Ja idd, ik doe deze dus als tussendoortje en dan ontbijten. Daarna ga ik naar training.
is brinta/whey een volwaardig ontbijt?
- Topic starter Demian
- Startdatum
- Recente activiteit Recente activiteit:
- Reacties 60
- Weergaven 11.863
- Volgers 9
Ja idd, ik doe deze dus als tussendoortje en dan ontbijten. Daarna ga ik naar training.
Demian
Huge Freak
- Lid sinds
- 16 jan 2011
- Berichten
- 7.643
- Waardering
- 649
- Lengte
- 1m88
- Massa
- 91kg
- Vetpercentage
- 15%
Demian
Huge Freak
- Lid sinds
- 16 jan 2011
- Berichten
- 7.643
- Waardering
- 649
- Lengte
- 1m88
- Massa
- 91kg
- Vetpercentage
- 15%
Als het goed is heb ik nutrix, havermoet moet je laten garen ofzo dus dat liever niet ;p
- Lid sinds
- 9 okt 2008
- Berichten
- 10.673
- Waardering
- 4.424
tbagcool
Advanced Bodybuilder
- Lid sinds
- 6 jun 2009
- Berichten
- 1.305
- Waardering
- 49
- Lengte
- 1m76
- Massa
- 45kg
Dat dus.
Snap niet waarom er hier zoveel (op een bodybuilding forum dan nog wel) geschreeuwd wordt die maaltijd is belangrijker dan die terwijl ze allemaal even belangrijk zijn.
En als je begint over insuline pieken is dat je insuline piek even groot zal zijn als je lichaam niet volledig aanvult ( bv door sochtend niet zwaar ontbijt) en later op te vullen dan dat in 1 keer te doen. want je lichaam is niet genoeg aangevuld dus insuline blijft hetzelfde.
- Lid sinds
- 9 jul 2009
- Berichten
- 15.746
- Waardering
- 14.131
De tijd die eiwitten nodig hebben om verwerkt te worden stijgt niet evenredig met de hoeveelheid.
Daarnaast varieert het nog van persoon tot persoon.
tbagcool
Advanced Bodybuilder
- Lid sinds
- 6 jun 2009
- Berichten
- 1.305
- Waardering
- 49
- Lengte
- 1m76
- Massa
- 45kg
En wat je erbij eet bv vettenDe tijd die eiwitten nodig hebben om verwerkt te worden stijgt niet evenredig met de hoeveelheid.
- Lid sinds
- 8 mrt 2007
- Berichten
- 8.688
- Waardering
- 1.269
- Lengte
- 1m96
- Massa
- 118kg
- Lid sinds
- 9 jul 2009
- Berichten
- 15.746
- Waardering
- 14.131
Onderbouw dat maar eens. En niet dat van de vetten, maar van het evenredig toenemen van de opneemsnelheid aan de hoeveelheid.
tbagcool
Advanced Bodybuilder
- Lid sinds
- 6 jun 2009
- Berichten
- 1.305
- Waardering
- 49
- Lengte
- 1m76
- Massa
- 45kg
Daar was ik ook niet mee akkoord hoor.
Had zijn reactie niet helemaal gelezen.
Klaver
Dutch Bodybuilder
- Lid sinds
- 14 apr 2011
- Berichten
- 521
- Waardering
- 20
- Lengte
- 1m51
- Massa
- 40kg
- Vetpercentage
- 14%
De tijd die eiwitten nodig hebben om verwerkt te worden stijgt niet evenredig met de hoeveelheid.
Het zal best niet helemaal evenredig lopen, mijn punt is vooral dat je lichaam in ieder geval lang genoeg kan doen met je laatste maaltijd mits het genoeg eiwit bevat uiteraard.Hoe kan het anders dat Intermittent Fasting zo'n succes is en vrijwel niemand last heeft van spier verlies?
Lees dit eens door:
Myth: Maintain a steady supply of amino acids by eating protein every 2-3 hours. The body can only absorb 30 grams of protein in one sitting.
Truth
Whenever you hear something really crazy you need to ask yourself if it makes sense from an evolutionary perspective. It's a great way to quickly determine if something may be valid or if it's more likely a steaming pile of horseshit. This myth is a great example of the latter. Do you think we would be here today if our bodies could only make use of 30 grams of protein per meal?
The simple truth is that more protein just takes a longer time to digest and be utilized. For some concrete numbers, digestion of a standard meal is still incomplete after five hours. Amino acids are still being released into your bloodstream and absorbed into muscles. You are still "anabolic." This is a fairly standard "Average Joe"-meal: 600 kcal, 75 g carbs, 37 g protein and 17 g fat. Best of all? This was after eating pizza, a refined food that should be quickly absorbed relatively speaking.
