2009 Studies & Research Blog

Performing physical training on a regular basis is one of the best ways to go about losing body fat and improving your overall health including the metabolic rate that is seen in the body.  There has been a number of research studies conducted that demonstrate that those who are performing sprint interval sessions show greater metabolic boosts compared with those who are doing straight cardio workouts, often making this the choice of workout for many.

Before jumping strictly on the interval bandwagon however, you may want to consider a few of the benefits you’ll see from aerobic training as well.

Recently researchers from the University of Texas Medical Branch assessed what impact lower intensity cardio training had on the fatty acid utilization of trained and untrained men.

They recorded whole body lipid kinetics, looking at the rates of glycerol and free fatty acid appearance in the plasma as well as lipid oxidation through indirect calorimetery before, during, and after exercise was completed.

The results of the study indicated that the lipolytic response to 4 hours of exercise was similar in both trained and untrained men, however the mean triglyceride oxidation was greater during exercise in the trained subjects compared to the untrained group.

It was also seen that during recovery, glycerol and FFA Ra values were decreased more rapidly in trained men, showing that those who were already endurance trained show a greater reliance on fat as fuel during low-intensity exercise and also, their lipid kinetics return to baseline more rapidly in trained men than in untrained subjects.

From this research then we can conclude that endurance training does help the body get better at utilizing fatty acids as fuel and you will see enhanced glycogen sparing during lower intensity exercise, which can potentially come in helpful for those who are involved in both endurance and strength and power activity.

Reference:
Coyle, EF, Klein, S. & Wolfe, RR. (1994). Fat metabolism during low-intensity exercise in endurance-trained and untrained men.  Am J Physiology. Dec;267(6 Pt 1): E934-40.

With so many advances in the supplement industry, one could argue that there now exists a greater opportunity to be in optimal health than ever before.  With antioxidants, precision-designed meal replacement shakes and bars, and an overall cultural focus on fitness, our society seems to have everything it needs to achieve high levels of athletic performance and great health.  Of course, there is a slight drawback in the focus on newer, cutting edge supplements - forgetting about old, reliable ones.

While no one is going to argue against the importance of something like protein in a strength athlete’s goals, concentrating on all of the ‘extras’ may overshadow the basics, such as a multivitamin.  What people don’t realize, though, is that even with all of their other supplements, multivitamins are still needed; these seemingly simple pills form the foundation for overall health.

But with (supposedly) healthier food, including organic vegetables and free-range meat, can’t people just get all of the nutrients they need from their diet?  You might like to think so, but that’s not the case.  What many people don’t realize is that cooking actually leeches nutrients from food, reducing their vitamin and mineral content significantly.  And the extent of the damage may be surprising - one study found that after boiling, spinach retained just 49 percent of its folate content, while broccoli retained just 44 percent (1).  These statistics are even more discouraging when one considers boiling is considered to be one of the lowest-risk cooking methods in terms of nutrient loss, due to the lack of extreme heat or long cooking times.

Of course, it’s always easier to obtain nutrients from your diet if you’re on a bulk, as you’ve got a large calorie budget in which to include healthy foods.  But for those who are cutting, downing a few bananas and potatoes each day really isn’t an option.  In these cases, a calorie-free multivitamin is a veritable lifesaver, as B vitamins can provide much needed energy and a mineral such as chromium can aid in the metabolism of foods.

So while multivitamins may not be as flashy as other supplements, they are every bit as important, and perhaps moreso.  In addition, multivitamins can actually help consumers save money by freeing them from the need to purchase a truckfull of produce each day.

SOURCE:

1. McKillop, Derek J., et al. The effect of different cooking methods on folate retention in various foods that are amongst the major contributors to folate intake in the UK diet. British Journal of Nutrition, 2002; 88:681-688

Most people who are consistent with their weight lifting efforts understand the concept that the more lean body mass they have on their body the higher their basal metabolic rate will be.  Because of this fact when you regularly perform your weight lifting workouts and work towards gaining additional body fat, you are successful in boosting the metabolic rate higher and having an easier time with the process of weight loss altogether.

