|
by Lyle McDonald
Lyle McDonald is the author of the
Ketogenic Diet as well as the
Rapid Fat Loss
Handbook and the
Guide to
Flexible Dieting. He has been interested in all aspects of human
performance physiology since becoming involved in competitive sports as
a teenager. Pursuing a degree in Physiological Sciences from UCLA, he has
devoted nearly 20 years of his life to studying human physiology and the
science, art and practice of human performance, muscle gain, fat loss and
body recomposition.
Publication Date: October 1, 1998
Dear Lyle,
I just read an article about protein
cycling at
http://www.testosterone.net. In it, the author (who's an MD AND
a bodybuilder, so he must know his stuff) recommends reducing
protein intake to 20-40 grams per day for up to a month, saying that
it'll help me get bigger. He also said that it's possible to grow
during starvation. He has references to support his claims. What do
you think?
Answer: OK, I'll come clean, I made up this question (but it's
the only one so far). No one sent it to me but I figured it was just
a matter of time before they did. The article on protein cycling
over at testosterone.net is a good example (to me at least) of the
problem with bodybuilding and the internet: anybody with any idea,
whether it's valid or not, can put it out there for the world to
see.
I was appalled by the article on protein cycling on
testosterone.net. While protein cycling may have some limited uses,
the claims made in the article, and the references used to support
those claims, are out in left field. Actually, they are beyond left
field, they are out in the parking lot where Mark McGwire's last
home run landed. I wrote a rather detailed feedback letter to the
guys at Testosterone.net. That was several weeks ago and they have
not dignified me with a response, not even to tell me to fuck off.
So, here in all it's glory, is the letter I wrote to them, so
everyone can know how easy it is to cite a couple of studies and
mislead people.
Addendum: Since writing this fake email question to myself, the
good Dr. graced me with a reply at Testosterone.net. I will be
addressing his comments (although I won't spend most of my time
using ad hominem attacks or making fun of his name, as he did with
me) here on Mesomorphosis.com.
And my next article will be on issues regarding protein
oxidations, synthesis, degradation, etc. to clear up some of these
issues (as well as explaining why protein cycling just probably
isn't going to work very well). And I'll actually be using human
research instead of chicken and sheep models. But I wanted my
original letter to be available somewhere on the web than on
Testosterone.net.
****
Where do I ever start? I wanted to write to you regarding the
good Dr. Marcus' rehashed ideas on protein cycling. I say rehashed
because Gironda was pushing low protein cycles years ago, Tom Platz
talked about it in "Big Beyond Belief" as did Akerfeldt last year in
his 'ABCDE' series in MM2K. Dr. Marcus' approach is far more extreme
than either approach, advocating 20-40 grams of protein for long
periods of time, up to a month.
I'm sorry guys, but I think one of your infamous 'Gang of Five'
is defective. First he makes this big deal about why you should
listen to him, because he's a smart cookie, and because he *knows*
how to do research, and because he's a *real* bodybuilder. Well I'm
not 'real' bodybuilder (just a wanna be with small arms) but I do
have a background in exercise physiology and nutrition. More
importantly, I know how to access Medline to check on the claims
being made by all the B.S. artists in the world of bodybuilding. And
this article was full of it.
First he talks about how protein depletion jacks GH to the
ceiling, and it doesn't come down for several days after protein is
refed, citing Guyton's textbook of medical physiology (pg. 939).
This is true (I checked my copy), at least for children suffering
from Kawashiorkor (that's a good model for bodybuilders) but he's
being awfully reductive. GH isn't the be-all, end-all anabolic
hormone, what about looking at what happens to testosterone levels
or IGF-1. Of course, GH is the big rage right now (i.e. all the B.S.
GH supplements flooding the market) so it makes sense that he'd play
up the role of GH in growth. Also, if you really want to jack GH to
the ceiling, try total starvation. Of course, no one would be dumb
enough to recommend starvation for growth. Oh wait, that came later
in the article.
That's when the article really got bad. first he claims:
"Other benefits of protein cycling include more efficient function
of the liver and kidneys and a decrease in organ size. We all know
that a smaller liver is great, especially to those of us with
protruding guts secondary to liver hypertrophy.(5)"
Citing:
5 - Differential effects of plane of protein or energy
nutrition on visceral organs and hormones in lambs. J Anim Sci 1995
Jun;73(6):1674-1688 Wester TJ, et. al.
Now this would be fascinating if it occurs, and could be
beneficial. So I looked up the abstract (don't have access to the
journal sadly). And it does state: " By wk 7 of restriction, liver
mass in ER and PR was decreased to 50% of controls (P < .05)."
So he's correct, sort of. But, the next sentence says: "Return of
liver mass, on an empty body weight basis, occurred by d 2 of
repletion (P< .01)"
Wow, 4 weeks of protein malnutrition and any advantage of a
reduced liver size is gone within 2 days. That sounds worth it to
me. Of course, he probably didn't expect anyone to actually look up
his studies (we all know that citing a passle of studies
automatically gives you credibility) and see if he was correct or
not.
Finally, to prove his brilliance, he states "Hey, don't be
afraid of losing muscle and wimp out...many of our current ideas
about building muscle are stupid and based on the ideas of peons and
pencil necks. For instance, I have discovered, in the literature and
through self-experimentation, that muscle can be built during
complete starvation...but that's another topic for another day.(6)"
Citing:
6 - Effect of food restriction on rat muscle hypertrophy...
Brown-CR. Comp-Bioch- Physiol-A. 1990; 95(3): 321-4
Now I am truly amazed. Not only has he solved the problems of
bodybuilding, he has figured out how to create something from
nothing and break a fundamental law of thermodynamics. I had to
check this one out. First off, the correct reference is:
Effects of food restriction on stretch induced muscle hypertrophy
in chickens of various ages. - Brown CR, et. al. - Comp Biochem
Physiol A 1990;95(3):321-324
Well, chickens and rats are both animals I suppose but it would
be nice if he could get the references correct if he's going to
bother citing them in the first place. Anyway, this study looked at
muscle growth in an ISOLATED MUSCLE during chronic stretch during
starvation. And after 6 days, that muscle had grown by 200%. So the
good doctor is sort of correct.
Of course, the effects on one muscle don't tell us anything about
whole body protein synthesis. I wonder if the good doctor can tell
me WHERE the nitrogen and amino acids are coming from during total
starvation to allow for whole body protein synthesis. The last time
I checked, humans could not fix nitrogen from the air like plants
do. And if you look at the huge amount of starvation literature
(hint, Dr. Marcus, do a Medline search on George F Cahill, Jr or a
very recent paper by OE Owen in the Am J Clin Nutr), the loss of
body protein is massive during the initial stages of starvation. I
would speculate the amino acids/nitrogen that were incorporated into
the chicken's wing came from the breakdown of other muscles. Sorry,
Dr. Marcus, you can't make something out of nothing.
So to be honest, I'm totally perplexed by this article. He
mangles the facts, he can't even get his references correct, and I
have to wonder what his motivations are. Perhaps a new low protein
MRP offered only through Testosterone.net?
Dr. Marcus, I thought the first rule of medicine was "First, do
no harm". Can you explain how encouraging protein malnutrition or
outright starvation fits with your Hippocratic oath?
Oh one more thing, in his most recent Gang of Five answers, Dr.
Marcus makes the strange statement that protein from grains and
vegetables should not be counted towards the daily total of 20-40
grams. So if I eat 20 bagels per day (approx. protein content 10
grams/bagel) for a total of 200 grams of protein, but nothing else,
does that mean I can count my protein intake as zero for that day? I
think someone needs a refresher in human physiology. Amino acids are
amino acids, and the point of this strategy is to downregulate amino
acid oxidation, so the source is irrelevant.
Anyway, I've talked long enough. I'll look forward to comments by
the esteemed Dr. Marcus regarding my criticisms of his article.
Lyle,
Hi, I got the impression that you don't
care for Bill Phillips, I’ve entered their contest this year, I
needed some kind of challenge to get myself going again. I’ve been a
couch potato for 10yrs. This helped. My question if you can answer
it is about BODYOPUS diet. I've lost 50lbs so far on Atkins and high
protein diets since Mar. Just started lifting in May (BF%35 in may
now at 22%).Is it possible to get down to 10-12% by Sept. About 8
weeks. I weigh 240 now would like to be around 215-220 with 10%bf
possible? 189lb Lean body mass now. I'm trying the BO diet now just
not losing weight, lost 4%BF in 2 weeks. Do I need more aerobics
(45-60min 5 days a wk)?
A: Actually I think the concept of the Bill Phillips contest is
excellent, invariably people do better when they have specific
goals. I just see it as a blatant excuse to sell a lot of overpriced
supplements, especially since he's requiring that you *only* use EAS
supplements. Anyway, that's neither here nor there....
Twenty lbs. in 8 weeks (2.5 lbs. per week) would be pushing it,
and you'd almost be certain to lose some muscle mass. The problem
you're going to have right now is that you’ve been dieting so long,
your body is going to be resistant to losing any more bodyfat.
You didn't mention calorie levels but, as I've said many times
before, it seems that the combo of too much cardio and too few
calories tends to hurt, not help fat loss. So if you've reduced
calories below 12 cal/lb., you should try raising them to that
level. Alternately, reduce cardio to 40' four times per week.
