|
|
The
Religion of Pre and Post Workout Nutrition. By
Guest Writer: Will Brink Bodybuilding
Revealed e-book. Fat
Loss Revealed Pre- and post-workout nutrition is all the rage
these days, and for good reason. For some, however, it’s become more than
a science—it’s become their religion, or perhaps just a place to focus
their OCD-like tendencies. Regardless, people have taken the topic of pre- and
post-workout nutrition to a level that is not justified by the research, or at
least not confirmed by the research that currently exists. Readers should
realize I may have my membership card to the Bodybuilding Nutrition Guru Society
torn up and thrown at me for what I am about to share in this article…
As expected, supplement companies—and self–proclaimed ‘net
guru types—have used what does exist for research to convince everyone that
that if they don’t take in exactly 98.7 grams of carbohydrates and 37.2
grams of protein within 28 seconds after they leave the gym, their muscles will
be attacked by every muscle-hating hormone they possess in their body by second
29; with the prior year of hard work in the gym totally wasted by second 30!
People are fixated on this particular topic like nothing else, and when you
throw in the other possible ingredients that can be added to the post-workout
drink, such as creatine, glutamine, and many others, it’s taken to the level
of psychosis! Of course supplement companies have come out with their
own “techno-functional ultra-repartitioning multi-dimensional”* post-workout
drink formulas that are claimed to be the latest breakthrough. Besides the carbs
and protein in these formulas, many of the additional compounds are either under
dosed (ergo the ‘label decoration’ syndrome), have no particular justification
for being in the formula in the first place, or both (ergo, the ‘shot gun’
approach)…but I digress. Now I have to take at least some blame—or
credit—for this predicament, depending on how you want to view it. I have
written extensively about the importance of post-workout nutrition in all manner
of articles, and give the topic extensive focus in my Bodybuilding
Revealed e-book. Unlike many of the supplement companies and ‘net
experts’ out there, however, I never claimed you would shrivel up into Pee
Wee Herman in a matter of minutes if you didn’t get your ultra high-tech
post-workout drink 29 seconds after your last set of squats. I have always taken
a balanced view on the topic, by pointing out that food is still more important
in the overall equation of muscle growth. Thus, what I can say is that
research—and common sense—tells us it’s advantageous to get
some fast-acting carbs and protein after a hard workout to optimize the time we
put in the gym. From there, however, people have relied more on wishful thinking
than science for their pre- and post-workout nutrition. People who have poor diets
and poorly thought-out training routines, but focus on the latest magic pre- and
post-workout elixirs are missing the point. Their approach is like trying to hold
up a three-legged stool with one support leg and the other two missing. General
Considerations of Research vs. the “Real World” As
we all know, a great deal of research is performed that—although interesting—has
very little “real world” application to bodybuilders and other athletes.
This is because scientists do everything in their power to study their
chosen topic in isolation. In other words, they go to great lengths and trouble
to control variables that will impact the outcomes of their studies. For example,
in a study looking at the effects of a drug or supplement, a placebo group is
matched to the “active” group. The scientists want to make sure the
effect they get—or don’t get—is due to the drug/supplement and
not the placebo effect. Making the study double-blind is another way of attempting
to prevent the bias of the scientists from influencing the study. The point
is that, when they attempt to isolate an effect of something being tested, scientists
often end up with results that may not always be directly applicable to the “real
world” of Joe Schmoe gym goer. When study designs don’t reflect
“real world” conditions, they need to be taken with a grain of salt.
Were the study participants fasted? What type of exercise did they perform? What
effects did the researchers actually look at and how does that apply to the “real
world” or athlete in question? Were the study participants new to the form
of exercise being utilized in the study or were they experienced athletes? How
many people were in the study? Who do the results apply to: endurance or strength
athletes? Both? Neither?! Those are just a few of the essential questions
that have to be asked and answered before you can even begin to draw any useful
“real world” conclusions from the studies that come out. Yet this
doesn’t stop people and supplement companies from jumping on the latest
studies as the last word in nutrition and start making recommendations from them.
They also tend to ignore the studies that contradict or fail to replicate the
advice they are giving out. Let’s look at some examples… The
Fast vs. Slow Protein Craze.. The use of fasted subjects in nutrition
studies illustrates how researchers can end up with results that may not apply
well to the real world. As the name implies, the study subjects are a group of
people who have not eaten for an extended period of time. In many cases, they
haven’t eaten for 8 – 10 hours or more, which of course does not reflect
how the average person eats, at let alone how the average athlete eats—especially
bodybuilders looking to add muscle mass. Enter stage right, the “fast
vs. slow” protein craze. The study that got this craze rolling was called
“Slow and fast dietary proteins differently modulate postprandial protein
accretion” and was responsible for causing a resurgence of interest in casein.
The basic premise of this much-touted study was that the speed of absorption of
dietary amino acids (from ingested proteins) varies according to the type of dietary
protein a person eats. The researchers wanted to see if the type of
protein eaten would affect postprandial (e.g., after a meal) protein synthesis,
breakdown, and deposition. To test the hypothesis, they fed casein (CAS) and whey
protein (WP) to a group of healthy adults, a single meal of casein (CAS) or whey
WP following an overnight fast (10 h). Using this specific study design, they
found: •WP induced a dramatic but short increase of plasma amino acids.
•CAS induced a prolonged plateau of a moderate increase in amino acids
(hyperaminoacidemia) •Whole body protein breakdown was inhibited by
34% after CAS ingestion but not after WP ingestion. •Postprandial protein
synthesis was stimulated by 68% with the WP meal and to a lesser extent (+31%)
with the CAS meal. The basic non-science summary is: the study found that
CAS was good at preventing protein breakdown (proteolysis), but was not so good
for increasing protein synthesis. WP had basically the opposite effects: it increased
protein synthesis but didn’t prevent protein breakdown. The problem is that
they were using fasted subjects for a single meal. *** Keep that in
mind as we move along here… So far so good right? So what can we conclude
from this study and how useful are the results? Like so many studies, the results
were interesting—and of little use to people in the real world. Do these
results hold up under more “real world” conditions where people are
eating every few hours and/or mixing the proteins with other macronutrients (i.e.,
carbs and fats)? The answer is probably not, which is exactly what the researchers
found when they attempted to mimic a more realistic eating pattern of multiple
meals and or the addition of other macronutrients. The follow up study was called
“The digestion rate of protein is an independent regulating factor of postprandial
protein retention.” Four groups of five to six healthy young men received: •
a single meal of slowly digested casein (CAS). • a single meal of free
amino acids mimicking the composition of casein (AA). • a single meal
of rapidly digested whey proteins (WP). • repeated meals of whey proteins
(RPT-WP) mimicking slow digestion rate of casein (i.e., reflecting how people
really eat). So what did they find? In a nut shell, giving people multiple
doses of whey—which more closely mimics how people really eat-—had
basically the same effects as a single dose of casein, and mixing either with
fats and proteins pretty much nullified any big differences between the two proteins.
Even that’s not the end of the story, however, as multiple follow
up studies done by the same group and others found these effects could also be
different in older versus younger people and male versus female! How messed up
is that?! So how much press did these follow up studies get? Little or none, as
I recall. Now, a later study did attempt to examine the actual net amino
acid uptake after resistance training with whey vs. casein, and found both proteins
had essentially the same effects on net muscle protein synthesis after exercise
despite different patterns of blood amino acid responses. Does that
put to rest the issue or debate of one protein vs. the other post-workout? No,
as there are yet more conflicting studies out there and my bet is still on whey
as the superior post-workout protein, but it’s important to realize the
answer is far from established at this time. Got Milk?
Milk: nature’s original MRP. Despite all the fancy proteins out there all
claiming to be the next step in the evolution of proteins that “will blast
you past your plateaus in the gym,” good old milk seems to be competing—and
winning—against some “high tech” products on the market. We
have various studies finding increased protein synthesis and other positive effects
when a purified protein supplement (e.g., whey, soy, casein, etc.) ingested right
after or before a workout—usually in conjunction with carbohydrates—but
what about good old milk, a “real” food? One recent study
found good old milk to be an effective post-workout drink that increased net muscle
protein synthesis after resistance training. Yet another recent study compared
2 cups of skim milk as a post workout drink compared to a soy drink and a “sports
drink.” In this study, the milk and soy drinks were matched for
basic macronutrient ratios and calories and all three were matched for total calories.
56 male volunteers were split into three groups, with all put on a resistance
training program for 12 weeks. The volunteers were then randomly assigned one
of the three drinks to consume as a post workout drink and again one hour after
the workouts. Although no major differences were found in strength between
the 3 groups, the group getting the milk had the greatest increase in muscle mass
(via increases in Type I and II fibers) with researchers concluding “…chronic
postexercise consumption of milk promotes greater hypertrophy during the early
stages of resistance training in novice weightlifters when compared with isoenergetic
soy or carbohydrate consumption.” But it gets better: how about
our favorite childhood drink, chocolate milk? How about chocolate milk vs. two
commercial energy/fluid replacement drinks, such as Gatorade and Endurox R4?
One recent study—albeit a small one—found chocolate milk as effective
as Gatorade, and more effective than Endurox, as a recovery drink for trained
cyclists between exhaustive bouts of endurance exercise. Now is this
a condemnation of sports drinks and an endorsement for milk/chocolate milk as
the last word on post-workout drinks? Not at all: remember those essential questions
I mentioned above? You have to look at such a study in context—in other
words, at the experimental design and how that applies to the “real world.”
The subjects fasted for 10 - 12 h prior to the chocolate milk experiment, and
these drinks were the only food these guys had for 14 - 16 hours. The results
may have been quite different had they been following their normal eating patterns.
They also measured effects on endurance vs.—say—strength
or increased protein synthesis, etc. So, in the context of this particular
study design, look at it this way: chocolate milk has casein (a “slow”
protein), and whey (a “fast” protein) as well as calcium, some vitamins
and a bunch of carbohydrates—so it makes a pretty good, cheap MRP, if that’s
all you are going to get all day long. It’s not a half-bad post-workout
drink either. It’s not the best MRP—or post workout drink—I
could design, but it’s cheap and easy to find. The reality is that there
are some inexpensive foods out there can be used, and most of your old school
bodybuilders and strong men used milk as the original post workout drink/MRP.
The study that looked at milk vs. soy and sports drink, was done in novice
weight lifters, so that too needs to be taken into consideration. Regardless,
milk, in particular chocolate milk, should make a perfectly acceptable and inexpensive
post workout drink and people who think it’s too “old school”
or not “high tech” enough to be if any use are clearly misinformed
and the victim of marketing. Now the study we need to see that does not
exist, of course, is milk or chocolate milk vs. a well thought out post-workout
drink of—say—whey and maltodextrin (high GI carb source), in experienced
weight lifters who are not fasted—but don’t hold your breath on that
one. Studies like that get expensive quickly and also pose practical issues. For
example, if you wanted to match the protein content of—say—2 scoops
of whey isolate to chocolate milk (so the groups were getting an equivalent amount
of protein), the subjects would need to drink a large volume of milk (remember,
milk is mostly water). My hunch is that a correctly designed post-workout
drink would be superior to chocolate milk, but it would be nice to see the two
compared, no? The Pre-Workout Drink The pre-workout
drink craze followed the post-workout craze after a study found pre-workout nutrition
may be more effective than post-workout nutrition. The study that got
this craze going was called “Timing of amino acid-carbohydrate ingestion
alters anabolic response of muscle to resistance exercise” which found that
drinking a mixture of essential amino acids and carbohydrates induced a greater
anabolic response (i.e., a net increase in muscle protein balance) when taken
right before weight training vs. right after. **** This study had everyone
taking in a pre-workout drink as well as a post-workout drink in an attempt to
cover all the bases. It should be noted, however, that—once again—they
were using fasted subjects. Think of it like this: you have not eaten in 8-10
or more hours, then you are made to work out on a (very) empty stomach.
Under those particular circumstances, does it not make sense getting something
to eat before the workout would be superior to after the workout? We all know
hitting the weights on an empty stomach is not an optimal method to preserve—or
build—muscle mass. Nor is it reflective of real world eating patterns where
the vast majority of people have eaten a full meal at least a few hours before
they hit the gym. After this study, everyone started drinking a protein
drink before they hit the gym. Interestingly, however, a recent study done by
the same group who did the pre-drink study mentioned above, found whey taken before
hitting the gym did not result in an improved net protein balance vs. taking it
after the gym. “Well wait a dang minute Will, now I am really
confused!” you are saying angrily to your comp screen! Does this new study
show pre-workout nutrition is no more effective than post workout nutrition?
No, and here’s why. It’s an apples vs. oranges study. The first
study used free amino acids plus carbohydrates, and the follow up study used whey
alone without carbohydrates—which is very odd if they were truly trying
to see if free aminos were superior to a whole protein such as whey.
Unfortunately this latter study really didn’t do much to confirm or deny
the first study’s findings. And, don’t forget my comments regarding
using fasted subjects, which adds yet another wrinkle to all this. So
does that essentially disprove the pre-workout drink vs. the post-workout drink
studies? Nope. One recent study did look specifically at the issue of timing and
does support the idea that the pre- and post-workout window is the most effective
period for ingesting some fast-acting protein and carbs. This study,
titled “Effects of supplement timing and resistance exercise on skeletal
muscle hypertrophy,” has gotten a fair amount of attention in the bodybuilding/sports
nutrition oriented publications. The researchers examined the effects of a drink
of whey, glucose and creatine given to two groups of experienced weight lifters,
either morning and evening (M/E) or pre- and post-workout (PP), to see if the
actual timing of the drink had an effect on muscle hypertrophy or strength development.
The study found that the group getting the drink PP had an increase
in lean body mass and 1RM strength in two of three assessments that were tested.
The group getting the drink PP also experienced greater creatine retention and
glycogen resynthesis, which means timing of specific nutrients is an important
strategy for optimizing the adaptations desired (e.g., increased muscle mass and
strength) from your hard work in the gym. So does this study finally
put to rest the issue of pre- vs. post-workout nutrition? No, it did not compare
one strategy to the other per se, but did confirm that nutrient timing is an important
aspect. One obvious issue is that this study used a drink that contained
creatine throughout, so technically it’s not a pro + carb study, but a pro
+ carb + creatine study. On the plus side, it was done in experienced weight lifters
and they were not fasted, so it does at least represent the metabolic realties
of “real world” people looking to get the most of their nutrition.
Either way, it supports the idea of taking in the right nutrients both pre- and
post-workout, but people should not be under the impression that this issue of
timing has been “put to bed,” so to speak, and realize there are still
plenty of unanswered questions yet to be explored. Of course, there
are more studies than just the ones mentioned above, so there are plenty of measurements
on indicators of recovery from exercise, such as effects on glycogen resynthesis,
alterations in hormones, and hormone levels. Nonetheless, I prefer to look at
the actual endpoint that really matters at the end of the day: did this person
gain muscle mass, strength, or performance by using this product? Without that,
everything else—though potentially interesting—is mental masturbation. Conclusions,
and Real World Recommendations. Now I didn’t write this
article to confuse you, but to demonstrate that the optimal strategy for increasing
strength and LBM in response to resistance training is not as cut and dried as
you are often led to believe. However, it’s also probably simpler than you
are led to believe, as the human body is far more adaptable to the types of protein
it receives as well as the amounts it receives. Thus, the people who
stress over whether they got 35g of protein and 60g of carbs in their post workout
drinks vs. 32g of protein and 70s of carbs in the drink are probably wasting their
time, and causing what is known as “paralysis by analysis.” Put more
practically, the amount of cortisol you produce from worrying about such minutia
probably offsets any gains you might make from one drink vs. another!*****
I also wanted to dispel some of the hype over one protein vs. another, and
the fact that expensive pre-made high tech drinks that are all the rage right
now are just that: expensive and over hyped. In the real world, people
have used variations of the idea that fast acting proteins and a good dose of
simple carbs can improve the effects of resistance training for many years. My
good friend, the late Dan Duchaine, used to give people whey mixed in water and
Corn Flakes with skim milk as their post workout meal. One bodybuilder
I knew who went onto be a well known IFBB pro, used to have a drink of whey after
his workouts and several slices of apple pie at the local Friday’s restaurant
next to the gym for his post-workout meal. Most of your old time strong
men and bodybuilders drank quite a lot of milk, and as we have seen from the research,
it’s not a half bad post workout drink either. If people want
to buy pre-made carb/protein mixtures with other nutrients added (e.g., creatine,
glutamine, various vitamins, etc) out of convenience and don’t care that
