Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
napsgear
genezapharmateuticals
domestic-supply
puritysourcelabs
Research Chemical SciencesUGFREAKeudomestic
napsgeargenezapharmateuticals domestic-supplypuritysourcelabsResearch Chemical SciencesUGFREAKeudomestic

The latest "theoretical" misconception

blood_drinker

New member
I just got back from my trip, and the first thing I did was log onto EF to look at a post started by SonnyBlack, entitled Man Ive always wondered...
In this he asked
Originally posted by Sonny Black
does it really matter wat you eat in terms of not gaining fat as long as you dont go over maintenance calories???In other words let say on one day you eat 2 mcdonalds hamburgers and a snickers ( i know im exagerating a litlle...i normally dont eat this crap myself) during a day and fries...but your calories stayed below maintenance...will you gain fat????Does it matter wat foods u eat or wat combos of foods u eat (fat and carbs, protein and fat...etc)...or how many calories u eat during the day???
--------
For those that want it, it is located at the below adress. Before you read it, finish reading my post.

http://boards.elitefitness.com/forum/showthread.php?threadid=41564

Many people answered on how that would theoretically work. What the hell are you guys thinking? I thought this is another FAQ that should be stuck for a couple of days. Lets look at a few reasons not to go the way sonny black wants to go:
Like has been said, theoretically it ´works´for some but THIS METHOD INVITES FAILURE. Your appetite will soar, your energy levels will plunge = failure and binges. Take a high simple carb diet. Lets have sugar, and pudding for our diet. That will surely satisfy sonnys cravings. But he better brace himself for the peaks and valleys in terms of energy associated with simple carb intake. I could bare a peaks and valleys diet if I could indulge in a pizza and a pudding, but it´s not that simple. Heck, you dont even have enough water in that diet - and we all know the important role of water in muscle building, protection and repair. The above is just simply the tip of the iceberg - and damn it´s an already huge reason for me not to go Sonnys way. But, Sonny is still not convinced, and the rest are feeding him "Theoretical" bullshit. Now, the one meal a day that "theoretically works" idea is crap. NO, IT DOES NOT BOIL DOWN TO CALORIC INTAKE. A tub of ice cream, 800cals, and 2 pbj sandwiches will give you the cals you need to stay alive while ´theoretically´ burning fat. But not only will you lose minimal fat, you will lose plenty of muscle. You need more protein than the whooping 30g P a massive burger and french fries can offer - and since you are eating such crap - you wont even be able to go to the gym or do cardio considering your energy levels. With those kinds of foods you are looking at a whooping 30g of protein give or take. ESPECIALLY when you train, you need more protein than that, particularly if your goal is more than to "theoretically burn fat." To maximize muscle growth you want protein available for synthesis at all times. This is of vital importance and is why supplying protein to your body every 3 hours is essential to maximize growth. Anytime your body has to steal protein from muscle you stall and even regress the muscle growth process. The last thing you ever want is to be protein deficient when your body needs it. You can even consume more than your required amount of protein daily and still be "time-deficient" in your protein needs. This is why timing protein and nutrient intake is so important. You never want your hard earned muscle tissue to have to sacrifice protein to meet demand from other systems in your body. Protein and other macro nutrients are of prime importance, as are many other things for muscle growth/repair - -whichever your case is, you cannot overlook the importance of other factors that , like it or not, happen to come into play. It does NOT boil down to caloric intake. Repeat, it DOES NOT BOIL DOWN, and no, not even theoretically, TO CALORIC INTAKE. Not even theoretically - its bullshit. It does not ´work´. For those of you that think it ´works´have a wrong definition of what compensates your efforts in the gym.
The 5-6 meals a day theory is necessary in order to satisfy the above demands. The extra effort of getting 5-6 meals is not only worth it, but IMO NECESSARY.
 
Last edited:
Blood_Drinker, exactly what I was pointing out. What you said is the UNIVERSAL truth, I agree with it 100% and I will in fact look for studies to back this up.

One more thing, Glad to see you back....

Mr.X :cool:
 
hey blood drinker...thanx for the explanation bro,,,its bros like u that make this board a great place for everyone...by the way i just wanted to clarify that i donot...i repeat ...I DO NOT EAT THIS KIND OF CRAP AT ALL!! I dont remember the last time that I ate one of those fukers! I pretty much have always followed a high protein very low carbs moderate fat diet...and I never lost jack on this diet. NEVER. if i would loose 5 pds it was just water and i would gain it bak. The only thing i got from this dite was low energy levels and plateaus in all my weights. Like a month ago i started following a 30-30-30 type diet and the pds started comin off me and the weights started goin up up and up! Man i feel great on this dite. And the point i was trying to make was that i hate when every time a newbie comes on this board and asks wat kind of diet he can follow to "rip up". he is alway told follow a cdk blah blah blah. Well i think that they should know that that is not the only way that u can go for fat loss. And i thank you from the bottom of my heart Blood drinker bro..for having started this sticky thead and letting know people that low carbs isnt the only way to go for fat loss. i commend u bro!
 
blood, you need to chill :)

I believe the original question in the thread had to do with fat gain, not loss.

Yes, eating more frequently can help control appetite better for alot of people, and is a perfectly valid reason to eat 6 meals a day.

But MS even made the explicit point that he needs to get enough protein to support his LBM. So your rant on getting 30 g protein/day, while entertaining, doesn't have much to do with the discussion going on.

As for the protein every 3 hours, if you're living off whey, maybe. But even casein is still providing protein to your body up to 7 hours after ingestion. And that was just straight protein. Mix that with other food, or by eating meat, and the digestion slows it more.

So yes, dieting isn't quite as simple as just "calories in vs calories out". And I'm not aware of anyone denying the importance of protein and fat in your diet. But I believe even Lyle Mcdonald made it a point to eat 2 Mcdonald's hamburgers every day during his last diet.
 
Yeah definitely time for a chill pill. First off, sonny referred to a diet of 2 McD burgers and a snickers bar. He didn't even mention what kind of burgers so we don't know what the protein intake is on this theoretical diet. The fact is, in study after study there is no difference in weight loss for people dieting on energy reduced diets. It doesn't matter what the macronutrient ratio is, or how many meals per day it's divided into as long as they STICK TO THE DIET. Additionally sonny's question was not about fat loss, but about not gaining fat. Again the same applies with the caveat that on a non-calorie restricted diet you are much more likely to overeat if you only eat once a day compared to 5-6 meals per day. But if the calories are the same, and protein (plus vitamins, minerals and fiber) is adequate, then it's not a big deal.

Please note I am not advocating this 'diet', just answering the original question. Is this a healthy way to eat? NO. Is this optimal for lean muscle gain? NO. But that was not the question.
 
I think we all got our points accross and Sonny is apparently satisfied with the answers he has gotten so far. Let´s keep at this.:beer:
 
I have learned to avoid posting scientific articles on this board (because of the yawn factor) but for sonny's sake (and anyone else who's following this) here's an important abstract that show how multiple meals helps curb appetite:

Acute appetite reduction associated with an increased frequency of eating in obese males.
Speechly DP, Rogers GG, Buffenstein R.
Department of Physiology, University of Witwatersrand Medical School, Johannesburg, South Africa. [email protected]
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effects of altered feeding frequencies on the relationship between perceived hunger and subsequent food intake and appetite control in obese men. DESIGN: Obese men reported in a fasted state in the morning to the laboratory where an isoenergetic pre-load (4100+/-234 kJ, which was 33% average daily energy requirement (ADER) of each subject) comprising 70% carbohydrate, 15% protein, and 15% fat was given. This was administered either as a SINGLE meal, or divided evenly over 5 meals given hourly as a MULTI feeding pattern. Five hours after the first pre-load, an ad libitum test meal was given to determine whether there was a difference in the amount of energy that was consumed between the two eating patterns. SUBJECTS: Seven non-diabetic, non-smoking, unrestrained obese men were recruited for this study. Subjects were not told the precise reasons for this study but rather were informed that changes in blood glucose, insulin and free fatty acids with meal frequency were to be monitored. MEASUREMENTS: Blood glucose, serum insulin and free fatty acid (FFA) concentrations, and visual analogue scales (VAS) were measured prior to commencing the feeding regime and thereafter hourly for 5 h. Thereafter an ad libitum meal was given. The weight (and energy content) of the food consumed, and the time taken to eat lunch were recorded. Following this ad libitum lunch, the same variables were determined again (15, 45, and 75 min post-test meal). RESULTS: When given a SINGLE pre-load, 27% more energy was consumed in the ad libitum test meal compared to that eaten after the MULTI pre-load This increase in food intake occurred despite no significant change in subjective hunger ratings. Over the 315 min pre-load period, peak insulin concentrations were significantly higher on the SINGLE treatment than on the MULTI treatment. Serum insulin remained elevated for longer on the MULTI meal treatment, resulting in no difference in the area under the insulin curves between the two feeding treatments. There was a positive correlation between the amount of energy consumed at lunch and insulin concentration before lunch in the SINGLE group. However, this relationship was not apparent when subjects were given the MULTI meal preload. CONCLUSION: Obese males fed an isoenergetic pre-load sub-divided into a multi-meal plan consumed 27% less at a subsequent ad libitum test meal than did the same men when given the pre-load as a single meal. Prolonged but attenuated increases in serum insulin concentration on the multi-meal programme may facilitate this acute reduction in appetite.


Again, yes you can lose weight by only eating one junk meal per day, but you're gonna be a lot hungrier than spacing your meals out. Notice that one meal a day really hammers you insulin up which may also not be a good idea for long term health (at least in this study which was low fat, low protein and high carb).
 
A quick recap:
You lose weight, not purely fat, but muscle and minimal fat. Because of the muscle loss, fat gain will be much easier now because muscle burns calories, and because that muscle is now gone, less calories make you more fat. Theoretically, it works.:rolleyes: But in reality, it just doesn't. Don't even start me again on the muscle *gain*. This is for weight *loss* - but seemingly I have been lost on what was the original question anyway. In any case, it's definetely not something you would want to do.

Now look at this.
Here I quote Paul Crib
Recent muscle kinetic studies by Giovanni Bolio and colleagues (Am.J.Physiol.Endo Metab.273:E122-E129,1997) have substantiated that after weight training protein synthesis rates and muscle breakdown rates are both phenomenally accelerated And without the introduction of protein and carbohydrates immediately after training net protein loss is the result.

By not introducing a post workout meal in your one meal a day diet, your body will simply breakdown other muscle tissue to get the nutrients it needs. You will lose muscle, slow down your metabolic rate, and predispose yourself to further unwanted fat gain. Precisely the opposite of why you workout!

I hope you understand that this has no place in our minds. Erase it. It does NOT work - not even "theoretically".:eek:
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom