Nutrition and Health Roundtable

[Montego1]

This has turned into a "ill just throw a link down and agree with it " thread with hardly any personal experience discussion brought to the table so I'll be unsubbing now.

 

[bdcc]

This has turned into a "ill just throw a link down and agree with it " thread with hardly any personal experience discussion brought to the table so I'll be unsubbing now.

Ok, here is my anecdote;

I spent a week training fasted when on holiday. I trained first thing in the morning.

I was significantly weaker and felt nauseous every session. My workouts were significantly easier yet I found them harder than the much more rigorous workouts that I would usually put myself through.

In theory if I did them for long enough I should notice some form of adaptation to them. If I was forced to train first thing in the morning due to my work schedule then I would do it but I don't believe fasted training offers any advantage in terms of performance.

 

[Jiigzz]

Ok, here is my anecdote;

I spent a week training fasted when on holiday. I trained first thing in the morning.

I was significantly weaker and felt nauseous every session. My workouts were significantly easier yet I found them harder than the much more rigorous workouts that I would usually put myself through.

In theory if I did them for long enough I should notice some form of adaptation to them. If I was forced to train first thing in the morning due to my work schedule then I would do it but I don't believe fasted training offers any advantage in terms of performance.

Interesting. I used to train fasted a while ago but have since changed my tact (as I always do) and now train after a large feed. Seems to sit better with me this way.

Although if I do HIIT, then eating beforehand makes me wanna puke so its hard to find a good balance lol

 

[Jiigzz]

I dont think the training is going to impact the bodyfat or weightloss. the overall caloric deficit would be the major factor regarding that. Depletion training (high rep/hypertrophy) training could aid in glyocgen depletion, but who is to say that is really the key factor to fatloss or fatloss for training. We have seen in real life that hypertrophy training while dieting can be a disaster and cause to a ton of muscle loss if one is not training heavy when they do diet. So it is doubtful as much science as we do read i doubt we have one specifically on bodybuilders or that does compare the fed to fasted state for our exact research we are trying to find since most reserach is done in either 1) Rats, 2) overweight subjects, or 3) People who have messed up caloric intakes to not really match their goal which skew the end result.

Anabolic response:

Insulin Response and Nutrient partitioning:
Invalid Link Removed

"GLUT4: Glucose transporter type 4 is a protein responsible for insulin-regulated glucose transport into the muscle cell. It increased by a whopping 28% in F but only 2-3% in C (not mentioned in the paper but this is my estimate based on the graphs). This partly explains why F saw superior results in regards to glucose tolerance and insulin sensitivity.

Since GLUT4 is triggered by AMPK, which is increased when glucose availability is low, i.e. during fasted training, one would assume the GLUT4 increase could then be explained by an increase in AMPK. This was found to be true: AMPK increased by 25% in F, which correlated closely with the increase in GLUT4 content."

Metabolic enzymes: Very fittingly, the same group of enzymes that were investigated in the study I covered in "Fasted Training Boosts Endurance and Muscle Glycogen" were looked at here.

Interestingly, changes in citrate synthase and HAD, two markers for fuel-utilization efficiency, were not different between F and C. However, two other important markers for glucose and fat metabolism, FAT/CD36 and CPT1, were increased by ~30% in F. C saw no increase at all.

Invalid Link Removed

Body composition: Now this is very interesting. Despite overfeeding the subjects with 1000 calories or more, F only gained 0.7 kg. From a scientific standpoint, this is deemed insignificant. That is, the gain could likely be attributed to chance or, very likely, fluctuations in body weight due to increased muscle glycogen. This lack of weight gain in F could not be explained by the training regimen. They were still overfed by 15-20% when accounting for the extra activity. This left the subjects with a theoretical surplus of 650 calories per day, on average, which should have resulted in weight gain equivalent to ~3.5 kg after six weeks.

What about C? They gained 1.4 kg, twice as much as F, despite doing the same amount of exercise and consuming the same amount of calories and macronutrients.

Invalid Link Removed

More from Martin:

"The main findings of the present study were that: training in an overnight-fasted state enhances storage of muscle glycogen compared to training in the fed state; skeletal muscle of men and women respond differently in terms of oxidative activity to training in the fed and overnight-fasted state; and peak VO2 and peak power improved more when training in the fasted state compared to the fed state."

Questioning the dramatic increase (+54.7%) in muscle glycogen in the fasted group, the researchers were not able to find an answer based on unexpected confounders or behaviors between groups. Muscle biopsies were taken at the same time and there were no difference in diet in between groups.

"...it is highly likely that the differences in glycogen stores between groups reflect the training intervention and not exercise timing or pre-biopsy diet."

Moreover, these results are in line with a prior study that found similar results for fasted training.

"Importantly, our findings correspond to that of De Bock et al. confirming that training whilst circulating CHO levels are low increases the capacity to accrue glycogen in the trained muscles."

What might be the reason for the different effects between genders on oxidative enzymes? As mentioned previously, differences in fuel utilization. Males rely less on intramuscular triglycerides and fatty acids and more on glucose, while females burn a higher percentage of fat at any given exercise intensity. But why fed state training would then be more beneficial for females when it comes to "oxidative adaptation" requires further investigation.


More on fasted training and protein synthesis:

Invalid Link Removed

In this study, subjects were split into two groups that were trained on two occasions separated by three weeks. The three-week rest period between sessions served as a "washout" period, in order to make sure that the prior session didn't interfere with the results obtained during the second test.

The workouts were fairly basic whole-body sessions: 3 x 8 in seven movements such as bench press, overhead press, curls and leg press.

One of the sessions (F) were performed on an empty stomach after an overnight fast.

The other session (B) was performed in the fed state. Subjects were given a breakfast of 722 kcal composed of 85% carbs, 11% protein and 4% fat, and training was initiated 90 minutes after the meal.

After the weight training session, both groups rested for 4 hours. At the one- and four-hour marks, muscle biopsies and blood tests were obtained . Participants were also also given a recovery drink to sip each hour during the rest period.

Results revealed that the F session had twice as high levels of p70s6k in comparison to the B when measured at the one-hour mark post-workout. Other myogenic transcription factors were also higher at this point, though not quite as pronounced as p70s6k. At the four-hour mark, the differences between the two groups had evened out.

Among other things, increased levels of p70s6k may lead to a faster transport of amino acids into the muscle cell membranes, which should lead to a more rapid and potent anabolic response to post-workout nutrient ingestion. The effects seen on the other myogenic signaling mechanisms could also affect muscle growth through other pathways.

Good studies.

 

[Montego1]

Interesting. I used to train fasted a while ago but have since changed my tact (as I always do) and now train after a large feed. Seems to sit better with me this way.

Although if I do HIIT, then eating beforehand makes me wanna puke so its hard to find a good balance lol

That balance is key for me also.

When i trained weights fasted I would get light headed ( i always try to train max effort and intensity. As heavy as possible and as many reps as possible). Even with a shake before hand I would get blackouts especially squats.

When I do Cardio on the other hand I enjoy it much more fasted but will always have bcaa intra or before.

I guess my point is when I weight trained fasted my workouts suffered. I'd rather have a killer session with some food in me and do my cardio after lifting then, weight train at a less capacity.

 

[Jiigzz]

That balance is key for me also.

When i trained weights fasted I would get light headed ( i always try to train max effort and intensity. As heavy as possible and as many reps as possible). Even with a shake before hand I would get blackouts especially squats.

When I do Cardio on the other hand I enjoy it much more fasted but will always have bcaa intra or before.

I guess my point is when I weight trained fasted my workouts suffered. I'd rather have a killer session with some food in me and do my cardio after lifting then, weight train at a less capacity.

totally agreed. I've never tried lifting max without having a big feed, only ever when doing light work. I think it would kill me lol.

 

[The Solution]

This has turned into a "ill just throw a link down and agree with it " thread with hardly any personal experience discussion brought to the table so I'll be unsubbing now.

Most roundtables include experience but is mostly based off the research they study. Even if someone throws out their experience some people will still rebuttal with "oh you should do this or you should do that" when it suits that individual and their success because it suits them and its optimal for their schedule. Both are vital IMO, sometimes the things that dont seem like they would work on paper or in a lab show the best results for that individual hence why i believe there is no true "best way" to do things because everyone responds so differently. Some prefer the fasted training and some do not. Some experience greater focus/energy in a fasted state, and some are just horrible, groggy and tired. The only true way is to give it a good 4-8 weeks minimum of trying something new, try to adjust, and take notes on what works for your mood, energy, strength, and performance and then adjust. Same could be said with intra-workout carbs, meal timing, meal frequency etc. There will never be a one size fits all for every individual that walks, but i am always eager to see how other people do things and see what works for them because each piece of advice could be utilized to help give you an edge for something in the future or your current program/diet/training.

For me i can do both in a fasted/non fasted state

Fasted:
- Greater Energy (Pre-workouts do hit harder in a true fasted state)
- Have hit PR's in a fasted state and notice increased energy compared to a fed state, longer focus, and greater mental clarity
- Overall strength may not be up to par compared to training later or with food in me, but i still put in very good sessions
- Focus/Intensity remains high
- Less Vascularity/Pump

Fed:
- May feel a bit bloated depending on how close or what i eat pre-workout (usually a very light meal to fuel training and eat more post/pre bed)
- Strength may be greater (have hit more PR's in a fed state)
- Energy/Focus may be a bit less if using a pre-workout due to food in the system and effects not as great
- performance on par if not a bit better with food in me (tough to tell since i train fasted more often due to schedule/job)
- Vascularity/Pump greater with food/pre-workout meal in me compared to fasted

my expereinces

That balance is key for me also.

When i trained weights fasted I would get light headed ( i always try to train max effort and intensity. As heavy as possible and as many reps as possible). Even with a shake before hand I would get blackouts especially squats.

When I do Cardio on the other hand I enjoy it much more fasted but will always have bcaa intra or before.

I guess my point is when I weight trained fasted my workouts suffered. I'd rather have a killer session with some food in me and do my cardio after lifting then, weight train at a less capacity.

 

[Montego1]

Most roundtables include experience but is mostly based off the research they study. Even if someone throws out their experience some people will still rebuttal with "oh you should do this or you should do that" when it suits that individual and their success because it suits them and its optimal for their schedule. Both are vital IMO, sometimes the things that dont seem like they would work on paper or in a lab show the best results for that individual hence why i believe there is no true "best way" to do things because everyone responds so differently. Some prefer the fasted training and some do not. Some experience greater focus/energy in a fasted state, and some are just horrible, groggy and tired. The only true way is to give it a good 4-8 weeks minimum of trying something new, try to adjust, and take notes on what works for your mood, energy, strength, and performance and then adjust. Same could be said with intra-workout carbs, meal timing, meal frequency etc. There will never be a one size fits all for every individual that walks, but i am always eager to see how other people do things and see what works for them because each piece of advice could be utilized to help give you an edge for something in the future or your current program/diet/training.

For me i can do both in a fasted/non fasted state

Fasted:
- Greater Energy (Pre-workouts do hit harder in a true fasted state)
- Have hit PR's in a fasted state and notice increased energy compared to a fed state, longer focus, and greater mental clarity
- Overall strength may not be up to par compared to training later or with food in me, but i still put in very good sessions
- Focus/Intensity remains high
- Less Vascularity/Pump

Fed:
- May feel a bit bloated depending on how close or what i eat pre-workout (usually a very light meal to fuel training and eat more post/pre bed)
- Strength may be greater (have hit more PR's in a fed state)
- Energy/Focus may be a bit less if using a pre-workout due to food in the system and effects not as great
- performance on par if not a bit better with food in me (tough to tell since i train fasted more often due to schedule/job)
- Vascularity/Pump greater with food/pre-workout meal in me compared to fasted

my expereinces

Now this was a helpful post.

