Anabolic Steroids - Steroid Forums
Pin it Share on Tumblr


buy steroids - roid-shop.com

 
Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: The Protein needs of women

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    130

    Default The Protein needs of women

    Hey strapping young ladies,
    I have a question about my wife. She has been hitting the gym lately but hasn't been eating anything after her workout. She is quite overweight but has like zero muscle, she's 6'1" and if she was 10%bf she might weigh 140 lbs, but she's not, she's just heavy. I told her the other day she needs some protein after resistance training but I'm not sure how much she needs.....any help??
    Stats:
    6'7" (2.00 m)
    300lbs (136 kg)
    30%bf

  2. #2

    Default

    1 gram of protien per pound of body fat per day! FOR RESISTANCE training! also after a work out drink a whey protien drink! and cardio reduces BF! so make sure she is also doing atleast 45-60 mins of cardio min. 3x week!

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    16,105

    Default

    Has she had a complete blood work done to seeif she has a medical issue? It isn't uncommon for overweight people to be hypothyroid. If she hasn't done so she should get it done right away.

    The key to losing fat and keeping it off is eating properly. This means portion control as well as the right foods at the right times. If she is not eating anything after a workout she needs to start. It does not have to be much but she should take on some protein and a small amount of carbs.

    I found this article helpful.
    Solving the Post Workout Puzzle
    Part II - The Recovery Plan
    By Dr. John M Berardi, Ph.D.

    It's been a week since I laid out the main repercussions of training and how they manifest themselves during the post-workout period. So now that you've had a chance to think about that, I'm ready to drop the recovery plan. Are you excited? I hope so. I also hope the build-up has been pretty dramatic. You have to realize, I've had to wait years for this information.

    With the publication of each new study, I could see that we were getting closer to understanding the post-workout puzzle. But, as Tom Petty once said, "the waiting is the hardest part". Finally, this year, with the culmination of a number of research projects, it's pretty clear what type of nutrition we need for optimal post-workout recovery.

    Maximize Post-Workout Glycogen Synthesis

    There are two key factors to rapidly increasing post-workout glycogen synthesis (8):

    1. Adequate carbohydrate availability (to convert to muscle glycogen) (9)
    2. High insulin levels (to stimulate glycogen storage and shuttle carbs into the muscle) (9)

    Endurance athletes have traditionally been encouraged to consume 1.2 g of carbohydrate per kg of body weight immediately after training/competition (8,10). In addition, they are encouraged to continue this supplementation every 2 hours up until 6 hours after their exercise bout. Recent evidence, however, indicates that the addition of protein to a carb drink can actually increase insulin levels higher than carbs alone (11,12). There seems to be a synergistic insulin release with protein plus carbs.

    The current recommendations for endurance athletes have therefore changed to include protein. Eating every 2 hours is still recommended, but now endurance athletes are encouraged to consume 0.8 g of carbs per kg of bodyweight in combination with 0.4 g of protein / kg of bodyweight. This means that a 154 lb endurance athlete should be consuming 56 g of carbs and 28 g of protein at each meal: right after training, and 2, 4, and 6 hours after training.

    Since most of the research on this topic has been done in endurance athletes, we have to speculate about what strength athletes would need in this regard. From the research, it's clear that strength athletes actually have higher glycogen synthesis rates after exercise than endurance athletes so they can more rapidly refill their glycogen stores (13).

    But since strength athletes don't deplete their glycogen stores as badly as endurance athletes, they would need fewer total calories. With this said, I believe it's reasonable to suggest that a strength athlete consume one meal of 0.8g of carbohydrate and 0.4 g of protein / kg of body weight immediately after training.

    This means that the 154 lb weight lifter would need 56 g of carbs and 28 g of protein while the 220 lb weight lifter would need about 80 g of carbs and 40 g of protein after a weight-training workout. Since glycogen synthesis rates are so high in strength athletes, they would only need to consume this type of meal immediately after the workout and then resume normal eating about 2-3 hours later.

    If the strength athlete is in a bulking cycle, the post-workout recommendations would include 2 servings of recommended formula, one immediately after training and one 30-60 minutes later. Normal eating could be resumed 2-3 hours later.

