0.3g/kg Bicarbonate Will Make Trained Cyclists Last 4.5 Min Longer (+9%) During Std. High Intensity Cycling Tests

Don't forget that cyclists are not the only group of athletes who can benefit from bicarbonate supplementation. Strength trainees who spend hours in the gym and train at high intensities will also benefit!

I know that most of you are into resistance not endurance training. So, before I even get into the discussion of the experimental procedures and the results of the latest study from the Institute of Sports and Preventive Medicine at the Saarland University in Saarbrücken, Germany, I would like to point you to an older SuppVersity article which indicates that bicarbonate supplementation is able to Up Your Squat (+27%) & Bench Press (+6%) Within 60 Min" (read more).

Now that you've hopefully put away your prejudices against "that endurance supplement", let's get to the previously mentioned study by Florian Egger, Tim Meyer, Ulf Such, and Anne Hecksteden (thanks to Conrad P. Earnest for bringing this to my attention).

You can learn more about bicarbonate and pH-buffers at the SuppVersity

The Hazards of Acidosis

Build Bigger Legs W/ Bicarbonate

HIIT it Hard W/ NaCHO3

HIIT + Bicarb = Perfect Match

Bicarb Buffers Creatine

Beta Alanine Fails to HIIT Back

To investigate the effects of BICA supplementation on performance during prolonged, high-intensity cycling to exhaustion in well-trained athletes, the scientists from the Saarland University recruited 6 male and 5 female "well-trained" cyclists (mean ± SD: age 24±8 y, BMI 21.3±1.7, VO2peak 67.3±9.8 ml/kg/min - the VO2peak value tells you that they were fit ;-).

In a double-blind, randomized cross-over design, the subjects underwent two stepwise incremental exercise tests and two constant load tests (with two phases) on an electrically braked cycle ergometer (Excalibur Sport, Lode, Groningen, The Netherlands).

Figure 1: Schematic representation of the general design.Time interval between tests is specified in days (d). Data are presented as means ± standard deviation respectively, with minimum (min) and maximum (max) values (Egger. 2014).

As the overview of the study design in Figure 1 tells you, each test type was completed twice. Once after the ingestion of 0.3 g/kg sodium bicarbonate (yes, that's roughly 24g for someone who weighs 80g and should not be consumed too fast, because otherwise it may trigger diarrhea) or a placebo supplement in form of 4 g sodium chloride that was chosen to make sure that any benefits that were observed were due to the natrium, not the bicarbonate content of sodium bicarbonate.

There is relatively little sodium in NaHCO3: Sodium bicarbonate, baking soda or NaHCO3, as a chemist would say is a molecule that contains natrium (or sodium as the Americans say) and bicarbonate. It has a total molar mass of 84.007 g/mol. This means that ~73% of the sodium bicarbonate powder you ingest are actually bicarbonate and only ~27% are sodium. The whopping dose of 20-30g of bicarbonate that is usually used in studies will thus deliver "only" 5.4g-8.1g of sodium. That's still plenty, but as you know for a trained athlete who's sweating like a pig during his workouts and may be losing up to 30g of sodium in his sweat, it's not a problem and can in fact be a performance enhancing blessing (see previous article on the dangers of low sodium diets in athletes).

Both the plain salt and the sodium bicarbonate were solved in 0.7 l water. The outcome measures were simple: Only if the subjects were able to pedal significantly longer until they were exhausted in the standardized constant load test, sodium bicarbonate could be considered to have practically relevant performance enhancing effects (maximum performance in the stepwise incremental exercise test, i.e. maximal workload and VO2peak were used as secondary outcomes).

Figure 2: Blood lactate (BLa) concentrations after ingestion (post drink) and during constant load tests (mean ± SD) for the BICA and placebo trials (Egger. 2014)

The other parameters the scientists measured, i.e. the blood lactate [BLa], pH, and bicarbonate concentration, were merely used determine the mechanisms for the potential improvements in exercise performance.

Speaking of auxiliary measures, if you take a look at Figure 2 you will see that the blood pH dropped significantly right after the ingestion of the bicarbonate supplement and remained "low" throughout the trial and afterwards. An observation that does not come unexpected. Previous trials have after all shown that it's the ability of bicarbonate to blunt the high-intensity exercise related perturbations in both blood and muscle acid-base that keeps the maximal work rate up and leads to performance increases compared to placebo supplements.

Bicarbonate Serial Loading! Don't forget that you can reduce the side effects by repeatedly using smaller quantities of sodium bicarbonate aka "serial loading" (read more). Personally, I would expect that this procotol turns the acute performance enhancer into a permanent ergogenic you can use on both on and off days. Unfortunately, a corresponding study that would prove my hypothesis has not yet been conducted.

These performance decrements are caused by the accumulation of hydrogen ions (H+) in the myoplasm and their detrimental effects on myofilament interaction, glycolytic flux and sarcoplasmatic reticulum function. As Egger et al. point out

"[t]he ability of the body to prevent or delay these force limiting processes is determined by the capacity of its intrinsic buffering systems, which counteract the accumulation of H+ both inside and outside the cell," (Egger. 2014)

which explains why the benefits of both beta alanine (which increases the intra-cellular buffering capacity) and bicarbonate are most pronounced in athletes competing in high intensity sports.

Figure 3: Time to exhaustion and maximal workload (total) and maximal workload at the individual anaerobic threshold (IAT) during the bicarbonate and placebo trials (Egger. 2014).

Apropos ergogenic effects: I already gave it away in the headline. The consumption of the bicarbonate supplement lead to immediate increases in the time to exhaustion with 49.5 ±11.5 min being the maximum in the bicarbonate and 45.0±9.5 min being the maximum in the placebo condition.

The maximal workload in the stepwise incremental tests (BICA: 341±66 W; placebo: 339±67 W) and workload at IAT (BICA: 234±5.5 W; placebo 233±5.7 W), on the other hand, did not differ significantly.

