[Steve]

Originally Posted by mikeb

Steve, you and I concur on the caloric intake however your information is quite different than I have access to on multiple meals per day, metabolism changes etc.

Very interesting.

Remember for every 1 study you may quote there are probably 2 more that go the other way

I have my head buried in research more than I’d like to admit.

And I will agree, on some subjects science is undecided. One such subject is protein requirements for the various populations.

However, with regards to meal frequency’s impact on metabolic rate…. the science is pretty conclusive. For every 1 study you might find for your side, I could probably find 15 or more against it.

So, I’d be interested to see what studies you are referencing.

I’m lucky to have access to world and olympic level wrestling nutritionists/fitness people as a guideline for my information

Very cool.

I’d be interested in speaking with some of them who don’t buy into meal frequency’s impact on metabolic output. (or I should say lack thereof)

I too, am lucky. I’ve made a name for myself in this industry. Not one to the point where general people know me. But various world renowned authorities in strength coaching, dietetics, and exercise science give me time, on a regular basis. Many published individuals not only in books, but studies as well.

I’ve recently completed my Bronze coaching certification and moving onto my Silver one of the things that we have to concentrate on is nutrition and weight training.

I assume this is a coaching certification for wrestling. First let me say, congrats. And good luck moving up the ranks! J

However, I highly doubt that the certifications go into any appreciable depth with regards to nutrition and weight training. Maybe weight training, but even top level personal training certs don’t go into weight training in any great deal, IMO. I’ve never seen a sport-specific cert go beyond the scope of the best personal training certs with regards to weight training, and again, they aren’t even sufficient IMO.

And nutrition is 10 times more involved than weight training, again, IMO.

Does the cert go into endocrinology and it’s relation to nutrition. Things like leptin, peptide YY, gherlin, etc? If so, I might consider your cert as a “reference” to back your expertise on the subject.

Sure, endocrinology is merely one facet of nutrition, but it’s a complex one at that. And when dealing with metabolic output, endocrinology is closely associated with the subject.

Any sport-specific cert I’ve seen certainly goes into the basics of nutrition and strength training. However, it would be impossible for them to go into either subject in great detail or it would overwhelm the subject of certification, read, the sport it is testing you on.

And let’s remember, certification aside, we are not talking about nutrition in relation to athletic performance. We are merely speaking of meal frequency’s relation to metabolic output.

The thoughts that I put down concur with the information given to me and the studies that were done to back them up.

Sounds outdated.

Again, I’d by very interested in seeing the science.

Sorry man, I’m going to go with what I know works and continue giving people that information.

Certainly no need for apologies.

I’d be interested in hearing how many people you’ve walked through weight loss using your “way” compared to my “way” in order to draw these conclusions. I hope you aren’t passing this advice out based simply on information you’ve read in a wrestling coach certification.

And FYI, I don’t care what level of coaches you have at your fingertips…. coaches are not experts. They get their information from the experts. At least they are supposed to.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

My recommendations come 3 fold:

1. I’ve trained literally hundreds of people. I started when I was 18, and I’ve had a lot of success. When I first started in the industry, I was simply a child. I was successful with my own physique, and people wanted me to share my philosophies. Most of my information was “second-hand” passed down through the bodybuilding tree, since that was my background. Now that I educated, I call this “bro-science.” Much of the myths circling around the athletic, fitness, nutrition community is actually based on bodybuilding bro-science.

It just so happens that one of those myths is meal frequency and the need to eat small, numerous meals to keep your metabolism “stoked.”

So I had all of my clients eating at least 5 meals per day…. and if I did enough arm-twisting, I would have them eating 7 or 8.

Eventually, as my credibility grew and I made myself more open and exposed to the industry leaders, I learned to research. I also learned to study. And I also met some of the top authorities with regards to the subject at hand. I eventually learned the “truths” of the human body and its relation to the world it interacts with, including nutrition.

At this point, I had many clients who weren’t happy. They were getting results, but they felt trapped by their meal plans. Eating every 2-4 hours killed them. Many working-class individuals just can’t swing it.

With my new found education, I simply dropped their feedings to whatever they wanted, as long as they were getting 3 in. Many did go down to 3 meals per day.

And guess what?

Results did not change. Rates of fat loss remained constant. As long as the various variables were accounted for (cals, protein, efas, etc), weight still went in the direction as planned, no matter how many times per day food touched their lips.

Same goes for myself. I am leaner than a vast majority of the nation. My schedule is insane. Rarely can I eat 6+ meals per day. I can remain just as lean eating 3 as I can eating 7+.

Real world results speak for themselves.

2. My contacts, as mentioned previously. I certainly don’t consider myself ground-breaking. Many of the top strength and figure coaches in the world will agree; meal frequency doesn’t have an impact on metabolic rate. Now, many of them will advocate frequent feedings…. however, their advocacy of this has nothing to do with some mystical impact on metabolic rate.

3. Science. And this comes last for a reason. Disregarding science is a mistake of the highest regard. However, science certainly doesn’t tell all. If science doesn’t match the real world, I certainly don’t throw out the real world and keep the science. J For science to be valid, it has to explain what actually happens in the real world. If it doesn’t, it’s back to the drawing board for the lab rats.

If science proclaimed that frequent feedings had some mystical impact on metabolic rate (which it DOESN’T), I certainly wouldn’t shift my viewpoints and make all of my clients who had equal results eating 3 meals compared to 7 go back to 7, simply because science says so.

Thankfully, in this particular instance though, science actually validates the ability to eat less meals without slowing down metabolic output.

FYI:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=AbstractPlu s&list_uids=9155494&query_hl=6&itool=pubmed_docs um

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=AbstractPlu s&list_uids=7076516&query_hl=18&itool=pubmed_docsu m

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=AbstractPlu s&list_uids=3592618&query_hl=20&itool=pubmed_docsu m

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=AbstractPlu s&list_uids=8383639&query_hl=22&itool=pubmed_docsu m

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=AbstractPlu s&list_uids=8399092&query_hl=23&itool=pubmed_docsu m

This is just a few. I can find more if need be. And again, I am serious about seeing your science… as it intrigues me that you have significant data suggesting otherwise.

Lyle McDonald, one of the top nutrition scientists in the world as well as a leader in exercise science says this with regards to the topic:

“for the most part, I suspect that
a. while 1 vs. 6 meals may show a difference in some things
b. 3 vs. 6 probably won't”

I honestly have no problems agreeing to disagree. However, I wonder about the things above. How much hands on work have you actually had in order to reach your conclusions that frequent feedings positively effects metabolic output. Also, what science have you found that backs up this claim. If someone can prove a strong viewpoint against one of my own with enough reasoning, empirical evidence, and science….. then I certainly don’t have problems agreeing to disagree.

And for everyone else’s reference…. I AM a huge advocate of frequent feedings. I am simply debating its impact on metabolic output in this thread.