Are You Overtraining? Two Scientifically Proven Methods to Test Yourself - Method 1: Heart Rate Variability Analyses

It may sound like the invention of the heart rate monitor industry, but it's a matter of scientific "fact" that HRV analyses are a great tool to monitor and manage training and recovery.

Overtraining, its existence, consequences and detection is and has always been one of the hottest topics in the fitness community. While some practitioners and trainers claim that it does not even exist, others fear it so much that they constantly undertrain. The result? Stagnation.

In the highly competitive world of the average iron-willed gymrat, it's however pretty rare that the gains ain't coming, 'cause he or she is under-training. I would guesstimate that the exact opposite is the case for at least 75% of the self-proclaimed hard-gainers. Overtraining, undereating and/or  a lack of consistency are the stumbling blocks of 99% of the trainees.

I know that you know all that, ...

... so I'll cut this short and get right to the point. Within the past two weeks I hit upon two interesting papers that describe very different, but - in both cases - effective methods to determine whether you are overtraining, or not. While I originally wanted to tackle both in one article, I had to realize that the day has only 24h for my to write and you to read SuppVersity articles. Therefore, I decided to tackle heart rate variability monitoring today and postpone writing about the other to next week's follow up (stay tuned!).

You can learn more about overtraining at the SuppVersity

Heart Rate Variability

ABEL Test

Overtraining & Undereating

Calculate your Energy Intake!

There Are No Magic Macros!

Reinvent Your Training!

I guess you may have heard about the usefulness of the latter on my buddy Carl Lanore's Super Human Radio, already and are thus familiar with the idea that your heart’s ability to produce fluctuations in the beat-to-beat interval in response to different situations. According to José Morales and his colleagues from the Laboratory of Sport Sciences a the Ramon Llull University in Spain,

Don't turn into the guy on the left, don't overtrain & undereat | learn more

"the use of heart rate variability (HRV) as a training tool has progressively increased and deserves attention as a tool to monitor the possible states of overtraining and recovery after a training process. [...] Several studies suggest that the quantification of HRV can be used as a non-invasive method for assessing autonomic  cardiovascular  control  via  the  impact  of  HRV  on  beat-to-beat  heart  rate  modifications." (Morales. 2013)

The relationship between autonomic modulation and HRV is different during exercise and immediate recovery compared to rest periods. This makes the HRV a viable tool for the non-invasive assessment of the autonomic cardiovascular control and a comparatively objective measure of your training status (Camm. 1996; Seiler. 2007; Bosquet. 2008) .

Hold on: What exactly is my HRV? Actually it's much less complicated than terms like fourier-transforms and frequency domain suggest. If you say "my heart rate is 60 beats per minute", this is an average you measured over a certain timespan. If you counted every beat for 60s, for example, the iterval between the beats probably was not exactly 1s. One beat may have been "premature", another took a little more than one second to finally come. The HRV is a measure for the variation in the time interval between heartbeats. In other words, if your heart beats 60 times per minute 24/7, your HRV would be zero and you're probably a cyborg ;-)

The HRV responds particularly to heavy loads / intense workouts. The magnitude of the workout-induced stress is thought to be proportional to the activation of the sympathetic arm of the autonomic nervous system and thus the variations in autonomic balance, which can be indirectly assessed using HRV analysis (Seiler. 2007). A significantly lowered HRV days after a heavy workout is thus a signal that your central nervous system is still recovering. It tells you that you'd better insert a light cardio day or spend the time with friends instead of getting back onto the grind for another torturous 5x5 session.

Technology vs. psyche - HRV vs. RESTQ-Sport

Compared to psychological tests like the Recovery Questionnaire for Athletes (RESTQ-Sport), which is frequently used in research to observe the balance between stress and recovery during training processes, the physiological data you evaluate with the HRV method is obviously more objective. It is yet still debated whether it is also reliable and can / should replace or complement the classic psychological testing procedures.

Table 1: Overview of the training weeks of the two groups (Morales. 2013)

For Morales and his colleagues this doubt was among the most important reasons to conduct a study that would integrate both methodologies. To this ends, the researchers recruited 14 male national-standard judo players (age 22.85 years; height 174.08 cm; body mass 76.85 kg) and randomized them to four-weeks of...

