Pre-Sleep Protein (study)

[Mrpb]

How can you reasonably conclude or ask anyone to conclude it's larger than a variable explains when all the variables weren't controlled for.

Because there is a ton of data available from other studies how much difference protein supplementation has on muscle hypertrophy.

They state they want to prove that it is "additive," but for this to be true, you'd have to prove that the same protein/caloric intake at a different point in the day wouldn't give the same net effect. .

No that's YOUR research question. It wasn't THEIR research question. And if you read the full text of the study linked in the OP you can find a detailed explanation of why they didn't perform that study.

[WillBrink]

How can you reasonably conclude or ask anyone to conclude it's larger than a variable explains when all the variables weren't controlled for.

They state they want to prove that it is "additive," but for this to be true, you'd have to prove that the same protein/caloric intake at a different point in the day wouldn't give the same net effect.
If the only point is that bed time is another opportunity to eat--I think we knew that.
If their only aim is to say more calories and more protein=more growth, again I think we had that down.

Does it hurt? No. It is anymore optimal than doing it a different way? I'm not seeing this as proof.

My attitude is timing data is all over the place. Eating a PW drink may or may not help, but will not hurt, so might as well. Eating some cottage cheese before bed may or may not help, but will not hurt, so why not. I personally just can't be bothered these days with minutia to maybe glean an extra lb of muscle here and there but for those focused on them gainz, may get best responses by paying attention to timing.

Truly accounting for all possible variables and confounders is difficult and gets real expensive real fast.

[jsmoor09]

Because there is a ton of data available from other studies how much difference protein supplementation has on muscle hypertrophy.



No that's YOUR research question. It wasn't THEIR research question. And if you read the full text of the study linked in the OP you can find a detailed explanation of why they didn't perform that study.

"While it is currently unclear whether pre-sleep protein ingestion is superior to protein ingestion at a different time point, we propose that a more relevant question is whether pre-sleep protein ingestion is additive to protein intake earlier in the day"

[x-ray vision]

Well color me corrected brah. The point only being, the ratio is quite different between cow juice and human and intended more as humor than relevant per se. To an adult human, unlikely to have physiological relevance to gainz is my guess.

Sure, your point still stands, and I was going to mention that in my post. However, I'm not sure if the poster you were responding to was making the claim you think - that since cow milk is in a particular percentage by nature it may be best. Maybe he's saying that since such an enormous amount of growth in calves takes place in a relatively short amount of time, the percentage may be optimal. Or maybe he's saying something else. Either way, when I have time on message boards, I like correct inaccurate info if I can.

[Mrpb]

"While it is currently unclear whether pre-sleep protein ingestion is superior to protein ingestion at a different time point, we propose that a more relevant question is whether pre-sleep protein ingestion is additive to protein intake earlier in the day"

That's not the part where they explain it.

[jsmoor09]

That's not the part where they explain it.

But that is the question, no?

I've flipped this thing inside and out, and I keep getting this condescending "maybe if you read it" response. But literally the only thing that came from this is that people given more protein/calories grew more.

Please explain to me what you view as THEIR research question, and how not controlling for multiple variables appropriately answers any question.

[Mrpb]

But that is the question, no?

I've flipped this thing inside and out, and I keep getting this condescending "maybe if you read it" response. But literally the only thing that came from this is that people given more protein/calories grew more.

Please explain to me what you view as THEIR research question, and how not controlling for multiple variables appropriately answers any question.

Thanks but no thanks. If you don't understand that 27 gram extra protein is not fully explanatory for 100% more gains I would rather not spend my time on trying to explain things to you.

[x-ray vision]

They state they want to prove that it is "additive," but for this to be true, you'd have to prove that the same protein/caloric intake at a different point in the day wouldn't give the same net effect.

No that's YOUR research question. It wasn't THEIR research question. And if you read the full text of the study linked in the OP you can find a detailed explanation of why they didn't perform that study.

So, you're saying a higher dose of some amount of protein gives you gainz is the point of the study?

Not according to the study. Let's just look at the conclusion alone (bolding mine):

Protein ingested immediately prior to sleep is effectively digested and absorbed, thereby increasing amino acid availability during overnight sleep. Greater amino acid availability during sleep stimulates muscle protein synthesis rates and improves whole-body protein net balance during overnight recovery.

