Arachidonic Acid (X-Factor) and fat loss

[SwolenONE]

William Llewellyn explains why X-Factor (Arachidonic acid) is great for fat loss in this concise article:

http://williamllewellyn.com/?p=420

[arseniclife1970]

This supplement is utter crap and some of it's stakeholders still keep trying to pimp it as the holy grail. This is the supplement science section so don't extrapolate irrelevant in-vitro studies for marketing purposes.

There is real clinical evidence that you worthless supplement promoters ignore everytime; namely the human clinical trial that shows NO effect on muscle mass, fat mass or body fat %.

No significant group × time interaction changes were observed among groups in body mass (P = 0.31), fat free mass (P = 0.71), fat mass (P = 0.22), percent body fat (P = 0.43)

Now get your worthless study to the promotion section where it belongs.

[chromaffin]

How about you link the full text rather than some horse**** summary

[acecombact1]

I have a log on X-facor somewhere here from back 2006 when it first came out. I got modest results. But the study here points out that ArA only lowered inflmation at 1g/day for 50 days. Seems like an expensive fish oil!!

----------------------------------

Effects of arachidonic acid supplementation on training adaptations in resistance-trained males

Received October 15, 2007; Accepted November 28, 2007.
Copyright © 2007 Roberts et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Go to:Abstract.Background
To determine the impact of AA supplementation during resistance training on body composition, training adaptations, and markers of muscle hypertrophy in resistance-trained males.

Methods
In a randomized and double blind manner, 31 resistance-trained male subjects (22.1 ± 5.0 years, 180 ± 0.1 cm, 86.1 ± 13.0 kg, 18.1 ± 6.4% body fat) ingested either a placebo (PLA: 1 g·day-1 corn oil, n = 16) or AA (AA: 1 g·day-1 AA, n = 15) while participating in a standardized 4 day·week-1 resistance training regimen. Fasting blood samples, body composition, bench press one-repetition maximum (1RM), leg press 1RM and Wingate anaerobic capacity sprint tests were completed after 0, 25, and 50 days of supplementation. Percutaneous muscle biopsies were taken from the vastus lateralis on days 0 and 50.

Results
Wingate relative peak power was significantly greater after 50 days of supplementation while the inflammatory cytokine IL-6 was significantly lower after 25 days of supplementation in the AA group. PGE2 levels tended to be greater in the AA group. However, no statistically significant differences were observed between groups in body composition, strength, anabolic and catabolic hormones, or markers of muscle hypertrophy (i.e. total protein content or MHC type I, IIa, and IIx protein content) and other intramuscular markers (i.e. FP and EP3 receptor density or MHC type I, IIa, and IIx mRNA expression).

Conclusion
AA supplementation during resistance-training may enhance anaerobic capacity and lessen the inflammatory response to training. However, AA supplementation did not promote statistically greater gains in strength, muscle mass, or influence markers of muscle hypertrophy.

[acecombact1]

There is also a corolation between amount of ArA in fat tissue and insulin resistance:

Arachidonic acid content in adipose tissue is associated with insulin resistance in healthy children.
Aldámiz-Echevarría L, Prieto JA, Andrade F, Elorz J, Sanjurjo P, Rodríguez Soriano J.
SourceDivision of Metabolism, Department of Pediatrics, Cruces Hospital and Basque University School of Medicine, Bilbao, Spain. kaldamiz@hcru.osakidetza.net

Abstract
BACKGROUND: The fatty acid composition of membrane structural lipids, which is partly dependent on dietary intake, is associated with insulin action.

AIM: To examine the association between fatty acid composition of adipose tissue and skeletal muscle phospholipids with insulin resistance markers in a healthy pediatric population.

METHODS: Using a cross-sectional design, we studied 83 healthy children divided into 3 groups, ages 2 to 5, 6 to 10 and more than 10 years.

MEASUREMENTS: Fatty acid composition of adipose tissue triacylglycerols and skeletal muscle phospholipids, plasma lipid profile and fasting plasma levels of glucose and insulin were measured.

RESULTS: There was a linear increase of insulinemia, glycemia and homeostasis adipose tissue model assessment (HOMA) index throughout the pediatric age range. Linoleic acid proportion in skeletal muscle and arachidonic acid proportion in adipose tissue also increased significantly with age. An age-independent positive correlation between insulinemia or HOMA index and arachidonic acid content in adipose tissue triacylglycerols (r = 0.47, P < 0.001) was found. An age-dependent negative correlation was present between insulinemia or HOMA index and oleic acid content in skeletal muscle phospholipids (r = -0.30, P = 0.03 and r = -0.28, P < 0.04, respectively). Trans fatty acids content did not correlate with any marker of insulin resistance.

CONCLUSION: Healthy children present a prepubertal increase of insulin resistance, which is significantly correlated with arachidonic acid content in adipose tissue.

[StrongRepublican]

I have a log on X-facor somewhere here from back 2006 when it first came out. I got modest results. But the study here points out that ArA only lowered inflmation at 1g/day for 50 days. Seems like an expensive fish oil!!

Correct me if I am wrong, but I was under the impression that ArA actually acted as an inflammatory rather than an anti-inflammatory. Hence, the supplementation of fish oil and other anit-inflammatory products is discouraged while taking ArA.

[SwolenONE]

Theoretically (in resistance training individuals), ArA decreases systemic inflammation hence the lack of cardiovascular side effects and the localized increased in inflammation is one of the proposed mechanisms of promoting hypertrophy.

[acecombact1]

Correct me if I am wrong, but I was under the impression that ArA actually acted as an inflammatory rather than an anti-inflammatory. Hence, the supplementation of fish oil and other anit-inflammatory products is discouraged while taking ArA.

Yes in theory, ArA converts prostaglandin PGF2alpha, which is pro-inflamatory. However in the study they found a slight increase in PGF2alpha, and reduction in inflammatory cytokine IL-6!!!


Not clear, but the take home message is that ArA didnt do much in terms of muscle gains

[SwolenONE]

Yes in theory, ArA converts prostaglandin PGF2alpha, which is pro-inflamatory. However in the study they found a slight increase in PGF2alpha, and reduction in inflammatory cytokine IL-6!!!


Not clear, but the take home message is that ArA didnt do much in terms of muscle gains

From Bill:

The ARA groups did better on all performance measures during that study. Peak Power was a statistically significant finding. Bench press 1RM max, average power, and endurance were all higher in the ARA group as well, but the small groups and individual variability didn't provide enough power to reach statistical significance. It is an excellent pilot study, but more refined studies are needed to expand on the findings.

[acecombact1]

From Bill:

The ARA groups did better on all performance measures during that study. Peak Power was a statistically significant finding. Bench press 1RM max, average power, and endurance were all higher in the ARA group as well, but the small groups and individual variability didn't provide enough power to reach statistical significance. It is an excellent pilot study, but more refined studies are needed to expand on the findings.

I dont want to argue. The study doesnt indacte an increase in muscle mass, but a slight increase in power peak (8%) after 50 days.
It is unlikely that ArA aids fat loss since insulin resistance, significantly correlated with arachidonic acid content in adipose tissue.
Back to the original topic.From that you can see it actualy does the opposite of that

[REALDEAL012]

I dont want to argue. The study doesnt indacte an increase in muscle mass, but a slight increase in power peak (8%) after 50 days.
It is unlikely that ArA aids fat loss since insulin resistance, significantly correlated with arachidonic acid content in adipose tissue.
Back to the original topic.From that you can see it actualy does the opposite of that

Who gives a sh!t what paper says.. Many users, including myself, have seen great results from this great product. If you choose not to supplement with it, so be it.. But you don't see me making heinous threads about Muscletech Cell Tech as a terrible creatine product.. Nobody gives a sh!t about your opinion.

[SwolenONE]

Who gives a sh!t what paper says.. Many users, including myself, have seen great results from this great product. If you choose not to supplement with it, so be it.. But you don't see me making heinous threads about Muscletech Cell Tech as a terrible creatine product.. Nobody gives a sh!t about your opinion.

Well said, solid scientific data coupled with unparalleled decade long anecdotal feedback makes X-Factor an easy choice and a purchase that will never be regretted.

[acecombact1]

Who gives a sh!t what paper says.. Many users, including myself, have seen great results from this great product. If you choose not to supplement with it, so be it.. But you don't see me making heinous threads about Muscletech Cell Tech as a terrible creatine product.. Nobody gives a sh!t about your opinion.

Fair enough, you dont give a damn about my opinion, but im pretty sure many others do. Placebo is one hell of a drug. Your not the only one who tried this product. I have tried the product way back in 2006 (i have a log on this forum) when it first came out also, and i have an opinion that may not agree with yours.

I agree that every study has its flaws. One study dont have much weight if its not replicated. But at the end, double blind peer reviwed studies hold more water than a subjective non-controlled user feedback (especially, like a users with IQ)

[itzDodge]

Yes in theory, ArA converts prostaglandin PGF2alpha, which is pro-inflamatory. However in the study they found a slight increase in PGF2alpha, and reduction in inflammatory cytokine IL-6!!!


Not clear, but the take home message is that ArA didnt do much in terms of muscle gains

http://ukpmc.ac.uk/abstract/MED/8218594
http://ukpmc.ac.uk/abstract/MED/11753584
http://www.jappl.org/content/98/3/911.short

[chromaffin]

Theoretically (in resistance training individuals), ArA decreases systemic inflammation hence the lack of cardiovascular side effects and the localized increased in inflammation is one of the proposed mechanisms of promoting hypertrophy.

From Bill:

The ARA groups did better on all performance measures during that study. Peak Power was a statistically significant finding. Bench press 1RM max, average power, and endurance were all higher in the ARA group as well, but the small groups and individual variability didn't provide enough power to reach statistical significance. It is an excellent pilot study, but more refined studies are needed to expand on the findings.

Why didn't you preface your first post with "From Bill:"

It's quite obvious that sentence didn't spawn from your feeble mind

I am still waiting for the full text

[w_llewellyn]

There has only been one pilot performance study on ARA thus far. The data was very good even with the small group sizes, with statistically strong (peak power) and statistically significant (bench press 1-RM, average power, endurance) findings on the performance measures. But still, it's just that; a single pilot study. We definitely need more studies on this supplement.

[w_llewellyn]

BTW - Swolen definitely didn't cut and paste that from me. I would have split that into two sentences.. It's a "run-on".

[NO HYPE]

The data was very good even with the small group sizes, with statistically strong (peak power) and statistically significant (bench press 1-RM, average power, endurance) findings on the performance measures. But still, it's just that; a single pilot study. We definitely need more studies on this supplement.

The only significant performance effect observed was in the Wingate peak power test however, there was no 'statistical' degree of significance [P = 0.02]. And in terms of 1RM bench press/leg press --> there was no significant changes between groups, nor was there in body mass, fat free mass, fat mass, body fat percentage, or training volume at the conclusion of the 50-day supplementation protocol.

More importantly, I'm wondering if any potential gains were actually hindered by AA supplementation, as significantly depleted total muscle protein concentrations were observed in the AA group upon conclusion.

[itzDodge]

The only significant performance effect observed was in the Wingate peak power test however, there was no 'statistical' degree of significance [P = 0.02]. And in terms of 1RM bench press/leg press --> there was no significant changes between groups, nor was there in body mass, fat free mass, fat mass, body fat percentage, or training volume at the conclusion of the 50-day supplementation protocol.

More importantly, I'm wondering if any potential gains were actually hindered by AA supplementation, as significantly depleted total muscle protein concentrations were observed in the AA group upon conclusion.

You missed a phenylP thread amigo

[w_llewellyn]

I am sure we agree NOHYPE - this study is not conclusive and we need much more investigation into ARA before drawing conclusions, at least from a clinical perspective. No ingredient should rest on one single study anyway. I do, however, want to point out the statistically strong trends that were found in the study. The following statement was from the abstract presented at the 2006 ISSN conference. They did not report statistically strong findings in the final paper, for obvious reasons (credible studies rarely emphasize statistical trends).

Statistical trends were seen in bench press 1RM (AA: 11.0 ± 6.2; P: 8.0 ± 8.0 kg, p=0.20), Wingate average power (AA:37.9 ± 10.0; P: 17.0 ± 24.0 W, p=0.16), and Wingate total work (AA: 1292 ± 1206; P:510 ± 1249 J, p=0.087). A significant group x time interaction effect was observed in Wingate relative peak power (AA: 1.2 ± 0.5; P: -0.2 ± 0.2 W•kg-1, p=0.015). In conclusion, AA supplementation during resistance-training promoted significant increases in relative peak power with other performance related variables approaching significance. These findings provide some preliminary evidence to support the use of AA as an ergogenic
aid.

[w_llewellyn]

I just want to add, if anyone wants to see how difficult it can be to refine clinical studies and prove statistically significant associations, just took at the early creatine studies. Many of them failed to find anything of significance; sometimes they were some statistically strong findings only. Yet look where we are today. There are more than 100 clinical studies on creatine. Its validity is beyond question.

I'm just saying, ARA has only had ONE clinical study behind it. ONE. To find ANY statistically significant performance improvement in the first small group clinical study on an ingredient is something to be excited about. Clearly, we are far from the body of evidence found on creatine. But you have to start somewhere. I believe like creatine was in its early stages, we see enough in the results and early data on ARA to believe this could be an ingredient of clinical significance, and one that is begging for further study.

[joregorn]

Bump

Why?

[DiabeticLifter]

Why?

Lol, now you look like a douche

[joregorn]

Lol, now you look like a douche

lold indeed

[ausfitt]

Hey I too am a user of the Fat loss Factor and can say so far so good. If you stick with the program it will work and I actually find this program quite easy to follow compared to others I have tried. Here is a user review I found of ebooksfitness.com/fat-loss-factor.html