Epicatechin Supplementation Inhibits Aerobic Adaptations to Cycling - Human Study

A

aaronuconn

Well-known member
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • First Up Vote
  • Established
Interesting human study done on (–)-Epicatechin. It would be nice to see this done on anaerobic exercise in healthy humans as well.

Abstract:
The purpose of the study was to determine if cycling exercise combined with (–)-epicatechin supplementation was more effective at increasing training adaptations than cycling combined with a placebo. Blood and muscle samples were obtained at rest before and after training to determine the effects of (–)-epicatechin supplementation on total serum antioxidant capacity, skeletal muscle mitochondrial protein content, and skeletal muscle myostatin gene expression. Participants (n = 20) completed two testing sessions separated by 4 weeks of cycle training, with supplementation of 100 mg (200 mg total daily) of (–)-epicatechin or a placebo, twice daily. Data were analyzed using a two-way mixed model ANOVA for each variable and the alpha level was set at p ≤ 0.05. A significant increase was observed for time for relative peak anaerobic power (p < 0.01), relative anaerobic capacity (p < 0.01), and fatigue index (p < 0.01). A significant increase was observed for time for absolute peak VO2 (p < 0.01) and peak power output obtained during the peak VO2 test (p < 0.01). A significant interaction between group and time for relative peak VO2 was observed (p = 0.04). Relative peak VO2 significantly increased over time in the placebo group (p < 0.01), but not in the (–)-epicatechin group (p = 0.21). A significant increase was observed for time for total serum antioxidant capacity (p = 0.01). No interaction or main effect of time was observed for myostatin (p > 0.05). Likewise, no interaction or main effect of time was observed for cytochrome C or citrate synthase (p > 0.05). A significant interaction effect was observed for succinate dehydrogenase (SDH; p = 0.02). SDH content increased significantly for the placebo group (p = 0.03, partial η2 = 0.59), but not for the (–)-epicatechin group (p = 0.81). Further, whereas no difference existed between the groups for SDH at baseline (p = 0.23), SDH content was significantly greater in the placebo group at the post time point (p = 0.01). Results indicate that (–)-epicatechin supplementation does not affect myostatin gene expression or anaerobic training adaptations but inhibits aerobic and mitochondrial SDH adaptations to cycle exercise training.

Full Text:
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fnut.2018.00132/full
 
Monte Brogan

Monte Brogan

Member
Awards
1
  • Established
Fascinating study. Thank you for taking the time to post this.

I'm surprised more people aren't talking about the conclusion. Does anyone have any theories they would like to share? I immediately wondered about bioavailability since that is an issue that must be addressed with oral supplementation.
 
H

herosjourney

New member
Awards
0
That’s interesting. I always wondered whether this would be the case.

Does anyone have a clue if not getting adaptations would actually be beneficial for fat loss, if the problem with aerobic exercise to lose fat in the long term is due to adaptations that make you more efficient in aerobic energy production?

I.e. I just want to run without ever getting better at it to lose more fat.
 
BCseacow83

BCseacow83

Active member
Awards
1
  • Established
Well we know anti-oxidants taken peri-workout decrees training adaptations, at least a few other studies I have seen over the years have born this out. Epi is an anti-oxidant so perhaps taking away from training would be advantages?????? As usual, we need far more research before we come to any strong conclusions.
 
T

TheIronAsylum

Active member
Awards
1
  • Established
soo epi is only an antioxidant supp?

if were sposed to take it away from lifting or cardio why do we get a boost in cardio output when using it
 
Cheeky Monkey

Cheeky Monkey

Member
Awards
2
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
I say they should try higher doses for a better comparison. They tried 200mg, so now they should have three groups and try 500mg, 1g, and 3g to see any differences in effect.
 
LeanEngineer

LeanEngineer

Well-known member
Awards
4
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • Best Answer
  • First Up Vote
I say they should try higher doses for a better comparison. They tried 200mg, so now they should have three groups and try 500mg, 1g, and 3g to see any differences in effect.
Agreed. It would definitely be interesting to see some more studies done at higher dosages.
 
B

BUILDFASTFORM

Member
Awards
0
In a year or so we'll look back on Epicatechin as we did with Urosolic acid.
 
BCseacow83

BCseacow83

Active member
Awards
1
  • Established
soo epi is only an antioxidant supp?

if were sposed to take it away from lifting or cardio why do we get a boost in cardio output when using it
No, it is not only an antioxidant. Boosting performance does not necessarily equal an increase in adaptation. To make an extreme example: Meth would boost performance and obviously would NOT boost adaptation lol. With only this one study I would not stop taking Epi preworkout if you find it helps. I like the stuff personally and am not going to change a thing based on this one study. Like I originally stated more research is needed. Long term the ability to train harder due to the increase in performance should outweigh any decrees in adaptation due to the antioxidant effects.
 
Monte Brogan

Monte Brogan

Member
Awards
1
  • Established
Just bumping for some other opinions on this. This is a human study with a conclusion that we were not expecting, so I find this particularly interesting.

Curious about thoughts from some of the epi experts here.
brundel justhere4comm
 
T

ttortman78

Member
Awards
1
  • Established
It works fantastic for me and has been a staple for awhile. Sometimes studies say one thing and personal experience is completely different. The map is not always the territory. Are you gonna live your life according to what someone else says or experience it for yourself?

There is only one way to find out. Give it a shot yourself. We are all based on the same design, yet there is so much variance within the schematic. Epicatechin does have some non responders, but for those that do respond, you will know immediately.
 
justhere4comm

justhere4comm

Board Sponsor
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
Just bumping for some other opinions on this. This is a human study with a conclusion that we were not expecting, so I find this particularly interesting.

Curious about thoughts from some of the epi experts here.
brundel justhere4comm
I just read the study through and shoudl have begun at the end.

"The EPI group consumed one capsule containing 100 mg of 98% pure (–)-epicatechin twice daily (200 mg total). Participants were instructed to consume one 100 mg capsule in the morning and one 100 mg capsule in the afternoon or evening."

Straight -(-epi) alone is not very bioavailable. What did they use for absorption? Answer: Nothing. How does a mouse consume a capsule?
Further, the 15 day experiment proved successful in improvement but the 30 day did not?"Mice bread for..." is not quite indicative of a human response. How many humans are bread for a lack of aeorbic capacity?

Personally, if anyone has followed my previous logs knows how can a 50 plus year old do what I did in 30-35 minutes would be crazy. I'll give the nod to Follidrone 2.0 for endurance and capacity. Did they also increase the carb intake prior to exercise? Probably not. Can you tell if a mouse is feeling hypoglycemic because if this mouse didn't eat his carbs prior to working out, he would.

I don't see the value in this study, like others as there is a more complex issue here.
Finally, and until I think of something else, I'd say, look at the unsponsored logs of ours and others.
 
Resolve10

Resolve10

Member
Awards
3
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • Best Answer
Well we know anti-oxidants taken peri-workout decrees training adaptations, at least a few other studies I have seen over the years have born this out. Epi is an anti-oxidant so perhaps taking away from training would be advantages?????? As usual, we need far more research before we come to any strong conclusions.
This study didn’t have them take it pre-workout though. They took 100mg (or placebo) twice daily.

They even mentioned that maybe results would be different had it been taken prior to training due to possible NO benefits proposed.

As usual though it would be nice to see more studies and continue to gather more information.

I just read the study through and shoudl have begun at the end.

"The EPI group consumed one capsule containing 100 mg of 98% pure (–)-epicatechin twice daily (200 mg total). Participants were instructed to consume one 100 mg capsule in the morning and one 100 mg capsule in the afternoon or evening."

Straight -(-epi) alone is not very bioavailable. What did they use for absorption? Answer: Nothing. How does a mouse consume a capsule?
Further, the 15 day experiment proved successful in improvement but the 30 day did not?"Mice bread for..." is not quite indicative of a human response. How many humans are bread for a lack of aeorbic capacity?

Personally, if anyone has followed my previous logs knows how can a 50 plus year old do what I did in 30-35 minutes would be crazy. I'll give the nod to Follidrone 2.0 for endurance and capacity. Did they also increase the carb intake prior to exercise? Probably not. Can you tell if a mouse is feeling hypoglycemic because if this mouse didn't eat his carbs prior to working out, he would.

I don't see the value in this study, like others as there is a more complex issue here.
Finally, and until I think of something else, I'd say, look at the unsponsored logs of ours and others.
Dude what are you even rambling about?

This wasn’t a mouse study? And it’s bred not bread.

They weren’t 50 year olds either.

Why would they increase carb intake prior to training that would become a conflicting variable to the study.

I’m just confused at what you are looking at.
 
Aleksandar37

Aleksandar37

Well-known member
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
I just read the study through and shoudl have begun at the end.

"The EPI group consumed one capsule containing 100 mg of 98% pure (–)-epicatechin twice daily (200 mg total). Participants were instructed to consume one 100 mg capsule in the morning and one 100 mg capsule in the afternoon or evening."

Straight -(-epi) alone is not very bioavailable. What did they use for absorption? Answer: Nothing. How does a mouse consume a capsule?
Further, the 15 day experiment proved successful in improvement but the 30 day did not?"Mice bread for..." is not quite indicative of a human response. How many humans are bread for a lack of aeorbic capacity?