    A couple of final factors need to be discussed. First, the research is very clear that if you wait to consume your post-workout nutrition, you lose (14). One study showed that if the post-workout beverage was consumed immediately after training, glycogen synthesis was three times higher than if the beverage was consumed just two hours later. So the sooner you drink the drink, the better the recovery rate.

    Secondly, with respect to the types of carbohydrate and protein to consume, it's clear that immediately after training, liquid nutrition is best tolerated (8,15). Since liquid nutrition is more rapidly digested and absorbed, nutrients are more rapidly delivered to the muscle. In addition, according to the literature, the optimal carbohydrates to consume are glucose and glucose polymers, like maltodextrin (8).

    As far as the best protein to consume, you want to choose a protein that is absorbed as rapidly as the ingested carbs so that the synergistic insulin response can be maximized. Now that's hard to find. Most intact proteins (yes, even in powdered form) take several hours to be fully absorbed. We need protein that can get absorbed within minutes, just like the carbs do. Without this simultaneous absorption of both, the insulin response will be disappointing. So what to do? Well, since one of the most quickly digested proteins is whey hydrolysate, it's the protein of choice for our purposes here (10).

    Stop Protein Breakdown Dead in its Tracks

    The scientific literature is pretty clear in terms of how to prevent post-workout protein breakdown. And it can be summarized in one word... Insulin.

    In previous years, scientists knew that the hormone insulin had a big impact on muscle-protein balance, but they just couldn't figure out if it impacted the synthesis or breakdown. Several studies within the last few years, however, have indicated that insulin is the main regulator of post-workout protein breakdown.

    In one very detailed study published in May of 1999, it was clearly demonstrated that at rest, high blood levels of insulin increased protein synthesis by about 67% while not changing protein breakdown (16). However, during the post-workout period, insulin infusion decreased protein breakdown by about 30% without impacting protein synthesis.

    The authors of this study concluded that at rest, insulin was anabolic, while after exercise insulin was anti-catabolic. These results have been validated by other studies showing that high blood levels of insulin considerably diminish post-workout protein breakdown without impacting protein synthesis during the post-workout period (17).

    So the bottom line is that insulin is not anabolic after workouts, but it sure is anti-catabolic. And that's great because insulin is easily controlled. Also, since protein breakdown predominates during the post-workout period, getting the insulin up allows muscle breakdown to diminish so that synthesis can dominate and we can quickly get back to building muscle!

    And don't forget that insulin causes vasodilation. This means the vessels "open up" and transport more blood (and nutrients) to the cells. Can you say "feed the muscle!"? And yes, that extra blood flow is full of the protein, amino acids, and carbs that you'll be ingesting immediately after the training session.

    So how do we get insulin up after a workout? Well, you could always become a human pin cushion and inject your insulin right into the subcutaneous area of your abdomen. But I think there are better and certainly safer ways.
    The statements contained herein have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. The consumer comments and experiences relayed herein may not be typical. Your experience may vary.



    Disclaimer: The advice I provide is based on experience and/or research and should not be considered professional medical advice. It is best to confirm any potential use of a drug or possible medical condition with a licensed doctor.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    16,105

    Default

    First, as mentioned earlier, by eating protein with carbs, insulin levels are higher than with carbs alone (10, 11). In the aforementioned studies the insulin response to 0.8 g of carbs/kg (in the form of glucose and maltodextrin) plus 0.4 g of protein/kg (in the form of protein hydrolysate) was 103% higher (double) than the insulin response to an equal amount of calories coming from carbs alone (1.2 carbs /kg). So the very same carb/protein beverage that we're relying on for maximizing glycogen storage is also preventing protein breakdown (10, 11). Sweet!

    Secondly, certain amino acids can increase the insulin response to meals. By adding certain amino acids to the carb/protein beverage in the above study, the insulin responses were considerably higher than the carb/protein beverage alone (10, 11). In addition, research in the 60s shows that specific amino-acid combinations were more effective than others at increasing insulin release (18). So it looks like carbs + protein + amino acids is the way to go.

    Complete Your Recovery by Jacking Up the Protein Synthesis...

    The final piece of the post-workout puzzle is the management of protein synthesis. And although this area is a little more complex than managing protein breakdown, there are three key ingredients to increasing protein synthesis immediately after workouts:

    1. A proper ratio of BCAAs
    2. High blood levels of essential amino acids
    3. High blood levels of insulin

    In the past, a high protein intake was recommended after workouts in order to increase protein synthesis. Actually, in the Protein Roundtable I even recommended a really big protein intake immediately after the workout in order to increase protein synthesis. Well, I'm here to say that I may have been a bit off base. Yeah, yeah, I'm admitting I may have been wrong, so cherish the moment and feel free to poke fun at me the next time you see me.

