ITT we discuss why protein timing isn't a meme
I'll start. When you consume your protein, it will finish going through the small intestines in 3-6 hours. At that point whatever protein hasn't been used by the body will be converted to energy by the liver.
So while consuming protein every 2-3 hours might be a meme, I can see getting 3 meals a day being an efficient way of keeping the resting process fed and keeping protein synthesis up.
>protein timing isn't a meme
oh but it is
Then post that study you're basing that opinion on. The one done on a bunch of European housewives, I'm curious to reread that one.
It's a fucking meme, why are you shilling it? The studies on protein absorption used whey protein which is fast acting. When there's another things like fat or carbs, fiber, or even more calories, this takes hours longer.
This is why people who only eat one meal a day still retain all there muscle. If they could only absorb 30 grams, they would have wasted away.
Go shill elsewhere.
3-6 hours isn't fast-acting. That's the time is takes a typical meal to leave your small intestines. Whatever protein is left is being turned to energy. I'll even give you potentially 8 hours, but that still leaves a big window of no protein.
>Go shill elsewhere.
It's not shilling, moron. It's called discussion and trying to optimize gains, not being such a bitch that you're scared of questioning general-consensus which could be based on inconclusive research.
It is shilling. All those studies were funded by protein companies. They invented the myth of protein timing to shill people using whey powder more frequently. The theory makes zero sense. Explain why there's plenty of body builders that eat one meal a day and are still able to build muscle. I've done it.
>I'll even give you potentially 8 hours
How about you Google that instead? It can take longer than ten hours.
Just so you know, even whey protein in a scam. Unless you have a terrible diet, you get plenty of protein if you eat well enough. You can be a skinny teenager with 12" arms, taking a bunch of supplements and drinking whey all you want, but that the end of the day you "questioning general-consensus" won't do shit.
Also you literally posted an ad for whey as your image.
I don't even use powders, I don't know why you keep insinuating that I do. I just googled: "protein butt" cause I know my audience. Got you in here.
>Explain why there's plenty of body builders that eat one meal a day and are still able to build muscle. I've done it.
Because you're still consuming protein. I'm not saying you'll get no gains, just sub-optimal.
No, you're claim made almost entirely on your opinion got me in here. Those studies used whey protein. It took 1.5 hours for whey protein to be absorbed. Real food can take over ten hours, depending on the meal size, which is why you don't just consume '30-40' grams of protein in one sitting which is the core tenant of protein timing.
Your body seems completely able to repair the muscle to the same extent of frequent meals even if you just eat once a day. I haven't read anything proving that it is sub-optimal that wasn't based on the bullshit whey protein studies.
>Real food can take over ten hours
Yeah, but that's not 24 hours. And 10 hours is probably for a giant meal.
As someone who does fasting, IF and is currently doing 36:12 IF, I'm all for being able to eat your daily amount of protein in a small window and still hope that bodybuilding faeries will slow the absorption. But I prefer to find the optimal timing so I don't waste protein or under-consume it.
Technically, protein timing isn't a meme cause you can't consume a weeks worth of protein in one day and assume it will last you all week. We also know that we don't need protein every 3 hours. Then what is the duration?
You should have said that. I don't support 36:12 fasting because you can burn through your readily available carb storage and transition into burning more muscle for energy. I don't even support every second day fasting because it's also unclear what it does to body composition. I'm talking specially about one meal a day or more frequent meals. What happens when cutting weight with your type of fasting may not be the case when you're not since you would have to consume almost 9,000 calories in one day and absorb most of it.
Is there evidence that you have which states that constantly absorbing protein in a day is superior to absorbing the same amount of protein in one or two meals? There's no real problem of consuming protein and them not being able to absorb it, within reason, that's the myth. That is assuming you're not taking in excess amounts or going a day without eating.
The 8 hour IF fasting studies showed better body composition than eating whenever you want, which I assume would have more frequent meals. How do those results stand if eating more frequently means you have better gains?
>Then what is the duration?
No one knows but almost all anecdotal evidence points to there being no difference providing you eat once a day. Without new studies on it, it will remain a mystery.
ITT: amateurs who think they know better than science facts.
I'm doing the 36/12 IF for two months to test out some theories and try to cut 20 lbs from 19%bf to 10%. Eating a big dinner and following breakfast after my every-other-day maintenance lift session to refuel muscles and consuming protein when protein synthesis is elevated from lift to conserve or hopefully gain mass. Will compare lean mass after it's over.
According to fasters, fasting is quite muscle sparing, so I want to see the extent that that's so.
>Is there evidence that you have which states that constantly absorbing protein in a day is superior to absorbing the same amount of protein in one or two meals?
No, supposedly constantly absorbing protein isn't protein-efficient because the increase in protein synthesis from eating works in cycles and has to go down back to basal and possibly even a couple/few hours after that point to really jump up again. Not really sure whether or not it's optimal for gains though.
>The 8 hour IF fasting studies showed better body composition
That doesn't necessarily mean optimal lean gains, just not becoming fatasses in the process of still getting gains, which is still a really good thing.
You should read this this article and the comment section where debate breaks out and it looks like Fung avoids the issue. It's been a few months since I read it but I remember walking away from it very unsure if longer fasts were worth it.
idmprogram.com
You're likely a retard that doesn't understand what the "scientific fact" is on this issue. Go back to reading bodybuilding.com articles and pretending you have any idea.
Yeah, I got thrown off by parts of that page when I first read it, namely pic related. He doesn't really comment much on any of the pages though, so he might not really care about the comments section in general and just lets his moderators/fanboys do the talking.
Wish some fatties would get their composition calculated before/after going on some 1-2 week fasts to see how muscle sparing it really is without any activity. Past 3 weeks and the muscle will naturally start to go away because of lack of use, so it will be conflicting.
Exactly what this guy said.
In all honesty, the proof is in the pudding. If you look like garbage, then whatever you're doing isn't working. That's the time tested truth. Also, you sound like a really boring conspiracy theorist where you read a line from some article regarding protein timing and you think the fitness industry circumvented science.
Someone recommend Whey that wont break me out.
Do you even know the science behind why protein timing, within a 24-hour period, is a meme? Like on any level beside "it just is"?
That video just talked about the post-workout anabolic window and why it's bullshit, which I agree with. But that's just a narrow aspect of protein timing.
People think you can eat one giant serving of protein a day and it will net you as many gains as eating 3-4 spaced meals. That's bullshit due to the rate your body digests food in the first place.
oldfag here, global macronutrient content in your body per 24 hours is all thats important, serum glucose levels go lower later in the day if you just eat giant meals, if you eat multiple small meals than its slightly negative for 24 hours instead of proportionally larger for shorter time. muscle growth occurs over resting periods between 1-3 days so youre protein content 1 hr before/after doesnt matter. inb4 talking about insulin and small time nitpicking that only helps after basic diet is established
why are you talking about serum glucose with regards to protein and amino acids? Glucose doesn't work the same way as protein and amino acids.
I think he talks about this in the 2nd of the 2 videos he has talking to muscle protein synthesis researcher. Here's both, they are long but good information in them both.
Lol, I guess you're one of those fat fucks that sees other people with great physiques and because you can't find an ounce of discipline, blames everything but yourself. Have fun you odd little Incel.
>Unless you have a terrible diet, you get plenty of protein if you eat well enough
Depends on how many calories you eat. 1.5-2 g/kg of bodyweight is 6-8 calories per kg. A typical cut recommendation for physique fags is 24-28 calories per kg. That works out to 25-35% of your calories from protein. You have to be pretty careful with your food choices to hit that - basically no room for sweets, alcohol, fatty meat, etc. If you're a vegetarian/vegan, it basically requires autistically planning every single meal.
>ITT we discuss why protein timing isn't a meme
It is a meme. This is a fact.
>Then post that study you're basing that opinion on.
You first.
Well veggie tales are autists sooo