Reply
Results 1 to 4 of 4
  1. #1
    INDUSTRY INSIDER WillBrink's Avatar
    Join Date: Oct 2002
    Location: United States
    Posts: 13,942
    Rep Power: 92457
    WillBrink has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) WillBrink has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) WillBrink has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) WillBrink has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) WillBrink has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) WillBrink has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) WillBrink has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) WillBrink has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) WillBrink has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) WillBrink has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) WillBrink has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000)
    WillBrink is offline

    Protein Intakes for Female Physique Athletes (study)

    This is the first study I'm aware of that looked specifically at female physique athletes and the effects of a higher protein intake, and comes from Bill Campbell, PhD lab via the University of South Florida, Performance & Physique Enhancement Laboratory, which I gave a talk at recently (see link below for more info) and presented at conferences. It's interesting to note they found increased LBM with higher protein off season:

    Cliffs: Higher P intakes better than lower for increasing dat muscle mass.

    Effects of a high (2.4 g/kg) vs. low/moderate (1.2 g/kg) protein intake on body composition in aspiring female physique athletes engaging in an 8-week resistance training program

    Bill I. Campbell, Danielle Aguilar, Andres Vargas, Laurin Conlin, Amey Sanders, Paola Fink-Irizarry, Layne Norton, Ross Perry, Ryley McCallum, Matthew R. Wynn, Jack Lenton.

    University of South Florida, Performance & Physique Enhancement Laboratory, Tampa, FL, USA

    Corresponding Author: Bill Campbell; bcampbell@usf.edu

    Background

    Aspiring female physique athletes are often encouraged to ingest relatively high levels of dietary protein in conjunction with their resistance-training programs. However, there is little to no research investigating higher vs. lower protein intakes in this population. The purpose of this investigation was to compare the effects of a high protein diet vs. a low protein diet in resistance trained, aspiring female physique athletes.

    Methods

    17 resistance-trained female subjects (21.2±2.1 years; 165.1±5.1 cm; 61±6.1 kg) participated in this investigation. At baseline and following 8-weeks of a periodized daily undulating resistance-training program (DUP), participants were assessed for body composition (body weight [BW], fat mass [FM], body fat % [BF%], and lean body mass [LBM]). After baseline testing, participants were matched according to total FM and randomized to the high protein group (HP; n = 8) or the low/moderate protein group (LP; n = 9). Participants in the high protein group were instructed to ingest at least 2.4 grams of protein/kg body mass per day and participants in the low protein group were instructed to ingest no more than 1.2 grams of protein/kg body mass. There were no restrictions or guidelines placed on dietary CHO or Fat intake during the study intervention for either group. Body composition was assessed via ultrasound (A mode, 2.5-MHz transmitter). The DUP program consisted of two lower body and two upper body workouts conducted a total of 4 times per week for 8 weeks. Data were analyzed via a 2-factor [2x2] between-subjects repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA). The criterion for significance was set at p ≤ 0.05.

    Results

    No differences existed between the two groups for any body composition measure at baseline. The repeated measures ANOVA revealed a significant group x time interaction for lean body mass (p = 0.009) favoring the high protein group. Specifically, lean body mass increased from 47.1 ± 4.5kg to 49.2 ± 5.4kg and from 48.1 ± 2.7kg to 48.8 ± 2 in the high and low protein groups, respectively. There were no differences between the groups for BW (HP: Pre = 61.2 ± 7.9kg, Post = 62.2 ± 8.2kg, LP: Pre = 61.4 ± 4.4kg, Post = 61.2 ± 4.6kg, p = 0.120); FM (HP: Pre = 14.1 ± 3.6kg, Post = 13.0 ± 3.3kg, LP: Pre = 13.2 ± 3.7kg, Post = 12.5 ± 3.0kg, p = 0.678), or BF% (HP: Pre = 22.7 ± 3.0%, Post = 20.7 ± 3.1%, LP: Pre = 21.4 ± 5.2%, Post = 20.3 ± 3.9%, p = 0.349).

    Conclusions

    In aspiring female physique athletes, it appears as if a higher protein diet (at least 2.4g/kg day) is superior to a lower protein diet in terms of increasing lean body mass in conjunction with a DUP program. It is important to note that these findings were observed during a non-dieting phase of training – equivalent to a physique athlete’s off-season. There does not appear to be any advantages to a higher protein diet in relation to inducing fat loss under the same conditions.


    http://www.brinkzone.com/training-pr...nt-laboratory/
    BrinkZone, Where Bro-Science Got Rabies and Died!

    www.BrinkZone.com

    Check out my BrinkZone mini site on BB.com at:

    www.bodybuilding.com/fun/willbrink.htm

    => President and Founder of Shaved head with goatee Crew
    => Science over bro science Crew
    Reply With Quote

  2. #2
    Do I even lift?!? megdaig's Avatar
    Join Date: Nov 2010
    Location: Houston, Texas, United States
    Posts: 5,495
    Rep Power: 18222
    megdaig is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) megdaig is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) megdaig is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) megdaig is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) megdaig is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) megdaig is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) megdaig is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) megdaig is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) megdaig is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) megdaig is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) megdaig is a splendid one to behold. (+10000)
    megdaig is offline
    Not too surprising since we are talking a difference between 0.5 g/lb versus 1 gram protein per pound of bodyweight. So further supports that the RDA for protein, even for women, is too low for positive body composition.
    Coming out of "retirement"...Meg is training for a Figure competition...again!!!
    http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=171008551&pagenumber=


    My first ever training journal: Oh snap....Meg-O's training for a Figure comp...
    http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=139228463
    Reply With Quote

  3. #3
    INDUSTRY INSIDER WillBrink's Avatar
    Join Date: Oct 2002
    Location: United States
    Posts: 13,942
    Rep Power: 92457
    WillBrink has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) WillBrink has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) WillBrink has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) WillBrink has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) WillBrink has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) WillBrink has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) WillBrink has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) WillBrink has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) WillBrink has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) WillBrink has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) WillBrink has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000)
    WillBrink is offline
    Originally Posted by megdaig View Post
    Not too surprising since we are talking a difference between 0.5 g/lb versus 1 gram protein per pound of bodyweight. So further supports that the RDA for protein, even for women, is too low for positive body composition.
    Agreed, not a surprising finding, but always good to see science based confirmation. It's also the first of it's kind to look specifically at female physique athletes.
    BrinkZone, Where Bro-Science Got Rabies and Died!

    www.BrinkZone.com

    Check out my BrinkZone mini site on BB.com at:

    www.bodybuilding.com/fun/willbrink.htm

    => President and Founder of Shaved head with goatee Crew
    => Science over bro science Crew
    Reply With Quote

  4. #4
    Do I even lift?!? megdaig's Avatar
    Join Date: Nov 2010
    Location: Houston, Texas, United States
    Posts: 5,495
    Rep Power: 18222
    megdaig is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) megdaig is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) megdaig is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) megdaig is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) megdaig is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) megdaig is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) megdaig is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) megdaig is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) megdaig is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) megdaig is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) megdaig is a splendid one to behold. (+10000)
    megdaig is offline
    Originally Posted by WillBrink View Post
    Agreed, not a surprising finding, but always good to see science based confirmation. It's also the first of it's kind to look specifically at female physique athletes.
    I honestly would have preferred to see an isocaloric study done on this. The HP group gained 2 or so odd pounds indicating that they were indeed eating in a surplus yet the LP group actually lost weight and maybe that is why their LBM gains weren't as high as the HP group?
    Coming out of "retirement"...Meg is training for a Figure competition...again!!!
    http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=171008551&pagenumber=


    My first ever training journal: Oh snap....Meg-O's training for a Figure comp...
    http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=139228463
    Reply With Quote

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts