I was wondering if there was any studies showing that CH is more beneficial for muscle building than an intact protein. Im currently having success with the protocol but im not sure if thats just because of the 1000+ calories im taking now that i wasnt taking in before or the I,Bodybuilder program itself.
I found an interesting study where they summed it up as “Hydrolysates are not only not superior to intact protein in terms of providing amino acids to skeletal muscle, they are distinctly inferior. Their fast digestion speed leads to greater digestive losses, more oxidation via deamination and provides less amino acids to skeletal muscle. Thatâ??s on top of tasting like vomit. Or at least making you want to.”
I asked charles poliquin this question and his short answer was why dont you think he doesnt carry a CH product in his line of supps…
you can google
"
Deglaire et al. Hydrolyzed dietary casein as compared with the intact protein reduces postprandial peripheral, but not whole-body, uptake of nitrogen in humans. Am J Clin Nutr. (2009) 90(4):1011-22.
Deglaire A, Fromentin C, Fouillet H, Airinei G, Gaudichon C, Boutry C et al
Hydrolyzed dietary casein as compared with the intact protein reduces postprandial peripheral, but not whole-body, uptake of nitrogen in humans.
Am J Clin Nutr. 2009 Oct;90(4):1011-22. Epub 2009 Aug 19.
pubmed.com, type in “Hydrolyzed dietary casein as compared with the intact protein reduces postprandial peripheral, but not whole-body, uptake of nitrogen in humans.” in the search box.
Please post a link to the study or the study in its entirety. As it stands, a study that quips about CH tasting like vomit does not sound very credible, as it is juvenile and not relevant to the digestion of CH.
You cannot post links because T-Nation has adopted a policy across the forums, that they are no longer able to allow links to many supplement/training websites or blogs due to trolls> youll have to go through all the trouble of typing it in google yourself.
[quote]sjow wrote:
I was wondering if there was any studies showing that CH is more beneficial for muscle building than an intact protein. Im currently having success with the protocol but im not sure if thats just because of the 1000+ calories im taking now that i wasnt taking in before or the I,Bodybuilder program itself.
I found an interesting study where they summed it up as “Hydrolysates are not only not superior to intact protein in terms of providing amino acids to skeletal muscle, they are distinctly inferior. Their fast digestion speed leads to greater digestive losses, more oxidation via deamination and provides less amino acids to skeletal muscle. Thatâ??s on top of tasting like vomit. Or at least making you want to.”
I asked charles poliquin this question and his short answer was why dont you think he doesnt carry a CH product in his line of supps…[/quote]
If you are making good progress using it, you would stop because a study tells you it shouldn’t?
Why not just add in 1000 calories to your diet and see if you make the same sort of progress.
The DOI for that study is 10.3945/ajcn.2009.27548. (See www.doi.org).
The results state that peripheral utilization of HC is less than IC (11% and 18%, respectively), however “HC was associated with a faster rate of absorption than was IC, resulting in earlier and stronger hyperaminoacidemia and hyperinsulinemia.” If I remember correctly, hyperaminoacidemia is the goal of using HC in the ANACONDA Protocol.
