Meal Timing Matters

Unknown

This content has been removed.

fivethreeone

BEFORE THE ****-STORM FOLLOWS!! IM WITH YOU MAN I HAVE ALWAYS BEEN A HUGE NUTRIENT TIMING ADVOCATE AND I RUN 5:10 MIN MILES, DL 500LBS AND WORK SIDE BY SIDE WITH SOME OF THE BEST ATHLETES IN THE MILITARY AND WE ALL AGREE....BUT YOUR PROBABLY ABOUT TO GET A HUNDRED PEOPLE HERE TELL YOU IT DOESNT MATTER. STICK TO YOUR GUNS BRO NUTRIENT TIMING IS WHERE ITS AT. RANGERS LEAD THE WAY <2>

why are you yelling?

In case we don't understand

Ohhh...

So like, when you go to another country on vacation and can't speak the language so you just English louder?

Does that make us the natives in this scenario?

yea your all a bunch of ignorant natives that's what that was all about

You're*

I don't know if you're allowed to correct someone when you're playing Ignorant Native. :laugh:

you're not you f****d that up too

Hm.

It's hard to resist the correction-lure of grammar-free posts.

usmcmp

Meal Timing Matters...


...if we construct a scenario in which it actually matters. K. Noted.

I know of a study in which 2 groups were given equal, relatively small amounts of protein each day. One group got it all in one meal. The other group received it in smaller amounts throughout the day. The group that received it all in one meal lost muscle mass. The group that received it throughout the day maintained muscle mass.

This would seem to indicate that the body utilizes protein better if it is always available in the blood stream.

Have a link to that? There was one earlier that said something different.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3595342/

In the context of an energy deficit this seems to suggest that one or two big-*kitten* meals will serve you just fine as far as suppressing protein breakdown.

tmpecus78

Layne is one of the most highly knowledgable and educated coaches in the fitness industry. Everything he preaches is backed by research and science. One of the most honest people you'll meet in this industry.

don't a lot of sites accuse him of not being natural though?

There will always be someone doubting you regardless, but he has passed every test given to him. I had the chance to meet him last year at the Arnold Classic and sat in his discussion on Protein. One of the nicest down to earth people you will meet.

JoRocka

So just saying "it matters" is just about as silly as saying "it doesn't matter" without providing context around that discussion.

This is what I was getting at. You said it better in fewer words.

True story.

This is why goals are so incredibly vital to the conversation.

RllyGudTweetr

Meal Timing Matters...


...if we construct a scenario in which it actually matters. K. Noted.

I know of a study in which 2 groups were given equal, relatively small amounts of protein each day. One group got it all in one meal. The other group received it in smaller amounts throughout the day. The group that received it all in one meal lost muscle mass. The group that received it throughout the day maintained muscle mass.

This would seem to indicate that the body utilizes protein better if it is always available in the blood stream.

A single study, you say? By chance, was it constructed to test the hypothesis that meal timing does matter? A growing body of evidence in the field of meta-research indicates that the aim of a particular study plays a significant role in the findings of that study, as statistics and data are often readable in more than one fashion for a given set of results.

QuietBloom

It may matter. Even if you eat the same number of calories, in this study, the women who at more of their calories earlier in the day lost more weight.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23357955

RESULTS:

Late lunch eaters lost less weight and displayed a slower weight-loss rate during the 20 weeks of treatment than early eaters (P=0.002). Surprisingly, energy intake, dietary composition, estimated energy expenditure, appetite hormones and sleep duration was similar between both groups. Nevertheless, late eaters were more evening types, had less energetic breakfasts and skipped breakfast more frequently that early eaters (all; P<0.05). CLOCK rs4580704 single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) associated with the timing of the main meal (P=0.015) with a higher frequency of minor allele (C) carriers among the late eaters (P=0.041). Neither sleep duration, nor CLOCK SNPs or morning/evening chronotype was independently associated with weight loss (all; P>0.05).

CONCLUSIONS:

Eating late may influence the success of weight-loss therapy. Novel therapeutic strategies should incorporate not only the caloric intake and macronutrient distribution - as is classically done - but also the timing of food.

ValGogo

I wouldn't like to eat a 1500 calorie meal (well, not today) but part of me believes that timing matters somewhat and I think it is also relative to how hard you train too.

ItsCasey once said she likes to eat a big meal at night and she's ripped. So, it may not be a "one size fits all" theory.

usmcmp

It may matter. Even if you eat the same number of calories, in this study, the women who at more of their calories earlier in the day lost more weight.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23357955

RESULTS:

Late lunch eaters lost less weight and displayed a slower weight-loss rate during the 20 weeks of treatment than early eaters (P=0.002). Surprisingly, energy intake, dietary composition, estimated energy expenditure, appetite hormones and sleep duration was similar between both groups. Nevertheless, late eaters were more evening types, had less energetic breakfasts and skipped breakfast more frequently that early eaters (all; P<0.05). CLOCK rs4580704 single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) associated with the timing of the main meal (P=0.015) with a higher frequency of minor allele (C) carriers among the late eaters (P=0.041). Neither sleep duration, nor CLOCK SNPs or morning/evening chronotype was independently associated with weight loss (all; P>0.05).

CONCLUSIONS:

Eating late may influence the success of weight-loss therapy. Novel therapeutic strategies should incorporate not only the caloric intake and macronutrient distribution - as is classically done - but also the timing of food.

If I ate more of my calories earlier in the day I would go over my calorie goal. Personal adherence is far more important than meal timing. If someone can afford to eat their calories earlier than it might be worth trying.

asdowe13

Nevermind!

QuietBloom

It may matter. Even if you eat the same number of calories, in this study, the women who at more of their calories earlier in the day lost more weight.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23357955

RESULTS:

Late lunch eaters lost less weight and displayed a slower weight-loss rate during the 20 weeks of treatment than early eaters (P=0.002). Surprisingly, energy intake, dietary composition, estimated energy expenditure, appetite hormones and sleep duration was similar between both groups. Nevertheless, late eaters were more evening types, had less energetic breakfasts and skipped breakfast more frequently that early eaters (all; P<0.05). CLOCK rs4580704 single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) associated with the timing of the main meal (P=0.015) with a higher frequency of minor allele (C) carriers among the late eaters (P=0.041). Neither sleep duration, nor CLOCK SNPs or morning/evening chronotype was independently associated with weight loss (all; P>0.05).

CONCLUSIONS:

Eating late may influence the success of weight-loss therapy. Novel therapeutic strategies should incorporate not only the caloric intake and macronutrient distribution - as is classically done - but also the timing of food.

If I ate more of my calories earlier in the day I would go over my calorie goal. Personal adherence is far more important than meal timing. If someone can afford to eat their calories earlier than it might be worth trying.

All things being equal, the women lost more when more calories were consumed earlier in the day. I'm not arguing that personal adherence doesn't matter. That would be silly!

DeadliftAddict

This discussion depends heavily on context. The bigger issue isn't whether or not meal timing matters, the issue is how much it may matter, WHY it may matter, and in what context?

Are we comparing something absurd like getting all your protein in a single dose, or are we comparing typical eating behaviors where people tend to consume multiple mixed meals throughout the day. Are we talking about advanced athletes looking to optimize every variable possible for a competition? Or are we talking about the person straight off the couch who is just trying to stop drinking mountain dew?




I'm rambling but:

Saying "it matters" is just about as silly as saying "it doesn't matter" without providing context around that discussion.

