Guest Post: The effect of omega-3 fatty acids on muscle and body composition (by Matt Jones)

Whole-body protein turnover is the continuous process within the human body by which protein is created (anabolism) and broken down (catabolism), it is believed to occur at a rate of 300 g/day in an average 70 kg man. Whole-body protein turnover is largely regulated by feeding, a number of specific nutritional factors, along with fasting, hormonal factors and certain disease states. Gains in skeletal muscle occur following prolonged periods of net protein deposition; where muscle protein synthesis exceeds net muscle protein breakdown, thus resulting in a net gain in muscle protein (Wagenmakers, 1999).

Humans, especially athletes often seek net gains in muscle protein; such gains enable increased muscle mass and enhance muscle recovery. As mentioned, a number of nutritional and hormonal factors regulate protein synthesis and thus have a significant impact on body composition; the way you look.

Protein intake is known to have a significant effect on whole-body protein turnover, but what effect does fish oil have, if any?

Recent studies have suggested long-chain omega-3 fatty acids enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of insulin pathway signalling, therefore generating mTOR activity. The mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) regulates a number of physiological components, including; interestingly protein synthesis. Signalling through the mTOR is activated by amino acids, insulin, and growth factors, but impaired by nutrient or overall energy deficiency.

So mTOR regulates muscle protein synthesis; and mTOR signalling is activated by insulin, the efficiency of which is enhanced by omega-3 fatty acids.

In a study of fish oil supplementation (4 g/day) providing 1.86 and 1.50 g/day EPA and DHA for 8-weeks in nine healthy middle aged subjects, Smith et al (2011a) revealed the anabolic response to insulin and amino acid infusion was greater in those subjects supplemented fish oils. In addition, muscle protein concentration and muscle cell size were both greater after fish oil supplementation; clearly demonstrating fish oil aids the activation of mTOR. This has previously been demonstrated in older adults (Smith et al. 2011b), and Gingras et al (2007) also demonstrated a positive effect of fish oil supplementation on mTOR activation and subsequent muscle protein synthesis through enhanced insulin signalling.

This apparent activation of the insulin signalling pathway is thought to derive from the anti-inflammatory effects of long-chain omega-3 fatty acids. Insulin resistance is associated with chronic inflammation; both EPA and DHA exert significant anti-inflammatory effects, and actively reduce inflammatory signalling molecule production. In an intricate study on mice, Young Oh et al. (2010) reported omega-3 fatty acid supplementation inhibited inflammation and enhanced insulin sensitivity. A similar mechanism has also been demonstrated in humans, Tsitouras et al. (2008) revealed adults fed a high omega-3 fatty acid diet for 8-weeks increased insulin sensitivity through improved inflammatory status.

So how is that of benefit?

Well supplementation of omega-3 fatty acids increase insulin sensitivity which allows for more effective activation of the insulin signalling pathway ultimately leading to mTOR stimulation and muscle protein synthesis. Increasing insulin sensitivity also has a significant effect on a number of other physiological functions including an increase in glucose and fatty acid uptake by muscle cells (Goodpaster et al. 2003); directing nutrients to muscle cells for oxidation (energy production) rather than fat storage, improving overall body composition and providing more fuel for muscle during exercise.

So omega-3 supplementation can activate the body’s muscle making systems and improve body composition?

Well, yes. A randomized double-blind study on 44 middle aged men and women supplemented either 4 g/day omega-3 fatty acids providing 1,600 mg/day EPA and 800 mg/day DHA, or 4 g/day safflower oil for 6-weeks revealed omega-3 fatty acid supplementation significantly increased fat free mass (body mass minus fat mass), significantly reduced fat mass, and had a tendency to reduce body fat percentage (Noreen et al. 2010).

These studies highlight a mechanism that eludes omega-3 fatty acid supplementation can significantly improve body composition. Stemming from the anti-inflammatory capacity of both EPA and DHA, omega-3 fatty acids can increase insulin sensitivity which has a knock on effect on muscle anabolism in the presence of dietary carbohydrate and protein (typical of a post-workout meal/supplement) and repartitioning of energy to muscle instead of fat which ultimately results in fat loss. These initial findings require further exploration in more rigorous studies with more participants and in a more controlled setting; although the science is clearly there to be disproved.

.

References

Gingras, A., White, P., Chouinard, P., Julien, P., Davis, T., Dombrowski, L.,... & Thivierge, M. (2007). Long-chain omega-3 fatty acids regulate bovine whole-body protein metabolism by promoting muscle insulin signalling to the Akt-mTOR-S6K1 pathway and insulin sensitivity. Journal of Physiology, 579, 269.

Goodpaster, B., Katsiaras, A., & Kelley, D. (2003). Enhanced fat oxidation through physical activity is associated with improvements in insulin sensitivity in obesity. Diabetes, 52, 2191 – 2197.

Noreen, E., Sass, M., Crowe, M., Pabon, V., Brandauer, J., & Averill, L. (2010). Effects of supplemental fish oil on resting metabolic rate, body composition, and salivary cortisol in healthy adults. Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition, 7, 31.

Smith, G., Atherton, P., Reeds, D., Mohammed, B., Rankin, D., Rennie, M., & Mittendorfer, B. (2011b). Dietary omega-3 fatty acid supplementation increases the rate of muscle protein synthesis on older adults: a randomized controlled trial. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 93, 402.

Smith, G., Atherton, P., Reeds, D., Mohammed, B., Rankin, D., Rennie, M., & Mittendorfer, B. (2011a). Omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids augment the muscle protein anabolic response to hyperaminoacidemiahyperinsulinemia in health young and middle aged men and women. Clinical Science (London), 121, 267.

Tsitouras, P., Gucciardo, F., Salbe, A., Heward, C., & Harman, S. (2008). High omega-3 fat intakes improves insulin sensitivity and reduces CRP and IL6, but does not affect other endocrine axes in healthy older adults. Hormonal Metabolism Research, 40, 199.

Wagenmakers, A. (1999). Tracers to investigate protein and amino acid metabolism in human subjects. The Proceedings of the Nutrition Society, 58, 987.

Young Oh, D., Talukdar, S., Bae, E., Imamura, T., Morinaga, H., Fan, W., Olefsky, J. (2010). GPR120 is an omega-3 fatty acid receptor mediating potent anti-inflammatory and insulin sensitizing effects. Cell, 142, 687.

.

Bio: Matt holds a BSc (Honours) degree in Sport & Exercise Science, an MSc in Nutrition Science. Through his own Performance Nutrition business, Nutrition Condition, he delivers frequent Health & Wellbeing Workshops to corporate and personal clients advising on how best to develop a sound, scientifically structured nutrition programme free from fads and marketing bias. Nutrition Condition also delivers Performance Nutrition services to professional athletes.

Matt can be contacted on matt@nutritioncondition.com or at www.nutritioncondition.co.uk

For regular updates follow Matt on Twitter @mattNCUK.

.

BCAAs for Bodybuilders: Just the Science (Part 1)

Introduction

Though BCAA supplementation is used by several populations with contrasting goals (e.g. bodybuilders and other aesthetic pursuits, strength athletes, the elderly or other individuals with the potential for lean body mass losses), this article will focus purely on the bodybuilder with the objectives of gaining more muscle mass, maintaining muscle mass, or maintaining muscle whilst losing fat.

.

What are BCAAs?

Branched-chain amino acids (BCAA) are named after their branching chemical structure and consist of the three essential amino acids: leucine, isoleucine and valine. BCAAs are one of the most popular supplements available on the market. Their popularity may rest in some part to the unique role of BCAAs, in particular, leucine, regarding the modulation of protein synthesis via the stimulation of the biochemical sensor, the mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR). In addition to their commercial use, BCAAs have been extensively studied in a number of roles relevant to athletic performance, including: immune function, central fatigue, sparing lean body mass, attenuating markers muscle damage and promoting muscle protein synthesis (MPS). Unknown to a lot of trainees, probably due to clever marketing, is the fact that BCAAs are found in whole proteins and are often cheaper on a gram per gram basis compared to their isolated counterparts. In addition to their BCAA content, whole foods contain all the additional amino acids and offer other benefits (some potentially anabolic) that go along with them (e.g. generally better satiety, various vitamins & minerals, and therapeutic properties) (Table 1).

.

Table 1: BCAA and leucine content of foods

Source for data.    *Products from www.myprotein.com

.

From table 1, you can see that high quality proteins such as animal flesh, eggs and supplements derived from milk, contain quite a high percentage of BCAAs. On a gram per gram basis, you get more than double the amount of BCAAs for your money if you opt for a high quality whey protein isolate than if you were to purchase isolated BCAAs. As such, why would someone not just opt for a whey protein supplement if they were looking to bump up the content of protein or BCAA in their diet? After all, it would offer the same convenience (probably more so if you account for the awful taste of BCAA powders).

Is there a benefit to BCAAs?

As stated earlier, there has been a fair bit of research examining the effects of BCAA supplementation on various aspects relating to performance and body composition. Indeed, several studies have in fact shown BCAA supplementation to positively impact body composition (i.e. improve muscle gain or fat loss), support immune function and reduce markers of muscle damage. All seems good so far? Not quite. With a closer inspection of the data, these outcomes are unsurprising, as it is clear that protein is always insufficient in the first place. So essentially, what these studies are showing is that adding BCAAs to a diet containing inadequate protein (by my standards, at least), their addition may improve the dependent variable/s that the researchers are looking at.

For example, in a study often-quoted by the companies/people looking to sell BCAA supplements, Mourier et al. (1997) examined the effects of 52 g of BCAAs on body composition during three weeks of caloric restriction in a group of competitive wrestlers. In this study, the wrestlers were given a diet consisting of 28 kcal/kg/day with 20% protein. This equated to roughly 80 g of protein per day (or 1.2g/kg) for a 68 kg wrestler. It was found that the supplement group, who ingested an additional 52g of BCAAs, spared more LBM and experienced slightly greater fat losses compared to the control.

