New Study Shows Omega-6 Fat Arachidonic Acid Builds Muscle

SwolenONE

SwolenONE

Board Sponsor
LAS VEGAS, July 11, 2014 /PRNewswire/ -- Molecular Nutrition (MN) announced today clinical study results for their X-Factor™ arachidonic acid (ARA) supplement. Under controlled conditions in the University of Tampa's Human Performance Research Lab, supplementation of ARA for eight weeks significantly increased lean body mass, muscle thickness, strength, and anaerobic power in experienced resistance-trained men. These findings were unveiled at the National Strength and Conditioning Association (NSCA) conference in Las Vegas, NV.

Arachidonic acid is an omega-6 fatty acid. It is found in many foods including eggs, beef, chicken, and fish. ARA is one of the most biologically important fatty acids; playing key roles in the immune system, memory and learning, bone mineral density, and cardiovascular health. MN CEO William Llewellyn first proposed that supplemental ARA would support skeletal muscle growth more than a decade ago. This study validates his original hypothesis, and provides very clear support for the use of ARA supplements in sports.

Thirty college-aged men were recruited for the study, and randomized into two groups. The men in the first group were given 1,500 mg of ARA daily, and the other an identical-looking placebo. All men followed a periodized resistance-training program for 8 weeks. At the end of the study, the group supplementing ARA reported significantly greater gains in lean body mass (3.6 lbs. vs. 0.2 lbs.). They also noticed an 88% greater increase in muscle thickness (.47 cm vs. .25 cm), and added significantly more strength to bench press and leg press (110 lbs. vs. 76 lbs.). Lastly, wingate peak anaerobic power was dramatically improved with ARA (78W vs. 28W), a 275% greater increase.

"This study has demonstrated in a controlled setting the type of remarkable results we've noticed with athletes and bodybuilders for many years now," said William Llewellyn. "Arachidonic acid is a key link between the mechanical stress of resistance training, and the biological repair process that comes in afterwards to facilitate protein synthesis and growth. This gives us an exceptionally effective opportunity for increasing muscle mass and strength. ARA supplementation should provide a distinct advantage for bodybuilders, and athletes in all sports where strength and power are decisive variables."

About Molecular Nutrition

Molecular Nutrition is a sports nutrition research and development company. X-Factor™ is available through many supplement retailers and distributors. For more information visit Invalid Link Removed Arachidonic acid (ARASYN™) is a patented sports nutrition ingredient. Interested companies should contact [email protected].
Invalid Link Removed
 
Solid results. Looking forward to giving the study a look over.
 
Full text anywhere?
 
Full text and graphs coming Monday.

What haters 1 starred a thread about one of the few legit scientific studies that our industry has ever seen?

BRB, furthering our industry with scientific validity while internet haters keep hating.
 
SwolenONE said:
Full text and graphs coming Monday.

What haters 1 starred a thread about one of the few legit scientific studies that our industry has ever seen?

BRB, furthering our industry with scientific validity while internet haters keep hating.
Click to expand...

I got one bottle sitting on my self. I may have two grab another.
 
SwolenONE said:
Full text and graphs coming Monday. What haters 1 starred a thread about one of the few legit scientific studies that our industry has ever seen? BRB, furthering our industry with scientific validity while internet haters keep hating.
Click to expand...

Cool, i look forward to the full text/graphs. I would like to see a good study done on daily v only workout day dosing schemes for ARA as that seems to be another debate that pops up regularly. Plus, this study says it was a daily dosing scheme in the text provided above.
 
SwolenONE said:
Full text and graphs coming Monday.

What haters 1 starred a thread about one of the few legit scientific studies that our industry has ever seen?

BRB, furthering our industry with scientific validity while internet haters keep hating.
Click to expand...
Congrats to Bill and Molecular One on the publication. If not for cost, I think ArA would enjoy the same status as creatine. This has been an awesome year for natty supplementation.
 
I have ran ArA at least three times already and it hasn't failed me. My lifts just keep going up on it. Actually have another set waiting on my closet :) excited!!!
 
jswain34 said:
Cool, i look forward to the full text/graphs. I would like to see a good study done on daily v only workout day dosing schemes for ARA as that seems to be another debate that pops up regularly. Plus, this study says it was a daily dosing scheme in the text provided above.
Click to expand...

This. I'd also like to know how it was dosed, i.e. if it was dosed on an empty stomach or with food, spread throughout day or one dose daily, etc.
 
Rostam said:
Is this a publication or press release?
Click to expand...

It's a publication within a press release...we're talking straight inception baby... ;) I believe full study details coming out on Monday.. this was just a general population release for the layman...
 
I already thought the studies were conclusive about ArA. I guess more doesn't hurt though. ArA was the first natty anabolic I used and it treated me well.
 
Strange, this is what Llewellyn has recently posted elsewhere:

The complete abstract should be posted on monday. The FULL paper is still in the works (phase II mechanism studies currently), and is expected to be published later this year.
Click to expand...
 
schizm said:
It's a publication within a press release...we're talking straight inception baby... ;) I believe full study details coming out on Monday.. this was just a general population release for the layman...
Click to expand...

I was wondering if this study is published in any scientific journal. If it is, the full paper should already be available. If it s not, it s very unusual for studies to disclose part of the study before publication. Unless the study is never going to be published.
 
NewAgeMayan said:
Is that due to headaches and/or inflammation issues when running XF? How long you been running XFA, and have you noticed any differences in training progression between the 2 versions?
Click to expand...

I notice a ton of pumps and Increased volume. I do not use gms nor carnitines either. I felt rough on xf, 8 workouts in so far
 
GreenMachineX said:
Do you know how many days a week that was and if it was dosed on an empty stomach or with a meal?
Click to expand...

You can follow the label or dose it all with your preworkout meal. How many times a week depends on your workout frequency. Of course if you workout less than 3x a week then you have a problem :rolleyes:
 
goodvibes said:
You can follow the label or dose it all with your preworkout meal. How many times a week depends on your workout frequency. Of course if you workout less than 3x a week then you have a problem :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Yeah, I know all that. But I was wondering exactly how it was used in the study. Thanks though.
 
i ve tried x factor in the past,4 capsules pre training and i saw nothing..no pumps,no doms no strength increases..and the bottle(200 caps)was a little underdosed too(it had 185 caps).
 
GreenMachineX said:
Do you know how many days a week that was and if it was dosed on an empty stomach or with a meal?
Click to expand...

No idea. The study isn't published yet. It's just a poster presentation at this point. I'm guessing another 6-12 months before we see a provisional followed by publication.
 
Id say go with straight ArA unless you get joint issues/pain.
 
On week 5 of my stack including ArA and have hit Pr's on bench and squat in back to back weeks/ must say this will be a staple 2/3 times a year! I think I may end up picking up another bottle of X-Gels though because Id like to give 1.5g a shot...

running 1g currently. Deciding whether or not to bump up to 1.5g after the first bottle is finished.
 
iThrow said:
On week 5 of my stack including ArA and have hit Pr's on bench and squat in back to back weeks/ must say this will be a staple 2/3 times a year! I think I may end up picking up another bottle of X-Gels though because Id like to give 1.5g a shot... running 1g currently. Deciding whether or not to bump up to 1.5g after the first bottle is finished.
Click to expand...
If 1g of X-Gels is working well, I'd keep it there.
 
aaronuconn said:
If 1g of X-Gels is working well, I'd keep it there.
Click to expand...
Id like to think it is based on results so far, but then again i havent noticed increased DOMS/soreness, and im not sure what else to expect.. hence why i was gonna play around with the dosage :D
 
Just noticed this, apparently they dosed 1.5 grams daily so most definitely taken on non-training days as well (which I personally recommend because I noticed better results @ 1 gram daily vs 1.5 grams training days only).

I would think 1 gram daily would be sufficient though, for smaller guys like myself.
 
kissdadookie said:
Just noticed this, apparently they dosed 1.5 grams daily so most definitely taken on non-training days as well (which I personally recommend because I noticed better results @ 1 gram daily vs 1.5 grams training days only).

I would think 1 gram daily would be sufficient though, for smaller guys like myself.
Click to expand...

im taking 1g on training days only.. training 4 days per week, sooooo youve taken it on non training days as well.
 
iThrow said:
im taking 1g on training days only.. training 4 days per week, sooooo youve taken it on non training days as well.
Click to expand...

First time I used XF, 1 gram every day first thing in the morning (training days, I train first thing in the morning). 50 days. No GMS, no LCLT, still continued taking fish oils at the time. That run was a better run than my second run @ 1.5 grams preworkout only (I think it was 5 days lift 1 day no lift, could possibly have been 4 days lift 1 day no lift, probably the latter) w/ GMS + LCLT. The first run was a better run than the second run.

When I run it again in the future, I'm just going to stick with daily dose of 1 gram. No GMS, no LCLT. Maybe grab 3 bottles and run it for 75 days straight.
 
kissdadookie said:
No idea. The study isn't published yet. It's just a poster presentation at this point. I'm guessing another 6-12 months before we see a provisional followed by publication.
Click to expand...

You won't get to see a provisional manuscript, most (real) journals don't allow authors to do that.
 
kissdadookie said:
First time I used XF, 1 gram every day first thing in the morning (training days, I train first thing in the morning). 50 days. No GMS, no LCLT, still continued taking fish oils at the time. That run was a better run than my second run @ 1.5 grams preworkout only (I think it was 5 days lift 1 day no lift, could possibly have been 4 days lift 1 day no lift, probably the latter) w/ GMS + LCLT. The first run was a better run than the second run.

When I run it again in the future, I'm just going to stick with daily dose of 1 gram. No GMS, no LCLT. Maybe grab 3 bottles and run it for 75 days straight.
Click to expand...

thought my post posted before i xd off the screen.. whoops.. anyway, what benefits did you see running it every day for 50 days vs the training days only? im interested especially because my lifting split is only 3-4 days per week. Knowing it take a few weeks to get integrated into the system and see results, my cycle of 50 training days is looking like 12-14 weeks :/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top