The Five Biggest Contradictions in Fitness
Latest Article

The Five Biggest Contradictions in Fitness

It’s no secret that when people contradict themselves, it has the effect of making the flaws in their actions or statements seem glaringly obvious. But what about when WE ourselves get caught contradicting ourselves by someone else?

By: Nick Tumminello Added: January 6th, 2014
More Recent Articles
Contrast Training for Size
By: Lee Boyce
An Interview with Marianne Kane of Girls Gone Strong
By: Jordan Syatt
What Supplements Should I be Taking? By: Jay Wainwright
Bench Like a Girl By: Julia Ladewski
Some Thoughts on Building a Big Pull By: Christopher Mason

Facebook Join Facebook Group       Twitter Follow on Twitter       rss Subscribe via RSS
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 99
  1. #51
    Banned Slim Schaedle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio
    Posts
    1,722
    Untrained subjects...but yeah....


    1: Metabolism. 2006 May;55(5):570-7. Links

    Liquid carbohydrate/essential amino acid ingestion during a short-term bout of resistance exercise suppresses myofibrillar protein degradation.

    Bird SP, Tarpenning KM, Marino FE.

    School of Human Movement Studies, Charles Sturt University, Bathurst, NSW 2795, Australia. sbird@csu.edu.au

    A number of physiological events including the level of contractile activity, nutrient status, and hormonal action influence the magnitude of exercise-induced skeletal muscle growth. However, it is not the independent action of a single mechanism, but the complex interaction between events that enhance the long-term adaptations to resistance training. The purpose of the present investigation was to examine the influence of liquid carbohydrate (CHO) and essential amino acid (EAA) ingestion during resistance exercise and modification of the immediate hormonal response on myofibrillar protein degradation as assessed by 3-methylhistidine (3-MH) excretion. After a 4-hour fast, 32 untrained young men (18-29 years) performed a single bout of resistance exercise (complete body; 3 setsx10 repetitions at 75% of 1-repetition maximum; 1-minute rest between sets), during which they consumed a 6% CHO (n=8) solution, a 6-g EAA (n=8) mixture, a combined CHO+EAA (n=8) supplement, or placebo (PLA; n=8) beverage. Resistance exercise performed in conjunction with CHO and CHO+EAA ingestion resulted in significantly elevated (P<.001) glucose and insulin concentrations above baseline, whereas EAA ingestion only increased the postexercise insulin response (P<.05). Time matched at 60 minutes, the PLA group exhibited a peak cortisol increase of 105% (P<.001) with no significant change in glucose or insulin concentrations. Conversely, the CHO and CHO+EAA groups displayed a decrease in cortisol levels of 11% and 7%, respectively. Coinciding with these hormonal response patterns were significant differences in myofibrillar protein degradation. Ingestion of the EAA and CHO treatments attenuated 3-MH excretion 48 hours after the exercise bout. Moreover, this response was synergistically potentiated when the 2 treatments were combined, with CHO+EAA ingestion resulting in a 27% reduction (P<.01) in 3-MH excretion. In contrast, the PLA group displayed a 56% increase (P<.01) in 3-MH excretion. These data demonstrate that not only does CHO and EAA ingestion during the exercise bout suppress exercise-induced cortisol release; the stimulatory effect of resistance exercise on myofibrillar protein degradation can be attenuated, most dramatically when the treatments are combined (CHO+EAA). Through an "anticatabolic effect," this altered balance may better favor the conservation of myofibrillar protein.

    PMID: 16631431 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

  2. #52
    Banned Slim Schaedle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio
    Posts
    1,722
    Uses cyclists, but interesting nonetheless......

    1: Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2005 Oct;37(10):1768-73. Links

    Effect of carbohydrate and prolonged exercise on affect and perceived exertion.

    Backhouse SH, Bishop NC, Biddle SJ, Williams C.

    Carnegie Research Institute, Carnegie Faculty of Sport and Education, Leeds Metropolitan University, Leeds, United Kingdom. S.Backhouse@leedsmet.ac.uk

    INTRODUCTION: It has been reported that perceptions of exertion are attenuated during prolonged cycle exercise, following CHO ingestion. However, no studies to date have examined the influence of such feedings on psychological affect during prolonged exercise, even though affect and perceived exertion are different constructs. PURPOSE: To examine the influence of regular CHO beverage ingestion on affect (pleasure-displeasure) and perceived exertion during prolonged cycle exercise. METHODS: In a randomized, double-blind, counterbalanced design, nine endurance trained males cycled for 2 h at 70% VO2max on two occasions, separated by 1 wk. On each occasion, they consumed either a water placebo (PLA) or a 6.4% carbohydrate-electrolyte solution (CHO) immediately before they cycled (5 mL x kg(-1) body mass) and every 15 min thereafter (2 mL x kg(-1) body mass). Pleasure-displeasure was assessed before, during, and after the prolonged bout of cycling. RESULTS: During exercise, reported pleasure initially improved and was subsequently maintained in the CHO trial, in contrast to a decline reported in the PLA trial. Ratings of pleasure-displeasure were more positive during recovery in the CHO trial compared with the PLA trial (P < 0.05) and the only significant increase (P < 0.05) in pleasure occurred 15 min postexercise in the CHO trial only. RPE increased (P < 0.05) over the course of the bout of cycling and was lower (P < 0.05) 75 min into exercise in the CHO trial. Immediately postexercise, plasma glucose concentration was higher in the CHO compared with the PLA trial (P < 0.05). A main effect of trial was found for plasma cortisol concentration, with higher values reported in PLA trial. CONCLUSION: Results suggest that CHO ingestion enhanced feelings of pleasure during and following prolonged cycling and highlighted the importance of assessing not only "what," but also "how" a person feels.

    PMID: 16260979 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

  3. #53
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    0
    hmmmmmm, slim you'd know the ins and outs on this I think - would carbohydrate influence endorphins/endogeneous opiod peptides? Or is it a completely different mechanism than the traditional, supposed anyways, understanding of the 'runner's high'?
    Go now, run along and tell your xerxes he faces free men here, not slaves

  4. #54
    Banned Slim Schaedle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio
    Posts
    1,722
    Post-exercise glucose....


    J Strength Cond Res. 2004 Feb;18(1):174-9.Links

    Effects of liquid carbohydrate ingestion on markers of anabolism following high-intensity resistance exercise.


    Thyfault JP, Carper MJ, Richmond SR, Hulver MW, Potteiger JA.

    Department of Physiology, Brody School of Medicine, East Carolina University, Greenville, North Carolina 27858, USA. thyfaultj@mail.edu.edu

    We examined the effects of liquid carbohydrate (CHO) supplementation on markers of anabolism following high-intensity resistance exercise. Nine resistance-trained men consumed either CHO or placebo (PLC) 10 minutes before and immediately following 2 resistance exercise sessions. Cortisol (CORT), insulin (INS), ammonia (AMM), and glucose (GLU) were measured before, immediately after, and 1.5 and 4 hours after exercise. Urinary nitrogen (NH(+3)) was measured 24 hours before and after exercise. There was a significant difference in INS levels immediately after exercise and 1.5 hours after exercise. No significant differences were observed for CORT, AMM, GLU, or NH(+3)between treatments. Significant within-group differences were found for the PLC group: CORT before compared with immediately after exercise; INS before compared with immediately after exercise and before compared with 1.5 hours after exercise; and AMM before compared with immediately after exercise and before compared with 1.5 hours after exercise. Significant within-group differences were found for the CHO group: CORT immediately after compared with 1.5 hours after exercise and immediately after compared with 4 hours after exercise; INS before compared with 1.5 hours after exercise; and AMM before compared with immediately after exercise. Liquid CHO ingestion leads to a more favorable anabolic environment immediately following a resistance exercise bout; however, our indirect measures of protein degradation were not altered by CHO ingestion.
    PMID: 14971964 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

  5. #55
    Banned Slim Schaedle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio
    Posts
    1,722
    High Glycogen, Intermittent running, additional carbohydrates


    Carbohydrate Availability and Muscle Energy Metabolism during Intermittent Running.
    M
    ed Sci Sports Exerc. 2007 Dec 4; [Epub ahead of print]

    PURPOSE:: To examine the influence of ingesting a carbohydrate-electrolyte (CHO-E) solution on muscle glycogen use and intermittent running capacity after consumption of a carbohydrate (CHO)-rich diet. METHODS:: Six male volunteers (mean +/- SD: age 22.7 +/- 3.4 yr; body mass (BM) 75.0 +/- 4.3 kg; V O2max 60.2 +/- 1.6 mL.kg.min) performed two trials separated by 14 d in a randomized, crossover design. Subjects consumed either a 6.4% CHO-E solution or a placebo (PLA) in a double-blind fashion immediately before each trial (8 mL.kg BM) and at 15-min intervals (3mL.kg BM) during intermittent high-intensity running to fatigue performed after CHO loading for 2 d. Muscle biopsy samples were obtained before exercise, after 90 min of exercise, and at fatigue. RESULTS:: Subjects ran longer in the CHO-E trial (158.0 +/- 28.4 min) compared with the PLA trial (131.0 +/- 19.7 min; P < 0.05). There were no differences in muscle glycogen use for the first 90 min of exercise (~2 mmol of glucosyl units per kilogram of dry matter (DM) per minute). However, there was a trend for a greater use in the PLA trial after 90 min (4.2 +/- 2.8 mmol.kg DM.min) compared with the CHO-E trial (2.5 +/- 0.7 mmol.kg DM.min; P = 0.10). Plasma glucose concentrations were higher at fatigue in the CHO-E than in the PLA trial (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS:: These results suggest that CHO-E ingestion improves endurance capacity during intermittent high-intensity running in subjects with high preexercise muscle glycogen concentrations. The greater endurance capacity cannot be explained solely by differences in muscle glycogen, and it may actually be a consequence of the higher plasma glucose concentration towards the end of exercise that provided a sustained source of CHO for muscle metabolism and for the central nervous system.
    Last edited by Slim Schaedle; 03-27-2008 at 12:34 PM.

  6. #56
    Banned Slim Schaedle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio
    Posts
    1,722
    On that one I just posted, I am going to see if I can get the entire thing to more closely examine the exercise protocol and method of intermittent exercise, since it could have closer relevance to strength training if their style was more HIIT-ish.

    Nevertheless, the fact that muscle glycogen was not a major factor in fatigue, and enhanced blood glucose levels provided counteraction to this, the case could be made that maximizzing blood glucose prior to strength would aid in maxmizing perforance throughout the 1-1.5 hour workouts typically employed by us, and other athletes.


    It goes without saying, that a large pre-workout dextrose/sguar drink would contribute immensly to blood glucose levels, even when muscle and liver glycogen stores are maximized.

    As I said, I need to look into this study deeper.
    Last edited by Slim Schaedle; 03-27-2008 at 03:20 PM.

  7. #57
    Banned bjohnso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Cincinnati Ohio
    Posts
    2,195
    I ate about 260g of carbs before working out today (about 56 from dextrose) and set some PRs on a cut. I'll have to give it more time to say conclusively what the effect of pre-workout carb intake is on me, but so far it looks promising.

  8. #58
    Banned Slim Schaedle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio
    Posts
    1,722
    Berardi.....I believe this dude is rather smart, popular, and accomplished.

    But I guess anyone could get a PhD by looking at past research studies and building upon it.

    Precision Nutrition for 2002 and Beyond
    By John M Berardi
    First published at www.t-mag.com, Dec 7 2001.

    Post-workout nutrition. Pre-workout nutrition. Mid-workout nutrition. Over the last year, you've heard a whole lot about these topics and for good reason. Whether you're a strength or endurance athlete, the correct nutrients before, during, and after exercise can dramatically impact your muscle mass and recovery.

    A few weeks ago at the annual Society for Weight Training Injuries Specialists (SWIS) symposium, I gave a 90-minute presentation detailing how skeletal muscle adapts to resistance exercise training. In addition, I discussed how general nutrition as well as pre- and post-workout nutrition could maximize this adaptation. The following article is adapted from that presentation and it's probably the most advanced, comprehensive article T-mag has ever published on the topic.

    Put your thinking caps on and let's delve into the details of why you'd better be paying close attention to what you consume around training time.

    Skeletal Muscle Adaptation to Resistance Exercise and the Effects of Nutrition - How You Get Hyoooge!

    The purpose of this article is to present a case for the importance of nutrition in terms of the adaptation to resistance exercise. My argument, while hopefully light and free of the burdens of complex and intimidating research jargon, is founded on dozens of research studies. Here's what's on the menu:

    Muscle Protein Composition
    Effects of a Single Bout of Resistance Exercise
    Effects of Long-Term Resistance Training
    Muscle Signaling and Protein Turnover
    Interactions Between Training and Nutrition
    Let's dig in.

    Muscle Protein Composition

    When most weightlifters think of muscle protein, protein synthesis, and protein breakdown, they undoubtedly think only of contractile protein. In the world of muscle physiology we call this portion of muscle the myofibrillar protein. However, this preferential focus on contractile protein is a big mistake since muscle protein synthesis and degradation processes are constantly occurring with respect to the other muscle proteins as well. The other muscle proteins include sarcoplasmic protein and mitochondrial protein.

    Sarcoplasmic proteins are located in the free fluid portion of the cell and include proteins like the anaerobic enzymes, some structural support units, RNA, receptors, etc. Mitochondrial proteins are located in the mitochondrion - the cell's metabolic machine - and these proteins include the aerobic enzymes, the structural proteins making up the mitochondrion, RNA, and receptors. Each of these proteins are important in the response to exercise and therefore should be recognized.

    Effects of A Single Bout of Resistance Exercise

    A single bout of resistance exercise is both a catabolic and an anabolic event. The stress on the body is serious, but the mechanism by which the body recovers leads to growth. I want to focus first on the catabolic events induced by exercise, then we'll look closer at the anabolic events.

    The Catabolic Events (The Bad Part)

    In response to a single bout of resistance exercise, the following catabolic events occur:

    Glycogen Depletion - Studies have shown that performing 10-rep sets of biceps curls and leg extensions leads to a significant depletion of stored muscle carbohydrates. One set of biceps curls leads to 12% depletion while three sets of biceps curls leads to 25% depletion. Three sets of leg extensions lead to 35% depletion, while six sets of leg extensions lead to over 40% depletion. A typical bodybuilding workout may consist of many more sets per muscle group and this may lead to even further depletion of muscle glycogen.

    Decreased Net Protein Balance - (Protein Breakdown > Protein Synthesis) In a fasted state, muscle protein status is negative. This means that more protein is broken down than is synthesized and that leads to muscle protein loss. Now, when resistance exercise (both moderate and intense) is performed in a fasted state (after an overnight fast or several hours after a meal), protein status drops even more during the few hours following the exercise bout. This means that you're losing even more muscle protein. Although this protein loss isn't all contractile protein, all of the degraded protein must be replenished via protein synthesis when recovery needs to take place.

    The question you should be asking yourself at this point is: "If protein status is negative after training, why don't people get smaller and waste away with resistance exercise?" Well, the answer is simple. Although protein status is negative during the first few hours following resistance exercise, this catabolism shifts toward anabolism later on. The body begins to build muscle after a certain point and this protein anabolism seems to peak at 24 hours after the training bout.

    Increased Resting Metabolic Rate - After intense resistance exercise, the body's resting metabolic rate increases by about 12 to 24%. Interestingly, the bigger you are, the more muscle you'll damage in training and the more your metabolism may increase.

    Increased Blood Cortisol Concentrations - Studies aren't totally conclusive on this point due to the daily variability of the measure (cortisol concentrations fluctuate widely based on the time of day). I believe that the evidence is fairly convincing that intense exercise leads to an increase in this catabolic hormone. Some studies have shown a doubling in cortisol concentrations after resistance exercise.

    Acute-Phase Response - The Acute-Phase Response is an immune and inflammatory response that's triggered when muscle is damaged. This process leads to further tissue injury and destruction as well as the production of free radicals.

    The Anabolic Events (The Good Part)

    In response to a single bout of resistance exercise, the following anabolic events occur:

    Increased skeletal muscle blood flow - During exercise, blood is shunted to the working muscle. This is often called "the pump." This blood delivers nutrients to fuel the muscular work.

    Increased anabolic hormones - There are short-lived increases in the anabolic hormones GH, Testosterone, and IGF-1 both during and after exercise. However, people have definitely overestimated the significance of these transient increases in hormone concentrations. I hate to commit a mortal sin here, but the endocrine response to exercise probably has little to do with increasing muscle mass. The small, short lived increases in these hormones are far too brief to really affect muscle mass.

    Acute-Phase Response - Wait a minute, didn't I include this in the catabolic section? Yes, I did. You see, while the beginning of the acute-phase response is catabolic, later on the response becomes anabolic.

    The Acute-Phase Response

    After each resistance exercise bout (assuming you've trained like a T-man), you're going to be sporting some muscle damage. This damage is most likely due to the eccentric (negative) component of the exercise and may manifest as large areas of dead or dying tissue. Once this damage occurs, an immune response is launched and this immune response is put in place to try to destroy and dispose of the dead tissue. So far, so good.

    However, the immune cells (leukocytes, macrophages, etc) often don't know where to stop and continue to destroy and dispose of undamaged tissue. This is where the catabolism comes in. Now, not only are we missing contractile proteins as a result of the exercise bout (original damage), but we're missing protein that was undamaged during the exercise but destroyed by the immune response (chemical mediated damage).

    Thank goodness the destruction stops here. The immune response, after its nasty destructive binge, leads to the activation of satellite cells. Basically, satellite cells are immature nuclei (nuclei contain the cell's DNA) that hang out on the periphery of the muscle cell. When the immune system kicks up, the satellite cells are stimulated to proliferate and move to the site of the injury.

    Simultaneously, growth factors from a place outside the cell called the extracellular matrix are brought into the cell. These two things lead to muscle repair. The satellite cells create new proteins to replace the destroyed contractile proteins. In fact, they do such a nice job that the muscles end up bigger and stronger than they were before the bout.

    Effects of Long Term Resistance Exercise Training

    It's no secret that resistance training leads to increases in muscle size (hypertrophy) and muscle strength. Next, let's discuss how the muscle adapts to this type of training.

    There's an increase in the size, number, and strength of myofibrils (contractile/structural protein). As muscle damage is repaired and protein synthesis elevated, a few things occur. First, the old myofibrils (not the muscle fiber itself) split in two, and when they're repaired there are two new contractile units available for growth.

    Second, brand new myofibrils are added to the periphery of the muscle cell, leading to a larger muscle cell. Third, the new myofibrils added will be better suited to the demands of the activity. Powerlifting training will lead the fibers to behave more like the fast twitch Type II-B fibers (fastest available) while bodybuilding training will lead fibers to behave more like the fast twitch Type II-A fibers (still fast twitch, but slower).

    There's an increase in the size and strength of connective tissue. Myofibrils are contained within muscle fibers and muscle fibers are grouped together to form muscle fiber bundles. A connective tissue sheath surrounds each bundle of muscle fibers within the whole muscle. This connective tissue adapts to resistance training by showing increases in size and strength parallel to the fiber itself.

    There's an increase in stored substrate. As a result of training, there's more glycogen (carbohydrate) and triglyceride (fat) storage within the muscle. This makes more fuel readily available for exercise.

    There's an increase in muscle-water content. Due to the increased carbohydrate storage (carbohydrates hold about four times their weight in water) and larger fiber size, more water is present in a trained muscle.
    There's an increase in muscle enzyme content and activity. As a result of resistance training, there's an increase in the content of the enzymes of the ATP/PC system and glycolytic system.

    There's an increase in nervous system efficiency. As a result of resistance training, the nervous system becomes more coordinated and efficient in terms of muscle recruitment/activation and firing frequency.

    I hope it's clear that the genetically driven program of adaptation is a sound one. Adaptations occur to make the body more efficient at doing what it habitually does.

    Protein Turnover and Muscle Signaling

    At this point, I'd like to address a theory I have regarding physiological adaptation. This theory is based on the concept of tissue turnover. As I've discussed before, all tissues of the body go through a regular program of turnover. Most often people talk about skin turnover. We all know that old skin is degraded and dies off while new skin is synthesized to take its place. This occurs more rapidly when we experience some type of tissue injury (like a sunburn). Well, the same holds true for all tissues of the body. The only thing that's different is the rate at which this occurs.

    Muscle protein is no exception to this rule. It's constantly being turned over. And turnover is the balance between protein breakdown and protein synthesis. The rate at which this turnover occurs is dependent on your nutritional intake, exercise habits (the damage caused), and genetic programming.

    Understand here that this protein tissue turnover is what allows the muscle to adapt. Therefore, the goal should be to dramatically increase your protein turnover rates. Yes, that's right, I want you to increase your protein turnover and this includes protein breakdown! The funny thing is that everyone wants to decrease their protein breakdown with "anti-catabolic supplements," but that's a bad thing. Let me show you why.

    When you first begin a training program, your goal is to lift heavy weights and have big slabs of beef hanging from your skeleton. However, at the start, your muscles are certainly weak and small compared to what they will be. So when faced with what you want them to do, they can't do it; they're dysfunctional.

    So how do you make a muscle more functional? You destroy it! And that's what training does for you. When you go to the gym, your muscle is inadequate so you lift weights to make it stronger. This process destroys the dysfunctional muscle and signals the cell to synthesize a new protein to take its place. This protein will certainly not be the same as the previous protein. It'll be bigger and stronger, better suited to what it thinks it'll have to do in the future.

    But what happens if another bout of exercise doesn't come after that? Well, as the natural tissue turnover process occurs, that strong muscle will be destroyed and replaced by a weaker one. See how it works? The body is constantly re-creating itself by breakdown and subsequent resynthesis based on what you ask it to do. It really is a beautiful system. Let's look at this process in a little more detail.

    As I stated, breakdown is always occurring and is necessary for tissue remodeling. This breakdown, in conjunction with extra cellular amino acids (primarily from the diet), helps to expand the intracellular amino acid pool. When the nucleus is stimulated, the DNA contained within undergoes a process called transcription. Transcription is the process by which a specific group of RNA molecules are formed (mRNA, rRNA, tRNA). These RNA molecules are specific for the signal that interacted with the nucleus.

    In the second phase of protein making, the RNA units are stimulated by a process called translation. This signal is responsible for the ultimate protein. The mRNA and rRNA units are the "template" or "blueprint" for protein formation. The tRNA units are responsible for picking up the amino acids and laying them down on this template to form the protein. The two phases of protein formation are regulated independently and I want to briefly discuss this.

    New data in the research world is beginning to explain how muscles respond to the exercise signal. This is one proposed model. Basically, when eccentric exercise leads to mechanical stress on the membrane (pulls it apart), a series of chemical events occur within the cell. These chemical events form a messenger system that ultimately stimulates the nucleus. This stimulation leads to the formation of specific RNA molecules (transcription) that may, if all the other cellular conditions are right, lead to more muscle protein and a larger muscle. Remember, transcription is only part of the equation. Translation is also required.

    Another major signaling pathway in the muscle is the insulin-signaling pathway. This pathway is elegant because once the insulin molecule binds to the cell membrane, it sets in motion two different chemical messenger systems that accomplish three goals. This system increases transcription (DNA formation), increases glucose uptake into the cell, and increases the translation of the cellular DNA into protein. Although there are other pathways that stimulate translation, the insulin pathway is the most important nutritional one.
    The insulin-signaling pathway is dependent on nutrients to run properly. Carbohydrates are necessary for insulin release. The amino acid leucine is necessary to run one part of the pathway that stimulates translation, and the essential amino acids are necessary to lay down on the template to form the protein. Ahh, things are all coming together now.

    To better remodel your muscle, you need to destroy the dysfunctional protein (keep tissue turnover rates high) and you need to exercise to stimulate the nucleus. This stimulation will lead to transcription or the creation of a specific blueprint for a better muscle. The insulin signaling pathway completes the protein making process by stimulating the translation of the blueprint into a protein. When all this comes together you end up with a muscle more suited to your activity pattern.

    The next question most people ask me is, "Do high rates of muscle protein turnover, when synthesis is greater than breakdown, always lead to huge muscles?" The answer is no! What happens to the muscle is dependent on the signal that stimulates the nucleus. If the signal is a weight-training signal, the RNA as well as the ultimate protein formed will lead to big muscles. In this situation, increasing the size and the strength of the myofibrils is the priority.

    However, if the signal is an endurance training signal, the RNA formed as well as the ultimate protein formed will lead to more metabolic muscles. In this situation, the priority is an increase in oxygen delivery and consumption. Because it's the exercise signal and not the nutritional signal that determines the adaptation, weightlifters and endurance athletes should have a common goal of increased protein breakdown (destruction of the old protein) coupled with an even higher increase in protein synthesis (formation of a better protein). In my opinion, nutritional needs of the two types of athletes are strikingly similar.

    So, I hope I've convinced you that high rates of tissue turnover are important regardless of which type of athlete you are. But knowledge without action is powerless. Next, I want to show you how to do it.

    Interactions Between Resistance Exercise and Nutrition - What to Consume to get Hyoooge!

    What's the most important nutritional consideration for maximizing the adaptive potential of muscle? The answer: Total daily energy intake.
    There are a few requirements for high rates of tissue turnover and they're all dependent on a high energy input. High rates of tissue turnover are very energy expensive so extra calories are needed to run this circuit. You see, your time in the gym is also very energy expensive and so is the hypermetabolism and muscle repair that follows your workout. If the body doesn't get adequate energy supplies (in the form of calories), it obviously can't optimally perform all the functions of exercise, repair, and tissue turnover.

    The first system to suffer in this equation will be your tissue turnover rates. If you don't eat enough daily calories, this system will slow down so that less energy is needed and the energy to fuel the workout and recovery is provided by the destruction of tissues. But in this case, remodeling suffers.
    Interestingly, this has implications for your body composition/body fat as well as muscle function. The loss of weight isn't always an indicator of inadequate calorie intake. As described above, the body will slow down tissue turnover in response to under eating. Since tissue turnover is expensive, your energy needs decrease and you remain weight stable. However, as mentioned, your tissue remodeling will suffer.

    When you increase calories, the first thing to occur will be the increase in tissue turnover rates. This will dramatically raise calorie needs. Depending on your calorie intake, you may end up either losing weight (turnover increases more than calories), remaining weight stable (turnover matches calorie intake), or increasing muscle weight (turnover is less than intake). But the benefit here is that when tissue cycling rates are high, even if you're losing weight or remaining weight stable, the body is being remodeled in a positive and functional way. Again, the key is a high calorie intake.

    Recovery Nutrition

    The next important nutritional issue to address is recovery nutrition. Here I'll address how the provision of liquid nutrients in and around the workout can lead to positive changes in the catabolic and anabolic events associated with a bout of resistance exercise. In addition, I'll make specific recommendations about what to take during and around the workout to maximize recovery and the adaptation to the exercise.

    The provision of liquid nutrients during and after exercise is important for several reasons. First, an anabolic environment is created, as the exercise and insulin signals are both stimulating cellular activity. Second, such nutrition can shift the net protein status in a positive direction so that muscle protein is being built in and around the workout. Third, muscle recovery is superior due to replenishment of muscle substrates. And fourth, nutrients are rapidly delivered for energy provision when it's most needed.
    Below I'll list the ideal beverage composition for both workout and post-workout drinks. After, I'll discuss the literature that supports these recommendations.

    Sip immediately before and during exercise:

    Carbohydrates (0.4 to 0.8g/kg) - The carbohydrate content of your drink should contain high GI carbohydrates that are easily digested. I recommend a 50/50 blend of glucose and maltodextrin.

    Protein (0.2 to 0.4g.kg) - The protein content of your drink should contain easily digested and assimilated proteins like hydrolyzed whey.

    Amino Acids (3-5g of each) - The BCAA (Branched Chain Amino Acids) may be important as they're the main amino acids oxidized during exercise. The provision of BCAA during exercise decreases net cellular protein breakdown. In addition, glutamine may spare muscle glutamine concentrations and maintain immune homeostasis during training and recovery.

    Creatine (3-5g) - Creatine intake increases work capabilities during exercise, increases recovery of ATP-PC homeostasis, and may increase muscle mass directly/indirectly.

    Water (2 L) - The amount of water you consume with such a beverage is crucial since digestion will suffer if you have a beverage that's too concentrated. A solution of 4 to 8% is ideal for proper digestion and hydration during exercise. Any more concentrated and many of those nutrients will be completely wasted. To calculate concentration, remember 10g of total powder in 1L is a 1% solution while 100g of total powder in 1L is a 10% solution.

    Editor's Note: Based on these recommendations, John formulated Biotest Surge as the perfect pre- and post-workout drink. (Biotest did not include creatine, however, because some people just don't want it or respond to it. Adding creatine would have also driven up the price, but you can certainly add creatine to your Surge drink if you like.)

    After exercise:

    Repeat the above beverage but add 500mg of vitamin C and 400IU of vitamin E.

    Here's a sample calculation of what a 220lb (100kg) person would need:


    Pre/During Exercise

    40g-80g of carbohydrate (50% glucose - 50% maltodextrin)
    20g-40g of hydrolyzed protein
    3-5g each of creatine, glutamine, BCAA
    2L water (80g CHO + 40g PRO + 5g Creatine +5g Glutamine +5g BCAA = 135g of nutrients. In 1L of water this would be a 13.5% solution and too concentrated. In 2L of water this is about 6.75% and the concentration is just right).

    Post Exercise

    40g-80g of carbohydrate (50%glucose-50%maltodextrin)
    20g-40g of hydrolyzed protein
    3-5g creatine each of glutamine, BCAA
    1L - 2L water
    500mg vitamin C, 400IU vitamin E

    Support for these recommendations

    Pre and Mid-Workout Benefits

    The benefits of such a beverage during exercise include:

    Rapid provision of fuel - Supplementation can provide fuel when it's needed most. Liquid, easily digestible nutrients can be digested, absorbed and delivered in a matter of minutes while whole food meals can take hours to reach the muscle.

    Maintenance of blood glucose - Blood glucose can decrease during exercise, leading to local muscular as well as central fatigue. Supplementation can maintain blood glucose concentrations and delay fatigue.

    Maintenance of muscle glycogen - As shown earlier, six sets of leg extensions can deplete thigh glycogen by over 40%. Supplementation with liquid carbohydrate during repeated sets of leg extensions can help prevent such a large decrease in muscle glycogen. Compared with the normal 40% decline in muscle glycogen, subjects supplemented with carbohydrate only experienced a 20% reduction of muscle glycogen.

    Increased muscle blood flow - While some theorize that the digestion of this drink will draw blood away from the muscle and toward the gastrointestinal tract, this couldn't be further from the truth. Since the recommended drink is so easily digested and the stimulus to send blood to the muscle is so strong, blood flow to the muscle will actually increase with such a drink.
    At rest, blood flow to the muscle is quite low. However, during exercise muscle blood flow increases by almost 150%. When a carbohydrate and amino acid drink is taken pre/during the workout, the blood flow during the workout increases by about 350%. This is a very powerful effect since there's significantly more blood going to the muscle and this blood is packed with anabolic nutrients!


    Increased insulin concentrations - By increasing insulin concentrations and delivering more of this insulin to the muscle, the extra glucose, amino acids, and creatine that are in the blood will be more readily taken up into the muscle. Studies have shown that the more insulin available in the blood, the more prominent the tissue building effect. The highest insulin response noted (over 1000% increase) was induced by a carbohydrate, protein, and amino acid beverage with the same proportions of nutrients as recommended above.

    More positive protein balance (see "positive protein status" below)

    Post-Workout Benefits

    Rapid fuel provision for recovery needs (same as above)

    Decreased post-exercise cortisol concentrations - After exercise, cortisol concentrations can increase to concentrations 80% higher than resting values. The provision of a carbohydrate supplement can lower the cortisol response to exercise by about half. This means that post exercise cortisol concentrations with supplementation will only be about 40% higher when compared to resting concentrations.

    Increased insulin concentrations - By increasing insulin concentrations, the extra glucose, amino acids, and creatine in the blood will be more readily taken up into the muscle.

    Rapid glycogen replenishment - After exercise, if nutrients aren't provided, glycogen replenishment won't occur. In one study, a resistance exercise protocol depleted muscle glycogen by 33%. If no meal was consumed and muscle glycogen was measured four hours later, muscle glycogen remained depleted. If a 230-calorie beverage was consumed (either carbohydrate alone, or a macronutrient blend) immediately after exercise, glycogen was fully restored in the four hours.

    Stimulation of protein synthetic pathway - Below, I've listed values for protein synthesis under different treatment conditions. Each percent increase is relative to fasting baseline values.

    Insulin Treatment - 50% higher
    Amino Acid Infusion - 150% higher
    24 Hours Post-Exercise - 100% higher
    Amino Acids Immediately Post-Exercise - 200% higher
    Amino Acids and Carbohydrate Immediately Post-Exercise - 350% higher
    Amino Acids and Carbohydrate Given Immediately Pre-Exercise - 400% higher

    It should be obvious that pre- and post-workout drinks dramatically stimulate protein synthesis.

    Positive protein status - When fasted, during exercise and immediately post exercise, protein status is negative (more protein is being lost than is being retained). With feeding, protein status increases so that more protein is retained than lost. If liquid nutrients are given after exercise, the protein status becomes positive very quickly with the highest increase in the group that gets carbohydrate and amino acids immediately before exercise.

    In all post-exercise situations where nutrients are provided, protein breakdown is accelerated (as we'd expect and as I recommend), but the increases in protein synthesis outweigh the increases in breakdown and lead to large increases in protein retention.

    Anabolic hormone changes seen with exercise are relatively unaffected - Testosterone decreases slightly after exercise when any type of food is consumed but the change is small and won't impact muscle mass. In addition, while GH declines with carbohydrate intake at rest, after exercise the signal to release GH is very strong and is unaffected by nutritional supplementation. Therefore a drink given post exercise won't diminish any small effects that the anabolic hormones may have on the body.

    Prevention of free radical damage - The vitamin C and E recommendations are in place to help prevent excess free radical induced cellular damage. The exercise itself as well as the acute phase response leads to free radical production. The antioxidants may save the cell from free radical damage.

    Rapid ATP/PC recovery - Intense resistance exercise leads to the loss of substrate from the ATP/PC system. Creatine supplementation can help the body more rapidly resynthesize these substrates.

    Conclusion

    At this point I must be completely frank by acknowledging potential critics. Some may argue that the data supporting these recommendations are incomplete. They may argue that there are no studies showing that using a Biotest Surge type of beverage will improve athletic performance or increase muscle mass. They will argue that there are no proven benefits to such a blend.

    In response I must concede that they're correct, at least partially. There are no such long-term studies at the present time. However, in our laboratory and others, research is currently being conducted to address these concerns. But, as we all know, research takes time. So what does one do until the debate is settled?

    You could certainly stay on the fence and wait until the data are in. However, in the mean time, I believe that the evidence and real world feedback weighs in strongly that such a beverage will offer significant benefits. And as Arnold Schwarzenegger said in the movie Pumping Iron, "All these things are available to me. And if they are available to me, I might as well use them."

    I'll go one step further in saying that you should use them.
    Last edited by Slim Schaedle; 03-28-2008 at 12:27 AM.

  9. #59
    Banned Slim Schaedle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio
    Posts
    1,722
    A little tid-bit about "sugar crash."

    http://www.criticalbench.com/pre-workout-meals.htm


    Pre Workout Meals
    By Mark Strasser M.S. CSCS of CriticalBench.com


    Maintaining your strength and energy level is essential when training or competing on a highly intense level. The food you eat is a big factor on how you perform.


    During exercise athletes primarily rely on pre-existing glycogen stores and fat stores. If your pre-workout meal is eaten at the proper time then you will be assured that your glycogen stores are plenty full and this will optimize performance. Liquid meals can also be an advantage by digesting more rapidly than solid foods as well as provide hydration. Liquid meals can be eaten closer to workouts because they are emptied from the stomach quickly.


    Pre-workout snacks within 1 hour of competition or practice can be more beneficial to athletes that exercise longer than 60 minutes.


    It is important to choose primarily carbohydrates before a workout because they are quickly digested, and readily available for fuel.



    Drink adequate amounts of fluid (avoid dairy). The American College of Sports Medicine recommends 17 ounces of fluid two hours before exercise, as well as enough fluid during exercise to replace the water lost through perspiration. A rule of thumb is to drink enough water to urinate clear prior to a workout. For the first hour of aerobic exercise use water only. Use electro-light replacement drinks after the first hour of exercising.


    Use caution with foods that have a high sugar content (such as soft drinks and candy). Since athletes' metabolism is higher than the average person they may experience a drop in blood sugar following consumption, which can result in light-headedness or fatigue and loss in performance.
    Last edited by Slim Schaedle; 03-28-2008 at 12:52 AM.

  10. #60
    Banned Slim Schaedle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio
    Posts
    1,722
    A topic I actually wrote about for Built's article.....



    mattclark 08-17-2006 02:49 PM

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Muscle Glycogen vs. Liver Glycogen

    This is a rather vast, open ended question.

    Aside from where they are stored, what is the major difference in the two in terms of how they are used?

    I guess what I'm getting are things like:

    Why is dextrose better than sucrose or fructose pre workout?
    Does a muscle glycogen depletion workout effect liver glycogen in any way?


    I know this has been discussed here and I even vaguely remember reading it in some threads, but for some reason search is sometimes like finding a needle in a haystack.

    Thanks.

    lylemcd 08-17-2006 02:56 PM

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Quote:

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Originally Posted by mattclark
    This is a rather vast, open ended question.

    Aside from where they are stored, what is the major difference in the two in terms of how they are used?

    I guess what I'm getting are things like:

    Why is dextrose better than sucrose or fructose pre workout?
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------


    Becaue fructose is preferentially used by the liver and works poorly to refill mucle glycogen
    that said, adding a small amount of fructose (perhaps 10% of the total) to post-workout drinks can be beneficial


    Quote:

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Does a muscle glycogen depletion workout effect liver glycogen in any way?
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------


    If it did, it would be indirectly. Liver glycogen exists to sustain blood glucose levels, muscle glycogen is for local muscular use. if muscle glycogen depletion increases teh rate of blood glucose ptake into muscle, that might mandate more need for the liver to release/produce glucose to sustain blood glucose levels

    Why?


    mattclark 08-17-2006 03:17 PM

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Thanks for the response.

    Im interested simply for my own knowledge. I mean, I currently eat some smarties before a workout because dextrose is "good for muscle glycogen" but thats the extent of my understanding. I have a post workout shake that contains milk so my post workout sugar is mostly lactose. But, to me, I'm not sure why or what that means physiologically.

    I guess I want to be able to talk some of the talk or at least really know whats going on when Im doing what Im doing.

    I dont quite understand why fructose would be good post workout. Wouldn't you want dextrose to replace the depleted muscle glycogen?


    lylemcd 08-17-2006 03:20 PM

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Quote:

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Originally Posted by mattclark
    I dont quite understand why fructose would be good post workout. Wouldn't you want dextrose to replace the depleted muscle glycogen?
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------


    two things

    1. liver glycogen is a major determinant of the body's overall anabolic status, refilling it post-workout helps with anabolism

    2. some ingested glucose can actually be used by the liver, as I recall, adding some fructose helps get glucose through the liver faster

    Lyle


    mattclark 08-17-2006 03:22 PM

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Ahhh. That actually makes a lot of sense.

