begin to dig: supplements

Showing posts with label supplements. Show all posts

Tuesday, January 19, 2010

Glucomannan: the Super Weight Loss Satiety Support Supplement (with Fiber, too)

Lawd, it can be hard when dieting to get enough fiber. Turns out there's a supplement that's been investigated since the 198o's at least that actually seems to keep showing up only positive results in all sorts of contexts. Glucomannan. The fiber of the Konjac root. A soluble fiber, but, what's more, it seems to enhance satiety with less food. And is safe. And seems to do many other Wonderful Things.

I first heard about this stuff in a Precision Nutrition interview with phd Casandra Forsythe of New Rules of Lifting for Women fame. Then there's this cool video on T-Nation showing how much liquid a bit of glucomannan absorbs.

Success -on so many levels.
Studies looking at adding glucomannan to calorie-restricted diets have consistently found that glucomannan groups lose more fat than the non-fiber'd up groups. In one study in 2005, over 5 weeks, the GM group dropped an additional .8/kg. Indeed, in a review of research done on GM and obesity up to 2005 found that adding 2-4g of the stuff to food a day had good weightloss effects while also doing other good things like lipid status, carb tolerance and satiety (as talked about way back in 92 as well).

Fat Related. The review reiterated what's been one of the earliest findings with GM: resduced serum cholesterol AND ldl (1984). IN looking at likely the most popular soluble fiber sup, psyllium, it *seems* that the results on lipoproteins levels are better with GM too.

Weight Loss. In the weightloss space, though, terms like carb tolerance and statiety are really important. Does the person on the calorie restricted diet feel full? That may reduce cheating. Satiety turns out to be a huge topic, and achieving satiety on 1200kcals, for example, is no small thing.

Likewise, being better able to handle starchy carbs means better insulin sensitivity means potentially not taking on board quite so many since one's getting the benefit from them that's approriate with appropriate insulin response.

Related Symptoms? Heck probiotics (eat yogurt) + GM have been shown to reduce acne.

Better Movement. Likekwise having good bowel movements while dieting can be a real challenge. Since gut health is a huge indicator it seems of overall wellbeing, lots of dieters tend to reach for psyllium as a main fiber solutions.

Turns out, though, there are advantages to going the soluble route with glucomannan. Besides just getting better more regular BM's, in a 2006 study, the group using GM (aka Konjac) also shows a significant increase in bifidobacteria, lactobacilli and total bacteria. You know, that friendly stuff we need. The GM "supplement also promoted colonic fermentation as shown in the decreased fecal pH (P < href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19282532">this is one supplement that's actually being suggested can play a role as part of a regimen with kids, where other diet approaches - like drugs - cannot.

Why Does it Work for Weight Loss?
Glucomannan does so many good things, it sounds like it's compressing every thing that goes

along with just eating right into one humble but potent powder. But for most folks doing diets, a biggie reason for adding a little GM (like 4 g, 1.5/meal mixed in with food, not caps) to our lives may be that simply eating less leaves us feeling fuller rather than lesser.

This effect of feeling full is not necessarily obvious - having a full gut does not always leave one feeling satisfied (review of gut triggering brain mechanisms; review of meal size brain signaling). One can have their stomach filled up with water, and as many dieters know, a stomach that's full - of water - doesn't necessarily result in a lack of desire to eat more. So what glucomannan seems to be doing within food use is to assist in having less food register as more satisfying, tripping off those sensors in the gut/brain signaling that say less is more in this case. That is very cool.

That it also helps with "increased fecal energy" as that 2005 review suggests, may be one more reason towards simply feeling better with what one is doing more of the day - i speculate. But feeling good is feeeling good.

Recommendation: If you are struggling with aspects of low-cal'ing, from feeling full, to having healthy bowel movements, glucomannan may be just the ticket. If you have LDL issues as well and are dieting, this may also be a good supplement in any case. Check with your Doc if you're on any medication that may be counterindicated.

Related:

b2d Nutrition Articles Index

Citations

Birketvedt GS, Shimshi M, Erling T, & Florholmen J (2005). Experiences with three different fiber supplements in weight reduction. Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research, 11 (1) PMID: 15614200

Keithley J, & Swanson B (2005). Glucomannan and obesity: a critical review. Alternative therapies in health and medicine, 11 (6), 30-4 PMID: 16320857

Walsh DE, Yaghoubian V, & Behforooz A (1984). Effect of glucomannan on obese patients: a clinical study. International journal of obesity, 8 (4), 289-93 PMID: 6096282

Sartore, G., Reitano, R., Barison, A., Magnanini, P., Cosma, C., Burlina, S., Manzato, E., Fedele, D., & Lapolla, A. (2009). The effects of psyllium on lipoproteins in type II diabetic patients European Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 63 (10), 1269-1271 DOI: 10.1038/ejcn.2009.60

Al-Ghazzewi FH, & Tester RF (2009). Effect of konjac glucomannan hydrolysates and probiotics on the growth of the skin bacterium Propionibacterium acnes in vitro. International journal of cosmetic science PMID: 19818083

Marsicano LJ, Berrizbeitia ML, & Mondelo A (1995). [Use of glucomannan dietary fiber in changes in intestinal habit] G.E.N, 49 (1), 7-14 PMID: 8566676

deFonseka A, & Kaunitz J (2009). Gut sensing mechanisms. Current gastroenterology reports, 11 (6), 442-7 PMID: 19903419

Grill, H. (2010). Leptin and the systems neuroscience of meal size control Frontiers in Neuroendocrinology, 31 (1), 61-78 DOI: 10.1016/j.yfrne.2009.10.005

Follow @begin2dig

Friday, January 15, 2010

CoQ10 (coenzyme q10)- is it worth it - from an athletic perspective

Follow @mcphoo

In the world of alluring supplements, coq10 feels like a relative new comer. Is it worth considering adding to one's regimen? CoQ10 is being investigated in so many contexts, the following is a consideration of where it's been looked at in athletics to help make a determination as to whether or not it's worth considering for your own regimen. Shaking the magic 8 ball, signs point to Yes, especially as we age.

CoQ10 as a supplement has been around for awhile, has been heavily studied it seems in Japan in particular, where it became a legal food supplement in 2001. The first review on any toxicity seems to have been done only in 2008 (it's "highly safe"). In the west, it's mainly been used in the area of heart conditions, muscular dystrophy and some uses to combat effects of statins (cholesterol drugs). More generally it is being promoted as a free-radical buster (anti-ageing) and as something good for the skin. In Athletics, however, it's mainly been considered as to whether or not it does anything for aerobic power.

Coq10: What is it Where is it and Why is it
Co-enzyme Q10 is produced in the body - everywhere in the body. Hence it's other name: ubiquinone - ubi, latin, everywhere. It's in that amazing cell, the mitochondria. We develop increasing amounts of mitochondria when we do aerobic work over time. Aerobic work means pretty much everything where we aren't sucking wind as aerobic=predominantly oxygen based. Mitochondria is the fat burning engine of the bod y. We develop more of it from aerobic work to help better oxygenate our bodies' processes including energy production. Indeed, CoQ10 is involved in the electron transport chain - a key part of converting fuel into ATP, so it's essential to that conversion process.

The thing about exercise is that the harder the effort, the more free radicals and reactvie oxygen species are produced. There are questions in research right now about how these things contribute to muscle damage experienced as everything from fatigue to DOMS. Since 96, it's been hypothesized that ROS and muscle stress impact coq10 levels in muscle tissue, and somehow this has a negative effect on muscle performance. The complement to this observation of course is that well, let's bring the level of coq10 up with supplementation.

We see similar logic and results operating with creatine to be available for ATP conversion in the high effort early anaerobic short duration phosphagen energy system (discussed in this b2d article on creatine and beta-alanine for aerobic power).

The plus side also of keeping an aerobic system able to work more may also mean that aerobic threshold extends, putting off going anaerobic for fuel - to the speedily available but sparse glycolytic (think carbohydrate) energy system.

Overview of Research on coq10 and Aerobic Effort
Study results have been all over the map in terms of whether More is Better for athletes. The intriguing thing about such studies and results is how the protocols - the way the study was performed - differs. So we can't just say CoQ10 didn't effect aerobic power - we have to ask, under what conditions is the jury still out - where if anywhere is their promise?

Consider a way early study in 1997 of whom some might say are the ultimate aerobic athletes, cross country skiiers. 94% of these elite Finnish team athletes "felt" their performance and recovery was better compared with only 33% on placebo. Beyond the affect, there were also results that showed a not huge but still significant effect on both anaerobic and aerobic groups compared with placebo over 6 weeks of training.

In 2003, there was a 'systemic review' of CoQ10 in physical exercies (hypertension and heart failure, too). The finding was that "six showed a modest improvement in exercise capacity with CoQ10 supplementation [including the one above] but five showed no effect."

