Against Glycogen Repletion...

[kp1512]

Quote

I apologise to all, in advance, if this offends you but the notion that someone who lifts weights - whether it be for fun and general fitness or in order to compete - are somehow biologically unique and elite compared to the rest of humanity is not only laughable and untrue but insulting! Any differences will be superficial at best and probably a matter of degree. Weightlifters suffer heart attacks, strokes, cancers, arthritis, diabetes, insulin resistance, boils, pimples and other assorted excrescences along with the rest of the population. Lifting weights makes you fit to lift weights it doesn't make you healthy or long-lived.

The point that was very purposefully missed in this is the effects. Cause and Effect. The said study was relating to non-trained individuals, whom did not put there bodies through workouts. Elite, or uniquness does not even come into the equation. Its simple cause and effect.....cant really glorifying this more than that.

Further example,

- non trained athlete - no stimulus for reactive reponse, and no need to replish and increase\curtail hormonal reactions.

- trained athelete - lots of stimulus, lots of reactionary requirements, numerous hormonal responses, requirement to repair, rebuild and adapt.

Quote

Insulin could be said to lower post-exercise cortisol release and that is what is observed in studies. However, a large bolus of simple carbs is ingested post-workout in order to 'spike' insulin and since cortisol [among it's many beneficial roles] is released when blood glucose is low [in order to raise it] it is no wonder that it's release is attenuated when blood glucose shoots up after ingesting carbs! Now you are substituting high levels of insulin for cortisol, which is hardly a fair trade! Since 'spiking' insulin in this way causes the blood-glucose lowering effect to overshoot, resulting in low levels yet again, you probably will still release cortisol at some point. Having this yo-yoing blood sugar is just another form of continuous low-level physical stress and what does the body pump out in response to stress? Cortisol!

Bit wishy washy. None of the summary there related to trained indivuals which have a varied requirement, against the non trained Joe Bloggs. Spiking insulin post workout excessively is obviously not good, but spiking it in a controlled manner is what its about. Further more, the diet that is followed by many who train is that of one which normally asks the trainee to eat multiple times per day, which in turn, as proved in numerous studies and real life, surpressed cortisol levels. Again, bigger picture, not tunnel view on components. Compare the intake of a mediated PWO carb intake, against one without, over 4-8 or 12 weeks, and the results speak for themselves

Quote

If you left well enough alone you might find that the transitory release of cortisol [post workout] will not only catabolise some protein, but also fat too. Whatever diet may be followed [providing subjects don't carb-load immediately before exercise], everyone will be somewhat ketotic after intense exercise. This allows the body to use both fatty acids and ketone bodies to fuel recovery. Cortisol will help in the breakdown of fat stores [providing you don't blunt lipolysis by spiking insulin!] to liberate these fatty acids, leaving plenty of glycerol backbones as raw material for gluconeogenesis. Proteins are present in virtually every cell, tissue and organ of the human body. Defunct hormones and other such 'junk' [damaged] proteins are just as likely to be catabolised into amino acids, for both GNG and muscle tissue synthesis, as the muscle tissue itself. Go back several pages and re-acquaint yourself with chaperone mediated autophagy. Keep going back, keep reading and connect the dots...and don't let one fact drop out of your brain for every new one that goes in!

Again, goes back to putting things into practice. Basing things on reading other peoples work and taking it as gospel without any further experience or understanding, against basing it on taking things into context and putting it to task is all thats required.....for more informed understanding.


KP

[Dtlv74]

Quote

Since 'spiking' insulin in this way causes the blood-glucose lowering effect to overshoot, resulting in low levels yet again, you probably will still release cortisol at some point. Having this yo-yoing blood sugar is just another form of continuous low-level physical stress and what does the body pump out in response to stress? Cortisol!

Yes but a large percentage of the blood glucose taken at this point is used to replensih glycogen, and if the carbohydrates used are a blend of dextrose and maltodextrin, I would speculate that the eventual cortisol rise you allude to would be minimized almost out of existence, thus resulting in slightly greater anabolism from the workout than without this protocol. Now I now this difference would be minutely small, but over the course of a lifetime of workouts...

To clarify what I'm speculating here (feel free to correct me if this is flawed) is that while the dextrose absobs quickly, rising insulin to a fast spike and replenishing glycogen quickly, the maltodextrin prevents the sudden drop-off in insulin and the sudden rise in cortisol as the process of it being broken down in the liver provides a more gradual release of glucose derived from the time it takes for the breaking of it's bonds. A higher quantity of malto than dextrose would be required for this to work - or even just malto. This allows a gradual taper back to normal blood sugar levels without the 'crash' associated with dextrose alone.

I have been trying this with 10g dextrose and 30g maltodextrin post w/o and have had accelerated gains since doing so.

This article makes an interesting read;

http://www.fitnessforoneandall.com/p...t/part_one.htm

[Gareth83]

Quote

Again, bigger picture, not tunnel view on components. Compare the intake of a mediated PWO carb intake, against one without, over 4-8 or 12 weeks, and the results speak for themselves

This is what I would like to know, are there any studies on this??

Does restoring glycogen immediately PWO have a significant effect (if any) on protein synthesis in the long run such as 4-8 or 12 weeks. Or is it just in the hours after??

My one mate doesn't even have a PWO shake full stop and he's made awesome gains

[Gareth83]

Quote

To clarify what I'm speculating here (feel free to correct me if this is flawed) is that while the dextrose absobs quickly, rising insulin to a fast spike and replenishing glycogen quickly, the maltodextrin prevents the sudden drop-off in insulin and the sudden rise in cortisol as the process of it being broken down in the liver provides a more gradual release of glucose derived from the time it takes for the breaking of it's bonds. A higher quantity of malto than dextrose would be required for this to work - or even just malto. This allows a gradual taper back to normal blood sugar levels without the 'crash' associated with dextrose alone.

glucose and malto are virtually the same things when it comes down to it

[kp1512]

Quote

This is what I would like to know, are there any studies on this??

Theres studies in this thread and beyond that have compared non PWO (carbs alone, carbs + protein, nothing) but these are limited to duration.
The take home message, is to use either argument and take it to task in your own protocols......then the results speak for themselves.

Quote

Does restoring glycogen immediately PWO have a significant effect (if any) on protein synthesis in the long run such as 4-8 or 12 weeks. Or is it just in the hours after??

Over 12 weeks, hell yeh. You have to remember the most important things here

- "we" generally follow a multi-meal approach where we take a balance of the macronutrients, correct?. So what occurs during this ingestion is an influence on various hormonal axis. Now this can be BG, Cortisol, GH, Testosterone, estrogen, you name it. Now, part of the benefits of this multi-meal approach, is that the body is able to be fed with continuous ingredients to ensure we are able to put the body into an anabolic state. Now if we compare this over,lets say 12 weeks, you will find without a down, personnaly, that the amount of lean muscle gains you will achieve is far greater than a diet without controlled PWO. Now the devil in me, would say "at what expense we are adding this tissue", and the infidel in me would reply, CONTROLLED CARB INTAKE PWO.

Quote

My one mate doesn't even have a PWO shake full stop and he's made awesome gains

What is awesome? What does eat eat in the period after his workout? Say 90 mins?...Dont get me wrong, but when I hear comments like this and dig deeper, its amazing what can be found out......

Now, as you probably know, if your on a fat loss schedule, of course fat loss will be greater with minimal carbs, thats a pretty much no-brainer.....but when we talk about gains, tbh its done and dusted and been ridiculed beyond reasonable doubt.

Not sure to what extent you follow Lyle Mcd, but if you have been about reading and following stuff as long as me, youll find that there is not many out there that have made decent enough gains from his no carb protocol.....BUT many have shed 10lb+ of fat in record time.........

Dave Polumbo is another good guy to read into, a former Pro BB...he has a similar logic on low carb, but PWO carbs....and that dude makes monsters.

KP

[Dtlv74]

Quote

glucose and malto are virtually the same things when it comes down to it

Almost - the difference being malto has several glucose molecules locked in a chain, while dextrose (glucose derived from corn) is just un-bonded glucose molecules.

While Malto is absorbed at the same rate as dextrose, because of it's short chain bonds it requires those bonds to be broken before the glucose it contains can be realeased into the bloodstream. This process is of course not required for dextrose. This makes malto a fast absobing, slow release sugar, as opposed to dextrose which is a fast absorbing, fast release sugar.

Similar but different!

