PDA

View Full Version : Eat every 3 hours vs IF for recovery


kevin mckay
05-16-2007, 08:38 PM
Along the same line as Mikes question but in regard to recovery. I am guessing higher metabolism = more cellular activity = more healing activity... what do you guys think?

Steve Shafley
05-17-2007, 06:41 AM
This is actually something I've thought about, Kevin, because, it seemed to me that bruised healed more slowly when I was on a cyclic low carb diet, and that might be the case while on an IF as well, though I haven't noticed anything.

Allen Yeh
05-17-2007, 08:23 AM
I'd say I feel like I recover better now than I did when I was eating the 5-6 times per day. This is hard for me to compare as I've changed the way I train since shifting over to IF. So it could just be that my body is not being taxed as much as it was when I was eating 5-6 times per day. It could also be that I typically ate 2-2.5 x BW in carbs per day when eating 5-6 times per day also. As opposed to now where I try to limit it to 1-1.5 x BW per day now.

Craig Cooper
05-17-2007, 09:10 AM
I would think that recovery would be enhanced with IF since you're giving your digestive system a break so that blood can be shunted to areas that are in need of recovery.

Mike ODonnell
05-17-2007, 11:05 AM
I say healing is a whole body process....so the less compromised the immune system is, the more resources the body can allocate towards recovery from exercise. I think IF has a benefit to improving the whole body process of health so it may help more in the long run.....fasting has proven health and improved detoxifcation results...the more cellular waste removal you can do, the more you can get to rebuilding....after all hard to build a new house on top of a garbage dump.....wow, where the hell did that come from??

Garrett Smith
05-17-2007, 01:41 PM
Note that animals, when injured, tend to stop eating.

Blood brings the nutrients, lymph carries away the waste. A hyper-fed state brings both of these in a concentrated manner to the gut.

Assuming proper nutrition on a regular basis, the body should heal better and faster in a fasted or eating-less-often state.

Stuart Mather
05-17-2007, 04:27 PM
Note that animals, when injured, tend to stop eating.

Blood brings the nutrients, lymph carries away the waste. A hyper-fed state brings both of these in a concentrated manner to the gut.

Assuming proper nutrition on a regular basis, the body should heal better and faster in a fasted or eating-less-often state.


7 years ago, I broke my neck. My appetite shut down completely for over a week, ie. I ate nothing. I was on a glucose drip though. I lost a lot of muscle and fat. The more serious the injury, the longer any animal naturally fasts. And considering that life itself is pretty damaging, IF is a theoretical no brainer. Seven months in, I'm discovering that the theory definitely matches the results.

-Ross Hunt
05-17-2007, 06:11 PM
7 years ago, I broke my neck. My appetite shut down completely for over a week, ie. I ate nothing. I was on a glucose drip though. I lost a lot of muscle and fat. The more serious the injury, the longer any animal naturally fasts. And considering that life itself is pretty damaging, IF is a theoretical no brainer. Seven months in, I'm discovering that the theory definitely matches the results.

I don't intend to bad-mouth IF; for all I know it may very well accelerate healing. But the fact that animals fast when they are injured is not a persuasive argument. It is wrong for the same reason the unsophisticated version of the argument for the Paleo Diet is wrong: Just because something is natural doesn't mean it's the best. Animals probably fast when they're injured for the same reason that muscles spasm unnecessarily around slightly injured joints--to increase the animal's chance of survival by discouraging motion that could aggravate the injury or jeaprodize the animal's life.


I fast only when I'm writing term papers... like now. :D

Craig Cooper
05-17-2007, 06:41 PM
I don't intend to bad-mouth IF; for all I know it may very well accelerate healing. But the fact that animals fast when they are injured is not a persuasive argument. It is wrong for the same reason the unsophisticated version of the argument for the Paleo Diet is wrong: Just because something is natural doesn't mean it's the best.

True, but everything happens in nature for a reason. You can theorize why that is, test it, and hopefully gain some insight.

Garrett Smith
05-18-2007, 05:44 AM
One thing that always throws people is when I say (now, after IFing): "If you're not hungry, don't eat."

Not common advice these days of 6 feedings a day...

-Ross Hunt
05-18-2007, 11:14 PM
True, but everything happens in nature for a reason. You can theorize why that is, test it, and hopefully gain some insight.

