2009 Studies & Research Blog

Chances are, if you walk into any gym and ask ten people what they think the most important supplement in their arsenal is, nine will probably offer the same response - whey protein. At some point, whey was crowned the king of protein supplements, most likely due to its high bioavailability and low fat and carbohydrate content. As a result, most strength athletes make it a staple supplement, without even thinking why - and that’s a problem.

Despite what Joe Bro and most of the supplement industry will tell you, whey protein is not the best source of protein. Alarming, I know. And the grand irony of the entire situation is that the very feature that is touted as whey’s best aspect is actually the reason it is ineffective. This characteristic is whey’s rapid absorption. While speed has its advantages in some cases, whey protein is just a bit too quick. In fact, almost 60% of it can be oxidized by your liver for glucogenesis, meaning it never reaches your muscles (1). Simply put, the speedy absorption of whey makes it ineffective at battling catabolism (muscle breakdown).

The only way that scientists were able to make whey effective at preventing catabolism was to administer two grams of it every 20 minutes for seven hours; this slow delivery proved to be more than three times better at fueling muscles than a single dose (2). Unfortunately, that’s not a realistic option. So what’s the solution? A protein blend, preferably one with micellar casein, egg albumin, and other sustained-release proteins.

Studies have shown there is a "synergistic effect between solubleproteins and caseins," meaning that a combination of protein sources is superior. Combining a slow-digesting protein source such as casein with whey provides a steady stream of amino acids for utilization by the muscles; one group of researchers specifically noted that whey’s "too-rapid dietary amino acid delivery cannot support the anabolic requirement" in the post-workout period (3).

By contrast, the sustained delivery of a protein blend yields much better results. One study found that using a blended protein supplement in conjunction with exercise resulted in twice the drop in body fat percentage, twice the gains in lean mass, and twice the gains in strength compared to whey and exercise (4). Given this information, the choice is clear - you can either work twice as hard with whey, or ditch the broscience and let a blend do the work for you.

SOURCES:

1. Jungas RL, et al. Physiological Review, 1992: 72: 419-448.

2. Biorie Y, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 1997: 94 (26): 14930-5.

3. Lacroix, Magali, et al. The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 2006: 84(5): 1070-1079.

4. Demling, Robert H., and DeSanti, Leslie. Annals of Nutrition and Metabolism, 2000: 44:21-29.

One of the predominant reasons why people lose muscle mass is because they aren’t placing enough stimulus on the muscle tissue that the body senses it needs to maintain it. With aging and a decrease in physical activity, this starts to become more predominant and it’s not uncommon at all to see older adults slowly putting on body fat due to the reduction in metabolic rate that goes along with this lean muscle mass loss.

Therefore, the best way to offset this will be to participate in a regular resistance training workout that places the stimulus on the muscle tissue so it will maintain itself over the long run.

Just how much resistance training is needed though to provide this effect? Must you go into the gym 4 times a week to maintain your muscle mass or is there some wiggle room for those with busy schedules?

This is what researchers out of the Institute of Anatomy looked at recently when they assessed the different responses to eccentric and concentric training in older men and women.

They had a group of elderly men and women participate in one of three different training protocols for a twelve week period.  One was cognitive training, the second group took part in convention resistance training, and the third group was involved with eccentric ergometer training, each group dedicating two sessions each week.

After the twelve week period the subjects were tested for functional parameters of strength as well as body composition.

The results indicated that the relative thigh lean muscle mass increased with both eccentric training and conventional resistance training but not with those performing the cognitive training.

From these results then we can conclude the any type of exercise where there is an overloading stimulus on the muscle fibres will help promote muscle maintenance and these benefits can be seen when performed at minimum twice a week, making it a very reasonable time commitment to prevent the later age weight gain and strength loss.

Reference:

Breil, FA. Et al. (2009). Different response to eccentric and concentric training in older men and women. European Journal of Applied Physiology. June 20.

With so much attention given to protein and protein supplements, it can be easy to overlook the fact that carbohydrates and fats are also essential components to a healthy diet and the promotion of optimal performance.  In fact, insufficient intake of carbohydrates and fats will effectively render all of your protein supplements useless, as you won’t have the proper nutrition needed to exercise, recover and grow.  And just as there are protein supplements to make hitting protein goals more convenient, there are carbohydrate and fat supplements as well.