But what about the during workout calorie burn?  Since fat loss does come down to how many calories you’re taking in on a daily basis versus how many calories you’re expending, it’s also important that you factor that into the equation.

For many years most people have been under the impression that you’ll burn far more calories during a cardio workout than a weight workout, which is many cases is true.  Intense cardio does tend to burn more calories minute per minute after the workout compared with weights due to the all the rest time that’s taken during a traditional weight lifting workout.

What many people fail to consider however is that weight lifting workouts can also cause you to expend more calories in the post-workout period than you otherwise would have, which is another significant factor in the game of fat loss.

But, with this point, not all weight lifting workouts are created equally.

Recently researchers published a study in the Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research that looked at the different effects of various strength training methods on post-exercise energy expenditure. What this particular study wanted to look at was whether the order that the exercises were performed had any impact on the overall post-exercise energy expenditure.

They had subjects either perform a circuit style strength training program or a pre-exhaustion style strength training program using seven different exercises where the loads varied between 50 and 55% of the total one rep max.

The oxygen uptake of the eight subjects was measured between the sessions to determine how many calories they were burning after each particular workout protocol.  They found that there was no significant difference in the EPOC levels or the post-exercise energy expenditure between the two methods of training.  

However the researchers also noted that in sessions where rest periods were very short between the sets the energy expenditure from those sessions very closely matched the workouts that were utilizing a higher percentage of one rep max, therefore providing indication of ways to boost your calorie burn depending on the nature of the workout you’re doing.

In conclusion then, if you are looking to maximize strength development, lifting with a higher percentage of your one rep max will be the best bet which does tend to produce a good post-calorie workout burn.  But if you aren’t looking to develop maximum strength and would prefer to utilize a slightly lighter weight, higher rep protocol, in order to get the same fat burning benefits from the former workout, you should really focus on reducing the total rest period that is used throughout the workout program.

So next workout, keep these points in mind.  Weight training workouts can be very effective for overall fat loss when performed correctly.

Reference:
Brentano, MA. Et al. (2009) Effects of Different Strength Training Methods on Post-Exercise Energetic Expenditure. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research.  Oct. 22.

Chances are, when you think of strength training, bodybuilding, or powerlifting, the last thing that comes to your mind is a pretty little flower.  For some reason, pouring hours of effort and creating pools of sweat just doesn’t seem to correlate with strolling carefree through green fields or stopping to smell some pleasant-smelling blooms.  In fact, the only time that plants and weight training are associated, the combination isn’t a good one - just see what happens if you suggest that a bodybuilder switch his main protein sources from eggs, chicken and whey to soy.  If he’s heard the oft-repeated rumors about soy causing increases in estrogen levels, he’ll either laugh in your face or make you sorry you asked.

But what if there was a type of innocuous-looking plant, something that would seem more at home in a Mothers’s Day bouquet than a muscle-building magazine?  There is - Tribulus Terristris.  Tribulus Terristris is a vine plant that has been used for countless years, and it grows in many places across the Northern Hemisphere.  And even more abundant than the places where this plant can be grown are the benefits of using Tribulus Terristris.

The most powerful effect of Tribulus is its tendency to boost levels of free testosterone, making it valuable in muscle-building and improving body composition.  In addition, Tribulus can increase the secretion of Luteinizing Hormone, which also triggers testosterone production.  In addition to the anabolic advantages, the effects of Tribulus also contribute to improved libido.

That’s not all, though.  Tribulus Terristris has also been shown to improve one’s cholesterol profile (1) and help maintain optimal blood pressure (2).  Of course, the best part of this supplement is the safety; years of research and use have shown that Tribulus Terristris is very safe, and is thus relied on by many for boosting testosterone and improving strength, body composition and endurance.

SOURCES:

1. Sharifi AM, Darabi R, Akbarloo N. Study of antihypertensive mechanism of Tribulus terrestris in 2K1C hypertensive rats: role of tissue ACE activity. Life Sciences, 2003; 73(23):2963-71.

2. Al-Ali M, Wahbi S, Twaij H, Al-Badr A. Tribulus terrestris: preliminary study of its diuretic and contractile effects and comparison with Zea mays. Journal of Ethnopharmacology, 2003; 85(2-3):257-60

If you’ve been paying attention recently to some of the latest research concerning health, nutrition, and essential fatty acids, you know that getting your daily intake of Omega-3 and Omega-6 fats is important.  These have been proven in many studies to help ward off a variety of conditions such as insulin resistance, Alzheimer’s, diabetes, and cancer, as well as a regular intake helps to promote higher energy levels, better athletic performance, and decreased incidence of colds and flues.

But, more and more research is also coming out about the type of intake that people are getting.  What’s now being talked about more than the straight health benefits this nutrient offers, is how important it is to be sure you’re taking in the correct proportions of Omega-3 and Omega-6 fatty acids.

A study recently published by the University of Iowa assessed this issue and found that most western diets contain a ratio of 20:1 Omega-6 to Omega-3 acids, while the optimal intake is closer to 1:1.

This is important to pay attention to because a very improper ratio of 3:6 fatty acids can actually set you up for an increase in disease rates, so you could essentially be doing more harm than good.

By educating yourself on the various sources of each individual fatty acid, you would stand a better chance at being sure you are getting an even level of each.  If you are currently taking your essential fatty acids in supplement form, then you would be well advised to have a close look at the specific fatty acid concentration of this to make sure it’s in line with where it needs to be.

Food sources of Omega-6 fatty acids include poultry, avocado, eggs, cereals, whole-grain breads, baked goods, nuts, flaxseed oil, and sunflower and safflower oil.

On the other hand, good sources of Omega-3 fatty acids include cold water fish like salmon, herring, mackerel, anchovies, and sardines, as well as flaxseed oil, walnuts, pecans, and hazelnuts.

So while you should definitely be taking steps to ensure you are getting your essential fatty acids, also make sure you’re getting the right level of each one.

Reference:
Wertz, PW. (2009). Essential fatty acids and dietary stress. Toxicology and Industrial Health. May-Jun;25(4-5):279-83.

A recent study compared polyethylene glycosylated (PEG) creatine hydrochloride to creatine monohydrate (CM). Fifty eight subjects took either a placebo, 5grams of CM, 1.25g of PEG creatine HCL or  2.5g PEG creatine HCL. The study lasted 30 days and looked at body mass and muscular strength, power and endurance. At the end of the study, the creatine monohydrate group was the only group to increase body mass.  All three creatine groups increased muscular strength, but none of them increased power output of endurance.  Based of previous research, we know after 28 days, low doses of creatine monohydrate(2.5g) will saturate muscle creatine levels to the much higher loading protocols. So, while an interesting study, the author’s conclusion, while accurate based off their own research, does not take into account what we already know from previous research on creatine. Due to the design of this study, it didn’t tell us much of anything new or in anyway, show this new studied form of creatine was any better than creatine monohydrate. If they had matched up the doses between the forms of creatine, then we could have learned if this new form was any better or worse than regular monohydrate.

Herda TJ, Beck TW, Ryan ED, Smith AE, Walter AA, Hartman MJ, Stout JR, Cramer JT.
Effects of creatine monohydrate and polyethylene glycosylated creatine supplementation on muscular strength, endurance, and power output.
J Strength Cond Res. 2009 May;23(3):818-26.

By:ATHLETIC EDGE NUTRITION

If you’ve spent enough time in the fitness world, you’re well aware that everything is not always as it seems.  Exercise routines, diets and guarantees that work for one person may not work for another.  It’s important to remember that every body is different, and the reaction to various stimuli will therefore not always be identical.  For this reason, it’s important not to be sucked in by clever marketing campaigns and glitzy advertisements that promise results based upon the success of a few, or even just one, individual.  There’s a reason that most ads are marked with the disclaimer, "results not typical" - because more often than not, the statistics and selling points that are being used are the result of one exceptional person doing a combination of all the right things.

