-
IF is more a mind over matter ordeal for people. It's almost a prevention to overeating in my eyes. You have a set time where you can eat, so it sort of limits the chance of possibly over eating for people. If you tell a person they can only eat in a 6 or something hour window, their most likely going to get full in that window and then once window is closed their like **** now I gotta wait. In their mind its set, "hey put that food down, the window isn't open yet".
Myself personally, I do IF from 2pm-8pm 6 hr window, for many reasons
-I don't see a point of eating late if I'm just going to go to bed in a few hours.
-Like training fasted.
-I get hungry 30 minutes after any meal, even if I were to say binge 5000 calories. So theres no point in eating small meals.
-I believe I get a more accurate weigh in, during morning. When i have nothing in my stomach.
-Piss fat people off when they see a short muscular dude eating all this food, and in their mind they think "I wish I could eat anything I wanted and not gain weight".
-
^^^ I think you're trying to say: restricting feeding hours can increase satiety and thus decrease caloric intake despite feeding [I]ad libitum[/I].
-
[QUOTE=WonderPug;1035633723]^^^ I think you're trying to say: restricting feeding hours can increase satiety and thus decrease caloric intake despite feeding [I]ad libitum[/I].[/QUOTE]
pretty much, cause I used to have the problem back in the day. Id wake up eat a big breakfast, and 30 minutes later I'd be hungry again.
-
[QUOTE=determined4000;1035357663]larger meals
easier meal planning
using an acronym[/QUOTE]
+ placebo effect of believing what you are doing is superior.
-
[QUOTE=jimsmith9999;1035657233]+ placebo effect of believing what you are doing is superior.[/QUOTE]
I like a good cheap placebo.
IF gains discussion was off on a little roll there, nobody jumping on the IF fails at gains bandwagon is odd. Usually there would be six or seven, "I am getting huge with the IF" by now. Hmm, maybe they all still reading that article MichieIN posted, what a WOT that thing was.
-
[QUOTE=jimsmith9999;1035657233]+ placebo effect of believing what you are doing is superior.[/QUOTE]
So true. Friend of mine thinks IF and carb cycling is the only way to lose weight. On workout days he won't have any dietary fat, but he'll have tons of carbs. I think restricting yourself like that is stupid.
-
I believe the hype with if. It makes sense if you want to loose -just eat a regular meal then take the rest of the day off. If your not addicted to sugar its a great feeling to do that once every two weeks. Just dobt carb out when you come back as your body is a sponge then.
-
[QUOTE=ObiJuanK;1035468863]Makes me feel as if I'm eating like a King after an 18-hour fast instead of like a little bitch every 3 hours lol[/QUOTE]
lol that feel, 24 hours puts you into God like status
-
[QUOTE=SuffolkPunch;1035460833]That is an interesting article. It makes we wonder about using IF for mass gain... I never though there were benefits but I didn't think it would be hurting gains either.
I wonder if the author is guilty of considering 'meals' as discrete events that occur on a fasted stomach and digest relatively quickly. We are taught meal frequency is irrelevant because in real life meals overlap and the digestion process lasts much longer than the gap in between meals...[/QUOTE]
The author has indeed considered that, and would propose that people stop looking at digestion and rate of appearance as a linear event. MPS is dependent on a threshold level of hyperaminoacidemia. When a meal is digested, the bulk of it's nutrients are released in the earlier hours, causing spikes in the earlier part of the process that then gradually taper off. It is not because the digestion of a meal lasts 5 hours, that you can expect a sufficient level of hyperaminoacidemia at that timepoint, hence the time of digestion does not correlate with time period of optimized MPS. Its similar to pharmacokinetics, where dosing of medication is typically given at the time of half-life, the point where blood levels reach half the peak value. As such, a meal that has a 5 hour digestion time would likely need to be superimposed with another meal at 3 or 3.5 hours in order to maintain sufficient hyperaminoacidemia.
Particularly of note is the study by Burk et al. (1) (who incidentally also noticed that the majority of the amino acids of his casein supplementation appeared within the first 4 hours, and does not extend to its 6-7 hour digestion time as many believe. The study compared 2 35g supplementations with casein. Both groups at at 8AM, noon and 8 PM and worked out at 4 PM, and received a first supplement at 10 AM. Group one received its second supplement prior to the 4 PM training and group 2 received its second supplement at 10.30 PM. Group 2 showed a significantly greater increase in fat free mass, and the authors concluded :
“However, in TDR, the whole daily protein intake was spread more evenly over time due to the ingestion of the second portion of the supplement late in the evening approximately 2.5 hours after dinner. This could prolong the duration of moderate amino acidemia each day and lead to an increase in protein deposition and fat-free mass over several weeks.”
Demonstrating the relevance of sustaining hyperaminoacidemia throughout the day by spreading out protein as best you can to obtain maximal results. It actually suggests that it may be more relevant than peri-workout nutrition, although data is slightly obscured by the source of the protein (since the casein would have significantly delayed rate of appearance in relation to the resistance training). Therefor, while a need to continuously eat as was the old-school suggestion, is certainly not needed, there is ample evidence that three square meals a day just doesn't cut it either, when an intervention as simple as a casein shake 2.5 hours after dinner managed to show significant improvements over several weeks.
(1) Burk A, Timpmann S, Medijainen L, Vähi M, Oöpik V. Time-divided ingestion pattern of casein-based protein supplement stimulates an increase in fat-free body mass during resistance training in young untrained men. Nutr Res. 2009 Jun;29(6):405-13.
-
[QUOTE=MichielN;1035521173]AFAIK he feels IF is not optimal, because you go for at least 16 hours without food - which is not optimal for protein synthesis and breakdown, and mTOR etc (or something like that). I thought he once said to me that he doubts it matters whether you eat 3 or 6 meals p/d, the difference (if any) would be absolutely negligable. As long as you spread your meals across the day, it doesn't really matter (3-5 meals would probably be best).
Also I think (and I believe he does as well) that the difference between bulking on IF and without IF wouldn't necessarily be something you should worry about - that would be something for the pros and for people with stage ambitions. If you're just looking to build a nice body and care about a social life as well, it would probably be something to forget about.
Main cliff: timing is NOT irrelevant, the question is probably whether you consider the small difference important or not.
That's my interpretation.[/QUOTE]
Pretty much how I see it.
-
@Big Cat - Thanks, very interesting. It's hardly a chore slugging back a shake 2-3 times a day between normal meals so I think I could easily implement this into my daily routine.
-
[QUOTE=Big Cat;1035999223]Snip[/QUOTE]
Holy crap it is BC.
Edit : repped
-
[quote=dxxxs;1035724763]i believe the hype with if. It makes sense if you want to loose -just eat a regular meal then take the rest of the day off. If your not addicted to sugar its a great feeling to do that once every two weeks. Just dobt carb out when you come back as your body is a sponge then.[/quote]loose
loose. Your
loose. Your
loose. Your
loose. Your
lose. You're
lose. You're
lose. You're
lose. You're
-
Wtf....Big Cat's back???!!!
Strong blast from the past itt
brb I.C.E training to maximize nostalgia