Is it advantageous to trigger MPS with every meal?

[Awk1993]

Alright, let me ask a nuanced question after seeing the latest nutrition lecture on YouTube.

On the one hand, you claim that BCAAs probably aren't useful between meals because there's no evidence to suggest that triggering MPS more times during the day is advantageous. In other words, as long as MPS is regularly being triggered, there isn't evidence to suggest that increasing the number of times is beneficial.

On the other hand, an important part of your recommendations is to ensure you get an adequate serving of protein to trigger MPS with every meal. The statements have been quite strong on this: in one podcast it was the most important dietary intervention somebody could make, and in another it was a 'wasted' meal if you didn't have it.

Don't these two points contradict? Let's say we're eating 5 times per day and only triggering MPS with 3 of them. If we consider this sub-optimal, then why isn't it sub-optimal for somebody eating 3 times per day to not take BCAAs twice?

This also has implications for the advice on the 3-5 hour window (if it's not important to trigger MPS every meal, then the window isn't as important) and on the overall daily protein requirements. This makes me think I'm probably missing something about why a meal without MPS is a bad idea, so would be great to get some clarification. Cheers!

[Jordan Feigenbaum]

No, they don't and in fact I addressed this cognitive dissonance using exactly the example you pose here in my lecture. Did you watch it?

[element-zero]

Jordan during minute 7 of the video:

Is it useful to generate a MPS event as frequently as possible over a given day? We don't know. […] Generating a good MPS response 3x a day vs. 5x a day, I think at the end of a year, you'll have no difference in outcomes.

Why Jordan recommends a maximum of 5 hours between meals is – I'm guessing – because you don't want essential amino acid levels to fall when taking BCAAs pre-/post-workout (as they won't do anything if you lack EAA)?

[Jordan Feigenbaum]

Jordan during minute 7 of the video:


Why Jordan recommends a maximum of 5 hours between meals is – I'm guessing – because you don't want essential amino acid levels to fall when taking BCAAs pre-/post-workout (as they won't do anything if you lack EAA)?

You just start running out of time to eat many meals, you know?

[element-zero]

Dear coach, why am I having trouble eating a 1500kcal meal two hours after a 2000kcal meal?

[Awk1993]

No, they don't and in fact I addressed this cognitive dissonance using exactly the example you pose here in my lecture. Did you watch it?

I just re-watched it and still not 100% clear. Let me try. So generating MPS is important each time you eat to ensure all the recovery takes place at the level of the muscle, but the actual number of times in total that that occurs isn't important? Is that correct?

[Shawn Sansom]

I always assumed the 5 hour max was exactly what Jordan just said.

However, in an extreme example: 1. if you're afflicted with a schedule that doesn't allow you to sleep more than 4-5 hours a day, 2. you don't like eating close to bed, and 3. you can't comply to eating more than 3 meals a day. It's conceivable that 6 hour meal spacings would be no different than 5 hour meal spacings. As long as you're eating the same amount of food, and the meals are well proportioned to generate MPS each time.
e.g. wake and eat by 6am, eat again at noon, train somewhere in here, eat again at 6:30pm, go to bed at 1-2am.


I watched the same lecture a few days ago. What I took from it was, there's no evidence that eating 5x/day v 3x/day creates more total MPS, assuming that the daily intake of protein and other macros is identical between both diets, and that each meal fully triggers MPS. That's not the same as saying. the 3x cohort gets MPS each time, and the 5x cohort eats 100% popcorn for 2 of their meals a day.

And I think the bigger point is -- as Jordan stated -- it's about compliance. I also think it's about what your body can handle. Obviously content of the meal matters, but I've noticed a strong correlation between meal size and my ability to digest without GI stress. I can handle 5x 500-700 calorie meals a lot better than I can handle a 3x 800-1200 calorie meals. I'm also a natural fatty, so I enjoy never being hungry. Eating more regularly satisfies this desire. Even while losing 1-2lbs a week, for 6 months, I was never legitimately hungry.

I think compliance is really two fold. It's what you can fit into your schedule, but also how your body reacts, and how those negative or positive reactions affect your overall mental and physical wellbeing.

[Jordan Feigenbaum]

Dear coach, why am I having trouble eating a 1500kcal meal two hours after a 2000kcal meal?

Probably still full, but that size meal is likely too great for anyone eating < 8000cal a day.

[element-zero]

It was a joke re: your comment about meal spacing, sorry if that didn't come across.

[Jordan Feigenbaum]

I just re-watched it and still not 100% clear. Let me try. So generating MPS is important each time you eat to ensure all the recovery takes place at the level of the muscle, but the actual number of times in total that that occurs isn't important? Is that correct?

No. MPS is probably the main reason to eat in the first place from a performance and recovery standpoint. If this occurs 1x/day vs 5x a day, 5x is probably better. 3x/day vs 5x/day is probably not a big deal.

[Awk1993]

No. MPS is probably the main reason to eat in the first place from a performance and recovery standpoint. If this occurs 1x/day vs 5x a day, 5x is probably better. 3x/day vs 5x/day is probably not a big deal.

But then if you eat 4-5x per day, why is it advantageous to generate an MPS response with every meal rather than with just 3 of them? Sorry that we've come full circle to the original post again, but I just can't find reference to this 'cognitive dissonance' in the video (apart from my previous suggestion, which you've said is wrong).

[neandrewthal]

No. MPS is probably the main reason to eat in the first place from a performance and recovery standpoint. If this occurs 1x/day vs 5x a day, 5x is probably better. 3x/day vs 5x/day is probably not a big deal.

So what it this implying? That there are diminishing returns from each bout of MPS? If they were all the same then shouldn't we see 66% more GainzZz for 5x vs 3?

[Jordan Feigenbaum]

But then if you eat 4-5x per day, why is it advantageous to generate an MPS response with every meal rather than with just 3 of them? Sorry that we've come full circle to the original post again, but I just can't find reference to this 'cognitive dissonance' in the video (apart from my previous suggestion, which you've said is wrong).

We don't know, but there's no advantage to NOT stimulating MPS so I'm not sure why someone would do that.

[Jordan Feigenbaum]

So what it this implying? That there are diminishing returns from each bout of MPS? If they were all the same then shouldn't we see 66% more GainzZz for 5x vs 3?

No. It just hasn't been studied long term and there are too many variables here to really look at discretely.

[Awk1993]

We don't know, but there's no advantage to NOT stimulating MPS so I'm not sure why someone would do that.

Thanks. I actually think there is a significant advantage to NOT worrying about stimulating MPS every single meal though: it allows far more flexibility throughout the day. If it's been 2-2.5 hours since your last meal, you don't have to wait since you don't need the 4th or 5th MPS for that day. If you have a low-protein meal, you don't have to worry that it's a 'waste of a meal'. Isn't this a huge difference for compliance and quality of life?

Take the following example:

7am - breakfast, trigger MPS
9am - snack, too soon to trigger MPS
1pm - lunch, trigger MPS
4pm - snack, not enough protein to trigger MPS
7pm - dinner, trigger MPS

In this scenario, based on your recommendations, one might ask this person to change their timing and add protein (expensive) to the 4pm snack, but there's probably no benefit since they're triggering MPS 3 times already. Doesn't this free you up to work on more meaningful interventions?

[Jordan Feigenbaum]

Thanks. I actually think there is a significant advantage to NOT worrying about stimulating MPS every single meal though: it allows far more flexibility throughout the day. If it's been 2-2.5 hours since your last meal, you don't have to wait since you don't need the 4th or 5th MPS for that day. If you have a low-protein meal, you don't have to worry that it's a 'waste of a meal'. Isn't this a huge difference for compliance and quality of life?

Take the following example:

7am - breakfast, trigger MPS
9am - snack, too soon to trigger MPS
1pm - lunch, trigger MPS
4pm - snack, not enough protein to trigger MPS
7pm - dinner, trigger MPS

In this scenario, based on your recommendations, one might ask this person to change their timing and add protein (expensive) to the 4pm snack, but there's probably no benefit since they're triggering MPS 3 times already. Doesn't this free you up to work on more meaningful interventions?

You do not understand how this works. Eating without triggering MPS, but introducing calories, extends the refractory period. So you're just compromising your outcomes. There are not benefits to eating a low protein meal and unfortunately, getting strong requires some thought about your diet most of the time. If you find that eating a palm sized portion of protein at each meal sucks up too much mental bandwidth to be dealt with, I'm not sure what to tell you.