[allthegoodnamesaregone]

Quote

Dave Polumbo is another good guy to read into, a former Pro BB...he has a similar logic on low carb, but PWO carbs....and that dude makes monsters.

KP

It makes sense, after trying most variables I'm settling on this way of thinking. High fat, High protein, controlled carbs for me.

Got to say I see no difference in between a solid meal or a shake right after but maybe I'm bias as too many carb shakes hit my digestive tract hard.

[NU_nutrition_TS]

Why do you think the insulin sensitivity of cells increase immediately after exercise? Not so that you can deafen them with the roar of a sugar-induced insulin surge! That way lies insulin resistance, syndrome X, high blood pressure, diabetes, heart disease and stroke. Having big muscles does not put anyone above the laws of basic human biology...unless you live on Mount Olympus?

[NU_nutrition_TS]

Quote

Yes but a large percentage of the blood glucose taken at this point is used to replensih glycogen, and if the carbohydrates used are a blend of dextrose and maltodextrin, I would speculate that the eventual cortisol rise you allude to would be minimized almost out of existence, thus resulting in slightly greater anabolism from the workout than without this protocol. Now I now this difference would be minutely small, but over the course of a lifetime of workouts...

Don't forget, the title of this thread is Against Glycogen Repletion! Cortisol, in it's proper place, time and dose, is beneficial and is a necessary precursor to a lengthy anabolic phase. You assume the mechanical damage to muscle caused by exercise is the 'tearing down' phase - it's not, it's merely the initial stimulus. If a bombed out building is going to be rebuilt, the ruins have to be 'torn down' by the wrecking ball [cortisol] first. This is the catabolic phase immediately following exercise, which is then followed by the anabolic phase as the muscles are repaired/rebuilt/augmented using both reclaimed materials [amino acids from the catabolic 'tearing down' phase] and new materials [amino acids from ingested protein]. Carbs & their attendant insulin surges [as per the OP] curtail these phases by sending the workforce [testosterone, GH, IGF-1, etc.] home early resulting in the building being thrown up relatively quickly on damaged foundations before the work comes to a grinding and premature halt. No wonder weight trainers who go the high carb PWO route suffer recurrent injuries!

Quote

To clarify what I'm speculating here (feel free to correct me if this is flawed) is that while the dextrose absobs quickly, rising insulin to a fast spike and replenishing glycogen quickly, the maltodextrin prevents the sudden drop-off in insulin and the sudden rise in cortisol as the process of it being broken down in the liver provides a more gradual release of glucose derived from the time it takes for the breaking of it's bonds. A higher quantity of malto than dextrose would be required for this to work - or even just malto. This allows a gradual taper back to normal blood sugar levels without the 'crash' associated with dextrose alone.

Why would you want to prevent a drop off in insulin? Having higher than basal levels of insulin sloshing around your system for extended periods of time is a recipe for blunted lipolysis, increased lipogenesis and insulin resistance leading to high BP, diabetes, stroke and heart disease and aging! It will also lead to reactive hypoglycemia which, in itself is a stimulus for cortisol release, which is what you were trying to avoid in the first place!

[Dtlv74]

Quote

Don't forget, the title of this thread is Against Glycogen Repletion!

Yes I know - I'm using the opposing view to give comparison. Please don't think I'm against the concept of this thread, I just think the hypothosis of a debate should always be reminded of the opposing position

Quote

Why would you want to prevent a drop off in insulin?

I think you misread me; I said prevents the sudden drop-off in insulin

'Sudden' being the key word. The idea behind a gradual build-up and tail-off in blood sugar with dex and malto is to avoid the lethargic crash which occurs with high dextrose intake alone. Also, since the blood glucose will become available more slowly this way than with dex alone, it should only raise insulin moderately for longer, rather than greatly for shorter duration. This should theorhetically also avoid some of the potential negative issues you raise.

Is a speculative point of argument in one sense, but is also something I'm experimenting with in my own training at the moment.

The reason, again speculative, for avoiding cortisol is that raised levels in the blood affect ALL muscles, not just those trained. So while the rebuilding process you suggest is good reasoning not to worry too much about cortisol affecting the muscles worked during the session, the nontrained muscles in that session would also be unnecessarily broken down. A moderate raise in insulin would hopefully prevent this.