In a study published in an Italian journal, the authors compared the effects of 0.2 g/kg of BCAAs with a non-caloric placebo taken 30 minutes before and after training, on bodybuilding progress in a group of experienced drug free bodybuilders (with at least 2 years training experience). The BCAA group showed better gains in body weight, arm and leg circumference, and squat and bench press performance. So essentially, using a 90 kg athlete as an example, this study showed that adding 36 g of BCAA around a workout is better than ingesting nothing. A 'bro' could’ve told you that!

These studies are often cited as ‘proof’ that you need massive doses of BCAAs, particularly around training. I think otherwise. Firstly, the subjects in the initial study consumed insufficient protein (1.2g/kg per day). In my previous article on protein requirements, I came to the conclusion that 2.5-3 g/kg would be more appropriate for strength/power athletes. Using a 68 kg individual as an example, this would mean a protein intake of 80 g vs. 170-204 g per day, a difference of about 18-25 g of BCAA per day from whole food sources (more so, if whey were to make up a significant proportion of the added protein intake). Though it is unknown whether the wrestlers would’ve still outperformed the control group given a sufficient protein intake in the first place, I have my doubts.

Speaking of protein insufficiency, it is no surprise that a mega dose of BCAAs around training was superior to consuming nothing around training. This study by Cribb & Hayes (2006) perfectly demonstrates the importance of the provision of nutrients around training. Given a sufficient protein intake in the first place, as well as the provision of whole foods around the training bouts, it is also unknown whether the BCAA group would have outperformed the placebo control.  Specifically, since I recommend consuming 40 g of protein within a two-hour window prior to and after training (80 g total), 80 g of protein would provide roughly 15-20g of BCAAs (depending on the source) around the training bout as well as all the other amino acids. For these reasons, I also have my doubts that additional BCAA supplementation on top of my whole protein recommendations, would prove any additional benefit.

Though there is research demonstrating the benefits of BCAA supplementation regarding the promotion of muscle protein synthesis and preventing muscle protein breakdown (MPB), whether this holds true in the presence of sufficient amino acids from whole food sources remains to be properly studied. As such, given that whole protein sources such as whey are more economical than isolated BCAAs, and that the vast majority of people looking to build muscle are already consuming (with many possibly exceeding) a protein intake that I consider adequate(2.5-3 grams per kilogram of body weight), the real question we should be asking is, whether adding BCAAs to an already high protein intake will offer any benefit. Or, an additional question is whether there is something unique about isolated BCAAs. Specifically, will isolated BCAAs offer something that adding more protein from whole foods will not (i.e. does their structure or their caloric economy offer any benefits to body composition)? In the following section and in a future post, I’ll attempt to answer these vital questions.

.

Is a high protein intake sufficient at optimising muscle gain?

To my knowledge, no published studies have examined the effects of chronic BCAA supplementation on body composition alongside a structured resistance-training program, and in addition to an already high protein intake. Luckily, there is a study that fits these criteria, and is the only one that comes close to answering the question of whether adding BCAA to a pre-existing sufficiency of protein yields any benefit. It isn’t fully published, but is available on the ISSN website in the form of a poster presentation. Stoppani et al. (2009) examined the effects of a supplement (Xtend) containing BCAAs on body composition and strength following an eight-week resistance-training program in 36 strength-trained males with a minimum of two years weight training experience. The participants were assigned to one of three groups and were to receive one of the following, during their eight week program: 14 g BCAAs (BCAA), 28 g whey protein (WHEY) or 28 g of carbohydrate from a sports drink (CHO). The BCAA group gained 4 kg of lean mass whilst the WHEY group gained 2 kg of LBM over the course of eight weeks. For completeness, the CHO group gained 1 kg of LBM in eight weeks. In addition, the BCAA group lost 2% body fat in the eight weeks whilst the WHEY and CHO groups both lost 1% body fat. To top things off, the BCAA group gained a greater amount of 10-RM strength in the bench press (6 vs. 3 kg) and squat (11 vs. 5 kg) compared with the WHEY group.

Interestingly, these results occurred despite a habitual daily protein intake of 2.2-2.4 g/kg. At closer inspection, these results do appear to be too good to be true. Indeed, a gain of 4kg of LBM in just eight weeks, with a concomitant decrease in body fat of 2%, seems a little farfetched, especially when you consider that these subjects were drug-free, experienced weight trainees. In my articles of maximum muscular potentials, I mentioned that a novice could expect to gain about 1kg per month (assuming they get everything right training and nutrition-wise). Achieving double this amount of muscle gain in experienced trainees just doesn’t seem right. When results appear this good, I look to see who funded the study. It was in fact Scivation, the makers of the Xtend product that was tested, who funded the study. While funding does not automatically invalidate study findings (they have to get the funding from somewhere!), it may bias the results somewhat. My thoughts on the matter echo those of Alan Aragon who discussed this trial in the February 2010 issue of his monthly research review:

“The skeptic in me is tempted to chalk up some of the results to not just funding source (Scivation), but also the longstanding friendship [my link] between Jim Stoppani and the Scivation staff. The fact is, there’s no way to quantify the degree of commercial bias inherent in this trial – or any other for that matter.”

With all things considered in this trial, I find it highly unlikely that the provision of an extra 7 g of BCAA per day in the BCAA group would have outperformed the WHEY group to such an extent. As such, I would like to see similar trials conducted before recommending the addition of BCAA on top of an already sufficient protein intake.

