Bad advice on how to gain weight is easy to find on the internet. If lean mass is the target, then you have to include the right muscle building workouts. Everything else is secondary.
.

How to Gain Weight – Tracking Lean Body Mass

Weight gain itself is not the correct target, lean body mass is. Specifically, muscle mass. An important component of any program for building muscle mass is simply keeping track of progress. This means that weighing yourself is insufficient. You must keep track of your body composition. Fortunately, this is simple these days because of the availability of inexpensive bioelectrical impedance devices ($40 or less) – either handheld or built into bathroom scales. They are easy to find at Target and other retailers, and they are easy to find on eBay or Amazon, etc., on the internet. The bathroom scale type might be the easiest to use, since a good one gives you weight, body fat percent, and hydration level.

The first step is, therefore, to keep track of your lean body mass as it changes. You can find this number by using the results from your bioelectrical impedance measurements. An example calculation would be:

Keep in mind that lean body mass includes water and bones as well as muscle, so you won’t know exactly how much is muscle. Besides, percent hydration includes muscle hydration. There is no easy or direct way to measure muscle mass by itself. However, if you are building muscle, then increases in lean body mass will be due to increasing muscle mass, not bone mass or water weight.

Best Muscle Building Workouts

The rate at which you add lean body mass depends on where you are starting. You will add more muscle mass over a few months if you have not been working out than you will if you are already in good shape. However, you can be in really top shape and still gain muscle. The example that John Little provides at BodybyScience.net is instructive.

Even though John has been in great shape for years, he still discovered how to add new muscle mass by experimenting with what he calls the Max Pyramid Protocol.

John wrote a rather extensive article on exactly how he did that, which is a primer for anyone who is serious about building muscle based on actual research and not on rampant myths from obsolete bodybuilding dogma.

John also benefited in his experiment by having a high-tech device for measuring muscle mass very accurately. Here is what he found:

The Most Important Key: Adequate Recovery Time

This quote from John’s article is crucial:

I’ll tell you right now that working out out 3 times per week, vs. once per week or less, is more destructive than constructive. Working out too often will slow your progress. It is as simple as that. You MUST be in an anabolic state for a sufficient amount of time after a workout to give your body time to build!

The Next Most Important Key – Muscle Building Workouts Themselves

The Max Pyramid Protocol is an optimization of the Body by Science methods for weightlifting. I posted a brief overview of what this approaches entails earlier: Top Muscle Building Exercises – Max Pyramid Protocol. The full article that I link there (and above) is rather extensive, with great explanations for why this protocol works so well.

I highly recommend that you study what John Little has to say in the full article. Spend some time reading it thoroughly. Then implement his protocol into your own workout schedule. You will be pleasantly surprised to discover that it is the best approach for how to gain weight, if you are interested specifically in building lean body mass (muscle).

Any Restrictions?

No. This protocol is applicable to men and women and boys and girls of all ages, regardless of their starting levels of fitness and health. It offers the best results in the shortest amount of time without risk of injury. No other types of muscle building workouts can accurately lay claim to that statement.

Updating how to gain weight the right way,

FitScientist
(Dennis)

L-Arginine is important as a component of dietary bodybuilding protein because it boosts growth hormone levels. Here is a comprehensive list of foods with their L-arginine content. Refer to it for keeping your L-arginine intake high throughout the day.

This list was developed by the USDA for people with certain viral infections, who are advised to minimize their L-arginine intake and maximize their L-lysine intake. Thanks to this effort, it also provides a detailed look at foods from which you can choose the highest L-arginine content, especially foods that contain bodybuilding proteins.

Bodybuilding Protein Sources

From: “Ratio of Lysine to Arginine in Certain Foods,” James M. Scutero

Transcribed and calculated using data from Agricultural Handbook, 1-23, U.S. Department of Agriculture.

This is a great list that you can either print out or bookmark here for daily reference.

Note that the best sources of L-arginine-rich foods include dairy (i.e., whey protein), fish, beef, and chicken. As a conversion example, several of the sources of animal protein are listed as milligrams of L-arginine per 454 grams of food, which is a pound. That means a pound of beef will give you around 5 grams (5000 mg) of L-arginine.

On a per weight basis, however, nuts are even better. Just 100 g (less than one-fourth of a pound) of walnuts, for example, will provide more than 2500 mg (2.5 g) of L-arginine. Good thing that walnuts also have an excellent seed oil profile, but that’s another story.

