why is this scientific study irrelevant?

[noahfor]

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11984302

Someone on another forum cited this study as evidence that "protein uptake is accelerated directly after sport. . . ." resulting in a need for a PWO shake immediately after training. What specifically about study makes it irrelevant in this context?

[josh001122]

If I read it correctly it said that the people who had protein after their workout recovered more in the recovery period than the people who had no protein, just hit your macros for the day, you should still have protein after a workout, but it doesn't matter if it's a shake immediately after or food a few hours later. Here's another study on protein saying that it's irrelevant to time it.

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

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.

[justfive]

in all seriousness, how valid is a study where 7 participants agree to do x or y? this is just my personal skepticism in play here and I am certainly not knowledgable enough on this topic to truly understand what makes these studies valid or invalid.

A lot of the studies that I see quoted are based on very small samples and it just strikes me as very possible that studies on body composition etc have so many factors in play which can skew the results. This makes 7 or 13 or 10 participants per group feel like a truly measly sample, and makes me not want to believe the results.

[noahfor]

Thanks a lot. You don't happen to have a link to a study proving why high GI carbs PWO are unnecessary for forcing the body into an anabolic state do you?

[deadlift_405]

If I read it correctly it said that the people who had protein after their workout recovered more in the recovery period than the people who had no protein, just hit your macros for the day, you should still have protein after a workout, but it doesn't matter if it's a shake immediately after or food a few hours later. Here's another study on protein saying that it's irrelevant to time it.

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

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.

very interesting, so therefore consuming an Isolate protein simply for faster absorption post workout is not necessary then?

[josh001122]

very interesting, so therefore consuming an Isolate protein simply for faster absorption post workout is not necessary then?

Nope, just worry about hitting your macros for the day.

http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showth...hp?t=123915821

[Anavation05]

Thanks a lot. You don't happen to have a link to a study proving why high GI carbs PWO are unnecessary for forcing the body into an anabolic state do you?

I would head over to google and search about Mauro Di Pasquale's opinion on this, as he has bascially shows how post-workout carbs can prevent glycogen supercompensation following a significant carb depletion with his Anabolic Diet/Metabolic Diet variants (availiable in the bb.com store). He also wrote one of THE MOST INFLUENTIAL BOOKS ever on the topic of protein with 1500 REFERENCES cited IN-TEXT according to the pertinence of the issue titled "Amino Acids and Protein for the Athlete: The Anabolic Edge," which contains more info about protein than any book I've read on the subject

Also - Brad Pilon who recently released his updated "How Much Protein" e-book contains ridiculous amounts of info about the necessity of protein in the diet, and how our surrogate methods of assessing muscle growth are nothing more than that (substitutes). Since muscle growth is such a tedious process we can only measure things such as increased protein synthesis, nitrogen balance, nutrient partitioning etc., yet Brad shows instances where muscle growth can occur even IN THE ABSENCE OF A POSITIVE NITROGEN BALANCE. I would HIGHLY recommend buying this book since the guy worked in the supplement industry for 10+ years and has a wealth of knowledge on the subject of nutrition where he went to graduate school to specialize in.

Well I think this is enough to keep you busy for a while

[or_yourlivingtodie]

forcing the body into an anabolic state do you?

pm LouB2010, he'll tell you all about keeping your anabolic window open.