Official MMDELAD Thread: Because Micros (and nutrition) Do Matter

[determined4000]

Background:

Well over a year ago I put the MMDELAD acronym (Micros Matter don't eat like a dumba##) in my sig. I was sick and tired of hearing the misapplication of IIFYM and flexible dieting.
I was sick and tired of hearing people ask legitimate questions and being told that they could
a. eat whatever they wanted as long as it fit their macros
b. eat anything as long as the majority of the food (or a certain stated %) was nutrient dense
c. that timing, food sources, types of fat/carbs/protein did not matter
and on.

Just hitting those macros became King and all that anyone cared about so it seemed.
Why?
Because, well doing such is what is most important to weight loss/gain and muscle gain/retention. I acknowledge this fully. However, if doesn't mean it is best for health or that there aren't other factors that could benefit (or hinder) someone.

Things I see wrong with the IIFYM approach.
What is nutrient dense to someone is not the same as someone else. People have different lines.
For ex.
One person says oats aren't because they are against carbs.
Another says they are fine but cheerios (also made of whole grain oats) aren't
Another says cheerios are fine but chocolate cheerios certainly aren't
Another says they are fine but cocoa puffs wouldn't be
Another says cocoa puffs are fine (still whole grain) but chocolate Teddy Grahams or (insert chocolate snack food here) isnt
And yet another says those are fine because they dont have trans fat, but a donut would be unhealthy.

See the problem?

2nd:
What if someone is eating 90% of food from brown rice, chicken, and olive oil. Is there anything wrong with those foods? Not IMO. However, that sort of diet would not be good for health. A healthy diet needs to be nutrient dense and varied.


We need to be able to say in some forum that bacon is not the same as protein and fat from chicken and coconut oil or beef and flax.
We need to be able to discuss that possibility that nutrient timing MAY have an impact on muscle protein synthesis.
We need to be able to ask legitimate nutrition questions and get legitimate answers or at least thoughts/comments besides
it doesn't matter" or "its fine"

So that is what I am creating this thread for.

If you disagree with my sentiments, no one is forcing you to open this thread.
Free will is great and should be exercised.

This thread will be used for asking real questions and getting real insights from others, knowing there probably is no real right or true answer.

We can post studies and discuss them.

I invite anyone who agrees with these concepts to please subscribe and participate as much as possible.

I will begin everything by posting a study and some thoughts in post #2.

D.

Edit:
I am making a rule that we are NOT ALLOWED TO USE THE Most used ACRONYM (hint:it begins with an I and ends with an M) in this thread. Those who do should be reminded and are subject to negging/reporting if they do not edit their posts.

[determined4000]

Study
http://www.nutritionandmetabolism.com/content/9/1/40
-Some interest tidbits-
1. MPS elevated up to 150% within a few hours after WO and then the drop happens.
2. MPS enhanced with Omega 3 intake
3. MPS best with whey and milk. Milk was better than meats and vegetable proteins.
4. Also interesting was that WHOLE milk was better than skim. So maybe all those old school bb'ers (touting whole milk as the best recovery food and touting the need to ingest something PWO) were right.

Discuss

[cls91]

In.


Too much parroting on these forums...would be nice to see some actual nutritional discussions

[determined4000]

In.


Too much parroting on these forums...would be nice to see some actual nutritional discussions

nice

I am hoping to get at least one good topic going each day or two.

[Sagaro87]

It's like anything new. People are gonna feel pretty silly in a few years when they find out that we're all doing it wrong. They will post some study about how the best post workout meal is a watermelon filled with yogurt and everyone will be doing that until the research says something else.

I find it funny that the "parrots" as cls91 called them always point people to the stickies, and I wonder when the last time any of them actually visited the stickies themselves. In Alan Aragon's sticky it says that nutrient timing is important, just not as important as total dietary needs. I don't see why someone couldn't mix a little of the old school mentality with a little of the new. I do. I work at night so I eat some snacks on my breaks (2) then I usually eat one or two meals (1 right after workout) before I go to bed in the morning and then again when I wake up. That's 4-5 times a day sometimes even 6 if I feel like it and it makes perfect sense. I'm hungry when I wake up and after I workout so why wouldn't I eat then. Am I gonna lose all my gains because it's bro-science to eat that many times a day? It just seems natural. It's more like bro-science to tell people not to eat six times a day, but then tell them it's okay to eat whatever they want and whenever they want.

