Jump to content

express

Platinum Member
  • Content count

    1,072
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by express

  1. Meal Frequency

    Much like Jason in the friday the 13th movie franchise, the myth of high frequency feeding refuses to die. Some still believe and books still tout that there is a METABOLIC ADVANTAGE when you increase the frequency of your meals by spreading them through out the day. An example would be spreading your meals from 3 to 6 in a belief that it will increase a your metabolic rate---> better fat oxidation being the end result. Following along the same lines of this belief ---> eating less frequently (2-3 times a day) will cause your metabolism to slow down or missing a meal will cause your body to go in a catabolic state--break down of muscle tissue for fuel. To be honest, years ago I used to believe the same thing. Fortunately, I am a strong believer of the aphorism "the mind is like a parachute, it works best when its open" so I overcame this limiting belief years ago when I found overwhelming evidence through research and application. TEF This myth originated from the misunderstanding of TEF : thermic effect of feeding (one of SEVERAL factors influencing metabolic rate)...the amount of calories burned by the body when processing the food you eat. The thermic effect of feeding averages to about 10% (meal composition also influences TEF) . This means a person consuming 300 calories can expect to burn 30 calories during digestion so every time we eat our metabolic rate spikes slightly during that particular time. The reasoning became "if I spread my meals out through the day, I will cause TEF more often raising my metabolic rate and burn more fat". However the truth is this : At the same total amount of calories and meal composition, the person consuming 3 meals per day is going to burn the same amount of calories through TEF as the person consuming 6 meals a day . The metabolism of the person consuming 6 meals a day isn't going to be faster than the person consuming 3 meals a day. The calories burned through TEF at the end of the day will be the same for both. You see even though the person consuming 6 meals have 6 spikes in their metabolic rate via TEF ..the spikes are smaller. The person consuming 3 larger meals will have 3 LARGER spikes resulting in the same amount of calories burned at the end of the day. To expound further: Two people consuming 3000 calories total: one person divides the 3000 calories into 6 SMALLER meals result:--> smaller calories burned (during the 6 instances of smaller feedings which caused smaller TEFs) will result in the same number of calories burned at the end of the day for the other person who divides the 3000 calories into 3 LARGER meals result:-->Larger calories burned ( during the 3 instances of larger feedings which caused Larger TEFs ). Numerous studies such as the one below have demonstrated no metabolic advantage of eating more frequently... Br J Nutr. 1997 Apr;77 Suppl 1:S57-70. Meal frequency and energy balance. Bellisle F, McDevitt R, Prentice AM. INSERM U341, Hotel Dieu de Paris, France. Abstract Several epidemiological studies have observed an inverse relationship between people's habitual frequency of eating and body weight, leading to the suggestion that a 'nibbling' meal pattern may help in the avoidance of obesity. A review of all pertinent studies shows that, although many fail to find any significant relationship, the relationship is consistently inverse in those that do observe a relationship. However, this finding is highly vulnerable to the probable confounding effects of post hoc changes in dietary patterns as a consequence of weight gain and to dietary under-reporting which undoubtedly invalidates some of the studies. We conclude that the epidemiological evidence is at best very weak, and almost certainly represents an artefact. A detailed review of the possible mechanistic explanations for a metabolic advantage of nibbling meal patterns failed to reveal significant benefits in respect of energy expenditure. Although some short-term studies suggest that the thermic effect of feeding is higher when an isoenergetic test load is divided into multiple small meals, other studies refute this, and most are neutral. More importantly, studies using whole-body calorimetry and doubly-labelled water to assess total 24 h energy expenditure find no difference between nibbling and gorging. Finally, with the exception of a single study, there is no evidence that weight loss on