20 tbsp. dextrose for post shake?!

[ryanmo123]

Question for y'all . . . finally got around to buyin some dextrose for post workout shake instead of just mixing with juice which has fructose. However, I read in this forum awhile back that the right amount to mix is 2 grams simple sugar for every gram of whey.

If this is the case then I would be tossin about 80g dextrose in there. But each serving (about one tablespoon) contains only 4g dextrose. Does this mean I'm supposed to add like 20 tablespoons to my 40g of whey for my post workout shake??!! This just doesn't make sense, can someone help??

 

[Bob Smith]

40 x 2 = 80 / 4 = 20 teaspoons

24 teaspoons = 1/2 cup

1/2 cup x 20/24 = .42 cups

Thats really not a ton of sugar, though IMO, carb intake post workout should be based more on the number of reps performed than simply because you went to the gym. By extension, that calls into question the absolute validity of your 2:1 ratio or carbsrotein in a postworkout shake. Would you need as many carbs doing 3x3 as you would if you were performing 4x15? Certainly not.

 

[bigtrevm]

Confusion

I've been wondering about this aswell. Some books I've read have suggested alot more than that based on your bodyweight. I want to add dextrose to my whey to build muscle but not sure how much? I'm 6'2 255lbs at 19% bf.

Also when trying to lose fat, do you guys cut out the sugar out post workout or reduce it?

Any advice would be appreciated!

bigtrevm

 

[Bob Smith]

Either work on losing fat or work on building muscle, dont try to do both at the same time. When I diet, yes, I dont use any postworkout carbs.

 

[bigtrevm]

Nice one

Perhaps I wasn't clear. I meant when I'm bulking I use Dextrose but wonderwed if okay when cutting? You cleared that part for me, thanks for the advise.

bigtrevm

 

[ryanmo123]

Bob, I'm not doing 3x3, but I'm not using a high a rep routine as 4x15 either. I think I get how much sugar to use now. But when cutting, you say you eliminate the sugars. So basically your post shake would consist of just whey and water (plus glutamine, creatine, or whatever other supps.)? Is that right?

 

[greyowl]

Bob, I'm not doing 3x3, but I'm not using a high a rep routine as 4x15 either. I think I get how much sugar to use now. But when cutting, you say you eliminate the sugars. So basically your post shake would consist of just whey and water (plus glutamine, creatine, or whatever other supps.)? Is that right?

Dated a nutritionist last year and she ssaid never to take anything sugary within 30 mins of a work out because it suppressed the exercised-induced surge of GH. After 30 mins was fine.

 

[Bob Smith]

Dated a nutritionist last year and she ssaid never to take anything sugary within 30 mins of a work out because it suppressed the exercised-induced surge of GH. After 30 mins was fine.

blah blah blah.

Go back and ask her how much of a nothing difference 30 minutes of "increased GH" makes to one's progress. Why not just whack yourself in the nuts a few times with a hammer? That, too, will cause a surge of GH. IMO, the whole GH deal (natural GH manipulation) is incredibly overrated and overhyped.

 

[perp69]

What is wrong with using juice anyway?

 

[Bob Smith]

What is wrong with using juice anyway?

Most juice is fairly low GI and about half fructose. Fructose isnt a good form of sugar to use.

 

[greyowl]

blah blah blah

There is overwhelming clinical evidence that GHRH triggers the secretion of GH through a negative feedback loop involving the pituitary gland as blood glucose levels decrease, and that GHRH release is turned off as blood glucose rises.

Note this prescribing information from jintropin (from about a year ago):

"Do not eat foods high in glucose (sugar) three hours before and an hour and half after injection. The sugar will interfere with absorption of the HGH."

I presume that that the impact of glucose levels on exogenously-administered GH corresponds to its impact on endogenously-produced GH. I'm open-minded, so I would be interested in hearing clinical evidence to the contrary.

Otherwise, you'll forgive me if I don't pay much attention to subjective statements which don't cite objective data or well-argued, science-based hypotheses.

 

[Bob Smith]

Do you have any evidence showing that natural GH manipulation results in any benefits or increased results? That is what your initial post was arguing, so I was wondering if you had any empirical support for your arguement.

