High Dose BCAAs for Cyclists | Cholostrum Peptides for Bulking | Intermittent Fasting for Cutting | Probiotics for Muscle Protection -- ISSN'15 Research Review Issue #6

Are you trying to build a body like this? Maybe one of the supplements discussed in this article can help.

To make sure that I am not missing other relevant / interesting new research spending time with the ISSN'15 poster presentations, this is going to be the last installment of the ISSN'15 Research Review. With six different studies in one installment of the series it is obviously difficult to find a common theme. With studies on the ergogenic and pro-anabolic effects of various supplements, I am yet sure that there's (at least) one interesting study for everyone. So what's your favorite? The study on the immune effects of BCAAs, the one investigating the differential effects of coffee and caffeine, or the experiment that probes the safety and effects of bioactive peptides, the one that tests the nootropic effects of alpha-glycerylphosphorylcholine, caffeine or placebo or the new study on intermittent fasting?

Read more about ISSN and other studies at the SuppVersity

Vitargo, Red Bull, Creatine & More | ISSN'15 #1

Pump Supps & Synephrine & X | ISSN'15 #2

High Protein, Body Comp & X | ISSN'15 #3

Keto Diet Re- search Update | ISSN'15 #4

The Misquantified Self & More | ISSN'15 #5

BCAA, Cholos-trum, Probiotics & Co | ISSN'15 #6

• Ten weeks of branched chain amino acid supplementation improves select performance and immunological variables in trained cyclists -- Unlike previous studies which used either relatively low amounts of BCAAs or investigated only the acute effects of BCAA supplementation on performance and immune markers in athletes, the latest study from the Auburn University used a total of 12g BCAAs per day (6g/d L-Leucine, 2g/d L-Isoleucine and 4g/d L-Valine) or a maltodextrin placebo that was consumed by the N=18 trained cyclists (32 ± 2 yr, 77.8 ± 2.6 kg, and 7.4 ± 1.2 yr training) who participated in the study for 10-weeks.
  
  Before and after the 10-week study, the following was assessed: a) 4-h fasting blood draws; b) dual X-ray absorptiometry body composition; c) Wingate peak power tests; and d) 4km time-trials.
  

  

  Figure 1: While there were no improvements in body composition, the scientists observed sign. increases in selected performance markers in response to 10-weeks on high dose BCAA (Kephart. 2015).

  The analysis of the data shows no group*time interactions existed for total lean mass (p = 0.27) or dual-leg lean mass (p = 0.96). A significant interaction existed for body mass-normalized relative peak power (19% increase in the BCAA group pre- to post-study, p = 0.01), and relative mean power (4% increase in the BCAA group pre- to post-study, p = 0.01), however.
  
  Non-significant, but still noteworthy were the improvements in 4km time-trial performance which shows a borderline significant interaction (p = 0.08) - with the BCAA group improving their TT performance by a non-significant +11% from pre- to post-study. To which extent this improvement was mediated by the increase in serum BCAA: L-Tryptophan ratio would have to be investigated separately, though (l-tryptophan is still suspected to mediate the exercise induced increase in central fatigue | Fernstrom. 2006).
  
  Of similarly unclear practical significance are the interactions the scientists observed for neutrophil numbers (p = 0.04), which increased only in the placebo (+18%), yet not in the BCAA group. In view of the association of increased neutrophil levels and the exercise-induced suppression of immunity, it is yet logical to follow the scientists' conclustion that "BCAAs may benefit immune function during a prolonged cycling season" (Kephart. 2015).
• Caffeine and coffee don't differ in their effects on exercise performance -- As Trexler et al. point out, coffee (COF) and caffeine (CAF) "have not yet been directly compared in the context of strength and sprint performance" (Trexler. 2015). To fill this gap in the available research Trexler et al. conducted a randomized, double-blind study that was to compare the effects of acute COF and CAF intake on strength and sprint performance.
  
  In the study, fifty-four resistance-trained male participants (mean ± SD; age = 20.1 ± 2.1 yrs; height = 177.3 ± 5.6cm; weight = 78.8 ± 8.8 kg; habitual caffeine intake = 32.9 ± 59.6mg/day) completed a baseline test that consisted of both one-rep max (1RM) and repetitions to fatigue (RTF) for leg press (LP) and bench press (BP).

  "Following strength testing, a friction-loaded cycle ergometer was loaded with a resistance of 95g/kg of bodyweight and participants completed a repeated sprint protocol consisting of five, ten-second sprints separated by one minute of passive rest. Peak power (PP) and total work (TW) were recorded for each sprint, along with average PP and TW values for the entire protocol (all five sprints). At least 48 hours later, participants returned for post-testing and ingested a beverage containing either CAF (300mg), a caffeine-matched dose of instant COF (8.9g, yielding 303mg of caffeine), or a flavored placebo (PLA) 30 minutes prior to exercise. Prior to each visit, participants were instructed to maintain similar dietary habits, abstain from strenuous exercise for at least 24 hours, and avoid caffeine intake for at least 48 hours. Change scores were compared using one-way ANOVAs, and 95% confidence intervals (mean ± 1.96 × SEM) were constructed for each dependent variable" (Trexler. 2015).

  The analysis of the data the experiment generated yielded significant performance increases on the on the leg press where the 1RM was improved more by COF compared to CAF (Δ = 32.2 ± 18.6 vs 15.3 ± 16.9lb, p = 0.04), but not to PLA (p = 0.99).
  

  

  Figure 2: At least in comparison to the placebo treatment, the improvements in exercise performance are not debatable. Whether caffeine or coffee is the better ergogenic is albeit still not 100% clear (Trexler. 2015)

  No significant interactions were not observed for bench press (BP) 1RM, BP RTF, or leg press (LP) RTF (p > 0.05). The total work during the spring, however was increased for CAF [81.4, 623.9J], but not COF [-121.0, 376.2J] or PLA [-239.9, 180.1J]. In addition, both caffeine and coffee blunted the significant reductions in peak power and total work during the latter sets of the spring training. In spite of the lack of general improvements of strength outcomes, the improvements that were observed during the repeated sprint test support the notion that both caffeine and coffee have practically relevant ergogenic effects.
• Bio-Gro™, a commercial food-based bio-active peptide product, may augment your gains and enhance your recovery -- I guess the question that's preying on your mind at the moment is "Bio-Gro? Wtf..." Well, I wish I could answer this question precisely, but all I can tell you is that it's a peptide-based powder (serving size 1.5g) of which the manufacturer, Isatori, says that it is extracted from bovine colostrums and contains ...

  "an exact concentration of bioactive:  Proline-Rich Peptides (PRP's), Growth Factors (IgF, TGF beta-2, EGF, PDGF), Immunoglobulins (IgG, IgA), Lactoferrin and Fibroblast-GF." (manufacturer website)

  Against that background it is not really surprising that Patrick Jacobs' study on the safety of the product did not find unwanted side effects in twenty recreationally resistance trained men who consumed the supplement that is available both in powder- and capsule-form.
  
  What is surprising, though, is that the provision of the supplement over 8-weeks also yielded significant enhancements in the rate of body mass and lean body mass gains with supplementation of a bio-active peptide in conjunction with eight weeks of resistance training. To be precise, Jacobs' analyses of the data revealed that ...

  "Bio-Gro™ produced significantly greater (p < 0.05) changes in total body mass as assessed with BodPod (+6.3 pounds) than the placebo condition (+2.8 pounds). [In addition, l]ean body mass changes were also significantly greater with Bio-Gro™ (+5.8 pounds) compared with placebo (+3.7 pounds) (p < 0.05)" (Jacobs. 2015).

  Similar benefits were observed for the subjects sleeve sized of which mid-arm flexed measurements (+0.74 inches) indicate that they increased more than 2x more in the treatmet vs. placebo condition (+0.31 inches) (p < 0.05).
  

  

  Figure 3: Pre- / post changes in body composition and mid-arm flexed circumference (Jacobs. 2015).

  In view of the lack of differences in other circumferential change scores, and the lack of statistical significance of the lean mass when the latter were assessed by skinfold measurements, I would still like to see an independent confirmation of the results (also a comparison to whey protein / the use of Bio-Gro™ alongside whey protein) before I invest 52.5 cents per serving. This is particularly true in view of the fact that the supplement appears to have boosted the subjects' fat gains, too (see Figure 3 where the difference between total mass and lean mass increases is probably fat, not organ or bone weight ;-).
• Caloric restriction is easy on "intermittent fasting", but fat loss does not ensue -- Bad news for intermittent fasting enthusiasts comes from the Baylor University, where Grant M Tinsley investigated the effects of intermittent fasting combined with resistance training on body composition, muscular performance, and dietary intake.
  
  For the course of the 8-week study, 18 adult men were randomly assigned to do either resistance training alone (RT) or resistance training plus IF, in the form of termed time-restricted feeding (RT+TRF). Both groups followed a 3-days-per-week resistance training program for 8 weeks.

  "The TRF program was implemented on non-workout days (i.e. 4 days per week) and consisted of consuming all calories within any 4-hour period between 4 PM and midnight. Both groups were allowed unrestricted food intake during feeding periods. Research visits were conducted at baseline, 4 weeks, and 8 weeks after beginning the study and consisted of body composition assessment via dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA), 1-repetition maximum (1-RM) strength testing and muscular endurance testing on bench press and leg press exercises, and subjective measures of program difficulty. Diet records, workout logs, and compliance forms were used to track and encourage program adherence, as well as examine dietary differences. One-way and factorial ANOVAs were conducted using R (version 3.1.1)" (my emphasis in Tinsley. 2015).

  For intermittent fasting enthusiasts, the results were - as previously said - disappointing: No group*time interactions were found for any measures of body composition (lean mass, fat mass, and body fat percentage), muscular performance, or dietary intake.
  
  Interestingly, the intermittent fasting group did still display a slightly higher leg press 1-RM as well as an increased bench press endurance compared to the resistance training only (RT) group. That this occurred in the presence of a significantly reduced energy and fat intake in the RT+TRF group on the fasting days, but in the absence of significant differences on the non-fasting days is surprising. It does after all suggest that the subjects in the intermittent fasting (RT+TRF) group must have consumed significantly less energy. Now, it's up to you to decide what you find more surprising:

  • 

    Intermittent fasting can make you fat | learn why!

    The fact that the subjects in the intermittent fasting group consumed significantly less energy without losing body weight or fat?
  • Or the fact that the subjects in the intermittent fasting group saw greater performance increases despite consuming significantly less energy and dietary fat?
  Whatever your personal answer to this question may be, the most significant results of the study is probably that there were "[n]oticeable differences in individual responses to the programs" (Tinsley. 2015) - an observation that should remind you of the conclusions to previous articles on Intermittent Fasting, here at the SuppVersity: Eventually, you will have to try it to find out if IF works for you.
• Probiotic muscle protectors -- Muscle protecting probiotics? I have to admit: That sounds awkward. Nobody would doubt that GanedenBC30 a probiotic supplement that contains Bacillus coagulans GBI-30, 6086, supports healthy digestive and immune function. I am even willing to believe that supplement-induced changes in the make-up of its users gut microbiome can increase the absorption of protein, but I would not have expected that it can actively promote muscle recovery through gut microbial modulation.
  
  Just that is yet what a recent study from the University of Tampa suggests. In said study, 30 healthy recreationally-trained males (mean+/-SD; age: 21.5 ± 2.8 years; height: 177.4 ± 8.0 cm; weight: 89.7 ± 28.2 kg) were randomly assigned to consume either 20 g of casein (Control = CON) or 20 g of casein plus probiotic (500M CFU GanedenBC30, = BC30) twice daily in a crossover, diet-controlled design for a two-week time period.

  "Subjects performed a damaging exercise bout consisting of 10 sets × 10 repetitions unilateral leg press at 70% 1 RM with 1 minute rest, one legged - leg extension (5 sets × 12 reps), and rear foot elevated split squat 5 sets × 12 reps with one minute rest at baseline and after two weeks of supplementation. Athletic performance consisting of peak power (Wingate 10 sec Peak Power Assessment at 7.5% BW at 175RPM threshold loaded drop), vertical jump power (Tendo unit, single-leg jump), and 1-RM single-leg press; and muscle damage was analyzed by muscle swelling (ultrasonography) and blood draws (creatine kinase (CK), blood urea nitrogen (BUN)) were taken at baseline (pre-supplementation) and 48 hours after damaging exercise bout. Perceptual measures (perceived recovery, soreness) were taken before, 24, 48 and 72 hours after exercise" (Jäger. 2015).

  The analysis of the data the tests generated shows that the damaging exercise bout significantly increased muscle soreness (p < 0.001), reduced perceived recovery (p < 0.001) in both groups. Compared to the control group, however, the subjects in the casein + BC30 group show a significantly increased rate of recovery at 24 and 72 hours, and decreased soreness at 72 hours post exercise.
  

  

  Figure 4: Changes in CK and Wingate peak power in the control and treatment group (Jäger. 2015).

  The perceptual measures were confirmed by increases in CK (CON: +266.8%, p = 0.0002; BC30: +137.7%, p = 0.01), with BC30 showing a trend towards reduced indices of muscle damage (p = 0.08). It is thus only logical that the significant reduction in athletic performance in the control group (Wingate Peak Power; CON: (-39.8 watts, - 5.3%, p = 0.03)), was ameliorated, yes even blocked, in the BC30 group (+10.1 watts, +1.7%).
  
  Whether similar effects can be seen with non-patented strains of probiotic bacteria warrants further investigation. What I can tell you already, though, is that even regular yogurt has immuno-supportive effects (Lollo. 2013). Previous studies also indicate that more commonly used lactobacillus strains have similar anti-oxidant effects in athletes (Martarelli. 2011). Whether their effects are more or less pronounced than those of the Bacillus coagulans strain in BC30 will now have to be elucidated in future studies.

Nootropics for the bottom line: In view of the inconclusive results of Parker et al.'s study on the effects of alpha-glycerylphosphorylcholine, caffeine or placebo on markers of mood, cognitive function, power, speed, and agility, I have "banned" it into the bottom line, where I'd like to cite the scientists's conclusion that "future research should focus on dosage of [alpha GPC for certain physical and mental performance tasks], timing of consumption before testing measurement, bioavailability, longer term supplementation, and subject selection, in order to reduce individual variability" (Parker. 2015) and add that you may want to memorize that the provision of 200mg of caffeine did not improve the 10 male and 10 female participants' performance on subsequent (30 min) tests for reaction time, hand-eye coordination, power, speed, and agility.

You have to adjust volume, intensity and frequency of your workouts according to your goals | learn how!

At first sight, the lack of efficacy of caffeine appears to stand in contrast to the results Trexler et al. present in their study. Eventually, however, it could well be nothing but the test that makes all the difference. After all, acute performance benefits were observed by Trexler et al. only in the total work during a sprint test - the total work, however, wasn't even assessed by Parker et al. So, if there's one important take-away it's that supplements must always be chosen according to one's personal goals...

Now, this which brings me back to the increased sleeve sizes in the Jacobs study. You will be happy about these inches only if you don't care about the purported fat gain Jacobs doesn't address in the abstracts to his 8-week study on cholostrum peptide supplementation | Comment on Facebook!

References:

• Fernstrom, John D., and Madelyn H. Fernstrom. "Exercise, serum free tryptophan, and central fatigue." The Journal of nutrition 136.2 (2006): 553S-559S.
• Jacobs, Patrick L. "Safety and organ health with 8 weeks use of commercially available bio-active peptide supplement: A prospective, double-blind, placebo controlled randomized trial." Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition 12.Suppl 1 (2015): P46.
• Jacobs, Patrick L. "Significant enhancement in the rate of body mass and lean body mass gains with supplementation of a bio-active peptide in conjunction with eight weeks of resistance training: a prospective, double-blind, placebo controlled randomized trial." Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition 12.Suppl 1 (2015): P47.
• Jäger, Ralf, et al. "Effects of probiotic supplementation on markers of skeletal muscle damage, perceived recovery and athletic performance after an intense single leg training bout." Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition 12.Suppl 1 (2015): P36.
• Lollo, Pablo Christiano B., et al. "Probiotic yogurt offers higher immune-protection than probiotic whey beverage." Food Research International 54.1 (2013): 118-124.
• Martarelli, Daniele, et al. "Effect of a probiotic intake on oxidant and antioxidant parameters in plasma of athletes during intense exercise training." Current microbiology 62.6 (2011): 1689-1696.
• Kephart, Wesley C., et al. "Ten weeks of branched chain amino acid supplementation improves select performance and immunological variables in trained cyclists." Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition 12.Suppl 1 (2015): P20.
• Parker, Adam G., et al. "The effects of alpha-glycerylphosphorylcholine, caffeine or placebo on markers of mood, cognitive function, power, speed, and agility." Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition 12.Suppl 1 (2015): P41.
• Tinsley, Grant M., et al. "Intermittent fasting combined with resistance training: effects on body composition, muscular performance, and dietary intake." Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition 12.Suppl 1 (2015): P38.
• Trexler, Eric T., et al. "Effects of coffee and caffeine anhydrous on strength and sprint performance." European journal of sport science (2015): 1-9.

Calculated Energy Requirements ±15% & More Off of True Resting Energy Expenditure | Genotyping May Help Maintain Muscle While Dieting -- ISSN'15 Research Review Issue #5

In view of the inaccuracy of the standard equations that are used to calculate our energy requirements we are approaching the age of the "misquantified self".

If I had to find a common theme in the studies discussed in this installment of the ISSN'15 Research Overview, I guess it would be "get lean and stay lean". If you asked for a common bottom line, it would be: It's complicated.

Complicated, because even though our genes appear to have a determining rule in what's the best diet for us, the "calories in vs. calories out" equation is eventually going to determine whether you are losing or gaining weight. That's problematic, not just because many of us have lost their inborn ability to match their energy intake to their individual requirements. It's also problematic in view of the increasing number of people who rely on the numbers of apps and fitness-trackers which are just as unreliable as the standard equations that were fed into the source code to calculate them.

Read more about ISSN and other studies at the SuppVersity

Vitargo, Red Bull, Creatine & More | ISSN'15 #1

Pump Supps & Synephrine & X | ISSN'15 #2

High Protein, Body Comp & X | ISSN'15 #3

Keto Diet Re- search Update | ISSN'15 #4

The Misquantified Self & More | ISSN'15 #5

BCAA, Cholos-trum, Probiotics & Co | ISSN'15 #6

• Eating according to your genes may help you retain lean mass -- You will have noticed that the number of companies that do gene testing in order to tell you "exactly" what and how to eat is exploding lately. Unfortunately, the same cannot be said of research that would confirm that any of the test results people often pay several hundred dollars for are worth the paper they are printed on.
  
  Against that background, a recent study from the Texas A&M University comes quite handy for the shareholder value of said companies. The corresponding poster presentation at the ISSN Conference 2015 expanded on the results of a 2015 study by Coletta et al. (2015a), in which the researchers observed "that correctly matching diet type to some obesity-related genes promoted greater fat loss during the first 3 months of a diet and exercise intervention" (Coletta. 2015b). In the study at hand the researchers did now examine "whether these changes were observed following a 6-month diet and exercise training program" (ibid.).
  
  Over the course of the 6-months study, fifty sedentary, obese women (41.6 ± 12 yrs, 35.4 ± 8 kg/m²) who had been genotyped before the intervention, were either truly matched (T) to their diet group based on genotype (n = 28) or falsely matched (F) based on genotype (n = 22).
  

  

  Figure 1: Macronutrient composition of the diets (Coletta. 2015b).

  Irrespective of the group they were assigned to, all subjects consumed the same amount of energy (1,500 kcal/d), but with either a high or low ratio of carbohydrate:fat:protein percentages (see Figure 1). But the women didn't just eat less, they also had to perform a supervised circuit-style resistance-exercise program four days/week and followed a standardized walking program that consisted of 10,000 steps/day on three days/week. 

High carbohydrate diets for metabolic syndrome? A question of your genes - Study suggests that diets high in carbohydrate may not be appropriate for rs328 G carriers with the metabolic syndrome. In said study, two districts in Shanghai, China were randomly selected to be the intervention and control group, and patients (n=235) with metabolic syndrome within these two districts were selected based on a multistage sampling method.

"Three Days on Pasta, Muffin & Bread Diet (84% CHO) = 1kg Add. Lean Mass and a Sign. Trend for Decreased Fat Mass" - Probably the subjects in the study discussed in this SV Classic Article simply had the right genes ;-)

Fasting glucose was reduced in rs328 CC homozygotes (p=0.028) but not G carriers (p=0.686) within the intervention group.

Also an ancillary study with greater statistical power by combining the baseline measurements across both the intervention and control groups was conducted to test the cross-sectional statistical interactions between carbohydrate/fat and lipoprotein lipase genotypes for homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance/insulin/fasting glucose. Increased carbohydrate intakes were positively associated with homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance and insulin in rs328 G carriers but not CC homozygotes (p for interaction was 0.025).

"These results indicate that diet high in carbohydrate may not be suitable for metabolic syndrome rs328 G carriers, calling for the development of personalized dietary intervention for metabolic syndrome subjects," (Zhang. 2015) scientists say.

• Unsurprisingly, the combination of both, diet and exercise triggered significant reductions in weight and body fat in both diet groups (high and low carb). Nevertheless, both, the carbohydrate content of the diet and the genotype < > diet match, had significant effects on the study outcomes, as well. More specifically, ...
  • the participants following a more carbohydrate restricted diet experienced significantly greater weight loss and slightly greater body composition changes (the low-carb-fat-loss-advantage), and
  • matching diet based on gene-type exhibited better retention of fat free mass, albeit with no significant differences between groups in changes in weight or fat mass (the genotype-lean-mass-advantage).
  Now that sounds pretty much like genotyping your diet was always the way to go, right? Well, in view of the fact that the falsely assigned subjects experienced a slightly greater reduction in body fat percentage, the interpretation of the study results does actually depend on one's individual goals and is thus less obvious than it may appear to be when you read the abstract.
• How much should you eat, ladies? Study shows: No equation can answer this question exactly -- You may believe that your apps and fitness trackers were able to tell you "exactly" how much energy you need, but  eventually their recommendations are also based on equations like those Kisiolek et al. tested in their latest study.
  
  

  

  Do We Systematically Underestimate the Energetic Costs of Push-Ups, Pull Ups, Squats & Co? Study Says Anaerobic Exercises Burn 2x More Energy Than Previously Thought | learn more

  For the experiment on which I base the above statement, the scientists recruited twenty-five recreationally active, college-aged women (20.72 ± 0.97 yrs; 163.04 ± 5.67 cm; 67.08 ± 10.40 kg; 29.04 ± 5.80% BF) who underwent a single day of testing, consisting of determination of REE by indirect calorimetry (TrueOne® 2400 Metabolic Measurement system, ParvoMedics, Sandy, UT) followed by body composition assessment.
  
  To avoid interferences by exercise or dietary factors, all subjects were instructed to refrain from strenuous exercise 48 hrs prior to testing in addition to fasting >8 hrs prior.
  
  During the actual testing, the participants laid motionless without falling asleep for 15-20 minutes during REE determination. Data were recorded during a period of time in which criterion variables (e.g., VO2 L/min) changed less than 5% every 5 minutes. In addition, the subjects' body composition was assessed using air displacement plethysmography (BODPOD, Cosmed, USA) via the Siri equatio and fed into the three equations the scientists tested, i.e. the (1) Nelson Equation the (2) Mifflin-St. Jeor Equation and the (3) Harris-Benedict Equation (with a moderate activity factor).
  

  

  Figure 2: Energy expenditure (kcal/24h) according to indirect calorimetry (measured) and the three tested equations (calculated); %-ages indicate differences to measured values (Kisiolek. 2015).

  For all three tested equations the results were significantly different than indirect calorimetry (p < 0.001; see Table 1). More specifically, ...
  • the Nelson and Mifflin-St. Jeor equations underestimated REE when compared to indirect calorimetry by 345.5 ± 51.5 and 220.6 ± 47.3 kcals, respectively,
  • while the Harris Benedict overestimated REE by 272.4 ± 49.3 kcals.
  Against that background it could be considered a "success" that all three equations were moderately correlated with the subjects' objectively measured resting energy expenditure (REE) as determined by indirect calorimetry.
  
  Well, "success" or not, the implications of Kisiolek's study should be clear: "Practitioners should exercise caution when providing dietary recommendations based upon predicted REE values as certain equations may over or underestimate energy requirements by several hundred kilocalories" (Kisiolek. 2015); and I would like to add: If you want to make sure you're nailing it, log your dietary intake during a weight stable week - that's the only way to know for sure how much energy you need.

So what didn't make the "cut"? Worth mentioning, but not discussing in detail are the observations Mullins et al. made when they investigated the effects of Iron Cuts®, a thermogenic supplement from MusclePharm, that appeared to improve the subjects strength, but had no significant effects on the health or body composition of 20 recreationally trained men who participated in Mullins' prospective, double-blind, placebo controlled randomized trial (Mullins. 2015).

Statistical significance was only observed for the small increase in fatty acid oxidation in response to Shred-Matrix® from -3h to pre-workout not for the post increase (Seijo. 2015). Neither of them means that the supplement will actively promote fat loss, though.

