View Full Version : Morning Meals: Must or Bust?


naturalofcourse
Thu, July 1st, 2004, 11:19 AM
Another NASM article written by Apex Fitness Group (http://www.apexfitness.com/)

Several studies have shown that exercise’s contribution to successful weight loss is quite small compared to the contribution of a low-calorie diet. And while most people agree that exercise combined with a proper diet is the best way to induce and maintain weight loss, there is controversy about the benefits or detriments of eating a morning meal before a workout.

The typical argument for morning exercise on an empty stomach is that it will result in more fat burned. The theory is that after a night of sleep, glycogen stores (in the liver) and blood sugar are low. If one performs cardiorespiratory exercise before eating, the body will use a higher percentage of calories from fat, translating into more fat burned for the dieter.

The first part of this argument—that more fat is oxidized as a result of little carbohydrate availability—is easily supported by science. Research shows that when the body is in a fasted state, it burns more fat during cardiovascular exercise. But if food is consumed (in this case carbohydrates) before exercise, there is a greater reliance on burning carbohydrate rather than fat. Why? Because carbohydrates are preferentially oxidized or burned when present.

The insulin response from carbohydrate ingestion reduces lipolysis, fatty acid release and fat oxidation. In fact, what one has consumed in the 24 hours preceding an exercise session can affect fat oxidation. Looking at fat oxidation by itself during an exercise session to determine the efficacy of the session for fat loss misses the lion's share of the story. The respiratory quotient (RQ) is the ratio of the oxygen inhaled to the CO2 expelled by the body. RQ is influenced by macronutrient percentages in the diet and tells a scientist how much fat or carbohydrate oxidation changes when all else is held constant. In addition to diet, a negative energy balance offsets the RQ and decreases it in favor of fat oxidation.

Carbohydrate and protein oxidation are both directly related to acute changes in their intake. In other words, a diet high in carbohydrate increases carbohydrate oxidation (RQ) and decreases fat oxidation. A large increase in protein consumption creates the same compensatory decrease in fat oxidation. Whether these changes in macronutrient intake increase fat stores on the body depends on energy balance. According to some, the way to test this is to measure RQ in relation to the food quotient (FQ). FQ is the ratio of carbon dioxide produced to oxygen consumed during the oxidation of foods representative of the habitual diet. When the RQ to FQ ratio (RQ/FQ) is less than one, it means that calorie intake is less than 24-hour energy expenditure. When RQ/FQ is greater than one, the opposite is true.

So what should we eat before our morning cardio? Just because a study shows fasting participants had a higher fat oxidation during exercise than fed subjects does not mean that an equivalent amount of body fat won't be lost at the end of the day as long an equivalent amount of calories were expended.

Consider a study by Schneiter et al, which showed that the percentage of fat burned by those exercising in a fasted state is higher than in those who ate before exercising. Both groups consumed the same calories during the eight-hour study period. The only difference between the two trials was that one trial was done in a fasted state with all food consumed after exercise. The other trial was performed with the same number of calories consumed before exercise. The biggest result from this study was that total calories expended during exercise and the eight-hour study period was the same in both trials. The meal-before-exercise group burned slightly more carbohydrate during the eight hours and the exercise-before-meal group burned more fat. Keep in mind that the groups did 45 minutes of high-intensity exercise (~8 METs) yet the fasted group burned only 10g of fat more in the eight-hour study period than the group that ate before exercising. This adds up to about a third of an ounce of fat. At this rate, it would take 45 days of exercise to burn one pound of fat with the differences between the groups! Thankfully, this is not where the bulk of fat loss resides for a typical client.

In reality, while the percentage of fat used during exercise varies depending on carbohydrate available, the most important thing for a client seeking fat loss is how many calories are burned during their training. The more calories used during exercise, the greater the total energy expenditure will be for that day, and the more stored fat will be lost at the same calorie intake. For example, Amy has a fat-loss goal and maintenance calorie level of 2,000 per day. She eats 1,500 calories daily and exercises four times per week. If she follows a 20/60/20 diet, she will consume 60 percent or 900 calories of carbohydrate daily in addition to 600 calories of protein and fat. If she wakes on Monday and exercises on an empty stomach for 30 minutes at 65 percent VO2 max, she’ll burn fat and muscle glycogen as illustrated in the above studies.

Throughout the rest of the day she has 1,500 calories to consume. She’ll use about 500 calories of stored fat to make up for the energy deficit. If she eats 300 calories of carbohydrate on Tuesday before exercising with the same duration and intensity, she burns much of the exogenous carbohydrates and less fat during exercise than on Monday. She now has only 1,200 calories to eat for the rest of the day and is still in a 500- calorie deficit. The result is that she will burn more stored fat during the post-exercise period on Tuesday than on Monday in contrast to the extra stored fat lost during exercise on Monday. The loss of stored body fat for Monday will be identical to Tuesday because her energy intake and expenditure is identical on both days. If the eight-hour study by Schneiter were performed on individuals in an energy deficit over a 24-hour period, the 10-gram difference would probably have been erased as the energy deficit forced the use of stored fat throughout the day.

Athletes have long known that performing cardiovascular exercise for more than an hour at a high intensity may require carbohydrates to sustain the activity. A study by Schabort et al concluded that subjects who consumed a breakfast before exercising had an increased time to fatigue compared to the fasted subjects. Because most dieters seeking fat loss don’t exercise to exhaustion, much less exceed an hour of cardio training, this is a moot point. This discussion does not change the fact that performance/endurance athletes need to be adequately nourished before and during endurance activity.

The ultimate decision about whether to eat before a morning workout comes down to preference. Some people need to eat before they exercise or they get lightheaded, dizzy or fatigue quickly. Others just feel better with food in their stomach, which may lead to a higher-intensity workout and more calories burned not only during the routine but also afterward (excess post-exercise oxygen consumption, or EPOC). For those who consume food before exercising in the morning, they should be aware that certain types of food might have a negative effect on their performance and should avoid too much or certain foods that upset the stomach.

JeremyLikness
Thu, July 1st, 2004, 02:51 PM
This is a great illustration of how people split hairs. Things like training in a fasted state or taking thermogenics may amount to a fraction of an ounce of fat. This is blown way out of proportion in promotions and ads to market these miracle programs. People then convince themselves that if they are not losing fat, these changes will magically make the difference, when in fact they should focus on their foundations - the basics - and get their total nutrition intake right before they start tweaking.

It is really an exercise in psychology. People have a hard time maintaining discipline throughout the day with nutrition. 99.9% of my clients will tell me training is no issue, but they struggle with food. A workout is something you get fired up about, jump into, and then walk out of. Nutrition is a day long, in and out proposition and requires a true focus.

Instead of taking on that massive responsibility to control their nutrition, people want the easy answer. By easy I don't mean it doesn't come without a struggle - sometimes it is tough to push yourself to do cardio in a fasted state or to deal with the symptoms of a thermogenic - but the thing is, it is that one thing they can focus on and convince themselves they're "doing something" without having to, again, take responsibility for their food throughout the day.

So, you have the person struggling with losing that last bit. They say, "Help me - I've tried everything." They'll take a thermogenic, they'll exercise in a fasted state, they'll cut carbs after dark or eliminate carbs entirely, etc.

But you ask them to count their calories or cut back on total calories, and you'd think it was the end of the world. "No way - too restrictive, can't do it, will never give up my beers, want to have the occassional chocolate, etc."

It is amazing how, as a society, we have trained ourselves to feel we deserve to simply live a lazy, carefree life instead of having to work to earn our health and wealth. I really like what one entrpeneur taught at a local seminar ... we take on challenges and overcome them not so that things get easier, but so that we improve our skills and gain the ability to take on GREATER challenges.

There are parallels between careers and health here. Some people settle for a "secure" job knowing they can do better but must take a risk. I'm not talking about having to leave corporate world - there are great positions IN the corporate world, but many people fear the challenge of going out to get them, and so sit complacent.

In health and fat loss, there is a similar vein. It's the person who, instead of embracing the challenge and the lifestyle, wants to struggle a bit, lose some weight, and then go back on auto-drive. They get to a certain level and then ask, "What do I do to maintain?" In my experience, the people who want to maintain are the people who backslide. That is because by maintain they don't mean maintain their physique - that is a continuing challenge that requires tackling greater and greater goals. What they mean by maintain is, "I really didn't embrace a new lifestyle, so how can I go back to my old habits and justify not training or eating McDonald's without falling back into poor health?"

Ahhhhhh... but once you get into it - when you take on the awesome responsibility of conquering greater challenges and choosing not to settle into some lazy cruise control but to push and exert yourself and not perceive it as a struggle but the thrill of overcoming yet another challenge - my how sweet the reward! Simply incredible.

/soapbox off

Jeremy Likness

naturalofcourse
Fri, July 2nd, 2004, 09:15 AM
Great insight...
Reminds me of one of my favorite sayings...
"You can get off of the bus anytime you'ld like...as long as you're willing to let it pull away without you..."

guava
Fri, July 2nd, 2004, 12:02 PM
I'm too tired to try to understand the above article (maybe some day I'll focus more on learning about nutrition) but on the ediets site I visit, they quoted an interesting study.

In the study, people who were trying to lose weight were assigned to a "breakfast" or "no breakfast" group. There were no significant results except that those who used to eat breakfast and started not eating breakfast lost weight, and those that used to not eat breakfast and started eating breakfast lost weight. The breakfast was not the most important factor; the most important factor was a change in routine.

TheLemonSong
Fri, July 2nd, 2004, 01:53 PM
This is a great illustration of how people split hairs. Things like training in a fasted state or taking thermogenics may amount to a fraction of an ounce of fat. This is blown way out of proportion in promotions and ads to market these miracle programs. People then convince themselves that if they are not losing fat, these changes will magically make the difference, when in fact they should focus on their foundations - the basics - and get their total nutrition intake right before they start tweaking.

It is really an exercise in psychology. People have a hard time maintaining discipline throughout the day with nutrition. 99.9% of my clients will tell me training is no issue, but they struggle with food. A workout is something you get fired up about, jump into, and then walk out of. Nutrition is a day long, in and out proposition and requires a true focus.

Instead of taking on that massive responsibility to control their nutrition, people want the easy answer. By easy I don't mean it doesn't come without a struggle - sometimes it is tough to push yourself to do cardio in a fasted state or to deal with the symptoms of a thermogenic - but the thing is, it is that one thing they can focus on and convince themselves they're "doing something" without having to, again, take responsibility for their food throughout the day.

So, you have the person struggling with losing that last bit. They say, "Help me - I've tried everything." They'll take a thermogenic, they'll exercise in a fasted state, they'll cut carbs after dark or eliminate carbs entirely, etc.

But you ask them to count their calories or cut back on total calories, and you'd think it was the end of the world. "No way - too restrictive, can't do it, will never give up my beers, want to have the occassional chocolate, etc."

It is amazing how, as a society, we have trained ourselves to feel we deserve to simply live a lazy, carefree life instead of having to work to earn our health and wealth. I really like what one entrpeneur taught at a local seminar ... we take on challenges and overcome them not so that things get easier, but so that we improve our skills and gain the ability to take on GREATER challenges.

There are parallels between careers and health here. Some people settle for a "secure" job knowing they can do better but must take a risk. I'm not talking about having to leave corporate world - there are great positions IN the corporate world, but many people fear the challenge of going out to get them, and so sit complacent.

In health and fat loss, there is a similar vein. It's the person who, instead of embracing the challenge and the lifestyle, wants to struggle a bit, lose some weight, and then go back on auto-drive. They get to a certain level and then ask, "What do I do to maintain?" In my experience, the people who want to maintain are the people who backslide. That is because by maintain they don't mean maintain their physique - that is a continuing challenge that requires tackling greater and greater goals. What they mean by maintain is, "I really didn't embrace a new lifestyle, so how can I go back to my old habits and justify not training or eating McDonald's without falling back into poor health?"

Ahhhhhh... but once you get into it - when you take on the awesome responsibility of conquering greater challenges and choosing not to settle into some lazy cruise control but to push and exert yourself and not perceive it as a struggle but the thrill of overcoming yet another challenge - my how sweet the reward! Simply incredible.

/soapbox off

Jeremy Likness

Great post Jeremy, as always...I read this twice.

Musicguy
Fri, July 2nd, 2004, 03:26 PM
The breakfast was not the most important factor; the most important factor was a change in routine.

Fascinating... this has proven to be true in my experience, too!

Jeremy, that was a good post, too.