There is overwhelming clinical evidence that GHRH triggers the secretion of GH through a negative feedback loop involving the pituitary gland as blood glucose levels decrease, and that GHRH release is turned off as blood glucose rises.

Im not arguing that part. Exogenous and endogenous GH levels are two separate animals. I am arguing that 30 minutes of higher GH levels makes absolutely no difference in terms of results, and waiting may actually impair the benefits of immediate post-workout nutrition. I will follow up with some empirical data, since you asked.

 

[greyowl]

Do you have any evidence showing that natural GH manipulation results in any benefits or increased results? That is what your initial post was arguing, so I was wondering if you had any empirical support for your arguement.

This was not my initial post was arguing. I was arguing that glucose inhibits GH secretion.

Nonetheless, there is clear evidence emerging that GH manipulation increases muscle torque and performance. See Stevens BR, Godfrey MD, Kaminski TW, Braith RW. "High-intensity dynamic human muscle performance enhanced by a metobolic intervention. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2002: 32 (12):21028" ... which concludes:

"Compared with isocaloric carbohydrate, oral GAKIC (a glycine and L-arginine salt of alpha-ketoisocaproic acid calcium) treatment increased muscle torque and work sustained during intense acute anaerobic dynamic exercise; additionally, it increased overall muscle performance by delaying muscle fatigue during the early phases of anaerobic dynamic exercise."

I've pasted a full abstract below.

I would also refer you to Elam RP, Hardin DH, Sutton RA, Hagen L. "Effects of arginine and ornithine on strength, lean body mass and urinary hydroxyproline in adult males. J Sports Med Phys Fitness. 1998;29(1):52-6."

I am arguing that 30 minutes of higher GH levels makes absolutely no difference in terms of results ... I will follow up with some empirical data, since you asked.

I look forward to seeing clinical evidence which contradicts the observation that it is the "peak effect" of GH release that carries its beneficial properties, not general levels; particularly because this runs counter to the findings of Dr. Mauro Di Pasquale ( whom I'm sure Swale would confirm is a leading expert on growth hormone and athletic performance) who states in reference to GH peak effect that "... you don't have to increase growth hormone very much to get a 10 to 20% rise in IGF1 level, which can have a definite effect on the body."

I don't suggest that young athletes in top shape should run out and take shitloads of "GH secretagogue" products which IMO are peddled by snake oil merchants and are a waste of $. But I do conclude from my own experience and my medline searches on this topic that biodynamic GH manipulation can yield real-world results in people whose GH response to GHRH is compromised by age, disease or disability.

More speculatively, I would also conjecture that small increases in GH secretion might help athletes who've reached the limits of their genetic potential squeeze out extra quanta of results.

Here's the abstract.

Stevens BR, Godfrey MD, Kaminski TW, Braith RW.

Department of Physiology, College of Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville 32610-0274, USA. stevens@phys.med.ufl.edu

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to quantify the effects of a metabolic treatment on human muscle dynamic performance (strength, work, and fatigue) measured under conditions of acute, exhaustive high-intensity anaerobic isokinetic exercise. METHODS: Unilateral prefatigue and postfatigue peak torque and work values were measured in the quadriceps femoris of 13 subjects using a computer-controlled isokinetic dynamometer, over a 23-d interval. The two experimental treatments were: 1) a glycine and L-arginine salt of alpha-ketoisocaproic acid calcium ("GAKIC"); and 2) isocaloric sucrose (control). Based on a randomized double-blind cross-over repeated measures design, measurements were made before and during an exhaustive anaerobic fatigue protocol to calculate a Fatigue Resistance Index (FRI = [peri-exhaustion torque]\[baseline peak torque]), as well as total work. RESULTS: The FRI and total work for each of the exhaustion sets measured at 0, 5, and 15 min after oral GAKIC treatment were greater than values obtained for isocaloric control treatment (P < 0.02). GAKIC treatment increased the mean resistance to fatigue (FRI) up to 28% over isocaloric control. Overall gain in total muscle work attributable to GAKIC was 10.5 +/- 0.8% greater than control, sustained for at least 15 min. After 24 h, both GAKIC and control concentric forces returned to the same absolute values (P > 0.05): mean FRI = 0.42 +/- 0.05 and mean total work = 4600 +/- 280 J. There were no significant differences attributable to random order of testing. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with isocaloric carbohydrate, oral GAKIC treatment increased muscle torque and work sustained during intense acute anaerobic dynamic exercise; additionally, it increased overall muscle performance by delaying muscle fatigue during the early phases of anaerobic dynamic exercise.

