Author Archives: SNI

‘Multiple Transporter’ Carbohydrates

By Scott Robinson. 

Supplementation of carbohydrate (CHO) sources (e.g. glucose or glucose polymers), has been widely observed to increase exercise capacity, most notably during prolonged exercise at moderate to high intensities (1).  These effects are largely attributed to a prevention of hypoglycaemia and the maintenance of high rates of CHO oxidation towards the latter phases of exercise when endogenous stores are either low or depleted (2). On this basis, it appears somewhat intuitive for athletes to seek methods of maximising their rate of CHO oxidation in the hope that a greater contribution from exogenous sources will increase exercise capacity through the ‘sparing’ of endogenous sources.

Background: Whereas it was once thought that 1 g.min-1 was the absolute maximum rate of CHO oxidation, more recent advances demonstrate convincingly that this rate is, in fact, much higher (in excess of 1.5 g.min-1; 3). To understand maximum CHO oxidation rates, it is important to understand what limits this. In an eloquent series of studies from Asker Jeukendrup’s lab in Birmingham, it was found that limitations to CHO oxidation were in the absorptive process most likely because of a saturation of carbohydrate transporters (for review see 4). They demonstrated that glucose oxidation rate is limited by a sodium-dependent glucose transporter (SGLT1), which, once saturated, the additional feeding of this carbohydrate will not result in greater intestinal absorption and increased oxidation rate (5). HOWEVER, other sugars are limited by different transport mechanisms (GLUT5 in the case of fructose). Thus, it was proposed that the use of different transporters might increase total carbohydrate absorption (see Figure 1).

 

Figure 1. The oxidation rate of glucose plus fructose in a combined drink is higher than the oxidation rate of similar amounts of either glucose or fructose alone (4)

Research study 1: Wallis et al. (2005; 6) tested this hypothesis by investigating the oxidation of combined ingestion of maltodextrins and fructose during cycling exercise. In this study, eight trained cyclists performed three exercise trials, with each comprising of 150 min cycling at 55% maximum power output. During each trial, subjects received a solution providing either 1.8 g.min-1 of maltodextrin (MD), 1.2 g/min-1 of maltodextrin + 0.6 g/min-1 of fructose (MD+F), or plain water. Results revealed that peak exogenous carbohydrate oxidation (last 30 min of exercise) was ~40% higher with combined MD+F ingestion compared with MD only ingestion. The authors concluded that ingestion of large amounts of maltodextrin and fructose during cycling exercise enables exogenous carbohydrate oxidation rates to reach peak values of ~1.5 g.min-1, which is much higher than oxidation rates from ingesting maltodextrin alone.

Performance Implications: Since these studies, it has been demonstrated that the ingestion multiple carbohydrate transporters i.e. glucose+fructose, exerts favourable influences on subjects’ ratings of perceived exertion (7) and endurance capacity (time to fatigue; 8). What is more, increased CHO oxidation with multiple transporter carbohydrates is well-regarded to be accompanied by increased fluid delivery and improved oxidation efficiency, thus reducing the likelihood of gastrointestinal distress (9).

Research study 2: Currell and Jeukendrup (2005; 8) investigated the effect of ingesting a glucose+fructose drink compared with a glucose-only drink (both delivering CHO at a rate of 1.8 g∙min-1) and a water placebo on endurance performance. Eight male trained cyclists performed120 min of cycling exercise at 55% Wmax followed by a time trial of approximately 1h duration. Results revealed a staggering 8% quicker time to completion during the time trial in the GF condition when compared with the G condition (times, 4022 s compared with 3641 s for FG and G, respectively). Total CHO oxidation did not differ significantly between GF (2.54 +/- 0.25 g∙min-1)and G (2.50 g∙min-1), indicating that there was a sparing of endogenous CHO stores in the GF trial, because GF has been shown to have a greater exogenous CHO oxidation than G.

Take home message: In sharp contrast to the original guidelines, the new recommendations are dictated by the type and duration of exercise. Multiple transportable carbohydrates, ingested at high rates (1.8-2.4 g∙min-1), are likely to improve exercise performance during ultra-endurance events of duration 3 h or more by reducing rating of perceived exertion and increasing time to fatigue. Such feeding strategies are not necessary for shorter duration events seeing that saturation of gut glucose transporters would be unlikely, especially if access to additional CHO is limited (e.g. team sports where fluid breaks are limited to unscheduled breaks in play and half-time).

BIO: Scott is a First Class Honours Sports Science graduate from the Research Institute of Sports and Exercise Sciences, at Liverpool John Moores University. He acquires a range of experience in both playing and coaching sport having represented Stoke City Football Club at Youth level and coached football at the International Youth Games. Scott has been an Assistant Sports Scientist at Blackburn Rovers Football Club and Everton Football Club for the 2010/2011 and 2011/2012 seasons, respectively. He has also partaken in Sports Science related research for FIFA, where he travelled across Europe as part of a multi-national team of sports scientists and athletes.  Scott is currently completing his Masters of Science in Sports Physiology, where his research focuses on creating the optimal sports drink for soccer performance, after which he is due to begin a PhD within the Exercise Metabolism Research Group at the University of Birmingham, in September.   Contact info:   scottr38@hotmail.co.uk and Twitter is @scottrobinson8

References

  1. Coyle EF, Coggan AR, Hemmert MK & Ivy JL. Muscle glycogen utilisation during prolonged strenuous exercise when fed carbohydrate. J Appl Physiol. 1986; 61: 165-172.
  2. Bosch AN, Dennis SC & Noakes TD. Influence of carbohydrate ingestion on fuel substrate turnover and oxidation during prolonged exercise. J Appl Physiol. 1994; 76: 2364-2372.
  3. Jentjens RL, et al. Oxidation of combined ingestion of glucose and fructose during exercise. J. Appl. Physiol. 2004; 96: 1277-1284.
  4. Jeukendrup, AE, Gleeson, M. Sport Nutrition, Leeds, UK, Human Kinetics. 2010.
  5. Jentjens RL, et al. Oxidation of exogenous glucose, sucrose and maltose during prolonged cycling exercise. J. Appl. Physiol. 2004; 96: 1285-1291.
  6. Wallis GA, et al. Oxidation of combined ingestion of maltodextrins and fructose during exercise. Med Sci Spo & Exer. 2005; 37: 426-432.
  7. Jeukendrup AE, et al.Exogenous carbohydrate oxidation during ultraendurance exercise. J. Appl. Physiol. 2006; 100: 1134-1141.
  8. Currell K, Jeukendrup AE. Superior endurance performance with ingestion of multiple transportable carbohydrates. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2008; 40: 275-281.
  9. Jeukendrup AE. Carbohydrate feeding during exercise. Eur J Sport Sci; 8: 77-86.

 

Idiots in the Mist – The Lowdown on Creatine

by Jose Antonio PhD.  For those of you who know me, you’re well aware that I’m pretty lazy when it comes to bs’ing you.  It takes too much work and frankly, it’s just a waste of time.  If you want a straight answer, I’ll give it.  If you want a sugar-coated answer that’ll make you feel better, go ask your Mommy.  So what’s with the sardonic prelude?  is-creatine-safe-how-the-king-of-supps-affects-your-organs-1

First a little edification.  I teach at Nova Southeastern University in Davie FL.  I try like a madman to instill lessons in critical thinking.  Any monkey can memorize and regurgitate information.  But true learning occurs when you can think critically and independently.  Sometimes the mark of a good thinker is when you realize the more you learn, the more questions you have.  Often, those who are uneducated don’t know enough to know what they don’t know.  Hence, they succumb to ‘bro-science.’

I implore students to think for themselves, look up the data, and not just believe what your buddy at the gym says.  When I read just plain stupid sh#* like “creatine supplementation is bad for your kidneys,” it would be like a rocket scientist at NASA reading “the Earth really is flat.”  Ask yourself, “is there data to support the statement?”  Certainly, if you are looking for 100% agreement on anything scientific, then you my friend are in the wrong field.  The only guarantees are death and taxes.  So how does one come to a reasonable and smart conclusion about sports nutrition? 

As they say on one of my favorite TV Shows “CSI,”  ‘just follow the data; the data will tell you the answer.’  So in essence you’re a sleuth looking at the evidence, the clues, and the data.  With regards to creatine, the data are so voluminous, so robust, so convincing that it would be idiotic to believe otherwise.  Unless of course you’re so skeptical that you think apples might rise tomorrow.

So here’s the lowdown on creatine. 

To wit:  I gave my two-cents worth of supplement advice vis a vis “The Creatine Report” by Nick Tumminello and Lou Schuler.  It is a nice, informative, and consumer-friendly piece on the most widely researched sports supplement in the history of mankind.  For a copy of the report, go to http://www.freecreatinereport.com/.  Nick and Lou did an excellent job outlining the facts and dispelling the myths associated with creatine.  One would think that with the HUNDREDS of randomized clinical trials on creatine the myths promulgated by the educated and uneducated would cease.  But alas, I am mistaken.

Apparently, one must never underestimate the stupidity of the general public (or the learned medical professional).  Nick was kind enough to share with me some of the questions/comments that he received regarding creatine.  To say some were just god-awful idiotic would be an insult to idiots.  Moreover, the gross ignorance demonstrated by so-called experts (i.e. the Mayo Clinic) is just plain embarrassing.  Below are some of the questions he received.  For me to answer each of them in detail would be like asking a physicist to explain why apples fall from a tree rather than rise.  Yep, we still have flat-earthers out there.  My response is easy to see.  It’s after my initials.

Questions from readers who slept through Biology 101.

– Is there any quality research showing Creatine doesn’t work? If so, should these results affect our decision to take creatine?

JA:  Of course there is good research out there that shows creatine does not have an ergogenic effect.  If you’re looking for 100% agreement in science, then you’re a fool.  Imagine giving aspirin to 100 individuals with a headache.  Ninety of them respond favorably and 10 do not.  And let’s say that’s the general pattern throughout the scientific literature.  So does that mean aspirin works (for treating headaches)?  Or not?  Scientific conclusions are based on the PREPONDERANCE of the evidence.  And it is clear that the preponderance of the evidence points to a robust ergogenic response from creatine supplementation.  Sure, it doesn’t work for everyone.  But then again what does?  For a scientific summary of creatine, please read the ISSN’s Position paper on creatine.[1]  http://www.jissn.com/content/4/1/6  

– Some people say creatine made them bloated. Is there any scientific evidence behind these claims? What do you say to people when they make (or repeat) this type of claim?

JA:  The problem with the word ‘bloated’ is that it has no scientific meaning.  How do you measure bloatedness?  If someone says they are bloated, how can you even argue against it?  If someone says they weigh more, that’s easy to measure.  If you ‘feel’ bloated (whatever that means to you) and that feeling bothers you, then by all means quit taking creatine. 

– There are also claims from people that creatine made them poop more often.  Any scientific validation to this claim? What do you say to folks who make (or repeat) this kind of claim?

JA:  What?  You gotta be kidding me.  Inasmuch as there hasn’t been a single study measuring ‘poop frequency’ and creatine use, it’s impossible to give a remotely scientific answer.  However, if you like pooping more, then by all means keep taking it (if that’s what creatine does to you).  If you don’t like it, then for chrissakes quit taking it.

Here are quotes verbatim from the Mayo Clinic: http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/creatine/NS_patient-creatine/METHOD=print; Sigh…

Mayo Clinic: Creatine has been associated with asthmatic symptoms. People should avoid creatine if they have known allergies to this supplement. Signs of allergy may include rash, itching, or shortness of breath.

JA:  There is animal data which suggests this.[2, 3]  However, with the hundreds of clinical trials in humans, there’s no evidence that creatine causes an allergic reaction in us bipeds. Hence, if you have a pet rodent, by all means don’t give it creatine.

Mayo Clinic:  There is limited systematic study of the safety, pharmacology, or toxicology of creatine. Individuals using creatine, including athletes, should be monitored by a healthcare professional. Users are advised to inform their physicians or other qualified healthcare professionals.

JA:  This is a bit of a straw man argument.  First of all, the data is ALWAYS LIMITED (i.e. ‘limited systematic study…’).  But my question is this.  How much data is sufficient to satisfy the naysayers?  If you do a NIH database search of ‘Creatine and Exercise,’ it turns up 597 peer-reviewed scientific publications.  If you search ‘Creatine and Health,’ it turns up 107 publications.  According to the hundreds of RCTs (randomized clinical trials), there is no evidence of harmful side effects vis a vis creatine supplementation.  And please, do not cite anecdotes or case studies as evidence to the contrary.  Physicians love using case studies.  But with hundreds of RCTs, it would be perverse to ignore the plethora of evidence supporting the safety and efficacy of creatine supplementation.  Again, read these papers for a good review of the literature.[1, 4]  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21424716 and http://www.jissn.com/content/4/1/6  .

Mayo Clinic: Some individuals may experience gastrointestinal symptoms, including loss of appetite, stomach discomfort, diarrhea, or nausea.

JA:  Really?  And the double-blind, placebo-controlled trials that show this are published where exactly?  Now it is entirely possible that there are those who have idiosyncratic responses to creatine ingestion.  Is it within the realm of possibilities that some may experience GI distress?  Of course.  But then again, folks get that eating nachos and cheese, hot dogs, or white bread too. 

Mayo Clinic: Creatine may cause muscle cramps or muscle breakdown, leading to muscle tears or discomfort.

