Arginine’s Anabolic Connection by Jerry Brainum

   Most bodybuilders are familiar with the amino acid L-arginine because it’s often touted as a “growth hormone” releaser. Various forms of arginine have recently played a starring role in sports supplements used to boost nitric oxide. Since arginine is the main dietary precursor of nitric oxide, it makes sense for NO-boosting supplements to feature it. Increasing NO may boost vasodilation, resulting in an increased muscle pump during training. As I pointed out recently in IRON MAN, NO does a number of other things that are beneficial to health and training.
      Arginine is classified as a conditionally essential amino acid. That means the nutritional requirement for arginine rises under certain conditions. Among other functions, arginine is involved in the detoxification of ammonia, which is produced as a result of the metabolism of amino acids. With the participation of arginine, potentially toxic ammonia is converted into urea, which is excreted from the kidneys.
    Arginine is also a glucogenic amino acid, meaning that it can be converted into glucose, the circulating form of sugar in the blood. That process happens in the liver and is called gluconeogenesis. Arginine is involved in the synthesis of various important body compounds, such as creatine, polyamines, ornithine and citrulline. Adding arginine to creatine supplements does not offer any benefits, because the limiting factor in the conversion of arginine into creatine is an enzyme rather than arginine itself.
     The most overlooked aspect of arginine is its effect on muscle protein synthesis. While the branched-chain amino acids, particularly leucine, are most associated with muscle protein synthesis, all essential amino acids are actively involved in the process. More recent evidence shows that arginine mimics many of the effects of BCAAs in regard to muscle protein synthesis.
     One recent study used rabbits as subjects. The authors note that under severe catabolic conditions, such as burn injuries, the requirement for arginine rises. Past studies show that arginine greatly aids wound healing. At first, the effect was attributed to increased growth hormone release. Later, when arginine was identified as the primary source of NO, the increased blood circulation fostered by NO was thought to be the cornerstone of arginine’s healing effects. The most recent studies indicate that the source of arginine’s healing power is its involvement in stimulating protein synthesis. BCAAs are involved in the same thing.
      The rabbit study involved wounds to the animals’ skin and muscle. One focus was whether the healing effect of arginine involved increased NO release in the wound area. The researchers gave the animals a chemical that blocks NO production. That had no effect on the increased muscle protein synthesis that occurred after the animals were given arginine, although the blood flow to the wounded area was markedly reduced, confirming that NO was blocked. The researchers also ruled out increased insulin release, since plasma glucose didn’t decrease, as would have occurred with upgraded insulin release. What they found was that arginine stimulated the movement of amino acids from blood into muscle. That increased amino acid availability and, consequently, muscle protein synthesis.
     The downside is that while you can duplicate the results of the experiment in humans, it would require an intake of arginine of 3.1 grams per hour for several hours. A possible side effect would be excess production of NO, resulting in a drop in blood pressure. The main point, however, is that arginine spurs muscle protein synthesis independent of NO—one more aspect of a versatile amino acid. Also consider that the dose suggested above is about what many bodybuilders take anyway in various protein or NO supplements. The muscle protein synthesis effect is a bonus of getting a lot of arginine.

Zhang, X.J., et al. (2008). The anabolic effect of arginine on proteins in skin wound and muscle is independent of nitric oxide production. Clin Nutr. In press.


©,2012, Jerry Brainum.Any reprinting in any type of media, including electronic and foreign is expressly prohibited.

JERRY BRAINUM'S BOOK AT www.jerrybrainum.com

Does Fish Oil Help Burn Bodyfat? By Jerry Brainum

     More than 40 years ago famed bodybuilding trainer Vince Gironda, whose trainees included many of the top bodybuilders of the ’60s and ’70s, stated that to lose bodyfat, you needed to eat fat. Dietary fat has nine calories per gram, 2 1/4 times as many calories as protein and carbohydrate (four calories per gram each), so fat is the densest form of energy. In addition, studies show that it’s far easier for the body to convert dietary fat into bodyfat than it is to convert protein or carbs. So was Vince wrong about fat?
      No. Science has confirmed that Vince was prescient. He also advocated a low-carbohydrate diet, and we now know that restricting carbs turns the body from a sugar-burning machine to a fat-burning machine, the result being that you not only tap into bodyfat stores but also oxidize, or burn, fat more rapidly.
     Vince had observed that polyunsaturated fat seemed linked to a greater use of bodyfat as fuel for exercise. Recent studies have confirmed that and have found that polyunsaturated fat can turn off fat-synthesizing genes in the body, though some forms are better at it than others.Omega-6 fats, found in various vegetable oils, qualify as polyunsaturated fats. Linoleic acid, for example, is one of two essential fatty acids, meaning that the body cannot synthesize it and must get it from food. Enzymes convert linoleic acid into arachidonic acid, which is trouble because that’s the major substrate for eicosanoids, substances that are potent inflammatories. Out-of-control inflammation is now recognized as the underlying cause of most degenerative disease, such as cardiovascular disease and cancer. Clearly, taking large doses of omega-6 fats to speed bodyfat loss is a nonstarter, unless you’re interested in a slow, painful death.
      Omega-3 fats, the other essential fatty acids, are present in fish oil and are quite another matter. They suppress inflammation and offer many other health benefits. The question is, Do they help you lose bodyfat? Animal studies show that taking in a lot of omega-3 fat blunts bodyfat synthesis, even when you eat a lot of saturated fat, which is ordinarily associated with insulin resistance and bodyfat gain.
      Another type of fat, conjugated linoleic acid, encourages fat loss in rodents and other animals, but the effect in humans isn’t as clear. Among the various isomers of CLA, only one kind can induce fat loss.In terms of their influence on fat loss, omega-3 fats are nearly as controversial as CLA. A recent study provided a generous dose of fish oil supplements to eight healthy young men, average age 24, whose average bodyfat level was 19 percent and who were engaged in exercise.¹ Some of them took 7.2 grams a day of a fish oil supplement while others took nothing for 14 days. They exercised for 30 minutes on a stationary cycle at a low level of intensity to maximize the use of fat as fuel.
The men took six capsules of a fish oil supplement, two with each of three meals. They ate a meal consisting of 80 percent carbs, 8 percent fat and 12 percent protein 2 1/2 hours before the workout. Since eating that much carbohydrate before exercise is known to block the use of fat as a fuel source, four of the men in the supplement group didn’t eat anything but did take the supplement. There were no differences in fat burning in those who got the fish oil and those who didn’t.
Another study found the same result: no acute effect of fish oil intake on fat oxidation during exercise. That study, however, came to a different conclusion.² Seven young men (aged 21 to 27), all of whom were actively engaged in both weight training and endurance exercise, were divided into the following groups:

1. No meal
2. Exercise four hours following a high-fat meal
3. Exercise four hours after a high-fat meal in which some of the fat was replaced by a caloric equivalent of fish oil