 

[Spaniard]

Ok, here is my anecdote;

I spent a week training fasted when on holiday. I trained first thing in the morning.

I was significantly weaker and felt nauseous every session. My workouts were significantly easier yet I found them harder than the much more rigorous workouts that I would usually put myself through.

In theory if I did them for long enough I should notice some form of adaptation to them. If I was forced to train first thing in the morning due to my work schedule then I would do it but I don't believe fasted training offers any advantage in terms of performance.

Interesting. I used to train fasted a while ago but have since changed my tact (as I always do) and now train after a large feed. Seems to sit better with me this way.

Although if I do HIIT, then eating beforehand makes me wanna puke so its hard to find a good balance lol

Agree with both of you. I can't train to my fullest potential fasted. My best workouts are always post a hefty carb weighted meal.

Training fasted seems to (IMO) go along with Martin and his Lean Gains health lore.

This has turned into a "ill just throw a link down and agree with it " thread with hardly any personal experience discussion brought to the table so I'll be unsubbing now.

Don't be such a lay down Larry

That balance is key for me also.

When i trained weights fasted I would get light headed ( i always try to train max effort and intensity. As heavy as possible and as many reps as possible). Even with a shake before hand I would get blackouts especially squats.

When I do Cardio on the other hand I enjoy it much more fasted but will always have bcaa intra or before.

I guess my point is when I weight trained fasted my workouts suffered. I'd rather have a killer session with some food in me and do my cardio after lifting then, weight train at a less capacity.

Irrelevant you unsubbed you're not supposed to be in here

Most roundtables include experience but is mostly based off the research they study. Even if someone throws out their experience some people will still rebuttal with "oh you should do this or you should do that" when it suits that individual and their success because it suits them and its optimal for their schedule. Both are vital IMO, sometimes the things that dont seem like they would work on paper or in a lab show the best results for that individual hence why i believe there is no true "best way" to do things because everyone responds so differently. Some prefer the fasted training and some do not. Some experience greater focus/energy in a fasted state, and some are just horrible, groggy and tired. The only true way is to give it a good 4-8 weeks minimum of trying something new, try to adjust, and take notes on what works for your mood, energy, strength, and performance and then adjust. Same could be said with intra-workout carbs, meal timing, meal frequency etc. There will never be a one size fits all for every individual that walks, but i am always eager to see how other people do things and see what works for them because each piece of advice could be utilized to help give you an edge for something in the future or your current program/diet/training.

For me i can do both in a fasted/non fasted state

Fasted:
- Greater Energy (Pre-workouts do hit harder in a true fasted state)
- Have hit PR's in a fasted state and notice increased energy compared to a fed state, longer focus, and greater mental clarity
- Overall strength may not be up to par compared to training later or with food in me, but i still put in very good sessions
- Focus/Intensity remains high
- Less Vascularity/Pump

Fed:
- May feel a bit bloated depending on how close or what i eat pre-workout (usually a very light meal to fuel training and eat more post/pre bed)
- Strength may be greater (have hit more PR's in a fed state)
- Energy/Focus may be a bit less if using a pre-workout due to food in the system and effects not as great
- performance on par if not a bit better with food in me (tough to tell since i train fasted more often due to schedule/job)
- Vascularity/Pump greater with food/pre-workout meal in me compared to fasted

my expereinces

"Most roundtables include experience but is mostly based off the research they study."

These Roundtables specifically aren't all about the studies but rather the total picture. If anyone wants to get worked up over a few scientific studies that's what the advanced section is for.

There is an inherent difference between a scientist and someone who puts what they read to practice and gets results.

Not talking about anyone in particular including you solution as you look like you're getting the results that you want. Just a generality, not aimed at any particular person in any way lol.

Being one sided in either direction (science/practice) is a narrow minded approach that slows progress all around

Now this was a helpful post.

Unsubbed

 

[drewsicle3210]

Subbed

Good stuff so far

 

[Jiigzz]

What about the post workout 'window'? Does anyone notice any difference between getting in some protein within 30 minutes or not? I know n=1 and it is uncontrolled, but I just want your personal opinions on what you feel works best

 

[bdcc]

What about the post workout 'window'? Does anyone notice any difference between getting in some protein within 30 minutes or not? I know n=1 and it is uncontrolled, but I just want your personal opinions on what you feel works best

I still consume liquid nutrition post workout.

I don't think it is necessary per se but I find it difficult to eat immediately and I find my mental acuity diminishes if I consume nothing.

 

[Danb2285]

What about the post workout 'window'? Does anyone notice any difference between getting in some protein within 30 minutes or not? I know n=1 and it is uncontrolled, but I just want your personal opinions on what you feel works best

I can definitely say I feel better after eating after I lift. I get all shakey and dizzy almost hypoglycemic like if I dont eat a meal post workout. Rather or not that meal adds to "dem gainz" I havent really noticed a difference.

 

[drewsicle3210]

I love food, I love working out, I love GOOD supplements, and I am sure that I will love gear and PH's.

None of my gains or progress would have been possible without proper nutrition (most days of the week). And I have screwed myself out of more gains and a visible 6 pack because of my lack of discipline with my nutritional choices. But like I said, I love food and I am not a Competitor of any kind, so I am going to eat my cheeseburgers.

This belongs here right?