One of the most popular carbohydrate supplements is Waxy Maize Starch (WMS).  Waxy Maize Starch is a relative newcomer to the supplement market, and has been widely hailed for its rapid digestion and lack of taste, making it easy to mix in with other foods and beverages you may already be taking.  Additionally, WMS has the unique ability to bypass the stomach, allowing it to be absorbed directly into muscles, shuttling nutrients without the bloating sometimes associated with dextrose or maltodextrin.

While all this sounds great, there is one thing that really matters - does it work?  Despite the relatively short time in the spotlight, numerous studies have investigated the benefits of WMS.  When supplemented before exercise, WMS resulted in an increase of carbohydrate oxidation.  In addition to this, researchers noted that WMS had an ergogenic effect, with athletes showing an ability to perform more work during a performance exercise (1).

But pre-workout isn’t the only time when Waxy Maize Starch has proven effective as an alternative to other, more traditional carbohydrate sources.  As one might expect, the post-workout period, where many place an emphasis on the quickness of nutrient delivery to potentially depleted muscles, is a great window of opportunity for the advantages of WMS.  In one study, researchers compared a variety of types of carbohydrates on their abilities to provide glycogen resynthesis after exercise.  Even when pitted against classic bodybuilding favorites such as maltodextrin and resistant starch, Waxy Maize Starch stole the show.  WMS outperformed both of those alternatives, providing nearly double the muscle gylogen concentration of resistant starch (2).

And thanks to the lack of fat and sugars, Waxy Maize Starch delivers everything you want and nothing you don’t, ensuring that you can create your ideal post-workout recovery nutrition.

SOURCES:

1. Goodpaster, BH, et al. The effects of pre-exercise starch ingestion on endurance performance. International Journal of Sports Medicine, 1996; 17(5):366-72.
2. Jozsi, AC, et al. The influence of starch structure on glycogen resynthesis and subsequent cycling performance. International Journal of Sports Medicine, 1996; 17(5):373-378

Many people are opting to use low carb diets in effort to help them reach their weight loss goals.  With this though, one issue that often sets in that they have to deal with is an increased level of fatigue.

This is normal as the body progresses on using the lower carb diet muscle glycogen levels will become more depleted (assuming exercise is also taking place), which then increases the fatigue experienced during any given workload.

But, one thing that many people think about with relation to fatigue while on their diet is sleep quality.  Sleep is going to play a very large role in how you feel overall while on the diet. If you aren’t getting optimal sleep, this will influence recovery rates, hunger levels, and workout performance as well.

Recently researchers wanted to assess the sleep indices of those who were utilizing a very low carbohydrate diet and those who are utilizing a mixed diet over the short term.

They had two groups divided into groups – one that consumed a very low calorie diet (38% protein, 61% fat, and less than 1% carbs) or else a mixed diet containing 15% protein 12.5% fat, and 72% carbohydrates).  Both groups took in 2400 calories each day so the only difference was the macronutrient make-up.

Urine Ketone levels were measured along with blood glucose levels before the evening meals as well as at bed time. Hunger and fullness were also assessed immediately after the meal until bed-time using Likert scales.

The results of the study indicated that the proportion of REM sleep (rapid eye movement where the body is in the dreaming stage of sleep) was significantly decreased for those who were following the low carb diets compared to those who weren’t. Instead, they spent a greater total portion of the evening in the slow wave sleep stage where the body is in deep sleep however tends to feel drowsy and groggy if waken up from.

The influence of these types of diets on the stages of sleep the individual spent most of the night in could help explain why some people really feel tired while utilizing the low carb diet approach.

Reference:
A***hi, A, et al. (2008). Acute effects of the very low carbohydrate diet on sleep indices.  Nutr Neurosci. Aug; 11(4):146-54.

Note: The following study was performed with SciVation Xtend as the source of BCAAs.

A randomized, double-blind study was performed to evaluate the efficacy of consuming a supplement containing branched-chain amino acids (BCAAs) during an eight-week resistance-training program.

