• FreeTrainers.com Forums
• Strength & Powerlifting
• Anabolics of insulin continued

Group: Strength & Powerlifting

Anabolics of insulin continued

wrestler125 Posts: 4,619 Joined: 2004/01/27	2005/10/28, 04:19 PM Ok, here's one more article. This one is a little more practical, and goes into much better detail as to the effect on the human body. A little less science, a little more application. Credit to Testosterone.net; t-nation.com A Defense of Massive Eating by Joel Marion Many of you are familiar with John Berardi's Massive Eating dietary regimen. In short, it promotes the idea that carbohydrates and fats (in most cases) shouldn't be mixed in significant amounts in the same meal. Lately, I've seen lots of angry people discounting the approach. Their argument is based on one fact: "Fat doesn't need insulin to be stored — it can store itself." Well, that's a fair argument, but it doesn't negate the principles espoused by the Massive Eating plan. Massive Eating and Fat Storage First off, let me just say that the "fat can store itself" argument only addresses one particular aspect of combining nutrients. If limiting acute fat storage were the only reason to avoid meals containing large amounts of both carbohydrates and fats, then I might not be such a big proponent of the theory. And I don't think John Beraridi's advocacy of ME is based on that premise alone either; however, this seems to be the facet that people harp on and end up coming to the conclusion that "it doesn't matter" or that "it's stupid" or that "it makes no sense" or that "it's pointless" to avoid the combination of fats and carbohydrates. Let's back track and cover acute fat storage for a minute. Yes, due to the phospholipid bilayer of adipocytes, fat can store itself without insulin. Similarly, many other nutrients (creatine, amino acids, etc.) can be stored without insulin because of various non-insulin dependant storage pathways. Still, in almost every situation, if you add insulin, you'll increase acute nutrient storage (this is a good thing when speaking of nutrients such as creatine and amino acids, but a bad thing when talking about fat); fatty acids are no exception. Molscript representation of insulin molecule Short chain and medium chain fatty acids can readily diffuse across the cell membrane; however, long chain fatty acids (LCFAs) rely on facilitated diffusion or "active transport" in order to cross. The fatty acid transfer proteins FAT/CD36 and FATP1 (responsible for the transport of LCFAs across the cell membrane) are mainly located inside the cell, but in the presence of insulin they're "translocated" to the cell membrane. This insulin induced translocation has been shown to increase the uptake of LCFAs in the adipocyte (1). You may counter the above with the fact that ketogenic diets — diets in which insulin is low all the time — show no benefit (from a fat loss perspective) over lower fat, higher carb diets with matching protein intakes. So why then would a diet that limits insulin only part of the time be more beneficial? If the above held water, then limiting insulin all the time (instead of just part of the time) should lead to greater fat loss. And to that I would bring mention of the hormone leptin — a hormone in which circulating levels are highly associated with that of insulin. Leptin is a regulatory hormone that communicates with the hypothalamus, and basically gives the body the "yea" or "nay" to utilize adipose tissue for energy. Under normal conditions, leptin is abundant and binds freely to its associated receptors. The receptors then send a message to the brain to assure it that things are in good shape. Now, when dieting (especially with diets in which insulin levels are chronically low), leptin levels are low and consequently there isn't as much binding occurring; the receptors recognize this and inform the brain as to what's going on. From there, the brain begins to send out various regulatory signals to the rest of the body, causing a decrease in thyroid output and metabolic rate and an increase in the catabolic hormone cortisol, along with appetite. So, having low levels of circulating insulin day-in and day-out can actually be detrimental to fat loss, which is the reason why I believe ketogenic diets do not show additional benefit to their higher-carb counterparts. Does that mean that keto diets don't work? No, it just means that there may be a better way to approach things. Going back to ME, yes we limit insulin at certain times of the day, which can be beneficial to fat loss, but at the same time we're consuming carbohydrates on a daily basis (again at specific, strategic times of the day, and I'll talk about that next), which may help to stabilize leptin levels in the long