    Based on the research, it appears that the amount of protein intake has very little to do with pushing protein synthesis up after workouts. And in fact, too much could be counter productive (more on this later). More important to increasing protein synthesis after workouts is the ability to rapidly deliver the right type of protein or, more correctly, the right type of amino acids. In a paper published last February, researchers discussed rates of protein synthesis during several conditions (7):

    1. At rest with increased insulin levels, protein synthesis increased by about 50% when compared to normal insulin levels (21).
    2. At rest with high amino acids in the blood, protein synthesis increased by about 150% when compared to normal blood levels of amino acids (22).
    3. After weight training, protein synthesis increased by about 100% vs. pre-training values (23).
    4. After weight training with high amino acids in the blood, protein synthesis increased by 200% vs. after weight training with normal blood amino acids (22).
    5. After weight training with high amino acids in the blood and high insulin in the blood, protein synthesis increase by over 400% vs. normal post-workout amino acid and insulin levels (7).

    The most interesting thing was that in the last condition, the post-workout beverage only contained 6 g of protein and 36 g of carbohydrate. As long as insulin was high and correct amounts of essential amino acids and BCAAs were present, protein synthesis got jacked after the workout.

    Several other studies have shown that either infused or orally administered post-workout amino acids are able to rapidly increase protein synthesis as well as rapidly create a positive muscle protein balance after training (24, 25).

    Interestingly, it seems that non-essential amino acids are not required for this process and that if only essential amino acids are supplied, there's no difference in the increases in protein synthesis (7, 26). Either way, the key seems to be this "infusion" concept where amino acids are very rapidly delivered to the blood. Again, whey hydrolysate is the quickest orally available protein for the blood unless you want to go ahead and hook up to the amino-acid IV drip.

    You may be asking yourself why too much protein could be counterproductive. Well, a very high protein meal can actually cause a release of glucagon. Glucagon is a hormone that antagonizes insulin release. So if you eat some protein with carbs, insulin shoots up. If you eat too much protein with carbs, the insulin release may actually be lower. And if this weren't bad enough, glucagon also has another function that we want to avoid. The darn stuff causes the body to convert amino acids into glucose (a process called gluconeogenesis). So take in too much protein and say goodbye to that special amino acid ratio. Instead those aminos become carbs!

    Let's get back to the amino acids. In addition to the requirement for rapidly delivered essential amino acids, BCAAs seem to play a big role in the recovery and increase of protein synthesis after a workout (2,7). Unpublished data presented at the 2000 Canadian Society for Exercise Physiology Meeting shed light on the importance of BCAAs in recovery (2). In endurance athletes, post workout protein synthesis rates will drop by about 30% for up to 6 hours after a training bout. Providing carbohydrates to these athletes, while favorable for increasing muscle glycogen stores, has no ability to increase protein synthesis.

    However, a drink providing only the BCAA leucine was able to promote full recovery of post-workout protein synthesis levels to pre-training values. In addition, by adding carbohydrate to the beverage, protein synthesis was higher after the workout than before the workout. Since this beverage increased blood insulin levels, the author of the study concluded that insulin indeed had a synergistic effect with leucine on protein synthesis.

    The results of this study and others have lead researchers to believe that within the muscle cell, there's one particular regulatory pathway for protein synthesis that's stimulated by insulin, but dependent on leucine (27). If insulin is present and leucine isn't, then protein synthesis can't maximally be stimulated. If leucine is present and insulin isn't, protein synthesis can't be maximally stimulated. But give 'em both and look out!

    Since leucine has this great impact on muscle protein synthesis and since levels of leucine, much like glutamine, decline during exercise, it only makes sense to supplement with leucine after workouts (28). In the end, it appears that leucine, along with protein and carbs, will lead to the greatest increases in protein synthesis.

    So what's the best way to rapidly increase protein synthesis after a workout? It seems that the 0.4g/kg of protein hydrolysate plus 0.8g/kg of glucose/glucose polymer plus insulin-stimulating amino acids takes care of the insulin angle. But remember, insulin isn't enough. Providing BCAAs in an ideal ratio is the second part in rapidly stimulating protein synthesis.

    The Grand Finale

    That's it. The ideal post workout combo that maximizes your growth and recovery potential. Whew, that's a lot of science! I hope I didn't lose you along the way because I honestly believe that this article is the most important I've ever written for T-mag.

    Compiling years of good post-workout science has enabled me to devise a plan of attack for optimal post-workout nutrition. And this plan of attack is designed with only one goal in mind... optimizing recovery for every human being that works out, regardless of the type of exercise they do.
    Remember, to be effective, post-workout nutrition has to...

    * Increase glycogen stores
    * Increase protein synthesis
    * Decrease protein breakdown

    Interestingly, several nutrients such as glucose and glucose polymers, protein hydrolysates, and amino acids can all work together with overlapping functions in order to accomplish all three goals. No drugs necessary!

    At this point, before the jaded cynics write in shouting about how this article is probably nothing more than a thinly veiled attempt at introducing a new Biotest supplement, I'm gonna' head them off at the pass. This isn't a thinly veiled attempt at introducing a new supplement. It is a full fledged, in your face, introduction to a new Biotest supplement .

    This supplement uses every glorious piece of available nutritional science to support its claims. Because about 95% of the idea behind the formula is founded on nothing but hard data, very little of this article is theoretical. If you don't believe me, go look up the references yourself.

    If that's not enough, the very formula that Biotest plans to launch is currently being evaluated in my lab. Unlike other companies, Biotest will actually have supporting data before the product is launched. Rest assured, T-mag readers will be the first to read about the results (which will be posted on this very site within the next few weeks).

    The better part of the last year has been spent putting together the ideal post-workout protein formula that can maximally stimulate glycogen and protein synthesis while decreasing protein breakdown in all types of athletes. Since the formula is based only on nutrients that occur naturally in food, it has no banned or potentially harmful substances. It's therefore useful for all athletes from triathletes to power lifters and from those in high school to those competing in the professional ranks. Each and every trainee who wants a better physique and each and every athlete who wants to improve their training and their performances has something to gain by taking it.
    The statements contained herein have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. The consumer comments and experiences relayed herein may not be typical. Your experience may vary.



    Disclaimer: The advice I provide is based on experience and/or research and should not be considered professional medical advice. It is best to confirm any potential use of a drug or possible medical condition with a licensed doctor.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Phoenix, Arizona
    Posts
    56

    Default

    GEEZ, FLG what do you take for carpel tunnel syndrome. You type alot, and you know so much. There is this finger execiser you can get at the music stores, guitar players use it to strengthen each individual finger, it's great. I bet you invented it, huh........

  6. #6
    Hazcat Guest

    Default

    In response to the posts above that are directed toward Biotest's product known as Surge Recovery.

    Haz ......................

    An Objective Comparison of Chocolate Milk and Surge Recovery

    Today’s article is a guest piece by Alan Aragon. Alan is one of the few in this field that I really respect; while he and I occasionally disagree on some bit of minutiae, it’s never anything more than a minor disagreement. This piece was originally run in Alan’s Monthly Research Review which I did my own review of last year. You can read my review in Alan Aragon Research Review – Product Review.
    Much of what Alan talks about in this piece is actually discussed in the article I did on Milk: The New Sports Drink? – A Review but, Alan, in an obsessive way that I can only admire, gets into much more detail.
    Enjoy.
    Lyle
    An Objective Comparison of Chocolate Milk and Surge Recovery.
    By Alan Aragon
    INTRODUCTION TO CENSORSHIP
    Recently, a member of the ************* forums posted a question about whether or not it’s safe for her 12 year-old son to have a postexercise product called Surge instead of chocolate milk. Bill Roberts, a product formulator for Biotest (the supplement company behind *************), said essentially that the carb source in chocolate milk (sucrose) was inferior to the carb source in Surge (dextrose). I then challenged him to justify his position. My position was that using sucrose isn’t any more of a nutritional compromise than using dextrose. His answer was that “everyone knows” dextrose is superior to sucrose for postworkout glycogen resynthesis, and that sucrose is inherently unhealthier than dextrose. I countered his position by presenting scientific research refuting his claims. He then got all bent out of shape and started hurling ad hominems at me, obviously frustrated that he was losing a public battle.
    “Everyone knows”
    In one of Bill’s posts, he literally said “everyone knows” more than a dozen times – while failing to provide a single trace of scientific research supporting his claims. If indeed everyone knew, and was in agreement with him, he would have had at least a handful of cronies sticking up for him, if for nothing else but to pad his fall to the mat. But alas, he received support from no one except one moderator, who I’ll quote as saying, “I refuse to back up my claims, so sue me”.
    To Bill’s credit, the soccer mom who asked the original question wouldn’t listen to anyone but him, so kudos to Bill on his politician-like rhetorical skills. In the mean time, several members expressed their disappointment in Bill’s neglect for citing research evidence to back his stance. I also know for a fact that a good handful of posts from innocent observers (supporting my side of the debate) were censored from posting in the thread. This was presumably because their posts made Bill look even more uninformed.
    It’s not surprising that people’s posts were blocked from appearing in the thread because eventually, my own posts never made it into the thread. At that point, I knew that continuing the debate was just not going to happen. Nevertheless, all of the key posts made it through; all of the posts that clearly showed Bill’s inability (and unwillingness) to engage in scientific debate were right there, plain as day. Ultimately, Bill ended up looking as prideful as he was ignorant. In order to save face, either Bill or administrators of ************* had the thread deleted.
    Ironically, I recently wrote an article for ************* (A Musclehead’s Guide to Alcohol). If I may say so myself, it was a hit, judging by the reader feedback and frequent links back to the article. Given that, it was downright humorous to be censored by the forum administrators shortly after contributing to their library of wisdom. In the following sections, I’ll compare the components of Surge with chocolate milk for postexercise recovery. For the sake of simplicity and context-specificity, I’ll judge the application of the two products to the target market of Surge, which consists of general fitness and bodybuilding fans.
    MEET THE COMPETITORS
    In the brown corner, we have chocolate milk. The ingredients of chocolate milk vary slightly across brands, but in general, the ingredients are: milk, sugar (or high fructose corn syrup), cocoa processed with alkali, natural and artificial flavors, salt, carrageenan, vitamin A palmitate, vitamin D3. Like regular milk, chocolate milk is available in varying levels of milk fat. For the purposes of this comparison, I’ll use the one most consumers are most likely to choose, the low-fat variety.
    In the red corner, we have Surge Recovery (which I’ll continue to abbreviate as Surge). The ingredient list is as follows: d-glucose (dextrose), whey-protein hydrolysate, maltodextrin, natural and artificial flavors, sucralose. Other ingredients include L-leucine and DL-phenylalanine.
    Research behind the products
    What’s exciting about this comparison is that both of these products have been highly heralded and hyped in their respective arenas. Surge in its exact formulation doesn’t have any peer-reviewed research behind it. However, Berardi et al reported that a solution of similar construction to Surge (33% whey hydrolysate, 33% glucose and 33% maltodextrin) was slightly superior for glycogen resynthesis at 6 hrs postexercise compared to a 100% maltodextrin solution[1]. Effects on muscle protein flux were not measured.
    Chocolate milk has thus far had an impressive run in the research examining its applications to various sporting goals [2,3]. It has performed equally well for rehydration and glycogen resynthesis compared to carb-based sports drinks, and it has outperformed them (and soy-based drinks) for protecting and synthesizing muscle protein. A standout study in this area was a comparison of chocolate milk, Gatorade, and Endurox R4 (a sports drink with a 4:1 carb to protein ratio) [4]. Chocolate milk was equally effective as Gatorade for total work output and prolonging time to exhaustion. Interestingly, both of the latter products outperformed Endurox R4 in both tests. The researchers speculated that the use of maltodextrin rather than sucrose (yes, you read that correctly) as the dominant carbohydrate source was the Achilles heel of Endurox R4. More on the virtues of sucrose instead of straight glucose for exercise applications will be covered.
    QUANTITATIVE MACRONUTRIENT COMPARISON

    Product Serving Kcal Protein Carbohydrate Fat
    Surge 3 scoops 340 25 grams 46 grams 2.5 grams
    Chocolate Milk 17.3 oz 340 17.3 grams 56.3 grams 6.5 grams

