"HOW MUCH PROTEIN" can your body digest/absorb in one meal
DSmallDivide
Posts: 4,565
This is a good read regarding "how much PROTEIN can your body digest/absorb in one meal" Subject
See the full blog artic here:
http://www.wannabebig.com/diet-and-nutrition/is-there-a-limit-to-how-much-protein-the-body-can-use-in-a-single-meal/
Introduction
A longstanding belief in fitness circles is that the body can only use a certain amount of protein per meal, and the excess is either oxidized or excreted. The ballpark range thrown around is 20-30 grams, with 30 grams being perhaps the most common figure.
This guideline has led many trainees to go through the pains of consuming multiple doses of protein throughout the day, banking that it will maximize muscle anabolism or muscle retention.
Well, true or not, this concept fits in nicely with another longstanding fitness “rule” that you have to eat at least six times per day in order to keep the body’s metabolism revving high. Since the meal frequency and metabolism dogma has been thoroughly debunked [1-5], it’s time to dig into the topic of whether there’s a limit to effective protein dosing, and if so, what that limit might be.
Looking at simple logic first
Let’s imagine an experiment involving two relatively lean 200 lb individuals. For the purposes of this illustration, I’ll assign a daily amount of protein known to adequately support the needs of the athletic population. We’ll give Person A 150 g protein spread over five meals at 30 g each. We’ll give Person B the same amount of protein, but in a single meal. Let’s say that this meal consists of a 16 oz steak, chased with a shake containing two scoops of protein powder.
If we really believed that only 30 g protein can be handled by the body in a single meal, then Person B would eventually run into protein deficiency symptoms because he supposedly is only absorbing a total of 30 g out of the 150 g we’re giving him. At 30 g/day, he’s only getting 0.33 g/kg of bodyweight, which isn’t even half of the already-low RDA of 0.8 g/kg. If the body worked this way, the human species would have quickly become extinct. The human body is more efficient and effective than we give it credit for.
The body will take all the sweet time it needs to effectively digest and absorb just about whatever dose you give it. Person A will have shorter digestion periods per meal in order to effectively absorb and utilize the small meals. Person B will have a longer digestion period in order to effectively absorb and utilize the large meal. While the truth in this logic seems self-evident, the important question is whether or not it’s supported by scientific research. Let’s look at the evidence, starting with immediate-effect (acute) studies, then move on to the longer-term trials.
Research examining speed of absorption
A thorough literature review by Bilsborough and Mann compiled data from studies by various investigators who measured the absorption rates of various protein sources. Oddly, an amino acid mixture designed to mimic the composition of pork tenderloin made the top spot, at 10 g/hour, while whey took a close second at 8-10 g/hour. Other proteins fell in their respective spots below the top two, with little rhyme or reason behind the outcomes. As a matter of trivia, raw egg protein was the most slowly absorbed of them all at 1.3 g/hour.
It’s important to note that these data have some serious limitations. A major one is the variance of the methods used to determine the absorption rates (i.e., intravenous infusion, oral ingestion, ileal ingestion). Most of the methods are just too crude or far-fetched for serious consideration. Another limitation is that these figures could be skewed depending upon their concentration in solution, which can affect their rate of gastric evacuation. Another factor to consider is the timing of ingestion relative to exercise and how that might differentially affect absorption rates. Finally, short-term data leaves a lot open to question.
Short-term research supporting the "magic limit"
I’ve heard many folks parrot that the maximal anabolic effect of a single protein dose is limited to 20 grams, citing recent work by Moore and colleagues. In this study’s 4-hour post-exercise test period, 40 g protein did not elicit a greater anabolic response than 20 g. I’d interpret these outcomes with caution. Fundamentally speaking, protein utilization can differ according to muscle mass. The requirements of a 140-lb person will differ markedly from someone who’s a lean 200. Additionally, a relatively low amount of total volume was used (12 sets total). Typical training bouts usually involve more than one muscle group and are commonly at least double that volume, which can potentially increase the demand for nutrient uptake. Finally, the conclusion of the authors is questionable. They state explicitly,
“…we speculate that no more than 5-6 times daily could one ingest this amount (~20 g) of protein and expect muscle protein synthesis to be maximally stimulated.”
So, they’re implying that 100-120 grams of protein per day is maximal for promoting muscle growth. Wait a minute, what? Based on both the bulk of the research evidence and numerous field observations, this is simply false.
In another recent study, Symons and colleagues compared the 5-hour response of a moderate serving of lean beef containing 30 g protein with a large serving containing 90 g protein. The smaller serving increased protein synthesis by approximately 50%, and the larger serving caused no further increase in protein synthesis, despite being triple the dose. The researchers concluded that the ingestion of more than 30 g protein in a single meal does not further enhance muscle protein synthesis. While their conclusion indeed supports the outcomes of their short-term study, it’s pretty easy to predict the outcomes in muscle size and strength if we compared a total daily protein dose of 90 g with 30 g over a longer trial period, let alone one involving a structured exercise protocol. This brings me to the crucial point that acute outcomes merely provide grounds for hypothesis. It’s not completely meaningless, but it’s far from conclusive without examining the long-term effects.
Longer-term research challenging the "magic limit"
If we were to believe the premise that a 20-30 g dose of protein yields a maximal anabolic effect, then it follows that any excess beyond this dose would be wasted. On the contrary, the body is smarter than that. In a 14-day trial, Arnal and colleagues found no difference in fat-free mass or nitrogen retention between consuming 79% of the day’s protein needs (roughly 54 g) in one meal, versus the same amount spread across four meals.
Notably, this study was done on young female adults whose fat-free mass averaged 40.8 kg (89.8 lb). Considering that most non-sedentary males have considerably more lean mass than the female subjects used in the aforementioned trial, it’s plausible that much more than 54 g protein in a single meal can be efficiently processed for anabolic and/or anti-catabolic purposes. If we extrapolated the protein dose used in this study (79% of 1.67g/kg) to the average adult male, it would be roughly 85-95 g or even more, depending on just how close someone is to the end of the upper limits of muscular size.
When Arnal and colleagues applied the same protocol to the elderly population, the single-dose treatment actually caused better muscle protein retention than the multiple-dose treatment. This raises the possibility that as we age, larger protein feedings might be necessary to achieve the same effect on protein retention as lesser amounts in our youth.
IF research nailing the coffin shut?
Perhaps the strongest case against the idea of a dosing limit beyond which anabolism or muscle retention can occur is the recent intermittent fasting (IF) research, particularly the trials with a control group on a conventional diet. For example, Soeters and colleagues compared two weeks of IF involving 20-hour fasting cycles with a conventional diet. Despite the IF group’s consumption of an average of 101 g protein in a 4-hour window, there was no difference in preservation of lean mass and muscle protein between groups.
In another example, Stote and colleagues actually reported an improvement in body composition (including an increase in lean mass) after 8 weeks in the IF group consuming one meal per day, where roughly 86 g protein was ingested in a 4-hour window. Interestingly, the conventional group consuming three meals spread throughout the day showed no significant body composition improvements.
Keep in mind that bioelectrical impedance (BIA) was used to determine body composition, so these outcomes should be viewed with caution. I’ve been highly critical of this study in the past, and I still am. Nevertheless, it cannot be completely written off and must be factored into the body of evidence against the idea of a magic protein dose limit.
Conclusion & application
Based on the available evidence, it’s false to assume that the body can only use a certain amount of protein per meal. Studies examining short-term effects have provided hints towards what might be an optimal protein dose for maximizing anabolism, but trials drawn out over longer periods haven’t supported this idea. So, is there a limit to how much protein per meal can be effectively used? Yes there is, but this limit is likely similar to the amount that’s maximally effective in an entire day. What’s the most protein that the body can effectively use in an entire day? The short answer is, a lot more than 20-30 g. The long answer is, it depends on several factors. In most cases it’s not too far from a gram per pound in drug-free trainees, given that adequate total calories are provided.
In terms of application, I’ve consistently observed the effectiveness of having approximately a quarter of your target bodyweight in both the pre- and post-exercise meal. Note: target bodyweight is a surrogate index of lean mass, and I use that to avoid making skewed calculations in cases where individuals are markedly over- or underweight. This dose surpasses the amounts seen to cause a maximal anabolic response but doesn’t impinge upon the rest of the day’s protein allotment, which can be distributed as desired. On days off from training, combine or split up your total protein allotment according to your personal preference and digestive tolerance. I realize that freedom and flexibility are uncommon terms in physique culture, but maybe it’s time for a paradigm shift.
In sum, view all information – especially gym folklore and short-term research – with caution. Don’t buy into the myth that protein won’t get used efficiently unless it’s dosed sparingly throughout the day. Hopefully, future research will definitively answer how different dosing schemes with various protein types affect relevant endpoints such as size and strength. In the mean time, feel free to eat the whole steak and drink the whole shake.
Written By Alan Aragon
See the full blog artic here:
http://www.wannabebig.com/diet-and-nutrition/is-there-a-limit-to-how-much-protein-the-body-can-use-in-a-single-meal/
Comments
paulit ulit na lang yang meal frequency na yan.... ako nga 2x a day lang kumain. lol
about the irrelevance of meal frequency.. i will not contradict these qualified gurus.. Pro Bodybuilding coaches says otherwise... but my take is "TO EACH HIS OWN".
some guys can live with 2x a day meal, some dont. i am one of those that eats 4-6 meals a day and get substantial gains as compared when i tried less than 3 meals.
heck! when i train really really hard, intense and consistent, hihimatayin ako sa 2 beses na kain lang sa isang araw. Besides, my weight aint lower than 190lbs, can i get the calories needed and burned by eating 2 meals only? yes, kaso glutton eating ang gagawin ko with those 2 meals para ma cover yung calories needed. But im not a follower of that.
peace
E yung ganito?
Hehe.
from page 45 to page 48:
>> >> >>
One of the most interesting studies showing the effect of working out without
any extra protein was published back in 1996. 43 men who were experienced
weight lifters took part in research that involved exercise and weekly injections
of anabolic steroids (testosterone enanthate) for 10 weeks [Bhasin S, 1996].
The men in the study were divided into 4 groups; working out or not working
out, and receiving weekly steroid injections or not receiving them.
* Group 1: NO EXERCISE + NO STERIODS
* Group 2: EXERCISE + NO STERIODS
* Group 3: NO EXERCISE + WEEKLY STEROID INJECTION
* Group 4: EXERCISE + WEEKLY STEROID INJECTION.
It is probably no surprise that after 10 weeks of lifting weights 3 times per
week, the group that was receiving the steroid injections gained a very
impressive amount of muscle (over 13 pounds!).
It is also not surprising that Group 2, (the group who were working out but
didn’t get any steroids) also increased their muscle mass, packing on almost 4.5
pounds of muscle in only ten weeks.
What was surprising is that the men who were injected with steroids and then
sat around doing nothing for 10 weeks amazingly saw an increase in lean mass
that exceeded what the guys working out without steroids gained. Imagine
gaining over 6 pounds of lean mass just by sitting around on your couch all day
not lifting a finger!
Obviously, the group who did not receive any steroids and didn't workout did
not see any change in their lean mass.
So what does a study on steroids have to do with protein? Well, all four groups
were on the same diet. They were all consuming about 0.7 grams of protein per
pound of body weight (roughly 120 grams of protein per day) and about 16
Calories per pound of body weight.
This research clearly shows that approximately 120 grams of protein per day
was enough for a group of men taking steroids and lifting weights to gain 13.5
pounds of lean mass! Even in their steroid-heightened anabolic state, 120
grams was enough to supply all of the necessary building blocks for a 13.5-
pound gain in lean mass.
Interestingly, it was also the same amount of protein that Group 2 the exercise–
only group ate to gain 4.5 pounds of lean mass. So even though we know that
these men consumed enough protein to provide for a 13.5-pound increase in
lean mass, they only saw a third of this increase. The difference was obviously
due to the anabolic effects of the steroids and NOT due to the protein intake.
Since the 120 grams was also the same amount of protein that the control
group ate (who not surprisingly saw no change). It seems apparent the protein
ITSELF did not have any growth promoting effect.
This study shows us that you can gain an impressive amount of muscle without
increasing your protein intake (albeit, through the use of anabolic steroids). It
also shows that protein alone does not cause the body to increase muscle mass.
In fact, resistance training and the combination of resistance training and
steroids can have dramatically different effects on lean body mass without any
change in protein intake at all.
>> >> >>
from page 55 to 56
>> >> >>
One of highest doses of protein I could find was in a study published by Burke
et al in 2001. In this study Forty-two men between the ages of 18 and 31 were
divided into 3 groups. The first group supplemented their diet with an
additional 0.54 grams of protein per pound of body weight.
To put this into perspective, for a 180-pound man that’s almost an EXTRA 100
grams of protein per day from protein powder. This is the equivalent of taking
about 5 extra scoops of protein powder every day in addition to your normal
protein intake!
The second group took the same amount of extra protein plus an additional
0.045 grams of creatine per pound body weight (about 10 grams of creatine per
day for a 180 pound man). The third group received 0.54 grams of maltodextrin
(a simple carbohydrate) per pound of body weight as their supplement (the
placebo group).
The whey protein group gained about 5 pounds in six weeks, while the placebo
group somehow managed to gain an insignificant 2 pounds. Impressively, the
group taking creatine gained 8.8 pounds of lean tissue mass! (We will discuss
how creatine works later) [Burke DG, 2001].
These findings agree with that of other studies that have shown that protein
intakes above 120 grams of protein per day do not increase muscle mass
[Hoffman JR, 2006].
>> >> >>
References
Bhasin s, Stoer TW, Berman N, Callegari C, Clevenger B, et al. The efecs o
supraphysiologic doses of testosterone on muscle size and strength in normal
men. 1996; N Engl J Med: 335:1-7
Burke DG, Chilibeck PD, Davison KS, Candow DG, Farthing J, Palmer TS. The
effect of whey protein supplementation with and without creatine monohydrate
combine with resistance training on lean tissue mass and muscle strength.
International Journal of Sports Nutrition and Metabolism. 2001 11 349-364
Hoffman JR, Ratamess NA, Kang J, Falvo MJ, Faigenbaum AD. Effect of
protein intake on strength, body composition and endocrine changes in
strength/power athletes. Journal of the International society of Sports Nutrition
3(2):12-18, 2006.
lol..
Note: kung malayo po sa topic, please disregard.
Since protein din lang ang usapan, share ko lang po. Salamat.
Protein. It’s every bodybuilder’s favorite macronutrient and for good reason. Protein is extremely essential, super satiating and amazingly anabolic. Protein is awesome… but you’re consuming too much of it.
Like most myths, the belief that you should take in 1g/lb of body weight has become so deeply entrenched in the fitness world that its validity is rarely questioned. Strangely, very few people think it’s a bit too accidental that the optimal amount of protein your body can assimilate in a day is exactly 1g/lb. 2.2g/kg doesn’t sound as right, does it? Of course, I know you read my articles for their scientific merit, so let’s look at the literature on the effects of daily protein intake to find out if 1g/lb really is the optimal amount of protein intake for maximum muscle gains.
Studies on Optimal Protein Intake
All values in the bullet point list below are expressed as grams of protein per pound of body weight per day. All of these studies controlled for energy intake, either based on individual requirements or by setting energy intake to be equal in all experimental conditions, so that only the proportion of protein in the diet varied between groups. If the studies were based on unreliable methods such as nitrogen balance, a marker of lean body mass changes, I only included them if they controlled for sweating and dietary adaptation periods.
• Tarnopolsky et al. (1992) observed no differences in whole body protein synthesis or indexes of lean body mass in strength athletes consuming either 0.64g/lb or 1.10g/lb over a 2 week period. Protein oxidation did increase in the high protein group, indicating a nutrient overload.
• Walberg et al. (1988) found that 0.73g/lb was sufficient to maintain positive nitrogen balance in cutting weightlifters over a 7 day time period.
• Tarnopolsky et al. (1988) found that only 0.37g/lb was required to maintain positive nitrogen balance in elite bodybuilders (over 5 years of experience, possible previous use of androgens) over a 10 day period. 0.45g/lb was sufficient to maintain lean body mass in bodybuilders over a 2 week period. The authors suggested that 0.55g/lb was sufficient for bodybuilders.
• Lemon et al. (1992) found no differences in muscle mass or strength gains in novice bodybuilders consuming either 0.61g/lb or 1.19g/lb over a 4 week period. Based on nitrogen balance data, the authors recommended 0.75g/lb.
• Hoffman et al. (2006) found no differences in body composition, strength or resting hormonal concentrations in strength athletes consuming either 0.77g/lb or >0.91g/lb over a 3 month period.
Now, there are some old studies based on nitrogen balance that suggest higher protein intakes are beneficial, but, as I stated above, these studies were methodological abominations. Nitrogen balance is a notoriously unreliable method to assess changes in lean body mass, especially at higher amounts, and these studies didn’t control for sweating or dietary adaptation. Significant changes in dietary protein intake are known to result in negative nitrogen balance for up to 2 weeks after the change, even when sufficient energy and protein is consumed. Furthermore, these studies didn’t exclude androgenic-anabolic steroid users though they studied competitive athletes. (Tarnopolsky et al., 1988).It’s no wonder many of these studies didn’t get translated and remain no more than a shady abstract on PubMed, if they’re even featured on there.
Based on the sound research, many review papers have concluded 0.82g/lb is the upper limit at which protein intake benefits body composition (Phillips & Van Loon, 2011). This recommendation often includes a double 95% confidence level, meaning they took the highest mean intake at which benefits were still observed and then added two standard deviations to that level to make absolutely sure all possible benefits from additional protein intake are utilized. As such, this is already overdoing it and consuming 1g/lb ‘to be safe’ doesn’t make any sense. 0.82g/lb is already very safe.
But, But, But…!
If you still think you need more than 0.82g/lb because you think you train harder than these test subjects, think again. Lemon et al. (1992) studied bodybuilders training 1.5h per day, 6 days per week and still concluded 0.75g/lb is the highest intake at which body composition benefits could occur.
Another frequently heard objection is that people need more protein because they are more experienced than the studied populations. Well, Tarnopolsky et al. (1988) used elite bodybuilders and found that less protein was needed than in novice bodybuilders. In fact, the finding that the more experienced you are, the less protein you need, has been replicated in several studies (Rennie & Tipton, 2000; Hartman, Moore & Phillips, 2006; Moore et al., 2007). In everyone there is both constant protein synthesis and breakdown. Resistance training causes both breakdown and synthesis to increase, normally with a favorable balance towards synthesis. As you progress in your training, the body becomes more efficient at stopping the breakdown of protein resulting from training. Since less protein now needs to be replenished, this increase in nitrogen retention means less protein is subsequently needed for optimal growth.
Secondly, the more advanced you are, the less protein synthesis increases after training. As you become more muscular and you get closer to your genetic limit, less muscle is built after training. This is very intuitive. The slower you can build muscle, the less protein is needed for optimal growth. It wouldn’t make any sense if the body needed more protein to build less muscle, especially considering that the body becomes more efficient at metabolizing protein.
A final objection that is often heard is that these values may be true during bulking or maintenance periods, but cutting requires more protein to maintain muscle mass. Walberg et al. (1988) studied cutting weightlifters and they still found 0.73g/lb was sufficient to maintain lean body mass. There are those other, often poorly controlled, nitrogen balance studies again though that suggest more protein is required to maintain nitrogen balance when energy is restricted. However, these changes in requirements for nitrogen balance do not correlate with whole body protein turnover rates; moreover, cutting at a daily 1000 calorie deficit when eating 1.8g/kg (0.82g/lb) protein has been shown not to affect nitrogen balance or whole body protein turnover (Pikosky et al. 2008). Therefore, you do not need more protein to preserve or gain muscle when cutting compared to when bulking, not even during periods of drastic energy shortage.
Also, the supposed difference in nitrogen sparing effects of carbs and fat are negligible (McCargar et al. 1989; Millward, 1989). Neither actually spares protein though. Only protein spares protein. I think the protein sparing idea came from a wrong interpretation of the nitrogen balance literature showing more lean mass is lost in more severe caloric deficits. A simple explanation for that finding is that the more total mass you lose, the more lean mass you lose. No surprises there.
As such, there is simply no empirically substantiated reason to think we need more than 0.82g/lb of protein per day when cutting. If anything, you could reason the body should be able to use more protein during bulking periods, because more muscle is being built and a lot of other nutrients are ingested that may enable more protein to be used.
The only people that may actually need more protein than 0.82g/lb are people with unusually high levels of anabolic hormones. Androgen or growth hormone users definitely fall into this category, but I don’t exclude the possibility that some adolescents do too. If you reach peak testosterone production while still growing (in height), your unusually high levels of growth hormone and testosterone might increase your protein requirements. Or not. There’s no research to support it. Those rare individuals with amazing bodybuilding genetics could also qualify, but unless your father happens to be a silverback gorilla, you are most likely just like other humans in this regard.
The 1g/lb Myth’s Origin
Why is it then that everybody says you need to consume 1g/lb? Aside from the facts that there don’t need to be any good reasons for why people believe in a myth, that myths tend to perpetuate themselves via conformism and tradition, and that the fitness industry is flooded with myths, here are some plausible grounds for the ‘confusion’.
• People copy the dietary practices of pro bodybuilders on androgens. Steroids enable you to assimilate far more protein than you’d normally could.
• People based their recommendations on the flawed nitrogen balance studies back from when the world was still flat.
• The more is better heuristic. There are so many studies showing protein is good for you, it’s hard not to think more of it is even better.
• Supplement companies have an obvious financial incentive to make you want to believe you need more protein than you really do. There are actually several industry-sponsored studies showing absolutely miraculous benefits of consuming more protein (see for example the studies by Cribb).
• People can’t be bothered with decimals and just round up to the nearest convenient integer, which so happens to be an easy to remember 1.
Often, more is better, but at some point it’s just too much.
On a final note, there’s nothing inherently wrong or unhealthy about consuming more protein than your body can use to build muscle. The excess will simply be used as energy. However, protein sources tend to be expensive compared to other energy sources and variety generally beats monotony with regards to your health, so satiety and food preferences are the only reasons I can think of why somebody would want to overconsume protein.
Take Home Messages
• There is normally no advantage to consuming more than 0.82g/lb (1.8g/kg) of protein per day to preserve or build muscle. This already includes a very safe mark-up. There hasn’t been any recorded advantage of consuming more than 0.64g/lb. The only exceptions to this rule could be individuals with extraordinarily high anabolic hormone levels.
• Optimal protein intake decreases with training age, because your body becomes more efficient at preventing protein breakdown resulting from training and less protein is needed for the increasingly smaller amount of muscle that is built after each training session. The magnitude of this effect is unclear.
I dont know kung may mali ba akong nagawa nung nag 0.82 ako but based from my computation, my protein is around 18% only of my bulking macro.
good point on that, iba iba talaga ang reactions based on different body types. And I feel safe to say that there are no exact science behind protein. IMHO
cheers!.
I remember the time i saw the 0.82 article. Nanlaki ang mata ko kasi naisip ko makakatipid ako sa protein. So i quickly adjusted my protein carbs and fat macro and followed a new diet. I didnt expected for this to end in regret. Anyway, at least my curiosity has been answered although di maganda ang result hehe...
Maybe isang factor din yung galing akong 1 to 1.1g protein then biglang shift to 0.82.
Is your nutrition the only variable you changed ?
How about your training ? sleep and recovery ?
Stress from work ?
Baka naman during the time na binabaan mo yung protein intake, may ibang factors din na nabago kaya siguro nag-lose ka ng muscle
Mahirap din kasi gumawa ng study. Usually, it's funded
Speculation ko lang ito: sa scientific studies funded by protein supplement manufacturers nagsimula yung 1g to 1.5 g of protein per pound of body weight
Syempre, pag may "scientific study" showing the need for 1g to 1.5g of protein per pound of body weight, magiging mabenta ang protein supplements nila
Carbs and fat were adjusted to come up with the same caloric surplus. Everything else stayed the same as far as i remember.
I believe na same din itong topic na ito sa macro ratios where everybody needs to find out kung anong macro ratio ang wowork sa kanila. 30p 50c 20f , 40p 40c 20f or something else.
If this 0.82 will work for others, then its good. Malaking tipid ito.
Or maybe the 1g to 1.5g was mathematically derived bases from macro ratios? I dont know yet. Maybe ill try to find that out.
We all want to be aesthetic, big and powerful but as gym enthusiasts, bodybuilders, etc we must also serve as a good example for everyone who lives a healthy lifestyle. You might be the most aesthetic guy around but having kidney failure isnt worth the sacrifice.
Mahirap magbitaw ng mga salita kung based lang lahat sa paniniwala, narinig o mga nabasa natin.
http://www.biolayne.com/news/episode-2-of-muscle-college-radio-muscle-protein-synthesis/
Found this on biolayne's website. Hope this helps.
"Mahirap magbitaw ng salita ng walang sariling ebidenxa"
Sinabi kong sarili, kasi dapat napatunayan natin mismo sa katawan hindi yung puro sa mga nabasa lang.
imagine mo lang diyan ang IF. keto etc. sa IF muscle loss daw when training fasted? really? sabi naman ng iba fats are bad. really again?
sabi nga sa article, why prohibit too much protein intake to an athlete, weight lifters or active individuals. narerepair naman ung mga nasira na muskels....siguro ung sa kidney problem mag apply yan sa mga tao na no intense lifting activities. ultra light exercises or an ordinary person na kain,tulog,gising,trabaho,computer lang, couch potato.and hindi padin mag babago pananaw ko sa meal frequencies. as long as you cover your calories and macros everyday. kahet naka 2x to 3x ka lang ng kain sa isang araw, pasok sa banga!
ako 2 na pwede kong patunayan based on my experience. from IF to KETO, youll shit bricks pag nalaman mo mismo sa sarili mo na WOW AH! nde ko akalain ganto ang epekto! lolz ka allen!
Mahirap din kasi minsan makipagtalo sa madaming nabasa hehehe.Sabi sabi din manghihina ka daw kapag nagtrain ka ng walang laman ang tiyan.
Tried it for several weeks, fasted for 16-20hrs then I trained.
What happened?
More alert.
More energey.
More endurance.
More awake.
I broke my PR lol.
@Dalton- apir tayo jan sa meal frequency since ang 2+1 = 3 at ang 1+1+1 = 3 pa rin. It doesn't matter how many times you eat, it all boils down to hitting your cal's and macro's for the day.