Eating for recovery before bed..Facts vs Myths (lets debate)
- Thread starter .Vision.
- Start date
Billegitimate
New member
I don't have a dog in this fight, but I did come across this that offers some actual research on the casein before bed stuff:
Protein shake before bed stimulates muscle growth
It would appear they don't control for overall protein consumption, but the measurements of protein levels might support the shake before bed approach.
Protein shake before bed stimulates muscle growth
It would appear they don't control for overall protein consumption, but the measurements of protein levels might support the shake before bed approach.
Mrrippedzilla
MIA - PM only
They're talking about the Res studies I highlighted earlier along with its many flaws (they provided the wrong reference but w/e).
Instead of repeating myself I want you to think about this:
- If protein intake isn't matched, how can it be possible for you to determine whether the higher intake or the specific timing creates the better results?
....
- It isn't possible, so what does this study prove?
...
- That the better results come from EITHER the higher daily intake OR the timing. The study says nothing beyond this.
...
And if we dig deeper into the data, which part is fully supported?
...
The daily intake part. Therefore, it is a safe bet, when considering the evidence as a whole, to suggest that the higher daily intake caused the more beneficial results NOT the specific timing pattern.
To prove that specific timing patterns do have an inherited advantage you need a study to match protein intake between the groups - there is no way around this I'm afraid
Last edited:
jozifp103
New member
They're talking about the Res studies I highlighted earlier along with its many flaws (they provided the wrong reference but w/e).
Instead of repeating myself I want you to think about this:
- If protein intake isn't matched, how can it be possible for you to determine whether the higher intake or the specific timing creates the better results?
....
- It isn't possible, so what does this study prove?
...
- That the better results come from EITHER the higher daily intake OR the timing. The study says nothing beyond this.
...
And if we dig deeper into the data, which part is fully supported?
...
The daily intake part. Therefore, it is a safe bet, when considering the evidence as a whole, to suggest that the higher daily intake caused the more beneficial results NOT the specific timing pattern.
To prove that specific timing patterns do have an inherited advantage you need a study to match protein intake between the groups - there is no way around this I'm afraid
Ok, I have a question for you. Assuming nutrient timing does not matter and only overall daily macros are important as you say. Let's say you manage to consume your daily protein requirement at breakfast. We'll say 300g. We know your body is not going to use that 300g right away. So would it be safe to assume that the body would eventually store a majority of the unused protein as glycogen/fat in this situation? Once that occurs the body will not be able to reverse the process later on when it needs more protein. I can't imagine the aminos just circulate in the blood stream all day until they are needed. I would imagine they are converted to glycogen and/or fat at some point.
Would it not be better to supply your body and muscle with an even supply throughout the day? So the muscles can slowly utilize the amino acids as needed? Once the protein gets converted to glycogen or fat..it can no longer be used, so it would seem the 300g of your daily protein needs would be mostly wasted.
I'm not as biologically saavy as some of you so this is put in very basic terms.
Megatron28
Moderator
I don't know if he said timing doesn't matter. I think he said studies show that timing is less important than overall protein intake.
Lots of people do Intermittent Fasting and they don't seem to have any issues maintaining and/or building muscle mass. So somehow they are meeting their protein requirements.
Mrrippedzilla
MIA - PM only
What Mega said. I'm not saying it doesn't matter, just that its extremely overrated (similar thread going on elsewhere on this topic).
Let's go back to my protein hierarchy of importance I mentioned earlier:
Daily intake > protein distribution > protein quality > specific protein timing (before bed, around workouts, etc)
Your talking specifically about protein distribution and my generic recommendation is that if your getting your protein from food sources, a meal every 4-6 hours is enough to keep anabolism ticking along. That's usually 3-6 meals for most people.
However, I've seen guys have success with BOTH higher & lower frequencies - this is because your body is very good at adapting to the pattern of distribution you have established.
For example, lets look at AA sensitivity.
With low meal frequency, AA sensitivity increases meaning your utilizing more of that protein for synthesis/reducing breakdown.
With a high meal frequency (10+ meals as some people have), AA sensitivity decreases meaning your using less of that protein for the same purpose because your body is expecting another influx of protein soon so no need to utilize it all.
The difference between the two is going to be fairly minimal because of these types of adaptations. Its also why I tend to go in the middle and say 3-6 meals is enough because...you know...logic and all that.
A side note on IF/low meal frequency, I'm certain I've seen research showing that 1 meal per day (what your proposing) was enough to preserve LBM when in a caloric deficit.
I also happen to have a number of clients who find that IF suits their lifestyle better. This includes a client who's maintained 6-7%bf year round, naturally, for a number of years now while gaining a steady amount of muscle. He consumes 2 meals per day.
I'm getting off point so yea...
Protein distribution does matter to an extent, certainly more than specific protein timing patterns (before bed, ec), but its still overrated in the grand scheme of things
Last edited:
jozifp103
New member
Ah yes...going back to previous posts I can see what he was trying to say.
What Mega said. I'm not saying it doesn't matter, just that its extremely overrated (similar thread going on elsewhere on this topic).
Let's go back to my protein hierarchy of importance I mentioned earlier:
Daily intake > protein distribution > protein quality > specific protein timing (before bed, around workouts, etc)
Your talking specifically about protein distribution and my generic recommendation is that if your getting your protein from food sources, a meal every 4-6 hours is enough to keep anabolism ticking along. That's usually 3-6 meals for most people.
However, I've seen guys have success with BOTH higher & lower frequencies - this is because your body is very good at adapting to the pattern of distribution you have established.
For example, lets look at AA sensitivity.
With low meal frequency, AA sensitivity increases meaning your utilizing more of that protein for synthesis/reducing breakdown.
With a high meal frequency (10+ meals as some people have), AA sensitivity decreases meaning your using less of that protein for the same purpose because your body is expecting another influx of protein soon so no need to utilize it all.
The difference between the two is going to be fairly minimal because of these types of adaptions. Its also why I tend to go in the middle and say 3-6 meals is enough because...you know...logic and all that.
A side note on IF/low meal frequency, I'm certain I've seen research showing that 1 meal per day (what your proposing) was enough to preserve LBM when in a caloric deficit.
I also happen to have a number of clients who find that IF suits their lifestyle better. This includes a client who's maintained 6-7%bf year round, naturally, for a number of years now while gaining a steady amount of muscle. He consumes 2 meals per day.
I'm getting off point so yea...
Protein distribution does matter to an extent, certainly more than specific protein timing patterns (before bed, ec), but its still overrated in the grand scheme of things
Ok that makes a lot more sense. This is something that I have been curious about for a long time now. I figured this thread would be a good place to bring it up. It seems the body is more capable of self preservation than I thought.
Thanks for the reply.
Milton
Administrator
damn, Im really in trouble then, I do that naturally when not working out at all. lol
cybrsage
New member
Shouldn't it have been Cream of Milton instead?
Milton
Administrator
Thats what she said lol
Similar threads
