Insulin Does Not Increase Muscle Protein Synthesis Rate

[I_know_nothing]

And the truth is that you still have provided 0 evidence and 0 credentials. Until then, the "Dr" in your forum name is 100% bullshit. I've proven what I am. I am among the best and the brightest medical students in the nation. What are you?

I'd also just like to continue that MJ reference. Just like we wouldn't recognize MJ as the greatest, we also wouldn't recognize that gifted doctor who worked in his/her backwater office instead of leading the field.

You can't call yourself among the best of the best if you aren't actively proving it, and actively proving it requires work regardless of your talent. That goes for athletes, doctors, students, businessmen, and everyone else.

Please stick around, im no doc but I'm not like these blind sheep either. I can tell jimmy isn't who he claims to be. Glad you provided the proof, now jim is going to get called out. For too long has he used his "status" and "dr" to lead the members who can't tell the real from the fake

 

[CensoredBoardsSuck]

Please stick around, im no doc but I'm not like these blind sheep either. I can tell jimmy isn't who he claims to be. Glad you provided the proof, now jim is going to get called out. For too long has he used his "status" and "dr" to lead the members who can't tell the real from the fake

You mean one of your impostor accounts isn't a doctor? I would have though you had that one covered since you're like the Village People of trolls.

You are funny, though. I mean, YOU of all people talking about calling someone else out? C'mon, dude! You're killing me here. LMFAO

 

[Dr JIM]

I know nothing about this but I'll take a guess: Non-ischemic central retinal vein occlusion.

Good guess really but those patients are essentially blind, primarily bc you specified a CENTRAL RA OCCLUSION.

Meaning their vision is typically limited to hand motion or light perception, depending upon the delay in diagnosis.
(In fact the degree of edema which often follows these occlusions is a major prognostic indicator)

However if the occlusion is more "segmental" AND spares the macula their central VA is often NORMAL!

 

[Dr JIM]

You mean one of your impostor accounts isn't a doctor? I would have though you had that one covered since you're like the Village People of trolls.

You are funny, though. I mean, YOU of all people talking about calling someone else out? C'mon, dude! You're killing me here. LMFAO

Oops, got that one right CBS, and the more ZIPPO posts the more obvious that becomes!

 

[CensoredBoardsSuck]

Good guess really but those patients are essentially blind, primarily bc you specified a CENTRAL RA OCCLUSION.

Meaning their vision is typically limited to hand motion or light perception, depending upon the delay in diagnosis.
(In fact the degree of edema which often follows these occlusions is a major prognostic indicator)

However if the occlusion is more "segmental" AND spares the macula their central VA is often NORMAL!

Refractive shift?

 

[zoot494]

Lol yea, I'm an imposter. That's why I posted pics of my hospital badge and student ID. Cuz that isn't definitive enough.

 

[Dr JIM]

Nope, but by now I thought for sure our elitist prick of a "doctor from Vandy" would have given it a go.

I mean how could someone so full of themselves overlook the opportunity to PROVE he is better than the rest.

Come on ZIPPO now is your time to shine, LMAO!

 

[I_know_nothing]

Nope, but by now I thought for sure our elitist prick of a "doctor from Vandy" would have given it a go.

I mean how could someone so full of themselves overlook the opportunity to PROVE he is better than the rest.

Come on ZIPPO now is your time to shine, LMAO!

Obviously because he doesn't have to engage in your little game. He's already provided his proof, where's your Jim? Why don't you upload some pics of proof you're a doc?

*cue excuses*

 

[A-a-Ron]

There is some good information in this post, and I am being open minded. However, you have to be careful with "studies" and "evidence". There are plenty of "studies" out there with "evidence" that shows steroids do not improve athletic performance and strength.

 

[A-a-Ron]

I have a question. Can insulin (even in theory) cause a carbing up effect after working out?

 

[Dr JIM]

There is some good information in this post, and I am being open minded. However, you have to be careful with "studies" and "evidence". There are plenty of "studies" out there with "evidence" that shows steroids do not improve athletic performance and strength.

Those "studies" were conducted in the 1970s and NOT in the year 2015 where the techniques, methods, equipment and training of those involved are vastly improved. It truly is the difference between night and day.

It's ironic to me how some want to remain naive and negate the relevance of ANY study that disagrees with their own PERSONAL practice or experience!

To that end I've not been able to locate ONE SOLITARY CONTEMPORARY study that disagrees with the authors conclusion in this REVIEW.

That's right the authors did the work for you, they reviewed ALL the available studies on the effect on insulin as an anabolic agent.

And they found it is not an anabolic agent by itself. At best insulin prevents SKM catabolism thereby creating an anabolic environment for those hormones which ARE anabolic, primarily GH and Test.

 

[A-a-Ron]

Those "studies" were conducted in the 1970s and NOT in the year 2015 where the techniques, methods, equipment and training of those involved are vastly improved. It truly is the difference between night and day.

It's ironic to me how some want to remain naive and negate the relevance of ANY study that disagrees with their own PERSONAL practice or experience!

To that end I've not been able to locate ONE SOLITARY CONTEMPORARY study that disagrees with the authors conclusion in this REVIEW.

That's right the authors did the work for you, they reviewed ALL the available studies on the effect on insulin as an anabolic agent.

And they found it is not an anabolic agent by itself. At best insulin prevents catabolism thereby creating an anabolic environment for those hormones which ARE anabolic, primarily GH and Test.[/QUOTE

Well, I'm not one to remain naive. That's why I read up on the stuff.

 

[Dr JIM]

I have a question. Can insulin (even in theory) cause a carbing up effect after working out?

Now your talking about what insulin DOES do that it very important, the restoration of glycogen stores.

That's also the most likely reason some may "see a benefit" with it's use, IMO.

But that's NOT to say supplementation is required.

 

[A-a-Ron]

Sorry, my quote posted in the wrong spot.

I keep from bring naive by reading many sources of information, studies and use personal experience.

 

[A-a-Ron]

Now your talking about what insulin DOES do that it very important, the restoration of glycogen stores.

That's also the most likely reason some may "see a benefit" with it's use, IMO.

But that's NOT to say supplementation is required.

As for my first post, I wasn't negating the study. I was simply saying its good to read from a lot of different sources.
Now to the current subject. When I used insulin (one time for a short time), I was on a low carb (during most of the day anyway) and high protein diet. The majority of my carbs came immediately after working out when I'd do my insulin shot and eat a large amount of protein, followed by a sweet potato an hour later. I'd blow up beyond a normal post workout pump. Do you think people are taking that restoration as growth?

 

[Dr JIM]

Hey AR speaking of outdated studies, when you have a chance and if you can locate a blog, forum or board that supports it's commentary with evidence based literature, take a look at the dates cited to support their commentary "insulin is a SKM anabolic agent" bc most if not all are AT LEAST 25 years old.

Look I just want BB to understand how little a difference adding insulin to their PED armamentarium will make ESPECIALLY considering the absolutely lame doses be mentioned in "protocols".

Somewhere between 5-12 units a day WTF, that's a joke and is hardly enough to lubricate that syringe let lone build muscle.

Most people just don't understand how different insulin secretion is compared to GH and TT.

Bc while the latter are relatively FIXED (which is why supplementation can and does improve anabolism) insulin secretion VARIES greatly depending upon the metabolic demands of the individual.

What metabolic process is insulin critical for? The mobilization of glucose into the cell to meet it's energy demands.

Now bc all other hormones RAISE serum BS levels, (or are neutral) is that function so surprising? Thus whatever anabolic effect insulin may have it's SECONDARY to BS modulation.

Moreover the insulin dependent transport of AA into some cells mandates the co-transport of glucose.

So why the mystery, bc if folk want to "supplement insulin" do so naturally by changing carb intake.

Heck if there was a means of similarity increasing the magnitude of TT or GH production I promise UGL would go broke, guys.

But nope this insulin thing is like most bro dogma, once it becomes a part of bro speech, it's often impossible for anyone to interject reason or another opinion based on the evidence IME.

It's not to surprising really bc much like the bro BS connection of 19Nor AAS causing hyperprolactinemia, "AI rebound", routine thyroid supps for GH or Tren use, insulin as a PED has proved no different, a paucity of evidence to support the bro speech that dominates almost all non-evidence based AAS forums.

 

[Dr JIM]

Perhaps I should have made that post more clear I was NOT necessarily referring to you as being naive AR.

It was only a contextual comment and could have been about any number of "studies" "experienced BB" use to support ther position or refute others, the latter often being more soundly based in the literature.

It's great people disagree bc it engenders a healthy debate which if optimized should be based on the FACTS each side presents.

THEREAFTER it becomes a learning process about how one study may be more applicable or valid than another. However if either side ONLY offers an experience, is there anything worth debating?
NIMO!

 

[A-a-Ron]

Hey AR speaking of outdated studies, when you have a chance and if you can locate a blog, forum or board that supports it's commentary with evidence based literature, take a look at the dates cited to support their commentary "insulin is a SKM anabolic agent" bc most if not all are AT LEAST 25 years old.

Look I just want BB to understand how little a difference adding insulin to their PED armamentarium will make ESPECIALLY considering the absolutely lame doses be mentioned in "protocols".

Somewhere between 5-12 units a day WTF, that's a joke and is hardly enough to lubricate that syringe let lone build muscle.

Most people just don't understand how different insulin secretion is compared to GH and TT.

Bc while the latter are relatively FIXED (which is why supplementation can and does improve anabolism) insulin secretion VARIES greatly depending upon the metabolic demands of the individual.

What metabolic process is insulin critical for? The mobilization of glucose into the cell to meet it's energy demands.

Now bc all other hormones RAISE serum BS levels, (or are neutral) is that function so surprising? Thus whatever anabolic effect insulin may have it's SECONDARY to BS modulation.

Moreover the insulin dependent transport of AA into some cells mandates the co-transport of glucose.

So why the mystery, bc if folk want to "supplement insulin" do so naturally by changing carb intake.

Heck if there was a means of similarity increasing the magnitude of TT or GH production I promise UGL would go broke, guys.

But nope this insulin thing is like most bro dogma, once it becomes a part of bro speech, it's often impossible for anyone to interject reason or another opinion based on the evidence IME.

It's not to surprising really bc much like the bro BS connection of 19Nor AAS causing hyperprolactinemia, "AI rebound", routine thyroid supps for GH or Tren use, insulin as a PED has proved no different, a paucity of evidence to support the bro speech that dominates almost all non-evidence based AAS forums.

So one would not receive even a temporary "pump" from carb loading with insulin immediately after a workout? That's what I was referring to in my last post ( and I meant to say eating pineapple and not protein....sorry, I was doing two things at once). I know it's a little off topic, but if small doses do not do anything to aid protein synthesis, is it possible some of the "gains people get are merely from the sudden increase in glycogen?

 

[Dr JIM]

Is it possible some of the "gains people get are merely from the sudden increase in glycogen?

Now at least that's physiologically accurate possibility!

But slapping on several pounds of muscle in a few brief days bc someone added insulin to their regimen, no way.

 

[A-a-Ron]

I

Now at least that's physiologically accurate possibility!

But slapping on several pounds of muscle in a few brief days bc someone added insulin to their regimen, no way.

I agree.

I used insulin deep in an eq cycle and I seemed to always get a pump after loading up on carbs. I also noticed during those few hours I seemed to smooth out a little. But no, the next morning I'd have a lean look. That's just my experience and might explain why some people get so excited about slin.

I'm still on the fence about insulin, but to me it's not worth the risk with what I do as far as cycles.