New study finds no difference between consuming a protein shake pre or post workout

[TMac26]

These guys must live on a protein clock

I would place money he has an alarm set to eat. Most pro videos I've seen, they do the same.



Except for Max Charles. He's just weird.

[Rushie]

Agreed. And now we have more certainty.

How can you have more certainty? It's either certain or its not.

Anyway, results from meta analysis are nice and all but are just another pebble in the mosaic. They are hardly something to take at face value. Even all of Aragon's conclusions always come to "may", "possibly", etc.

I guess that is my one major pet peeve, some people taking results like this as gospel when in reality it's impossible to know how valid they really are. Any meta analysis of potentially crappy, biased studies (even double blind studies can apparently be biased and poorly set up) is potentially crappy and biased in itself. I'm pretty sure if Aragon et al. went to look at individual studies included in the meta-analysis, they could find flaws in each and every one of them.

Also, if it hasn't been studied or studies haven't provided proof that it is so, it doesn't necessarily mean that it really isn't so IMO. I know people want certainty (especially in this mad world of supplementation) but I'm pretty sure that is (close to) an impossibility.

[Mrpb]

How can you have more certainty? It's either certain or its not.

Now we have 1 study that investigated it in well trained individuals. That's more certainty than 0 studies offer

Anyway, results from meta analysis are nice and all but are just another pebble in the mosaic.

This was an actual study, not a meta analysis.

I know people want certainty (especially in this mad world of supplementation) but I'm pretty sure that is (close to) an impossibility.

Agreed.

[snorkelman]

How can you have more certainty? It's either certain or its not.

Anyway, results from meta analysis are nice and all but are just another pebble in the mosaic. They are hardly something to take at face value. Even all of Aragon's conclusions always come to "may", "possibly", etc.

I guess that is my one major pet peeve, some people taking results like this as gospel when in reality it's impossible to know how valid they really are. Any meta analysis of potentially crappy, biased studies (even double blind studies can apparently be biased and poorly set up) is potentially crappy and biased in itself. I'm pretty sure if Aragon et al. went to look at individual studies included in the meta-analysis, they could find flaws in each and every one of them.

Also, if it hasn't been studied or studies haven't provided proof that it is so, it doesn't necessarily mean that it really isn't so IMO. I know people want certainty (especially in this mad world of supplementation) but I'm pretty sure that is (close to) an impossibility.

It sounds like you may be the kind of guy who will never be satisfied. Of course every study has strengths and limitations. One of Alan's teaching techniques is to have those he instructs identify both. Just because a study has limitations doesn't make it useless or valueless. It is easy to make negative comments if a study comes to a conclusion (or if the evidence fails to support) a long-held pre-conceived belief of yours. OP was simply sharing this new info for discussion and many of us will be looking forward to the publication.

[TheFugitive]

It sounds like you may be the kind of guy who will never be satisfied. Of course every study has strengths and limitations. One of Alan's teaching techniques is to have those he instructs identify both. Just because a study has limitations doesn't make it useless or valueless. It is easy to make negative comments if a study comes to a conclusion (or if the evidence fails to support) a long-held pre-conceived belief of yours. OP was simply sharing this new info for discussion and many of us will be looking forward to the publication.

Studies are great for peace of mind but IMO they create more clinical placebo than anything else.

[BigPoppaPump84]

This was pretty much well understood for awhile now (that if pre and optionally intra workout nutrition was properly in place then the post workout meal does not have as much importance).

The trend in recent years however has been that "training fasted is great and doesn't matter! Just get your daily food in whenever!" Which is just not a good idea unless your only concern is to lose fat and you don't care about your LBM.

What do you mean by this?

[kissdadookie]

What do you mean by this?

Fasted training will increase fat loss... it will also be counter productive to muscle gain/preservation.

[dazedncnfz]

Fasted training will increase fat loss... it will also be counter productive to muscle gain/preservation.

You can't keep saying that as a definitive statement when there are plenty of people who do in fact make progress and gain muscle while training fasted.

[kissdadookie]

You can't keep saying that as a definitive statement when there are plenty of people who do in fact make progress and gain muscle while training fasted.

Nobody said you can't make gains. I've also made my comment with it being in a cutting phase (implied). We can even see this somewhat demonstrated in the recent BCAA study. The BCAA group actually had less fat loss but they had benefits in LBM compared to placebo. So the implication or practical application of this is if you are contest prepping and already in low single digit BF levels, it may be beneficial or even crucial to implement that pre and possibly intra and post workout BCAA/aminos use to preserve LBM.

Now, making better gains being well nourished, this is also likely to be true from practice and anecdote. At bare minimum, having carbs pre and intra has a perceivable impact on performance. Increased performance is part of the definition of an ergogenic.

[dazedncnfz]

Nobody said you can't make gains. I've also made my comment with it being in a cutting phase (implied). We can even see this somewhat demonstrated in the recent BCAA study. The BCAA group actually had less fat loss but they had benefits in LBM compared to placebo. So the implication or practical application of this is if you are contest prepping and already in low single digit BF levels, it may be beneficial or even crucial to implement that pre and possibly intra and post workout BCAA/aminos use to preserve LBM.

Now, making better gains being well nourished, this is also likely to be true from practice and anecdote. At bare minimum, having carbs pre and intra has a perceivable impact on performance.

Worded much better.

[Mrpb]

Fasted training will increase fat loss... it will also be counter productive to muscle gain/preservation.

It could be true but I haven't seen studies to back up either claim.

Aragon and Schoenfeld found no difference in fat loss between fasted and fed cardio.

If fasted training is superior for fat loss or inferior for muscle retention, I'd like to see studies that support it.

The BCAA group actually had less fat loss but they had benefits in LBM compared to placebo..

When 85kg guys (claim to) eat ~2300 calories for 8 weeks and only lose 100 grams of body weight that says one thing: they were consuming more calories than they reported.

If anything spares lean mass it's eating at maintenance. That renders the study mostly useless to draw conclusions from it.

[kissdadookie]

It could be true but I haven't seen studies to back up either claim.

Aragon and Schoenfeld found no difference in fat loss between fasted and fed cardio.

If fasted training is superior for fat loss or inferior for muscle retention, I'd like to see studies that support it.



When 85kg guys (claim to) eat ~2300 calories for 8 weeks and only lose 100 grams of body weight that says one thing: they were consuming more calories than they reported.

If anything spares lean mass it's eating at maintenance. That renders the study mostly useless to draw conclusions from it.

Who's talking about fasted cardio? I was talking about fasted strength training.

[cory2731]

as in most things in life, daily macros and nutrition as a whole, can be managed with just a bit of common sense. eating as clean as possible, in sufficient quantities and in the big picture it wont really matter at all when, or even if, a protein shake is consumed.

studies are great, but common sense will always rule.

[Mrpb]

Who's talking about fasted cardio? I was talking about fasted strength training.

Yeah and there's no evidence for that either.

[kissdadookie]

Yeah and there's no evidence for that either.

That BCAA study in and of itself demonstrates what happens when you at least take the amino acids peri workout out of the equation on a cutting phase. Higher fat loss but also far more LBM loss.

It's also illogical to assume that the BCAA study is not a good example due to people not being spoon fed their meals. You had a placebo control group and a BCAA group. Everybody was given meal plans rather than macro breakdowns to follow. They were all calorically matched. So the only real variable was BCAA vs placebo.

This is not somehow evidence? Really? How do you figure? That study demonstrated a number of things. That carbohydrates periworkout really work mainly as a energy substrate whilst the AA is the main driver of the muscle protein preservation and repair.

[jamesovercome]

I lift fasted and I don't take supplements and I work a physical job.
Just eat. Eat everything.

[Mrpb]

That BCAA study in and of itself demonstrates what happens when you at least take the amino acids peri workout out of the equation on a cutting phase. Higher fat loss but also far more LBM loss.

The participants in the BCAA study were consuming 5 meals per day. There is no mention of training fasted in that study. In all likelihood, they weren't.

It's also illogical to assume that the BCAA study is not a good example due to people not being spoon fed their meals.

That's not the reason. If ~187 pound guys, strong guys, working out 4 days a week only lose a 100 grams (!) of body weight over 8 weeks, they were not in a significant deficit. The purpose of the study was to make it a cutting study. The data suggests it wasn't.

One of the authors of the BCAA study has already admitted that the data shows they did not stick to their calorie targets.

I'll make this easy for you: there's currently no good evidence to support that fasted training is better for fat loss or worse for muscle gain/retention.

[alan aragon]

This was already known with many if not most bodybuilders. Did a study really need to be done to realize this? We have had earlier studies showing the benefits of pre/intra workout nutrition and we also have the post workout nutrition study from last year. It's not that difficult to extrapolate the key points by looking through the earlier data.

The post workout nutrition study from last year was particularly interesting since it looked at net protein balance rather than what the acute markers indicated.

I'm not implying that this new study is worthless, it's more or less validation for what many already realized or could be extrapolated from existing data. Mind you, the post workout nutrition data from last year also used well trained individuals.

Apparently you're unaware that this indeed was a gap in the literature - as in, no such design has yet been carried out. Another thing you're failing to understand is that the early post-exercise period has repeatedly been touted in both the primary & secondary literature as the MOST critical feeding juncture for stimulating MPS acutely, and hypertrophy chronically. Our purpose was to test this claim by comparing pre vs. post in a longitudinal design. Finally, research is not avoided on the basis of what we feel trainees or coaches "already know." Research is about testing both questions and assumptions -- this is what builds foundations for objective knowledge, as opposed to speculation, anecdote, tradition, & opinion.

[LoudyRowdy]

Apparently you're unaware that this indeed was a gap in the literature - as in, no such design has yet been carried out. Another thing you're failing to understand is that the early post-exercise period has repeatedly been touted in both the primary & secondary literature as the MOST critical feeding juncture for stimulating MPS acutely, and hypertrophy chronically. Our purpose was to test this claim by comparing pre vs. post in a longitudinal design. Finally, research is not avoided on the basis of what we feel trainees or coaches "already know." Research is about testing both questions and assumptions -- this is what builds foundations for objective knowledge, as opposed to speculation, anecdote, tradition, & opinion.

wait...is this....could it be?

[TMac26]

Indeed it is

[dazedncnfz]

School is in session.

[OT2000]

Looking forward to the study Alan, thanks for sharing.

[dailob]

i picked a good day to not be in the field...

[lucia316]

Am I in bizzaro world? Taking a look at most posts in this forum has many people recommending a post-workout shake. Even many of the guys that say in one breath that they are aware that the most important factor is total protein, in the next breath say that they personally have a shake afterwards, and/or tout BCAAs for between meals.

Agree here. Plus, there are so many "studies" that require more research, why not confirm? I'm not saying I'm hopeful or expect timing to mean anything, but to see these things confirmed or the knowledge expanded is important. We talk about studies and efficacy and other things back by science on these forums, so why wouldn't we want more science?

A bit confused right now. While it's easy to say, this is known, it's known because that's what current science tells us or past studies show us. Why not take it further to better understand if what we believe is indeed true or was it just another bad study or study taken out of context.

[Big_Spaz]

I agree, I mean the studies are great (I loved the BCAA study) but at the same time each person is different as well.

I mean diets differ, lifting times differ, body chemistry differs, etc. Meaning I train every morning at 5 AM. And I CANNOT eat before I train. So essentially I always weight lift (and do cardio) in what would be considered a "fasted" state.

The problem is with me, as I have gotten older, my digestive system isn't nearly what it once was. So if I eat anything before I lift (whole food or shake) I get bloated and feel absolutely horrible. So you could show me a study that says "x gained 20 lbs. of LBM in 6 weeks consuming 4 egg McMuffins before each workout ..." and you know what, I still couldn't do it. I wouldn't be able to workout.

So it's one of those things where studies are great, but I still have to do what works best for me, my body and my schedule. In a perfect world, I would have no job except to eat and train. Unfortunately, that's not realistic for me






-Spaz

[dazedncnfz]

I agree, I mean the studies are great (I loved the BCAA study) but at the same time each person is different as well.

I mean diets differ, lifting times differ, body chemistry differs, etc. Meaning I train every morning at 5 AM. And I CANNOT eat before I train. So essentially I always weight lift (and do cardio) in what would be considered a "fasted" state.

The problem is with me, as I have gotten older, my digestive system isn't nearly what it once was. So if I eat anything before I lift (whole food or shake) I get bloated and feel absolutely horrible. So you could show me a study that says "x gained 20 lbs. of LBM in 6 weeks consuming 4 egg McMuffins before each workout ..." and you know what, I still couldn't do it. I wouldn't be able to workout.

So it's one of those things where studies are great, but I still have to do what works best for me, my body and my schedule. In a perfect world, I would have no job except to eat and train. Unfortunately, that's not realistic for me






-Spaz

How about if the study said 4 grande burritos?

[Big_Spaz]

How about if the study said 4 grande burritos?

You know what ... then I might have to sit down and re-think my strategy a bit






-Spaz

[alan aragon]

On the note of the Xtend study -- there's a major reporting error that casts doubt on the entire thing. Quoting the text: "While there was a significant decrease in lean mass in the CHO group, there was not a loss of fat mass, though the trend (p < 0.1) was strong. [...] The BCAA group showed no change in body mass, due to the maintenance of lean mass in the presence of a significant loss of fat mass." <--- U FOCKING WOT M8? The CHO group had both a greater proportional decrease in fat mass (-1.4% vs -0.5% in the Xtend group) and also a greater net decrease in fat mass (-1.4 kg vs -0.05 kg in the Xtend group). Another limitation of the study should be obvious - it was not designed to be an isonitrogenous comparison. The whole point of timing AAs pre, intra, or post-exercise is to see whether there's a significant effect compared to a non-proximally timed isonitrogenous, intact protein control condition.

[OT2000]

That would explain why it took so long to get published.

[Valhallabound86]

Sciencegasm.