It’s been a l-o-n-g while since I wrote on this blog. That could be a bad or a good thing, depending on your perspective.

I’ve been swamped with my consulting business, working 6-7 days a week. As such, I just haven’t had the time to write.

Over the years, I’ve done a lot of personal experimentation to find out what causes water retention. I’ve come to the conclusion that one of the causes for me is artificial sweeteners, including not not necessarily limited to sucralose (brand name Splenda).

I don’t have any science to back up my conclusion. Still, I encourage you to try the following experiment: If you consume any dietary supplements or food products containing sucralose, stop them “cold turkey” for 14 consecutive days. See what happens to your physical appearance.

I should point out that water retention tends to be more noticeable when you are fairly lean. My body fat is always well under 10%, so if I retain water, it is noticeable (at least in my eyes) like night versus day. If you have a high body fat %, then you may not notice the extra water weight as much. But that’s just an assumption on my part.

Of course, like all things, some people will be more sensitive to the water-retaining effects of artificial sweeteners such as sucralose than others. But I’m not alone. I know people who have had to stop taking protein powders because they “blow up” with several pounds of water weight upon using them. The weight promptly disappears (much to their approval) upon ceasing use of said protein powders.

Remember that sucralose and other artificial sweeteners are all around us. In the dietary supplement world there are pre-training powders, amino acid powders, protein powders and other products bearing sucralose. In the food products world, the list goes on forever.

Give it a shot. Try dropping artificial sweeteners out of your diet for 14 consecutive days. See what happens. If you’re no better off, then hats off to you. I wish I was that lucky!

 

 

 

Check it out: https://physsportsmed.org/doi/10.3810/psm.2011.09.1927

24 physically active men took MRI’s Platinum NO2 product or a placebo for 7 days (1). Platinum supplied a total of 12 g of arginine alpha-ketoglutarate (AKG) in the dosage given.

Before and after supplementation, the subjects lifted weights.Various measurements were made, including markers of blood flow and nitric oxide (NO) production.

The result: Supplementing with arginine AKG increased arginine levels (not much of a surprise here), but was no more effective at increasing blood flow and NO production than a placebo. Thus, changes in either were attributed to resistance exercise itself.

Conclusion: The best way to get a pump is to work out. Arginine won’t improve it.

REFERENCE

1. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21813912

Well, I was going to write an e-book about my new training style and charge the world for it -at least a few bucks, anyways. But I’m so busy with my consulting business that I don’t have the time. Plus, I’d rather just get the information into as many people’s hands as possible, as quickly as possible. So I’ll just tell you what to do here on this blog.

Beginning in 2005, I began experimenting with a new style of resistance exercise. Instead of performing the normal “full” range of motion for each exercise, I perform the first third of this range in which the main muscle being exercise is at its longest length.

Let’s use the barbell bench press as an example. I lift the barbell off the rack and lower it to my chest. Then I lift it back up about 1/3 of the way before lowering it back to my chest. Then I repeat for anywhere from 10-25 reps.

Now let’s consider barbell squats. I begin by bending my knees and descending into a squat position. Once my thighs are parallel to the floor, I begin to lift the barbell back up again. As above, I only lift it up about 1/3 of the way before descending again.

I perform anywhere from 15-20 sets per muscle group using this technique. I hit each muscle group 1-2 times per week.

That’s it.

How does it work? My experience has been that it works very well. If I go back to doing full-range reps for a week or so and then go back to my new “ROB” training style -”thirds”, if you like- my muscles appear much fuller and leaner within 24-48 hours. This type of training really does seem to make the muscles “pop” more. I swear they take on a different shape with this style of training. I really like it.

I’ve talk to one scientist about my new training style, and he says that it is possible that it might produce a greater hypertrophic (muscle-building) stimulus because I am performing my reps in a position where the muscles are longer. May this is why it seems to work. Perhaps there are other mechanisms involved. Noone can know for sure.

Try it out, and let me know what you think!

If you’re a bodybuilder, then you may not enjoy this post. It even makes me a little concerned. I’ve lived a bodybuilding lifestyle for over two decades, not that I can do anything about the past, of course!

I recently received an impressive review paper from Professor John Speakman, Director of the Institute of Biological and Environmental Sciences at the University of Aberdeen in Scotland. He and his colleague, Sharon Mitchell, wrote about the topic of caloric restriction in their paper, which was recently published in the journal Molecular Aspects of Medicine (1).

As I told Dr. Speakman by email, I’m no PhD; nevertheless, I can appreciate the immense amount of work that must have gone into preparing his review paper. I found it very impressive. It was also quite ironic.

What made the paper ironic is the following. Referring to extensive research, Drs. Speakman and Mitchell discuss a number of factors, the restriction or down-regulation of which may delay aging. Yet these are some of the very same factors that bodybuilders -often encouraged by bodybuilding supplement marketers- hope to increase or up-regulate. Therein lies the irony. Let’s hope they aren’t making themselves age faster.

I’ll briefly cover a few examples below. If you want more details, definitely read the full paper.

(1) Caloric restriction: Animal studies suggest that by eating fewer calories, aging may be delayed.

(2) Protein restriction: Restriction of protein may also delay aging. In fact, some of the anti-aging effects of caloric restriction may be due to the restriction of protein per se.

(3) mTOR: If you read enough bodybuilding supplement ads, you’re bound to come across one talking about how the advertised product stimulates mTOR, which in turn increases muscle protein synthesis, the essential element of building muscle. This is common with amino acid formulas, especially those containing leucine. Ironically, mTOR has also been suggested to play a role in aging. That’s why some scientists are studying compounds (e.g. resveratrol) that may lower mTOR activity.

(4) Insulin and insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF-1): These two anabolic hormones are often talked about within bodybuilding circles. Bodybuilders generally try to increase their levels, not reduce them. More irony: Reducing insulin and IGF-1 levels may delay aging. Dairy protein (think whey and casein) has been shown to increase insulin and IGF-1. In large (~5-gram) doses resveratrol may lower IGF-1.

(5) Metabolic rate: This is an oldie but still a goodie. Animals with higher metabolic rates tend to age faster. Yet what are all those stimulant-containing “fat-burners” (a.k.a. “thermogenics”) designed to do? Stimulate your metabolism.

 

A caveat: Yes, much of what I’ve written above remains to be proven. Still, after reading the review paper of Drs. Speakman and Mitchell, it’s hard not to wonder if a bodybuilding lifestyle may encourage you to age more quickly. Again, let’s hope this isn’t the case.

REFERENCE

1. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21840335

 

Caloric restriction
John R. Speakman ⇑, Sharon E. Mitchell

 

A new HMB study has appeared in the British Journal of Nutrition (1). The authors compared the bioavailability of a free acid gel form of HMB with the calcium salt (calcium HMB) in capsule form. The gel was either swallowed right away or held under the tongue (sublingually) for 15 seconds before swallowing. The free acid gel produced nearly 200% greater peak concentrations of HMB than the calcium salt, whether it was swallowed right away or held under the tongue before swallowing. The results also suggest that the HMB from the gel was more efficiently taken up by tissues. The authors concluded, “These data offer the theoretical advantages of delivering a better dosing method based upon ease of administration, and achieving higher sustained HMB plasma concentration that could improve HMB availability and efficacy to tissues.”

I reached out to one of the authors, Dr. Rathmacher, who I have corresponded with in the past. I asked him when the free acid gel form of HMB might be available on the market. Dr. Rathmacher said that no release date has yet been established.

REFERENCE

1. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21134325

 

 

Good news! I’m currently coordinating two double-blind, placebo-controlled studies. One is on a thermogenic dietary supplement that contains 1,3-dimethylamylamine. The other study involves a botanical extract. We will be examining the effect that each product has on thermogenesis and mood. The good news is that our IRB (International Review Board) has approved the studies. I’m very excited.

Lots of people take fish oil supplements thinking that they will make their brain work better, resulting in improved cognitive performance and a more positive mood. I’ve taken fish oil for extended periods of time and noticed zero in both regards. What about you?

A study recently published in the British Journal of Nutrition seems to agree with the results of my own personal experiments. For 12 weeks, 159 healthy young adults (18-35 years) received 1 g/day of two types of fish oil. Now, as I understand it, the subjects got 1 g/day of an EPA-rich fish oil and 1 g/day of a DHA-rich fish oil, for a total of 2 g daily. I could be wrong. However, I’ve only got the abstract (see reference below) at this point. I requested the full study from one of the authors.

The authors concluded: “Despite good adherence to the study protocol – as reflected in increased concentrations of n-3 serum fatty acids – compared with placebo, the observed effects of both active treatments were minimal. The only finding of note revealed that supplementation with EPA-rich FO may reduce subjective mental fatigue at times of high cognitive demand, although further investigation is required. These findings, taken together with other recent reports of null effects, suggest that dietary supplementation with n-3 PUFA in healthy, normally developing and impairment-free populations is unlikely to result in cognitive enhancement.”

How does fish oil work for you? Share your story.

REFERENCE

http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=8361394&fulltextType=RA&fileId=S000711451100403X

 

The n-3 PUFA are a unique class of fatty acids that cannot be manufactured by the body, and must be acquired via dietary sources. In the UK, as well as in other Western nations, these ‘essential’ fatty acids are consumed in quantities that fall below government guidelines. The present study explored the effects of 12 weeks’ dietary supplementation with 1 g/d of two types of fish oil (FO; DHA-rich and EPA-rich) in 159 healthy young adults aged 18–35 years. An assessment of performance on a battery of computerised cognitive tasks and mood measures took place before and following the 12-week treatment regimen. Venous blood samples were also supplied by participants at both time points which were later analysed for serum fatty acid concentrations.