Here's an interesting finding about those papers:

We identified eleven studies in which CoQ10 was tested for an effect on exercise capacity, six were positive and five showed no effect. Of the six positive trials (Table 1), four were in trained sports persons, athletes, cyclists and skiers, and two involved untrained individuals. Subjects (n = 18 to 28 per study) were given CoQ10, 90 to 100 mg per day for 4 to 8 weeks. Benefits were observed in terms of improved maximum oxygen consumption, averaging 8% (range 3% to 18%) and improved exercise capacity, averaging 13% (range 5% to 33%). Five trials failed to show any statistically significant benefit of CoQ10 (Table 2). Four of these were in trained sports persons and one in untrained individuals. Trials included 10 to 19 subjects and the duration of treatment was four to eight weeks. Dosage and duration of therapy were similar in the two groups of studies.

It is worth noting that whereas all the negative studies were published in peer-reviewed journals, only one of the six positive studies [our skier paper -mc] were published in this way, the other five being published as conference proceedings, probably not peer-reviewed and therefore carried less weight. In conclusion it appears that a modest improvement in exercise capacity may be observed with CoQ10 supplementation but this is not a consistent finding. Inconsistencies in trial results may be due to small numbers of subjects enrolled [in both the showing signs of effect and no signs - mc] and to differences in experimental design. In view of the indication of benefit in some studies, further larger randomised trials in this area are indicated.

Has anything changed since 2003?
In 2005, in what seems an even crappier study for population, took 6 people and over four weeks looked at whether their was an effect. There wasn't. I can't get at the actual study to see how it was run or whether these men with similar vo2max levels for their age (not great).

But here's something recent that seems really interesting. A new (2010) study spent 8 weeks with groups of sedentary guys.

Study Ref: Gökbel, Hakk; Gül, Ibrahim; Belviranl, Muaz; Okudan, Nilsel (2101). The Effects Of Coenzyme Q10 Supplementation on Performance During Repeated Bouts of Supramaximal Exercise in Sedentary Men Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 24 (1), 97-102 : 10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181a61a50

It's a randomized, double blind kinda set up. Fifteen guys. Here's what was found using wingate tests (those things elsewhere shown to be pretty good for developing mitochondria in 6 mins of effort). The measures are Peak Power, Mean Power and Fatigue index.

The cool thing that the researchers found is that the benefit of the coq10 didn't show up in the coq10 group until the fifth wingate (WT) test.

Let's put this in perspective. Wingates are pretty much your all out sprint for 30 secs. Doing one is hard. Doing 3, is absolutely no fun (what the blokes in the 6min a week trial did). Doing 5? With 2 mins of recovery between each? That's not really what you'd call full recovery. It's a break. And it's hard. Why they decided to do 5 of these gruelling sprints?

The rationale tells us about the hypothesis of what we might see with coq10.

The WTs 30-second duration was chosen for being sufficiently long, not only for eliciting maximal glycolytic power but also for requiring a good measure of ‘‘glycolytic/anaerobic endurance’’ (10). The WT strongly stimulates both the adenosine triphosphate-phosphocreatine and glycolytic systems (26), and thus activates purine catabolism and lactic acid production (12). In addition, supramaximal anaerobic exercise has been associated with major increase in plasma catecholamine levels [catecholamines, by the way, are important for fat mobilization, and while any action spurs them, the greater the load the greater the release it seems -mc] (36). These factors are the cause of oxidative stress in supramaximal anaerobic exercise.

It has been shown that during WT, performance to be dependent on energy release from both anaerobic and aerobic processes (3,11). It has been suggested that the WT may be used as an exercise task that stimulates both aerobic and anaerobic processes (21). In the previous studies, it has been demonstrated that aerobic contribution in WT is between 19.5 (3) and 27% (28) but during the repeated supramaximal activities aerobic contribution might be increased.

Therefore, in this study, we are planning to investigate the effects of CoQ10, which has been known to effects on aerobic performance. The purpose of this study was to determine the effects of oral CoQ10 supplementation on performance during repeated bouts of supramaximal exercise.

In other words, the reason for the multiple bouts of wingates is, taking it from the top:

coq10 is found in mitochondria
it is important for converting (oxidizing) fat (it's aerobic energy source) into ATP for energy
there's some work that shows that repeated wingates start to push into the aerobic energy system more than the carb/sugar based glycolytic (fascinating!) and so
if the extra coq10 in the mitochondria is going to show up, it will show up by being fatiuge busting in these more aerobic, later repeats, by being able to make more energy availabe when the system goes more oxidative.

Wow. And guess what the researchers saw? See below:

Peak power across the trials continued to go down; fatigue goes up. This isn't particularly surprising. With only two minutes recovery between repeats, one is going to get pooped. But what is rather interiguing is mean power (shown above). Only in the coq10 group, does mean power go up, and this in the fifth trial, from 285.6 6 +/-47.7W to 331.5 +/- 84.3Wcompared
with the baseline exercise session (p less than 0.05).

More intriguingly, when considering that fifth trial peak power, they harken back to previous work. Let me give you the whole thing, because the use of related research to make the case is fascinating, and has implications for one's decision to take coq10 or not. For this, bear in mind the energy system hierarchy, simplified, of phophagen - burns out in about 30 secs; takes about 5 mins to recover. 2 mins recovery before going into another anaerobic interval is not going to recharge that, which means cutting into the glycolytic - sugar stores. Those have about a 3-10min shelf life and at supramaximal, we're talking the shorter end of the scale. Then there's the aerobic, fat burning system.

Bonetti et al. (6) suggested that increase in muscle performance might be due to the antioxidant effect of CoQ10 supplementation and/or its probable action on the central nervous system. There is a direct relationship between the PP and MP: PP is based on the alactic (phosphagen) anaerobic processes and reflects to maximal anaerobic power and MP shows the anaerobic glycolysis rate in muscles (25,32).

[...] In conclusion, the most important effect of CoQ10 supplementation is an increase in MP during the WT5. Increase of the MP during WT5 suggested that contribution of aerobic metabolism was increased during the repeated supramaximal exercises and CoQ10 supplementation increased performance in this type of exercises. Therefore, we concluded that CoQ10 supplementation increases exercise performance, especially anaerobic capacity during repeated bouts of supramaximal exercises. This is the first study investigating the effects of CoQ10 on supramaximal exercises.

While these are cool results - especially because they map to the hypothesis of what should be shown in the trial if the model is in the zone of being correct, is that difference in power a really big deal? Maybe indirectly in terms of what it *might* be doing anti-oxidatively.

Here's what the authors say:

This study suggests that the effects of 8 weeks of CoQ10 supplementation on PP and FI during the 5WTs were limited. Of primary importance, our results demonstrate that CoQ10 supplementation increased MP during the repeated bouts of supramaximal exercise. This increase in MP might be due to antioxidant effect of CoQ10 or contribution of CoQ10 to the aerobic metabolism and increasing of the aerobic contribution caused to amelioration of performance during the repeated bouts of the supramaximal exercises. It means that CoQ10 might be used as an ergogenic aid to increase anaerobic power after its effect clearly exhibited with the further research.

An ergogenic aid is just something that helps performance. But note the typical reserved speculativeness of the research claims. (1) The effect is limited and (2) we still don't know exactly what's causing the effect we see in the results.

What Do these Results Portend?
The interesting thing, i find, about the results, is that, despite the limited effects, there may be especial benefit for athletes as we age. Coq10 levels go down with age - hence the other research that looks at heart disease and skin and anti-oxidation etc. If we see that the effect on aerobic power is from anti-oxidant processes, perhaps that's a good sign in general for enhancing recovery - one of the things that gets more challenging, again, as we age.

Another possibility here is that the coq10 is helping the body make use of fat oxidation longer rather than having to punt to the less abundant resources of the anaerobic system. This result also has benefits for effort and recovery.

One of the things to note is that unlike the previous study on sedentary men, this more recent study took 8 weeks to run, not four, and used a somewhat different (better reasoned) protocol for its supramaximal load reps - timing the effect to be seen when going long enough and hard enough to trigger a more aerobic response, the aerobic being where the mitochondria oxygen burners kick in. Again, the directly observed effect mayn't be great. But it's still statistically significant, and it may be, as one of the grocery chains in the UK claims that "every little helps"

Putting Together the Supplement Package
Last week, b2d presented a review of where creatine and beta-alanine may fit into benefitting aerobic effort by improving ventilatory threshold in particular at sub-maximal efforts and total work done, as well as time to exhaustion.

Coq10 is showing up as benefitting effort in supramaximal efforts - those intense wingates.

The obvious question would be what might the combined effect be for aerobic power across sub to supra efforts?

