Gå til innhold

Intervju med Layne Norton

Espen Espelund

Anbefalte innlegg

Fortsetter under...


Interessant at begge to var inne på viktigheten av å stimulere til proteinsyntese flere ganger iløpet av dagen.

Jeg ville anbefalt deg å lese hele tråden her:


Spesielt Alan Aragons svar til Layne:


To Layne specifically:

I read your article, and it was very well-done. However, I disagree with the idea that 1) 8 meals per day will evoke the refractory response and thus inhibit optimal muscle growth, and 2) 2 meals per day is insufficient for optimal muscle retention/growth. We'll take these one at a time.

1) The "protein stat hypothesis" which is the source of your concern for the inhibition of muscle growth by constant AA elevation is exactly that - a hypothesis. It's based on preliminary & circumstantial evidence. The work you cited by Bohe et al is intravenous infusion of AAs examined acutely (in the short-term). This research did not measure effects on muscular size or strength over the long-term. At best, this data is hypothesis-generating, and far from conclusive. To translate this data into a recommendation against high meal frequency is quite a large leap of faith. The other work you cited by Paddon-Jones et al in support of inter-meal AA dosing had some serious treatment imbalance. The experimental group consumed a total of 45g EAA + 90g carbs above & beyond the control group, so the results were not surprising. Furthermore, the control group's protein intake totaled 64g for the day, while the supplemented group averaged 109g. It not only was a matter of treatment imbalance, but it essentially became a comparison of insufficient protein intake versus barely adequate intake, even by sedentary standards.

2) Aside from individual variations in gastric tolerance, the idea that 2 meals per day is not optimal for muscle growth is sort of a slippery slope for a couple of main reasons. First off, most people eating 2 meals a day do not have size gains as their main goal. Their priority is usually fat oxidation, and 2 meals per day in many cases works great for this. Secondly, even if the main goal was muscle retention, there are human studies lasting several weeks showing the muscle-preserving superiority of 1 meal/day instead of 3 (Stote et al, 2008), and 3 meals instead of 6 (Oyvind et al, 2007). In addition, human research has also shown no difference in LBM retention despite 20-hr fasting cycles compared to a conventional eating pattern (Soeters et al, 2009). Furthermore, in young women, no difference in muscle retention was seen between consuming most of the day's protein in one meal, versus the same amount spread across four meals (Arnal et al, 2000). Elderly women put through the same protocol actually had better muscle retention on the large pulse rather than the spread-out pattern (Arnal et al, 1999).

Keep in mind, NONE of these studies involved the abundance of protein that BBers typically ingest, which would actually make differential effects of meal frequency even more miniscule. So... Given the existence of human data to the contrary, a compelling case cannot be made from rodent research - despite the flaws of the existing human research compared to the meticulous execution of the critter designs. The latter is still up for human confirmation at best.

To no one in particular:

The postexercise "anabolic window" is a highly misused & abused concept (which I believe Layne agrees with). Preworkout nutrition all but cancels the urgency, unless you're an endurance athlete with multiple glycogen-depleting events in a single day. Getting down to brass tacks, a relatively recent study (Power et al. 2009) showed that a 45g dose of whey protein isolate takes appx 50 minutes to cause blood AA levels to peak. Resulting insulin levels, which peaked at 40 minutes after ingestion, remained at elevations known to max out the inhibition of muscle protein breakdown (15-30 mU/L) for 120 minutes after ingestion. This dose takes 3 hours for insulin & AA levels to return to baseline from the point of ingestion. The inclusion of carbs to this dose would cause AA & insulin levels to peak higher & stay elevated above baseline even longer.

So much for the anabolic peephole & the urgency to down AAs during your weight training workout; they are already seeping into circulation (& will continue to do so after your training bout is done). Even in the event that a preworkout meal is skipped, the anabolic effect of the postworkout meal is increased as a supercompensatory response (Deldicque et al, 2010). Moving on, another recent study (Staples et al, 2010) found that a substantial dose of carbohydrate (50g maltodextrin) added to 25g whey protein was unable to further increase postexercise net muscle protein balance compared to the protein dose without carbs. Again, this is not to say that adding carbs at this point is counterproductive, but it certainly doesn't support the idea that you must get your lightning-fast postexercise carb orgy for optimal results.

Sorry about the length of this post, I tried to keep it concise, but sh!t happens. I might not be able to come on for a while (the weekend calls). And by the way, there are even more compelling data against the standard practice of neurotic micromanagement of meal timing, but it's not my intention to write a book here.

Layne Svarer:

I agree, we disagree on minute things.

but for the sake of disagreement

1) I"m not sure how you would expect someone to run a test on hypertrophy testing long term outcomes of a refractory response. Shall we infuse people 24/7 with amino acids? It's just not viable. As you said, it's a hypothesis, but we have since followed it up with another paper I talked about that will be coming out soon that has data which supports this 'stat' hypothesis. I agree it would be great to get a long term study, but sometimes when you are actually writing grants and doing the research in the lab, there is a disconnect between what you'd like to do, and what is actually practical to get done.

2) Our data indicates the more bouts of muscle protein synthesis you can stimulate per day, the more hypertrophy you will experience and the data in my thesis backed this up. Hardly conclusive at this point, but I think if you can stimulate protein synthesis 4-5 times per day as oppossed to 2, you are better off. Additionally, it's not as if 4 or 5 meals per day is a huge impedement.

In all likelyhood we are arguing over a 5-10% difference in gains, if that and so for most people who are super meticulous, it won't mean much. But for a competitor, it might mean everything.

Again, it is just a hypothesis, but that doesn't mean it's not viable either

Lenke til kommentar
Del på andre sider

Syntes denne var spennende.

One thing that occurred to me there is that if you look at a large meal, one with a slow digesting protein source such as casein or animal protein, you do find that the actual digestion of the meal can take several hours. Given that context, I’m assuming there is going to be an ongoing release of amino acids from the protein sources in that meal so in the situation when you introduce a BCAA is there not already protein synthesis going on at the same time?

Yes there is but the point being that the BCAA’s are going to cause a really rapid rise in plasma BCAA’s compared to eating another meal or a steady release of amino acids over time as with casein ingestion. Even if there are amino acids going in, as we’ve shown before a steady influx of amino acids is not sufficient to keep protein synthesis elevated, BCAAs are going to spike it even more which will increase BCAA oxidation in muscle, replenish ATP and keep protein synthesis going. It’s not an amino acid availability issue that limits the duration of protein synthesis in response to a meal, it’s an ATP issue.In the study I keep referencing we gave whey for the meal protein sources, which people see as a ‘fast’ digesting protein source but when you feed it in the context of a whole meal, we still had very high amino acid levels three hours post meal and that’s when protein synthesis had already fallen back to baseline. You have an elevated amino acid level even though protein synthesis is falling off and that was pretty shocking to us, which is again why we suggested eating another meal wouldn’t do it. Branched chain amino acids are not really touched by the gut or the liver and get into the bloodstream rapidly so we postulated they would act differently to simply eating another meal. The research seems to support our theories thus far. BCAAs are digested so rapidly, they cause a rapid spike and they act differently compared to eating intact protein. People will say ‘well there’s already BCAA’s in the food you eat, in whey protein etc.’ Yes, that’s true but those are peptide bounded. They are bound to other amino acids and you would have digest and release those, whereas when taking a free-form BCAA there is no digestion required. It goes straight through the digestive tract and into your bloodstream pretty rapidly and that’s why it tends to have a differential effect compared to eating another meal.

Lenke til kommentar
Del på andre sider

Bli med i samtalen

Du kan publisere innhold nå og registrere deg senere. Hvis du har en konto, logg inn nå for å poste med kontoen din.

Skriv svar til emnet...

×   Du har limt inn tekst med formatering.   Lim inn uten formatering i stedet

  Du kan kun bruke opp til 75 smilefjes.

×   Lenken din har blitt bygget inn på siden automatisk.   Vis som en ordinær lenke i stedet

×   Tidligere tekst har blitt gjenopprettet.   Tøm tekstverktøy

×   Du kan ikke lime inn bilder direkte. Last opp eller legg inn bilder fra URL.

  • Opprett ny...