Calorie Prioritization - Yes, a calorie is a calorie….
Options
Replies
-
LolBroScience wrote: »
but the carbs, protein, vitamins and minerals you ate earlier in the day or the previous night are already in your system broken down or being broken down, so why is after so important when you already have it in your system, as long as you get more nutrition at some point relatively soon after, which could be hours, then there is no issue.JoshLibby wrote:
I don't think a person should avoid "spiking", I would recommend doing it after a workout or before to ensure that energy is efficiently used when the body needs it, and these two times are the only times it really be should bejmule24 wrote:You do know there is no "secret" anabolic window post workout, right? Muscle Protein Synthesis usually spikes around 24 hours after you workout and up to 48 hours for total MPS........joshlibby wrote:Once again, good information, but what does it even have regards to? Are you giving me information or trying to now talk about protein synthesis.
See above posts. So, I just provide "good information," or factual information? Either way, you seem to be disagreeing with your previous statement made.
Just because I put "good information" doesn't mean anything.
After working out, one should fuel their body, people have been doing it from the beginning of time in body building and it's still done today, it's tried and true.
I think what you're talking about is the amount of time that is , people use to believe you had a 30 minute window, there is no 30 minute window.
This pertained to muscle break down, your muscle won't instantly break down if you don't get your protein in 30 mins or less, that is what this was about. I remember reading about it.
Although. you still need to fuel your body in a reasonable amount of time and there is evidence the faster you do it the better.
Food takes a while to digest regardless (depending on the chain in the food), so I am thinking this topic you're mentioning was something to do with that, but I don't know know what the topic was and don't care.
I always fuel my body before or after a workout regardless, and I tend to go with what has been working.
what evidence would that be?
I linked this on page four:
http://www.jissn.com/content/10/1/53
from the abstract: (my emphasis added)
Protein timing is a popular dietary strategy designed to optimize the adaptive response to exercise. The strategy involves consuming protein in and around a training session in an effort to facilitate muscular repair and remodeling, and thereby enhance post-exercise strength- and hypertrophy-related adaptations. Despite the apparent biological plausibility of the strategy, however, the effectiveness of protein timing in chronic training studies has been decidedly mixed. The purpose of this paper therefore was to conduct a multi-level meta-regression of randomized controlled trials to determine whether protein timing is a viable strategy for enhancing post-exercise muscular adaptations. The strength analysis comprised 478 subjects and 96 ESs, nested within 41 treatment or control groups and 20 studies. The hypertrophy analysis comprised 525 subjects and 132 ESs, nested with 47 treatment or control groups and 23 studies. A simple pooled analysis of protein timing without controlling for covariates showed a small to moderate effect on muscle hypertrophy with no significant effect found on muscle strength. In the full meta-regression model controlling for all covariates, however, no significant differences were found between treatment and control for strength or hypertrophy. The reduced model was not significantly different from the full model for either strength or hypertrophy. With respect to hypertrophy, total protein intake was the strongest predictor of ES magnitude. These results refute the commonly held belief that the timing of protein intake in and around a training session is critical to muscular adaptations and indicate that consuming adequate protein in combination with resistance exercise is the key factor for maximizing muscle protein accretion.
The evidence would be the food reaching the body to give nutrition to wherever is needed. Do you really need a study to know that the faster food is in you, the faster it gets broken down?
You make it sound so simple, when in reality It varies on the person, how they are training split, fullbody, when, type of exercise. If I exercised when I got up and it had been 8 hours before I had previously eaten or more, it would vary from someone who ate breakfast then 6 hours later and worked out. Since we are all not on the same schedule it's better to be safe than sorry, as the calories are going to count to the total regardless. But I linked something you can read when you get the chance, I'm sure you'll dispute it somehow.
@JoshLibby do you read anything you link? Per the link and summary:
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.
So, like @erickirb said... as long as you get more nutrition at some point relatively soon after, which could be hours, then there is no issue.
but @JoshLibby 's is more logical, because it says the same thing that the other study did ....lol0 -
JoshLibby wrote:
I don't think a person should avoid "spiking", I would recommend doing it after a workout or before to ensure that energy is efficiently used when the body needs it, and these two times are the only times it really be should bejmule24 wrote:You do know there is no "secret" anabolic window post workout, right? Muscle Protein Synthesis usually spikes around 24 hours after you workout and up to 48 hours for total MPS........joshlibby wrote:Once again, good information, but what does it even have regards to? Are you giving me information or trying to now talk about protein synthesis.
See above posts. So, I just provide "good information," or factual information? Either way, you seem to be disagreeing with your previous statement made.
Just because I put "good information" doesn't mean anything.
After working out, one should fuel their body, people have been doing it from the beginning of time in body building and it's still done today, it's tried and true.
I think what you're talking about is the amount of time that is , people use to believe you had a 30 minute window, there is no 30 minute window.
This pertained to muscle break down, your muscle won't instantly break down if you don't get your protein in 30 mins or less, that is what this was about. I remember reading about it.
Although. you still need to fuel your body in a reasonable amount of time and there is evidence the faster you do it the better.
Food takes a while to digest regardless (depending on the chain in the food), so I am thinking this topic you're mentioning was something to do with that, but I don't know know what the topic was and don't care.
I always fuel my body before or after a workout regardless, and I tend to go with what has been working.
what evidence would that be?
I linked this on page four:
http://www.jissn.com/content/10/1/53
from the abstract: (my emphasis added)
Protein timing is a popular dietary strategy designed to optimize the adaptive response to exercise. The strategy involves consuming protein in and around a training session in an effort to facilitate muscular repair and remodeling, and thereby enhance post-exercise strength- and hypertrophy-related adaptations. Despite the apparent biological plausibility of the strategy, however, the effectiveness of protein timing in chronic training studies has been decidedly mixed. The purpose of this paper therefore was to conduct a multi-level meta-regression of randomized controlled trials to determine whether protein timing is a viable strategy for enhancing post-exercise muscular adaptations. The strength analysis comprised 478 subjects and 96 ESs, nested within 41 treatment or control groups and 20 studies. The hypertrophy analysis comprised 525 subjects and 132 ESs, nested with 47 treatment or control groups and 23 studies. A simple pooled analysis of protein timing without controlling for covariates showed a small to moderate effect on muscle hypertrophy with no significant effect found on muscle strength. In the full meta-regression model controlling for all covariates, however, no significant differences were found between treatment and control for strength or hypertrophy. The reduced model was not significantly different from the full model for either strength or hypertrophy. With respect to hypertrophy, total protein intake was the strongest predictor of ES magnitude. These results refute the commonly held belief that the timing of protein intake in and around a training session is critical to muscular adaptations and indicate that consuming adequate protein in combination with resistance exercise is the key factor for maximizing muscle protein accretion.
The evidence would be the food reaching the body to give nutrition to wherever is needed. Do you really need a study to know that the faster food is in you, the faster it gets broken down?
specifically referring to your "evidence" that you need to fuel your body faster...
the study that I posted clearly states that faster meal timing is not necessary.
For protein, which I never even mention just one macro/micro. I stated nutrients. What about everything else, did they test that too. wow talk about grabbing straws.
pretty sure they consumed more than just protein. Did you even bother to read the study?
And you never stressed nutrients in your fueling sentence, so way to move the goal posts.
You're right I didn't say nutrients but fueling the body doesn't just mean protein either.. I read your article also, and here is my rebuttal. By the way both links have the same dates, so it seems we have a problem. Mine is more logical to me though since it says it varies on the person and they are doing. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3577439/
it also states that the window can be up to five or six hours on either side....
so not really sure what that proves.
it also says that carbohydrate timing is not important, or is your argument that carbs are not nutrients? As you specifically said nutrients....
And that's for "hypothetical benefits" it might have and all of that is in the pursuit of most anabolic possible. Let's rephrase that, to get the sickest gainz possibro, you should have meals anytime up to 6 hours before and/or after working out, doesn't really matter, so for example between 12 pm and 6 pm, normal lunch and dinner time. Gee, this meal timing stuff is really hard, I'd never eat like that.0 -
stevencloser wrote: »JoshLibby wrote:
I don't think a person should avoid "spiking", I would recommend doing it after a workout or before to ensure that energy is efficiently used when the body needs it, and these two times are the only times it really be should bejmule24 wrote:You do know there is no "secret" anabolic window post workout, right? Muscle Protein Synthesis usually spikes around 24 hours after you workout and up to 48 hours for total MPS........joshlibby wrote:Once again, good information, but what does it even have regards to? Are you giving me information or trying to now talk about protein synthesis.
See above posts. So, I just provide "good information," or factual information? Either way, you seem to be disagreeing with your previous statement made.
Just because I put "good information" doesn't mean anything.
After working out, one should fuel their body, people have been doing it from the beginning of time in body building and it's still done today, it's tried and true.
I think what you're talking about is the amount of time that is , people use to believe you had a 30 minute window, there is no 30 minute window.
This pertained to muscle break down, your muscle won't instantly break down if you don't get your protein in 30 mins or less, that is what this was about. I remember reading about it.
Although. you still need to fuel your body in a reasonable amount of time and there is evidence the faster you do it the better.
Food takes a while to digest regardless (depending on the chain in the food), so I am thinking this topic you're mentioning was something to do with that, but I don't know know what the topic was and don't care.
I always fuel my body before or after a workout regardless, and I tend to go with what has been working.
what evidence would that be?
I linked this on page four:
http://www.jissn.com/content/10/1/53
from the abstract: (my emphasis added)
Protein timing is a popular dietary strategy designed to optimize the adaptive response to exercise. The strategy involves consuming protein in and around a training session in an effort to facilitate muscular repair and remodeling, and thereby enhance post-exercise strength- and hypertrophy-related adaptations. Despite the apparent biological plausibility of the strategy, however, the effectiveness of protein timing in chronic training studies has been decidedly mixed. The purpose of this paper therefore was to conduct a multi-level meta-regression of randomized controlled trials to determine whether protein timing is a viable strategy for enhancing post-exercise muscular adaptations. The strength analysis comprised 478 subjects and 96 ESs, nested within 41 treatment or control groups and 20 studies. The hypertrophy analysis comprised 525 subjects and 132 ESs, nested with 47 treatment or control groups and 23 studies. A simple pooled analysis of protein timing without controlling for covariates showed a small to moderate effect on muscle hypertrophy with no significant effect found on muscle strength. In the full meta-regression model controlling for all covariates, however, no significant differences were found between treatment and control for strength or hypertrophy. The reduced model was not significantly different from the full model for either strength or hypertrophy. With respect to hypertrophy, total protein intake was the strongest predictor of ES magnitude. These results refute the commonly held belief that the timing of protein intake in and around a training session is critical to muscular adaptations and indicate that consuming adequate protein in combination with resistance exercise is the key factor for maximizing muscle protein accretion.
The evidence would be the food reaching the body to give nutrition to wherever is needed. Do you really need a study to know that the faster food is in you, the faster it gets broken down?
specifically referring to your "evidence" that you need to fuel your body faster...
the study that I posted clearly states that faster meal timing is not necessary.
For protein, which I never even mention just one macro/micro. I stated nutrients. What about everything else, did they test that too. wow talk about grabbing straws.
pretty sure they consumed more than just protein. Did you even bother to read the study?
And you never stressed nutrients in your fueling sentence, so way to move the goal posts.
You're right I didn't say nutrients but fueling the body doesn't just mean protein either.. I read your article also, and here is my rebuttal. By the way both links have the same dates, so it seems we have a problem. Mine is more logical to me though since it says it varies on the person and they are doing. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3577439/
it also states that the window can be up to five or six hours on either side....
so not really sure what that proves.
it also says that carbohydrate timing is not important, or is your argument that carbs are not nutrients? As you specifically said nutrients....
And that's for "hypothetical benefits" it might have and all of that is in the pursuit of most anabolic possible. Let's rephrase that, to get the sickest gainz possibro, you should have meals anytime up to 6 hours before and/or after working out, doesn't really matter, so for example between 12 pm and 6 pm, normal lunch and dinner time. Gee, this meal timing stuff is really hard, I'd never eat like that.
