- Liittynyt
- 31.1.2004
- Viestejä
- 2 150
Tuo Laynen 4-5h kommentti taas koski normaalia syömisrytmiä, ei pätkäpaastoa. Kaivoin seuraavan tekstin jostain Laynen haastattelusta, mutta siinäkin on vähän yksioikoisesti käsitelty pätkäpaastoa yhden mättöaterian periaatteella. Lainauksen lopussa ihan mielenkiintoinen ajatus kyllä tuo pätkäpaaston hyötyjen kerääminen pelkällä hiilarisyklityksellä, mutta siinä riittäisi paljonkin argumentoitavaa.
I think intermittent fasting has helped a lot of people with a diet they can stick to, however I also see many people use it as an excuse to binge, and that is never healthy. One of the other problems with it is my PhD thesis research demonstrated that if you eat low protein throughout the day, you cannot make up for that lack of anabolic stimulus earlier in the day by eating a huge protein meal later in the day because their is an ‘anabolic cap’ to each meal, so to stimulate muscle protein synthesis maximally it’s wise to consume multiple (probably 4-5) meals rich in high quality protein. You want to make sure you are getting enough protein to hit around 3-4g of leucine at a meal to ensure that you are maxing out anabolism, that is typically around 30-45g of protein for most sources. But as far as meal frequency and it’s impact on fat loss, it does not seem to matter, and if anything eating too frequently actually impedes fat loss. I believe however, that you could get many of the benefits, if not all of the benefits of intermittent fasting by simply intermittently eating carbs but still having multiple protein meals as eating protein with low/no carb would still maintain elevated insulin sensitivity.
Enivei mutuiluna heittäisin, että kehonkoostumus- ja yleisterveystavoitteita kokonaisuutena ajatellen pätkäpaasto päihittää perinteisen ateriarytmin, vaikka mahdollisesti proteiinisynteesin osalta tulisikin hiukan takkiin. Ja vaikka ero olisikin kokonaisuutena marginaalinen, niin pätkäpaasto on ainakin monille käytännöllisempi strategia, varsinkin laihduttaessa.
