in the mice on restricted diets. For three days, these mice received half of the calories that were consumed daily by control mice. Food was gradually added so that by day six, all mice received the same amount of food each day.

But the mice that had been on restricted diets developed gorging behavior that persisted throughout the study, meaning they finished their day's worth of food in about four hours and then ended up fasting for the next 20 hours.

"With the mice, this is basically binging and then fasting," Belury said. "People don't necessarily do that over a 24-hour period, but some people do eat just one large meal a day."

The gorging and fasting in these mice affected a host of metabolic measures that the researchers attributed to a spike and then severe drop in insulin production. In mice that gorged and then fasted, the researchers saw elevations in inflammation, higher activation of genes that promote storage of fatty molecules and plumper fat cells -- especially in the abdominal area -- compared to the mice that nibbled all day.

To check for insulin resistance, the scientists used a sophisticated technique to assess glucose production. The liver pumps out glucose when it receives signals that insulin levels are low -- for example, while people sleep, the liver supplies glucose to the brain. But that production stops after a meal, when insulin is released by the pancreas and performs its main task of removing sugar from the blood and shepherding the glucose to multiple types of cells that absorb it for energy.

With this research technique, Belury and colleagues found that glucose lingered in the blood of mice that gorged and fasted -- meaning the liver wasn't getting the insulin message.

"Under conditions when the liver is not stimulated by insulin, increased glucose output from the liver means the liver isn't responding to signals telling it to shut down glucose production," Belury said. "These mice don't have type 2 diabetes yet, but they're not responding to insulin anymore and that state of insulin resistance is referred to as prediabetes."

Insulin resistance is also a risk for gaining abdominal fat known as white adipose tissue, which stores energy.

"Even though the gorging and fasting mice had about the same body weights as control mice, their adipose depots were heavier. If you're pumping out more sugar into the blood, adipose is happy to pick up glucose and store it. That makes for a happy fat cell -- but it's not the one you want to have. We want to shrink these cells to reduce fat tissue," Belury said.
 
JudoJosh

JudoJosh

Pro Virili Parte
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
Anyone know the paper this article is about?
 
warpyfunch

warpyfunch

Member
Awards
1
  • Established
No access, but here's the citation and summary:

http://www.jnutbio.com/article/S0955-2863(15)00055-8/abstract

Rodents are commonly used in food restriction refeeding studies to investigate weight regain. Mice that are rationed food every 24 h may consume all allocated food in a short time (gorge) and therefore undergo a brief well-fed period followed by an extended fasted period until the next day’s food allotment. These exaggerated metabolic states are not typical in mice fed ad libitum (nibbling). The aim of the current study was to elucidate the intraday and cumulative metabolic consequences of gorging (induced by food restriction) in mice during controlled refeeding. Accordingly, following a temporary food restriction, mice were fed rations similar to intakes of controls fed ad libitum. Temporary food restriction initiated gorging behavior that persisted during refeeding; consequently, metabolism-related measurements were obtained in the gorging mice during their daily fed and fasted metabolic states. Robust differences in adipose tissue lipogenic and inflammatory gene expression were found in the gorging mice by metabolic state (fed versus fasted). Additionally, despite a reduced cumulative food intake compared to mice fed ad libitum, restriction-induced gorging mice had increased intraabdominal fat accumulation, diminished hepatic and peripheral insulin sensitivity, and a gene expression profile favoring lipid deposition. Our findings highlight the intraday differences in gene expression in gorging mice before and after feeding that confound comparisons with mice fed ad libitum, or nibbling. The present study also provides evidence that weight regain following food restriction is associated with cumulative metabolic and behavioral abnormalities in mice.
 
Otheridstaken

Otheridstaken

Active member
Awards
0
If intermittent fasting works for humans, really why should anyone care about mice? Are they going to do studies of mice and HIIT training next?
 