For the best bodybuilding protein,

FitScientist
(Dennis)

How often should you do muscle building workouts for optimum effectiveness? Working out every day, or even three times a week is a mistake. Timing must allow for full recovery. Medical research on how long this takes may surprise you.

Muscle Building Workouts – All About Dose-Response

One of the most common mistakes that trainers make is to advise their clients to workout too often. In our society, we have the notion that we should do some kind of exercise every day or we will not make good progress. And heaven help anyone who is so slovenly as to work out only once per week!

All of these notions are based either on assumptions or on inertia … we always did it this way, so it must be the best way to do it. Now here is a surprise:

The folks at BodybyScience.net have really dug into the medical research on the issue of “dose-response” for exercise. In other words, how much/how often (dose) for what result (response). Since one of the guys behind this program is an MD (Doug McGuff) and since the other one is a studious and experienced science-based trainer (John Little), you can expect that what they have to say is backed by scientific research.

What they have discovered regarding timing for full recovery from muscle building workouts is that the every-day, every-other-day, or three-times-a-week standard frequencies actually undermine muscle building. They do not allow for full recovery. And full recovery is crucial for optimum muscle building.

Dr. McGuff writes long articles that offer extensive details and explanations of what he has discovered. Whenever possible he also cites his personal experience or his experience training others at his own training center in South Carolina.

I suggest that you take some time and see how you can optimize your muscle building workouts by reading this article by the BodybyScience folks. It is well worth it.

The really nice thing about this approach is that it makes ‘living in the gym’ totally unnecessary … actually even going to the gym more than once per week is counterproductive.

Updating muscle building workouts,

FitScientist
(Dennis)

L-arginine dosage is supposed to help as a growth hormone secretagogue. Research, however, is all over the map. GH levels vary depending on several factors, as summarized in these studies..
.
.
.

L-Arginine Dosage Studies

Is L-arginine really a growth hormone releaser? Take a look at the following studies. Different results seem to contradict one another.

Note the highlighted background for the main point of each study below.

The Good

Growth Horm IGF Res. 2005 Apr;15(2):136-9. Epub 2005 Jan 26.

Intravenous (IV) arginine invokes an increase in growth hormone (GH) concentrations, however, little is known about the impact of oral arginine ingestion on the GH response.OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine the dose of oral arginine that elicits an optimal GH response and to determine the time course of the response.
DESIGN: Eight healthy males (18-33 years – 24.8+/-1.2 years) were studied on 4 separate occasions. Following an overnight fast at 0700 h, a catheter was placed in a forearm vein. Blood samples were taken every 10 min for 5 h. Thirty minutes after sampling was initiated, the subject ingested a dose of arginine (5, 9 or 13 g) or placebo (randomly assigned).
RESULTS: Mean resting GH values for the placebo, 5, 9 and 13 g day were 0.76, 0.67, 2.0 and 0.79 microg/L (n=6), respectively. Integrated area under the curve was not different with 13 g (197.8+/-65.7 min microg/L), yet it increased with 5 and 9 g compared with the placebo (301.5+/-74.6, 524.28+/-82.9 and 186.04+/-47.8 min microg/L, respectively, P<0.05). Mean peak GH levels were 2.9+/-0.69, 3.9+/-0.85, 6.4+/-1.3 and 4.73+/-1.27 microg/L on each day for the placebo, 5, 9 and 13 g days.
CONCLUSION: In conclusion, 5 and 9 g of oral arginine caused a significant GH response. A 13 g dose of arginine resulted in considerable gastrointestinal distress in most subjects without augmentation in the GH response. The rise in GH concentration started approximately 30 min after ingestion and peaked approximately 60 min post ingestion.

The Bad

Appl Physiol Nutr Metab. 2011 Jun;36(3):405-11. Epub 2011 May 16.

L-arginine (2-amino-5-guanidinovaleric acid) is a conditionally essential amino acid. Intravenous (IV) administration of l-arginine invokes a large metabolic (nitrate/nitrite (NO(x))) and hormonal (growth hormone (GH), insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF-1), and insulin) response; however, research examining oral l-arginine supplementation is conflicting, potentially owing to dose. The purpose of this study was examine a low and high dose of oral l-arginine on blood l-arginine, NO(x), GH, IGF-1, and insulin response. Fourteen physically active males (age: 25 ± 5 years; weight: 78.0 ± 8.5 kg; height: 179.4 ± 4.7 cm) volunteered to be in a randomized, double-blind, repeated-measures study. Following an overnight fast, an IV catheter was placed in a forearm vein and a resting blood sample was drawn at ?0800 hours. Each subject was then provided 1 of 3 treatment conditions (placebo, low (0.075 g·kg(-1) of body mass), or high (0.15 g·kg(-1) of body mass of l-arginine)). Blood samples were drawn at 30, 60, 90, 120, and 180 min after consumption. l-arginine plasma concentrations significantly increased (p < 0.001) to a similar level at any time point in both the low- and high-dose conditions; there was no change over time in the placebo condition. There was no significant difference between conditions for NO(x), GH, IGF-1, or insulin. Based on these findings, a low dose of l-arginine was just as effective at increasing plasma l-arginine concentrations as a high dose; however, neither dose was able to promote a significant increase in NO(x), GH, IGF-1, or insulin at rest.