    So pre workout dextrose for better workout performance, post workout fructose for anti-catabolic effects.

    Excellent. Thanks
    .
    Last edited by Slim Schaedle; 03-28-2008 at 11:10 AM.

  11. #61
    Banned Slim Schaedle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio
    Posts
    1,722
    "Real Life" evidence that some people do not tolerate pre-glucose well, and feel sick...as described in other threads...

    Pattos 06-15-2006 02:47 AM

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Carbs pre-workout, can't do it!

    hi.
    i was hoping people could answer a few questions for me:
    1)
    i know people recommend eating carbohydrates pre-workout,
    complex carbs, with low GI (starches preferred), and post)_workout should be high glycemic carbs, first i would like to know what's the quickest, highest GI carb aside from dexterose? will sugar table (sucrose) do the trick?
    2)
    and second: each time i eat carbs before workout i always feel either weak\tired or sick during the training session. All of my best workouts always take place when i don't eat any carbs at least 4 hours before my workout.
    what's wrong with me???

    (when i say workout, i mean weight lifting, usually rep range 8-12).

    thanks in advance!

  12. #62
    Banned Slim Schaedle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio
    Posts
    1,722
    Video

  13. #63
    C.S.C.S. ddegroff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    3,817
    Are you bored on spring break Slim?

    Or is this a quest for something?

    It's good info but what are you trying to prove? Just curious.
    Make Shift IF diet
    My Training Experience
    GET BODY SMART
    Goals:
    CF WOD and Recomp...
    "My fault. I was fiddling with the Gravitational Constant of the Universe again.
    I've set it back - you might need to reboot, though..." -Built

    "Nothing can stop the man with the right mental attitude from achieving his goal--
    nothing on earth can help the man with the wrong attitude" - Thomas J

    "Obsessed is what the lazy call the dedicated" - Slim Schaedle

  14. #64

  15. #65
    C.S.C.S. ddegroff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    3,817
    ^Haha. That's why I'm thinking spring break.
    Make Shift IF diet
    My Training Experience
    GET BODY SMART
    Goals:
    CF WOD and Recomp...
    "My fault. I was fiddling with the Gravitational Constant of the Universe again.
    I've set it back - you might need to reboot, though..." -Built

    "Nothing can stop the man with the right mental attitude from achieving his goal--
    nothing on earth can help the man with the wrong attitude" - Thomas J

    "Obsessed is what the lazy call the dedicated" - Slim Schaedle

  16. #66
    Banned Slim Schaedle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio
    Posts
    1,722
    Quote Originally Posted by ddegroff View Post

    It's good info but what are you trying to prove? Just curious.
    Prove? Nothing.


    Examine? Everything.


    I have received several PMs thanking me for this thread and the varied info it presents, so I might as well roll with it.

    If anything, someone could link it to a newbie asking questiuons, or for debate purposes if an issue on the topic were to arise.

  17. #67
    Banned Slim Schaedle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio
    Posts
    1,722
    Quote Originally Posted by Built View Post
    Don't you know? Slim's OCD!


    <giggles>
    I prefer dedicated.


    And perhaps, motivated.
    Last edited by Slim Schaedle; 03-28-2008 at 05:27 PM.

  18. #68
    Banned bjohnso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Cincinnati Ohio
    Posts
    2,195
    It's a good thread. There is a ton of good info here.

  19. #69
    Banned Slim Schaedle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio
    Posts
    1,722
    From Maki, another one of our own......

    Also touches on fructose, which was part of the topic I provided Built with for her article.


    The Fat Loss King - An Interview With Lyle McDonald (Part III)

    For the final interview I‘ve decided to throw some commonly-asked questions at Lyle--questions which are forever appearing on the message board. I figured this would make for an interesting, informative piece, and perhaps put to rest some of the debates that frequent the various forums… or add more fuel to the fire. I'm sure you'll find that this read will equip you with new insights on some controversial topics.

    Wannabebig: For some time now, doctors, trainers and coaches have had an ongoing problem with people who complain of weight-gain even though they’ve been exercising vigorously. The standard diagnosis in fitness circles says that a diet lacking in calories is the culprit. In most cases, many are told that it's because their body’s metabolism is cruising along at a snail’s pace. The body, in fact, has been storing the food as fat instead of distributing it as needed. Is there any truth to this?

    Lyle M: Over the years, there's been a long held debate over the fact that people swear that they can gain weight (or not lose weight) on low calories. There's typically been two interpretations of the data: either there are people out there who's metabolism are just so far outside of the norm that they violate basic laws of thermodynamics OR that people are just really ****ty at estimating how much food that they eat and how much exercise they do.

    Wannabebig: I think that the majority of the exercising population fails to pay attention to certain areas such as portion control which, in turn, takes them several steps backward instead of forward.

    Lyle M:
    A number of recent studies support the latter conclusion. The fundamental problem with most of these reports is that they are self-reported. That is, you ask
    people how much they are exercising and they say "A ton, at high intensities" and then you ask how much they are eating and they say "Oh, almost nothing." Then you actually track them covertly and you find that most people are vastly over-estimating how much exercise they are doing, and vastly under-estimating how many calories, they are burning. These mis-estimations can vary by 50% either way (that is people may over-estimate their activity by 50% and under-estimate their caloric expenditure by 50%). In addition, I want to make it clear: I'm not saying that these people are doing it deliberately, or lying. Most people are simply very bad at this sort of thing.

    Now, that said, don't misunderstand me: there are most certainly adaptive decreases in metabolism with dieting that do occur. This, of course, reduces maintenance calorie needs. Now, part of the reduction simply has to do with the weight loss itself. Both resting metabolic rate and the calorie burn during activity (moving around and exercise) are related to bodyweight; so less weight means fewer calories burned (if you don't believe me, put a 10 lb weight in a backpack and carry it around all day, tell me how much more tired you are from the extra workload). Carrying around 100 lbs of fat burns a lot of calories.

    Wannabebig:
    No thanks; I have enough trouble carrying around my stomach as it is.

    Lyle M: But there is also an adaptive component that is a drop in metabolic rate beyond what can be explained by the drop in bodyweight. This gets back to the leptin system I talked about earlier: the body down regulates total metabolism during dieting to compensate and dropping leptin appears to be the main signal involved.

    Now, during extreme dieting, either extended periods to very low body fat percentages, or simply very low calorie dieting, this adaptation tends to be the greatest. In one of the classic studies (the Minnesota Semi-starvation study), lean men were put on 50% of maintenance calories for 24 weeks. They pretty much lost all of their body fat and had a reduction in total energy expenditure of 36%, of which 16% was part of the adaptive response. However, their maintenance calorie requirement never went below their caloric intake. Now, that's a very extreme reduction, 5-10% is closer to average. That is, the adaptation to low calorie dieting, even extremely low calorie dieting is NEVER large enough to suddenly bring that person back into positive energy balance. You see a 5-10% reduction in resting metabolic rate at the maximum.

    So say you have someone with a total energy expenditure of 2000 calories/day. Now you put them on 800 cal/day. Let's assume the same level of adaptation as seen in the Minnesota study (which is the largest value I've ever seen): 36%. So, after a while, their energy expenditure is down 36%. That's 720 calories, giving them a new maintenance level of 1280. Fine, yes, that will certainly slow weight loss, but they are still in a caloric deficit. They don't magically start getting fat again *unless* they start overeating.

    Wannabebig: And, sad as it is, most will start over-eating again.

    Lyle M:
    Basically, I've seen no evidence in the studies (done over 3 decades where food and activity are rigorously controlled, and that's the key) that daily maintenance calories can ever somehow drop below caloric intake during low calorie dieting. Yes, it will adapt and I've seen it literally stop fat loss in its tracks. And certainly, if you jack up calories rapidly under those conditions (a depressed metabolic rate), you're going to get rapid fat gain. However gaining fat on super low calories has more to do with people being terrible at estimating their caloric intake and expenditure.

    Ultimately, it comes down to the following discrepancy: in controlled lab studies where caloric intake and expenditure are rigorously controlled and measure (and I'm talking they spray these folk's plates with water and make them drink the mush so they know *exactly* how many calories they are eating), the observation of someone gaining weight on super low calories has NEVER been observed. That's over decades of study and lord knows how many subjects. Then we have these self-reports of folks gaining weight while dieting, coupled with more studies showing that people usually underestimate food intake and over-estimate activity.

    I hate to be a party pooper but people are deluding themselves.

    Wannabebig: Well I'm sure you've been asked this question many times, but since it's always being debated I have to ask you. There's a nasty myth in circulation right now claiming that only 30 grams can be taken in. How much protein can the body assimilate at one time?

    Lyle M: Well, I think part of the problem has to do with what you mean by 'assimilate'. That is, you sometimes see the '30 grams per meal' (or whatever it is) to mean how much the body can digest, utilize, or what have you. But nobody seems to really want to nail down what they are talking about.

    Wannabebig: Ok, let me rephrase the question: "how much protein can the body handle in one sitting?"

    Lyle M: I consider all of this "The body can only use X grams per Y" as a lot of nonsense. First and foremost, it makes no evolutionary sense (how I've been looking at a lot of physiological processes lately). That is, our ancestors did not eat protein in small amounts throughout the day. Yet, anthropological studies show that they had more muscle and bone mass than most of us. Rather, they were more likely to eat a ton of protein after a kill, and whatever amount they got from vegetables and such the rest of the time. Massive protein intakes at once were more likely the norm during 99% of our evolution than not. This means that our guts evolved to handle it. In addition, when you start looking at digestion and such, you see exactly that: even with massive protein loads (I vaguely recall they've looked at like 1.5 g/kg of beef all at once), digestion still stays very high (on average 90-95% for animal proteins meaning you're losing at most 10 grams of protein/100 grams ingested). The body can digest/absorb pretty much anything you throw at it. You won’t be pooping protein if you eat 35 grams at a sitting, is what I'm saying.