 

[gokix811]

What about the post workout 'window'? Does anyone notice any difference between getting in some protein within 30 minutes or not? I know n=1 and it is uncontrolled, but I just want your personal opinions on what you feel works best

In regards to gains, I don't really notice a difference with protein consumed immediately post workout. I am usually not hungry afterwards. The idea of a shower and nap is more appealing, but I will say once I finish my post workout meal I turn into a ravenous eating machine...impatiently awaiting the next meal.

 

[drewsicle3210]

I can definitely say I feel better after eating after I lift. I get all shakey and dizzy almost hypoglycemic like if I dont eat a meal post workout. Rather or not that meal adds to "dem gainz" I havent really noticed a difference.

This is how I feel also. I have read that it doesn't matter when you eat but how much

 

[Montego1]

I'm usually eating a meal WITH a shake post workout. Normally about thirty minutes after leaving the gym.

I don't eat immediately after but never more then an hour. This also hads to do with meal timing and frequency largely.

Since I added whole foods in my post workout meal instead of just a shake and carb powder, I notice I'm not nearly as lethargic the rest of the day as well.

 

[The Solution]

What about the post workout 'window'? Does anyone notice any difference between getting in some protein within 30 minutes or not? I know n=1 and it is uncontrolled, but I just want your personal opinions on what you feel works best

My stance:

Meeting total calories in the 24 hour period is most important, but this will breakdown to many scenarios:

Factors:
- Amount eaten prior to workout (Food overlap into the post-workout period
- Size of that meal eaten prior (Amount of protein)
- Fasted or non fasted workout? The need for immediate or non-immediate food post-workout
- Inclusion of Intra-workout BCAA (which will carry into the post-workout period of amions present in the bloodstream)
- Type of training? (Endurnace or typical gym goer 60-90 minutes)
- Amount of cardio individual is doing and amount of food required to replenish what the individual lost (for some normal guy guy, not too much, someone doing higher volume or higher intensity forms of cardio it may differ)

what i would suggest:

1) Fasted Trainee:
- Take Intra-workout BCAA (to stop catabolic response from overnight fast)
- Meal 1 follows training

2) Fed Trainee
Pre-workout meal (400-500 kcals)
Post-workout meal (food will be overlapping from pre-workout meal so the need for something right away is not really 100% necessary) how long well that depends on how big the pre-workout meal was, how much protein and how long it will sit in the system. for someone who eats a 200 calorie meal it will be different than someone who eats a 600-1000 kcal meal which will allow for a longer digestion process of protein synthesis as well


Also the need for timing right after (IE a shake) may not be necessary due to the amount of aminos (intra-workout BCAA) or food overlap from your pre-workout meal which is still digesting.

This comes right from Alan's Protein per meal article here: Regarding synthsis and how much we would need depending on the size of the meal

Invalid Link Removed

"Short-term research supporting the magic limit

I’ve heard many folks parrot that the maximal anabolic effect of a single protein dose is limited to 20 grams, citing recent work by Moore and colleagues [7]. In this study’s 4-hour post-exercise test period, 40 g protein did not elicit a greater anabolic response than 20 g. I’d interpret these outcomes with caution. Fundamentally speaking, protein utilization can differ according to muscle mass. The requirements of a 140-lb person will differ markedly from someone who’s a lean 200. Additionally, a relatively low amount of total volume was used (12 sets total). Typical training bouts usually involve more than one muscle group and are commonly at least double that volume, which can potentially increase the demand for nutrient uptake. Finally, the conclusion of the authors is questionable. They state explicitly,

“…we speculate that no more than 5-6 times daily could one ingest this amount (~20 g) of protein and expect muscle protein synthesis to be maximally stimulated.”

So, they’re implying that 100-120 grams of protein per day is maximal for promoting muscle growth. Wait a minute, what? Based on both the bulk of the research evidence and numerous field observations, this is simply false [8,9].

In another recent study, Symons and colleagues compared the 5-hour response of a moderate serving of lean beef containing 30 g protein with a large serving containing 90 g protein [10]. The smaller serving increased protein synthesis by approximately 50%, and the larger serving caused no further increase in protein synthesis, despite being triple the dose. The researchers concluded that the ingestion of more than 30 g protein in a single meal does not further enhance muscle protein synthesis. While their conclusion indeed supports the outcomes of their short-term study, it’s pretty easy to predict the outcomes in muscle size and strength if we compared a total daily protein dose of 90 g with 30 g over a longer trial period, let alone one involving a structured exercise protocol. This brings me to the crucial point that acute outcomes merely provide grounds for hypothesis. It’s not completely meaningless, but it’s far from conclusive without examining the long-term effects."

My thoughts again:

Showing that a smaller meal may not hold a longer response and the need for another meal quicker than someone who eats a larger meal (who can wait longer to eat) how long? That is really personal dependent, but i would just say no longer than 60-90 minutes post-workout, but i feel there is no need for a shake right away and a meal 30-60 minutes shortly after because that defeats the purpose of Muscle Protein Synthesis and allowing protein levels to reach their fractory stages before being spiked again which we have seen and heard in the following articles by Layne Norton:

Invalid Link Removed

and his podcast here: with Dr Jake Wilson

Invalid Link Removed

The thing that is MOST necessary in any situation is Pre-workout nutrition, how much, or how little. which will show you how long protein may take to be digested or how much longer it would take for protein levels to reach refractory stages

Are you training fasted and taking an intra-workout BCAA where amions will be present in the post-workout period sseeing protein synthesis is boosted 24 hours post-exercise? What is your goal? Endurance Athlete or an average gym goer which will be a total 180.

Again this is alan's MOST recent study on Post-Workout Nutriton:

Invalid Link Removed

The Takeaway points below:

Due to the transient anabolic impact of a protein-rich meal and its potential synergy with the trained state, pre- and post-exercise meals should not be separated by more than approximately 3–4 hours, given a typical resistance training bout lasting 45–90 minutes. If protein is delivered within particularly large mixed-meals (which are inherently more anticatabolic), a case can be made for lengthening the interval to 5–6 hours. This strategy covers the hypothetical timing benefits while allowing significant flexibility in the length of the feeding windows before and after training. Specific timing within this general framework would vary depending on individual preference and tolerance, as well as exercise duration. One of many possible examples involving a 60-minute resistance training bout could have up to 90-minute feeding windows on both sides of the bout, given central placement between the meals. In contrast, bouts exceeding typical duration would default to shorter feeding windows if the 3–4 hour pre- to post-exercise meal interval is maintained. Shifting the training session closer to the pre- or post-exercise meal should be dictated by personal preference, tolerance, and lifestyle/scheduling constraints.

Even more so than with protein, carbohydrate dosage and timing relative to resistance training is a gray area lacking cohesive data to form concrete recommendations. It is tempting to recommend pre- and post-exercise carbohydrate doses that at least match or exceed the amounts of protein consumed in these meals. However, carbohydrate availability during and after exercise is of greater concern for endurance as opposed to strength or hypertrophy goals. Furthermore, the importance of co-ingesting post-exercise protein and carbohydrate has recently been challenged by studies examining the early recovery period, particularly when sufficient protein is provided. Koopman et al [52] found that after full-body resistance training, adding carbohydrate (0.15, or 0.6 g/kg/hr) to amply dosed casein hydrolysate (0.3 g/kg/hr) did not increase whole body protein balance during a 6-hour post-exercise recovery period compared to the protein-only treatment. Subsequently, Staples et al [53] reported that after lower-body resistance exercise (leg extensions), the increase in post-exercise muscle protein balance from ingesting 25 g whey isolate was not improved by an additional 50 g maltodextrin during a 3-hour recovery period. For the goal of maximizing rates of muscle gain, these findings support the broader objective of meeting total daily carbohydrate need instead of specifically timing its constituent doses. Collectively, these data indicate an increased potential for dietary flexibility while maintaining the pursuit of optimal timing

 

[Jiigzz]

I still consume liquid nutrition post workout.

I don't think it is necessary per se but I find it difficult to eat immediately and I find my mental acuity diminishes if I consume nothing.

This is what I do too. I slam back a homemade shake almost straight after; whether or not it makes a difference to my results is irrelevant. I just like to reward myself with something nice lol.

I can definitely say I feel better after eating after I lift. I get all shakey and dizzy almost hypoglycemic like if I dont eat a meal post workout. Rather or not that meal adds to "dem gainz" I havent really noticed a difference.

I applaud you for being able to eat afterwards

I really wish I could eat something afterwards but I literally cannot stomach it. I don't often work out to the point of nausea but for some reason, I just get repelled by the smell of food until at least an hour afterward.

I love food, I love working out, I love GOOD supplements, and I am sure that I will love gear and PH's.

None of my gains or progress would have been possible without proper nutrition (most days of the week). And I have screwed myself out of more gains and a visible 6 pack because of my lack of discipline with my nutritional choices. But like I said, I love food and I am not a Competitor of any kind, so I am going to eat my cheeseburgers.

This belongs here right?

I don't even remember the last time I ate a cheeseburger...

a big mac on the otherhand, well I had one of those last week.

In regards to gains, I don't really notice a difference with protein consumed immediately post workout. I am usually not hungry afterwards. The idea of a shower and nap is more appealing, but I will say once I finish my post workout meal I turn into a ravenous eating machine...impatiently awaiting the next meal.

A nap does sound appealing although I work straight afterward so a shower, some clean clothes and a hearty, liquid meal suits me just fine

 

[AdonisBelt]

What about the post workout 'window'? Does anyone notice any difference between getting in some protein within 30 minutes or not? I know n=1 and it is uncontrolled, but I just want your personal opinions on what you feel works best

I actually feel a lot better waiting between 45 minutes to an hour after.

 

[Jiigzz]

I actually feel a lot better waiting between 45 minutes to an hour after.

Nice. Is this for whole food or a shake?

 

[AdonisBelt]

Nice. Is this for whole food or a shake?

Both. I just feel like that post workout fatigue/pump/anabolic state FEEL end the second I put something besides water, and I feel like I'm back to my normal self. ... Does that make sense? It's totally anecdotal, but I feel like I stay in a state of "fat burning" or "anabolism" longer (depending on whether I'm cutting/bulking). I'm a fasted trainer as well so perhaps it carries over.

That being said, I can easily put down 4lbs of food after I hold off (I weigh everything out)

 

[booneman77]

Over the years I've done both setups... A quick PWO shake immediately after as well as nothing until a whole food meal 1hr or so later... I don't notice much difference either way but since I love to cram food and drink into my mouth as often as possible, I prefer the shake, then meal, then another, etc... I do find that during a cut, the post workout shake is an easy few hundred cals to remove and I don't seem to feel any difference as far as "extra" muscle loss.

 

[RecompMan]

I train faste and I'm routinely not hungry after my workout for about 2 hours

I take intra bcaa and post workout bcaas. Then more bcaas 2-3 hours later if I'm my hungry and eat my food when I'm hungry I've noticed good leaning and recovery this way

Plus I yak if I eat prior to the gym

 

[Spaniard]

The studies were not geared toward a calorie deficit. And calling a calorie a calorie is simply misguided. Ketogenic diets improve CVD biomarkets and lipid profiles; this is shown in LCD and VLCKD.

Carbs are not the body's primary source of energy; they are only that way because you eat them and eating carbs inhibits lipolysis. Fat provides more energy per gram and is far more sustainable.
The body, once keto adapted, can use ketones to fuel exercise of any intensity and, the body is sufficiently capable of producing carbohydrates from non-carbohydrate sources.

You're forgetting a few key points here, man. Red blood cells require glucose as do specific areas of the brain. Not only that, but the nervous system also heavily relies on glucose as fuel. Those require about 500kcals of glucose to operate efficiently. Yes, ketones can be used as energy efficiently throughout the body but certain systems REQUIRE glucose, no two ways about it. Fatty acids are converted to Acetyl CoA and cannot make glucose, ketones yes but not glucose. Therefore, when on keto diets the only glucose source you're getting is from deamination of protein or from Glycerol, which can be converted to glucose or to pyruvate (then Acetyl CoA) but the rate that Glycerol (due to most fatty acids only containing one glycerol molecule) converts is minor. Making the sacrificing of protein (or high intake thereof) one of the only significant sources of glucose production and even then only certain amino acids can be converted to pyruvate (pyruvate -> glucose) others favor Acetyl CoA or go directly into the TCA cycle which can later be used for glucose.

All that being said, I'm not entirely sold that the body can "sufficiently" produce enough glucose to fuel the systems that only accept it as fuel.

BTW I used all those studies you put up showing keto diets as positive findings in defense of keto diets with my nutrition teacher. Thanks

 

[JudoJosh]

You're forgetting a few key points here, man. Red blood cells require glucose as do specific areas of the brain. Not only that, but the nervous system also heavily relies on glucose as fuel. Those require about 500kcals of glucose to operate efficiently. Yes, ketones can be used as energy efficiently throughout the body but certain systems REQUIRE glucose, no two ways about it. Fatty acids are converted to Acetyl CoA and cannot make glucose, ketones yes but not glucose. Therefore, when on keto diets the only glucose source you're getting is from deamination of protein or from Glycerol, which can be converted to glucose or to pyruvate (then Acetyl CoA) but the rate that Glycerol (due to most fatty acids only containing one glycerol molecule) converts is minor. Making the sacrificing of protein (or high intake thereof) one of the only significant sources of glucose production and even then only certain amino acids can be converted to pyruvate (pyruvate -> glucose) others favor Acetyl CoA or go directly into the TCA cycle which can later be used for glucose.

All that being said, I'm not entirely sold that the body can "sufficiently" produce enough glucose to fuel the systems that only accept it as fuel.

BTW I used all those studies you put up showing keto diets as positive findings in defense of keto diets with my nutrition teacher. Thanks

Amount of glucose needed changes when keto adapted

 

[jimbuick]

Amount of glucose needed changes when keto adapted

Any references for that?

 

[Spaniard]

Amount of glucose needed changes when keto adapted

Within the brain, nervous system and red blood cells? Color me interested, I'd also be very interested in seeing some evidence that this occurs.

 

[Jiigzz]

You're forgetting a few key points here, man. Red blood cells require glucose as do specific areas of the brain. Not only that, but the nervous system also heavily relies on glucose as fuel. Those require about 500kcals of glucose to operate efficiently. Yes, ketones can be used as energy efficiently throughout the body but certain systems REQUIRE glucose, no two ways about it. Fatty acids are converted to Acetyl CoA and cannot make glucose, ketones yes but not glucose. Therefore, when on keto diets the only glucose source you're getting is from deamination of protein or from Glycerol, which can be converted to glucose or to pyruvate (then Acetyl CoA) but the rate that Glycerol (due to most fatty acids only containing one glycerol molecule) converts is minor. Making the sacrificing of protein (or high intake thereof) one of the only significant sources of glucose production and even then only certain amino acids can be converted to pyruvate (pyruvate -> glucose) others favor Acetyl CoA or go directly into the TCA cycle which can later be used for glucose.

All that being said, I'm not entirely sold that the body can "sufficiently" produce enough glucose to fuel the systems that only accept it as fuel.

BTW I used all those studies you put up showing keto diets as positive findings in defense of keto diets with my nutrition teacher. Thanks

A body can produce sufficient glucose from non-glucose sources (does a Lion eat Grass?) in order to supply the brain with adequete fuel. There is no need for Carbs.

Lactate is converted to pyruvate which can subsequently be used to produce glucose and likewise odd chain fatty acids produce succinyl COA which also produces glucose.

Acetic acid (from acetyl COA) combine with pyruvate to make glucose.

Amount of glucose needed changes when keto adapted

Some studies: Invalid Link Removed
Keto diets neuroprotective: Invalid Link Removed
2 studies which show the brain can use certain ketones as fuel: Invalid Link Removed AND Invalid Link Removed

That JISSN study is a good read if you have the time.

Not related but interesting exert:

"However, serum lipids generally improve with the low-carbohydrate diet, especially the triglyceride and HDL measurements. In sharp contrast, high-carbohydrate diets, which reduce high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol and raise triglyceride levels, exacerbate the metabolic manifestations of the insulin resistance syndrome [18]."

 

[Jiigzz]

Any references for that?

I've posted some.

Exert from JISSN study:

However, the body limits glucose utilization to reduce the need for gluconeogenesis. In the liver in the well-fed state, acetyl CoA formed during the β-oxidation of fatty acids is oxidized to CO2 and H2O in the citric acid cycle. However, when the rate of mobilization of fatty acids from adipose tissue is accelerated, as, for example, during very low carbohydrate intake, the liver converts acetyl CoA into ketone bodies: Acetoacetate and 3-hydroxybutyrate. The liver cannot utilize ketone bodies because it lacks the mitochondrial enzyme succinyl CoA:3-ketoacid CoA transferase required for activation of acetoacetate to acetoacetyl CoA [3]. Therefore, ketone bodies flow from the liver to extra-hepatic tissues (e.g., brain) for use as a fuel;

 

[Jiigzz]

Over the years I've done both setups... A quick PWO shake immediately after as well as nothing until a whole food meal 1hr or so later... I don't notice much difference either way but since I love to cram food and drink into my mouth as often as possible, I prefer the shake, then meal, then another, etc... I do find that during a cut, the post workout shake is an easy few hundred cals to remove and I don't seem to feel any difference as far as "extra" muscle loss.

I train faste and I'm routinely not hungry after my workout for about 2 hours

I take intra bcaa and post workout bcaas. Then more bcaas 2-3 hours later if I'm my hungry and eat my food when I'm hungry I've noticed good leaning and recovery this way

Plus I yak if I eat prior to the gym

Crazy how different the protocols are across the board. I tend to follow old gym bro lore and still get down a shake within 15-30 minutes but that isn't because I feel my 'gains' will be hindered, I just prefer it this way lol.

 

[Spaniard]

The body can produce sufficient glucose from non-glucose sources (does a Lion eat Grass?) in order to supply the brain with adequete fuel. There is no need for Carbs.

Lactate is converted to pyruvate which can subsequently be used to produce glucose and likewise odd chain fatty acids produce succinyl COA which also produces glucose.

Acetic acid (from acetyl COA) combine with pyruvate to make glucose.

"Does a lion eat grass" doesn't really apply to humans considering humans have evolved to use their brains differently than Lions and am quite sure have different nervous systems.

Lactate -> pyruvate conversion rate is 10:1. That provides a sufficient source of glucose? Pyruvate also converts downstream to Acetyl CoA or upstream to glucose. There is no guarantee that the synthesized pyruvate-> glucose will happen.

"Acetic acid (from acetyl COA) combine with pyruvate to make glucose. "

Which is all well and good but that conversion still requires pyruvate, which can after a number of processes be synthesized via glycerol. This occurs at an extremely limited rate due to the makeup of triglycerides or more specifically the small amount of glycerol yielded. 95% of the content within triglycerides (5% glycerol by weight) do not make glucose.

There is no need for carbs at all. That's a slightly irresponsible statement.

 

[Montego1]

I like carbs. They make my belly and my muscles full

 

[Spaniard]

I like carbs. They make my belly and my muscles full

Chia swole as a mofo!

 

[AdonisBelt]

Fun and relevant word: gluconeogenesis.


You don't need to eat carbs, hence this nifty metabolic process.

 

[Spaniard]

Therefore, when on keto diets the only glucose source you're getting is from deamination of protein or from Glycerol, which can be converted to glucose or to pyruvate (then Acetyl CoA) but the rate that Glycerol (due to most fatty acids only containing one glycerol molecule) converts is minor. Making the sacrificing of protein (or high intake thereof) one of the only significant sources of glucose production and even then only certain amino acids can be converted to pyruvate (pyruvate -> glucose) others favor Acetyl CoA or go directly into the TCA cycle which can later be used for glucose.

Fun and relevant word: gluconeogenesis.


You don't need to eat carbs, hence this nifty metabolic process.

Yea... ^Sir skips a lot lol

Are you aware of the key roles protein plays in the body? Using protein to produce glucose via gluconeogenisis steals amino acids that may have been needed to synthesize an enzyme or antibody and so on...

In addition, the body also needs glucose to make some nonessential amino acids. So in the absence of carbs, you now have amino acids sacrificing themselves, to produce glucose, to make nonessential amino acids. Fatty acids cannot be used to synthesize proteins. Glycerol can contribute to the formation of nonessential amino acids (when nitrogen is available) BUT Glycerol isn't exactly sufficient (IMO) to sustain ALL these tasks that the absence of carbs is responsible for. That means you now have yet another important task of glucose in an environment that isn't producing adequate amounts, since you think its beneficial to not eat carbs.

 

[aceroni]

Yea... ^Sir skips a lot lol

Are you aware of the key roles protein plays in the body? Using protein to produce glucose via gluconeogenisis steals amino acids that may have been needed to synthesize an enzyme or antibody and so on...

In addition, the body also needs glucose to make some nonessential amino acids. So in the absence of carbs, you now have amino acids sacrificing themselves, to produce glucose, to make nonessential amino acids. Fatty acids cannot be used to synthesize proteins. Glycerol can contribute to the formation of nonessential amino acids (when nitrogen is available) BUT Glycerol isn't exactly sufficient (IMO) to sustain ALL these tasks that the absence of carbs is responsible for. That means you now have yet another important task of glucose in an environment that isn't producing adequate amounts, since you think its beneficial to not eat carbs.

Thank you.

I know you guys are in a heated discussion right now, but as far as training fasted... I don't believe in it.

This is just my experience.
When I have done fasted cardio in the am in the past (do not anymore, beyond that nonsense) I would feel like poop. Hungry, tired, angry.

For quite some time, I have been training after breakfast.. With only one meal in me. In the past month I began training later in the day, and ended up eating 2-3x before training.

I have noticed that I feel so much stronger and better when I train a little later in the day, with extra meals in me

 

[Jiigzz]

"Does a lion eat grass" doesn't really apply to humans considering humans have evolved to use their brains differently than Lions and am quite sure have different nervous systems.

Lactate -> pyruvate conversion rate is 10:1. That provides a sufficient source of glucose? Pyruvate also converts downstream to Acetyl CoA or upstream to glucose. There is no guarantee that the synthesized pyruvate-> glucose will happen.

"Acetic acid (from acetyl COA) combine with pyruvate to make glucose. "

Which is all well and good but that conversion still requires pyruvate, which can after a number of processes be synthesized via glycerol. This occurs at an extremely limited rate due to the makeup of triglycerides or more specifically the small amount of glycerol yielded. 95% of the content within triglycerides (5% glycerol by weight) do not make glucose.

There is no need for carbs at all. That's a slightly irresponsible statement.