(Example L-arginine dosage for a 90 kg man [i.e., 198 lbs] would be 6.75 g per day on the low dose and 13.5 g per day on the high dose.)

The Maybe

J Strength Cond Res. 2010 Apr;24(4):1082-90.

This placebo-controlled double-blind study was designed to investigate the effect of arginine and ornithine (arg and orn) supplementation during 3-week heavy-resistance training on serum growth hormone/insulin-like growth factor-1/insulin-like growth factor-binding protein 3 (GH/IGF-1/IGFBP-3), testosterone, cortisol, and insulin levels in experienced strength-trained athletes. The subjects were randomly divided between a placebo group (n=8) and the l-Arg/l-Orn-supplemented group (n=9), and performed pre and posttraining standard exercise tests with the same absolute load, which consisted of the same exercise schedule as that applied in the training process. Fasting blood samples were obtained at rest, 2 minutes after the cessation of the strength exercise protocol, and after 1 hour of recovery. The resting concentrations of the investigated hormones and IGFBP-3 did not differ significantly between the study groups. In response to exercise test, all the hormones were elevated (p < 0.05) at both time points. Significant increases (p < 0.05) were observed in both GH and IGF-1 serum levels after arg and orn supplementation at both time points, whereas a significant decrease was seen in IGFBP-3 protein during the recovery period. Because there was no between-group difference in the remaining hormone levels, it appears that the GH/IGF-1/IGFBP-3 complex may be the major player in muscle tissue response to short-term resistance training after arg and orn supplementation.

Likely Interpretation

The most effective dose according to the first study was 9 g per day. The second study had a gap between 6.75 and 13.5 g per day (for my body size, anyway), and saw no boosting effect on GH at either level. It missed the 9 g per day that was found to be effective in the first study. These scientists!

Finally, as I would expect, the truly best way to boost the effects of any L-arginine dosage requires exercise, notably intense resistance execise. No surprise there. This variable was confounded somewhat by combining L-arginine with L-ornithine, which is supposed to enhance the effects of L-arginine.

Updating L-arginine dosage research,

FitScientist
(Dennis)

Muscle building exercises are mostly inefficient and destructive. The Max Pyramid Protocol by John Little shows how to get the most out of a workout in the least amount of time..
.
.
.
.
.

Muscle Building Exercises That Work!

The good news is that you don’t have to spend your life in the gym just to get fit and strong. In fact, it takes a full week to recover between workouts. Three times a week weightlifting workouts are destructive and inefficient.

The best advice that I have ever seen comes from the folks at BodybyScience.net, Dr. Doug McGuff and John Little. They do serious research, and they really know what they are talking about.

John Little offers this very extensive overview of what he calls the Max Pyramid Protocol. This is exactly what I do, and the results are better than anything I have ever experienced. It is especially rewarding to see how this kind of approach can fit anybody’s schedule, since you only have to workout once per week (or even once every other week!).

Below is a summary of the article. You can see John’s full article, with explanations about why the protocol is so good and his own personal results here: The Max Pyramid Protocol.

With muscle building exercises for everyone,

FitScientist
(Dennis)

Are kettlebell workouts dangerous? You bet they are. Here is why and what to do instead.

Kettlebell Workouts Comments

The best conversation online that I have seen about kettlebell workouts was posted by Frank Rumbauskas on his blogpost, Kettlebell Swings: Dangerous and Stupid. That pretty much tells you what Frank’s point of view is.

However, his article drew ire from kettlebell enthusiasts. I tend to agree with Frank, though, especially after I found comments by Dr. Doug McGuff on the topic. Doug explained exactly what kettlebell workouts can do to injure … his comment, in fact, was that it is only a matter of time when (not if) injury will occur.

Fortunately, there are better ways to strengthen back muscles, as shown in the following two videos by Doug McGuff. Now these make sense. These workouts are another in the line of Body by Science exercises that ensure fast, effective personal fitness without injury.

Take a look and see what I mean.

Trashing kettlebell workouts,

FitScientist
(Dennis)

Your exercise bike workout ideally provides aerobic fitness. However, surprising scientific research shows how you can quickly build endurance, too. No more long torturous workouts!

SIT: Sprint Interval Training

A research group at McMaster University in Ontario, headed by M.J. Gibala, has been studying SIT in a variety of ways over the past few years. One of the more surprising results they found compares standard cycling training (‘control’) with sprint interval training. You can wade through the details in their published abstract below, from the Journal of Applied Physiology if you want. Or you can just note the main result that I’ve indicated here, highlighted and in italics.

Burgomaster KA, Hughes SC, Heigenhauser GJ, Bradwell SN, Gibala MJ. 2005. Six sessions of sprint interval training increases muscle oxidative potential and cycle endurance capacity in humans. J Appl Physiol. Jun;98(6):1985-90.

Parra et al. (Acta Physiol. Scand 169: 157-165, 2000) showed that 2 wk of daily sprint interval training (SIT) increased citrate synthase (CS) maximal activity but did not change “anaerobic” work capacity, possibly because of chronic fatigue induced by daily training. The effect of fewer SIT sessions on muscle oxidative potential is unknown, and aside from changes in peak oxygen uptake (Vo(2 peak)), no study has examined the effect of SIT on “aerobic” exercise capacity. We tested the hypothesis that six sessions of SIT, performed over 2 wk with 1-2 days rest between sessions to promote recovery, would increase CS maximal activity and endurance capacity during cycling at approximately 80% Vo(2 peak). Eight recreationally active subjects [age = 22 +/- 1 yr; Vo(2 peak) = 45 +/- 3 ml.kg(-1).min(-1) (mean +/- SE)] were studied before and 3 days after SIT. Each training session consisted of four to seven “all-out” 30-s Wingate tests with 4 min of recovery. After SIT, CS maximal activity increased by 38% (5.5 +/- 1.0 vs. 4.0 +/- 0.7 mmol.kg protein(-1).h(-1)) and resting muscle glycogen content increased by 26% (614 +/- 39 vs. 489 +/- 57 mmol/kg dry wt) (both P < 0.05). Most strikingly, cycle endurance capacity increased by 100% after SIT (51 +/- 11 vs. 26 +/- 5 min; P < 0.05), despite no change in Vo(2 peak). The coefficient of variation for the cycle test was 12.0%, and a control group (n = 8) showed no change in performance when tested approximately 2 wk apart without SIT. We conclude that short sprint interval training (approximately 15 min of intense exercise over 2 wk) increased muscle oxidative potential and doubled endurance capacity during intense aerobic cycling in recreationally active individuals.

Note that the doubled endurance capacity occurred after only six sessions over two weeks. This is a very fast way to build endurance next time you go to the gym for an exercise bike workout.

Oh, and note that the results from two weeks of SIT also were also better than those of standard cycling training (the ‘control’). Although not stated in the abstract, standard cycling training is what you might expect – i.e., long distance riding for more than an hour at a time. Long, tortuous hours on the road (or exercycle) are no longer necessary for building endurance. Indeed, they are not even as efficient as a few SIT sessions.

Exercise bike updates,

FitScientist
(Dennis)

Barefoot running has attracted all kinds of attention and advice from the medical community. Some of it is informed and much of it is ignorant. Just take a look at the nuchal ligament to see why humans were born to run barefoot.

Simple Logic Behind Barefoot Running

We could just say that humans did not evolve to run in 5-star running shoes. Indeed, we evolved to run without shoes. Barefoot running requires that each footfall is a forefoot-strike, as opposed to the predominant heel-strike style that has been around since the late 1970s – that is, since the invention of the running shoe.

Think about it:

Forefoot-strike: 2 million years of evolution.
Heel-strike: 40+ years of running shoes.

Hmm.

As a small distraction from this post, you can see how Prof. Daniel Lieberman of the Harvard University Skeletal Biology Lab explains why we were born to run barefoot. Then take a look below the video here, at the importance of the nuchal ligament in all this.

What is the Nuchal Ligament?

You can see exactly what it is in this diagram from the classic book, Gray’s Anatomy:

Not all animals have a nuchal ligament. Dogs, horses, and humans do. Cats and pigs, and other primates do not. This ligament helps keep the head stable when running. Keeping the head stable helps animals with a nuchal ligament to run long distances.

Yes, this means that humans evolved to be long-distance runners. Imagine how hard it would be to run with your head bobbing all around, like this pig on a treadmill.

Of course, the nuchal ligament isn’t our only adaptation for long-distance, barefoot running. However, we wouldn’t get very far without it.

With barefoot running updates,

FitScientist
(Dennis)

Main Results

My official finish was a PR of 1:03:47, or 2 minutes faster than last year’s finish. That places me in 1153rd place out of 1650 who finished, and 25th out of 39 males in my age class (60-64).

Now all I have to do to win this race is keep up my speed long enough to enter the race in the 75-79 year age class. This year I would have won that class by 5 minutes!

Sounds like a plan to me.

For the past few years I’ve been shooting to finish one of these things in less than hour, and I am getting closer. I credit my shorter and easier training method for the improvement, which entailed only one running day per week. My longest run was a three-quarter mile warm-up.

This is as simple as an endurance training program can be: Once a week for the past 6 months, I ran 10 intervals at 80-90% max (whatever THAT is), with 3-4 minutes rest in between. In fact, I never ran with less than a 7-day break between workouts, and occasionally it would be 8-10 days. Once or twice I spaced training runs 2-3 weeks apart.

This should be easy to tweak for more endurance and more speed, maybe by reducing the time between workouts or increasing the number of intervals. I’ll keep you posted on how I change the experiment and the results I get, probably with another 10K in a couple of months.

Although this sounds like a recipe for disaster, the results say otherwise. I took the idea for this this burst-training or sprint-training approach from some recent scientific research articles that compared long-run endurance training (aka, ‘old style’) with the short-run sprint training approach. Research has shown that the latter proves superior in endurance testing and in several key physiological parameters that mark endurance. (Oh, ‘parameters’ is just a fancy term that we scientists like to use. It just refers to different kinds of variables. You may have heard the term on ‘Star Trek: The Next Generation’, when Commander Data was asked, “How are you?’ He responded, “All systems are operating within normal parameters.” You get the idea.)

My Barefoot Running Style

My sprint training approach would not be as effective if I had not also adopted a barefoot running style. This style took me several months to acclimate and strengthen the right muscles, mostly my glutes and calves. This is absolutely the best running style that I have ever used. It is what humans evolved to do. I’ve posted comments on why it is so important, how to do it right, and what the research behind it shows. See:

These give you some good reading on the topic. Of course, I’m biased on how good these posts are, since I wrote them.

All the best for barefoot running,

FitScientist
(Dennis)

Post Workout Meal Choices

It seems as though thousands of combinations of different food groups and nutritional supplements have been promoted for optimizing muscle building exercises. Most such advice, however, has no scientific backing. Fortunately, recent research at European universities offers some promising results on how to stimulate muscle protein synthesis after a workout.

The main choices of food groups are carbohydrate, protein, and fat. These classifications are oversimplified, especially regarding subcategories of carbohydrate. Moreover, although dietary protein contains all the standard amino acids, muscle protein synthesis depends on supplying an overabundance of one type. Here is what one key research study discovered.

The application of this research information should give you a good idea of what you can do to boost the benefits of your muscle building exercises once you have finished your workout.

The Research

I’ve selected one of a handful of studies on this topic because the researchers in this example used a very specific method for determining muscle protein synthesis. (See Koopman et al., American Journal of Physiology, 2005.) This method entailed providing an isotope-labeled amino acid (carbon-13, non-radioactive) to the test subjects, which enabled the precise tracking of new protein synthesis in skeletal muscle tissue.

The full reference citation data are:

Koopman R, Wagenmakers AJ, Manders RJ, Zorenc AH, Senden JM, Gorselink M, Keizer HA, van Loon LJ. 2004. Combined ingestion of protein and free leucine with carbohydrate increases postexercise muscle protein synthesis in vivo in male subjects. Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab. Apr;288(4):E645-53.

ABSTRACT

The present study was designed to determine postexercise muscle protein synthesis and whole body protein balance following the combined ingestion of carbohydrate with or without protein and/or free leucine. Eight male subjects were randomly assigned to three trials in which they consumed drinks containing either carbohydrate (CHO), carbohydrate and protein (CHO+PRO), or carbohydrate, protein, and free leucine (CHO+PRO+Leu) following 45 min of resistance exercise. A primed, continuous infusion of L-[ring-13C6]phenylalanine was applied, with blood samples and muscle biopsies collected to assess fractional synthetic rate (FSR) in the vastus lateralis muscle as well as whole body protein turnover during 6 h of postexercise recovery. Plasma insulin response was higher in the CHO+PRO+Leu compared with the CHO and CHO+PRO trials (+240 ± 19% and +77 ± 11%, respectively, P < 0.05). Whole body protein breakdown rates were lower, and whole body protein synthesis rates were higher, in the CHO+PRO and CHO+PRO+Leu trials compared with the CHO trial (P < 0.05). Addition of leucine in the CHO+PRO+Leu trial resulted in a lower protein oxidation rate compared with the CHO+PRO trial. Protein balance was negative during recovery in the CHO trial but positive in the CHO+PRO and CHO+PRO+Leu trials. In the CHO+PRO+Leu trial, whole body net protein balance was significantly greater compared with values observed in the CHO+PRO and CHO trials (P < 0.05). Mixed muscle FSR, measured over a 6-h period of postexercise recovery, was significantly greater in the CHO+PRO+Leu trial compared with the CHO trial (0.095 ± 0.006 vs. 0.061 ± 0.008%/h, respectively, P < 0.05), with intermediate values observed in the CHO+PRO trial (0.0820 ± 0.0104%/h). We conclude that coingestion of protein and leucine stimulates muscle protein synthesis and optimizes whole body protein balance compared with the intake of carbohydrate only.

The study followed each of eight subjects, none of whom had ever done a regular exercise program. Each subject consumed an experimental post workout meal, in liquid form, after each of three bouts of resistance training. In other words, every subject was tested for three meals, which were categorized as: 1) CHO (carbohydrate only); 2) CHOP (carbohydrate plus protein); and, 3) CHOPL (carbohydrate plus protein plus leucine). Training bouts were separated by 7 days.

At the end of each resistance exercise, each subject immediately received an initial 3 ml/kg dose of one of the sample formulas, followed by additional doses of the same formula every 30 minutes thereafter for a total of 11 doses. Since the average weight of the subjects was 74.1 kg (ca. 163 lbs), this turned out to be a total of nearly 2.5 liters consumed over the full dosing period. The total dose of carbohydrate in the CHO component of each meal was about 125 grams (1:1 ratio of glucose to maltodextrin). The added protein total in the CHOP and CHOPL formulas was about 83 grams of whey hydrolysate. The added free leucine total in the CHOPL formula was about 41 grams.

Summary of Results

Several measures of physiological change were taken from blood plasma and muscle tissue, as follows:

1) Plasma insulin response was almost 3 times higher with CHOPL vs. CHO and CHOP.

2) Whole body protein breakdown rates were lower with CHOP and with CHOPL vs. CHO.

3) Whole body protein synthesis rates were higher with CHOP and with CHOPL vs. CHO.

3) The CHOPL formula caused a lower protein oxidation rate compared with that of the CHOP formula.

4) Protein balance was negative during recovery with CHO but positive with CHOP and CHOPL.

5) CHOPL caused a significantly greater whole body net protein balance in comparison with CHO and CHOP.

6) Mixed muscle FSR (Fractional Synthetic Rate) was significantly greater with CHOPL, measured over a 6-hour post-exercise recovery period, compared with CHO. Results with CHOP were intermediate in value.

Conclusions

Even the simple summary here shows why the scientists behind this study concluded that the combination of protein, leucine, and carbohydrate was superior for improving whole body protein balance and muscle protein synthesis during recover from resistance exercise.

Note that the increased level of plasma insulin is known to be induced by leucine. The net positive impact of this increase is believed to be due to the interaction between leucine and insulin to decrease the rate of protein degradation.

How Can This Formula Work for You?

Keep in mind that the results of this study were derived from subjects who were young males in good health (not overweight) and who had no history of regular exercise. Also keep in mind that each workout was a one-time event and that each post workout meal contained a substantially larger amount of carbohydrate, protein, and/or leucine than you would ever consume after a workout.

Nevertheless, the trend for a combining carbohydrate plus protein plus leucine for getting superior results is clear. The actual extent to which it might work for you depends on your level of fitness and health, and probably on your age, too.

I would suggest one improvement in the formula, based on research involving the role of insulin in muscle metabolism. Glucose is a co-transporter molecule, meaning that it helps to shuttle other kinds of molecules into muscle cells (water, minerals, creatine, amino acids, etc.). It depends on insulin for this action. The experimental formula in this study included maltodextrin and glucose in equal amounts. Simply put, all you really need is glucose as a carbohydrate source.

For your best post workout meal,

FitScientist
(Dennis)