Intermittent Fasting for Strength Training and Fat Loss

[exile-swede]

Read the book, "Nutrient Timing". It's a good book concerning what you're talking about. Also you must understand that one research paper doesn't reflect fact. It also depends on the subjects being researched and a lot of other factors. Humans have not changed since 2001. Neither has the obscene amount of research showing that insulin is the most anabolic hormone in the human body.

http://lib.bioinfo.pl/pmid:12937306

How does that study from 2003, where they infused large amounts of insulin into renal failure patients, prove that "insulin is the most anabolic hormone in the human body"?

Please show me the "obscene amount of research".

[Lawdog1379]

How does that study, where they infused large amounts of insulin into renal failure patients, from 2003 prove that "insulin is the most anabolic hormone in the human body"?

Please show me the "obscene amount of research".

Please show me the onscene amount of research that shows insulin isn't anabolic instead of ONE research paper written by a professor....oh hell I guess I'll just stop right there and ask you a question...

Who were his test subjects?

One thing you've got to understand and you will if you spend a lot of time in the academic community is that the outcome of a particular research paper can be construed many different ways if not properly analyzed in its entirety. Also something that all academic researchers know is that if you have a community with a mass amount of research heading in one direction and someone makes a claim stating otherwise he may or may not be accurate. Odds are he's not.

[DJohnson]

What the heck is going on? Here exile-swede is blowing my mind with the latest research that applies directly to bodybuilding, and people are so close minded they won't even consider it.

How is bodybuilding going to improve if we reject anything new for no good reason?

[Lawdog1379]

What the heck is going on? Here exile-swede is blowing my mind with the latest research that applies directly to bodybuilding, and people are so close minded they won't even consider it.

How is bodybuilding going to improve if we reject anything new for no good reason?

What article? What article did he post in it's entirety?

[Jaydigs1122]

How does that study from 2003, where they infused large amounts of insulin into renal failure patients, prove that "insulin is the most anabolic hormone in the human body"?

Please show me the "obscene amount of research".

I am not getting into this with you nor am I about to spend my time posting research or studies. What you are saying is simply not true.

Just for giggles? What do you think is the most anabolic hormone in the human body?

Let me guess testosterone....? Insulin would be twice as anabolic as NATURAL/FREE testosterone and if you don't know that you need to read better studies and do better research.

[Basil08]

What the heck is going on? Here exile-swede is blowing my mind with the latest research that applies directly to bodybuilding, and people are so close minded they won't even consider it.

How is bodybuilding going to improve if we reject anything new for no good reason?

X2, i'm curious about this as well, rather than dismissing the subject, let us analyze it.

[CF10]

What the heck is going on? Here exile-swede is blowing my mind with the latest research that applies directly to bodybuilding, and people are so close minded they won't even consider it.

How is bodybuilding going to improve if we reject anything new for no good reason?

X2, i'm curious about this as well, rather than dismissing the subject, let us analyze it.

You guys, please, use your heads here. As Lawdog said, any study can be manipulated any way. Let me go find an obscure study about how testosterone isnt anabolic, what you you say to that? What about this, food isnt anabolic...yeah right, right? Well without insulin food isnt anabolic. Chew on that for a while.

I'm all for new things guys but this is common knowledge.

[exile-swede]

Please show me the onscene amount of research that shows insulin isn't anabolic instead of ONE research paper written by a professor....oh hell I guess I'll just stop right there and ask you a question...

Who were his test subjects?

One thing you've got to understand and you will if you spend a lot of time in the academic community is that the outcome of a particular research paper can be construed many different ways if not properly analyzed in its entirety. Also something that all academic researchers know is that if you have a community with a mass amount of research heading in one direction and someone makes a claim stating otherwise he may or may not be accurate. Odds are he's not.