Friday night I returned from a business trip to Atlanta. It was hot and muggy there, as it is at home in south Florida. But it was a worthwhile trip. I was introducing a new client of mine to a manufacturer. The client is from Asia. I’m helping them develop their own sports nutrition brand. The products will be manufactured here and exported for sale in Asia.

During meetings with the manufacturer and my client, the topic of raw material prices –specifically, protein- came up. We talked about how some companies are trying to cut costs by cutting corners. For instance, when making protein supplements, some companies are diluting the protein with non-protein amino acids like taurine that are much less expensive than protein. When a protein supplement is tested for its protein content, the test measures not protein per se, but rather nitrogen. If the protein has been diluted with amino acids, the results will be similar. But you’re actually getting a lower-quality product from a muscle-building standpoint. It might also taste not as good. (NOTE: Taurine is much less expensive than whey protein. But it is not used by the body to make muscle protein or any other type of tissue protein. That’s why we call it a “non-protein” amino acid.)

How can consumers determine which companies are cutting corners by performing this stunt? Practically speaking, you can’t. You could pay a lab perform tests on a protein supplement to measure the molecular weight of its contents. This might give you some idea as to whether or not the manufacturer replaced some of the protein with amino acids. But other than that, you’re shooting in the dark.

Now here is some good news. I just signed off on a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized, cross-over study. I’m coordinating the study for a client of mine. We’ll be looking at the effects of a weight management supplement and a herbal extract on thermogenesis, mood and fat-burning. I’m excited to see the results! I’ll keep you posted, of course.

Below I make some weight-loss related statements based on the results of actual clinical studies. These are the kinds of statements you might find in advertisements for weight-loss supplements. I’ve then analyzed each statement so that you can see how easy it is to get carried away by clever advertising.

I don’t write posts like this one too often. The research and number-crunching required is just too time-consuming. Maybe I’m just slow in the brain!

The Statements:

• A single 50-mg dose of caffeine, equivalent to a little over ½ a cup of coffee, was found to increase the calorie-burning rate of healthy male subjects by 6%.
• Women given a meal containing capsaicin, the compound responsible for the painful experience of eating hot red pepper, experienced an increase in calorie-burning rate of 10% after the meal.
• Pre-diabetic subjects given a cinnamon extract reduced their body fat by 0.7% and increased their lean mass by 1.1%. No such changes were observed in subjects receiving a placebo.
• Men and women given a green tea extract increased their calorie-burning rate by 3.5%.

The figures cited above may sound impressive. The reality is that they are not. A closer re-examination shows why:

• Caffeine: The 6% increase in calorie-burning rate only lasted 4 hours, causing subjects to burn an average of 17 more Calories. That’s roughly the caloric content of 3 tablespoons of Coca-Cola.
• Capsaicin: The women in this study ate a curried rice curry dish containing 3 mg of capsaicin, equivalent to a few grams of hot red pepper, depending on the variety. Their calorie-burning rate increased 10%, but only for 30 minutes. As one of the scientists who conducted the study told me, it would take a year to lose 1 kg (2.2 lb) of body fat at this rate.
• Cinnamon: Subjects received the cinnamon extract for 12 weeks. The daily dose was equivalent to 10 g of whole cinnamon. While the reduction in body fat experienced by the subjects taking cinnamon was significant, it was also pretty modest. For a 190-lb person with 25% body fat, a 0.7% decrease represents a loss of less than half a pound of body fat. It’s questionable whether you would even notice a change this small, though the fact that the subjects taking cinnamon gained lean mass at the same time as they lost fat does make the results quite a bit more compelling. Subjects taking cinnamon also experienced a significant decrease in systolic blood pressure.
• Green tea: The results of this study are somewhat more impressive. Subjects who took the extract received a daily dose equivalent to 3-4 cups of brewed green tea. Their calorie-burning rate rose by 3.5%, not just for an hour or two, but for twenty-four hours. This meant they burned anywhere from 63.5-200 additional Calories a day (average 78.3 Calories). Using the highest figure in this range, this is roughly equivalent to the caloric content of a small piece of pizza, or how many Calories an athlete might burn by running on a treadmill at over 9 miles per hour for almost 10 minutes without stopping. Remember, however, that the average was 78.3 Calories.  If you did nothing else but ingest green tea and it increased your calorie-burning rate by this amount every single day, it would take you nearly 7 weeks to lose one pound of body fat. Also remember that anything that you are likely to develop a tolerance to anything that stimulates your metabolism.