Any value to this 'diet' ?

[TT Eric]

I was wondering your thought on this:

http://www.t-nation.com/diet-fat-loss/5-2-fat-loss-diet-for-lifters

I'm not a fan of IF, but this approach seems less worse then the others I saw since it's based on improving insulin sensibility!

Thanks

Eric

[#8]

nope lol

[Praetorian]

As John Meadows has said many times...IF is called muscle loss! I would never suggest any client do IF especially for a physique athlete. Also I would take anything TC says with a grain of salt! Improving insulin sensitivity is fairly straight forward...just reduce carb intake.

P


By John Meadows:

"Proponents of IF like to think of it as the 'science diet' but the complete opposite is true. Intermittent fasting is the fad diet. There's no logic to it, unless your goal is to lose muscle, slow down your metabolism, and have poor workouts.

"My most difficult clients are people that have crashed and burned on intermittent fasting. Here's how it always plays out: I get a guy that was 20-30% body fat. He does IF and he loses some fat and muscle. Then he gets stuck at 15-18% body fat, so he takes his calories down. Now he's stuck at 1800-2000 calories, nothing is happening, and he's miserable. Then he comes to me for help.

"That's the scenario I see every time. His metabolism is shot and he'll gain fat when coming off IF. His body is hoarding fat at this point; it's a self-protective mechanism. It can take us months to get his body functioning correctly again."

(1) Leucine or carbohydrate supplementation reduces AMPK and eEF2 phosphorylation and extends postprandial muscle protein synthesis in rats

Gabriel J. Wilson (1), Donald K. Layman (1), Christopher J. Moulton (1), Layne E. Norton (1), Tracy G. Anthony (2), Christopher G. Proud (3), S. Indu Rupassara (4), and Peter J. Garlick (4)

(1) Division of Nutritional Sciences, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, Illinois; (2) Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Indiana University School of Medicine-Evansville, Evansville, Indiana; (3) School of Biological Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton, United Kingdom; and (4) Department of Animal Sciences, University of Illinois, Urbana, Illinois

Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab 301: E1236–E1242, 2011.

Muscle protein synthesis (MPS) increases after consumption of a protein-containing meal but returns to baseline values within 3 h despite continued elevations of plasma amino acids and mammalian target of rapamycin (mTORC1) signaling. This study evaluated the potential for supplemental leucine (Leu), carbohydrates (CHO), or both to prolong elevated MPS after a meal. Male Sprague-Dawley rats (~270 g) trained to consume three meals daily were food deprived for 12 h, and then blood and gastrocnemius muscle were collected 0, 90, or 180 min after a standard 4-g test meal (20% whey protein). At 135 min postmeal, rats were orally administered 2.63 g of CHO, 270 mg of Leu, both, or water (sham control). Following test meal consumption, MPS peaked at 90 min and then returned to basal (time 0) rates at 180 min, although ribosomal protein S6 kinase and eIF4E-binding protein-1 phosphorylation remained elevated. In contrast, rats administered Leu and/or CHO supplements at 135 min postmeal maintained peak MPS through 180 min. MPS was inversely associated with the phosphorylation states of translation elongation factor 2, the "cellular energy sensor" adenosine monophosphate-activated protein kinase-alpha (AMPKalpha) and its substrate acetyl-CoA carboxylase, and increases in the ratio of AMP/ATP. We conclude that the incongruity between MPS and mTORC1 at 180 min reflects a block in translation elongation due to reduced cellular energy. Administering Leu or CHO supplements ~2 h after a meal maintains cellular energy status and extends the postprandial duration of MPS.

[steve_d]

I dunno...There are worse diets out there, and there are far better. But at the end of the week / month, you would likely do ok on this diet. Just as you would on any other diet. The problem with this though, is that they don't specify intake during the 5 normal days. Normal can start off normal, but once you start losing, I bet your body will start fighting back, and by only having 2 days of the week that are 'pre-specified' in terms of calorie intake, you will notice the other 5 days you tend to eat a little more to compensate. But If you're used to eating 2500 a day to maintain, and now you change this to 2500x5 and 800x2 on non-consecutive days, you will begin to lose weight.

Will you lose muscle? Perhaps a little. But probably not a whole lot more (or less) than had you stuck to a steady deficit of 500/day instead of making that deficit on 2 days. Perhaps the better question is which diet would be easier to follow? Personally, I don't know. My recent diets have been almost in between (or a combo of) many diets. I might go in a deficit of 400 per day, but then one day increase by 1000 calories, but the following day a deficit of 1000. There is no mathematical or scientific rationale behind how I diet. Just listening to my body and going with the flow. Some weeks I might cheat more, some less. Depending on the workout too I might not have gone in a large deficit that day, and so on.

Personally though, I think there is value to this diet. Just not necessarily for any of the reasons they back it up with. The way I see it is they are going to be in a weekly deficit if they can control the 5 days. That is more or less the most important part to any diet within reason. Do I recommend it? Not really - I wouldn't enjoy the 800 calorie days and the diet for me would likely be harder than another. If you like gimmicks though, this is another that would make you lose weight. I am strictly speaking about in myself or possibly other competitors who know their bodies well. I wouldn't recommend this to the average person trying to lose weight. But I bet you if I committed to this diet for a contest prep it would most definitely work and I would not noticeably lose any more muscle than another diet. Perhaps I would lose more of my sanity though.

[TT Eric]

I would not use that diet to lean for a show, but more like off season leaning, the arguments I liked in this is the possibility to gain some muscles 5 days a week, while loosing fat on 2 days. I don't think this kind of diet would lead to loosing muscle noticeably since you can easily take half of those 800 calories in proteins (100g) and if it help insulin sensibility like he says it does, I like the idea. This is not the regular IF we see. Not sure I would do it, just found it and was curious about it.

Eric

[Praetorian]

If i am going to use a specific diet I want to use something that is easy to stick to and that maximizes results. IF does the opposite not to mention it causes metabolic issues as JM pointed out.
Improving insulin sensitivity is simple...reduce carbohydrate intake, use lower GI and GL carbs, take in the majority of carbs when uptake is maximized, and use GDA's.
P