Just make sure you don't eat carbs after 6pm........straight fat homey!!!!!0 -
Mine is logical because it says it can matter, but depends on variables of the individual and what they are doing, when they had their last food intake too.
Yours is more specific about protein at least that's what I see and gather and says protein timing does not matter, it's even what you quoted. But once again, I could care about protein I hit my goals there regardless.
Once again you always find something...0 -
You can't fight evangelicals with science...0
-
Mine is logical because it says it can matter, but it also it depends on variables of the individual and what they are doing, when they had their last food intake too.
Yours is more specific about protein at least that's I see and gather and says protein timing does not matter, it's even what you quoted. But once again, I could care about protein I hit my goals there regardless.
Once again you always find something...
What's your point? All I read is "can, maybe, sort of, might"0 -
Mine is logical because it says it can matter, but it also it depends on variables of the individual and what they are doing, when they had their last food intake too.
Yours is more specific about protein at least that's I see and gather and says protein timing does not matter, it's even what you quoted. But once again, I could care about protein I hit my goals there regardless.
Once again you always find something...
LOL did you miss the six hour window part? So yea if I work out from 4 to 5:30 then I have until 11:30 at night to eat which is ridiculous beucase I will eat dinner at 7pm anyway ...
It also clearly said that carb timing did not matter, or is your argument that carbs are not nutrients?
It would be beneficial to read the full text of studies that you link.
I would suggest you also read @LolBroScience response to said study.0 -
Mine is logical because it says it can matter, but it also it depends on variables of the individual and what they are doing, when they had their last food intake too.
Yours is more specific about protein at least that's I see and gather and says protein timing does not matter, it's even what you quoted. But once again, I could care about protein I hit my goals there regardless.
Once again you always find something...
LOL did you miss the six hour window part? So yea if I work out from 4 to 5:30 then I have until 11:30 at night to eat which is ridiculous beucase I will eat dinner at 7pm anyway ...
It also clearly said that carb timing did not matter, or is your argument that carbs are not nutrients?
It would be beneficial to read the full text of studies that you link.
I would suggest you also read @LolBroScience response to said study.
Nutrients as a whole.
By the time I can read one response and respond to it, there is 9 more. I am not going to sit here and read and reply to them all. LOL
0 -
Do you have any clue that both articles have Alan Aragon and Brad Schofield on them? Do you seriously not realize that, and that your own article goes, once again, against what you're trying to show? That the one linked by NDJ is a meta-analysis (meaning it is a higher standard of evidence than a single study because it synthesizes the existing knowledgebase of studies)?JoshLibby wrote:
I don't think a person should avoid "spiking", I would recommend doing it after a workout or before to ensure that energy is efficiently used when the body needs it, and these two times are the only times it really be should bejmule24 wrote:You do know there is no "secret" anabolic window post workout, right? Muscle Protein Synthesis usually spikes around 24 hours after you workout and up to 48 hours for total MPS........joshlibby wrote:Once again, good information, but what does it even have regards to? Are you giving me information or trying to now talk about protein synthesis.
See above posts. So, I just provide "good information," or factual information? Either way, you seem to be disagreeing with your previous statement made.
Just because I put "good information" doesn't mean anything.
After working out, one should fuel their body, people have been doing it from the beginning of time in body building and it's still done today, it's tried and true.
I think what you're talking about is the amount of time that is , people use to believe you had a 30 minute window, there is no 30 minute window.
This pertained to muscle break down, your muscle won't instantly break down if you don't get your protein in 30 mins or less, that is what this was about. I remember reading about it.
Although. you still need to fuel your body in a reasonable amount of time and there is evidence the faster you do it the better.
Food takes a while to digest regardless (depending on the chain in the food), so I am thinking this topic you're mentioning was something to do with that, but I don't know know what the topic was and don't care.
I always fuel my body before or after a workout regardless, and I tend to go with what has been working.
what evidence would that be?
I linked this on page four:
http://www.jissn.com/content/10/1/53
from the abstract: (my emphasis added)
Protein timing is a popular dietary strategy designed to optimize the adaptive response to exercise. The strategy involves consuming protein in and around a training session in an effort to facilitate muscular repair and remodeling, and thereby enhance post-exercise strength- and hypertrophy-related adaptations. Despite the apparent biological plausibility of the strategy, however, the effectiveness of protein timing in chronic training studies has been decidedly mixed. The purpose of this paper therefore was to conduct a multi-level meta-regression of randomized controlled trials to determine whether protein timing is a viable strategy for enhancing post-exercise muscular adaptations. The strength analysis comprised 478 subjects and 96 ESs, nested within 41 treatment or control groups and 20 studies. The hypertrophy analysis comprised 525 subjects and 132 ESs, nested with 47 treatment or control groups and 23 studies. A simple pooled analysis of protein timing without controlling for covariates showed a small to moderate effect on muscle hypertrophy with no significant effect found on muscle strength. In the full meta-regression model controlling for all covariates, however, no significant differences were found between treatment and control for strength or hypertrophy. The reduced model was not significantly different from the full model for either strength or hypertrophy. With respect to hypertrophy, total protein intake was the strongest predictor of ES magnitude. These results refute the commonly held belief that the timing of protein intake in and around a training session is critical to muscular adaptations and indicate that consuming adequate protein in combination with resistance exercise is the key factor for maximizing muscle protein accretion.
The evidence would be the food reaching the body to give nutrition to wherever is needed. Do you really need a study to know that the faster food is in you, the faster it gets broken down?
specifically referring to your "evidence" that you need to fuel your body faster...
the study that I posted clearly states that faster meal timing is not necessary.
For protein, which I never even mention just one macro/micro. I stated nutrients. What about everything else, did they test that too. wow talk about grabbing straws.
pretty sure they consumed more than just protein. Did you even bother to read the study?
And you never stressed nutrients in your fueling sentence, so way to move the goal posts.
You're right I didn't say nutrients but fueling the body doesn't just mean protein either.. I read your article also, and here is my rebuttal. By the way both links have the same dates, so it seems we have a problem. Mine is more logical to me though since it says it varies on the person and they are doing. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3577439/
0 -
Mine is logical because it says it can matter, but it also it depends on variables of the individual and what they are doing, when they had their last food intake too.
Yours is more specific about protein at least that's I see and gather and says protein timing does not matter, it's even what you quoted. But once again, I could care about protein I hit my goals there regardless.
Once again you always find something...
What's your point? All I read is "can, maybe, sort of, might"
What's the point in adding more calories? A person does it because might gain muscle, because it can work. LOL. The point...
0 -
Mine is logical because it says it can matter, but depends on variables of the individual and what they are doing, when they had their last food intake too.
Yours is more specific about protein at least that's what I see and gather and says protein timing does not matter, it's even what you quoted. But once again, I could care about protein I hit my goals there regardless.
Once again you always find something...
Logical doesn't mean "agrees with my pre-existing biase".
At extremes, everything matters.
Yes, there is an anabolic window - if you never eat anything at all, you'll stop being anabolic, you'll go so catabolic you'll die because you're not eating. No, it doesn't exist in the sense that you'll lose your workout's effect if you don't chug protein shakes before, during, or after your workout.
Yes, food quality matters - if you don't any micronutrients, again, you'll die. That doesn't mean getting 5,000% of the RDA for micronutrients is better than 100%. In some cases, it will definitely be worse.
Whether a paper briefly acknowledges those things doesn't make it logical or not. It doesn't even make it rational or not.0 -
Seeing the whole calorie is not a calorie thing come up a few times in this forum, so just wanted to lay out some thoughts on the subject for everyone.
From an energy standpoint, all calories are created equally; however, this does not mean that all calories are nutritionally the same.
So while 100 calories of carrots = 100 calories of cookies from an energy standpoint, they are not nutritionally the same.
What this means when one is bulking is that one should prioritize calorie intake into three tiers.
Tier One = make sure that you eat nutritionally dense foods like vegetables, fish, rice, etc, so that one gets adequate micronutrients (nutrition)
Tier Two = deals with macronutrients and making sure that one is hitting protein and fat minimums.
tier three = filling in the rest of your day with calorie dense foods to make sure that one is getting into a caloric surplus. The recommendation is that after one gets micronutrients and protein and fat minimums, that the rest of your day should be filled in with carbs.