hypoenergetic regimens is altered by meal frequency. We conclude that any effects of meal pattern on the regulation of body weight are likely to be mediated through effects on the food intake side of the energy balance equation. This is just one of many studies that discredits the " high frequent feeding = faster metabolic rate ". Add to it is the fact that you have people who practice intermittent fasting or what some call "warrior diet" ( Eating one big meal a day or 3 meals in a 1 to 8 hour period while fasting for 12 to 23 hours) with no effect on their metabolism and no loss of muscle mass. Our metabolism isn't easily changed, for example it takes around 3-4 days of strict dieting for our metabolism to even slow down. Which brings me to the other myth about meal frequency.. Myth: Missing meals will cause muscle loss. It takes about 5-6 hours for a typical meal to be completely out of your system--determined by macro nutrient composition. For example, amino acids are still being released in your blood stream 7 hours later after ingestion of 43 grams of casein protein. This means when people eat every 2 or 3 hours the previous meal still haven't finished digesting . Never mind the fact that it will take 24 hours after last meal (if you were to go without eating)for liver glycogen to completely to deplete . The liver is the switch that tells the body whether to go in a catabolic state. This would indicate that you have about 24 hours (some sources say 18) before your body starts using your muscle for fuel. Thus missing a meal or eating less frequently isn't going to cause muscle loss. The key is having the adequate amount calories for your activity level by the end of the day. Along the same lines there are actually studies that show eating too frequently (every 2 hours for instance) isn't conducive protein synthesis--> gaining mass. In other words if both people were eating the same amount of calories, the person eating every 4 hours would gain more muscle mass than the person eating every 2 hours . What about appetite control? In the same vein albeit a little off the subject of meal frequency and metabolism. Some people often mention the fact that high frequency meals controls appetite thus ensuring compliance for people dieting to lose weight. However studies (and experience) show that this isn't the case the study below shows meal frequency isn't the determining factor for controlling appetite: Br J Nutr. 2010 Apr;103(8):1098-101. Epub 2009 Nov 30. Increased meal frequency does not promote greater weight loss in subjects who were prescribed an 8-week equi-energetic energy-restricted diet. Cameron JD, Cyr MJ, Doucet E. Behavioural and Metabolic Research Unit, School of Human Kinetics, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. Abstract There have been reports of an inverse relationship between meal frequency (MF) and adiposity. It has been postulated that this may be explained by favourable effects of increased MF on appetite control and possibly on gut peptides as well. The main goal of the present study was to investigate whether using a high MF could lead to a greater weight loss than that obtained with a low MF under conditions of similar energy restriction. Subjects were randomised into two treatment arms (high MF = 3 meals+3 snacks/d or low MF = 3 meals/d) and subjected to the same dietary energy restriction of - 2931 kJ/d for 8 weeks. Sixteen obese adults (n 8 women and 8 men; age 34.6 (sd 9.5); BMI 37.1 (sd 4.5) kg/m2) completed the study. Overall, there was a 4.7 % decrease in body weight (P As you can see from the conclusions the hormones peptide YY (a satiety hormone) and ghrelin (hunger hormone) were the same in both groups. This shows that the high meal frequency group didn't fair any better in terms of appetite control (or weight loss for that matter) any more than the low frequency meal group. Meal frequency should be determined on an individual needs--> not based on the idea that it will speed up the metabolism, suppress appetite or even increase muscle mass (via continuous ingestion of protein every 2 hours). It would be ludicrous to divide the caloric requirement of a person whose daily caloric requirement is 1200 calories into 6 meals. At the same time, it wouldn't be a good idea to divide up the caloric requirement of an individual whose daily caloric requirement is 6000 calories into 3 meals. Instead base meal frequency on what's convenient for you, the frequency that's going to allow you to reach your nutritional goal.
  2. Meal Frequency