    When isocalorically matched, Surge and lowfat chocolate milk have the expected similarities and differences. The suggested serving of Surge has 7.7 g more protein than chocolate milk, while chocolate milk has 10.3 g more carbohydrate. While the lesser protein content of chocolate milk might on the surface seem like a point scored for Surge, this is actually a non-issue.
    Recent research by Tang et al found that as little as 10g whey plus 21 g fructose taken after resistance exercise was able to stimulate a rise in muscle protein synthesis [5]. Considering that an isocaloric serving of lowfat chocolate milk has 17.3 g protein plus 56.3 g carbohydrate, a hike in muscle protein synthesis (as well as inhibition of protein breakdown) would be easily achieved. Chocolate milk has 4g more fat than Surge. Again, this might be viewed as a detriment for those conserving fat calories, but it’s still a low absolute amount of fat. This also may have a potential benefit which I’ll discuss in a minute. Bottom line: there’s no clear winner in this department; there’s too many contingencies to make a blanket judgement.

  7. #7
    Hazcat Guest

    Default

    Continued......

    QUALITATIVE MACRONUTRIENT COMPARISON
    Protein
    Surge uses whey protein hydrolysate (WPH). In theory, WPH is favorable because it’s already broken down into peptide fragments. This spurred the assumption that it would have faster absorption and uptake by muscle, which in turn would result in greater net anabolism. However, a recent study by Farnfield et al observed the exact opposite when WPH was compared with whey protein isolate (WPI), which consists of intact whole protein [6]. WPH not only was absorbed more slowly, but its levels in the blood also declined more rapidly, resulting in a much weaker response curve. Leucine and the rest of the BCAAs were significantly better absorbed from WPI than WPH. The researchers concluded that total amino acid availability of WPI was superior to WPH.
    Of note, Surge is fortified with leucine, a branched chain amino acid (BCAA) that plays a critical role in muscle protein synthesis. An isocaloric serving of chocolate milk has 1.7g leucine. This may or may not have any impact, especially within the context of a high protein intake typical of the athletic population. It’s important to keep in mind that most high-quality animal-based protein is 18-26% BCAA [7]. Adding a few grams of supplemental BCAA to a pre-existent high intake within the diet is not likely to yield any magic. Surge is also fortified with phenylalanine, presumably for the purpose of enhancing the insulin response. Again, this is an unnecessary tactic since insulin’s primary action is the inhibition of muscle protein breakdown. This antiproteolytic effect of nutrient-mediated insulin response is maximal at elevations just slightly above fasting levels [8].
    Chocolate milk’s protein is no different than that of regular milk. Milk protein is roughly 20% whey and 80% casein. Thus far in the scientific literature, comparisons of casein-dominant proteins with whey for sports applications are evenly split. Some studies show casein as superior (in spite of a higher leucine content in the whey treatments) [9,10], while others point to whey as the victor [11,12]. The only certainty is that it can’t be assumed that faster is better when it comes to promoting net anabolism. An acute study on post-ingestion amino acid kinetics by LaCroix suggests that milk protein is best left as-is rather than isolating its protein fractions [13]. Compared to total milk protein, whey’s amino acid delivery was too transient, and underwent rapid deamination during the postprandial period. The authors concluded that milk proteins had the best nutritional quality, which suggested a synergistic effect between its casein and whey. Bottom line: chocolate milk gets the edge; WPH has thus far bit the dust compared to WPI in a head-to-head comparison, and whey has not been consistently superior to total milk protein.
    Carbohydrate
    Surge has dextrose (synonymous with glucose) as its sole carbohydrate source, while chocolate milk has an even mix of sucrose (in the form of either sucrose or high-fructose corn syrup) and lactose. While it’s common to assume that dextrose is superior to sucrose for postexercise glycogen resynthesis, research doesn’t necessarily agree. A trial by Bowtell et al showed a glucose polymer to synthesize more glycogen by the 2-hr mark postworkout [14]. However, two other trials whose postexercise observation periods were 4 and 6 hours respectively saw no significant difference in glycogen storage between sucrose and glucose [15,16].
    Perhaps the most overlooked advantage of a fructose-containing carbohydrate source (sucrose is 50% fructose) is that it supports liver glycogen better than a glucose-only source, as in the case of Surge. A little-known fact is that hepatic glycogenolysis (liver glycogen use) occurs to a significant degree during exercise, and the magnitude of glycogenolysis is intensity-dependent [17]. Illustrating the potential superiority of sucrose over glucose, Casey et al saw no difference in muscle glycogen resynthesis 4 hrs postexercise [15]. However, there was more liver glycogen resynthesis in the sucrose group, and this correlated with a slightly greater exercise capacity.
