Expect to see quite a bit more press on this study.
They actually forgot my name on the article this time, as Anssi and I collaborated on this write-up..lol 
But none the less, I wrote the beta-alanine section and Anssi wrote the leucine section.
Invalid Link Removed
I just received my electronic version of Muscular Development(Nov pg190) and saw another one of our beta-alanine articles published.
This article is a head on comparison with creatine, showing their similarities and differences. As you all know, beta-alanine consistently gets touted as the next creatine for obvious reasons.
The point of this article was to show why it is often touted this way, but at the same time, also explain how this statement can be misleading if the details are not fully understood. Hopefully the intention of this article is understood and the reader realizes that beta-alanine DOES NOT replace creatine. At the same time getting the point across, that they do share many parallels, which brings about the comparison.
You all know I love beta-alanine, but I also have huge respect for creatine and do not want beta-alanine to be known as a replacement to creatine. Not only would it be inaccurate to market beta-alanine this way, it could also stop people from properly understanding how beta-alanine works and how different it is from creatine!
Creatine is one of my all time favorite supplements and NOTHING can ever replace it. I believe both creatine and beta-alanine to be the two most effective ergogenic aids in sports nutrition by FAR.
Invalid Link Removed
Beta-Alanine & PreWO articles in Muscular Development!
Our beta-alanine article- science meets real world results, in Muscular Development-
Thank you for your support and we have another VERY different article that should be out in MD next month!
:dance:
Question though. I have tried creatine several times in the past and I have come to the conclusion that I do not respond to it like most others do (at all). Have you ever heard of BA non responders?
Some awesome info here. Looks like I have found something to take with my Xtend. This will be in my next order at NP fo sho.
Ok, first GH secretion is quite a complex process that is both directly and indirectly stimulated. It's not even close to as simple as stated above or even in my explanation.
Regarding exercise, GH secretion is sensitive to these main stimuli:
1.Volume of exercise
2. The amount of rest between sets
3. Resistance used
4. Catecholamines, primarily epinephrine can also stimulate GH release.
Some of these stimuli or variables do lead to increased H+ and lactate concentrations, which in tern do increase GH release.
The last part, where it says, resulting in significant loss of body fat is not supported by any research I have ever seen. And I find it highly doubtful.
Moving along..
Most people, really have no clue how beta-alanine works or have a proper understanding of glycolysis, which is why there is so much weird information out there on beta-alanine.
The ANSWER is it affects BOTH!! It reduces lactic acid formation and fights the drop in pH caused by increased H+ concentrations. NOW
I got into this exact discussion with some of the top phD researchers in the world and initially we came to one conclusion. In a nutshell, that lactate levels should actually increase due to glycolysis being able to carry on longer due to increased CARN concentrations soaking up more H+. But after some deep research myself, I came to a much bigger picture and I believe many of them agree with me now.
Based on how I believe beta-alanine can both reduce lactic acid formation but also allow increased lactate ion levels to occur, I would say NO significant affect one way or the other. Just in case you don't want to take my word, there is a beta-alanine study that actually showed that beta-alanine DID NOT alter GH concentrations.
Lastly, I don't think GH release during exercise matters that much to begin with, so it's kind of a moot point.
This basic premise is off? Clear me up, since that's what I've gathered thus far
Beta-Alanine works in the muscle and the lactic acid feedback mechanism that stimulates GH release occurs in the blood.
Nope not off at all. You first need to think where the primary source of lactic and H+ are produced(within the muscles{intracellulary}) Our first line of defense against this is of course intracellular buffers like CARN. There is a close relationship between intracellular and extracellular buffers,with intracellular buffers being your first line of defense reducing the amount of H+ and lactic acid that then go into extracellularly fluid/blood circulation. They work as a team, not separate.
Lactate produced in the muscles, circulates through the BLOOD to the liver and kidneys. Importantly the lactate that goes to the liver can then go through gluconeogenesis and produce us some glucose to be used as fuel. By controlling pH within the muscles, you will also greatly modulate pH in the blood. This in a nushell is part of the Cori Cycle. Look into it for a better understanding of everything I am saying.
Good question btw
But I might add, the quotes in the OP first post probably didn't know this, so yes their basic premise is probably off!
Also high amounts of H+ limit fat oxidation, so he is wrong about that as well.
This discussion is taken from another forum and may be of interest.
Yup, your question the other day, jogged the old memory!
BTW, check PM's
