Lifting and Protein

Training
41

[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:

[quote]Derek542 wrote:

[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:
I think it’s really interesting the last few years that the discussion of multiple spaced out feedings vs more infrequent greater nutrient based meals has become such a widely discussed issue.

For decades everyone with even a basic understanding of training for physique or performance had heard, and blindly repeated the “small protein centered meals every few hours” dogma.

I’m not saying that the approach is suddenly incorrect (obviously, as it’d be hard to argue with the decades of physiques and athletes it’s contributed to creating), but there certainly seem to be a lot of well educated and versed folks in the industry with conflicting views on what is indeed the better route.

Anyone remember when all you’d read about was maintaining a positive nitrogen balance? Has that become less of a concern with fewer meals, and various fasting approaches?

S
[/quote]
Me personally Stu I think its not so much the utilization for “rebuilding” vs the energy level and constant glucose/insulin levels.

Eating two huge ass meals a day vs 5 spread out meals, I have done both. My energy levels dropped with the two huge meals. Plus the fasting periods with my stressful life lead me to eat “bad” when I finally did eat.[/quote]

I hear ya. I can’t go very long without eating, not just protein, but anything. I’ve had friends and acquaintances notice when I start getting a bit spacey if it’s been more than a couple of hours after a meal. Whether I would be like this normally, or if I’ve created this issue with years of intentional frequent eating is an interesting question.

S[/quote]
Have you never changed your diet?

I mean in regards to the recent fasting and gluttony (not knocking this if it works for people, its just a question for Stu) diet.

42

[quote]Derek542 wrote:

Yes there is a difference, but transit time still occurs with powdered and the different proteins, whey, casein and egg etc. The farther up the complex protein the longer it takes to break it down. Personally I would feel uncomfortable ingesting that much powder at one time, cause my GI transit time is “slow” compared to others. My only reason for making the comment originally was I think people get locked in on #'s sometimes.

You know anyone that did the Velocity diet? Or have you done it?

I have just FYI, pretty interesting results.

After 25 years of lifting and dieting I have done a lot of diets, took me awhile to find out what’s best for me. [/quote]

I certainly agree with you about not getting locked into numbers and wasn’t trying to put any real “limit” on anything. I still think 140g all at once is basically a waste and could be used a bit more efficiently. I mean, if 140 is OK is 200, 250? Where do you say “ok, enough is enough”?

How many grams per shake in the V-Diet, do you recall?

Take a look at the bottom of the first page underneath the last photo. Thoughts about those first two paragraphs specifically?

43

[quote]cueball wrote:

[quote]Derek542 wrote:

Yes there is a difference, but transit time still occurs with powdered and the different proteins, whey, casein and egg etc. The farther up the complex protein the longer it takes to break it down. Personally I would feel uncomfortable ingesting that much powder at one time, cause my GI transit time is “slow” compared to others. My only reason for making the comment originally was I think people get locked in on #'s sometimes.

You know anyone that did the Velocity diet? Or have you done it?

I have just FYI, pretty interesting results.

After 25 years of lifting and dieting I have done a lot of diets, took me awhile to find out what’s best for me. [/quote]

I certainly agree with you about not getting locked into numbers and wasn’t trying to put any real “limit” on anything. I still think 140g all at once is basically a waste and could be used a bit more efficiently. I mean, if 140 is OK is 200, 250? Where do you say “ok, enough is enough”?

How many grams per shake in the V diet, do you recall?

Take a look at the bottom of the first page underneath the last photo. Thoughts about those first two paragraphs specifically?

[/quote]
Cant disagree, but again you read this and it clearly states that studies that have been done are not accurate, due to the level of training in the study vs real world.

Okay you do a balls out workout squat and DL, you ingest 140 gms of protein and some carbs an hour later to hit that “peak” period. Say your body utilizes 40 grams of that to “rebuild” you have a period of time where that 100 grams is working through your GI system. Then 3-4 hours later you ingest some more carbs and your body will still utilize that 100 grams going through the intestine.

I read this as you need to find your max intake vs weight training unfortunately that takes some trial and error. I am sure Stu could write a book on that.

44

[quote]cueball wrote:

[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:
I think it’s really interesting the last few years that the discussion of multiple spaced out feedings vs more infrequent greater nutrient based meals has become such a widely discussed issue.

For decades everyone with even a basic understanding of training for physique or performance had heard, and blindly repeated the “small protein centered meals every few hours” dogma.

I’m not saying that the approach is suddenly incorrect (obviously, as it’d be hard to argue with the decades of physiques and athletes it’s contributed to creating), but there certainly seem to be a lot of well educated and versed folks in the industry with conflicting views on what is indeed the better route.

Anyone remember when all you’d read about was maintaining a positive nitrogen balance? Has that become less of a concern with fewer meals, and various fasting approaches?

S
[/quote]

What is you’re method of choice, Stu? This would be in regards to shakes, not whole food meals since that is where the 140g came in to play, Would you rather spread out the 280 total grams from those 2 shakes into four 70g shakes, or leave it at two 140g?[/quote]

I can still remember the first time I mixed up a “mega mass 2000” shake, and drank it all down. A short while later I thought I was going to have to go to the emergency room to clear out my innards -lol.

I guess I just feel better when I don’t over stuff myself. Sure, I’ve been known to wolf down way too many pancakes on occasional, and yes, maybe I’ve been banned from a few Sushi buffets, but for the most part, I just prefer to break things up more. This certainly doesn’t mean that everyone has the same reaction though. My friend Scotty has been eating one meal a day (maybe two) for years, and no one would ever dispute his impressive physique (of course he’s quite a fan of the PEDs, so I’m sure it helps just a smidge)

Additionally, there were some studies a few years back where they were comparing small doses of BCAAs, or straight whey, and whole food meals. I honestly can’t recall all the specifics (I’m sure someone can, so feel free to throw it out there), but the take-away I got was that in terms of keeping your body in a state of repair and growth, we don’t really need to force in as much as we may have come to believe. Of course how fast your blood levels fall is really going to be a concern with any approach.

I’m sure the issues of individual digestive rates, and combined macros slower the process etc can all factor in though.

S

45

[quote]Derek542 wrote:

[quote]cueball wrote:

[quote]Derek542 wrote:

Yes there is a difference, but transit time still occurs with powdered and the different proteins, whey, casein and egg etc. The farther up the complex protein the longer it takes to break it down. Personally I would feel uncomfortable ingesting that much powder at one time, cause my GI transit time is “slow” compared to others. My only reason for making the comment originally was I think people get locked in on #'s sometimes.

You know anyone that did the Velocity diet? Or have you done it?

I have just FYI, pretty interesting results.

After 25 years of lifting and dieting I have done a lot of diets, took me awhile to find out what’s best for me. [/quote]

I certainly agree with you about not getting locked into numbers and wasn’t trying to put any real “limit” on anything. I still think 140g all at once is basically a waste and could be used a bit more efficiently. I mean, if 140 is OK is 200, 250? Where do you say “ok, enough is enough”?

How many grams per shake in the V diet, do you recall?

Take a look at the bottom of the first page underneath the last photo. Thoughts about those first two paragraphs specifically?

[/quote]
Cant disagree, but again you read this and it clearly states that studies that have been done are not accurate, due to the level of training in the study vs real world.

Okay you do a balls out workout squat and DL, you ingest 140 gms of protein and some carbs an hour later to hit that “peak” period. Say your body utilizes 40 grams of that to “rebuild” you have a period of time where that 100 grams is working through your GI system. Then 3-4 hours later you ingest some more carbs and your body will still utilize that 100 grams going through the intestine.

I read this as you need to find your max intake vs weight training unfortunately that takes some trial and error. I am sure Stu could write a book on that. [/quote]

Right, and that number was low, about 20g. Let’s just triple that number for a serious trainer. Were only at 60g, and that’s not even half of 140g.

Available for utilization and ability to be utilized are two different things. It would seem that by the time the rest of the 140g becomes available, more protein would have already be ingested.

Any thoughts on the extra being converted to triglycerides?

I’m on board for over-shooting just to be safe, but 140g? I just can’t see that being optimal, AT ALL.

46

[quote]cueball wrote:

[quote]Derek542 wrote:

[quote]cueball wrote:

[quote]Derek542 wrote:

Yes there is a difference, but transit time still occurs with powdered and the different proteins, whey, casein and egg etc. The farther up the complex protein the longer it takes to break it down. Personally I would feel uncomfortable ingesting that much powder at one time, cause my GI transit time is “slow” compared to others. My only reason for making the comment originally was I think people get locked in on #'s sometimes.

You know anyone that did the Velocity diet? Or have you done it?

I have just FYI, pretty interesting results.

After 25 years of lifting and dieting I have done a lot of diets, took me awhile to find out what’s best for me. [/quote]

I certainly agree with you about not getting locked into numbers and wasn’t trying to put any real “limit” on anything. I still think 140g all at once is basically a waste and could be used a bit more efficiently. I mean, if 140 is OK is 200, 250? Where do you say “ok, enough is enough”?

How many grams per shake in the V diet, do you recall?

Take a look at the bottom of the first page underneath the last photo. Thoughts about those first two paragraphs specifically?

[/quote]
Cant disagree, but again you read this and it clearly states that studies that have been done are not accurate, due to the level of training in the study vs real world.

Okay you do a balls out workout squat and DL, you ingest 140 gms of protein and some carbs an hour later to hit that “peak” period. Say your body utilizes 40 grams of that to “rebuild” you have a period of time where that 100 grams is working through your GI system. Then 3-4 hours later you ingest some more carbs and your body will still utilize that 100 grams going through the intestine.

I read this as you need to find your max intake vs weight training unfortunately that takes some trial and error. I am sure Stu could write a book on that. [/quote]

Right, and that number was low, about 20g. Let’s just triple that number for a serious trainer. Were only at 60g, and that’s not even half of 140g.

Available for utilization and ability to be utilized are two different things. It would seem that by the time the rest of the 140g becomes available, more protein would have already be ingested.

Any thoughts on the extra being converted to triglycerides?

I’m on board for over-shooting just to be safe, but 140g? I just can’t see that being optimal, AT ALL.[/quote]
Yep and see Stu’s comments before yours in regards to this also.

About the Trigs yes again only whatever is not utilized but to me that is more “at the end of the day”. Meaning if you ingested 280 during the day and only utilized 200 that last 80 may be converted to trigs or some people it may just go to waste products.

This is what I find funny and why I was saying getting wrapped up in numbers. Just from my medical opinion, to me its more like guidelines and never any hard and fast rules.

What about the hard gainer? Due to the higher probable transit time and metabolism, which would be a better approach?

47

I don’t have anything to contribute but just wanted to say how nice it is to see a civil discussion going on. It’s a relief.

48

[quote]bwilliamsr89 wrote:
I don’t have anything to contribute but just wanted to say how nice it is to see a civil discussion going on. It’s a relief.[/quote]
It happens, just hard to see sometimes

49

[quote]cueball wrote:
DOn’t you think that much protein at one time is a bit unnecessary? [/quote]

Its very unnecessary… but i agree with him. Who has time to eat a meal every 3 “waking hours” that just made me laugh…i didn’t know you can eat in your sleep 0.o ???

50

[quote]Jaycuts wrote:

[quote]cueball wrote:
DOn’t you think that much protein at one time is a bit unnecessary? [/quote]

Its very unnecessary… but i agree with him. Who has time to eat a meal every 3 “waking hours” that just made me laugh…i didn’t know you can eat in your sleep 0.o ???[/quote]

lots of serious trainers wake up during the night and eat every 3 hours

and these are not even competitors never mind pros

lots of them post on other sites

im not advocating this just saying it happens

there are often rumours about people using IVs during the night too

51

[quote]Derek542 wrote:

[quote]cueball wrote:

[quote]Derek542 wrote:

[quote]cueball wrote:

[quote]Derek542 wrote:

Yes there is a difference, but transit time still occurs with powdered and the different proteins, whey, casein and egg etc. The farther up the complex protein the longer it takes to break it down. Personally I would feel uncomfortable ingesting that much powder at one time, cause my GI transit time is “slow” compared to others. My only reason for making the comment originally was I think people get locked in on #'s sometimes.

You know anyone that did the Velocity diet? Or have you done it?

I have just FYI, pretty interesting results.

After 25 years of lifting and dieting I have done a lot of diets, took me awhile to find out what’s best for me. [/quote]

I certainly agree with you about not getting locked into numbers and wasn’t trying to put any real “limit” on anything. I still think 140g all at once is basically a waste and could be used a bit more efficiently. I mean, if 140 is OK is 200, 250? Where do you say “ok, enough is enough”?

How many grams per shake in the V diet, do you recall?

Take a look at the bottom of the first page underneath the last photo. Thoughts about those first two paragraphs specifically?

[/quote]
Cant disagree, but again you read this and it clearly states that studies that have been done are not accurate, due to the level of training in the study vs real world.

Okay you do a balls out workout squat and DL, you ingest 140 gms of protein and some carbs an hour later to hit that “peak” period. Say your body utilizes 40 grams of that to “rebuild” you have a period of time where that 100 grams is working through your GI system. Then 3-4 hours later you ingest some more carbs and your body will still utilize that 100 grams going through the intestine.

I read this as you need to find your max intake vs weight training unfortunately that takes some trial and error. I am sure Stu could write a book on that. [/quote]

Right, and that number was low, about 20g. Let’s just triple that number for a serious trainer. Were only at 60g, and that’s not even half of 140g.

Available for utilization and ability to be utilized are two different things. It would seem that by the time the rest of the 140g becomes available, more protein would have already be ingested.

Any thoughts on the extra being converted to triglycerides?

I’m on board for over-shooting just to be safe, but 140g? I just can’t see that being optimal, AT ALL.[/quote]
Yep and see Stu’s comments before yours in regards to this also.

About the Trigs yes again only whatever is not utilized but to me that is more “at the end of the day”. Meaning if you ingested 280 during the day and only utilized 200 that last 80 may be converted to trigs or some people it may just go to waste products.

This is what I find funny and why I was saying getting wrapped up in numbers. Just from my medical opinion, to me its more like guidelines and never any hard and fast rules.

What about the hard gainer? Due to the higher probable transit time and metabolism, which would be a better approach? [/quote]

I’m sure you’re right about it being a daily total thing for the triglycerides. So then, assuming no GI issues from it, why not just consume your daily intake in the morning and let it float around till it’s used? I realize that’s extreme, but there’s got to be at least a range that makes the most sense and at some point, it’s just over-saturation at one sitting.

Interesting question about the hard-gainer. Assuming we are calling him this due to a faster metabolism, maybe he needs more protein overall. Would he benefit from form more frequent pulses, or less frequent higher dose pulses. I dunno, I guess we probably all agree it would have to be tested on the guy.

52

^ that was why I was saying to me it kind of has more to do with energy levels and “feeling full”. You really probably could eat 200 gm post workout and then not eat until next morning with pre-workout. Wasnt that kind of the theory with pulse dieting? Since the body loves to utilize everything and keep homeostasis if you ate this way you would even have higher utilization of that 200 gm?

I never was a hard gainer but one of my kids is, I outweigh him easy 90 to 100 pounds, but he even out eats me.

53

[quote]Derek542 wrote:
^ that was why I was saying to me it kind of has more to do with energy levels and “feeling full”. You really probably could eat 200 gm post workout and then not eat until next morning with pre-workout. Wasnt that kind of the theory with pulse dieting? Since the body loves to utilize everything and keep homeostasis if you ate this way you would even have higher utilization of that 200 gm?

I never was a hard gainer but one of my kids is, I outweigh him easy 90 to 100 pounds, but he even out eats me. [/quote]

Right on. I do see your point and if it’s working for the guy, well, OK. I would be curious to see if he has tried it the other way. And if he hasn’t, what would the results be if he did.

marshaldteach, any input?

54

[quote]Derek542 wrote:
^ that was why I was saying to me it kind of has more to do with energy levels and “feeling full”. You really probably could eat 200 gm post workout and then not eat until next morning with pre-workout. Wasnt that kind of the theory with pulse dieting? Since the body loves to utilize everything and keep homeostasis if you ate this way you would even have higher utilization of that 200 gm?

I never was a hard gainer but one of my kids is, I outweigh him easy 90 to 100 pounds, but he even out eats me. [/quote]

For someone like that, taking in many meals helps them meet the amount needed.

I agree, it comes down to “comfort”, not survival. I COULD eat my entire food intake for one day at one meal…but that would fuck up my energy for training and leave me feeling bad the rest of the day. Long term, that could mean lesser results in the gym because I didn’t count that recovery aspect as a factor around that specific time period.

It really comes down to what you are doing and if you are fueling yourself enough to that and recover from it.

55

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]Derek542 wrote:
^ that was why I was saying to me it kind of has more to do with energy levels and “feeling full”. You really probably could eat 200 gm post workout and then not eat until next morning with pre-workout. Wasnt that kind of the theory with pulse dieting? Since the body loves to utilize everything and keep homeostasis if you ate this way you would even have higher utilization of that 200 gm?

I never was a hard gainer but one of my kids is, I outweigh him easy 90 to 100 pounds, but he even out eats me. [/quote]

For someone like that, taking in many meals helps them meet the amount needed.

I agree, it comes down to “comfort”, not survival. I COULD eat my entire food intake for one day at one meal…but that would fuck up my energy for training and leave me feeling bad the rest of the day. Long term, that could mean lesser results in the gym because I didn’t count that recovery aspect as a factor around that specific time period.

It really comes down to what you are doing and if you are fueling yourself enough to that and recover from it.[/quote]

What is your opinion on a range, grams-wise, for a single sitting? Is there a point where you feel it would just be too much and be better used split up? Granted, this might change the larger the guy is.

56

[quote]cueball wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]Derek542 wrote:
^ that was why I was saying to me it kind of has more to do with energy levels and “feeling full”. You really probably could eat 200 gm post workout and then not eat until next morning with pre-workout. Wasnt that kind of the theory with pulse dieting? Since the body loves to utilize everything and keep homeostasis if you ate this way you would even have higher utilization of that 200 gm?

I never was a hard gainer but one of my kids is, I outweigh him easy 90 to 100 pounds, but he even out eats me. [/quote]

For someone like that, taking in many meals helps them meet the amount needed.

I agree, it comes down to “comfort”, not survival. I COULD eat my entire food intake for one day at one meal…but that would fuck up my energy for training and leave me feeling bad the rest of the day. Long term, that could mean lesser results in the gym because I didn’t count that recovery aspect as a factor around that specific time period.

It really comes down to what you are doing and if you are fueling yourself enough to that and recover from it.[/quote]

What is your opinion on a range, grams-wise, for a single sitting? Is there a point where you feel it would just be too much and be better used split up? Granted, this might change the larger the guy is.
[/quote]

I have drunk as much as up to 80gr in one sitting and it seemed to work for the time I was doing it.

I would avoid making ANY strict rules on this aside from extremities. If I was going to base it on anything, it would be general size and muscularity of the individual and their metabolism. The bigger the guy, the more he can get away with without problem.

A lbs steak has over 80gr of protein so taking in 100ghr in one sitting for a guy like Ronnie Coleman is nothing.

57

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]cueball wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]Derek542 wrote:
^ that was why I was saying to me it kind of has more to do with energy levels and “feeling full”. You really probably could eat 200 gm post workout and then not eat until next morning with pre-workout. Wasnt that kind of the theory with pulse dieting? Since the body loves to utilize everything and keep homeostasis if you ate this way you would even have higher utilization of that 200 gm?

I never was a hard gainer but one of my kids is, I outweigh him easy 90 to 100 pounds, but he even out eats me. [/quote]

For someone like that, taking in many meals helps them meet the amount needed.

I agree, it comes down to “comfort”, not survival. I COULD eat my entire food intake for one day at one meal…but that would fuck up my energy for training and leave me feeling bad the rest of the day. Long term, that could mean lesser results in the gym because I didn’t count that recovery aspect as a factor around that specific time period.

It really comes down to what you are doing and if you are fueling yourself enough to that and recover from it.[/quote]

What is your opinion on a range, grams-wise, for a single sitting? Is there a point where you feel it would just be too much and be better used split up? Granted, this might change the larger the guy is.
[/quote]

I have drunk as much as up to 80gr in one sitting and it seemed to work for the time I was doing it.

I would avoid making ANY strict rules on this aside from extremities. If I was going to base it on anything, it would be general size and muscularity of the individual and their metabolism. The bigger the guy, the more he can get away with without problem.[/quote]

Thanks. Yeah, I really didn’t want anything strict as 5-10g either way probably isn’t going to make THAT much difference (unless we’re talking 20g doses). I agree it’ll change with how much mass is being carted around. Just considering a rough range.

58

[quote]yolo84 wrote:

there are often rumours about people using IVs during the night too[/quote]

that shit is nutz

59

[quote]flipcollar wrote:

[quote]yolo84 wrote:

there are often rumours about people using IVs during the night too[/quote]

that shit is nutz[/quote]

There was actually a fad in the late 80’s of waking up at night for that extra meal. That was back when “6 meals a day” was the staple for anyone in any gym.

60

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]flipcollar wrote:

[quote]yolo84 wrote:

there are often rumours about people using IVs during the night too[/quote]

that shit is nutz[/quote]

There was actually a fad in the late 80’s of waking up at night for that extra meal. That was back when “6 meals a day” was the staple for anyone in any gym.[/quote]
Bodyopus diet was that way by Dan Duchaine.

I did it back in the mid 90’s would wake up every 2 hours in the night to get in good carbs.