I quoted the abstract of an review of up-to-date studies, made by one of the most prominent researchers on the subject in the world, prof. Michael Rennie:
http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/cisbm/in...?page=1.3.0.21

Don't mix up studies where they infuse insulin with studies measuring the effect of insulin naturally available in the body. In humans, fasting levels of insulin is enough to stimulate maximal anabolic response (in presence of EAA).

http://www.physoc.org/publications/p...0SciencesSA138

http://ep.physoc.org/cgi/content/full/90/4/427

http://ajpendo.physiology.org/cgi/co...ull/291/4/E729

[exile-swede]

This may also be relevant:

"The present study was designed to assess the impact of co-ingestion of various amounts of carbohydrate combined to an ample amount of protein intake on post-exercise muscle protein synthesis rates. Ten healthy, fit men (20?0.3 y) were randomly assigned to 3 cross-over experiments. After 60 min of resistance exercise, subjects consumed 0.3 g?kg-1?h-1 protein hydrolysate with 0, 0.15, or 0.6 g?kg-1?h-1 carbohydrate during a 6 h recovery period (PRO, PRO+LCHO, and PRO+HCHO, respectively). Primed, continuous infusions with L-[ring-13C6]phenylalanine, L-[ring-2H2]tyrosine, and [6,6-2H2]glucose were applied, and blood and muscle samples were collected to assess whole-body protein turnover and glucose kinetics as well as protein fractional synthesis rate (FSR) in the vastus lateralis muscle over 6 h of post-exercise recovery. Plasma insulin responses were significantly greater in PRO+HCHO compared to PRO+LCHO and PRO (18.4?2.9 vs. 3.7?0.5 and 1.5?0.2 U?6h?L-1, respectively: P<0.001). Plasma glucose rate of appearance (Ra) and disappearance (Rd) increased over time in PRO+HCHO and PRO+LCHO but not in PRO. Plasma glucose Ra and Rd were substantially greater in PRO+HCHO vs both PRO and PRO+LCHO (P<0.01). Whole-body protein breakdown, synthesis and oxidation rates, as well as whole-body protein balance did not differ between experiments. Mixed muscle FSR did not differ between treatments and averaged 0.10?0.01, 0.10?0.01 and 0.11?0.01 %?h-1 in the PRO, PRO+LCHO and PRO+HCHO experiments, respectively. In conclusion, co-ingestion of carbohydrate during recovery does not further stimulate post-exercise muscle protein synthesis when ample protein is ingested."

Co-ingestion of carbohydrate with protein does not further augment post-exercise muscle protein synthesis

Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab (July 3, 2007).


Earlier studies showing a synergistic effect of EAA + carbs where made with free EAA, and not intact protein like casein or whey.

[Basil08]

You guys, please, use your heads here. As Lawdog said, any study can be manipulated any way. Let me go find an obscure study about how testosterone isnt anabolic, what you you say to that? What about this, food isnt anabolic...yeah right, right? Well without insulin food isnt anabolic. Chew on that for a while.

I'm all for new things guys but this is common knowledge.

Indeed, good point as well. I have seen some pretty far-fetched studies recently. Especially as of late, they all seem to have the common distinction of horrible placebo groups.

[Sibrek]

Just wondering if anyone NOT being paid (I.e.) 1000+ posts is doing well on this diet?

If my memory serves correctly, our real posters who have tried it being: Aaron, BabyBodyBuilder, and w8isgr8, have all abandoned it.

[Basil08]

Just wondering if anyone NOT being paid (I.e.) 1000+ posts is doing well on this diet?

If my memory serves correctly, our real posters who have tried it being: Aaron, BabyBodyBuilder, and w8isgr8, have all abandoned it.

Me as well. It seems to be correlated with a significant decrease in thyroid function.

[Lawdog1379]

I quoted the abstract of an review of up-to-date studies, made by one of the most prominent researchers on the subject in the world, prof. Michael Rennie:
http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/cisbm/in...?page=1.3.0.21

Don't mix up studies where they infuse insulin with studies measuring the effect of insulin naturally available in the body. In humans, fasting levels of insulin is enough to stimulate maximal anabolic response (in presence of EAA).

http://www.physoc.org/publications/p...0SciencesSA138

http://ep.physoc.org/cgi/content/full/90/4/427

http://ajpendo.physiology.org/cgi/co...ull/291/4/E729

Thanks for the links.

[gjohnson5]

There's nothing "latest" about his research. There is not alot of science on using insulin as an anabolic.
Trust me , that there is not a hormone more anabolic then insulin. I guess the better question is if insulin is NOT the most anabolic hormone then what is?

No need looking any further because insulin is the answer.

There's nothing new or good about that study. I agree more research needs to be done , but that does not answer the question as to why several IF users have retracted the diet saying they were not growing any further.

http://www.ast-ss.com/research/cribb...cle_growth.htm

What Does Insulin Do?

Insulin is a protein peptide hormone (around 50 odd amino acids linked in an exact sequence) secreted by the pancreas. It is secreted in response to ingestion of food. Different foods evoke different blood insulin levels. The job of insulin is to transport/drive nutrients into the cells of all organs in the body, including muscle and body fat. While considerable progress has been made in the understanding of how insulin exerts its affects on muscle, after 75 years of intense research, this is basically all we know! 1,4

It is difficult to determine precisely what effects insulin has on muscle in vivo (within the living body) because it also triggers a cascade of anabolic hormonal activity and other processes that, in turn, promote potent anabolic mechanisms within muscle. Also, the intrinsic biology of insulin and its related growth factors (such as IGF-I) dictates they possess the ability to bind to each other’s cell membrane receptors and that a hybrid of interchangeable IGF/insulin receptors also exist in muscle cells.4

However, it has been well known for a long time that insulin plays a major role in regulation of protein body mass. Prior to its clinical availability, patients with Type I diabetes experienced continuous loss of protein from all tissues until they died. After its introduction it was apparent that treating of these patients with insulin dramatically restored muscle mass.4 Now as we discuss protein and muscle metabolism, it is important to keep in mind that both protein synthesis and degradation proceed simultaneously at all times. And that net protein metabolism (muscle gain or loss) is regulated by a increase/decrease of either or both of these processes.

What the heck is going on? Here exile-swede is blowing my mind with the latest research that applies directly to bodybuilding, and people are so close minded they won't even consider it.

How is bodybuilding going to improve if we reject anything new for no good reason?

[gjohnson5]

No it is not relevant , because the purpose of a 5 meal diet is to keep insulin in the blood during a 24 hour period. The diet is not limited to PWO nutrition.

This may also be relevant:

"The present study was designed to assess the impact of co-ingestion of various amounts of carbohydrate combined to an ample amount of protein intake on post-exercise muscle protein synthesis rates. Ten healthy, fit men (20?0.3 y) were randomly assigned to 3 cross-over experiments. After 60 min of resistance exercise, subjects consumed 0.3 g?kg-1?h-1 protein hydrolysate with 0, 0.15, or 0.6 g?kg-1?h-1 carbohydrate during a 6 h recovery period (PRO, PRO+LCHO, and PRO+HCHO, respectively). Primed, continuous infusions with L-[ring-13C6]phenylalanine, L-[ring-2H2]tyrosine, and [6,6-2H2]glucose were applied, and blood and muscle samples were collected to assess whole-body protein turnover and glucose kinetics as well as protein fractional synthesis rate (FSR) in the vastus lateralis muscle over 6 h of post-exercise recovery. Plasma insulin responses were significantly greater in PRO+HCHO compared to PRO+LCHO and PRO (18.4?2.9 vs. 3.7?0.5 and 1.5?0.2 U?6h?L-1, respectively: P<0.001). Plasma glucose rate of appearance (Ra) and disappearance (Rd) increased over time in PRO+HCHO and PRO+LCHO but not in PRO. Plasma glucose Ra and Rd were substantially greater in PRO+HCHO vs both PRO and PRO+LCHO (P<0.01). Whole-body protein breakdown, synthesis and oxidation rates, as well as whole-body protein balance did not differ between experiments. Mixed muscle FSR did not differ between treatments and averaged 0.10?0.01, 0.10?0.01 and 0.11?0.01 %?h-1 in the PRO, PRO+LCHO and PRO+HCHO experiments, respectively. In conclusion, co-ingestion of carbohydrate during recovery does not further stimulate post-exercise muscle protein synthesis when ample protein is ingested."

Co-ingestion of carbohydrate with protein does not further augment post-exercise muscle protein synthesis

Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab (July 3, 2007).


Earlier studies showing a synergistic effect of EAA + carbs where made with free EAA, and not intact protein like casein or whey.

[Death-Mobile]

I read just about all 80-something pages of this thread and I'm convinced. It makes a lot of sense. I'm going on it tomorrow for a month.

[-Aaron-]

I read just about all 80-something pages of this thread and I'm convinced. It makes a lot of sense. I'm going on it tomorrow for a month.

lol

What's funny is, most of us who supported it, no longer do.

[Death-Mobile]

lol

What's funny is, most of us who supported it, no longer do.

Ha, yea, but that seems to be the people who are afraid of failed progression in their bodybuilding stats. I have some excess weight to lose, and I could use a good detoxification.

[gjohnson5]

Well a diet which limits insulin , IMHO is not good for either fat loss or muscle anabolism. The idea behind blood sugar concentrations and insulin as well as IGF-1 release is to stimulate muscle growth , AS WELL AS, stop protein catabolism.

Since on a fast there is no way to stop protein catabolism, lean body mass should decrease. Since we know insulin causes secretion of several other hormones in response to rising blood sugar levels such as IFG-1 and testosterone, it has been hard to measure exactly what the role of insulin is in terms of anabolism. But we do know what happens when one does without...
When eating a 16/8 style diet , the individual is eating more calories then the body needs at the current time to make up for fasting period. Those calories are stored as fat. Yes the body can absorb more nutrients then normal coming off a fast , but this would need person to person measurements to "draw the line" as to when to stop caloric intake. The excess should be stored as fat. Yes , on an IF diet , you will lose weight. But you will gain fat and lose muscle thus resulting in a net weight loss. This is the worst idea ever in terms of dieting. I don't see how anyone can think it makes sense but they can lose muscle too and post back on here how it was a bad idea.

Insulin will stop muscle loss as well as increase skeletal muscle growth. This in combination with a low calroie diet will help with one to lose fat while maintaining if not gaining lean mass. This is how you drop bodyfat percentage points. You cannot guarantee muscle breakdown on a fast. Eating anything , and I do mean anything , should cause some elevation of blood sugar which should help stop muscle loss

[Death-Mobile]

But if you are 100% correct, then there wouldn't be one positive testimonial from anyone on this diet.

I mean: this is obviously a short term plan and not a way of life. I see dieting the same way as bodybuilding. A change everyone once in a while is a very positive thing. And the science behind this diet seems sufficient enough to to try it as something new. Some people seemed to enjoy it for some extent of the time they were on it.

[gjohnson5]

The problem with your post is that I would have to believe everything that I read on the internet and I would have to believe that what I reading has had genuine results.

Just because someone gives something a "positive testominial" doesn't mean that it makes sense , works , or is even sane.

[Death-Mobile]

The problem with your post is that I would have to believe everything that I read on the internet and I would have to believe that what I reading has had genuine results.

Just because someone gives something a "positive testominial" doesn't mean that it makes sense , works , or is even sane.

Yea, I agree...that does sound gullible now that I read it. I just meant to stress that some unconventional ideas have their place.

[CF10]

The problem with your post is that I would have to believe everything that I read on the internet and I would have to believe that what I reading has had genuine results.

Just because someone gives something a "positive testominial" doesn't mean that it makes sense , works , or is even sane.

Exactly. Case in point, just go to the supplement section and watch how everyone proclaims how great the newest gimick on the market is. Then go back in a month and see how many people who had those great results still use the stuff. I admit I used to fall in that category too though. It's tough. When you try something, whether it be a diet or supplement or routine, you want it to work (especially if it is something as controversial as this diet and you posted about it on here, you wanna defend yourself). So, people will kinda see what they want to see sometimes. I know I did for many gimick supps in the past.

[Death-Mobile]

So this diet is a total bust?

[CF10]

So this diet is a total bust?

No but it is a terrible way to lose fat while maintaining muscle, so it isnt a bodybuilding diet. I always tell my friends who dont workout but just want to lose some weight, that it is cals in vs cals out. They dont care about their muscle mass and they dont want to be cut or ripped, they just wanna drop 5-10 lbs of flab they added by living the typical American lifestyle over the last few months. In that case, I say just eat a little less, add some cardio for a few months, and you will lose your weight. They usually do, and then the process begins again because they are not consistent with it and they go back to the beer drinking and pizza shoveling, then they diet it off in 6 months lol. So if this is you or your goals, cals in vs cals out. If you want some muscle to show up when you get rid of the fat, dont use this.

[Death-Mobile]

Well, I appreciate all the information.

[Basil08]

No but it is a terrible way to lose fat while maintaining muscle, so it isnt a bodybuilding diet. I always tell my friends who dont workout but just want to lose some weight, that it is cals in vs cals out. They dont care about their muscle mass and they dont want to be cut or ripped, they just wanna drop 5-10 lbs of flab they added by living the typical American lifestyle over the last few months. In that case, I say just eat a little less, add some cardio for a few months, and you will lose your weight. They usually do, and then the process begins again because they are not consistent with it and they go back to the beer drinking and pizza shoveling, then they diet it off in 6 months lol. So if this is you or your goals, cals in vs cals out. If you want some muscle to show up when you get rid of the fat, dont use this.

You have earned my respect. Not by one post, but by the continual advice you give, whether it be humble, wise, or scientific. Your here to help others and learn a bit yourself. I respect that.

[CF10]

You have earned my respect. Not by one post, but by the continual advice you give, whether it be humble, wise, or scientific. Your here to help others and learn a bit yourself. I respect that.

Thanks man.

[exile-swede]

There's nothing "latest" about his research. There is not alot of science on using insulin as an anabolic.
Trust me , that there is not a hormone more anabolic then insulin. I guess the better question is if insulin is NOT the most anabolic hormone then what is?

No need looking any further because insulin is the answer.

There's nothing new or good about that study. I agree more research needs to be done , but that does not answer the question as to why several IF users have retracted the diet saying they were not growing any further.

http://www.ast-ss.com/research/cribb...cle_growth.htm

What Does Insulin Do?

Insulin is a protein peptide hormone (around 50 odd amino acids linked in an exact sequence) secreted by the pancreas. It is secreted in response to ingestion of food. Different foods evoke different blood insulin levels. The job of insulin is to transport/drive nutrients into the cells of all organs in the body, including muscle and body fat. While considerable progress has been made in the understanding of how insulin exerts its affects on muscle, after 75 years of intense research, this is basically all we know! 1,4

It is difficult to determine precisely what effects insulin has on muscle in vivo (within the living body) because it also triggers a cascade of anabolic hormonal activity and other processes that, in turn, promote potent anabolic mechanisms within muscle. Also, the intrinsic biology of insulin and its related growth factors (such as IGF-I) dictates they possess the ability to bind to each other?s cell membrane receptors and that a hybrid of interchangeable IGF/insulin receptors also exist in muscle cells.4

However, it has been well known for a long time that insulin plays a major role in regulation of protein body mass. Prior to its clinical availability, patients with Type I diabetes experienced continuous loss of protein from all tissues until they died. After its introduction it was apparent that treating of these patients with insulin dramatically restored muscle mass.4 Now as we discuss protein and muscle metabolism, it is important to keep in mind that both protein synthesis and degradation proceed simultaneously at all times. And that net protein metabolism (muscle gain or loss) is regulated by a increase/decrease of either or both of these processes.

Please don't refer to a supplement selling company (AST) as a reliable scientific source. If it's one industry who has an economical interest in this matter, it's the supplement industry (meal replacements is big business).

I'm not arguing the specific role of insulin in the body. I'm arguing the amounts needed for stimulation of protein synthesis and inhibition of muscle protein degradation.

For stimulation of protein synthesis fasting levels is sufficient:

"it is demonstrated that in healthy humans in the postabsorptive state, insulin does not stimulate muscle protein synthesis" - Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab (May 16, 2006).

"In people, it appears that it is possible to stimulate muscle protein synthesis by supplying exogenous amino acids alone while maintaining (using the insulin clamp techniques) basal blood insulin concentration at the overnight fasted level" - Experimental Physiology. 90.4 pp 427-436; January 2005

... and for inhibiting muscle protein breakdown higher levels are advantageous after physical activity, but not othervise:

"Further, the direct effect of factors on breakdown may depend on the physiological state. For example, local hyperinsulinemia suppresses accelerated muscle protein breakdown after exercise, but not normal resting breakdown." - Int J Sport Nutr Exerc Metab. 2001 Dec;11 Suppl:S164-9.


"Insulin has little effect on protein synthesis in human muscle, but it has a marked inhibitory effect on protein breakdown. The amino acid simulation of anabolism is not dependent on the presence of insulin, IGF-1 (insulin-like growth factor-1) or growth hormone." - Biochem Soc Trans. 2007 Oct;35(Pt 5):1302-5.



This is also relevant:

"Insulin resistance is currently a major health problem. This may be because of a marked decrease in daily physical activity during recent decades combined with constant food abundance. This lifestyle collides with our genome, which was most likely selected in the late Paleolithic era (50,000-10,000 BC) by criteria that favored survival in an environment characterized by fluctuations between periods of feast and famine. The theory of thrifty genes states that these fluctuations are required for optimal metabolic function. We mimicked the fluctuations in eight healthy young men [25.0 +/- 0.1 yr (mean +/- SE); body mass index: 25.7 +/- 0.4 kg/m(2)] by subjecting them to intermittent fasting every second day for 20 h for 15 days. Euglycemic hyperinsulinemic (40 mU.min(-1).m(-2)) clamps were performed before and after the intervention period. Subjects maintained body weight (86.4 +/- 2.3 kg; coefficient of variation: 0.8 +/- 0.1%). Plasma free fatty acid and beta-hydroxybutyrate concentrations were 347 +/- 18 and 0.06 +/- 0.02 mM, respectively, after overnight fast but increased (P < 0.05) to 423 +/- 86 and 0.10 +/- 0.04 mM after 20-h fasting, confirming that the subjects were fasting. Insulin-mediated whole body glucose uptake rates increased from 6.3 +/- 0.6 to 7.3 +/- 0.3 mg.kg(-1).min(-1) (P = 0.03), and insulin-induced inhibition of adipose tissue lipolysis was more prominent after than before the intervention (P = 0.05). After the 20-h fasting periods, plasma adiponectin was increased compared with the basal levels before and after the intervention (5,922 +/- 991 vs. 3,860 +/- 784 ng/ml, P = 0.02). This experiment is the first in humans to show that intermittent fasting increases insulin-mediated glucose uptake rates, and the findings are compatible with the thrifty gene concept."

Effect of intermittent fasting and refeeding on insulin action in healthy men. J Appl Physiol. 2005 Dec;99(6):2128-36. Epub 2005 Jul 28.

So this diet is a total bust?

Not by my opinion.

[exile-swede]

Well a diet which limits insulin , IMHO is not good for either fat loss or muscle anabolism. The idea behind blood sugar concentrations and insulin as well as IGF-1 release is to stimulate muscle growth , AS WELL AS, stop protein catabolism.

Since on a fast there is no way to stop protein catabolism, lean body mass should decrease. Since we know insulin causes secretion of several other hormones in response to rising blood sugar levels such as IFG-1 and testosterone, it has been hard to measure exactly what the role of insulin is in terms of anabolism. But we do know what happens when one does without...
When eating a 16/8 style diet , the individual is eating more calories then the body needs at the current time to make up for fasting period. Those calories are stored as fat. Yes the body can absorb more nutrients then normal coming off a fast , but this would need person to person measurements to "draw the line" as to when to stop caloric intake. The excess should be stored as fat. Yes , on an IF diet , you will lose weight. But you will gain fat and lose muscle thus resulting in a net weight loss. This is the worst idea ever in terms of dieting. I don't see how anyone can think it makes sense but they can lose muscle too and post back on here how it was a bad idea.

Insulin will stop muscle loss as well as increase skeletal muscle growth. This in combination with a low calroie diet will help with one to lose fat while maintaining if not gaining lean mass. This is how you drop bodyfat percentage points. You cannot guarantee muscle breakdown on a fast. Eating anything , and I do mean anything , should cause some elevation of blood sugar which should help stop muscle loss

Short term fasting does not accelerate muscle protein breakdown:

"RESULTS: There were no significant alterations in either the positive or negative regulators of muscle mass at either 15 or 40 h, when compared to gene expression measured 3 h after a meal. ... short-term fasting (40 h) fails to elicit marked alteration of the genes regulating both muscle-specific protein synthesis or atrophy. Greater periods of fasting may be required to initiate coordinated inhibition of myogenic and atrogenic gene expression."

Actions of short-term fasting on human skeletal muscle myogenic and atrogenic gene expression. Ann Nutr Metab. 2006;50(5):476-81. Epub 2006 Aug 24.



The effect is probably mediated by an increase in the serum level of growth hormone during the fast:

"The metabolic response to fasting involves a series of hormonal and metabolic adaptations leading to protein conservation. An increase in the serum level of growth hormone (GH) during fasting has been well substantiated. ... These results demonstrate that GH?possibly by maintenance of circulating concentrations of free IGF-I?is a decisive component of protein conservation during fasting and provide evidence that the underlying mechanism involves a decrease in muscle protein breakdown."

The Protein-Retaining Effects of Growth Hormone During Fasting Involve Inhibition of Muscle-Protein Breakdown. Diabetes 50:96-104, 2001