Think about this for a second. How long do you think a big steak, with double the protein intake of the above example, and a big pile of veggies would last you? More than 10 hours, that's for sure. Meal composition plays an important role in absorption speed, especially when it comes to amino acids. Type of protein, fiber, carbohydrates and prior meals eaten all affect how long you'll have amino acids released and being taken up by tissues after meals.
Origin
I think this "30 grams of protein"-nonsense started to circulate after a classic study from 1997 by Boirie and colleagues. "Slow and fast dietary proteins differently modulate postprandial protein accretion" was the first study to quantify the absorption rate of whey and casein protein and gave birth to the concept of fast and slow protein. After that, whey protein came to be known for it's ability to rapidly elevate amino acids in the blood stream and casein for it's ability to create a sustained release of amino acids. Whey was anabolic and casein anti-catabolic.
Given that 30 grams of whey protein was absorbed within 3-4 hours, I guess some people believed that meant 30 grams of protein can only be used in one sitting. Or that you had to eat every 3-4 hours to stay "anabolic." Unfortunately, people missed a few facts that made these findings irrelevant to real-world scenarios. First of all, this study looked at the absorption rate of whey protein in the fasted state. On it's own, and with no meals eaten beforehand, 30 grams of whey protein is absorbed within a mere 3-4 hours. With meals eaten earlier in the day, or if you'd consume a whey shake after a meal, absorption would be much slower.
Second of all, whey protein is the fastest protein of all and digests at 10 g/hour. Casein is much slower; in Boirie's study, the casein protein was still being absorbed when they stopped the experiment 7 hours later. Most whole food proteins are absorbed at a rate of 3-6 grams an hour. Add other macronutrients to that and they'll take longer.
6. Myth: Fasting causes muscle loss.
Truth
This myth hinges on people's belief it's important to have a steady stream of amino acids available to not lose muscle. As I explained earlier, protein is absorbed at a very slow rate. After a large high-protein meal, amino acids trickle into your blood stream for several hours.
No studies have looked at this in a context that is relevant to most of us. For example, by examining amino acid appearance in the blood and tissue utilization of amino acids after a large steak, veggies and followed up with some cottage cheese with berries for dessert. That's easily 100 grams of protein and a typical meal for those that follow the Leangains approach. We are left to draw our own conclusions based on what we know; that a modest amount of casein, consumed as a liquid on an empty stomach is still releasing amino acids after 7 hours. With this in mind it's no stretch to assume that 100 grams of protein as part of a mixed meal at the end of the day would still be releasing aminos for 16-24 hours.
Few studies has examined the effects of regular fasting on muscle retention and compared it to a control diet. None of them are relevant to how most people fast and some are marred by flaws in study design and methodology. Like this study which showed increased muscle gain and fat loss, with no weight training or change in calorie intake, just by changing meal frequency. While I would love to cite that study as proof for the benefits of intermittent fasting, body composition was measured by BIA, which is notoriously imprecise.
Only in prolonged fasting does protein catabolism become an issue. This happens when stored liver glycogen becomes depleted. In order to maintain blood glucose, conversion of amino acids into glucose must occur (DNG: de novo glucogenesis). This happens gradually and if amino acids are not available from food, protein must be taken from bodily stores such as muscle. Cahill looked at the contribution of amino acids to DNG after a 100 gram glucose load. He found that amino acids from muscle contributed 50% to glucose maintenance after 16 hours and almost 100% after 28 hours (when stored liver glycogen was fully depleted). Obviously, for someone who eats a high protein meal before fasting, this is a moot point as you will have plenty of aminos available from food during the fast.
Origin
An example of severe exaggeration of physiological and scientific fact, not relevant to anyone who's not undergoing prolonged fasting or starvation.
7. Myth: Skipping breakfast is bad and will make you fat.
Truth
Breakfast skipping is associated with higher body weights in the population. The explanation is similar to that of lower meal frequencies and higher body weights. Breakfast skippers have dysregulated eating habits and show a higher disregard for health. People who skip breakfast are also more likely to be dieting, thus by default they are also likely to be heavier than non-dieters. Keep in mind that most people who resort to breakfast skipping are not the type that sit around and read about nutrition. They are like most people dieting in a haphazard manner. The type to go on a 800 calorie-crash diet and then rebound, gaining all the weight (and then some) back.
Sometimes, an argument is made for eating breakfast as we are more insulin sensitive in the morning. This is true; you are always more insulin sensitive after an overnight fast. Or rather, you are always the most insulin sensitive during the first meal of the day. Insulin sensitivity is increased after glycogen depletion. If you haven't eaten in 8-10 hours, liver glycogen is modestly depleted. This is what increases insulin sensitivity - not some magical time period during the morning hours. Same thing with weight training. Insulin sensitivity is increased as long as muscle glycogen stores aren't full. It doesn't disappear if you omit carbs after your workout.