.

Conclusion (for now)

To summarise so far, we have learned what BCAAs are, their unique role in protein synthesis, as well as what foods they are contained in and in what percentages (table 1). At first glance, the extravagant marketing claims and suggested protocols of usage seem to be backed by scientific research. However, as we dig a little deeper, it seems unlikely that these benefits would exist in the presence of a sufficient protein intake. Though additional BCAAs might be beneficial to bodybuilding goals (i.e. more muscle and less fat), the research has yet to show these effects. If such effects do exist, they are likely to be miniscule. Because of this, they would only be something worth considering for the elite physique athletes who are looking for that extra 1-2% to gain an advantage over their competitors. For the majority of people just looking to improve their body composition, I see them as an unnecessary expense; focusing more on what delivers (i.e. progressive strength gains in the main compound lifts in addition to a well-structured nutrition protocol) will allow them to reach their desired goals (and more). In the absence of sufficient scientific evidence, from my experiences both personally, as well as client feedback, adding BCAAs to a diet of adequate protein consumed appropriately around training, has failed to produce any noticeable benefits, despite the potential for placebo effects.

To give this topic appropriate justice, I will be splitting it into two or more parts. In subsequent posts, I will examine the research behind between-meal dosing of BCAAs (popularised by Dr. Layne Norton) and the rationale for their use whilst dieting. I will end the topic of BCAA supplementation by tying things up with an overall summary and offer my practical recommendations.

Click here for part 2.

If you enjoy my writings, please follow me on twitter (@JosephAgu) and don’t forget to subscribe to the blog to be informed of future posts -->

Where are Poliquin’s principles?

.

Introduction

As the title suggests, this is another article about world-renowned strength coach, Charles Poliquin. Poliquin's ideas have received a lot of resistance over the past 12 months. Not only have these criticisms come from internet message boards and other things that I consider “bro”, but from many respectable people within the fitness industry, such as Alan Aragon and Bret Contreras. Are these negative claims towards Poliquin warranted, you ask? As the saying goes, “there is no smoke without fire”, and indeed, Poliquin has made countless ridiculous claims in his career. I am not talking about minor quibbles regarding the interpretation of the available literature, which I expect of any human being. Rather, many are unsubstantiated and dishonest claims, with the apparent aim of promoting his supplement line and other interests. To give you a taste of some of his outlandish claims, I critiqued the ever-popular ‘BioSignature Modulation’ in some detail a while back.

Getting back to the current post, it was Bret Contreras who inspired the topic of this article. In May of last year, Contreras wrote an article entitled ‘Grill the Guru I: Charles Poliquin’ for reasons contained in that post. Towards the end of that article, I witnessed quite possibly the most ridiculous claim I’ve ever seen from a fitness industry “expert”. Poliquin stated that he gained 14.5 lbs. of solid muscle whilst simultaneously losing 3.5 lbs. of fat, in only five days! Perhaps the most absurd part of this claim is that he supposedly achieved it by a change in food quality, specifically, eating foods from the Dominican Republic rather than his native US. In the following sections, I’ll show you why these claims are impossible. I’ll quote parts of the original article written by Poliquin and interject with my own thoughts, countering these claims from several angles.

“I realize how anabolic food is every time I go teach in the Dominican Republic [DR]. Last time I taught a Biosignature Modulation course in the DR, the students took my body fat Monday morning. I was at 8% and weighed 198 pounds… Anyway, five days later, after eating only Dominican Republic foods, I weighed 209 [pounds] at 6% body fat. My business partner came to finish the seminar, took one look at me and said, "What happened to you?!" 

Before I get in to the specifics, the five-day timeframe might actually be an error on Poliquins part. He stated that he had his measurements taken at the beginning of the week (Monday morning). It’s unlikely that the course would’ve run till Saturday. Instead, it is more likely that it would’ve been a Monday-Friday thing. Thus, making it four days (Monday-Friday) instead of five (Monday-Saturday). Since I’m nice, I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt and go along with five days to give him an extra 24 hours to have achieved this feat within. As such, Poliquin supposedly gained an average of 2.8 lbs. (1.3 kg) of muscle per day, whilst simultaneously losing 0.7 lbs. (0.32kg) of fat per day.

.

Is it even possible?

Looking back at my previous article on maximum natural muscular potentials, I provided a table, adapted from bodyrecomposition.com, showing that the potential rate of muscle gain for an absolute beginner is roughly 2.2lbs. (1 kg) per month. These figures assume a well-structured weight-training program, excellent nutrition, average genetics and no drugs. With all other factors being equal, it is possible to slightly exceed this rate of muscle growth providing you have exceptional genetics. Additionally, one could also exceed this rate of muscle growth following a period of detraining (the wonderful phenomenon of muscle memory!), as all you’re doing is regaining what you initially lost. Finally, if you add a cocktail of drugs into the mix, you could potentially double this rate of muscle gain (at least in the short term anyway).

To be fair to Poliquin, he very well may have spikes in muscle gain that may exceed the rate of "newbie gains" within given timeframes, as he admittedly loses muscle mass from time to time on his travels (see quote below). As such, following a period of muscle loss followed by normal training/eating, he can expect to regain the lost muscle rather quickly.

“But when I work in the UK or Ireland, I lose muscle mass and put fat on almost inevitably, even though I try to eat as cleanly as possible. The quality of the food is just piss poor.”

Claiming that you can lose any significant amount of muscle and gain fat (if at all) within the space of a few days due to minor changes in nutrient density is also ridiculous. However puzzlingly, in this video, Poliquin states quite clearly that he goes to great lengths to maintain his diet on his travels, specifically, his meat and nut breakfast which he states “will dictate all your neurotransmitters for the day” due to the maximisation of levels of dopamine and acetyl choline. Though these statements aren't supported by science, if this is what he eats year round, I highly doubt he'll lose muscle just by eating it in a different restaurant.

So, if CP could gain that much muscle in such as short space of time, what would it theoretically take to achieve such as feat? In order to gain 2.8 lbs. (1.3 kg) of pure muscle tissue per day, for five days it would require lots of protein. For the sake of argument, let’s just ignore human protein metabolism for a minute and pretend that protein is digested with 100% efficiency whilst being exclusively used by and incorporated in the muscle with 100% efficiency (and that the energy required for these process and total energy expenditure were already taken care of). Even then, it would require the consumption of at least 1300g (14g/kg.BW) of protein (5200kcal) per day. This would be the equivalent of about 52 chicken breasts, 217 eggs or 26 protein shakes (assuming 2 scoops per shake and 25g of protein per scoop).

Even if it were possible to store this much protein on a daily basis, it would require much more than 1300g per day. The exact amount is unknown since it has never been tested. However, based on the estimated rates of muscle gain in natural trainees (assuming a protein intake of the often quoted 1 g/lb. of body weight and a body weight of 75 kg), depending on the experience of the weight trainee, it was calculated that between 1.25-33g of protein were incorporated into muscle tissue per day. This equates to 0.76-20.2% of the total daily protein intake. If we extrapolate these figures to the claims of CP, he would require between 6435-170,300g of protein per day (25,740- 681,200 kcal). I’ll give CP the benefit of the doubt one more time and assume that he could gain muscle at twice the rate of a newbie. To achieve an average daily increase in muscle mass of 2.8 lbs. (1.3 kg), it would still require a daily protein intake of 3217 g (12,870 kcal); an intake that would be impossible using whole food sources. Ultimately, whatever the theoretical number to gain this much muscle may be, it would be physiologically impossible to digest, and more importantly, synthesise this much protein in a single day.

Even if you starved Phil Heath until he was 150 lbs, made him live in the gym, injected him with as many drugs as you could find, and force fed him to the point that his stomach would almost rupture, he couldn’t gain that much muscle in such a short space of time. It’s impossible!

.

Hold on a minute!

Poliquin made no mention of increases in protein intake; he was talking solely about food quality.

“Now, there's no such thing as grain-fed in the DR; they can't afford it, so cows eat grass. And if you eat a mango over there you have to eat it over a sink because it's so juicy. The eggs too are far more anabolic. They're orange and full of omega-3s, like all eggs naturally were thousands of years ago… A DR avocado tastes like butter it's so rich in nutrients. Eating avocados over here is like eating fiberglass once you've had a DR avocado. It's like having sex with Pamela Anderson then having to have sex with Rosie O'Donnell.”

Thankfully, I’ve never had sex with either Pamela Anderson or Rosie O’Donnell, so I can't comment further on this statement. I strongly doubt that Poliquin has either, making his comment a moot one.

If we assume that the quality of foods is generally better in the Dominican Republic than here in the UK, what CP is saying is that by eating a few grams more omega-3 fatty acids per day, you can put on a kilogram of muscle per day, whilst losing body fat. Whilst omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids may have “anabolic” properties, these effects would be miniscule, and you certainly wouldn’t notice any differences in a matter of a few days. Besides, since you would have to consume roughly 115g of grass fed beef to get a gram of omega-3 compared to 400g of conventional beef, it seems like a very inefficient way of boosting omega-3 intake. Surely Poliquin knows this since he recommends mega dosing fish oils in the order of 30 g or more per day. As for the eggs, each omega-3 enriched egg contains roughly 0.3-0.6g of omega-3s, compared to around 0.1g per regular egg. This is also an inefficient means to increase total omega-3 intake; a supplement or the regular consumption of fatty fish would be a better option. To top things off, in the same video, Poliquin states that he "rarely eats eggs" anyway.

It gets even sillier

While CP supposedly finds the time to eat all of this food to gain 14.5 lbs. of muscle tissue, how on earth does he possibly oxidise a net value of roughly 0.7 lbs. of fat per day (roughly 2520kcal worth)? While it is possible to just about shift this amount of fat within the specified time frame, it would require an extraordinary effort, and would also inevitably result in muscle loss. Unless he could partition calories with a god-like effect, he wouldn’t be able to gain an ounce of muscle while maintaining such an energy deficit.

 .

Concluding remarks

You might be wondering why CP makes such extravagant claims? I'll let you decide after his next point in response to the initial question.

The original question: “Is there a supplement-related trick to retaining muscle while on a strict fat loss program?”

“Back to your question. One of the most important supplements to take when on a calorie restricted diet is BCAAs. You need about 50 grams a day. Take it between meals.”

This article is already getting lengthy so the short answer to his response is that you don’t need 50 g per day. In fact, if you were to take 50g of BCAAs, using Poliquin’s product, it would set you back around $66 (£39) per week (excluding shipping). That’s over $3432 (£2143) per year, on top of all your food and other supplements.

Even after cutting CP an incredible amount of slack and when viewed in the most optimistic light, his claims of gaining 14.5 lbs. of muscle whilst simultaneously losing 3.5 lbs. of fat, in as little as five days, are impossible. These assertions are even more ridiculous when you consider that he apparently achieved all this by some minor changes in food quality. These claims also beg the question "if living in the Dominican Republic were so anabolic, surely they would dominate the majority of strength/power sports as well as bodybuilding". However, they don't.

Hopefully this article has done its job, and shown you that even the most decorated and respected “fitness gurus” can be full of hot air. While this article might not seem to offer anything constructive, when it comes to nutrition, knowing not what to do is often more important than knowing what to do, or who to listen to. Given that the vast majority of people interested in improving their body composition or performance don't have a background in exercise physiology or nutrition, they often don't have the tools to make the right decisions and therefore have to put a certain degree of faith in who they listen to. Unfortunately, a lot of these individuals succumb to glamorous marketing, leaving them spinning their wheels when they don't get the results they expected. So while this article will, at best, provide a little humour to the honest professionals who share my frustrations, it will hopefully allow the people who don't know any better, to make more informed decisions and give them realistic expectations of what they can achieve. I encourage these people to question everyone and everything they hear (including me), especially if there's something to be sold. Would you expect a car salesman to tell you that you could save money and go with a cheaper, better model from a different dealership? No, so why expect any different from someone wanting to sell you supplements.

Anyway, that’s enough ranting for one day; I’m off to book my flight to the Dominican Republic because I’m losing muscle mass by the millisecond living here in the UK.

Happy New Year!

How to miminise fat gain during the Xmas period

Due to the large quantities of not so good food within reaching distance over the Xmas and new year period, as well as the volume of parties and other social events, this part of the calendar is a difficult time to maintain bodyweight. As such, the purpose of this article is to suggest some tips to avoid sabotaging your diet over the festive period.

During this time, most people usually fall into one of two categories. The first type of person (the obsessive type) carries on the way they did the other 300+ days of the year and doesn’t gain an ounce of fat. They felt miserable and deprived over Xmas, but at least they still have their six-pack! The other type of person, completely caves into temptation and eats everything in sight, and more. They end up gaining a significant amount of body fat in as little as a couple of weeks, which can often take a few months to shift with anything but extreme dieting. This type of person has a great time over Xmas but pays the price come new year. These type of people are also seemingly responsible for the sudden January ‘spike’ in gym memberships.

For those of you who want to have your cake and eat it (no pun intended), this short article will hopefully give you some tips that will allow you to have a certain degree of flexibility within your diet and enjoy the festivities, without the unwanted fat gain. Nothing in this article is new, in fact, many of these ideas have been discussed in detail elsewhere; I can remember Lyle McDonald even writing a similar article a few years ago on this very topic. You won't find things like “keep your eye on the prize”, choose to lose” or “Just say NO” here. What I’m attempting to achieve is to combine some science and a little common sense, to allow people to eat more of what everyone else is having without worrying too much about the consequences. Contrary to several claims in recent years, ingesting more energy that is expended over a protracted period is basically what fat gain boils down to. Therefore, the following strategies all work by minimising the chances of overeating.

1. Eat lean protein and vegetables prior to (or at) the event before tucking into more calorific food. Given the satiating power of lean proteins such as chicken, turkey and some fish (e.g. cod and tuna), consuming some protein will curb hunger somewhat before you move on to more calorific mains and desserts, leaving you less likely to overeat. Adding some veg to this protein snack/meal will add to the satiating effects of protein.

2. Try intermittent fasting. Though there are many approaches to intermittent fasting, arguably the most popular interpretation is that of Martin Berkhan from LeanGains. His approach involves fasting for 14-16 hours everyday, leaving the person with an 8-10 hour window to consume all their food for the day (typically to the tune of 2-3 larger meals). Assuming the party will be in the evening, an individual would fast (or only consume lean protein and veg) during the day then consume all of (or the majority of) their calories that evening. If they will be eating the bulk of the food during the day there is no reason not to fast (or just consume protein) for the rest of the day, or even the following day. Using this protocol, unless the person eats everything in sight, it is unlikely that they will consume much more than their maintenance caloric needs, if at all.

3. Employ a degree of ‘damage control’. Lyle McDonald used this term in relation to dieting in his book A Guide to Flexible Dieting. It ties into the previous point about not eating everything in sight, or until you feel like you’re going to burst. Oftentimes, when people eat something they think they shouldn’t, they gorge on whatever they were eating until they consumed the whole thing. They see themselves as a failure for breaking their diet and somehow rationalise to themselves that “If I ate one piece of cake, I might as well have three”. If you go to a party or meal, eat what you want, but stop eating when you’re satisfied. There is no point going eating beyond hunger just for the sake of it, you’ll probably just regret it in the long run. Basically, eat what you fancy, enjoy it, don’t feel guilty, and don’t be a pig about it.

4. Eat out. This ties in with the last point about damage control. If you’re at a friend’s party it is much easier to eat several pieces of cake or whatever else takes your fancy. However, if you’re at a restaurant, you can only imagine the awkwardness of ordering three desserts.

5. Go deplete some glycogen. In addition to increasing fat oxidation, depleting glycogen prior to an event or meal will increase the likelihood that the carbs you consume will be stored as glycogen instead of being used for energy or possibly being stored as fat; it’s almost like you are getting those calories for free. To deplete glycogen, you’ll need to increase your training volume leading up to the event. This can be achieved by performing more reps (8-12 per set) and more sets (4-8 depending on how many body parts you’re training). Something akin to German volume training should do the trick. Otherwise you can simply get more running or cycling miles in at a decent enough intensity (two or three extra hard 60 minute efforts should almost empty muscle glycogen stores, assuming you aren’t compensating with food intake).

6. Go for the low calorie option. Again, this ties into point 3 about limiting the amount of damage. Go for low fat versions of cakes and other desserts. For alcohol, opt for spirits with a diet mixer to get as drunk as you desire while consuming the minimal amount of calories. If these options aren’t feasible you could always host your own party.

In conclusion, these are some simple strategies that anyone can employ to ultimately prevent overeating over Xmas, or in similar situations at other times of the year. Though each point will work alone, they can be combined to increase their effectiveness. For example, performing depletion work, while intermittent fasting, followed by eating out will almost guarantee that you won’t overeat. In fact, chances are that you’ll lose body fat with this approach. There are other things you can do, but for the most part, I feel that these are the most effective without being too restrictive. As a final pointer, it would be best to steer clear of the bathroom scales since bodyweight tends to fluctuate independent of actual fat mass due to variations in sodium and carbohydrate intakes. This water retention may lead you to believe that you’ve gained 3kg of fat in a couple of days, however, such a feat would require a daily energy surplus in excess of 11,000 kcal!  By following some of these principles, the worst/least common case scenario is that you gain a pound or two of fat, which is far better than ten. This isn't a bad price to pay for an enjoyable Xmas, and you can be back to your pre-Xmas body composition by mid-January.

How to create a diet: part 2

Continued from part I

2. Setting protein intake

With the more complicated stuff out of the way, the next step of filling the calories with the macronutrients is really simple.

I discussed the issue of protein requirements here so I won’t go into any great detail in this article. The RDA for protein is set at 0.8 grams per kilogram of bodyweight (g/kgBW), while research typically recommends intakes of 1.2-2.2 g/kgBW for athletic populations (i.e. from endurance to strength athletes). As I mentioned in the protein requirements article, I tend to err on the side of too much than too little protein and typically recommend intakes between 1.7-3 g/kg.BW for most individuals. Such intakes are realistically achievable by most and wouldn’t seem to impede on carbohydrate requirements of athletes for a given energy budget.

3. Setting fat intake

Unlike protein there isn’t really an evidenced-based dosing range to cite when talking about fat intake. As long as essential fatty acid intake is met, which is virtually impossible not to with a typical diet, fat intake technically doesn’t have to be any higher. Having said that, calories have to come from somewhere. Furthermore, in order for a diet not to be bland, in addition to there being enough fat to optimise the absorption of fat soluble vitamins, I like to use intakes of 1-1.5 g/kg as a starting point, which suit both non-athletes and athletes (due to the contribution of intramuscular triglycerides [IMTG] as a fuel source during exercise) alike.

4. Setting carbohydrate intake

Now that we’ve set total kcal, protein and fat, carbohydrates simply fill the remaining calorie allotment. Using myself again as an example, I’ll run through steps 1-4 based on my stats and training/activity.

• REE/BMR = 24.2 x 78 kg = 1888 kcal. Since the “moderately active” activity factor most accurately represents my current activity I’ll multiply my REE/BMR by 1.55 (1888 x 1.55) giving a TEE of 2925 kcal per day.
• Since my athletic goals include maximising muscle hypertrophy and strength, I’ll set protein intake at the upper end (3g/kg of BW) of my recommendations. This equates to a daily protein intake of (78 x 3) 234g. As each gram of protein contains roughly 4 kcal, daily protein intake equates to 936 kcal.
• As I don’t deplete a great deal of IMTG through training, I’ll set fat intake at the lower end of my recommendation (1g/kg). This equates to a daily fat intake of (78 x 1) 78 g. As each gram of fat contains roughly 9 kcal, daily fat intake equates to 702 kcal.
• To calculate carbohydrate intake in grams, all we need to do is subtract the sum of protein and fat kcal from total kcal, then divide by 4 (the amount of kcal per gram of carbohydrate).

1. Protein = 234 x 4 kcal/g = 936 kcal
2. Fat = 78 x 9 kcal/g = 702 kcal
3. TEE (2925 kcal) – 1638 (936 + 702) = 1287 kcal from carbohydrate.
4. 1287 / 4 (number of kcal per gram of carbohydrate) = 321 g

Totals:

Energy: 2925 kcal

Protein: 236 g (32%)

Fat: 78 g (24%)

Carbs: 321 g (44%)

This whole process is pretty straightforward and should take a few minutes at most since all you need to know is your current body weight and training volume/frequency.

From the totals, you will also notice I listed the percentage of total energy that each macronutrient makes up. While knowing this percentage breakdown isn’t all that useful for most purposes, it gives you an idea of how your diet compares to ones that are set up as percentages. In reality, these percentages are not too dissimilar from the Zone Diet. However this won’t be the case for everyone as made in the earlier example.

As a final point on this matter, diet percentages are secondary to meeting a person’s individual macronutrient requirements. In other words, once you’ve worked out how much protein and fat you require, allow carbs fill the remaining calorie budget and let the percentages be what they are. Attempting to do things the other way round is confusing and doesn’t address individual needs.

From the current example, my real-world experience tells me that my maintenance energy need has been overestimated by roughly 200-300 kcal. In this case, I’d leave protein and fat intake the same and decrease the suggested carbohydrate intake from 321 g to roughly 246-271 g per day.

From there, you would split the macronutrients up over a realistic number of meals (3-5) over the course of the day and aim to meet these individual macronutrient goals. It is worth remembering that the total macronutrients consumed is far more important (at least in terms of body composition) than the macronutrient subtype (i.e. type of protein, type of fat, glycaemic index etc.), meal frequency, or any specific timing of the ingested nutrients etc. (with the possible exception of outlandish extremes that are very rarely encountered in the real-world).

Is this for everyone?

As with everything in relation to nutrition, the answer is almost always, “it depends”. These values aren’t set in stone I just use them as a good staring point. I don’t mind going lower than the bottom end of my protein recommendations (e.g. for people who already have achieved their desired amount of lean body mass and are eating at maintenance). However, rarely do I suggest much more than 3 g/kg, even when dieting (a possible exception being drug-fuelled bodybuilders). After accounting for protein, I typically let fat intake determine carbohydrate intake (as it makes up the remaining calories). However, for type II diabetics or insulin resistant individuals, or just people who don’t tolerate carbs very well in general, I like to opt for a lower carbohydrate intake. Because of this, fat intake has to increase in order to make up the calories.

For people who don’t really engage in a great deal of high-intensity exercise, fat intake can also be set a bit higher than recommended above (if preferred), with a relatively lower carbohydrate intake. Contrary to what the insulin-phobic “gurus” would like to convince you, calories do count, and after adequate protein is set, skewing fat or carbohydrate either way will have little overall impact on body composition in healthy individuals as long as total calories remain the same. Anyone who says that you can eat as much as you want as long as you avoid carbs has either completely ignored the available evidence on the matter or/and is trying to sell something.

What about fat loss or muscle gain?

While these recommendations are fine for people who wish to remain weight stable, most people want to lose weight (fat), and some, gain weight (usually muscle). In the case of losing body fat (speaking exclusively about manipulating diet), I like to increase protein slightly (relative to maintenance levels; see my previous article on protein requirements for details on this) and then create an energy deficit as a percentage of maintenance requirements (by roughly 10-20% as a starting point). The reason being that an often quoted 500 kcal deficit would be quite significant for a small female with a maintenance caloric requirement of 1800 kcal (28%), and less so for a large male with a maintenance requirement of 3500 kcal (14%). Calories would be cut from either fat, carbs or both and would depend on several factors (e.g. level of hunger, type of training, food preference etc.). It should also be mentioned that individuals might wish to eat the same and just increase activity, or use a combination of both dieting and increased exercise to bring about fat loss.

In terms of gaining muscle mass, I’d go with the exact opposite (i.e. increase carbs and/or fat) except for keeping protein the same as maintenance levels. Though these recommendations aren't a bad starting point, I should point out that I am grossly oversimplifying matters, and to go in any great detail would take many more articles.

Final point

Though total macronutrient intake would seem to have the greatest overall impact compared with any single dietary modification, other variables such as: nutrient timing, meal frequency, macronutrient subtype, nutrient density (vitamin and mineral content per calorie), non-nutritive dietary components and supplementation, would have a measureable impact on body composition, sporting performance and health. That is assuming the ability of an individual to successfully implement a desired macronutrient intake on a daily basis in the first place.

Summary & application

Hopefully these two articles have shed some light on how to properly construct the backbone of a diet (i.e. the macronutrient content) in a simple and individualised manner. Estimating total maintenance macronutrient intake is briefly summarised below and requires knowledge of only current body weight and training load:

1. Multiply bodyweight (in kg) by 24.2 (males) or 22 (females) to determine resting energy expenditure.
2. Multiply this value by an appropriate activity factor.
3. Set protein intake between 1.7-3 g kg of bodyweight.
4. Set fat intake between 1-1.5 g kg of bodyweight.
5. Let carbohydrate fill the remaining calorie budget.

This totals would then be roughly divided among a realistic number of meals and modified in accordance with real world observations (i.e. changes in body composition) or body composition goals (e.g. fat loss or muscle gain).