However, for objectives Dabrafenib datasheet relevant to bodybuilding,

the current evidence indicates that the global macronutrient composition of the diet is likely the most important nutritional variable related to chronic training adaptations. Figure 1 below provides a BMS345541 Continuum of importance with bodybuilding-specific context for nutrient timing. Figure 1 Continuum of nutrient & supplement timing importance. Meal frequency Previous optimal meal frequency studies have lacked structured resistance training protocols. Moreover, there are no studies that specifically examined meal frequency in bodybuilders, let alone during contest preparation conditions. Despite this limitation, the available research has consistently learn more refuted the popular belief that a grazing pattern (smaller, more frequent meals) raises energy expenditure compared to a gorging pattern (larger, less frequent meals). Disparate feeding patterns ranging from two to seven meals per day have been compared in tightly controlled studies using metabolic chambers, and no significant differences in 24-hour thermogenesis have

been detected [100, 101]. It should be noted that irregular feeding patterns across the week, as opposed to maintaining a stable daily frequency, has been shown to decrease post-prandial thermogenesis [102] and adversely affect insulin sensitivity and blood lipid profile [103]. However, relevance of the latter findings might be limited to sedentary populations, since regular exercise is well-established in its ability to improve insulin sensitivity and blood lipids. Bodybuilders typically employ a higher meal frequency in an attempt to optimize fat loss and muscle preservation. However, the majority of chronic experimental studies have failed

to show that different meal frequencies have different influences on bodyweight or body composition [104–108]. Of particular interest is the research examining the latter, since the preservation of muscle mass during fat loss is a paramount concern in the pre-contest phase. A recent review by Varady [109] examined 11 daily caloric restriction (CR) studies and 7 intermittent calorie restriction (ICR) studies. Ribonucleotide reductase CR involved a linear consumption of 15-60% of baseline needs every day, while ICR alternated ad libitum ‘feed’ days with ‘fast’ days involving partial or total food intake restriction. It was concluded that although both types have similar effects on total bodyweight reduction, ICR has thus far been more effective for retaining lean mass. Three of the ICR studies showed no significant decrease in LBM, while all of the CR studies showed decreased LBM. However, the majority of the ICR trials used bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) to measure body composition, while the majority of CR studies used dual X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).