• high training load (HTL - 8 sessions per week ➙ short recovery periods)
• moderate training load (MTL - 4 sessions per week ➙ long recovery periods) 

For the detection of the HRV at the beginning of the first and last session in weeks 1 and 4, the researchers used a Polar S810 cardiotachometer which provided the scientists with the following parameters either directly or the corresponding data to calculate them:

Figure 1: A wide spread (green ellipse) of the poincare plot indicates full recovery.

• the mean inter-beat (RR) interval,
• the standard deviation of the inter-beat (RR) interval , 
• the heart rate & its standard deviation
• the square root of the mean squared difference of successive RR intervals, 
• the number of consecutive RRs that differed by more than 5 ms each, and 
• the percentage of consecutive RRs that differed by more than 5 ms each

That sounds extremely complicated, but in the day and age of automated data acquisition and immediate processing (including fourier transformation to get the frequency data, etc.), there are lot of tiny little gadgets and apps that can do all the hard math-work for us.

HRV + RESTQ-SPORT + HTL vs. MTL = reliable training analysis

The next thing they did was to to simply plot pairs of inter-beat intervals, e.g. 1/60 vs. 1/64, 1/64 vs. 1/76, etc. the resulting graph is a so-called poincare plot (see Figure 1) and the spread of the point in this graph can tell you whether you are well-rested (wide ellipse) or overtrained / need rest (narrow ellipse)

Figure 2: Changes in selected HRV variables, left; performance, as well as stress + recovery values in the RESTQ-Sport, right; all differences expressed relative to values at the beginning to study (Morales. 2013)

The data in Figure 2 (left) does yet demonstrate - the poincare plot of the inter-beat variables characterizes the decreased heart rate variability (HRV) quite well.

"The multivariate test indicated that there was an interaction effect between the testing time and group on HRV variables. [...] the HTL group showed lower square root of the mean squared difference for successive RR intervals, very low frequency, high frequency, short-term variability and short-range scaling exponent in the post-test than in the pre-test (p < 0.05). The HTL group showed higher low/high frequency ratio in the post-test than in the pre-test. Finally, there were no differences between the pre-test and post-test in the MTL group." (Morales. 2013)

In other words: While the HTL group showed the expected increase in HRV, the judo players in the MTL group did not experience any significant changes in heart rate variability.

The question that remains - at least until you take a look at the data in Figure 2 (right) - is: Do these abstract figures really tell me that I am overtraining? The answer the comparison to the data from the RESTQ-Sport questionnaire gives us is YES, it does!

Don't be that guy or girl who works his / her ass off for nothing. Learn how to identify and combat the Athlete's Triad | read all articles.

Bottom Line: The accumulating scientific evidence and the ever-increasing number of practitioners (trainers and trainees) who rely on heart rate variability analyses to judge whether or not they are over-training clearly suggest that a heart rate monitor and the appropriate software (usually part of the bundle) would make a valuable addition to any (over-)ambitious athlete's Christmas gift list.

If there is still room for another present on your wishlist, I'd suggest you come back next week for part II of this series, to learn about another, maybe sexier method to find out whether your perception that training 1h-2h with no sweat every day won't have you overtrain (note: not sweating or feeling cold in the gym can be signs of severe or chronic overtraining).

Reference:

• Bosquet, L, et al. "Is heart rate a convenient tool to monitor over-reaching? A systematic review of the literature." British journal of sports medicine 42.9 (2008): 709-714.
• Camm, A. J., et al. "Heart rate variability: standards of measurement, physiological interpretation and clinical use. Task Force of the European Society of Cardiology and the North American Society of Pacing and Electrophysiology." Circulation 93.5 (1996): 1043-1065.
• Morales, J., Álamo, J. M., García-Massó, X., López, J. L., Serra-Añó, P., & González, L. M. (2013). The Use Of Heart Rate Variability In Monitoring Stress And Recovery In Judo Athletes. Journal of strength and conditioning research/National Strength & Conditioning Association. 
• Seiler, Stephen, Olav Haugen, and Erin Kuffel. "Autonomic recovery after exercise in trained athletes: intensity and duration effects." Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise 39.8 (2007): 1366.  

Pre Workout Protein Supplementation 101: Slow or Fast, Bolus or Pulse? Protein Synthetic Response is Identical!

Should she drink her protein shake all at once or in 33ml gulps every 15min, if she has it before her workout? And wait, wouldn't it be better to have the shake afterwards, anyway? A recent study provides some answers.

I don't know if you notices, but it has been a while since the last study from the Exercise Metabolism Research Group at the Department of Kinesiology of the McMaster University in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada, hit the SuppVersity news. Allegedly, I mentioned Stuart Phillips only a couple of days ago, when I referenced the West study on "Associations of exercise-induced hormone profiles and gains in strength" (West. 2012), in the context of the questionable significance of post-exercise increases in testosterone levels, as far as muscle and strength gains are concerned - for those who missed that, it was  in the "Anabolic Workouts Revisited" post from last Monday. That was however about it as far as the news of the last weeks are concerned. So I was already wondering, when the first of you would be showing initial signs of "acute protein synthesis in response to protein ingestion study withdrawal symptoms", when I hit onto the latest study Phillips' group at McMasters participated in. The lead author of the study is however Louise M. Burke who's currently working at the Australian Institute of Sport in Canberra, Australia.

What happens if you ingest your post-workout protein before the workout ;-) ?

The aim of the study, of which the authors explicitly state that it is a quasi-followup to previous results which have conclusively identified fast acting protein sources (mostly whey, in some instances EAAs) as superior triggers, or I should say, promoters of post-exercise protein synthesis, was

"[...] to investigate the effects of manipulating patterns of aminoacidemia from protein sources consumed before a bout of resistance exercise bout." (Burke. 2012)

To this end, Burke et al. simulated the ingestion of slow or fast protein sources by bolus vs. pulse feeding of a leucine-enriched (+5g) whey protein drink (Nestec by Nestlé, sponsor of the study; the reason for the enrichment was to make sure that there would be a decent amount of leucine in each pulse serving).

• Bolus (B) - 1 x 500ml w/ 25g whey + 5g leucine drink, 14 x 33ml placebo every 15 min
• Pulse (P) - 1 x 500ml placebo drink,  14 x 33ml w/ 1.79g whey + 0.36g leucine each
• Placebo - 1 x 500ml placebo drink, 14 x 33ml placebo drink

The subjects, 12 resistance-trained men (age: 27y; body mass: 94.3kg; 1 RM single leg ext.: 42.8kg) with greater than 2 yr of experience of regular (at least twice per week) strength training, who had followed a standardized diet before each of the testing sessions (energy content of 80kcal/kg BM; 45%/34%/21% of the energy from carbs/fats/protein), started consuming their large 500ml beverage and the subsequent 14 small 33ml servings (every 15 min) 45min before they performed a standardized leg training session:

"This bout consisted of a  standardized warm-up, followed by 10 sets of 8–10 repetitions of leg extension at a workload equivalent to 80% of the specific leg 1 RM with 2-min recovery between sets. The leg that performed exercise was alternated for each trial. The duration of the resistance bout was approximately 45 min." (Burke. 2012)

Before during and after the exercise bout blood samples were collected. Muscle biopsies from the vastus lateralis of the exercised leg were taken 45min before, as well as after 1 h and 5 h of recovery.

Figure 1: Serum leucine and insulin levels after bolus and pulse ingestion, expressed relative to placebo group (left) and fractional protein synthesis rate (in %/h) during the 5h following the rest period after the workout (right; based on Burke. 2012)

As you can see in figure 1 the results basically confirmed the scientists expectation that the provision of protein before a workout would work just as well, because - more than anything else - it is the availability (or should I say abundance?) of amino acids in the blood stream that is the main determined of post the actual fractional protein synthesis rate (FSR) after moderate  volume workout like the one the participants conducted in the study at hand. In addition it did, at least as far as the protein synthetic response goes, neither make a significant difference, whether the subjects had all their protion at once before the workout or consumed it in 15min intervals before and during the workout.

Bolus or pulse = fast or slow? Pulsed whey does not equal casein (imho)

What I am personally not happy with, though, is the way Burke et al. equate the "pulse" protocol to the ingestion of a "slow" protein source, such as a micellar casein protein, for example. While they put that into perspective in the discussion of the results (see below) and despite the fact that do see the rationale of Burke et al. not to use a real slow digesting protein like casein in order to have absolutely identical amino acid compositions and to exclude other confounding factors, it is at least in my humble opinion somewhat confusing for the "average" reader. And while it is likely that the results for a "real" slow digesting protein would be similar, this would warrant direct experimental evidence. A fact the authors only hint at indirectly towards the end of the discussion of their results, when they state:

"[...] A specific issue in interpreting the finding of these previous studies and in increasing the utility of the concept of ‘‘fast’’ and ‘‘slow’’ dietary proteins is the difficulty of determining the individual and interactive contributions of the different AA composition of protein-rich foods and the digestibility of proteins or protein-rich meals to the pattern of delivery of these AAs. Our protocol, in which the same (fast) protein was consumed to achieve its traditional AA profile or as a series of small divided feed-ings to replicate the plasma leucine response associated with a slow protein, provides an opportunity to differ-entiate these effects." (Burke. 2012)

But hey, who knows, maybe that's going to be the research question of the next paper... and in the mean time it will spare you to buy two or even more different protein powders ;-)

"So what's better Dr. Andro? Pre- or post-workout protein supplementation?"

I guess most of you won't care anyways, as there is another question that's now preying on your minds... but to be honest, I can't provide you with a definite answer to it (see headline). What I can do, however is compare the study by West et al. (West. 2011) which used 25g of whey protein post workout to the one at hand (Burke. 2012).

Figure 2: Fractional protein synthesis (FSR in %/h) after the workout with post workout protein ingestion (West. 2011) and pre workout protein ingestion (Burke. 2012) on the left; relative increase in FSR in the two trials (compared to fasted for West. 2011 vs. Placebo for Burke. 2012) on the right (please mind that this is by no means a scientifically valid comparison, it's more of a "food for thought illustration"!)

I've done just that for you in figure 2, and what this comparison tells you is that it does not make a difference, whether you ingest all your protein as a bolus after a workout or start "pulse ingesting" (mind my words in the previous paragraph wrt to "slow != pulse") your protein 45min before the workout - at least, if you take the relative increase in fractional protein synthesis as a measure (figure 2, right). 

Unfortunately, both the composition of the protein supplement (25g whey in West. 2011 vs. 25g whey + 5g leucine in Burke. 2012), as well as the exact outcome variables that were measured (1-3h and 3-5h FSR in West. 2011 vs. 5h post workout FSR in Burke. 2012) were different, so that the comparison of the relative increases in protein synthesis I plotted on the right hand side of figure 2 is actually not 100% valid.

Moreover, and this is something I know a couple of you will now be thinking of, this comparison does by no means allow for any quantitative predictions with respect to the question of ...

What would happen, when you do both: Pulse ingest before and bolus ingest afterwards?

If  you don't remember or - even worse ! - have not read the previous SuppVersity post "Protein Synthesis Beyond the '20g Limit': Study Shows Exercise Facilitates 32% Greater Increases in Fractional Protein Synthesis With 40g Instead of 20g of Whey PWO" click on the image and (re-)read it ;-)

In view of the fact that the existence of a "threshold level" of protein intake, where the addition of even more protein won't yield any further benefits appears to be self-evident, the exact amount of this limit has yet still to be determined. At least after a workout, it seems that this threshold would be higher than the 25g and 20g of protein the subjects ingested in the Burke and West studies, respectively (please read my previous post "Protein Synthesis Beyond the 20g Limit" for a more detailed discussion of this topic).

That being said, it is reasonable to assume, but would likewise warrant experimental verification, that the combination of both protocols could increase the fractional protein synthesis even further. Yet while I am 100% sure that they won't simply add up, I would hesitate to bet money that the difference would actually reach statistical significant... at least with a low volume leg extension workout as it was used in the studies at hand.

References:

• Burke LM, Hawley JA, Ross ML, Moore DR, Phillips SM, Slater GR, Stellingwerff T, Tipton KD, Garnham AP, Coffey VG. Preexercise aminoacidemia and muscle protein synthesis after resistance exercise. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2012 Oct;44(10):1968-77.
• West DW, Burd NA, Coffey VG, et al. Rapid aminoacidemia enhances protein synthesis and anabolic intramuscular signal-ling responses after resistance exercise. Am J Clin Nutr. 2011; 94:795–803. 
• West DW, Phillips SM. Associations of exercise-induced hormone profiles and gains in strength and hypertrophy in a large cohort after weight training. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2012 Jul;112(7):2693-702.  

Protein Timing Reloaded: A Reminder on the Importance of Repeated 20g Pulses for Optimal Protein Synthesis

Protein timing & dosage matter for protein synthesis in the PWO window.

"30g+ of quality (=leucine rich) protein per meal." I am not really sure how often I have been writing and saying this here, on facebook and on the Science Round Up at SuperHumanRadio in the past months, but I hope that it's been enough for you to remember this simple rule; a rule that will also help you to distribute your protein intake somewhat more evenly across the day and thus - as a recent study that was conducted by researchers from the School of Medical Sciences at the RMIT University, in Melbourne, the Australian Institute of Sport in Canberra, the Department of Kinesiology at the  McMaster University in Hamilton, Ontario and the Nestlé Research Center in Lausanne, Switzerland - maximize the protein induced increase in protein synthesis.

Note: This paper is actually an almost identical clone to a previous paper by the same groups of researchers (Moore. 2012). Since I've discussed that back in 2012 already, I still decided to include it in this week's SuppVersity line-up, because it fits in perfectly with the previously discussed study on the benefits of protein intakes >2x RDA and that simply eating more protein is not really gonna cut it. If you want to read up on the corresponding SuppVersity article discussing the 2012 study, you can do this right here.

More is only more if it's adequately timed & distributed

The scientists knew from countless previous experiments that a single bolus of∼20 g of protein after a bout of resistance exercise would provide a maximal anabolic stimulus during the early post-exercise recovery period (∼5 h). The "effect of various protein feeding strategies on skeletal muscle protein synthesis during an extended recovery period (12 h)" (Areta. 2013) was yet largely  unknown. In order to shed some light onto the protein-anabolic response in this "post-post-workout window", the researchers compared three different patterns of ingestion of 80 g of protein during 12 h recovery after resistance exercise and the associated anabolic response in human skeletal muscle:

• 10, 20 or 40 g feedings using a pulsed, intermediate or bolus ingestion regimen, respectively
• consumed after 4x10 reps @  80% of the 1 RM with 3 min rest between sets

 In accordance with the hypothesis that protein timing would directly influence the expression of "anabolic" signalling proteins in the muscle, the researchers observed significant hierarchy with BOLUS > INT > PULSE in the magnitude of phosphorylation of p70S6K and p-AKT on an individual base.

Figure 1: Fractional protein synthesis expressed relative to mean protein synthesis at the respective timepoint (left); corresponding levels of the "anabolic" signaling proteins p70S6K (right, top) and p-akt (right, bottom; Areta. 2013)

However, despite the fact that the immediate response was maximal in the BOLUS group, both the actual amount of protein that was shuttled into the muscle was still significantly higher in the INT trial, in the course of which the subjects ingested 20g of protein every three hours.

So what's the deal, then?

The "anabolic window" turns out to be more of a barn door, which is unlocked by the key of exercise and nutrition science (learn more)

In their discussion of the results, the researchers point out that this is the first study to confirm the long-touted notion that ...

"[...] rates of myofibrillar protein synthesis (MPS) remain elevated above rest throughout 12 h of recovery when a single bout of resistance exercise is followed by the partitioned ingestion of 80 g of high quality protein. Furthermore, we show that daily rates of protein synthesis were highest with regular (i.e. every 3 h) intake of a moderate (20 g) quantity of rapidly digested whey protein." (Areta. 2013)

Areta et al. specifically emphasis that the acute stimulation of the nutrient and contraction-sensitive intracellular signalling network is thus not the main determinant of net protein synthesis in the huge post-anabolic window.

A word of caution: Before you freak out totally about how big you're going to be next week, now that you follow the optimal protein supplementation regimen, I suggest you take a look at Alan Aragon and Brad Schoenfelds paper on the purported and real benefits of protein timing and its real-world implications | read more ...

The anabolic effects of the intermediate supplementation do yet only appear to be. Over the whole study period, they are not statistically different and the superiority in terms of the actual fractional protein synthesis (FSR) persists, even when using a mean intracellular enrichment from the other groups. Thus an increase in intracellular enrichment cannot be the underlying mechanism for the increase in  fractional synthesis rates in the intermittent supplementation trial (INT) the researchers ascribe to an optimized interplay between resistance exercise, time between ingestion, and the total quantity (20g = at the critical threshold) of each (whey) protein feeding. The optimally timed and adequately dosed ingestion of 4 servings of 20g of whey could thus have

Figure 2: Plasma EAA concentration following a bout of leg extensions and subsequent whey ingestion during a 12 h recovery period (top); timing and dosage of supplementation (bottom); p < 0.05 for pulse *, intermittent †, and bolus ‡ at equivalent time point (Areta. 2013)

"[...] resulted in a cyclical plasma AA profile that might be considered ideal to stimulate MPS [...] While the temporal resolution of time points selected for quantifying plasma amino acid concentrations failed to clearly show distinct amino acid profiles throughout the 12 h post-exercise period a hierarchical response was observed for leucine concentration early in recovery indicative of an initial divergence in branch-chain amino acid availability between feeding patterns [figure 2]. Thereafter, the continuous hyperaminoacidaemia or lack of postprandial periods of relative hypoaminoacidaemia over the 12 h period with PULSE feeding most likely resulted in some suboptimal stimulation of the protein synthesis machinery similar to that observed with continuous amino acid infusion." (Areta. 2013). 

Now, this may appear counter-intuitive at first, after all the aminoacedemia in the intermediate trial does not appear to be more pronounced than that in the pulse trial and certainly inferior to the one of the bolus trial. This is in fact true, but it is a mere consequence of much greater %-ual absorption of the amino acids in the intermittent trial compared to both the bolus and pulse supplementation, of which the former are 'protein wasting' and the latter simply insufficient to fully trigger the protein synthetic response.

---

One thing to keep in mind, when you look at the results of the study at hand is the fact that this is just another acute resistance training study that employs an unrealistic (leg extensions only) workout. In other words, we cannot simply take for granted that statistical significant difference in short term protein synthesis (12h is still short) will also translate into measurable, let alone visible improvements in muscle hypertrophy. Still following the protocol outlined to the left is certainly not going to hurt you.

Bottom line:  It should not really be necessary that I actually formulate another bottom line. If you stick to my basic recommendations (outlined among others in my interview with my buddy Sean Casey) you will do something very similar with your 3-5 meals with 30+g of quality protein each. The only thing that may be worth adding to it is a re-emphasis on the interaction of timing and dosing. 

You need at least 20g of leucine-rich protein to kickstart protein synthesis and - as of now - it looks like those will not sustain maximal protein synthesis for longer than ~3h before you have to 'refuel' the amino acid pool and (probably more imporatantly) 'reignite" the protein synthetic machinery with another 20g+ bolus of whey.

In view of the fat that proteins with a low(er) leucine content will probably need to be ingested in higher amounts I would still stick to the '30g+ rule' - after all, I assume you won't want to live off whey protein supplements and Quest Bars, only - do you?

Important additional read: "Evidence From the Metabolic Ward: 1.6-2.4g/kg Protein Turn Short Term Weight Loss Intervention into a Fat Loss Diet" | read more...

References: 

• Areta JL, Burke LM, Ross ML, Camera DM, West DW, Broad EM, Jeacocke NA, Moore DR, Stellingwerff T, Phillips SM, Hawley JA, Coffey VG. Timing and distribution of protein ingestion during prolonged recovery from resistance exercise alters myofibrillar protein synthesis. J Physiol. 2013 May 1;591(Pt 9):2319-31. doi: 10.1113/jphysiol.2012.244897. Epub 2013 Mar 4. 
• Moore DR, Areta J, Coffey VG, Stellingwerff T, Phillips SM, Burke LM, Cléroux M, Godin JP, Hawley JA. Daytime pattern of post-exercise protein intake affects whole-body protein turnover in resistance-trained males. Nutr Metab (Lond). 2012 Oct 16;9(1):91.

It Does Matter How You Spread Your Protein Intake - 30% Higher 24h Protein Synthesis with 30g+ Protein per Meal

Today's SuppVersity News will provide you with "confirmation" rather than "innovation", I suppose

With my recent article on the non-existance of protein-related osteoporosis (read more) and the short news post about the unique satiating effects of protein snacks (read more), there's been quite some protein lovin' here at the SuppVersity as of late. Usually, I would try to avoid having yet another "protein article" in the same week, but for the most recent study on "Dietary Protein Distribution", I will make an exception and I bet, you won't mind! Why? Well, what about what follows the "Dietary Protein Distribution" in the title of said paper?

"...Influences 24-h Muscle Protein Synthesis in Healthy Adults"

By now, you may feel reminded of a recent review by Alan Aragon and Brad Schoenfeld (Aragon. 2013), the results of which (learn more) are not refuted by the results of the study at hand.

Avoid protein wasting post workout.