 

[Bob Smith]

But I do conclude from my own experience

You chastise me for saying I think natural GH manipulation is bunk, and yet you come back with a similar anecdotal arguement?

and my medline searches on this topic that biodynamic GH manipulation can yield real-world results in people whose GH response to GHRH is compromised by age, disease or disability.

To discount those findings:

Does growth hormone therapy in conjunction with resistance exercise increase muscle force production and muscle mass in men and women aged 60 years or older?[size=-1] Phys Ther. 1999 Jan;79(1):76-82. [/size][size=-1]Zachwieja JJ, Yarasheski KE.

[/size]Effect of growth hormone and resistance exercise on muscle growth and strength in older men.
[size=-1]Am J Physiol. 1995 Feb;268(2 Pt 1):E268-76.[/size][size=-1]Yarasheski KE, Zachwieja JJ, Campbell JA, Bier DM.[/size]
[size=-1]
"[/size]These observations suggest that resistance exercise training improved muscle strength and anabolism in older men, but these improvements were not enhanced when exercise was combined with daily GH administration."

"On the basis of the similar increases in muscle protein synthesis, muscle cross-sectional area, and muscle strength observed in placebo and GH-treated exercising young adults, it is doubtful that the nitrogen retention associated with daily GH treatment results in an increase in contractile protein, improved muscle function, strength and athletic performance."

And both of those quotes are with injected GH! So if injectible GH doesnt work very well, how can you (or your former gf) postulate that natural GH swings are worth a shit?

 

[greyowl]

Quote:
Originally Posted by greyowl
But I do conclude from my own experience

You chastise me for saying I think natural GH manipulation is bunk, and yet you come back with a similar anecdotal arguement

My actual statement was as follows (emphasis mine)
"But I do conclude from my own experience AND MY MEDLINE SEARCHES ..." thus indicating that my deductions were based on clinical studies as well my personal observation.

With regard to the Yarasheski studies and your comment

both of those quotes are with injected GH! So if injectible GH doesnt work very well, how can you (or your former gf) postulate that natural GH swings are worth a shit?"

I postulate this because there are several papers that contradict Yarasheski's findings, so the debate about this isssue is clearly not over. I've cited one study in an earlier post, and append two more abstracts at the end this post.

I'll post some of my hypotheses about why I think Yarasheski's studies aren't conclusive later in the week when I get home from a business trip.

Here are the two other abstracts.

Aging 1997 Jun;9(3):193-7.

Effects of six-month administration of recombinant human growth hormone to healthy elderly subjects.

Cuttica CM, Castoldi L, Gorrini GP, Peluffo F, Delitala G, Filippa P, Fanciulli G, Giusti M.

DISEM, Cattedra di Endocrinologia, University of Genova, Italy.

In aging, both changes in body composition and a decrease in GH secretion are observed. While recombinant human GH (rhGH) therapy was shown to be effective in GH-deficient adults, its effects on normal aging are controversial. This study addressed the effects of six-month administration of low dosages of rhGH in a group of 5 healthy elderly subjects (age range 71-86 years). All subjects received 2 IU rhGH (Saizen, Serono) x 2/week s.c., which was approximately 0.03 mg/kg/week, and were examined before and 1, 3, and 6 months after the start of the therapy, as well as 3 months after therapy was suspended. Hormonal, metabolic and biochemical parameters, as well as bone density at the forearm level, body composition and muscle strength, assessed by isokinetic exercises, were evaluated at each scheduled visit. After the start of the therapy, there was an average 9 +/- 3% increase (median 8%) in IGF-I levels (IGF-I basal: 145.6 +/- 9 ng/mL, IGF-I peak: 176.0 +/- 10; p < 0.001). An increase in lean body weight, a decrease in fat (p < 0.05), and an improvement in muscle strength (p < 0.01) were recorded.

--------------------------

Horm Res. 2004;62 Suppl 4:23-30.


Long-term challenges in growth hormone treatment.

Leal Cerro A.

Department of Endocrinology, Hospital Universitario Virgen del Rocio, Hospital General, Sevilla, Spain. alfonso.leal.sspa@juntadeandalucia.es

Growth hormone deficiency (GHD) is defined biochemically as a response to hypoglycaemia with a peak GH concentration of less than 5 microg/l. The 'GHD syndrome' is a range of psychological and physical symptoms that are associated with GHD, which include increased central adiposity, decreased bone mineral density, abnormal lipid profiles, decreased cardiovascular performance, reduced lean body mass (LBM), social isolation, depressed mood and increased anxiety. Importantly, the combination of physical and psychological problems can often result in a reduced quality of life. A number of trials have shown that GH replacement therapy can lead to a substantial improvement in GHD associated symptoms. Following up to 12 months of treatment with GH, LBM increased, left ventricular systolic function improved and the mean volume of adipose tissue fell. After only 4 months of treatment, a rise in exercise capacity was recorded, and after 2 years' treatment, isokinetic and isometric muscle strength had normalized in proximal muscle groups.

 

[zonemaster]

PWO whey 25 -50 grams with 1/2 cup of dextrose is a good thing. Good time to shuttle aminos into your system. Body does not store as fat post workout...assuming you hit the metal hard and depleted your muscles.

 

[Bob Smith]

Does exogenous growth hormone improve athletic performance?
[size=-1]H. Dean Clin J Sport Med. 2002 Jul;12(4):250-3.

"[/size]CONCLUSION: There is no evidence of increased muscle strength with HGH in trained athletes."

Effect of growth hormone treatment on hormonal parameters, body composition and strength in athletes.
[size=-1]Deyssig R, Frisch H, Blum WF, Waldhor T. [/size][size=-1]Acta Endocrinol (Copenh). 1993 Apr;128(4):313-8.[/size]

"There was no effect of GH treatment on maximal strength during concentric contraction of the biceps and quadriceps muscles. Body weight and body fat were not changed significantly during treatment."


Again, my question/arguement goes back to the idea that waiting 30 minutes for postworkout nutrition is probably going to be more detrimental despite a short-term spike in endogenous GH levels.

 

[perp69]

Haven't heard that about juice before. Sounds so damn complicated I think I will just mix mine with water

 

[J DUB]

OK, here's my quick take on the GH issue.

Some animal studies have shown exogenous GH to be beneficial to hypertrophy of skeletal muscle. However, the animals were not given GH in a single dose as is usually done with bodybuilders but rather were basically hooked up to IV's with GH constantly dripping in them. Much different scenarios.

I, like Bob, have a hard time believing that transient increases in hormone levels post-exercise have a whole lot to do with hypertrophy. The mechanisms for hypertrophy are far from understood, especially the endocrine aspect...for example, hypertrophy can occur in the absence of testosterone and in the absence of GH. Igf-1 has been shown to be an extremely important factor, but it is by no means the absolute most important or the only factor in hypertrophy. GH is of course a component of the endocrine response to training, but this does not mean that one should decrease rest intervals to elicit a larger GH response or alter one's nutrition program to maximize GH secretion. This short term increase in GH is not the answer to hypertrophy...if it were, everyone would be doing it as this research is nothing new. To be succinct, hypertrophy, or adaptation to training, is a multi-factorial, non-linear, complex process, so to focus on a single hormone such as GH (especially such a small increase in the short term) is not a great idea (although we do know the effects of supraphysiological doses of test!).

What's more, don't forget that there have been several studies on the effects of exogenous GH administration in humans and they for the most part concluded that GH didn't do much for strength or hypertrophy. While the results may be different in well-trained lifters, anecdotal evidence which is even abundant on this site and others shows that for the most part, even experienced lifters do not gain much from administration of GH. If these high levels of GH don't do much for people, then a small endogenous increase isn't likely to do jack. You have to look at the big picture and realize that adaptation to training has little to do with one hormone, but rather is a complex process that is not fully understood by any means.

I have read a decent amount on this topic, and needless to say we are nowhere close to understanding all of this. However, don't worry about glucose/GH mumbo jumbo...eat some food after working out and call it a day.

 

[Bob Smith]

Good post, Dub.