- 05-29-2007, 03:35 AM
- 05-29-2007, 03:50 AM
no, its definitely high glycemic 100 same as dextrose. will make you fat for sure.
- 05-29-2007, 04:11 AM
thats what i thought as well. would it be helpful for those that still believe n the postworkout insulin spike? does it spike insulin like dextrose does?
05-29-2007, 04:17 AM
- 6'0" 265 lbs.
- Join Date
- Feb 2003
- Rep Power
- Lv. Percent
Just because a carb is marketed as being complex doesn't mean it won't be a high glycemic carb
The insulin spike you get from it is not worth storing additional fat, take it from an endomorph like me
05-29-2007, 09:18 AM
- 6'3" 215 lbs.
- Join Date
- Dec 2004
- Rep Power
- Lv. Percent
It is structurally a complex carb. However, it acts as a very simple carb in your body.
05-30-2007, 11:39 AM
Maltodextrin will cause a spike in insulin levels.
If you're a competitive/performance athlete or just bulking and not worried about possible excess fat storage from this, then it could be a worthwhile addition.
If you're working out for any other reason, the insulin spike isn't necessary.
05-30-2007, 02:21 PM
well i think an insulin spike for me would be beneficial. I mean i am sure i spike my insulin levels needlessly at other points in the day. If i drink a soda BAM, insulin spike. If i eat a little candy BAM again. so basically why would i use low glycemic carbs postworkout if i am spiking my insulin at other times. i am gonna give it a try.
05-30-2007, 03:02 PM
I'm not trying to judge anyone's lifestyle. But for every person I see that can get away with eating junk food, there's another that would benefit greatly from changing their habits. I'd rather not mislead this later group into something that will do more harm than good. I honestly hope you take care with how you play with insulin.
05-30-2007, 07:53 PM
Post workout, your cells are hungry and require less insulin for nutrient uptake. Overcompensating with extra large servings of carbs or by using high GI carbs will just increase the potential for fat gain.
Focus on energy replacement not on what your insulin is doing.
05-30-2007, 08:10 PM
Now saying the only thing spiking insulin lvls is good for is getting fat is far from the truth. Glycogen is the principal stored form of carbohydrate energy (glucose), which is reserved in muscles. When your muscles are full of glycogen, they look and feel full. After you workout your muscles are like sponges that absorb everything you feed them. When I teel people taking carbs after a workout is just as important as taking protein they look at me like I'm a retard. Post workout nutrition is essential, and when done correctly it can positively effect hormonal milieu by naturally increasing growth hormone and insulin, which are both potent hormones necessary for muscle growth.
Now with this in mind, taking large amounts of carbs post workout after half assing it in the gym can result in fat stores because simply put you haven't depleted your glycogen stores, therefore the carbs consumed will not be used towards your depleted stores. But if you work hard and give it hell then you need carbs. Just give it hell in the gym fellas.
05-31-2007, 12:37 AM
05-31-2007, 12:49 AM
As one SteelEntity ironically states, after workouts your muscles are primed and there is no need for the insulin spike.
But to answer your question, Complex carb doesn't automatically mean low GI. GI has sort of evolved into the concept of GL (Glycemic Load) . Supposedly it is much indicative of the body's response to a carb.
05-31-2007, 01:26 AM
Good call stell entity. One of the best ways to gain is half dextrose half maltodextrin with isolate and alot of water after the gym.
Helps your muscles better use the protein and bulk after workout. The more fat you can gain, the more muscle you can gain.
And getting fat is not a problem for an ecto like me.,
05-31-2007, 02:42 AM
if you still consider it risky consider me the evil knevil of post workout shakes.
as far as fast or slow carbs post workout, using simple logic tells me that to take full advantage of the golden hour after a workout fast carbs would be beneficial.
05-31-2007, 03:07 AM
05-31-2007, 12:36 PM
I think what people would like you to realize is that the benefits you believe maltodextrin has post-workout can be achieved through more nutritious alternatives. I believe that if you just keep it simple and get proper nourishment after a workout, there's not a large need for these super-compensatory practices. The body isn't that acute and/or unforgiving, and in most cases reacts badly to acute imbalances.