    One of the potential concerns of consuming a large amount of sucrose instead of glucose is how the 50% fructose content in sucrose might be metabolized from a lipogenic standpoint. Answering this question directly, McDevitt saw no difference in de novo lipogenesis (conversion to fat) between the massive overfeeding of either glucose or sucrose at 135g above maintenance needs [18]. Another potential concern is the use of high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS) in chocolate milk. The common fear of HFCS being some sort of special agent that undermines health is simply not grounded in science. HFCS is virtually identical to sucrose both in chemical structure and metabolic effect [19]. Independent researcher John White eloquently clarified HFCS misconceptions in a recent review, which I’ll quote [20].
    “Although examples of pure fructose causing metabolic upset at high concentrations abound, especially when fed as the sole carbohydrate source, there is no evidence that the common fructose-glucose sweeteners do the same. Thus, studies using extreme carbohydrate diets may be useful for probing biochemical pathways, but they have no relevance to the human diet or to current consumption. I conclude that the HFCS-obesity hypothesis is supported neither in the United States nor worldwide.”
    It bears mentioning that lactose intolerance can prohibit regular milk use for certain susceptible individuals. However, this can be remedied by using Lactaid brand milk, or by using lactase pills or drops. Bottom line: For those who can digest lactose or are willing to take the extra step to make it digestible, chocolate milk wins. But since there are those who can’t or won’t do what’s required to tolerate lactose, I’m calling this a tie.
    Fat
    Coincidentally, Surge and chocolate milk have identical proportions of saturated fat. Lowfat chocolate milk has more fat than Surge, which would cause some folks to call a foul for postworkout purposes. However, a trial by Elliot et al found that postexercise ingestion of whole milk was superior for increasing net protein balance than fat-free milk [21]. The most striking aspect about this trial was that the calorie-matched dose of fat free milk contained 14.5g protein, versus 8.0 g in the whole milk. Apparently, postworkout fat intake (particularly milk fat) is nothing to fear, and may even be beneficial from the standpoint of synthesizing muscle protein. Bottom line: it’s a tie, since there is very little evidence favoring one fat profile/amount versus the other. On one hand, you can be saving fat calories by going with Surge. On the other hand, postworkout milk fat might potentially enhance protein synthesis. Things come out even.
    MICRONUTRIENT COMPARISON (per 340 kcal serving)*
    Surge Recovery Chocolate Milk
    Calcium 180 mg 624 mg
    Cholesterol 75 mg 16 mg
    Leucine 4000 mg 1714 mg
    Magnesium 20 mg 70 mg
    Phenylalanine 2000 mg 844 mg
    Phosphorous 120 mg 558 mg
    Potassium 400 mg 920 mg
    Sodium 200 mg 329 mg
    *This comparison is limited to the micronutrients on the Surge label. And yes, I realize that not all of the above are technically micronutrients.
    A quick glance at the above chart shows that chocolate milk is markedly more nutrient-dense, with the exception of a higher content of leucine and phenylalanine in Surge, whose significance (or lack of) I discussed earlier. As an interesting triviality, both have a low cholesterol content, but Surge has 4.6 times more. Chocolate milk has more sodium, but it also has a significantly higher potassium-to-sodium ratio. Bottom line: chocolate milk wins this one decisively.


  8. #8
    Hazcat Guest

    Default

    Part 3

    OTHER CONSIDERATIONS
    Price
    Chocolate milk by the half gallon (64oz, or about 2000 ml) is approximately $3.00 USD. Sticking with our 340 kcal figure, this yields 3.7 servings, which boils down to $0.81 per serving. A tub of Surge costs $36.00 and yields 16 servings (3 scoops, 340 kcals per serving). This boils down to $2.25 per serving. That’s 277% more expensive than chocolate milk. Even on a protein-matched basis, Surge is still roughly double the price. Bottom line: chocolate milk is many times easier on your wallet.
    Convenience & taste
    Convenience is the single area where Surge wins. Being a powder, it’s non-perishable, requiring no refrigeration. This makes it more easily portable. Taste will always be, well, a matter of taste. I highly doubt that in a blinded test that Surge would win over chocolate milk. Bottom line: Surge is more convenient, but I’ll go out on a limb and guess that chocolate milk would taste better to most people.

