Quantity and Timing of Protein Intake

[CFC]

Another paper on protein timing, which may be of interest to some of you. You'd probably be surprised how much disagreement there is about the subject of timing strategies. Generally speaking, the biggest flaw that all these papers suffer from is a lack of longitudinal research. There is some insight that the body attunes itself to consistent feeding patterns and figures out how to maximise its growth strategy given enough time, even from a few very large meals. I'd always err on the side of frequency being fundamentally more beneficial however.


***


J Physiol. 2013 May 1;591(Pt 9):2319-31.

Timing and distribution of protein ingestion during prolonged recovery from resistance exercise alters myofibrillar protein synthesis.

Areta JL1, Burke LM, Ross ML, Camera DM, West DW, Broad EM, Jeacocke NA, Moore DR, Stellingwerff T, Phillips SM, Hawley JA, Coffey VG.


Abstract

Quantity and timing of protein ingestion are major factors regulating myofibrillar protein synthesis (MPS). However, the effect of specific ingestion patterns on MPS throughout a 12 h period is unknown. We determined how different distributions of protein feeding during 12 h recovery after resistance exercise affects anabolic responses in skeletal muscle. Twenty-four healthy trained males were assigned to three groups (n = 8/group) and undertook a bout of resistance exercise followed by ingestion of 80 g of whey protein throughout 12 h recovery in one of the following protocols: 8 × 10 g every 1.5 h (PULSE); 4 × 20 g every 3 h (intermediate: INT); or 2 × 40 g every 6 h (BOLUS). Muscle biopsies were obtained at rest and after 1, 4, 6, 7 and 12 h post exercise. Resting and post-exercise MPS (l-[ring-(13)C6] phenylalanine), and muscle mRNA abundance and cell signalling were assessed. All ingestion protocols increased MPS above rest throughout 1-12 h recovery (88-148%, P < 0.02), but INT elicited greater MPS than PULSE and BOLUS (31-48%, P < 0.02). In general signalling showed a BOLUS>INT>PULSE hierarchy in magnitude of phosphorylation. MuRF-1 and SLC38A2 mRNA were differentially expressed with BOLUS. In conclusion, 20 g of whey protein consumed every 3 h was superior to either PULSE or BOLUS feeding patterns for stimulating MPS throughout the day. This study provides novel information on the effect of modulating the distribution of protein intake on anabolic responses in skeletal muscle and has the potential to maximize outcomes of resistance training for attaining peak muscle mass.

 

[NeighborMike]

What do you think about the bodies ability to absorb the protein from regular milk? Ive seen things saying that we dont

 

[CFC]

Hmm, milk is a pretty good source of easily digested casein and whey AFAIK. Are you thinking of lactose (one of the sugars) maybe?

 

[Serotonin101]

^^I've heard raw milk can be utilized as it has all the necessary enzymes to process it?

 

[NeighborMike]

Hmm, milk is a pretty good source of easily digested casein and whey AFAIK. Are you thinking of lactose (one of the sugars) maybe?

Im not quite sure exactly ill try to find the article someplace...it was something to do with for whatever reason the human body does not absorb all of the protein. Part of the article also had to do with the claim humans arnt supposed to drink milk and we are the only mamal that does so out of its infancy

 

[CFC]

^^I've heard raw milk can be utilized as it has all the necessary enzymes to process it?

Not sure about that, but pasteurisation does destroy some of the nutritional value of milk, and it's speculated that homogenisation of milk (by emulsifying/miniturising the fat droplets) raises the risk of heart disease. There's not a lot of science that I'm aware of to back the latter claim though.

 

[Snarky91]

I skimmed the text, but as I understand it the best course is to consume protein every three hours as opposed to every 1 1/2 hour or every six hours.

Obviously, the question arises whether 1.5h interval feeding would be best, provided the protein intake was increased to 20 g and the 3h interval feeding was increased to 40g and the 2 x 6h interval dose was increased to 80 g per dose. The point is perhaps the timing alone does not determine protein synthesis; maybe the dose is also a determinant, up to a maximum threshold where there's the greatest practical utility.

I subscribe to the view that once a day is not as good as two or three times a day; however, five or six times a day protein ingestion (common to bodybuilders) achieves nothing but ensure that some people always have Tupperware in hand.

 

[Serotonin101]

I try to consume protein 4x daily. Usually morning before work is whey with almond milk (lactose fucks me lately) and some coconut oil. Then for lunch and dinner and pre bed shake same as morning. I'll tailor the morning and evening ones to whatever I'm deficient in such as add bananas and berries and what not for morning occasionally especially if it's gonna be a hot day to get some added potassium. And at night if I'm still starving add more fats to satiate me.

 

[CFC]

Obviously, the question arises whether 1.5h interval feeding would be best, provided the protein intake was increased to 20 g and the 3h interval feeding was increased to 40g and the 2 x 6h interval dose was increased to 80 g per dose. The point is perhaps the timing alone does not determine protein synthesis; maybe the dose is also a determinant, up to a maximum threshold where there's the greatest practical utility.

Yes exactly. The study is interesting because each protocol utilises the same protein intake, but the every 3-hr scheme produces the greatest MPS. It is perhaps the most efficient strategy, although as said the body does appear to 'learn' meal timing and optimise it over time, so results 2 months down the road may be different. The 3hr timing may simply be more automatically 'familiar' to the bodies of the subjects being tested.

However in general total protein intake is seen to be most strongly correlated with MPS. There's a mountain of active research into the subject, but most of it is painfully faulty (eg using untrained subjects, introducing a completely new dietary strategy - especially with weight-loss protocols - without giving the body time to adjust etc).

I think with regards to, say, a typical 6 meals/day strategy, a lot of it is out of practicality - most people struggle to eat huge amounts in only 3-4 sittings.

 

[Snarky91]

Yes, it uses the same absolute protein intake. What if instead of 10 g every 1.5h the dose was increased to 20 g. Would the results stay the same. The absolute dose is important, but the dose dependent activation of protein synthesis is not discussed. Unless it's known that greater than 10 g protein in one serving produces no more protein synthesis than 10 g. The idea is someone who's taking 160 mg protein (or 240 for that matter) over 12 hours might be better taking 20 mg every 1.5 rather than 40 mg every 3 hours. I've heard that more than x grams in one serving cannot even be utilized in the essential processes of repair. Obviously it's known that excess protein consumption will result in some protein being converted to carbs.

 

[CFC]

Yes, it uses the same absolute protein intake. What if instead of 10 g every 1.5h the dose was increased to 20 g. Would the results stay the same. The absolute dose is important, but the dose dependent activation of protein synthesis is not discussed. Unless it's known that greater than 10 g protein in one serving produces no more protein synthesis than 10 g. The idea is someone who's taking 160 mg protein (or 240 for that matter) over 12 hours might be better taking 20 mg every 1.5 rather than 40 mg every 3 hours. I've heard that more than x grams in one serving cannot even be utilized in the essential processes of repair. Obviously it's known that excess protein consumption will result in some protein being converted to carbs.

Yes the idea of a maximum intake per sitting has been bouncing around for years. It used to be assumed to be 40g per sitting. Then it was decided some could handle as much as 60g. In reality, it must depend on numerous factors including habituation (hormonal, digestive and circadian systems align to food intake protocols over time), the size of the person, their intestinal bacterial flora, the size of their intestines and capillary bed that feeds them, insulin sensitivity, the amount of fibre consumed, and so on.

 

[CFC]

I try to consume protein 4x daily. Usually morning before work is whey with almond milk (lactose fucks me lately) and some coconut oil. Then for lunch and dinner and pre bed shake same as morning. I'll tailor the morning and evening ones to whatever I'm deficient in such as add bananas and berries and what not for morning occasionally especially if it's gonna be a hot day to get some added potassium. And at night if I'm still starving add more fats to satiate me.

I generally aim for between 4-7, depending on the diet I'm using and what my goals are. Sometimes when I'm really detraining and being lazy I'll eat just 3 times a day, though I tend to snack a lot if I do that!

 

[GrymReefer]

Well you just made me reconsider how I go about with meal timing. I eat 2 real meals a day, but maintain intermittent feeding throughout the day with fruits, yogurt 24/7, whole oats, and dem' almonds.

 

[RedLeader]

I think it is pretty well understood that there is an upper bound for each of our bodies regarding grams that can be used for protein synthesis within a given time window. I try and keep my meals under 30g, and if I do eat, for example, a ton of shrimp at once, I borrow the additional protein calories from carbs for that day.

Now let's assume a 150lb individual. As we said, three 50g meals is less optimal than five 30g meals. But what about comparing 5x30g with 10x15g? Or give the guy (just over) 5g per hour around the clock...

It's probably not the best way to handle post-workout nutrition, but would it make a difference in the long run changing the patterns for the rest of the day toward the other end of that spectrum?

I usually have small and frequent meals. Not for the broscience reasons, but because I am always on the go. Rarely do I actually sit down and have a large meal. Even if I have an 800cal meal in Tupperware, I will likely just keep picking at it over time.

 

[Genetic Freak]

I think it is pretty well understood that there is an upper bound for each of our bodies regarding grams that can be used for protein synthesis within a given time window. I try and keep my meals under 30g, and if I do eat, for example, a ton of shrimp at once, I borrow the additional protein calories from carbs for that day.

Now let's assume a 150lb individual. As we said, three 50g meals is less optimal than five 30g meals. But what about comparing 5x30g with 10x15g? Or give the guy (just over) 5g per hour around the clock...

It's probably not the best way to handle post-workout nutrition, but would it make a difference in the long run changing the patterns for the rest of the day toward the other end of that spectrum?

I usually have small and frequent meals. Not for the broscience reasons, but because I am always on the go. Rarely do I actually sit down and have a large meal. Even if I have an 800cal meal in Tupperware, I will likely just keep picking at it over time.

Wasn't there research a while back to show there is no difference in eating 2-3 larger protein meals/day as opposed to 6-8 relatively smaller.. It's all about the amount consumed within a 24 hr period, rather than specific timings..?
Personally I'd think more frequent meals might be optimal but there has been quite a bit of heated discussion in recent years..

 

[CFC]

Now let's assume a 150lb individual. As we said, three 50g meals is less optimal than five 30g meals. But what about comparing 5x30g with 10x15g? Or give the guy (just over) 5g per hour around the clock...

The body doesn't respond well to constantly elevated blood sugar levels, which is what would happen if you effectively eliminated pulsatility and snacked continuously. It would also attenuate the frequency and amplitude of natural GH pulses, which would lower circulating IGF-1. It hasn't been tested (well, the snacking potentially making you fat has), but I suspect you may develop insulin resistance unless you combine the strategy with some variation of IF (beyond just fasting while sleeping).

 

[CFC]

Wasn't there research a while back to show there is no difference in eating 2-3 larger protein meals/day as opposed to 6-8 relatively smaller.. It's all about the amount consumed within a 24 hr period, rather than specific timings..?
Personally I'd think more frequent meals might be optimal but there has been quite a bit of heated discussion in recent years..

That's mostly sound for the majority of dietary strategies. The body tends to adjust to how you feed it and optimise, making many of these studies (which generally last for only 6-18 weeks or so) partial snapshots rather than continuously reproducible findings. The best thing is just to eat how it suits your own schedule but try to get the macros right - unless you're competing.

 

[RedLeader]

The body doesn't respond well to constantly elevated blood sugar levels, which is what would happen if you effectively eliminated pulsatility and snacked continuously. It would also attenuate the frequency and amplitude of natural GH pulses, which would lower circulating IGF-1. It hasn't been tested (well, the snacking potentially making you fat has), but I suspect you may develop insulin resistance unless you combine the strategy with some variation of IF (beyond just fasting while sleeping).

Interesting, thanks. I actually don't know this... So if a person introduces exogenous IGF-1 regualrly, does that sabotage the body's production of endogenous 1GF-1 a la testosterone sabotaging?

 

[Genetic Freak]

Interesting, thanks. I actually don't know this... So if a person introduces exogenous IGF-1 regularly, does that sabotage the body's production of endogenous 1GF-1 a la testosterone sabotaging?

An interesting difference between men and women is related to negative feedbacks, and specifically how IGF-1 suppresses GH secretion...

In both sexes, continuous infusion of IGF-1 simultaneously increased plasma IGF-1 levels 3-4 times above upper reference ranges while suppressing plasma GH by 50-80% as well as GH pulse amplitude. However when exogenous GHRH was administered, the IGF-1 highly suppressed the men's plasma GH response to GHRH. In women, the IGF-1 had virtually no effect on plasma GH response though. So, this suggests that the way IGF-1 negatively feedbacks GH secretion may use unique mechanisms in men and women.

Bermann M, Jaffe CA, Tsai W, DeMott-Friberg R, Barkan AL. Negative feedback regulation of pulsatile growth hormone secretion by insulin-like growth factor I. Involvement of hypothalamic somatostatin. J Clin Invest. 1994 Jul;94(1):138-45.


We know that the hypertrophy effects of GH are mediated through IGF-1. However, we also know that this must be autocrine IGF-1 and not endocrine (systemic/hepatic) IGF-1...

 

[CFC]

Yeah, although systemic IGF-1 is sucked up by recently worked muscles for anabolic effect (which is one reason exercise significantly reduces the risk of cancer and that everyone should be lifting weights).

Interesting that men and women differ in that situation above though, I wonder if oestrogen plays some role there.