This is definitely true. I was just pointing out that there's a big gap between 'everything happens in nature for a reason' and 'nature does nothing in vain.'

Robb Wolf
05-19-2007, 07:58 AM
The literature shows great benefit with regards to healing and both caloric restriction and intermittent fasting:
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn10386-fasting-may-boost-recovery-from-spinal-injury.html

Decrease inflammation, enhanced insulin sensitivity and modulated immune function are all good for healing.

Kurtis Bowler ruptured his achilles tendon training for strong man and continued to IF. I believe his recovery was "surprisingly fast" according to his doc.

Stuart Mather
05-19-2007, 08:25 PM
I don't intend to bad-mouth IF; for all I know it may very well accelerate healing. But the fact that animals fast when they are injured is not a persuasive argument. It is wrong for the same reason the unsophisticated version of the argument for the Paleo Diet is wrong: Just because something is natural doesn't mean it's the best. Animals probably fast when they're injured for the same reason that muscles spasm unnecessarily around slightly injured joints--to increase the animal's chance of survival by discouraging motion that could aggravate the injury or jeaprodize the animal's life.




Except that animals don't only fast when they're injured. They also fast when ill. I certainly agree with you that everything that is natural is not necessarily the best. However the converse is equally ridiculous. Just an even cursory look at the biochemistry of fasting would seem to indicate that fasting in response to either injury or illness is for beneficial regenerative reasons, not merely mechanical.

Stuart.

Rene Renteria
05-20-2007, 12:25 AM
blah blah blah hormesis! (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hormesis) blah blah blah

(sorry, I got nuthin')

Robb Wolf
05-20-2007, 11:48 AM
blah blah blah hormesis! (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hormesis) blah blah blah

(sorry, I got nuthin')

LOL! thanks!

Troy Archie
06-07-2007, 07:41 AM
This topic has been on the back of my mind lately. In Lon Kilgore's "Physics, Physiology, and Food" in this months CFJ, he brought up an interesting point in regards to the eat every 3 hours principle:

"Insulin stimulates the transport of that newly digested carbohydrate, now in the form of blood sugar, to be moved out of the blood into the various tissues of the body. The inevitable result of insulin action, a reduction in blood sugar, stimulates hunger, which is a response to depressions in blood sugar. You get hungry more frequently on a low-fat diet. That tiny little problem usually dooms low-fat diets to failure and abandonment in a matter of weeks. For a chance at success with a low-fat diet, not only do you need to change the foods you eat, you also need to change how you eat. Instead of three squares a day, it is much more effective to eat four or five smaller meals with little snacks between. Spreading the food relatively uniformly across the waking day helps minimize the time between insulin concentration troughs, thereby helping limit between-meal hunger pangs."

If that's the main reasoning behind the 4-6 small meals per day ideology then does it fit into a low-carb/high fat principle too? I'm thinking no.

Ron Nelson
06-07-2007, 08:41 AM
I think that's a good question and you're probably right about the answer. I'm no nutritionist, but my sneaking suspicion is the caloric intake would be way too high as low carb/high fat foods tend to have a higher caloric density.

It's probably why I couldn't make any headway on a low carb, six meal diet and seem to have lost inches, but not strength, using IF.

THOMAS RICHARDS
06-07-2007, 09:06 AM
Just want to make some of my observations about If, can't really say about the six meals
-weight loss down from 242-222lbs as of 6 am this morning (4wks in}
-% percentage body fat loss down from about 30% to a measured 21% (you know the pool testing)
- I am less gassed after the wod @ crossfitnc 3-4 days a week times are going down
- strength numbers are still maintained with a deadlift and back squat of still over 400 lbs
-

I think so far this has been the easiest lifestyle change I could have made, some people think I am crazy but the pounds and fat are dropping, I am still
doing better in the gym, don't think I am anywhere near my potential performance lab told me at 190lbs I would be at 10% bf if I didn't lose any lean muscle can't wait to get there, and the fact you can cheat a little and start over the next day makes everything great, the weekends are a welcomed sight!

I thought the guy who told me about IF was a f**cking nut, until I tried it
another lesson learned! Now in my families eyes I am the nut!

Robb Wolf
06-07-2007, 09:43 AM
Troy-
That scenario you describe is the classic "hypoglycemic's" situation...they need a constant titration of food to make it. They are sufficiently insulin resistant such that they can not access body fat for energy and MUST have a near constant glucose infusion.