Origin
First of all, we have the large scale epidemiological studies showing an association with breakfast skipping and higher body weights in the population. One researcher from that study, commenting on the association with breakfast skipping or food choices for breakfast, said:
"These groups appear to represent people 'on the run,' eating only candy or soda, or grabbing a glass of milk or a piece of cheese. Their higher BMI would appear to
support the notion that 'dysregulated' eating patterns are associated with obesity, instead of or in addition to total energy intake per se."
Kellogg's and clueless RDs love to cite them over and over again, so people are lead to believe that breakfast has unique metabolic and health-related benefits. In reality, these studies just show breakfast eaters maintain better dietary habits overall.
Other studies frequently cited claiming that breakfast is beneficial for insulin sensitivity are all marred with methodological flaws and largely uncontrolled in design.
In one widely cited study, subjects were entrusted to eat most meals in free-living conditions. The breakfast skipping group ate more and gained weight, which affected health parameters negatively.
From the abstract: "Reported energy intake was significantly lower in the EB period (P=0.001), and resting energy expenditure did not differ significantly between the 2 periods." EB = eating breakfast. In essence, people who ate breakfast could control their energy intake better for the rest of the day. They didn't gain any weight but the breakfast skipping group did. Fat gain always affects insulin sensitivity and other health parameters negatively. Thus what people took this to mean is that breakfast is healthy and improves insulin sensitivity. Which isn't at all what the study showed.
Tommyboy
Freaky Bodybuilder
- Lid sinds
- 18 mrt 2004
- Berichten
- 4.757
- Waardering
- 83
- Lengte
- 1m79
- Massa
- 88kg
- Vetpercentage
- 13%
Pannenkoeken ontbijten oké..
Zomaar pannenkoeken aanraden is ook echt zo alá DBB.
Het belangrijkste is een juiste hoeveelheid koolhydraten, eiwitten en eventueel vetten. Als je dat uit pannenkoeken kan halen prima, maar dat betekend niet dat dat voor iedereen een succes gaat worden. Daarnaast is een doorsnee pannenkoek gewoon rommel imo.
---------- Toegevoegd om 17:13 ---------- De post hierboven werd geplaatst om 17:12 ----------
99% van de lui hoef je hier toch niet meer te vertellen dat dat geen pinokio-kant-en-klaar-pannenkoek van de liddle is
jou opmerking van strafkamp ontbijt slaat ook nergens op hoor ace
en JA vetten (niet eventueel vetten)
- Lid sinds
- 9 jul 2009
- Berichten
- 15.746
- Waardering
- 14.131
Leuke feitjes, maar dit is voor niemand op dit forum nieuw. Het bevat niet de onderbouwing mbt jou conclusies over het evenredig stijgen van het verteringsproces in verhouding tot de hoeveelheid.
Wat hebben vetten voor meerwaarde in je ontbijt dan?
Wat hebben vetten voor meerwaarde in je ontbijt dan?
Klaver
Dutch Bodybuilder
- Lid sinds
- 14 apr 2011
- Berichten
- 521
- Waardering
- 20
- Lengte
- 1m51
- Massa
- 40kg
- Vetpercentage
- 14%
Dat had ik verkeerd geformuleerd en is inderdaad niet zo. Was meer om te laten zien dat je lichaam lang genoeg met de eiwitten van een laatste maaltijd kan doen, en wat ik daarnet postte ging vooral over de punten die jij in je eerdere post noemde over waarom het ontbijt zogenaamd een belangrijke maaltijd zou zijn, wat dikke bullshit is. Kan je er verder op ingaan, is een ontbijt nog steeds zo belangrijk?
- Lid sinds
- 9 jul 2009
- Berichten
- 15.746
- Waardering
- 14.131
Dan nog blijft de vraag waarom je je ontbijt over zou willen slaan of er een kleine shake in de plaats voor nemen. Natuurlijk hoef je niet te ontbijten. Natuurlijk werkt intermitterend fasting. Wel ontbijten en geen intermitterend fasting doen werkt ook. Waarom? Omdat je je lichaam dwingt reserves aan te spreken dmv een kcal/energie tekort.
Ieder zijn eigen manier.
Klaver
Dutch Bodybuilder
- Lid sinds
- 14 apr 2011
- Berichten
- 521
- Waardering
- 20
- Lengte
- 1m51
- Massa
- 40kg
- Vetpercentage
- 14%
Waarom verkondigde je dan dat het ontbijt een van je belangrijkste maaltijden zou zijn? Gelukkig geef je nu zelf toe dat het eigenlijk niet zo is, omdat je stelt dat niet ontbijten ook prima werkt. Daar ging het me dus juist om, maar ben blij dat je het nu zelf ook inziet.
- Lid sinds
- 9 jul 2009
- Berichten
- 15.746
- Waardering
- 14.131
Ik blijf erbij dat je ontbijt belangrijk is. Waarom heb ik al gezegd, en ik ga het niet herhalen.
Hey als jij niet wil ontbijten, prima.