    CONCLUSION
    I have no vested interest in glorifying chocolate milk, nor do I stand to benefit by vilifying Surge. My goal was to objectively examine the facts. Using research as the judge, chocolate milk was superior or equal to Surge in all categories. The single exception was a win for Surge in the convenience department. So, if the consumer were forced to choose between the two products, the decision would boil down to quality at the expense of convenience, or vice versa. I personally would go for the higher quality, lower price, and strength of the scientific evidence. Chocolate milk it is.
    REFERENCES CITED:
    Berardi JM, et al. Postexercise muscle glycogen recovery enhanced with a carbohydrate-protein supplement. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2006 Jun;38(6):1106-13.
    Roy BD. Milk: the new sports drink? a review. J Int Soc Sports Nutr. 2008 Oct 2;5:15.
    McDonald L. (Review of) Milk the new sports drink? a review. Bodyrecomposition.com, 2008.
    Karp JR. Chocolate milk as a post-exercise recovery aid. Int J Sport Nutr Exerc Metab. 2006 Feb;16(1):78-91. [
    Tang JE, et al. Minimal whey protein with carbohydrate stimulates muscle protein synthesis following resistance exercise in trained young men. Appl Physiol Nutr Metab. 2007 Dec;32(6):1132-8.
    Farnfield MM, et al. Plasma amino acid response after ingestion of different whey protein fractions. Int J Food Sci Nutr. 2008 May 8:1-11.
    Millward DJ, et al. Protein quality assessment: impact of expanding understanding of protein and amino acid needs for optimal health. Am J Clin Nutr. 2008 May;87(5):1576S-1581S.
    Rennie MJ, et al. Branched-chain amino acids as fuels and anabolic signals in human muscle. J Nutr. 2006 Jan;136(1 Suppl):264S-8S.
    Demling RH, Desanti L. Effect of a hypocaloric diet, increased protein intake and resistance training on lean mass gains and fat mass loss in overweight police officers. Ann Nutr Metab. 2000;44(1):21-9.
    Kerksick CM, et al. The effects of protein and amino acid supplementation on performance and training adaptations during ten weeks of resistance training. J Strength Cond Res. 2006 Aug;20(3):643-53.
    Lands LC, et al. Effect of supplementation with a cystein donor on muscular performance. J Appl Physiol 1999;87:1381-5.
    Cribb PJ, et al. The effect of whey isolate and resistance training on strength, body composition, and plasma glutamine. Int J Sport Nutr Exerc Metab. 2006 Oct;16(5):494-509.
    LaCroix M, et al. Compared with casein or total milk protein, digestion of milk soluble proteins is too rapid to sustain the anabolic postprandial amino acid requirement. Am J Clin Nutr. 2006 Nov;84(5):1070-9.
    Bowtell JL, et al. Effect of different carbohydrate drinks on whole body carbohydrate storage after exhaustive exercise. J Appl Physiol 2000; 88 (5): 1529-36.
    Casey A, et al. Effect of carbohydrate ingestion on glycogen resynthesis in human liver and skeletal muscle, measured by (13)C MRS. Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab. 2000 Jan;278(1):E65-75.
    Blom PC, et al. Effect of different post-exercise sugar diets on the rate of muscle glycogen synthesis. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1987 Oct;19(5):491-6.
    Suh SH, et al. Regulation of blood glucose homeostasis during prolonged exercise. Mol Cells. 2007 Jun 30;23(3):272-9.
    McDevitt et al. De novo lipogenesis during controlled overfeeding with sucrose or glucose in lean and obese women. Am J Clin Nutr. 2001 Dec;74(6):737-46.
    Melanson KJ, et al. High-fructose corn syrup, energy intake, and appetite regulation. Am J Clin Nutr. 2008 Dec;88(6):1738S-1744S.
    White JS. Straight talk about high-fructose corn syrup: what it is and what it ain’t. Am J Clin Nutr. 2008 Dec;88(6):1716S-1721S.
    Elliot TA, et al. Milk ingestion stimulates net muscle protein synthesis following resistance exercise. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2006 Apr;38(4):667-74.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •