6 hours straight following the training. That is, a whole bunch of nutrients were given at short periods for 6 hours following the workout. He’s done this in every study he’s done (including the bullshit leucine studies) and it’s simply not relevant to what is being discussed or how people actually consume nutrients after training.

Or to what I’m talking about in this article which is the immediate post-workout intake.

Beyond that, you do realize that there are more processes to post-workout recovery than just growth, right? Like glycogen resynthesis. Which admittedly isn’t a huge issue given low to moderate volumes but is a consideration (given that depletion activates AMPk which inhibits mTOR).

But, of course, you don’t need massive amounts of carbs which is where Frameless went wrong from the outset. That and mis-understanding what Blade was suggesting.

And that said, I think every point that there is to make has been made in this thread so I’m going to close comments. I’ve got nothing more to say and it’s just going to go around in circles.

I’ll finish by saying this: my opinion here is the same for every other article I write and it’s quite simple: if you disagree with my recommendations, more power to you.

If you don’t want to consume carbs post-workout, that’s just skippy. I think it optimizes recovery and growth, I think that’s what the research (and decades of empirical practice) support. That’s my opinion and you’ll have to forgive me if I have little emotional investment in changing your mind.

If you disagree with me, that’s just fantastic. You’re not paying me for my advice so I don’t really care if you agree with me or not.

You can make what I think are bad choices in your post-workout nutrition if you want just like you don’t have to agree with anything else I suggest either.

I’ll keep telling people what I think is optimal based on my interpretation of the research and if you disagree, go start your own site and spread the truth as you know it.

Oh yeah, if you try to continue this discussion in other articles on the site, those comments will be deleted.

I think you’re looking at another study, please let me cite fig. 5 in Koopman et al (2007) paper:

“Whole body protein breakdown, synthesis, and oxidation rates and net protein balance (expressed as µmol phenylalanine·kg–1·h–1; A) and fractional synthesis rate (FSR) of mixed muscle protein (B) in the PRO, PRO + LCHO, and PRO + HCHO treatments in healthy men (n = 10). Values represent means ± SE. Data were analyzed with ANOVA. No differences were observed between treatments in whole body protein breakdown (P = 0.68), synthesis (P = 0.74), oxidation (P = 0.69), whole body protein net balance (P = 0.53), and FSR in skeletal muscle tissue (P = 0.51).”

The studies Lyle cited where done before Koopman’s, and if you take a better look at the data in these studies the discrepancy between the two is very easy to explain.

Again what you are saying is a large leap to make. As has already been said whole body proteolysis is not always reflective of muscle proteolysis you do know that right? Unfortunately, Koopman et al. did not measure muscle protein breakdown or cortisol levels following the ingestion of the various supplements. However, they did provide indirect evidence (based off plasma and muscle BCAA levels) that muscle proteolysis was reduced when carbohydrates were taken along with the protein drink (vs. protein alone).

Please give me a minute to explain why:

I think we can all agree that 25mU/l is sufficient to inhibit MPB, right?
Ok than let’s take a look at your own data Lyle and please let me explain why there is discrepancy between yours and others (ie Koopman et al.).
In your data Lyle, the amino acids solution is not able to raise insuline levels to above 25mU/l, hence why CHO seems to inhibit MPB to a much bigger degree!
Whereas in the paper of Koopman et al. they use 0,3gr/kg whey(h) which is sufficient to raise insulin above 25mU/l. So if you ingest ample protein (and heck which resistance trainee does not) there is NO need for CHO. Now you finally see the discrepancy Lyle?
Another reason why it maybe not so smart to ingest much CHO (don’t say you said so, just in general) is this:

“…Specifically, the study found that exercise enhanced insulin sensitivity, particularly when meals eaten after the exercise session contained relatively low carbohydrate content. Enhanced insulin sensitivity means that it is easier for the body to take up sugar from the blood stream into tissues like muscles, where it can be stored or used as fuel. Impaired insulin sensitivity (i.e., “insulin resistance”) is a hallmark of Type II diabetes, as well as being a major risk factor for other chronic diseases, such as heart disease.”
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/01/100128122142.htm

The next time you write an article (and I really love this site!!) please take a look at the data in a paper and not just skimming the abstract. Also it might be wise to be open-minded and not just turn your head from data when you don’t like it.
Please don’t get this post wrong. I truly love your research skills and your site but I justed wanted to get this straight.
Hope to see a reaction from you,

Look at this graph in the discussion part of the study, comparing 6g EAA to 6g EAA + 35g carbs from the same study Lyle is referring to.
http://ajpendo.physiology.org/cgi/content/full/283/4/E648?ijkey=a6f4a1df3c33f2590fda06a9ae506937e10a1de3#F7

“In a recent study, Miller et al. (14) compared the independent and combined effects of a balanced mixture of amino acids (i.e., EAAs + NEAAs) and carbohydrate on muscle protein synthesis after resistance exercise. Addition of 35 g of carbohydrate to 6 g of mixed AA did not cause a greater stimulation of net muscle protein synthesis than the AAs alone. The effect of adding carbohydrate to 6 g of EAA can be seen in Fig. 7, which compares the AUC for net phenylalanine uptake for the 1st h after intake of drink (i.e., 60-120 min) in the present study with the previously published response to 6 g of EAAs plus 35 g of carbohydrate (16). The additional carbohydrate provided no advantage to EAAs alone. From these results, it is clear that the stimulation of protein synthesis by EAAs is not a caloric effect, because ingestion of an additional 3 g of EAA (difference in EAA content between mixed AA and EAA groups) caused a much larger effect than addition of 35 g of carbohydrate to the amino acid mixture (Fig. 7), and 35 g of carbohydrate alone had a minimal effect (14). Although direct comparison with historical data may be problematic, the cited studies (14, 16) were performed in the same laboratory, approximately contemporaneously, and by use of the same general experimental protocol and techniques. ”

Clearly there is little if any difference between ingesting protein alone vs. protein+carbs.
So to say that protein+carbs is “superior” than protein alone, is false.

Iv’e aslo showed you guys a study that shows hyperinsulinemia favoring protein synthesis in splanchnic tissue rather than peripheral areas (muscle);
http://ajpendo.physiology.org/cgi/content/full/281/2/E248/F8

A smaller dose of carbs will probably not have the same effect, but this shows us that a large dose of carbs with protein, is probably not a good idea.

Other roles of CHO should be considered (glycogen repletion) but are outside of the scope of this debate.

It even included a nifty chart [IMG]http://i49.tinypic.com/2l8vgh2.jpg[/IMG]

No differences were observed between treatments in whole body [b]protein breakdown[/b] (P = 0.68), synthesis (P = 0.74), oxidation (P = 0.69), whole body protein net balance (P = 0.53), and FSR in skeletal muscle tissue (P = 0.51).

I see that Lyle specifically states, “Folks will often state that ‘You only need protein post-workout because carbs don’t effect protein synthesis.’ This is true but ignores the impact of decreasing protein breakdown on net protein gain.”

So, Lyle, can you please explain to me what I am missing because when I look at the Koopman study the “breakdown” and “net balance” seem pretty darn close whether you have carbs or not when I look at the chart and the study.

I do recognize that plasma insulin responses were significantly greater in the carb + PRO treatments when compared tothe PRO only treatment. But whole body protein breakdown, whole body protein balance, and mixed muscle protein FSR did not differ between treatments.

Also in addition to CHO elevating the plasma insulin response, it has many benefits than solely inhibiting muscle protein breakdown in athletes PWO.