Bottom line: In the end, the study at hand confirms what we already knew. Sodium bicarbonate is one of the few supplements with instant ergogenic effects. In that, these benefits are particularly pronounced, when it comes to high volume + high intensity exercises (in this case high volume means cycling for a comparatively long time).

Don't forget that serial loading, i.e. taking smaller amounts of NaHCO3 spread repeatedly, can reduce the side effects without compromising the benefits of sodium bicarbonate supplementation | learn more

Both of these qualities distinguish sodium bicarbonate from beta alanine which acts as an intra-cellular buffer, only, has to be taken for at least two, better four weeks and provides significant performance benefits of 2.85% on average only on exercises that last for 60-240s (Hobson. 2012).

Thus, in spite of the fact that you can obviously use both (see "Beta Alanine and Baking Soda (NaHCO3), a Synergistic Duo for 4-min All-Out Sprints Even in Highly Trained Athletes?" | read more), I personally think that sodium bicarbonate is the more powerful acid buffer for athletes... but as you know, I am willing to accept if you have a different opinion - as long as it is substantiated | Make yourselves heard on Facebook!

References:

• Egger F, Meyer T, Such U, Hecksteden A. "Effects of Sodium Bicarbonate on High-Intensity Endurance Performance in Cyclists: A Double-Blind, Randomized Cross-Over Trial". PLoS ONE 9.12 (2014): e114729.
• Hobson, Ruth M., et al. "Effects of β-alanine supplementation on exercise performance: a meta-analysis." Amino acids 43.1 (2012): 25-37.

Making HIIT a Hit Part I/II: The Quest for the Optimal Interval to Rest Ratio for Your Type & Goals - Warming up: Selected Studies + Individual Take Home Messages to Set the Scene

This series will not readdress the "HIIT and/or LISS debate", but simply try to do what the title says: Help you to determine the "ideal" form of HIIT for your type & goals.

After posting yet another article about the benefits of high intensity interval training (HIIT) training on Wednesday, I thought it may be a good idea to take a look at the pertinent literature to get a better grasp of what exactly high intensity interval training actually is... "What it is? What do you mean?" While almost everyone appears to recommend you do at least some amount of high intensity interval training, these days, the definition of both the "high intensity" and the "intervals" which are more than just eponymous of this type of training are usually pretty wooly. The two questions this article is supposed to answer are therefore: How long should the intervals and rest periods be and at which intensity should they be performed.

Attention, this article turned into a two part series: I must warn you, this "quest" turned out to be hell lot of work and way more than I had expected. So I will have to split it up into a two-part series. With today's first part discussing exemplary "success stories" and the subsequent follow up on next Sunday providing a more comprehensive overview and general conclusions one may draw based on the picture that emerges.

Part I: Success stories - learning from the "best"

I decided that it may be a good idea to initially compile some examples of which you could say that they are examples of a successfully implementation of high intensity interval training. In that, I will put an emphasis on "old" studies that have not yet been discussed on the SuppVersity. This means, if you want more examples before next week's 2nd installment with a more general overview, you can simply click through the archive of articles that are marked with the keyword HIIT - either as HTML or RSS (I recommend the latter if you do not intend to read all of them anyway; opens in all good browsers without a reader).

Untrained participants and non-athletes

• 5min on, 2min off HIIT to increase fitness (VO2max) alternated with 40 min steady state cardio for 4 + 5 weeks (Hickson. 1981) -- Hard to believe but it's more than 30(!) years ago that Hickson, Hagberg and Ehsani were able to show that a combination of high intensity interval training with 6x5min cycling at 90-100% of the VO2max and 2-min at 30%-50% active rest between intervals on day one and 40 min of steady state "cardio" on a treadmill on day 2 (6 workouts per week) yielded profound increases in VO2max:
  

  

  Figure 1: Adaptation to combined HIIT + steady state protocol in "occasionally active" but not "regularly" trained men (n=8) and women (n=1) in the Hickson study (Hickson. 1982).

  For our purpose, the most significant finding of this study may however be that the t_1/2, i.e. the amount of time it takes for 50% of the adaptations to take place is only 10 days (on this intense protocol).
  
  Take home message: If VO2Max and overall conditioning is your goal you should up the intensity every three weeks, to make sure you continue to make progress. If you go by VO2max, this would be an increase in the speed you run or bike - not (!) the duration of the intervals and / or their number.

• 2 series of 5s sprint cycling (8-13x) with 55s of active rest increase force production and rids subjects of "useless" type IIb fibers (Linossier. 1993) -- The 10 students (8 men, 2 women; age 22y; VO2max = 51.2ml/kg/min, everything below 55 is still considered ) in the Linossier study performed 4 HIIT only workouts consisting of 5s all-out sprints on a cycle ergometer interspersed by 55s of active rest cycling at a heart rate of 130-140bpm per week. The number of sprints in each of the two sessions on a single training day (15 min of rest between) were increased from 8 to 13 sprints over the 7-week study period. The main results were improvements in both peak performances +25%  and in the 30-s total work +16%.
  
  

  

  Figure 2: Unexpected shift in muscle fiber type distribution (Linossier. 1993)

  What's also relevant, though not directly performance related is the 19% increase in phosphofructokinase and a 20% increase in lactate dehydrogenase, both are glycolytic enzymes and are indicative of improvements in the glycolytic pathway, which goes to show you that you don't have to be afraid of the fiber type changes hampering either your ability to handle glucose or your strength - I mean +29% in maximal force production in the sprint tests are everything else but "weak".
  
  Take home message: Shorter sprints appear to be a valid means to hammer and improve the glycolytic pathway and get rid of the useless type IIb fibers, of which not endurance athletes, but bodybuilders have the lowest amount and sedentary controls the most (cf. figure 1 in the overview of the Intermittent Thoughts on Building Muscle). To actually build muscle the 1% increase in muscle weight the scientists observed, is yet not sufficient enough.

