The Rule: 6 Meals/Day

Training
261

[quote]TC wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]TC wrote:
Coincidentally, I’ve got a couple of articles coming out that addresses most of these points.

Regarding peri workout nutrition, let’s assume a hypothetical lifter who doesn’t follow modern day peri workout conditions. Let’s say he ate maybe an hour or two before his workout and that’s it.

During his workout, Test, GH, and IGF-1 make a transient increase, but they fall below baseline after his workout. Insulin, because he ate two or three hours ago, is in short supply. but that’s what’s needed to offset the catabolic hormones that were induced by the workout.

Muscle cells are amazingly sensitive to insulin during and after a workout, more so than any other time. Very few nutrients will be stored as fat after a workout, but this sensitivity starts to fall as the post-workout minutes pass.

By the time the traditional lifter drags his butt home, his muscle cells are deaf, dumb, and blind to any rise in insulin from the food he might be ingesting. As a result, insulin will carry amino acids and glycogen to the muscle cell but it won’t respond.

Homeless, much of the glucose and glycogen molecules get stored as fat. Some end up in the liver.

Metabolically, the lifter’s body has gone to hell and back. Glycogen levels remain depressed. Catabolic hormones remain elevated. And the rate of protein breakdown exceeds the rate of protein synthesis.

All could have been avoided with proper peri-workout nutrition.[/quote]

I’m curious will your articles discuss how/what peri-workout nutrition is necessary to naturally avoid the Test, GH, and IGF-1 fall off below baseline? I realize there are a number of article out now. I’m curious if things have changed with time.

Coincidentally I was reading one of your earlier articles today where you spoke about couch potatoes having higher T than your average athlete due to a number of factors. Would supplementation of say Tribulus have an affect on this phenomena?

Also I’m curious if the use of say Plazma affords you a larger window post workout to capitalize on insulin sensitivity?

Thanks TC![/quote]

Yep, my upcoming article does address all that. I think I make a pretty solid case.

The reason couch potatoes often have higher T is probably multifactorial – for one things, lifters generally have a drop in T levels after a workout. There’s a lot of speculation as to why that happens. Secondly, athletes in general have a higher clearance rate of T. I don’t think anyone’s got a real clear picture as to what’s happening.

High grade Tribulus seems to have an effect on Test levels, as does Forskolin, but lifters will probably still have weird T levels compared to non-athletes. It’s a mystery.

And yeah, using Plazma during the workout should give you a bigger window of opportunity, but it’s hard to quantify given phys differences among people.[/quote]

Awesome, that all makes sense. Thanks!

262

This is a good thread professor x. I am glad someone with a biology degree can weigh on the subject . Truly. I think it is important to get a couple hundred grams of protein per day one way or another. IMO breakfast and post workout is most critical. But not specific hours.

263

[quote]CircaThursday wrote:
This is a good thread professor x. I am glad someone with a biology degree can weigh on the subject . Truly. I think it is important to get a couple hundred grams of protein per day one way or another. IMO breakfast and post workout is most critical. But not specific hours.[/quote]

I appreciate that and agree with you overall in terms of basic needs.

That protein base is what I started focusing on years back as a newb after understanding how important the types of foods you eat are.

Once you have been at this a while, it is easy to just keep a general focus on making sure you get that protein in and general nutritional knowledge usually lets everything else fall into place.

Things like that don’t come easy to a newb though.

I was trying to focus on aiding that concept…beginning a discussion about what has actually worked to build the biggest muscles in the shortest times period over years.

Yes, just like TC wrote, I agree that eating around training times can aid your training greatly…and if you are going to eat at all, making it periworkout is the best idea.

That doesn’t mean that is the only way to progress so falling into that “all or nothing” mindset needs to be avoided.

So far we have heard that simply eating several times a day is a risk for diabetes or “pre-diabetes”.

This is false.

Regular training (especially at the above average level many here are training at) changes how foods affect you or much of the "damage’ they may have.

Your body simply being in a state of gaining significant amounts of muscle discounts many of the risks of “syndrome x” or diabetes.

What we saw here was bro science has been what was leading the thoughts of some here and nothing else.

Did the guys with the biggest muscles build most of that only eating once or twice a day? (avoid only looking at what they may do NOW)

264

[quote]Chris Colucci wrote:
Not totally sure where this thread is headed, for or against 6 meals a day, but Nate Miyaki had an article pretty much exactly addressing this topic. “Deep Meal-Frequency Thoughts”:

Basically saying, ‘We know 5-6 meals a day works, but the basic 3 meals a day, plus workout nutrition, can work great too.’[/quote]

From that article:

[quote]Disregarding personal bias or tradition and looking at the objective science, clearly there’s no major difference between smaller, more frequent meals or larger meals spaced out further apart for fat loss, and metabolic factors related to fat loss (dietary induced thermogenesis, 24-hour energy expenditure, etc.).

Now, some will use this science to “hear what they want to hear” and bash bodybuilding nutrition. “I knew it. Three-meals a day is superior to the six-small-meals a day approach. Bodybuilders are obsessive, compulsive idiots.”

That’s not what the research is saying. It’s saying they’re relatively equal. Translation? Both can be effective in a real-world protocol.[/quote]

I agree with this.

I am taking it one step further and asking which one has built the biggest bodies and the biggest muscles.

I am sure most agree that the “number” itself is not important if the goal is huge gains in muscle mass.

However, we know how anabolic insulin is and maybe, just maybe…just POSSIBLY eating more than once allows the creation of more muscle mass over time.

265


Did most of the guys this size or bigger eat once or twice a day only to do it?

Do those insulin surges aid in muscle gains at all?

Can more frequent influxes of nutrients overall lead to more muscle built over years?

The NUMBER isn’t the main importance here.

What makes you super swole is.

266

[quote]Professor X wrote:
So far we have heard that simply eating several times a day is a risk for diabetes or “pre-diabetes”.
[/quote]

I don’t think we heard that at all. We heard that in some people (more sedentary types, and I would assume those with certain predispositions), constantly elevated insulin levels created through certain food choices at frequent feedings can potentially become an issue. Anyone who has read a basic nutrition text realizes that physical activity improves how the body handles insulin and drastically changes the game.

[quote]

What we saw here was bro science has been what was leading the thoughts of some here and nothing else.[/quote]

I think the fact that there are so many Phds, RDs, and even scientists these days with an interest in bodybuilding has shifted the landscape of being able to obtain research write ups, as well as have access to true experts and their interpreting such information for the average gym rat. The term ‘broscience’ gets thrown around a lot as an obvious insult, but to be honest, if you use it to discount anything that isn’t proven in a well planned out, double blind, peer reviewed study, you risk ending up with practically nothing that doesn’t fit into the category of applicable knowledge.

[quote]
Did the guys with the biggest muscles build most of that only eating once or twice a day? (avoid only looking at what they may do NOW)[/quote]

I think it’s fair to say that some probably did. Some of the biggest dudes I’ve known have had the worst eating habits and simply relied on ‘extra help’ to get them through (a good quote I’ve heard is “who needs protein powder when you’re getting enough test?!” -lol). Is it the best way? Who can argue? The point is the very idea of throwing such a blanket statement about how the biggest got big is silly. If anything, I have a feeling that you’ll find that some of the biggest guys became much more attentive to the smaller details and commitments as they got further along progress wise.

S

267

Do you get bigger than Clay Mathews only eating once or twice a day?

If the goal is truly to build the most muscle you can, which way should you expect to go from the very start?

268

[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:

I don’t think we heard that at all.[/quote]

I disagree.

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:

TC the writer from here has labs to back up that yes “healthy” 6 meals and lifting can lead to pre diabetes.

Speaking of not adding anything to the forums. How are you[/quote]

This was written two pages ago.

yes, it happened.

[quote]
I think the fact that there are so many Phds, RDs, and even scientists these days with an interest in bodybuilding has shifted the landscape of being able to obtain research write ups, as well as have access to true experts and their interpreting such information for the average gym rat. The term ‘broscience’ gets thrown around a lot as an obvious insult, but to be honest, if you use it to discount anything that isn’t proven in a well planned out, double blind, peer reviewed study, you risk ending up with practically nothing that doesn’t fit into the category of applicable knowledge.[/quote]

I am not discounting anything at all though. The idea that frequent feedings puts you at risk of diabetes alone has no basis in science fact as if that exercise doesn’t matter.

[quote]

[quote]
Did the guys with the biggest muscles build most of that only eating once or twice a day? (avoid only looking at what they may do NOW)[/quote]

I think it’s fair to say that some probably did. Some of the biggest dudes I’ve known have had the worst eating habits and simply relied on ‘extra help’ to get them through (a good quote I’ve heard is “who needs protein powder when you’re getting enough test?!” -lol). Is it the best way? Who can argue? The point is the very idea of throwing such a blanket statement about how the biggest got big is silly. If anything, I have a feeling that you’ll find that some of the biggest guys became much more attentive to the smaller details and commitments as they got further along progress wise.

S[/quote]

It can’t be silly if you value personal experience.

Looking at what built the biggest muscles is a part of that observation that allows us to learn how to replicate it.

269

Px since constant elevations in insulin levels by eat very frequently doesn’t increase ones risk for beetus. What does. Please explain the pathophysiologic mechanisms for me mr biology doctor

270

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Do you get bigger than Clay Mathews only eating once or twice a day?

If the goal is truly to build the most muscle you can, which way should you expect to go from the very start?[/quote]

If you are someone with the potential to be his size and train properly and get the appropriate protein and calories to grow to that size, then you can do it with infrequent eating.

Some large athletic men have enormous caloric needs, so consuming 5,000 to 6,000 calories might be impossible or highly uncomfortable. Most people wouldn’t be inclined to take in that much food in one or two sittings. Michael Phelps ate 10,000 kcal in 3 meals. Many powerlifters just eat three ungodly large meals per day.

271

Many old time bodybuilders consumed huge amounts of calories in only three meals.

272

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Did most of the guys this size or bigger eat once or twice a day only to do it?

Do those insulin surges aid in muscle gains at all?

Can more frequent influxes of nutrients overall lead to more muscle built over years?

The NUMBER isn’t the main importance here.

What makes you super swole is.[/quote]

Is that guy natty?

273

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:
Px since constant elevations in insulin levels by eat very frequently doesn’t increase ones risk for beetus. What does. Please explain the pathophysiologic mechanisms for me mr biology doctor [/quote]

First, answer this for me since you are one of the ones writing many of the mistaken information we are discussing here.

Do you understand that the human body does not function on the course of only one variable?

Syndrome X and diabetes are a condition of MANY VARIABLES, not just “elevated insulin”. Your body needs that same insulin to build that muscle mass you are after.

What you are doing is the same as someone seeing that drinking too much water can kill you and then running around telling people that drinking water puts them at risk of death.

274

[quote]BrickHead wrote:

If you are someone with the potential to be his size and train properly and get the appropriate protein and calories to grow to that size, then you can do it with infrequent eating. [/quote]

How do you know this?

275

[quote]BrickHead wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Did most of the guys this size or bigger eat once or twice a day only to do it?

Do those insulin surges aid in muscle gains at all?

Can more frequent influxes of nutrients overall lead to more muscle built over years?

The NUMBER isn’t the main importance here.

What makes you super swole is.[/quote]

Is that guy natty?[/quote]

This will be a fun answer :wink:

276

[quote]BrickHead wrote:
Many old time bodybuilders consumed huge amounts of calories in only three meals. [/quote]

From the article that Chris Colucci linked:

[quote]Disregarding personal bias or tradition and looking at the objective science, clearly there’s no major difference between smaller, more frequent meals or larger meals spaced out further apart for fat loss, and metabolic factors related to fat loss (dietary induced thermogenesis, 24-hour energy expenditure, etc.).

Now, some will use this science to “hear what they want to hear” and bash bodybuilding nutrition. “I knew it. Three-meals a day is superior to the six-small-meals a day approach. Bodybuilders are obsessive, compulsive idiots.”

That’s not what the research is saying. It’s saying they’re relatively equal. Translation? Both can be effective in a real-world protocol.[/quote]

Like I wrote above, I agree with this. This point alone isn’t the discussion.

277

Just my thoughts,

  1. What stands out from this forum to me is the lack of consideration for a middle ground. The large majority of the thread as discussed and referenced either end of the spectrum i.e 6-8 meals a day vs 1-2 when 9/10 the answer lies in the grey area between the two.

  2. PX, either way this is going to come across as inflammatory but I feel it to be essential. So far, every example you have used to back up your point has involved the genetic elite or people at the very top of there game (Olympia competitors, nfl players). What applies to them does not apply to the majority on this forum (sorry guys). I know you are a big a fan of science and evidence as anyone so you should know that correlation does NOT equal causation. Just because these guys got where they are or as big as they are whilst eating 6+ meals doesn’t mean that is what got them to that size or level it is more than likely to do with many of the other factors that contribute to that person reaching the highest level (genetics, drugs).

  3. Finally my contribution to the forum. I think the answer comes down to what you personally can consistently stick to whilst taking care of all other considerations in life and getting on with life in general, and yes, that does mean physique goals and gains (after all that is what we re all here for and love). So if that means eating 4 meals a day gets you the gains and physique you want whilst keeping you sane then do it. same goes for 1 meals a day or 8 meals a day. This does, however, mean getting you expectations in check. Looking to the elite and what they do all the time isn’t always that healthy for mind or body. Finally, if you want to take things further i.e compete or go to the extremes, then yes different steps and measures must be taken. which I know members of this forum have done.

278

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:
The point is the very idea of throwing such a blanket statement about how the biggest got big is silly. If anything, I have a feeling that you’ll find that some of the biggest guys became much more attentive to the smaller details and commitments as they got further along progress wise.

S[/quote]

It can’t be silly if you value personal experience.[/quote]

No, it’s silly because you can find ‘big’ guys who have done many different things, and usually do offer their personal experiences as such. And I’m not even solely referring to PED usage (which appears to most to be a common practice in the images of athletes you choose to post in your arguments).

[quote]
Looking at what built the biggest muscles is a part of that observation that allows us to learn how to replicate it.[/quote]

So obviously we should all be looking at what you did because there can’t be any other way?
Your habit of posting as if you are the expert in what builds “the biggest muscles”, or what “the biggest guys do” is fast growing very old. Why not just accept that people can be found on both sides of any fence.

(Also, “can” is a very different word than “does”, why continually gloss over this?)

S

279

[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:
The point is the very idea of throwing such a blanket statement about how the biggest got big is silly. If anything, I have a feeling that you’ll find that some of the biggest guys became much more attentive to the smaller details and commitments as they got further along progress wise.

S[/quote]

It can’t be silly if you value personal experience.[/quote]

No, it’s silly because you can find ‘big’ guys who have done many different things, and usually do offer their personal experiences as such. And I’m not even solely referring to PED usage (which appears to most to be a common practice in the images of athletes you choose to post in your arguments).

[quote]
Looking at what built the biggest muscles is a part of that observation that allows us to learn how to replicate it.[/quote]

So obviously we should all be looking at what you did because there can’t be any other way?
Your habit of posting as if you are the expert in what builds “the biggest muscles”, or what “the biggest guys do” is fast growing very old. Why not just accept that people can be found on both sides of any fence.

(Also, “can” is a very different word than “does”, why continually gloss over this?)

S[/quote]

Now, hold up…first you say you doubt that anyone made a claim I was responding to…and now that you are shown to be wrong on that point, you move on to more critiques?

No offense, Stu, but it looks like you are just trying to find things to disagree with.

I am not even using myself as an example.

Once again, the issue is will one meal a day lead to the biggest muscles…or “INFREQUENT EATING”…or whatever you want to call it.

How is it possibly wrong to want to know this and to look at what the really big guys did?

280

[quote]Hull2012 wrote:
Just my thoughts,

  1. What stands out from this forum to me is the lack of consideration for a middle ground. The large majority of the thread as discussed and referenced either end of the spectrum i.e 6-8 meals a day vs 1-2 when 9/10 the answer lies in the grey area between the two. [/quote]

Actually, Chris Colucci posts an article I have written three times now that I agree with that just agreed with a middle ground.

The issue is NOT whether you should eat exactly six times a day.

The issue is eating ONCE or very infrequently going to build the same HUGE muscles at the same speed as someone that allows more use of that anabolic insulin throughout the day.

[quote]
2. PX, either way this is going to come across as inflammatory but I feel it to be essential. So far, every example you have used to back up your point has involved the genetic elite or people at the very top of there game (Olympia competitors, nfl players). What applies to them does not apply to the majority on this forum (sorry guys). I know you are a big a fan of science and evidence as anyone so you should know that correlation does NOT equal causation. Just because these guys got where they are or as big as they are whilst eating 6+ meals doesn’t mean that is what got them to that size or level it is more than likely to do with many of the other factors that contribute to that person reaching the highest level (genetics, drugs).[/quote]

This discussion isn’t about what most people can do.