Frequently that is enough to get fat loss going again. You didn't
mention any other specifics but some people don't do well with 2 day
carb-ups on BO. You may find that cutting back to a 1-1.5 day
carb-up (from Friday evening to Saturday bedtime) is sufficient to
maintain training intensity and allow for better fat loss. I know
that when I did 2 day carb-ups, I tended to regain some of the fat I
had lost during the previous week. A 30 hour carb-up works much
better for me.
Hi Lyle,
Thank you for your June article on flax
oil? I was hoping you could answer some further questions on the
topic. I've read several purported benefits of flax oil
supplementation - Dan Duchaine has stated that the EFA's in flax oil
may have protein uncoupling properties (I know you have experience
with that other protein uncoupler - DNP!). I've read abstracts that
show omega3's, 6's, 9's improve insulin sensitivity. Also, a few
people have claimed flax oil selectively improves insulin
sensitivity and glucose disposal in muscle cells while minimizing in
fat cells. Since most diabetic drugs improve storage in muscle and
fat cells, this flax oil stuff sounds like a great, inexpensive
supplement! Can this actually aid in fat loss? If flax does have
protein uncoupling properties, wouldn't more be better (as long as
you have a "proper" diet and no excessive caloric intake)? Also, do
the lignans in flax have estrogenic or anti-estrogenic effects?
First, I want to apologize for taking so long to answer this
question.
I want to first say that I haven't had a ton of time to read all
of the EFA research (been too busy looking at ketogenesis of course)
so all I can go buy is some anecdotal experience and what I've read
in THE book on EFA's which is "Fats the kill, fats that heal" by Udo
Erasmus.
Anecdotally, it does seem as if substituting some of your normal
fat intake with EFA's aids in fat loss. In fact, it's a strategy I
recommend for individuals who hit a plateau on the CKD. In general,
the individuals who do this seem to lose fat a bit more effectively,
and some mention an increased feeling of warmth.
Additionally, I have one paper that looked at very high doses of
fat (I’m talking 600 grams per day) on a ketogenic diet and the
subjects lost more weight/gained less weight when they consumed corn
oil (high in the EFA linoleic acid) but not when they consumed olive
oil (low in EFA's). In this study, all subjects mentioned a feeling
of warmth all over their body, which is suggestive of increased
thermogenesis/uncoupling.
Now is more better? I think like anything it's a matter of
degrees. First and foremost, at some point, a larger and larger fat
intake (even if it is EFA's) will mean you're consuming too many
calories and fat loss will stop. Secondly, Erasmus has talked about
the potentially negative effects of overconsuming any one EFA, in
that the body can get an imbalance (i.e. too much can be just as bad
as too little). So I think we're looking for an optimum but I'm not
sure if anyone can say what it is.
As to the lignan issue, I had to farm that question out to a
biochem nerd friend of mine who has done much more research into
androgen/estrogen stuff than I've had time to do. She said that the
answer is yes, meaning that lignans can have both estrogenic and
anti-estrogenic potential depending on what tissue it is studied in
and a whole host of other factors. However she said that any effect
(good or bad) is likely to be small so I don't think it's worth
worrying about. According to Erasmus, unless you're eating raw flax,
the lignan content of flax oil is fairly low, maybe 1% so you'd have
to work hard to get enough lignans to have an effect either way.
I was wondering whether the EFA's where
destroyed by cooking fish. I have always heard that heat will
destroy them, and what about canned fish? Are fish oil capsules an
effective stable form?
As with the previous question, for lack of having had time to
read the relevant research myself, I turned to THE book on fats and
oils by Udo Erasmus. Like any EFA, fish oils can be degraded by
excessive heat, oxygen or light. so if you do cook your fish, don't
fry them, he suggests boiling, poaching or done as sushi. Of course
sushi may or may not be healthy if you don't know what you're doing.
The fish oil capsules should be stable as long as they are in a
dark bottle, in dark gelcaps and kept cool.
Lyle, I have been reading your weekly
Bodyopus experiences with great interest due to the fact that I have
been doing it for a while and share many of your experiences. On my
second day on Bodyopus after 2 months of a traditional moderate/high
carb and high pro., I took three caps of 200mg. Lipoic Acid. This is
the (recommend) daily dose needed for its potent glucose disposal
effects.
I got crazy low carb blues, tired, no
energy which had never happened to me to the same extent with taking
magnesium, CP, and VS with on/off Bodyopus for 2 years. I have not
seen or heard anything about Lipoic acid on Bodyopus before. I think
it works great and I think it got me into ketosis quicker than ever
before. Thoughts or opinions would be greatly appreciated.
Q: First let me be 100% honest when I say that I haven't
personally used alpha lipoic acid (ALA) or had the time to read a
lot of the research (most of which is in German anyhow). So all I
can offer on this one is anecdotal information from people I know
who have used it.
I know of several people (on the lowcarb-l exercise list) who
have used ALA, primarily during the carb-up phase. Almost without
exception, they report that it is THE king-hell glucose disposal
agent, far more potent than vanadyl, chromium or magnesium could
EVER be. Of course it is a bit expensive but you get what you pay
for. To the contrary, most of the people (including myself) who used
vanadyl/chromium/magnesium to try and get into ketosis faster or
during carb-ups didn't notice a huge amount of difference.
The first thing this tells me is that ALA is very potent. It's
very rare to truly 'feel' any supplement working like this. The
second thing this tells me is that it probably was the cause of your
blood sugar crash during the ketogenic week. What probably happened
is that you dropped your blood sugar too quickly before you had
produced enough ketones to keep the brain happy. So you got the
low-blood sugar blues and crashed. The only advice I could give
would be to either ditch the ALA during the lowcarb week and use it
during the carb-up or perhaps try a smaller dose during the first
days of the lowcarb week, to see if you can get some blood glucose
lowering effects without crashing out like that (which is really no
fun).
Q: Would like to ask a few questions
about the Iso-Caloric Diet. How does it compare to BodyOpus? At
preserving LBM? Is it better than the High-carb Diet?
A: It seems like most naturals definitely tend to do better in
terms of sparing LBM with a more isocaloric diet compared to a high
carb diet (though some do just fine on high carb, maybe related to
high insulin sensitivity or something else entirely). It's hard to
say whether a CKD will always show greater fat loss/LBM sparing
compared to an isocaloric diet. For some people it does, for others
it doesn't. Once again I imagine this is due to insulin sensitivity
and other issues like that.
To achieve ketosis I believe one must
cut carbs to 0 or < 20. On the IsoCaloric what happens? some
ketosis? Is body still glycogen burning? Or is there some kind of
split or 50/50, since the carbs and fats both make up 33% of diet.
Technically speaking, ketosis can occur with any carbohydrate
intake less than 100 grams/day, it's just that it won't develop to
any great degree if carbs are higher (you'd probably need blood
tests to pick ketosis up at 100 g/day of carbs). With an isocaloric
diet, it would be rare for carb intake to fall below 100 grams/day
and I would be very surprised if someone developed ketosis. however,
people who have done a CKD for long periods of time who then shift
to an isocaloric diet have reported that they will go into ketosis
sometimes, especially in the morning. this may reflect that their
body has adapted to the point that it 'prefers' ketosis, it's hard
to say.
As far as fuel utilization, you can pretty much draw a
relationship between the amount of carbs in the diet/muscle glycogen
levels, and how well or poorly the body will use fat for fuel. With
very high carb intakes, fat utilization is blocked. As carb intake
decreases (and muscle glycogen is depleted with weight training),
the body will use more fat for fuel, both during exercise and at
rest. obviously a zero carb diet will give the maximum fat oxidation
because carb intake will be the lowest and muscle glycogen will be
maintained at the lowest level (except during a carb-up of course).
However, this isn't to automatically say that a CKD will cause
more fat loss than an isocaloric diet. Ultimately fat loss is going
to be the difference between fat burned (a function of diet and
metabolic rate) and fat consumed. Yes it's true that on a ketogenic
diet you are burning the maximum amount of fat, but you are also
consuming the most fat (compared to a high carb or isocaloric diet).
So the difference in fat loss between a ketogenic diet (maximum fat
burned but maximum fat eaten) and an isocaloric diet (less than
maximum fat burned but less than maximum fat eaten) is likely to be
small in the long run.
Do you think a 1 day carb up would be
beneficial for this diet? To preserve LBM? Or possibly increase LBM?
I think a cheat day (or at least a cheat meal) is a good thing on
any diet for a few reasons. One it helps to prevent cheating during
the week if you know that you can have anything you want to eat that
one time a week. Two, it may prevent metabolic rate from dropping so
much since you're eating more calories. Three, I guess it could help
with LBM preservation and the extra calories might be anabolic,
especially if they came after a weight training session.
And one question about BodyOpus. Have
you maintained your strength while dropping to 7% BF from 10%.
Strength in gym seems to be best indicator of whether muscle lost or
maintained.
It depends. During my first Bodyopus diet cycle, the mistake I
made was to diet too long (10 weeks straight), cut calories too much
(way too much), and to do too much cardio. Although I didn't lose
much strength in my upper body, I did in my legs. I think this just
reflected overtraining since I was doing twice a day cardio at the
end there. Since then, I have done much shorter diet cycles,
generally 4-6 weeks maximum and I rarely see a big drop in strength.
Dear Lyle,
I was talking to my lab advisor Derek
about this. If there is no ATP production (or at least it is merely
thrown off as heat during the aerobic respiration cycle) would not
it be hard for the cell(s) to be able to bond the proper peptides in
order for protein synthesis to occur? If that is so, taking anabolic
hormones would not be much of a plus. However, there are many people
that do. Is it worth doing?
A: Yes and yes in that order. I would think that, yes, ATP
depletion in the cell would limit how much protein synthesis could
occur if you were using DNP with anabolic steroids. However, DNP
affects primarily Type I muscle fibers (which have the most
mitochondria) while it's well known that most of the hypertrophy
seen with weight training (and I would assume by extension weight
training + steroids) occurs in the Type II muscle fibers. So I think
it's conceivable that you could still get hypertrophy (or at least
maintenance if you were using DNP in a dieting cycle) in the type II
fibers (from the anabolic steroids) while getting the fat loss
effects (from the DNP) in the Type I fibers.
An interesting bit of trivia is that DNP didn't negatively affect
my ability to weight train, it just made it really hard to walk from
my car to the gym. This tells me that I wasn't ATP depleted in my
Type II fibers or my weight training performance would have gone to
hell while I was using DNP. But I was depleted of ATP in my Type I
fibers, which is why low intensity activity was so exhausting.
Dear Lyle,
I have been on CKDs on and off for about
a year. My question is would the use of pro-hormones be beneficial
or a waste of money on a CKD. I will look forward to your response.
I'll give you two answers:
1. On the one hand, anything that can help to keep testosterone
up while dieting would be a good thing from the standpoint of
preventing muscle loss.
2. ON the other hand, the conversion of the pro-hormones to
testosterone / nortestosterone occurs in the liver and is ATP
dependent. Low carb diets deplete liver glycogen/liver ATP and I
have to wonder if the conversion to testosterone is impaired, which
would make the pro-hormones useless.
Since we don't have any data on #2, all I can say is to try
dieting for 2-4 weeks without the pro-hormones and then maybe try
dieting 2-4 weeks with them and see if there are any differences in
fat loss or muscle loss. That's about the best you can do.
Lyle,
I want to gain LBM with a BodyOpus type
diet. Can you give me your best diet/workout schedule to do this? I
need to stay lean while increasing LBM. I used insulin twice with
BodyOpus with good results - if you think it will help please
advise. Thanks!
First let me say that I don't think the CKD is the ideal mass
gaining diet. Part of this is hormonal, which I discussed a couple
of questions back. The lack of carbs will lower insulin, may raise
cortisol, and will affect IGF-1 and thyroid. Additionally the lack
of carbs *may* negatively affect training intensity. I am of the
opinion that you should optimize your diet, training and supplements
for your goal. So if your goal is mass, I think you should pick the
diet that will optimize your hormonal milieu (meaning high insulin,
testosterone, thyroid, GH and IGF-1 and low cortisol and glucagon),
your training intensity (which means eating carbs) and your
supplements (don't use fat burners during your mass phase).
Now if you're still determined to use CKD, here are my thoughts.
For fat loss, the CKD has to be very rigidly structured, for reasons
I outlined in my last article on this site. There are very specific
goals including muscle mass maintenance, glycogen depletion, etc.
which necessitates a specific training structure, volume, etc.
For mass gains, it's just not that critical. You don't need to be
concerned as much with glycogen depletion between carb-ups although
how much volume you can do per bodypart will be determined by the
length of your carb-up. The primary considerations that I see are
the following:
1. You will be strongest on the 2 days following your carb-up. So
I can make a case for putting any weak bodyparts on these days since
you will be able to train them the most intensely.
2. The main anabolic effect of the diet is on the weekends,
meaning that I could also make a case for putting any weak bodyparts
on the day prior to the carb-up. Even though you may not be able to
work it as intensely, any bodyparts worked immediately before the
carb-up will get the benefit of incoming carbs and protein as well
as elevated insulin, etc.
Along these same lines, if your training structure has you
performing the same workout every week (i.e. chest/back on Monday,
legs on Wednesday, delts/arms on Friday) this means that your
chest/back workout will always be the strongest, your leg workout
will always be the hardest, and your delt/arms workout will always
get the benefit of the carb-up). Therefore, if your looking for
overall growth, I think it's better to use some type of rotating
schedule in your training. One option (though it looks simplistic, I
think it can be very effective) is to alternate an A workout (say
upper body) and a B workout (say lower body) in the following way:
Mon: A
Wed: B
Fri: A
Mon: B
Wed: A
Fri: B
This way, each week you alternate which bodypart comes after the
carb-up and which comes right before.
Alternately, if your schedule will allow, you can use a 5 day
cycle such as:
Day 1: chest/back, Day 2: legs/abs, Day 3: off, Day 4: delts/arms
Day 5: off
By inserting a 5 day training cycle onto a 7 day diet cycle (5
days lowcarb, 2 days high carb) you will eventually have every
workout fall at some point on the diet. So the cycle will look like:
Day 1: lowcarb, chest/back
Day 2: lowcarb, legs/abs
Day 3: lowcarb, off
Day 4: lowcarb, delts/arms
Day 5: lowcarb
Day 6: chest/back, carb-up
Day 7: legs/abs, carb-up
Day 8: lowcarb, off
day 9: delts/arms, lowcarb
etc., etc.
As far as insulin, there are two potential ways you could use it
(and let me preface by saying that insulin is potentially very
dangerous/fatal). You can use it to turbocharge your carb-up
(allowing you to get full supercompensation in 24 hours, instead of
the normal 36-38 hours) or you can do what some people call
death-wish dieting. I know of people who have used insulin with some
carbs right after their training (during the week) to ramjet carbs
into the muscle and re-establish ketosis. Thing is this requires
meticulous timing of the insulin and carbs and I don't think it's
worth the risk.
Dear Lyle,
I have now been training for almost two
years but unfortunately I have reached a plateau. I have become
desperate to put on some mass but nothing really seems to work. As a
result I tried to read everything I can about various mass boosting
diets and the Anabolic Diet seems to be the best but in your article
about the CKD you claimed that this diet wasn=B4t optimal in order =
to gain muscle mass. Which diet will you then prefer for mass gain?
Well, you didn't give me a ton of information about your training
or diet so it's hard for me to say what caused you to plateau. So
I'll try and make some general comments. Yeah, right, this is one of
those posts that I should turn into an article here on
Mesomorphosis.com, since I got a bit carried away with the info
dump.
In the body, we are always dealing with net processes. Writers
tend to simplify things down (mainly to make it easier to read, and
because the details aren't the critical for the average reader) to
the end result. That is to say, any end result you get is the net
effect of two competing processes, which still doesn't make any
sense. Put in a more comprehensible way.
net fat loss =3D fat burned - fat stored
net muscle gained =3D protein synthesized - protein broken down
As far as end result, thinking in these terms isn't so critical,
because most of us are concerned with the net result. that is, if I
want to lose fat, I really don't care whether I increased the amount
of fat I burned or decreased the amount of fat I stored, all I care
about it that I can see my abs (and I'm still waiting for this one).
If I want to gain muscle, I don't really care if I increased protein
synthesis or decreased protein breakdown, the end result is that I
have more muscle (I'm still waiting for this one too).
But from a training, diet, supplement strategy, it can be
important to differentiate between the individual processes. The
easiest example I can think of is the ephedrine/caffeine/aspirin
stack (ECA). The ECA stack's main effect is to increase fat
breakdown. but a lesser known effect is that it also increases fat
storage to a small degree. The reason that fat is lost is that the
increase in fat breakdown is larger than the increase in fat
storage. So that the net effect is fat loss. By the same token,
yohimbe inhibits fat storage. Which is why combining ECA (increases
fat breakdown and increases fat storage) with yohimbe (decreases fat
storage) has a greater effect than either taken by itself. Note that
this isn't a recommendation as the combo of ECA and Y can be
dangerous for many people.
Muscle gain is basically the same way. To get a net increase in
muscle mass, we can approach it from two basic directions. We can
either try to increase protein synthesis (which I'll call anabolism
from here on out) OR we can try to decrease protein breakdown (which
I'll call catabolism from here on out). Up until this decade, the
big supplement push was in terms of increasing anabolism (it was
also thought that anabolic steroids, as their name would suggest,
primarily acted by promoting protein synthesis, now it is thought
that a lot of the effects of AS occur by decreasing catabolism). Now
one of the big supplement buzz words is 'anti-catabolics', such as
leucine, glutamine, KIC, HMB, Phosphatidyl Serine, etc., etc.
So let's look a little bit more at anabolism and catabolism in
general. Since no-one has even a marginal clue as to all of the
factors which affect anabolism and catabolism, I'll focus on the two
we do know a lot about: hormones and nutrients and some of their
interactions.
The primary anabolic hormones are
Testosterone: this is one of the main hormones involved in muscle
growth. Men have more than women which is part of why men can put on
more muscle, on average. It can be lowered by too much training and
too little dietary fat. The big push in supplements right now are
the various testosterone precursors like androstene &c, and for a
very good reason: raising testosterone tends to increase muscle
mass.
Insulin: another one of the main anabolic hormones, this is
almost entirely determined by carb intake. The decrease in insulin
levels is the main reason that I don't think the Anabolic diet (or
any ketogenic diet) is ideal for mass gains. Low carbs means low
insulin.
Thyroid: thyroid hormones have a dual role in terms of growth.
Too much thyroid causes muscle loss and too little thyroid helps
prevent muscle loss. So for optimal protein synthesis, we don't want
thyroid to be too high (rare unless your hyperthyroid or using
thyroid medications) or too low (low carb diet). Thyroid drops on a
low carb diet which is another reason that I don't think lowcarb
diets are ideal for mass gains. Thyroid tends to go up with a higher
carb intake, and a higher calorie intake, and may be influenced by
protein intake.
Growth hormone: I personally think GH is highly overrated in that
most of it's effects are thought to be mediated through IGF-1. Sure
a ketogenic diet will raise GH but so will total starvation. The
problem being that IGF-1 levels drop in both cases. This is also why
I think the rash of GH supplements flooding the market are total
crap but that's a different discussion for a different day.
IGF-1: Insulin like growth factor 1, this is determine both by
protein intake AND by total caloric/carb intake. Too little protein
and IGF-1 drops like a rock, same thing with too few carbs. This is
the final reason I don't think the Anabolic diet is ideal for mass
gains since a lowcarb diet will lower IGF-1 levels. however a recent
review paper suggested that blood levels of IGF-1 don't play a big
role in growth anyhow so the drop on a ketogenic diet may not be a
big issue. This may also explain why injectable IGF-1 didn't really
pan out as an anabolic.
The catabolic hormones are
Glucagon: which primarily affects the liver, shifting it from
anabolic to catabolic. Glucagon will only be high when carbs are
very low. So it will go up on a ketogenic diet and be low on a high
carb diet.
Cortisol: cortisol is thought to be one of the main catabolic
hormones, stimulating the breakdown of muscle protein directly.
Cortisol is increased by any kind of exercise but especially by
overtraining. Additionally, cortisol will go up when insulin/blood
glucose decreases. So keeping blood glucose/insulin high (meaning
eat carbs) will help keep cortisol down.
So the ideal anabolic situation (in terms of hormones) would have
fairly high levels of testosterone, insulin, GH and IGF-1 and low
levels of glucagon, cortisol and the catecholamines. This means
that, in general terms, the ideal diet for mass gains would provide:
1. Sufficient calories: hard to say how many for mass gains but
18 cal/lb. is a good place to start, increasing as necessary. I find
that a lot of lifters simply don't eat enough to provide mass gains.
2. Sufficient protein: assuming adequate calories and a high
quality source, a protein intake of 1 gram/lb. of bodyweight should
be sufficient
3. Sufficient carbs: hard to say exactly how much but 50-60% of
total calories is probably a good place to start. I also find that a
lot of lifters eat too much protein and too few carbs. What is
ultimately happening is that the protein is just being used for
energy anyhow (by being converted to glucose). Carbs are a cheaper
way to get energy. A guy I'm training right now has determined that
his best growth occurs with ~4000 cal/day and he weighs right at 200
lbs. Anything less and growth is very slow, anything more and he
just gets fat.
4. Sufficient dietary fat: 20-30% seems optimal for maximizing
testosterone levels.
Obviously you should be eating every 3 hours or so to keep
protein flowing to your muscles as constantly as possible. Every
meal should be a mix of carbs, protein and fat IMO.
Some other strategies to consider:
1. Drink carbs during your workout. A recent abstract (posted
on this site by Bryan Haycock) found that consuming a carb drink
during training helped keep insulin up and cortisol down, causing
the supplement group to gain more muscle over the length of the
study. A 5-7% carb drink (like Gatorade or Twinlab Hydra Fuel or
just diluted orange juice so that you get about 35 grams of carbs
over an hour period) during training would be ideal.
2. Take in carbs/protein immediately after training. Typically
1-1.5 grams/kg of carbs and about 1/3rd as much protein right after
training is the recommended amount. This will help keep cortisol
down and get carbs/protein to the muscles when they need it.
3. I think a good strategy for mass gains (that has gone largely
ignored) is to consume a protein/carb/fat/fiber meal right before
going to bed. The 8 hours when you're sleeping represent a time
period when the body shifts from anabolic to catabolic because blood
glucose and insulin go down and cortisol goes up. By providing
nutrients while you sleep, you should be able to maintain an overall
anabolic mode and get more growth. If you're truly motivated, you
could get up in the middle of the night (about 4 hours into sleep)
and have another small carb/protein drink. I'm still looking into
this phenomenon (called diurnal cycling of protein) to see how much
of an impact it might have.
4. Glutamine: muscular glutamine levels correlate highly with
protein synthesis and training is known to cause depletion of
glutamine. The problem (addressed in other Q&A's) is getting the
glutamine into the muscles. I think the best strategy is to use
small doses (like 2 grams) several times a day to avoid causing
increased liver uptake and to get as much into the muscle as
possible. If nothing else, 2 grams of glutamine should probably go
into your post-workout shake.
Finally you should look at your training. I find that a lot of
people's first instinct when they plateau is to increase training.
In general, the opposite is what's needed. Taking a week at a
lowered volume/frequency of training can get gains going again (in
fact, taking a week off when you are slightly overtrained tends to
cause a rebound of anabolic hormones). Also, to keep from lowering
testosterone and raising cortisol, a good rule of thumb is no more
than 2 days of training in a row without a day off. Finally,
workouts lasting longer than 90' tend to raise cortisol more so than
shorter workouts (and may lower testosterone) because liver glycogen
becomes depleted and the body goes catabolic. So keep your workouts
short and sweet and try applying some of the strategies I've
described here and see what happens.
Lyle,
I'm wanting to maximize my results on a
CKD (BodyOpus) diet. I have the diet down to a science where I can
start first thing Monday AM & enter ketosis by Tuesday afternoon. In
addition to doing cardio work, I also try and throw in a couple of
extra circuit weight training days. I was a little confused in
reading your last couple of articles. I believe you mentioned that
despite being in ketosis (where your body prefers ketones over
carbs), weight training while in a ketogenic state, still burns
glycogen from muscle cells. As a result, weight training has little
effect on burning extra fat. Did I interpret this correctly?
A: Yes and no. During weight training (actually, any high
intensity training), glycogen/glucose is the only substrate which
can be used for fuel. In addition, after about week 3 of a ketogenic
diet, the muscles have stopped using ketones for fuel for the most
part, the brain is the only tissue which uses ketones to a
significant degree at this point. So in one sense, weight training
has no effect on fat loss, in that muscles don't use fat (or
ketones) for fuel during weight training.
However weight training has some indirect effects on fat loss.
1. After weight training, there exists something called the
Excess Post-exercise Oxygen consumption (EPOC) which is basically
the difference between how much energy your body needed (during the
workout) and how much you could provide it. EPOC is much higher
following high intensity exercise than low intensity exercise and it
will be repaid from fat (since rest is the lowest intensity you can
achieve).
2. Protein synthesis is elevated following weight training and,
in all likelihood, the ATP for protein synthesis is coming from fat.
3. 2 recent studies (one in obese individuals, one in lean) found
that depleting muscle glycogen made it easier for the body to adapt
to a high fat diet. That is, the more muscle glycogen which is
present, the less fat your muscles tend to use for fuel at rest. So
by lowering muscle glycogen, you improve your overall fat burning
capacity. You simply have to be careful not to deplete *too* much
glycogen or you can start using protein for fuel.
I plan on extending ketosis out for 7-10
days before a carb-up day. What I would like to know is, am I better
of doing mild cardio work instead of mild workout days?
It depends on a lot of factors, the biggest of which is your
total training volume. If you read my article "Training
on the CKD", you'll see that a certain amount of volume is
necessary to fully deplete glycogen between carb-ups. The workout I
designed is set up to deplete most of that glycogen on Monday and
Tuesday but I don't see any reason you couldn't stretch that out
over a longer period.
That is, one person I know had excellent results with a 10 day
cycle. He did:
Day 1/2: normal upper/lower split
Day 3/4: cardio
Day 5: short depletion (basically what you're asking about)
Day 6-9: cardio
Day 10: finish depletion, carb-up and then start over
On a side note: In your June
Question/Answer column, specifically about the ECA question, you
mentioned that ECA for extended periods of time might actually be
more effective than at the beginning of a cycle. Could this be
partly due to an increase in Cortisol? I remember reading something
that Dan D. wrote about in his book, where Cortisol has a shrinking
effect on Fat Cells. I understand that taking ECA/Yohimbe products
for a prolonged period of time, may increase Cortisol levels.
Possible. It's been suggested (and I'll admit that I haven't
looked at the research in a few years, but am again this week) that
chronic use of ECA may increase the amount of Brown Adipose Tissue
(BAT) in the body. Normal white fat has lot of fat and a few
mitochondria (where fat is burned), BAT has little fat and lots of
mitochondria. When BAT is stimulated (by ECA for example, or by
cold) it burns normal fat to make heat, hence thermogenesis. In
animal models at least, chronic stimulate of BAT causes it to
increase in amount and activity. For example, animals which live in
the cold have lots of BAT, presumably as an adaptation to generate
heat and keep them alive. The ECA stack might cause the same thing
to happen. Realize that it's still highly debated as to how much BAT
humans actually have in the first place or how much it contributes
to fat use in the body. |