Driven2lift

Driven2lift

AnabolicMinds Site Rep
Awards
0
If intermittent fasting works for humans, really why should anyone care about mice? Are they going to do studies of mice and HIIT training next?
Works for weight loss as any calorie deficit should

But this shows potential for differences in health markers and abdominal fat

If this is legit next step is a human study, it always has to start somewhere
 
AntM1564

AntM1564

Legend
Awards
4
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
Works for weight loss as any calorie deficit should

But this shows potential for differences in health markers and abdominal fat

If this is legit next step is a human study, it always has to start somewhere
So if one bulks with IF, they will gain abdominal fat?
 
Driven2lift

Driven2lift

AnabolicMinds Site Rep
Awards
0
So if one bulks with IF, they will gain abdominal fat?
Dont think this study was in a caloric excess?

I need to actually see the study before any kind of statement I was just replying to the above comment how it could have potential

Someone find the study
 
booneman77

booneman77

Legend
Awards
5
  • First Up Vote
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
  • Best Answer
Very interesting. In for some full text readers to weigh in
 
Jiigzz

Jiigzz

Legend
Awards
5
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • First Up Vote
In.
 
JudoJosh

JudoJosh

Pro Virili Parte
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
I forgot all about this paper. Too busy eating burgers this weekend.

I'll try and pull the paper and give it a read this evening. From the abstract it appears to be an interesting paper. The IF rats ate less total daily food than the normal fed rats, and both group of rats weighed the same BUT the IF rats gained more body fat than the normal fed ones.

But that was just from the abstract. Gotta read the method section to see what they did. From the article it appears prior to the study the IF rats were put on a restricted diet to lose weight while the control wasnt. So this is going to be more about feeding patterns post cutting... as in, IF might not be the best way to gain weight. Still gotta read the paper though
 
warpyfunch

warpyfunch

Member
Awards
1
  • Established
I forgot all about this paper. Too busy eating burgers this weekend.

I'll try and pull the paper and give it a read this evening. From the abstract it appears to be an interesting paper. The IF rats ate less total daily food than the normal fed rats, and both group of rats weighed the same BUT the IF rats gained more body fat than the normal fed ones.

But that was just from the abstract. Gotta read the method section to see what they did. From the article it appears prior to the study the IF rats were put on a restricted diet to lose weight while the control wasnt. So this is going to be more about feeding patterns post cutting... as in, IF might not be the best way to gain weight. Still gotta read the paper though

Makes sense. So it sounds like IF might still be great for cutting, but on a bulk following a cut, IF might make one more prone to storing fat. And specifically abdominal fat, which is especially troubling to me as a health marker.
 
LeanEngineer

LeanEngineer

Legend
Awards
4
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • Best Answer
  • First Up Vote
Yep I know so many ppl that think just not eatting will get the weight off. But if they really want to keep if off they need to get more and more frequently and smaller portions.
 
booneman77

booneman77

Legend
Awards
5
  • First Up Vote
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
  • Best Answer
Yep I know so many ppl that think just not eatting will get the weight off. But if they really want to keep if off they need to get more and more frequently and smaller portions.
Ummmmmm no....

Eating more frequently has nothing to do with keeping weight off and this article states nothing of the sort. It's saying that eating MORE may lead to gained fat but nothing about keeping diet steady.
 
Driven2lift

Driven2lift

AnabolicMinds Site Rep
Awards
0
^ that, my first article written here hammered this home with a mountain of references
 
JudoJosh

JudoJosh

Pro Virili Parte
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
It is about meal frequency, just not in a weight loss perspective.

I keep forgetting to pull this paper when I'm at my PC :(
 
Driven2lift

Driven2lift

AnabolicMinds Site Rep
Awards
0
It is about meal frequency, just not in a weight loss perspective. I keep forgetting to pull this paper when I'm at my PC :(
Pull it!

I'll remind you next time I see you online FB
 
choccyswag

choccyswag

Active member
Awards
0
tl:dr.. sorry lol. So having meals too far apart makes the body think it is starving so the metabolism is slower. is this what I am thinking this is about?
 
booneman77

booneman77

Legend
Awards
5
  • First Up Vote
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
  • Best Answer
tl:dr.. sorry lol. So having meals too far apart makes the body think it is starving so the metabolism is slower. is this what I am thinking this is about?
Ugh.... No no no. Why do people still think this nonsense.
 
choccyswag

choccyswag

Active member
Awards
0
Ugh.... No no no. Why do people still think this nonsense.
well i am glad i dont! (maybe i used to haha but not anymore). I like having food in my tummy. Being hungry sucks :)
 
booneman77

booneman77

Legend
Awards
5
  • First Up Vote
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
  • Best Answer
well i am glad i dont! (maybe i used to haha but not anymore). I like having food in my tummy. Being hungry sucks :)
Ha I like having LOTS of food in my tummy... Which means I have to go without meals for fairly long periods in order to stay within a low cal range ha
 
booneman77

booneman77

Legend
Awards
5
  • First Up Vote
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
  • Best Answer
still not a fan of IF ... who would want to do IF on a bulk anyway??
Someone who doesn't bulk on a ton of calories and wants to eat calorically dense foods...
 
hvactech

hvactech

Legend
Awards
0
There are benefits to fasts as well...
 
booneman77

booneman77

Legend
Awards
5
  • First Up Vote
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
  • Best Answer
again.. why would you do this?
You don't like bacon? Or steak? Or some ice cream?

These are heavily calorically dense foods that if eaten on low calories would fill up your macros incredibly fast, but not allow for a very big volume of food aka you would be hungry again sooner
 
JudoJosh

JudoJosh

Pro Virili Parte
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
tl:dr.. sorry lol. So having meals too far apart makes the body think it is starving so the metabolism is slower. is this what I am thinking this is about?
Have to check the paper, (which I still havent) to see what the authors think the mechanism is. It might be a change in metabolic rate but this would be counter to several other studies we have thus unlikely to be the reason, but it's a possibility I suppose
 
jaces

jaces

Active member
Awards
0
You don't like bacon? Or steak? Or some ice cream?

These are heavily calorically dense foods that if eaten on low calories would fill up your macros incredibly fast, but not allow for a very big volume of food aka you would be hungry again sooner
i tried the IFFYM for 6weeks and i went from 260lbs to 250 but my fat went from 13 to 15% plus i feel **** when i eat foods like that so ill stick with my butternut oats eggs and lean meat
 
Rodja

Rodja

Board Sponsor
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
i tried the IFFYM for 6weeks and i went from 260lbs to 250 but my fat went from 13 to 15% plus i feel **** when i eat foods like that so ill stick with my butternut oats eggs and lean meat
Then you did it severely wrong. It has nothing to do with going out of your way to eat a specific food. It's about weaving in a particular food or meal based upon your macros for the day. If you want to eat more bacon, then take out some fat from other meals. If you want to eat some ice cream, then take out some fat and carbs from other meals. That's all it is. There's a massive misconception about IIFYM and you clearly fell into this trap.
 
AntM1564

AntM1564

Legend
Awards
4
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
i tried the IFFYM for 6weeks and i went from 260lbs to 250 but my fat went from 13 to 15% plus i feel **** when i eat foods like that so ill stick with my butternut oats eggs and lean meat
If you still track your macros with "clean" or "bro" foods, you're still following IIFYM. IIFYM, for some reason, is associated with people that take the thought to the extreme and eat an excess of "dirty" foods.
 
jaces

jaces

Active member
Awards
0
If you still track your macros with "clean" or "bro" foods, you're still following IIFYM. IIFYM, for some reason, is associated with people that take the thought to the extreme and eat an excess of "dirty" foods.
yes no i wont argue there .. but still in the way IIFYM is used people swop out foods high in important nutrients for foods low in nutrients and lets not start on GI values as thats an arguement on its own..im not saing IIFYM isnt going to work but for me it is an excuse to eat ****
 
Rodja

Rodja

Board Sponsor
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
yes no i wont argue there .. but still in the way IIFYM is used people swop out foods high in important nutrients for foods low in nutrients and lets not start on GI values as thats an arguement on its own..im not saing IIFYM isnt going to work but for me it is an excuse to eat ****
How nutrient dense is rice again? Your argument is based on the assumption that people automatically fill the majority of their foods with "junk" instead of realizing that it's about weaving in a certain food or meal into your daily plan. The proper way of doing it is no different than swapping out chicken breast for chicken thighs and adjusting later in the day. That's all IIFYM is about and not looking to eat only dirtier foods.
 
Jiigzz

Jiigzz

Legend
Awards
5
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • First Up Vote
yes no i wont argue there .. but still in the way IIFYM is used people swop out foods high in important nutrients for foods low in nutrients and lets not start on GI values as thats an arguement on its own..im not saing IIFYM isnt going to work but for me it is an excuse to eat ****
Gi is a redundant concept for majority of people.

People do make out like IIFYM is about eating crap, but thats not what the concept is actually about. Its about allowing people to be human and enjoy foods not typically considered 'clean' without feeling bound to a certain type of eating. It doesn't mean all food choices are 'dirty'.
 
jaces

jaces

Active member
Awards
0
Gi is a redundant concept for majority of people.

People do make out like IIFYM is about eating crap, but thats not what the concept is actually about. Its about allowing people to be human and enjoy foods not typically considered 'clean' without feeling bound to a certain type of eating. It doesn't mean all food choices are 'dirty'.
its for people who consider doing **** at 80%.. it isnt about being human.. its about being average and weak.. if you cant diet then stay fat.. if you cant lift til the pain overwelms your body then stay small.. people have become weak searching for an easy road
 
JudoJosh

JudoJosh

Pro Virili Parte
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
its for people who consider doing **** at 80%.. it isnt about being human.. its about being average and weak.. if you cant diet then stay fat.. if you cant lift til the pain overwelms your body then stay small.. people have become weak searching for an easy road
No... just no
 
money0351

money0351

Well-known member
Awards
2
  • RockStar
  • Established
its for people who consider doing **** at 80%.. it isnt about being human.. its about being average and weak.. if you cant diet then stay fat.. if you cant lift til the pain overwelms your body then stay small.. people have become weak searching for an easy road
Do you honestly believe training and dieting has to be excruciatingly painful and monotonous to get results?
 
JudoJosh

JudoJosh

Pro Virili Parte
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
Kids these days....
Especially on my yard!


^ how I feel sometimes. Turning into one of those grumpy old men who shake their head at the youth
 
JudoJosh

JudoJosh

Pro Virili Parte
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
finally got a chance to pull this. Will give it a read sometime this week.
 
jaces

jaces

Active member
Awards
0
ok moving on.. a thing i have always wondered is if the size of a meal effects 1. absorption of nutrients and 2. if it increases the likelyhood of fat being stored??
 
jaces

jaces

Active member
Awards
0
Do you honestly believe training and dieting has to be excruciatingly painful and monotonous to get results?
no but people are so scared of feeling hungry or not eating something that died in fat or sugar..
 
jaces

jaces

Active member
Awards
0
Someone who works a job that has really crazy hours will enjoy this diet. That's why I follow IF. In my line of work, I'm too busy in the morning to graze or snack or whatever you want to call it. It's not until several hours later that I can chill for 15 and pound some food.
uf you work at a desk you can eat .. i am a full time student and i work after class and i can eat my 6 meals a day
 
Chrisehyoung

Chrisehyoung

Active member
Awards
0
Does eating every other day count as IF? lol
 
booneman77

booneman77

Legend
Awards
5
  • First Up Vote
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
  • Best Answer
Does eating every other day count as IF? lol
Yes, totally. IF just means set periods of fasting followed by set periods of feeding. There's many variations:
16hr fast, 8hr feed (Leangains)
20hr fast, 4 hr feed (Warrior diet/eat stop eat)
Alternate day fasting
and everything in between... Plenty of options that all have similar benefits
 
AntM1564

AntM1564

Legend
Awards
4
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
  • First Up Vote

Similar threads


Top