Thirty-six strength-trained males with a minimum of two years resistance-training experience (25.5 yrs, 177.7 cm, 85.2 kg and 9.3 % body fat) were randomly assigned to receive either 14 grams of BCAAs (n=12), 28 grams of whey protein (n=12), or 28 grams of carbohydrates from a sports drink (n=12) while performing an eight-week resistance-training program.

Participants followed a periodized, whole-body training program that involved training all major muscle groups once per week using a four-day training split. Subjects body weight, body composition, and 10-rep max on the bench press and squat were determined before and after the eight-week training program. Subjects followed a standardized diet while following the program.

All groups had a 100% compliance with the study protocol. The BCAA group experienced a significantly greater gain in body weight than the whey group (2 ± 1 kg vs. 1 ± 1 kg; p < 0.02) and the carbohydrate group (2 ± 1 kg vs. 1 ± 1 kg; p < 0.01). For lean mass, the BCAA group gained significantly greater lean mass than the whey group (4 ± 1 kg vs. 2 ± 1 kg; p < 0.01) and the carbohydrate group (4 ± 1 kg vs. 1 ± 1 kg; p < 0.01).

The whey group also gained significantly more lean mass than the carbohydrate group (2 ± 1 kg vs. 1 ± 1 kg; p < 0.02). BCAA group decreased their percent body fat significantly more than the whey group (2 ± 1 % vs. 1 ± 1 %; p = 0.039) and the carbohydrate group (2 ± 1 % vs. 1 ± 1 %; p < 0.01).

Muscular strength was significantly greater in the BCAA group on the 10-RM bench press than the whey group (6 ± 3 kg vs. 3 ± 2 kg; p < 0.01) and the carbohydrate group (6 ± 3 kg vs. 2 ± 2 kg; p < 0.01). For the squat, the BCAA group gained significantly more strength on their 10-RM than the whey group (11 ± 5 kg vs. 5 ± 3 kg; p < 0.01) and the carbohydrate group (11 ± 5 kg vs. 3 ± 2 kg; p < 0.01).

Ingestion of a supplement containing BCAAs while following an 8-week resistance training program resulted in a greater decrease in percent body fat, an increase in lean mass, and 10-RM strength gains on the bench press and squat vs. ingestion of a whey supplement or a sports drink. In addition, the ingestion of a whey protein supplement resulted in greater lean mass gains than ingestion of a sports drink.

Check out Bodybuilding.com’s full line of BCAAs right here.

Step into any supplement shop and head on over to the protein section, and you’ll likely be faced with the same thing no matter where you are - a wall of whey. Whey protein seems to have cornered the market as far as bodybuilders are concerned, prized for its high bioavailability, rapid absorption, and convenient, powdered form. However, whey isn’t the only way to go - there are plenty of other powdered protein sources, such as egg and soy, the latter of which may, according to recent research, be preferable to whey, despite what supplement store shelves might indicate.

One reason whey protein is a favorite of athletes is its low cost. When purchased in bulk, such as 10lb containers, whey can cost as little as $.40 per serving. But even this cost isn’t preferable to soy protein, which often costs as little as $.36 per serving in 2lb containers. Even without the bulk discount, soy protein can be just as reasonably priced, if not more so, than whey (1,2).

Whey is also prized for its array of amino acids and easy digestibility, an area in which soy protein also ranks highly. While overlooked by many, "Soy protein is a complete protein that ranks right up there with the best in the Protein Digestibility Corrected Amino Acid Score (PDCAAS). Soy protein is generally very low in or free of fat, cholesterol, and lactose" (2). Additionally, soy may be preferable for those who are lactose intolerant, because unlike whey, it is not a dairy product. However, many whey protein products are lactose-free or have very low levels of lactose, so this may not be a very big concern.

The most common complaint against the use of soy protein is the fact that soy protein may raise estrogen levels. However, it should be noted that studies have shown that soy protein consumption may actually reduce estrogen levels - one group of researchers found that "estrone (a type of estrogen) levels were about 15 percent lower among women who consumed the highest amounts of soy protein" (3). Also noteworthy is that soy contains a number of "physiologically active compounds with cholesterol-lowering properties" (4).

In order to test the merit of soy protein in the realm of bodybuilding, researchers also pitted soy supplementation versus whey in a study of men undergoing a resistance training regimen. After 12 weeks of training, the group receiving soy protein and the group receiving whey protein displayed nearly identical improvements in body composition, with both experiencing increases in lean mass and reductions in body fat. Additionally, the two groups had very similar increases in strength over the course of the 12 weeks. As a result, the researchers concluded that "soy based protein supplements appear to be as effective as animal-based protein to support strength gains," and that prior research indicated "regular soy consumption improves lipid profiles and the insulin-to-glucagon ratio and lowers oxidative stress" (4).

Considering this strong body of research, it would seem that whey is not the only way - soy is a perfectly suitable alternative.

SOURCES:
1. Whey Protein Information and Product Listing, Bodybuilding.com: http://www.bodybuilding.com/store/wheyper.html
2. Soy Protein Information and Product Listing, Bodybuilding.com: http://www.bodybuilding.com/store/soy.html
3. Diet Rich in Soy Protein Lowers Estrogen: http://www.annieappleseedproject.org/dietricinsoy.html
4. DeNysschen, Carol A., et al. Resistance Training with Soy vs. Whey Protein Supplements in Hyperlipidemic Males. Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition, 2009; 6(8)

As you get more and more involved with your workout program, you may start to wish there was a way you could dramatically reduce your need for recovery time with your program so you could spend more time in the gym getting results.

After all, the more frequently you can stimulate a muscle tissue the faster it’s going to grow, but that is with the limiting condition that muscle tissue is fully recovered.  If you attempt too frequent stimulation with not enough recovery, progress will move backwards, rather than forwards.

But what other methods can one use to improve recovery so you can get into the gym more frequently?  We already know that post-workout nutrition dramatically improves how quickly you recover, but what about other methods such as tissue massage during your actual workout session (as opposed to just standing and waiting which is the common protocol)?

That is just what researchers out of the University of Tulsa set out to study.

They had subjects perform three workouts, all identical in terms of exercises (leg press, prone leg curl, seated shoulder press, standing barbell curl), number of sets, and the resistance that was used.

After each set was performed the subjects were then given one of three different treatments.  The first treatment group received one minute rest where they stood upright. The second treatment group received just 30 seconds of upright standing to rest, while the third treatment group received 30 seconds of message and body part elevation.

The study subjects were then asked to perform as many repetitions as possible for each set they performed and the two measurements that were taken were the total work versus elapsed time ratio as well as the cumulative number of reps performed total.

The results indicated that the one minute rest subjects had greater readings than the 30 seconds plain rest subjects as well as the 30 seconds rest with massage and body elevation subjects.  

From this study we can conclude that total rest is going to be the largest factor indicating recovery during a resistance training workout and if full recovery is what you’re after, you’re better off letting the full time elapse rather than trying get by with less total rest time using alternative therapy methods.

Rest is a vital component of any workout program, so make extra sure you are paying attention to this variable when designing your resistance training set-up.

Reference:

Caruso, JF & Coday, MA. (2008) The combined acute effects of massage, rest periods, and body part elevation on resistance exercise performance.  Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. Mar;22(2):575-82.

Excerpt:

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Hormone experts said on Wednesday they are becoming worried by a chemical called bisphenol A, which some politicians say they want taken out of products and which consumers are increasingly shunning.

They said they have gathered a growing body evidence to show the compound, also known as BPA, might damage human health. The Endocrine Society issued a scientific statement on Wednesday calling for better studies into its effects.

Studies presented at the group’s annual meeting show BPA can affect the hearts of women, can permanently damage the DNA of mice, and appear to be pouring into the human body from a variety of unknown sources.

BPA, used to stiffen plastic bottles, line cans and make smooth paper receipts, belongs to a broad class of compounds called endocrine disruptors.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration is examining their safety but there has not been much evidence to show that they are any threat to human health.

"We present evidence that endocrine disruptors do have effects on male and female development, prostate cancer, thyroid disease, cardiovascular disease," Dr. Robert Carey of the University of Virginia, who is president of the Endocrine Society, told a news conference.

The society issued a lengthy scientific statement about the chemicals in general that admits the evidence is not yet overwhelming, but is worrying.

Dr. Hugh Taylor of Yale University in Connecticut found evidence in mice that the compounds could affect unborn pups.

"We exposed some mice to bisphenol A and then we looked at their offspring," Taylor told the news conference.

"We found that even when a they had a brief exposure during pregnancy … mice exposed to these chemicals as a fetus carried these changes throughout their lives."

The BPA did not directly change DNA through mutations, but rather through a process called epigenetics — when chemicals attach to the DNA and change its function.

Read the rest here:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20090611/sc_nm/us_bisphenol/print

Bodybuilding.com offers Emerald Balance EcoDrink which includes a BPA-Free Reusable Eco-Friendly Bottle!

For those wishing to maximize the results of their efforts in the gym, the idea that fitness is a science as well as a sport is a familiar one.  Countless scientific journals, text books, and college courses continue to be developed regarding proper exercise technique and nutrition.  While the former has more universally accepted tenets, nutrition is a subject in which heated debates continue to rage.  One of the reasons the body of knowledge regarding sports nutrition is constantly expanding and evolving is due to the influence of supplement companies, who fund studies in an attempt to back the claims of their products.  But there are also studies that disprove their claims, leading to a cycle of scientific arguments back and forth.

Recently, a study was published that affected perhaps the most contested element of nutrition, at least in the bodybuilding world - what to consume post-workout for optimal recovery.  Countless products claim to be the best at this, despite the wide range of macronutrient profiles and ingredient lists.  Companies such as Cytosport argue that Muscle Milk is the best, with a blend of medium-chain triglycerides, protein and complex carbohydrates.  On the other end of the spectrum, the manufacturers of Gatorade claim that carbohydrates - specifically the simple sugars found in their product - are they key to recovery.  These claims were partly supported by a study published in the latest issue of the Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition, but suggested an even better recovery aid - cereal and milk.

It turns out that the staple American breakfast may in fact be the most important meal of your day, even if you’re not having it first thing in the morning.  The study pitted the ingestion of cereal and non-fat milk versus a carbohydrate-electrolyte beverage in the post-workout period, and measured plasma insulin, plasma lactate and glycogen and muscle protein levels.  After the exercise trials, the participants were fed either the cereal or the beverage, with measurements taken 15, 30, and 60 minutes afterward (1).

The results of the study indicated that cereal and milk was as good as, if not better than, the carbohydrate beverage in terms of muscle recovery.  Plasma insulin levels were significantly higher with the cereal, and levels of plasma lactate were lower with the cereal, indicating that it would be the better choice for delivering nutrients to muscles and reducing levels of lactic acid buildup (1).

Also worth noting is the higher levels of mTor phosphorylation in the cereal-consuming groups - this is the addition of a phosphate group to a protein, which is an important part in a number of bodily functions.  And due to the lower cost of cereal and milk than sports beverages and the superior supply of amino acids, the researchers concluded that the classic breakfast combination would be a preferable post-workout option (1).

SOURCES:

1. Kammer, Lynne, at al.  Cereal and Nonfat Milk Support Muscle Recovery Following Exercise.  Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition, 2009; 6(11)

You likely already know that eating breakfast regularly will play a large role in helping prevent you from over-consuming calories later on in the day.  Those who decide to forgo breakfast thinking this will help decrease their total daily calorie intake are strongly mistaken because most of they more than make up for this lack of calories later on in the day.

But, just how much does the composition of this breakfast meal matter? That’s what researchers out of the University of Sydney set out to find recently.

They had fourteen subjects consume four different equal caloric breakfasts, with the only difference being in the macronutrient composition each breakfast contained. Two had a rich fat content, while the other two had a rich carbohydrate content, with one being high in dietary fibre and the other being much lower.

After each breakfast was eating, the subjects were asked to complete an appetite and alertness rating at specific times during the remainder of the day.

The results indicated that the high fibre carbohydrate breakfast was the one that they enjoyed the least, however it was also the most filling as subjects proceeded to eat less food during the rest of the morning and at lunch.  The hunger rate also returned more slowly than after the high carb, but low fiber meal.  

