Nutrition Leucine

[Snowman]

I thought the thing with Mtor was to limit it? For longevity, that is.

Only if you're living in a sterile environment without physical demands . MTor is critical for immune function and tissue maintenance. For mice living in sterile cages, with no physical demands, that doesn't make much of a difference. For real humans in real life, it's kind of important.

Honestly, I feel like this whole mTor thing is just blown out of proportion. You don't want it turned on all the time. But you do want it turned on occasionally. Just like every other thing in the human body. Almost nothing in physiology is optimized in a steady state. Pulsatile activation is key, with everything from growth hormone production to myocardial contractions. MTor ain't special. Turn it on occasionally, but don't keep it on. How do you do that? I dunno, maybe with a healthy diet and exercise, like people have been doing forever.

The mTor cancer mice had a genetic variant that kept mTor on all the time, which is why they got cancer. It's extremely difficult to mimic that level of activation with protein. Actually, the only way to keep the switch turned on [almost] all day is by relying on another molecule that activate mTor even better than protein. Any guesses? Insulin. Insulin turns on mTor in a big way, one of the many reasons it's an effective PED for bodybuilders. So ironically, the people who limit protein and increase carbs in an effort to limit constant mTor activation might be doing the opposite, if their insulin levels are remaining elevated through the day. Better to just eat your damn protein in discreet servings a few hours apart [EDIT: at least a few hours apart. As in, not constantly], so mTor can turn on and then turn off again, like it's supposed to.

There is nothing new under the sun...

 

[Deleted member 316]

Dr Amen Ra recommends omad and low protein. Jason Fung recommended some 16/8 days and some omad days. Low carb moderate protein. Wim Hof and our very own Pavel eat once a day.

 

[ali]

@Snowman, well yes, agree.
I don't make a bee line for any single amino. Diverse protein, diverse carb sources for me. Rightly or wrongly.

 

[offwidth]

I dunno, maybe with a healthy diet and exercise

Now you are just talking crazy...

 

[Deleted member 316]

To play devils advocate, what's the explanation for construction workers being muscular? Most have a piss poor diet. Breakfast is coffee and cigarettes (coffee inhibits mtor and cigarettes are junk), hardwork during the day which may trigger mtor(but they usually are drinking boatloads of coffee which inhibit mtor), maybe a s*** burger and fries and coke for lunch, and for supper it's booze and more cigarettes. Everything points to no mtor,but .most are strong and muscular.

 

[offwidth]

You must know a different bunch of construction workers than I do...

 

[Antti]

Why?

What leads you to believe that exercise mTOR should be healthier than with protein/luecine?

Evidently, you came up with some justification for making that statement.

I have been led to believe exercise mTOR is more specific than diet induced mTOR. That would mean that the growth would happen more specifically in desired locations instead of a more general response which may have negative effects such as tumor growth.

 

[Bret S.]

To play devils advocate, what's the explanation for construction workers being muscular? Most have a piss poor diet. Breakfast is coffee and cigarettes (coffee inhibits mtor and cigarettes are junk), hardwork during the day which may trigger mtor(but they usually are drinking boatloads of coffee which inhibit mtor), maybe a s*** burger and fries and coke for lunch, and for supper it's booze and more cigarettes. Everything points to no mtor,but .most are strong and muscular.

It depends on what they do, try to never face off with a concrete finisher, it could be ugly.. some of those guys are monsterously strong. I've worked on huge jobs where I was dwarfed by many, and I'm 6'2 and weighed 250 lbs at the time. Wrestled around with one guy who threw me around like a rag doll. 6'7-8" mansters everywhere, oil fields are full of them.

There are NO easy construction jobs.

 

[Deleted member 316]

It depends on what they do, try to never face off with a concrete finisher, it could be ugly.. some of those guys are monsterously strong. I've worked on huge jobs where I was dwarfed by many, and I'm 6'2 and weighed 250 lbs at the time. Wrestled around with one guy who threw me around like a rag doll. 6'7-8" mansters everywhere, oil fields are full of them.

There are NO easy construction jobs.

My point exactly. I know quite a few like that. If it wasn't for my fighting skills and my cardio ability to weather the storm I'd be dead. Alot of those guys have more muscle and strength than us guys who work out, take care of ourselves, and eat right. Like I've said I know alot who's diet is atrocious and that's the good guys. Alot subsists on smokes, drugs, and booze. And certainly no leucine.

 

[Bret S.]

My point exactly. I know quite a few like that. If it wasn't for my fighting skills and my cardio ability to weather the storm I'd be dead. Alot of those guys have more muscle and strength than us guys who work out, take care of ourselves, and eat right. Like I've said I know alot who's diet is atrocious and that's the good guys. Alot subsists on smokes, drugs, and booze. And certainly no leucine.

True enough.. you can't duplicate what a construction guy does for 8 hrs every day, weight training helps but overall 'old man strength' is earned over a lifetime of hard work.

 

[Kenny Croxdale]

... construction workers ...most are strong and muscular.

Questionable

Many construction works are fat, as well. They may have muscle mass but it buried under a few layer of fat.

As the saying goes, "You can't out train a bad diet"; that applies to construction works, as well.

At some point, junk food, beer, etc catches up with them, especially as they age.

 

[offwidth]

Yes... that was what I was referring to in my earlier comment.

And another thing (which is a whole other topic and may open a can of worms..)...

Could it be possible that we see a lot of big, burly, strong construction workers because they are genetically that way to begin with and some other mechanisms steer or guide them to these lines of work? The same mechanisms responsible for why there are fewer of these body types in accounting jobs, bio-med labs, and whatnot?

 

[Kenny Croxdale]

Could it be possible that we see a lot of big, burly, strong construction workers because they are genetically that way to begin with and some other mechanisms steer or guide them to these lines of work? The same mechanisms responsible for why there are fewer of these body types in accounting jobs, bio-med labs, and what not?

Genetics

Great point.

Most individuals gravitate toward the sport they are built for. Most likely that applies to many construction workers, as well.

You don't usually see a thin, small individual (Ectomorph) playing football.

Nor do you see a heavy, large individual (Endomorph) 5k or 10k runners.

 

[Groove Greaser]

Has anyone looked into Dr. Gabbrielle Lyon's work? It sounds a lot like this experiment - she suggests 3 meals a day with 30 g of protein at a minimum (or 2 meals with 50 g).

I'd be curious to see what this group has to say about some of her clinical recommendations.

Note - I've heard her detail her recommendations on podcasts (for instance she appears on the Power Project Podcast with Mark Bell) and there's a "Lyon Protocol" download behind a registration wall on her website (which I haven't downloaded yet) - so this conversation might not get too far...

 

[John Bye]

Very interesting this discussion...
I wonder if energy flux is somehow relevant to old man strength (assuming calories in vs calories out are the same, but if you’re using 4,000 a day vs 2,000 there are different outcomes aside from that you’re generally doing more strength work- of course it’s also far easier to get sufficient leucine at a higher calorie turnover). Also whether just not sitting at a desk (which tends to be the alternative) enhances strength- or some other via Negativa issue. And then genetics and cumulative choices over a very long period - I remember the less academically-inclined, strong, physically active kids at school simply built on that , whereas the more academically-inclined followed that path and tended to become more interested in fitness and strength later on (whilst in desk jobs).

 

[Antti]

It's not just genetics, but especially what we do as little kids that can have a great influence on how we can develop as adults.

 

[vegpedlr]

And there are prison inmates with a steady, but maybe not high quality diet.

Or these refugee athletes:

 

[Stuart Elliott]

There is an example/experiment in one of pavels books, might be S&S, of Russian manual workers and non manual put on a strength programme and at the end there was no difference between the comparative abilities. I'm vague of the details.
This I guess is where genetics come in, assuming all things equal.

 

[Molson]

It's not just genetics, but especially what we do as little kids that can have a great influence on how we can develop as adults.

Or isn’t this the other way - genetics for your habbits in early childhood already.

 

[LukeV]

There's a difference between what works and what's optimal. In the developing world I've seen some dudes with big muscles on by our standards very low protein diets - they can't afford protein in more than one meal daily and that's usually just a handful of meat added to a carb base. But would they be bigger on three protein rich meals? Or, maybe more importantly, would they have built their physiques quicker? And will they maintain them longer as they age?