Check out this journal!!

[JOHN GARGANI]

sure to be controversial:

Effect of Protein-Supplement Timing on Strength, Power, and Body-Composition Changes in Resistance-Trained Men

Jay R. Hoffman, Nicholas A. Ratamess, Christopher P. Tranchina, Stefanie L. Rashti, Jie Kang, Avery D. Faigenbaum
Full Article Table of Contents for Vol. 19, Iss. 2

Abstract
The effect of 10 wk of protein-supplement timing on strength, power, and body composition was examined in 33 resistance-trained men. Participants were randomly assigned to a protein supplement either provided in the morning and evening (n = 13) or provided immediately before and immediately after workouts (n = 13). In addition, 7 participants agreed to serve as a control group and did not use any protein or other nutritional supplement. During each testing session participants were assessed for strength (one-repetition-maximum [1RM] bench press and squat), power (5 repetitions performed at 80% of 1RM in both the bench press and the squat), and body composition. A significant main effect for all 3 groups in strength improvement was seen in 1RM bench press (120.6 ? 20.5 kg vs. 125.4 ? 16.7 at Week 0 and Week 10 testing, respectively) and 1RM squat (154.5 ? 28.4 kg vs. 169.0 ? 25.5 at Week 0 and Week 10 testing, respectively). However, no significant between-groups interactions were seen in 1RM squat or 1RM bench press. Significant main effects were also seen in both upper and lower body peak and mean power, but no significant differences were seen between groups. No changes in body mass or percent body fat were seen in any of the groups. Results indicate that the time of protein-supplement ingestion in resistance-trained athletes during a 10-wk training program does not provide any added benefit to strength, power, or body-composition changes.

I did a rant on here many moons ago about the anabolic window and how, although there is nothing wrong with it, but that it is overhyped by the Supplement companies, and how Arnold and his boys, as seen in Pumping Iron, would workout, shower and then just go for solid food, usually huge chopped steak thingies, by-passing the "advanced nutritional PWDs", of which they didn't even have back then.....

anyway, this article is sure to create a stir as it shows up in various places.....


what they probably should have said at the end of the abstract was this:

Results FOR OUR PARTICULAR STUDY AND ATHELETES indicate that the time of protein-supplement ingestion in resistance-trained athletes during a 10-wk training program does not provide any added benefit to strength, power, or body-composition changes

[ironwill2008]

I've long suspected that the "anabolic window" was a bit bigger than some folks (protein powder manufacturers?) would have you believe. Since studies supporting either side of just about any topic (and especially nutrition topics) are a dime-a-dozen on the 'netz, I've never bothered to pursue it.

I simply do what everyone else does; I get a shot of protein and carbs within a half hour or so of training, and then a real-food meal an hour or so after that, since I really don't know exactly when that window closes.

It might be interesting to see what this thread dredges up, John. I'd bet it would be really interesting in the NUTrition forum!

[plmb1]

sure to be controversial:





I did a rant on here many moons ago about the anabolic window and how, although there is nothing wrong with it, but that it is overhyped by the Supplement companies, and how Arnold and his boys, as seen in Pumping Iron, would workout, shower and then just go for solid food, usually huge chopped steak thingies, by-passing the "advanced nutritional PWDs", of which they didn't even have back then.....

anyway, this article is sure to create a stir as it shows up in various places.....


what they probably should have said at the end of the abstract was this:

I have never thought that any one meal is more important than another..........all my meals are important to me.........

great read.......thanks....

[LogPressing]

Thanks for the info.

[dbx]

sure to be controversial:

I did a rant on here many moons ago about the anabolic window

And I likely joined in, agreeing . I've read a few good articles in the past 2yrs that pretty much destroy the window myth. It's really nothing new, as much as many just haven't heard about them. And of course, myths take forever to be finally broken, as they're continually handed down. Unfortunately, I lost some good ones I had bookmarked, but do have this one: http://www.tmuscle.com/free_online_a...E37C9C6D.hydra

See "Myth" #4 (and even #3 addresses it to some extent).

[BuckSpin]

In that I do practice & believe in nutrient timing, I'll offer these study summaries that argue the contrary:

http://www.nsca-lift.org/HotTopic/do...t%20Timing.pdf

Excerpt (actual studies indexed at end of article):

"In perhaps one of the more elegant studies in the literature, scientists examined the effects of supplement timing compared with supplementation in the hours not close to the workout on muscle-fiber hypertrophy, strength, and body composition during a 10 week resistance exercise (RE) program. In a single-blind, randomized protocol, resistance trained males were matched for strength and placed into one of two groups; the PRE-POST (pre-workout and postworkout) group consumed a supplement (1 g x kg(-1) body weight) containing protein/creatine/glucose immediately before and after RE. The morning and evening (MOR-EVE) group consumed the same dose of the same supplement in the morning and late evening. All assessments were completed the week before and after 10 weeks of structured, supervised RE training. The results indicated that the PRE-POST treatment demonstrated a significantly greater increase in lean body mass and 1-RM strength in two of three exercises. The changes in body composition were supported by a significantly greater increase in size of the type II fibers (fast-twitch) and contractile protein content (7). This study confirms the notion that the timing of your nutrient intake does indeed greatly impact the adaptive response even when compared to the isocaloric and isonitrogenous consumption of the same nutrients."

In short, it may not work for you, but it sure as #@!! has worked wonders for me & I can only offer my own experiences, update pics & journal entries to that extent as proof.

I would be very hesitant to blanket statement that there is no "anabolic window".

[Nikonguy]

And I likely joined in, agreeing . I've read a few good articles in the past 2yrs that pretty much destroy the window myth. It's really nothing new, as much as many just haven't heard about them. And of course, myths take forever to be finally broken, as they're continually handed down. Unfortunately, I lost some good ones I had bookmarked, but do have this one: http://www.tmuscle.com/free_online_a...E37C9C6D.hydra

See "Myth" #4 (and even #3 addresses it to some extent).

An outstanding article, though I got distracted right after finishing #4. Were there other myths after that?

Ahem, back on topic: This bodybuilding issue, like so many others, appears to require individual adjustment. If I were observing a particular timetable for eating before and after workouts and I was getting measureable gains I'd be hesitant to change it much.

[Do_Somethin]

In that I do practice & believe in nutrient timing, I'll offer these study summaries that argue the contrary:

http://www.nsca-lift.org/HotTopic/do...t%20Timing.pdf

Excerpt (actual studies indexed at end of article):

"In perhaps one of the more elegant studies in the literature, scientists examined the effects of supplement timing compared with supplementation in the hours not close to the workout on muscle-fiber hypertrophy, strength, and body composition during a 10 week resistance exercise (RE) program. In a single-blind, randomized protocol, resistance trained males were matched for strength and placed into one of two groups; the PRE-POST (pre-workout and postworkout) group consumed a supplement (1 g x kg(-1) body weight) containing protein/creatine/glucose immediately before and after RE. The morning and evening (MOR-EVE) group consumed the same dose of the same supplement in the morning and late evening. All assessments were completed the week before and after 10 weeks of structured, supervised RE training. The results indicated that the PRE-POST treatment demonstrated a significantly greater increase in lean body mass and 1-RM strength in two of three exercises. The changes in body composition were supported by a significantly greater increase in size of the type II fibers (fast-twitch) and contractile protein content (7). This study confirms the notion that the timing of your nutrient intake does indeed greatly impact the adaptive response even when compared to the isocaloric and isonitrogenous consumption of the same nutrients."

In short, it may not work for you, but it sure as #@!! has worked wonders for me & I can only offer my own experiences, update pics & journal entries to that extent as proof.

I would be very hesitant to blanket statement that there is no "anabolic window".

Often my schedule leaves me with post-workout as the most convenient time for me to consume protein. I also get hungry very quickly if I don't which will also have a detrimental effect on my concentration doing tasks/duties post-workout not too mention catabolism. I also have to eat/consume calories anyway so why not?
In short, the anabolic window works for me.

[dbx]

Ahem, back on topic: This bodybuilding issue, like so many others, appears to require individual adjustment. If I were observing a particular timetable for eating before and after workouts and I was measureable gains I'd be hesitant to change it much.

I believe it's really just another case of "either way you decide to go, any difference is negligible", for the most part. And while I don't concern myself with this "window", I follow a routine that has me covered as if I did . And I also believe that subsequent meals over the course of up to 48hrs after a workout are perhaps even more important in recovery and growth.

I don't see this as much different than the "fasted cardio vs non-fasted" argument, as any actual difference doing either is negligible, if even measurable. People just don't need to obsess over these things.

[JOHN GARGANI]

as I said, it sparks conversation......


here is how I look at it: since muscle recovery occurs for a good 48 hours after a good workout, then, why not down a shake PW??

I look at it as simply another parcel of nutrition to begin the compensation and recovery period of time......

however: on occasions where I workout in late afternoon, I hold back on the drink, and then just have dinner and hour or hour and a half later, consisting of the usual solid food......

Wherever downing the drink "fits in" , I most certainly do it.....

[gbg]

I'm no expert when it comes to this but I don't think it's that important all, what is however is your OVERALL consumption of food.
A post w/o shake in comparison is minute. IMO of course.

[timberwolf]

I'm no expert when it comes to this but I don't think it's that important all, what is however is your OVERALL consumption of food.
A post w/o shake in comparison is minute. IMO of course.

This.
I will add that what may be statistically insignificant to someone at maintenance calories, maybe significant to someone in precontest preparation. But that's just speculation.

[Do_Somethin]

This.
I will add that what may be statistically insignificant to someone at maintenance calories, maybe significant to someone in precontest preparation. But that's just speculation.

Why do you say that?

[Marius_Ursus]

It's hard to make a judgement on any conclusion in a study like that without knowing what the pre-workout nutrition and off-day nutrition is like, too. Looking strictly at how the GLUT-4 molecule in the muscles are activated to a greater extent than fat cells' GLUT-4, it would seem that eating anything pre-workout would get sucked up into the muscle cells just the same as in the touted "anabolic window".

Numbers don't mean a whole lot without context.

[BuckSpin]

Wherever downing the drink "fits in" , I most certainly do it.....

To confirm:

You are saying that "the drink" itself is the key & not when it is consumed?

And just a quick observation:

A number of replies eschew the overall nutrition as most important. The issue presented for debate/discussion was the utilization of certain macro-nutritional ratios before and (from what I've read) 30-60 minutes post training. This is not a discussion on what to eat 24/7.

[BuckSpin]

I'll throw this out as a comparison & something to think about:

Let's view, for the sake of this argument, an entire training session as a set of warm-ups, if you will:

Imagine doing warm-ups to squat, deadlift, etc. You start light & slowly add weight as one pyramid's up to what will be working set(s). You spend all that time getting your body primed & ready to work very, very hard for a short "window" of time.

Now, instead of doing your working sets at that moment when you are all warmed up & have "opened that window" via warm-ups......go wait an hour, or wait until later that day, or even that evening. Now attempt those working sets.

Do you believe, after waiting all that time, you would be able to do them to the fullest of your capabilities? Would you walk up cold to a bar loaded heavy with plates & do full working sets?

If not, then why think that the body's ability to absorb nutrition would be the same in the evening than it would be immediately after "warming up" your metabolism via training earlier?

[gbg]

To confirm:

You are saying that "the drink" itself is the key & not when it is consumed?

And just a quick observation:

A number of replies eschew the overall nutrition as most important. The issue presented for debate/discussion was the utilization of certain macro-nutritional ratios before and (from what I've read) 30-60 minutes post training. This is not a discussion on what to eat 24/7.

I was just stating that the in big picture, the overall scheme of things what's most important is your general food consumption.
This, IMO is an important observation in comparison, why oh why it is, has been and will be discussed over and over is beyond me.

Eat big lift hard! it's not brain science.

[BuckSpin]

I was just stating that the in big picture, the overall scheme of things what's most important is your general food consumption. This, IMO is an important observation in comparison, why oh why it is, has been and will be discussed over and over is beyond me.

Eat big lift hard! it's not brain science.

Oh, I agree that the big picture is very important & cannot be ignored/overlooked. I get all kind of funny looks as I lug my lil' red insulated lunch box around and eat what I do when I do & where I am (oh MAN have I eaten in some funny places...great way to embarass a 16 year old son! LOL)

I just noticed that it seemed to me that a number of respondants kinda danced around the main issue via this route, but as Bill says "You can't out-train bad nutrition".

I even don't subscribe to what is typical SOP for a pre/post WO shake in that I just cannot bring myself to ingest 100% whatever-dose/trose that is basically 100% "sugar" and has 0% nutritional value, hence my use of sweet potatoes.

And yes, it really is as easy as "Eat, Lift, Sleep, Repeat"....100% agree.

[gbg]

Oh, I agree that the big picture is very important & cannot be ignored/overlooked. I get all kind of funny looks as I lug my lil' red insulated lunch box around and eat what I do when I do & where I am (oh MAN have I eaten in some funny places...great way to embarass a 16 year old son! LOL)

I just noticed that it seemed to me that a number of respondants kinda danced around the main issue via this route, but as Bill says "You can't out-train bad nutrition".

I even don't subscribe to what is typical SOP for a pre/post WO shake in that I just cannot bring myself to ingest 100% whatever-dose/trose that is basically 100% "sugar" and has 0% nutritional value, hence my use of sweet potatoes.

And yes, it really is as easy as "Eat, Lift, Sleep, Repeat"....100% agree.

Could be because it's been discussed into the ground

[timberwolf]

Why do you say that?

What's necessary to take a person from 15% to even 10% bodyfat with minimum lean mass sacrificed may not be the same steps needed to take them from 8% to 3%.

[Nikonguy]

I believe it's really just another case of "either way you decide to go, any difference is negligible", for the most part. And while I don't concern myself with this "window", I follow a routine that has me covered as if I did . And I also believe that subsequent meals over the course of up to 48hrs after a workout are perhaps even more important in recovery and growth.

I think this is where a lot of people (like me) screw up. Too much emphasis on immediate post workout nutrition.

[Jill75]

I have never thought that any one meal is more important than another..........all my meals are important to me.........

great read.......thanks....

Same here with me. Why focus on only one meal.

[snorkelman]

John, interesting post, but it doesn't appear if anyone actually read the study itself (rather than just the abstract that you posted).

The first question that popped in my head when I read the abstract was whether the diets were controlled because if not, then it really is a major weakness. I confess that I haven't had the time to read the actual study myself.

But, imagine a control group eating more protein (or even just adequate) during the day...that could explain the non-impact of the post workout protein intake.

Also, since pre-workout nutrient intake often has a lingering carry-over effect into the during- and post-exercise period, that diminishes the significance of post workout timing precision. That being said, let's not forget that all research indicating the benefit of quickly absorbed post workout substrates was done on subjects who were overnight fasted AND glycogen-depleted AND devoid of any pre-workout substrates, which is probably not the case for many athletes or even us.