High carbs for everyone?:Carb nightmare I,II en III - I

[3XL]

De site die dit oorspronkelijk plaatste is ter ziele en ik kan niet alle plaatjes meer vinden, maar dat maakt het artikeln niet minder intressant.

3

High Carbs for Everyone?

Part 1: Carb Nightmare
Lonnie Lowery, PhD Cndt

You see it first! Some pretty disturbing EARLY data revealing the struggle your body undertakes just to deal with dietary carbohydrates while in a sore state. You punish your body with intense exercise but you're certainly no runner. The bottom line is, you shouldn't have to rely on high carb recommendations that stem from research on endurance athletes! Well, you don't have to anymore...



Do you get muscle soreness regularly from your lifting? If you train intensely, using eccentric contractions ("negatives") you're probably no stranger to the pain that comes from muscle damage. By "muscle damage" we mean the microscopic trauma that causes weakness and soreness while your body struggles to recover. Experienced lifters and physiologists know that the actual time spent in the gym is destructive, not constructive; that is, maximal growth comes only after some stress is placed upon a muscle and some damage is done. But many do not realize that if a large enough amount of muscle tissue is stressed, their ability to take-up and metabolize blood glucose is considerably worsened. That's right. Worsened.



A disease that is similar to (but more severe than) this state of poor glucose tolerance is Type II diabetes. Type II diabetics suffer from bodily tissues that are chronically unresponsive to insulin. The carbohydrates they eat enter their bloodstream (as glucose) but tend to stay there, gumming-up (glycosylating) other blood constituents and casing the pancreas to dump insulin in an effort to drive it in. About 90% of them are obese and have other problems related to hyperinsulinemia. Although many bodybuilders actually use insulin injections to aid muscle growth and recovery (dangerous and not recommended!), Type II diabetes is definitely "too much of a good thing". You see, having excess insulin in one's circulation can cause a number of problems, not the least of which is excess body FAT.

Enter exercise. It's a great way to get muscles to take-up blood glucose independent of insulin. Endurance training and weight training are a critical part of American Diabetes Association guidelines. But spending 30 minutes on a universal machine lifting two plates is a far cry from having 315 on one's back for six sets of ten! This is one thing we've been discovering lately in the Human Nutrition Lab (HNL) at Kent State University. Place enough load on large muscle groups using negatives - as many athletes do - and glucose intolerance can result! It's not as severe as that seen in diabetics but it appears to be enough to dampen recovery. You see, muscles need to turn blood glucose into glycogen (stored carbs) to stay full and energetic... but it can't get into a damaged muscle very well. It's a "catch-22" situation. Eccentric contractions induce superior growth4 but result in long recovery periods and poor carbohydrate efficiency.1,2,3,6,7 With regards to glucose intolerance, it's a scenario similar in appearance to Syndrome X, a condition rampant in western societies characterized by obesity and hypertension - presumably due to poor glucose handling. Even without intense lifting nearly 10% of men are hyperglycemic (have abnormally high blood glucose)5.



Taking a look at the above graph that's hot off the presses from the HNL at Kent State, we see that early results suggest hampered glucose tolerance in all subjects from muscle damage. This bodes poorly for maximal recovery. The lines come from an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) performed before and 24 hours after an intense workout. An OGTT is simply a series of blood draws, taken before and immediately after ingestion of 75 g of glucose (fast-acting sugar). Blood glucose commonly goes up about 40 points (mg/ dl) between 30-60 minutes, then insulin drives it back down. We didn't expect blood glucose to be this affected by the intense (eccentric) lifting. You see, the body's control over circulating glucose is necessarily TIGHT. We hypothesized (guessed) that subjects' pancreases would have to dump extra insulin to keep the glucose down in the face of all this "trauma", but not this actual hyperglycemic response; wow! The exercise bout consisted of six sets of six repetitions at 80% of the subjects' one rep max. Both bench press and squatting were performed in this manner on a Smith machine, using a four-count to lower the bar. The exercise session was designed to affect a maximal amount of skeletal muscle but also to mimic a state that is common to weight lifters.



The relatedness (or correlation) between fasting blood glucose and CK, for example, was tested on two separate post-workout occasions, revealing significant relationships (r = 0.54 to 0.75). These are moderate to strong relationships between muscle damage and poor glucose usage. In other words, when muscles are damaged, dietary carbs don't leave the blood stream very well (and enter the muscle tissue). Muscle soreness measurements add to the evidence, also suggesting that damage was done (have YOU ever gotten really sore from training?). They correlated moderately to highly with the CK results.

