High carbs for everyone?:Carb nightmare I,II en III

[3XL]

High carbs for everyone?:Carb nightmare I,II en III - I

Deel I

Ik ben ze lang kwijt geweest maar gelukkig via archive.org weer gevonden

3 zeer intersante artikelen van Lonnie Lowery die ooit op virtualmuscle verschenen met als essentie dat het voor krachtsporters wel een helemaal niet zo goed kan zijn direkt na het trainen koolhydraten te nemen ! !

Ik heb geen zin om de plaatjes te kopieren, dus hierbij ook de link

http://web.archive.org/web/20030812093340/virtualmuscle.com/carb_nightmare.htm


Part I: Carb Nightmare?

Lonnie Lowery, PhD Cndt


You see it first! Some pretty disturbing EARLY data revealing the struggle your body undertakes just to deal with dietary carbohydrates while in a sore state. You punish your body with intense exercise but you're certainly no runner. The bottom line is, you shouldn't have to rely on high carb recommendations that stem from research on endurance athletes! Well, you don't have to anymore...

(This is the printer-friendly version.)

Do you get muscle soreness regularly from your lifting? If you train intensely, using eccentric contractions ("negatives") you're probably no stranger to the pain that comes from muscle damage. By "muscle damage" we mean the microscopic trauma that causes weakness and soreness while your body struggles to recover. Experienced lifters and physiologists know that the actual time spent in the gym is destructive, not constructive; that is, maximal growth comes only after some stress is placed upon a muscle and some damage is done. But many do not realize that if a large enough amount of muscle tissue is stressed, their ability to take-up and metabolize blood glucose is considerably worsened. That's right. Worsened.

A disease that is similar to (but more severe than) this state of poor glucose tolerance is Type II diabetes. Type II diabetics suffer from bodily tissues that are chronically unresponsive to insulin. The carbohydrates they eat enter their bloodstream (as glucose) but tend to stay there, gumming-up (glycosylating) other blood constituents and casing the pancreas to dump insulin in an effort to drive it in. About 90% of them are obese and have other problems related to hyperinsulinemia. Although many bodybuilders actually use insulin injections to aid muscle growth and recovery (dangerous and not recommended!), Type II diabetes is definitely "too much of a good thing". You see, having excess insulin in one's circulation can cause a number of problems, not the least of which is excess body FAT.

Enter exercise. It's a great way to get muscles to take-up blood glucose independent of insulin. Endurance training and weight training are a critical part of American Diabetes Association guidelines. But spending 30 minutes on a universal machine lifting two plates is a far cry from having 315 on one's back for six sets of ten! This is one thing we've been discovering lately in the Human Nutrition Lab (HNL) at Kent State University. Place enough load on large muscle groups using negatives - as many athletes do - and glucose intolerance can result! It's not as severe as that seen in diabetics but it appears to be enough to dampen recovery. You see, muscles need to turn blood glucose into glycogen (stored carbs) to stay full and energetic... but it can't get into a damaged muscle very well. It's a "catch-22" situation. Eccentric contractions induce superior growth4 but result in long recovery periods and poor carbohydrate efficiency.1,2,3,6,7 With regards to glucose intolerance, it's a scenario similar in appearance to Syndrome X, a condition rampant in western societies characterized by obesity and hypertension - presumably due to poor glucose handling. Even without intense lifting nearly 10% of men are hyperglycemic (have abnormally high blood glucose)5.







Taking a look at the above graph that's hot off the presses from the HNL at Kent State, we see that early results suggest hampered glucose tolerance in all subjects from muscle damage. This bodes poorly for maximal recovery. The lines come from an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) performed before and 24 hours after an intense workout. An OGTT is simply a series of blood draws, taken before and immediately after ingestion of 75 g of glucose (fast-acting sugar). Blood glucose commonly goes up about 40 points (mg/ dl) between 30-60 minutes, then insulin drives it back down. We didn't expect blood glucose to be this affected by the intense (eccentric) lifting. You see, the body's control over circulating glucose is necessarily TIGHT. We hypothesized (guessed) that subjects' pancreases would have to dump extra insulin to keep the glucose down in the face of all this "trauma", but not this actual hyperglycemic response; wow! The exercise bout consisted of six sets of six repetitions at 80% of the subjects' one rep max. Both bench press and squatting were performed in this manner on a Smith machine, using a four-count to lower the bar. The exercise session was designed to affect a maximal amount of skeletal muscle but also to mimic a state that is common to weight lifters.

Of course data is still coming in, but we are able to share some numbers on the first five subjects. By analyzing the data, we find that (with a fancy statistical test) we have high statistical power, meaning that we will end up with significant results by the end of the study (20 subjects). Yes, stats can turn us into veritable "swamis", allowing us to "see into the future" and not waste time on worthless studies. How many supplement investigators do that?! It's another benefit of having strong researchers at the HNL. We've got evidence to be pretty excited about the possibility of actually changing current nutrition recommendations for lifters, which is why I'm sharing this info now. I have to reserve final judgment, however, for the date my associates and I complete the study.

It's also important to realize that we need to validate that the large muscle groups of the shoulder girdle and lower body were actually damaged to some extent from the exercise. To do this we took some of the blood from the OGTT, spun it down in a centrifuge and tested the serum for creatine kinase (CK), alanine aminotransferase (ALT), aspartate aminotransferase (AST) and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH). These enzymes (notice the -ase suffix on each word; that denotes an enzyme) are "spilled" from muscle tissue for a period of 3-7 days after hard eccentric exercise.6 They suggest muscle trauma and our subjects were, in fact "traumatized". Check out the elevation in CK from an example subject:





The relatedness (or correlation) between fasting blood glucose and CK, for example, was tested on two separate post-workout occasions, revealing significant relationships (r = 0.54 to 0.75). These are moderate to strong relationships between muscle damage and poor glucose usage. In other words, when muscles are damaged, dietary carbs don't leave the blood stream very well (and enter the muscle tissue). Muscle soreness measurements add to the evidence, also suggesting that damage was done (have YOU ever gotten really sore from training?). They correlated moderately to highly with the CK results.

Clearly runners and cyclists need to replenish carb stores; they exhaust their glycogen almost daily. Hence the high dietary carb recommendations. And although many weight trainers insist carbs make them fat, they do need some for similar reasons. But for most of us it's really about growth as opposed to say, boosted performance and if we're not getting them into our sore muscles, where are they going?

One answer could be adipose tissue. Yep, body fat is another recipient of blood glucose. When insulin levels are high, fat cells grab up the blood borne glucose - even more so than sore muscles, presumably. And what happens to glucose once in a fat cell? You guessed it, fat building (lipogenesis). So now we see a "double whammy" scenario when muscles are just too rocked to accept blood glucose efficiently: First, they can't recovery rapidly, failing to optimally replenish their glycogen stores (and creating muscle fullness); Second, the left over circulating glucose likely goes where it can, into body fat.

What can be done about this problem that appears to be specific to weight trainers? Well, one thing is to report it to the scientific community so "experts" tone-down their "high carbs for all athletes" recommendations. Another is to give some preliminary suggestions to athletes as to when to eat plenty of carbs and when it might be better to reduce them. Finally, we can search for nutrients that may help glucose tolerance so bodybuilders can continue to induce muscle growth via "negatives" AND recover maximally. THAT, my friends, is what we're working on in the HNL right now! Stay tuned for Part Two of "High Carbs for Everyone?" to get practical suggestions and to see which compounds we're testing and what they're doing for glucose metabolism!

Editors' Note: Remember, data on graphs above are preliminary, using available data as it comes-in and representative case examples. It's important to wait for the completion of these studies for more comprehensive conclusions. Virtual Muscle shares this information in an effort to get it to those who matter, the ATHLETES, as soon as possible!



REFERENCES

Doyle, J., et al. (1993). J Appl Physiol 74(4): 1848-1855.
Friden, J., et al. (1983). Int J Sport Med 4: 170-176.
Gibala, M., et al. (1995). J Appl Physiol 78(2): 702-708.
Hortobagyi, T., et al. (1996). J Appl Physiol 80(3): 765-772.
Lowe, L., et al. (1997). Diabetes Care 20 (1): 163-175.
Lowery, L., et al. (2001). Doctoral dissertation. Kent State University.
Sherman, W. (1992). Int J Sport Nutr 2(3): 251-259.

 

[3XL]

everyone?:Carb nightmare I,II en III - II

Deel II


http://web.archive.org/web/20030812093208/virtualmuscle.com/carb_nightmare_II.htm


Part II: Data Accumulates

the VM Editors





This article is for those of you who want hard facts to help your supplement buying decisions and training recovery! It shows relationships between exercise-induced muscle damage and hampered carb use. It also updates everyone on the effects of a new herbal blend that may help. If you lift to the point of muscle soreness you need to stay abreast of this series of studies! Knowledge is power, baby. Show me the data!

Having printer issues? Want a more easily printed version of this article? Right-click here.



Hormone Havok

The alarm goes off in its usual rude tone: Beep! Beep! Beep! “Time to make the donuts”, thinks professor Lowery jokingly as his feet hit the cool hardwood floor. It’s six o’clock AM on a Sunday. Lonnie Lowery, director of the Human Nutrition Laboratory (HNL) at Kent State University, might be a bit salty at this hour but he rushes to the shower nonetheless. “Today’s the day,” he anticipates. “We’ll finally get our insulin measurements and know the whole picture…”

Why is this man excited – especially at this hour? Because he knows that a picture is becoming clearer as his research continues. The picture involves resistance trained athletes and their ability to recover from intense lifting. It's starting to look as if current high dietary carbohydrate recommendations may be overstated. Thirty minutes away, his colleague, Dr. Ron Mendel is already getting in his car to leave for the Lab. Ron, too knows that they may be on the verge of something big.

The campus is a ghost town on this frigid Sunday morning but already the Lab is percolating to life. As the coffee brews down in the office, the two men are joined by Dr. Tim Ziegenfuss, who’s made the drive down to lend a hand with the hormone assays.

“Hmm…” mutters Lonnie as the results are spit out of the ELISA machine. “It looks as if the hypothesis was correct; these subjects are not handling carbohydrates well at all when they’re sore. Look at those insulin levels.” For the past few months these researchers have been hypothesizing (guessing) that intensely training bodybuilders may be at least partly justified in their insistence that “carbs make them fat”. [Editors’ note: See “Carb Nightmare” in the Virtual Muscle online archives.] There has been indirect evidence of this in the past but a primary goal of HNL is to provide direct evidence straight to those who matter: the athletes. Look how strong the relationships are between muscle damage (from exercise) and poor dietary carb use:







The above graphs show how the body produces additional insulin after a "meal" to try and compensate for damaged muscles. They also indicate that dietary carbs appear to stay in the blood of sore athletes. The muscle damage, as indicated by CK in the blood (described more below) and perceptions of soreness, apparently retard muscles' ability to take up blood sugar (glucose). That is, subjects with more damage are the ones who exhibit worse "glucose tolerance". The more severe the damage, the worse the glucose intolerance. The pancreas won't stand for high blood sugar and attempts to hammer-home the glucose by dumping lots of insulin. If you've read earlier VM pieces on insulin and muscle building, you know that, although highly anabolic, insulin is a "Jeckyl and Hyde" hormone. Too much can be counter productive to the physique athlete by building fatty tissue (lipogenesis).

The problem here is that athletes need to rebuild muscle carbohydrate stores (glycogen) in order to recover - but can't ...at least not when they use heavy weights and "negatives" to induce additional growth. Are we hard lifters relegated to limiting our workouts to less than once per week?



Supplement Savior?

The following information refers to a "double blind" study: a type of research in which supplement bottles are simply labeled by a letter (rather than the type of supplement). For example, subjects will get "A" or "B" - but neither they nor the researchers know what's what during the study. Only one outside person knows the code and breaks it for the researchers at the end. This ensures objectivity and eliminates bias until the end of the study...

And yet these men are not content to simply acknowledge a problem. They’ve set out to do something about it with the help of Bodyonics Pinnacle and Phoenix Labs. With the financial commitment of these forward-looking companies and some compelling evidence on particular herbs from the scientific literature, it’s time to see if bodybuilders will have a legal alternative to insulin use. [Editors’ note: See “Bodybuilding and the Insulin Enigma” in the Virtual Muscle online archives.]

The second in their series of studies on muscle recovery and insulin focused upon the acute (immediate) effects of a blend containing glucosol, inzitol, and known nutrients like chromium and lipoic acid. Would this combination reduce blood sugar after consuming carbohydrates? Would the effects be similar to those of insulin? Based on existing data from studies on diabetics and muscle cells in culture (in vitro studies), Mel Rich, product formulator (and pharmacist) for Pinnacle thinks so.

The Human Nutrition Lab is now humming with hormone analyzers and overheating computers as data are created and analyzed. “Look at this,” says Dr. Mendel as Lonnie peers over his shoulder. “We’ve got three subjects done in each group and it looks as if a picture is emerging here.” Ron Mendel is looking closely at a blood (actually serum) marker of muscle damage called creatine kinase (CK). "First, we knew from your and Traci's data that CK was related to poor glucose tolerance1 (above) and now we know even more. Check it out... there’s a nearly significant decline in CK after four weeks of ingesting the capsules in group D; this wasn't expected, eh? Could the supplement protect subjects from a session THAT intense? Meanwhile the other group looks just as damaged as ever from the lifting session. I bet that's the placebo group. If it’s Insulene protecting the damage-resistant subjects then we may be onto something..."

“Hey guys,” inquires Tim as he returns from the biochemistry lab. “How’s the data analysis coming?”

“Well Z, Ron’s seeing some pretty interesting findings regarding improved muscle recovery… and check this out… after four weeks of the supplementation, there’s a trend toward lower fasting glucose levels in group D as well.”

"Mel is definitely going to be interested in this,” muses Tim. All that digging in the scientific literature seems to be paying-off for him. And for Pinnacle. There’s very little chance that it's the placebo group that's improving after just a month, wouldn’t you agree? If only we knew right now! I'm telling ya, I can't wait to finally break the code and know for sure the reason for these recovery-boosting effects.

Will these researchers’ hunch be right? Will the unique combination of insulin potentiating compounds pan out to be the reason for the improved ability to handle dietary carbs and recover better? The data won’t lie, so tune in next month when these guys finally wrap-up this study and ask colleague Dr. Karen Lowry-Gordon to unlock the “double blind” code.

Only then will the Virtual Muscle editors start pestering Pinnacle executives for discounts on this fascinating supplement.

Editors' Note: Remember, data on graphs above are preliminary, using available data (currently three to nine subjects per analysis) as it comes-in. It's important to wait for the completion of these studies for more comprehensive conclusions. Virtual Muscle shares this information in an effort to get it to those who matter, the ATHLETES, as soon as possible!



REFERENCES

Sexton, T. and Lowery, L. (2001). Oh J Sci (Medicine and Biology), 101 (1): 13.

 

[3XL]

High carbs for everyone? : Carb nightmare I, II en III - III

http://web.archive.org/web/20030812093542/virtualmuscle.com/carb_nightmare_III.htm


Part III: Lessons From a Year of Research

by Drs. Lonnie Lowery, Ron Mendel and Tim Ziegenfuss


This article is an update in a series. It's meant for those of you who have been following the whole research process at the Human Nutrition Lab since last Fall. After collecting and analyzing data on a total of 12 subjects, we have new findings to share. If you lift to the point of muscle soreness you should review this series of studies. Knowledge is power, baby. Show me the data!

Also see Carb Nightmare Part I and Carb Nightmare Part II.





Insulin Inquiry

How is a dietary supplement evaluated? How do we assess if it "works"? If you've ever thought about such things, good for you. Knowing how and why dietary substances work help keep you from getting conned. There is a fairly consistent research process and it starts with asking the right questions. In the case of the new generation of herbs that aid humans' ability to handle dietary carbohydrate, called "insulin potentiators", a specific question came to mind: Can we overcome power athlete's difficulties in using dietary carbs? It's become rather well established that sore muscles don't take up carbs well (See Parts I and II). We've only recently shown this for the first time specifically in resistance-trained athletes.1 Well, guess what ? We at the Human Nutrition Lab (HNL) are resistance trained athletes... and we seem to always be sore. Are you? If so, your ability to recover and grow is probably compromised. And training like a wimp, avoiding soreness is not the answer. Soreness is a sign of progress.

Dr. Lowery (Lonnie) has been examining post-exercise muscle soreness in the lab for about three years. But he knows soreness is just the tip of the iceberg. It's a symptom of something much deeper. A whole series of biological events take place over about four days after an intense workout. Lengthening contractions, called "eccentric" contractions or, in the weight room, "negatives", induce muscle damage, immune reactions and metabolic disturbances collectively referred to as the acute phase response.3 Believe it or not, it's the same response your body has to infection and trauma! Nutrition support is called for.

One disturbance is glucose intolerance. Dietary carbohydrates don't enter muscle tissue well in this state. It could be due to hormonal alterations or perhaps damaged muscle tissue itself. It's particularly problematic for us athletes because we need carbs from our diets to form glycogen in our liver and muscles to optimally recover. Without replenished glycogen storage, athletes get fatigued, break down bodily protein and can't perform as well.1,2

Over countless discussions in the lab we've wrestled with ways to handle this dilemma. Before conclusions could be made, however, we needed to observe and record various phenomena. That's part of what science is. Our first observation was that the current high-carb recommendations (up to 70 percent of kcal intake!) for all athletes stem from data on endurance athletes who aren't chronically sore. Perhaps this was why bodybuilders insist that "carbs make them fat". Our second observation came early this year with the confirmation that bodybuilders do, in fact, need help recovering...from a carb usage perspective. We confirmed this by looking carefully at insulin and blood glucose levels 24 hours after an intense whole-body workout using negatives. Here it is:

Smith machine bench press:

6 sets of six negative reps at 80% of 1 RM*

Smith machine squat:
6 sets of six negative reps at 80% of 1 RM*

If this looks tough to you, you're pretty astute. It was. In fact, we used the Smith machine not only to remove skill differences in the exercises, but for safety reasons. Think how you'd feel after 36 slow, lowering reps (four-count) in the bench AND squat! Research can be rough on subjects as well as researchers! Check out the video.

This type of data collection is a long, sometimes difficult, expensive, and somewhat invasive process. If you've been contaminated with the wild claims like "2000% better than D-bol !" that pervade our industry, it's time to smell the coffee. Let's get real. Dietary supplements are typically more mild than drugs (this can be good and bad, we suppose). Being as honest and straight forward as possible helps athletes. It is ultimately even the best long-term approach for supplement marketers. Supplement sales don't last if marketing claims don't live up to their hype. Our funding sources at the HNL know this and thus have few concerns with us sharing the presently mild effects (compared to insulin, for example) of a herbal blend called Insulene.



Design Difficulties

Since our last update, we've discovered that "group D" in our protocol was, in fact, the blend of "glucose control agents" and "group C" was, in fact, a placebo. Unfortunately, the effects regarding creatine kinase and glucose reduction were lost after adding a few additional subjects. What does this mean? Well, when analyzing four out of seven subjects, improved recovery was probable but as things now stand, the effect is not significant. Power analyses (see Carb Nightmare Part I) have their limitations when performing expensive, relatively invasive research on just a few subjects.

To be more certain that any recovery effects are real, we've decided to look deeper. The nutrients within the Insulene supplement are too promising to ignore. Glucosol, Inzitol, lipoic acid and "insulin-potentiating" minerals are all backed by evidence that they could help athletes. Several companies now sell some or all of these substances in various products and athletes are raving. But please recognize that these nutrients must be documented by science. Next month we hope to perform what's called a "crossover" design, bringing placebo subjects back into the lab to try Insulene for one month. Of course, they won't know what they're taking. Likewise, we'll be asking Insulene subjects to come back for a month on the placebo. This way we can avoid genetic differences that we believe are confounding (messing up) our data. It's a longer process, to be sure, but it will allow for very tightly controlled research.

We're here for you, the consumer, and, thus, need your support. Email your thoughts to Virtual Muscle! It's either that or you can continue to spend your hard-earned cash based on bullsh*t claims and marketing hype! The companies working with us at the Human Nutrition Lab agree that there's a better way. If you insist on hard data, stay tuned!



New Bodybuilder-Specific Data!

Our research is not only about dietary supplements. We've learned a ton about how bodybuilders recover and metabolize carbohydrates. Want to learn and grow as a result? Read on.

After bringing in additional subjects (since our last update), we still found relationships between muscle damage and poor glucose use. We also looked carefully to see if our research protocols were producing results that one would expect. They did. For example, we found direct relationships between blood glucose and insulin levels after administering sugar beverages (for you research enthusiasts: r=0.63, p=0.028 to r=0.73, p=0.007). One would expect this: higher blood sugar brings about higher blood insulin levels. We also found correlations between our various markers of muscle damage, including soreness and serum enzymes coming from damaged tissues (p<0.05). Okay, so the expected relationships were there, but anything else interesting?

Well, we learned that fat-free mass (largely muscle tissue) tended to correlate negatively with fasting blood glucose (r=-0.59, p=0.055) as well as "gummed-up red blood cells", known as "glycosylated hemoglobin" (r=-0.52, p=0.10). In this case, the negative correlation shows that subjects with higher fat free (muscle) mass had lower blood glucose levels over time. This suggests that adding muscle mass gives athletes more tissue to store glucose as glycogen (when they're not sore) and thus reduces potential "diabetes-like" problems (e.g. bodyfat). Cool. In other words, get big and recover properly to help stay lean.

Additionally, we learned - as one might expect - that the heaviest squatters did more damage to themselves than weaker ones. This was observed despite setting everyone at 80 percent of their maximum squat for the workout (above). It makes sense that our strongest squatter (max = 525 pounds, workout at 420 lb.) self-inflicted more damage than the weaker ones who only worked out with about 135 pounds (even though they, too, were at 80 percent of their max).

Alrighty then, to summarize what we know from this past year, specific to bodybuilders:

Adding muscle appears to be a good thing regarding glucose usage and body fat reduction - if adequate recovery is present.

Damaged sore muscles, however, are related to poor dietary carb use; one MUST recover to make progress.

It makes sense to eat plenty of carbs on days when soreness is low / gone, especially in the morning.

Strong guys can self inflict more damage in the weight room and may actually need nutrition support even more than beginning lifters.

The time frame for unaided recovery from eccentric training can be approximately five days.

Difficulties with dietary carb use occur in as little as 24 hours after lifting.

We're already using this data to make ourselves better. Will you? Until next update from the lab, keep sending your feedback. It helps us form hypotheses towards better research!



Editor's Note: Remember, data on graphs above are still preliminary, using available data (currently up to twelve subjects per analysis) as it comes in. It's important to wait for the completion of these studies for more comprehensive conclusions. Virtual Muscle shares this information in an effort to get it to those who matter, the ATHLETES, as soon as possible!



REFERENCES

Hargreaves, M. (1991). J Sports Sci. 9 Spec No:17-28.
Lemon, P. and Mullin, J. (1980). J Appl Physiol. 48(4): 624-9.
Lowery, L., et al. (2001). Doctoral dissertation. Kent State University.
Sexton, T. and Lowery, L. (2001). Oh J Sci (Medicine and Biology), 101 (1): 13.

 

[Big-T]

Voor zover ik weet is insuline gevoeligheid altijd groter in spiercellen na KT. Als ik het zo snel eens bekijk komt dit me bekend voor en had het ermee te maken dat de hoeveelheid suikers die veel BB nemen te groot is, maar wel nodig blijft, zei het in mindere mate. Die studies ga ik nog eens lezen, lijkt me wel interessant.

 

[3XL]

Er word hier gesteld dat na KT de cellen te beschadigd zijn om goed glucose op te nemen.

You see, muscles need to turn blood glucose into glycogen (stored carbs) to stay full and energetic... but it can't get into a damaged muscle very well.

 

[Big-T]

Yep, ik zie dat dit vooral opgaat na een training met veel negatives. Er zijn verder ook aanwijzingen/studies dat carbs gewoon belangrijk zijn na een training. Nu denk ik dat de waarheid waarschijnlijk ergens tussenin zit. Je moet ergens energie aanvullen na een training, maar beschadigde spiercellen hebben hier dus moeite mee. Geen carbs eten is zeker ook niet goed. misschien moeten we gewoon de traditionele PWS met dextrose eruit gooien en het houden op een meer normale maaltijd (wat ik al een tijdje doe nu) .

 

[3XL]

Ik heb een tijdje geexperimenteerd met enkel wei-hydrolisaat na de training. Doordat het vrij veel glucoplastice aminozuren bevat word er ook een gedeelt te aanvulling van glucose gebruikt onder echt een erg hoge insuline piek te bewerkstelligen.

Werkte goed.

 

[Unregistered]

Ik neem ook een normale maaltijd ipv PWO Shake. Interessant artikel, maar persoonlijk train ik nooit op puur negatieven.

3XL, ik las ergens dat je een tijdje alleen hydroisolaat had genomen PWO? Wat vond je ervan?

 

[3XL]

Zoals ik in m'n rply net boven je al stel bevalt het goed

Ik heb het gebrobeer in verschillende combinaties (met dextrose, met maltodextrine en puur) en eigenlijk kon ik geen verschil bemerken tussen deze 3 varianten.

Enige verschillen waren dat ik met de dextrose wat sneller last kreeg van een bloedsuikerdaling waardoor ik eerder weer moest eten en dat ik het idee had met de maltodextrine iets meer vet op te slaan maar dit zou ook kunnen omdat de maltodextrine een klein % (10%) fructose bevatte.

Beiden zijn wel verklaarbaar, snelle verhoging in de bloedsuikerspiel betekd een evenredig snelle dip en fructose ba de training is niet de beste KH vorm

Ik ben va. eind 2003 met wei-hydrolisaat bezig en heb er op zich goede resultaten mee. Ik ben iemand die vlak na de training geen hap gewoon voer naar binnen krijg en voor mij werkt dit uitstekend.



BTW er word in het artikel ook niet gesteld dat het alleen opgaat voor negatieve training. Negatieve reps worden alleen aangehaal als zijnde intensief.

 

[wazzup]

hmmm... klinkt misschien dom, maar minder intensief trainen, dat zou toch wel verschil maken ? Misschien een pleidooi voor full-body workouts, omdat die minder intensief zijn dan workouts in een split ? (minder belasting per spiergroep in ieder geval)

 

[Big-T]

Maar, het blijkt dat ze 5 studies aanhalen die negatives gebruikten om te bewijzen dat glucose slecht werd opgenomen. 1 studie kon aantonen dat negatieven geschikt zijn voor ouderen om balance/kracht te verbeteren.
Ze concluderen dan dat negatieven de beste manier van training zijn.

Er zijn zoveel studies die aantonen hoe belangrijk het is om insuline en glucose hoog te houden na WO. Eerlijk gezegd hecht ik hier veel meer waarde aan.

 

[kingnbajam]

Hier een citaat van 1 van de heren van Avant Labs:

"High carbs is the absolute worst thing you can do in the morning, especially if fructose is involved. You alread have high output of glucose and FFA from the liver combined decreased uptake in skeletal muscle -- this will increase that and add Tg's and cholesterol to the mix.

Have a mini-meal, of 10g carbs and 20g of protein, then have a real meal an hour or so later.

The exception is if you plan to exercise immediately."

bron: http://forum.avantlabs.com/?act=ST&f=25&t=11756&hl=glucose&

En ik moet zeggen, sinds ik tijdens mn ontbijt geen grote hoeveelheden KH eet, maar die op een later tijdstip nuttig (eind ochtend, lunch, PWO) ik minder snel vet aan lijk te zetten, ondanks dat cals gelijk blijven.

In dit artikel staat het omgekeerde: veel KH eten tijdens ontbijt. Beetje tegenstrijdig!

 

[Big Byron]

Wel, en ik kan er 's morgens in gooien wat ik wil (halve liter yoghurt met ahornsiroop, 4 eieren en boterhammen met pindakaas, banaan en chokopasta) en merk geen verschil met een 'gematigde' maaltijd. Zolang ik de rest van de dag 'clean' eet natuurlijk...


On-topic, toen ik een jaar bezig was met bb'ing en voor de eerste keer whey icm melk en banaan begon te gebruiken (voorts geen aangepaste voeding) heb ik de meeste vooruitgang ooit geboekt op korte termijn. Het zal wel niet alles zeggen, maar mijn PWO blijft toch hoor! (en idd, 1.5h later complex carbs + EI om de dip tegen te gaan).

 

[kingnbajam]

Wel, en ik kan er 's morgens in gooien wat ik wil (halve liter yoghurt met ahornsiroop, 4 eieren en boterhammen met pindakaas, banaan en chokopasta) en merk geen verschil met een 'gematigde' maaltijd. Zolang ik de rest van de dag 'clean' eet natuurlijk...


On-topic, toen ik een jaar bezig was met bb'ing en voor de eerste keer whey icm melk en banaan begon te gebruiken (voorts geen aangepaste voeding) heb ik de meeste vooruitgang ooit geboekt op korte termijn. Het zal wel niet alles zeggen, maar mijn PWO blijft toch hoor! (en idd, 1.5h later complex carbs + EI om de dip tegen te gaan).

dan ben je geen endo vermoed ik

 

[Frenkpie]

Hmm maar wat is nu dan het beste ? Misshien verschilt het gewoon in wat voor soort lichaam je hebt.. ik denk dat het zo is per lichaam:

Ecto: 1 gram dextrose per 1 kg VVM en de 0,5 gram whey per 1 kg VVM
Meso: 0,75 gram dextrose per 1 kg VVM en 0,5 gram whey per 1 kg VVM
Endo: 0,5 gram dextrose per 1 kg VVm en 0,4 of 0,3 gram whey per 1 kg VVM of enkel whey en een Low GI carbs maaltijd 1 uur na training.

Maar ik weet dat ze altijd zeggen dat je hard moet trainen, maar dit onderzoek wil eigenlijk weer zeggen dat je weer minder hard moet trainen.

 

[Anoniem_1989]

wat is meso?

ecto is tog dat je moeilijk aankomt, snelle stofwisseling
en endo het tegenovergestelde

 

[wazzup]

endo komt makkelijk vet aan
meso komt makkelijk spier aan (BB-pro's enzo, van die eikels die maar naar een DB hoeven te kijken en ze groeien al)

 

[Big-T]

Hmm maar wat is nu dan het beste ? Misshien verschilt het gewoon in wat voor soort lichaam je hebt.. ik denk dat het zo is per lichaam:

Ecto: 1 gram dextrose per 1 kg VVM en de 0,5 gram whey per 1 kg VVM
Meso: 0,75 gram dextrose per 1 kg VVM en 0,5 gram whey per 1 kg VVM
Endo: 0,5 gram dextrose per 1 kg VVm en 0,4 of 0,3 gram whey per 1 kg VVM of enkel whey en een Low GI carbs maaltijd 1 uur na training.

Maar ik weet dat ze altijd zeggen dat je hard moet trainen, maar dit onderzoek wil eigenlijk weer zeggen dat je weer minder hard moet trainen.

Ik denk dat het vooral belangrijk is dat je niet teveel nadruk legt op failure en negatives. Teveel beschadiging is ook niet goed, zowel voor spieren als CZS.

Wat de lichaamstypes aangaat kan ik me er wel in vinden, maar dan meer als geheel voedingsschema. Er word imo veel teveel belang gehecht aan PW shakes.

 

[3XL]

Wat de somato(lichaams)typen aangaat kan ik me er HELEMAAL NIET in vinden.

Niemand is 100% dit of dat. Wat doe je bv als je qua lichaamsbouw korte/dikke benen heb(endo) een atletisch gebouwde romp(meso) en lange dunne armen(ecto). Of wat dat aangaat elke ander combinatie

Hoe wil je dit vertalen naar je voeding inname na de training?



Ook meer eiwit voor een ecto zal niet werken omdat eiwit op zich meer calorien verbruikt om opgenomen te worden als koolhydraten. Veel eiwitten voor een zgn ecto betekend dus een hogere stofwisseling, en ik denk niet dat de meste zgn ecto's hier op zitten te wachten.

 

[Big-T]

Ik zie het eigenlijk meer als persoonlijke aanpak, iemand die gemakkelijk dikker wordt eet nu eenmaal beter minder koolhydraten, iemand met een snelle stofwisseling (niet perse puur ecto!) eet beter minder maaltijden en eiwit omdat deze 2 dat nog verhogen etc

Dit is zeer persoonlijk, en ik denk dat 3 daar een, goed punt heeft: hoe wil je dat in een of 3 groepen opdelen als er uiteindelijk 6 miljard unieke/ verschillende mensen zijn?

Ik sta erachter, maar dan als je geval per geval bekijkt.