Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
Debate on wheter 3 or 6 meals is better for utilizing calories
Comments
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
Now back on topic, I don’t have full access to pubmed.com and can’t be arsed at the mo going though books so please point out to my dumb ass where I’m wrong on the points below.
As I said...happy for this discussion to go anywhere but far from being back on topic it is off topic.
The topic just to clear was:'If you spread your existing daily total calories over 6 portions instead of the usually big 3 it will help as the body will utilize the calories more efficiently.'
Happy to keep flogging that dead horse but just as happy to move on to the broader subject.
1. Wrong. I mean you're making statements here without a frame of reference so there's no perspective to what you are saying but just for the sake of my response to your assertions I'll assume we're still talking about the op from the other thread who was searching for the holy grail...that is to add lean muscle mass and decrease body fat.My own logic behind this
1 Keeping blood sugar levels balanced is an important part of keeping energy and weight levels.
2 Keeping blood sugar levels balanced makes it much easier to keep a good clean diet as glucose levels aren’t dropping and results in less craving for foods of lesser nutritional value.
3 Eating 6 v 3 meals (total calories equal) places less stress on the digestive system. The body can utilize the smaller meals nutritional content more efficiently.
a) to decrease his bodyfat a calorie deficit is going to need to be created. by definition keeping his blood sugar levels 'balanced' (whatever that means...I'll assume you mean stable) would mean that this would never take place...as for weight (I'll assume you mean his lean muscle mass)...all he needs to do to sustain this is to make sure he is getting enough aa's and energy to achieve homeostasis at a minimum while decreasing his bodyfat.
2. Wrong. Creating a calorie deficit by definition involves getting less calories than required at maintainance....do you know what happens when you get less calories than you need? I'll answer it...you get hungry. How you deal with that is more of a psychological issue than a physiological one.
3. I disagree with but can not find any data to support this assertion...that being that more meals place more 'stress' on the digestive system. I am not sure what type of stress you are even talking about?
The second part is I'm guessing is related to the fact that the body can only handle a certain amount of protein at a time? I see that written here a lot. Stuff like 'don't bother with this x because you'll just excrete it' and all that kind of stuff. Happy to show you the research on this one as well and burst that bubble also. This simply isn't true.
You're just assuming the worst in people...you need to be more of an optimist like me and see the best in people.Reason I gave this answer to the guy with the original question is,
When we eat a large meal which is unfortunately for the average person is usually high in carbs and fat, insulin response is triggered and the excess calories that body can’t handle at that time get stored as fat.
There's a fare few problems with that as well. You seem to be on a complete insulin buzz...pardon the pun.So in my basic unqualified nutritional take on this is that if you spread the total calories over 6 meals there’s not going to as high an insulin response (depends too on the card quality) and excess calories then less fat storage.
Let's take those 3000 calories just as an example and just for the sake of argument...we did an experiment and gave subjects either 6x500 calorie meals or 3x1000 calorie meals or 1x3000 calorie meal per day...all the subjects trained daily in the same way for 12 weeks...what do you think the results would be regarding fat loss or gain and lean muscle mass and gain? I'll give you a hint...I'm cheating...I know the answer....the reason being that this study has actually been done and it was done with a large number of subjects.
Do you realise that is actually almost the opposite...the stress you are talking about that is...do you know that you can actually eat too often and that doing so actually blunts your aa absorption and utilisation?Due to less stress on the digestive system it can also better digest the food and better nutritional update. There are other variable in the process but that description is at a high level.
As with everything else...happy to start listing of the studies to support this.
I think the problem here is that far too many people have bought the 'supplement company' line or the 'muscle and fitness' line or even worse the 'broscience' line and it just gets repeated so many times that people think that it must be true.
As I've said numerous times...a lot of what you are doing makes sense but apparently from what you are saying not for the reasons that you think it does.
Like d-gal...I'm sure he's doing stuff that works...all I'm trying to get at is that we need to be a bit more questioning of what gets passed around on this board as advice etc...and that's not me saying that I know everything or that I am better than everyone...I'm not...I read stuff here because I enjoy it...I read the MMA and Self Defense board because I am a novice bjj player and mma fighter and I want to know more. I read stuff here because on the fitness side of things people have far more experience with differing population groups and I'm interested in hearing their experiences etc.
So I am not trying to run you down...not picking on you...I don't have a problem with you...I don't have a problem with other advice you've given. Like I said I like the fact that both you and d-gal have actually stuck up for yourselves and your opinions and if I knew you both better I'd be PM'ing you stuff to use against me so we could have a real knock em down...punch em out slugfest of a debate.
I'll keep responding to peoples posts but will switch to trying to make more constructive posts and try to give you the information you need to give the information and advice you are giving and the solid research based reasons for giving it
0 -
-
What would you say about this then? I linked it earlier in the thread.
I've read it before...or seen it before. What is the source? I want to see the references.
It's a big article and I'm sure there's plenty to comment on...what are YOU interested in before I go ahead and read it again?
Why don't you make a statement or pose a question...I won't bite I promise.
You could go for one of the common statements like:
'You need to eat at least 6-8 meals a day because the human body can only absorb 30 grams on protein per meal. So that means that I have to eat 7 meals a day to get my 210 grams of protein.'
or you can be original and try something else 0 -
Advertisement
-
Wow you guys are quick! Not a troll though so don't get too excited ...:)
Surely the question is so general as to be almost meaningless:
'If you spread your existing daily total calories over 6 portions instead of the usually big 3 it will help as the body will utilize the calories more efficiently.'
More efficiently for what? Fat loss? Performance? And if so, performance for what? Sports/activities that require endurance, speed, stamina - all of the above or a particular requirement for one over the other?
I'd love to see some more studies quoted here, and have a read of them tonight. There are never enough studies quoted on here and so the debates revolve around 'this is what I reckon vs what you reckon'.
My take on it in general terms is that the # of calories you take in and the macro-nutrient breakdown is ultimately more important than when you take them in (5 times a day/4 times a day/6 times a day).
Now this bit:
do you know that you can actually eat too often and that doing so actually blunts your aa absorption and utilisation?
sounds interesting - got any more detail on that?
For me, I think these kind of debates would be a lot more helpful in more of a question and answer format as opposed to people arguing back and forth...prob less entertaining though 0 -
-
We Were Promised Jetpacks wrote: »Wow you guys are quick! Not a troll though so don't get too excited ...:)
...I love feeding trolls.
Yes...I would agree with all that. I just didn't like the way it was worded...that and am I am a small petty man...and things just rub me the wrong way and I just have to kick and stomp them to death...in a good way I mean.Surely the question is so general as to be almost meaningless:
'If you spread your existing daily total calories over 6 portions instead of the usually big 3 it will help as the body will utilize the calories more efficiently.'
More efficiently for what? Fat loss? Performance? And if so, performance for what? Sports/activities that require endurance, speed, stamina - all of the above or a particular requirement for one over the other?
Like I said...a lot of posters silence on this topic is deafening...because I've seen a number of very regular contributors here giving the exact same advice that d-gal and siochain have proferred and there's not been a peep for them. It's understandable of course but dissapointing because if you are going to give all that advice and accept all those 'thanks' for it you'd think that you'd have something to back it up. Thing is what would happen here if I actually went after then...as I've often considered doing I am sure there'd be very little appreciation for it. I might have to develop a warm and soft internet persona just built for the purpose. I don't say things or make statements I don't have a grounding for...plenty of people here do...doesn't make for the highest quality of discussion. I suppose we can try and raise the standard....see what happens.I'd love to see some more studies quoted here, and have a read of them tonight. There are never enough studies quoted on here and so the debates revolve around 'this is what I reckon vs what you reckon'.
Agreed...depending on the framework and reference point...big difference between a 60kg fighter cutting weight on 1200 calories a day and a 120kg rubgy player on a bulking/hypertrophy cycle 8000+ calories a day.My take on it in general terms is that the # of calories you take in and the macro-nutrient breakdown is ultimately more important than when you take them in (5 times a day/4 times a day/6 times a day).
Yes, of course I have.Now this bit:
do you know that you can actually eat too often and that doing so actually blunts your aa absorption and utilisation?
sounds interesting - got any more detail on that?
Go and find Wallis GA et. al. Oxidation of combined ingestion of maltodextrins and fructose during exercise. Med Sci Sport Exer (2005) 37 (3):426-32
and then read
Shi x et. al. Effects of carbohydrate type and concentration and solution osmolality on water absorption. Med Sci Sport Exer (1995) 27 (12):1607-15
I like to think that I am running a good balance....between trying to be positive and informative and destructive and critical...I try to throw a few jokes in along the way...try to make sure that I am constantly on the border of mods wanting to ban/give out to me and some posters reading it and going 'Right on...about time' and 'I hate this guy...wish he'd shut up'...it's hard keeping everyone happy...especially myself.For me, I think these kind of debates would be a lot more helpful in more of a question and answer format as opposed to people arguing back and forth...prob less entertaining though0 -
Will Heffernan wrote: »I'm a 120kg man currently trying to squeeze myself into a 92kg fighters body
I tried paying attention for the full 11 pages but I'm been laughing at this for the last 6.
Anyone know of some supplements I can take to increase my maturity levels?0 -
You seem to be too lazy to even write in complete sentencesdrdeadlift wrote: »Sorry too lazy to look for the ans to the q-but will what do you reckon will is to be 3 meals or 6 0 -
Don't laugh....it's true...and it's sad.Procasinator wrote: »I tried paying attention for the full 11 pages but I'm been laughing at this for the last 6.
If you find some let me know...because I'm closer to 40 than I am to 21...and I've a 23 year old girlfriend who is probably going to leave me because she's too mature for me... think she wants to actually have a relationship with a grown up....which is actually what I want to be when I get older...just don't know if I'll ever get there.Anyone know of some supplements I can take to increase my maturity levels?0 -
-
I'm going to have to bleach my brain to get that image outProcasinator wrote: »I'm not laughing at you trying to lose weight.. out of context it appears you are talking about 2 individuals.
Nevermind. 0 -
-
Will Heffernan wrote: »You seem to be too lazy to even write in complete sentences
ah giz a break will ye,did you have your mma fight if so did you win?0 -
Advertisement
-
-
Will Heffernan wrote: »I won't bite I promise.
I think you're probably hungry enough to bite anything. :pac:Will Heffernan wrote: »You could go for one of the common statements like:
'You need to eat at least 6-8 meals a day because the human body can only absorb 30 grams on protein per meal. So that means that I have to eat 7 meals a day to get my 210 grams of protein.'
or you can be original and try something else
Ah I think you know what I'm getting at. The article implies that it's better to have protein in a "little and often" type way. I'd like to see the references too but the link is broken.
Anyway, you wanted a question so here it comes (this is not directly related to the original 3 v's 6 issue, but it may prove somewhat relevant):
Let's say my calorie intake for the day is fixed, but that I base the timing of my macronutrient intake around training. We're agreed that liquid carbs during training can improve effort exerted (33% longer blah blah) and therefore calories burned. So if calories in is fixed but calories out are higher if you time your calories then it should (in theory at least) result in better lean body mass, right? Now I'm sure you're gonna shoot that down with some study or other, but the logic seems reasonable enough to me.
Another possible example of this is eating for recovery; Let's say I'm training twice in a given day. Again, calorie intake is fixed, but lets say I front load my calories for the day. I eat to fuel both workouts and eat very little in the evening (i.e. when both workouts are complete). It would seem to me again that effort exerted would be higher in that case resulting in calories in being fixed but calories out being higher (versus someone who spreads calorie intake more evenly over the day).
I admit that I am (in large part) basing the assertions above on personal experience of "fueling" a workout. My experience is that hitting pads without having had carbs beforehand = horrible.0 -
-
Ok, that's a really good answer, thanks.Will Heffernan wrote: »Let's be really specific...if for no other reason than it makes things less wishy washy...hope I'm not being to technical for you?
No, not at all. Fire ahead.Will Heffernan wrote: »I know I said I wouldn't yesterday but I know you and know what yor're doing...roughly. So what are you saying your calories are set at and what are you trying to achieve with your diet? Decreasing fat, maintainence, adding lean muscle mass?
Well...I suppose I'm like most fighters in that I want a few things. I want to be lean because I reckon getting into the ring fat is handing away a competitive advantage to a guy who gets in the ring lean. I want to be strong and I want to be fighting fit. Generally I'm operating in one of 4 modes:
1) sitting on my hole, eating too much (generally a week or two after a fight)
2) maintenance calories, training hard
3) calorie deficit, training hard
4) maintenance calories, tipping away
When I'm running a calorie deficit I'll try to keep the deficit constant (usually at around the 1000 calorie deficit mark). It works well for me for predictable weight loss over a predictable time period. Personally, for example, I'd rather run a 1000 calorie deficit for a week and eat maintenance for a week than run a 500 calorie deficit for 2 weeks or try to starve the life out of myself in the last week before a fight.Will Heffernan wrote: »I don't want to blow your mind but that would seem like an awesome way to lose body fat....especially seeing as after your evening session you might have something like 12 hours before your next session and that you are going to spend the majority of that time asleep....and that your body may be forced to convert atipose tissue to return blood, liver and muscle glycogen levels to baseline....wouldn't that be kind of cool. What I might think of doing is saving a few calories for after your workout and maybe eating some kind of protein with high bioavailability right after your session...maybe a couple of boiled eggs.
Sounds good. That's more or less exactly what I do when I'm trying to lose weight. I figure if I'm gonna be hungry I may as well be asleep for it. 0 -
-
i think the guys over on elitefts have been watchin this thread
http://articles.elitefts.com/articles/nutrition/logic-does-not-apply-part-1-meal-frequency/0 -
Cool...I haven't read the article but I'll just go ahead and assume that it backs up everything I said?i think the guys over on elitefts have been watchin this thread
http://articles.elitefts.com/articles/nutrition/logic-does-not-apply-part-1-meal-frequency/
I suppose it's OK for me to be right now that someone in America said it and it was on EliteFTS so it must be right LOL. 0 -
-
Don't worry...if it did...I would of been ecstatic...because I would tear it to pieces without batting an eyelid.You should have read it Will. It totally rubbishes everything you said.
I'm actually a little dissapointed that it didn't contradict me...people could of used it to reignite the argument and I could of jumped up and down all over it again.Ah sure I'm only buzzin' off ye.
I need to get myself a troll account so I can argue both sides of the case simultaneously.0 -
Advertisement
-
Will Heffernan wrote: »I need to get myself a troll account so I can argue both sides of the case simultaneously.
Ah Will no, one of you is quite enough
0 -
Will Heffernan wrote: »Cool...I haven't read the article but I'll just go ahead and assume that it backs up everything I said?
I suppose it's OK for me to be right now that someone in America said it and it was on EliteFTS so it must be right LOL.
and another... http://articles.elitefts.com/articles/training-articles/random-thoughts-on-nutrition-and-training/
Will there robbing all your stuff 0 -
You joke....but it does happens a lot...2 students in the UK...failed university this year...they thought they'd away with copying junks of my blog for their thesis. I could tell you a dozen events this year of trainers and coaches ripping off my work and presenting it as their own...sneaky buggers.and another... http://articles.elitefts.com/articles/training-articles/random-thoughts-on-nutrition-and-training/
Will there robbing all your stuff0 -
-
-
Look..it's cool...I don't mind people disagreeing with me...I don't mind being wrong...when I am wrong. I don't even want to talk about this whole people hating me thing...as the mods so often say...it's not true and it never happens and I am just imagining it allShane Fitz wrote: »Do these EliteFTS articles now count as validation for all you "Will haters".?. it's a pity they weren't written last week, we would never have had to put up with all the back biting and questioning of Will and his knowledge etc....seriously though...it actually doesn't bother me in the slightest. People are entitled to their opinion whatever it is.
So lets just move on...everyday is a new day. I've been trying hard to play nice and mix well with others. I am happy to discuss any topic or issue...happy to make my contribution just like everyone else does.
I do think it is pretty funny though. People must think I work here in Ireland as punishment...I work here because I love it here. If I liked football and could stomach living in England I would be working in the Premiereship...been offered plenty of jobs there (by plenty I mean 3) and if I wanted to work in the US I'd be working in the NFL...a couple of years ago was offered a job there. What I think is funny that if I left Ireland and took one of those jobs I would immediately be a credible authority...I could write books and articles and be a guru. I honestly think that we don't charge enough at Informed Performance...and posting here might be part of the problem.
Anyway...I am just rambling now...so thanks for sticking up for me. We can just get back to talking about the topic. I might actually spend less time next week answering questions and instead write more on nutrition, protein and supplementation....and give us way more cool stuff to argue about.0 -
Advertisement
-
-
I have to say that I feel I've learned more from the Boards in the last two days than I have in years!
I have a question and maybe I missed the answer elsewhere here and I hope I'm not going off topic...
Does the quality of your calories make a huge difference?
For instance you hear you should be on a high protein diet, High Carb etc
If I ate 3000 calories of Cream buns would I look any different than if I ate 3000 calories of a more balanced diet say Protein:Carbs:Fat at 40:40:25 (I know that adds up to more than 100% but you should always give more than 100% no matter how hard that is) 0 -
KeithReilly wrote: »I have to say that I feel I've learned more from the Boards in the last two days than I have in years!
I have a question and maybe I missed the answer elsewhere here and I hope I'm not going off topic...
Does the quality of your calories make a huge difference?
For instance you hear you should be on a high protein diet, High Carb etc
If I ate 3000 calories of Cream buns would I look any different than if I ate 3000 calories of a more balanced diet say Protein:Carbs:Fat at 40:40:25 (I know that adds up to more than 100% but you should always give more than 100% no matter how hard that is)
Like so many other things....it depends.
As this thread has pointed out, if you eat and burn the 3000 calories (from either diet) well you wouldnt gain weight. However, if you were burning them doing weight training, IMO the diet with protein in it would allow for better recovery and therefore a better training effect which eventually would allow for a better body shape then the diet of cream buns would allow for.
In simple terms, its how and if you burn the calories that has the greater effect rather than their source. (Just my two cents, feel free to attack me, i wont get offended) 0 -
Very true point but Ireland is miles behind in the fitness industry (the general public anyways) and people would prefer to spend money on other things rather than fitness, it's a pity because gyms like yourselves are well worth it and should be able to charge more.Will Heffernan wrote: »I honestly think that we don't charge enough at Informed Performance.
I'd love to give you a debate regarding supplements, involved in two companies so it would be a good oneI might actually spend less time next week answering questions and instead write more on nutrition, protein and supplementation....and give us way more cool stuff to argue about. 0 -
About what? Interested in hearing what it is you are interested in? I'm more interested in the people who view and say nothing that I am almost in the people who post...and I'll clarify that before I start a fight of insult someone else.KeithReilly wrote: »I have to say that I feel I've learned more from the Boards in the last two days than I have in years!
1. The people that have come from boards and joined Informed Performance aren't the people who's usernames would be recognised...they are browsers here.
2. Like I said I love answering questions and or taking part in discussions and as much as I love talking to myself...this debate here wouldn't mean anything if d-gal, siochain, khannie, g'em et. al. didn't stick their necks out or jump into the spotlight here and voice their opinions or make there thoughts known.
3. So both posters and non posters are needed...the non posters join informed performance and pay my bills and the posters give me a chance to be 'seen' or have a 'presence' on the interwebs.
So Mr NeverSeenYouPostBefore...I'm interested in what you've learned about?
There is no such thing as off topic in this thread...Cowzerp was dumb enough to put my name on it when he shifted it over here...that means I own itI have a question and maybe I missed the answer elsewhere here and I hope I'm not going off topic... so feel free to ask whatever you like.
Yes it does...and don't take all my talk of Quarter Pounders and Cheese to mean that it doesn't. Food 'quality' is important. I will answer this questions with the short version first because as I said here or elsewhere I will empty some of the information in my noodle regarding nutrition for what it's worth onto the internet this coming week and I am sure more questions, argument and discussion will come from that...which will be excellent.Does the quality of your calories make a huge difference?
1. The first thing you need to do eat for good health. Meaning ensuring at a bare minimum you are getting all the micronutrients and macronutrients you need to maintain optimal health...the micronutrients being the vitamins and minerals and the macronutrients being the protein, carbohydrates and healthy fats. This is our baseline.
2. Then you need to consider eating to support your lifestyle. This includes taking into account what you do for work...is it sedentary or active...are you working in an office or on a building site...you need to eat accordingly. Then on top of that you have your sport and activity...are you a powerlifter who works in an office or a triathlete that works on a building site.
3. The last consideration is eating to optimise your performance....this is where the when, how and what you eat and why comes in to the mix.
Aren't you glad I gave you the short answer? It is a massive area and a great topic of discussion.
This is the point I am making...you can't be a building site working triathlete on a high protein/low carb diet...well you can...but you'd be an idiot...there is no 'best' way to eat. When some tells you they have the answer...they are ****ting you because there is no best diet...there is no super solution...the fundamentals are easy to work out and there is tinkering to be done at the edges....high protein can work....and it can suck....high carb can work and it can suck...it depends on the person and the circumstance.For instance you hear you should be on a high protein diet, High Carb etc
Yes you would look very different...not immediately...but eventually...as they say...man can not live on bread alone.If I ate 3000 calories of Cream buns would I look any different than if I ate 3000 calories of a more balanced diet say Protein:Carbs:Fat at 40:40:25 (I know that adds up to more than 100% but you should always give more than 100% no matter how hard that is)
See above for clarification.0 -
Advertisement
-
Like so many other things....it depends.
As this thread has pointed out, if you eat and burn the 3000 calories (from either diet) well you wouldnt gain weight. However, if you were burning them doing weight training, IMO the diet with protein in it would allow for better recovery and therefore a better training effect which eventually would allow for a better body shape then the diet of cream buns would allow for.
In simple terms, its how and if you burn the calories that has the greater effect rather than their source. (Just my two cents, feel free to attack me, i wont get offended)
Is that how people feel? That anything that they post is going to get attacked...not by me of course but by somebody?
Of course you are right...having 'balanced' diet that meets the needs of your training and lifestyle is important.0 -
-
-
-
Good questions...and I've answers for both of you...but I'll stop giving off the cuff answers and start putting a little more time into putting a 'piece' together...for us all to argue and fight over.
To this end....it would be good if people listed questions, or made points like the one regarding better conditioning leading to better tolerance and stuff like that because I don't know what 'you' don't know or what in particular people are interested in etc. So the more questions the better...I'll try to wrap them all up in a pretty box and put a bow on it and you guys can have fun trying to smash it all to pieces next week 0 -
-
-
-
-
Red Cortina wrote: »Same here. Read that Paleo Diet book and yer man reckoned that it was impossible to overeat if you just ate meat/veg/eggs. Well I think that I must have been a big body builder or something in another life cause I can eat loads of eggs/meat and veg and still be hungry:(
Erm.....
0 -
Advertisement
Advertisement