[quote]doubleh wrote:
[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:
[quote]The3Commandments wrote:
[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:
The issue with carbs being ‘protein sparing’ means that when you have carbs present, your body will not need to break down proteins in order to reassemble the glucose it may need. This will leave more protein for the purpose of actually synthesizing new muscle tissue, and not being used (albeit in a ‘costly’ manner) for energy requirements.
[/quote]
I’ve read a whole lot over the past two years about this sort of thing, and I have one question that I generally have not seen addressed:
I understand that protein can be broken down into carbohydrates in two cases: a) when glycogen stores demand it in the absence of carbohydrates and b) when more protein is taken in than the body can process as protein.
This usually leads to the conclusion that (esp during the PWO period, for example) carbohydrates should be combined with protein when glycogen stores are lowered to “spare” the protein, as you say.
But let’s say we had an individual who was carb-averse. Not as a matter of “makes me bloated/fat/whatever that probably isn’t even the case”–instead, just either has allergies to many carb-heavy foods (oatmeal) and/or doesn’t find fruits palatable (too sweet, etc).
So let’s take two cases PWO: a) individual takes in 120 grams of nutrients–60 grams protein, 60 grams carbs; b) individual takes in 120 grams of nutrients–120 grams protein.
Is the idea that (a) is better than (b) simply because of the metabolic cost of protein? One argument would be similar to the argument against taking in fat PWO–i.e. that the metabolic processing of fat competes with protein synthesis into muscle. Another would be that you’re “teaching” the body to turn protein into glycogen stores (i.e. an energy source) instead of muscle. Separate arguments, but the general consensus seems to be that P+C>P, even in same total amounts.
Thoughts on this? Have any of you actually experimented with this? I’m doing so currently (introducing carbs PWO), and I guess I’m just going to see what happens. I apologize if this question is elementary–I just don’t think that I’ve come across a satisfactory explanation of this. I should also mention that I realize that this is, at least to some extent, “majoring in the minors,” as it were–I’m asking more out of general interest than anything else.[/quote]
One comment that Tim Patterson made to me when I was in Colorado that has stayed with me since, was that if you want to teach your body to oxidize proteins (muscle?) at an accelerated rate, jack up your protein intake and eat not much else. Think about that for a moment.
If all your body is getting the majority of the time is protein, then it will in theory adapt. The issue of concern with this though, would be at what point does the body differentiate between muscle protein and recently ingested protein. Arguments for the nutrient partioning effect of interval cardio sessions state that by forcing the body to use glycogen as fuel during the session, the primnary fuel source at other times of the day will become more fat-dependent.
That is why you will hear about competitors still eating carbs before high intensity cardio sessions, even though they are on ‘low carb’ diets. It’s all about the body seeing protein as the very last possible resource to burn through, and hence support the ultimate goal of muscle retention.
S[/quote]
GREAT post Stu, on an issue I think is often overlooked. Far too many people just assume more protein is always better; I’ve heard people recommend 2g/lb sometimes. And to add to your point, all the research I’ve done looking into this seems to indicate that the body DOESN’T differentiate between ingested protein and muscle when it is… let’s call it “gluconeogenesis adapted”.
However, the one contradiction to this that I’ve struggled to understand is how PSMFs work. Is it because of the relative brevity of this type of diet? Is it because protein intake (and kcal intake) are both still low enough that the body continues to prefer fat as a fuel source?
If you have any answers Stu I’d love to hear them.[/quote]
I’m not Stu, but I can say from experience that PSMF’s don’t really “work.” Sure, you lose some fat, but you also lose a lot of muscle. I’m sure that there are things you can do, but when I’ve done things like the V-Diet, I’ve lost strength as well as fat. You can’t have your cake and eat it too. But, I don’t think the body ever gets “gluconeogenesis adapted” unless you’re in ketosis and taking in a whole bunch of protein. When I was doing the AD (a keto diet), I was eating around 350g protein a day, which I now realize is completely counter-intuitive and I didn’t understand the science, but still tried the newest fad diet…Needless to say I made small gains, if any.