I think it's hard as hell to eat every 3 hrs on low carb. This is part of the reason a moderate-high carb diet is likely better for gaining muscle at some point as you are actually hungry. Low carb means little or no hunger.

Mike ODonnell
06-07-2007, 11:20 AM
Low carb means little or no hunger.

Mongo crave meat.......Fire bad......

Robb Wolf
06-08-2007, 03:14 PM
Mongo crave meat.......Fire bad......

Yes...Mongo good. Mongo Goooood.

Bo Bolund
06-20-2007, 08:38 AM
Along the same line as Mikes question but in regard to recovery. I am guessing higher metabolism = more cellular activity = more healing activity... what do you guys think?

The more meals... the more insulin release... the more inflammation (CRP)

Fasting seems to increase metabolism during the first 48 hours.

Troy Archie
06-21-2007, 07:32 AM
I'm really beginning to question the whole higher metabolism thing associated with eating many small meals. Is it really that much of a difference that it's going to make an impact? For someone eating a paleo diet, IF'n, lifting hard, exercising right and trying to sleep as much as they can, are they going to see any improvements or a better level of health and performance? Yeah I'm sure if you're obese, have zero activity and borderline diabetic it could probably make a work of difference...

Mike ODonnell
06-21-2007, 09:38 AM
I'm really beginning to question the whole higher metabolism thing associated with eating many small meals. Is it really that much of a difference that it's going to make an impact? For someone eating a paleo diet, IF'n, lifting hard, exercising right and trying to sleep as much as they can, are they going to see any improvements or a better level of health and performance? Yeah I'm sure if you're obese, have zero activity and borderline diabetic it could probably make a work of difference...

Good question....as if you limit the calories through IF...even if the metabolism lowers itself you will still have a defecit and can have weight loss. Not to mention the added health benefits of daily lower calorie intake, less insulin release, etc..etc..etc. I lift 2x a week only, eat IF...and actually gain muscle and lose fat....so if I am also being healthier and reducing ageing factors while increasing my immune system and insulin sensitivity....well seems like a win win....

Lots of the people who train intense every day....eat 6-7x a day....don't make it past 40 or 50 without some major heart issues.....moderation and figuring out how the body was supposed to be used is the key to keeping it healthy for a long time....

You want your car to last a long time? Don't put on a ton of miles and drive it like a race car everyday....

William Hunter
06-21-2007, 10:21 AM
MOD, that's a very funny statement coming from someone who no doubt has to drive on 285 from time to time. Cars don't always last long in the ATL. (lived there for 11 years, now up the road in Rome)

Mike ODonnell
06-21-2007, 11:09 AM
MOD, that's a very funny statement coming from someone who no doubt has to drive on 285 from time to time. Cars don't always last long in the ATL. (lived there for 11 years, now up the road in Rome)

I hate the highways....as I had to wait 90min to go see the Sox beat up on the Braves....luckily we can all buy new cars...can't buy new bodies....or at least they are way more expensive...at least 6million dollars by 1970s TV economy...

William Hunter
06-21-2007, 12:54 PM
My car made up until 6 weeks before I moved from ATL, then it got totalled. Unfortunately I was in the car at the time.

My nutrition teacher in chiro school was fond of fasting, even just skipping a meal or two now and then (didn't call it IF back then). He described it as "complete physiological rest" so that your body could get to some long overdo repair work on a cellular basis. Not sure if it would work with some of the crazy amounts of training some people do. I'm not doing hardcore metcon/CF stuff currently and I'm enjoying IF with 3 strength workouts per week. Taking it easy and feeling good...for now.

Mike, and all those old enough to remember 70's TV, I just saw an ad for a new show coming this fall...The Bionic Woman! I think she's got the one arm and both leg thing going. Effects should be a little bit better this time around. Even money Lindsay Wagner gets at least a cameo.

One last thing Mike. The Sox's 10 game lead on the Yanks is not enough. The Evil Empire lives on.

signed,

Brooklyn native

Mike ODonnell
06-21-2007, 01:06 PM
One last thing Mike. The Sox's 10 game lead on the Yanks is not enough. The Evil Empire lives on.

Being a true Bostonian Yankee Carpetbagger....this I know to be true.....40 games isn't enough....but I just enjoy the ride while I can....