A few weeks ago, we published Dr. Marcus Jones' dogma-smashing article on protein cycling. (For those of you who haven't read it yet, check it out on the Previous Issues section of the Testosterone website.) Although the article was well received for the most part, it generated a lot of well thought-out questions and even one lengthy rebuttal from a cynical reader. Dr. Jones has already answered several of these questions/attacks in our regular "Gang of Five" feature, but more just keep on coming. Hence, this special Q and A devoted entirely to his protein-cycling article:

Q: Loved the article on protein cycling and I'm gonna give it a try. My question is this: I noticed in the Q and A that you said NOT to go low-cal while on the low protein part of the diet. Why is this? It seems like it would be ideal if you could go for four weeks, taking in low calories and low protein and then go high calories and high protein. That way you could hopefully burn fat and gain muscle at the same time. Anyway, the article was great. Keep it up.

A: Excellent question. I recommended keeping calories up during the low protein phase of the protein cycling program for a couple of reasons. First of all, without adequate caloric compensation during protein restriction, the body will catabolize many valuable protein stores for energy. This is normally compensated for with dietary protein, but during protein restriction, you're not replacing these proteins, so it would invariably result in some muscle loss. The other major reason for keeping calories high during this phase is to insure that the body makes anabolic adaptations rather than adaptations that would result in concomitant fat gain. If fat loss is what you're seeking, then consider caloric restriction during the high protein phase of the protein cycle. Also, choose protein sources high in omega-6 fatty acids during the fat loss attempt and you will greatly enhance your hardening efforts. And, as I mentioned in my original article, avoid yohimbine during the protein repletion phase as it is a potent GH inhibitor. Keep me informed of your progress.

Q: I am trying your protein cycling theories out. Anyway, I find myself very tired from the additional carbs. My body has always reacted this way, even when eating very low glycemic-index foods. Instead, I wanted to increase the fat to a higher level?somewhere between 30-50%?and keep carb intake lower. Would this effect the high protein part of the cycle?

A: This question brings up an excellent point which I should have addressed in my article. It is acceptable to increase fat calories in order to decrease any glucose intolerance that you may be experiencing. It is important to determine the extent of your glucose intolerance to be sure you haven't become somewhat diabetic without knowing it. I would advise being evaluated by a health-care provider to definitively rule out diabetes, but I will answer the question with the assumption that you are healthy.

Increasing fatty-acid consumption can be a very beneficial adjunct to the protein cycling program, provided you do it right. The omega-3 series of fatty acids, commonly obtained from fish oil and flaxseed oil, are not only mildly anabolic but they also have been shown to significantly improve glucose disposal in diabetic and healthy human subjects. I would also encourage the use of chromium picolinate if there is a possibility that you are deficient (in chromium). Also consider the addition of vanadyl sulfate for stimulation of glucose disposal pathways independent of insulin and IGF-1. If you incorporate all of the above suggestions, you will begin to experience muscular pumps during your workouts like you have never experienced in past training because of glycogen overcompensation (provided you keep your repetitions high). Keep on thinking and let me know how it goes.

Q: I would like to begin by saying that I really appreciate the manner in which you view science in regard to bodybuilding. The sport needs more individuals like you who educate themselves and then put their knowledge to the test, and that is exactly what I'm trying to do. I'm a third year nutrition science/pre-med major at the University of Georgia, and I just received my personal trainer certification from the International Sports Sciences Association. (I'm also a competitive natural bodybuilder with a few titles under my belt as a teenager?one of which is a Gold Medal at the 1997 Junior Olympic Games). Hey, I thought if you could blow your own horn in your article that I could at least try to toot mine a little.

Anyway to get to the point, I plan on trying your protein cycle system, but have a few questions first.

Would it be beneficial to take some sort of GH-releasing supplement on the low protein portion of the diet in order to enhance the already enormous GH increase (maybe glutamine, or one of the new GHRP products)? Would it reinforce the anabolism of the high-protein phase to take a testosterone booster such as Androdiol? What would be the consequences if you dropped your protein rather quickly, instead of tapering it off like you describe? Is it possible to actually gain muscle mass on the low protein phase? In other words, should I keep my workout intensity in high gear?

I realize that I've approached you with many questions with probably many different answers?or at least many different variations of answers?but any response will be greatly appreciated!

A: Here we go, another horn blower like myself. I like it! Anyway, your questions suggest some great modifications of the protein cycling regimen. The first idea about GH enhancement is one I had considered when designing the program but did not include for simplicity's sake. There are benefits to taking GH releasing supplements (of the prescription variety, or amino acids like L-arginine) while protein cycling but not during the protein depletion phase. The body does an excellent job of elevating GH by itself during this phase AND the idea is to allow the body to naturally modify all the mechanisms influencing GH secretion during protein reduction. There is a possibility that adding an agent to enhance GH release during protein restriction could cause some degree of inhibitory feedback in the long run. The good news is that GH enhancers are a great thing to utilize during the high protein period because that's when the body begins to decrease the amount of GH production. I would not recommend glutamine supplementation because of increased gut growth but something as simple as several grams of L-arginine at night on an empty stomach will keep GH and IGF-1 levels further elevated. L-arginine also enhances muscular growth in ways not clearly elucidated in the literature (arginine is real cheap, too).

The physiologic responses to most over-the-counter testosterone boosters have been unpredictable and weakly verified in the literature. If one still wanted to use such a booster or even some supervised authentic gear, then the high-protein phase is definitely the time to use it. The protein re-feeding phase is likely the healthiest and most anabolically charged your body will have ever been so that its responsiveness to any androgen will be greatly enhanced.

It is actually not just possible, but easy to gain muscle on the low protein phase of the protein cycling program; therefore, keep that training intensity high. If you cut your protein too dramatically over a short period, it is possible to experience some lean mass loss until your body compensates. Take your time and the gains will come without suffering. Thanks for the question.

EDITOR'S NOTE: This last "question" is actually the rebuttal we spoke of in the intro to this article. It's lengthy, but we decided to print it out in its entirety because we're really thrilled that a reader took the time to actually check Dr. Jones' references. The reader gets a little nasty a few times, but we applaud his cynicism, regardless.

Q: Where do I ever start? I wanted to write to you regarding good ol' Dr. Marcus' rehashed ideas on protein cycling. I say rehashed because Gironda was pushing low protein cycles years ago. Tom Platz talked about it in "Big Beyond Belief" as did Akerfeldt last year in his 'ABCDE' series in MM2K. Dr. Marcus' approach is far more extreme than either approach, advocating 20-40 grams of protein for long periods of time, up to a month.

I'm sorry guys, but I think one of your infamous "Gang of Five" is defective. First he makes this big deal about why you should listen to him, because he's a smart cookie, and because he "knows" how to do research, and because he's a "real" bodybuilder. Well I'm not a "real" bodybuilder (just a wanna-be with small arms), but I do have a background in exercise physiology and nutrition. More importantly, I know how to access Medline to check on the claims being made by all the B.S. artists in the world of bodybuilding. And this article was full of it.

First, he talks about how protein depletion jacks GH to the ceiling, and it doesn't come down for several days after protein is re-fed, citing Guyton's textbook of medical physiology (pg. 939). This is true (I checked my copy), at least for children suffering from Kawashiorkor (that's a good model for bodybuilders), but he's being awfully reductive. GH isn't the be-all, end-all anabolic hormone; what about looking at what happens to testosterone levels or IGF-1? Of course, GH is the big rage right now (i.e., all the B.S. GH supplements flooding the market) so it makes sense that he'd play up the role of GH in growth. Also, if you really want to jack GH to the ceiling, try total starvation. Of course, no one would be dumb enough to recommend starvation for growth. Oh wait, that came later in the article.

That's when the article really got bad. First he claims:

"Other benefits of protein cycling include more efficient function of the liver and kidneys and a decrease in organ size. We all know that a smaller liver is great, especially to those of us with protruding guts secondary to liver hypertrophy."⁵

Citing 5) Differential effects of plane of protein or energy nutrition on visceral organs and hormones in lambs. J Anim Sci 1995 Jun;73(6):1674-1688 Wester TJ, et. al.

Now this would be fascinating if it occurs, and admittedly, it could be beneficial. So I looked up the abstract (don't have access to the journal, sadly). And it does state:

"By week seven of restriction, liver mass in ER and PR was decreased to 50% of controls (P. 5)."

So he's correct, sort of. But, the next sentence says:

"Return of liver mass, on an empty body weight basis, occurred by d 2 of repletion (P. 1)."

Wow, four weeks of protein malnutrition and any advantage of a reduced liver size is gone within two days! That sure sounds worth it to me. Of course, he probably didn't expect anyone to actually look up his studies (we all know that citing a bushel of studies automatically gives you credibility) to see if he was correct or not.

Finally, to prove his brilliance, he states:

"Hey, don't be afraid of losing muscle and wimp out...many of our current ideas about building muscle are stupid and based on the ideas of peons and pencil necks. For instance, I have discovered, in the literature and through self-experimentation, that muscle can be built during complete starvation...but that's another topic for another day."⁶

Citing 6) Effect of food restriction on rat muscle hypertrophy... Brown-CR. Comp-Bioch- Physiol-A. 1990; 95(3): 321-4

Now I am truly amazed. Not only has he solved the problems of bodybuilding, he has figured out how to create something from nothing and break a fundamental law of thermodynamics. I had to check this one out. First off, the correct reference is:

Effects of food restriction on stretch induced muscle hypertrophy in chickens of various ages. - Brown CR, et. al. - Comp Biochem Physiol A 1990;95(3):321-324

Well, chickens and rats are both animals, I suppose, but it would be nice if he could get the references correct if he's going to bother citing them in the first place. Anyway, this study looked at muscle growth in an ISOLATED MUSCLE during chronic stretch during starvation. And after 6 days, that muscle had grown by 200%. So the good doctor is sort of correct.

Of course, the effects on one muscle don't tell us anything about whole body protein synthesis. I wonder if the good doctor can tell me WHERE the nitrogen and amino acids are coming from during total starvation to allow for whole body protein synthesis. The last time I checked, humans could not fix nitrogen from the air like plants do. And if you look at the huge amount of starvation literature (hint, Dr. Marcus, do a Medline search on George F Cahill, Jr or a very recent paper by OE Owen in the Am J Clin Nutr), the loss of body protein is massive during the initial stages of starvation. I would speculate the amino acids/nitrogen that were incorporated into the chicken's wing came from the breakdown of other muscles. Sorry, Dr. Marcus, you can't make something out of nothing.

So to be honest, I'm totally perplexed by this article. He mangles the facts, he can't even get his references correct, and I have to wonder what his motivations are. Perhaps a new low protein MRP offered only through test.net? Perhaps he's trying to prove how dangerously hardcore he is.

Dr. Marcus, I thought the first rule of medicine was "First, do no harm". Can you explain how encouraging protein malnutrition or outright starvation fits with your Hippocratic oath?

Oh, one more thing, in his most recent Gang of Five answers, Dr. Marcus makes the strange statement that protein from grains and vegetables should not be counted towards the daily total of 20-40 grams. So if I eat 20 bagels per day (approx. protein content 10 grams/bagel) for a total of 200 grams of protein, but nothing else, does that mean I can count my protein intake as zero for that day? I think someone needs a refresher in human physiology. Amino acids are amino acids, and the point of this strategy is to down-regulate amino acid oxidation, so the source is irrelevant.

Anyway, I've talked long enough. I'll look forward to comments by the esteemed Dr. Marcus regarding my criticisms of his article.

Sincerely,

Lyle McDonald

A: "Old" McDonald! E-I-E-I-O! I love this question by "old" McDonald because it demonstrates just how dangerous a little knowledge can be. I must praise this reader, though, for at least attempting to examine the principles proposed in my article. Many bodybuilders (and in this case I use the term "bodybuilder" in a VERY broad sense) take all that they read for granted. Though I may tease this particular reader throughout my answer, I really do encourage thorough investigation of all my references and love to debate the issues. Well, let's get to it!

This question is an entire article in and of itself except the author has a limited capacity to acknowledge his limitations. Never fear though, for I will help him discover his shortcomings (call it a type of therapy). Our "wanna-be" bodybuilder reader has doubts about the benefit of raising GH levels during the protein depletion period. I'm glad he was able to read the Guyton text and admit that a phenomenal GH increase can be achieved but I wish he had utilized his "background in exercise physiology and nutrition" a tad more to discover what hormonal changes occur during the protein repletion phase.

Maybe I touched upon one of his many obvious limitations, but I am here to enlighten him. During the protein depletion phase of the cycle, IGF-1 and IGF-2 are markedly decreased while the GH level climbs. This is a metabolic paradox but is a very beneficial physiologic occurrence. You see, the liver has a decrease in IGF binding protein production and total mass during protein restriction but has a marked increase in IGF gene expression. During protein re-feeding, for reasons not well understood, the liver is more sensitive to GH (which is 10 to 100 times the normal level at initial protein re-feeding) which is the stimulus for IGF-1 secretion. The bottom line is that the liver has substantially more "stored" IGF-1 during protein depletion and the liver has an exaggerated response to GH (which stimulates IGF-1 production and release); thereby creating an ultra-anabolic environment during the protein re-feeding phase. Not to mention that there are fewer binding proteins in the serum, creating an even higher level of free growth factors.

Testosterone levels are also increased during the protein re-feeding phase secondary to increased FSH and LH levels. Hopefully, this information sheds a little light on the actual depth of research that has gone into developing this program, but even this bit of information is only the tip of the iceberg. I did not address insulin levels or thyroid responses to protein cycling due to space limitations, but, suffice it to say, anyone who investigates these aspects of metabolism will be impressed with the beneficial physiologic adaptations that protein cycling produces.

Our budding scientist has also questioned the lasting benefits that protein cycling has on liver size. One major problem our pencil-neck friend has is that he only reads abstracts. BAD MOVE! Secondly, he doesn't respect the adage RIF (reading is fundamental)! The reference he questioned demonstrates that protein restriction can reduce liver size up to 50% in some animals. He noted that the liver mass returned to baseline levels within 2 days of re-feeding. What he seemed to miss in his lapse of literacy was that the protein cycling system was designed to avoid returning to the level of protein consumption prior to initiation of the protein cycling program. As I stated in my original article, many of these protein-engorged bodybuilders are taking in as much as 400 grams of protein a day! The entire premise of the re-feeding phase is the idea that you can grow enormous on much less protein than you were consuming prior to utilizing the outlined principles. The animals in the study were fed the same amount of protein that they were consuming prior to restriction.

In addition, the length of protein restriction in the animal studies was a one-time shot, and not the repeated cycles that I recommended in the protein cycling program. Finally, these animals were not weight trained so that their protein storage and disposal pathways were much different than those athletes who cycle protein intake. This reader stated that I didn't expect anyone to be verifying my references but glancing at an abstract is a far cry from looking up a reference (especially when you don't understand the principles of what you read in the first place).

My literate friend also hated to admit that muscle can be grown during starvation. Just because he doesn't understand the mechanism of this type of muscle growth doesn't make it erroneous. I had already cited references that illustrated where the body gets some of its protein during restriction (liver, kidney, and other enlarged viscera), but he still asks where the nitrogen comes from to build muscle during starvation. In addition, all muscle hypertrophy doesn't result from incorporation of new amino acids. Muscle also hypertrophies from remodeling mechanisms that only require the more efficient reincorporation of the aminos released during exercise. Hopefully our friend will read about these proposed mechanisms before he tries to form his own uninformed theories about how the muscle grows during starvation.

The last thing that I will address from our reader is his comment regarding my answer to another reader about how he should count the protein in vegetable sources. I tried to keep the counting of protein grams simple for sanity's sake. I know that there are those of us who are overly obsessive about our new bodybuilding endeavors; therefore, I suggested to a prior reader to only count meat and supplement sources of protein. Others who follow the program more stringently will get more dramatic results. Remember, there is no hurry in making these dietary changes. Your gains will be proportional to your level of motivation. I am not an extremist nor do I encourage extremism. I only present information to benefit those who are willing to utilize it. I hope this reader has not taken offense at me poking fun at his deficiencies, but we all need deflation now and then. I hope Mr. McDonald will send us some photos so we can see how well his program works (whatever program that is). Take it easy.

EDITOR'S NOTE: By the way, Lyle, Biotest's MRP is not going to be low-protein, and Dr. Jones' article was not meant to be a marketing lead-in for that product or any other product?you cynical guy, you.

T

© 1998 — 2008 Testosterone, LLC. All Rights Reserved.