Why do I even mention the Aragon + Schoenfeld study? The reason is that I already read how people were going on about how this "stupid review" got it all wrong on Facebook. And though I know that SuppVersity readers are not as ignorant as the average gymbro (watch what I am talking about, here) I wanted to make sure that (a) this study is not about the post-workout anabolic window Aragon & Schoenfeld wrote about and that (b) the tow actually argued that spreading your protein intake across the day instead of placing it in the "anabolic window", should yield superior results.

What the study does tell us, is simple: "The consumption of a moderate amount of protein at each meal stimulated 24-h muscle protein synthesis more effectively than skewing protein intake toward the evening meal." (Mamerow. 2014)

In other words: Don't cram all your protein into one meal!

I guess in view of past articles on related topics (e.g. "2x40g, 4x20g or 8x10g of Whey? Which Feeding Strategy Yields the Greatest Net Protein Retention?" | read more; or "Protein Timing Reloaded: A Reminder on the Importance of Repeated 20g Pulses for Optimal Protein Synthesis" | read more), this insight is not really going to surprise you.

Figure 1: Fractional protein synthesis at breakfast (left), when the difference was most pronounced (+30%) and rel. calculated 24h fractional protein synthesis (right) with EVEN vs. SKEWED protein distribution (Mamerow. 2014)

What may surprise you, though is the simple fact that this study, which was a joint venture of scienfitsts from the Division of Rehabilitation Sciences at the Department of Nutrition and Metabolism, and Department of Internal Medicine at the University of Texas Medical Branch and the Department of Food Science and Human Nutrition at the University of Illinois at Urbana (Mamerow. 2014) is the first study to conclusively show that spreading a relatively high protein intake (1.2g/kg body weight) across the day is superior to the large steak the average intermittent faster may be washing down with a triple protein shake in the evening.

With an average age of 37 years the 8 healthy, normal-weight adult men and women who participated in the study at hand were neither rodents, nor elderly individuals, and - contrary to what you may expect if you look at the italicized names of the Institutions the scientists who were involved in this study are working at - they were not in need of rehabilitation after an injury - they were average Joes (n = 5) and Janes (n= 3).

This is not about rodents, elderly people or injured athletes

As you can see in the overview in Table 1, the subjects consumed three square meals, i.e. breakfast, lunch and dinner in the course of the 7-day study period. The previous reference to intermittent fasting is thus obsolete - eating a minimal amount of protein in the morning and at noon is after all very different from eating nothing at all. 

Table 1: Seven-day mean energy and macronutrient intake in healthy adults consuming diets with an EVEN or SKEW protein distribution (Mamerow. 2014)

As the scientists point out, the total 24-h protein, carbohydrate, and fat consumption in the SKEW and EVEN conditions was not different.

"Both diets exceeded the RDA for protein [0.8 g/(kg d)] by ~50%. The SKEW diet met the RDA for protein during the evening meal alone. In all versions of the EVEN and SKEW menus used in this study, the animal-to-vegetable protein ratio was ~2:1." (Mamerow. 2014)

By using a 7-d crossover feeding design with a 30-d washout period, the scientists were thus able to measure the influence of protein timing, on the changes in muscle protein synthesis.

The latter was measured thrice, i.e. after each of the three meals, and used to calculate the twenty-four-hour mixed muscle protein fractional synthesis rates on days 1 and 7 after the ingestion of EVEN-ly or SKEW-edly distributed protein diets.

"Fat Loss Principles That Work: 10g+ of EAA W/ Every Meal" | read more

Bottom line: You have already seen the outcome of the three FSR measurement in Figure 1 and there is actually not much to add to what you're seeing there already.

In view of the fact that I gather that you'd expected a result like this, I don't feel inclined to repeat that I have been suggesting for years to consume 30g+ of quality protein ("quality" = 10g+ of EAAs per 30g serving) with every meal.

If you stick to this simple principle, it's going to help you build muscle and lose fat (see "Fat Loss Principles That Work: 10g+ of EAA W/ Every Meal" | read more).

Reference:

• Aragon, Alan Albert, and Brad Jon Schoenfeld. "Nutrient timing revisited: is there a post-exercise anabolic window?." Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition 10.1 (2013): 5.
• Mamerow, Madonna M., et al. "Dietary Protein Distribution Positively Influences 24-h Muscle Protein Synthesis in Healthy Adults". J. Nutr. January 29, 2014 jn.113.185280 [ahead of print].