      The subjects jogged at low intensity for 60 minutes. In the first phase of the study they received a massive, or “acute,” dose of fish oil—16 to 22 grams—with a high-fat meal just prior to exercise. In the second part of the study they got far less fish oil, averaging four grams daily, but took that dose for 24 to 28 days.
      As with the other study, taking a large dose of fish oil before exercise didn’t affect fat oxidation in the short term. When used for a longer period, however, the fish oil significantly increased the use of fat during exercise. Conclusion: You get better fat loss when you take fish oil supplements long term.
      Fish oil aids fat burning because it helps suppress bodyfat synthesis and amplifies fat oxidation in both the liver and muscle. It also lowers malonyl coenzyme-A, a substance produced from carbohydrates that blunts fat burning during exercise. Fish oils stimulate the activity of a gene activator called peroxisomal proliferator-activated receptor-alpha, or PPAR-A, which ignites genes involved in thermogenesis, fatty acid transport and fat oxidation.
       A recent study examined the fat-oxidizing effects of EPA, one of two major omega-3 fatty acids.³ Rats were given a high-fat diet that paralleled the kinds of food eaten by obese humans. One group of rats also got supplemental EPA and gained significantly less bodyfat than the unsupplemented rats. The rats on EPA experienced an increase in PPAR-A activity and in apoptosis, or the self-destruction of fat cells. They also had higher levels of adiponectin, an anti-inflammatory substance that favors fat oxidation, as well as decreased tumor necrosis factor-A, an inflammatory. Leptin, still another substance released by fat cells, became normalized in the EPA rats, a metabolic scenario friendly to bodyfat loss.
       While some have suggested taking 15 grams or more a day of fish oil for fat loss, the study suggested a daily dose of four grams. Flaxseed oil, which is often listed as a good source of omega-3s, contains alpha linoleic acid, a precursor of DHA and EPA, the active omega-3 fats. Unfortunately, the human body converts only up to 5 percent of ALA into EPA and DHA, making fish oil a far more reliable source of those valuable nutrients.

References

¹ Bortolotti, M., et al. (2007). Fish oil supplementation does not alter energy efficiency in healthy males. Clin Nutr. 26(2):225-30.
² Huffman, D.M., et al. (2004). Chronic supplementation with fish oil increases fat oxidation during exercise in young men. J Exerc Physiol Online. 7:48-56.
3 Matute-Perez P. (2007). Eicosapentaenoic acid actions on adiposity and insulin resistance in control and high-fat fed rats: role of apoptosis, adiponectin and tumor necrosis factor-A. Brit J Nutr. 97:389-98.

Want more evidence-based information on exercise science, nutrition and food supplements, fat-loss,ergogenic aids, and anti-aging research? Check out Applied Metabolics Newsletter at www.appliedmetabolics.com.

 

©,2012, Jerry Brainum.Any reprinting in any type of media, including electronic and foreign is expressly prohibited.

JERRY BRAINUM'S BOOK AT www.jerrybrainum.com

Does CLA help build more muscle and burn more bodyfat? By Jerry Brainum

      Conjugated linoleic acid is a controversial food element. It’s been touted as helping build muscle while promoting fat loss. Structurally, it’s an 18-carbon polyunsaturated fatty acid isomer derived from the essential fatty acid linoleic acid. While there are 28 identified isomers, or similar compounds of CLA, the two most active versions are cis-9, trans-11; and trans-10, cis-12. Most commercial CLA supplements are composed of a mixture of those two isomers. CLA is found naturally in beef, lamb and dairy foods.

     Several animal studies have found that CLA has interesting effects, such as beneficial changes in body composition and protection against cancer. The animals used in the studies include rats, mice, pigs and chickens. Nearly all animal studies show that CLA promotes significant fat loss.
      The results of studies done with human subjects are far more equivocal. Some indicate that people respond the same way animals do, while others show few or no changes. The largest human study of CLA, involving 180 subjects, showed that when taken for one year, CLA supplements promoted bodyfat loss and increased lean-tissue mass. Only two previous human studies looked at the effects of combining CLA with exercise. One showed a fat-loss effect; the other showed none. Those differences are often attributed to the composition of the CLA used in the studies, since one isomer of CLA is reputed to promote fat loss more efficiently than the other.
      The most recent exercise study of CLA had 76 subjects, who took five grams a day of supplemental CLA or a placebo consisting of seven grams of safflower oil. Both groups trained with weights three times a week during the course of the study. After seven weeks, 17 of the subjects switched to the other group, making it a crossover study.
     After seven more weeks those in the CLA group showed greater increases in lean mass, greater loss of bodyfat and less muscle loss. The only strength change was an increase in bench press strength in the male subjects. The CLA appeared to exert an anticatabolic effect in muscle. How it does that isn’t known, but several theories are offered, including the following:

• CLA may modulate the immune stress response, possibly by interacting with cortisol release.
• CLA may blunt the release of inflammatory substances linked to muscle breakdown.

 CLA may help reduce bodyfat by:

• Increasing resting energy expenditure by stimulating the activity of thermogenic proteins known as uncoupling proteins.
• Interfering with the activity of the fat-cell enzyme lipoprotein lipase, which blunts the amount of fat that can be stored in fat cells.
• Increasing the activity of the enzyme that works with L-carnitine in shuttling fat into the mitochondria, where fat is burned.
• Preventing new fat cells from forming by inhibiting the actions of fat-promoting genes.
• Lowering levels of leptin, a protein produced in fat cells that helps to regulate food intake and energy usage.

       However, the authors note that the beneficial changes induced in the CLA group were small and of borderline significance. In addition, the crossover group that used CLA experienced no changes in either lean or fat mass, although CLA did appear to lower bone resorption, which would prevent bone mass loss.
      This study suggests that while CLA may be somewhat useful in conjunction with a weight-training program, its effect is small and, as the authors noted, not comparable to other supplements, such as creatine. What needs to be done now is to test the individual active isomers of CLA to see which works better for purposes of fat loss and muscle gain.

Pinkoski, C., et al. (2006). The effects of conjugated linoleic acid supplementation during resistance training. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 38:339-48.

©,2012, Jerry Brainum.Any reprinting in any type of media, including electronic and foreign is expressly prohibited.

Have you been ripped off by supplement makers whose products don’t work as advertised? Want to know the truth about them? Check out Jerry Brainum's book Natural Anabolics, available at JerryBrainum.com.

 

Want more evidence-based information on exercise science, nutrition and food supplements, ergogenic aids, and anti-aging research? Check out Applied Metabolics Newsletter at www.appliedmetabolics.com.

 

The Applied Ergogenics blog is a collection of articles written and published by Jerry Brainum over the past 20 years. These articles have appeared in Muscle and Fitness, Ironman, and other magazines. Many of the posts on the blog are original articles, having appeared here for the first time. For Jerry’s most recent articles, which are far more in depth than anything that appears on this blog site, please subscribe to his Applied Metabolics Newsletter, at www.appliedmetabolics.com. This newsletter, which is more correctly referred to as a monthly e-book, since its average length is 35 to 40 pages, contains the latest findings about nutrition, exercise science, fat-loss, anti-aging, ergogenic aids, food supplements, and other topics. For 33 cents a day you get the benefit of Jerry’s 53 years of writing and intense study of all matters pertaining to fitness,health, bodybuilding, and disease prevention.

 

See Jerry's book at  http://www.jerrybrainum.com

 

Does late-night eating make you fat? By Jerry Brainum

   One of the axioms in dieting is that you should never eat food past a certain time of day. For some, that means not eating anything past dinnertime, or about 6 p.m., although the time varies with individuals. The basic rule, however, is that you should eat the majority of your calories while you’re most active—for most people during the day. That way you’re more likely to burn off excess calories.
     Various popular diets continue to promulgate this dictum, including the Atkins and South Beach diets. Many bodybuilders adhere to the no-late-night-eating rule, mainly because metabolism drops during sleep, making it easier to retain calories and either stay or get fat.
   On the surface the advice makes sense. After all, when you’re inactive, where do the calories go? Research confirms that the metabolic rate drops during sleep in both humans and various animal species, but studies examining the effects of late-night or evening eating provide conflicting results. One study of women, for example, showed that those who ate at night gained weight over two weeks.
People who work the night shift are often heavier and gain more weight than their daytime peers. That’s curious since the night shift workers are ostensibly awake and active. Those who get more than half their total calorie intake at night gain weight faster than those who eat mostly during the day.
     Other research, however, shows little or no effect of night eating. A 10-year study of more than 7,000 people showed no connection between night eating and weight gain. Some studies do show that those who are obese tend to eat more at night than slimmer types, while another study found that those who tended to eat late were slimmer than usual. Confusion abounds.
     The most recent study to examine the late-night-eating controversy featured rhesus monkeys as subjects.¹ They could be closely monitored, with every morsel of food and activity accounted for. All of the monkeys were female, and their ovaries were removed—a known cause of weight gain. The monkeys were also put on high-fat diets, another established mechanism of weight gain. No monkeying around in this study.
The number of calories the monkeys consumed at night made little or no difference in their tendency to gain weight. Despite a diet that contained 368 percent more calories than their usual intake, most of the monkeys didn’t gain much. The authors suggest that the monkeys’ bodies successfully disposed of the excess calories through a thermogenic mechanism; that is, the excess calories were converted into heat, not stored.
When you overeat, your metabolism temporarily increases as a way of compensating for the extra calories. In addition, increasing fat stores aren’t related to a particular eating time but to a continued surfeit of calories over the course of several days. In short, people get fat because they overeat in relation to their physical activity level day after day. Contrary to popular belief, although your metabolism does drop when you sleep, that doesn’t automatically translate into weight gain.
    In fact, one eating plan frequently discussed in IRON MAN, the Warrior Diet espoused by Ori Hofmekler, suggests that you should get a large percentage of your calories at night. Hofmekler claims that such eating promotes a more efficient use of nutrients. One thing is certain, however: If you want to eat at night, go ahead. What’s important is not when you eat, but how much.        
  
¹ Sullivan, E.L., et al. (2005). Evidence in female rhesus monkeys that nighttime caloric intake is not associated with weight gain. Obesity Res. 13:2072-2080.

©,2012, Jerry Brainum.Any reprinting in any type of media, including electronic and foreign is expressly prohibited.

JERRY BRAINUM'S BOOK AT www.jerrybrainum.com

Fuel the Fire by Jerry Brainum

Do carbs help you train?

   Since carbohydrates are key energy nutrients, sipping on carb drinks while training ought to improve training intensity by decreasing fatigue. That explains why many bodybuilders carry drinks in the gym containing carb or energy supplements. Some research shows that taking in carbs during workouts may lessen cortisol response. Since cortisol is associated with muscle breakdown, curbing cortisol may provide a minor anabolic effect.

   Studies have shown that the older you are, the more cortisol you produce during weight workouts. When men over age 40 took carb drinks during their workouts, their cortisol release levels matched those of 20-year-olds. The only negative aspect is that carb intake blocks the use of fat as fuel during training. It’s a moot point, however, since anaerobic training is powered mainly by circulating blood glucose and muscle glycogen stores—both of which would be maintained if you had a carb drink during training.

   The question is, Can sipping a carb drink during a workout help you train harder? That issue was examined by researchers from Midwestern State University in Wichita Falls, Texas, who presented their findings at an annual meeting of the National Strength and Conditioning Association.
Their study featured eight resistance-trained men, average age 23, all of whom were capable of squatting with at least 150 percent of their bodyweight. The subjects participated in a seven-day crossover, double-blind study in which they were placed in either a carb drink or a placebo group. One supplement had 0.3 grams of carb per kilogram (2.2 pounds) of bodyweight and was taken immediately before and after every other set done to exhaustion of back squats. The participants did sets of five reps, using weights equal to 85 percent of one-rep maximum, with three minutes of rest between sets.

   Performance was measured by the total number of sets completed, reps and time to exercise failure. There were no significant differences in the two groups. The researchers concluded that taking in carbs during high-intensity training has no ergogenic effect.

 ©,2012, Jerry Brainum.Any reprinting in any type of media, including electronic and foreign is expressly prohibited.

JERRY BRAINUM'S BOOK AT   www.jerrybrainum.com

Aspartame Gets the Blame by Jerry Brainum

     Aspartame is an artificial sweetener sold under the brand name Nutrasweet and various other generic names. It was approved by the Food and Drug Administration in 1974 and has been in widespread use ever since. In fact, it's the second most widely used artificial sweetener in the world, just behind saccharin. More than 6,000 products contain aspartame, including many food supplements popular with bodybuilders and other athletes. Aspartame is 180 to 200 times sweeter than sucrose, or table sugar.
Aspartame is composed of three different ingredients: the amino acid phenylalanine, aspartic acid and methanol. Methanol is considered by many to be the most problematic ingredient, since its other name is wood alcohol. It can be toxic at certain levels. Aspartame is rapidly absorbed, and its constituent ingredients go through specific breakdown pathways. Aspartic acid is converted first to another amino acid, alanine, and to oxaloacetate, a component of the citric acid cycle, which results in the production of cellular energy. Phenylalanine is enzymatically converted into the amino acid tyrosine, which is itself the precursor of a number of vital body substances, such as melanin, the primary skin-coloring pigment, and the brain chemicals epinephrine, norepinephrine and dopamine, collectively known as catecholamines. Along with the trace mineral iodine, tyrosine is a component of thyroid hormones.
     Methanol, on the other hand, converts into formaldehyde, then formic acid. That's where the primary controversy about aspartame arises, since formaldehyde is toxic and a potential carcinogen, or cancer-causing substance.
      Various reports over the years, many of which circulate over the Internet, implicate aspartame in several health problems-hair loss, depression, dizziness, dementia, behavioral disturbances, adverse mood changes, impaired vision and headaches. Aspartame is also allegedly involved in the onset of several types of cancer, notably brain tumors.
     Government commissions in the United States, Europe and Japan have examined the many claims of harmful health effects made about aspartame and dismissed them. That hasn't silenced the critics, however, who dismiss the government findings as another example of government and industry collusion. The implication is that human health and well-being are sacrificed in the name of corporate profit.
      The newest report on the safety of aspartame initially appears to confirm the dangers of ingesting this sweetener.1 Published by a group of Italian researchers, it showed that when aspartame was given to rats in doses equal to less than half of the currently acceptable daily intake, the rats showed increased incidence of malignant tumors, lymphomas and leukemia. The authors began studying the rats at eight weeks old and continued to follow them until they died, giving them various doses of aspartame as part of their feed. Unlike earlier studies about aspartame safety, this one followed the rats for a longer time and examined them after death for microscopic changes that may have occurred.
     Both male and female rats experienced increased incidence of various types of cancer. The authors speculate that the immediate cause was likely the methanol content of aspartame, since methanol degrades into known carcinogenic compounds.
     Does that mean that aspartame is dangerous after all? No concrete evidence shows that it causes any type of cancer in humans. Rats are far more prone to cancer than humans, and doses of chemicals that cause cancer in rats have no effect in humans whatsoever.
     Another problem is the suggestion that methanol is the probable smoking gun. Aspartame contains 10 percent methanol by weight, and a liter of a beverage containing aspartame would have 50 milligrams of methanol, far less than is found in an average serving of most fruit juices. If methanol is the problem, fruit juice should also be carcinogenic, which it's not. A study in which human subjects got 75 milligrams of aspartame per kilogram of bodyweight-25 milligrams over the acceptable safe intake-for six months failed to show any detectable increases in blood levels of methanol or its breakdown
     Still, the science of toxicology decrees that all compounds can be potentially toxic, including salt, water and sugar. That's illustrated by another recent study that linked aspartame to various neurological side effects, such as headache, seizures and panic attacks.2 The prevailing theory is that aspartame may interfere with the sodium pump enzyme system in cells. That's significant if true, because the sodium pump regulates the entry of electrolytes in nerve cells and is vital to normal nerve function.
     The study had an isolated-cell design, in which cells were exposed to varying levels of aspartame. At low exposure levels aspartame had no effect on the sodium pump mechanism. At high concentrations, though, it indeed inhibited the activity of the sodium pump, which could lead to many symptoms of electrolyte imbalance. The effect was due to increased oxidation incurred by high levels of aspartame exposure. On the other hand, the amino acid L-cysteine and glutathione completely blocked the negative effects of aspartame on the sodium pump mechanism.
     L-cysteine is the nutritional precursor of glutathione, which itself consists of three amino acids and is one of the body's most vital antioxidant compounds. That may explain why you don't see more aspartame-produced side effects. First, few people ingest enough to cause toxic effects. Second, if you use such supplements as whey protein, N-acetylcysteine or lipoic acid, you're producing optimal levels of glutathione in the body.
    There is little to fear from aspartame, unless you're taking in huge amounts of the sweetener. Adults would need to drink 10 cans a day of an aspartame-sweetened beverage just to get to the acceptable intake of 40 milligrams per kilogram of bodyweight per day. Most people get an average of 10 milligrams per kilogram a day. Because of its phenylalanine content, aspartame may produce problems in those born with a genetic lack of enzymes needed to process the amino acid PKU, or phenylketonuria. For them, aspartame may indeed turn bitter.
References
1 Soffritti, M., et al. (2006). First experimental demonstration of the multipotential carcinogenic effects of aspartame administered in the feed to Sprague-Dawley rats. Environ Health Perspect 114:379-385.
2 Schulpis, K., et al. (2005). The effect of L-cysteine and glutathione on inhibition of NA+, K+ ATPase activity by aspartame metabolites in human erythrocyte membrane. Eur J Clin Nutr. [Epub ahead of print].

©,2013 Jerry Brainum. Any reprinting in any type of media, including electronic and foreign is expressly prohibited.
 

Have you been ripped off by supplement makers whose products don’t work as advertised? Want to know the truth about them? Check out Jerry Brainum's book Natural Anabolics, available at JerryBrainum.com

 
 

The Applied Ergogenics blog is a collection of articles written and published by Jerry Brainum over the past 20 years. These articles have appeared in Muscle and Fitness, Ironman, and other magazines. Many of the posts on the blog are original articles, having appeared here for the first time. For Jerry’s most recent articles, which are far more in depth than anything that appears on this blog site, please subscribe to his Applied Metabolics Newsletter, at www.appliedmetabolics.com. This newsletter, which is more correctly referred to as a monthly e-book, since its average length is 35 to 40 pages, contains the latest findings about nutrition, exercise science, fat-loss, anti-aging, ergogenic aids, food supplements, and other topics. For 33 cents a day you get the benefit of Jerry’s 53 years of writing and intense study of all matters pertaining to fitness,health, bodybuilding, and disease prevention.

 

See Jerry's book at  http://www.jerrybrainum.com

 

Want more evidence-based information on exercise science, nutrition and food supplements, ergogenic aids, and anti-aging research? Check out Applied Metabolics Newsletter at www.appliedmetabolics.com

Building Older Muscles By Jerry Brainum

A common concern among bodybuilders over 40 is how to retain muscle with the passing years. It’s important not only for aesthetic reasons but for health as well. Recent research shows that muscle weakness is the most common cause of loss of mobility among the elderly. One simple way to preserve muscle is to just keep training.
   Certainly modifications may be in order. Weights that were easy in your 20s may prove too formidable when you’re past 40.
    Diet also plays a part. Various studies show that diet can favorably affect muscular progress in older trainees. That’s clear from a recent study featuring men aged 49 to 73, who underwent 21 weeks of supervised weight training.
Half of the subjects were advised to eat high-fiber grains, fruits, vegetables, lean meats, fish and dairy foods. The suggested percentage of nutrients closely matched that recommended in the United States (the study took place in Finland). In addition, the subjects were told how to plan meals that would provide at least one gram of protein per kilogram (2.2 pounds) of bodyweight daily. That’s slightly more than the 0.8 grams advised for most people. They lifted weights twice a week for 21 weeks, using a program that focused on progressive resistance, with a special emphasis on leg training.
    A high-fiber, lowfat diet fosters a decline in men’s testosterone. Lower testosterone isn’t conducive to building muscle, which is one reason you rarely see vegan bodybuilding champions; vegetarians who do eat milk products and eggs fare much better.
     The study found that the combination of more protein and a fat intake of at least 30 percent led to increased testosterone and improved gains in the subjects’ muscular size and strength. A high-fiber diet didn’t seem to have any adverse effects on building muscle or the hormone picture. The key was the 30 percent fat intake. Eating less fat than that while following a high-fiber diet would likely adversely affect testosterone count. The men also had higher levels of free, or active, testosterone. Most testosterone is bound to proteins in the blood and becomes active only when unbound. One way to encourage that is to get more protein, as the Finnish study of older men demonstrated.

