Yeah; increased fat free mass above placebo and consistent fat loss (slight) in all groups, including placebo, so treatment means more lean mass without effecting fat mass relative to training alone.
So I started to read that study finally and any clinical research by its authors but I stopped.
I get that companies fund studies but the one noted has too much around it to actually consider.
The author is financed by the amino company. Here is a PP by him:
http://csusap.csu.edu.au/~sbird/Research/Nutrient%20Timing/Nutrient%20timing%20info%20session.pdf
He is a strong supporter of nutrient timing which may/can be beneficial for select few. There is no dietary controls and he has multiple studies showing timing of the companies EAA’s or carbs co-ingested. All with no controls, protein intake etc. And financed by Musashi
One thing I did notice is that he notes the drop in cortisol and subsequent increases in insulin etc as positive in some of his studies but fails to note a concern with the drop in testosterone that coincides with it. Even if you attenuate muscle damage, you need a favorable anabolic environment for growth.
1 Like
If by control group you mean a placebo group who exercised but didn’t take any supplements, the study did have that, but I will agree that the lack of dietary control, and also actual data on the characteristics of the subjects (their actual weight and strength progression, etc) isn’t exactly the most thoroughly put together full text of a study.
As for the testosterone thing, I’m not completely sold that what may well be transient changes in hormone levels will have lasting/significant effects on hypertrophy and muscle growth. But that would go for both positives (deceasing cortisol) and negatives (decreasing testosterone). I think the Solution’s answer is the simplest, and also likely the most correct; that if you give people who likely aren’t eating ideal diets extra carbs and amino acids (protein), they’ll probably make more gains, which is entirely logical enough. Perhaps this would have happened if they gave the subjects the same EAA+carbs at a random other time between meals throughout the day or something, and perhaps this effect wouldn’t have been as significant if the subjects were consuming ideal protein/carbs/etc pre-workout to begin with.
Either way, if I’m hitting the gym after not eating for more than a few hours, and plan on having a long, high-volume workout, I still like to have some EAAs + carbs intra-workout (although I’ve also just taken them pre-workout too, so it’s not that precise timing. I’m confident that, if nothing else, I’m getting some extra calories, or nothing is happening; I’m certain that it’s not going to negatively impact my progress, so it’s all good really.
1 Like
There is no doubt that when you provide extra calories in the form of what the body recognizes as potentially fueled substrates (carbohydrates) and tissue repair (EAA’s) you should have an increase in performance thus an increase in growth. We can all agree that calories over and above needs especially if the diet isn’t being properly controlled should/will result in potential fat free mass whether actual muscle tissue or even just water or muscle glycogen.
The same theory could be applied to a simple whey shake above and beyond the standard diet which is well researched and what is the optimal choice and would hold similar if not better results. Now I prefer to agree with research from people like Stuart Phillips that’s has no financial backing. This unbiased research shows consuming amino acids during exercise actually limits the response of post exercise nutrition mainly amino acid uptake which imo holds more value especially long term. And without the question on how your hormonal response will act.
I don’t get why they focused on the cortisol response after exercise. It is acted like it’s terrible when in fact, it’s necessary. Researchers are too busy focusing on the response of something specific (usually when they’re funded by an external source like in this case) versus understanding and helping to improve the overall physiological response of exercise and nutrition.
Just my own opinion, I would rather have a continuous positive hormone response especially testosterone than a few extra calories that may or may not be actually beneficial. I would also like a researcher to be unbiased, not write off hormonal changes that don’t benefit their research.