And while this is true of recommendations pertaining to nutrition plans and exercise selections or programs, the "one size doesn’t fit all" scenario emerges quite often when it comes to supplements as well.  While a friend or family member may experience dramatic effects while using a certain supplement, you shouldn’t expect to directly emulate that success.  Of course, one should be aware of the differences in effects even for those supplements that don’t promise amazing transformations or significant improvements in strength, muscle mass or body composition.  Even supplements making more modest claims can fail to deliver the expected health benefits.  And worse, some of these supplements can actually be detrimental to your health.  Luckily, scientists continue to investigate the effects of these products to warn consumers of potential risks.

One possible threat from a seemingly safe supplement came to light in the latest edition of the Journal of Nutrition.  The supplement in question is one that has risen in popularity recently and is now nearly ubiquitous, available in supplement stores, online and even in grocery stores and pharmacies.  The culprit? Coenzyme Q10.  The enzyme has been promoted for benefits such as slowing the aging process, preventing against oxidative stress, and stimulate energy production in cells.  CoQ10 has also been promoted as a weight loss solution as it can stimulate the metabolism and aid in the prevention of cardiovascular disease.

While this all sounds very promising, there are some warnings that must be noted. The new Nutrition study analyzed the effects of CoQ10 through 25 months of supplementation.  Unfortunately, the results were not beneficial.  Moderate amounts of CoQ10 did nothing to prevent age-related losses in muscular strength, coordination, balance, learning and memory.  To make matters worse, a higher dose decreased acuity of responses to auditory and physical stimuli, and actually impaired spacial learning and memory.  As the researchers concluded, the results indicated that CoQ10 did not enhance fitness or provide anti-aging properties (1).

The lesson here is that even the most seemingly innocuous recommendations must be regarded with skepticism and researched appropriately.  Based on the data from this study, the risks of CoQ1 may seem to outweigh the possible rewards for some people.  It’s important to gather as much information as you can on all of your supplements so you can make an informed decision on what to use.

SOURCE:

1. Sumien, Nathalie, et al. Prolonged Intake of Coenzyme Q10 Impairs Cognitive Functions in Mice. Journal of Nutrition, 2009; 139(10): 1926-1932

If you’ve been diagnosed as having diabetes, or if you know diabetes runs in your family and you are at a high risk of suffering from it, it’s important you start taking action steps to control and manage the condition.

Often this means many lifestyle and exercise changes that will help your body better handle the carbohydrates you consume and work to prevent any excess weight gain.

Recently researchers out of the National institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases looked at the effects of artificial sweeteners on glucose, insulin, and GLP-1 in humans.   GLP-1 is the glucagons-like peptide that is known for its role in increasing insulin secretion from the pancreas when glucose is present while also decreasing glucagons secretion, as well as increasing overall insulin sensitivity.  These factors related to this peptide make it quite significant for those trying to manage their blood sugar levels regularly.

The researchers had twenty two healthy individuals undergo two 75 gram oral glucose tolerance tests while measurements were taken of glucose, insulin, and GLP-1 at various intervals for 180 minutes following glucose ingestion.  

In addition to this, ten minutes before the subjects received the glucose load, they also were instructed to either consume 240 ml of diet soda or a carbonated water beverage.

After the results were in, it was indicated that those who consumed the diet soda had higher levels of GLP-1 release, making this a significant finding for diabetes control.

From this study we can conclude that diabetics in particular should watch the amount of artificial sweeteners they are consuming, especially if they are going to be taking in more carbohydrates in a particular meal as it may cause additional effects on their blood sugar levels.

If they are unaware of how their body reacts to this it will make it more difficult to cope and manage the condition.

Reference:

Brown, RJ., Rother, KI. & Walter, M. (2009). Ingestion of Diet Soda before a Glucose Load Augments GLP-1 Secretion. National institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases. Oct 6.

In most matters of fitness, it seems that any debate between different techniques or methodologies always boils down to some sort of oppositional dichotomy.  Inevitably, two opposites come to the forefront of the argument.  The examples are countless: Bulking vs. Cutting. Push vs. Pull. Upper vs. Lower. Full body vs. Body part splits.  Low-intensity, steady state cardio vs. high-intensity interval training.  Just as athletes are always striving to build the biggest, fastest, or strongest bodies they can, there is a constant push to find the most effective training methods to allow an efficient pursuit of one’s goals.  But when you think about it, it makes sense - who wants to waste time with techniques that don’t work when there are better alternatives available?  Certainly not me, and no one I can think of fits this description either.

One other popular debate that often arises involves the type of muscular contraction that is performed as the stimulus in strength training.  Muscles in the body can be contracted in three ways: concentrically, eccentrically, and isometrically.  In concentric contractions, the length of the prime mover muscle is shortened as it provides more force than the resistance, as in the lifting phase of a dumbbell curl.  In eccentric contractions, the length of the prime mover lengthens, as it works to slow a resistance that has a larger force output, as in the lowering phase of the aforementioned dumbbell curl.  And lastly, in an isometric contraction, the length of the muscle remains the same as it pushes against an immobile object.

While all three of these contractions stimulate muscle fibers, concentric and eccentric contraction are used more frequently than isometric contraction, and thus, a debate has emerged as to which method is more effective for strength training.  In order to clear up the debate, the August 2009 issue of the British Journal of Sports Medicine investigated the advantages and disadvantages associated with concentric and eccentric exercises.

Because muscles have the ability to attain higher absolute force during an eccentric contraction then a concentric one, many believe that eccentric contractions are superior in terms of building strength, as such exercises would provide a larger stimulus to the working muscles.  Despite this popular assumption, though, this new research indicated that when the intensity of training was comparable for eccentric and concentric contractions, the gains in total strength gained were not significantly different.  According to the data, strength gains with eccentric training were only superior to concentric training when the intensity was higher during eccentric training.

However, when gains in muscular size were compared, eccentric training proved to be superior, both when intensity of training was the same in both groups and when the eccentric group worked at a higher intensity.  Additionally, eccentric contraction adaptations seemed to be closely related to velocity.

Based on this research, eccentric contraction may be superior for building muscle size alone, but is not necessarily better for building strength.  In any case, a combination of the methods seems worthwhile, if only for the sake of variety.

SOURCE:

1. Roig, M., et al. The effects of eccentric versus concentric resistance training on muscle strength and mass in healthy adults: a systematic review with meta-analysis. The British Journal of Sports Medicine, 2009; 43:556-568

One of the key reasons many people don’t make progress with their resistance training program is because they are simply doing too much volume. It’s important to remember that the body only grows during the rest portion of your day, while during your workout it’s being broken down.

If you are going into the gym and performing a very high amount of volume, this is going to take much longer to recover from than a reduced volume workout, thus if you’re not providing that rest, you aren’t going to improve.

Very often those who actually cut back on their volume show strength gains, and this is for the simple reason that now that they are doing less work, they can actually recover and that’s when they get stronger.

Recently a study was published in the International Journal of Sports Medicine that assessed this very thing.

The researchers had a group of 24 men and 26 women partake in a reduced volume workout program that lasted 10 weeks in duration.

Before the trial took place, the subjects were either working out three times a week or two times a week.  Those that were on the three day a week program reduced frequency down to two days, and those using a two day a week program reduced frequency down to one day.

They also had one group of subjects serve as the control who stopped training entirely.

The isometric strength of the subjects was then measured on two separate occasions, first immediately prior to implementing the reduced volume program and again immediately following.

The researchers found that immediately after training the peak isometric strength increased between 21 and 49.5% amongst the individuals.  The subjects who stopped training altogether lost strength however.

These findings then suggest that moving over to a lower frequency program will not necessarily limit the strength gains, but could potentially improve them.  If you fail to train entirely however, then strength loss will be evident.

So if you’re still hung up on a five-day-a-week program, it may be time to rethink that.  When it comes to strength training and progress, there is a very strong case for the ‘less is more’ theory.

Reference:

Bishop, LE. Et al. (1988) Effect of reduced training frequency on muscular strength.  International Journal of Sports Medicine. Oct; 9 (5):316-9

It’s no secret that resistance training has a number of benefits. However, despite the advantages associated with it, this method of exercise still seems to be suffering from the effects of a stereotype that supposes any amount of weight training will result in a big, bulky figure. Contrary to popular belief, this is not true. Although many women resist weight training because they feel the activity will result in a more manly physique, those fears are unfounded. Men and women have physiological differences that prevent women from adopting the same build as men.