Those who had taken in the high fat breakfasts were pleased with the taste, but didn’t find they stayed satisfied as long as and ended up eating more later on in the morning.  The researchers noted that this may have been a compensatory response as their body was trying to get them to consume a similar amount of carbohydrates as what they were normally used to during their morning meal.

At the end of the day when comparing the two groups, the high fat breakfast groups had a much higher total calorie intake as well as a higher overall dietary fat intake.  

From this study we can then conclude that choosing a higher carbohydrate, high fibre breakfast is going to be your best option here.

Those on low carbohydrate diets may want to make particular note of this since they often start their day with only protein and fat meals, so the addition of a high fibre carb could potentially decrease their overall daily calorie intake.

Reference:

Blundell, JE. (1999) The effects of high-carbohydrate vs high-fat breakfasts on feelings of fullness and alertness, and subsequent food intake. International Journal of Food Sciences and Nutrition. Jan;50(1):13-28.

Those familiar with the supplement industry are aware that most supplements are grouped into general categories, according to their supposed effects.  A few of the most popular groups are supplements intended to increase lean mass, those intended to decrease body fat, and those to increase strength.  And while many supplements concern themselves with one or maybe two of these categories, a multi-purpose supplement that targeted all three would be ideal.  According to recent research, that supplement might be HMB.

You’re probably wondering - what is HMB?  Good question.  HMB stands for beta-hydroxy-beta-methylbutyrate, which is a metabolite of leucine, an essential amino acid.  While it does naturally occur in certain foods, including alfalfa and catfish, some have surmised that supplementing HMB might be beneficial (1).

The first study investigating the effects of HMB on body composition and strength in conjunction with exercise was conducted in 2000.  While the study only lasted four weeks, the benefits of HMB were clear.  Groups receiving HMB supplementation experienced two times the reduction in body fat that the placebo group experienced.   The HMB group also experienced greater lean mass gains and strength.  The researchers concluded that "regardless of gender or training status, HMB may increase upper body strength and minimize muscle damage when combined with an exercise program" (2).

A study published this month in the Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research took the prior research a step further, investigating HMB’s effects throughout a nine-week exercise program.  The researchers noted that earlier research had not considered the effects on "resistance-trained" individuals, which may have accounted for the impressive results in past studies.  To counter this, the study participants were required to have at least one year of weight training experience.  The average level of experience was 3.9 years, suggesting that any growth from the study would be a direct result of the HMB, rather than so-called "noob gains" (3).

The findings of the study in regard to strength gains were curious; while one-repetition maximum in the leg extension increased by 9.1 percent on average, its effect on upper body strength was negligible.  The researchers did note, though that it was "possible that the 9-week study period was not long enough to establish the effect of HMB on gains in strength" (3)

The HMB supplementation seemed to have a greater effect in regard to body composition, though, as the HMB group members experienced a mean decrease in body fat percentage of 7 percent, while the placebo group only had a 1 percent decrease.  Additionally, the HMB group experienced greater gains in lean body mass than the placebo group (3).

So is HMB the ultimate supplement?  Not quite.  While it did boost strength it some lifts, it generated only negligible differences in others.  But it also had a positive effect on lean mass and body composition, so it may still be worth a look.  The researchers also noted that HMB seemed to be "more efficacious to individuals initiating resistance training programs and, possibly, also in less well-trained muscle groups," so more experienced lifters may not see the same benefits (3).

SOURCES:

1. HMB Supplement Review - BodyBuilding For You: http://www.bodybuildingforyou.com/supplements-reviews/hmb-supplement-review.htm

2. Panton, Lynn B., et al. Nutritional supplementation of the leucine metabolite ?-hydroxy-?-methylbutyrate (hmb) during resistance training.  Nutrition, 2000; 16(9): 734-739

3. Thomson, Jasmine S., Waston, Patricia E., and Rowlands, David S. Effects of Nine Weeks of ?-hydroxy-?-methylbutyrate Supplementation on Strength and Body Composition in Resistance Trained Men.  The Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 2009; 23(3): 827-835