    Now, a slightly separate issue might be one of how much protein (amino acids really) the liver can handle at once. If the recent studies on whey vs. casein have pointed anything out, it's that flooding the liver with amino acids at a high rate leads to increased amino acid oxidation (burning) in the liver. I suppose it's conceivable that high protein intakes at any given meal could be having this effect. I suspect it depends on the source of the protein (whole food which digests slowly vs. protein powders which digest faster). That is, consuming, say, 50 grams of whey protein at once might lead to more waste (mainly as amino acids oxidized and then converted to urea) than 50 grams of casein or beef. But that's more an issue of speed of digestion than amount per se.

    Wannabebig: So how much protein can the body use for growth?

    Lyle M: In terms of supporting optimal growth, an interesting discrepancy actually occurs here between the studies on our ancestral diet and the protein needs of athletes, but nobody has an explanation yet. Good studies by Peter Lemon, Mark Tarnopolsky, etc. support a maximum protein requirement for natural lifters of about 1.8 g/kg (a little less than the 1 g/lb that bodybuilders have used for years). But studies of our ancestral diet suggest protein intakes as high as 2.5-3 g/kg. Nobody is quite sure if this protein intake was simply a side effect of the diet our ancestors followed, or if it had some actual benefit.

    Finally, I think the whole 30 g/meal (or whatever) thing can't possibly apply to everyone. I mean, at the low end, figure a 210 lb lifter is eating 210 grams of protein per day. If he's limited to 30 grams/meal, that means seven meals minimum per day. Obviously, if there is some limit to protein absorption/assimilation/digestion/utilization (and I don't honestly think that there is) it's going to be related to body mass: a larger individual needs more protein and would be able to utilize protein in larger amounts than a smaller person. Ultimately, my hunch is that the whole '30 grams per meal' (or whatever) thing came from one of two places:





    Early supplement companies trying to convince lifters why their protein product (containing 30 grams) was better than others. I remember one company pulling a scheme like this, when their product contained like 37 grams of protein, they wrote that 37 grams was the maximum that could be absorbed. When they bumped it to 42 grams of protein per serving, 42 became the magic number. Ah, advertising.


    Bodybuilders rationalizing what they had already decided to do. That is, you frequently see bodybuilders and other athletes finding a strategy that works (i.e. eat protein at intervals throughout the day) and then making up physiological rationalizations afterwards. It wouldn't really surprise me if that weren't the case here. Of course, if anybody has a single piece of peer-reviewed research supporting this 30 grams myth (everybody seems to claim to have seen it but nobody seems to ever have it; it's like those friend of a friend stories), they can feel free to send it to me care of lylemcd@onr.com



    Wannabebig: How much muscle can a person gain? Bryan Haycock states that theoretically a trainee could put on 20 pounds in 4 weeks and 60-100 pounds in a year’s time by an individual using anabolic steroids. Most people realize that theory and real-life results don't always go hand-in-hand. Variables such as protein synthesis, proliferation and differentiation of satellite cells, environment, hormonal levels etc. all play big roles. Given a perfect playing field, do you think that this is achievable and how much can the average natural lifter gain in a year?

    Lyle M: What he actually said on the HST forum (www.hypertrophy-specific.com) was: "Theoretically, with heavy drug use, a human could probably put on 20 pounds in 4 weeks. That same person could probably put on 60-100 pounds in 12 months. I have never personally seen anyone do this though."

    Unfortunately, all of the theoretical calculations tend to be exactly that, theoretical. Moreover, they never seem to pan out because they ignore the body's ability to adapt to just about anything. So short-term studies looking at bumps in protein synthesis after training (which can be used to calculate theoretical maxes over a year or what have you) ignore the fact that the body will also be increasing rates of protein breakdown as you get larger.

    On top of that, you have hormones, nutrition, optimizing training, etc.

    But ignoring all of that, I think that 20-25 lbs in the first year by a natural lifter would be average. Again, that assumes they get even most of it right in terms of training and diet (on top of rampant training mistakes, most people simply don't eat enough to put on mass at an appreciable rate). After that, it's harder to predict. Another 10 lbs in the second year, maybe 5-10 lbs more total after that; so you're looking at maybe 40 lbs total for a natural lifter. Women would probably make maybe half of that naturally. I think that's going to close to the limit for your average natural trainee.


    Wannabebig: How flawed is the Glycemic Index?

    Lyle M: Ah, another quickly answered question. Sure. As usual, I'm going to be wordy as hell and look at GI from both the pro and con parts of the debate. IF readers are wondering, this is how I at least try to look at stuff. That is, rather than trying to say "X good, Y bad", I look at it from a cost/benefit or pro/con point of view. It's part of why I'll never be a billion dollar best selling diet book author; I won't give people absolute answers when that's what they want. But that's another rant for another day.

    Wannabebig: How about explaining to readers who aren’t familiar with it, what the glycemic index is all about.

    Lyle M: The glycemic index (GI) is a measure of how a given food affects blood glucose. It was originally developed for diabetics, for whom blood glucose regulation is literally a matter a life and death. To measure GI, subjects are given either 50 or 100 grams of a reference carbohydrate (they used to use glucose, now they use white bread) and blood glucose concentrations are measured. Technically, they are measuring the area under the curve of blood glucose versus time. This is given an arbitrary value of 100. Then they give 50 or 100 grams (I think they are using 50 grams of digestible carbohydrate now since it's a more realistic portion) of the test carbohydrate, measure area under the curve, and compare the two. So if a food only has 60% of the effect on blood glucose as white bread, it's given a GI of 60. A food with 110% of the effect on blood glucose has a GI of 110. And I really want to make the point that GI is a relative scale. The numbers don't mean anything, they are simple arbitrary values. You could call white bread 1 and give foods a value of 0.6 and 1.1 for all it would matter. The 100, 60, and 110 don't mean anything, they are just relative rankings.

    Now, before the GI, the assumption was always that simple carbohydrates (think sugars and fruit) would digest more quickly and be worse for diabetics than the complex carbohydrates (starches and such). The early studies on GI showed this to be false. It turned out that the sugars fructose (which is handled mainly by the liver) and sucrose (which is half glucose and half fructose) had much lower GI's than more complex carbs. Potatoes had a very high GI, so did carrots (more on this in a second). Table sugar had a lower GI than many complex carbs, which threw a real wrench into the whole issue. We can generalize that less refined foods have lower GI's than more refined foods but it's not even that consistent. It's turning out that the type, form, structure of the carbohydrate are all having an impact.Everybody thought that this would really revolutionize diabetic meal planning and, of course, athletes picked up on it because glucose/insulin control is important for them. But there were some immediate problems.

    Wannabebig: What were some of the problems?

    Lyle M: The first is how GI is measured, by giving folks 50 grams (again, digestible carbohydrates, fiber doesn't count) of that food alone. Some foods can't be tested. I mean, how much lettuce would it take to get 50 grams of digestible carbs. A metric ton is how much. Of course, those types of foods really aren't the problem.

    But what about carrots? Folks got their panties in a twist because carrots were shown to have a high GI. But you'd have to eat enough carrots to get 50 grams of carbohydrates. That's like 9 or 10 carrots in a sitting. Worrying about the carrot shards in your salad while dieting is missing the point.

    Now, this led to one easy solution, the concept of the glycemic load, which is simply the amount of carbohydrate (in grams) times the GI. So say you want to compare two foods, one with a GI of 50 and the other with a GI of 100. In terms of glycemic load, you could eat twice as much of the first food as of the second.

    That is, 10 grams of the first food (GI = 50) gives a glycemic load of 500. 5 grams of the second (GI = 100) gives a glycemic load of 500 as well. The next problem is that people don't just eat carbs at a meal (well, many do but they shouldn't). It turned out that adding protein, fat and fiber to a meal almost universally lowered GI (most likely by slowing digestion which decreases how quickly glucose hits the bloodstream). There were also problems with individual response, and the fact that most foods hadn't been tested (at this point, this last criticism isn't that big of a deal).

    Wannabebig: Maybe I'm getting ahead of myself, but does the insulin index come into play somewhere along here?

    Lyle M: Hold your horses. Recently, more research has identified another problem: although glucose is a problem for diabetics, insulin management is equally crucial (the fundamental problem in diabetics is related to insulin). It was always assumed that changes in insulin and blood glucose would be identical but it turns out not to be the case. One group of researchers has recently identified an 'Insulin Index’, which is a measure of the actual insulin response to various carb foods. And while GI and insulin index are related, they aren't always consistent. For example, adding protein to a meal does lower the GI, but some studies show it increases the insulin response at the same time. Oh what to do? Eventually you reach the conclusion that you just shouldn't eat anything at all.

    Anyway, the argument over GI usually goes along these lines.




    GI is good, because it lets us predict the blood glucose (and maybe insulin) response to foods.

    Yeah, but it's only valid if you eat that food by itself, as long as you eat protein, fat and fiber at each meal, GI doesn't really matter.

    Maybe not, but research in diabetics does show that mixed meals with low GI foods still give better blood glucose control than meals with high GI foods.

    Well, ok, but GI is a bitch to use, most foods haven't been tested, and it's just not practical in the real world. And if you’re worrying about insulin, GI may not predict the insulin index.

    Well, you're an idiot.

    Oh yeah, your mama



    Wannabebig: Hah! #6 is sure to ignite some debate amongst the white coats.

    Lyle M: Around and around it goes and it's always fun to watch scientists bitch at one another over stuff like this. It never quite gets to stages 5 and 6 but it's not far off.

    My opinion, GI is one of many nutritional factors that can be useful, but don't get too hung up or psycho about it. As I mentioned above, as long as you get sufficient protein, fat and fiber with each meal, the GI of a food becomes much lower and the GI concept ceases to have much relevance. For diabetics, yes, GI is probably far more important.

    Regular exercise, maintaining a low/normal body fat percentage, all of the other behaviors that bodybuilders and athletes engage in makes GI much less important because the body is so much better at handling blood glucose and insulin.

    Of course, there are other good reasons to pick unrefined, high fiber carbs besides the low GI. They tend to promote more fullness, have more micronutrients, etc. But, overall, I don't think that the GI concept per se is that big of a deal, especially not if you're eating protein, fat and fiber at each meal (as I think folks should be). That's on top of regular training to maintain glucose disposal and insulin sensitivity, keeping body fat under control, etc.

    Wannabebig: So, what would you say to sum things up?

    Lyle M: I guess, I don’t know that the GI concept is inherently flawed, it simply has some real limitations in terms of application, and I think it only has a huge relevance to certain groups (diabetics).

    Wannabebig: Let's switch gears here and look at muscle hypertrophy, and at how glycogen super compensation may be a focus area for supplement companies in the future. We all know that a happy muscle (full of glycogen) is one that will produce more work thus leading to a more 'intense' (I'm using the term "intense" loosely) workout.

    Lyle M: Ok, lemme go into one of my page long 'quick' tangents and talk about this. First, I agree about avoiding debates over intensity, too many competing definitions. Instead, I want to talk about the role of glycogen levels on weight training performance.

    Semi-surprisingly, but maybe not, the studies on the topic don't generally show a decrease in performance with weight training during glycogen depletion (or improvements with super compensation). Of course, there are some problems, the main one being that most of the studies are only testing performance over a set or two. Unless glycogen is really really depleted, a single set or two isn't going to tax stores.

    As well, fatigue during a single set isn't limited by glycogen stores (generally). Rather, it's caused (depending on rep range/set time) on lactic acid buildup and neural factors. So, in theory at least, glycogen stores shouldn't matter. OF course, in reality, we know that's bunk. Unless you're doing very low volume training, your ability to perform well across multiple sets is going to be affected by glycogen stores.

    Which leads to another tangent, related to glycogen compensation, training volume and growth. The energy stores of a muscle are involved in how well growth can proceed. For example, during a set, levels of ATP drop (technically the ATP/ADP ratio goes up). In response to this, little buggers called eukaryotic initiation, factors (EIF's) stop working. Now EIF's help to turn on ribosome activity (ribosomes take messenger RNA and make proteins out of amino acids). Once ATP levels are repleted, EIF's activate ribosomes again and protein synthesis can take place.

    The point being that cellular energy depletion tends to 'tell' the cell what's relatively more or less important. Under most circumstances, short-term energy repletion is more important than anything else (in this case protein synthesis). Basically, if you’ve depleted muscle glycogen extensively, you can't really grow until you replete it. Depending on diet, that can take 1-3 days (depending on depletion as well). The body doesn't do two things at once well under most circumstances (this was a point that Duchaine/Zumpano made nearly 20 years ago in their Ultimate Diet and they were absolutely right). That is, if you deplete glycogen and stimulate growth, your body will tend to refill glycogen first, and worry about growth second.

    Now, most people training high volume (assuming average genetics) are training each body part infrequently. By the time, they've refilled glycogen; the stimulus for growth is gone (mRNA and increased ribosome activity is pretty short-term, 36 hours or so). I suspect this is part of why these types of folks invariably grow better on higher frequently, lower volume training (think Hardgainer philosophy or my buddy Bryan Haycock's Hypertrophy Specific Training). Not only are they not significantly depleting glycogen because of the lower volume (meaning no real need for repletion), but also they are able to train more frequently and keep growth (via mRNA and ribosome activity elevation) going better. Now, most people training high volume (assuming average genetics) are training each body part infrequently. By the time, they've refilled glycogen; the stimulus for growth is gone (mRNA and increased ribosome activity is pretty short-term, 36 hours or so). I suspect this is part of why these types of folks invariably grow better on higher frequently, lower volume training (think Hardgainer philosophy or my buddy Bryan Haycock's Hypertrophy Specific Training). Not only are they not significantly depleting glycogen because of the lower volume (meaning no real need for repletion), but they are able to train more frequently and keep growth (via mRNA and ribosome activity elevation) going better.

    Wannabebig:
    Interesting stuff. Now, what about those who use anabolic substanceslike testosterone? Many people who've dabbled with or are frequent users of this drug have found they can get away with a higher volume of sets. Does this have anything to do with their glycogen stores?

    Lyle M: Interestingly enough, a thing about glycogen repletion is that testosterone increases the body's ability to replete glycogen (and store more of it). So take a steroid user or someone with high normal testosterone (i.e. not me); they are the folks who can do high volume training and grow well. They can pack so much glycogen into their muscles that they don't really deplete it that much in the first place; and in response to training they can refill glycogen so quickly that they can still get growth even training very infrequently. This is sort of a tangential benefit of testosterone (ab) use among athletes; in addition to direct effects on protein synthesis, by affecting glycogen storage, you get overall increased growth. That would be on top of any cellular hydration based mechanisms.

    But the point of where this started: glycogen super compensation does appear to make people marginally stronger, most likely via purely mechanical/leverage means (water storage in the muscle). But it's not really an effect of having more glycogen per se; because glycogen levels aren't (typically) what limits performance. However, glycogen stores are still important from the standpoint of growth for other reasons.

    Wannabebig: With all these new methods and the revolving factor of 'refeeds', 'carb ups' and/or 'binge days' being the center of attention, people are going to be looking at trying to minimize the spill-over of glucose and maximize glycogen stores. Supplements such as Alpha Lipoic Acid, Vanadyl Sulfate, Chromium Picolinate, Glutamine and drugs such as snythetic Glycogenin (not yet approved for human consumption--at least to my knowledge) Metformin and Phenformin are being explored increasingly. Do you think that any of the above-mentioned have had any noteworthy effect on glycogen storage?

    Lyle M: Lipoic acid definitely works but it takes high doses (gram plus per day) which gets pricey. Honestly, most people never really got much out of chromium or vanadyl (maybe at high doses). I think using glutamine for glycogen repletion is an inefficient way to do it; I know what Poliquin (who has popularized the approach) is trying to do, I just think it's very expensive for what it does. I wasn't aware that they were working on a synthetic glycogenin drug, interesting. I've used Metformin (or was it Phenformin) years ago and it definitely improved the quality of my old Bodyopus carb-ups (even as crappy as they were): more glycogen storage and less spillover. So I think they have some utility here.

    So yeah, I think they have some benefit but it depends on what you're trying to do. Someone with normally good muscular insulin sensitivity (these people tend to stay lean while putting on muscle, get great pumps during training, etc) probably won't get much out of him or her. But they might be worth trying for other people.

    Wannabebig: What do you think is the most effective method for shuttling glucose into the muscles and bringing about greater glycogen storage?

    Lyle M: Well, the classic method of increasing glycogen stores is with prior depletion. Back in the 50's, the endurance folks did 3 days of low carbs with glycogen depletion followed by 3 days of high-carbs and reduced training. They were able to push glycogen stores far above normal levels that way. As with the weight training studies, while it didn't increase the speed at which they could go (equivalent to strength in weight training), it let them maintain that speed for longer periods (equivalent to doing multiple sets in weight training).

    Later research showed that you didn't have to go to that extreme: regular training plus a high carb diet leads to higher than normal glycogen storage anyhow (athletes run higher levels of muscle glycogen than non-athletes for this reason).

    A recent study (I saw it, like a week ago) showed that you can actually get super compensation of muscle glycogen (quads) in 24 hours which runs contrary to old belief which says it takes 2-4 days or so. They had guys cycle for something like 250 seconds at 100% of VO2 max followed by 30 seconds at 130% of VO2 max. Then they gave them 10 g/kg carbs over the next 24 hours. They achieved near maximal glycogen levels. So, if your explicit goal were to max out glycogen stores, for some reason, you would first want to deplete (meaning high volume, high reps: sets in the 45-60 second range which maximizes glycogen use) and then eat carbs like they were going out of style. This was what the Bodyopus diet was doing.

    Wannabebig: If someone were to incorporate training as a way of increasing their stores they would basically train using higher than normal volume and eat carbs post- workout like a pig.

    Lyle M: Yes. Muscular contraction increases glucose uptake into the muscle cell (via increased levels of the transporter, GLUT-4). As well, glycogen depletion leads to increases in levels of the enzymes which store glycogen (glycogen phosporylase and glycogen synthase).

    If you were trying for super compensation (as opposed to just maintaining normal or high-normal levels), you'd want to go for nearly full depletion (which takes quite a bit of volume) followed by one or more days of very high carbs (10 g/kg lean body mass in the first 24 hours, 5 g/kg in the second 24 hours).

    Using lipoic, acid or one of the other insulin mimetics might very well either:

    a. increase the levels of glycogen you achieved
    b. speed up the process (so you could carb-load faster).


    Wannabebig: Speaking of carbs and glycogen replenishment--what would you say is the best post-workout method for enhancing muscle recovery and promoting protein synthesis?

    Lyle M: It really depends on which part of recovery you're focusing on. Unfortunately, most authorities only focus on one part of the big picture.

    In simplistic terms, you need to be worried about two recovery factors in terms of optimizing growth (this assumes that your workout stimulated it which is a separate issue: local and systemic recovery. The first is local glycogen recovery, along with the provision of amino acids. Part of this ties into refilling muscular glycogen stores as quickly as possible (as per the question above), so that protein synthesis can take place. You get the most rapid rate of glycogen storage right after the workout so this is the best time to do it. Additionally, study after study after study show that raising insulin (via carbs) along with amino acid levels (via protein intake) improves post workout protein synthesis.

    A recent study actually showed that pre-workout carbs/protein (and we're not talking large amount: it was like 30 grams carbs, 6 grams essential amino acids) improved post-workout protein synthesis better than post-workout carbs. The reasons is likely one of timing: even if you slug a shake immediately after your workout: it's still 30 minutes before it gets to your muscle. Take a drink right before training, and it's there as soon as the workout ends. Of course, I'd suggest people do both.

    Recommendations below.

    But muscular recovery is only part of the picture; you're only dealing with local factors. There is also a systemic factor to consider, in terms of the body's overall metabolism (anabolic or catabolic to be simplistic). This is being controlled mainly by liver metabolism. Now, liver metabolism doesn't get talked about very much, it's not a very 'sexy' topic. But it is important to overall growth. Keeping the liver in a fed state (by maintaining levels of liver glycogen) keeps the body in a more anabolic state. You maintain insulin levels better, which means better IGF-1 levels (although blood borne IGF-1 really isn't that important to muscular growth, contrary to what most people believe), you get better thyroid conversion, the higher insulin also helps unbind testosterone from SHBG (sex hormone binding globulin) and keeps cortisol down. etc. etc.



    Wannabebig: Most publications, studies, and fitness experts talk about Fructose being a carbohydrate that should not be a bodybuilder’s first choice when it comes to a post-workout shake. Why is that?

    Lyle M: Well, intensive training depletes liver glycogen quickly because of the hormonal response. That means that, depending on diet, length of your workout, etc. you are entering a systemically catabolic state as you come out of the workout because of the shift in liver metabolism. Correcting that and returning to an anabolic, state is part of overall recovery and growth.

    Now, while glucose is the main fuel for muscle glycogen (quite in fact, fructose can't be taken into the muscle cell, there's no transporter), it doesn't do a very good job of replacing liver glycogen. 80% or more of ingested glucose goes straight through the liver, to get to the muscle. Fructose, on the other hand is primarily liver fuel. Now, I know that a lot of people have made an issue of how *excess* fructose converts to triglycerides and this is an issue with massive amounts (which you see in the general public because of too much sucrose and high fructose corn syrup intake). But you don't see problems until you get to like 50-60 grams per day, which is actually quite a bit (an average piece of fruit may have 7 grams of fructose). It's simply a non-issue for most people.

    Wannabebig: In your opinion, what would be an approximate ratio for pre/middle/post workout nutrition?

    Lyle M:




    Take a small shake of say 20-30 grams carbs (glucose/maltodextrin) with some protein (maybe 12-15 grams since we don't have access to essential AAs by themselves) in as little water as you can mix it (this is to avoid getting sick) right before your workout starts.


    If your workout were particularly long (more than 1-1.5 hours), it would be a good idea to sip on a Gatorade solution. 15-30 grams of carbohydrate per hour is plenty. This will maintain blood glucose better, and an abstract a year or two ago showed that it improved overall anabolism.


    Then slam your post workout shake immediately after training. The old recommendations for post-workout carb intake was 1-1.5 grams of carbs/kg lean body mass with about 1/3rd as much protein. So, for an average lifter (say 65 kg=150 lbs of LBM or so), you get 65-100 grams of carbs with 20-30 grams of protein. Since you already took in 20-30 grams pre-workout, I'd subtract this from the post-workout shake. If you took in carbs during the workout, you'd subtract that too. So you'd be looking at 45-80 grams of carbs post workout, with 20-30 grams of an easily digested protein. You'd want most of the carbs to be glucose or glucose polymers, but with some fructose (maybe 10-20 grams) in there as well.


    Then you'd eat a normal meal about 2 hours later to keep things moving.



    So it would look like this overall for a lifter with 65 kg (150 lb) of LBM:

    Pre-workout: 20-30 grams glucose/12-15 grams whey protein

    During workout: 15-30 grams carbohydrate/hour (if needed)

    Post-workout: 45-80 grams carbs from glucose/maltodextrin and some fructose (10-20 grams) with 20-30 grams of protein

    2 hours later: normal meal

    Wannabebig: I'm sure our readers have acquired a great deal of info they can apply to training. Nevertheless, to a large extent knowledge does not necessarily empower someone if they aren’t mentally motivated. In all your experiences did you ever, or can you pass along any inspirational quotes which may have motivated you?

    Lyle M: I'm going to have to pass on this question; I'm not really a motivated/motivational type of person. Any quotes I'd put here would just be mean and nasty because I'm really cynical and pessimistic most of the time.

    Wannabebig: Are you available to do online coaching, programs, nutritional plans and pre-comp prep? If so, how can people reach you?

    Lyle M: The best way is to simply email me directly (lylemcd@onr.com). I'm usually looking for new guinea pigs for various ideas.

    Wannabebig: Thank you Lyle.

    Well there you have it folks. I'm sure Lyle will return in the future to share more information about nutrition, supplementation and training. If you’re interested in purchasing one or both of Lyle’s books you can do so at Power store, Netrition, Amazon.com, or they can also be ordered directly from our Lyle's Ebooks section on Wannabebig.

    His new book 'Special Report #1: Bromocriptine' is currently also only available in our Lyle's Ebooks section on Wannabebig.

    Written by Maki Riddington

  20. #70
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    411
    This thread should be added to the Diet and Nutrition FAQ under the category of: The Timing Of Nutrition Intake.

    This thread seems to have more info than the thread that is currently being linked to.

  21. #71
    C.S.C.S. ddegroff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    3,817
    Quote Originally Posted by Slim Schaedle View Post
    Prove? Nothing.


    Examine? Everything.


    I have received several PMs thanking me for this thread and the varied info it presents, so I might as well roll with it.

    If anything, someone could link it to a newbie asking questiuons, or for debate purposes if an issue on the topic were to arise.
    NO don't get me wrong this is a great thread. I was kinda making a joke. You kept posting stuff with no contention from other members. It was you posting a bunch of proof about what we already know. I agree that "we" know this but it's good for newbies and people new to the game.

    Let's get a little debate going. Or atleast I'll try. Now I skimmed most of the stuff you posted but it seems most of it points to pre work out sugar is good for muscle glyco replenishment. Certain amino's promote protein synthesis more than others. So if I take a shake pre-workout with the things I listed above (L-carnitine, Whey, WM, etc.) I will increase glyco replenishment and protein synthesis.

    Now if it whole food sits in the gut for a while whats wrong with a meal 1.5hrs before supplying everything above? Then a shake of the right amino's, whey etc. post workout. Do you think it really matters for the average individual? Or does this only really matter for that top 5%?

    Now I've had some of my best workouts on low carbs (UD2), some of my best workouts on carb load (UD2), some at a totally fasted state, and drinking whey/sugar durning my workouts. For me it really doesn't matter. I feel that most of us are over thinking most of this and consitancy is really what matters. Whatever you choose, keep doing it more than 2wks. See what happens.

    Slim, I like that your posting all of the point of views. I like the science approach but sometimes the science just fits certain individuals and not otheres.

    This turned out to be a lot longer than I thought it was going to be. But it's worth disscussing.
    Make Shift IF diet
    My Training Experience
    GET BODY SMART
    Goals:
    CF WOD and Recomp...
    "My fault. I was fiddling with the Gravitational Constant of the Universe again.
    I've set it back - you might need to reboot, though..." -Built

    "Nothing can stop the man with the right mental attitude from achieving his goal--
    nothing on earth can help the man with the wrong attitude" - Thomas J

    "Obsessed is what the lazy call the dedicated" - Slim Schaedle

  22. #72
    Just watch me ... Built's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    9,912
    I do the solid food thing, too - just farther ahead, as you suggested. It's all a logistics problem - getting the right stuff (glucose and amino acids) to the right place (your working muscles) at the right time (while they're working, to spare glucose and let you maintain intensity throughout your workout, and start the rebuilding process ASAP).

  23. #73
    C.S.C.S. ddegroff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    3,817
    Quote Originally Posted by Built View Post
    I do the solid food thing, too - just farther ahead, as you suggested. It's all a logistics problem - getting the right stuff (glucose and amino acids) to the right place (your working muscles) at the right time (while they're working, to spare glucose and let you maintain intensity throughout your workout, and start the rebuilding process ASAP).
    That's kind of my point. I've done some of the most intense workouts completely fasted. Some intense workouts with a bunch of sugar. Now that's just me so it's not too scientific. Arn't human's built for this. We have stored glyco for intense exercise at the spur of the moment?

    I just feel sometimes we get too nit picky about nutrition timing. Isn't the bigger deal getting most of our cals "around" our workout not necessarily before (CHO+PRO)?
    Make Shift IF diet
    My Training Experience
    GET BODY SMART
    Goals:
    CF WOD and Recomp...
    "My fault. I was fiddling with the Gravitational Constant of the Universe again.
    I've set it back - you might need to reboot, though..." -Built

    "Nothing can stop the man with the right mental attitude from achieving his goal--
    nothing on earth can help the man with the wrong attitude" - Thomas J

    "Obsessed is what the lazy call the dedicated" - Slim Schaedle

  24. #74
    Banned Slim Schaedle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio
    Posts
    1,722
    Quote Originally Posted by ddegroff View Post
    NO don't get me wrong this is a great thread. I was kinda making a joke.
    Yeah, I took it that way, so it's cool.

    I will get to the other stuff later.

  25. #75
    Banned Slim Schaedle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio
    Posts
    1,722
    Real quick....let's say that pre-carbs do all this fun stuff for glyco replenishment and protein synthesis as evident by the articles and stuies posted here.

    So someone benches 315 during the session the took the pre-shake but cannot go higher.

    Next week they come back and bench 320, a new PR, and continue to work better throughout their assistance and auxiallry exercises with more strength and endurance, less fatigue, etc.

    Let's say this contunues, and is out of the norm.

    Could we attribute this to the pre dex/pro?

Similar Threads

  1. Caffeine, pre workout. so what's the verdict..?
    By speak in forum Diet and Nutrition
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 12-02-2009, 12:44 PM
  2. Post workout nutrition: 20g Carbs and 21g Protein?
    By ARN in forum Diet and Nutrition
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 04-16-2005, 04:13 PM
  3. Only carbs for pre workout?
    By BulkMeUp in forum Diet and Nutrition
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 06-21-2004, 06:51 PM
  4. Pre Workout Meal Confusion
    By CBates in forum Diet and Nutrition
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 11-29-2001, 01:26 PM
  5. Pre and Post workout meals
    By janzik in forum Diet and Nutrition
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 11-15-2001, 12:56 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •