1,3-DMAA (1,3-dimethylamylamine; 1,3-dimethylpentylamine; and some other names) is structurally similar to amphetamine and appears to work in the brain rather like amphetamine:
Amphetamine:
1,3-DMAA:
So amphetamine has a closed ring structure (the hexagon at the left) while 1,3-DMAA has only part of this structure. The rest of the molecule is the exact same shape.
It’s a matter of question as to whether 1,3-DMAA is naturally-occurring or not. The claims made by given product labels that their ingredient was geranium extract was never true.
The FDA has sent a warning letter deeming that products containing the ingredient are, according to a legal term, “adulterated.” For this reason at least most companies that had been selling the ingredient are no longer doing so.
[quote]audiogarden1 wrote:
In fact if i dont have some food in my stomach during a session, i get light-headed and run out of energy fast. I think my body already starts utilizing the food in my stomach during intense workouts to keep me going. [/quote]
Nah, its just that your metabolism is so accustomed to burning sugar for fuel.
Switch things over to a fat-adapted state (not the easiest transition, granted) and that’ll never happen anymore during a workout.
[quote]audiogarden1 wrote:
In fact if i dont have some food in my stomach during a session, i get light-headed and run out of energy fast. I think my body already starts utilizing the food in my stomach during intense workouts to keep me going. [/quote]
Nah, its just that your metabolism is so accustomed to burning sugar for fuel.
Switch things over to a fat-adapted state (not the easiest transition, granted) and that’ll never happen anymore during a workout.
[/quote]If someone is accustomed to burning sugar for fuel does it mean he can have a more productive weight-training session than if he were in a fat-adapted state ?
[quote]tolismann wrote:
If someone is accustomed to burning sugar for fuel does it mean he can have a more productive weight-training session than if he were in a fat-adapted state ?
[/quote]
Yes and no:
No, because training intensity is determined by how much glycogen one has to work with and a sugar burning individual can still train the same as a (mostly) fat burning individual (using the term sugar burner and fat burner means that most of the time this is the dominant energy substrate being metabolized but all individual will use both to varying degrees).
Yes, because higher training intensity can be endured much longer for a fat adapted individual. He can do this because he is using ketone bodies as well as glycogen so he uses a lot less glycogen and also has higher concentrations of ketone bodies in his bloodstream and does not have to depend on breaking down protein to make glucose for brain support. The fat-adapted versus the non fat adapted runs low on glycogen a lot slower so he can train more intensely much longer.
A sugar burner will hit the wall and start to feel foggy and lose power long before a fat burner will.
I think strongman, relative strength or endurance athletes would benefit more from being fat adapted than a traditional bodybuilder would (mainly because a bodybuilder’s diet is 100% Macros).
For me, I just feel better not feeling hungry before training - even after coming off an 18 hour fast.
[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
1,3-DMAA (1,3-dimethylamylamine; 1,3-dimethylpentylamine; and some other names) is structurally similar to amphetamine and appears to work in the brain rather like amphetamine:
Amphetamine:
1,3-DMAA:
So amphetamine has a closed ring structure (the hexagon at the left) while 1,3-DMAA has only part of this structure. The rest of the molecule is the exact same shape.
It’s a matter of question as to whether 1,3-DMAA is naturally-occurring or not. The claims made by given product labels that their ingredient was geranium extract was never true.
The FDA has sent a warning letter deeming that products containing the ingredient are, according to a legal term, “adulterated.” For this reason at least most companies that had been selling the ingredient are no longer doing so.[/quote]
[quote]tolismann wrote:
If someone is accustomed to burning sugar for fuel does it mean he can have a more productive weight-training session than if he were in a fat-adapted state ?
[/quote]
Yes and no:
No, because training intensity is determined by how much glycogen one has to work with and a sugar burning individual can still train the same as a (mostly) fat burning individual (using the term sugar burner and fat burner means that most of the time this is the dominant energy substrate being metabolized but all individual will use both to varying degrees).
Yes, because higher training intensity can be endured much longer for a fat adapted individual. He can do this because he is using ketone bodies as well as glycogen so he uses a lot less glycogen and also has higher concentrations of ketone bodies in his bloodstream and does not have to depend on breaking down protein to make glucose for brain support. The fat-adapted versus the non fat adapted runs low on glycogen a lot slower so he can train more intensely much longer.
A sugar burner will hit the wall and start to feel foggy and lose power long before a fat burner will.
I think strongman, relative strength or endurance athletes would benefit more from being fat adapted than a traditional bodybuilder would (mainly because a bodybuilder’s diet is 100% Macros).
For me, I just feel better not feeling hungry before training - even after coming off an 18 hour fast.[/quote]
Spike works as advertised. Brain Candy is the best formulation to refresh the mind/body. Are you trying to get cranked up or recover from a hard day? The simplest and cheapest way I’ve found is pure powered caffeine rubbed onto gums. Yes you will get stares in public but just a bit, into the stream and away you go.
I go with coffee and some trail mix before a workout and I watch some World’s Strongest Man clips or Zydrunas Savickas training to get myself pissed that I can’t do those things