The increase in fatty acid oxidation Seijo et al. observed when they studies the acute effects of Shred-Matrix® on fat oxidation is certainly more impressive than the results of Mullins study, but eventually it is of even less practical relevance. As a SuppVersity reader you should now that the currently available research refutes the existence of a reliable mechanistic link between the acute increases in fatty acid oxidation the scientists observed before and after the workout and long-term fat loss (the post-workout increase in fatty acid oxidation was not even significantly higher than the increase in the placebo group, by the way).

In view of the lack of effect on mood state and perception of hunger it is thus very questionable, whether the supplement can actually do what the scientists say their results would "suggest" and augment "the weight-loss benefits at rest and during exercise" (Seijo. 2015) | Comment!

References:

• Coletta, A., et al. "Influence of Obesity-Related Genotype on Weight Loss Success and Body Composition Changes While Participating in an a 3-Month Exercise and Weight Loss Program: Preliminary Findings." The FASEB Journal 29.1 Supplement (2015a): LB241.
• Coletta, A., et al. "Effects of matching diet type to obesity-related genotype on body composition changes in women during a six-month resistance-exercise training and walking program." Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition 12.Suppl 1 (2015b): P16.
• Kisiolek, J., et al. "A comparison of resting energy prediction equations in young recreationally active women." Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition 12.Suppl 1 (2015): P50.
• Mullins, Jacy, et al. "Safety and efficacy of a proprietary thermogenic and cutting agent on measures of muscular strength and endurance, body composition, fat metabolism, and hormone levels." Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition 12.Suppl 1 (2015): P13.
• Seijo, Marcos, et al. "Effectiveness of multi-ingredient supplement on substrate utilisation, perception of hunger, mood state and rate of perceived exertion (RPE) at rest and during exercise." Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition 12.Suppl 1 (2015): P42.
• Zhang, Shixiu, et al. "Diets high in carbohydrate may not be appropriate for rs328 G carriers with the metabolic syndrome." Asia Pac J Clin Nutr 24.3 (2015): Ahead of print

MSM Cures Exercise Related Joint & Muscle Pain, But May Effect Immunity | Arginine Silicate Delivers, but Practically Relevant Data is Still Missing | ISSN Research Review '15 #5

Exercise induced joint and muscle pain - Can a few grams MSM help?

In this installment of the SuppVersity ISSN '15 Research Re- or rather Overview I couldn't really find a common theme. With two studies on MSM and one on arginine silicate you could probably best call it the "less researched supplement review".

Many people probably don't even know that MSM stands for "methylsulfonylmethane" and the notion that one could benefit from inositol-stabilized arginine silicate was - I openly admit that - complete news to me, too.

Read more about ISSN and other studies at the SuppVersity

Vitargo, Red Bull, Creatine & More | ISSN'15 #1

Pump Supps & Synephrine & X | ISSN'15 #2

High Protein, Body Comp & X | ISSN'15 #3

Keto Diet Re- search Update | ISSN'15 #4

The Misquantified Self & More | ISSN'15 #5

BCAA, Cholos-trum, Probiotics & Co | ISSN'15 #6

• The benefits of inositol-stabilized arginine silicate as a workout ingredient - Over the past years the way people thought and think about arginine has changed significantly. While it was originally considered a super-supplement that would increase pump, gains and vascularity, most recent studies on its effects on relevant markers of exercise performance and training adaptation yield similarly disappointing results as Gary Cooks honor thesis from 2015 in which he observed that neither arginine supplementation 20 minutes prior to exercise, nor arginine supplementation two hours post exercise had an effect on the increase in strength performance or hypertrophy following a 4-week resistance training regime (Cook. 2015).
  
  

  

  Only few studies show ergogenic effects of plain arginine. This one, however reports a sign. increase in to exhaustion in a group of elite wrestlers.

  With more and more consumers becoming aware of the lack of effect of regular arginine, supplement producers are forced to develop "alternatives" - alternatives that promise to finally do what regular l-arginine supplements promised to do: Boost your nitric oxide levels, exercise performance and overall gym experience. With inositol-stabilized arginine silicate (ASI; Nitrosigine®) there's a true newcomer that is set about revolutionizing the pre-workout supplement scene ... that's at least if we believe in what the patent holders tell us about the "new standard for pumped results" (manufacturer's homepage).
  
  In fact, ASI has been previously shown to enhance blood levels of arginine up to six hours post-dose and increase nitric oxide levels, acutely (Kahlman. 2014). In the long(er) term, Whether that would produce practically relevant increases in perceived intra-workout energy, muscle pump, and stamina, as well as post-workout muscle recovery was now the subject of a new study by Rood-Ojalvo et al. (2015).

Future (independent) research necessary: When it comes to supplement research it is absolutely normal that the effects of new products are initially tested by the ones who invent / produce it. In the long run, however, it would be nice to see the results of the study being reproduced by independent research... research that would also include actually meaningful (=performance or hypertrophy-related), objectively measurable study outcomes instead of subjective levels of perceived energy and (on their own) practically irrelevant increases in blood flow.

• The randomized double-blind placebo-controlled cross-over study study was conducted with 16 male subjects with limited exercise routines prior to participating in the study. The subjects took 1,5g/day of ASI or a placebo supplement daily for 4 days before they completed an intense leg extension exercise protocol to induce muscle soreness. Subjects then returned to the lab after 24, 48, and 72 hours for additional study measurements. After 72 hours, subjects repeated the leg extension exercise protocol to assess whether the provision of ASI (or placebo) had measurable effects on the recovery protocol.
  

  

  Figure 1: In spite of significant changes in blood flow velocity and leg circumference (which is interpreted as increased blood flow / hyperemia by the authors) the study at hand cannot prove practically relevant ergogenic effects of ASI simply because corresponding outcome variables were not assessed (Rood-Ojalvo. 2015).

  The scientists' analysis of the data they got produced two important results: Firstly, the 19-33 year-old subjects felt significantly more energetic and less fatigued (at least based on inertia sub-scores) on the 72 hour retest compared to placebo (p = 0.039). Secondly, the provision of the supplement lead to significant increases in leg circumference. Unfortunately, this increase in leg circumference is not a sudden muscle gain. Rather than that, the increased leg circumference appears to be a result of increased hyperemia (=increase of blood flow).
• In conjunction with the significant decrease in CK levels - a purported, albeit unspecific marker of muscle damage - in the ASI group at 24 (p = 0.040), 48 (p = 0.017) and 72 (p = 0.034) hours, the overall results of the study at hand do thus suggest that short-term supplementation with inositol-stabilized arginine silicate could have ergogenic effects. In the absence of meaningful outcome measures such as the number of reps (=volume) or the maximal weight lifted during the exercise tests, it would yet be premature to say that ASI is a proven ergogenic. 
• MSM for muscle and joint pain in marathoners and other athletes -- As Withee et al. point out in the introduction of the abstract to their poster presentation "[p]articipants in organized running commonly experience muscle and joint pain while training for and competing in distance events" for them a supplement that is able to reduce the pain associated with osteoarthritis could be a true game changer; and methylsulfonylmethane (MSM), a sulfur-based nutritional supplement, could be that supplement.
  
  Several previous studies have shown that MSM has anti-osteoarthritic and anti-inflammatory properties. Whether it would also help managing exercise-induced muscle and joint pain, effectively, was now the research question of a recent study from the National College of Natural Medicine in Portland (Withee. 2015). The design of the study is simple:

  "Twenty-two healthy females (n = 17) and males (n = 5) (33.7 ± 6.9 yrs.) were recruited from the 2014 Portland Half-Marathon registrant pool. Participants were randomized to take either MSM (OptiMSM®) (n = 11), or a placebo (n = 11) at 3g/day for 21 days prior to the race and two days after (23 total). Pain was recorded using a 100 mm Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) for both muscle pain (MP) and joint pain (JP) on a single questionnaire. Participants completed the questionnaire at five time points. Baseline levels (T0) were recorded approximately one month prior to the race. Post-race pain levels were recorded at 15 minutes (T1), 90 minutes (T2), 1 Day (T3), and 2 days (T4) after race finish. Data were analyzed using linear mixed models controlled for baseline, with time point as a repeated factor. Simple contrasts compared post-race time points to baseline, and Student's t-tests assessed between-group time point comparisons" (Withee. 2015)

  Unfortunately, this cannot be said for the study results, which showed nothing but a trend of lower pain levels in the MSM group - with non-significant time-by-treatment effects in either of the groups.
  

  

  Figure 2: Muscle and joint pain  15 minutes (T1), 90 minutes (T2), 1 Day (T3) after half-marathon race with methylsulfonylmethane (MSM | 3g/day) or placebo supplementation (Withee. 2015)

  In view of the fact that the provision of the 3g of MSM did result "in nearly significantly lower MP at T1 (MSM = 27.3mm vs. placebo = 49.8mm, p = 0.063), and lower MP at T2 (27.1mm vs. 40.0mm; p = 0.300), and T3 (30.0mm vs. 41.9mm; p = 0.306)" (my emphasis in Withee. 2015), as well as similar changes in joint pain (see Figure 2), it does still appear warranted to conclude that MSM supplements (3g/day) may be worth trying for anyone suffering from persistent joint and/or muscle pain after workouts.
• MSM as an inflammatory cytokine modulator -- While the previously discussed study by Withee et al. (2015) clearly indicates that MSM supplementation helps managing the level of exercise-induced inflammation, Withee et al. did not investigate the mechanism that was responsible for their observations. A recent study from the University of Memphis, however, did just that: In said study, Godwin et al. determined the effect of MSM on lipopolysaccharide (LPS) - induced inflammatory mediators after a single bout of acute eccentric exercise.
  
  To do so, they had five recreationally active, healthy men consume either 3g/day of MSM or a placebo supplement for 28 days. At the end of the supplementation program, a single bout of acute exercise (10 sets of 10 repetitions of eccentric knee extensions) was performed and blood samples were collected (immediately = 0 h, as well as 24 h, 48 h and 72 h post exercise) and analyzed.
  
  

  

  Do you remember that MSM can also act as a GH booster & bone builder | more

  The most significant results of the analysis are hardly surprising: The supplementation of MSM blunted the increase in the systemic levels of inflammatory cytokines (IL-6 and IL-1β) immediately after exercise.
  
  What is surprising, though, is the fact that the inflammatory response to LPS exposure in an ex-vivo study with blood that had been drawn at various time-points during the study shows a "dramatic increase in inflammatory cytokine secretion (IL-6, IL-1β and TNF-α) only after exercise for samples that was exposed to MSM" (Godwin. 2015).
  
  So what does that mean - practically speaking? Well, the authors are certainly right, when they point out that ...

  "[t]his response is specific to the stimulation with LPS as secretion of LPS-non responsive proteins is not increased, as evident by the stable levels of IL-17a [... and thus suggestive of the fact that] MSM is able to reduce the initial cytokine surge that is induced by acute exercise, while allowing for an efficient response to infectious stimuli after a single bout of acute exercise" (Godwin. 2015).

  On the other hand, this assumption stands in contrast to the 2-3 fold increase in IL-10 production after LPS stimulation for the subjects in the MSM group whose pre-exercise levels of the IL-10 levels before exercise. Previous research did after all suggest that greater IL-10 production my be the motor of the exercise induced "depression of immunity commonly reported in athletes engaged in high training loads" (Handzlik. 2013). Whether the chronic use of MSM supplements entails an increased risk of infection may thus warrant further investigations.

3x 1.3g/day cordiceps synensis can significantly increase time to exhaustion and have (individually different) beneficial effects on the ventilatory threshold (Hirsch. 2015).

Two more to go... two more studies that is: While the total number of ISSN '15 studies I haven't discussed or at least mentioned in this series yet is larger than two, there are only two studies I'd like to single out before the end of this installment of this Suppversity series. The Cordyceps synensis study by Hirsh et al. who were able to show that 4g of the mushroom can improve oxygen kinetics, and peak power non-significantly, as well as time to exhaustion significantly in recreationally active subjects who completed  a maximal graded exercise test, 6 min sub-maximal cycle test, and 3 min all-out cycle test, each separated by at least 24 hrs when the supplement is consumed chronically, i.e. in thee servings of 1.3 g equally spread across the day for three weeks (Hirsch. 2015).

Also worth mentioning, but in the absence of hard evidence of causality hardly worth discussing in much detail is Marc Bubbs' observation that basketball players who are training at high-intensity "seem more likely to have insufficient levels of vitamin 25(OH)D" (Bubbs. 2015) - if a follow up shows that normalizing these levels with supplementation will have performance enhancing effects, though, this would be really news-worthy | Comment on Facebook!

References:

• Bubbs, Marc. "Observational case study-Vitamin 25 (OH) D status of professional basketball players and its impact on athletic performance and recovery." Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition 12.Suppl 1 (2015): P55.
• Cook, Gary. The Effects of Chronic Arginine Supplementation on Muscle Strength and Hypertrophy Following Resistance Training. Diss. Ohio Dominican University, 2015.
• Godwin, Simone, et al. "MSM enhances LPS-induced inflammatory response after exercise." Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition 12.Suppl 1 (2015): P48.
• Handzlik, Michal K., et al. "The influence of exercise training status on antigen-stimulated IL-10 production in whole blood culture and numbers of circulating regulatory T cells." European journal of applied physiology 113.7 (2013): 1839-1848.
• Hirsch, Katie R., et al. "Chronic supplementation of a mushroom blend on oxygen kinetics, peak power, and time to exhaustion." Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition 12.Suppl 1 (2015): P45.
• Kalman, Douglas, et al. "A clinical evaluation to determine the safety, pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of an inositol-stabilized arginine silicate dietary supplement in healthy adult males.(LB418)." The FASEB Journal 28.1 Supplement (2014): LB418.
• Rood-Ojalvo, S., et al. "The benefits of inositol-stabilized arginine silicate as a workout ingredient." Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition 12.Suppl 1 (2015): P14.

Ketogenic Diet Research: Total Body Weight and Fat Gain, but not Muscle Protein Synthesis After Exercise is Impaired in Rodents on Ketogenic Diet | ISSN Research Review '15 #4

I don't know what exactly was in the ketogenic rodent chow that was used in the study at hand, but I doubt it were transfat laden sausages ;-)

Welcome to the fourth issue of the SuppVersity ISSN '15 Research Review... as you will notice I am trying to make the introductions shorter and shorter with each installment of this series. So, let's not waste time and dig right into the latest research on ketogenic diets.

Yes, you heard me right. There is new research on ketogenic diets that does not focus on weight loss, the obese and/or cancer. Rather than that, the studies discussed in this installment of the ISSN '15 Research Review deal with the effects of ketogenic diets on the skeletal muscle anabolic response to resistance exercise, as well as its effects on weight gain in an ad-libitum diet scenario.

Read more about ISSN and other studies at the SuppVersity

Vitargo, Red Bull, Creatine & More | ISSN'15 #1

Pump Supps & Synephrine & X | ISSN'15 #2

High Protein, Body Comp & X | ISSN'15 #3

Keto Diet Re- search Update | ISSN'15 #4

The Misquantified Self & More | ISSN'15 #5

BCAA, Cholos-trum, Probiotics & Co | ISSN'15 #6

• You can build muscle on a ketogenic diet - theoretically -- While previous studies on low carbohydrate diets have already demonstrated that eating tons of fat and almost no carbohydrates can trigger improvements in body composition, it is still not clear whether the consumption of virtually carbohydrate-free diets may impair the resistance training induced anabolic response in skeletal muscle. In a previous ISSN article, for example, Paoli et al. )2012) state that their observations in gymnasts on ketogenic diets confirms that

  "the mechanism underlying the increase of body fat utilization [on ketogenic diets] has some pathways in common with mechanisms contributing to the lack of muscle mass increase [which is why] during the ketogenic diet it is actually very difficult to increase muscle mass" (Paoli. 2012).

In their latest study, researchers from the University of Tampa tried to get to the bottom of this myth by looking at the degree of muscle protein synthesis (MPS) in rodents on carbohydrate-rich Western and low-carbohydrate "ketogenic" diets (see Figure 1 for the exact macronutrient ratios).




Figure 1: Macro composition of the non-isocaloric chow (KD - 5.2 kcal/g, W - 4.5kcal/g | Mobley. 2015).

In week seven and thus after six weeks on the respective diets, the right-leg plantarflexor muscles of the researchers' "subjects", male Sprague-Dawley, were acutely exercised under isoflurane anesthesia by the means of high-frequency electrical stimulations (4 sets of 8 repetitions with 2 min recovery between sets). 90, 180 and 270 minutes after this highly controlled exercise stimulus a group of 8 rodents, each, was sacrificed and the levels of a previously injected tracer (intraperitoneal puromycin) were used as a marker for skeletal muscle protein synthesis (MPS).




Figure 2: While the absolute figures have not yet been published, I can already tell you that - statistically speaking - the type of diet did not make a difference (Mobley. 2015)

As you can see in Figure 2, the scientists observed a "main time effect for MPS". In non-scientist English this means that the training resulted in statistically significantly increase in muscle protein synthesis in the trained vs. untrained legs at 90, 180 and 270 min. What is much more important, though, is that this effect was not significantly different for the ketogenic vs. Western diet group. In conjunction with the lack of difference in phosphorylated (p)-4E-BP1 (Thr37/46) and p-rps6 (Ser235/236), two important signalling proteins that are involved in the control of skeletal muscle protein synthesis, it is thus probably warranted to conclude that "these data demonstrate that rats fed a ketogenic diet present a similar anabolic response to resistance exercise compared to rats fed a Western diet" (Mobley. 2015). Whether that's a "fair", let alone practically relevant comparison (the Western diet was lower in protein and isn't exactly a good representation of the average diet true muscle heads will be consuming) is anyone's guess, though.

While some people make it appear as if we already knew that ketogenic diets are superior, you may remember that some recent studies show that balanced diets have more favorable effects on the body composition of certain athletes | learn more

Ketogenic diets and fat free mass - an issue that requires further research in general: Only recently Grant M. Tinsley and Darryn S. Willoughby from the Baylor University highlighted in a review that a "potential loss of fat-free mass (e.g. skeletal muscle)", is a "potential concern of these “ketogenic” diets" of which the "majority of studies" suggests that it was inevitable. Since the most of these studies involve "aggressive weight loss diets" and lack an exercise component, "further research is needed to determine whether resistance training can effectively slow or stop the loss of fat-free mass typically seen in individuals following a ketogenic diet" (Tinsley. 2015). The study at hand can thus be considered the first in a line of studies on the effects and "mechanisms underlying the effects of a ketogenic diet on fat-free mass" (ibid.).

• Even if it wasn't for the questionable control diet, there would still be one thing the data from Mobley's study cannot tell us and that's whether the putative reduction in IGF-1 that has been observed on low carbohydrate diets (Caton. 2012) may have long(er)-term detrimental effects on muscle gains. There is, as you as a SuppVersity reader will know, good evidence that IGF-1, despite its irrelevance for short term increases in muscle protein synthesis, may play an important role in the long-term adaptational response to exercise (I suggest you go back to this SuppVersity Classic Article if that's news to you). It's thus not just the fact that we are dealing with a rodent study here that makes me want to say that future long(er) term studies in humans are necessary before the myth that ketogenic diets may impair (long-term) gains can be put to rest once and for all.
• Is weight gain hardly possible on the ketogenic diet? Actually this is another common ketogenic diet myth: When you are consuming a ketogenic diet you cannot get fat. Sounds stupid, right? Well, if you look at a recent study that comes - just as the previously cited study - from the University of Tampa (Holland. 2015), would certainly appear as if there may be something to this claim.
  
  In their 6-week rodent study, Angelina M. Holland and colleagues compared the effects of ketogenic (KD), Western (WD), and standard chow (StdChow) control diets on fat deposition and serum health-related biomarkers (exact macronutrient ratios are given in Figure 3).
  

  

  Figure 3: Macronutrient composition of the diets in Holland's study (Holland. 2015).

  Over the course of the study, the scientists' "subjects", male Sprague-Dawley rats (~9-10 weeks of age) were provided isocaloric amounts of either a KD (5.2 kcal/g, 20.2% protein, 10.3% carbohydrate, 69.5% fat; n = 50), WD (4.5 kcal/g, 15.2% protein, 42.7% carbohydrate, 42.0% fat; n = 66), or StdChow (3.1 kcal/g, 24.0% protein, 58.0% carbohydrate, 18.0% fat n = 10). At the end of the study the exact daily food intake and body weights were recorded and the animals were sacrificed in order to analyze the weight of four different fat depots.
  
  As it was to be expected, the rats on the ketogenic diet consumed slightly less energy (3,540 ± 74 kcal) than those on the western diet (3,638 ± 83 kcal) over the course of the six week study. It is thus not surprising that there was a significant inter-group difference in terms in terms of the total amount of weight rodents in the KD and WD group gained: 397g vs. 494g to be precise.
  

  

  Figure 4: Due to a significantly reduced feed efficacy (weight gain per energy intake) the rats on the ketogenic diet gained sign. less weight than both, the rats on the Western diet and standard chow (Holland. 2015).

  What may come as a surprise, though, is the generally reduced feed efficiency (=amount of body weight gained per kcal the rodents consumed) of the ketogenic diet. With a feed efficacy of only 0.018g/kcal, the ketogenic diet was significantly less fattening than the Western diet (0.042 ± 0.007g/kcal) and the standard chow (0.045 ± 0.012g/kcal).
  
  That's a quite a remarkable result, but if the lack of weight gain applied only to the total amount of body weight, it would be difficult to decide whether that's a good or a bad thing. When the scientists took a look at the weight of the fat depots, however, it became clear that the lion's share of the weight difference was mediated by a lack of fat, not just weight gain.

  "KD and StdChow had significantly less absolute and relative omental (absolute omental: 0.8 ± 0.3g and 1.2 ± 0.4g vs 1.6 ± 0.6g, respectively, p < 0.05; relative omental: 2.1 ± 0.7 and 2.4 ± 0.7 vs 3.2 ± 1.2g/kg, respectively, p < 0.05) compared to WD rats. KD and StdChow also had significantly less perirenal adipose tissue compared to WD (absolute perirenal: 4.2 ± 1.3 and 5.4 ± 1.4 vs 7.8 ± 1.8g, respectively, p < 0.05; relative perirenal: 10.6 ± 2.8 and 11.4 ± 2.4 vs 15.6 ± 3.0g/kg, respectively, p < 0.05). KD had significantly less absolute inguinal subcutaneous (SQ) and scapular brown fat than WD (absolute SQ: 4.3 ± 1.5 vs 6.6 ± 2.4g/kg; absolute brown fat: 0.6 ± 0.2 vs 0.8 ± 0.3g) but similar relative SQ and brown fat weights" (Holland. 2015).

  In view of the concomitantly reduced serum triglyceride levels (WD - 319.7 ± 109.8mg/dL versus StdChow 163.0 ± 67.0mg/dL and KD 69.9 ± 21.2mg/dL; p < 0.05), serum cholesterol and glucose levels glucose, the claim that ketogenic diets may help mammals to maintain stable body weights while improving, not messing with their glucose and lipid metabolism does therefore appear to be clearly supported by the study at hand. All that still has to be done before we can remove the "?" from the subheading that precedes the previous paragraphs would be a human study with a similar / identical design to exclude that any differences in glucose and, more importantly, fat metabolism in human beings increase the feed efficacy of the ketogenic diet to an extent that nullifies the benefits.

Are you looking for an unconventional nootropic? Look no further. Morning cardio on empty could be just what you've been looking for. Learn more in "Breaking the Fast, Cardio & Your Brain: Cardio on Empty is Fatiguing. Fasting Without Exercise, However, Can Have Nootropic Effects"

Which studies didn't make it into this installment of the ISSN '15 Research Review? This time, three studies didn't make the cut. There's Jason Cholewa's study on the "effects of a sports nutrition education intervention on nutritional status, sport nutrition knowledge, body composition, and performance in NCAA Division I baseball players," which may make it into a special on the importance of sport nutrition knowledge, when the full text is published, Solomon et al.'s study on the "efficacy study of alpha BRAIN®" as a nootropic where I would like to see the absolute improvements and the respective standard deviations in cognitive performance before discussing the study in the SuppVersity news, as well as Jones' and Davidson's investigations into the "proportionality of skeletal muscle before and after intervention" the significance of which would go unappreciated if I simply summarized the little information from the abstract | Comment on Facebook!

References

• Caton, Samantha J., et al. "Low-carbohydrate high-fat diets in combination with daily exercise in rats: effects on body weight regulation, body composition and exercise capacity." Physiology & behavior 106.2 (2012): 185-192.
• Cholewa, Jason M., et al. "The effects of a sports nutrition education intervention on nutritional status, sport nutrition knowledge, body composition, and performance in NCAA Division I baseball players." Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition 12.Suppl 1 (2015): P44.
• Holland, Angelia M., et al. "Ketogenic versus Western and standard chow diets favorably alters fat deposition and serum biomarkers in rats." Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition 12.Suppl 1 (2015): P21.
• Jones, Brian A., and Robert T. Davidson. "Muscle proportionality: The proportionality of skeletal muscle before and after intervention." Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition 12.Suppl 1 (2015): P51.
• Mobley, C. Brooks, et al. "The anabolic skeletal muscle response to acute resistance exercise is not impaired in rats fed a ketogenic diet." Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition 12.Suppl 1 (2015): P22.
• Paoli, Antonio, et al. "Ketogenic diet does not affect strength performance in elite artistic gymnasts." Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition 9.1 (2012): 34.
• Solomon, Todd M., et al. "A randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled, parallel group, efficacy study of alpha BRAIN® administered orally." Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition 12.Suppl 1 (2015): P54.