Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
napsgear
genezapharmateuticals
domestic-supply
puritysourcelabs
UGL OZ
UGFREAK
napsgeargenezapharmateuticals domestic-supplypuritysourcelabsUGL OZUGFREAK

proteins / calories

lilleole

New member
any suggestions on protein intake and what amount of calories for bulking?

I just want to try doing everything correctly for my upcoming cycle..and add as much mass as I can before my midsummercuttercycle

5"9 and 165lbs

I'll be doing
sust @ 500mg 1-10
anadrol @ 50mg 1-4(5) w/arimidex 0.5mg
winstrol 10-14
..
pct with clomid/nolvadex


thanks.
 
You gotta find your personal caloric intake during maintenance...then add about 500-1000 cals per day. keep protein intake at 1g per pound.
 
1gm/lb of body wt would be the absolute min amt of protien. I eat that much when off. When on it's closer to 2 or 2.5gm /lb. I eat about 20 to 25 cals per lb ed. Keep the carbs and fats of good quality, you will grow!
 
Nucman said:
1gm/lb of body wt would be the absolute min amt of protien. I eat that much when off. When on it's closer to 2 or 2.5gm /lb. I eat about 20 to 25 cals per lb ed. Keep the carbs and fats of good quality, you will grow!


Show me ONE shred of evidence that says that ANYONE needs 2g/lb and I'll send you $100...and it can't be "my friend's cousin ate that much, and he's a monster."
 
I just know what works for me and anyone I've helped. My BMR (estimated) cals are about 2750. If I ate 3750 cals a day while on, sure I'd gain weight, but bump that up to 5500 and 450 to 500 gm protein a day, and now I grow like a weed, and my strength goes through the roof.
I don't need your $100, but where exactly would you find evidence to the contrary? Evidence on the most efficacious protein intake while using aas?


Here's 1 website, but evidence? Are there any studies on this?
http://www.elitefitness.com/members/profiles/nutrition.html
Literally, protein is the essential building block of muscle. Without this, you cannot and will not grow, even if you are on a boatload of drugs! As a matter of fact, without sufficient protein you will lose muscle. Strive for a bare minimum of 1 gram of protein per pound of bodyweight each and every day. Most bodybuilders keep protein intake at 2 grams per pound or more.

And you already read:
building the perfect beast suggests bodyweight x 1.818

This taken from http://www.bodybuildingpro.com/proteinbodybuilders3.html
Typically, competitive bodybuilders consume 1.25 - 1.5 grams per pound of bodyweight during the off season. Before competitions, it's not uncommon for a bodybuilder to increase the protein to as much as 1.75 - 2.0 g./lb.

This taken from the second in the series http://www.bodybuildingpro.com/proteinbodybuilders2.html
1. Protein is the only nutrient directly responsible for building muscle.
2. Exercise increases protein needs.
3. The Recommended Daily Allowance (RDA) for protein (.36 grams per pound of body weight) is woefully inadequate if you work out on a regular basis.
4. Studies by the world’s top protein researchers such as Dr. Peter Lemon, have determined that .8 grams per pound of body weight should be your minimum for protein if you exercise regularly (more than double the RDA!)
5. Optimal intakes for hard-training athletes, such as bodybuilders, are still unknown and may be even higher. In one study of Polish weightlifters, 50% of the subjects were still in negative nitrogen balance, even while consuming 250% of the RDA.

2.5 X .36 = .9gms/lb And still in neg nitrogen balance. I don't think that other 1% would put them on the positive side. BB, train to break down the tissues even more than power lifters to have the muscle over compensate and grow bigger. Therefore their protein requirements must be higher. While on, you have more recoverability, so give your body all the protein it needs to rebuild bigger, and stronger. You've been cheating yourself at only 1gm/lb.

All the studies that have been done, at least what I found, have been with "strenous exercise", from tennis to weightlifting. Dr. Peter Lemon recommends .8 to 1gm/lb of body weight for these athletes. Wouldn't you agree, that a BB who works out 5d/wk and on a gm/wk of gear would need more protien than a tennis player, a lot more.

Anothe article, this one from http://www.anabolicextreme.com/archives/anex_archive_issue2_protein.htm
So, how much more protein is required by athletes? Who knows! To be perfectly frank, I don't care about how much protein a tennis player needs, or how much a figure skater needs. I concern myself with the needs of bodybuilders. Bodybuilders have protein requirements far greater than that of any other athlete because their success in the sport is based on breaking down muscle tissue during a workout. During the recovery phase, this muscle tissue is repaired, and hopefully comes back slightly thicker than it was before. This constant tearing down and rebuilding is what causes muscular hypertrophy. In order to ensure that the "factory" has all of the necessary "parts" in order to produce protein, I advocate a protein consumption of 3 gm a day per lb of bodyweight. What?!!! That would mean that a 250 lb bodybuilder would consume somewhere in the range of 750 gm of protein a day. This equates to about 3000 kcals from protein alone on a daily basis for this particular bodybuilder. If you're not prepared to do this, I guess you're not prepared to succeed in bodybuilding

Many people share my view. The fact is that there are few, if any, studies done on BB, consumption of protein, and gear. Let your body be the evidence. Try it, if it works for you great, if it doesn't, you lost nothing but some methane. If you have been eating 1gm/lb for a long time, working up to 1.5 or 2gm/lb should be done over a few weeks. You just might be surprised.
 
I asked for some evidence...not some subjective shit written by people with no scientific background. Anyone can suggest 3g/lb of protein...doesn't make it true. I've read several studies on this matter, and never once have I ever seen anything close to 2g/lb being suggested...The closest I've seen is from the ACSM, American Dietetic Assn., and Dieticians of Canada (2000), who said "resistance and strength trained athletes may be as high as 1.6-1.7g/kg body weight per day."
 
Bulldog_10 said:
I asked for some evidence...not some subjective shit written by people with no scientific background. Anyone can suggest 3g/lb of protein...doesn't make it true. I've read several studies on this matter, and never once have I ever seen anything close to 2g/lb being suggested...The closest I've seen is from the ACSM, American Dietetic Assn., and Dieticians of Canada (2000), who said "resistance and strength trained athletes may be as high as 1.6-1.7g/kg body weight per day."
your my boy and all...and Yes I said boy ;)... but can you show me evidence that consuming 2 grams of protein per lbm would cause a negative effect ? other than "kidney stress"
 
muscleup said:
your my boy and all...and Yes I said boy ;)... but can you show me evidence that consuming 2 grams of protein per lbm would cause a negative effect ? other than "kidney stress"


No.
 
The Terminator said:
For me personally I grow better off 350-400 grams a day than I do at 250 grams/day
(though that could come from sheer caloric increase...not necessarily higher protein consumption...)
you skinny bastard...LMAO...or should I say shredded...shredded is more like it....shredded on pizza everyday...
 
muscleup said:
mmk just wondering


LOL...I was gonna elaborate...but I thought the simple "No." response was a little funnier.

Ok, there may be no real negative effects of eating too much protein, although there have been some thoughts on kidney problems...which make sense considering your kidneys have to excrete all that extra nitrogen in the urine, which causes frequent urination...which could cause dehydration. Dehydration leads to increased sympathetic nervous system activity, this leads to a shift of the "cross-over point," which means that you will burn more carbohydrates than fats at any given exercise intensity. When trying to spare glycogen, this can have negative consequences such as early fatigue and delayed recovery.


I just made that shit up off the top of my head...I'm sure if I did some background research I could find some more shit. Maybe I'll go look if I don't pass out before I get the chance. :coffee:
 
Bulldog_10 said:
LOL...I was gonna elaborate...but I thought the simple "No." response was a little funnier.

Ok, there may be no real negative effects of eating too much protein, although there have been some thoughts on kidney problems...which make sense considering your kidneys have to excrete all that extra nitrogen in the urine, which causes frequent urination...which could cause dehydration. Dehydration leads to increased sympathetic nervous system activity, this leads to a shift of the "cross-over point," which means that you will burn more carbohydrates than fats at any given exercise intensity. When trying to spare glycogen, this can have negative consequences such as early fatigue and delayed recovery.


I just made that shit up off the top of my head...I'm sure if I did some background research I could find some more shit. Maybe I'll go look if I don't pass out before I get the chance. :coffee:
LOL...You fucker you had me going there for a minute...well I drink 1.5 gallons of water per day, and I'm eating close to 500 carbs per day, so glycogen and dehydration I really do not have to worry about...I have wondered about my kidneys though...
 
Bulldog_10 said:
LOL...I was gonna elaborate...but I thought the simple "No." response was a little funnier.

Ok, there may be no real negative effects of eating too much protein, although there have been some thoughts on kidney problems...which make sense considering your kidneys have to excrete all that extra nitrogen in the urine, which causes frequent urination...which could cause dehydration. Dehydration leads to increased sympathetic nervous system activity, this leads to a shift of the "cross-over point," which means that you will burn more carbohydrates than fats at any given exercise intensity. When trying to spare glycogen, this can have negative consequences such as early fatigue and delayed recovery.


I just made that shit up off the top of my head...I'm sure if I did some background research I could find some more shit. Maybe I'll go look if I don't pass out before I get the chance. :coffee:
LOL...You fucker you had me going there for a minute...well I drink 1.5 gallons of water per day, and I'm eating close to 500 carbs per day, so glycogen and dehydration I really do not have to worry about...I have wondered about my kidneys though...
 
muscleup said:
LOL...You fucker you had me going there for a minute...well I drink 1.5 gallons of water per day, and I'm eating close to 500 carbs per day, so glycogen and dehydration I really do not have to worry about...I have wondered about my kidneys though...


I'll see if I can dig anything up for ya. I asked one of my professors about the subject of high protein (he's VERY accomplished in the areas of exercise physiology, nutrition, and the such...he's got 3 degrees in those areas...) and he mentioned kidney problems. If I can't find anything on my own, I'll ask him to elaborate, and maybe point me in the right direction.
 
Bulldog_10 said:
I'll see if I can dig anything up for ya. I asked one of my professors about the subject of high protein (he's VERY accomplished in the areas of exercise physiology, nutrition, and the such...he's got 3 degrees in those areas...) and he mentioned kidney problems. If I can't find anything on my own, I'll ask him to elaborate, and maybe point me in the right direction.
good deal bro
 
Nothing too involved...but it's a start...I'll find more:




Title: Efficacy of nutritional supplements used by athletes.
Author, Editor, Inventor: Beltz-Susan-Durden; Doering-Paul-L {a}
Author Address: {a} Coll. Pharm., Health Sci. Cent., Univ. Fla., P.O. Box 100486, Gainesville, FL 32610-0486, USA
Source: Clinical-Pharmacy. 1993; 12 (12) 900-908.
Publication Year: 1993
Document Type: Literature-Review
ISSN (International Standard Serial Number): 0278-2677
Language: English
Abstract: Findings on the efficacy of nutritional supplements used by athletes are reviewed. Many athletes have turned away from anabolic steroids and toward nutritional supplements in the hope of gaining a competitive edge without threatening their health. Athletes may require slightly more protein than sedentary people do to maintain positive nitrogen balance, but it is dubious whether extra dietary protein will help someone to achieve athletic goals. Purified amino acids have become a popular if expensive form of protein supplementation; there is no scientific evidence, however, to support their use. Excessive protein supplementation can lead to dehydration, gout, liver and kidney damage, calcium loss, and gastrointestinal effects. Supplementation with vitamins and minerals in excess of recommended daily allowances appears to have no effect on muscle mass or athletic performance. Other substances touted as having ergogenic properties are carnitine, cobamamide, growth hormone releasers, octacosanol, and ginseng; again, there is no reliable scientific evidence to support claims that products containing these compounds have ergogenic potential, and heavy supplementation may lead to adverse effects. Nutritional supplements are promoted through unsubstantiated claims by magazine advertisements, health food stores, coaches, and other sources. The FDA considers nutritional supplements to be foodstuffs, not drugs, and therefore has not required that they be proved safe and effective. Dosage guidelines are inadequate, and quality control is poor. The FDA has begun to revise regulations governing labeling and health claims for these products. There is little if any evidence that nutritional supplements have ergogenic effects in athletes consuming a balanced diet, and some products have the potential for harm.
 
This one's about diabetes, but nonetheless it implies that excessive protein intake can have a negative effect on the kidney:



In Database: Biological Abstracts 2000/07-2000/12
Title: Lipids, protein intake, and diabetic nephropathy.
Author, Editor, Inventor: Gin-H {a}; Rigalleau-V; Aparicio-M
Author Address: {a} Service de Nutrition-Diabetologie, Hopital du Haut Leveque, Avenue de Magellan, 33604, Pessac Cedex, France
Source: Diabetes-and-Metabolism. [print] July, 2000; 26 (Supplement 4): 45-53.
Publication Year: 2000
Document Type: Article-
ISSN (International Standard Serial Number): 1262-3636
Language: English
Language of Summary: English; French
Abstract: Progressive impairment of kidney function is one of the major problems in diabetic patients. Control of glycaemia and blood pressure is the main strategy for preventing or slowing impairment in renal function in this condition. However, contributing factors such as hyperlipidaemia and high protein intake have now been identified, and their control can be regarded as a complementary measure. The role of lipid abnormalities and hypercholesterolaemia in the pathogenesis of glomerular injury has been demonstrated in animal models, and a link between hypercholesterolaemia and diabetic nephropathy has been established in humans. To date, few intervention studies in diabetic patients have shown a slower decline in renal function. Nonetheless, in every study in which follow-up was long enough, cholesterol lowering had a beneficial effect on renal function. Although hypercholesterolaemia may not be the cause of renal injury, it represents an aggravating factor. High serum cholesterol seems to have a similar action on glomerular mesangial cells and endothelial cells. This appears to be analogous to the process of atherosclerosis, as mesangial cells possess binding sites for LDL and oxidised LDL, help recruit macrophages and secrete proliferative factors. Protein intake is another factor that can influence renal deterioration. Two meta-analyses have confirmed the beneficial effect of a low-protein diet in diabetic nephropathy, showing no adverse effects on the glycaemic control. Protein intake even seems to enhance the sensitivity of tissues and liver to insulin. Thus, there appear to be no contraindications to such diets in well-controlled diabetic patients. In short, although glycaemic and blood pressure control are still the main lines of treatment for diabetic patients, lowering blood cholesterol and restricting protein intake represent complementary measures that can help slow renal impairment.
 
Bulldog_10 said:
This one's about diabetes, but nonetheless it implies that excessive protein intake can have a negative effect on the kidney:



In Database: Biological Abstracts 2000/07-2000/12
Title: Lipids, protein intake, and diabetic nephropathy.
Author, Editor, Inventor: Gin-H {a}; Rigalleau-V; Aparicio-M
Author Address: {a} Service de Nutrition-Diabetologie, Hopital du Haut Leveque, Avenue de Magellan, 33604, Pessac Cedex, France
Source: Diabetes-and-Metabolism. [print] July, 2000; 26 (Supplement 4): 45-53.
Publication Year: 2000
Document Type: Article-
ISSN (International Standard Serial Number): 1262-3636
Language: English
Language of Summary: English; French
Abstract: Progressive impairment of kidney function is one of the major problems in diabetic patients. Control of glycaemia and blood pressure is the main strategy for preventing or slowing impairment in renal function in this condition. However, contributing factors such as hyperlipidaemia and high protein intake have now been identified, and their control can be regarded as a complementary measure. The role of lipid abnormalities and hypercholesterolaemia in the pathogenesis of glomerular injury has been demonstrated in animal models, and a link between hypercholesterolaemia and diabetic nephropathy has been established in humans. To date, few intervention studies in diabetic patients have shown a slower decline in renal function. Nonetheless, in every study in which follow-up was long enough, cholesterol lowering had a beneficial effect on renal function. Although hypercholesterolaemia may not be the cause of renal injury, it represents an aggravating factor. High serum cholesterol seems to have a similar action on glomerular mesangial cells and endothelial cells. This appears to be analogous to the process of atherosclerosis, as mesangial cells possess binding sites for LDL and oxidised LDL, help recruit macrophages and secrete proliferative factors. Protein intake is another factor that can influence renal deterioration. Two meta-analyses have confirmed the beneficial effect of a low-protein diet in diabetic nephropathy, showing no adverse effects on the glycaemic control. Protein intake even seems to enhance the sensitivity of tissues and liver to insulin. Thus, there appear to be no contraindications to such diets in well-controlled diabetic patients. In short, although glycaemic and blood pressure control are still the main lines of treatment for diabetic patients, lowering blood cholesterol and restricting protein intake represent complementary measures that can help slow renal impairment.
Thanks bro
 
muscleup said:
Thanks bro


LOL...There's more coming...now that you got me started. Here's the last one...I don't want to take up this whole thread...this one is a positive one for you guys:



In Database: Biological Abstracts 1997/01-1997/06
Title: Dietary protein requirements in athletes.
Author, Editor, Inventor: Lemon-Peter-W-R
Author Address: Applied Physiol. Res. Lab., Room 162 MACC Annex, Kent State university, Kent, OH 44242, USA
Source: Journal-of-Nutritional-Biochemistry. 1997; 8 (2) 52-60.
Publication Year: 1997
Document Type: Literature-Review
ISSN (International Standard Serial Number): 0955-2863
Language: English
Abstract: Current dietary protein requirements were determined using essentially sedentary individuals and, therefore, are designed for the general population. Unfortunately, the recommendations from these studies have been applied to athletes as well. Because of the vast differences in daily energy expenditure alone this would seem to be a naive approach. Moreover in recent years, considerable evidence has accumulated on athletes, primarily those involved at each end of the exercise intensity-duration continuum, i.e., strength (weight lifting) to endurance (running, cycling, or swimming), suggesting that dietary protein needs may be greater by as much as 125% in comparison to sedentary individuals. The additional protein may be necessary for use as an auxiliary fuel for endurance exercise and as a supplementary source of amino acids to build and/or maintain the large muscle mass present in those who strength train. In addition, although more speculative, it is possible that other constituents in high quality protein sources, i.e., creatine, conjugated linoleic acid, carnosine, etc. may also be beneficial. Definitive dietary recommendations for various athletic populations must await further study, but the mass of current evidence indicates that individuals involved in strength/power/speed activities may benefit from intakes of about 1.7 to 1.8 g protein cntdot g body mass-1 cntdot day-1 (approximately 112-125% higher than the sedentary recommendation) and those who participate in endurance activities from about 1.2-1.4 g cntdot kg-1 cntdot d-1 (approximately 50 to 75% higher than the sedentary recommendation). Assuming total energy intake is sufficient to cover expenditure, these intakes can be obtained from a diet consisting of about 10% energy intake as protein. Some athletes may not consume this amount of protein, especially those who consume inadequate energy (dieters or those trying to maintain an arbitrary body mass for their activity, i.e., gymnasts, dancers, wrestlers, etc.), those who are growing (children, adolescents, women who are pregnant), or those who select diets which may exclude high quality protein sources (vegetarians and seniors). Despite the common practice of consuming greater amounts of protein (2-4 g cntdot kg-1 cntdot d-1) among strength athletes in particular, few data exist suggesting that this has any further benefit, i.e., there appears to be a ceiling effect. Finally, the concerns expressed routinely about liver or kidney problems with high protein diets have little scientific support; however, the easy accessibility of individual amino acid supplements poses a potentially serious threat because there are likely a variety of confounding interactions and the effects of mega doses of single amino acids are largely untested. Future studies are needed to fine tune these recommendations.
 
Athletes may require slightly more protein than sedentary people do to maintain positive nitrogen balance

Ya think?? Just slightly more? Fucking absurd!

Did you even read that abstract? The only thing it says about protein is :
Excessive protein supplementation can lead to dehydration, gout, liver and kidney damage, calcium loss, and gastrointestinal effects
A totally archaic view point, that there is no data to support in healthy individuals. It talks about "supplements" (vitamins, minerals, amino's, octacosanol, ginseng, etc), not excessive amts of protein. And Nothing about protein requirements while ON?? I don't think your poor example supports your opinion. This one is entitled"Efficacy of nutritional supplements used by athletes" "nutritional supplements", being the key phrase. Pick another study over a decade old.

Really, you gotta be kidding me. You really believe that for a BB, on AAS, the most efficacious dosage of protein.

I asked for some evidence...not some subjective shit written by people with no scientific background. Anyone can suggest 3g/lb of protein...doesn't make it true. I've read several studies on this matter, and never once have I ever seen anything close to 2g/lb being suggested...The closest I've seen is from the ACSM, American Dietetic Assn., and Dieticians of Canada (2000), who said "resistance and strength trained athletes may be as high as 1.6-1.7g/kg body weight per day."

Well subjective it may be, but at least it was on the topic, the "evidence" you submitted has nothing to do with protein. Do you really think that the American Dietetic Assn knows 1 fucking thing about todays BB? How about when that BB is jacked? Their answer "resistance and strength trained athletes may be as high as 1.6-1.7g/kg body weight per day." is not even proof. They made no absolute conclusion. And I think my intensity is way higher than their idea of resistance training. I'm pretty sure they didn't work out at the intensity we do 5 days a week.


The reason why neither me or you can't find any "evidence" is because there have been 0 studies on the protein requirements of BB's juiced to the gills. One can only extrapolate from the available data (yes some were 2nd hand experts of real scientific studies). 1gm of protein will put the heavy duty tennis player within positive nitrogen balance, but not the Polish weightlifters(who care nothing about size, in fact lighter is better in that sport). So even if you used common sense, you could draw a line, assuming you agree that there is a direct relationship between training intensity/muscle breakdown/protein requirements. BB need more protein, especially when on juice.

So you go ahead and follow the American Dietetic Assn's advice on nutritional requirements. I'll follow what has worked for me, and many other's, including pro's. The real proof is in the results in the real world. This is fucking stupid---I'm done
 
Nucman said:
Ya think?? Just slightly more? Fucking absurd!

Did you even read that abstract? The only thing it says about protein is :

A totally archaic view point, that there is no data to support in healthy individuals. It talks about "supplements" (vitamins, minerals, amino's, octacosanol, ginseng, etc), not excessive amts of protein. And Nothing about protein requirements while ON?? I don't think your poor example supports your opinion. This one is entitled"Efficacy of nutritional supplements used by athletes" "nutritional supplements", being the key phrase. Pick another study over a decade old.

Really, you gotta be kidding me. You really believe that for a BB, on AAS, the most efficacious dosage of protein.



Well subjective it may be, but at least it was on the topic, the "evidence" you submitted has nothing to do with protein. Do you really think that the American Dietetic Assn knows 1 fucking thing about todays BB? How about when that BB is jacked? Their answer "resistance and strength trained athletes may be as high as 1.6-1.7g/kg body weight per day." is not even proof. They made no absolute conclusion. And I think my intensity is way higher than their idea of resistance training. I'm pretty sure they didn't work out at the intensity we do 5 days a week.


The reason why neither me or you can't find any "evidence" is because there have been 0 studies on the protein requirements of BB's juiced to the gills. One can only extrapolate from the available data (yes some were 2nd hand experts of real scientific studies). 1gm of protein will put the heavy duty tennis player within positive nitrogen balance, but not the Polish weightlifters(who care nothing about size, in fact lighter is better in that sport). So even if you used common sense, you could draw a line, assuming you agree that there is a direct relationship between training intensity/muscle breakdown/protein requirements. BB need more protein, especially when on juice.

So you go ahead and follow the American Dietetic Assn's advice on nutritional requirements. I'll follow what has worked for me, and many other's, including pro's. The real proof is in the results in the real world. This is fucking stupid---I'm done



Easy killer. The studies I posted had nothing to do with our conversation...I was just posting the fact that many people with advanced degrees seem to think that high protein intake may have an adverse effect on the kidneys...but I guess you would know better than they would.

As for protein requirements...sure 3g/lb will work great, it doesn't mean it's optimal. And maybe people in the studies weren't working at the intensities you do...but at least it's something.

I love how you dismiss the validity of the American Dietetic Association...I'm sure bodybuilders know more about nutrition than thousands of people who have spent decades studying the shit. So go for it, I couldn't care less how much protein you eat...but for those who want to learn...I'm trying to give them another point of view.

I still have yet to see ONE SHRED of evidence that supports any of your claims.
 
From 1996:




Protein intake and muscle mass

AX Bigarda, *

a Unité de bioénergétique, centre de recherches du service de santé des Armées 38702 La Tronche cedex France

Reçu le: 30 Juin 1996; accepté le: 15 Octobre 1996. Available online 26 May 1999.




Abstract
There is a general belief among strength-trained athletes that high-protein intakes have a positive effect on muscle mass accretion and lead to greater strength gains. There is now substantive evidence indicating that protein intakes above the current recommended dietary allowance (0.8 g·kg-1·day-1) are needed to maintain positive nitrogen balance. Restricted energy intake in an attempt to reduce body weight to make a particular weight class, results in increase in protein needs. For strength athletes, protein intakes of 1.6 to 2 g·kg-1·day-1 are close to the optimal requirements for muscle development. There is now experimental evidence that excessive protein intake compared with adequate intake does not result in an increased muscle protein synthesis. Amino acids deriving from excess protein intake are oxidized rather than stored as protein. Thus, there is no data available to date, showing that protein intakes as high as 3-4 g·kg-1·day-1 have positive effects on muscle mass development. Gains in muscle mass are likely influenced not only by the volume and intensity of exercise during training, but also by the hormonal environment of the muscles. It has been hypothesized that amino acid supplements can influence the hormonal milieu during and after strength exercise and promote skeletal muscle anabolism. There is only little scientific evidence supporting the hypothesis that specific amino acid supplements may stimulate growth hormone (GH) release. It is likely that the magnitude of GH production consequent to heavy-resistance exercise might be higher than GH release resulting from amino acid intake. However, carbohydrate-protein supplements can affect the anabolic hormonal milieu after exercise, and are able to stimulate an environment favorable for muscle growth by increasing plasma concentrations of GH and insulin. Thus, while it is important to maintain protein balance during strength training, amino acids consumed in excess do not result in an increased accretion of lean body mass.
 
Top Bottom