So over the course of the day one should be meeting micronutrient goals, hitting macronutrients, and then fill in with calorie dense foods to get into a surplus.
This does NOT mean that I am saying eat 2500 calories of pizza or donuts, as it would then be impossible to get adequate nutrition and hit macros.
enjoy the bulking!
^^ This is good general advice to anyone new to or struggling with bulking or gaining weight. I hope those that need that sort of basic guidance find this info useful, and don't get too bogged down in the various unrelated sidebar arguments.
(figured it made sense to repeat myself since we're on a new page now and all...)0 -
Do you have any clue that both articles have Alan Aragon and Brad Schofield on them? Do you seriously not realize that, and that your own article goes, once again, against what you're trying to show? That the one linked by NDJ is a meta-analysis (meaning it is a higher standard of evidence than a single study because it synthesizes the existing knowledgebase of studies)?JoshLibby wrote:
I don't think a person should avoid "spiking", I would recommend doing it after a workout or before to ensure that energy is efficiently used when the body needs it, and these two times are the only times it really be should bejmule24 wrote:You do know there is no "secret" anabolic window post workout, right? Muscle Protein Synthesis usually spikes around 24 hours after you workout and up to 48 hours for total MPS........joshlibby wrote:Once again, good information, but what does it even have regards to? Are you giving me information or trying to now talk about protein synthesis.
See above posts. So, I just provide "good information," or factual information? Either way, you seem to be disagreeing with your previous statement made.
Just because I put "good information" doesn't mean anything.
After working out, one should fuel their body, people have been doing it from the beginning of time in body building and it's still done today, it's tried and true.
I think what you're talking about is the amount of time that is , people use to believe you had a 30 minute window, there is no 30 minute window.
This pertained to muscle break down, your muscle won't instantly break down if you don't get your protein in 30 mins or less, that is what this was about. I remember reading about it.
Although. you still need to fuel your body in a reasonable amount of time and there is evidence the faster you do it the better.
Food takes a while to digest regardless (depending on the chain in the food), so I am thinking this topic you're mentioning was something to do with that, but I don't know know what the topic was and don't care.
I always fuel my body before or after a workout regardless, and I tend to go with what has been working.
what evidence would that be?
I linked this on page four:
http://www.jissn.com/content/10/1/53
from the abstract: (my emphasis added)
Protein timing is a popular dietary strategy designed to optimize the adaptive response to exercise. The strategy involves consuming protein in and around a training session in an effort to facilitate muscular repair and remodeling, and thereby enhance post-exercise strength- and hypertrophy-related adaptations. Despite the apparent biological plausibility of the strategy, however, the effectiveness of protein timing in chronic training studies has been decidedly mixed. The purpose of this paper therefore was to conduct a multi-level meta-regression of randomized controlled trials to determine whether protein timing is a viable strategy for enhancing post-exercise muscular adaptations. The strength analysis comprised 478 subjects and 96 ESs, nested within 41 treatment or control groups and 20 studies. The hypertrophy analysis comprised 525 subjects and 132 ESs, nested with 47 treatment or control groups and 23 studies. A simple pooled analysis of protein timing without controlling for covariates showed a small to moderate effect on muscle hypertrophy with no significant effect found on muscle strength. In the full meta-regression model controlling for all covariates, however, no significant differences were found between treatment and control for strength or hypertrophy. The reduced model was not significantly different from the full model for either strength or hypertrophy. With respect to hypertrophy, total protein intake was the strongest predictor of ES magnitude. These results refute the commonly held belief that the timing of protein intake in and around a training session is critical to muscular adaptations and indicate that consuming adequate protein in combination with resistance exercise is the key factor for maximizing muscle protein accretion.
The evidence would be the food reaching the body to give nutrition to wherever is needed. Do you really need a study to know that the faster food is in you, the faster it gets broken down?
specifically referring to your "evidence" that you need to fuel your body faster...
the study that I posted clearly states that faster meal timing is not necessary.