Read the studies; they show that the body can work and function without the need for carbs quite effectively via ketone use (yes, the brain can work on ketones).

Humans have adapted to low carb diets, hence the reason that we can produce glucose through other means. The body has sufficient capability to produce glucose through the mechanisms shown.
Pyruvate is constantly produced through normal metabolic functions; where it becomes an issue is when build-up exceeds removal (blood lactate levels are approx 1-2mmol/L at rest).

Invalid Link Removed

And again, all unbound albumin fatty acids CAN be used as a fuel for the brain (as they can pass through the BBB). MCTs for example.

You can not base statements on assumptions: "There is no guarantee that the synthesized pyruvate-> glucose will happen"; What evidence is there that the body cannot function effectively in the absence of carbohydrate in the diet when Keto adpated (not just someone who has entered ketosis for 1-2 or 3 days).

Also remember that fats and triglycerides have sugar bonds and when they are cleaved (i.e. broken down) they release glucose into the bloodstream

Also, muscle proteins are spared via this process; Glycogen is spared which saves muscle proteins.

 

[Jiigzz]

Yea... ^Sir skips a lot lol

Are you aware of the key roles protein plays in the body? Using protein to produce glucose via gluconeogenisis steals amino acids that may have been needed to synthesize an enzyme or antibody and so on...

In addition, the body also needs glucose to make some nonessential amino acids. So in the absence of carbs, you now have amino acids sacrificing themselves, to produce glucose, to make nonessential amino acids. Fatty acids cannot be used to synthesize proteins. Glycerol can contribute to the formation of nonessential amino acids (when nitrogen is available) BUT Glycerol isn't exactly sufficient (IMO) to sustain ALL these tasks that the absence of carbs is responsible for. That means you now have yet another important task of glucose in an environment that isn't producing adequate amounts, since you think its beneficial to not eat carbs.

The body needs glucose, yes but this doesn't need to be supplied exogenously. Glycerol is not the only component that is used to provide energy to the body in absence of carbs.

It seems like you are making the assumption that ketosis = zero glucose when in fact this is not the case. ketosis =/= zero glucose manufacturing.

Also, can you state factually that the body cannot function properly in absence of exogenous carbohydrate? Because it seems like speculation at this stage

 

[JudoJosh]

Any references for that?

Within the brain, nervous system and red blood cells? Color me interested, I'd also be very interested in seeing some evidence that this occurs.

If you have access

PMID: 4915800

If not I can try and attach it

 

[Jiigzz]

If you have access

PMID: 4915800

If not I can try and attach it

JJ do you have access to this text by Cahill?: Invalid Link Removed

Edit: Nvm, I have it

 

[Spaniard]

The body needs glucose, yes but this doesn't need to be supplied exogenously. Glycerol is not the only component that is used to provide energy to the body in absence of carbs.

It seems like you are making the assumption that ketosis = zero glucose when in fact this is not the case. ketosis =/= zero glucose manufacturing.

Also, can you state factually that the body cannot function properly in absence of exogenous carbohydrate? Because it seems like speculation at this stage

I never made that case. Not once did I say that, I also pointed out that glucose can be made with protein did I not? Also, did I state the "body" or did I say the brain, red blood cells and nervous system?

If you have access

PMID: 4915800

If not I can try and attach it

Cool ill check it out thanks Man

 

[Spaniard]

Read the studies; they show that the body can work and function without the need for carbs quite effectively via ketone use (yes, the brain can work on ketones).

Humans have adapted to low carb diets, hence the reason that we can produce glucose through other means. The body has sufficient capability to produce glucose through the mechanisms shown.
Pyruvate is constantly produced through normal metabolic functions; where it becomes an issue is when build-up exceeds removal (blood lactate levels are approx 1-2mmol/L at rest).

Invalid Link Removed

And again, all unbound albumin fatty acids CAN be used as a fuel for the brain (as they can pass through the BBB). MCTs for example.

You can not base statements on assumptions: "There is no guarantee that the synthesized pyruvate-> glucose will happen"; What evidence is there that the body cannot function effectively in the absence of carbohydrate in the diet when Keto adpated (not just someone who has entered ketosis for 1-2 or 3 days).

Also remember that fats and triglycerides have sugar bonds and when they are cleaved (i.e. broken down) they release glucose into the bloodstream

Also, muscle proteins are spared via this process; Glycogen is spared which saves muscle proteins.

That link is to a summary. I don't have full text access to the site it redirects to. The summary really doesn't say anything pertinent

 

[Jiigzz]

I never made that case. Not once did I say that, I also pointed out that glucose can be made with protein did I not? Also, did I state the "body" or did I say the brain, red blood cells and nervous system?



Cool ill check it out thanks Man

The study is just another brain thing lol

I should add at this stage that i'm just playing devils advocate here; i'm a low carb, non keto person personally FWIW.

 

[Montego1]

You jerks.... you just like to argue! :rant:

 

[Jiigzz]

You jerks.... you just like to argue! :rant:

Debating lol. The best way to learn imo; lets you understand both sides to any argument

 

[bdcc]

Debating lol. The best way to learn imo; lets you understand both sides to any argument

This is my favourite part to the thread so far lol.

I, too like to play devil's advocate.

 

[Spaniard]

Debating lol. The best way to learn imo; lets you understand both sides to any argument

No doubt I read about the brain's ability to use ketones as fuel for like 4 hours last night, well into the morning lol

 

[AdonisBelt]

No doubt I read about the brain's ability to use ketones as fuel for like 4 hours last night, well into the morning lol

Who needs to snack on skittles I'll just crunch on a handful of raspberry ketones when I study.

 

[aceroni]

Just reporting in. trained after just one meal today. Hungry as ****. Not as much endurance. That's all the proof I need