Dosing of CoQ10?
The usual doses on the shelf of coq10 are either 30 or 100mg. Natural coq10 being usually advised over synthetic for absorption etc. Most of the athletic research averages out around 100mg - none are anywhere as low as 30. In a way that's kind of too bad. I haven't seen in any of these pieces a rationale for the particular amounts of CoQ10 chosen, or for that matter why regular dietary sups are only 30. More is not always better, but all i can point to is that the *limited* effects/benefits shown in the CoQ10 work are all at the 100's-ish levels.

On a website by Dr Ray Shalen, MD, he reports the following personal experience after reviewing the usual uses of CoQ10:

The effect from 30 mg is mild, mostly consisting of a slightly higher energy level. The effects become more noticeable with 50 mg. I have taken up to 100 mg in the morning. On this dose, I notice an increase in energy as the day goes on, with an urge to take a long walk or be physically active. There is enhanced focus, motivation, and productivity, along with the desire to talk to people. The 100-mg dose of CoQ10, though, is too much since I feel too energetic and alert even in late evening when I want to slow down and get ready for sleep. I usually do not recommend more than 10 to 50 mg of CoQ10 on a long term basis without medical supervision.

Wow again. Personally i've been doing 30mg and haven't noticed a thing - not even mild. Perhaps i work out more than Dr. Shalen and so 30mg is still being attenuated by these training bouts? I may bump it up to 100 for a month or so and see if there's any perceivable effect.

Is it Worth It?
This supplement may be of interest for different reasons to different groups: for those wanting to eek out that wee bit more effort in their training, this may be a complement to that work. For those going off warranty (as a colleague calls hitting over forty) its value may be more in the potential recovery benefit than in direct work.

It's not a cheap supplement, especially at 100mg, and it seems reasonably to need about 2 months of regular use to judge effects. Based on the above toxicity we know harm is in the nil zone (but check with your doctor if you have ANY medical conditions if this is ok or not), so if you think these effects sound good to you, happy trialing. Let me know, please, what you find. Follow @begin2dig

Saturday, January 9, 2010

Creatine, Beta-Alanine and Aerobic Power. Two naf tastes that go Great Together (for stuff like kb & vo2max training)

Follow @mcphoo

Creatine and Beta Alanine are increasingly discussed and used supplements. How might either

fit into the kind of training program that works both endurance and power, like say kettlebell training? The following is an overview of some work that's looked at creatine, beta-alanine, and the two together for aerobic power.

Creatine (Cr), an amino acid, is perhaps the most researched supplement on the planet. When it first came out the hope was that it would improve endurance. Apparently, It didn't, and looking back, one might say understandably so, since creatine mainly benefits the phosphocreatine (PCr) energy system - that system used mainly by sprints or sudden explosive moves that makes a blast of ATP (our energy fuel) available for work, fast.

It takes about 10 - 30 seconds to use up the ATP from PCr and about 6 minutes to resynthesize it at rest. The idea of creatine supplementation is that by getting more Cr into the muscle, more PCr will be available and thus more fast ATP is available for a sustained power blast (see for instance Kreider 98 and Volek, Kraemer and crew 97). When tested to see if it would help endurance athletes stay out longer before fatiguing, it just didn't.

Consquently, folks who sprint or folks who do power training in particular, where the focus is on low rep sets but high volume, generally like creatine. It's one of two supplements iron game master Clarence Bass uses. The other being Whey. So it's pretty durn normal and pretty durn popular. For resistance training.

Endurance Redux. Intriguingly, in what seems like a wee corner of the creatine research world, some researchers

have kept studying the aerobi/endurance space. In certain but quite common contexts of effort, creatine may actually help. Here's a quick review.

A good deal of research on endurance looks at time to exhaustion when pumping out maximal load. It's these kinds of tests where creatine didn't make a difference. Creatine or not, people quit pretty much at the same time to exhaustion.

In 2000, researchers set up a test to see if there were different levels of effort - submaximal loads (like VO2Max training) - creatine may make a difference to anything like maximal oxygen level for load and time to exhaustion.

Vo2Max Anyone? What they found, after just a week of supplementation - no special training - at the usual loading phase of 20g Cr a day for a week was that the Vo2 used for amount of effort dropped (see Fig 1 above). That's great. Now that's only a test of 15 mins of effort, but it's a graded effort to exhaustion. As the authors state,

In summary, creatine loading alters the initial mtabolic responses seen during a short-stage GXT. These alteration are most significant at the early stages of the GXT and are mnifested by a lower sub-maimal Vo2 and heart rate at the end of each GXT stage.

The creatine group also lasted about 70s longer, and had a significant improvement in T(vent) or Ventilatory Threshold (VT). AKA Lactate Threshold (a concept familiar to folks doing Viking Warrior Conditioning (VWC) and thinking VO2Max thoughts). VO2max training, remember, isn't sprint training or a maximal effort. It's submaximal, designed to push the edge of the aerobic envelop - to get greater oxidative capacity before flipping over to the anaerobic/glycolytic energy system. Cr sounds pretty good.

Heart & Power The authors hypothesize that Cr may impact VT due to the presence of greater PCr in the muscle This means the muscles can use that PCr as an energy source a wee bit longer, and that it MAY also be using H+ better (lactate buffering, keeping the Ph balance steady, so delaying fatiuge). Maybe. Now that sounds like Cr. is good for endurance after all?

In 2005, researchers looked at creatine on aerobic power as well as - way cool - what it does to the heart. Their concern was that if creatine brings water into the muscle (that's a not bad thing), what if it did this to the heart? Turns out, from their study that at least 4 weeks of sup'ing with Cr doesn't do anything negative. Groovy. They also found great lean mass improvements without fat mass improvements, though they didn't know what the mechanism for this was.

But what about endurance? Well, as of days of old, nothing again in terms of maximal effort in time to exhaustion. Indeed, they found, unlike the 2000 study, that there was no real significant difference in time to exhaustion between Cr & placebo groups, but once again, submaximal loads showed lower heart rates/more work.

The authors noted additionally beyond the 2000 study, that there was a "significant 3.7% decrease in HRmax following Cr supplementation." They couldn't entirely figure out what creatine was doing that resulted in the lower HRMax, since they saw no changes in the heart with the creatine. They speculate the effect may be due to plasma changes or Doppler flow changes.

Creatine and Beta-Alanine Combo for Endurance? More recently (2006) in the journal Amino Acids, researchers looked at these same measures but investigated creatine & beta-alanine individually and Cr and BA in combination. Like Reece's peanut butter cups, ya got two great tastes that go great together, at least this seems to be indicative.

The most noteworthy finding of this study was the significant increase in five of eight indices of cardiorespiratory endurance with CrBA supplementation. Individually, supplementation with Cr showed improvements in power output at VT and TTE, while b-Ala only demonstrated an improvement in power output at LT. A significant improvement in TTE was seen in the placebo group, but this was accompanied by decreases in power output and percent _V VO2peak at LT. The improvement in TTE seen in the placebo group appears to have been driven by relatively large increases in four of the subjects. These individuals demonstrated increases in TTE of 40, 45, 62, and 63 sec compared with a non-significant decrease of 15.4+/- 7.2 sec in the remainder of the group. However, any conclusions based on these findings must be tempered by the fact that there were no significant between-group effects.
Regardless, the present data at least suggest that supplementation with CrBA may enhance the potential for submaximal endurance performance as measured by the lactate and ventilatory thresholds....these data at least suggest that supplementation with CrBA especially may delay the onset of the VT and LT during incremental cycle exercise in men. Future studies should examine muscle carnosine and=or PCr levels along with blood lactate concentration during submaximal fatiguing exercise with and without b-Ala and=or Cr supplementation.

What about HIIT, Cr and Endurance? Now the interesting bit is where the supplement consideration falls apart again, and researchers' interests turn to HIIT and creatine in 2009. The idea would be that surely here, we'd get to an endurance breakthrough with creatine. But no. once again, doing the time to exhausion test, total work done is the same in both groups.

On the plus side, the same kinds of results for the VT are again seen, and the 2000 hypothesis is again asserted as to why this particular factor is so effected:

In conclusion, HIIT is an effective and time-efficient way to improve maximal endurance performance. The addition of Cr improved VT, but did not increase TWD. Therefore, 10 g of Cr per day for five days per week for four weeks does not seem to further augment maximal oxygen consumption, greater than HIIT alone; however, Cr supplementation may improve submaximal exercise performance.

What about Beta-Alanine and HIIT? Same year, same journal, and pretty much the same HIIT study uses beta-alanine instead of creatine.

Results: Significant improvements in VO₂peak, VO_2TTE, and TWD after three weeks of training were displayed (p <>2peak, VO_2TTE, TWD and lean body mass were only significant for the BA group after the second three weeks of training.

A key point? while BA did actually improve TWD - total work done - as well as improving that illusive Time to Exhaustion, it took over three weeks of supplementation of 6g a day.

Here's an interesting aside on how beta-alanine works from these papers' authors. It's the whole background section of the paper, but it's worth it. They say it so well and this shows why BA may be the next Cr:

This first part represents ideas around fatigue and what's causing it:

High-intensity exercise results in diminished stores of adenosine tri-phosphate (ATP), phosphocreatine (PCr) and glycogenic substrates, and the intracellular accumulation of metabolites (adenosine di-phosphate (ADP), inorganic phosphate (P_i), hydrogen ions (H⁺) and magnesium (Mg⁺), each of which has been implicated as a cause of muscle fatigue [1-3]. Excessive formation of H⁺results in a decrease in intramuscular pH which may contribute to fatigue in some models of exercise [1,4-6]. Enhancing an individual's ability to buffer protons may delay fatigue by improving the use of energy substrates and maintaining muscular contraction [6-9]. When the time and intensity level of exercise is sufficient, the majority of protons that are produced are buffered by the bicarbonate (HCO₃^-) buffering system [10,11] in which they are exported from the muscle [12]. Physiological buffering during dynamic exercise is typically controlled by the HCO₃^-system and is also supported by direct physico-chemical buffering, provided mainly by phosphate, hisitidine residues of peptides and proteins, and the small amount of bicarbonate present in muscle at the start of exercise. However, during short bursts of intense exercise, such as HIIT, physico-chemical buffering will exceed that by HCO₃^-mediated dynamic buffering, calling on intramuscular stores of phosphates and peptides.
In other words, HIIT pushes the body beyond the muscles' levels of chemicals available for buffering. Here comes why beta-alanine is such a potentially big deal: teh connection to canrosine

Specifically, carnosine (β-alanyl-L-histidine), a cytoplasmic dipeptide, constitutes an important non-bicarbonate physico-chemical buffer. By virtue of a pKa of 6.83 and its high concentration in muscle, carnosine is more effective at sequestering protons than either bicarbonate (pKa 6.37) or inorganic phosphate (pKa 7.2), the other two major physico-chemical buffers over the physiological pH range [7,13]. However, as a result of the greater concentration of carnosine in muscle than bicarbonate in the initial stages of muscle contraction, and inorganic phosphate, its buffering contribution may be quantitatively more important.
This sounds like BA would be a no-brainer since it gets carnosine metabolised. But here's why there's a research question:

Mechanisms for increasing muscle carnosine concentration have been somewhat disputed. While carnosine may be increased in chronically trained athletes, the effects of acute training are less clear. In one study, it has been reported that eight weeks of intensive training may increase intramuscular carnosine content [14]. In contrast, several other studies have shown that intense training, of up to 16 weeks, has been unable to promote a rise in skeletal muscle carnosine levels [6,15-17]. Only when β-alanine supplementation was combined with training did an increase in muscle carnosine occur [16], although the increase (40–60%) was similar to that seen with supplementation alone [18].
While carnosine is synthesized in the muscle from its two constituents, β-alanine and histidine [19], synthesis is limited by the availability of β-alanine [18,20]. β-alanine supplementation alone has been shown to significantly increase the intramuscular carnosine content [6,18]. Elevation of intramuscular carnosine content via β-alanine supplementation alone, has been shown to improve performance [6,14,21-24]. Recently, Hill and colleagues [6] demonstrated a 13% improvement in total work done (TWD) following four weeks of β-alanine supplementation, and an additional 3.2% increase after 10 weeks. Zoeller et al. [24] also reported significant increases in ventilatory threshold (VT) in a sample of untrained men after supplementing with β-alanine (3.2 g·d^-1) for 28 days. In agreement, Kim et al. [21] also reported significant increases in VT and time to exhaustion (TTE) in highly trained male cyclists after 12 weeks of β-alanine (4.8 g·d^-1) supplementation and endurance training. Furthermore, Stout et al. [22,23] reported a significant delay in neuromuscular fatigue, measured by physical working capacity at the fatigue threshold (PWC_FT), in both men and women after 28 days of β-alanine supplementation (3.2 g·d^-1– 6.4 g·d^-1).
And here's the kicker

Despite the improvements in VT, TTE, TWD, and PWC_FTafter supplementation, there were no increases in aerobic power, measured by VO₂peak [22-24].
So why test BA with HIIT?

Although HIIT alone does not appear to increase skeletal muscle carnosine content [17], training has been suggested to improve muscle buffering capacity [25-27]. When repeated bouts of high-intensity intervals are interspersed with short rest periods, subsequent trials are initiated at a much lower pH [28]. Training in such a manner subjects the body to an acidic environment, forcing several physiological adaptations. Notably, HIIT has been shown to improve VO₂peak and whole body fat oxidation in only two weeks (7 sessions at 90% VO₂peak) [29]. Furthermore, over a longer period of time (4–6 weeks), HIIT has been reported to increase high-intensity exercise performance (6–21%), muscle buffering capacity, whole body exercise fat oxidation, and aerobic power (VO₂peak) [25-27].
The respective supporting bodies of literature for the use of β-alanine supplementation alone and high-intensity training alone have gained recent popularity. However, to date, no study has combined and evaluated concurrent HIIT with β-alanine supplementation. In theory, we hypothesize that an increase in intramuscular carnosine content, as a result of β-alanine supplementation, may enhance the quality of HIIT by reducing the accumulation of hydrogen ions, leading to greater physiological adaptations. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to determine the effects of chronic (6 weeks) β-alanine supplementation in combination with HIIT on endurance performance measures in recreationally trained individuals.

That is one of the clearest rationales for a study i've read. The authors ought to get a prize for that related work section. But just to bring it all home, BA sure seems wonderful. Imagine doing Viking Warrior Conditioning on BA:

Our findings support the use of HIIT as an effective training stimulus for improving aerobic performance, in as little as three weeks. The use of β-alanine supplementation, in combination with HIIT, appeared to result in greater changes in VO₂peak and VO_2TTE, during the second three weeks of training, while no significant change occurred in placebo group. In addition, TWD significantly (p < class="entity">β-alanine and Placebo groups, respectively. While more research is needed, the current study suggests that in untrained young men, the use of β-alanine supplementation may enhance the benefits of HIIT and augment endurance performance.

From the above, we can begin to see why creatine and beta-alanine are being proposed as the super 1-2 punch (well actually the latest is creatine, beta-alanine and citruline malate) for strength in resistance and endurance training. It's a hypothesis but the bet is that combining both Cr shown to be good for certain parts of HIIT and BA shown to be good for quite a few, might just be double plus good?

So for those of us doing power/endurance strength work like the Long Cycle, or Viking Warrior Conditioning, Cr+BA seems well worth exploring. That said, a key point may be to remember that while Cr. can kick in in 7 days and have an effect, it takes BA about 3+ weeks.

If you're thinking of giving either of these supplements a go, brand doesn't matter. Just look for certified GMP (cGMP) - see this overview on supplements for why. On Creatine, also, their are a bunch of types. Creatine Monohydrate is the one that gets studied and is the best. Creapure is a particular Creatine Monohydrate that's micronized for easy mixing that is 99% pure - look for a brand that's re-packaged that and you're doing great.

Best with your training.

Related Posts

Supplement Curmudgeon: Does that DO anything for you?
Supplement Quality: is what's on the label really in the Tin?
Nutrient timing MAY make a difference.
Dealing with a wretched cold
Carbs or Protein before bed?
b2d nutrition article index
b2d kettlebell article index
what's a scientific abstract and how's it used?

Citations

Graef, J., Smith, A., Kendall, K., Fukuda, D., Moon, J., Beck, T., Cramer, J., & Stout, J. (2009). The effects of four weeks of creatine supplementation and high-intensity interval training on cardiorespiratory fitness: a randomized controlled trial Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition, 6 (1) DOI: 10.1186/1550-2783-6-18

Zoeller, R., Stout, J., O’Kroy, J., Torok, D., & Mielke, M. (2006). Effects of 28 days of beta-alanine and creatine monohydrate supplementation on aerobic power, ventilatory and lactate thresholds, and time to exhaustion Amino Acids, 33 (3), 505-510 DOI: 10.1007/s00726-006-0399-6

Murphy AJ, Watsford ML, Coutts AJ, & Richards DA (2005). Effects of creatine supplementation on aerobic power and cardiovascular structure and function. Journal of science and medicine in sport / Sports Medicine Australia, 8 (3), 305-13 PMID: 16248471

Nelson, A., Day, R., Glickman-Weiss, E., Hegsted, M., Kokkonen, J., & Sampson, B. (2000). Creatine supplementation alters the response to a graded cycle ergometer test European Journal of Applied Physiology, 83 (1), 89-94 DOI: 10.1007/s004210000244

VOLEK, J. (1997). Creatine Supplementation Enhances Muscular Performance During High-Intensity Resistance Exercise Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 97 (7), 765-770 DOI: 10.1016/S0002-8223(97)00189-2

Follow @begin2dig

Sunday, December 20, 2009

B2D Nutrition Article Index: All things Foodish on begin2dig

Follow @mcphoo begin2dig has a lot of posts about topics in nutrition, from discussions around nutrients (how does fat and fat burning work; what are carbs) to supplements (and quality of same), to what do various body fat percentages really look like to how rewiring the brain may be a critical part for diet success. To get a feel for b2d's take on nutrition, here's an index of articles organized from nutrients to nutrition resources. Hope this provides a useful reference point for your nutrition explorations.

Fat:

Respect the Fat: An overview of Fat Burning Goodness

Brown Fat: New Improved Single Factor Thinking

We're Happy happy Happy With our Fat - or maybe not

"Lean Muscle "- muscle is lean - do you mean lean mass?

Green Tea - good for more than what ails ya - facilitating fat burning

Carbohydrates

What's 100% whole wheat? and what is it vs sprouted wheat? or sprouted anything?

Carbohydrates: the New Fat

Carbs or Protein before Bed? Not what you think

Protein

How much protein - no really - for muscle gain, maintenance

i like this piece - cuz i'm not crazy about the conclusions. That mainly protein may well be overdone if you're talking about muscle gain, which is different than using it for diet to feel fuller on less. There's also a difference between protein synthesis and protein absorption. They are not the same. And in particular, why creatine and load may be more important than protein for *gaining* beyond what ya gain just with exercise.

What's a whole protein? and why how should/can we have them?

ever wondered this? especially if you're a vegetarian? how get a whole protein from bread and beans? or what's a super bean as a whole/complete protein?

Optimal Protein Blends - for carnivores and vegetarians alike

A Minute with Mike: BCAA's, Leucine, or Plain Old Whey - does it make a difference?

Nutrient timing *may* make difference - for strength, body comp, muscle fiber...

The Pump: What is it, Does it Work and if so How and for What Kind of Muscle Growth?

Farmed Salmon: Health and Environment Concerns. Dam

Diets
Eating: Rewiring our Instincts for Sure Fire Weight Loss

Habits and Alternatives: one step at a time dieting (within critique of P90x) (including references to Precision Nutrition, Lyle McDonald, M.Beck, and a cast of thousands)

Supplements

Supplement Curmudgeon: Does that DO anything for you?

Is what's on the label really in your supplement?

Creatine, Beta Alanine, Citrulline malate, and more b2d

Dealing with (a wretched) Cold

The Raw and The Cooked of Enzyme Supplementation

Weight Loss & Exercise
More on Exercise without Diet doesn't produce Weight Loss

Exercise doesn't work - without diet - really

Athletic Bodies: which one is you(r desired shape)?

P90X Critique Part 2 0f 3 - WIll you really "get ripped"?

Nutrient Timing
Nutrient timing *may* make difference - for strength/mass development

Minute with Mike (2 ), Post Workout Recovery Window: real or myth?

Approaches to Nutrition
What the Heck is Sustenance? Review of the Z-Health 9S Sustenance

Rewiring Habits - support for lean eating (part of a Critique of P90X )

Set Point Theory is Crap: We are Only What We Eat

Review of the "Science" claims of the Warrior Diet

Human Support is KEY for Good Eating/Diet Success

Resources
Precision Nutrition. The best source to Learn about one's self and food

Georgie Fear's Dig In: The new easy, fast, tasty, satisfying recipe book: DIG IN

Farmed Salmon: Health and Environment Concerns. Dam

Food Inc.: the unbearable lightness of the food industry

Fitness Geek Book Recommendations

Images and Approaches: Real People making Real Changes with Real Support

Athletic Bodies: which one is you(r desired shape)?

Reflection/Critique of P90X review (in Three Parts)

Motivation as Skill: a Functional Definition of same Follow @begin2dig

Monday, December 7, 2009

Supplement Curmudgeon: Does that DO anything for you?

Follow @mcphoo I've recently come to the conclusion that i think i've become a training supplement curmudgeon. Anytime i see someone on an associated forum asking about where they can get a good brand of glutamine or even bcaa's but especially anything nitric oxidyish, i find my eyeballs rolling.

What do we know about longitudinal responses to stuff that

shows these refined fractions do anything marvelous? As far as i know the assessment of glutamine from 2002 that unless you're training at altitude, or have GI distress from malto/dextro carbs, it's a good thing to use, has only been reaffirmed (see overview 2007). And yet it keeps showing up in formulas of stuff.

Likewise there are legions of studies to show that BCAA's are wonderful, but when compared with plain old Whey, whey rules. It also seems that if there were any remaining doubt about creatine monohydrate vs creatine ethyl esther, this year's research has raised sufficient questions about CEE to say CM is once again affirmed as the winner. Again.

And as for nitric oxide supplements, i'm willing to own that i may be wrong, but the resaerch has only shown that without it, protein synthesis does not occur - if NO is chemically surpressed. Having more of it present doesn't - again as far as i can tell from extant research - increase protein synthesis. There are other ways to get a pump - though it's not clear getting a pump aids protein synthesis either.

Supplements That Support What we Want to Do: Work.
As far as i can tell, the supplements that seem to have the best value are those that support energy production, and then support protein synthesis. So, we seem to know that after 20 years of research, creatine monohydrate is good for grinding out a few more quality intense reps. Nice.

We also seem to see promise in Beta Alanine for energy production and some recent studies have looked at *perceived* fatigue reduction in athletic contexts like football games. Rather surprising, but interesting. Worth looking at.

After this, the most research seems to be around getting some carbs and proteins into a person after a workout (carbs are needed for protein synthesis if muscle building of any kind is the aim). But even here, nutrient timing is not established unequivocably, but the nutrient requirements are. And here, it seems things closer to a food - like whey vs bcaa's - may have better effect.

These are the basics. Now, there's all sorts of stuff out there to give one's workouts a boost - to get charged up to go GRRR. But again, as far as i can tell, the two main ingredients in such combinations usually come down to caffeine and/or l-tyrosine (sometimes taurine). Tyrosine i do like once in awhile in lieu of caffeine. But what is the point of this? Why does one need/want to get caffenated to work hard? As work earlier this year showed, one actually gets substantial performance benefits from surprisingly small amounts of caffeine (not coffee. alas, there's a difference).

Reality Check
About two years ago, determined to explore the range of possible ways to get my teeth into my workouts, i ordered as many ingredients as i could see listed on most t-nation type products like power drive, surge, or products like Xtreme ICE etc. I chatted with folks at precision nutrition's forum about various CNS stacks like this one by john berardi for competition/heavy training schedules.

80mg caffeine
--CNS stimulation

300mg of green tea extract
--CNS stimulation

3g Tyrosine - (OR 1.5g N-acetyl-L-Tyrosine)
--Epi and Norepi precursor formation (but precursors must form neurotransmitters and these neurotransmitters must be released - the green tea and caffeine assist in NT release)

1g of Lecithin (or Choline) - (OR 100-200mg DMAE)
--AcH precursor formation (but, same as above, these precursors must be released)

15mg Policosanol
--Increases AcH release, decreases AcH breakdown in NM junction, and increases AcH binding affinity (all leading to decreased reaction time)

*10mg Vitamin B6*
--Potentiates the effects of the other ingredients

Yes i gave these a go. I honestly don't know if they did much for my workouts. I think the tyrosine is a great perker upper and focuser, sometimes surreally so -but - and this is the really deep part - how often do i work out when i actually need to be more in the zone of my workout? like i won't complete it without that? Or, should i not do so (hasn't happened in ages), it would make a difference in the not even grand but rather immediate scheme of things?

My workouts are generally pretty pre-planned: eg today is medium day of RTK; tomorrow will be VWC. A good sleep will enable each better than anything else, i'm finding, more than priming with coffee, taurine or anything else. What am i missing? Am i missing something?

Going Clear: personal realities
About a week ago i gave away a shed load of supplements from DMEA, chocomine, and related cns stack ingredients listed above, and even including a bag of maltodextrin. The latter was because i knew it was produced from corn in the US that is GMO'd sourced, and since seeing Food Inc, i do not want to go there. But more on that anon.

It was shortly after this, i saw word of a new product from t-nation called Anaconda.

"The only question is, are you that serious?" the ad asks. - Where one is already Huge and into working out three times a day. No. i guess i'm not that serious, if that's what serious means.

And that's sorta what my supplement curmudgeonliness has come down to:
what will work to best support what i ACTUALLY do, as opposed to imagining the scenario for which most of these supplements are designed - with a mix of science perhaps and a lot of speculation - to support? Because of course to state the obvious, taking supplements won't make it so, where IT is whatever the body comp goal is.

For me, the complexity is now at about is there really a benefit to taking the protien/carbs (and i happen to add creatine then so i don't forget it) right before and right after the workout or not? And if not, does it really matter? is that what's going to be the real difference between me adding another fraction of an inch of mass to my arms or not? Hard to see from this vantage point that it would.