[jsmoor09]

Thanks but no thanks. If you don't understand that 27 gram extra protein is not fully explanatory for 100% more gains I would rather not spend my time trying to explain things to you.

I do understand. Literally that's what I'm saying.

Add 2000 grams of protein and 9,000+ calories over 3 months and you'll get gains. We didn't need this to show it. Why was the protein administered prior to bed if all they cared about was adding 27 g?

What was their purpose?

It's easy to call someone too stupid to understand when you're not able to defend a position.

This was a poorly done study that doesn't add anything to the knowledge base.

[Mrpb]

So, you're saying a higher dose of some amount of protein gives you gainz is the point of the study?

No that's not what I'm saying. And the conversation with jsmoor is about Snijders 2015.

It's easy to call someone too stupid to understand when you're not able to defend a position.

I didn't call you stupid but I do notice that most of your questions are already addressed in the full texts of the studies.

[x-ray vision]

In line, muscle protein synthesis rates were approximately 22% higher during overnight recovery when protein was ingested prior to sleep when compared to the placebo treatment. From these data we concluded that pre-sleep protein ingestion represents an effective dietary strategy to further augment the skeletal muscle adaptive response to resistance-type exercise training (Figure 1).

How much higher would muscle protein synthesis rates been (if any) if the same amount of protein were ingested at other times of the day? We don't know - at least not from this study. But other studies (and I'm sure most here are aware of the meta done by Aragon and Schoenfeld) don't show much significan't difference except when looking at extreme diets.

[Mrpb]

While the meta by Brad and Stu was interesting, the included studies weren't done with resistance trained athletes. And the majority of the studies didn't include resistance training.

It stands to reason that meal frequency becomes more important for trained athletes in resistance training. This is why Alan and Eric Helms recommend a meal frequency of 3 to 6 protein rich meals in deficit for bodybuilders: https://jissn.biomedcentral.com/arti...550-2783-11-20

[JornT]

Im the author of that review and several pre-sleep protein studies, so hopefully I can clear some things up.

I don't understand why people want to know if protein at a certain time point (either pre-sleep, post workout, or whatever), is better than at a different time point. Does it really matter how one time point compares to a differen time point?

Option 1:
Let's say pre-sleep protein is better than protein at any other time of the day. Does that mean you shouldn't eat protein at those other times? Of course not.

Option 2:
Let's say pre-sleep protein is the same or even worse than protein at in any other time of the day. Does that mean you shouldn't have pre-sleep protein? Of course not. Eating more protein in the morning might help build more muscle early in the day. But's is simply not going to help you during the night. If extra protein is going help to build more muscle early in the day, than you should absolutely eat more protein in the morning. But that has nothing to do with whether you should or should not take extra protein before sleep. Pre-sleep protein appears to be ADDITIVE to what you do during the day, so regardless of what you eat durng the day, you can only benefit from eating some more protein prior to sleep.

Jsmoor, I'm not trying to bully on you, but take a look at these two posts you make.

I've flipped this thing inside and out, and I keep getting this condescending "maybe if you read it" response.

Here you complain about a condescending tone. Yet in the next post you act like you are the research judge and jury:

This was a poorly done study that doesn't add anything to the knowledge base.

Why the mean comment? Would it not be better to respectfully ask why the study was done the way it was instead of assuming you know much better?

Since you made the strong statement ''this was a poorly done study'', you seem to have made up your mind and there is likely nothing I can do to chance it. Yet I hope the beginning of this posts helps you understand why the study was done this way and why we think that's a much more relevant question.

[x-ray vision]

No that's not what I'm saying.

Did you notice that in posts 37 and 38 jsmoor09 and I simulposted and interpreted your statements the same way? If you're going to bother posting that you're not saying what two people just interpreted what you said the same way, why not explain?

But since you're going to do that, allow me:

While the meta by Brad and Stu was interesting, the included studies weren't done with resistance trained athletes.

Wrong. Very wrong.

Im the author of that review and several pre-sleep protein studies, so hopefully I can clear some things up.

I don't understand why people want to know if protein at a certain time point (either pre-sleep, post workout, or whatever), is better than at a different time point. Does it really matter how one time point compares to a differen time point?

You really don't know the answer? On a nutrition forum of a bodybuilding message board...you don't know the answer to that question? I think you do, but since you're asking, I'll do my best to speak for the masses and answer.

For decades bodybuilding magazines have been touting the importance in terms of gains that nutrition timing, in particular, protein timing has. Since then, folks like Aragon and Schoenfeld have done a lot to demolish the dogma by using real and updated research. Because of this paradigm shift, the sort of folks that would read and post here want to know the real deal.

If you don't think knowing such a thing is important, what was the point of your review?

Option 1:
Let's say pre-sleep protein is better than protein at any other time of the day. Does that mean you shouldn't eat protein at those other times? Of course not.

Nice straw man you built there.

Option 2:
Let's say pre-sleep protein is the same or even worse than protein at in any other time of the day. Does that mean you shouldn't have pre-sleep protein?

Depending on one's macro needs/plans/preference, yes, it does. If it's worse, one may benefit by having those calories at another time of the day. That's not obvious?

Not to mention acid reflux and GERD. As someone who has done plenty of swallowing studies, I can tell you that if you live long enough, you will have issues with your eso****us. Ingesting anything besides water before bed better have a definite benefit for someone that is particularly doing it for benefits and not preference, when there can be a serious drawback, especially if one already has eso****eal issues.

Here you complain about a condescending tone. Yet in the next post you act like you are the research judge and jury:

Oh, please. What he said is relatively tame and it is common in debates to claim such things, and especially a fine thing to do when you have been continuously trying to find another to post what the benefit is and getting obfuscating replies. No one is getting sentenced by jsmoor09 here.

Why the mean comment? Would it not be better to respectfully ask why the study was done the way it was instead of assuming you know much better?

It wasn't "mean", especially when considering you have not yet identified yourself as the author of that review yet. And he did respectfully ask. See his first post.

Since you made the strong statement ''this was a poorly done study'', you seem to have made up your mind and there is likely nothing I can do to chance it. Yet I hope the beginning of this posts helps you understand why the study was done this way and why we think that's a much more relevant question.

You're selling someone short and he asked plenty of questions. All of us open-minded folks make statements that we withdraw when someone helps us to understand something more fully. Why such a mean statement?

[jsmoor09]

Im the author of that review and several pre-sleep protein studies, so hopefully I can clear some things up.

I don't understand why people want to know if protein at a certain time point (either pre-sleep, post workout, or whatever), is better than at a different time point. Does it really matter how one time point compares to a differen time point?

Option 1:
Let's say pre-sleep protein is better than protein at any other time of the day. Does that mean you shouldn't eat protein at those other times? Of course not.

Option 2:
Let's say pre-sleep protein is the same or even worse than protein at in any other time of the day. Does that mean you shouldn't have pre-sleep protein? Of course not. Eating more protein in the morning might help build more muscle early in the day. But's is simply not going to help you during the night. If extra protein is going help to build more muscle early in the day, than you should absolutely eat more protein in the morning. But that has nothing to do with whether you should or should not take extra protein before sleep. Pre-sleep protein appears to be ADDITIVE to what you do during the day, so regardless of what you eat durng the day, you can only benefit from eating some more protein prior to sleep.

Jsmoor, I'm not trying to bully on you, but take a look at these two posts you make.



Here you complain about a condescending tone. Yet in the next post you act like you are the research judge and jury:



Why the mean comment? Would it not be better to respectfully ask why the study was done the way it was instead of assuming you know much better?

Since you made the strong statement ''this was a poorly done study'', you seem to have made up your mind and there is likely nothing I can do to chance it. Yet I hope the beginning of this posts helps you understand why the study was done this way and why we think that's a much more relevant question.

I never thought I'd see the author here. I respect your willingness to discuss it.

I guess I'm missing the goal of the experiment.

If you weren't aiming to show benefits of protein intake before bed, what do you feel that you've shown that is new?

For my own credentialing, I'm a physician. While that doesn't make me an expert on nutrition, I certainly have spent my share of time critically reviewing research.

The way this reads to me is: We want to tell you that 27.5 g of protein prior to bed causes significant muscle growth--that not taking it before bed may not cause.

Because, respectfully, if all you're saying is that more protein and more calories=more muscle growth, well I think most people view that as hard science at this point.

You present it as "Well, why wouldn't you take protein before sleep?" But assuming I'm taking 200 g of protein a day, does it matter if 27.5 of those are before bed?

An old doctor I trained under made us walk through his own hand-out when reviewing journal articles in a group. One of the questions was: "Does this change how I'm going to do things?"

And while I'm not going to say that there's anything wrong with protein before sleep, your study fails to show why that protein at 10 pm is better than the same protein at 2 pm. Based on this study that you've presented, I don't see a compelling or convincing reason to change anything.

And, while I keep reading that the relevance of timing wasn't what you intended to study--I have to again ask--what was? More protein=more growth? Why did you choose to give the protein prior to sleep if timing wasn't of interest?

[EjnarKolinkar]

Hmm, interesting. Well I get both sides of the argument. I however consume 175-225g protein a day, so getting 30-50g of high quality protein prior to sleep is not an issue which required picking a time to rob those grams from, ever... I reckon if I was a 100 pound woman this might be a point of contention though.

Studies again prove consuming a high quality protein supports training and muscle mass






*in after optimal casein to whey ratio lmao.

[Mrpb]

Did you notice that in posts 37 and 38 jsmoor09 and I simulposted and interpreted your statements the same way?

You came in half way while I was having a discussion with jsmoor. Perhaps you missed the first part of my reply in post #24: "No one knows exactly how much difference it will make".

I don't think you and I are in disagreement in that regard.

I'll let Stu Phillips reiterate the point I have been making in this thread:

Pre-sleep feeding is a time when protein provision may provide a marked benefit to remodel muscle proteins. Ingestion of 40 g of casein protein before bed stimulates MPS and improves net protein balance overnight in healthy young men (Res et al., 2012). Recently, a 12 week progressive RE training study showed that a pre-sleep casein beverage (27.5 g protein, 15 g carbohydrate, 0.1 g fat) in comparison with a placebo beverage augmented muscle mass, muscle fiber area, and strength gains (Snijders et al., 2015). However, the control group in this study did not receive a protein supplement resulting in a 0.6 g/kg difference in total protein intakes (1.3 vs. 1.9 g/kg/d), which some would argue would confer an advantage to the supplemented group regardless of when the protein was consumed. This may be the case and we acknowledge that 1.3 g/kg/d does not fall within even our recommendations for a protein intake that appears to be optimal for hypertrophy (Phillips, 2014a). Nonetheless, it is interesting to note that in a meta-analysis done by Cermak et al. (2012) only 3 of the 16 studies she analyzed showed statistically significant gains in lean mass with protein supplementation in young persons. While there were a further 4–5 studies that approached statistical significance, the fact that only 3 (19%) of the studies [one of which was in women in a hypoenergetic state (Josse et al., 2011)] independently reported augmented hypertrophy with protein supplementation shows that protein's effect on hypertrophy is small compared to the stimulus of the exercise itself. The point we make here is that the magnitude of the effects seen by Snijders et al. (2015) are impressive even considering the extra protein ingested and so we propose that the pre-sleep timing of the protein supplement was as, if not more, important as the higher protein intake of the supplemented group.

http://journal.frontiersin.org/artic...015.00245/full

And of course I've already admitted that this still carries an element of speculation in it. Nonetheless it's a credible argument in my opinion.

Wrong. Very wrong.

I think I'm quite right actually. This is confirmed by how many times the word obese is used in table 1. It also states how many studies did not include exercise.

http://nutritionreviews.oxfordjourna.../2/69.full.pdf

And yes I'm aware that some of these studies used some light exercise program. Not to be confused with the rigorous resistance exercise programs bodybuilders typically submit themselves to though.

Edit: Ah I just noticed from your post above that you're referring to another meta analysis. While it's an interesting question to look at how important timing close to the training is, timing pre sleep is quite a different topic. Maybe someone could use the available data to do a new meta analysis. One weakness in the data is that the large majority of these studies used DEXA or underwater weighing as a gauge for changes in muscle mass. I'm sure you're aware of the low accuracy of these tools. James Krieger has written an excellent series about this. And that happens to be one of the strengths of the Snijder study; they used DEXA, ultrasound and biopsy.

[jonnicola]

Perhaps I'm dumbing things down too much, but I inferred that this study suggests that the last meal of the day (pre-bed) is followed by the longest time that one won't be consuming protein (during their sleep), and thus to maximise protein synthesis on a 12-24hour window, it would benefit to have a large protein intake just before we hit the sack.

Which kinda makes sense intuitively.

[SubWooferCooker]

This study shows that 27g Pre-sleep Protein contributes to muscle growth, So unless taking that 27g or even a further 27g at some other point earlier in the day somehow magically blunts the ability to synthesis protein while sleeping then this study is pretty informative if you ask me.

[jsmoor09]

This study shows that 27g Pre-sleep Protein contributes to muscle growth, So unless taking that 27g or even a further 27g at some other point earlier in the day somehow magically blunts the ability to synthesis protein while sleeping then this study is pretty informative if you ask me.

The point I'm arguing, and the point that no one seems interested in addressing:

If I gave that 27 g of protein at some alternate time in the day, say lunch time or a snack after lunch.

Then we measured total mps over the course of 3 months, instead of focusing on night time mps--then are the results the same?

If both result in the same "gains" in the end, why do I care about the pre-sleep part?

[SubWooferCooker]

The point I'm arguing, and the point that no one seems interested in addressing:

If I gave that 27 g of protein at some alternate time in the day, say lunch time or a snack after lunch.

Then we measured total mps over the course of 3 months, instead of focusing on night time mps--then are the results the same?

If both result in the same "gains" in the end, why do I care about the pre-sleep part?

I totally get your point and would like to see this data also. I guess no study can be taken as absolute gospel but this evidence seems to strongly suggest that pre-bed protein may very well be beneficial, But like you say The example you propose would be something really needed to draw a definite conclusion.

[jsmoor09]

While the meta by Brad and Stu was interesting, the included studies weren't done with resistance trained athletes. And the majority of the studies didn't include resistance training.

It stands to reason that meal frequency becomes more important for trained athletes in resistance training. This is why Alan and Eric Helms recommend a meal frequency of 3 to 6 protein rich meals in deficit for bodybuilders: https://jissn.biomedcentral.com/arti...550-2783-11-20

Judging by the other large thread in the section, you're very invested/interested in the meal frequency science. And I'm not dismissing that. But this doesn't fall in line with that.

They didn't control for meal frequency. They gave one group more protein and more calories.

If they'd given the same 27.5 g of protein as part of lunch, and then the other group got 27.5 as a separate bed-time meal--now we're talking.

But to simply give one group more protein and more calories--you've showed us that body building 101 is still true.

[Mrpb]

The point I'm arguing, and the point that no one seems interested in addressing:

If I gave that 27 g of protein at some alternate time in the day, say lunch time or a snack after lunch.

Of course that's would be an interesting study TOO (I had already mentioned that). However, the researchers choose a different design.

They had a good reason for choosing the design they did and they had a good reason why they didn't choose the protein matched design.

The latter is explained in the full text of the latest review. And interestingly a new study has emerged that completely backed up their point.

Since you keep saying "they should have compared to a group that had the supplement at another time of the day" it makes me wonder if you actually read the explanation.

If you have read it, why not address their argument?

Judging by the other large thread in the section, you're very invested/interested in the meal frequency science. And I'm not dismissing that. But this doesn't fall in line with that.

They didn't control for meal frequency. They gave one group more protein and more calories.

If they'd given the same 27.5 g of protein as part of lunch, and then the other group got 27.5 as a separate bed-time meal--now we're talking.

But to simply give one group more protein and more calories--you've showed us that body building 101 is still true.

No kidding. I was already aware of these basic facts last year when the study came out. I know what they choose as design.

There's been many discussions on why they did what they did and I have seen all the arguments for and against. Over a year ago.

So everyone is aware that one group got 27 gram more protein and a little extra calories. However my original point still stands: 27 gram extra protein doesn't explain 100% more gains. Or as said by Stu Phillips:

The point we make here is that the magnitude of the effects seen by Snijders et al. (2015) are impressive even considering the extra protein ingested and so we propose that the pre-sleep timing of the protein supplement was as, if not more, important as the higher protein intake of the supplemented group.

http://journal.frontiersin.org/artic...015.00245/full

[WillBrink]

Judging by the other large thread in the section, you're very invested/interested in the meal frequency science. And I'm not dismissing that. But this doesn't fall in line with that.

They didn't control for meal frequency. They gave one group more protein and more calories.

If they'd given the same 27.5 g of protein as part of lunch, and then the other group got 27.5 as a separate bed-time meal--now we're talking.

But to simply give one group more protein and more calories--you've showed us that body building 101 is still true.

Matching macros and cals but altering the timing would be an excellent follow up study for this group or others to examine.

[Mrpb]

Matching macros and cals but altering the timing would be an excellent follow up study for this group or others to examine.

A protein matched design has been done recently by Jose Antonio's group. Afaik it's currently under peer review. Unfortunately muscle wasn't directly measured in that study, only LBM by DEXA. There was slightly more LBM gain in the night time group but it didn't reach statistical significance.

On that note it's interesting to see that the Snijders study didn't find a statistical significant difference in LBM gains between groups either. They only found statistically significant differences when they measured muscle with ultrasound and biopsy.

[WillBrink]

A protein matched design has been done recently by Jose Antonio's group. Afaik it's currently under peer review. Unfortunately muscle wasn't directly measured in that study, only LBM by DEXA. There was slightly more LBM gain in the night time group but it didn't reach statistical significance.

On that note it's interesting to see that the Snijders study didn't find a statistical significant difference in LBM gains between groups either. They only found statistically significant differences when they measured muscle with ultrasound and biopsy.

Using a similar design? FYI, I spoke at his lab yesterday:

http://www.brinkzone.com/articles/ex...se-university/

[jsmoor09]

A protein matched design has been done recently by Jose Antonio's group. Afaik it's currently under peer review. Unfortunately muscle wasn't directly measured in that study, only LBM by DEXA. There was slightly more LBM gain in the night time group but it didn't reach statistical significance.

On that note it's interesting to see that the Snijders study didn't find a statistical significant difference in LBM gains between groups either. They only found statistically significant differences when they measured muscle with ultrasound and biopsy.

I'll look forward to it.

[Mrpb]

Using a similar design? FYI, I spoke at his lab yesterday:

http://www.brinkzone.com/articles/ex...se-university/

Nice. His design was that one group took the supplement before bed, the other with breakfast iirc.

I believe the poster was presented on the ISSN conference and there was a thread about it on these forums. I can't find it now.

I'll look forward to it.

Not much to look forward to in my opinion because there was just a small non significant difference in LBM as measured by DEXA scan. What happened on a muscle level we don't know.

I believe most of the data is available on the ISSN website.

Edit: here is the text https://jissn.biomedcentral.com/arti...970-016-0144-9 Bodycomposition was measured with Bodpod.

Another issue with this design is that we don't know what time the morning group had their last meal and how much protein they had. A late dinner with a lot of protein could have nearly the same effects as an overnight shake.

[ThinkAndGoHam]

How do we even know how much mps actually corresponds to increased muscle growth anyway? The body replaces cells year round, How do we know Most of the mps activity is not simply the body replacing cells with new cells not necessarily MORE? and that increased mps is simply repairing the cells we broke down during the exercise? the muscle building phenomenon could be happening in some other way we don't even understand.

Why isn't everybody that optimizes mps jacked?

[Mrpb]

How do we even know how much mps actually corresponds to increased muscle growth anyway?

Stu Phillips' lab did a high quality study recently. Once muscle damage was attenuated correlation between 24h/48h MPS and actual muscle gain was ~0.9, so very high.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/1.../JP272472/full

Why isn't everybody that optimizes mps jacked?

Lack of adequate training, stress levels, poor sleep. Could be many factors. And not everyone is genetically gifted to gain a lot of muscle.

I'd speculate for most bb-ers optimising training will have a larger effect than optimising nutrition. Mainly because most bb-ers already consume a lot of protein spread over their day.