    na mate, this is an article WORTH reading, its a collection of abstracts / conclusions desigined to illistrate a particular point. TOTAL CALORIES FOR THE DAY IS MORE IMPORTANT THAT EATING THEM SPECIFICALLY SPREAD OVER 6 OR 8 MEALS!! Nutritent timing in my eyes is very important. I take in more carbs post training than i do pre, I have fruit only pre workout, i take vitamin c after training for cortisol control, I have good fats.. fibreous vegies and casien to provide sustained release protein, i have bcaa's before training. I think that CLEARLY indicates that i care about nutrient timing. This article is focused on the bigger picture your DAILY INTAKE. your taking things down to the next level - this is for the broader community who dont look at their caloric intake for the day but have heard however, they need to make sure they eat 6 meals so their metabolism responds better. http://www.facebook.com/#!/kelechiopara1 that's the guy who wrote this summary. he knows a thing or 2.
  3. I just read this article and was VERY intrigued. Keen to hear thoughts / retorts!! People that are either malicious or ignorant hold the diet and health industry, and even government agencies hostage. If I had an overwhelmingly positive view of humanity, I’d assume the best and go with ignorant, but I don’t. They use the logical slight-of-hand of exchanging observation for proof. Ten men in a bar might all observe the lady in the corner with silicone enhancements, crimson lipstick, fishnet stockings and stilettos, but unless one of them tests the hypothesis that she is a woman, none of them will ever find out that he’s a transvestite. Observing something doesn’t make it true, and sometimes, depending on the depth one explores, no one wants to admit the reality — it might be a little embarrassing. Observation creates a place for all scientific research to begin. From Plato to Einstein, observation has gotten science started down some extraordinary paths — started. Once on the trail, scientists dream up explanations (step 2) and test these explanations for validity (step 3). They’re either right or wrong and proceed as necessary. In the health and fitness world, the process often stops at observation. This is where we find ourselves with myriad training and eating protocols, but I want to tackle one that’s entrenched more than any other, breakfast. The Idea Breakfast is the most important meal of the day and makes people healthy, thin and smart. The Logic All metabolic arguments aside, scientists have witnessed that healthy, smart people eat breakfast; therefore, breakfast must be key. (Of course, from here, there are endless theories on why it’s so important: the body’s been starving all night and needs food to function; if you eat a lot of food in the morning it sparks metabolism and you burn off all the food and some fat; since the brain needs carbs to function, supplying the body with a low-fat breakfast gets the mind working at peak performance; etc.) The Reality The only reasonable conclusion the facts support is that breakfast sucks. It’s no secret that I’m not a fan of breakfast. When working with a new client in a physique or strength sport or the average person trying to lose a few pounds, more often than not, the first thing I say is, “stop eating breakfast.” Brian Carroll loves the excuse to skip breakfast as do a large number of people I work with. Like I once thought, they believe that breakfast is critical to mental and physical performance and they force themselves to eat it whether they want to or not. Here’s a brief synopsis of hormonal-happenings around 7 AM for the average person. Cortisol levels elevate naturally through the night1-9 and peak2, 9-14. Uh oh, cortisol is catabolic and without food, the body’s going to start eating all that hard-earned muscle, right? Wrong. Catabolic only describes the process of something being broken down for energy. Cortisol, when acting without elevated insulin levels and in a natural manner — so without being constantly elevated like during chronic stress — triggers the breakdown of triglycerides into free-fatty acids (FFAs) for metabolization and triggers lipolysis1, 2, 14-28. Cortisol, in the morning, accelerates fat burning. Ghrelin, the main hunger-control hormone32, is released in a pulsatile manner through the night with a peak occurring upon waking29-31, which incites hunger. Ghrelin not only causes hunger, but also potently stimulates growth hormone release33-44. As growth hormone levels raise the body releases more fat to be burned as fuel45-49 and decreases the destruction of protein for use as fuel50. Growth hormone levels peak roughly two hours after waking without breakfast51. Every day the body starts as a fat-burning furnace. Even during exercise, without eating breakfast, the body burns far higher levels of fat than normal52, 53 and causes up regulation of the enzymes necessary to burn fat, allowing fat to be metabolized faster54. Now contrast with what happens as soon as you eat breakfast, one that contains around 30 grams or more of carbs. As is well known, insulin levels raise with the rise in blood sugar, kick-starting a downward spiral: the early-morning release of insulin reduces fat burning for the entire rest of the day55; while cortisol levels remain high, the insulin release causes new empty fat cells to be created56-64; and the insulin lowers levels of ghrelin and growth hormone29-31, 51. From the facts above—this is not what I think happens, this is what happens — one would come to the conclusion that maybe we should hold breakfast off for a bit when we get up, at least until cortisol levels return to normal and growth hormone levels fall naturally, which takes a few hours. Skipping breakfast looks like a way to lose body fat faster, or at least to keep it off. At this point, you may think, “well, you’ve hobbled together a lot of research to explain your theory, but where are the results?” I’m not so obtuse as to think that a thorough understanding of anything means prediction is possible…a famous mathematician showed that you can know everything about how a system works and still not predict how the damn thing might act. Luckily for me and my hobbled together studies, researchers did test the idea that maybe breakfast isn’t so great. If what I assume from the facts is true, then skipping breakfast and eating more food at the end of the day rather than the beginning should lead to more fat loss when trying to lose weight, especially if eating breakfast impairs fat burning for the entire day. So what happened when researchers studied two groups, one that ate most of their calories in the beginning of the day, to simulate the no-eating-after-seven routine, and the other that skipped breakfast and ate most of their meals in the latter half of the day? Damn if I shouldn’t be embarrassed: the group that ate most of their calories early in the day, including a big breakfast, lost more weight than the other group65. Hold on: there’s more to this story. The researchers also looked at body composition before and after. The morning group lost more weight but lost a lot more muscle and a lot less fat. The night group lost almost exclusively fat and preserved muscle65-69. Who knew, maybe there is something to this science stuff after all? No matter what I say about fat loss, someone will say that skipping breakfast turns people into mental sloths. Does it really? You think so? I disagree and when I do in a public forum, someone always says — which I actually don’t believe — “Well, I design tests for grade schools and the kids that eat breakfast always perform the best; I have the studies but I don’t have the time to show you.” Even if they have them, they’re observation studies. They’re not experiments. Do experiments prove that breakfast improves cognitive abilities? Yes, if the person is malnourished70-73. What about healthy kids? I know, it doesn’t seem right to take food away from kids in the morning, but some mean group of bastards did just that — and several more bastards did the same thing. They withheld breakfast from one group of kids, letting them eat at lunch, and the other group had a balanced breakfast. When kids skip breakfast they pay attention, behave, and perform better throughout the entire school day72-83. That’s the difference between observation and experiment. There must be some other factor relating eating breakfast to academic performance: both vary in the same way with socio-economic status84. I can imagine the comments now saying I ignore the importance of breakfast because of this observational study or that observational study or some other justification that has no relevance to this discussion. The only point here is that breakfast is definitely not the most important meal of the day and can be detrimental. There are many reasons and ways to incorporate breakfast effectively. Carb Back-Loading™ is one example and Carb Nite® is another. When using either of these strategies for fat loss, I still tend to delay my first meal of the day until 11am or noon Someone in a forum also referenced an article stating that skipping breakfast primes the body to get fat and slows fat burning, which is the opposite of the truth, but the article goes on to say that all of this can be avoided by adding some branched-chain amino acids in lieu of breakfast and suggests leucine, isoleucine and valine. This is probably a bad idea, as the amino acid leucine stimulates insulin release without the presence of glucose85-86 and may cause the same reactions as a carby breakfast. As far as strength is concerned, there is little effect as long as glycogen stores remain adequate87-88, hence the application of Carb Back-Loading™ to strength, power and physique athletes. Eating breakfast impairs fat burning, can aid in fat storage, lowers growth hormone levels and doesn’t offer cognitive benefits. What else can I say? Stop eating breakfast. You’ll thank me in the morning.
  4. skipping breakfast for fat loss

    takes your cal allowance down by around 50cals a day. yeh if you keen on taking things to the next level you will have to get serious about the diet. your foot long subway role gives you close to 90grams of carbs.. that's more that i listed as ideal for a whole day on the diet above
  5. Lunch Options

    half a kilo of chicken? 110 grams of protein in one sitting is a lot to stomach! I would say keep the pasta and throwing a medium sized can of tuna in it.
  6. 3000 cal a day

    Meal #1 Whole Eggs + 1/2 Cup Egg Whites p35 1 cup oatmeal - 60g carbs greens Meal #2 protein shake with milk + 2 tblsp peanut butter p40 4 pieces of wholmeal bread - 60 g carbs piece of fruit and heaps of veg Meal #3 chicken breast p55 24 Almonds 150g rice / 60g carbs Meal #4 chicken breast / 50 protein whole avocado 1 large potato - 60g carbs + veg Meal #5 (Post-Workout) Whey Protein 30p + peanutbutter/flaxseed oil 15f + oats + dextrose + milk 90c Meal #6 1 tub cottage cheese / mix with casein protein p35 24 almonds 150g brown rice spinach 390g carbs - 1560cal 245 protein - 980cal 90 fat - 810 cal = 3350 cal, bit over but you prob need it.
  7. skipping breakfast for fat loss

    if its only that much, i would say def calorie deficit. post your exact intake and we can work it all out but as far as what you should be aiming for.. his maintainence calorie intake (assuming he is 21 years old / similar) is 2300 perday - this is what his body will burn lying in bed. If you add in an low intensity / avg workout that adds another 300 burned - 2600 cals, take away 20% for fat loss and you have 2000 cals a day. a low carb diet that would work well for this would look something like Meal #1 1. Choose protein = 3 Whole Eggs + 1/2 Cup Egg Whites 2. Choose fat = fat comes from whole eggs 3. Choose carbs = no carbs 4. Add in fruits/veggies = 1 Cup Green Peppers, Onions, and Mushrooms (in eggs) Meal #2 1. Choose protein = whey protein shake 2. Choose fat = 30g Peanut Butter 3. Choose carbs = No Carbs 4. Add in fruits/veggies = 3/4 Cup Blueberries Meal #3 1. Choose protein = 5 oz. Lean Turkey 2. Choose fat = 24 Almonds 3. Choose carbs = no carbs 4. Add in fruits/veggies = 1.5 cups Green Beans Meal #4 1. Choose protein = 5 oz. Chicken Breast 2. Choose fat = 3 oz. Avocado 3. Choose carbs = no carbs 4. Add in fruits/veggies = 1/2 Grapefruit Meal #5 (Post-Workout) 1. Choose protein = Whey Protein 2. Choose fat = oil (flax or pb oil) 3. Choose carbs = 1 Cup Oatmeal 4. Add in fruits/veggies = veg Meal #6 1. Choose protein = 5 oz. Lean Beef 2. Choose fat = 3 tsp Macadamia Nut Oil 3. Choose carbs = no carbs 4. Add in fruits/veggies = 4-8 oz. Asparagus
  8. Meal Frequency

    1200 calories per day is not the point, its more saying dont stress if you cant eat 6 meals, just get in your goal calories within a set 24hr period. This means you can have the everyday "3 square meals" and get the same results as someone consuming the same about of calories through 6. Summo, in your experiment, there are so many other variables, were you eating exactly the same food with the same macronutrient breadown? are you genetically matched? what's your background regarding training and muscle memory? do you lift the same weight to the same rep with the same intensity? are you both getting the same amount of rest / recovery? do you carry the same muscle mass (resting metabolism shift), is one of you doing more labourious work throughout the day (creating a calorie deficit) (probably the mechanic).. u get the point For me, I have 6 primarily because I like to "bracket" my workouts with meals and if I workout twice a day - that's four meals 1 before and after each workout + ill have breakfast and pre-bed. On saturdays I eat 8 meals through the day with 50grams of carbs in each for a refeed - getting 400 grams of carbs through 3 meals would be a struggle. Sometimes its more convienient / practical to have more meals & given for the most part bodybuilders are bulking, its very hard to get 3000+ calories through 3 meals eating clean.
  9. skipping breakfast for fat loss

    disagree. Sucrose is fine, goes towards liver glycogen - 2 pieces of friut a day is recomended - no matter what time of the day, however preworkout - or if a bananna - post workout is ideal. That diet is terrible though, that's not a real diet - its a massive calorie deficit, your metabolic rate would be so low. Your 6 foot 2, 105kg's and your eating half of what I am at 5'9, 76kg, and im cutting. take the time to understand and construct a diet that suits your body.
  10. New protein!

    as a bit of an update we have got some great feedback recently from other customers on taste, mixability, price etc! We are always looking for further customer feedback and were still working on samples for you guys! you can also mix flavours - IE: get 1kg of vanilla, 1kg of choc and the carbs all the in the same pack. cheers!
  11. working bi's.... HARD!

    hahahhahahaha ^^^^ not sure that will help his cause. I revolve my weights around squat, dead and pressing - i agree with everone else on this, isolates do jack s$%t in comparison with compounds basically your arms have probably adapted to what weight your pushing them to each time, if you plateau, its probably best to even drop the weight and work sets between 12 and 15 to stimulate further growth, also, if you were doing 3 do 5 sets. incorperate this into what your doing now once a week do very heavy - reps 3-5 once a week do light - reps 12 - 15/failure this should ensure you dont reach a plateau. Listen to ardie as awell, if you start to get any kind of bad feeling in your elbows / joints STOP IMMEDIATLEY AND DITCH IT FROM YOUR ROUTINE - last thing you want.
  12. Anyone blend their foods?

    i blend cottage cheese and peanut butter with a bit of casien in my bedtime shake.. thats about it. as far as weird things go... I melt peanutbutter into spinach
  13. not sure i agree, my digital scales say im 19% bf... pretty sure im not I have bought digital calipers as im on a cut at the moment to see if that's more accurate
  14. Motivation

    motivation is coming from trying a new cut diet after bulking up to 81kg - sitting at 77 at the moment, looking lean but want to get shredded lean and then up cal's again. motivation also coming from learing through others experience's and adapting my own program as well as helpin other people
  15. terry bennetts would be the most cost effective, used to go there.
  16. New protein!

    exactly right. our protein doesnt contain carbs.. we have the carbs on the side as an additive primarily for post workout when your body requires them (our carb mix is also a mix of malodextrose, fructose etc) People have also stated they can get "mass" protein for cheaper.. well.. of course, that's because half of the product is carbohydrate based (as mentioned, the cheaper part)
  17. New protein!

    It depends what you want, our protein is not a basic WPI, its an isolate, concentrate and casien mix... Legal attorney, if you add to that the stated delivery cost, the total price for JUST WPI is 2kg is $81.. why not get a isolate, concentrate and casien mix, quick digesting carbs to have post workout and shaker for an extra $9? As i said this is very compeditive pricing I would slightly disagree Kairazy, the prices didnt include delivery, ours does so the prices are on par with those wholesalers. I think this is perfect for the PTC market, because they know the importance of protein and carb timing better than your "average joe" they understand nutrient timing and the role it plays in your diet
  18. New protein!

    its $90 INCLUDING delivery for the 2kg protein and 1kg carbs + shaker. For the quality of product, its very compeditive pricing.
  19. Hitting the wall..

    plan out what exercises you need to do and do them. thats it. dont think about it further, dont overcomplicate.
  20. 100kg challenge

    Lying in bed last night, couldnt get to sleep, thinking about what challenges me at gym and I think this would properly f#$k me. Quite simple, similar to total lifts of bench, squat and press but only lifting 100kg all round. So as many consecutive reps of 100kg bench, 100kg dead and 100kg squat. I think I would get 35 deadlifts, 25 squat and maybe 8 bench (weak bench at the moment) for a total of 68. I will give it a crack next time im fresh and see what actual numbers are. Anyone else keen to try?
  21. New protein!

    fantastic feedback dan_180, always good to hear! We are a small business so please let your friends know and pass on the discount details for the $90 package!
  22. puttin on mass

    agree, i mix peanut butter throuhg my scrambled eggs in the morning.. lol
  23. New protein!

    Thanks for your feedback KrayzieNeo!!!!
  24. 100kg challenge

    it is an each to their own topic, and depends on how important grip is to you. Holding onto 270 is incredible either way. for the purposes of this exercise... repping out 100kg for as many as possible, i know my grip would fail before my back/leg strength so ill use them - if you dont need them for the measely 100kg... dont use em!
×