Personally, if anyone has followed my previous logs knows how can a 50 plus year old do what I did in 30-35 minutes would be crazy. I'll give the nod to Follidrone 2.0 for endurance and capacity. Did they also increase the carb intake prior to exercise? Probably not. Can you tell if a mouse is feeling hypoglycemic because if this mouse didn't eat his carbs prior to working out, he would.

I don't see the value in this study, like others as there is a more complex issue here.
Finally, and until I think of something else, I'd say, look at the unsponsored logs of ours and others.
I agree with Resolve10, what paper are you reading? You seem to be talking about a mouse paper that they cite in the introduction and not the human study results. Of course that other study would use mice bred for low running capacity as it would be easier to see any significant changes in performance.

Furthermore, this is a placebo-controlled study in which they saw a significant effect. On what scientific basis (not your personal opinion or marketing) are you saying this study has no value, but you do believe in completely uncontrolled supplement logs?
 
K

kisaj

Well-known member
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
I'd love to see more studies that correlate to how most people would take -(-epi) for performance purposes. I know that I definitely see improvement in my cardio output and endurance, but I also am taking 600mg 45-60 min prior to activity.
 
Resolve10

Resolve10

Member
Awards
3
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • Best Answer
I'd love to see more studies that correlate to how most people would take -(-epi) for performance purposes. I know that I definitely see improvement in my cardio output and endurance, but I also am taking 600mg 45-60 min prior to activity.
I’d be interested as well, mostly because I as well feel like I’ve seen benefit!
 
Monte Brogan

Monte Brogan

Member
Awards
1
  • Established
I'd love to see more studies that correlate to how most people would take -(-epi) for performance purposes. I know that I definitely see improvement in my cardio output and endurance, but I also am taking 600mg 45-60 min prior to activity.
Any strength or lean mass gains at 600 mg per day?

Anyone else taking 600 mg and seeing anything, good or bad?
 
Jiigzz

Jiigzz

Legend
Awards
5
  • Legend!
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • First Up Vote
It works fantastic for me and has been a staple for awhile. Sometimes studies say one thing and personal experience is completely different. The map is not always the territory. Are you gonna live your life according to what someone else says or experience it for yourself?

There is only one way to find out. Give it a shot yourself. We are all based on the same design, yet there is so much variance within the schematic. Epicatechin does have some non responders, but for those that do respond, you will know immediately.
People are prone to placebo, even when they know it's a placebo.

A study takes a group of people and objectively measures different variables and then plots them for statistical significance.

The argument you posted is exactly the rationale people use for various voodoo medicines like healing crystals - none of which are actually supported by evidence, all of which people stand by - often to their own demise.
 
T

ttortman78

Member
Awards
1
  • Established
People are prone to placebo, even when they know it's a placebo.

A study takes a group of people and objectively measures different variables and then plots them for statistical significance.

The argument you posted is exactly the rationale people use for various voodoo medicines like healing crystals - none of which are actually supported by evidence, all of which people stand by - often to their own demise.
I wasn't arguing anything just my own personal experience. Been using epicatechin for several years straight. I know what it does for me. Yet now that I read your comment, the "light" has gone off for me, how could I have not seen it. I will never use epicatechin again. Thank you so much.
 
HIT4ME

HIT4ME

Well-known member
Awards
2
  • RockStar
  • Established
I agree with Resolve10, what paper are you reading? You seem to be talking about a mouse paper that they cite in the introduction and not the human study results. Of course that other study would use mice bred for low running capacity as it would be easier to see any significant changes in performance.

Furthermore, this is a placebo-controlled study in which they saw a significant effect. On what scientific basis (not your personal opinion or marketing) are you saying this study has no value, but you do believe in completely uncontrolled supplement logs?
I was thinking this...did I read the wrong study? lol.

Also - justhere4comm - this study saw a significant impact in humans, so if there were no absorption enhancers the study kind if negates the bioavailability angle a little. If you take something orally and it has an impact - then that is the impact. The bioavailabilty then becomes more of an MOA issue to some degree.

People are prone to placebo, even when they know it's a placebo.

A study takes a group of people and objectively measures different variables and then plots them for statistical significance.

The argument you posted is exactly the rationale people use for various voodoo medicines like healing crystals - none of which are actually supported by evidence, all of which people stand by - often to their own demise.
This isn't directed at anyone, but it has always struck me how the people who think they are not effected by something are often the most effected.

I personally haven't ever thought epi had the impact many claim. But on the other hand, I wouldn't put too much into this one study either. It is certainly useful, especially since it has an unexpected result. It may actually turn out to have more to do with our beliefs about stress/adaptation than our beleifs about -epi itself.

It is kind of like how everyone for a long time acted as if antioxidants were all good with no downside, or inflammation was all bad with no upside.
 

Similar threads


Top