40 Things You Should Know – The Science (part 5)

Point 19, 30

Protein feeding pattern does not affect protein retention in young women.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10867039

Abstract                              

This study was undertaken to determine whether a pulse protein feeding pattern was more efficient than a spread pattern to improve protein anabolism in young women as was already shown in elderly women. After a 15-d adaptive period [1.2 g protein/(kg fat-free mass (average 40.8kg. d)], 16 young women (age 26 +/- 1 y) were given a 14-d diet providing 1.7 g protein/(kg fat-free mass. d), using either a pulse pattern (protein consumed mainly in one meal, n = 8), or a spread pattern (spreading daily protein intake over four meals, n = 8). Nitrogen balance was determined at the end of both the 15-d adaptive and the 14-d experimental periods. Whole-body protein turnover was determined at the end of the 14-d experimental period using [(15)N]glycine as an oral tracer. Nitrogen balance was 17 +/- 5 mg N/(kg fat-free mass. d) during the adaptive period. It was higher during the experimental period, but not significantly different in the women fed the spread or the pulse patterns [59 +/- 12 and 36 +/- 8 mg N/(kg fat-free mass. d) respectively]. No significant effects of the protein feeding pattern were detected on either whole-body protein turnover [5.5 +/- 0.2 vs. 6.1 +/- 0.3 g protein/(kg fat-free mass. d) for spread and pulse pattern, respectively] or whole-body protein synthesis and protein breakdown. Thus, in young women, these protein feeding patterns did not have significantly different effects on protein retention.
*Average of 54 grams of protein consumed in the pulse pattern.

Protein pulse feeding improves protein retention in elderly women.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10357740

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

Adequate protein nutrition could be used to limit gradual body protein loss and improve protein anabolism in the elderly.

OBJECTIVE:

We tested the hypothesis that an uneven protein feeding pattern was more efficient in improving protein anabolism than was an even pattern.

DESIGN:

After a controlled period, 15 elderly women (mean age: 68 y) were fed for 14 d either a pulse diet (n = 7), providing 80% of the daily protein intake at 1200, or a spread diet (n = 8), in which the same daily protein intake was spread over 4 meals. Both diets provided 1.7 g protein x kg fat-free mass (FFM)(-1) x d(-1). Protein accretion and daily protein turnover were determined by using the nitrogen balance method and the end product method (ammonia and urea) after an oral dose of [15N]glycine.

RESULTS:

Nitrogen balance was more positive with the pulse than with the spread diet (54 +/- 7 compared with 27 +/- 6 mg N x kg FFM(-1) x d(-1); P < 0.05). Protein turnover rates were also higher with the pulse than with the spread diet (5.58 +/- 0.22 compared with 4.98 +/- 0.17 g protein x kg FFM(-1) x d(-1); P < 0.05), mainly because of higher protein synthesis in the pulse group (4.48 +/- 0.19 g protein x kg FFM(-1) x d(-1)) than in the spread group (3.75 +/- 0.19 g protein x kg FFM(-1) x d(-1)) (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION:

A protein pulse-feeding pattern was more efficient than was a protein spread-feeding pattern in improving, after 14 d, whole-body protein retention in elderly women.
*Average of 51 grams of protein consumed in the pulse pattern.

 

A controlled trial of reduced meal frequency without caloric restriction in healthy, normal-weight, middle-aged adults.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17413096

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

Although consumption of 3 meals/d is the most common pattern of eating in industrialized countries, a scientific rationale for this meal frequency with respect to optimal health is lacking. A diet with less meal frequency can improve the health and extend the lifespan of laboratory animals, but its effect on humans has never been tested.

OBJECTIVE:

A pilot study was conducted to establish the effects of a reduced-meal-frequency diet on health indicators in healthy, normal-weight adults.

DESIGN:

The study was a randomized crossover design with two 8-wk treatment periods. During the treatment periods, subjects consumed all of the calories needed for weight maintenance in either 3 meals/d or 1 meal/d.

RESULTS:

Subjects who completed the study maintained their body weight within 2 kg of their initial weight throughout the 6-mo period. There were no significant effects of meal frequency on heart rate, body temperature, or most of the blood variables measured. However, when consuming 1 meal/d, subjects had a significant increase in hunger; a significant modification of body composition, including reductions in fat mass; significant increases in blood pressure and in total, LDL-, and HDL-cholesterol concentrations; and a significant decrease in concentrations of cortisol.

CONCLUSIONS:

Normal-weight subjects are able to comply with a 1 meal/d diet. When meal frequency is decreased without a reduction in overall calorie intake, modest changes occur in body composition, some cardiovascular disease risk factors, and hematologic variables. Diurnal variations may affect outcomes.
*86 grams of protein ingested in with 4 hours.

Point 19

Effect of protein-supplement timing on strength, power, and body-composition changes in resistance-trained men.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19478342

Abstract

The effect of 10 wk of protein-supplement timing on strength, power, and body composition was examined in 33 resistance-trained men. Participants were randomly assigned to a protein supplement either provided in the morning and evening (n = 13) or provided immediately before and immediately after workouts (n = 13). In addition, 7 participants agreed to serve as a control group and did not use any protein or other nutritional supplement. During each testing session participants were assessed for strength (one-repetition-maximum [1RM] bench press and squat), power (5 repetitions performed at 80% of 1RM in both the bench press and the squat), and body composition. A significant main effect for all 3 groups in strength improvement was seen in 1RM bench press (120.6 +/- 20.5 kg vs. 125.4 +/- 16.7 at Week 0 and Week 10 testing, respectively) and 1RM squat (154.5 +/- 28.4 kg vs. 169.0 +/- 25.5 at Week 0 and Week 10 testing, respectively). However, no significant between-groups interactions were seen in 1RM squat or 1RM bench press. Significant main effects were also seen in both upper and lower body peak and mean power, but no significant differences were seen between groups. No changes in body mass or percent body fat were seen in any of the groups. Results indicate that the time of protein-supplement ingestion in resistance-trained athletes during a 10-wk training program does not provide any added benefit to strength, power, or body-composition changes.