|In today’s installation: Alpha-GCP and reduces thyroid functioning; accurate body fat measurement in competition preparation confirms recomp result; more protein keeps change workers lean and healthy.|
Since I did not wish to bore those that are (for whatever reason) not interested in considerably annotated summaries of the studies presented at the previous ISSN conference, I’ve deliberately taken a break before publishing the next installment of the #ISSN17 show; with this one answering important questions such as: Can alpha-GPC supplements give me migraines? Can lean individuals however do a “recomp”, i.e. lose substantial quantities of fat while gaining muscle in brief amounts of time – Exactly what exactly does a gold-standard dimension w/ the 4-C method say? And last but not least, is now a greater protein consumption the landmark characteristic of these night shift employees who don’t get sick and obese and how does it work? Interested? Alright, here we go…
- Alpha-GCP, nootropic and alleged GH booster, also impairs thyroid function? To answer this query in the positive, the information Bellar et al. presented at #ISSN17 is obviously not sufficient. It is, nevertheless, interesting to note that Bellar’s experiment in forty-eight healthy certainly confirmed the authors’ hypothesis that “increasing CNS acetylcholine can influence serotonin levels, which can, in turn, influence other hormones such as Thyroid stimulating hormone (TSH)” (Bellar 2017).
To test this hypothesis, the researchers in the University of Louisiana at Lafayette, the Louisiana State University, and Ball State University analyzed the aforementioned young men 500 milligrams A-GPC, 250 milligrams A-GPC, or Placebo. During 1-2 h after the ingestion of this supplement, the authors found that…
- serum free choline was considerably elevated in the two A-GPC groups as compared to placebo (132 percent and 59% respectively)
- serum TSH was significantly depressed in the 500 milligrams A-GPC group compared to other treatments (p < 0.04).
At least acutely and (probably) transiently, the answer in the subheading does, consequently, must be answered affirmatively.
What is the verdict on alpha-GPC along with your thyroidgland?
It’s as easy as “big effect = huge side effect”. You cannot possess the calming effect of greater CNS acetylcholine without its “drawbacks”. Without understanding how long/if the effects on TSH and therefore downstream impacts on the generation of thyroid hormones persist, there is no reason to fear, however.
Figure 1: The decrease in TSH may be a response to the increase in GH many nutritional supplement users are actually aiming to reach if they consume alpha-GPC nutritional supplements. If that is the case, the decreased TSH can be anticipated to be transient as the boost in growth hormone (which is btw. Irrelevant to your gainz, bro).
Moreover, if alpha-GPC does exactly what it is advertised to get the TSH suppression might also be due to a growth hormone spike (Kawamura 2012). GH depresses the secretion of thyrotropin and thus TSH, but by boosting the peripheral conversion of thyroxine to triiodothyronine, the occasional transient GH spike in alpha-GPC will not have your metabolism tank… let alone trigger hypothyroidism. What would happen in response to chronic administration of alpha-GPC remains up in the open, however.
- You cannot lose body fat and gain muscle at the identical moment? Yes, you can! One reason people tend to blow up to insane body fat levels when bulking is the still widespread believe that you would have to be in a significant calorie excess to pack on muscle. In fact, I overheard a trainer at the gym tell a skinny fat rookie only lately: “You have to eat… that you need a significant energy to acquire muscle.”
Many retired and active practitioners, on the other hand, often speak about “recomp” and thus refer to shedding fat and adding muscle to their frames concurrently. Among the poster presentations at #ISSN17 appears to imply that – at least in the first period of a drug-free contest prep – that is exactly what’s occurring.
Figure 2: The case study shows: If you combine diet and exercise in the right way(s) that you can gain lean mass (+4%) and get rid of body fat (-35%) – information measured using the 4-C model (Tinsley 2017).
Employing an former NCAA Division II athlete that had listened in 4 physique competitions, Grant M. Tinsley attempted to re learn more info regarding the way(s) the human body changes when it is subjected to a carefully timed and balanced combination of diet and exercise intended to maximize fat and minimize muscle loss. At the beginning of the research, the topic was beginning an 18-week preparation phase prior to competing in a National Physique Committee (NPC) competition in the Figure division. Tinsley further explains:
“Throughout the preparation phase, the athlete has been closely advised by her coach, a competitive bodybuilder with 20+ years of coaching experience. The athlete thoroughly tracked dietary intake, supplement use and exercise sessions. Also, the athlete has been assessed monthly in the university research labs” (Tinsley 2017).
These assessments included dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) and multi-frequency bioelectrical impedance analysis (MF-BIA). Body quantity and total body were calculated with DXA output (Wilson 2013 body composition was analyzed utilizing the 4-compartment model according to Lohman & Going (Lohmann 1993).
|Figure 3: The use of a 4-compartment model to evaluate body composition is really a power of the case study since it isn’t as easily fooled as the DXA independently as it was utilized in Wilson’s current keto newspaper I wrote about lately (example from Ellis 2000)|
For all dieters out there: Don’t trust ‘your own’ DXA blindly: A neat side-finding of this analysis at hand was that there were “substantial differences in body fat percent between DXA and 4C”. In actuality, during the first 3 months of this preparation phase, DXA overestimated body fat percent by 4.5% on average compared to this 4-compartment model. Therefore, Tinsley advises: “When possible, more advanced methods of body composition evaluation, such as the 4-compartment model, ought to be used in physique athletes to allow for more accurate evaluation” (Tinsley 2017) particularly when true data may make the difference between victory and defeat.
More from a different ISSN#17 newspaper: If you are working with athletes, however overweight/obese customers, your very best choice, beside the 4c model, will be air displacement plethysmograph (ADP | BodPod). Of the latterTrexler et al. (2017) reported at #ISSN17 that it “provided more valid quotes for cross-sectional and anatomical changes in body composition compared with DXA along with US” (Trexler 2017) – together with DXA performing much better than ultrasound.
- According to 4-compartment calculations, Tinsley reports that “the athlete’s body fat decreased from 18.3% to 12.3% within the first 3 months of preparation” (Tinsley 2017). This alone wouldn’t seem surprising. The simple fact that, Tinsley observed concomitant decreases in fat mass (12.0 kg to 7.8 kg) and increases in fat-free mass (53.3 kg to 55.2 kg), on the other hand, is noteworthy.
What is the verdict on ‘recomp’?
In view of the existence of many RCTs that demonstrated concomitant gains in muscle mass and decreases in fat mass in overweight individuals who were exposed to combined diet and (resistance) training, the ‘news’ here’s that works with lean(er, more) athletic people also. With that said, Trexel et al. reported very similar results in the mixed cohort of fifteen physique athletes – 7 male, 8 female drugfree (based on interviews) athletes competing in bikini (n=7), figure (n=1), physique (n=5), or stimulation (n=2) classes. In the event you missed this yet, it is possible to read up on it here!
What? You’re asking yourself the Tinsley study made the cut if Trexel’s research had more subjects, showcased both, men and women, and had been discussed at length? Well, Tinsley utilized the “gold-standard 4-compartment model”, Trexel et al. “just” amplitude-mode ultrasonography and skinfold measurements. Exactly like classic DXA scans of which Tinsley found that “it considerably overestimated body fat percent in the detected athlete” these approaches possess a comparatively (vs. 4-C) higher margin of error (see info box). To point you to a research using the 4-C model was thus (IMHO) beneficial.
- Health care employees’ protein consumption could affect their body composition and health. More protein = leaner and fitter? Likewise right from #ISSN17 is the insight that “exceeding general PRO recommendations (0.8 g/kg) may advantageously influence body composition and blood lipid profile” (Pihoker 2017) – highly advantageous concerning body fat, BMI, body fat, and blood lipids (see Figure 4).
Before beginning rejoice, however, please be aware: This insight has been phrased based on observational information from thirty-three female healthcare shift-workers (Mean ± SD: age = 30.6 ± 9.2 yrs, height = 164.7 ± 6.8 cm, weight = 66.5 ± 10.2 kg, body mass index (BMI) = 24.5 ± 3.7 kg/m2) that were tested following a minimal eight-hour fast. That is not ‘bad’, but it is not the result of a randomized controlled research, which leaves room for a good deal of uncontrollable confoundable factors such as ‘people who consume more protein are ordinarily more health-conscious, work more regularly and/or eat overall healthier diets’.
At least among these possible confounders may be deducted from the scientists, however. Next to being flashed with DXA to assess fat mass (FM), lean mass (LM), bone mineral content (BMC), and body fat percentage (%fat), the areas also filled regular dietary logs (2 workdays, 1 off-day) according to what the scientists estimated the typical kilocalorie (kcal), carbohydrate (CHO), PRO, and fat consumption. For the last evaluation, participants were initially stratified into two groups with protein ingestion of ≥ 1.2 g/kg bodyweight (‘sufficient’, n=15) or <1.2 g/kg BW ('deficient', n=18). Between-group differences were evaluated with a series of separate t-tests. Relationships between dietary consumption estimations (kcal, PRO, CHO, and obese) and body composition and blood factors were analyzed with Pearson's bivariate correlations. The results of the battery of tests demonstrated that the areas in the “sufficient protein” group (the research workers words), i.e. those who consumed greater than 150 percent of the RDA daily had -10.81±2.89 kg (p=0.001) lower body weights, significantly less body fat (∆=6.73±2.34 kg, p=0.008), lower amounts of pro-atherogenic non-HDL cholesterol (∆=17.09 ± 7.83, p=0.037), along with a comparatively low percentage of total to HDL cholesterol (TC:HDL ∆=0.54±0.25, p=0.039) that is indicative of a reduced risk of cardiovascular disease.
Figure 4: Body makeup of shift employees w/ protein intakes >1.2g/kg vs. intakes <1.2g/kg (RDA = 0.8g/kg).
In this it is interesting to remember that no other dietary factor correlated significantly with these measures – neither the whole energy consumption, although the “macros”, i.e. the supply of energy on proteins, fats and carbs [note: that will also mean that there was no additional benefit of more protein].
What is the verdict on high(er) protein intakes for health employees?
Again, we’re just talking about observational data, but the absence of important relationships between other/all measured dietary factors, body composition, and blood dimensions does really, since the scientists write, “indicates that protein plays a very special role concerning the body composition and blood lipids in shift-working personnel. And let’s be fair: Why shouldn’t a protein consumption beyond the demarcation point of 0.8gram per kg/d do exactly that!?
The proof in favor of these beneficial effects of high(er compared to RDA) protein diets on desire is quite conclusive. Should we take under account that high protein foods often replace/reduce the usage of classic low protein snacks, any deliberate or unconscious increase in protein consumption will – at least hypothetically – address 2 of the key nutritional problems of health-care shift-workers (Lowden 2010).
Additionally, data from Ishizuka et al. 1983 even indicates that high protein meals have at night could have an indirect and for shift-workers very welcome influence on the circadian rhythm as they, however, not ordinary or higher fat/high carbohydrate meals activate a deep release of cortisol independent of the time of the day. Compared to low protein meals, change employees’ circadian clock will thus get the exact cortisol-related comments (Åkerstedt 1978) in reaction to a meal at night as they would get during the day – certainly no disadvantage in view of how the latest research indicates that the metabolic and weight problems of shift employees are at least aggravated or even actuated by circadian desynchronization (Broussard 2016), which can, subsequently, be actuated and (partially) reversed by meals timing (Vetter 2017).
|High Protein Breakfast Lowers Weight (8%), Waistline (4 percent) + HbA1c (12%) in T2DM – Especially if the Protein is currently Whey | read the full article|
What is the verdict, then? Let’s go study by research, here. About Alpha-GPC: I’ve already outlined “the verdict” for alpha-GPC to the conclusion of the first section (see headline). In short: In view of how the only convincing proof of interference with thyroid gland metabolism comes from a brief time research and considering that these short-term detrimental effects could be an side-effect of the GH fostering effect (several) people cover if they purchase alpha-GPC there is no reason to freak out because of the results of Bellar’s research.
Should you insist on freaking out, do this if that is the first time you understand that any side effect of dietary supplements would be, when everything is said and done, just a regular effect you did not cover and (often) did not expect to see. In this the rule of thumb is: powerful intended influence = possible for powerful side-effect.
About ‘recomping’: ” While Tinsley’s case analysis did notice a significant body-recomposition effect, it is important to remember that the 4-C model the scientist used is not 100% true and that a 1.9kg change of lean mass measured in a single topic ain’t sufficient to “prove” the claim that you can build muscle and lose fat concomitantly. But in combination with the growth in total body material (in 10.4 kg to 10.9 kg), the case-study at hand still increases the proof that this kind of ‘recomp’ is not impossible to reach – and that not just for the fat (there are many studies demonstrating that diet + exercise can cause fat loss + muscle reduction in the fat), but also for normal-weight/even lean individuals.
The info on low-carb diets for shift-workers can, when evaluated in isolation, never be very convincing. In view of everything you’ve heard about the general effect of high(er) protein ingestion on food consumption, body composition, and health, it will however confirm an evidence-based hypothesis a lot of you probably already needed. Plus: the possibly corrective circadian effects of high(er) protein meals at night I discussed in the corresponding subsection of the report would just add to the general metabolic benefits of greater protein intakes | Comment on Facebook!
- Åkerstedt. “Circadian rhythms in the secretion of cortisol, adrenaline and noradrenaline.” European journal of clinical investigation 8.2 (1978): 57-58.
- Bellar, et al. “Evaluation of the effects of 2 doses of alpha glycerylphosphorylcholine on thyroid hormone levels.” Proceedings of the Fourteenth International Society of Sports Nutrition (ISSN) Conference and Expo (2017).
- Broussard, Josiane L., along with Eve Van Cauter. “Disturbances of sleep and circadian rhythms: publication risk factors for obesity.” Current Opinion in Endocrinology, Diabetes and Obesity 23.5 (2016): 353-359.
- Ellis, Kenneth J. “Human body composition: in vivo methods.” Physiological reviews 80.2 (2000): 649-680.
- Ishizuka, B., M. E. Quigley, and S. S. C. Yen. “Pituitary hormone release in response to food ingestion: evidence for neuroendocrine signals from gut to brain.” The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism 57.6 (1983): 1111-1116.
- Kawamura, Takashi, et al. “Glycerophosphocholine enhances testosterone hormone secretion and fat oxidation in young adults.” Nutrition 28.11 (2012): 1122-1126.
- Lohman, Timothy G., and Scott B. Going. “Multicomponent units in human composition research: advantages and opportunities.” Human body composition. Springer US, 1993. 53-58.
- Lowden, Arne, et al. “Eating and change work–effects on metabolism, habits, and performance.” Scandinavian journal of work, environment & health (2010): 150-162.
- Pihoker, et al. “Characterization of body composition, blood lipids, and nourishment profile in female healthcare shift-workers if stratified by protein ingestion.” Proceedings of the Fourteenth International Society of Sports Nutrition (ISSN) Conference and Expo (2017).
- Tinsley, Grant M. “Substantial body recomposition during competition preparation in an seasoned female body competitor: outcomes of 4-compartment model and complete body protein calculations.” Proceedings of the Fourteenth International Society of Sports Nutrition (ISSN) Conference and Expo (2017).
- Trexel, et al. “Estimating body composition at baseline and tracking changes during weight loss: Validity of ordinary methods compared to a standard four-compartment model.” Proceedings of the Fourteenth International Society of Sports Nutrition (ISSN) Conference and Expo (2017).
- Vetter, Celine, and Frank AJL Scheer. “Circadian Biology: Uncoupling Human Body Clocks by Food Timing.” Present Biology 27.13 (2017): R656-R658.
- Wilson, Joseph P., et al. “Improved 4-compartment body-composition model for a clinically accessible measure of overall body protein.” The American journal of clinical nutrition 97.3 (2013): 497-504.