Not Trolling, I Swear

[phillycheese92]

So while studying for my nutrition test, I came across this paragraph:

"There is much less debate on the addition of protein to the carbohydrate recovery meal, since it has been shown convincingly to aid in improved body composition greater than carbohydrate alone, there is much less debate on the addition of protein to the carbohydrate recovery meal.In fact, after one bout of lower body resistance training, a supplement with carbohydrates, amino acids, and complete proteins was shown to increase muscular protein synthesis and muscle growth by 400% (24 grams of new muscle protein versus 6 grams) over an isocaloric carbohydrate recovery drink (Borsheim, et al. 2004)."

as well as this quote from my teacher (paraphrased):
"Insulin levels will be low, and cortisol levels will be high, creating a catabolic state that will persist after exercise. The goal is to correct this hormone imbalance ASAP. To correct this imbalance, consume a 3:1 carbohydrate to protein ratio immediately after exercise, trying to take in 1.5 grams of carbohydrate and 0.5 grams of protein within 60 minutes after exercise."

so whats the deal with this? It seems like any time people bring up catabolism on this thread they're called an idiot. But my teacher has a doctorate in nutrition and the info int he textbook is based on an actual study...

I just feel like there's too much evidence here to ignore the idea that meal timing could be pretty relevant

[strapsstar]

I can confirm I am your brofessor

[InItForFitness]

So while studying for my nutrition test, I came across this paragraph:

"There is much less debate on the addition of protein to the carbohydrate recovery meal, since it has been shown convincingly to aid in improved body composition greater than carbohydrate alone, there is much less debate on the addition of protein to the carbohydrate recovery meal.In fact, after one bout of lower body resistance training, a supplement with carbohydrates, amino acids, and complete proteins was shown to increase muscular protein synthesis and muscle growth by 400% (24 grams of new muscle protein versus 6 grams) over an isocaloric carbohydrate recovery drink (Borsheim, et al. 2004)."

as well as this quote from my teacher (paraphrased):
"Insulin levels will be low, and cortisol levels will be high, creating a catabolic state that will persist after exercise. The goal is to correct this hormone imbalance ASAP. To correct this imbalance, consume a 3:1 carbohydrate to protein ratio immediately after exercise, trying to take in 1.5 grams of carbohydrate and 0.5 grams of protein within 60 minutes after exercise."

so whats the deal with this? It seems like any time people bring up catabolism on this thread they're called an idiot. But my teacher has a doctorate in nutrition and the info int he textbook is based on an actual study...

I just feel like there's too much evidence here to ignore the idea that meal timing could be pretty relevant

Are they factoring in total caloric intake?
Have they been fasting for >48 hours?
Is there a difference in body composition of the study groups?
How well controlled were the various variables?

[phillycheese92]

I can confirm I am your brofessor

this is exactly what i mean haha, how can you assume that he's wrong? im sure there are conflicting studies but its not like there isnt any convincing evidence out there that protein and carbs directly after a workout wont help... i mean a 400% increase in protein synthesis...

and you can say my professor is making up the theoretical science behind it all you want, but he has a degree in science.

[phillycheese92]

Are they factoring in total caloric intake?
Have they been fasting for >48 hours?
Is there a difference in body composition of the study groups?
How well controlled were the various variables?

so basically the argument is that all studies that prove my professors point were not done well and the studies whose conclusions were the opposite were done with better controls and whatnot? seems kinda biased to me

not trying to be rude or discredit your knowledge, but do you have a science degree? do you really trust that your abilities to critique a study are better than that of a professor with a doctorate in nutritional sciences?

[invain]

What is the question/issue? It's pretty welly established by now that consuming protein post workout increases protein synthesis/recovery, and consuming carbs along with protein can slightly enhance effects.

[InItForFitness]

so basically the argument is that all studies that prove my professors point were not done well and the studies whose conclusions were the opposite were done with better controls and whatnot? seems kinda biased to me

not trying to be rude or discredit your knowledge, but do you have a science degree? do you really trust that your abilities to critique a study are better than that of a professor with a doctorate in nutritional sciences?

I don't get where you're drawing this statement from.
I simply asked a couple of questions in regards to the study.

I don't need a degree in science to find research that supports either side of this argument.
I'm simply asking questions in regards to the validity of the study at hand. That's all.

[kinesthetic1234]

So while studying for my nutrition test, I came across this paragraph:

"There is much less debate on the addition of protein to the carbohydrate recovery meal, since it has been shown convincingly to aid in improved body composition greater than carbohydrate alone, there is much less debate on the addition of protein to the carbohydrate recovery meal.In fact, after one bout of lower body resistance training, a supplement with carbohydrates, amino acids, and complete proteins was shown to increase muscular protein synthesis and muscle growth by 400% (24 grams of new muscle protein versus 6 grams) over an isocaloric carbohydrate recovery drink (Borsheim, et al. 2004)."

as well as this quote from my teacher (paraphrased):
"Insulin levels will be low, and cortisol levels will be high, creating a catabolic state that will persist after exercise. The goal is to correct this hormone imbalance ASAP. To correct this imbalance, consume a 3:1 carbohydrate to protein ratio immediately after exercise, trying to take in 1.5 grams of carbohydrate and 0.5 grams of protein within 60 minutes after exercise."

so whats the deal with this? It seems like any time people bring up catabolism on this thread they're called an idiot. But my teacher has a doctorate in nutrition and the info int he textbook is based on an actual study...

I just feel like there's too much evidence here to ignore the idea that meal timing could be pretty relevant

I don't understand the concept of timing as being irrelevant - it's that it (PALES) in comparison to surplus/deficit theory.

[phillycheese92]

What is the question/issue? It's pretty welly established by now that consuming protein post workout increases protein synthesis/recovery, and consuming carbs along with protein can slightly enhance effects.

well the general motto for this thread is that meal timing is basically irrelavant. and i think a 400% increase in protein synthesis is extremely relevant, if true.

I don't get where you're drawing this statement from.
I simply asked a couple of questions in regards to the study.

I don't need a degree in science to find research that supports either side of this argument.
I'm simply asking questions in regards to the validity of the study at hand. That's all.

I didn't mean to try to call you out, im more just voicing my frustration. With my limited knowledge I have very little ability to critique a study on my own, so I try to look for the most reputable source. Idk the answer to any of your questions, but it just seems like outside this forum there is alot of reputable scientists that support these ideas

and i would assume that any PHD would look in to those types of variables before supporting those studies

[InItForFitness]

I don't understand the concept of timing as being irrelevant - it's that it (PALES) in comparison to surplus/deficit theory.

Strong this OP^
In the 'Hierarchy of Importance' the minimalistic benefits one may achieve through meal timing is at the bottom end of the spectrum.
So though it may not be completely irrelevant to body composition results, it is not completely disregarded.

Also I just browsed back through your original post.
This study is doing nothing but testing MPS, I see nothing stated that one test group received favorable body composition results as opposed to the other.

[InItForFitness]

well the general motto for this thread is that meal timing is basically irrelavant. and i think a 400% increase in protein synthesis is extremely relevant, if true.


I didn't mean to try to call you out, im more just voicing my frustration. With my limited knowledge I have very little ability to critique a study on my own, so I try to look for the most reputable source. Idk the answer to any of your questions, but it just seems like outside this forum there is alot of reputable scientists that support these ideas

Strong this OP^
In the 'Hierarchy of Importance' the minimalistic benefits one may achieve through meal timing is at the bottom end of the spectrum.
So though it may not be completely irrelevant to body composition results, it is not completely disregarded.

Also I just browsed back through your original post.
This study is doing nothing but testing MPS, I see nothing stated that one test group received favorable body composition results as opposed to the other.

Here lies your answer.

[ironwill2008]

So while studying for my nutrition test, I came across this paragraph:

"There is much less debate on the addition of protein to the carbohydrate recovery meal, since it has been shown convincingly to aid in improved body composition greater than carbohydrate alone, there is much less debate on the addition of protein to the carbohydrate recovery meal.In fact, after one bout of lower body resistance training, a supplement with carbohydrates, amino acids, and complete proteins was shown to increase muscular protein synthesis and muscle growth by 400% (24 grams of new muscle protein versus 6 grams) over an isocaloric carbohydrate recovery drink (Borsheim, et al. 2004)."

as well as this quote from my teacher (paraphrased):
"Insulin levels will be low, and cortisol levels will be high, creating a catabolic state that will persist after exercise. The goal is to correct this hormone imbalance ASAP. To correct this imbalance, consume a 3:1 carbohydrate to protein ratio immediately after exercise, trying to take in 1.5 grams of carbohydrate and 0.5 grams of protein within 60 minutes after exercise."

so whats the deal with this? It seems like any time people bring up catabolism on this thread they're called an idiot. But my teacher has a doctorate in nutrition and the info int he textbook is based on an actual study...

I just feel like there's too much evidence here to ignore the idea that meal timing could be pretty relevant

Can you provide a link to the study in question? I tried to find it but couldn't locate it. Generally though, it's never a good idea to make sweeping changes in whatever you're doing based solely on one study.


That said, I don't think I've ever seen anyone state that slamming a shake immediately after training will harm your gains. If you choose to do so, go right ahead. At the very least, the supp companies will like you.




In regards to the mention of cortisol after a training session, that bogeyman has been put to rest quite some time ago.

[phillycheese92]

interesting, so MPS doesnt necessarily translate to body composition? and I have no idea how to find that study haha it was just referenced in the textbook. Again, i dont really have a good understanding of how to properly critique a study so i pretty much just go off what people tell me if they can give me a sensible argument haha

[xuerebx]

Can you provide a link to the study in question? I tried to find it but couldn't locate it.

I think this study referenced the authors OP posted: http://www.jssm.org/vol9/n3/1/v9n3-1pdf.pdf

These results were supported by a later analysis that concluded 100 g of carbohydrates improves overall protein balance when ingested one hour following a resistance exercise bout (Borsheim et al., 2004b).

Borsheim, E., Cree, M.G., Tipton, K.D., Elliott, T.A., Aarsland, A. and Wolfe, R.R. (2004b) Effect of carbohydrate intake on net muscle protein synthesis during recovery from resistance exercise. Journal of Applied Physiology 96, 674-678.

So it should be this one: https://www.dropbox.com/s/7c8ssq96hj...%20et%20al.pdf

This should be noted, however (in the discussion):

The principal finding was that intake of 100 g of carbohydrates after resistance exercise improved muscle net protein balance. However, this improvement was of questionable physiological significance because the net balance did not reach positive values and the improvement was minor compared with the reported effect of intake of amino acids.

But I'm not expert so someone more knowledgeable than me could interpret the results better.

[InItForFitness]

interesting, so MPS doesnt necessarily translate to body composition?

No.
Net caloric intake over a prolonged duration will determine this.

[rhadam]

So while studying for my nutrition test, I came across this paragraph:

"There is much less debate on the addition of protein to the carbohydrate recovery meal, since it has been shown convincingly to aid in improved body composition greater than carbohydrate alone, there is much less debate on the addition of protein to the carbohydrate recovery meal.In fact, after one bout of lower body resistance training, a supplement with carbohydrates, amino acids, and complete proteins was shown to increase muscular protein synthesis and muscle growth by 400% (24 grams of new muscle protein versus 6 grams) over an isocaloric carbohydrate recovery drink (Borsheim, et al. 2004)."

as well as this quote from my teacher (paraphrased):
"Insulin levels will be low, and cortisol levels will be high, creating a catabolic state that will persist after exercise. The goal is to correct this hormone imbalance ASAP. To correct this imbalance, consume a 3:1 carbohydrate to protein ratio immediately after exercise, trying to take in 1.5 grams of carbohydrate and 0.5 grams of protein within 60 minutes after exercise."

so whats the deal with this? It seems like any time people bring up catabolism on this thread they're called an idiot. But my teacher has a doctorate in nutrition and the info int he textbook is based on an actual study...

I just feel like there's too much evidence here to ignore the idea that meal timing could be pretty relevant

What you've posted is true, and proven in studies. But, you don't know the context of the studies as you've probably not read them. Context should always be looked at to then understand why the results are what they are, and how you should interpret those results. Also, some of the information in nutrition and physio textbooks are outdated (I know from experience). The "anabolic window" has been debunked for years and has been proven that MPS is upregulated and anabolic signaling is present for many many hours post bout.

Simply having a degree in a field doesn't make you an expert. There are many people with masters in my field I would never listen to and I would wager my knowledge and grasp of physio/nutrition against them. I won't even bother to look at a paper that's older than 8 years, no point.

[kinesthetic1234]

As was mentioned - context - is indeed everything. Now, I will share one possibility with you that can be an example of this. Based solely on critical thought.

Lets say you could measure in weight the exact amount of muscle growth that occurs with and without feeding, within the next hour after you lift. Put it at (maybe this can be done - but I am demonstrating context only) ....

1. Put it at, 1 milligram without getting nourishment in that window.
2. A 400% increase if nourishment is consumed within the window.

HERE WE GOOOO - 400 x 1 Milligram = .4 grams ........... Do you see where I am going with this??

If this were the case, and you worked out 5x a week, and always achieved nourishment in that window - and did so for a year, it would equal 96 grams more muscle = like 1/3 lb.



This is what a 400% increase could legitimately be indicating.

[ironwill2008]

The principal finding was that intake of 100 g of carbohydrates after resistance exercise improved muscle net protein balance. However, this improvement was of questionable physiological significance because the net balance did not reach positive values and the improvement was minor compared with the reported effect of intake of amino acids.

^^^^ This is pretty much the same conclusion that a multitude of other, similar, studies came to. It also should be noted, again, that protein alone will produce an insulin response.



I don't see the bridge between the study conclusion, above, and this quote:

this quote from my teacher (paraphrased):
"Insulin levels will be low, and cortisol levels will be high, creating a catabolic state that will persist after exercise. The goal is to correct this hormone imbalance ASAP. To correct this imbalance, consume a 3:1 carbohydrate to protein ratio immediately after exercise, trying to take in 1.5 grams of carbohydrate and 0.5 grams of protein within 60 minutes after exercise."

As I mentioned before, the whole "Cortisol is the Enemy" schtick has been debunked quite some time ago, along with the "anabolic window" theory, which has proven to actually be an anabolic "garage door."