People always talk about preference, but what about what makes sense. I'm not really a fan of IF because unless you work 12-14 hours a day there really is no excuse to eat like that. Who prefers to cram all those calories into a break-fast window, seriously? I'm not telling people what to do nor am I trying to start a pissing match, but that's just my opinion.

Also I commend the OP for trying to be a little different and find a balance between nutrients and timing.

[DaveGabe24]

Also I commend the OP for trying to be a little different and find a balance between nutrients and timing.

It's pretty sad that wanting to explore and iron out the intricacies of dieting and nutrition, and refusing to conform to the one-size-fits-all method of IIFYM is "trying to be a little different." Not that I disagree, but it strikes me as a bit alarming when a nutrition forum considers questioning an extreme style of dieting as being different.



Good thread, curious to see where it goes, and good luck.

[MrBillson]

Hopefully this won't turn into a "IIFYM is wrong" thread. IIFYM isn't wrong, it's just misinterpreted.

And yes I'm definitely up for some new discussion and research regarding nutrient timing, however I will still recommend that noobs don't concern themselves with it.

[Former300lber]

There's not enough factual evidence to say that meal timing other then for personal and performance related issues is relevant, secondly people are going to eat what they want in the end regardless of what you or anyone else says, Flexible Dieting was just a way of saying don't be afraid certain foods because the types of foods you eat wont make you fat, it's how much you eat.

If someone wants to be healthy, they will make those choices on there own, and nothing you post will convince someone that they should eat x vs y because y has more nutrients.

Humans as a whole are a extremely stubborn species, health & proper nutrition are advocated everywhere in the media, we just fail to realize it because truthfully the commercial with the bacon cheese burger is a lot more enticing then the commercial talking about local organic grass fed beef.

Oh and let's not forget, it's not exactly easy to make nutritionally wise choices when these types of foods are drastically over priced compared to others.

However I do agree that these forums are very repetitive, and a lot of replys people get to questions are always answered with the same "hit this and that and fill with whatever, only thing that matter is calories" answers, but these replies are also just the basics, sometimes too much information can and WILL be overwhelming for someone who's trying to educate them selves a bit, it's all about baby steps.

[InItForFitness]

Study
http://www.nutritionandmetabolism.com/content/9/1/40
-Some interest tidbits-
1. MPS elevated up to 150% within a few hours after WO and then the drop happens.
2. MPS enhanced with Omega 3 intake
3. MPS best with whey and milk. Milk was better than meats and vegetable proteins.
4. Also interesting was that WHOLE milk was better than skim. So maybe all those old school bb'ers (touting whole milk as the best recovery food and touting the need to ingest something PWO) were right.

Discuss

"However, since resistance exercise increases MPS for up to ~48 h [24] consumption of dietary amino acids 24 - 48 h post-exercise recovery would also likely convey the same synergistic effects on MPS as those that are observed when amino acids are provided immediately after resistance exercise..."


"We propose that there is, at least in young individuals, an extended ‘window of anabolic opportunity’ beyond the immediate post-exercise period that persists for at least 24 h..."



(IMO) The most useful information from the entire study.

Helps further explain the "PWO Anabolic Window" and how it's so commonly exaggerated.

[HealingHands8]

In!

Ready for scientific debate.

[naturalguy]

I commend you, great thread

[MikeWines]

In on first page.

[DaveGabe24]

Hopefully this won't turn into a "IIFYM is wrong" thread. IIFYM isn't wrong, it's just misinterpreted.

And yes I'm definitely up for some new discussion and research regarding nutrient timing, however I will still recommend that noobs don't concern themselves with it.

Misinterpreted would be an understatement. Some of the guys that have had REAL success (not the average IIFYM joe around here, I'm thinking Nunez type guys) are the ones who eat strict and structured 99% of the time and then IIFYM one a rare occassion. People see a poptart in guys hands and then go off on a tangent trying to justify it so they feel better eating a box themselves lol

How many guys have actually made it to the stage using IIFYM? Just curious, cause Ken Hill has posted quite a bit how it's really just a lazy diet and may work for the average person. I wonder how many guys at a competitive level actually use it because that would really speak volumes on just how far you can take it imo.

There's not enough factual evidence to say that meal timing other then for personal and performance related issues is relevant, secondly people are going to eat what they want in the end regardless of what you or anyone else says, IIFYM was just a way of saying don't be afraid certain foods because the types of foods you eat wont make you fat, it's how much you eat.

If someone wants to be healthy, they will make those choices on there own, and nothing you post will convince someone that they should eat x vs y because y has more nutrients.

Humans as a whole are a extremely stubborn species, health & proper nutrition are advocated everywhere in the media, we just fail to realize it because truthfully the commercial with the bacon cheese burger is a lot more enticing then the commercial talking about local organic grass fed beef.

Oh and let's not forget, it's not exactly easy to make nutritionally wise choices when these types of foods are drastically over priced compared to others.

However I do agree that these forums are very repetitive, and a lot of replys people get to questions are always answered with the same "hit this and that and fill with whatever, only thing that matter is calories" answers, but these replies are also just the basics, sometimes too much information can and WILL be overwhelming for someone who's trying to educate them selves a bit, it's all about baby steps.

Health and proper nutrition in the media? Like avoiding egg yolks, etc.? lol Anyways I don't necessarily disagree with your post but I can't help but think a healthy discussion always has a place on a forum. Especially because some big time guys (John Meadows, Scott Stevenson, etc) do think peri workout plays a role in optimization of a protocol.

I commend you, great thread

Well look who it is! How ya been man? It's been quite a while...

[SuperHippo]

"However, since resistance exercise increases MPS for up to ~48 h [24] consumption of dietary amino acids 24 - 48 h post-exercise recovery would also likely convey the same synergistic effects on MPS as those that are observed when amino acids are provided immediately after resistance exercise..."


"We propose that there is, at least in young individuals, an extended ‘window of anabolic opportunity’ beyond the immediate post-exercise period that persists for at least 24 h..."



(IMO) The most useful information from the entire study.

Helps further explain the "PWO Anabolic Window" and how it's so commonly exaggerated.

Totally agree

[MikeWines]

Modulation of obesity-induced inflammation by dietary fats: mechanisms and clinical evidence

[MrBillson]

Misinterpreted would be an understatement. Some of the guys that have had REAL success (not the average IIFYM joe around here, I'm thinking Nunez type guys) are the ones who eat strict and structured 99% of the time and then IIFYM one a rare occassion. People see a poptart in guys hands and then go off on a tangent trying to justify it so they feel better eating a box themselves lol

How many guys have actually made it to the stage using IIFYM? Just curious, cause Ken Hill has posted quite a bit how it's really just a lazy diet and may work for the average person. I wonder how many guys at a competitive level actually use it because that would really speak volumes on just how far you can take it imo.

I don't think you understand what IIFYM is. It has nothing to do with your food choices. You can eat nothing but brown rice, chicken and broccoli and still use IIFYM. So a lot of people probably do use it to compete.

[AntM1564]

So in on this. Great thread.

[TrojanFtball82]

Many IFBB competitors have structured refeeds each week where their carbs are elevated and macros change. This is when they eat the cereal, carbs, etc. that they've been missing out on. That's IIFYM.

Also saying many will feel stupid when science debunks whatever is hogwash. Science is constantly updating itself, which is the studies are so interesting to read. Aragon never said "don't eat after you workout", just that "total daily caloric intake is more important than nutrient timing". The main problem, above all else, is people that only hear what they want to hear.

Also in

[BULLandTERRIER]

Some of the guys that have had REAL success (not the average IIFYM joe around here, I'm thinking Nunez type guys) are the ones who eat strict and structured 99% of the time and then IIFYM one a rare occassion.

I think this ^^^ is the whole point of IIFYM. 90% of the time you eat "clean", "healthy", "nutrition dense" ... food and leave that 10% for some ice cream, cookies ... whatever you enjoy eating.

[InItForFitness]

Really wish we could have a MOD here to regulate the thread and prevent any/all "IIFY " discussion.

The potential of this thread is great, but it's already looking like it's going to turn I to an "IIFYM" ****-fest.


PEOPLE PLEASE READ THE OP AND WHAT THIS THREAD IS ABOUT! IT IS NOT HERE TO TURN INTO AN "IIFYM" THREAD

[cls91]

Really wish we could have a MOD here to regulate the thread and prevent any/all "IIFY " discussion.

The potential of this thread is great, but it's already looking like it's going to turn I to an "IIFYM" ****-fest.


PEOPLE PLEASE READ THE OP AND WHAT THIS THREAD IS ABOUT! IT IS NOT HERE TO TURN INTO AN "IIFYM" THREAD

^^ this. Thought it was worth quoting so people would read it twice

I haven't had a chance to read the initial study, or the one MikeWines just posted, but hopefully I'll have some time later today and start contributing to the thread.

[MaximosJ]

Cool thread, but I prefer the acronym in my sig. The more letters the better.

[HealingHands8]

Misinterpreted would be an understatement. Some of the guys that have had REAL success (not the average IIFYM joe around here, I'm thinking Nunez type guys) are the ones who eat strict and structured 99% of the time and then IIFYM one a rare occassion. People see a poptart in guys hands and then go off on a tangent trying to justify it so they feel better eating a box themselves lol

Oh lord, not a good start.

Really wish we could have a MOD here to regulate the thread and prevent any/all "IIFY " discussion.

The potential of this thread is great, but it's already looking like it's going to turn I to an "IIFYM" ****-fest.


PEOPLE PLEASE READ THE OP AND WHAT THIS THREAD IS ABOUT! IT IS NOT HERE TO TURN INTO AN "IIFYM" THREAD

If that is the case, lets not turn this into a post workout nutrition thread. That cow has been milked dry.

[PBateman2]

Subbed. Nice D4K.

[Webber91]

THANK YOU.

Too many parrotting idiots in this section.

[ErikTheElectric]

In and in.

[DaveGabe24]

I don't think you understand what IIFYM is. It has nothing to do with your food choices. You can eat nothing but brown rice, chicken and broccoli and still use IIFYM. So a lot of people probably do use it to compete.

Many IFBB competitors have structured refeeds each week where their carbs are elevated and macros change. This is when they eat the cereal, carbs, etc. that they've been missing out on. That's IIFYM.


Also saying many will feel stupid when science debunks whatever is hogwash. Science is constantly updating itself, which is the studies are so interesting to read. Aragon never said "don't eat after you workout", just that "total daily caloric intake is more important than nutrient timing". The main problem, above all else, is people that only hear what they want to hear.

Also in

This makes it sound like IIFYM came first and then people's food choices came second lol Guys have been eating the same for years, now people just have a cool acronym to slap on these habits. Too funny, it's like saying skiploading is IIFYM haha

Anyways, lets get back on track. People seem confused already about the intentions of the thread.

Oh lord, not a good start.



If that is the case, lets not turn this into a post workout nutrition thread. That cow has been milked dry.

Care to elaborate? What topic hasn't been "milked dry?" The point of this proverbial mental masturbation is to strive for the optimal strategies and methods. Not just overlook some topic because it's been covered before. Imagine if science avoided topics because they've been "milked dry?" What a sad world it would be lol

[Shredthetics]

Agreed..
It should be common knowledge that at the end of the day a calorie is a calorie.
However, if one is to eat a diet of strictly micro/phyto nutrient deficient foods(I***M extremists) they maybe develop negative health concerns or a lessened-state of well being.
If one does not feel their best, they cannot train their best. IME

If your on a diet and half-assing your training you aren't going to achieve results as impressive as another on a healthier diet training with double the intensity.


This is IME as I have tried I***M with a diet of things like poptarts, protein powder, sour patch and nothing else.. while my composition didn't necessarily change as macros stayed the same I felt terrible and my lifts followed suit. Changed back to a more nutrient dense diet and my glycogen stores went up along with my well being and intensity.



I mean say you have have inflammation issues(among other things) when your fat intake is coming from strictly bacon grease... replace that with a proper EPA/DHA/ALA intake from fish/flax/nuts and I'd bet money those issues improved.


It's unfortunate that there aren't many(if any?) studies comparing the effects of a micro/phyto nutrient dense vs deficient diet in athletes performance & composition.

[InItForFitness]

If that is the case, lets not turn this into a post workout nutrition thread. That cow has been milked dry.

My response was in regards to the study that was posted, which is what the OP was about.

Posting studies and responding to the topic at hand.

[HealingHands8]

More high quality studies needed in this area:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19943985

My response was in regards to the study that was posted, which is what the OP was about.

Posting studies and responding to the topic at hand.

I was referring specifically to your post, but more as a generalised point. The majority of the posters here have only ever read the two papers Alan was a part of.