Getting Real is Sometimes More Challenging than Getting Intrigued
When we get into health and fitness it seems we work so hard to get the details perfect. There's a certain satisfaction, isn't there, to things being just so. The gymboss timer is set for exactly 36/36 for those intervals or 8/12 or whatever. I have been just as particular. To the point of ripping the skin off my hands in doing snatches in a VWC set lest pausing to tape up so i can actually get through the workout break the stride. I must get through the workout without pause.

It's taken awhile for the Voice to come through the noise to say "Why? "

Indeed, what real difference will it make to my fitness goals if i stop to wrap? what real difference will it definitely make if i don't?

Metabolic Flexibility
Listening to Mike T Nelson talk this summer at the Sustenance course about Metabolic Flexibility has helped me start to get my head around the awesome adaptability of our embodied selves. If we ain't got it raw, our bodies will try to manufacture it. If we don't have it right NOW our bodies will find mechanisms to find what it needs. In fact the more non-predictive we become in our patterns potentially the more robust our systems will be - that's just a guess.

So i guess i've gotten either rather skeptical about supplementation or way more relaxed about thinking one supplement will help, for instance, unlock a "hard" workout.

I keep thinking about Clarence Bass: he likes creatine (and that only after quite a period of personal testing and validating with research) and he likes whey protein powder and he is the daddio of whole foods lean eating. He may be a sample size of one but lots of folks using his approach seem very happy with their body comp and health.

Me, i like creatine - and do notice a difference between creapure, the nice pure german stuff, and generics. I like a hydo whey for post workouts, along with a nice mix of non-gmo starchy carbs and electrolytes. I personally tend to do half before a workout and half right after for convenience, and i personally seem to feel better than delaying on that.

The jury is out for me on taurine, tyrosine, beta alanine and citruline malate - though again the science seems promising on those last two.

Sleep that knits up the unraveled sleeve of care
One of the biggest things for me of late has been the difference uninterrupted sleep makes, and investigating that - and how regular nutrition/daily diet is related to that, and the benefits from that, vs just about anything else. That sounds rather boring though in comparison to a CNS stack, doesn't it? I'm not sure it's a lack of seriousness; more a oh let's get real-ness perhaps.

Know what i mean? anyone? Follow @begin2dig

Tuesday, September 8, 2009

P90X Critique Part 3A, Alternatives: to P90X's Diet Plan (or any 12 week diet, really)

Follow @mcphoo

In part 2 of this critique of P90x we saw that Body comp change is about diet first, exercise second. We also detailed the specifics and limitations of the P90X diet. Since diet is SO fundamental to fat shedding (& getting ripped), here in Part three where we finally consider alternatives to P90X itself, we're going to consider alternative nutrition/diet first (this post, part A). In part B (the next, post) we'll look at alternative workouts.

Changing Habits and ANY "diet" Plan (not just P90X's)
Getting diet right though is about more than eating less. For lots of us it also means neurological rewiring to support new dietary practices, not just for 12 weeks, but BEYOND - the place that P90X will not go. So we need our alternatives to include support to plan for success. In the following, therefore, we're going to look at two things - diet or what we actually eat - but also, especially, what's rarely discussed, where habit and change come into play to ensure WHATEVER diet we undertake works for more than the diet period. So we'll start with how habit and diet need to go together for successful and lasting body comp change. We'll look at some programs that support change in nutrition practice, and a way of assessing any diet plan to make sure it works for you.

Who is this article for?
If we're considering a 12 week program like P90X it's usually because we have some goal where we think that following such a program will let us accomplish. And if we're looking at a 12 week program, it's likely that we don't feel sufficiently knowledgeable about fitness to design a program for ourselves. Or we've tried something else, didn't feel it worked, and are looking for a brand new solution.

So in this article, i'm going to assume that someone is, like the P90X client, a person who once perhaps worked out, played on a team and so on, but feels that they are "out of shape" and also wants to "loose weight" and "get back in shape." Or maybe some folks do not have a previous atheletic background, but want to get healthy now, or have simply been trying stuff recently and it hasn't seemed to work.

And if you're here, i'm also thinking that you may too be wondering if there's other, better or just different ways to get what P90X (or related approaches) promises to deliver.

So how do we even begin to think about whether a plan is appropriate?

In a well rounded health program to deliver on body comp, we'd look at three components:

- a nutrition program to support the work being undertaken - that's first.
- a resistance program not only to develop strength, but also for the associated health benefits of lifting heavy. Lifting heavy also has benefits for bone building as well as fat burning too.
- an endurance/cardio program to improve work capacity which actually means improving fat burning capacity. This endurance program can be further broken down into a couple of parts - interval work and steady state cardio work. We'll come back to that

In this Part 3A of Alternatives to P90X we're going to focus on the Nutrition side; Part 3b will look at workout alternatives.

Deliverables: by the end of this article,

you'll have a set of options/alternatives to P90X and other diet plan nutrition approaches that will sustain you during and beyond 90X days of moving to better health, wellbeing and leanness (or bulkness).
You'll also have a set of heuristics against which you can assess any diet plan you may be considering to see how well it will support your goals

You can scroll down to the bottom if you just want that template now.

Nutrition When Fat Burning/Fat Loss is the Goal
From part 2, we killed the myth that exercise is the number 1 factor in a fat loss program. For a review, here's a discussion of a couple references.

So, the fundamental requirement for fat loss is: fewer calories in than needed for maintenance.
The result of caloric restriction will always be weight loss. More than exercise, diet makes the difference.

Consider this: 20 mins of HARD intervals on a bike burns about 200 calories.

That's

two pieces of whole wheat bread - nothing on them.
or 29 almonds
or a doughnut
or less than two 8oz glasses of apple juice
or not quite a pint of guiness
or 1.5 cans of coke
or two cans of red bull

Change one Thing that = 20 mins of Sweat: If any of the above items are part of your daily regimen, cutting just one of them - like cutting juice or coke or a beer - and suddenly you've done the equivalent of 20 mins of an exhausting work out. This approach of change one thing is described in detail at iamgeekfit.

Any Diet will Do - if you just want to lose fat. On that basis you can use any diet you like: Mediteranian, so called Paleo, Atkins. Anything. Just eat less than you need for your energy requirements.

Research has shown over the past two years (example 1; example 2)with studies lasting way more than 12 weeks (some 2 years) that after about 12 weeks, it doesn't matter what diet you're on, weight loss levels out to the same - based pretty much on predicted caloric deficit.

What Is "less" in eating less? Really: one one level, it's that simple. Here it is: eat less - consistently. How much less can be predicted quite closely, too so that you're burning what's available to burn and not going into starvation mode where, initially, weight loss will stall out and start eating muscle rather than fat. So eat less, but the right less.

You can use the above and start your sensible fat burning (as opposed to weight loss) journey today. Bon Voyage.

Individual Responses and Habits of a Lifetime.

For some people, the above simple prescription is ample to set off on a fat loss journey of success. For the rest of us, the principles make sense, the physics is reasonable, but we still struggle with burning fat. And then we look at exercise programs cuz that must be it rather than looking a little more deeply at our eating practices.

We are complex, multi-facetted, amazing organisms, don't you think? all the stuff going on all the time inside us, reacting to our environment, regulating our heart rate, body temperature, digestion, movement, nutrient flow. Awesomely complex.

Who are we with respect to food? So while the principle of "eat less" is righteous in its truth, sometimes, what less when and how can

be important. If we're working out, in order to keep working out, we may find that we get our best efforts out of ourselves if we have some yogurt, half an apple and a coffee forty minutes before we work out. Some folks find a coffee after dinner helps them relax; others it perks right up. Some of us just don't know whether eating breakfast or not in the morning makes a difference to how we feel during the day because we've never tried it for a sufficient period to be able to say.

In other words, before heading into a diet of any kind, it might be useful for us to set aside some period of time in which we get to know ourselves and our responses to food a bit better. This doesn't mean we won't burn fat in the process. But if the emphasis is on learning about ourselves and our responses to food first, then we'll have the knowledge to take into those diet phases of caloric restriction.

I'll talk about an approach in a minute that supports that kind of investigation, but let's take a look at one other issue that informs the perceived success or failure: habits

Change is Pain. "Going on a Diet" often involve significant and sudden revisions to the

way we are used to do doing things. And when we do something by rote, we generally refer to such practices as habits - practice that has become an unconscious, reflexive response to a situation.

We practice habits for instance when we train for a sport. In learning, this has been described at a very basic level as a three stage process where we go from very conscious practice of an activity - best done with instruction and guidance to refine technique, to a second level where we know enough to be able to correct ourselves, but still not proficient, to a third level where the behaviour becomes reflexive, automatic.

Reflexive responses are habituated response to a stimulus where we no longer have to think about its performance. That reflexive response could be a backhand swing in tennis, setting up an amplifier for a gig, filing messages from phone calls, or getting up at 7am each morning and putting the kettle on for tea, or snacking while watching TV. Effortless, thought-less activites. Habits.