Sallinen, J., et al. (2007). Dietary intake, serum hormones, muscle mass and strength during strength training in 49-73-year-old men. Int J Sports Med. 28(12):1070-1076.


©,2012, Jerry Brainum.Any reprinting in any type of media, including electronic and foreign is expressly prohibited.

Have you been ripped off by supplement makers whose products don’t work as advertised? Want to know the truth about them? Check out Jerry Brainum's book Natural Anabolics, available at JerryBrainum.com.

 

Want more evidence-based information on exercise science, nutrition and food supplements, ergogenic aids, and anti-aging research? Check out Applied Metabolics Newsletter at www.appliedmetabolics.com.

 

The Applied Ergogenics blog is a collection of articles written and published by Jerry Brainum over the past 20 years. These articles have appeared in Muscle and Fitness, Ironman, and other magazines. Many of the posts on the blog are original articles, having appeared here for the first time. For Jerry’s most recent articles, which are far more in depth than anything that appears on this blog site, please subscribe to his Applied Metabolics Newsletter, at www.appliedmetabolics.com. This newsletter, which is more correctly referred to as a monthly e-book, since its average length is 35 to 40 pages, contains the latest findings about nutrition, exercise science, fat-loss, anti-aging, ergogenic aids, food supplements, and other topics. For 33 cents a day you get the benefit of Jerry’s 53 years of writing and intense study of all matters pertaining to fitness,health, bodybuilding, and disease prevention.

 

See Jerry's book at  http://www.jerrybrainum.com

 

Aerobics and Cholesterol Absorption by Jerry Brainum

   Aerobics, or endurance exercise, beneficially affects several cardiovascular risk factors. It lowers blood pressure, increases nitric oxide release in blood vessels and lowers elevated blood lipids, or fats, such as cholesterol. A new study, presented at the American College of Sports Medicine meeting in San Francisco earlier this year, illustrated a novel way that aerobics lowers cholesterol.
The study measured levels of sterols, substances produced in the cholesterol synthesis pathway, in 30 sedentary subjects (20 women, 10 men, average age 59) before and after six months of aerobics training. The results showed a trend for a 20 percent increase in the sterol campesterol, along with an increase in protective high-density-lipoprotein cholesterol and a lowering of blood triglycerides, or fat.

   The significance of this is that cam­pesterol interferes with the uptake and absorption of food cholesterol, as well as cholesterol produced in the body. That leads to increased cholesterol excretion and a lowering of blood cholesterol levels. Note that cholesterol, unlike fat, cannot be burned, and excretion is the only way the body can dispose of an excess. So aerobics may help prevent cardiovascular disease through this previously unknown mechanism.

Feeney, L.A., et al. (2006). Effect of endurance exercise on markers of cholesterol absorption and synthesis. Med Sci Sports Exer. 38:S483-S484.

©,2012, Jerry Brainum.Any reprinting in any type of media, including electronic and foreign is expressly prohibited.

JERRY BRAINUM'S BOOK AT www.jerrybrainum.com