For protein, which I never even mention just one macro/micro. I stated nutrients. What about everything else, did they test that too. wow talk about grabbing straws.
pretty sure they consumed more than just protein. Did you even bother to read the study?
And you never stressed nutrients in your fueling sentence, so way to move the goal posts.
You're right I didn't say nutrients but fueling the body doesn't just mean protein either.. I read your article also, and here is my rebuttal. By the way both links have the same dates, so it seems we have a problem. Mine is more logical to me though since it says it varies on the person and they are doing. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3577439/
So, does that make it any untrue, or invalid, if both people are on them? It also does not go against what I am showing because it depends on how I work out, how I eat, when I eat (the individual). Just because it doesn't concur with your schedule/beliefs it doesn't make it any less true.0 -
I don't think anyone's suggesting otherwise. But I had alluded to this earlier - getting a little over 100% of the RDA may provide more benefit. Again, this is within reason, and it's not to say that there are massive health benefits by doing so.
Yes, food quality matters - if you don't any micronutrients, again, you'll die. That doesn't mean getting 5,000% of the RDA for micronutrients is better than 100%. In some cases, it will definitely be worse.Mine is logical because it says it can matter, but depends on variables of the individual and what they are doing, when they had their last food intake too.
Yours is more specific about protein at least that's what I see and gather and says protein timing does not matter, it's even what you quoted. But once again, I could care about protein I hit my goals there regardless.
Once again you always find something...
0 -
Mine is logical because it says it can matter, but it also it depends on variables of the individual and what they are doing, when they had their last food intake too.
Yours is more specific about protein at least that's I see and gather and says protein timing does not matter, it's even what you quoted. But once again, I could care about protein I hit my goals there regardless.
Once again you always find something...
LOL did you miss the six hour window part? So yea if I work out from 4 to 5:30 then I have until 11:30 at night to eat which is ridiculous beucase I will eat dinner at 7pm anyway ...
It also clearly said that carb timing did not matter, or is your argument that carbs are not nutrients?
It would be beneficial to read the full text of studies that you link.
I would suggest you also read @LolBroScience response to said study.
Nutrients as a whole.
By the time I can read one response and respond to it, there is 9 more. I am not going to sit here and read and reply to them all. LOL
maybe you should realize the reason that you are getting so many responses is because your entire premise is wrong and is not based on any evidence. Almost every thing you have linked us to runs counter to what you are arguing.
Maybe you should take the time to go back and actually read what you are linking us to.0 -
Mine is logical because it says it can matter, but it also it depends on variables of the individual and what they are doing, when they had their last food intake too.
Yours is more specific about protein at least that's I see and gather and says protein timing does not matter, it's even what you quoted. But once again, I could care about protein I hit my goals there regardless.
Once again you always find something...
LOL did you miss the six hour window part? So yea if I work out from 4 to 5:30 then I have until 11:30 at night to eat which is ridiculous beucase I will eat dinner at 7pm anyway ...
It also clearly said that carb timing did not matter, or is your argument that carbs are not nutrients?
It would be beneficial to read the full text of studies that you link.
I would suggest you also read @LolBroScience response to said study.
Nutrients as a whole.
By the time I can read one response and respond to it, there is 9 more. I am not going to sit here and read and reply to them all. LOL
maybe you should realize the reason that you are getting so many responses is because your entire premise is wrong and is not based on any evidence. Almost every thing you have linked us to runs counter to what you are arguing.
Maybe you should take the time to go back and actually read what you are linking us to.
Actually I linked evidence many times, people with average knowledge, no certificates in training or degrees, nutritional background said it was wrong.
0 -
Mine is logical because it says it can matter, but it also it depends on variables of the individual and what they are doing, when they had their last food intake too.
Yours is more specific about protein at least that's I see and gather and says protein timing does not matter, it's even what you quoted. But once again, I could care about protein I hit my goals there regardless.
Once again you always find something...
LOL did you miss the six hour window part? So yea if I work out from 4 to 5:30 then I have until 11:30 at night to eat which is ridiculous beucase I will eat dinner at 7pm anyway ...
It also clearly said that carb timing did not matter, or is your argument that carbs are not nutrients?
It would be beneficial to read the full text of studies that you link.
I would suggest you also read @LolBroScience response to said study.
Nutrients as a whole.
By the time I can read one response and respond to it, there is 9 more. I am not going to sit here and read and reply to them all. LOL
maybe you should realize the reason that you are getting so many responses is because your entire premise is wrong and is not based on any evidence. Almost every thing you have linked us to runs counter to what you are arguing.
Maybe you should take the time to go back and actually read what you are linking us to.
Actually I linked evidence many times, people I assume have average knowledge, no certificates in training or degrees, nutritional background said it was wrong.
FIFY.
And I can absolutely guarantee that is incorrect.
0 -
3dogsrunning wrote: »Mine is logical because it says it can matter, but it also it depends on variables of the individual and what they are doing, when they had their last food intake too.
Yours is more specific about protein at least that's I see and gather and says protein timing does not matter, it's even what you quoted. But once again, I could care about protein I hit my goals there regardless.
Once again you always find something...
LOL did you miss the six hour window part? So yea if I work out from 4 to 5:30 then I have until 11:30 at night to eat which is ridiculous beucase I will eat dinner at 7pm anyway ...
It also clearly said that carb timing did not matter, or is your argument that carbs are not nutrients?
It would be beneficial to read the full text of studies that you link.
I would suggest you also read @LolBroScience response to said study.
Nutrients as a whole.
By the time I can read one response and respond to it, there is 9 more. I am not going to sit here and read and reply to them all. LOL
maybe you should realize the reason that you are getting so many responses is because your entire premise is wrong and is not based on any evidence. Almost every thing you have linked us to runs counter to what you are arguing.
Maybe you should take the time to go back and actually read what you are linking us to.
Actually I linked evidence many times, people I assume have average knowledge, no certificates in training or degrees, nutritional background said it was wrong.
FIFY.
And I can absolutely guarantee that is incorrect.
Maybe, but until that proof comes it's just speculation.0 -
ForecasterJason wrote: »
I don't think anyone's suggesting otherwise. But I had alluded to this earlier - getting a little over 100% of the RDA may provide more benefit. Again, this is within reason, and it's not to say that there are massive health benefits by doing so.
Yes, food quality matters - if you don't any micronutrients, again, you'll die. That doesn't mean getting 5,000% of the RDA for micronutrients is better than 100%. In some cases, it will definitely be worse.Mine is logical because it says it can matter, but depends on variables of the individual and what they are doing, when they had their last food intake too.
Yours is more specific about protein at least that's what I see and gather and says protein timing does not matter, it's even what you quoted. But once again, I could care about protein I hit my goals there regardless.
Once again you always find something...
please link us to evidence showing that your body can absorb more than 100% of the RDA for micros...0 -
Mine is logical because it says it can matter, but it also it depends on variables of the individual and what they are doing, when they had their last food intake too.
Yours is more specific about protein at least that's I see and gather and says protein timing does not matter, it's even what you quoted. But once again, I could care about protein I hit my goals there regardless.
Once again you always find something...
LOL did you miss the six hour window part? So yea if I work out from 4 to 5:30 then I have until 11:30 at night to eat which is ridiculous beucase I will eat dinner at 7pm anyway ...
It also clearly said that carb timing did not matter, or is your argument that carbs are not nutrients?
It would be beneficial to read the full text of studies that you link.
I would suggest you also read @LolBroScience response to said study.
Nutrients as a whole.
By the time I can read one response and respond to it, there is 9 more. I am not going to sit here and read and reply to them all. LOL
maybe you should realize the reason that you are getting so many responses is because your entire premise is wrong and is not based on any evidence. Almost every thing you have linked us to runs counter to what you are arguing.
Maybe you should take the time to go back and actually read what you are linking us to.
Actually I linked evidence many times, people with average knowledge, no certificates in training or degrees, nutritional background said it was wrong.
yes, and the "evidence" that you linked ran counter to your argument, or have you not realized that yet?
and your credentials are?
at least the people in this thread have actually run successful bulk/cut cycles, which you, at your own admission, have never done.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392K Introduce Yourself
- 43.6K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 401 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 992 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions