Showing posts with label recovery. Show all posts
Showing posts with label recovery. Show all posts

Sunday, December 8, 2013

Fit Kids = Smart Kids, Creatine & Muscle Repair, Epigenetic Transfer From one Leg to Another. Plus: Fat Effects of Anti-Psychotics, Larger Muscle = Greater CNS Impact, Rhodiola a Natural Opiate, Hawthorn for More & Thicker Hair

It's never too early for your first push-up ;-)
"10" is this week's SuppVersity figure of the week. Ten as in "ten push-ups" which is the mean number of push-ups the 12 year-old boys and girls from the Coe study you can read about in one of the items of today's news mash-up aka "On Short Notice". I am honestly not yet sure what to make of it, it's not as bad as what I had expected based on a couple of observations I have made as of late, but it still goes to show you that you cannot take the most fundamental feats of physical fitness for granted, when it comes to pre-/peri-pubertal kids in today's sedentary society.

Now, while I am still trying to make up my mind I would suggest we take a look at the actual outcomes of the study. The 10 push-ups were after all only part of the subject characteristics and not the reason Coe et al. actually conducted their study.

Fit Kids are smart kids - Strength and cardio both matter!

You can hardly start your career as a physical culturist too early, there are simply way too many benefits from giving your body the nutrients and the exercise it needs and therefore it is actually not surprising that conclusion of a recently published paper in the Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness reads:
"Students with the highest fitness level performed better on standardized tests and students with the lowest fitness level performed lower in class grades" (Coe. 2013)
Interestingly enough, this effect was associated with both cardiorespiratory fitness and strength, which brings us back to yesterday's news about the PGC-1 alpha isoforms (read the comments as well) and the detailed follow up I just decided to post on the whole matter, tomorrow.
Figure 1: Spearman rank correlations and achievements cores in terms of grades (0:min, 80:max), test scores (% of max) and combined (% of mean of all kids; data based on Coe. 2013)
Since this is the first study of its kind to investigate all five established parameters of health-related fitness (HFR), it should also be mentioned that body composition, flexibility and muscular endurance did not show the same statistically significant correlations the scientists observed for cardiorespiratory endurance and muscle strength in the kids (52% boy, 48% girls; all from the same age group ~12 years). Now, it would be nice if the people who design the curricula would keep that in mind, when they add junk after junk to the syllabus and regard sports and being active as an unnecessary diversion from the constant intellectual drills.

Creatine can do much, but it can't accelerate skeletal muscle repair after a workout 

The results of a recent study from the Department of Kinesiology and Physical Education at the Wilfrid Laurier University in Canada (McKinnon. 2013) , in the course of which  a total of 27 male (n = 15) and female (n = 12) participants between the ages of 18-24 completed an experimental training protocol with either
  • 2x creatine monohydrate (20g) and a carbohydrate supplement (20g) in order to blend consistency and taste (CREA),
  • 2x 40 g of maltodextrin only in 500mL of water (MALTO), or
  • no supplementation at all (control)  
The supplement was consumed over a 5-day period (check out the "Pharmacokinetics of Creatine" posts and you will learn that this dosage regimen is an unnecessary overkill - even if you insist on "loading") after which the participants participated in a baseline strength test that was followed by a muscle-damaging protocol that consisted of maximal force eccentric contractions:
Suggested read: "Creatine a Proven Non-Anabolic Agent: It's the Increase in Training Intensity that Will Give You the Hypertrophic Edge (read full story)
"Subjects performed 60 maximal eccentric contractions that were divided into 6 sets of 10 repetitions, with a 45 second rest period between repetitions.  The velocity of eccentric contractions was varied between sets (2 at 75°/sec, 2 at 90°/sec, and 2 at 120°/sec). This protocol has been used in previous studies and has been shown to be an effective means of inducing skeletal muscle damage (Cooke et al., 2009). The researchers also provided verbal encouragement to the subjects to help maintain maximal effort throughout the protocol." (McKinnon. 2013)
After adequate rest, the first of 5 post-tests was conducted. The results (figure 2) clearly show that despite the overall greater force recovery in the creatine group, the relative rebound after an allegedly higher drop was seen in the MALTO group while it was minimal in the no-supplement group.
Figure 2: Force recovery and muscle soreness at 0h, 24h, 48h, 72h, 96h in the control, maltodextrin and creatine groups subsequent to a 5-day suppelemtation regimen (nothing,  2x 20g crea + 2x20g malto, or 2x40g malto (McKinnon. 2013)
Overall the scientists are yet still right, when they say that "creatine supplementation failed to significantly influence indices elbow flexor muscle damage or rate of muscle recovery following eccentric muscle contractions." After all, there were no statistically significant differences between either the muscle force loss and rate of recovery or muscle soreness (small figure in figure 2) between the groups - and it is unlikely that this would change after the initial 96h of recovery.

Additional suggested reads:
  • DHEA Blunts Muscle Damage During 5 Days of Combined Endurance, Strength and HIIT Training in Young Men (read more)
  • Speed Up Your Regeneration and Propel Your Gains by Taking a HOT Bath Bath 2-Days Before Arduous Workouts (read more)
  • Overtraining, Inflammation, Insufficient Repair: Scientists Shed Some More Light on the Counterproductive Triad of Ups & Downs in Testosterone, IL-6, IL-10, COX II & Co (read more)
Ah, I almost forget to mention, you see that the mean isometric peak torque is not even back up to 100% after 96h, right? Remember that whenever you decide that it would be a good idea to do "yet another set of forced reps". It is possible that the seasoned strength training veteran you are, you recover faster than the subjects in the study at hand who had not trained for at least 4 months, but it stands out of question that eccentric forced reps will increase the time you need to regenerate, let alone to see what we are all striving for, i.e. super-compensation effects (see suggested links on the right for more on "doing too much" and faster recuperation after workouts).

Working out one leg changes genes in the other leg as well 

The progress research in the area of epigenetics, i.e. the changes of gene methylation and thus activity in response to nutrition, exercise and other variables you can easily control is actually amazing. With the recent publication of a study into what you may call epi-genetic cross-reactivity further contributing to our insights into the relations of the local and system epigenetic effects of exercise and their respective metabolic downstream effect (Catoire. 2013).
Figure 3: Graphical summary of the study design and selected results (Catoire. 2013)
As you can see in my graphical mini-summary of the study design (top) and outcomes (middle + bottom) in figure 3 there was a whole lot going on... and that despite the fact that I did already spare you a complete page with font 10 lists of genes that changed (you do have the numbers, I guess that shall suffice) and paired them in groups. What's funny is that, when it's all said and done, this does yet again tie in to yesterday's news on PGC-1 alpha 4 - how? Well, let's hear (or read), what the scientists have to say in the discussion of their results:
"Many of the observed exercise-induced changes in gene expression are likely part of an acute stress response related to disturbances in homeostasis elicited by exercise. The most highly induced genes in the exercising leg were all members of the NR4A family, a subgroup of orphan receptors within the nuclear receptor superfamily. NR4A1 and NR4A3 have been reported to be upregulated shortly after acute exercise and during recovery in rat, pig, and human [24], and this upregulation likely occurs locally by contractile stimuli. This finding was confirmed by our study in which we observed an upregulation of NR4As in the exercising, but not in the non-exercising leg. NR4A transcription factors are also known to be induced by adrenaline and noradrenaline. Circulating adrenalin and noradrenalin levels were increased in our study but must exert only a minor effect as NR4As were exclusively induced in the exercising leg,. [...] NR4A1 and 3 are thought to play a key role in regulating energy metabolism and early adaptation. [...] The results may imply that NR4A family might play an important role in the regulation of metabolic responses after exercise." (Catoire. 2013)
The study at hand does thus add yet another puzzle piece to the image of the crossroads of the endocrine (from one tissue to the other) and intracrine (in this case in the exercised muscle) effects of energy and metabolic changes on the one hand and muscular contraction and local stress, on the other hand. As closely interwoven as they are, we are now - thanks to the novel gene essays - able to see through the complex network, understand what exercise does to our physiology and can then, in the next step, come up with ways to modulate these effects for our own benefit.

It is clear that this is not going to be easy and the presence of two "mutants" among the 12 relatively old  study participants (52 year; "old" only for studies like this, of course!) suggests that any cookie cuter solutions are probably about to fail. I mean, if you have got two guys out of twelve where the overall magnitude of gene expression changes in the exercising and non-exercising leg were very similar, it is more than likely that you would see these and other anomalies very frequently; and each of them would have to be considered if you wanted to design he optimal workout (nutrition and supplementation) regimen for an individual (good news for personal trainers, if you know what you are doing, no sciency compendium is ever going to replace you ;-)

In rehab, doctors and therapists use the neurological stimulation a stiff leg receives, when you move the other while looking into a mirror that fools you into believing that the stiff leg would be moving as well.
In that it does not even really matter, whether the observed anomalies were actually due to genetic differences or, as the scientists suspect simply the result of unconsciously performed isometric contractions in of the non-exercising leg. The ensuing neuronal activation could have brought about similar effects as they are observed (and intended) during mirror therapy (see image on the right), where an involuntary neural stimulation of the muscles in a stiff leg occurs, when the mirror fools you into believing that you actually just moved your stiff leg, or other body part, when it was in fact only the counter-lateral limb that moved (note: one of the latest reviews of the literature says about its efficacy in stroke rehab would facilitate the recovery of "motor function, activities of daily living and pain" and could be recommended "at least as an adjunct to normal rehabilitation for patients after stroke"; cf. Thieme. 2013).

With the effects of neural stimulation, which has already been shown to induce gene expression changes via increased calcium concentrations in the skeletal muscle as well as via other mechanisms (Long. 2007; Kanzleiter. 2009; Chin. 2010, we do thus have a third player in the epigenetic / protein regulatory exercise orchestrate that does now consist of a metabolic, a contractile / stress mediated and a neuronal component. As far as skeletal muscle hypertrophy is concerned, the local expression does still appear to be the major determinant of adaptation and thus growth - to train your left leg only expecting that the other will grow due to "bystander effects" is therefore almost as hilarious as skipping leg day with the lame excuse that your legs would grow from training your biceps ;-)

On ultra short notice

With that I'll call it a day as far as the detailed posts are concerned and invite you to come back tomorrow, when I am going to pick up on this discussion in a detailed post on the Roa study on PGC-1 alpha 4, muscle growth, myofiber composition, strength development, workouts and the whole megillah. For the time being here is a bunch of unsorted other things I considered newsworthy:
  • Anti-psychotics increase lipid synthesis by depressing it!? What sounds totally counterintuitive, is actually the main message of an editorial to the latest issue of the Journal of Lipid Research, in which Skreede, Steen & Ferno argue that a paper by Canfrán-Duque et al. clearly suggests that the obesity and hypercholesterolemic effects of 2nd generation anti-psychotics such as clozapine, risperidone, and ziprasidone are brought about by the counter-regulatory upregulation of cellular lipogenesis in response to their suppressive effect on cholesterol synthesis. (Skreede. 2013)
  • The greater the muscle group you work, the larger the impact on the central nervous system will be (Rossmann. 2013) -- In the end everybody will know that intuitive, back and leg days are the hardest and most taxing to the whole system. Based on a trial involving eight young men who performed exhaustive large (cycling – BIKE) and small (knee extensor – KE) muscle mass dynamic exercises at 85% of the modality-specific maximal workload, scientists from Salt Lake City did now provide further experimental evidence that supports the notion that the CNS tolerates a greater magnitude of peripheral fatigue and likely a greater intramuscular metabolic disturbance when the pertinent afferent signaling comes from small vs. large muscle groups . 
  • Rhodiola Rosea turns out to be an opiate (Lee. 2013).-- In a recent study scientists from the Chi-Mei Medical Center in Yong Kang, Tainan City, Taiwan were able to show that the popular but questionable (as far as the significance of its effects are concerned) adaptogen rhodiala decreased the systolic blood pressure of spontaneously hypertensive rats. Intriguingly the effect was blunted by the administration of the selective opioid μ-receptor antagonist, cyprodime, but not by naloxonazine, an antagonist specific to opioid μ1-receptor, which suggests that a direct effect on the opiate receptor. Moreover, the level of mood enhancing and relaxing beta-endorphins rose in both wild type and hypertensive rodents (with the effect being more pronounced in the latter)
  • Chinese hawthorn for the hair, not the heart (Shin. 2013) -- I guess if you hear hawthorn or Crataegus you will probably think of its purported beneficial effects on heart health. Now if the results from a recent rodent study are applicable to humans, as well, you will soon have to establish a novel neuronal connection between (Chinese) hawthorn and your scalp, or rather the hair on your scalp . With its beneficial effects on the initiation of the anagen phase in mice in teloge and the ensuing increase in skin color, thickness of the hair shafts, and density (number and size) of the hair. Oral C. pinnatifida extract (at a human equivalent dose of ~320mg/day) could soon be all the rage among men and women who fear for their superb head of hair.
I think this is enough for today. There is a life beyond the SuppVersity not for you, of course, but for me - so while you head over to the SuppVersity facebook page for even more news, I am going to enjoy Saturday night ;-)

    References:
    • Canfrán-Duque, A., M. Casado, Ó. Pastor, J. Sánchez-Wandelmer, G. Peña, M. Lerma, P. Mariscal, P. Bracher, M. Lasunción, and R. Busto. Atypical antipsychotics alter cholesterol and fatty acid metabolism in vitro. J Lipid Res. 2013 [in press]
    • Catoire M, Mensink M, Boekschoten MV, Hangelbroek R, Müller M, et al.  Pronounced Effects of Acute Endurance Exercise on Gene Expression in Resting and Exercising Human Skeletal Muscle. PLoS ONE 7. 2013; 11: e51066.
    • Chin ER. Intracellular Ca2+ signaling in skeletal muscle: decoding a complex message. Exerc Sport Sci Rev. 2010 Apr;38(2):76-85. 
    • Coe DP, Pivarnik JM, Womack CJ, Reeves MJ, Malina RM. Health-related fitness and academic achievement in middle school students. J Sports Med Phys Fitness. 2013 Dec;52(6):654-60. 
    • Kanzleiter T, Wilks D, Preston E, Ye J, Frangioudakis G, Cooney GJ. Regulation of the nuclear hormone receptor nur77 in muscle: influence of exercise-activated pathways in vitro and obesity in vivo. Biochim Biophys Acta. 2009 Aug;1792(8):777-82. 
    • Lee WJ, Chung HH, Cheng YZ, Lin HJ, Cheng JT. Rhodiola-Water Extract Induces β-endorphin Secretion to Lower Blood Pressure in Spontaneously Hypertensive Rats. Phytother Res. 2013 Nov 28.
    • Long YC, Glund S, Garcia-Roves PM, Zierath JR. Calcineurin regulates skeletal muscle metabolism via coordinated changes in gene expression. J Biol Chem. 2007 Jan 19;282(3):1607-14.
    • Rossman MJ, Venturelli M, McDaniel J, Amann M, Richardson RS. Muscle mass and peripheral fatigue: a potential role for afferent feedback? Acta Physiol (Oxf). 2013 Dec;206(4):242-50. 
    • Shin HS, Lee JM, Park SY, Yang JE, Kim JH, Yi TH. Hair Growth Activity of Crataegus pinnatifida on C57BL/6 Mouse Model. Phytother Res. 2013 Nov 12.
    • Skrede J, Steen VM, Ferno J. Antipsychotic-induced increase in lipid biosynthesis: activation through inhibition? Journal of Lipid Research. December 7, 2013 [Epub ahead of print] 
    • Thieme H, Mehrholz J, Pohl M, Behrens J, Dohle C. Mirror therapy for improving motor function after stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013 Mar 14;3:CD008449.

    Monday, October 28, 2013

    The Female(?) Athlete Triad - Part III/III: Road to Recovery! Step #3 = Reinvent Your Training Regimen

    You don't have to wonder that you get lost, when you embark on a journey without food, a map and as you will soon realize no definitive destination.
    After I did not have time to write the third part of the Road to Recovery, which is Part II of the SuppVersity Female(?) Athlete's Triad Series, my guilty conscious has been plaguing me, so that I will simply take the time, sit down and write down everything that comes to mind, as far as the workout side of the triad is concerned. To be honest, aside from those of you who are still caught in the "working out to burn body fat" idiocy, I believe that everyone who has been following the SuppVersity for some time, who has read the Step By Step Guide to Your Own Workout Routine and, most importantly, follows his or her rationale instead of being misguided by fears of "getting fat again", "losing muscle", etc. should not make so many mistakes, here... right? Well we will see ...

    When we are talking about training, there are a couple of fundamental, objectively measurable variables and a handful of non-quantifiable parameters you have to keep an eye on. In view of the fact that there really is no high quality research into a 'recovery protocol' you could apply to rid yourself of the athlete triad and against the background that I am very that you won't be willing to follow the mainstream recommendation to lie around idly and eat, I decided to base this third part of the Road to Recovery on a general discussion of these training variables and their individual contribution to the etiology of the athlete's trial.
    • Training density: The density of your training regimen refers to the time lag between training stimuli. Accordingly, the number of workout days per week, the number of exercises and sets (or intervals) per workout and the rest you take between sets all have to be taken into account.

      If we go by the hormonal patter, of an insufficient acute response to stressors, a flattened, initially elevated, at later stages of the triad rock bottom cortisol profile that's accompanied by profound reductions in luteinizing hormone, testosterone and estrogen, the following adaptations appear to be reasonable
      1. Remember: There is no mating and by no means childbirth possible, when your body feels that he is being chased by a saber-tooth. You can be active on the other days, but you cannot train more than 3 times per week during the recovery phase.
        reduce the number of workouts per week - This will allow for more of the urgently needed time to recover. Unless your physical stress level goes down first you cannot expect to (a) see the rest of the hormonal millieu, esp. the reproductive part, recover and (b) the restoration of an appropriate acute phase stress response to your workout with increases in catecholamines, a spike in cortisol and a subsequent decline to below baseline.
      2. increase the rest between sets - I am usually no proponent of long rest times, but due to the messed up response to acute stressors, it will necessarily take longer for your body and brain to recover. And this will be the case not just after a workout, but also after each set in the workout. 90s+ should be the rule of thumb for isolation or machine exercises and 120+ seconds for complex compound movements such as the squat
        Note: "Rest" does not include carrying weight around the gym. It does not allow for ab-exercises to be done in-between sets. And it is not be estimated, but has to be taken with a stop watch - at least for so long until you really know how long 90s and 120s actually are!
        You can rest longer, but in my humble opinion it does not really make sense, if you are not training to total failure, which is something you should avoid like a plague during the recovery phase (see paragraph on intensity techniques below).
      3. adapt the total number of sets accordingly - In order not to stay at the gym forever, but also to avoid falling victim to the "damn I just have 30min, the 90s rest must be over now" - syndrome. You will simply do a calculation like this:
        5 exercises x 3 sets each x 90s rest) x 2(*) = 45 min
        * we multiply by 2 to have room for the sets & everything else
        The figure this equation will yield is your estimated total workout time. If it is higher than the maximum workout time you are about to settle for in the next paragraph, you'll have to reduce the number of sets.
      Figure 1: Growth hormone response to exercise in 13 resistance trained men after 6 months on a standardized strength training program with either short (SR) or long (LR) rest periods (Ahtiainen. 2005) - The subjects trained to failure, were even assisted on the last 2 reps of their 10-RM, therefore the "short" rest periods were actually already 2 minutes, the longer ones 5 minutes long.
      For most of you, I guess this is going to be all about reducing training density. I know you will read in other article here at the SuppVersity how beneficial the increase in density actually is - "get  more results in less time", etc. - for you, however, even the hailed increase in GH levels that would only remain on a very high lever after 6 months of regular training level, when the 13 recreationally strength-trained men of a 2005 study by Aithianen trained with short rest periods, would be counter-indicated (see figure 1; Ahtiainen. 2005).  
        
      Assuming that you have been following the previous installments of this series, you will be aware that th GH levels of athletes who suffer from the triad are not only through the roof already (due to the constant overexpression of ghrelin, see Part I of this series), but also  fail to do their anabolic magic, since their livers (and other organs) simply refuse to turn the growth hormone into IGF-1.
    • Training volume: The volume of your training regimen is defined by a set of 'totals', the total number of sets, the total number of reps, the total number of minutes you spend actually working out, etc. The most straight forward reason you will have to cut back on the volume side, is actually the amount of energy you are willing / physically able to consume.

      Figure 2: Mere illustrative plot of the fallacy of training more to burn more energy (not based on actually data, effects deliberately accentuated)
      Despite the fact that the caloric expenditure during your workouts will scale with their duration (figure 2, blue line), the scaling is nonlinear and once you start working out "too long" (obviously a relative term) on a regular basis, your bodie's evolutionary conserved energy saving mechanisms will kick into full gear (figure 2 red line). They will decrease the energy you expend and increase the energy you conserve and store. The less energy you consume, the more pronounced the effects will be. And what may start off with a very welcome loss of body fat, while you are only overreaching, will segue into chronic fatigue, loss of lean muscle mass, bone demineralization, compromised immune health and so on and so forth once you are chronically overtrained (see "How An Evolutionary Advantage Can Turn Its Ugly Face On You!").

      I am not aware of your current training volume, but if you intend to slowly crawl out of your self-dug hole, you better make sure to limit the total workout time per week (including all medium to high activities at the gym / on the track or wherever you work out) to less than three hours.

      Don't be afraid to cut back on the training volume. The main use of high(er) training volumes is to increase the overload. The whole issue of "chronic" overload (i+1) is however counteracted, when you are adding so many i + 1 stimuli to the equation that adaptive and thus beneficial adaptation processes can no longer occur.
      You can remain, and I would even suggest you should remain active for more than those three square hours, but this activity should be either "just for fun" or as a means of locomotion and should not make you sweet, huff or puff at all (e.g. walking from A to B, taking the bike instead of the car, walking the dog, throwing a couple of baskets with your friends, sun or nephew, etc.)

      At the same time the you want to reduce the length of individual workouts do less than one hour, to avoid depleting your glucose stores completely.

      If we take the sample calculation from the paragraph on workout density as a basis these recommendations would imply that those five exercises with three sets for each of them per workout, plus five minutes of specific warm-ups and a ten minute cool-down is the maximum you will do on a weekly basis during the recovery phase. 
    • Intensity techniques: Intensity techniques are a way to increase the density, weight, or volume of your workouts temporarily in order to provide a novel growth stimulus without that goes beyond the steady increase in weights, running speed, cycling duration or whatever else it is that your athletic progress is measured against. 
      Please note: while I did hint at progress in sports other than weight lifting, intensity techniques are so resistance training specific that will stick to a discussion of those in the following paragraph.
      I already mentioned that you will need longer rest period in between sets, if you insist on training to failure. Even if you are not already within the vicious cycle of overtraining and undereating, training to failure on each and every set of a medium to high volume hypertrophy routine can - in the long run - do more harm than good. If you have already 'fried' your central nervous system, though, it is the very best way to forestall recovery and to ruin your physical and in many cases also your mental well-being completely.
        intensity techniques you should not to use at all:
      • extended sets, super-sets, 
      • triple (or more) drop sets, 
      • breathing squats, EDT-type training, 
      • forced repetitions, training to failure
      • techniques you can use very sparingly: 
      • single-drop sets - only on the last set of a given exercise, and only to extend a set where you wanted to do 10 reps, but stopped in order not to fail at rep number six , by another four reps to arrive at the ten reps you intended to do
      • rest pause training - can make sense especially once the initial recovery phase is over; e.g. you plan to do eight reps, but pick a weight, were you know you can only crank out five if you want to stick to the "don't train to failure" principle; you do the five reps, rack the weight, take ten deep breaths, do another two reps, rack the weight, take another 10 deep breaths and do your last rep -- not a single rep more regardless of whether you feel you could do more!
      • intensity techniques you should use chronically:
      • none!
      As far as bullet-point three, i.e. "intensity techniques you should use chronically" goes, the answer "none!" applies to all trainees, regardless of whether you would or wouldn't say that you are at risk of getting caught up in the vicious cycle of the Athlete's triad. I mean, what's the "novel growth stimulus" an intensity technique is supposed to provide, if you do it during each and every workout, anyway? If you are lucky, your body will simply consider that "normal" and what once has been beneficial overreaching will simply become "normal training" (green path in illustration above). It is however more likely that overreaching will turn into overtraining and you will start digging one of those nasty dark holes, so many athletes before you have dropped into.
    • Training for a purpose:  I have repeatedly pointed out that lifting weight is a means to an end. This goes regardless of whether you do it to lose weight, to build muscle or to win at the next strongman, power lifting or o-lifting event. What you do during your training has to be purposeful! 
       
      Once you are losing sight of your goals, you are almost guaranteed to either fall off the wagon completely or get caught in a cycle of ever increasing weights, training volume, frequency and density that will inevitably pave the way to the athlete's triad.

      To avoid this ill fate you will have to (1) make up your mind about what exactly it is that you want, (2) draft a plan of attack, (3) find ways to hold yourself accountable and (4) monitor your progress.
      Another common mistake: Confusing athletic and social / other goals 'I want to look good naked' is per se not the best goal, it is however truly problematic if the actual reason you are training is that you are not just unsatisfied with the way you look, but if that dissatisfaction with yourself goes way deeper... if you are training with the one thought in the back of your head. That little spark of hope that "everything is going to change, once I finally get rid of that pouch". That finally all the girls that have been ignoring or laughing at you would want to date you, that finally all the guys who only wanted to be "friends" with you would regret that they did not recognize the woman in you before. That all the bullies would ... I guess, you get the message.

      Believe me, life does not work that way. Just like you don't get six-pack abs from training your self-confidence, training your abs, biceps, legs and butt won't automatically give you the confidence you have never had.
      1. Know what you want! The best ways to fall victim to the athlete's triad are to try to accomplish diametrically opposed goals (make maximal muscle gains and get to the below 10% body fat range at the same time), not to have a goal at all (to train to feel the exhaustion / accomplishment of 'having survived another workout'), or to have nothing but a nebulous idea of what exactly you want to achieve ('I look good!')
      2. Don't follow your instincts, or use someone else's routine! Either you find a non-cookie cutter trainer or come up with a well-thought routine of your own. Never go to the gym without having an idea of what you want to do there and how this is going to take you closer to your goal.
      3. Tell your friends and family about your new goals. Believe me, if you have not scared them away already (isolation and depression are unfortunately also part of the triad), they will be happy to hear that you realized that you can't go on like that and will support you.
      4. Make a habit of bringing a training log to the gym. I know it looks hilarious, but think about the argument most trainees will bring forward for not bringing a log with them and laughing at those who do - "Look at him / her! As if this guy / gal was a pro-athlete *laughs*?" If that's embarrassing for anyone, it's embarrassing for the idiot who says that. No athlete carries a training log around to "look like an athlete", he or she uses it as a tool to increase his performance from the  level of the amateurish gymbro who feels that a training log is laughable and absurd to that of a pro athlete!
      1. Training type: The type of training is basically defined by its purpose about which I have written in the previous paragraph. Overall there are so many ways to train (and to train successfully) that simply compiling a comprehensive list of all of them would already go well beyond the scope of this series. Therefore we will stick to the most fundamental distinction: Aerobic and anaerbic training.
         
        Why do you train as if you would try to win the Ironman and the Mr. O in one year? You know that won't work!
        If you take a look at successful athletes, you will realize that regardless of what their sports and athletic goals may be, in the long term they all need incorporate both, an aerobic, as well as an an anaerobic component. The former not to drop the weight or whatever you they may be moving, throwing, etc. because they are huffing and puffing and the latter in order to maintain, better build the muscle mass that's necessary to be competitive.
         
        I could now go on about how athletes who perform in aerobic sports are more prone to overtrain and fall victim to the athlete's triad, but this is of no avail, if your goal is to win the next marathon, the Ironman or whatever (and I am the last one to argue you ot of perusing the one goal that truly motivates you).

        What I can and want to do, though, is to remind you of the necessity not to lose sight of your goals. And this will necessarily entail that you have to prioritize one training type over another. Don't lull yourself into the believe you could win the Mr. O and the Ironman in a single year!
      2. Off time: Off-time includes both the 2-4 days you take off every week, as well as the 1-2 weeks you should take off every 4-6 weeks. In that, off means, no regular training! It does not mean you have to sit around all day.
         
        "Where is everyone? At home recovering and growing?" Click on the image to learn more about "Detraining & Training Periodization"
        "The time off is the time you grow!" All of you will have heard that sentence, but few of us actually live by the rules it entails. And when you already fell victim to your own ambition and discipline and followed a "plan", although your body kept telling you that this is too much for years, it won't feel right to take just a single day off. Right? Yeah, that feels so wrong...

        Ignore that feeling, use your brain! If you still feel after all those things I mentioned before that you id absolutely nothing wrong, take a week off, now! Completely off! And don't even think about cutting back on calories!


        Come back here in 7 days without exercise and plenty of nutritious food, read the post again and you will (a) realize that your brain is able to process information again and (b) you did not get a fat diabetic slob from giving your body what it needs: REST & FOOD!

      That's it for this week! 


      A long, not very sciency post of which I am quite sure that some of you will say that this was not very useful. After all, they were already doing all that... were they really? And what about the adequate energy intake? What about not calculating how much energy you spend during your workout and rather not eating another rice crump with all its "bad carbs", when they missed 5 minutes of your regular 45 minutes "till-I-drop" run on the treadmill they add on top of a strength workout to make sure they stay lean on a bulk, telling themselves that it was a "walk in the park" anyways and would thus promote regeneration? ... Not you? And you still got problems? Fine, then take a month off to fully recover.
        
      Learn to program success
      Use this month to think about your goals, about why you have been hitting the gym almost everyday in the past months, if not years. Take baseline measures, identify a new quantifiable goal, design a workout and nutrition routine that will get you there. Generate an Excel spreadsheet in which you will log the progress towards your goal and file bi-weekly progress pictures in the same folder on your hard-drive. Start all over and be wary of that little man (or woman) in your ear who keeps crying "faster", "harder", "more" while simultaneously telling you that "carbs are bad", "you are not hungry", "you did not train, so you have no right to eat", etc. Take action and write your own success story. You deserve better than total burn-out!

      References
      • Ahtiainen JP, Pakarinen A, Alen M, Kraemer WJ, Häkkinen K. Short vs. long rest period between the sets in hypertrophic resistance training: influence on muscle strength, size, and hormonal adaptations in trained men. J Strength Cond Res. 2005 Aug;19(3):572-82.

      Wednesday, February 6, 2013

      Chronic Resistance Training Reduces the Anabolic Signaling in Response to Exercise - 12 Days of Detraining Restore It

      This rodent obviously knows about the value of detraining as a means to restore the signaling protein response that gets blunted over weeks of continuous training (photo from livescience.com)
      Ah, some really good stuff in the news, or rather in the journals as of late (for the news version of the articles, you obviously got to come here, to the SuppVersity ;-). So, let's skip any lengthy preludes and let's start with a simple question pertaining to the topic of the day: "When was the last time you took 2 weeks or more off?" What? Last year, when you were down with the flu? No, that does not count. I am talking about detraining, here; so only voluntary off-times will be reckoned as off time... I thought so, you haven't taken off in years, right? Well, what if I told you that this may be the reason your gains have not taken off either? Interested? Yeah, that's what I thought.

      Chronic resistance training reduces its own anabolic effect, detraining restores it

      I guess in the end, all of us knew this instinctively: The unbelievable gains you make as a rookie vs. the slow and arduous road you will be walking later in your "career" as a trainee are too obvious for anyone not to suspect that the marginal utility of exercise declines.

      Learn more about domain sizes, protein synthesis and  "muscle bulding" in Part II of the Intermittent Thoughts on Building muscle.
      Now, one of the most common and certainly accurate hypothesis to explain this phenomenon is that the restructuring processes that starts when you hit the early domain size limit is more time consuming than just "pumping more protein into the muscle" - a process, which happens more or less automatically, a previously sedentary individual picks up a dumb- or barbell ;-)

      With the impending publication of a study by researchers from the Ritsumeikan University, the University of Tokyo, the Nippon Sport Science University and the  University of Mississippi we do now have evidence for another, yet probably not unrelated reason to the exponential decline in marginal utility: The amelioration of the exercise induced phosphorylation of signaling proteins, due to which the marginal utility of your workouts decreases over time.

      What did the scientists do?

      In the experiment, the results of which Riki Ogasawara and his colleagues summarized an discussed in their latest paper, the researchers randomized a group of male Sprague-Dawley rats (10 weeks of age, 356.1 ± 4.4 g body weight) to four groups (+control) performing either continuous training (1S, 12S, 18S), in the form of 1 exercise session (1S), 12 exercise sessions (12S), or 18 exercise sessions (18S) every other day (Mo, Tue, Wed, Fr, Su, Tue, ...), or continuous training + detraining (DT), in the form of 12 sessions of exercise every followed by 12 days of detraining.
        Figure 1: The "muscle builder" mTOR and the pertaining signaling cascade(s); remember that the line with the bar at the end indicates an antagonism → higher mTOR = higher phosphorylation of p70SK and it's downstream target rpS6, but lower 4E-BP1 (my orange markups; original from ebiotrade.com).
        The exercise itself was mimicking a leg-training regimen, in the course of which, the gastrocnemius muscle was trained by stimulating 5 contractions, with a 5-s interval between contractions, per set for 5 sets (5-min rest intervals in-between the sets).
        "The voltage (~30 V) and stimulation frequency (60 Hz) were adjusted to produce maximal isometric tension. Before every exercise session, peak twitch torque was measured. Torque signals were collected continuously at a sampling rate of 1024 Hz using a 16-bit analog-to-digital converter (PowerLab/16SP;AD Instruments, Japan) and analyzed using Power Lab Chart 5 software (AD Instruments, Japan). " (Ogasawara. 2013)
        24h after the last exercise session, the rats were anesthetized and exsanguinated. The muscles were removed immediately after death and both muscle size, volume and weight, as well as the expression of the signaling proteins p70S6 kinase, p90RSK, 4E-BP1 and S6 ribosomal protein (rpS6) were measured.

        So what's that all about? Did the rats become more muscular?

        As you can see from  my plot of the protein responses on the left and the respective effects the different training (+detraining) protocols had on the muscle weight of the rodents on the right hand side of figure 2, the chronic resistance training protocols lead to statistically significant reductions in the post training p70S6K and rpS6 expression, which were restored in response to the detraining protocol.
        Figure 2: Phosphorylation status of p70S6K (Thr389), p90RSK (Thr573), 4E-BP1 (total) an rpS6(Ser235/236) on the left and body weight, as well as muscle weight  in both exercised (RT ) and non-exercised (CON) rodents measured on the day after the last workout of the respective training group (Ogasawara. 2013).
        Notwithstanding, the fact that the muscle gains were (expressed relative to the respective control group) statistically identical, shouldn't surprise you. After all, the growth benefits of the detraining protocol will show only in the weeks after your absence from the gym. The rodents in the study at hand, however, were subjected to only one training session after the detraining period and killed afterwards. Therefore, the main message the data on the increase in muscle weight in the DT compared to its control group is sending us is that short periods of detraining won't cost you precious muscle mass.

        Don't hesitate, dare growing like a rookie again - dare taking a week off!

        In a previous study, by Ogasawara et al. I have likewise discussed here at the SuppVersity, the researchers have already shown that a "6-weeks-on vs. 3-weeks off" training-detraining regimen produces identical gains in muscle growth as continuous training w/out  producing the logarithmic decline in marginal gains that brings skeletal muscle hypertrophy to a screetching halt over time (read more)
        The novel information about the decline and restoration of the signaling proteins this study provides would support the longstanding hypothesis that continuous exercise blunts its own growth response. And what's more it's also supported by various human studies. In 2006, for example, Coffey et al. were able to show that the phosphorylation of p70S6K and rpS6 in response to resistance training was almost completely blunted in highly resistance-trained subjects (power lifters), while it did occur in the untrained controls (Coffey. 2006).Morever, Ogasawara et al. have shown last year already that an even longer detraining period of 3 weeks lead to much steeper inclines in muscle CSA in human subjects than continous training (see figure next to the paragraph below and read up all the details in the respective SuppVersity article from October 2013)

        Collectively, these results clearly suggest that the notion of planned, regular detraining periods could have benefits that go way beyond the well-known ability to protect you from getting caught in the downward spiral of chronic overtraining, as it will also "reset" the anabolic response to a given workload.

        And while you can hardly expect the results to be anywhere similar to those you've hopefully experienced, when you were still a scrawny beginner, the data from the study at hand does suggest that there will be an increase in the marginal utility of your workouts after one or two weeks of detraining. Moreover, there is no reason to be afraid that you could lose muscle within this short time period. Based on the absolute numbers in the study at hand (cf. figure 2), you could rather expect to see a non-significant increase in muscle mass that will occur during shorter (1-2 weeks) detraining phases.

        If you have no idea what macro- and micro-cycles are or are clueless about how to incorporate phases of detraining and - as a possible alternative with potentially similar effects - tapering into your routine, I suggest you go back to part VI of the Step by Step Guide to Your Own Workout
        Just don't forget, that just as it was the case in the previously mentioned 2013 human study by Ogasawara et al., you will see and feel the beneficial effects of the detraining period, not before you are back on the grind for 1-2 weeks. If you look back at the protocol, Ogasawara et al. used, the fact that the gains were "just" identical (even that would be a huge plus: after all you get the added bonus of reduced risk of injury, overtraining, etc. without missing out on a single additional mm on your arms, chest, shoulders, quads, hams, and what not) would actually support my gut feeling that a detraining period (= no training at all) of three weeks after "only" 6 weeks, could be a little too long. In the study at hand, which is obviously not a human stud and did not involve a regular full-body split routine, it did after all take no more than 12 days, i.e. 9 days less for the signaling responses to return to baseline.

        Further speculations about optimal off-times and respective increases in muscle gains would be mere speculation, so that I would suggest, we will postpone more concrete suggestions until the next paper from Ogosawara's group at the Research Organization of Science and Technology to be published. If we assume that it will take another 3 months, which happens to be the interval between the aforementioned human study and the study at hand, you better mark the first two weeks of April 2013 in your calendar, if you don't want to miss the respective SuppVersity post on the matter ;-)



        Regular periods of detraining are not the only thing you should keep in mind, when you lay out your workout routine. A study I wrote about in June 2013, for example showed that appropriate periodization can help you "Cut 12% Body Fat in 12 Weeks, Get Stronger, Bigger and Better Conditioned" (read more)
        In short, what is it, this paper brings to the table and what are the implications? The "new" information this paper has to offer pertains to the restorative effects of detraining n the exercise induced protein signaling cascade that will eventually result in skeletal muscle hypertrophy (=muscle gains). The differential protein expression in the different training groups tell us, that the 12 days of detraining effectively restored the p70S6K an  rpS96 that declines with each and every workout during periods of continuous training.

        The practical implications of these findings, should actually be obvious: Incorporating regular periods of detraining in your macrocycles and most importantly sticking to the plan, will not just help you to avoid overtraining with all it's negative side effects, it will also prevent the hypertrophy response to your workouts from diminishing and thus propel your lean mass gains.
        Update: Steven Acerra called my attention to an older study by Kadi et al. who report distinct effects of detraining on the satellite cell response to heavy resistance training (Kadi. 2004). According to the results of their study, the often overlooked contribution of the satellite cells to the structural underpinnings of skelatal muscle appears to peak early in the detraining phase with the maximal number of satellite cells per muscle fiber being achieved after 10 days of detraining and a return to pre-training levels after 90 days. Despite the fact that a straight forward extrapolation of practical recommendations based on these observations alone is not feasible, the researchers observations do confirm that there is a multilayered benefit to short (~14 day) detraining periods.
        Whether 12 days is the "optimal" length for a detraining period, if this "optimum" depends on the length, intensity and type of the previous training period, whether it's body part specific (like stop training arms for two weeks to restore your growth response in the biceps and triceps) and whether or not the training status of an individual has any impact on the time that's necessary for the "reset" to take place, will have to be elucidated in previous studies. That the SuppVersity is going to be the place, where you will read about these first, is something I probably don't have to tell you, right?

        References: 
        • Coffey VG, Zhong Z, Shield A, Canny BJ, Chibalin AV, Zierath JR, and Hawley JA. Early signaling responses to divergent exercisestimuli in skeletal muscle from well-trained humans. FASEB J. 2006; 20: 190-192. 
        • Kadi F, Schjerling P, Andersen LL, Charifi N, Madsen JL, Christensen LR, Andersen JL. The effects of heavy resistance training and detraining on satellite cells in human skeletal muscles. J Physiol. 2004 Aug 1;558(Pt 3):1005-12. Epub 2004 Jun 24.
        • Ogasawara R, Yasuda T, Sakamaki M, Ozaki H, Abe T. Effects of periodic and continued resistance training on muscle CSA and strength in previously untrained men. Clin Physiol Funct Imaging. 2011 Sep;31(5):399-404.
        • Ogasawara R, Kobayashi K, Tsutaki A, Lee K, Abe T, Fujita S, Nakazato K, Ishii N. mTOR signaling response to resistance exercise is altered by chronic resistance training and detraining in skeletal muscle. J Appl Physiol. 2013 Jan 31. [Epub ahead of print]