This guy has it right. Depending on what your goals are you can be right either way. You can also get to each goal either way. You go out there and eat however the f*** you want to eat!

usmcmp

It may matter. Even if you eat the same number of calories, in this study, the women who at more of their calories earlier in the day lost more weight.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23357955

RESULTS:

Late lunch eaters lost less weight and displayed a slower weight-loss rate during the 20 weeks of treatment than early eaters (P=0.002). Surprisingly, energy intake, dietary composition, estimated energy expenditure, appetite hormones and sleep duration was similar between both groups. Nevertheless, late eaters were more evening types, had less energetic breakfasts and skipped breakfast more frequently that early eaters (all; P<0.05). CLOCK rs4580704 single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) associated with the timing of the main meal (P=0.015) with a higher frequency of minor allele (C) carriers among the late eaters (P=0.041). Neither sleep duration, nor CLOCK SNPs or morning/evening chronotype was independently associated with weight loss (all; P>0.05).

CONCLUSIONS:

Eating late may influence the success of weight-loss therapy. Novel therapeutic strategies should incorporate not only the caloric intake and macronutrient distribution - as is classically done - but also the timing of food.

If I ate more of my calories earlier in the day I would go over my calorie goal. Personal adherence is far more important than meal timing. If someone can afford to eat their calories earlier than it might be worth trying.

All things being equal, the women lost more when more calories were consumed earlier in the day. I'm not arguing that personal adherence doesn't matter. That would be silly!

:drinker: I think people often forget it doesn't matter how "optimal" something is scientifically, it's completely useless if someone can't stick to it.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

Fittreelol

Context matters.

Only in some scenarios.

usmcmp

Context matters.

Only in some scenarios.

Yeah....meal timing matters in some scenarios. That's context.

devil_in_a_blue_dress

Context matters.

Only in some scenarios.

Yeah....meal timing matters in some scenarios. That's context.

What's a little context among friends?

FunkyTobias

Layne is one

of the most highly knowledgable and educated coaches in the fitness industry. Everything he preaches is backed by research and science. One of the most honest people you'll meet in this industry.

don't a lot of sites accuse him of not being natural though?

There will always be someone doubting you regardless, but he has passed every test given to him. I had the chance to meet him last year at the Arnold Classic and sat in his discussion on Protein. One of the nicest down to earth people you will meet.

How many drug tests did Lance Armstrong pass?

Unknown

This content has been removed.

chrisdavey

I never thought that it didn't matter. How much it matters is SFA though.

IFing here, 16/8ish. Approximately 8% BF (find out next week). Will see what level of LBM maintenance since start of cut 2 months ago also.

BTW Layne Norton is sponsored by a supplement company. It is in his best interests to tell people to use protein supps. Not saying he is biased, but just sayin'

Unknown

This content has been removed.

EvgeniZyntx

So just saying "it matters" is just about as silly as saying "it doesn't matter" without providing context around that discussion.

This is what I was getting at. You said it better in fewer words.

From Lyle's post everyone should be eating 60g of protein a day in a single sitting!! Right? Right!? :huh:
That's what the research showed. In elderly ladies.

While meal timing might matter (there are also 24 hour feed protocol studies that show the opposite in weight loss conditions:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22895782 - Lyle forgot to mention those....and Aragon, Helms do reference other studies in http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24864135 to recommend 3-6 meals a day) it is secondary to assuring the basics in general weight loss - calorie deficit, adherence, macros and some sort of strength training remaining the primary factors to recommend first.

Other research suggests possible positive effects eating post exercise in that dem dar window. Or maybe not.
http://www.jissn.com/content/10/1/5 (Aragon, again)

Plus, I like clinically valid end points. So we have higher protein synthesis going on with these grandmothers and their bolus meals - that's great! Are they now "ripped"? Free plasma protein =/= muscular development. It's important, but protein uptake is much more.
Guess what happens to free plasma protein when uptake is cranked up? Oh, yeah, it drops.

So any study measuring fpp you are actually left in the dark if this is being left to circulate about or if actual uptake has been activated/exceeded.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

acpgee

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-27422547