they can “roll their own” for less money, there’s nothing wrong
with that. Just don’t think there’s anything magical about
the pre-made post-workout drinks, no matter what the marketing material or web
site says to entice you to purchase it. Comments of interest: *
= yes, I have seen every one of those words used in the marketing of a product;
sadly it's not exaggeration! ** = Brink’s
Body Building Revealed *** = The reason for this is that whey is absorbed
rapidly (being a highly soluble protein) and much of it is oxidized while casein
forms a “clot” in the gut and is absorbed slowly (being a fairly insoluble
protein), thus causing a steady level of amino acids. That’s why they dubbed
whey a “fast” protein and casein a “slow” protein. ****
= Measured as the Phenylalanine disappearance rate - considered an indicator of
muscle protein synthesis - via femoral arteriovenous catheterization, as well
as muscle biopsies from the vastus lateralis were used to determine phenylalanine
concentrations ***** = Credit for that statement/joke has to be given to
nutrition writer Lyle McDonald who said something very similar in a post on the
news group misc.fitness.weights a long, long time ago in a galaxy far, far away
about a topic I don’t remember…. References Boirie
Y, et al. Slow and fast dietary proteins differently modulate postprandial protein
accretion. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1997 Dec 23;94(26):14930 Dangin M,
et al. The digestion rate of protein is an independent regulating factor of postprandial
protein retention. Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab. 2001 Feb;280(2):E340-8. Dangin
M, Boirie Y, Guillet C, Beaufrere B. Influence of the protein digestion rate on
protein turnover in young and elderly subjects. J Nutr. 2002 Oct;132(10):3228S-33S. Dangin
M, et al. The rate of protein digestion affects protein gain differently during
aging in humans. J Physiol. 2003 Jun 1;549(Pt 2):635-44. Epub 2003 Mar 28. Demling
RH, DeSanti L .Effect of a hypocaloric diet, increased protein intake and resistance
training on lean mass gains and fat mass loss in overweight police officers. Ann
Nutr Metab 2000;44(1):21-9 Tipton KD, et al. Ingestion of casein and whey
proteins result in muscle anabolism after resistance exercise. Med Sci Sports
Exerc. 2004 Dec;36(12):2073-81. Elliot TA, et al.Milk ingestion stimulates
net muscle protein synthesis following resistance exercise. Med Sci Sports Exerc.
2006 Apr;38(4):667-74. Hartman JW, et al. Consumption of fat-free fluid
milk after resistance exercise promotes greater lean mass accretion than does
consumption of soy or carbohydrate in young, novice, male weightlifters. Am J
Clin Nutr. 2007 Aug;86(2):373-81. Karp JR, et al. Chocolate milk as a post-exercise
recovery aid. Int J Sport Nutr Exerc Metab. 2006 Feb;16(1):78-91.
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. Cribb PJ, Hayes A. Effects of supplement
timing and resistance exercise on skeletal muscle hypertrophy. Med Sci Sports
Exerc. 2006 Nov;38(11):1918-25. Additional citations of interest: Rankin
JW, et al. Effect of post-exercise supplement consumption on adaptations to resistance
training. J Am Coll Nutr. 2004 Aug;23(4):322-30. Børsheim E, et
al. Effect of carbohydrate intake on net muscle protein synthesis during recovery
from resistance exercise. J Appl Physiol. 2004 Feb;96(2):674-8. Epub 2003 Oct
31. Bird SP, Tarpenning KM, Marino FE. Liquid carbohydrate/essential amino
acid ingestion during a short-term bout of resistance exercise suppresses myofibrillar
protein degradation. Metabolism. 2006 May;55(5):570-7. Baty JJ, et al. The
effect of a carbohydrate and protein supplement on resistance exercise performance,
hormonal response, and muscle damage. J Strength Cond Res. 2007 May;21(2):321-9.
About the Author - William D. Brink Will
Brink is a columnist, contributing consultant, and writer for various health/fitness,
medical, and bodybuilding publications. His articles relating to nutrition, supplements,
weight loss, exercise and medicine can be found in such publications as Lets Live,
Muscle Media 2000, MuscleMag International, The Life Extension Magazine, Muscle
n Fitness, Inside Karate, Exercise For Men Only, Body International, Power, Oxygen,
Penthouse, Women’s World and The Townsend Letter For Doctors. He
is the author of Priming The Anabolic Environment , Body Building Revealed &
Fat Loss Revealed. He is the Consulting Sports Nutrition Editor and a monthly
columnist for Physical magazine, Musclemag and an Editor at Large for Power magazine.
Will graduated from Harvard University with a concentration in the natural sciences,
and is a consultant to major supplement, dairy, and pharmaceutical companies.
He has been co author of several studies relating to sports nutrition and
health found in peer reviewed academic journals, as well as having commentary
published in JAMA. He runs the highly popular web site BrinkZone.com which is
strategically positioned to fulfill the needs and interests of people with diverse
backgrounds and knowledge. The BrinkZone site has a following with many sports
nutrition enthusiasts, athletes, fitness professionals, scientists, medical doctors,
nutritionists, and interested lay people. William has been invited to lecture
on the benefits of weight training and nutrition at conventions and symposiums
around the U.S. and Canada, and has appeared on numerous radio and television
programs. William has worked with athletes ranging from professional bodybuilders,
golfers, fitness contestants, to police and military personnel. See
Will's ebook's online here: Brink's
BodyBuilding Revealed "Bodybuilding Revealed is a complete
blue print to muscle building success. Everything you need to know about diet
& muscle building nutrition, over 50 bodybuilding supplements reviewed, weight
training routines, high intensity cardio, the mental edge, pre made muscle building
diets and an online private members forum, diet planner, meal planner and much
more. It's all in Will Brink's ultimate guide to gaining muscle mass." Fat
Loss Revealed "Fat Loss Revealed is the ultimate fat
loss manual. A complete online and offline system used by anybody looking to attain
a fantastic lean physique. A complete fat loss diet plan, with pre made diets,
over 40+ fat loss supplement reviews, resistance workouts, and cardio , along
with motivation and goal setting and a huge online private members area and forum
form Will Brink's Ultimate Fat loss Program. The
Religion of Pre and Post Workout Nutrition. By
Will Brink Pre- and post-workout nutrition is all the rage these
days, and for good reason. For some, however, it’s become more than a science—it’s
become their religion, or perhaps just a place to focus their OCD-like tendencies.
Regardless, people have taken the topic of pre- and post-workout nutrition to
a level that is not justified by the research, or at least not confirmed by the
research that currently exists. Readers should realize I may have my
membership card to the Bodybuilding Nutrition Guru Society torn up and thrown
at me for what I am about to share in this article… As expected,
supplement companies—and self–proclaimed ‘net guru types—have
used what does exist for research to convince everyone that that if they don’t
take in exactly 98.7 grams of carbohydrates and 37.2 grams of protein within 28
seconds after they leave the gym, their muscles will be attacked by every muscle-hating
hormone they possess in their body by second 29; with the prior year of hard work
in the gym totally wasted by second 30! People are fixated on this particular
topic like nothing else, and when you throw in the other possible ingredients
that can be added to the post-workout drink, such as creatine, glutamine, and
many others, it’s taken to the level of psychosis! Of course supplement
companies have come out with their own “techno-functional ultra-repartitioning
multi-dimensional”* post-workout drink formulas that are claimed to be the
latest breakthrough. Besides the carbs and protein in these formulas, many of
the additional compounds are either under dosed (ergo the ‘label decoration’
syndrome), have no particular justification for being in the formula in the first
place, or both (ergo, the ‘shot gun’ approach)…but I digress.
Now I have to take at least some blame—or credit—for this
predicament, depending on how you want to view it. I have written extensively
about the importance of post-workout nutrition in all manner of articles, and
give the topic extensive focus in my Bodybuilding
Revealed e-book. Unlike many of the supplement companies and ‘net
experts’ out there, however, I never claimed you would shrivel up into Pee
Wee Herman in a matter of minutes if you didn’t get your ultra high-tech
post-workout drink 29 seconds after your last set of squats. I have always taken
a balanced view on the topic, by pointing out that food is still more important
in the overall equation of muscle growth. Thus, what I can say is that
research—and common sense—tells us it’s advantageous to get
some fast-acting carbs and protein after a hard workout to optimize the time we
put in the gym. From there, however, people have relied more on wishful thinking
than science for their pre- and post-workout nutrition. People who have poor diets
and poorly thought-out training routines, but focus on the latest magic pre- and
post-workout elixirs are missing the point. Their approach is like trying to hold
up a three-legged stool with one support leg and the other two missing. General
Considerations of Research vs. the “Real World” As
we all know, a great deal of research is performed that—although interesting—has
very little “real world” application to bodybuilders and other athletes.
This is because scientists do everything in their power to study their
chosen topic in isolation. In other words, they go to great lengths and trouble
to control variables that will impact the outcomes of their studies. For example,
in a study looking at the effects of a drug or supplement, a placebo group is
matched to the “active” group. The scientists want to make sure the
effect they get—or don’t get—is due to the drug/supplement and
not the placebo effect. Making the study double-blind is another way of attempting
to prevent the bias of the scientists from influencing the study. The point
is that, when they attempt to isolate an effect of something being tested, scientists
often end up with results that may not always be directly applicable to the “real
world” of Joe Schmoe gym goer. When study designs don’t reflect
“real world” conditions, they need to be taken with a grain of salt.
Were the study participants fasted? What type of exercise did they perform? What
effects did the researchers actually look at and how does that apply to the “real
world” or athlete in question? Were the study participants new to the form
of exercise being utilized in the study or were they experienced athletes? How
many people were in the study? Who do the results apply to: endurance or strength
athletes? Both? Neither?! Those are just a few of the essential questions
that have to be asked and answered before you can even begin to draw any useful
“real world” conclusions from the studies that come out. Yet this
doesn’t stop people and supplement companies from jumping on the latest
studies as the last word in nutrition and start making recommendations from them.
They also tend to ignore the studies that contradict or fail to replicate the
advice they are giving out. Let’s look at some examples… The
Fast vs. Slow Protein Craze.. The use of fasted subjects in nutrition
studies illustrates how researchers can end up with results that may not apply
well to the real world. As the name implies, the study subjects are a group of
people who have not eaten for an extended period of time. In many cases, they
haven’t eaten for 8 – 10 hours or more, which of course does not reflect
how the average person eats, at let alone how the average athlete eats—especially
bodybuilders looking to add muscle mass. Enter stage right, the “fast
vs. slow” protein craze. The study that got this craze rolling was called
“Slow and fast dietary proteins differently modulate postprandial protein
accretion” and was responsible for causing a resurgence of interest in casein.
The basic premise of this much-touted study was that the speed of absorption of
dietary amino acids (from ingested proteins) varies according to the type of dietary
protein a person eats. The researchers wanted to see if the type of
protein eaten would affect postprandial (e.g., after a meal) protein synthesis,
breakdown, and deposition. To test the hypothesis, they fed casein (CAS) and whey
protein (WP) to a group of healthy adults, a single meal of casein (CAS) or whey
WP following an overnight fast (10 h). Using this specific study design, they
found: •WP induced a dramatic but short increase of plasma amino acids.
•CAS induced a prolonged plateau of a moderate increase in amino acids
(hyperaminoacidemia) •Whole body protein breakdown was inhibited by
34% after CAS ingestion but not after WP ingestion. •Postprandial protein
synthesis was stimulated by 68% with the WP meal and to a lesser extent (+31%)
with the CAS meal. The basic non-science summary is: the study found that
CAS was good at preventing protein breakdown (proteolysis), but was not so good
for increasing protein synthesis. WP had basically the opposite effects: it increased
protein synthesis but didn’t prevent protein breakdown. The problem is that
they were using fasted subjects for a single meal. *** Keep that in
mind as we move along here… So far so good right? So what can we conclude
from this study and how useful are the results? Like so many studies, the results
were interesting—and of little use to people in the real world. Do these
results hold up under more “real world” conditions where people are
eating every few hours and/or mixing the proteins with other macronutrients (i.e.,
carbs and fats)? The answer is probably not, which is exactly what the researchers
found when they attempted to mimic a more realistic eating pattern of multiple
meals and or the addition of other macronutrients. The follow up study was called
“The digestion rate of protein is an independent regulating factor of postprandial
protein retention.” Four groups of five to six healthy young men received: •
a single meal of slowly digested casein (CAS). • a single meal of free
amino acids mimicking the composition of casein (AA). • a single meal
of rapidly digested whey proteins (WP). • repeated meals of whey proteins
(RPT-WP) mimicking slow digestion rate of casein (i.e., reflecting how people
really eat). So what did they find? In a nut shell, giving people multiple
doses of whey—which more closely mimics how people really eat-—had
basically the same effects as a single dose of casein, and mixing either with
fats and proteins pretty much nullified any big differences between the two proteins.
Even that’s not the end of the story, however, as multiple follow
up studies done by the same group and others found these effects could also be
different in older versus younger people and male versus female! How messed up
is that?! So how much press did these follow up studies get? Little or none, as
I recall. Now, a later study did attempt to examine the actual net amino
acid uptake after resistance training with whey vs. casein, and found both proteins
had essentially the same effects on net muscle protein synthesis after exercise
despite different patterns of blood amino acid responses. Does that
put to rest the issue or debate of one protein vs. the other post-workout? No,
as there are yet more conflicting studies out there and my bet is still on whey
as the superior post-workout protein, but it’s important to realize the
answer is far from established at this time. Got Milk?
Milk: nature’s original MRP. Despite all the fancy proteins out there all
claiming to be the next step in the evolution of proteins that “will blast
you past your plateaus in the gym,” good old milk seems to be competing—and
winning—against some “high tech” products on the market. We
have various studies finding increased protein synthesis and other positive effects
when a purified protein supplement (e.g., whey, soy, casein, etc.) ingested right
after or before a workout—usually in conjunction with carbohydrates—but
what about good old milk, a “real” food? One recent study
found good old milk to be an effective post-workout drink that increased net muscle
protein synthesis after resistance training. Yet another recent study compared
2 cups of skim milk as a post workout drink compared to a soy drink and a “sports
drink.” In this study, the milk and soy drinks were matched for
basic macronutrient ratios and calories and all three were matched for total calories.
56 male volunteers were split into three groups, with all put on a resistance
training program for 12 weeks. The volunteers were then randomly assigned one
of the three drinks to consume as a post workout drink and again one hour after
the workouts. Although no major differences were found in strength between
the 3 groups, the group getting the milk had the greatest increase in muscle mass
(via increases in Type I and II fibers) with researchers concluding “…chronic
postexercise consumption of milk promotes greater hypertrophy during the early
stages of resistance training in novice weightlifters when compared with isoenergetic
soy or carbohydrate consumption.” But it gets better: how about
our favorite childhood drink, chocolate milk? How about chocolate milk vs. two
commercial energy/fluid replacement drinks, such as Gatorade and Endurox R4?
One recent study—albeit a small one—found chocolate milk as effective
as Gatorade, and more effective than Endurox, as a recovery drink for trained
cyclists between exhaustive bouts of endurance exercise. Now is this
a condemnation of sports drinks and an endorsement for milk/chocolate milk as
the last word on post-workout drinks? Not at all: remember those essential questions
I mentioned above? You have to look at such a study in context—in other
words, at the experimental design and how that applies to the “real world.”
The subjects fasted for 10 - 12 h prior to the chocolate milk experiment, and
these drinks were the only food these guys had for 14 - 16 hours. The results
may have been quite different had they been following their normal eating patterns.
They also measured effects on endurance vs.—say—strength
or increased protein synthesis, etc. So, in the context of this particular
study design, look at it this way: chocolate milk has casein (a “slow”
protein), and whey (a “fast” protein) as well as calcium, some vitamins
and a bunch of carbohydrates—so it makes a pretty good, cheap MRP, if that’s
all you are going to get all day long. It’s not a half-bad post-workout
drink either. It’s not the best MRP—or post workout drink—I
could design, but it’s cheap and easy to find. The reality is that there
are some inexpensive foods out there can be used, and most of your old school
bodybuilders and strong men used milk as the original post workout drink/MRP.
The study that looked at milk vs. soy and sports drink, was done in novice
weight lifters, so that too needs to be taken into consideration. Regardless,
milk, in particular chocolate milk, should make a perfectly acceptable and inexpensive
post workout drink and people who think it’s too “old school”
or not “high tech” enough to be if any use are clearly misinformed
and the victim of marketing. Now the study we need to see that does not
exist, of course, is milk or chocolate milk vs. a well thought out post-workout
drink of—say—whey and maltodextrin (high GI carb source), in experienced
weight lifters who are not fasted—but don’t hold your breath on that
one. Studies like that get expensive quickly and also pose practical issues. For
example, if you wanted to match the protein content of—say—2 scoops
of whey isolate to chocolate milk (so the groups were getting an equivalent amount
of protein), the subjects would need to drink a large volume of milk (remember,
milk is mostly water). My hunch is that a correctly designed post-workout
drink would be superior to chocolate milk, but it would be nice to see the two
compared, no? The Pre-Workout Drink The pre-workout
drink craze followed the post-workout craze after a study found pre-workout nutrition
may be more effective than post-workout nutrition. The study that got
this craze going was called “Timing of amino acid-carbohydrate ingestion
alters anabolic response of muscle to resistance exercise” which found that
drinking a mixture of essential amino acids and carbohydrates induced a greater
anabolic response (i.e., a net increase in muscle protein balance) when taken
right before weight training vs. right after. **** This study had everyone
taking in a pre-workout drink as well as a post-workout drink in an attempt to
cover all the bases. It should be noted, however, that—once again—they
were using fasted subjects. Think of it like this: you have not eaten in 8-10
or more hours, then you are made to work out on a (very) empty stomach.
Under those particular circumstances, does it not make sense getting something
to eat before the workout would be superior to after the workout? We all know
hitting the weights on an empty stomach is not an optimal method to preserve—or
build—muscle mass. Nor is it reflective of real world eating patterns where
the vast majority of people have eaten a full meal at least a few hours before
they hit the gym.
After this study,
|