And I can't say I agree too much with the extreme views of the post-workout "golden hour" as you put it. Sure you do need nourishment to feed the deficiencies you just created, but it doesn't have to be so immediately after a workout. An hour afterwards is fine, but I hope you're not one of the people that downs a shake right after they finish their last set in the gym.
There's a study I read that found protein synthesis actually decreases if you consume a shake immediately following a workout. My logic tells me that this is correct:
-If you're working out at the proper level of intensity, then your sympathetic nervous system (fight or flight) is engaged.
-If the sympathetic nervous system is active, then blood is being actively diverted from the gut into muscle tissues to deal with the stress the body is undergoing.
-Therefore, if you just finished working out, blood has not yet resumed normal circulation to the digestive organs and the meal you just consumed isn't effectively utilized.
Think about this question:
You see a large lion running at you. What's your body more concerned about?
a) Preparing to fight or flee by priming your muscles.
b) Digesting that last meal you ate.
I'd say 'a' which is why you see many organisms release their bowels when encountering a stressful or potentially fatal situation. Working out intensely puts the body in a similar situation. So my philosophy is to workout, get home, shower, start relaxing, and eat.
05-31-2007, 04:09 PM
- 6'3" 215 lbs.
- Join Date
- Dec 2004
- Rep Power
- Lv. Percent
05-31-2007, 05:18 PM
Slightly spiking insulin lvls after a workout will cause diabetes... well lets agree to disagree on this one
05-31-2007, 08:47 PM
Some are more prone to the risk of Diabetes. Now no one here is shooting R-slin or what not. If you spike PWO and reall do have a good diet, a few sodas is ok for some. You're not really risking it.
As said above, many people do it and there are worse practices.
As far as supps being on the market for a few weeks. Studies have been done in those and in the spiking of insulin. So really there is no difference, well a little.
I am currently doing the spike PWO and i say it is going good. Why mix Malto/Dextro tho?
05-31-2007, 09:42 PM
Using a blood glucose meter daily, I can tell you that dextrose will start to raise levels in about 4 minutes versus about 8 for something like oatmeal. Consequently I find it hard to believe that maltodextrin is 'extremely important' PWO for the sake of 4 minutes.
As for research: how much dextrose pwo
Reading articles, unsupported by relevant studies, published by hacks (authors who are paid to produce articles), IMO, does not constitute as credible research. All it does is foster superstition, much like the 50/50 dex/malto thing.
05-31-2007, 09:47 PM
Pre, During, & Postworkout Nutrition. - Page 29 - Bodybuilding.com Forums
0 benefit + increased risk = unnecessary risk.
And no you are not pulling it out of your ass, you are pulling it out of the ass of a supplement company.
In the grand scheme of things, is it really that bad? Not really. But "well it could be worse. QED." is not a valid proof of high GI carbs having any benefit.
So keep on patronizing me, but after you finish that 10lb jug of malto you paid too much for read through those threads.
06-01-2007, 12:26 AM
Dougman how am I patronizing you for christ sake, lighten up. Everyone has a take on the subject, I am trying to give my 2 cents on it and don't appreciate getting bashed. And big ****ing deal, I used a site to help get my point across because the point was excellently told, well ****ing call the cops.
Next time think before you get so ****ing hostile. Don't bother responding to this as you surely won't get a response. Have a nice day
06-01-2007, 01:34 AM
Everyone does have a take on the issue, but not everyone is correct. I didn't mean to come off hostile, but I am not a fan of the "to each his own, but I still want my comment to stand as valid" mindset.
The way I see it, this argument has been beat to death 100x times. It usually ends with the low carb GI people having more of the research/theory on their side and the high carb people saying something to the effect that it has worked in their experience. Personal experience does not beat out research/theory in this argument. If you want to say,"lets just agree to disagree" you can't then ask me "Why not just do some research about post workout nutrition?"
Bobo has presented the research, that is my point.
So you can either refute the research, or admit what you are doing is not optimal but is good enough for your liking. I don't think anyone is arguing that Malto is not effective; it is a source of calories and is a carbohydrate, so it is of course going to have a positive effect PWO. The argument I am making is that it provides no substantial additional benefits to oats or another complex carb [edit:complex carb/low GI], while unnecessarily increasing the risk of insulin-related side effects, mainly diabetes and fat storage.
We are really not that far apart, you hit the core of my argument right here:
No need to spike insulin if that is the case.Originally Posted by SteelEntity
Last edited by DougMan; 06-01-2007 at 11:03 AM. Reason: Qualifying a statement
06-01-2007, 02:59 AM
i personally did not read all of those entire studies. however i am getting the idea that the studies were not too elaborate.
our digestive systems do not require the energy/bloodflow to digest fast absorbing nutrients. they are basically already broken down. sip the fast nutrients and take the load of your digestive track.
however if you drink complex nutrients wether they be slow digesting proteins or carbs, it will take more energy/bloodflow to digest. the most efficient and effective way to restore muscles post workout in my opinion is to slowly sip fast absorbing nutrients over the period of 30-60 minutes. it takes the load off your body of having to digest and will easily shuttle nutrients to the sponges that are also known as muscles.
edit: when i say not too elaborate i mean that they did not specify how fast the post work out shakes were consumed
06-01-2007, 12:26 PM
Some other food for thought: the combination of protein and carbs without any significant fat source spikes insulin the greatest out of any macronutrient combination. So just a guess, but I would think that using the combination of a fast protein and a fast carb would give the greatest spike and thus the greatest amount of spillover into fat storage.
I'll concede that sugars can have their place in the diet, but let's look at a goal oriented approach.
-Bulking: I've use maltodextrin in the past and didn't find any difference in ability to gain mass when I switched to "slow" carbs. So, if for some reason, the maltodextrin is more convenient, I can't honestly recommend a switch unless the person's lifestyle is tending toward diabetes.
-Cutting: An insulin spike will increase the risk of spill-over into fat stores, not recommended.
I don't think anyone is trying to lie in this thread. There's so much contradicting evidence to be found out there and it's difficult to find the best answer. The experience of discussion is rewarding enough for me, regardless of whether my suggestions are taken.
Maybe we can compromise on waxy maize starch, which replenishes glycogen stores quickly without using the mechanism of an insulin spike?
06-01-2007, 03:51 PM
06-01-2007, 04:08 PM
Looks like I'm going to have to cite my favorite article on PWO nutrition.
Hyperinsulinaemia, hyperaminoacidaemia and post-exercise muscle anabolism: the search for the optimal recovery drink -- Manninen 40 (11): 900 -- British Journal of Sports Medicine
Dietary supplements and other ergogenic aids are popular among athletes. Recent studies have shown that nutritional mixtures containing protein hydrolysates, added leucine, and high-glycaemic carbohydrates greatly augment insulin secretion compared with high-glycaemic carbohydrates only. When post-exercise hyperinsulinaemia is supported by hyperaminoacidaemia induced by protein hydrolysate and leucine ingestion, net protein deposition in muscle should occur. Thus, consumption of post-exercise recovery drinks containing these nutrients in conjunction with appropriate resistance training may lead to increased skeletal muscle hypertrophy and strength. However, the long-term effects on body composition and exercise performance remain to be determined.
The goal of PWO carbs shouldn't be to restore glycogen. The goal should be to shuttle amino acids to the muscle to increase protein synthesis. Glycogen will replenish just fine if you're eating enough carbs in your regular diet.
06-02-2007, 01:23 AM
Theoretically, as a diabetic, if I eat WMS I should then not have to take my insulin for it? I wouldn't bet on it. I will have to waste some money and try it out.
Here's another good thread with some PWO nutrition discussion: Waxy Maize Starch Craze
06-02-2007, 01:37 AM
Not to mention that the statement As discussed in the Window of Opportunity, these factors make dextrose and maltodextrin the perfect post workout combo Is hardly objective.
06-02-2007, 01:44 AM
06-02-2007, 07:11 AM
06-02-2007, 09:39 AM
Not sure if you actually have anything specific in mind, but yeah I can accept the logic that you have to compare equal caloric amounts.
I was relying on information from the books authored by some Scivation people.
or CUT DIET.COM also has some stuff
but it does look like they are comparing the situation of, say,
500 carbohydrate calories vs. 500 carbs + 250 protein.
After reading some of the WMS thread (Bobo's a cool fellow), I thought I'd clarify what I intend to use WMS for. I'm not really concerned with replenishing glycogen stores quickly after workouts, but I thought it might be a good idea to use WMS only in the morning before my workouts to try to make sure I'm all fueled up and ready to work hard.
06-02-2007, 12:41 PM
There is a lot of conflicting info out there and that is one reason why I've been commenting on the validity of some articles/studies. I see a trend of articles published that seemed to be geared towards selling supps or for making a name for the author that are wrapped up in an analytical packaging in an attempt to add credibility. Identifying these and weighing their actual value is helpful to cut through a lot of the BS; I'm not trying to be argumentative.
06-02-2007, 01:28 PM
Alternatively I could measure blood glucose increases with different macro combos but Im not up for turning my fingers into pincushions just yet.
I think some of the arguments could be resolved if the definition of a 'spike' is cleared up. What we really referring to is a pointed portion of a continuous curve or graph, usually rising above the adjacent portion. This does not really tell us anything quantitative about the levels just that it is a localized high point.
Insulin regulates nutrient (hence energy) uptake. The higher the insulin the higher the rate of uptake. Since there is only so much glycogen storage available and muscle can only be built so fast wheras fat storage is relatively unlimited. Yes, the higher the insulin the higher the percentage of energy that will stored as fat. So a 'spike' could be both good or bad depending on the actual level generated.
06-02-2007, 03:23 PM
06-02-2007, 05:02 PM
Another view that was brought up is that the goal of post-workout nutrition is protein synthesis, not so much in glycogen replenishment. I'd agree, but the next point was that a large insulin spike stimulates protein synthesis. I would say a better stimulus for protein synthesis is simply the presence of amino acids in the blood plasma, which you can get consuming just protein.
06-02-2007, 05:14 PM
Yeah, forums like this are much more essential than reading studies alone. I know I'm tired of seeing some new supplement make some extraordinary claims, backed by some evidence or research study just to make it seem legit.
It might be better just to rely on people's personal experience. They can tell you what practices or methods they followed, and the results that they saw. Usually you won't hear--"I think I got fat from doing this," or "I think I gained x lean pounds doing that." We can be extremely perceptive about ourselves, and have access to decent ways to accurately measure weight and bodyfat. However, even then, everyone can react uniquely to different diet and exercise practices.
But for what it's worth, I'll restate my experience with using maltodextrin vs. using rice (if I remember right) for postworkout carbs. There was no big difference in ability to gain mass. I did use both methods each consistently for at least 6-8 weeks. And I believe the carbs for each meal was around the same of 70-85 grams. Amount of protein was also approximately 40-60 grams for each method. I don't think I used any additional fat beyond what was in the carb & protein sources. Only deviation was in how I felt after the meal. With the maltodextrin I had a semi-crash sometime afterwards, and with the rice I just felt full and lazy for a while. Think that covers it all, don't ask if my workout intensity/difficulty differed at all or I might be offended.
06-03-2007, 04:56 PM
06-05-2007, 02:12 PM
increases glucose uptake and glycogen production in the muscles
increases amino acids transport to muscles
increases protein synthesis
increases blood flow to skeletal muscles (vasodilation)
decreases protein degradation
decreases cortisol levels
Is this incorrect?
I have also heard that raising insulin levels shuts down GH production?
06-05-2007, 02:58 PM
IMO all this focus on insulin is doing more harm than good. Insulin is basically a catalyst for energy uptake that is essentially triggered by energy intake. PWO nutrition should focus more on replenishing energy deficits created through activity and less on achieving peak insulin levels. Sure they are related but they are not the same.
Similar Forum Threads
- By crazy gains in forum SupplementsReplies: 7Last Post: 07-29-2004, 06:31 PM
- By Rock Lee in forum Weight LossReplies: 1Last Post: 03-22-2004, 08:22 PM
- By Truck 44 in forum SupplementsReplies: 6Last Post: 08-18-2003, 02:25 PM
- By aeoliantru in forum Weight LossReplies: 4Last Post: 07-02-2003, 12:03 PM
- By JohnGafnea in forum Weight LossReplies: 5Last Post: 04-22-2003, 06:56 PM