Martin MacDonald – Carbohydrate Tolerance, Rapid Fat Loss & Protein Timing

[NotThereYet25]

- What does the recent protein research discussions mean for practical recommendations?
- Muscle mass retention and large calorie deficits
- The trap of being ‘too moderate’ in evidence-based practice
- Carbohydrate tolerance – what are people referring to?
- Are low-carb diets compulsory for those with insulin resistance?

http://sigmanutrition.com/episode128/

[NotThereYet25]

bump. this is a really great podcast

[Tyler2106]

Cliffs? I'm at work and can't watch.

[Mrpb]

Meh. They left out some vital information. The Longland study that found no muscle loss while dieting at 40% deficit and 1.2 gram protein per kg involved previously resistance trained overweight athletes coming back from a layoff. So they had muscle memory helping out big time. Yes they retained all LBM, no wonder. The 2.4 gram per kg group actually did much better as they gained substantial LBM.

But these results are meaningless for well trained bodybuilders.

[SuffolkPunch]

- Are low-carb diets compulsory for those with insulin resistance?

Are they? I'm interested in this specific point.

[Mrpb]

Are they? I'm interested in this specific point.

No.

(paraphrasing: the difference in the latest study was not significant)

[themonkay]

Thx, I'll give it a listen today. Sigma is generally a good podcast.

[SuffolkPunch]

No.

(paraphrasing: the difference in the latest study was not significant)

Thanks - but is reducing carbs still important or is it all down to losing weight and doing exercise?

[Mrpb]

Thanks - but is reducing carbs still important or is it all down to losing weight and doing exercise?

Even high carbs diets can improve insulin sensitivity, he says.

What's more important: eating according to personal preference and adherence. Some days can be high carb, some days low carb.

[rhadam]

Even high carbs diets can improve insulin sensitivity, he says.

What's more important: eating according to personal preference and adherence. Some days can be high carb, some days low carb.

What was his evidence for the bolded claim? Did he attribute it to the effect of exercise on insulin sensitivity and insulin response?

[Mrpb]

What was his evidence for the bolded claim? Did he attribute it to the effect of exercise on insulin sensitivity and insulin response?

Not sure if I heard it correctly but they mentioned a study with a vegan diet. I think the diet got the credits. I assume it was also a deficit.

I'll upload the transcript once it becomes available. Probably within a few days.

[rhadam]

Not sure if I heard it correctly but they mentioned a study with a vegan diet. I think the diet got the credits. I assume it was also a deficit.

I'll upload the transcript once it becomes available. Probably within a few days.

Interesting, i may actually remember the study (vaguely) that you speak of, as anything involving Vegan and dieting i do take notice since i get a lot of questions about vegetarian/vegan diets.

[Mrpb]

Interesting, i may actually remember the study (vaguely) that you speak of, as anything involving Vegan and dieting i do take notice since i get a lot of questions about vegetarian/vegan diets.

The other study that they talked quite a bit about was Gardner, iirc. Apparently tested high carb and low carb diets for people classified on insulin sensitivity and showed no significant differences in fat loss.

[Heisman2]

The other study that they talked quite a bit about was Gardner, iirc. Apparently tested high carb and low carb diets for people classified on insulin sensitivity and showed no significant differences in fat loss.

This study? http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26638192

I've read through that. Great study for its purpose but probably not applicable to people here.

They looked at adults aged 18-50 with BMI 28-40 and they measured the AUC of insulin of 4 blood samples during an OGTT and classified those above the median as resistant and those below the median as sensitive (separating men and women), so it’s more correct to think of them as “more” or “less insulin sensitive than as necessarily “sensitive” vs. “resistant” (they acknowledge this). They randomly put these people in LF or LC groups and did 14 one-hour classes over 6 months (one/week for 8 weeks, then one every other week for 8 weeks, then one/month for 8 weeks). LF were told to cut to 20 g/day total fat and LC were told to cut to 20 g/d digestible carbohydrate. They wanted to get the lowest total possible the first 8 weeks then slowly add fat/carbs back in at 5 grams for 1-4 weeks, then add 5 more grams for 1-4 weeks, etc, and they wanted to see the lowest levels subjects thought they could maintain long term. Both groups were told to maximize vegetables, minimize added sugars and refined white flour products as well as sources of trans fats, as well as given instructions for water intake. There were no caloric restrictions in the intervention and all participants were encouraged to be physically active. Average class attendance was 80-85% and 80% completed the 6 month protocol.
LF had a 58:22 C:F ratio and LC had a 21:53 ratio (average at 6 months), with modest recidivism between 3-6 months in the LC group and an overall reported energy intake suggesting a 600 kcal/day deficit in both groups. They don’t mention this, but if you look at Figure 4 you’ll see the box plots show a wide distribution of results, with a trend of people classified as insulin resistant as losing more weight on low carbs. They mention this is a pilot study and they are following up with a large one including 600 people.

I think you may like this review: https://www.researchgate.net/publica...lin_Resistance

Anyways, I'm completely swamped now and will log on/post sparingly, primarily in threads that seem medical in nature by the title, so if I don't get back to this or other threads for days at a time, sorry about that.

[Mrpb]

bump. this is a really great podcast

I think I know why you like it. I asked Martin which studies support the idea that resistance trained individuals can get away with large deficits. He said he didn't know any study that showed that. It's something he has observed with his own clients.

I'd be skeptical of that claim as individual DEXA scans have quite the error margin.

This study? http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26638192

I think that's the one.

[SuffolkPunch]

OK, I listened to it properly. He is in favour of lower (but not no carb) diets for people with pre-diabetic or PCOS conditions which is what I was interested in. However, he speculates it's just as likely down to reducing FODMAPs as reducing total carbs.

[muruku]

there's a verrrrrrrrrrrrrrrry old study that showed high carb diets worked for diabetics. might be this one; http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/52/3/524.abstract

but i remember it being much much older. maybe it's this one; http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/29/8/895.abstract

recent ones that i can think of.. the Ma-pi studies?

[Mrpb]

OK, I listened to it properly. He is in favour of lower (but not no carb) diets for people with pre-diabetic or PCOS conditions which is what I was interested in. However, he speculates it's just as likely down to reducing FODMAPs as reducing total carbs.

Irrc he said the reduction in FODMAPs only applied to a small percentage of people sensitive to them.

What I found an interesting remark is that he thinks many of the people who claim to get tired after eating carbs are really getting tired from the size of the meal and not necessarily the carbs. This holds somewhat true for me. I seem to do fine on smaller carb based meals.

[Tyler2106]

What I found an interesting remark is that he thinks many of the people who claim to get tired after eating carbs are really getting tired from the size of the meal and not necessarily the carbs. This holds somewhat true for me. I seem to do fine on smaller carb based meals.

I would second that idea. I can eat carbs and be fine, but when I eat a larger meal I'm usually always really tired. I've noticed this a lot when I go out to lunch at work and eat a bigger meal. I come back to work and want to nap.

[Mrpb]

I would second that idea. I can eat carbs and be fine, but when I eat a larger meal I'm usually always really tired. I've noticed this a lot when I go out to lunch at work and eat a bigger meal. I come back to work and want to nap.

Same for me, lunch can easily make me tired. Seems I do best with a salad and some chicken/fish. Later in the day my tolerance for larger meals goes up.

[Heisman2]

there's a verrrrrrrrrrrrrrrry old study that showed high carb diets worked for diabetics. might be this one; http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/52/3/524.abstract

but i remember it being much much older. maybe it's this one; http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/29/8/895.abstract

recent ones that i can think of.. the Ma-pi studies?

The Ma-Pi 2 studies are cool. You introduced them to me about a month ago and I went through a handful. Seems to work quite well. Once reference describe the diet in part as:

"In all four studies, the same Ma-Pi 2 diet was administered to each patient. It consisted of 40–50% whole-grain (rice, millet and barley); 30–40% vegetables (carrots, savoy cabbage, chicory, red radish, onions, parsley, cabbage and, because of the local lack of some vegetables, other varieties not included in the original Ma-Pi 2 diet were used such as kale, broccoli, lettuce and chive); and 8–10% legumes (adzuki beans, chickpeas, lentils and black beans); plus gomashio (roasted ground sesame seeds with unrefined sea salt); fermented products (miso, tamari and umeboshi); seaweeds (kombu, wakame and nori); and Bancha tea (caffeine-free green tea). Daily average energy intake was 2000 kcal (12% protein, 18% fat and 70% carbohydrate). The Ma-Pi 2 diet contained 18% saturated, 46% monounsaturated and 36% polyunsaturated fat, without trans-fatty acids and an n-6 : n-3 polyunsaturated fatty acid ratio of 5 : 1. It provided nutrients and phytocompounds with antioxidant, hypoglycemic and hypolipemic effects, such as vitamin C, β carotene, magnesium (700 mg/day), manganese (16 mg/day), zinc (15 mg/day), chromium, phytosterols (326 mg/day), dietary fibre (50–60 g/day), inulin (9 g/day), poliphenols, tocotrienols, folates (more than 500 μg/day), quercetin and prebiotic and probiotic products [58]."

OK, I listened to it properly. He is in favour of lower (but not no carb) diets for people with pre-diabetic or PCOS conditions which is what I was interested in. However, he speculates it's just as likely down to reducing FODMAPs as reducing total carbs.

This study showed a nice impact of moderately reducing carbohydrates in people with insulin resistance as well as with separate PCOS. It unfortunately does not describe the source of the carbohydrates that was consumed. http://jn.nutrition.org/content/earl...95065.abstract

If you're really curious about diets regarding PCOS, I'd read this systematic review from 2013: https://www.researchgate.net/publica...sed_Guidelines

Edit: to be clear I have not listened to the podcast in the first post; no idea if what I'm posting is relevant to it specifically at all.

[Mrpb]

This study showed a nice impact of moderately reducing carbohydrates in people with insulin resistance as well as with separate PCOS. It unfortunately does not describe the source of the carbohydrates that was consumed. http://jn.nutrition.org/content/earl...95065.abstract

If you're really curious about diets regarding PCOS, I'd read this systematic review from 2013: https://www.researchgate.net/publica...sed_Guidelines

Edit: to be clear I have not listened to the podcast in the first post; no idea if what I'm posting is relevant to it specifically at all.

I was just reading this thread when I saw this page, maybe it's interesting for one of you: http://www.eattoperform.com/2016/06/...ce-side-story/

[NotThereYet25]

Is Slow & Steady Actually the Best Way to Diet?

http://sigmanutrition.com/is-slow-an...ie-deficits-2/

[muruku]

Is Slow & Steady Actually the Best Way to Diet?

http://sigmanutrition.com/is-slow-an...ie-deficits-2/

http://sigmanutrition.com/episode119/

[Mrpb]

Let me guess.... we think fast is better and we'll ignore any study that says otherwise?

[NotThereYet25]

Let me guess.... fast is better but we don't have any studies to support it?

No, wrong.
I think you're familiar with Danny Lennon's work, so you should know that his articles are never like that.

That's the take home message:

Take Home Point

The purpose of this post is NOT to serve as a “pro-aggressive dieting” stance. Nor is it to push the idea that using large calorie deficits is “better” than more slight calorie deficits.

It is also NOT a thorough literature review. I’m aware there are conflicting studies. The reason the studies in this article were included is because they are representative examples of other research showing a few important things:

- Large calorie deficits do not always mean muscle mass will be lost
- Even advanced trainees and athletes can maintain/gain muscle during a deficit
- Rapid weight loss does not always mean more weight will be regained
- In some cases, aggressive dieting and fast weight loss can be the best option

To conclude, the point of this article is that rather than presume a certain method is always the best, we need to remain critical in our thinking and consider the various scenarios that could be applied.

Nothing in nutrition is ALWAYS the best option or THE one true way to success. Slow vs. rapid weight loss (or slight vs. large calorie deficits) is just another example.

[Mrpb]

^ It is actually exactly what I expected.

It's a nice opinion but unfortunately not supported by research.

I'll change my mind when the science change. Not before, based on speculation or anecdotal evidence.

IMO Eric Helms and Alan Aragon did a good job reflecting what the science currently says about maximising lean mass retention:

https://jissn.biomedcentral.com/arti...550-2783-11-20

[muruku]

context is everything..?

[muruku]

IMO, the advice given in the ep I linked is pretty sound for gen pop people.

[Mrpb]

context is everything..?

Not sure if you listened to the podcast by Martin MacDonald but he is a firm believer that well trained guys can get away with large deficits without muscle loss.

I asked him what studies support his view. He couldn't mention any. He admitted it was based on personal experience with clients.

Now I'm not saying he's wrong, he could be right who knows. But at the moment his position isn't supported by the available science.

Hopefully someone will set up a properly powered study with well trained guys with high protein intakes that actually measures muscle in a reliable way.

IMO, the advice given in the ep I linked is pretty sound for gen pop people.

In that context it does make sense.