term. With ME, the longest you'll go without giving substantial rise to insulin is 12-16 hours, while with a keto diet you may go days, weeks, or even months with low levels of insulin; a scenario which will undoubtedly have an impact on leptin and, ultimately, fat loss. Massive Eating and Nutrient Timing As alluded to earlier, we need to consider optimal nutrient timing around activity and normal metabolic patterns, which will play into several other factors. For instance, after a workout, muscle tissue is longing to suck up nutrients and it's the only time of the day where maximizing insulin is both okay and desirable. This is probably the major reason I advocate the ME approach. So, during your workout and the few hours following, P+C meals are the way to go. Including fat in these meals would simply slow gastric emptying (and consequently the rate at which nutrients are delivered to muscle tissue), which at this particular time is undesirable. By consuming all your carbohydrates during your workout and within the few hours following, you're forced to consume other nutrients at other times of the day. This is when you make the switch to P+F meals, which again only makes sense. As metabolism slows in the evening, insulin is being controlled via P+F meals. Also, at other times of the day when you don't necessarily "need" insulin, it's being limited. This means you're still able to consume a large amount of carbohydrates daily, but at the same time you're limiting insulin during a good portion of the day, resulting in more time spent in a lipolytic state at the end of said day. In the long term, this leads to greater insulin sensitivity and lipolysis without compromising results. You're still eating plenty of carbohydrates to promote growth and/or maintenance of LBM, but you only consume them when your body is primed for an insulin rush. When it isn't, you're managing insulin with P+F meals. Also, on a related note, splitting a day's worth of carbohydrates over 3 meals instead of 6 will cause higher peaks and lower valleys in both insulin and blood sugar throughout the course of the day. In the 6-meal example, both insulin and blood sugar remain rather stable, never peaking very high, and never dropping very low. The key to carbohydrate consumption is timing. Generally, one would consider stabilizing insulin and blood sugar the more optimal approach; however, a closer look may unveil that a large amount of the success many experience with ME may be a result of these "spikes" and "dips." How so? Well, a high spike in insulin is very advantageous when it comes to metabolic upregulation in the brain, and theoretically, it should offer the benefit of strongly stimulating neurological signals (and consequently hormonal changes) that are dependent on a relatively high physiological concentration of insulin. With the 6-meal approach, insulin probably never peaks to the degree necessary to optimally stimulate the metabolism. But won't large insulin spikes simply cause more fat to be stored, canceling out any metabolic benefits? Being that the "spikes" are limited to times of the day when partitioning is optimized (around workouts and/or in the morning), I don't see this being an issue. Similarly, the "dip" associated with ME has its own set of benefits. We all know that insulin hampers lipolysis due to its inhibitory effect on enzymes responsible for fat mobilization. With ME, the period of time between carbohydrate feedings is lengthened, leading to a greater amount of time spent outside of the influence of insulin. This lipolytic state is further enhanced by what was mentioned previously — the fact that we're optimally stimulating the metabolism with periodic insulin spikes. A higher metabolic rate while in a lipolytic state will ultimately lead to more fat being burned while in that state. The above "spike/dip" phenomenon is probably the major reason/explanation for the fact that almost everyone who switches over to ME notices an immediate increase in their maintenance calorie intake. So, acute fat storage aside, there are at least 5 other reasons to combine nutrients in this fashion: • Optimal nutrient timing around activity • Optimal nutrient timing around normal metabolic patterns • Improvements in long term insulin sensitivity • The ability to consume plenty of carbohydrates while still managing insulin • Metabolic and lipolytic benefits of the "spike/dip" phenomenon Lastly, when attempting to prove or disprove the efficacy of a given method, real world results must be considered. Science can only prove and disprove so much, and sometimes what happens in the real world can't be explained by science. I've attempted above to give some scientific credibility to the idea of not combining carbohydrates and fats in significant amounts, but I'm sure someone can respond to every single point I made with a counter argument and numerous peer reviewed journal abstracts, to boot. This topic can be theoretically debated forever without a victor ever emerging. But what can't be debated are the positive results that many have experienced by utilizing the ME approach. Tell me it "doesn't matter" all you want, but I've noticed the beneficial effects first hand in both my own life and in the lives of my clients. What exactly have I noticed? My maintenance caloric intake went up by 600 calories immediately upon implementing ME; you can't argue that. I can now eat more calories while bulking without gaining additional fat. I can eat more calories while cutting and achieve a greater rate of fat loss than I did when consuming fewer calories (which I attribute to increased leptin levels from the increased caloric intake); this has also lead to greater satiation and LBM retention while dieting. Ask any of my clients and they'll tell you the same. Every single nutrition program that I design is based on the ME food combining method, and I have yet to have a client complain about the results they've obtained from working with me. And obviously John is doing something right; the results he achieves with his clients speak for themselves. You know the saying, a man with an experience is not subject to a man with a theory. Science is great, but in the end, results are the proof in the pudding, and results are exactly what ME delivers. Use; Don't Abuse Having said all that, I want to briefly touch on what I consider a potential problem with ME. Some will treat the food combining method as some sort of nutritional dogma to keep them lean forever. Because of this, if a meal doesn't contain carbs — regardless of its nutritional content — people think it's fair game. I've seen a guy down 20 buffalo wings and a 16 oz. steak while dieting and think nothing of it because, "Hey, the meal didn't contain carbs...I can't get fat!" WRONG. ME is not a magical method of combining nutrients that will allow you to totally disregard calorie balance and not pay the price with your physique. Yes, it'll allow you to eat slightly more calories than you did previously, but let's not fool ourselves — a 1/2-lb of ground beef molded into a delectable patty topped with 4 different kinds of cheese and bacon right before you go to bed isn't a smart food choice simply because it's a P+F meal. Calorie balance still plays a critical role, even when avoiding the combination of fats and carbs. References 1. Stahl A, Evans JG, Pattel S, et al. Develop Cell. 2002;2:477-488. © 1998 — 2005 Testosterone, LLC. All Rights Reserved. -------------- To have talent is to have limits. I have no talent therefor I have no limits. Steve Prefontaine If you smoke or don’t wear your seatbelt, please don’t tell me the deadlift is dangerous.
arondaballer Posts: 1,054 Joined: 2003/06/14	2005/10/29, 01:04 AM Dang my brain is spinning. So what this guy basically is sayin is that there are many arguments that are considerable against Dr. Berardi's dieting concepts, but that he knows first hand that they work. So he's pretty much sayin that others may argue with the concept, but that he believes it works, right? -------------- I firmly believe that any man's finest hour, the greatest fulfillment of all that he holds dear, is the moment when he has worked his heart out in a good cause and lies exhausted on the field of battle-victorious. --Vince Lombardi "Decide what you want, decide what you are willing to exchange for it. Establish your priorities and go to work." H. L. Hunt
arondaballer Posts: 1,054 Joined: 2003/06/14	2005/10/29, 01:06 AM Wow that question sounded really dumb and pretty much repeated itself. Sorry, the whole insulin issue has really been boggling me lately. I am going to be doing Berardi's P/C-P/F eating, and I just wanted that cleared up. -------------- I firmly believe that any man's finest hour, the greatest fulfillment of all that he holds dear, is the moment when he has worked his heart out in a good cause and lies exhausted on the field of battle-victorious. --Vince Lombardi "Decide what you want, decide what you are willing to exchange for it. Establish your priorities and go to work." H. L. Hunt
wrestler125 Posts: 4,619 Joined: 2004/01/27	2005/10/29, 03:44 PM He's saying that not only is there science to back it up, but that he has personally, and through his clients, experianced its effectiveness. Basicly, its science, and implementation. -------------- To have talent is to have limits. I have no talent therefor I have no limits. Steve Prefontaine If you smoke or don’t wear your seatbelt, please don’t tell me the deadlift is dangerous.