or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Health & Body › Ask a Fitness Model
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Ask a Fitness Model - Page 39

post #571 of 962
...
Quote:
Carbohydrates Offer Some Help In Muscle Protein Synthesis, But Not Enough For The Desired Effect This study is the first to compare net muscle protein balance (protein synthesis minus breakdown) after carbohydrate ingestion with control after exercise. The principal finding was that intake of 100 grams of carbohydrates after resistance exercise improved muscle net protein balance. The findings from this research demonstrate that carbohydrates intake alone can improve net protein balance between synthesis and breakdown. In this work, the gradual improvement in net muscle protein balance after carbohydrate intake was due principally to a progressive reduction in breakdown. However, the improvement was small compared with previous findings after intake of amino acids or amino acids and carbohydrates. The researchers conclude that intake of carbohydrates alone after resistance exercise will modestly improve the anabolic effect of exercise. However, amino acid intake is necessary for a maximal response, one desired by most participating in resistance exercise programs.
post #572 of 962
...

Quote:
Ingestion of casein and whey proteins result in muscle anabolism after resistance exercise.

PURPOSE: Determination of the anabolic response to exercise and nutrition is important for individuals who may benefit from increased muscle mass. Intake of free amino acids after resistance exercise stimulates net muscle protein synthesis. The response of muscle protein balance to intact protein ingestion after exercise has not been studied. This study was designed to examine the acute response of muscle protein balance to ingestion of two different intact proteins after resistance exercise. METHODS: Healthy volunteers were randomly assigned to one of three groups. Each group consumed one of three drinks: placebo (PL; N = 7), 20 g of casein (CS; N = 7), or whey proteins (WH; N = 9). Volunteers consumed the drink 1 h after the conclusion of a leg extension exercise bout. Leucine and phenylalanine concentrations were measured in femoral arteriovenous samples to determine balance across the leg. RESULTS: Arterial amino acid concentrations were elevated by protein ingestion, but the pattern of appearance was different for CS and WH. Net amino acid balance switched from negative to positive after ingestion of both proteins. Peak leucine net balance over time was greater for WH (347 +/- 50 nmol.min(-1).100 mL(-1) leg) than CS (133 +/- 45 nmol.min(-1).100 mL(-1) leg), but peak phenylalanine balance was similar for CS and WH. Ingestion of both CS and WH stimulated a significantly larger net phenylalanine uptake after resistance exercise, compared with the PL (PL -5 +/- 15 mg, CS 84 +/- 10 mg, WH 62 +/- 18 mg). Amino acid uptake relative to amount ingested was similar for both CS and WH (approximately 10-15%). CONCLUSIONS: Acute ingestion of both WH and CS after exercise resulted in similar increases in muscle protein net balance, resulting in net muscle protein synthesis despite different patterns of blood amino acid responses.

post #573 of 962
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShyBoy View Post
of course protein is integral to building muscle,but i personally have tried different diets,varied the amount of meals,amount of protein and nutrient timing,and found that the amount of protein that is needed is greatly exaggerated eg 40 grams per meal

Maybe you're not lifting hard enough.
post #574 of 962
Quote:
Originally Posted by turbozed View Post
Maybe you're not lifting hard enough.

i assure you fatboy,i do
post #575 of 962
^^^ Weak Deltz. The sweet necklace makes up for it though!
post #576 of 962
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedLantern View Post
^^^ Weak Deltz. The sweet necklace makes up for it though!

looks that way,but my delts are one my stronger body parts...its just that my arms are even more devoloped,hence overpowering my delts.To think that i have lost over 1/2 inch off my bicecps as i stopped training them for 2 months

i find the traps to be the hardest body part to develop...bloody genetics
post #577 of 962
Quote:
Originally Posted by turbozed View Post
Hmm...can you link me to any of these studies? Pretty interesting since everywhere I've read seems to confirm that protein is integral to muscle synthesis.

What do you mean by "muscle synthesis?" Do you mean protein synthesis? Because protein synthesis is NOT the same as increased muscle mass, but they are often confused and lumped together.
post #578 of 962
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShyBoy View Post
looks that way,but my delts are one my stronger body parts...its just that my arms are even more devoloped,hence overpowering my delts.To think that i have lost over 1/2 inch off my bicecps as i stopped training them for 2 months

i find the traps to be the hardest body part to develop...bloody genetics

No, it's because your training program is designed around looking cool in the gym.
post #579 of 962
^i will back him up on traps. i've tried everything and mine just get wider; have little to no depth.
post #580 of 962
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShyBoy View Post
of course protein is integral to building muscle,but i personally have tried different diets,varied the amount of meals,amount of protein and nutrient timing,and found that the amount of protein that is needed is greatly exaggerated eg 40 grams per meal

Yes, protein is necessary, but even vegetarians get enough protein to build muscle. Here's an interesting study taken from "How Much Protein"

Quote:
We can look at the research that explored the effect of resistance training on vegetarians as another way to assess the need for protein. Not only do vegetarians eat somewhat below average intakes of protein, they also obviously do not eat any animal meat, which in the sports nutrition world are largely considered to be the most "anabolic" of all protein sources.

In a study published in the scientific journal "˜Medicine Science, Sports and Exercise', 2 groups of people were asked to follow weight-training programs [Burke DG, 2003].

Both groups followed the exact same high volume, heavy load resistance training workout program for 8 full weeks. The only difference between the groups was that one group consisted of people who have all been vegetarians for at least the last 3 years of their lives. They were either lacto-ovo (milk and eggs only) or even stricter forms of vegetarians. The other group consisted of people who ate the traditional North American diet consisting of all forms of meat.

The vegetarian group ate almost 450 less calories per day than the nonvegetarian subjects, while the non-veggie group ate around 1.75 times more protein than the veggie subjects (79 grams per day versus 138.5 grams per day). Neither group took any form of post-workout supplement other than creatine.

From there, the two groups were each divided in two again. This time with people either taking creatine or not taking any form of supplement. So the study design ended up looking like this:

* Group 1: VEGETERIAN + NO CREATINE
* Group 2: VEGETRAIAN + CREATINE
* Group 3: NON-VEGETARIAN + NO CREATINE
* Group 4: NON-VEGETARIAN + CREATINE

By the end of this study all four groups had gained similar amounts of lean mass (between roughly 2-5 pounds, the exact amount we would expect from a resistance training program of this length). The only group that was significantly different was the vegetarian plus creatine group, who gained slightly more muscle than the non-vegetarian plus creatine group.

This research illustrates that muscle growth is possible without eating high amounts of protein, and also suggests that once minimum protein (and calorie) requirements are met, adding more protein and more calories does not seem to increase the total amount of lean mass that is gained from a resistance training program.
post #581 of 962
Here's another interesting study on testosterone and muscle growth, also from "How Much Protein?"
Quote:
One of the most interesting studies showing the effect of working out without any extra protein was published back in 1996. 43 men who were experienced weight lifters took part in research that involved exercise and weekly injections of anabolic steroids (testosterone enanthate) for 10 weeks [Bhasin S, 1996]. The men in the study were divided into 4 groups; working out or not working out, and receiving weekly steroid injections or not receiving them. * Group 1: NO EXERCISE + NO STERIODS * Group 2: EXERCISE + NO STERIODS * Group 3: NO EXERCISE + WEEKLY STEROID INJECTION * Group 4: EXERCISE + WEEKLY STEROID INJECTION. It is probably no surprise that after 10 weeks of lifting weights 3 times per week, the group that was receiving the steroid injections gained a very impressive amount of muscle (over 13 pounds!). It is also not surprising that Group 2, (the group who were working out but didn’t get any steroids) also increased their muscle mass, packing on almost 4.5 pounds of muscle in only ten weeks. What was surprising is that the men who were injected with steroids and then sat around doing nothing for 10 weeks amazingly saw an increase in lean mass that exceeded what the guys working out without steroids gained. Imagine gaining over 6 pounds of lean mass just by sitting around on your couch all day not lifting a finger! Obviously, the group who did not receive any steroids and didn't workout did not see any change in their lean mass. So what does a study on steroids have to do with protein? Well, all four groups were on the same diet. They were all consuming about 0.7 grams of protein per pound of body weight (roughly 120 grams of protein per day) and about 16 Calories per pound of body weight. This research clearly shows that approximately 120 grams of protein per day was enough for a group of men taking steroids and lifting weights to gain 13.5 pounds of lean mass! Even in their steroid-heightened anabolic state, 120 grams was enough to supply all of the necessary building blocks for a 13.5- pound gain in lean mass. Interestingly, it was also the same amount of protein that Group 2 the exercise–only group ate to gain 4.5 pounds of lean mass. So even though we know that these men consumed enough protein to provide for a 13.5-pound increase in lean mass, they only saw a third of this increase. The difference was obviously due to the anabolic effects of the steroids and NOT due to the protein intake. Since the 120 grams was also the same amount of protein that the control group ate (who not surprisingly saw no change). It seems apparent the protein ITSELF did not have any growth promoting effect. This study shows us that you can gain an impressive amount of muscle without increasing your protein intake (albeit, through the use of anabolic steroids). It also shows that protein alone does not cause the body to increase muscle mass. In fact, resistance training and the combination of resistance training and steroids can have dramatically different effects on lean body mass without any change in protein intake at all.
The protein shakes that we spend a fortune on are a complete waste of money. In a typical western diet, you would have to deliberately try to not get enough protein.
post #582 of 962
Pretty interesting study results Lance. So how does one reconcile that with Turbozed's results? Would it be fair to say (assuming that both of the studies have accurate results) that while protein consumption is important in building muscle, with carbohydrate consumption and whey+casein consumption post-workout giving better results by slowing down muscle breakdown and stimulating synthesis than if one were to take nothing, that beyond a certain amount of protein per day, excess protein will not yield an additional increase in skeletal muscle synthesis? That seems to be plausible. After all, the body can only repair and build up so much muscle tissue depending on how much resistance/strength training one does. Any additional calories taken in beyond your needs would just result in storage as fat correct or simply excreted as waste?...that being the case how should one's diet be? How does one determine exactly how much protein you need? Furthermore, wouldn't taking in protein for your caloric needs (even if all of it is not used to synthesize muscle) be better than loading up on carbohydrates and fats (beyond what the body needs for cellular and tissue maintenance and repair and to replenish glycogen stores) which can easily be stored as fat?
post #583 of 962
Quote:
Originally Posted by lance konami View Post
Yes, protein is necessary, but even vegetarians get enough protein to build muscle. Here's an interesting study taken from "How Much Protein"

Lance, your posts are very informative - thanks! I would like to see more details on what the vegetarian diet from the study looks like. I am vegetarian and there's no way I can protein without a lot of carbs coming along. If you take lentils, beans, etc. - the staple protein sources of vegetarians, they also come with a lot of carbs. There's virtually nothing in the vegetarian diet that's the equivalent of tuna or chicken or something like that - protein and some fat but little else. For me at least, supplementing with protein shakes is a must. For people who can eat meat, I agree that they could probably get all the protein they need with normal food.
post #584 of 962
bill pearl was a lacto-vegetarian and built a pretty amazing physique.
post #585 of 962
Quote:
Originally Posted by lance konami View Post
In a typical western diet, you would have to deliberately try to not get enough protein.

Unfortunately, my western-chinese diet does not offer enough protein since we traditionally (for my family and extended family) only consume protein once or twice a day at most, with the majority of intake at dinner time, which would maybe amount to 40-60g protein at most. Roughly 1/2 of my 130-160g/day comes from supplements....darn us not being heavy flesh eaters lol
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Health & Body
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Health & Body › Ask a Fitness Model