Clearly runners and cyclists need to replenish carb stores; they exhaust their glycogen almost daily. Hence the high dietary carb recommendations. And although many weight trainers insist carbs make them fat, they do need some for similar reasons. But for most of us it's really about growth as opposed to say, boosted performance and if we're not getting them into our sore muscles, where are they going?

One answer could be adipose tissue. Yep, body fat is another recipient of blood glucose. When insulin levels are high, fat cells grab up the blood borne glucose - even more so than sore muscles, presumably. And what happens to glucose once in a fat cell? You guessed it, fat building (lipogenesis). So now we see a "double whammy" scenario when muscles are just too rocked to accept blood glucose efficiently: First, they can't recovery rapidly, failing to optimally replenish their glycogen stores (and creating muscle fullness); Second, the left over circulating glucose likely goes where it can, into body fat.

What can be done about this problem that appears to be specific to weight trainers? Well, one thing is to report it to the scientific community so "experts" tone-down their "high carbs for all athletes" recommendations. Another is to give some preliminary suggestions to athletes as to when to eat plenty of carbs and when it might be better to reduce them. Finally, we can search for nutrients that may help glucose tolerance so bodybuilders can continue to induce muscle growth via "negatives" AND recover maximally. THAT, my friends, is what we're working on in the HNL right now! Stay tuned for Part Two of "High Carbs for Everyone?" to get practical suggestions and to see which compounds we're testing and what they're doing for glucose metabolism!

Editors' Note: Remember, data on graphs above are preliminary, using available data as it comes-in and representative case examples. It's important to wait for the completion of these studies for more comprehensive conclusions. Virtual Muscle shares this information in an effort to get it to those who matter, the ATHLETES, as soon as possible!

REFERENCES
1 Doyle, J., et al. (1993). J Appl Physiol 74(4): 1848-1855.
2 Friden, J., et al. (1983). Int J Sport Med 4: 170-176.
3 Gibala, M., et al. (1995). J Appl Physiol 78(2): 702-708.
4 Hortobagyi, T., et al. (1996). J Appl Physiol 80(3): 765-772.
5 Lowe, L., et al. (1997). Diabetes Care 20 (1): 163-175.
6 Lowery, L., et al. (2001). Doctoral dissertation. Kent State University.
7 Sherman, W. (1992). Int J Sport Nutr 2(3): 251-259.


bron

[3XL]

High carbs for everyone?:Carb nightmare I,II en III - II

High Carbs for Everyone?

Part 2: Data Accumulates
the Virtual Muscle editors

This article is for those of you who want hard facts to help your supplement buying decisions and training recovery! It shows relationships between exercise-induced muscle damage and hampered carb use. It also updates everyone on the effects of a new herbal blend that may help. If you lift to the point of muscle soreness you need to stay abreast of this series of studies! Knowledge is power, baby. Show me the data!

Hormone Havok
The alarm goes off in its usual rude tone: Beep! Beep! Beep! “Time to make the donuts”, thinks professor Lowery jokingly as his feet hit the cool hardwood floor. It’s six o’clock AM on a Sunday. Lonnie Lowery, director of the Human Nutrition Laboratory (HNL) at Kent State University, might be a bit salty at this hour but he rushes to the shower nonetheless. “Today’s the day,” he anticipates. “We’ll finally get our insulin measurements and know the whole picture…”

Why is this man excited – especially at this hour? Because he knows that a picture is becoming clearer as his research continues. The picture involves resistance trained athletes and their ability to recover from intense lifting. It's starting to look as if current high dietary carbohydrate recommendations may be overstated. Thirty minutes away, his colleague, Dr. Ron Mendel is already getting in his car to leave for the Lab. Ron, too knows that they may be on the verge of something big.

The campus is a ghost town on this frigid Sunday morning but already the Lab is percolating to life. As the coffee brews down in the office, the two men are joined by Dr. Tim Ziegenfuss, who’s made the drive down to lend a hand with the hormone assays.

“Hmm…” mutters Lonnie as the results are spit out of the ELISA machine. “It looks as if the hypothesis was correct; these subjects are not handling carbohydrates well at all when they’re sore. Look at those insulin levels.” For the past few months these researchers have been hypothesizing (guessing) that intensely training bodybuilders may be at least partly justified in their insistence that “carbs make them fat”. [Editors’ note: See “Carb Nightmare” in the Virtual Muscle online archives.] There has been indirect evidence of this in the past but a primary goal of HNL is to provide direct evidence straight to those who matter: the athletes. Look how strong the relationships are between muscle damage (from exercise) and poor dietary carb use:




The above graphs show how the body produces additional insulin after a "meal" to try and compensate for damaged muscles. They also indicate that dietary carbs appear to stay in the blood of sore athletes. The muscle damage, as indicated by CK in the blood (described more below) and perceptions of soreness, apparently retard muscles' ability to take up blood sugar (glucose). That is, subjects with more damage are the ones who exhibit worse "glucose tolerance". The more severe the damage, the worse the glucose intolerance. The pancreas won't stand for high blood sugar and attempts to hammer-home the glucose by dumping lots of insulin. If you've read earlier VM pieces on insulin and muscle building, you know that, although highly anabolic, insulin is a "Jeckyl and Hyde" hormone. Too much can be counter productive to the physique athlete by building fatty tissue (lipogenesis).

The problem here is that athletes need to rebuild muscle carbohydrate stores (glycogen) in order to recover - but can't ...at least not when they use heavy weights and "negatives" to induce additional growth. Are we hard lifters relegated to limiting our workouts to less than once per week?



Supplement Savior?

The following information refers to a "double blind" study: a type of research in which supplement bottles are simply labeled by a letter (rather than the type of supplement). For example, subjects will get "A" or "B" - but neither they nor the researchers know what's what during the study. Only one outside person knows the code and breaks it for the researchers at the end. This ensures objectivity and eliminates bias until the end of the study...

And yet these men are not content to simply acknowledge a problem. They’ve set out to do something about it with the help of Bodyonics Pinnacle and Phoenix Labs. With the financial commitment of these forward-looking companies and some compelling evidence on particular herbs from the scientific literature, it’s time to see if bodybuilders will have a legal alternative to insulin use. [Editors’ note: See “Bodybuilding and the Insulin Enigma” in the Virtual Muscle online archives.]

The second in their series of studies on muscle recovery and insulin focused upon the acute (immediate) effects of a blend containing glucosol, inzitol, and known nutrients like chromium and lipoic acid. Would this combination reduce blood sugar after consuming carbohydrates? Would the effects be similar to those of insulin? Based on existing data from studies on diabetics and muscle cells in culture (in vitro studies), Mel Rich, product formulator (and pharmacist) for Pinnacle thinks so.

The Human Nutrition Lab is now humming with hormone analyzers and overheating computers as data are created and analyzed. “Look at this,” says Dr. Mendel as Lonnie peers over his shoulder. “We’ve got three subjects done in each group and it looks as if a picture is emerging here.” Ron Mendel is looking closely at a blood (actually serum) marker of muscle damage called creatine kinase (CK). "First, we knew from your and Traci's data that CK was related to poor glucose tolerance1 (above) and now we know even more. Check it out... there’s a nearly significant decline in CK after four weeks of ingesting the capsules in group D; this wasn't expected, eh? Could the supplement protect subjects from a session THAT intense? Meanwhile the other group looks just as damaged as ever from the lifting session. I bet that's the placebo group. If it’s Insulene protecting the damage-resistant subjects then we may be onto something..."




“Hey guys,” inquires Tim as he returns from the biochemistry lab. “How’s the data analysis coming?”

“Well Z, Ron’s seeing some pretty interesting findings regarding improved muscle recovery… and check this out… after four weeks of the supplementation, there’s a trend toward lower fasting glucose levels in group D as well.”

"Mel is definitely going to be interested in this,” muses Tim. All that digging in the scientific literature seems to be paying-off for him. And for Pinnacle. There’s very little chance that it's the placebo group that's improving after just a month, wouldn’t you agree? If only we knew right now! I'm telling ya, I can't wait to finally break the code and know for sure the reason for these recovery-boosting effects.

Will these researchers’ hunch be right? Will the unique combination of insulin potentiating compounds pan out to be the reason for the improved ability to handle dietary carbs and recover better? The data won’t lie, so tune in next month when these guys finally wrap-up this study and ask colleague Dr. Karen Lowry-Gordon to unlock the “double blind” code.

Only then will the Virtual Muscle editors start pestering Pinnacle executives for discounts on this fascinating supplement.

Editors' Note: Remember, data on graphs above are preliminary, using available data (currently three to nine subjects per analysis) as it comes-in. It's important to wait for the completion of these studies for more comprehensive conclusions. Virtual Muscle shares this information in an effort to get it to those who matter, the ATHLETES, as soon as possible!



REFERENCES
1 Sexton, T. and Lowery, L. (2001). Oh J Sci (Medicine and Biology), 101 (1): 13.

[3XL]

High carbs for everyone?:Carb nightmare I,II en III - III

High Carbs for Everyone?

Part 3: Lessons From a Year of Research
Lonnie Lowery, PhD Cndt

This article is an update in a series. It's meant for those of you who have been following the whole research process at the Human Nutrition Lab since last Fall. After collecting and analyzing data on a total of 12 subjects, we have new findings to share. If you lift to the point of muscle soreness you should review this series of studies. Knowledge is power, baby. Show me the data!

Insulin Inquiry
How is a dietary supplement evaluated? How do we assess if it "works"? If you've ever thought about such things, good for you. Knowing how and why dietary substances work help keep you from getting conned. There is a fairly consistent research process and it starts with asking the right questions. In the case of the new generation of herbs that aid humans' ability to handle dietary carbohydrate, called "insulin potentiators", a specific question came to mind: Can we overcome power athlete's difficulties in using dietary carbs? It's become rather well established that sore muscles don't take up carbs well (See Parts I and II). We've only recently shown this for the first time specifically in resistance-trained athletes.1 Well, guess what ? We at the Human Nutrition Lab (HNL) are resistance trained athletes... and we seem to always be sore. Are you? If so, your ability to recover and grow is probably compromised. And training like a wimp, avoiding soreness is not the answer. Soreness is a sign of progress.

Dr. Lowery (Lonnie) has been examining post-exercise muscle soreness in the lab for about three years. But he knows soreness is just the tip of the iceberg. It's a symptom of something much deeper. A whole series of biological events take place over about four days after an intense workout. Lengthening contractions, called "eccentric" contractions or, in the weight room, "negatives", induce muscle damage, immune reactions and metabolic disturbances collectively referred to as the acute phase response.3 Believe it or not, it's the same response your body has to infection and trauma! Nutrition support is called for.

One disturbance is glucose intolerance. Dietary carbohydrates don't enter muscle tissue well in this state. It could be due to hormonal alterations or perhaps damaged muscle tissue itself. It's particularly problematic for us athletes because we need carbs from our diets to form glycogen in our liver and muscles to optimally recover. Without replenished glycogen storage, athletes get fatigued, break down bodily protein and can't perform as well.1,2

Over countless discussions in the lab we've wrestled with ways to handle this dilemma. Before conclusions could be made, however, we needed to observe and record various phenomena. That's part of what science is. Our first observation was that the current high-carb recommendations (up to 70 percent of kcal intake!) for all athletes stem from data on endurance athletes who aren't chronically sore. Perhaps this was why bodybuilders insist that "carbs make them fat". Our second observation came early this year with the confirmation that bodybuilders do, in fact, need help recovering...from a carb usage perspective. We confirmed this by looking carefully at insulin and blood glucose levels 24 hours after an intense whole-body workout using negatives. Here it is:

Smith machine bench press: 6 sets of six negative reps at 80% of 1 RM* Smith machine squat: 6 sets of six negative reps at 80% of 1 RM*

If this looks tough to you, you're pretty astute. It was. In fact, we used the Smith machine not only to remove skill differences in the exercises, but for safety reasons. Think how you'd feel after 36 slow, lowering reps (four-count) in the bench AND squat! Research can be rough on subjects as well as researchers!

This type of data collection is a long, sometimes difficult, expensive, and somewhat invasive process. If you've been contaminated with the wild claims like "2000% better than D-bol !" that pervade our industry, it's time to smell the coffee. Let's get real. Dietary supplements are typically more mild than drugs (this can be good and bad, we suppose). Being as honest and straight forward as possible helps athletes. It is ultimately even the best long-term approach for supplement marketers. Supplement sales don't last if marketing claims don't live up to their hype. Our funding sources at the HNL know this and thus have few concerns with us sharing the presently mild effects (compared to insulin, for example) of a herbal blend called Insulene.

Design Difficulties
Since our last update, we've discovered that "group D" in our protocol was, in fact, the blend of "glucose control agents" and "group C" was, in fact, a placebo. Unfortunately, the effects regarding creatine kinase and glucose reduction were lost after adding a few additional subjects. What does this mean? Well, when analyzing four out of seven subjects, improved recovery was probable but as things now stand, the effect is not significant. Power analyses (see Carb Nightmare Part I) have their limitations when performing expensive, relatively invasive research on just a few subjects.

To be more certain that any recovery effects are real, we've decided to look deeper. The nutrients within the Insulene supplement are too promising to ignore. Glucosol, Inzitol, lipoic acid and "insulin-potentiating" minerals are all backed by evidence that they could help athletes. Several companies now sell some or all of these substances in various products and athletes are raving. But please recognize that these nutrients must be documented by science. Next month we hope to perform what's called a "crossover" design, bringing placebo subjects back into the lab to try Insulene for one month. Of course, they won't know what they're taking. Likewise, we'll be asking Insulene subjects to come back for a month on the placebo. This way we can avoid genetic differences that we believe are confounding (messing up) our data. It's a longer process, to be sure, but it will allow for very tightly controlled research.

We're here for you, the consumer, and, thus, need your support. Email your thoughts to Virtual Muscle! It's either that or you can continue to spend your hard-earned cash based on bullsh*t claims and marketing hype! The companies working with us at the Human Nutrition Lab agree that there's a better way. If you insist on hard data, stay tuned!


New Bodybuilder-Specific Data!

Our research is not only about dietary supplements. We've learned a ton about how bodybuilders recover and metabolize carbohydrates. Want to learn and grow as a result? Read on.

After bringing in additional subjects (since our last update), we still found relationships between muscle damage and poor glucose use. We also looked carefully to see if our research protocols were producing results that one would expect. They did. For example, we found direct relationships between blood glucose and insulin levels after administering sugar beverages (for you research enthusiasts: r=0.63, p=0.028 to r=0.73, p=0.007). One would expect this: higher blood sugar brings about higher blood insulin levels. We also found correlations between our various markers of muscle damage, including soreness and serum enzymes coming from damaged tissues (p<0.05). Okay, so the expected relationships were there, but anything else interesting?

Well, we learned that fat-free mass (largely muscle tissue) tended to correlate negatively with fasting blood glucose (r=-0.59, p=0.055) as well as "gummed-up red blood cells", known as "glycosylated hemoglobin" (r=-0.52, p=0.10). In this case, the negative correlation shows that subjects with higher fat free (muscle) mass had lower blood glucose levels over time. This suggests that adding muscle mass gives athletes more tissue to store glucose as glycogen (when they're not sore) and thus reduces potential "diabetes-like" problems (e.g. bodyfat). Cool. In other words, get big and recover properly to help stay lean.

Additionally, we learned - as one might expect - that the heaviest squatters did more damage to themselves than weaker ones. This was observed despite setting everyone at 80 percent of their maximum squat for the workout (above). It makes sense that our strongest squatter (max = 525 pounds, workout at 420 lb.) self-inflicted more damage than the weaker ones who only worked out with about 135 pounds (even though they, too, were at 80 percent of their max).

Alrighty then, to summarize what we know from this past year, specific to bodybuilders:

- Adding muscle appears to be a good thing regarding glucose usage and body fat reduction - if adequate recovery is present.
- Damaged sore muscles, however, are related to poor dietary carb use; one MUST recover to make progress.
- It makes sense to eat plenty of carbs on days when soreness is low / gone, especially in the morning.
- Strong guys can self inflict more damage in the weight room and may actually need nutrition support even more than beginning lifters.
- The time frame for unaided recovery from eccentric training can be approximately five days.
- Difficulties with dietary carb use occur in as little as 24 hours after lifting.

Editor's Note: Remember, data on graphs above are still preliminary, using available data (currently up to twelve subjects per analysis) as it comes in. It's important to wait for the completion of these studies for more comprehensive conclusions. Virtual Muscle shares this information in an effort to get it to those who matter, the ATHLETES, as soon as possible!


REFERENCES
1 Hargreaves, M. (1991). J Sports Sci. 9 Spec No:17-28.
2 Lemon, P. and Mullin, J. (1980). J Appl Physiol. 48(4): 624-9.
3 Lowery, L., et al. (2001). Doctoral dissertation. Kent State University.
4 Sexton, T. and Lowery, L. (2001). Oh J Sci (Medicine and Biology), 101 (1): 13.


bron

[GeneralIx]

Mooi stukje. Het komt er dus op neer dat je ondanks het hoge insuline niveau teveel glucose in je bloed blijft hebben, omdat je spieren het niet opnemen. Daardoor gaat het naar je vetreserve, en wordt je dikker.
Maar als ik het goed begrijp moet je dus wegblijven van carbs als je spierpijn hebt, dan gaat het naar je vetreserve. Maar, als je dus geen spierpijn hebt kun je smijten met carbs?
En hoewel het hoge glucose gehalte in je bloed uiteraard weinig positief is, de insuline zou toch juist het herstel moeten bevorderen en zo het eigen probleem (insulineresistentie door spierschade) oplossen, en als je die insuline uit die vergelijking schopt zit je het herstel in de weg waardoor het probleem langer blijft hangen? Lijkt me ook wel een interessante studie.

[3XL]

Belangrijkste punt hierin is dat die enorme bergen snelle koolhydraten die soms na de training worden genomen voor KTrs onzin zijn.

Wat insuline aangat ben ik het met je eens dat meer insuline beter herstel (en dus groei) op kan leveren. Allen neem ik daar zelf geen kh voor maar baser ik m'n post-workout op hydrolisaat.

Heb wel dextrose en vitargo geprobeerd, maar vond de resultaten tegenvallen. Overschakeling op hydrolisaat bracht wel winst.

[GeneralIx]

Zal dan ook eens kijken voor hydrolisaat.

[qbane]

hydrolisaat = whey eiwit hydrolisaat?

[3XL]

Ik heb zelf wei hydrolisaat, maar er is ook caseine hydrolisaat op de markt.

[dynobet]

Ik kwam tericht in dit topic, via een recent topic over chocomel na de training: http://forum.bodynet.nl/dagelijkse-v...uilding-7.html

Sinds kort doe ik aan carb cyclen:

op dagen dat ik train, eet ik vooral rondom mijn training veel koolhydraten en eiwitten. (4000 kcal, 300g eiwit, 500g carbs, 88g vet. dit komt neer op 50%carbs van mijn totale inname aan kcal). Voor training een 100g carbs, en na de training een 150g carbs . andere 250g verdeeld over de rest van de dag.

op dagen dat ik niet train, eet ik wat minder kcal en carbs, en wat meer vetten. (3300 kcal, 300g eiwitten, 300g carbs, 100g vetten). In de ochtend dan flink veel eiwitten en koolhydraten, en de rest van de dag matige hoeveelheid carbs, en wat meer vetten.

Sinds ik dit doe, kom ik veel minder snel aan in vet, en blijf ik aardig droog, en spieren worden een stuk voller (en kracht neemt aardig toe).
-----------------

Voor mij werkt veel carbs en eiwitten rondom de training dus best wel goed. Ik persoonlijk denk dat wanneer je een laag lichaamsvet% hebt, je lichaam beter reageert op koolhydraten. (Dit is denk ik ook de reden waarom ik tijdens mijn ud2 cycle carb loads er steeds beter op reageerde naarmate mijn lichaamsvet% zakte). Ik denk dus dat hoe lager je lichaamsvet% hoe beter je lichaams carbs aankan.

Ik heb ook meermaals gelezen dat creatine de opname van glucose in de spieren verbeterd. en dat azijn dit ook verbeterd. (zou het dus nuttig zijn om deze dingen te supplementeren voor maximaal herstel/spiergroei?)

En als veel koolhydraten rondom je training eten niet goed zou zijn, wat dan wel??? je moet toch ergens je kcal vandaan halen toch? want je moet flink wat kcal rondom je training hebben voor herstel en groei. je moet boven behoefte eten voor spierwinst. Moet je dan juist Meer vetten en eiwitten eten na de training? of enkel nog meer eiwitten, en minder koolhydraten?

Verder vraag ik me ook af wat te veel koolhydraten is. in het artikel hebben ze het over 70% van de dagelijkse kcal inname. dat lijkt me een beetje overdreven. (met 40-50% zit ik al aan 400g-500g, en dat lijkt me echt wel voldoende). Ook hebben ze het steeds over een bepaalde manier van trainen (eccentric contractions cq negatives) waarmee enorm veel schade aan de spieren wordt toegebracht, en dat hierdoor de slechtere reactie op carbs wordt veroorzaakt. (maar dit hoeft dus niet voor alle manieren van trainen te gelden).

hoop deze discussie wat nieuw leven in te blazen. en wat leuke dingen erbij te leren, die ik zelf in de praktijk kan uitproberen/testen.

[GeneralIx]

Laag vp=hogere insulinegevoeligheid (relatief t.o.v. jezelf in dikkere vorm, niet te vergelijken met andere mensen)=betere carbtolerantie. Kan dus kloppen wat je zegt.

Negatieven geeft spierschade--> creatine kinase omhoog--> insulinegevoeligheid omlaag. Denk dat de stijgende creatine kinase niet gerelateerd is aan negatieven, maar aan spierschade. En dan kun je krachttraining gelijkschakelen aan die negatieven.

Overigens is dus volgens die andere studie die ik linkte in de discussie over chocomel, het inderdaad het geval dat je beter hoger in de eiwitten en vetten gaat.

[Brambo19]

Alle topics die de status quo uitdagen vind ik interessant, spijtig dat deze al snel stilviel... Dus bij deze hoop ik opnieuw een discussie aan de gang te krijgen ivm (simpele) koolhydraten na de training. Er is hier de laatste tijd redelijk veel om te doen geweest (carb back loading, pre workout belangrijker dan post workout,...) dus ik denk dat dit topic wel handig zou kunnen zijn.

In mijn ogen de twee belangrijkste redenen waarom zoveel koolhydraten na een training genuttigd worden zijn de aanvulling van glycogeen voorraden en insuline aanmaak.
Nu ik bezig ben aan mijn tweede ketogeen dieet merk ik dat die glycogeen voorraden helemaal niet zo snel leeg geraken... Twee zware trainingen tijdens de week en een depletion training, en nog zijn deze niet helemaal leeg, en dit tijdens een extreem low carb dieet. Het lijkt mij duidelijk dat voor iemand die een normale hoeveelheid carbs eet glycogeen aanvulling geen absolute prioriteit is.
Nu, insuline aanmaak. Iedereen hier weet dat insuline een belangrijk anabool hormoon is, dus een grote hoeveelheid carbs na een trainig zou in dat opzicht erg voordelig zijn. Maar hier duiken twee problemen op. Het eerste is de insuline gevoeligheid. Deze is verhoogd na de training, en dit is positief voor krachtsporters. Het probleem met koolhydraten is dat ze deze insuline gevoeligheid kunnen verminderen, dit maakt post workout carbs nadelig. Een ander probleem is afgifte van groeihormoon. Er bestaat een negatieve correlatie tussen groeihormoon en insuline (wanneer er dus veel insuline wordt aangemaakt, wordt er weinig groeihormoon aagemaakt door het lichaam en vice versa).

Zo, dit is wat ik weet van koolhydraten Het is niet veel en niet erg onderbouwd, maar ik ben geen deskundige en heb ook niet de tijd om referenties op te zoeken.

Dus bij deze, kom even uit het 18+ topic, vergeet gigolo's die hier info vragen over hun derde kuur en zeg even wat jij hiervan vindt en waarom.

[Joshua90]

Interessant maar ook weer klote om te lezen.
Ik had uit andere informatie aangenomen dat bijv. postworkout dex+prot
juist voordelig zou zijn. Nu wordt het weer de grond in geslagen...

[Brambo19]

Interessant maar ook weer klote om te lezen.
Ik had uit andere informatie aangenomen dat bijv. postworkout dex+prot
juist voordelig zou zijn. Nu wordt het weer de grond in geslagen...

Ik zeg niet dat post workout carbs per definitie slecht zouden zijn, dit is enkel wat ik geleerd heb uit enkele artikels en onderzoeken. De meerderheid van onderzoeken blijft aangeven dat carbs+protein als post workout de perfecte combinatie is. Of zoals Lyle McDonald het perfect weergeeft:

Waarbij proteinen zorgen voor meer protein synthesis en carbs protein breakdown voorkomen (adhv insuline).

Toch vraag ik me af of hierbij niet teveel naar de korte termijn wordt gekeken... Op lange termijn is insuline gevoeligheid immers enorm belangrijk, en post workout carbs blijken dit tegen te werken.

Maar zoals ik al zei, dit is enkel wat ik geleerd heb uit artikels die ik heb gelezen. Ben geen deskundige, maar zou wel eens willen weten wat de deskundigen op dit forum hier van denken en hoe zij dit toepassen

[marnop]

Beste is, voor of tijdens de training een lage hoeveelheid carb's te nemen, ik doe zelfs tijdens de training, in de vorm van een mix water en vruchtensap.

Dus de glycogeenvoorraden raken sowieso al niet leeg.
Daarna een grote dosis carbs nemen in welke vorm dan ook heeft totaaal geen nut.
Na de training is de insulinegevoeligheid hoog en de spieren schreeuwen om antikatabolisme en voeding.
Om daar goed op te antwoorden is een mix van hoog in proteïne en een klein beetje KH zeer goed.
In principe zou de KH in de melk van je shake al voldoende zijn, optimaal is een klein schepje dextrose of liever een banaan door de shake heen mixen.

Teveel aan KH nemen voor en tijdens de training heeft ook als nadelig effect dat je geen of zeer weinig vet zal aanspreken tijdens de workout. Een groot teveel kan zelfs nog extra vet doen aanzetten als de intensiteit van de training te laag is.


Ik doe het al jaren zo en zie toch altijd weer dat mijn gains overal vele malen beter zijn dan bij de mensen die geen shakes nemen of alleen KH nemen.

[dynobet]

In mijn ogen de twee belangrijkste redenen waarom zoveel koolhydraten na een training genuttigd worden zijn de aanvulling van glycogeen voorraden en insuline aanmaak. correct.

Nu ik bezig ben aan mijn tweede ketogeen dieet merk ik dat die glycogeen voorraden helemaal niet zo snel leeg geraken... Twee zware trainingen tijdens de week en een depletion training, en nog zijn deze niet helemaal leeg, en dit tijdens een extreem low carb dieet. Het duurt idd veel langer als de meeste mensen denken voor je glycogeen voorraden leeg zijn. Ook dit klopt dus.

Het lijkt mij duidelijk dat voor iemand die een normale hoeveelheid carbs eet glycogeen aanvulling geen absolute prioriteit is. Hier ligt je denkfout. Hoe voller je glycogeen voorraden, hoe anaboler je bent (heeft te maken met de reactie van bepaalde hormomen op glycogeen deplitie). Vandaar ook dat je na een deplitie fase gaat carb loaden (glycogeen supercompensatie). Je bent dan namelijk uber anabool.

Tussen vol en helemaal leeg zit een hele grote kloof. Ookal zijn je glycogeen voorraden na de training nog 70% vol, als ze 100% zijn, ben je het anaboolst. Hoe lager je glycogeen voorraden, hoe kataboler je bent. Glycogeen aanvulling is dus wel erg belangrijk.


Nu, insuline aanmaak. Iedereen hier weet dat insuline een belangrijk anabool hormoon is, dus een grote hoeveelheid carbs na een trainig zou in dat opzicht erg voordelig zijn. Maar hier duiken twee problemen op. Het eerste is de insuline gevoeligheid. Deze is verhoogd na de training, en dit is positief voor krachtsporters.

Insuline is niet alleen een anabool hormoon. Het zorgt er ook voor dat er minder afbraak aan spiermassa is. Proteines zorgen aan de ene kant voor een hogere proteine synthese, terwijl insuline (buiten de transport functie van macros) ook nog de afbraak tegengaat. (je moet meer opbouw als afbraak hebben om winst te boeken. Als de afbraak te groot is ten opzichte van de opbouw, zul je nog steeds netto spiermassa verliezen). Dat is het geval bij lage koolhydraat dieten (bij keto ga je dit tegen door een anabole fase in het dieet. de carbload en de dagen erna fase).

Whole Body Protein Breakdown Is Less Inhibited by Insulin, But Still Responsive to Amino Acid, in Nondiabetic Elderly Subjects -- Guillet et al. 89 (12): 6017 -- Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism


Insuline gevoeligheid is afhankelijk van tig factoren. een belangrijke is je vet%. Hoe lager je vet%, hoe beter je lichaam reageert op insuline (hoge insuline gevoeligheid). Krachttraining bevordert ook je insuline gevoeligheid.

Het probleem met koolhydraten is dat ze deze insuline gevoeligheid kunnen verminderen, dit maakt post workout carbs nadelig. Een ander probleem is afgifte van groeihormoon. Er bestaat een negatieve correlatie tussen groeihormoon en insuline (wanneer er dus veel insuline wordt aangemaakt, wordt er weinig groeihormoon aagemaakt door het lichaam en vice versa).

Regelmatige insuline pieken voor een lange tijd, zorgen ervoor dat je lichaam gewend raakt aan deze pieken. Ik heb een leuke metafoor om dit principe uit te leggen. Stel dat heel hard geluid waarnemen gelijk zou staan aan spiergroei. En dat schreeuwen gelijk zou staan aan insuline.

Als iemand dan in jouw buurt schreeuwt, dan hoor je dat super goed (spieropbouw). Gebeurt dit heel vaak en heel lang, dan zul je dit schreeuwen steeds minder goed waarnemen. je word een beetje doof.


Dit "doof" worden gebeurt echter niet in een paar weken of maanden. zo nu en dan een 6-8 weekjes cutten (minder en minder grote insuline pieken), verbetert je insuline gevoeligheid enorm.


Over groeihormoon weet ik niet veel, maar ik vraag me af of het effect van een iets lagere afgifte van groeihormoon wel zo belangrijk is (vergeleken met de voordelen van koolhydraten bij je ontbijt, Pre en post workout).

Zo, dit is wat ik weet van koolhydraten Het is niet veel en niet erg onderbouwd, maar ik ben geen deskundige en heb ook niet de tijd om referenties op te zoeken.

Dus bij deze, kom even uit het 18+ topic, vergeet gigolo's die hier info vragen over hun derde kuur en zeg even wat jij hiervan vindt en waarom.

Ik persoonlijk hou het tijdens het massa bouwen op een 350-400g carbs per dag (ontbijt, pre workout maaltijd, post workout shake, en post workout maaltijd). De enige twijfel die ik heb, is of de dextro in mijn post workout shake nou echt zo noodzakelijk is. Tot ik ervan overtuigd ben dat het geen meerwaarde levert, blijf ik ook dit nemen.