JA: This is one is just sheer fabrication.  Wouldn’t the hundreds of peer-reviewed studies that examined the effects of creatine supplementation on exercise performance have already shown this?  According to a study published in the British Journal of Sports Medicine, “Recent reports now suggest that creatine may enhance performance in hot and/or humid conditions by maintaining haematocrit, aiding thermoregulation and reducing exercising heart rate and sweat rate. Creatine may also positively influence plasma volume during the onset of dehydration. Considering these new published findings, little evidence exists that creatine supplementation in the heat presents additional risk, and this should be taken into consideration as position statements and other related documents are published.”[5] Another study found that “the incidence of cramping or injury in Division IA football players was significantly lower or proportional for creatine users compared with nonusers.”[6]  For the Mayo Clinic to post this on their website is at best irresponsible and at worst, just plain moronic.

Mayo Clinic: Strains and sprains have been reported due to enthusiastic increases in workout regimens once starting creatine. Weight gain and increased body mass may occur. Heat intolerance, fever, dehydration, reduced blood volume, or electrolyte imbalances (and resulting seizures) may occur.

JA: What?  Really?  Did the author of this Mayo Clinic piece fall asleep during ‘Science 101?’ Again as stated in the previous answer: “Recent reports now suggest that creatine may enhance performance in hot and/or humid conditions by maintaining haematocrit, aiding thermoregulation and reducing exercising heart rate and sweat rate. Creatine may also positively influence plasma volume during the onset of dehydration. Considering these new published findings, little evidence exists that creatine supplementation in the heat presents additional risk, and this should be taken into consideration as position statements and other related documents are published.”[5] Another study found that “the incidence of cramping or injury in Division IA football players was significantly lower or proportional for creatine users compared with nonusers.”[6]  I feel like a broken record at times (yes, that dates me huh?). 

Here’s another excerpt from a study:  “The incidence of cramping (37/96, 39%), heat/dehydration (8/28, 36%), muscle tightness (18/42, 43%), muscle pulls/strains (25/51, 49%), non-contact joint injuries (44/132, 33%), contact injuries (39/104, 44%), illness (12/27, 44%), number of missed practices due to injury (19/41, 46%), players lost for the season (3/8, 38%), and total injuries/missed practices (205/529, 39%) were generally lower or proportional to the creatine use rate among players. Creatine supplementation does not appear to increase the incidence of injury or cramping in Division IA college football players.”[7]  Hey Mayo Clinic, did you bother to read any of this? 

Mayo Clinic: Long-term administration of large quantities of creatine is reported to increase the production of formaldehyde, which may potentially cause serious unwanted side effects.

JA: One study from Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise states: Low-dose creatine combined with protein supplementation increases lean tissue mass and… reduces muscle protein degradation and bone resorption without increasing formaldehyde production.[8]  A publication in the journal ‘Amino Acids’ states: “Even if there is a slight increase (within the normal range) of urinary methylamine and formaldehyde excretion after a heavy load of creatine (20 g/day) this is without effect on kidney function. The search for the excretion of heterocyclic amines remains a future task to definitively exclude the unproved allegation made by some national agencies. We advise that high-dose (>3-5 g/day) creatine supplementation should not be used by individuals with pre-existing renal disease or those with a potential risk for renal dysfunction (diabetes, hypertension, reduced glomerular filtration rate). A pre-supplementation investigation of kidney function might be considered for reasons of safety, but in normal healthy subjects appears unnecessary.”  Thus, if you are a normal healthy exercising individual (and that pretty much describes the demo of those who consume creatine), then you are perfectly okay taking it.

Mayo Clinic: Creatine may increase the risk of compartment syndrome of the lower leg, a condition characterized by pain in the lower leg associated with inflammation and ischemia (diminished blood flow), which is a potential surgical emergency.

JA: “A 7-day loading dose of CrM increased anterior compartment pressures after dehydration and immediately after the heat tolerance tests, but the changes did not induce symptoms and the pressure changes were transient.”[9]  Is it possible that in rare instances, creatine supplementation might increase the risk of compartment syndrome?  Well, in the realm of possibilities, anything is possible.  And you might get struck by lightning and bitten by a shark too.

Mayo Clinic: Reports of other side effects include thirst, mild headache, anxiety, irritability, aggression, nervousness, sleepiness, depression, abnormal heart rhythm, fainting or dizziness, blood clots in the legs (called deep vein thrombosis), seizure, or swollen limbs.

JA:  Depression?  With the millions of creatine users in North America alone, one would think you’d have the offices of clinical psychologists lined up with depressed patients.  Again, this is entirely taken out of context.  Here is an excerpt from the report in which this ‘depression’ is based:  “Eight unipolar and two bipolar patients with treatment-resistant depression were treated for four weeks with 3-5 g/day of creatine monohydrate in an open add-on design. Outcome measures were the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale, Hamilton Anxiety Scale, and Clinical Global Impression scores, recorded at baseline and at weeks 1, 2, 3 and 4. One patient improved considerably after one week and withdrew. Both bipolar patients developed hypomania/mania. For the remaining seven patients, all scale scores significantly improved. Adverse reactions were mild and transitory.  This small, preliminary, open study of creatine monohydrate suggests a beneficial effect of creatine augmentation in unipolar depression, but possible precipitation of a manic switch in bipolar depression.”  Did you read that?  They gave creatine to unipolar and bipolar patients!  Not exactly the demographic that walks into Vitamin Shoppe and buys creatine is it?   And this passes for ‘evidence’ that it may cause depression.  Now all the other nonsense listed by the Mayo Clinic is just that, nonsense.  Again, sounding like a broken record; please read these papers which give you a broad overview of the creatine literature.[1, 4] 

The Moral of the Story

Be smart; don’t be lazy; look up the data.  And please don’t believe all the silly comments you hear from your friends or read on the internet.  If you have questions about any sports nutrition topic, then for chrissakes, go to the original source.  Read the science!

Remember, if you eat a lot of fish, you are eating a fair amount of creatine.  Last time I checked, fish was one of the healthiest foods to consume on the planet.  So for the naysayers, if you’re going to condemn creatine, you might as well put fish (and other meats) in that category. 

Nonetheless, the data supporting creatine’s safety and efficacy is as clear as the Montana sky.  Do yourself a favor.  Read the peer-reviewed science on creatine.  Don’t succumb to the Google-induced idiocy when you do searches like “creatine and poop frequency,” or “creatine and repetitive TiVo watching of The View.”  Yep, you can pretty much find anything on the web.  If you’re convinced creatine supplementation causes a third eye to pop out in the middle of your forehead, then there’s no hope for you.

I’ll end this story with a quote by Dalbo et al:  “Creatine is one of the most popular athletic supplements with sales surpassing 400 million dollars in 2004. Due to the popularity and efficacy of creatine supplementation over 200 studies have examined the effects of creatine on athletic performance. Despite the abundance of research suggesting the effectiveness and safety of creatine, a fallacy appears to exist among the general public, driven by media claims and anecdotal reports, that creatine supplementation can result in muscle cramps and dehydration. Although a number of published studies have refuted these claims, a recent position statement by the American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM) in 2000 advised individuals who are managing their weight and exercising intensely or in hot environments to avoid creatine supplementation. Recent reports now suggest that creatine may enhance performance in hot and/or humid conditions by maintaining haematocrit, aiding thermoregulation and reducing exercising heart rate and sweat rate. Creatine may also positively influence plasma volume during the onset of dehydration. Considering these new published findings, little evidence exists that creatine supplementation in the heat presents additional risk, and this should be taken into consideration as position statements and other related documents are published.[5]”

References

1.            Buford TW, Kreider RB, Stout JR, Greenwood M, Campbell B, Spano M, Ziegenfuss T, Lopez H, Landis J, Antonio J: International Society of Sports Nutrition position stand: creatine supplementation and exercise. J Int Soc Sports Nutr 2007, 4:6.

2.            Ferreira SC, Toledo AC, Hage M, Santos AB, Medeiros MC, Martins MA, Carvalho CR, Dolhnikoff M, Vieira RP: Creatine activates airway epithelium in asthma. Int J Sports Med 2010, 31:906-912.

3.            Vieira RP, Duarte AC, Claudino RC, Perini A, Santos AB, Moriya HT, Arantes-Costa FM, Martins MA, Carvalho CR, Dolhnikoff M: Creatine supplementation exacerbates allergic lung inflammation and airway remodeling in mice. Am J Respir Cell Mol Biol 2007, 37:660-667.

4.            Jager R, Purpura M, Shao A, Inoue T, Kreider RB: Analysis of the efficacy, safety, and regulatory status of novel forms of creatine. Amino Acids 2011, 40:1369-1383.

5.            Dalbo VJ, Roberts MD, Stout JR, Kerksick CM: Putting to rest the myth of creatine supplementation leading to muscle cramps and dehydration. Br J Sports Med 2008, 42:567-573.

6.            Greenwood M, Kreider RB, Greenwood L, Byars A: Cramping and Injury Incidence in Collegiate Football Players Are Reduced by Creatine Supplementation. J Athl Train 2003, 38:216-219.

7.            Greenwood M, Kreider RB, Melton C, Rasmussen C, Lancaster S, Cantler E, Milnor P, Almada A: Creatine supplementation during college football training does not increase the incidence of cramping or injury. Mol Cell Biochem 2003, 244:83-88.

8.            Candow DG, Little JP, Chilibeck PD, Abeysekara S, Zello GA, Kazachkov M, Cornish SM, Yu PH: Low-dose creatine combined with protein during resistance training in older men. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2008, 40:1645-1652.

9.            Hile AM, Anderson JM, Fiala KA, Stevenson JH, Casa DJ, Maresh CM: Creatine supplementation and anterior compartment pressure during exercise in the heat in dehydrated men. J Athl Train 2006, 41:30-35.

 

 

Coconut or Coco-No? Is Coconut Oil the Next Big Thing?

By Brooke Kugler, MS, CISSN.CoconutOil

Coconut oil has been acclaimed to be associated with a wide array of health benefits such as: hair/skin care, weight loss, stress relief, increased immunity, relief from kidney problems, HIV and cancer, bone strength, maintenance of cholesterol levels and much more. But, only limited research has been done on this particular oil.  Although many of the components (lipids/fatty acids) that make up this fruit’s oil have been known to fulfill such claims, the BIG question is…. does the oil itself prove to do the same?

Let’s see What Makes Coconut Oil Special?

Coconut oil composition— The benefits of coconut oil can be attributed to its unique combination of essential components. Coconut oil is 92% saturated fat, but unlike other saturated fats, such as from animal and dairy products, coconut oil is composed of a majority of medium chain triglycerides (MCT). The main MCT’s in coconut oil are: lauric acid (44-52%), palmitic acid (8-11%), and myristic acid (13-19%). The liver metabolizes these MCT’s very fast, similar to how the liver metabolizes carbohydrates just without the insulin spike, and MCT’s raise LDL-, HDL- and total-cholesterol. This is even why MCT’s are used in infant formulas and used to nourish hospital patients. In addition, other organic acids that are present in coconut oil, such as capric acid and caprylic acid, support health and overall quality of life through their antimicrobial, antioxidant, antifungal, antibacterial and soothing properties. The interesting thing about coconut oil is that you can receive certain benefits through consumption (dietary) and topical application.

Should you eat it? Or, should you apply it to your skin? (Dietary Vs. Topical)

Let’s go over the Dietary Benefits/Claims:

Boosts Immunity—The antimicrobial lipids (lauric acid, capric acid and caprylic acid) have antifungal, antibacterial and antiviral properties. Registered dietitian and sports dietitian Kristy Richardson explains that the body converts lauric acid to monolaurin, which is thought to be an anti-viral and anti-bacterial and can help boost immunity. Monolaurin is claimed to help in dealing with viruses and bacteria causing diseases such as herpes, influenza, cytomegalovirus and HIV. A study done on coconut oil in health and disease and specifically its potential as a cure for HIV/AIDS (Dayrit, 2000) shows how coconut oil plays an instrumental role in reducing viral susceptibility of HIV and cancer patients, and this preliminary research has shown the effect of coconut oil on reducing the viral load of HIV patients. In addition, according to the Coconut Research Center, coconut oil kills viruses that cause the above diseases as well as measles, hepatitis and SARS also killing bacterial that cause ulcers, throat infections, urinary tract infection and pneumonia.

Cholesterol Levels—Research on Pacific Island and Asian populations whose diets are naturally very high in coconut oil has shown unexpectedly low rates of heart disease. But, these populations also eat a mostly plant-based diet (opposed to a Western Diet) and are far more active than the average American, making a direct cause and effect comparison rather bias if the two populations were to be compared.cholesterol1

One study, in the Journal of Lipids found that women with too much abdominal fat (waist size >35”) paired with consumption of coconut oil while following a low-calorie diet and walking almost an hour a day raised HDL and lowered belly fat more than a diet using soybean oil. Another larger study of Filipino women showed association between coconut oil intake and higher levels of HDL and no significant association with “bad” LDL-cholesterol. These findings reveal that there could be a link between coconut oil consumption and increase of HDL along with a decrease in fat mass. However, studies to date are limited and inconsistent. Much more research must be done to land on a solid conclusion to determine the accurate and true relationship between coconut oil and weight loss paired with cholesterol levels/ratios.

Weight loss & Digestion—Coconut oil contains short and medium chain fatty acids that aid in improving weight loss and digestion. It supports healthy functioning of the thyroid and enzyme systems while reducing stress on the pancreas by increasing body metabolism. Most vegetable or seed oils are comprised of long-chain fatty acids (LCT’s), and these molecules are difficult to break down, thus they are predominantly stored as fat.

Coconut oil has also been found to help in the prevention of various stomach and digestion related problems including chronic fatigue syndrome, IBS, and Crohn’s disease. However, there is insufficient evidence (limited number of studies) to rate its true effectiveness.

Cooking: Put on the Heat!—Coconut oil, with a smoke point of up to 450°F, is high in vitamin E and stable enough to resist heat-induced damage while cooking. Other vegetable oils, such as olive oil, have a lower smoke point up to 405°F, and if the range is higher than an oil’s smoke point, the fatty acids can be damaged. This is why coconut oil is great for cooking—it’s a heat-stable oil. It is also solid at room temperature as it is composed of mostly saturated fats; therefore, its lack of polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFA’s) actually allows it to be stored for a longer duration, increasing its shelf life, due to a slower rancidification rate.

Let’s go over the Topical Benefits/Claims:

Skin and Hair Care—Want silky, smooth, shiny hair? Well, coconut oil can help you in this department! Regular massage of the head with coconut oil moisturizes your scalp with its oils. It is used extensively in the Indian sub-continent for hair care. It can act as an excellent conditioner and aid in re-growth of damaged hair by providing essential proteins for nourishing damaged hair. This is why it is used in the manufacturing of various conditioners, and dandruff relief creams.

Coconut oil has also been found to be an effective moisturizer on all types of skins (especially drier skin types) and is comparable to that of mineral oil. But, unlike mineral oil there is zero chance of adverse side effects when applying coconut oil to your skin. Furthermore, there are claims that it delays wrinkles from aging, which can be due to its oil composition as well as its antioxidant properties.

Physiologist and biochemist Ray Peat, Ph.D. considers coconut oil to be an antioxidant due to its stability and resistance to oxidation and free radical formation. In addition, coconut oil has been used in the treatment of various skin problems including psoriasis, dermatitis, eczema, and other skin infections. It also forms a major ingredient in many body care products—soaps, lotions, and creams.

Stress Relief – Due to its soothing effects, coconut oil has been found to help relieve and tame stress. Apply coconut oil to the head followed with gentle massage, and this could help in removing mental fatigue and anxiety.

What’s it looking like– Coconut? Or, Coco-No?

There is much controversy over this unique oil. As we all know, coconut oil is very high in saturated fat, and this shadows its potential health and therapeutic benefits on the body.

For those trying to determine if coconut oil is everything it’s been “mocked” up to be, Kristy Richardson gives her recommendation, “Continue to follow the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics recommendations to limit saturated fat intake to less than 10% of total calories from fat. For vegans or people who prefer the taste and flavor, coconut oil adds to dishes and baked goods so it can be a good replacement for butter or Crisco.” The Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics recommends limiting intake of saturated fats, trans fats and cholesterol, and to replace saturated fat with mono- or polyunsaturated fats as much as possible while increasing intake of omega-3 fatty acids.

Richardson further explains that small amounts of coconut oil in the diet are probably not harmful, however, “research is so limited and there is no concrete scientific evidence to support all of the coconut health benefit claims.” When asked if she recommends coconut oil to her clients she said, “Coconut oil can be a good replacement for less healthy saturated and trans fats, but the key is replacement and substitution, not addition.”

Topical Vs. Dietary Overall Conclusions:  The Skinny on this Type of Fat

The benefits (skin and hair care) that come of topical application of coconut oil seem to be safe and effective if used on a regular basis. This can also be a far less expensive treatment when compared to most other hair and skin care treatments.

The rule of thumb– “Be careful consuming, when assuming.” Consuming a product can have many consequences, side effects and repercussions when health claims are made without substantial evidence to back them up. This is why we need to be cautious and avoid being too quick to believe everything and anything we see, read and hear.

In the realm of coconut oil, research is very limited, thus far. “There is simply not enough evidence to substantiate any sweeping claims for coconut oil,” says Evelyn Tribole, a dietitian and author of The Ultimate Omega-3 Diet. As Tribole explains, “We can’t just look at classes of fat, we have to look at the individual type of fat.” She further explains that she wouldn’t go out of her way to add it to her diet, but in small amounts this oil is a great way to add flavor to foods you make at home.

Inadequate exploration of coconut oil leaves us hanging without definite answers. But, there are reasons why this oil is sparking up new questions, which calls on research to do its job best. Until we can bring merit to all of its health benefits, the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics (AND) and registered dietitians say, “We should substitute other oils and saturated/trans fats with coconut oil rather than make it an addition to our diets.” So, all-in-all, coco-yes or coco-no? Certainty will come with time.

About Brooke R. Kugler, M.S., CISSN

Brooke has devoted her life to research and the practical application of dietetics and sports nutrition. She has been involved in competitive sports throughout her entire life, including 14 years of professional figure skating. But, it wasn’t until she began competing in figure and fitness competitions where she realized her true passion for the field of sports nutrition, and that was the spark that set the stage for the rest of her life! She believes that there’s nothing better than helping someone achieve a successful and positive physical and mental—full-body–transformation. She will soon be a registered dietitian and plans on focusing her efforts on bridging the gap between sports nutrition research and sport nutrition practice.

References

Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics (2012). Retrieved May 27, 2012, from http://www.eatright.org/

Dayrit, CS. (2000). Coconut oil in health and disease: Its and monolaurin’s potential     as cure for HIV/AIDS. Retrieved from     http://www.apccsec.org/document/Dayrit.PDF.

Peat, R. Why is coconut oil for skin so beneficial? Retrieved from http://www.be-healthy-with-coconuts.com/coconut-oil-for-skin.html.

Richardson, K. MS, MPH, CSSD, CHES. Personal Interview. May 28, 2012.

Interview with Nutrition Expert Darcy Johannsen PhD

SNI:  It is commonly heard among fitness professionals (i.e. personal trainers) that overweight or fat individuals complain of having a ‘slow metabolism.’ How often is a ‘slow metabolism’ (e.g. thyroid dysfunction, nervous system disorders) to blame for being overweight versus merely eating too much and moving too little?Girl-dieting

Darcy: Studies show that individuals who are overweight or obese have a higher resting metabolic rate than normal weight individuals, due to the increased energy costs of supporting the basal functions of a larger body mass.  Once normalized for body weight however, there are usually no differences in metabolic rate between lean and obese people.  That being said, a study done in a population of Pima Indians in the late 1980’s showed that a lower 24-hour expenditure (measured in a metabolic chamber) significantly predicted weight gain over the next 2 years, and furthermore 24-hr energy expenditure tended to be similar among siblings.  Whether this is true for a larger population is unknown, as metabolic rate is not usually measured prior to becoming obese.  The similarity in metabolism among siblings does suggest a genetic influence on resting metabolic rate.  There is also some evidence for subclinical hypothyroidism in obese individuals that may be contributing to weight gain and this is a current area of research interest.  However, restricting calories and moving more can overcome these pre-dispositions; i.e., the effects of a healthy lifestyle are stronger than the genetic influences.

SNI: In your paper published in JCEM, you discovered that despite the preservation of fat-free mass in severely obese people, exercise did NOT prevent the dramatic drop in metabolic rate after severe weight loss. Why is that? We’ve been told that if you preserve muscle or LBM, that metabolic rate should stay high.

Darcy: We were surprised by this finding as well.  We thought that since these individuals maintained a lot of their lean mass, their metabolic rate would stay higher.  But it fell dramatically, despite the lean mass maintenance.  This is probably due to the enormity of the weight loss and the rapid rate at which it occurred.  The body ‘adapted’ to try to conserve energy.  For example, we found that T3 (the active thyroid hormone) levels were significantly reduced, as was leptin.  These hormonal changes would cause the muscle to conserve energy.  Although we did not measure it, I suspect that mitochondrial activity within the muscle became much more efficient as well.  In other words, muscle metabolism probably slowed along with the weight loss.

SNI:  In a younger population (18-40 years of age), does a gain in muscle or LBM result in an increase in metabolic rate? If so, how much? For instance, does a 5 pound gain in LBM translate into a specific increase in metabolic rate?

Darcy: Yes, theoretically with all other things being the same, a gain in lean mass would cause an increase in metabolic rate.  The amount of increase would depend on the amount of muscle gained.  It is difficult to tease out just the contribution of skeletal muscle to metabolic rate, because the human body is so dynamic – other lean masses are changing too (internal organs, which have a MUCH higher metabolic rate than muscle).  Likewise, if fat mass is lost, metabolic rate will drop some, and if a lot of muscle is gained, there is probably some increase in fat too.  To answer your last question, you would have to ensure that ONLY skeletal muscle was changing – no fluid changes, no loss or gain of fat mass, and no change in organ function, and still an exact number would be impossible, as mitochondrial activity and muscle metabolism is highly variable among individuals. 

SNI: What advice would you give to someone 50 years of age and older with regards to maintaining a lean physique? 9e6b966e44acb38dc78f1aee0350

Darcy: First, I would advise them to carefully watch their diet in order to maintain a healthy body weight.  Metabolism naturally slows with aging (although we are not sure why) and it is more difficult to lose weight once your metabolism slows.  Restrict calories if some weight loss is needed.  Then, adding an exercise regimen is important.  Not particularly for weight loss, but to maintain a healthy weight and also to maintain muscle mass, which we know declines with aging.

SNI: What effect does weight cycling (i.e. repeated weight gain/weight loss) on body composition, metabolic rate, and health?

Darcy: Weight cycling can be very detrimental to one’s health.  Many adaptations occur during weight loss.  Fat mass is reduced but so is lean muscle mass.  Metabolic rate drops.  Hormone concentrations change.  All of the changes occur in effort to conserve energy, a very important process during times when energy (food) was scarce.  There is recent evidence that suggests that these adaptations persist beyond the immediate weight loss phase, that is, you do not come back to ‘baseline’.  This increases the risk for weight re-gain, and unfortunately, the same adaptive responses are not as strong during weight gain.  In other words, your body does not defend against weight gain like it does for weight loss.  After the weight re-gain, it is probably more difficult to get the weight off because your metabolism did not completely return to normal after the initial weight loss, and you would likely have to restrict calories even more or add extra exercise in order to create the necessary energy deficit.

About Dr. Darcy Johannsen

I completed my Bachelor’s and Master’s of Science degrees in Human Nutrition from South Dakota State University. I completed a clinical dietetics internship at Hurley Medical Center in Flint, MI. I then worked as a clinical dietitian for several years before obtaining my PhD in Nutritional Sciences from Iowa State University. For my dissertation work I studied protein metabolism in elderly subjects and also investigated postural allocation and components of energy expenditure in lean and obese women. I then went on to do a postdoctoral fellowship under the guidance of Dr. Eric Ravussin, where I focused on energy metabolism in aging and obesity. Currently I am an Assistant Professor of Skeletal Muscle Physiology. My studies center on how mitochondrial function changes with weight gain or loss and during aging, and how these changes influence energy metabolism.

Don’t Be Fooled! Grocery Shoppers’ Guide 101

By Brooke Kugler, MS, CISSNgrocerygirl

Grocery store navigation 101— The path you follow in the grocery store can help you eat right, avoid unwanted weight gain, prevent and reverse certain health complications as well as increase your overall well-being. Now, envision the entire grocery store—produce section, meats, poultry, dairy, chips, cookies, crackers, beverages, grains/breads, fish and seafood etc.

Now, think of the path you usually take through the grocery store as you check off ingredients and foods from your list as you reach for them and place them in your cart. Are you spending most of that time in the middle aisles? Chances are, the unhealthier foods on your grocery list are in these middle aisles. And, if you find yourself here often, you might be reaching for highly processed foods. These processed foods are usually high-calorie packaged snack foods. They have been altered from their natural state through the addition of sugars, sodium, refined white flour (opposed to whole grains) and unhealthy saturated and trans fats to increase convenience and shelf life. The ingredients used to prolong shelf life, unfortunately, can and most often times have the opposite effects on our health.

Processed foods are composed of simple sugars and unhealthy fats that cause rapid spikes in blood sugar and insulin levels, which can promote weight gain, blood sugar irregularities and cholesterol imbalances. In addition, saturated- and trans-fats raise the “bad” LDL-cholesterol levels while lowering the “good” HDL-cholesterol levels. Highly processed foods have been linked to many chronic health conditions such as obesity, diabetes and cardiovascular disease.

Avoid highly processed foods: The perimeter shopping method—If the middle aisles are filled with highly processed foods, where should you spend most of your time gathering groceries? The answer to this question is: along the perimeter. Foods closest to their natural forms are usually located along the outside areas of the grocery store. These foods include: dairy, bread/whole grains, meats/seafood, and fresh produce.

Shopping along the perimeter of the store is your ticket to better health through these nutrient-rich foods. This is also the best way to ensure that you are avoiding those highly processed foods with added sugars and artificial ingredients found within the middle aisles. These “perimeter” foods are in their most natural form, which means they haven’t been stripped of their healthy nutrients. This is why most of these foods are highly perishable. They haven’t been tampered with, like processed foods, in order to achieve higher shelf life. They are fresh and contain large amounts of vitamins, minerals, proteins, whole grains and healthy fats.

Time Saved

istock_000016547723xsmallDon’t get “processed.” Stay simple—sticking to the outer edges of the grocery store ensure you’ll be getting the biggest bang for your buck. And, this doesn’t just apply to the money in your pocket. This means your health! “Eat the colors of the rainbow”—Consuming a variety of fruits and vegetables, daily, provides you with many vitamins, minerals and other natural substances that help protect you from chronic diseases. And, eating fruits and vegetables of different colors gives your body a wide range of valuable nutrients, such as: fiber, folate, potassium, and many antioxidants (vitamins A and C). Increased consumption of fruits and vegetables can lower cholesterol levels, boost immune function, help you to maintain a healthy weight and aid in the reversal of many chronic health conditions.  The addition of “simple”, natural foods, especially increased consumption of fruits and vegetables, in place of unhealthy, processed foods can help someone to get off of prescription medications and increase health, energy levels, performance and overall well-being.

