the truth about meal timing

[bungledoona]

Some dude told me I can get my whole caloric intake in just one meal aka breakfast and still achieve the same physiological results as eating 6-8 times per day spread out evenly. For arguments sake we will say hypertrophy

It was a hypothetical statement, im pretty sure nobody has 1 meal per day.... im just curious

Is there any truth to this? Can you get mad gainz with just one meal per day?

[uhit]

You would be hungry later in the day if you had all calories in that one meal for breakfast though

[Khazima]

Yes it's true. It's not going to make a noticeable difference. Your body is building and breaking down all the time, it uses whatever nutrients are in the body, if you eat 3000 in one sitting it's going to take however long it needs to utilise the 3000. Given it's used for exercise/muscle building or stored if not used.

[jimmyinkedup]

I pretty much believe this to be true. Now there was a time I didnt but I do now.

[Docd187123]

The only thing you need to be concerned about with meal timing is how to time your meals to optimize your performance. Whether thats one meal or 8, training after eating or training fasted, no breakfast or a big breakfast, no PWO shake or a big PWO shake, etc it will make negligible impacts directly on body composition. Meal timing can make you workout better or worse which is why it depends on you. Try multiple different approaches and find what you do best with.

[gbrice75]

As much as a fan of IF as I am, I don't know that it's an optimal approach when adding mass is the goal - especially at one meal/day. This is debatable and you'll hear all kinds of responses ... this is just my personal opinion - I'd probably stick with a few meals/day within a specified window - that's if you choose to continue fasting at all.

[jimmyinkedup]

As much as a fan of IF as I am, I don't know that it's an optimal approach when adding mass is the goal - especially at one meal/day. This is debatable and you'll hear all kinds of responses ... this is just my personal opinion - I'd probably stick with a few meals/day within a specified window - that's if you choose to continue fasting at all.

Now you it is great to see here brother!

[gbrice75]

Now you it is great to see here brother!

My man ... long time, no talk. How are you, and how is the family? Great to see you're still around.

[jimmyinkedup]

My man ... long time, no talk. How are you, and how is the family? Great to see you're still around.

Great to see you too brother! I will touch base and fill you in on some stuff but overall cant complain man. Hope you and yours are all well bro!

[gbrice75]

Great to see you too brother! I will touch base and fill you in on some stuff but overall cant complain man. Hope you and yours are all well bro!

Yea buddy, hit me up on FB if you're still on, or PM me here.

OP - sorry for the temporary hijack. Carry on ...

[Times Roman]

As much as a fan of IF as I am, I don't know that it's an optimal approach when adding mass is the goal - especially at one meal/day. This is debatable and you'll hear all kinds of responses ... this is just my personal opinion - I'd probably stick with a few meals/day within a specified window - that's if you choose to continue fasting at all.

I'm going to agree with GB's opinion here. My opinion is that the body has certain absorption efficiencies at certain points in the digestion process. For example, not much is going on in the large intestine except absorbing water. And really not too much going on in the stomach other than just rendering down and making available to the intestinal fauna in the small intestine. So to determine how long your single meal/day would provide you benefit, you would need to know throughput time of the small intestine. And of course, this can vary per individual and per meal. We also know that there is a spectrum of protein sources that are metabolized in a certain time frame. Whey can be as little as two hours, eggs 4 to 6 hours, and casein about 8 hours.

But to think that the small intestine can be absorbing nutrients and protein from the same meal for 24 hours seems to be pushing it.

So I will disagree by saying that one meal a day is sub optimal.

[Docd187123]

I'm going to agree with GB's opinion here. My opinion is that the body has certain absorption efficiencies at certain points in the digestion process. For example, not much is going on in the large intestine except absorbing water. And really not too much going on in the stomach other than just rendering down and making available to the intestinal fauna in the small intestine. So to determine how long your single meal/day would provide you benefit, you would need to know throughput time of the small intestine. And of course, this can vary per individual and per meal. We also know that there is a spectrum of protein sources that are metabolized in a certain time frame. Whey can be as little as two hours, eggs 4 to 6 hours, and casein about 8 hours.

But to think that the small intestine can be absorbing nutrients and protein from the same meal for 24 hours seems to be pushing it.

So I will disagree by saying that one meal a day is sub optimal.

you're not taking into account the fact that the digestion times you listed are when those protein sources are taken in isolation. When you begin to add carbs, fat, fiber, and large amounts of protein the digestion times drastically slow down. The ileal tract is sort of like a braking system for the human body and is in the small intestine. It slows down and speeds up digestion based on macro content of the meal/s and the volume of food eaten.

One other issue is that you don't necessarily NEED protein and nutrients for a full 24hours in a day. It seems nice and effective on paper but the body super compensates for times of catabolism or lack of nutrients the next time you go into an anabolic or into a post-prandial state and the effect is greater than if you had been in a fed state the entire time. Kind of like when you spike MPS too many times during the day it ends up being blunted and never reaching the maximum peak it could have.

[Buster Brown]

I think a meal plan is better than no plan. Too stress about the dif between taking in 1 gram of protein vs 1.25 grams is ludicrous and unproductive. I feel it makes sense to eat smaller meals and try to be consistent then 2 heavy meals. I only bring this up bcuz during the weeks I stay on schedule and on the weekends I work a second job and my eating pattern is all over the place and poor. If I have to make a choice I vote smaller meals ...... As far as outcome...., it probably doesn't make a bit of difference besides less farting!

[Chicagotarsier]

Water timing is more important to me than meal timing currently.

My body tells me when I am hungry. That is when I eat. I only eat a heavy meal once in a great while now. When I do it is a buffet and the proteins suffer the wrath of hunger. Westin in Beijing is the best choice if you ever visit the Chinese top city.

[Buster Brown]

My body tells me when I'm thirsty!

[Pericu]

It doesn't really matter if you're consuming you're calories in 1 meal or 6. It comes down to what you prefer. For most people 3 meals are most convenient due to social environment and stuff. But in the end the nutritional pyramid looks kind of like this;

Calorie Balance > Macros > Micros > Meal Timing > Supplements

[Times Roman]

you're not taking into account the fact that the digestion times you listed are when those protein sources are taken in isolation. When you begin to add carbs, fat, fiber, and large amounts of protein the digestion times drastically slow down. The ileal tract is sort of like a braking system for the human body and is in the small intestine. It slows down and speeds up digestion based on macro content of the meal/s and the volume of food eaten.

One other issue is that you don't necessarily NEED protein and nutrients for a full 24hours in a day. It seems nice and effective on paper but the body super compensates for times of catabolism or lack of nutrients the next time you go into an anabolic or into a post-prandial state and the effect is greater than if you had been in a fed state the entire time. Kind of like when you spike MPS too many times during the day it ends up being blunted and never reaching the maximum peak it could have.

from a survival perspective, I would agree. But we are not in survival mode. Unless we are in an optimal state, growth and gains come slow or not at all.

Protein, like carbs and the corresponding GV, has a load factor based on everything else you eat.

So let's take an extreme example and see if it doesn't make sense. Suppose I front load a meal with nothing but protein whey iso, with a burn rate of about 2 hours. then I finish the days meal with fast burning simple carbs, no or little fiber, and that's pretty much it.

Are we still saying that fast burning 2 hour whey protein iso will last us 24 hours? and that this is sufficient for body building? or are we saying this position is sub optimal?

[Docd187123]

from a survival perspective, I would agree. But we are not in survival mode. Unless we are in an optimal state, growth and gains come slow or not at all.

Protein, like carbs and the corresponding GV, has a load factor based on everything else you eat.

So let's take an extreme example and see if it doesn't make sense. Suppose I front load a meal with nothing but protein whey iso, with a burn rate of about 2 hours. then I finish the days meal with fast burning simple carbs, no or little fiber, and that's pretty much it.

Are we still saying that fast burning 2 hour whey protein iso will last us 24 hours? and that this is sufficient for body building? or are we saying this position is sub optimal?

How could it be optimal if you're deficient in protein and dietary fat?