• 7 sessions of 10x4 min cycling at 90% with 2 min rest ramp up skeletal muscle fat metabolism in young women (Talanian. 2006) -- The 8 healthy recreationally active women (22 yr old, 65.0 kg body wt) who had previously engaged in 2-3 just-for-fun sessions of various activities from weight lifting, soccer and cycling to swimming, or walking, participated in no more than 7 HIIT sessions within 2 weeks (1 day on, 1 day off) which consisted of 10x 4min sprints at 90% of their individual VO2max with two minutes of rest in between.
  
  

  

  Figure 3. Changes in substrate utilization during standardized 60 min LISS test at 60% of the VO2Max (Talanian. 2006)

  Contrary to the previously discussed studies, the scientists were in this case less interested in the performance than in the metabolic benefits, which were - as the data in figure 1 show - surprisingly significant given the short duration of the study. The increases in fat oxidation and decreases in the respiratory ratio (the ratio of glucose to fatty acid oxidation) during a standardized 60min light intensity (60% VO2max) test that was performed at the beginning and end of the study, were a consequence of increases in citrate synthase and beta-hydroxyacyl-CoA dehydrogenase (beta -HAD) activity.
  
  Take home message: In view of the important contribution of beta-HAD to the beta oxidation of (esp. medium-chain) fatty acids, the fact that an upregulation of this enzyme has been observed in response to the long duration intervals, but neither light intensitsy exercise (even w/ 2h per day, 5-6 times per week; cf. Phillipps. 1996), nor during a similar 2-week sprint training protocol (30s all-out on cycle ergometer, 4 min rest; cf. Burgomaster. 2005) points towards "long" duration intervals when mitochondrial adaptations that favor fatty oxidation and thus subsequent increases in fat loss with light activity are concerned. 

Highly trained participants and pro-athletes
 

• 3 sessions of 10 intervals at 96% VO2Max with 60-180s rest increase running economy and relative fatty oxidation during subsequent steady state exercise test (Zavorsky. 1998) -- Twelve highly trained endurance athletes volunteered for this study, four of them qualified for the 1996 Canadian Olympic Trials, and one subject was a Canadian record holder in triathlon. On three different occasions the subject ran 10 x 400-m sprints with active recovery periods of 60, 120, 180s (randomly assigned). 10 min before and afterwards standardized running economy tests were performed.
  
  

  

  Figure 4: Respiratory exchange ratio in RE test before and after the sprinting protocol (Zavorsky. 1998)

  During these running economy tests, which consisted of 2 x 5 min running on a treadmill at 12km/h or 16km/h (5 min total rest in between), the subjects exhibited, much contrary to the research hypothesis, by the way, an increase in the running economy (RE, a measure of how efficiently a person uses oxygen while running at a given pace) and - probably of greater interest for most of you an increase in fatty acid oxidation, as evidenced by the reduced respiratory exchange ratio (RER, figure 4). The latter was particularly pronounced in the "low intensity" RE test at 12km/h.
  
  As far as the differential effects of the rest intervals is concerned, significant effects were observed for the rates of perceived exertion (60s: 17.7; 120s: 16.1; 180s: 14.4), but not for the performance related measurements velocity, and the time it took the athletes to run the 400m sprints (actually the latter should be self-evident with identical velocities).
  
  Take home message: Doing ten short sprints (if you are not an athlete, shorter ones will suffice) before you go jogging (or do any other type of steady state cardio) won't hamper your running economy. And since the study at hand suggests that the relative increase in fatty acid oxidation is specifically pronounced in the lower intensities (this is supposedly even more the case if you jog at 10km/h), the combination of sprints + steady state cardio appears to be an ideal "cardio" only day, when you are trying to lose body fat.

• 8x all-out (100% VO2max) 2.5min intervals with 4 min of active rest increase VO2Max, peak aerobic power and 5k time trial performance regardless rest between sessions (Gross. 2007) -- With the unique twist with respect to the training frequency this study is somewhat unique. While other studies report similar benefits in highly trained collegiate cyclists (13 men, 4 women; VO2Max at baseline 62ml/kg/min) or other endurance athletes, this is one of the few that investigates whether it makes a difference if the athletes implement the 3-days per week HIIT regimen as a block or interspersed by one day of rest into their regimen.
  
  

  

  Percent change in TT5k velocitym TT5k power output VO2peak, and peak aerobic power output in cyclists trainin on consecutive vs. non-consecutive days (Gross. 2007)

  Interestingly enough, neither the performance outcome on the pre- and post tests, i.e. increases in VO2Max (+5.7%), peak aerobic power (+7.2%), 5k time trial performance (+6.9%), nor the actual performance during each of the workouts the subjects performed in the course of the 3-week study period suffered from doing the HIIT sessions back to back. These results refute previous speculations that doing HIIT as a block would trigger greater metabolic adaptations, specifically in athletes (e.g. Padilla. 2000). Even more, though the changes were not statistically significant, the data in figure 5 shows that - with one for endurance athletes important exception, namely the VO2Max - training on non-consecutive days produced marginally better results.
  
  Take home message: While it appears as if it would not make a difference whether you perform your HIIT workouts blocked or within your training week. The non-significant differences in figure 5 could suggest that endurance athletes intending to improve their already high VO2Max even further would be better off with the blocked training. Everybody else has the choice and I would pick the interspersed variety, whenever my schedule allows me to do this - my personal experience told me that this works better for me... apropos, take another look at figure 5 you see the narrow bars indicating the standard deviations? This goes to tell you that it is very likely that not just the personal preferences, but also the actual outcome will vary from trainee to trainee, which supports the notion that you will have to experiment to find what works best for you.

That's it for the "success stories"! Don't forget to come back next Sunday for part II and in case you have not done so already, just browse the previous SuppVersity posts on this matter, either as HTML version, post by post, or from the RSS overview (works in every modern browser, yet not in Google spyware ;-). I know you are smart enough to draw your own conclusions. And what's more, this may yield some cognitive input for the comment area of this article, where you can post questions. I will try to tackle those I can answer in the next installment.