Portion Control

Fruits and Vegetables—The amount of fruits and vegetables you need to eat daily depends on your age, sex and level of physical activity.  A rough estimate is about 2-3 cups of vegetables per day and 1 ½ to 2 cups of fruit per day. The Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics recommends that half your plate be filled with fruits and vegetables, about one fourth with lean meat, poultry or fish, and one-fourth with grains. To round out your meal, add fat-free or low-fat milk, yogurt or cheese.

Every thing in moderation—Although regular consumption of processed foods can be harmful to our health, it depends on the degree (how much and how often) to which you choose to eat these foods. There’s nothing wrong with indulging in your favorite treat or snack. Use the “80/20 Rule”—if you spend 80% of your time adhering closely to a healthy lifestyle, your health should be able to withstand whatever you do during the remaining 20% of the time.

You can also apply the 80/20 rule to your grocery store shopping cart—80% of the foods you choose should be in their most natural forms (lean meats, whole grains, fruits, vegetables) while the remaining 20% can be those tasty treats or condiments/ingredients that add extra flavor to your meal. The “80/20 Rule” works beautifully to incorporate a well-balanced diet into your life.

Don’t Get Ripped Off

“Work smarter, not harder”—Many headlines on food packages make claims and statements, such as: “low-fat”, “with whole grain”, “gluten-free”, however, they may be completely void of any real nutritional value. This is where we can be fooled if we don’t have a sharp eye to spot these red flags! It’s all about nutritional literacy. Yes, a food may be made with whole grain, but 95% of it is processed. This also gives rise to the health halo effect: when the perception of positive qualities in one part of an object/product gives rise and influences an overall positive perception for the entire object/product. For example, a food labeled as ”low fat” can cause one to believe that same food is low calorie. However, many foods that are low in fat make up for taste through added sugar. This common mistake ultimately results in a high-calorie food choice.

Don’t get robbed of your money, time and more importantly, your health. Knowing how to eat and what to eat can give you a new lease on life, the natural way. Choosing the right foods will make every second of your workout count, decrease visits to the doctor and improve performance. Whether you’re a seasoned athlete or someone simply trying to improve your overall quality of life, knowing how to choose the right foods for optimum health is vital to living a truly fulfilling life.

To Sum it All Up:

Processed Food Facts:

  1. They have been altered from their natural state through the addition of sugars, sodium, refined white flour, and unhealthy saturated and trans fats.
  2. Cause rapid spikes in blood sugar and insulin levels sometimes resulting in a “sugar (glucose) crash”, also known as reactive hypoglycemia, with symptoms of fatigue, lethargy, and irritation.
  3. These foods are usually high-calorie packaged snack foods
  4. These foods are composed of simple sugars and unhealthy (saturated and trans) fats.

Health Concerns Linked with Processed Foods:

  1. Cause rapid spikes in blood sugar and insulin levels, which can promote weight gain, blood sugar irregularities and cholesterol imbalances.
  2. Saturated- and trans-fats raise the “bad” LDL-cholesterol levels while lowering the “good” HDL-cholesterol levels.
  3. Highly processed foods have been linked to many chronic health conditions such as obesity, diabetes and cardiovascular disease.

Fruits and vegetables health benefits:  “Eat the colors of the rainbow”

  1. Consuming a variety of fruits and vegetables, daily, provides you with many vitamins, minerals and other natural substances that help protect you from chronic diseases.
  2. Fruits and vegetables of different colors give your body a wide range of valuable nutrients, such as: fiber, folate, potassium, and many antioxidants (vitamins A and C).
  3. Increasing the consumption of fruits and vegetables can lower cholesterol levels, boost immune function, help you to maintain a healthy weight and aid in the reversal of many chronic health conditions.
  4. Substituting fruits and vegetables in place of unhealthy, processed foods can help someone to get off of prescription medications.
  5. Increase health, energy levels, performance and overall well-being

How to Save Time and Shop Smart:

  1. Shop the perimeter.
  2. Avoid middle aisles.
  3. Stick to foods that are closest to their most natural form.
  4. Consume a variety of fruits and vegetables.
  5. Do not make food choices based on packaging and marketing statements.
  6. Make food choices based on ingredients.
  7. Avoid the health halo effect.
  8. Use the 80/20 rule.

References

Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics. (2012). Retrieved May 19, 2012, from http://www.eatright.org/

Nutrient Data Laboratory. Search the USDA National Nutrient Database for Standard Reference. Retrieved May 19, 2012, from www.nal.usda.gov/fnic/foodcomp/search

Sports, Cardiovascular, and Wellness Nutrition. (2012). Retrieved May 20, 2012, from http://www.scandpg.org/

About Brooke R. Kugler, M.S., CISSN

Brooke has devoted her life to research and the practical application of dietetics and sports nutrition. She has been involved in competitive sports throughout her entire life, including 14 years of professional figure skating. But, it wasn’t until she began competing in figure and fitness competitions where she realized her true passion for the field of sports nutrition, and that was the spark that set the stage for the rest of her life! She believes that there’s nothing better than helping someone achieve a successful and positive physical and mental—full-body–transformation. She will soon be a registered dietitian and plans on focusing her efforts on bridging the gap between sports nutrition research and sport nutrition practice.

 

CLA Supplementation For Weight Management

By Ross Edgley, BSc Sports Science

Daily supplementation of Conjugated Linoleic Acid (CLA) may reduce body fat and favorably change body composition researchers at I-Shou University in China reveal.   The study led by Chih-Kun Huang, MD took 63 subjects and randomly assigned them to receive daily supplements of CLA (3.4 grams) or a placebo (salad oil) in a milk product for 12 weeks. Results showed that after 12 weeks of supplementation participants in the CLA group displayed average decreases in bodyweight of 0.7kg, BMI of 0.31 kg/m2, body fat mass of 0.58kg and fat percentage of 0.6%. Chih-Kun Huang said ‘to our knowledge this is the first randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled clinical trial to evaluate the effect of CLA on body fat composition and the results seem promising.’ Concluding ‘the consumption of milk supplemented with CLA (3.4 grams per day) significantly decreased the body weight, BMI, body fat mass, fat percentage, subcutaneous fat mass and the waist-to-hip ratio in subjects over just 12 weeks.’

But what exactly is conjugated linoleic acid and what are the benefits for athletes, bodybuilders or gym goers? Well it’s a naturally occurring fatty acid found mainly in cheese and beef however it’s only found in these foods in very low doses (no way near the 3.4 grams used in the study at I-Shou University previously mentioned). Furthermore similar promising results were found at Uppsala University in Sweden where they found supplementing 4.2 grams of CLA a day in healthy, young subjects resulted in a 3.8% decrease in body fat compared with individuals not taking the supplement.

Whilst it’s clear studies support the use of CLA to lower your body fat, experts still aren’t entirely clear as to the mechanism by which it works. It’s been theorized that it reduces your body fat in 3 ways: firstly research conducted at the University of País Vasco found that conjugated linoleic acid interferes with a substance in your body called lipoprotein lipase, which aside from various other roles in the body is mainly responsible for storing fat in the body. Furthermore Simón. E et al 2005 of the same study found that CLA actually helped the body use its existing fat for energy. Therefore studies show CLA not only inhibits the storing of fat it also enhances the burning of fat.

Thirdly, and perhaps most important for athletes, bodybuilders or those training for aesthetics, it was found CLA supplementation actually increased muscle mass as well as lowering body fat. This in turn increases your basal metabolic rate and the amount of calories you burn at rest. Scientists concluded therefore that CLA doesn’t actually make you lose weight (like thermogenics do) but rather it favorably changes your body composition (i.e. body fat to muscle ratio). This notion is further supported by the 1 year human study published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition that found CLA supplementation produced a 9% reduction in body fat and 2% increase in muscle mass.

So in summation, CLA supplementation may prove effective for athletes wanting to change their body composition (such as American Football players wanting to get rid of unwanted fat and develop a more powerful and ‘functional’ physique) but perhaps not so effective for athletes wanting to lower their weight such as boxers, martial artists or anyone athletes needing to make a weight cut. Regarding dosage, there seems to be different amounts that have proved effective in various studies ranging from 1.4 grams to 6.5 grams. The most common dosage seems to be 3 grams per day, so it may be advisable to start with this dosage and increase or decrease depending on how your body responds.

 

About the Author: Ross Edgley is a Sports Scientist with a BSc Degree in Sports Science from Loughborough University. Ross Edgley was a Strength and Conditioning Coach at The English Institute of Sport working alongside Britain’s Olympic Physicians, Nutritionists and S&C coaches and is currently fitness and nutrition advisor to a range of athletes and the UK’s biggest online sports nutrition company Myprotein.com.

 

References:

Mougios V, Matsakas A, Petridou A, Ring S, Sagredos A, Melissopoulou A,Tsigilis N, Nikolaidis M. Effect of supplementation with conjugated linoleic acid on human serum lipids and body fat. J NutrBiochem 2001;12:585-94

Blankson H, Stakkestad JA, Fagertun H,Thom E, Wadstein J, Gudmundsen O.Conjugated linoleic acid reduces body fat mass in overweight and obese humans. J.Nutr. 130:2943-2948 (2000).

Roche HM, Noone E, Nugent A, Gibney MJ. Conjugated linoleic acid: a novel therapeutic nutrient? Nutr. Res. Rev. 187 (2001).

Smedman A,Vessby B.Conjugated linoleic acid supplementation in humans – Metabolic effects. Lipids 36:773-781 (2001).

Lowery L.M., Appicelli P.A. and Lemon P.W.R. (1998). Conjugated linoleic acid enhances muscle size and strength gains in novice bodybuilders. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 30.182.

Kreider RB, Ferreira MP,Greenwood M, Wilson M, Almada AL. Effects of conjugated linoleic acid supplementation during resistance-training on body composition. Bone density, strength, and selected hematological markers. J Strength Cond Res 2002; 3:325-34.

Berven G, Bye A, Hals O, Blankson H, Fagertun H, Thom E,Wadstein J, Gudmundsen O. Safety of conjugated linoleic acid (CLA) in overweight or obese human volunteers. European J. Lipid Sci.Technol. 102:455;462 (2000).

Thom E,Wadstein J, Gudmundson O. Conjugated linoleic acid reduces body fat in healthy exercising humans. J Int Med Res 2001;29:392-6.

Kamphuis MMJW, Lejeune MPGM, Saris WHM, Westerterp-Plantinga MS. The effect of conjugated linoleic acid supplementation after weight loss on body weight regain, body composition, and resting metabolic rate in overweight subjects. Int J Obesity 2003; 27: 840-847.

Gaullier Jm, Hasle J,Hoye K., Kristiansen K., Berven G., Blankson H and Gudmonson O. Effects of CLA in moderate overweights during one year supplementation. 94th AOCS annual meeting and Expo, Kansas,May 2003

A. Zabala et al (2006) ‘Trans-10,cis-12 Conjugated linoleic acid inhibits lipoprotein lipase but increases the activity of lipogenic enzymes in adipose tissue from hamsters fed an atherogenic diet.’ Br J Nutr. 2006 Jun;95(6):1112-9.

 

 

 

 

7 LESSONS from BRUCE LEE (that’ll make YOU a better trainer)

by Nick Tumminello.

In addition to being a legendary martial artist, Bruce Lee was an inspiring philosopher and a passionate learner. In fact, Spike TV has been running an amazing documentary on Bruce Lee that’s a must watch!

I am BRUCE LEE. (click to watch video)

If you’re a Bruce Lee fan, you may have already realized that much of the philosophical basis for the Hybrid Strength Training & Conditioning concepts we use at Performance U are founded on principles we’ve have adapted from Bruce Lee.

I strongly believe the reason why we’ve been able to celebrate so much universal success with such a wide range of individuals we’ve worked with is because our Hybrid Fitness Training approach has evolved from this philosophical basis, which has empowered us with the ability to connect with our clients & students on a different level.

In this post I’m going to share with you 7 lessons we’ve learned from Bruce Lee that have made us better trainers, teachers, learners and lovers of life. And, I’m confident they’ll do the same for you. That is, if you have openness to embrace them, and the discipline put them into action?

My FAVORITE Bruce Lee Book!

The State of the Fitness Industry!

Everyday more training & conditioning information (most of it free through blogs, articles, Youtube, etc.) is handed to us on a silver platter. Yet, fitness professionals and exercise enthusiasts are growing more confused about what they should (and shouldn’t) do to optimize their programs. This really comes as no surprise with all the different training approaches, certifications, methods and tools (many of which conflict one another) being sold to us as the missing piece to our training puzzle.

An identity crisis has also come along with this confusion. In that, not only are we unsure of what to do, we are also unsure about how we should “label” ourselves to properly represent what we do, what we believe and the affiliations we hold.

Additionally, when we do find training concepts that strike a chord in us. And when we do decide on how to “label” ourselves – We become divided and continually frustrated with one another as we cross our arms, stand firm and engage in intellectual battle to prove OUR WAY, while trying to convince everyone else that folks who don’t agree with US “just don’t get it” or that they are simply “misinformed.”

The Solution to the Confusion & Conflict (and it isn’t training related)

We believe the ever growing amount of industry confusion & separation does not stem from a lack of technical information. We feel it stems from a lack of a philosophical outlook.

Put simply, when you change the way you look at things, things look differently to you.

The philosophies we’ve adopted from Bruce lee have helped us to see things differently and quite the noise that’s always surrounding us. They’ve empowered us with the ability to see through the confusion created by conflicting information and different opinions, helped us to avoid getting caught up in debating why we should or shouldn’t do this or that technique. And, given us a crystal clear view of who we are, what we do and why we do it.

It’s from this clear vision that we’re able to be the BEST at what we do, which is probably why you’re reading this blog to begin with

If you’re ready to become the best at what YOU do, establish a clear cut identity of who you are and how to cultivate what makes you unique and special. And, establish a solid philosophical base that doesn’t get you caught up with trying to “prove your way”, or allow you to become bogged down by conflicting information & industry noise – These 7 Lessons from Bruce Lee will make you a bullet-proof fitness philosopher!

7 Lessons from Bruce Lee (that will make you a better trainer)

These 7 lessons can really be applied to anything in life. But, since this is a fitness site, I’ll be relating Bruce Lee’s words of wisdom in regards to martial arts to our world of fitness training.

As you’ll see, the problems Bruce Lee faced in the martial arts world 30-40yrs ago are the very same issues we face today (as I mentioned above) in the fitness training & conditioning world.

In other words, we have a new industry that’s suffering from old problems, which Bruce Lee developed these brilliant philosophies to solve. And, he obviously did a great job. All we have to do is listen, learn and apply!

To help you better related to these Bruce Lee quotes – Whenever you see him use the term Martial Arts, substitute in Fitness Training instead.

Here’s a few more words to exchange that’ll make the following quotes more applicable to Fitness Training;

Fighting = Training (i.e working out)

Fighting Styles = Training Styles

Opponent = Client

Instructor = Trainer or Coach

Jeet-Kune-Do = Hybrid Training

Lesson #1 – ALL Styles & Systems are limited! Use a SYSTEMLESS training system and have NO Style as your Style.

“To reach the masses, some sort of big organization (whether) domestic and foreign branch affiliation, is not necessary. To reach the growing number of students, some sort of pre-conformed set must be established as standards for the branch to follow. As a result all members will be conditioned according to the prescribed system. Many will probably end up as a prisoner of a systematized drill. Classical methods like these, which I consider a form of paralysis, only solidify and constrain what was once fluid. Their practitioners are merely blindly rehearsing routines and stunts that will lead nowhere.

“Styles tend to not only separate people because they have their own doctrines and then the doctrine became the gospel truth that you cannot change. But if you do not have a style, if you just say: Well, here I am as a human being, how can I express myself totally and completely? Now, that way you won’t create a style, because style is a crystallization. That way, it’s a process of continuing growth. “

“Many styles claim totality. They say that they can cope with all types of attacks (i.e. training situation); that their structures cover all the possibilities. If this is true, then how did all the different styles come about? “

“Take no thought of who is right or wrong or who is better than. Be not for or against.“

“The highest technique is to have no technique. In sparring (i.e. Training) there’s no exact path or method, but instead a perceptive, pliable, choice-less awareness. ”

Lesson #2 – Hybrid Training isn’t a specific style or system. It’s a concept!

“I have not invented a “new style,” composite, modified or otherwise that is set within distinct form as apart from “this” method or “that” method. On the contrary, I hope to free my followers from clinging to styles, patterns, or molds. Remember that Jeet Kune Do is merely a name used, a mirror in which to see “ourselves”. . . Jeet Kune Do (i.e. Hybrid Training) is not an organized institution that one can be a member of.”

“A Jeet Kune Do man who says Jeet Kune Do is exclusively Jeet Kune Do is simply not with it. He is still hung up on his self-closing resistance, in this case anchored down to reactionary pattern, and naturally is still bound by another modified pattern and can move within its limits. He has not digested the simple fact that truth exists outside all molds; pattern and awareness is never exclusive.

“Again let me remind you Jeet Kune Do (i.e. Hybrid Training) is just a name used, a boat to get one across, and once across it is to be discarded and not to be carried on one’s back.”

Lesson #3- The BEST trainers & coaches are observant, adaptive and responsive to the uniqueness of each client.

“A good teacher can never be fixed in a routine… each moment requires a sensitive mind that is constantly changing and constantly adapting.”

“A teacher must never impose this student to fit his favorite pattern; a good teacher functions as a pointer, exposing his student’s vulnerability (and) causing him to explore both internally and finally integrating himself with his being.”

“A martial artist (i.e. trainer or coach) who drills exclusively to a set pattern of combat is losing his freedom. He is actually becoming a slave to a choice pattern and feels that the pattern is the real thing. It leads to stagnation because the way of combat (i.e. training) is never based on personal choice and fancies, but constantly changes from moment to moment, and the disappointed combatant will soon find out that his ‘choice routine’ lacks pliability. There must be a ‘being’ instead of a ‘doing’ in training”

“If nothing within you stays rigid, outward things will disclose themselves.”

“My technique is a result of your technique; my movement is a result of your movement. One should not respond to circumstance with artificial and “wooden” prearrangement. Your action should be like the immediacy of a shadow adapting to its moving object.”

Lesson #4 – Less is always more! And, the simplest, most direct way is the right way!

“Don’t indulge in any unnecessary, sophisticated moves”

“In JKD (i.e. Hybrid Training), one does not accumulate but eliminate. It is not daily increase but daily decrease. The height of cultivation always runs to simplicity. In building a statue, a sculptor doesn’t keep adding clay to his subject. Actually, he keeps chiselling away at the inessentials until the truth of its creation is revealed without obstructions. Thus, contrary to other styles, being wise in Jeet Kune-Do (i.e. Hybrid Training) doesn’t mean adding more; it means to minimize, in other words to hack away the unessential. It is not daily increase but daily decrease; hack away the unessential.“

“The easy way is also the right way. Efficiency in sparring and fighting (i.e. training) is not a matter of correct classical, traditional form. Efficiency is anything that scores. “

 

Lesson #5 – Good at Exercising doesn’t mean good at sports!

“You can’t learn to swim on land”

“Let me give you a bit of warning: just because you get very good at your training it should not go to your head that you are an expert. Remember, actual sparring is the ultimate, and the training is, only a means toward this.”

Lesson #6 – Human movement can be taught, but it CAN’T be standardized.

“I believe that the only way to teach anyone proper self-defence (i.e. Functional Movement Patterns) is to approach each individual personally. Each one of us is different and each one of us should be taught the correct form. By correct form I mean the most useful techniques the person is inclined toward. Find his ability and then develop these techniques. I don’t think it is important whether a side kick is performed with the heel higher than the toes, as long as the fundamental principle is not violated. Most classical martial arts (i.e. fitness training) are a mere imitative repetition – a product – and individuality is lost.”

Lesson #7 – Don’t turn your education into imitation. Be YOURSELF!

“I’m not in this world to live up to your expectations and you‘re not in this world to live up to mine”

“Knowledge in martial arts (i.e. training) actually means self-knowledge“

In Conclusion…

I’ll leave you with this fake Grave Stone Bruce Lee had made to put on his desk as a powerful daily reminder.

 

Fish Oil for Muscle Growth

fish-oilby Monica Mollica

Most supplements are used for one specific outcome, for example fat loss, muscle growth or general health promotion. However, there are a few exceptions. Fish oil is one of them.

We all know about the cardiovascular health benefits of fish oil, and in a previous article I covered the fat loss effect of fish oil. Now let’s take a look at the potential application of fish oil for those of us who are interested in muscle growth…

Anti-catabolic effects of fish oil

Muscle protein undergoes a continuous process of synthesis (anabolism) and degradation (catabolism). In a healthy state, the anabolic and catabolic processes are balanced to maintain stability of or even increase muscle mass (as is observed with resistance training combined with proper nutrition).

Catabolism of muscle tissue is common in both clinical states (for example diabetes, renal failure, trauma and cancer) and during diet-induced weight loss and other stress conditions 1-6. During these catabolic states, muscle protein degradation exceeds muscle protein synthesis, which results in muscle loss and weakness.

Muscle protein catabolism is primarily caused by the ubiquitin-proteasome system 36-11. It is here fish oil enters the picture, since its fatty acid EPA significantly decreases the activity of the muscle protein catabolic (ubiquitin-proteasome) system 24512-16.

Another mechanism by which fish oil exerts its anti-catabolic effect is by reducing cortisol levels 1718. As we all know, cortisol breaks down muscle tissue 19 and has a host of other detrimental effects when present at chronically elevated levels (which is a topic in its own right), so this is a beneficial effect of fish oil beyond anti-catabolism.

Anabolic effects of fish oilfishoil5

What makes fish oil especially interesting is that it seems to promote muscle growth by not only inhibiting muscle catabolism, but also by stimulating muscle anabolism. Recent studies showed that supplementing for 8 weeks with 4 g per day of fish oil concentrate providing a daily dose of 1.86 g EPA and 1.5 g DHA, significantly increases the anabolic response of muscle protein synthesis to amino acids and insulin 20. The augmented anabolic response to amino acids and insulin was shown to be due to an increased activation of the mTOR/p70S6K signalling pathway, which is considered an integral control point for muscle protein anabolism 21 and muscle cell growth 22-25.

Other mechanisms probably contribute as well. The same study showed that the fish oil supplementation in  25-45 year old healthy subjects doubled the proportion of EPA, DPA (another less talked about omega-3 fatty acid) and DHA in muscle cell membranes, at the expense of omega-6 fatty acids and mono-unsaturated fatty acids, with no change in saturated fatty acid) concentrations 20. Thus, it is also possible that fish oil supplementation influences anabolic signalling cascades by affecting membrane lipid composition and/or fluidity 26-29.

Are you older than 45 yr? Don’t fret, you will still benefit from the muscle anabolic effects of fish oil. The same research team conducted another study, using an identical research protocol (1.86 g EPA and 1.5 g DHA for 8 weeks), in healthy elderly subjects over 65 years (mean age 71 years). The results were the same as in the younger subjects; the fish oil supplementation significantly increased the muscle protein synthetic response to amino acids and insulin 30. Thus, fish oil seems to attenuate the anabolic resistance associated with old age 31-33. The researchers were so impressed with the response that they concluded fish oil can be useful for both prevention and treatment of sarcopenia 30.

In both of these studies, muscle mass was not measured because the interventions only lasted for 8 weeks. However, taking into consideration that changes in muscle protein metabolism precede corresponding changes in muscle mass 34-36, these results are promising. It is going to be interesting to see longer term studies that measure actual fish oil induced gains in muscle mass, and also how the anabolic response to fish oil interacts with resistance training.

Wrap up

Whether you’re looking to build muscle or prevent loss of muscle during a diet, evidence supports the addition of fish oil to your supplement regimen. Fish oil, and especially EPA, not only counteracts the detrimental loss of muscle mass that we see in stressful and catabolic states, but also boosts the anabolic response to nutritional stimuli in healthy muscle from both young, middle-age and older adults. Thus, it beneficially affects both the catabolic and anabolic sides of the muscle protein balance equation.

The studies to date used a fish oil dose corresponding to 1.86 g EPA and 1.5 g DHA (which can be considered to be a medium high dose). We don’t know yet if a higher or lower dose would have a greater/smaller effect, but this dose is a good guideline to start with.

References:

1. Bailey JL, Wang X, Price SR. The balance between glucocorticoids and insulin regulates muscle proteolysis via the ubiquitin-proteasome pathway. Miner Electrolyte Metab 1999;25(4-6):220-3.

2. Ross JA, Moses AG, Fearon KC. The anti-catabolic effects of n-3 fatty acids. Current opinion in clinical nutrition and metabolic care 1999;2(3):219-26.

3. Ventadour S, Attaix D. Mechanisms of skeletal muscle atrophy. Curr Opin Rheumatol 2006;18(6):631-5.

4. Whitehouse AS, Smith HJ, Drake JL, Tisdale MJ. Mechanism of attenuation of skeletal muscle protein catabolism in cancer cachexia by eicosapentaenoic acid. Cancer Res 2001;61(9):3604-9.

5. Whitehouse AS, Tisdale MJ. Downregulation of ubiquitin-dependent proteolysis by eicosapentaenoic acid in acute starvation. Biochemical and biophysical research communications 2001;285(3):598-602.

6. Wing SS, Goldberg AL. Glucocorticoids activate the ATP-ubiquitin-dependent proteolytic system in skeletal muscle during fasting. The American journal of physiology 1993;264(4 Pt 1):E668-76.

7. Attaix D, Aurousseau E, Combaret L, Kee A, Larbaud D, Ralliere C, et al. Ubiquitin-proteasome-dependent proteolysis in skeletal muscle. Reprod Nutr Dev 1998;38(2):153-65.

8. Attaix D, Ventadour S, Codran A, Bechet D, Taillandier D, Combaret L. The ubiquitin-proteasome system and skeletal muscle wasting. Essays Biochem 2005;41:173-86.

9. Jagoe RT, Goldberg AL. What do we really know about the ubiquitin-proteasome pathway in muscle atrophy? Current opinion in clinical nutrition and metabolic care 2001;4(3):183-90.

10. Mitch WE, Goldberg AL. Mechanisms of muscle wasting. The role of the ubiquitin-proteasome pathway. The New England journal of medicine 1996;335(25):1897-905.

11. Tisdale MJ. The ubiquitin-proteasome pathway as a therapeutic target for muscle wasting. J Support Oncol 2005;3(3):209-17.

12. Fearon KC, Von Meyenfeldt MF, Moses AG, Van Geenen R, Roy A, Gouma DJ, et al. Effect of a protein and energy dense N-3 fatty acid enriched oral supplement on loss of weight and lean tissue in cancer cachexia: a randomised double blind trial. Gut 2003;52(10):1479-86.

13. Smith HJ, Greenberg NA, Tisdale MJ. Effect of eicosapentaenoic acid, protein and amino acids on protein synthesis and degradation in skeletal muscle of cachectic mice. British journal of cancer 2004;91(2):408-12.

14. Smith HJ, Khal J, Tisdale MJ. Downregulation of ubiquitin-dependent protein degradation in murine myotubes during hyperthermia by eicosapentaenoic acid. Biochemical and biophysical research communications 2005;332(1):83-8.

15. Smith HJ, Lorite MJ, Tisdale MJ. Effect of a cancer cachectic factor on protein synthesis/degradation in murine C2C12 myoblasts: modulation by eicosapentaenoic acid. Cancer Res 1999;59(21):5507-13.

16. Smith HJ, Tisdale MJ. Induction of apoptosis by a cachectic-factor in murine myotubes and inhibition by eicosapentaenoic acid. Apoptosis 2003;8(2):161-9.

17. Delarue J, Matzinger O, Binnert C, Schneiter P, Chiolero R, Tappy L. Fish oil prevents the adrenal activation elicited by mental stress in healthy men. Diabetes & metabolism 2003;29(3):289-95.

18. Noreen EE, Sass MJ, Crowe ML, Pabon VA, Brandauer J, Averill LK. Effects of supplemental fish oil on resting metabolic rate, body composition, and salivary cortisol in healthy adults. Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition 2010;7:31.

19. Rooyackers OE, Nair KS. Hormonal regulation of human muscle protein metabolism. Annual review of nutrition 1997;17:457-85.

20. Smith GI, Atherton P, Reeds DN, Mohammed BS, Rankin D, Rennie MJ, et al. Omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids augment the muscle protein anabolic response to hyperinsulinaemia-hyperaminoacidaemia in healthy young and middle-aged men and women. Clin Sci (Lond) 2011;121(6):267-78.

21. Drummond MJ, Fry CS, Glynn EL, Dreyer HC, Dhanani S, Timmerman KL, et al. Rapamycin administration in humans blocks the contraction-induced increase in skeletal muscle protein synthesis. The Journal of physiology 2009;587(Pt 7):1535-46.

22. Bodine SC, Stitt TN, Gonzalez M, Kline WO, Stover GL, Bauerlein R, et al. Akt/mTOR pathway is a crucial regulator of skeletal muscle hypertrophy and can prevent muscle atrophy in vivo. Nature cell biology 2001;3(11):1014-9.

23. Rommel C, Bodine SC, Clarke BA, Rossman R, Nunez L, Stitt TN, et al. Mediation of IGF-1-induced skeletal myotube hypertrophy by PI(3)K/Akt/mTOR and PI(3)K/Akt/GSK3 pathways. Nature cell biology 2001;3(11):1009-13.

24. Baar K, Esser K. Phosphorylation of p70(S6k) correlates with increased skeletal muscle mass following resistance exercise. The American journal of physiology 1999;276(1 Pt 1):C120-7.

25. O’Neil TK, Duffy LR, Frey JW, Hornberger TA. The role of phosphoinositide 3-kinase and phosphatidic acid in the regulation of mammalian target of rapamycin following eccentric contractions. The Journal of physiology 2009;587(Pt 14):3691-701.

26. Mansilla MC, Banchio CE, de Mendoza D. Signalling pathways controlling fatty acid desaturation. Sub-cellular biochemistry 2008;49:71-99.

27. Stillwell W, Wassall SR. Docosahexaenoic acid: membrane properties of a unique fatty acid. Chemistry and physics of lipids 2003;126(1):1-27.

28. Armstrong VT, Brzustowicz MR, Wassall SR, Jenski LJ, Stillwell W. Rapid flip-flop in polyunsaturated (docosahexaenoate) phospholipid membranes. Archives of biochemistry and biophysics 2003;414(1):74-82.

29. Stillwell W, Shaikh SR, Zerouga M, Siddiqui R, Wassall SR. Docosahexaenoic acid affects cell signaling by altering lipid rafts. Reprod Nutr Dev 2005;45(5):559-79.

30. Smith GI, Atherton P, Reeds DN, Mohammed BS, Rankin D, Rennie MJ, et al. Dietary omega-3 fatty acid supplementation increases the rate of muscle protein synthesis in older adults: a randomized controlled trial. The American journal of clinical nutrition 2011;93(2):402-12.

31. Cuthbertson D, Smith K, Babraj J, Leese G, Waddell T, Atherton P, et al. Anabolic signaling deficits underlie amino acid resistance of wasting, aging muscle. The FASEB journal : official publication of the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology 2005;19(3):422-4.

32. Guillet C, Prod’homme M, Balage M, Gachon P, Giraudet C, Morin L, et al. Impaired anabolic response of muscle protein synthesis is associated with S6K1 dysregulation in elderly humans. The FASEB journal : official publication of the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology 2004;18(13):1586-7.

33. Rasmussen BB, Fujita S, Wolfe RR, Mittendorfer B, Roy M, Rowe VL, et al. Insulin resistance of muscle protein metabolism in aging. The FASEB journal : official publication of the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology 2006;20(6):768-9.

34. Hawley JA, Tipton KD, Millard-Stafford ML. Promoting training adaptations through nutritional interventions. Journal of sports sciences 2006;24(7):709-21.

35. Hawley JA, Burke LM, Phillips SM, Spriet LL. Nutritional modulation of training-induced skeletal muscle adaptations. J Appl Physiol 2011;110(3):834-45.

36. Rennie MJ, Wackerhage H, Spangenburg EE, Booth FW. Control of the size of the human muscle mass. Annual review of physiology 2004;66:799-828.

About the Author

Monica Mollica

Health Journalist, Nutrition / Diet Consultant & Personal Trainer

BSc and MSc in Nutrition from the University of Stockholm

ISSA Certified Personal Trainer

Website:   www.trainergize.com

Email:   monica@trainergize.com

 

 

Cheating on a diet – good or bad?

By Monica Mollica. In discussions about dieting, a topic that often comes up is that of “cheating”; is it good or bad to cheat once in a while during a diet?

In order to answer this question appropriately, it is necessary to look at both the quantitative and qualitative aspects of dieting, and the physiological and psychological responses they each elicit.

Dieting – what are we really talking about?

The dictionary definition of “diet” and “dieting” is “to eat and drink sparingly or according to prescribed rules” or “a controlled intake of foods, as for medical reasons or cosmetic weight loss”.

However, these definitions do not tell us anything about the two different aspects of dieting; the quantitative and qualitative parts, and their respective consequences.  In everyday parlance, dieting usually implies both eating less calories (quantitative aspect) than usual and eating “specific” foods (qualitative aspect).

Nevertheless, when considering the consequences of “cheating” (more formally known as dieting consistency / inconsistency) and trying to answer the question whether it is a good or bad practice, it is important to distinguish these aspects of dieting. Let’s take a quick look at each:

Calorie restriction

Calorie restriction (also known as dietary restriction). When reducing calories our bodies respond by lowering basal metabolic rate, and there also is reduction is spontaneous physical activity. If the calorie restriction is severe enough, our bodies go into starvation mode, which will counteract any fat loss efforts 1,2.

Specific food restriction

A diet usually has an explicit (or implicit) list of foods that it recommends. Eating specific foods has a more psychological impact than calorie restriction per see, especially if you don’t like the foods that are part of your diet plan.

The different types of “cheating”cheating-diet2

Now back to the issue of cheating. Looking at calorie restriction and specific food restriction separately, you see that that you can cheat in three different ways:

– eating more calories from the same “dieting foods”  (quantitative cheating)

– eating non-dieting “forbidden” foods, but still within your daily calorie allotment

(quantitative cheating)

– eating non-dieting “forbidden” foods, and exceeding your daily calorie allotment

(double whammy cheating!)

Dieting consistency is not yo-yo dieting!

Before we continue I want to make clear that this discussion on diet cheating (dieting consistency) should not be confused with yo-yo dieting (also called weight cycling; when one is repeatedly losing and regaining weight). Yo-yo dieting definitely has detrimental effects, especially psychologically 3,4.

Dieting consistency in this context is about maintaining the same diet regimen on weekends as on weekdays. For many people, diet and activity patterns differ substantially on weekends as compared to weekdays, with potential consequences on long term body fat weight that could promote the development or maintenance of excess fat storage and obesity if the pattern is repeated throughout the year.

Possible benefits and risk with cheating on a diet?

Allowing some diet flexibility on weekends, holidays, and vacations might reduce boredom, which is a known contributor to dieting lapses 5, and be more realistic from a long-term perspective. However, flexibility might also increase exposure to high-risk situations, a the chance for loss of control. This is especially true among people with addictive personalities 6.

What does the research say?

While it is well documented that holidays are associated with fat gain 7-9 it wasn’t until recently that studies started to investigate the influence of weekend eating patterns on short- and long-term body fat weight. The first study on weekend eating patterns was done on National Weight Control Registry subjects, who had successfully maintained a weight loss of at least 13.6 kg for 8 years 10. The purpose of the study was to examine whether maintaining the same diet regimen across the week and year promotes weight control or if dieting more strictly on weekdays and/or non-holidays is more conducive to long-term maintenance. Participants who reported greater dieting consistency were more likely to maintain their weight within 2.3 kg during the subsequent year, whereas participants with lower dieting consistency scores were more likely to regain weight during the subsequent year 10. A more recent study, where subjects consumed on average 236 calories more on weekend days, confirmed that weekend dietary indulgences contribute to weight gain or cessation of weight loss 11.

It has also been documented that as the duration of a diet increases, a shift in the balance between the effort and pleasure of weight maintenance may occur, which makes it easier to stick to the diet and thereby increases the likelihood of continued maintenance 12. This is supported by findings showing that repeated exposure trains flavor preference 13. In other words, a strong correlation exists between a person’s customary intake of a flavor and his preference for that flavor.

Bottom Line

Whether cheating on a diet (that is, a low diet consistency) will cause you any harm or good depends on your personal inclinations, and the reasons for the cheating.

From a biological perspective, I believe quantitative cheating, when you eat more calories from the same “dieting foods”, can be a good thing, since it can prevent lowering your resting metabolic rate and drops in spontaneous physical activity.

When it comes to the other types of  cheating, the consequences are more of a psychological origin. If you have an addictive personality, do not even think about cheating. Remember, the best cure for any addiction is complete abstinence.

If you don’t have an addictive personality, but have a lot of fat to loose, it is ok for you to engage in quantitative or qualitative cheating on weekends, when you eat non-dieting “forbidden” foods, but still within your daily calorie allotment. But only do this if you feel that it helps you stay on track with your diet during the week days.

If you don’t have much fat to loose, and are just dieting to get in a little better shape, you can indulge  in double whammy cheating, when you eat non-dieting “forbidden” foods AND exceed your daily calorie allotment. Just don’t go too much overboard; your body and mind will still take note of what you’re doing.

In any case, the reason for you to cheat on a diet should be that it helps you to stick to in the long run. Not because other people coerce you into it or are trying to make you believe that you “have to” cheat on your diet to get results. That’s nonsense you often hear from folks who don’t have the willpower and discipline themselves. It has actually been shown that friends have an even larger impact on a person’s risk of obesity than genes do 14. So don’t fall for the peer-pressure and never engage in risky behaviors because your friends do!

My advice to you is to be your own scientist and lab rat; try and see how you feel. If you lose control you know cheating on a diet is not for you, and you better put your foot down and stick to your guns. However, a slip doesn’t have to mean failure; turn the experience you gain from it into good data to guide your for future dietary decisions and long-term success!

References:

1.         Maclean PS, Bergouignan A, Cornier MA, Jackman MR. Biology’s response to dieting: the impetus for weight regain. American journal of physiology. Regulatory, integrative and comparative physiology. Sep 2011;301(3):R581-600.

2.         Goran MI, Calles-Escandon J, Poehlman ET, O’Connell M, Danforth E, Jr. Effects of increased energy intake and/or physical activity on energy expenditure in young healthy men. J Appl Physiol. Jul 1994;77(1):366-372.

3.         Osborn RL, Forys KL, Psota TL, Sbrocco T. Yo-yo dieting in African American women: weight cycling and health. Ethnicity & disease. Summer 2011;21(3):274-280.

4.         Amigo I, Fernandez C. Effects of diets and their role in weight control. Psychology, health & medicine. May 2007;12(3):321-327.

5.         Smith CF, Burke LE, Wing RR. Vegetarian and weight-loss diets among young adults. Obesity research. Mar 2000;8(2):123-129.

6.         Avena NM, Rada P, Hoebel BG. Sugar and fat bingeing have notable differences in addictive-like behavior. The Journal of nutrition. Mar 2009;139(3):623-628.

7.         Hull HR, Radley D, Dinger MK, Fields DA. The effect of the Thanksgiving holiday on weight gain. Nutrition journal. 2006;5:29.

8.         Klesges RC, Klem ML, Bene CR. Effects of dietary restraint, obesity, and gender on holiday eating behavior and weight gain. Journal of abnormal psychology. Nov 1989;98(4):499-503.

9.         Yanovski JA, Yanovski SZ, Sovik KN, Nguyen TT, O’Neil PM, Sebring NG. A prospective study of holiday weight gain. The New England journal of medicine. Mar 23 2000;342(12):861-867.

10.      Gorin AA, Phelan S, Wing RR, Hill JO. Promoting long-term weight control: does dieting consistency matter? International journal of obesity and related metabolic disorders : journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity. Feb 2004;28(2):278-281.

11.      Racette SB, Weiss EP, Schechtman KB, et al. Influence of weekend lifestyle patterns on body weight. Obesity (Silver Spring). Aug 2008;16(8):1826-1830.

12.      Klem ML, Wing RR, Lang W, McGuire MT, Hill JO. Does weight loss maintenance become easier over time? Obesity research. Sep 2000;8(6):438-444.

13.      Liem DG, de Graaf C. Sweet and sour preferences in young children and adults: role of repeated exposure. Physiology & behavior. Dec 15 2004;83(3):421-429.

14.      Christakis NA, Fowler JH. The spread of obesity in a large social network over 32 years. The New England journal of medicine. Jul 26 2007;357(4):370-379.

 

About the Author

Monica Mollica

Health Journalist, Nutrition / Diet Consultant & Personal Trainer

BSc and MSc in Nutrition from the University of Stockholm

ISSA Certified Personal Trainer

Website:   www.trainergize.com

Email:   monica@trainergize.com

 

Should You “Spike” This Hormone?

By Brian St. Pierre, CSCS, CISSN.

Well Everybody Knows – Everybody knows that the first rule of a post-training shake is that it has to be fast. You must drink it as soon as you are done or you won’t get lean. You must drink the fastest protein on earth with only the fastest carbs, no fiber or fat allowed! This usually entails people drinking whey protein, either in the form of isolates or hydrolysates, because concentrates are just too darn slow. The carbs are usually from maltodextrin or dextrose, and maybe even that fancy defense-against-the-backlash-on-protein-powders_anew waxy maize starch. Anything with fiber , fat or fructose is terrible and will decrease absorption time. Right? We know all of this because that is what we have always been told. No one denies that this is effective, as it has worked for millions of people, but does effective equal optimal? What are we actually trying to accomplish with this shake?  I do want to preface all this with the fact that there isn’t one perfect pre-and-post-training feeding for everyone. It is always context specific. The protein/carbohydrate/fat/fluid/micronutrition requirements for a 155lb endurance athlete in the midst of marathon training vs. a 225lb bodybuilder recovering from a heavy resistance-training session are quite different. Times of training year will also dictate different needs in the post-exercise recovery period. That same bodybuilder will need a different approach when they start to diet in preparation for a show. In reality proper pre-training nutrition also alters the needs of the post-training period. Having said all that, these recommendations are appropriate for the average gym-goer, looking to gain (or retain) some lean mass while trying to stay relatively lean and healthy. Your actual needs may vary.

Hierarchy of Needs – There is a distinct hierarchy of needs for pre-and-post-training recovery. The goal of pre-training nutrition is to fuel the upcoming training session, maintain hydration, boost training performance, increase muscle protein synthesis, decrease muscle protein breakdown, and spare muscle and liver glycogen. The goal of post-training nutrition is not at all dissimilar: recover from the completed training session, maintain hydration, increase muscle protein synthesis, decrease muscle protein breakdown, and replenish muscle and liver glycogen. Does 40g of whey hydrolysate with 80g grams of maltodextrin and/or dextrose optimally achieve the desired result? Let’s dig a little deeper and find out.

Do We Really Need to “Spike” Insulin? – Contrary to popular belief it is not necessary to use refined carbohydrates and sugars to “spike” insulin levels and restore muscle and liver glycogen as rapidly as possible. In fact research has shown that unrefined carbohydrates and fructose (preferably from fruit, to protect and restore liver glycogen), is every bit the equal of those high-GI carbs. This combination restores glycogen as effectively over a 24 hour time period as the high-GI carbs, and might (I emphasize might) actually lead to better next-day performance. While it is clear that unrefined carbs are just as effective as refined high-GI carbs at enhancing recovery and restoring glycogen levels over a 24 hour period, there are certainly times when a simple high-GI shake is warranted. In particular when endurance athletes have two glycogen depleting sessions within eight hours of each other, as the speed of glycogen replenishment is imperative in this scenario. In addition to that there are times when convenience and portability are deciding factors, and pre-made high-GI powders still allow people to get in some quality nutrition before and/or after they train.

In that same vein, research has also shown that muscle protein breakdown is maximally inhibited when insulin is only 2-3 times above fasting levels. This is easily accomplished by a mixed meal or shake an hour or two before training. In reality, proper pre-training nutrition is at the very least equal, if not superior to post-training nutrition for maximal results. It sets the stage for recovery and provides fuel for the session, allowing for potentially better training; without this you are definitely not getting the most out of your sessions.

This high quality mixed meal or shake has been shown to elevate insulin levels well above those needed for maximal anabolic and anti-catabolic effects for at least 5 hours, and it remains elevated even after a training session. This tells us that worrying about spiking our insulin immediately after training with tremendous amounts of high-GI carbs is not necessary, as our insulin is already above the threshold for exerting its maximal benefit. This isn’t to say that you shouldn’t have carbs after training, you should, but you should worry more about the quality of the source, rather than exact timing or the speed of its digestion.

Protein – The Good, The Bad and The Ugly – Well what about protein you ask? There has been a lot of recent hype over whey and casein hydrolysate, and their alleged ability to drastically improve your results. However, research has shown that large doses of whey hydrolysate are actually too fast. It is in and out of the blood stream too rapidly to maximally stimulate protein synthesis and inhibit protein breakdown. In addition to failure of whey hydrolysate to showcase its superiority, casein hydrolysate has failed to live up to its billing. It has been found to be preferentially taken up by the splanchnic bed, so unless your goal is to get jacked organs it probably isn’t the way to go either. A blend of low-temperature processed whey proteins, especially pre-training where it can get into your bloodstream rapidly, is superior to either whey or casein hydrolysates, as it also contains the ever-important biologically active fractions.

The Glory of Fat – On top of protein and carbohydrates, it is often recommended that fat and fiber be restricted from the pre or post training period, again because of the idea that it would limit speed of absorption and decrease results. Research has found that consuming as much as 55 grams of fat post-training and in two subsequent meals did not inhibit glycogen replenishment. As well it has been found that whole milk was superior to skim milk post-training, even when skim milk was calorically matched. The skim milk actually contained more protein (14g to 8g) and yet the whole milk, with 8g of fat to skim’s 0g, was more anabolic. While this is just one study, clearly fat does not inhibit maximal results, even if it does decrease speed of absorption. In reality post-training fat consumption may potentially improve results!

The Finish – The best pre-and-post-training meals will contain a combination of high quality proteins, high quality carbohydrates, healthy fats and some fruit and/or vegetables. These whole foods provide a plethora of nutrients: protein, carbohydrates, fats, fiber, vitamins, minerals, antioxidants, anti-inflammatory compounds and phytonutrients that supply energy, decrease inflammation, boost recovery, maximally stimulate protein synthesis and maximally inhibit protein breakdown. However as noted above, if you have two glycogen depleting sessions within 8 hours of each other, or are a time-crunched individual who requires highly portable and convenient pre and/or post-training nutrition, a pre-made high-GI powder will work best for you.

These meals can come in the form of solid food or shakes, and the amounts of each macronutrient can vary depending on your needs as well as personal preferences and tolerances. I have personally found that liquid meals pre-training seem to be ideal because they supply rapid uptake while minimizing the volume of food in your stomach. This will make it easier to consume closer to training so that the substrates are available to your body as you train and after, rather than having to consume a solid food meal several hours before training. Post-training I have found a solid meal to be top-notch, but this can also depend on personal preference and tolerance. Many trainees do not have an appetite post-training, or are seeking to pack in as many calories as possible, and liquid meals are more feasible in these situations.

References

Erith S, et al. The effect of high carbohydrate meals with different glycemic indices on recovery of performance during prolonged intermittent high-intensity shuttle running. Int J Sport Nutr Exerc Metab. 2006 Aug;16(4):393-404.

Stevenson E. Improved recovery from prolonged exercise following the consumption of low glycemic index carbohydrate meals. Int J Sport Nutr Exerc Metab. 2005 Aug;15(4):333-49.

Jentjens RL, Jeukendrup AE. High rates of exogenous carbohydrate oxidation from a mixture of glucose and fructose ingested during prolonged cycling exercise. Br J Nutr. 2005 Apr;93(4):485-92.

Jentjens RL, et al. Oxidation of exogenous glucose, sucrose and maltose during prolonged cycling exercise. J Apply Physiol. 2004 Apr;96(4):1285-91.

Jentjens RL, et al. Oxidation of combined ingestion of glucose and fructose during exercise. J Apply Physiol. 2004 Apr;96(4):1277-84.

Jentjens RL, Jeukendrup AE. Determinants of postexercise glycogen synthesis during short-term recovery. Sports Med. 2003;33(2):117-44.

Bloom PC, et al. Effect of different post-exercise sugar diets on the rate of muscle glycogen synthesis. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1987 Oct;19(5):491-6.

Burke LM, et al. Effect of coingestion of fat and protein with carbohydrate feedings on muscle glycogen storage. J Appl Physiol. 1995 Jun;78(6):2187-92.

Rennie MJ, et al. Branched-chain amino acids as fuels and anabolic signals in human muscle. J Nutr. 2006 Jan;136(1 Suppl):264S-8S.

Tipton KD, et al. Timing of amino acid-carbohydrate ingestion alters anabolic response of muscle to resistance exercise. Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab. 2001 Aug;281(2):E197-206.

Tipton KD, et al. Stimulation of net muscle protein synthesis by whey protein ingestion before and after exercise. Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab. 2007 Jan;292(1):E71-6.

Farnfield MM, et al. Plasma amino acid response after ingestion of different whey protein fractions. Int J Food Sci Nutr. 2008 May 8:1-11.

LaCroix M, et al. Compared with casein or total milk protein, digestion of milk soluble proteins is too rapid to sustain the anabolic postprandial amino acid requirement. Am J Clin Nutr. 2006 Nov;84(5):1070-9.

Deglaire A, et al. Hydrolyzed dietary casein as compared with the intact protein reduces postprandial peripheral, but not whole-body, uptake of nitrogen in humans. Am J Clin Nutr. 2009 Oct;90(4):1011-22.

Elliot TA, et al. Milk ingestion stimulates net muscle protein synthesis following resistance exercise. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2006 Apr;38(4):667-74.

Fox AK, et al. Adding fat calories to meals after exercise does not alter glucose tolerance. J Appl Physiol. 2004 Jul;97(1):11-6.

Keizer HA, et al. Influence of liquid and solid meals on muscle glycogen resynthesis, plasma fuel hormone response, and maximal physical working capacity. Int J Sports Med. 1987 Apr;8(2):99-104.

Reed MJ, et al. Muscle glycogen storage postexercise: effect of mode of carbohydrate administration. J Appl Physiol. 1989 Feb;66(2):99-104.

 

The Best Damn Protein Book Ever!

Dietary supplement companies and the food industry spend millions to reach resistance trainers—often with exaggerated 51Uiq-KGCNL._SY344_BO1,204,203,200_marketing messages—while health practitioners continue to counsel athletes that their interest in protein is misguided and even dangerous. There appears to be a disconnect between scientists and almost everyone else in sports nutrition. With so much conflicting information, it’s difficult to know who to believe. With contributions from the world’s foremost experts, Dietary Protein and Resistance Exercise delivers the uncut scientific truth about the role of dietary protein in the well-being of athletes.

Updating and clarifying the issues surrounding purposeful protein intake and resistance trainers, this volume:

  • Reviews the science-related history of protein and its consumption among strength athletes
  • Analyzes the mechanisms behind what proteins do in muscle cells
  • Describes protein’s effect on performance, recovery, and body composition
  • Explores various populations that actively employ resistance training and dietary protein
  • Discusses timing, type, and safety data regarding liberal protein diets and related supplements
  • Includes sidebars, practical examples, and case studies—translating the science into a practical understanding of various protein-related topics

Separating fact from fiction and providing the hard science behind the numbers, this volume demonstrates how changes in dietary protein intake may lead to measurable improvements in body composition, energy levels, and athletic performance.

Save 20% + Free Shipping when you order directly from CRC Press:  Discount Code 888FX at checkout.

http://www.crcpress.com/product/isbn/9781439844564

Table of Contents

Chapter 1 Dietary Protein and Strength Exercise: Historical Perspectives

Peter W. R. Lemon

Chapter 2 Protein Metabolism: Synthesis and Breakdown on a Cellular Level

Layne E. Norton, Gabriel J. Wilson, and Jacob M. Wilson

Chapter 3 The Safety Debate Regarding Dietary Protein in Strength Athletes

Lonnie M. Lowery

Chapter 4 Dietary Protein Efficacy: Dose and Peri-Exercise Timing

Joshua Cotter and David Barr

Chapter 5 Dietary Protein Efficacy: Dietary Protein Types

Bill Campbell

Chapter 6 Weight Control with Dietary Protein

Ronald Mendel

Chapter 7 Protein, Resistance Training, and Women

Dawn Anderson and Christin Dietz-Seher

Chapter 8 Protein’s Effects on Rehabilitation and the Sarcopenia of Aging

Troy Smurawa

Chapter 9 Nitrogenous Compounds and Supplements

Jamie Landis, Tim N. Ziegenfuss, and Hector L. Lopez

Chapter 10 Case Studies and Sports Application

Michael T. Nelson, Jonathan N. Mike, and David Barr

Editor BIOs

Lonnie M. Lowery, PhD, RD, is a professor of nutrition and exercise physiology of 11 years, currently at Winona State University, and president of Nutrition, Exercise and Wellness Associates Ltd. With formal training in both exercise physiology and nutrition he has published in academic and research settings on various sports nutrition topics such as dietary proteins, fats, antioxidants, dietary supplements, and overtraining. Dr. Lowery has also served as an educational, scientific, and product development consultant for a number of large dietary supplement companies such as Met Rx, Bodyonics-Pinnacle, and Biotest Laboratories. As an award-winning mentor and educator, he has written hundreds of lay articles for the strength and fitness communities and co-hosts www.IronRadio.org, a free educational and consumer advocacy podcast on iTunes.

Jose Antonio, PhD, is the chief executive officer and cofounder of the International Society of Sports Nutrition (www.theissn.org); furthermore, he is a Fellow of the American College of Sports Medicine and National Strength and Conditioning Association (NSCA). He was the 2005 recipient of the NSCA Research Achievement Award and the 2009 NSCA Educator of the Year.  Dr. Antonio is the editor-in-chief of Sports Nutrition Insider, and Inside Fitness magazine, and has contributed to Ironman, Muscular Development, Muscle and Fitness, and Fitness Rx Men/Women. He is an assistant professor at Nova Southeastern University in Fort Lauderdale, Florida.

How Much Protein the Body Can Use in a Single Meal?

By Alan Aragon

(Note: this article was originally posted at: www.wannabebig.com )

Introduction

Protein-Diets-for-Weight-LossA longstanding belief in fitness circles is that the body can only use a certain amount of protein per meal, and the excess is either oxidized or excreted. The ballpark range thrown around is 20-30 grams, with 30 grams being perhaps the most common figure.  This guideline has led many trainees to go through the pains of consuming multiple doses of protein throughout the day, banking that it will maximize muscle anabolism or muscle retention.  Well, true or not, this concept fits in nicely with another longstanding fitness “rule” that you have to eat at least six times per day in order to keep the body’s metabolism revving high. Since the meal frequency and metabolism dogma has been thoroughly debunked [1-5], it’s time to dig into the topic of whether there’s a limit to effective protein dosing, and if so, what that limit might be. 

Looking at simple logic first

Let’s imagine an experiment involving two relatively lean 200 lb individuals. For the purposes of this illustration, I’ll assign a daily amount of protein known to adequately support the needs of the athletic population. We’ll give Person A 150 g protein spread over five meals at 30 g each. We’ll give Person B the same amount of protein, but in a single meal. Let’s say that this meal consists of a 16 oz steak, chased with a shake containing two scoops of protein powder. If we really believed that only 30 g protein can be handled by the body in a single meal, then Person B would eventually run into protein deficiency symptoms because he supposedly is only absorbing a total of 30 g out of the 150 g we’re giving him. At 30 g/day, he’s only getting 0.33 g/kg of bodyweight, which isn’t even half of the already-low RDA of 0.8 g/kg. If the body worked this way, the human species would have quickly become extinct. The human body is more efficient and effective than we give it credit for. The body will take all the sweet time it needs to effectively digest and absorb just about whatever dose you give it. Person A will have shorter digestion periods per meal in order to effectively absorb and utilize the small meals. Person B will have a longer digestion period in order to effectively absorb and utilize the large meal. While the truth in this logic seems self-evident, the important question is whether or not it’s supported by scientific research. Let’s look at the evidence, starting with immediate-effect (acute) studies, then move on to the longer-term trials.

Research examining speed of absorption

A thorough literature review by Bilsborough and Mann compiled data from studies by various investigators who measured the absorption rates of various protein sources [6]. Oddly, an amino acid mixture designed to mimic the composition of pork tenderloin made the top spot, at 10 g/hour, while whey took a close second at 8-10 g/hour. Other proteins fell in their respective spots below the top two, with little rhyme or reason behind the outcomes. As a matter of trivia, raw egg protein was the most slowly absorbed of them all at 1.3 g/hour. It’s important to note that these data have some serious limitations. A major one is the variance of the methods used to determine the absorption rates (i.e., intravenous infusion, oral ingestion, ileal ingestion). Most of the methods are just too crude or far-fetched for serious consideration. Another limitation is that these figures could be skewed depending upon their concentration in solution, which can affect their rate of gastric evacuation. Another factor to consider is the timing of ingestion relative to exercise and how that might differentially affect absorption rates. Finally, short-term data leaves a lot open to question.high-protein-diet

Short-term research supporting the magic limit

I’ve heard many folks parrot that the maximal anabolic effect of a single protein dose is limited to 20 grams, citing recent work by Moore and colleagues [7]. In this study’s 4-hour post-exercise test period, 40 g protein did not elicit a greater anabolic response than 20 g. I’d interpret these outcomes with caution. Fundamentally speaking, protein utilization can differ according to muscle mass. The requirements of a 140-lb person will differ markedly from someone who’s a lean 200. Additionally, a relatively low amount of total volume was used (12 sets total). Typical training bouts usually involve more than one muscle group and are commonly at least double that volume, which can potentially increase the demand for nutrient uptake. Finally, the conclusion of the authors is questionable. They state explicitly,

“…we speculate that no more than 5-6 times daily could one ingest this amount (~20 g) of protein and expect muscle protein synthesis to be maximally stimulated.”

So, they’re implying that 100-120 grams of protein per day is maximal for promoting muscle growth. Wait a minute, what? Based on both the bulk of the research evidence and numerous field observations, this is simply false [8,9].  In another recent study, Symons and colleagues compared the 5-hour response of a moderate serving of lean beef containing 30 g protein with a large serving containing 90 g protein [10]. The smaller serving increased protein synthesis by approximately 50%, and the larger serving caused no further increase in protein synthesis, despite being triple the dose. The researchers concluded that the ingestion of more than 30 g protein in a single meal does not further enhance muscle protein synthesis. While their conclusion indeed supports the outcomes of their short-term study, it’s pretty easy to predict the outcomes in muscle size and strength if we compared a total daily protein dose of 90 g with 30 g over a longer trial period, let alone one involving a structured exercise protocol. This brings me to the crucial point that acute outcomes merely provide grounds for hypothesis. It’s not completely meaningless, but it’s far from conclusive without examining the long-term effects.

Longer-term research challenging the magic limit

If we were to believe the premise that a 20-30 g dose of protein yields a maximal anabolic effect, then it follows that any excess beyond this dose would be wasted. On the contrary, the body is smarter than that. In a 14-day trial, Arnal and colleagues found no difference in fat-free mass or nitrogen retention between consuming 79% of the day’s protein needs (roughly 54 g) in one meal, versus the same amount spread across four meals [11].  Notably, this study was done on young female adults whose fat-free mass averaged 40.8 kg (89.8 lb). Considering that most non-sedentary males have considerably more lean mass than the female subjects used in the aforementioned trial, it’s plausible that much more than 54 g protein in a single meal can be efficiently processed for anabolic and/or anti-catabolic purposes. If we extrapolated the protein dose used in this study (79% of 1.67g/kg) to the average adult male, it would be roughly 85-95 g or even more, depending on just how close someone is to the end of the upper limits of muscular size.  When Arnal and colleagues applied the same protocol to the elderly population, the single-dose treatment actually caused better muscle protein retention than the multiple-dose treatment [12].  This raises the possibility that as we age, larger protein feedings might be necessary to achieve the same effect on protein retention as lesser amounts in our youth.

Intermittent Fasting research nailing the coffin shut?

Perhaps the strongest case against the idea of a dosing limit beyond which anabolism or muscle retention can occur is the recent intermittent fasting (IF) research, particularly the trials with a control group on a conventional diet. For example, Soeters and colleagues compared two weeks of IF involving 20-hour fasting cycles with a conventional diet [13].  Despite the IF group’s consumption of an average of 101 g protein in a 4-hour window, there was no difference in preservation of lean mass and muscle protein between groups. In another example, Stote and colleagues actually reported an improvement in body composition (including an increase in lean mass) after 8 weeks in the IF group consuming one meal per day, where roughly 86 g protein was ingested in a 4-hour window [14]. Interestingly, the conventional group consuming three meals spread throughout the day showed no significant body composition improvements.  Keep in mind that bioelectrical impedance (BIA) was used to determine body composition, so these outcomes should be viewed with caution. I’ve been highly critical of this study in the past, and I still am. Nevertheless, it cannot be completely written off and must be factored into the body of evidence against the idea of a magic protein dose limit.

Conclusion & application

Based on the available evidence, it’s false to assume that the body can only use a certain amount of protein per meal. Studies examining short-term effects have provided hints towards what might be an optimal protein dose for maximizing anabolism, but trials drawn out over longer periods haven’t supported this idea. So, is there a limit to how much protein per meal can be effectively used? Yes there is, but this limit is variety-of-protein-sourceslikely similar to the amount that’s maximally effective in an entire day. What’s the most protein that the body can effectively use in an entire day? The short answer is, a lot more than 20-30 g. The long answer is, it depends on several factors. In most cases it’s not too far from a gram per pound in drug-free trainees, given that adequate total calories are provided [8,9].  In terms of application, I’ve consistently observed the effectiveness of having approximately a quarter of your target bodyweight in both the pre- and post-exercise meal. Note: target bodyweight is a surrogate index of lean mass, and I use that to avoid making skewed calculations in cases where individuals are markedly over- or underweight. This dose surpasses the amounts seen to cause a maximal anabolic response but doesn’t impinge upon the rest of the day’s protein allotment, which can be distributed as desired. On days off from training, combine or split up your total protein allotment according to your personal preference and digestive tolerance. I realize that freedom and flexibility are uncommon terms in physique culture, but maybe it’s time for a paradigm shift.  In sum, view all information – especially gym folklore and short-term research – with caution. Don’t buy into the myth that protein won’t get used efficiently unless it’s dosed sparingly throughout the day. Hopefully, future research will definitively answer how different dosing schemes with various protein types affect relevant endpoints such as size and strength. In the mean time, feel free to eat the whole steak and drink the whole shake, and if you want to get the best bang for your buck, go for a quality protein blend such as Nitrean!  (http://www.atlargenutrition.com/products/nitrean-46)

BIO

alan-coach-mug-e1392796548403Alan Aragon has over 15 years of success in the fitness field. He earned his Bachelor and Master of Science in Nutrition with top honors. Alan is a continuing education provider for the Commission on Dietetic Registration, National Academy of Sports Medicine, American Council on Exercise, and National Strength & Conditioning Association. Alan recently lectured to clinicians at the FDA and the annual conference of the Los Angeles Dietetic Association.  He maintains a private practice designing programs for recreational, Olympic, and professional athletes, including the Los Angeles Lakers, Los Angeles Kings, and Anaheim Mighty Ducks. Alan is a contributing editor and Weight Loss Coach of Men’s Health magazine.  His book Girth Control is considered one of the most in-depth manuals for physique improvement and understanding nutrition for fitness & sports. Last but not least, Alan writes a monthly research review providing of the latest science on nutrition, training, and supplementation. Visit Alan’s blog to keep up with his latest shenanigans.  For more information, go to www.alanaragonblog.com   

References

1. Smeets AJ, Westerterp-Plantenga MS. Acute effects on metabolism and appetite profile of one meal difference in the lower range of meal frequency. Br J Nutr. 2008 Jun;99(6):1316-21.

2. Taylor MA, Garrow JS. Compared with nibbling, neither gorging nor a morning fast affect short-term energy balance in obese patients in a chamber calorimeter. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord. 2001 Apr;25(4):519-28.

3. Bellisle F, McDevitt R, Prentice AM. Meal frequency and energy balance. Br J Nutr. 1997 Apr;77 Suppl 1:S57-70.

4. Verboeket-van de Venne WP, Westerterp KR. Frequency of feeding, weight reduction and energy metabolism. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord. 1993 Jan;17(1):31-6.

5. Verboeket-van de Venne WP, Westerterp KR. Influence of the feeding frequency on nutrient utilization in man: consequences for energy metabolism. Eur J Clin Nutr. 1991 Mar;45(3):161-9.

6. Bilsborough S, Mann N. A review of issues of dietary protein intake in humans. Int J Sport Nutr Exerc Metab. 2006 Apr;16(2):129-52.

7. Moore DR, et al. Ingested protein dose response of muscle and albumin protein synthesis after resistance exercise in young men. Am J Clin Nutr. 2009 Jan;89(1):161-8.

8. Campbell B, et al. International Society of Sports Nutrition position stand: protein and exercise. J Int Soc Sports Nutr. 2007 Sep 26;4:8.

9. Tipton KD, Wolfe RR. Protein and amino acids for athletes. J Sports Sci. 2004 Jan;22(1):65-79.

10. Symons TB, et al. A moderate serving of high-quality protein maximally stimulates skeletal muscle protein synthesis in young and elderly subjects. J Am Diet Assoc. 2009 Sep;109(9):1582-6.

11. Arnal MA, et al. Protein feeding pattern does not affect protein retention in young women. J Nutr. 2000 Jul;130(7):1700-4.

12. Arnal MA, et al. Protein pulse feeding improves protein retention in elderly women. Am J Clin Nutr. 1999 Jun;69(6):1202-8.

13. Soeters MR, et al. Intermittent fasting does not affect whole-body glucose, lipid, or protein metabolism. Am J Clin Nutr. 2009 Nov;90(5):1244-51.

14. Stote KS, et al. A controlled trial of reduced meal frequency without caloric restriction in healthy, normal-weight, middle-aged adults. Am J Clin Nutr. 2007 Apr;85(4):981-8