When we seek to change these habits we are ripping out connections that have been made one way, and re-growing them another way. Ouch. Change in itself can cause headaches: the brain is a sugar feind: it uses a lot of the carbs we ingest to keep going. When it's working harder to process new stuff, it's not just muscularly fatiguing; it's mentally fatiguing. Eating right (not pigging out) for our brains is important when we're going through change. So how great do you think going from lots of starchy carbs/crap food to no crap food would be for the initial transition? We get wired for what we do, even when what we do is crappy.

Habits are Wired In. Really. Neurologically, science is showing increasingly that we build up patterns of responses in our brains that manifest in our bodies: neurological actions are triggered in the chemical-physical soup that is us, so there are strong connections between our brains and bodies. We really do get *used* to doing something a particular way; doing something - like eating or not eating under particular conditions - if we do it for many repetitions - becomes wired into our very chemistry.

Eating = Habits. Increasingly, cool research in eating is also

showing that eating is habit/behaviourally based. Our habits reinforce our neurological responses to food. For instance if we regularly eat in the morning, we will feel hungry in the morning if we don't eat. This is in part down to ghrelin telling us we're supposed to get food now, and if it's in the AM, that means carbs now please. We can change our behaviours and affect that physiological response. But changing habits means patience and planning for successful, enduring change. That takes practice. Lots of reps. With conscious attention to the new practices.

So, big point, we need to be gentle with ourselves in this retraining - as we would be with anyone we were teaching a very challenging new skill. Consider that most people do not learn how to play an instrument with proficiency over night. There are techniques to master; skills to learn.

Likewise the nutritional care and feeding of our very complex selves requires this kind of patience. In thinking about alternatives to P90X, the challenge becomes, do you want to try to get to your body comp goal with another 12 week approach? or do you want to get there where 12 weeks is part of a lifelong success story?

What i've seen have tremendous value and longer lasting benefit than just "going on a diet" or "doing a fitness program" for 12 weeks, are approaches that let us

a) learn about what works for us in eating and
b) helps to adjust our wiring (habits) around eating to plan for and support ongoing success.

In other words, the successful approaches mean thinking about nutrition not just as a 12 week performance piece on deprivation, but as life long behaviors for health.

This focus shift in itself may be challenging for some folks who want that lean body NOW. The good news is that starting out thinking about spending some quality time learning about responses to food and developing more habits also goes hand in hand with burning fat, if that's the goal. What it means is that the effects will endure past 12 weeks. For this to work, as more psychologists who work with dieters state, we need to plan for success. Generally that means we have to plan to reduce the brain strain of change (i like that alliteration).

How long does this loss/learning take? This process of fat burning while learning about ourselves and food intake takes time -6 weeks with a plan sort of at a minimum it seems but 16-24 is also reasonable. The difference is, we do see progress in the results we want, but we're gaining knowledge and habits to support that process.

Some Approaches to Consider

Precision Nutrition. Right now, one of the best approaches that brings together this kind of approach to learning about YOU and what works for YOU while getting into a groove with new habits to sustain this practice over the long haul is Precision Nutrition.

It's constructed around 10 habits: 7 about eating; 3 about food preparation practice. A first phase is to get to 90% compliance with the core eating habits for a month.

1) that means you've had time to practice success with these habits many times a day for 30 days.
One of these habits is to get veggies/greens with every meal; another is get protein with every feeding. - IF one is eating 6 times a day, that's 240 perfect practices or 216 at 90%. over say 540 waking hours. If learning theory is correct, we likely need 5 times that to develop this practice as a habit rather than a conscious effort.

2) that's also 2 microcycles of consistent adaptation to a food plan.
A general heuristic in working with food is when we want to make a change and see if that change is having the desired effect - like dropping 250 kcals a day - folks generally use a two week period to factor out other effects that could be bringing about results in a shorter period. If we have consistency for a month, that's two cycles, and we have a great baseline then from which to start to tweak one thing at a time.

And tweaking once the baseline is established is just what Precision Nutrition supports in it's Individualization plan that considers a whack of variables, from body type to workout type to carb tolerance to get you able to dial in your reality.

And unlike P90X and other programs, PN actually provides the tools one needs to be able to measure body comp progress, including illustrated guides for girth measurements AND 7 site caliper readings for calculating body fat % as well as how frequently to take them, calculations used, etc. Nothing's left to chance. Here's a two part review that details the programs very closely: what's in it; how/when individualization kicks in.

Also you can check out the free PN PDF and see what you think.

Likewise in contrast to P90X, check out some real transformations over 16 weeks of real people with great but realistic transformations.

Working Out and Diet. Another one of the reasons i really like PN is that it's also normal person to athlete tested. It's approach is designed to support nutritional needs around working out - all kinds of workouts. Not all diet books relate to folks for whom movement/workouts are a part of their practice, and physiological needs.

In this case, learning about how eat right to optimize workouts' effects for lean tissue building is a useful thing to know.

If you already have a diet you want to try, plan for successful change/rewiring
Now, i think P90X is fabulous because of the resources it provides (detailed in this review). One of those resources is the online forum which has a wealth of workout options and lots of experts on the site who have done these workout programs while doing PN - lots of trainers who use PN with their clients; lots of gals who lift heavy; guys who run. You want experts and many Folks Like You, PN has both. It also keeps tabs on the latest nutrition research, with expert commentary that's accessible and usable. You just cannot get stuck with PN or the PN community.

That said, you may already have a diet you think would be just great. OK.

Then as said, a huge factor in anyone's success in a diet and MAINTAINING the results of the diet is planning for the diet, and the habits around it: planning for before, during and especially after in that all important and critical maintenance phase.

This model of planning for successful CHANGE has been studied now in psychology for about 15 years. It's been studied in big change areas like smoking, alcohol consumption and diet. Again and again, the big issue for successful changing is planning - and having a reasonable plan.

Now, PN is all about developing new habits, and it says you can take each one in turn: get comfy with one, then move onto the next until you have all 7 under your belt (taking fish oil capsules with each meal seems so easy for me, and yet i know some people who struggle with getting down a bottle. So how plan for success?

My big struggle for adaptation was starchy carbs only after a workout, whereas i know other folks who didn't give that a second thought. Take on the ones that work first; use that success to build on the others. And THEN with that base, swing into individualization (which may just bring back some starchy carbs for other non-post-workout times, once what's known as my own carb-tolerance is understood).

Saying that, some folks find picking up habits like those in PN easy peasy; others struggle - their wiring may be further away from PN's than someone who's already been eating in a PN'ish kind of way.

Deliberate Support for Habit Change.
For support in developing new habits around food and eating, there are two fabulous books that are based on that psychological model for successful habit changing. One is called the Beck Diet, and the other is the Four Day Win. More than anything else you do for yourself, no matter what diet you choose, consider either of these books. Do the "look inside" thing at amazon (linked below) and see which one resonates better with you. These guides are some of the best ways to PLAN for successful change and to maintain that change as the new habit.

The Beck Diet: Train your brain to think like a thin person (US || UK), Judith Beck. Despite its title, is not about Diet at all. It's about how to build up the strategies one needs to make a success of that diet. A lot of it is about providing strategies that will support the rewiring of old eating habits and the development of new habits.

In the Four Day Win: your guide to thinner peace (US || UK) the author (another

Beck, Martha Beck, not related) takes the concept of building up both an understanding of what's happening psychologically and physiologically inside a person when just dieting without knowledge about the process (enter the Wild Child and the Disciplinarian, for instance: important characters within to get to know, acknowledge and deal with). This Beck suggests four day micro cycles of practices to build new habits for success. The book is both an awesome, fun read, and some great ideas for practice.

The Instinct Diet: Use Your Five Food Instincts to Lose Weight and Keep it Off

The Instinct Diet Fascinating work by Susan Roberts of Tufts around the ways we seem to be wired almost instinctively to go for just the kinds of foods that, when there's an abundance of 'um, they become "bad" foods, but at just about any other time than now, really they are survival smart: energy dense, familiar, available, satisfy hunger, and even variety rich.

The research is a cool way to undesrstand more about why we do what we do when making food choices - especially under stress.

Delving into Other Territory: wilder diets
If you're into P90X and working out - or want to be there, at some point you're going to hear about all sorts of diets that are supposed to optimize getting ripped and building mass and doing amazing things.

Idea one: get the basics down first - learn about yourself and what works. then
Idea two: by all means, experiment.
Idea three: experiment THEN with the best information possible.

For this experimentation, Lyle McDonald (b2d article about his approach) is fabulous. McDonald has written perhaps the best reference on Ketogenic dieting out there. And it is a reference. It's about ten or so years old now, but it's fabulous. For folks who have heard about high fat diets and want to give them a go WHILE training - you really owe it to yourself, your health and your well being to read this book.

McDonald has lots of other great books, but the other two to think about are the Ultimate Diet 2.0, and Rapid Fat Loss Handbook. RFL is a revision of something known as protein sparing. and the other is about cycling intake to get off the last bit of fat *if you're already way low body fat %*

Both of these are i'd say largely for folks who are close to or are actually lean, and have already built up the habits of clean eating. If you haven't these books are jumping prematurely into the deep end. I mention them here at all so that you'll have a sense of when they might be most appropriate.

Indeed, Precision Nutrition has with it something called the Get Shredded Diet and the Get Unshredded Diet (it takes time to come down from a lean gets leaner program and NOT put back on a lot of fat) - both approaches for once you have arrived at a really low leanness and would just like to get at that super lean place for whatever reason.

What i really like about McDonald's books is that in each he presents the pros and cons of any approach, for whom they're useful, when, and how to go about running them. Personally, i like them more for what i learn about what's happening physiologically than for the actual diets (that take up about 5% of the texts).

Intermittent Fasting
A few of my Z-Health and even PN colleagues say that they have found themselves moving into cycles of Intermittent Fasting. Human research has lagged behind on the health benefits of IF, because most of them have focused on longevity, and that's harder to measure in humans than in rats in terms of data collection. But it seems some new physiological effects seem to be showing benefits of intermittently, intermittently fasting. So far it seems none of the physiological effects are unique to fasting; they are replicated with good diet and exercise, as this research review shows. BUT, affect is important, too. Some folks report getting mean and nasty with some forms of IF, while other report feeling better.

Happily, these same colleagues suggest IF as an advanced technique - and by advanced i think we all mean, that doing something like PN first let's a person get to know a lot about how we respond best to food under different types of conditions: when working out really hard; not so hard; not at all, and so on. With that knowledge, hitting IF can be a really intriguing process, and i'd say "real" IF as opposed to faux IF. A fast can be any time we're not eating, but physiologically effects seem to show up at 16 hours - some folks stop eating early in the evening and then wait till lunch to eat on their IF'ish days.

Getting into IF detail is beyond the scope of this article. Colleagues recommend Eat Stop Eat as a good template. My suggestion again would be get to know your food self and

then check out IF if that makes sense. Especially if you're looking at working out, challenging yourself with fasting and effort can get counter productive fast. This doesn't mean that it mayn't be possible to combine both; it's just it may be asking a lot of your body to pick up a lot of new habits, and new reactions. For some this may be great, but for many it's a combination that initially can retard progress rather than help it. Why?

Surprisingly you may find that to lose weight, if you've already been chronically under eating and working out and not seeing the scales change, you need to EAT MORE to start to burn fat. Adding IF to that can cause some issues. Now, cycling your calories is a cool technique and PN gets into this in the individualization phase for sure. But again, it's everything in its place: plan for success. You have all the time in the world to try everything under the sun. So give yourself a chance to succeed.

Aside: The Lucky Bastards who Need to Gain Weight

If you're a skinny bastard and you want to get not just ripped but built, this book is for you. Why? it has both an eating plan and a workout plan that will take you there. It's been tested; it works. You'll find lots of people on the Precision Nutrition site doing Scrawny to Brawny (US || UK) - there's a forum there for the S2B clan, and it's great. Skinny Bastards can need habit help, too, so do consider either Beck or Beck for support.

Summing Up Part 3A on Alternatives to P90X Diet:
Life Is Longer than 90X days. Learning to Eat better for all of them is a plan.

I haven't gone through a detailed critique of P90X's diet here. That's more or less in part 2, but the main thing is that as part of a 12 week program, it's limited in how well it can actually support what a person is doing or wants to achieve. As we saw, if you're in the first two energy levels, you can count on losing 0-6 pounds in the 90days if you stick to the plan.

A person may learn something about portion size and eating "clean" over that period, and that's great. But it's not great if that 90 days has been a study in deprivation that gets derailed post program.

Template for Assessing Nutrition Plans
This post isn't exhaustive. It's giving some examples of approaches that i can recommend based on my experience of them both for myself and folks i work with, as well as from the results of colleagues and their clients - where i trust their reports.

So what's a template for assessing a nutrition approach that you might be interested in?

First what do we know about making changes to our body comp (fat mass to lean mass ratio):

eating is the fundamental biggest affecter in body comp change, whether burning fat or putting on mass
our eating practices are largely habit based
changing habits and wiring in new ones has psychological and initial neurological cost
the better we support ourselves for successful change with nutrition approaches that enhance change while supporting our activities, the better we do over the duration.

What do we know that seems to be pretty solid about fat loss?

any diet works for fat loss as long as there's caloric restriction, though some foods/combinations may work better or worse for some people (in terms of energy, well being, results), at some times, pending goals/activities.
when adding workouts, there are physiological effects so good to have an approach that is sensitive to these factors and provides for them (until a person knows how to do that for themselves
a huge part of diet success of any kind is to develop practices to support the requirements of the diet. the post diet rebound of regaining more than the weight lost is most often the result of not having that support.

Based on the above some practices an effective nutrition program will support:

learning about one's own responses to food, amount of less food amount of more food that one needs when working out or not
providing practices to support successful and ongoing change in practice - till that change becomes the new habit.
with the above two parts, being able to determine a successful plan to support athletic practice or body comp goals.

With these heuristics, you can assess any diet, where it may have shortcomings that you'd want to supplement from somewhere else, perhaps, and what you may need to make a success of the effort.

The biggest shift that this part of the Alternatives discussion foregrounds relative to P90X is the primacy of nutrition over any workout program.

Saying that, a physical practice does have physiological effects that enhance calorie burning and lean tissue building. Physical practice can also decrease inflammation, improve energy levels, make recovery from injury easier, and slow down aging.

SO just because we can cut 200 cals by giving up those 29 almonds (i love almonds and raisins. dang), doesn't mean that workingout out doesn't have huge value. In fact what it means is there are more better and other reasons to work out than fat burning. Some fat burning is just a nice side effect of building a more cardio efficient, more muscular you which only takes 6 mins. Really.

So now that we have nutrition front and center, and hammered down, in Part3 b we're going to look at some alternatives to P90X workouts to get to that more effective, efficient - even ripped, muscular - you, and how to assess workout alternatives to P90X to work for you and for your goals.

Preview of Workout Alterntatives:
The complete article (part 3b) is now up on assessing/choosing workout alternatives. In that piece, we review that P90X is about endurance strength. We look at other parts of strength and skill for a general physical preparedness program where getting lean is the goal.

We consider our other energy systems - besides fat burning which P90X privileges - and why that might be important
we look at our other systems like joints, tendons and bones, and think about how a program works those or not
we look at our neural responses to reps and how rep quality is really important.
we also take a look at a few other p90x concepts like reps to failure and the pump and put them in context.

The end goal is - if you decide you want to do P90X you do so cuz you know what it's offering is what you want based on what you know it's doing. But if you'd like to work those other systems that are also a part of us, well, some help on finding alternatives, too.

does any of this help you decide on a program? please let me know your thoughts.
thanks for reading.
mc

Related Posts/Resources:

P90X critique part 1: muscle confusion confusing?
P90X critique part 2: will p90x really get you ripped?
P90X critique part 3b: workout alternatives and why consider 'em

Athletic bodies: what do elite amateurs and sports pros look like under their shirts?
Respect the Fat: an overview of Fat Burning Goodness.
about repetitions to become habit: how many reps should i do?
A minute with Mike: the whey window
another minute with mike: whey, bcaa's leucine, what gives?
supplements: creatine, beta alanine, citruline malate.
protein or carbs before bed? do you want to sleep?

set point theory: what it is and why it's crap
other sups: green tea
and quality of sups: is what's on the label in the tin?
beyond nutrition: what the heck is sustance?
fat burning: six minutes to better oxidative you?
ryan andrews: what's your four pounds a day made of?

Follow @begin2dig

begin to dig

Pages

Tuesday, January 19, 2010

Glucomannan: the Super Weight Loss Satiety Support Supplement (with Fiber, too)

Friday, January 15, 2010

CoQ10 (coenzyme q10)- is it worth it - from an athletic perspective

Saturday, January 9, 2010

Creatine, Beta-Alanine and Aerobic Power. Two naf tastes that go Great Together (for stuff like kb & vo2max training)

Sunday, December 20, 2009

B2D Nutrition Article Index: All things Foodish on begin2dig

Monday, December 7, 2009

Supplement Curmudgeon: Does that DO anything for you?

"The only question is, are you that serious?" the ad asks. - Where one is already Huge and into working out three times a day. No. i guess i'm not that serious, if that's what serious means.

Tuesday, September 8, 2009

P90X Critique Part 3A, Alternatives: to P90X's Diet Plan (or any 12 week diet, really)

ShareThis

Connecting

it's in b2d somewhere...

How to Subsrcibe to B2D

Blog Archive

About Me