References:

• Burgomaster KA, Hughes SC, Heigenhauser GJF, Bradwell SN, Gibala MJ. Six sessions of sprint interval training increase muscle oxidative potential and cycle endurance capacity in humans. J Appl Physiol. 2005; 98: 1985–1990.  
• Gross M, Swensen T, King D. Nonconsecutive- versus consecutive-day high-intensity interval training in cyclists. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2007 Sep;39(9):1666-71.
• Hickson RC, Hagberg JM, Ehsani AA, et al. Time course of the adaptive responses of aerobic power and heart rate to training. Med Sci Sports Exerc 1981; 13: 17-20.
• Linossier MT, Denis C, Dormois D, Geyssant A, Lacour JR. Ergometric and metabolic adaptation to a 5-s sprint training programme. Eur J Appl Physiol Occup Physiol. 1993;67(5):408-14. 
• Padilla S, Mujika I, Orbañanos J, Angulo F. Exercise intensity during competition time trials in professional road cycling. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2000 Apr;32(4):850-6.
• Phillips SM, Green HJ, Tarnopolsky MA, Heigenhauser GJ, Grant SM. Progressive effect of endurance training on metabolic adaptations in working skeletal muscle. Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab. 1996: 270: E265– E272, 1996
• Talanian JL, Galloway SD, Heigenhauser GJ, Bonen A, Spriet LL. Two weeks of high-intensity aerobic interval training increases the capacity for fat oxidation during exercise in women. J Appl Physiol. 2007 Apr;102(4):1439-47. 
• Zavorsky GS, Montgomery DL, Pearsall DJ. Effect of intense interval workouts on running economy using three recovery durations. Eur J Appl Physiol. 1998; 77: 224-30.

To Spit or to Swallow - That is the Question! Carbohydrate Mouthrinse May Be Better Than Water, Yet Still Not an Option for Performance Oriented Athletes

Image 1: "You need carbs to fuel your workouts!" You know the whole litany... what may be news to you is that scientists are speculating that "intra workout carbs" do not necessarily have to be ingested to do their ergogenic magic.

Those of you, who already "friended" me on Facebook and are following what is going on on the SuppVersity Facebook page (just want to remind you that Facebook has now an option that allows you to be informed, whenever something new is posted), will probably remember the discussion revolving around "carbohydrate mouthrinsing" and whether or not it may be even more beneficial to spit and not to drink your Gatorade... now, all the health benefits of low-carbohydrate (when I am talking "low" I am not talking of Atkins type <80g) diets aside, it does seem pretty counter-intuitive that just swishing one of those carbohydrate-laden electrolyte drinks in between your teeth for a few seconds, to then spit it out again could actually have any merit. Yet, science, or I should say a handful of studies, do suggest otherwise.

As part of their recently published study into the effects of carbohydrate mouthrinsing on exercise capacity in the pre- and postprandial state (Fares. 2011), Elie-J. M. Fares and Bengt Kayser have compiled a list of the 8 hitherto published peer-reviewed papers on that subject. And if you just went by the column "increased perfomance", "yes or no", it appears like it was an established fact that carbohydrate mouthrinsing was highly ergogenic. After all, six out of the eight studies are marked with the tag "increased performance".

Figure 1: Performance increases and standard deviations of the respective measures from studies on the advantage of carbohydrate vs. artificially sweetened or plain water mouthrinse (data calculated based on summary in table 2 of (Fares. 2011)

If we do yet have a look at the quantity of those performance increases and the individual standard deviations (I compiled the respective data for you in figure 1), things begin to look less conclusive. I mean, there is obviously a standard deviation for both arms of each study and there also is a mean improvement (or decrease in performance), but if the "performance increment" is smaller than the standard deviation, for all but one study, this does make me feel uncomfortable with the statement that I would see "scientific evidence", let alone "conclusive scientific evidence" in support of carbohydrate mouth-rinses.

Mouthrinse vs. placebo = minimal (if any advantage), but what about vs. ingestion?

Regardless of what you think about the real world significance of an average performance increase of 1% (calculated based on the data from figure 1), for the small fraction of athletes for whom these minimal performance increases would actually count, i.e. high intensity endurance athletes, like time-trial Tour de France cyclists, the "control", or I should say the "benchmark" should not be plain or sweetened water, but rather one of these crab-, ah... pardon me, carb-loaden sugary electrolyte drinks these athletes are habitually consuming. I was thusly happy to see that Catherine Moss, a student of Sports and Exercise Sciences at the Massey University in Auckland, New Zealand has recently conducted an experiment for her thesis that has much more practical relevance for the high achieving athletes (Moss. 2011).

Table 1: Composition of the placebo and CHO supplement in the Moss study (adopted from Moss. 2011)

In a randomized, counter-balanced, double-blind study, Moss had eight recreationally trained cyclists perform a time trial (with a predetermined amount of work) in the course of which the cyclists ingested or rinsed (swirling 0.33ml/kg body weight of the solution for 8s) with either a placebo solution or a carbohydrate drink, whenever another 12.5% of the total work was done. In that it is worth mentioning that the composition of the CHO solutions differed for the one that was meant to be ingested and the one that was intended to be swished. With the former containing 7.5% and the latter 15% carbs, Moss mimicked solutions that had been used "successfully" previous studies. I do yet no idea, why the placebo did not contain electrolytes, as this could obviously have made a difference at least in the ingestion trials... I guess this is what distinguishes a thesis like this from a study that is worth being published in a peer-reviewed journal ;-)

Figure 2: Mean power output (in Watts) at different time points during time trial (data adapted from Moss. 2011).

As the performance data in figure 2 goes to show, only the ingestion of the carbohydrate led to significant improvements in mean power output, specifically at the later stages of the time trial. This "breakdown" may be explained by the "glycogen reduction exercise protocol" all participants had conducted the day before the time trial. So that after a "low carbohydrate" dinner, the participants were supposed to be glycogen depleted when they performed the time-trial on the subsequent morning.

Figure 3: Total time (in s) during time trial (data adapted from Moss. 2011).

In a way this is an unfair advantage, for the carb ingestion, which accordingly elicited way better time trial times. It does yet not lessen the significance of data on carbohydrate vs. water mouth rinse, which shows pretty conclusively that in a glycogen depleted state both forms of mouthrinsing (plain water or a 15% carbohydrate solution) are equally ineffective, when it comes to actual performance increases.

Figure 4: Pleasure / displeasure feeling during time trial (data adapted from Moss. 2011).

If you do however look at the pleasure/displeasure feeling scale data in figure 4, I would speculate that in a non-glycogen depleted state the carbohydrate-rinsers would have performed significantly better... I mean, without gas in the tank a car won't work even if it "wanted". In view of the fact that the carbohydrate ingestion group did yet pedal at a higher intensity, this would warrant further investigation.

Figure 5: Respiratory exchange ratio (higher values = higher carbohydrate oxidation) during time trial (data adapted from Moss. 2011).

That being said, there was what I consider an interesting effect of carbohydrate rinsing on the respiratory exchange ratio (remember higher values = higher carb oxidation), which would suggest that the theory Fares and Kayser propose (Fares. 2011), according to which the activation of sweetness taste receptors cells (T1R2 and T1R3) in the mouth would explain the previously cited performance "increases" in other studies, may have its merits. What else than the sensation of incoming carbs could explain that the cyclists burned more carbs in the carb mouthrinse compared to the placebo mouthrinse trial (cf. figure 5) - and that in the absence of significant differences in blood glucose or insulin levels?

Spit it or suck it? What's right for you?

While we do not know whether it would make sense to mouthrinse in a glycogen repleted state (yeah, I know +1% ;-), for any athlete interested in maximal performance, simply ingesting his carb + electrolyte drink would certainly be the best option. The (intermittendly) fasting dieter, who wants to maximize his fatty acid oxidation in the course of say his "morning cardio", on the other hand, would be best off with a non-carby electrolyte drink that helps him avoid dehydration and does not compromise (even if the effect is minimal) fatty acid oxidation... what? You want to know who would  benefit from spitting his carbs out? Well, at least based on the current data, mostly the cleaning contractors of your local gym - after all, they would have to work overtime (and be paid overtime) to clean up the mess ;-)

Add Two Pounds of Lean Mass in Three Weeks W/ HIIT. HIIT Sprint Training Builds Muscle & Anaerobic Power While Reducing the Exercise Induced GH Response by 64%

HIIT - A GH diminishing mass builder?

I know it sounds contradictory, at first. If you take into considerations that previous studies show that the post-exercise increase in growth (and other) hormones does not correlate with the beneficial adaptational effects of exercise, it's actually no longer that surprising that researchers from the Department of Exercise Physiology at the Winston-Salem State University found that "[o]ne week of HIT significantly decreased GH release, with a simultaneous significant increase in anaerobic power and lean body mass of the lower extremities." (Ritsche. 2014)

In their latest paper which appeared in the December edition of the Journal of Exercise Physiology Kevin Ritsche, Jason Smith, Paul Mellick, and Laurie Wideman report the results of a recent experiment in the course of which 19 recreationally active male subjects (24.9 ± 3.9 yrs) completed a one-week high intensity interval training.

You can learn more about HIIT at the SuppVersity

Never Train To Burn Calories!

Tabata = 14.2kcal /min ≠ Fat Loss

30s Intervals + 2:1 Work/Rec.

Making HIIT a Hit Part I/II

Making HIIT a Hit Part II/II

HIIT Ain't For Everyone

The training protocol used in the study was based on similar high-intensity protocols published by Burgomaster et al. (2005) and Gibala et al. (2006) and began 24 hrs after the completion of a pre-test that was designed to measure the baseline fitness, body fat and lean body mass (by DEXA), as well as the acute GH response to high intensity exercise in the 19 young subjects.

The training protocol consisted of 4 to 6 repetitions of 30-sec maximal sprints and was performed three times per week for 3 weeks. One day of rest intervened each training session.

"The first 3 training sessions consisted of four 30-sec repetitions at 7.5% body mass with 4 min of active recovery at 50 W between each repetition. Training sessions 4 to 6 (wk 2) consisted of 5 repetitions, and sessions 7 to 9 (wk 3) consisted of six 30-sec maximal repetitions. During each repetition, each subject was encouraged verbally to provide maximal effort" (Ritsche. 2014).

At the end of each week, 48 hrs after the third training session for the week, subjects completed the acute sprint test protocol outlined previously (including blood draws).

Figure 1: Changes in body composition in response to the 3-week hiit-training protocol. the percentages above the bars indicate the relative difference between pre- and post-value. The light bars tell you that the corresponding changes were not statistically significant (Ritsche. 2014).

At least 48 hrs after the final blood profile, a post-training DXA scan was completed as outlined previously.

Figure 2: (a) Peak power; (b) peak power-corrected for subjects’ body mass; and (c) fatigue index during each 30-sec maximal cycle ergometer acute sprint (as) before and after 3 wks of hit; and (d) total combined workload of every sprint during each training week (Ritsche. 2014)

As you can see in Figure 1, the DXA-scans revealed significant increases in total and leg lean mass, albeit only non-significant reductions in body fat - changes which went hand in hand with a profound increase in exercise performance (see Figure 2) and a significant reduction of the initially observed post-exercise growth hormone spikes (see Figure 3).

Figure 3: Peak growth hormone concentrations after the workouts during the pre-test and after 1, 2 & 3 weeks of training; %-ages indicate difference to pre-value (Ritsche. 2014).

Bottom line: If you take into consideration that there is a close association between the post-workout growth hormone release and the relative exercise intensity - i.e. relative to one's individual fitness level and the corresponding demands of the exercise - the amelioration of the growth hormone response could be a consequence of the adaptation process that occurred in the course of the three week intervention.

It is thus not necessarily a bad thing and does therefore not stand in contrast to the adaptational response Ritsche et al. describe in their latest paper. If you take another look at Figure 3 and compare the GH response to the adaptations in Figure 2, it rather indicates that the subjects got used to the exercise | Comment on Facebook!

References:

• Burgomaster, Kirsten A., et al. "Six sessions of sprint interval training increases muscle oxidative potential and cycle endurance capacity in humans." Journal of applied physiology 98.6 (2005): 1985-1990.
• Gibala, Martin J., et al. "Short-term sprint interval versus traditional endurance training: similar initial adaptations in human skeletal muscle and exercise performance." The Journal of physiology 575.3 (2006): 901-911.
• Ritsche, Kevin, et al. "Acute Exercise-Induced Growth Hormone is Attenuated in Response to Short-Term, High-Intensity Exercise Training." Journal of Exercise Physiology (2014).

The Acute & 24h Effects of 3 Types of High Intensity Circuit Training on Testosterone & Cortisol in Young Trained Men.

It's obviously to have the 24h effects on testosterone and cortisol than only those measured after the workout , but can we make solid conclusions based on the additional data?

In spite of the fact that the acute testosterone and cortisol response to exercise appears to have little direct effects on the overall training outcome (Schoenfeld. 2013), acute increase in cortisol and reductions in testosterone, i.e. a decrease in the testosterone:cortisol ratio is a classic feature of overtraining and can very well blunt, if not reverse the beneficial effects of exercise on your health and body composition.

Against that background a recent experiment that was conducted by researchers from the University of Chieti-Pescara in Italy could be of great interest to everyone who is performing high intensity interval training on a regular basis. Why?

Well, in contrast to previous studies, Blasio et al. investigated both the acute and 24h effects of a high intensity interval resistance training regimen in trained young men.

Learn more about building muscle and strength at www.suppversity.com

Tri- or Multi-Set Training for Body Recomp.?

Alternating Squat & Blood Pressure - Productive?

Pre-Exhaustion Exhausts Your Growth Potential

Exercise not Intensity Variation for Max. Gains

Battle the Rope to Get Ripped & Strong

Study Indicates Cut the Volume Make the Gains!

To characterize the effects on heart rate and hormonal responses the subjects, eight trained, healthy trained men (28.61 ±3.51 yrs), performed three different workouts which had the same exercises, the same load and number of repetitions for each exercise, but different exercise order, recovery and speed of execution.

• RANDOM workout: the assigned goal was to complete the assigned repetitions respecting only two duties. The first one was don’t stop until all of the repetitions were completed; the second was that there were no assigned order of execution of exercises and no assigned consecutive repetitions to complete.
  
  Participants were thus free to choose both the order of exercises and number of consecutive repetitions for each exercise (i.e. 2 repetitions of kettlebell swing, 10 repetitions of medicine ball slam, 20 repetitions of squat, 4 repetitions of spin with Bulgarian bag, etc.).
  
  No recovery period was assigned, except the time necessary to move from a station to another, and no speed of execution of exercises was assigned: participants were free to choose the preferred speed. 
• LADDER workout: respecting the following order of execution, kettlebell swing, medicine ball slam, spin with Bulgarian bag, squat, pull-up, burpee, participants had to complete the total repetitions according to a pyramidal scheme (e.g. 1st lap 10 repetitions at each exercise, 2nd lap 9 repetitions at each exercise) until the total number of repetitions of each exercise was executed.
  
  Each lap of the circuit was followed by 1 minute of recovery. No speed of execution of exercises was assigned: participants were free to choose the preferred speed. 
• AS SOON AS POSSIBLE (ASAP) workout : respecting the following order of execution, kettlebel swing, medicine ball slam, spin with Bulgarian bag, squat, pull-up, burpee, participants had to complete the total volume in six laps executed as soon as possible.
  
  During each lap participants had to complete the sixth part of total number of repetitions of each exercise without rest among exercises. Each lap of the circuit was followed by 1 minute of recovery.

Salivary samples were collected before and after each workout, at 11:00 p.m. and at 7:00 a.m. of the following day. Salive was also collected during a non-training day. Similarly, before and after the workout, plasma lactate was measured while a beat-to-beat heart rate recording was executed during each workout. Cortisol (C) and testosterone (T) were measured in salivary samples.

2h before the workouts the subjects who had to abstain from sexual intercourse, stimulants and alcohol from 2 days before to the experimental days and until 9:00 a.m. of the following day, consumed a standardized meal that was lower to 400 and consisted of 33 cl of water, 35 cl of orange juice and two 30 g energy bars (Power Sport Double Use, Enervit, Milan, Italy).

Let's look at the results

While the protocols elicited the same heart rate response (the major part of each workout was spent between 80 and 100% of maximal heart rate, confirming the high cardiovascular intensity of the workouts), they elicited different hormonal and lactate variations with the LADDER workout producing the lowest lactate increase and the RANDOM workout eliciting the highest lactate, cortisol and testosterone increases.

Figure 1: Relative changes in hormone and lactate concentration in response to the workouts (Di Blasio. 2014)

When C was considered in ratio with T no significant differences have been shown among workouts-induced variations. Results of the analysis of covariance, executed on significantly modified variables, confirmed that basal hormonal and lactate values did not influence their variations.

When they studied the effects of workouts on prolonged hormones production (i.e. until the morning following the morning, di Blasio et. al. found that observed that observed that

"C had both time (F=179.723; p < 0.001) and group × time effect (F=10.942; p < 0.001): while during non-training day there is a physiological decline of C production at 11:00 p.m., during training days its decline is not present but seems to have a continuous increase from 7:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m." (Di Blasio. 2014)

For the testosterone production the authors found both time (F=443.340; p < 0.001) and group × time effect (F=3.254; p=0.008) even if the group × time effect seems determined by the samples collected at 7:00 p.m., so that the effects cannot be ascribed fully / exclusively to the workout.

Figure 2: 23h hormone profile after the RANDOM, LADDER, ASAP workouts on a control day (di Blasio. 2014)

What is most interesting, though, is the cortisol to testosterone ratio. It shows the greatest inter-group differences and could potentially be of great physiological relevance (Crowley. 1996). In that, the LADDER workout has the most negative effect, as it will totally blunt the natural decline of the C:T ratio at noon.

In case you're planning to incorporate circuit training into your schedule, make sure to have a huge chunk of beef after your workouts ;-) - "Post-Workout Steak "Supplementation" (135g of Lean Beef) Augments Improvements in Body Composition In Response to 8 Weeks of Circuit Resistance Training" | more

Bottom line: As usual, it is difficult to interpret the results in order to make concrete practical recommendations. The lactate and hormonal data does yet suggest that the "random" order, i.e. a training that involves a self-selected exercise order and rep speed, as well as little to no rest between exercises is the least, the ladder training, with its decreasing 10, 9, ... rep numbers and one minute rest between each lap of the curcuits is the most metabolically demanding workout.

Whether and to which extend this translates into an increased risk of overtraining, let alone increased muscle and strength gains, on the other hand, remains to be seen. In view of the overall effect on lactate levels and the C:T ratio, though, the study does suggest that you better be careful with high intensity circuit / interval resistance training sessions and give your body adequate time to rest and recover | Comment on Facebook!

References:

• Crowley, Michael A., and Kathleen S. Matt. "Hormonal regulation of skeletal muscle hypertrophy in rats: the testosterone to cortisol ratio." European journal of applied physiology and occupational physiology 73.1-2 (1996): 66-72. 
• Schoenfeld, Brad J. "Postexercise hypertrophic adaptations: a reexamination of the hormone hypothesis and its applicability to resistance training program design." The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research 27.6 (2013): 1720-1730.

HIT Your Satellite Cells to Increase Your Gains! Only High Intensity "Cardio" Exercise Will Fuel Your Satellite Cell Pool and Set You Up For Future Muscle Growth.

Image 1: NO-mediated satellite cell
recruitement (Anderson. 2000)

You have read it on the SuppVersity, you have heard about it on Carl Lanore's Super Human Radio and the BodyRX Show and those of you who have seen videos or pictures from the latest New York City Marathon, should actually have been able to infer it from the way the "finishers" looked like. Intensity not duration is what counts, when doing "cardio". Yet, as a very recent (7 days old) study shows (Naito. 2011), High Intensity Training (HIT) will not only burn off your lovehandles, while keeping your muscles intact, it will also prime your musclefibers for future growth by increasing the number of satellite cells, the small dormant mononuclear progenitor cells that are sandwiched between the basement membrane and sarcolemma of the fibers of your muscle and are recruited, whenever your body feels that you could use a little more or have to replace some damaged muscle mass.

While I will go into more detail on how your muscles actually grow in the upcoming parts of the Intermittent Fasting Series, in the course of which I am going to explain how you should train, eat and sleep in order to exploit all three major pathways of skeletal muscle growth, I want to give you a sneak peak at what you are going to learn, by highlighting that protein synthesis, i.e. the accrual of muscle protein in existing myonuclear domains, and the recruitment of satellite cells to replace damaged or add new myonuclei are distinct processes. It should nevertheless be obvious that with all the protein synthesis of the world you will - sooner or later - hit a plateau, when all the existing myonuclei have "blown up" to their maximal size - or as Naito et al. put it: "Increases in the number of satellite cells are necessary for full skeletal muscle growth and hypertrophy" So, whenever the existing myonuclei have reached their "full potential", the only way to keep growing is by adding new myonuclei via satellite cell recruitment. Keep that in mind before you discard the results the following study, because the "HIT rats" did not gain more "active" muscle than the "LIT rats" ;-)

In their experiment Hasashi Naito and his colleagues from the Tokai University and the Juntendo University in Japan put 17-week old (these are old rats!) female Sprague-Dawley rats on one out of four exercise regimen (for a detailed outline of the regimen, cf. table 1):

1. High Intensity, High Duration (90H)
2. High Intensity, Low Duration (30H)
3. Low Intensity, High Duration (90L)
4. Low Intensity, Low Duration (30L)

Table 1: Outline of the exercise
protocol (from Naito. 2011)

In the course of the 10-week study period the rats were exercised five times a week on one of those funky rodent treadmills. What's funny is that despite the fact that, as the scientists say, "[e]lectrical shocks were used sparingly to motivate the animals to run", two of the critters in the high intensity groups refused to do their workouts, which reminds me of what Dr. Layne Norton had to say on one of the past installments of BodyRX Radio: "Most of those who will tell you that they cannot do HIT for whatever reasons are usually just too lazy" - we may thus consider those two lazy rats as evidence for the accuracy of the model... and by the way, it did not save them from being anesthetized and deprived of their plantaris muscle, which was weighed and analyzed for its fiber composition and satellite cell count.

As it was to be expected in view of the high age of the rats, where skeletal muscle mass maintenance, may be considered a success, there were no statistically significant increases in plantaris and/or body mass in any of the treatment groups.

Figure 1: Changes (compared to untrained control) in number of myonuclei and satellite cells per muscle fiber (data calculate base on Naito. 2011)

Despite the absence of measurable skeletal muscle hypertrophy, the pronounced (cf. figure 1) and fiber-type specific (cf. figure 2) increases in satellite cell counts in the high intensity groups may well be considered as the necessary prestage of a hypertophic growth spurt, which could be triggered by appropriate training (which would obviously be strength training) and endocrine (more on that in the conclusion) stimuli.

Figure 1: Satellite cells per muscle fiber in type I (slow twitch) and type II (fast twitch) muscle fibers of rats in the control and the high intensity, high duration (90H) groups (data calculate base on Naito. 2011)

In that, it is also interesting to note that contrary to popular believe, the slow-twitch type I fibers, with their greater number of satellite cells, have an increased propensity for maximal myonuclear numbers, the fable of the "hypertrophy-prone fast-twitch type II" fibers, on the other end, is a consequence of their ability to accumulate more protein per myonucleus. And while I will - as promised in the red box above - dig deeper into that in future installments of Sunday's Intermittent Thoughts, I can already tell you that the fiber composition (not the size!) of professional body builders is almost identical to those of non-strength-trained individuals and thusly fundamentally different from that of strength athletes, like powerlifters (Tesch. 1982) - in order to achieve maximal muscularity you can thusly not neglect your type I fibers!

That being said, both the strength training, which would make use of the increased propensity to grow by recruiting satellite cells to form new myonuclei, as well as the necessary local IGF and MGF responses, which have been shown to decrease with age (Grounds. 2002), were absent in the study at hand. In someone like you, a young, vigorous strength trainee, both stimuli will yet obviously be present in abundance (at least I would hope so ;-). Accordingly, 1-3 high intensity (and in view of the fact that the duration, 30 vs. 90min, did not make a difference probably also high intensity interval) training (HIT or HIIT) sessions per week could not only make your increasingly fat-free muscles shine in their full glory, they will also "precondition" you for future muscle growth by increasing your satellite cell pool. I would thus suggest, you better not join the two lazy rats from the study, and rather find yourself the next best track to do a bunch of sprints ;-)

Intensity or Exercises Switching? What's More Effective to Build Muscle And Strength - Switching Exercises Yields 20% Higher Strength & 5% Higher + Balanced Muscle Gains!

Intensity or exercises switching what's more effective to build muscle and strength - or is it best to do both?

Let's be honest: When was the last time you've switched up your exercise regimen? Kicked out the old boring bench presses and squats and did something totally different? You don't remember? Well, what if I tell you that the latest study from the University of São Paulo, the University of Tampa and Delboni Auriemo Diagnostic Imaging Sector shows that not switching up your exercises is what's keeping you from making the gains you deserve?

Shocker? Well in that case I highly suggest you read the rest of today's article, before you go back to the drawing board and revamp your training regimen.

Learn more about building muscle at www.suppversity.com

Tri- or Multi-Set Training for Body Recomp.?

Alternating Squat & Blood Pressure - Productive?

Pre-Exhaustion Exhausts Your Growth Potential

Full ROM ➯ Full Gains - Form Counts!

Battle the Rope to Get Ripped & Strong

Study Indicates Cut the Volume Make the Gains!

The actual purpose of the study, the results of which are soon going to be published in the Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research was...

"to investigate the effects of different combinations of training intensities and exercises selection, as well as the combination of both, on muscle strength and CSA." (Fonseca. 2014)

Base on the authors previous findings (Lamas. 2012; Laurentino. 2012; Wallerstein. 2012), Fonseca et al. hypothesized that muscle hypertrophy would not be affected by the different loading schemes and exercise variation; however, the differences in motor unit recruitment provided by the exercise variation would produce superior gains in muscle strength.

A secondary purpose of the present study was thus to identify if the loading scheme and exercises variation would produce differences in the hypertrophy response of the quadriceps muscle heads.

Figure 1:  Vastus lateralis (VL), vastus medialis (VM), vastus intermedius (VI), and rectus femoris (RF) cross sectional area (mm²) for the constant exercise-constant intensity (CICE), constant intensity-varied exercise (CIVE), varied intensity-constant exercise (VICE), and varied intensity-varied exercise (VIVE) groups, pre- and post-training (Fonseca. 2014)

Speaking of muscle heads, the two letter acronyms in Figure 1 represent vastus lateralis (VL), vastus medialis (VM), vastus intermedius (VI), and rectus femoris (RF) and as you can see the hypertrophy response was affected by the different loading schemes and exercise variation.

Chest	Biceps	Back	Core	Legs	Triceps	Shoulders
Navigate the SuppVersity EMG Series - Click on the desired body part to see the optimal exercises.

Based on the caption of Figure 1 you will already have gathered that the study protocol involved 4 different conditions (+ control; not shown in Figure 1).

Maybe it's not just about the exercises, but also about which exercises you rotate in... This is something you should keep in mind, when you look aat the results of the study at hand. Ok, squats may be the best exercise for legs, but is it surprising that adding in some leg presses and deadlifts will yield even better results? I don't think so - do you?

Table 1: Overview of the Training protocols; CICE= constant intensity and constant exercise, CIVE= constant int. varying exercise, VICE= varying int. and constant ex. VIVE= varying int. and varying ex (Fonseca. 2014).

I would have to waste a thousand words to explain exactly how the exercise regimen differed.

Therefore I decided to simply give you the overview of the 12 training weeks from the original paper in which you can see that there were two parameters Fonseca et al. varied, i.e.

• intensity as in higher reps, lower weight vs. lower reps, higher weight and 
• exercise, i.e. did the subjects to the same stuff all the time or did they switch from one exercise to the next,

And eventually, both of them influenced the training outcome, with varying exercises producing a "more homogeneous muscle hypertrophy response" (Fonseca. 2014). 

In terms of strength gains, it's ~20% less efficient to vary only the intensity on the same exercise (Fonseca. 2014).

Bottom line: As the scientists point out, future studies will have to elucidate,"whether highly trained individuals would be able to handle a high degree of training variations (i.e. intensity and exercises) and achieve greater strength gains when compared to a program that only varies the exercises." (Fonseca. 2014)

In the mean time, the Brazilian / US research team is yet spot on, when they say that "variations in training intensity are not critical to produce strength and muscle hypertrophy gains in the initial phase of a ST program." (Fonseca. 2014).

Specifically for rapid mass and even more so strength gains beginners and early advanced trainees (instead of trainees who hadn't touched a weight regular for at least 6 months, as it was the case in the study at hand), varying the the exercises and thus the stimulus mode instead of its intensity will yield significant gains and "seems to produce a more  complete  muscle  activation  hypertrophying  all  of  the  heads  of  multi-pennate muscles." (Fonseca. 2014)

References:

• Fonseca, RM, et al. "Changes in exercises are more effective than in loading schemes to improve muscle strength." Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research (2014). Published Ahead of Print.
• Lamas, Leonardo, et al. "Effects of strength and power training on neuromuscular adaptations and jumping movement pattern and performance." The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research 26.12 (2012): 3335-3344.
• Laurentino, Gilberto Candido, et al. "Strength training with blood flow restriction diminishes myostatin gene expression." Med Sci Sports Exerc 44.3 (2012): 406-412.
• Wallerstein, Lilian França, et al. "Effects of strength and power training on neuromuscular variables in older adults." Journal of aging and physical activity 20.2 (2012): 171-85.