Is there a 'best time' to take protein shakes?

ThinkProgress

Zillah wrote: »

If someone did not form their opinion based on reason then you can't change their position using reason. Your views are ideological (nature good, manmade bad) - you essentially have faith. You openly mock the idea of, say, providing evidence for your claim that whey is unhealthy fast food muck. It doesn't matter to you in the slightest what the facts or studies say, you base your views on your ideological beliefs and rationalise everything else later, to the extreme of trying to make the idea of providing evidence sound pointless.

So I've resorted to just mocking you instead, because it has as much chance of changing your mind as making any argument, or banging my head against the wall for that matter.

I already explained that my views are not purely based on unsubstantiated opinion or gut instincts. I have read many studies that could back it up.

Just like I'm sure you have studies that back up it's health benefits. I'm just not going to start throwing around research studies to legitimize my opinion. Why bother? Because I've also read the studies that contradict it.

At some point we all pick a side of the fence to stand on. Right now, my stance is that protein powders are not ideal for optimal health.

That's part scientific, but yes also part gut instinct/common sense etc. I'm not going to apologize for trusting my human instincts.

If you want to mock me, go right ahead. It has zero affect on me... as I have total belief in myself and the way I do things. I've always trusted my gut on things and went with what feels right. (while also being open-minded enough to listen to and question EVERYTHING)

It has rarely - if ever - let me down.

But by all means you follow all those irrefutable scientific "facts" you're so fond of. How could you possibly go wrong!?

Alf Veedersane

ThinkProgress wrote: »

Whey protein IS rubbish compared with whole food sources.

There is little or no fiber in protein powder. (unlike many whole food alternatives) This means it's digested far too quickly - not unlike refined simple carbs in that respect. (although obviously not as quickly as carbs)

It's often packed with sweeteners/preservatives/sugars/artificial flavors etc.

Our bodies were not designed to consume so much protein and in such concentrated forms... it's unnatural and unhealthy. Most whole foods are very difficult to consume in excess like that, because of their slower digestion. (which is nature's built-in defense against this type of thing)

All sorts of crazy stuff have been found in protein powders over the years. And because it's such a fine powdered product, you may be consuming bad things without ever even knowing it. (including heavy metal particles from the production process)

Over consumption of protein (very likely if you lift weights often and consume protein shakes), can and does lead to premature organ failure in later life.

I could go on and on with my reasons, but why bother? Some people will say I'm talking nonsense because they like drinking their cow powder... those people will defend it no matter what "evidence" I use to back it up!

Good luck to them. I wouldn't touch the stuff anymore if you paid me to... it's not worth the health risks and it has no nutritional value to me that can't be better sourced from whole foods.

And if I'm giving advice, that's what I say. People can take it or leave it. Everyone's body/health is ultimately their own responsibility.

You stated it was rubbish. Not just that it was rubbish compared with whole food sources.

As for what's in the protein powder, you're lumping them all in together. At the outset, good whey protein was specified. Most of the widely used whey proteins bought in Ireland are from reputable suppliers with negligible fillers. So, not packed with fillers/crazy stuff.

With that in mind and the fact that most people are advised to get the vast majority of their protein from food and to use whey protein to supplement if needed, there isn't an issue with its use.

People use it to meet well established protein targets so talk of organ failure is, at best, extreme.

You say people will disagree no matter what "evidence" you back your opinions up with. But you haven't even attempted to reference any "evidence" or "research", much less evidence or research.

Inspector Coptoor

ThinkProgress wrote: »

It's a waste of money, because it's unhealthy and highly concentrated rubbish.

It's an unnatural way of eating. You'll pay a bigger cost in the long run when it comes to your health. It's just fast food that's marketed as a health food. It's all muck!

Real protein sources are more filling and digest slower. Something like chicken breast actually has natural fiber within it that aids digestion. (not the same type of fiber found in grains etc)

Protein powders lead to many digestion problems because they're 'fake food'. If you care about your body and health, I would stay well clear of them.

Where to start here?

This post is full of misinformation, conjecture and stinks of BS.

Unnatural way of eating?
Do you think people always ate meals that had meat, spuds and two veg?

Whey protein is a by-product of the cheese making process which comes from milk.
Is that not a natural food?

Real protein sources contain fibre?
Really?
That is just completely made up.
100g of chicken breast has
30g protein
0g fat
0g carbs
0g fibre.

He other 70g is water as meat is muscle tissue, made of cells and most cells are 65-70% water.

Outline one digestive problem consuming whey protein can have assuming the person consuming it isn't lactose intolerant or allergic to dairy in any way?

Take your terrible and misinformed opinions out of this thread where the OP is looking for correct information you charlatan

ThinkProgress

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

You stated it was rubbish. Not just that it was rubbish compared with whole food sources.

As for what's in the protein powder, you're lumping them all in together. At the outset, good whey protein was specified. Most of the widely used whey proteins bought in Ireland are from reputable suppliers with negligible fillers. So, not packed with fillers/crazy stuff.

With that in mind and the fact that most people are advised to get the vast majority of their protein from food and to use whey protein to supplement if needed, there isn't an issue with its use.

People use it to meet well established protein targets so talk of organ failure is, at best, extreme.

You say people will disagree no matter what "evidence" you back your opinions up with. But you haven't even attempted to reference any "evidence" or "research", much less evidence or research.

You have to compare it to something else in order for it to be deemed rubbish, obviously. I would have thought that this would be self explanatory.

Let me ask you something... why would you not eat ALL your protein from powder if it's so healthy?

What would be the problem with doing that? If it's exactly the same as whole foods, then why eat whole foods at all?

Try it some time. (I have) See how your body feels when you eat nothing but powdered processed food. (whey protein/powdered oats/olive oil) <--- Try that or something very similar and see how you feel.

Don't bother giving me any update. It's not about "I told you so"... it's just for your own research.

Watch what happens when your body has no solid food for an extended period. (Because an adult's digestive system is perfectly designed for consuming solid food - and performs optimally when given such foods)

Inspector Coptoor wrote: »

Where to start here?

This post is full of misinformation, conjecture and stinks of BS.

Unnatural way of eating?
Do you think people always ate meals that had meat, spuds and two veg?

Whey protein is a by-product of the cheese making process which comes from milk.
Is that not a natural food?

Real protein sources contain fibre?
Really?
That is just completely made up.
100g of chicken breast has
30g protein
0g fat
0g carbs
0g fibre.

He other 70g is water as meat is muscle tissue, made of cells and most cells are 65-70% water.

Outline one digestive problem consuming whey protein can have assuming the person consuming it isn't lactose intolerant or allergic to dairy in any way?

Take your terrible and misinformed opinions out of this thread where the OP is looking for correct information you charlatan

As I already explained in an earlier post, it's not fiber as most people know it. (not like grain fiber)

It's the resistance of solid food in your digestive system. It's essential for healthy digestion. We don't just get fiber from plants and grains, we get it from all solid foods.

That's why powdered food it not ideal for our body's digestive system. It's too finely concentrated. It passes through our system too fast, leading to many problems. Slower digestion is essential for better absorbtion of nutrients.

Over consumption and rapid digestion of protein, in particular, puts too much strain on certain organs - liver, kidneys etc.

You asked for one digestive issue connected with consumption of whey protein: I'll give you eleven (acid reflux, bloating, constipation, cramps, gas, increased bowel movements, movement problems, nausea, reduced appetite, swelling of limbs, and upset stomach)

None of which are necessarily due to lactose or dairy intolerance. I'm not lactose or dairy intolerant and I've experienced most of those symptoms when consuming whey protein.

I'm entitled to my opinion and you have no right calling me a charlatan, or asking me to leave the thread. (backseat modding is forbidden) Your so called "facts" are no more or less factual than mine! And they are no more legitimate just because they're more widely practiced.

This is an opinion based platform. And the nutrition/fitness industry is open to wide interpretation and greatly varying practices.

Please don't try to shut my voice down again because you disagree with it. You should not fear differing opinions... it's a sign of deep insecurity!

Inspector Coptoor

Movement problems?
What kind of movement?
A lot of those sound made up.

This isn't really an opinion based platform, particularly when your sample size is n=1, opinion doesn't really matter at all.

The only "fact" I gave is actually a fact in relation to the composition of chicken which is completely true.
You talked about fibre & then tried to change the meaning of the word fibre.

Much like Dominic added weight to his "opinion" earlier, which you ignored, I feel I should add here that I have a degree in Biochemistry and teach Biology and Chemistry.

What background do you have in this field?

Inspector Coptoor

Movement problems?
What kind of movement?
A lot of those sound made up.

This isn't really an opinion based platform, particularly when your sample size is n=1, opinion doesn't really matter at all.

The only "fact" I gave is actually a fact in relation to the composition of chicken which is completely true.
You talked about fibre & then tried to change the meaning of the word fibre.

Much like Dominic added weight to his "opinion" earlier, which you ignored, I feel I should add here that I have a degree in Biochemistry and teach Biology and Chemistry.

What background do you have in this field?

Zillah

If water isn't bad for you why don't you try a diet of nothing but water? I tried it and I died. Your move.

ThinkProgress

Inspector Coptoor wrote: »

Movement problems?
What kind of movement?
A lot of those sound made up.

This isn't really an opinion based platform, particularly when your sample size is n=1, opinion doesn't really matter at all.

The only "fact" I gave is actually a fact in relation to the composition of chicken which is completely true.
You talked about fibre & then tried to change the meaning of the word fibre.

Much like Dominic added weight to his "opinion" earlier, which you ignored, I feel I should add here that I have a degree in Biochemistry and teach Biology and Chemistry.

What background do you have in this field?

They're not made up actually. My source was the mayo clinic: http://www.mayoclinic.org/drugs-supplements/whey-protein/safety/hrb-20060532 (scroll down past the allergies section) Because I knew what your response would be before you even wrote it...

Like I said before, no point throwing evidence/research around because everybody just finds a reason to discredit it or disprove it with counter evidence... it's a pointless exercise. Completely futile on this subject matter.

I have plenty of studies and evidence I can show to back up my assertions, but I'm not getting into that game. Nor am I going to throw around qualifications or achievements on an anonymous internet forum. (again another pointless exercise)

I never tried to redefine fiber. I very clearly stated from the outset that I wasn't referring to the type of fiber found in plants and grains. It's fibrous material, fiber-like. And it's essential for healthy digestion. (both protein and fat are important for digestion when eaten in whole food form - not just plant matter as most people think)

Maybe you should try reading points properly before disagreeing with them. I find it helps form better counter arguments!

It very much is an opinion based platform. And you have no right attempting to remove my opinion from this thread. My views have as much relevance as your's or anyone else's!

It's just a sign of insecurity and desperation when people attempt to do that.

Alf Veedersane

ThinkProgress wrote: »

You have to compare it to something else in order for it to be deemed rubbish, obviously. I would have thought that this would be self explanatory.

Let me ask you something... why would you not eat ALL your protein from powder if it's so healthy?

What would be the problem with doing that? If it's exactly the same as whole foods, then why eat whole foods at all?

Try it some time. (I have) See how your body feels when you eat nothing but powdered processed food. (whey protein/powdered oats/olive oil) <--- Try that or something very similar and see how you feel.

Don't bother giving me any update. It's not about "I told you so"... it's just for your own research.

You declared it to be rubbish and unhealthy. That's not the same as saying "it's a poor substitute for whole food".

Why would I not get all my protein from whey supplements? Because it's a supplement. It supplements protein intake from food. And because I like eating all of the foods with a high level of protein.

Again, you're trying to make a point they counters something no one has made.

And suggesting a diet of whey, powdered oats and oil won't back you up either because it's an extreme.

Your point about protein from whole foods was valid and there is consensus on that. Most of the rest is misinformed guff.

There are plenty of people whose beliefs on the benefits of utilising whey protein as a supplement where appropriate have generated results for themselves and for people who look to them for advice on training, nutrition and general health, i.e. for more than one person.

ThinkProgress

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

You declared it to be rubbish and unhealthy. That's not the same as saying "it's a poor substitute for whole food".

Why would I not get all my protein from whey supplements? Because it's a supplement. It supplements protein intake from food. And because I like eating all of the foods with a high level of protein.

Again, you're trying to make a point they counters something no one has made.

And suggesting a diet of whey, powdered oats and oil won't back you up either because it's an extreme.

Your point about protein from whole foods was valid and there is consensus on that. Most of the rest is misinformed guff.

There are plenty of people whose beliefs on the benefits of utilising whey protein as a supplement where appropriate have generated results for themselves and for people who look to them for advice on training, nutrition and general health, i.e. for more than one person.

Actually it is exactly the same thing as far as I'm concerned. You're talking about semantics now... degrees of unhealthiness. (you're getting desperate) lol

If protein powder is perfectly ok to consume, then logically there should be no requirement (nutritionally) to consume solid protein sources. Unless you're admitting to supplementing with something of lesser quality? Is that what you're admitting to? (hmm careful now) :pac:

I never asked you what you liked. Stop trying to move the goalposts. I thought we were talking about degrees of healthiness? Is that not where you're attempting to drag this discussion?

It is an extreme idea, but try it. If your powdered proteins are perfectly healthy for consumption... then they should be fine to consume in isolation too.

Don't give me this BS about it only being for supplementing in small amounts. If it's powdered FOOD, then it should be safe to consume in ANY amount.

Others on this thread have tried to tell me that it's NOT a supplement. It's a real food source. Well real food can be consumed regularly in regular quantities without any ill effects.

I know from first hand experience what happens when you attempt to consume just powdered food. It's not pretty.

And you are trying to tell me that powdered protein is basically the same as whole food protein. And I'm telling you that's total BS!! They're NOT the same thing.

Our adult body needs, Yes NEEDS to digest whole food. It's designed, engineered to digest partially chewed food. Only babies require concentrated foods, because their bodies (and hence digestive systems) are not fully developed yet.

Just because we can tolerate some small amounts of powdered food such as whey protein, doesn't mean it's optimal for our bodies. Our bodies would much prefer a piece of chicken rather than highly concentrated protein powder.

And just because you don't see/feel any negative effects in the short term, doesn't mean there isn't problems going on inside your body.

My example of that powdered diet is a perfect trial if you doubt what I'm saying. Although I would never attempt such an experiment again in my lifetime... I'm very much glad I did it. It completely changed my perspective on nutrition. It shaped a lot of what I understand right now.

Mellor

ThinkProgress wrote: »

Real protein sources are more filling and digest slower. Something like chicken breast actually has natural fiber within it that aids digestion. (not the same type of fiber found in grains etc)

There's no fibre in chicken breast. There's no carbs either. And there's very little fat if it's skinless.

But, wait a minute, you said;

ThinkProgress wrote: »

Protein should be consumed in balance with the other three macro nutrients. So in that sense it's an unbalanced/unnaturally high concentrated food supplement. (just like those carb energy gels people consume during sports events)

So when you take something like a whey protein shake, your body is expecting carbs and fat too... but it's only getting one third of that equation.

This usually leads to an unbalanced diet. You're filling up on protein, but your body will still be craving carbs and fat. It often leads to weight gain... but not the kind of weight gain that many people would want.

By you same logic, chicken breast is an unbalanced food. which is obviously ridiculous.



Nobody has suggest not eating a balanced diet. But ensuring that every meat is perfectly split into the same macros. And in fact, its probably not even optimal like you suggest. Studies show that higher amounts of certain macros at certain times can improve results and performance. Logic dictates that also, a long distance runner carb loading before a race, by your suggestion he shouldn't do that but instead follow the same balance at every meal - whose results do you think will be optimizes.
And nutrient timing is really a minor detail, not necessary for everyone, but if you are so focused on optimizing its worth pointing out you are doing it wrong.

Alf Veedersane

ThinkProgress wrote: »

Actually it is exactly the same thing as far as I'm concerned. You're talking about semantics now... degrees of unhealthiness. (you're getting desperate) lol

If protein powder is perfectly ok to consume, then logically there should be no requirement (nutritionally) to consume solid protein sources. Unless you're admitting to supplementing with something of lesser quality? Is that what you're admitting to? (hmm careful now) :pac:

I never asked you what you liked. Stop trying to move the goalposts. I thought we were talking about degrees of healthiness? Is that not where you're attempting to drag this discussion?

It is an extreme idea, but try it. If your powdered proteins are perfectly healthy for consumption... then they should be fine to consume in isolation too.

Don't give me this BS about it only being for supplementing in small amounts. If it's powdered FOOD, then it should be safe to consume in ANY amount.

Others on this thread have tried to tell me that it's NOT a supplement. It's a real food source. Well real food can be consumed regularly in regular quantities without any ill effects.

I know from first hand experience what happens when you attempt to consume just powdered food. It's not pretty.

And you are trying to tell me that powdered protein is basically the same as whole food protein. And I'm telling you that's total BS!! They're NOT the same thing.

Our adult body needs, Yes NEEDS to digest whole food. It's designed, engineered to digest partially chewed food. Only babies require concentrated foods, because their bodies (and hence digestive systems) are not fully developed yet.

Just because we can tolerate some small amounts of powdered food such as whey protein, doesn't mean it's optimal for our bodies. Our bodies would much prefer a piece of chicken rather than highly concentrated protein powder.

And just because you don't see/feel any negative effects in the short term, doesn't mean there isn't problems going on inside your body.

My example of that powdered diet is a perfect trial if you doubt what I'm saying. Although I would never attempt such an experiment again in my lifetime... I'm very much glad I did it. It completely changed my perspective on nutrition. It shaped a lot of what I understand right now.

Indeed. Well, best of luck with that.

I'll just continue to desperately cling to science and evidence in the hope that they did indeed carry the 1.

OP, I hope you got your answer.

Vomit

OP, the answer is no- there's no 'best time'. However, if you require, say, 130g of protein a day, you should spread it out evenly throughout the day. If you eat it all at once you'll get indigestion and you probably won't absorb all of it properly, as the body will burn it for energy.

Mellor

Vomit wrote: »

OP, the answer is no- there's no 'best time'. However, if you require, say, 130g of protein a day, you should spread it out evenly throughout the day. If you eat it all at once you'll get indigestion and you probably won't absorb all of it properly, as the body will burn it for energy.

Why would the body use it for energy if you eat it all at once?

Assuming that you don't eat no other food, if which case it be used for energy no matter how you split it. I agree with not eating it all at once, but purely for a normal meal breakdown point of view rather than energy or anything.

tonto24

Q for the non crazy people people on this thread ( that means butt out ThinkProgress)

http://www.discountsupplements.ie/optimum-nutrition/optimum-nutrition-performance-bundle-model-optimum-nutrition

Is this a good offer Alf, Hanley, other gym users?

Hanley

tonto24 wrote: »

Q for the non crazy people people on this thread ( that means butt out ThinkProgress)

http://www.discountsupplements.ie/optimum-nutrition/optimum-nutrition-performance-bundle-model-optimum-nutrition

Is this a good offer Alf, Hanley, other gym users?

It's a good price but you're buying a load of unecessary stuff.

I've been using this the last 5 years with no complaints: http://www.myprotein.com//sports-nutrition/impact-whey-protein/10530943.html?switchcurrency=EUR

Marginally better quality and MUCH cheaper on a gram per gram basis.

Neutral flavours like vanilla or banana tend to be best.

Alf Veedersane

tonto24 wrote: »

Q for the non crazy people people on this thread ( that means butt out ThinkProgress)

http://www.discountsupplements.ie/optimum-nutrition/optimum-nutrition-performance-bundle-model-optimum-nutrition

Is this a good offer Alf, Hanley, other gym users?

It's not bad as ON goes. You could get the whey (2.5kg) and casein (1kg) for €70 on MyProtein. I'd question the need for the rest of the bundle though. The OptiMen is just a multi-vit and the amino energy is amino acids plus beta alanine. The whey will have aminos in it anyway.

If it were me, I'd just get whey. Wouldn't bother with the casein. You could make a case for it but for the majority of people, whey would be all they need.

Zillah

Hanley wrote: »

I've been using this the last 5 years with no complaints: http://www.myprotein.com//sports-nutrition/impact-whey-protein/10530943.html?switchcurrency=EUR

This really is all you need.

tonto24

Thanks lads, have some ON casein already but not a whole pile! Will just use up that up after gym in the evenings and will use the whey throughout the day!

tonto24

25% off with the code PROTEIN25 too!

ThinkProgress

Mellor wrote: »

There's no fibre in chicken breast. There's no carbs either. And there's very little fat if it's skinless.

But, wait a minute, you said;

By you same logic, chicken breast is an unbalanced food. which is obviously ridiculous.

Nobody has suggest not eating a balanced diet. But ensuring that every meat is perfectly split into the same macros. And in fact, its probably not even optimal like you suggest. Studies show that higher amounts of certain macros at certain times can improve results and performance. Logic dictates that also, a long distance runner carb loading before a race, by your suggestion he shouldn't do that but instead follow the same balance at every meal - whose results do you think will be optimizes.
And nutrient timing is really a minor detail, not necessary for everyone, but if you are so focused on optimizing its worth pointing out you are doing it wrong.

There is fibrous material in ALL whole foods. That's why it's optimal for digestion over powdered junk.

And there are plenty of studies that state the complete opposite about carb loading. Plenty of experts out there say it's not effective and unnecessary.

So which studies do you believe? Many experts have completely different opinions...

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

Indeed. Well, best of luck with that.

I'll just continue to desperately cling to science and evidence in the hope that they did indeed carry the 1.

OP, I hope you got your answer.

Ok yes... all those irrefutable "facts" and fool-proof scientific results. How could you ever go wrong!? :pac:

I'm the only one here NOT blindly putting all my faith in dodgy science. I've researched both sides of this argument, but I still make a judgement based partly on my own experiments, instincts and experience!

Some of you guys are just blindly trusting science that is not as "factual" as you seem to think. Science does not fully understand nutrition yet. It's very much a new frontier.

There is science to back up my opinions too, but I'm not foolish enough to blindly put all my trust in it like some of you. Our instincts and experiences are just as important. (if not more so)

Inspector Coptoor

ThinkProgress wrote: »

There is fibrous material in ALL whole foods. That's why it's optimal for digestion over powdered junk.

No.
There isn't.
Unless you want to provide me with a new definition of what fibre is.

FYI
Dietary Fibre is a structural polysaccharide found in fungal and plant cell walls.


Is powdered beef and chicken "junk" by virtue of being made physically smaller in size?

What about powdered milk?
If I reconstitute that with 98% water, is it still junk as it had been made powdered initially?

Hanley

Inspector Coptoor wrote: »

No.
There isn't.
Unless you want to provide me with a new definition of what fibre is.

FYI
Dietary Fibre is a structural polysaccharide found in fungal and plant cell walls.


Is powdered beef and chicken "junk" by virtue of being made physically smaller in size?

What about powdered milk?
If I reconstitute that with 98% water, is it still junk as it had been made powdered initially?

I think he's getting concept of muscle fibre confused with, you know, actual fibre

Dtp1979

I'm goin for a pizza

Vomit

Mellor wrote: »

Why would the body use it for energy if you eat it all at once?

Assuming that you don't eat no other food, if which case it be used for energy no matter how you split it. I agree with not eating it all at once, but purely for a normal meal breakdown point of view rather than energy or anything.

Because the body will break down whatever is in the stomach for its immediate needs and only can utilise around 30g of protein per hour.

Alf Veedersane

Hanley wrote: »

I think he's getting concept of muscle fibre confused with, you know, actual fibre

Or maybe it's "fiber", which is different to "fibre" and "science" doesn't understand it fully.

Hanley

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

Or maybe it's "fiber", which is different to "fibre" and "science" doesn't understand it fully.

You mean "scienec", right?

papu

Vomit wrote: »

Because the body will break down whatever is in the stomach for its immediate needs and only can utilise around 30g of protein per hour.

Nope

Eating the entire days’ worth of protein in a 4-hour window (followed by 20 hours of fasting) didn’t negatively impact muscle preservation.

Mellor

ThinkProgress wrote: »

There is fibrous material in ALL whole foods. That's why it's optimal for digestion over powdered junk.
!? :pac:

"fibrous material" doesn't equal dietary fibre. It turns to chicken soup in your stomach.

Also, and its silly that I even have to point this out, fibreglass, carbon fibre, and fibre optics aren't good for our digestion either. Please don't eat these fibrous materials.

Vomit wrote: »

Because the body will break down whatever is in the stomach for its immediate needs and only can utilise around 30g of protein per hour.

But that makes no sense when you think about it.
If the body can only process 30g of protein - then how does it use the rest for energy, without processing it? It can't, there isn't a separate energy pathway from the stomach.
Same applies when people say you piss it out without absorbing it, again makes no sense, it can't get from stomach to bladder without be absorbed into the bloodstream first.

The reality of eating a massive meal, is simply a long time needed to digest. You "system" is drip fed by the stomach over a period of hours.

Dtp1979

papu wrote: »

Nope

Eating the entire days’ worth of protein in a 4-hour window (followed by 20 hours of fasting) didn’t negatively impact muscle preservation.

What's This got to do with what vomit said?

Vomit

Mellor wrote: »

But that makes no sense when you think about it.
If the body can only process 30g of protein - then how does it use the rest for energy, without processing it? It can't, there isn't a separate energy pathway from the stomach.
Same applies when people say you piss it out without absorbing it, again makes no sense, it can't get from stomach to bladder without be absorbed into the bloodstream first.

The reality of eating a massive meal, is simply a long time needed to digest. You "system" is drip fed by the stomach over a period of hours.

Protein isn't the body's preferred source of energy, as I'm sure you know. But it will use it for such if it needs to do so. The 30g-per-hour thing refers to how much the body can take in as amino acids (for tissue repair etc). This is what I've consistently read over the years, and my body seems to agree, as if I eat lots of protein in one sitting, it gives me digestive upset. I know, that last part is subjective, but you can be sure not to find me eating all my protein at once! Surely the most efficient thing is to give yourself a fresh dose of protein with every meal, spreading it out.

Maybe some of the articles I read were bro-science, but I tend to find the bro-science wisdom is slightly ahead of real science when it comes to results..i.e., it takes a while for a phenomenon to actually be studied properly for confirmation, even though the 'gurus' have known already for years.

An example would be hypertrophy. I can't find a proper study that says sarcoplasmic hypertrophy is a result of high volume training, but that's how bodybuilders train, and they exhibit that the most (according to studies). Those same studies will claim that you cannot take any particular action to favour sarcoplasmic hypertrophy over myofibrillar, as they happen together.

Alf Veedersane

Most people won't be eating once or trying to get their protein in one go anyway so it's all moot. Spread your intake across your meals, it's that simple.

TRS30

Lots of interesting info, thanks all.

Looking for a good breakfast option for work. Would love to have omelet or scrambled eggs however not really feasible for work. Currently have muesli with banana. Any easy more protein rich options?

MaxPower89

TRS30 wrote: »

Lots of interesting info, thanks all.

Looking for a good breakfast option for work. Would love to have omelet or scrambled eggs however not really feasible for work. Currently have muesli with banana. Any easy more protein rich options?

Eggs or bit of Bacon? Portein bar?

The muesli can be very high in sugar, as high as 35/40% iirc, probably best to avoid it.

Alf Veedersane

TRS30 wrote: »

Would love to have omelet or scrambled eggs however not really feasible for work. Currently have muesli with banana. Any easy more protein rich options?

If you have a microwave at work, you can have scrambled eggs. I have 'em most days.

MartyMcFly84

Lots of interesting info, thanks all.

Looking for a good breakfast option for work. Would love to have omelet or scrambled eggs however not really feasible for work. Currently have muesli with banana. Any easy more protein rich options?

You can eat anything for breakfast that you would eat at any other time of the day.

We are brainwashed into thinking we should only eat certain food types for certain meals. All hogwash really, are you in a position to bring pre cooked food into work?

If you are really pushed just add protein powder with some milk (mix first) then add it to your coffee and you have a protein latte. you can also add protein powder to your porridge to up the protein content in the meal.

Alf Veedersane

MartyMcFly84 wrote: »

hogwash

Did your DeLorean just take you to medieval times, Marty?

Sugar Free

TRS30 wrote: »

Lots of interesting info, thanks all.

Looking for a good breakfast option for work. Would love to have omelet or scrambled eggs however not really feasible for work. Currently have muesli with banana. Any easy more protein rich options?

Granola mixed with greek (style) yoghurt and a protein shake. Or mix in the whey with the rest if you want but I prefer it separate.

Careful you don't go over 30g protein though or the ProPo come to get you.

ford2600

OP on days you are tight for time skip breakfast.

I find getting to 1pm much easier fasted than if I had a typical greek yoghurt, seeds and a little fruit type breakfast. If I had your typical breakfast I'd struggle to get two hours withough getting hungry.

Just eat more later in day, experiment see what works for you.

I'm up since 5, still fasted and probably won't eat until at least 1pm. No hunger

Zillah

MartyMcFly84 wrote: »

We are brainwashed into thinking we should only eat certain food types for certain meals.

I always find people's attitude so weird on this. I had a plate full of cheese, fruit, and nuts for dinner once and people were looking at me like I was a lunatic. But, it's not hot? Where are the spuds? Jaysus, sure you don't even have to do a wash up, that's not a dinner.

Dtp1979

ford2600 wrote: »

I'm up since 5, still fasted and probably won't eat until at least 1pm. No hunger

.........is the wrong way to do it. You hardly think starving yourself for 7 hours during the day is the right way to do things do u

Alf Veedersane

Dtp1979 wrote: »

.........is the wrong way to do it. You hardly think starving yourself for 7 hours during the day is the right way to do things do u

What makes it wrong?

It's eating when hungry not starving himself until 1pm.

Transform

Dtp1979 wrote: »

.........is the wrong way to do it. You hardly think starving yourself for 7 hours during the day is the right way to do things do u

is that other fella gone yet?

Alf Veedersane

Transform wrote: »

is that other fella gone yet?

He's gone to Google "fiber"

ford2600

Dtp1979 wrote: »

.........is the wrong way to do it. You hardly think starving yourself for 7 hours during the day is the right way to do things do u

We are a very adaptable species.

Skipping breakfast or eating breakfast makes little or no difference to me in terms of how I feel energy levels etc.

It does however allow me to have complete control over what I eat and let's me do all the cooking( I'm quite good☺) rather than contracting it out.

Unsure as to how you got "starving myself" out of "no hunger".

I'll do the exact same tomorrow, rise at 5 eat around 12;except at that stage I'll have around 160km-180km cycled completely fasted. I'll eat about 1000 calories by end of 300km cycle.

Most other guys will be back the road eating junk and on toilet breaks 😕

I'll eat everything in sight Sunday and Monday mind.

Mellor

Vomit wrote: »

Protein isn't the body's preferred source of energy, as I'm sure you know. But it will use it for such if it needs to do so.

I'm not disputing that it can be used for energy. I'm disputing that anything beyond the 30g absorption limit is used for energy. Before it can be used for energy it has to be absorbed.

The 30g-per-hour thing refers to how much the body can take in as amino acids (for tissue repair etc). This is what I've consistently read over the years,

The 30g per hour comes from a particular study, where they assessed the processing times for different proteins (whey and caesin I think). Different proteins process at different speeds. I'm sure you've heard that Whey is fast, and Caesin slow. That broscience contradicts the idea of a uniform 30g.
30g may well be an hourly limit for certain proteins, but that just means that 60g takes 2 hours.
In order to use it for energy, it must be taken in as amino acids too.

and my body seems to agree, as if I eat lots of protein in one sitting, it gives me digestive upset. I know, that last part is subjective, but you can be sure not to find me eating all my protein at once!

Eating a big meal gives you indigestion. That's not uncommon. But it has nothing to do with protein being used for energy.

An example would be hypertrophy. I can't find a proper study that says sarcoplasmic hypertrophy is a result of high volume training,

Here you go
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/24471859/

but that's how bodybuilders train, and they exhibit that the most (according to studies). Those same studies will claim that you cannot take any particular action to favour sarcoplasmic hypertrophy over myofibrillar, as they happen together.

But if bodybuilders where able to isolate sarcoplasmic HT, then they would get bigger but not stronger. I've never seen anything that remotely suggest that's possible. Bodybuilders who've put on significant mass are also pretty strong guys. So that's reflects the fact they don't happen in isolation.

TRS30

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

If you have a microwave at work, you can have scrambled eggs. I have 'em most days.

Do you prepare them the night before or in work? I wouldn't have the time to do much as only get about 10 minutes to make/eat brekkie.

MartyMcFly84 wrote: »

You can eat anything for breakfast that you would eat at any other time of the day.

We are brainwashed into thinking we should only eat certain food types for certain meals. All hogwash really, are you in a position to bring pre cooked food into work?

If you are really pushed just add protein powder with some milk (mix first) then add it to your coffee and you have a protein latte. you can also add protein powder to your porridge to up the protein content in the meal.

I don't believe in eating certain types of food at certain times of the day. I just like a not of variety so don't want to eat the same thing for every meal.

I take my protein powder (ducks and hides!) in the morning first thing before going to work and last thing at night so twice a day is enough for me.

Alf Veedersane

TRS30 wrote: »

Do you prepare them the night before or in work? I wouldn't have the time to do much as only get about 10 minutes to make/eat brekkie.

I crack two eggs in the bowl, add milk, stir and put in the microwave for a minute forty.

That should leave you with 7 minutes to eat them. 6 minutes if you go with 3 eggs.

TRS30

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

I crack two eggs in the bowl, add milk, stir and put in the microwave for a minute forty.

That should leave you with 7 minutes to eat them. 6 minutes if you go with 3 eggs.

I take it you don't remove the yoke?

Do you find it particularly filling? Doesn't sound like a lot

Alf Veedersane

TRS30 wrote: »

I take it you don't remove the yoke?

Do you find it particularly filling? Doesn't sound like a lot

Depends. 3 eggs would see me from 1.30 to 6.30 anyway.

It doesn't sound like a lot but I find it filling anyway.