In addition, many men will avoid resistance training because they are just trying to "slim down" or "tone up." What they fail to realize is that resistance training isn’t just for bodybuilders. In fact, an individual is not going to acquire a big and buff physique unless a consistent caloric surplus is maintained. But if one simply consumes their maintenance level of calories or just below, there will be positive changes in body composition (ie, less fat mass and more lean mass), but not a dramatic increase in muscle size.

Of course, there is also the misconception that resistance training isn’t a good idea for weight-management because it doesn’t burn very many calories. This could not be farther from the truth. In fact, an hour of vigorous weight lifting will burn about twice as many calories as an hour of treadmill walking at two miles per hour. In addition, resistance training raises one’s metabolism for many hours after the session is over, burning additional calories. Also, muscle mass itself requires quite a few calories to maintain, so the more muscle one has, the faster his metabolism will be. And last but certainly not least is the fact that research has shown that low muscle mass is associated with "clustered metabolic risk" - a condition that puts one at a higher susceptibility for cardiovascular disease and obesity-related disorders (1).

Perhaps the biggest obstacle to adopting a resistance training program, though, is the fear that it will take a very considerable commitment to achieve any results. But just like all of the aforementioned ideas about fitness, this belief is mistaken as well. In fact, a study published recently in the journal Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise found that positive benefits of resistance training can come in a surprisingly short amount of time. The six-month study found that just 11 minutes of resistance training resulted in a "chronic increase in energy expenditure." In other words, metabolic rate didn’t just increase during the sessions; resting metabolic rate increased by more than seven percent, and the data also indicated increased fat oxidation (fat burning) (2).

Given this new data, there’s really no reason not to begin resistance training. In less than the time it takes to watch half of a television show, you can significantly increase you resting metabolic rate and increase your likelihood of burning fat for energy.

SOURCES:

1. Steene-Johannessen, Jostein, et al. Low Muscle Fitness Is Associated with Metabolic Risk in Youth. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 2009; 41(7): 1361-1367

2. Kirk, Erik P., et al. Minimal Resistance Training Improves Daily Energy Expenditure and Fat Oxidation. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 2009; 41(5): 1122-1129

Typically you can fairly easily divide groups of people into two different supplement profiles: those who are looking for body image enhancing supplements (aimed to help you lose fat or build muscle) and those who are looking for performance or health enhancing supplements (aimed to boost your workout potential or improve your overall health).

In some cases a particular supplement can offer the benefits of both worlds, however in other cases they are more tailored towards one specific goal.

One supplement that you need to be careful with and match to your training goals is arginine.  

Recently researches out of Taiwan investigated the effects of arginine supplementation on the metabolic responses that went on in the body after a single bout of endurance training.

They divided twelve healthy judo male athletes into two groups and then perform a 60 minute exercise session at 75% of their VO2 max.  After the session was completed, they were then instructed to take either a 0.1g/kg of body weight arginine supplement or else a placebo.

Blood samples were taken before the exercise started, and then immediately after, followed by 15, 30, 45, 60, 90, and 120 minutes later.  The blood was measured for concentrations of glucose, insulin, free fatty acids, glycerol, lactate, ammonia, creatine kinase, and nitric oxide.

After the results were in, they demonstrated that there was no difference in the levels of glycerol, lactate, ammonia, creatine kinese, or nitric oxide between the two groups.  However there was a significantly higher concentration of glucose in the blood, as well as insulin, and a correspondingly decrease level of free fatty acids.

We can use the information from this study then and apply it to our own training programs by adding the use of arginine if you are looking for performance enhancement (since the increase in glucose and insulin will improve recovery immediately after exercise) or discontinue use if you are looking for fat loss (to create more free fatty acid availability).

Reference:

Chen, KW. Et al. (2009). Effects of arginine supplementation on post-exercise metabolic responses. Chinese Journal of Physiology. Jun 30; 52(3):136-42.