Muscle Glycogen and Growth

I just realized that everybody may have missed the point. My original contention is that a carbohydrate metabolism is abnormal and as a result, the conclusions we draw from it are incorrect.

Quad, you ask that I show you some evidence that we can bulk without the carbs. All this time I've been showing you evidence that a carbohydrate metabolism is abnormal. I've been showing you the wrong evidence. Well maybe not all of it; Jeff Volek is a good example of what low carb can do for strength at least. Even if I don't have more than those few studies on low carb and training as evidence that we can bulk without carbs, I see no problem with that anyway. It's not like we're going to feel good about all the problems that come with eating carbs once we realize how bad carbs are. Then it's only a matter of time before somebody thinks up some low carb bulking diet and shows us his results.
 
Lol, thats funny. Do you honestly think that nobody has done a low carb bulk? or that people missed your point?

hahah
 
Papers on the mechanism known as confirmation bias, and a link to wikipedia. Remember what I said about equal scrutiny of new and old ideas? Confirmation bias is what happens when we don't do that. It's something to think about next time you ask for proof of anything. I don't mean to say you shouldn't ask for proof. Instead, I mean to say you should ask for proof of both sides including yours.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias
Quote:
"Confirmation bias is of interest in the teaching of critical thinking, as the skill is misused if rigorous critical scrutiny is applied only to evidence challenging a preconceived idea but not to evidence supporting it."

Quote:
=====
The behavior of confirmation bias has been named[attribution needed] after a quote from Count Leo Tolstoy (1828-1910):
"I know that most men, including those at ease with problems of the greatest complexity, can seldom accept the simplest and most obvious truth if it be such as would oblige them to admit the falsity of conclusions which they have proudly taught to others, and which they have woven, thread by thread, into the fabrics of their life".

A related Tolstoy quote is:
"The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of doubt, what is laid before him."
=====



Theory and data interactions of the scientific mind: evidence from the molecular and the cognitive laboratory.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed....VDocSum





Hindsight and confirmation biases in an exercise in telepathy.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed....VDocSum

Prior knowledge on the illumination position.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed....VDocSum

Confirmation bias in sequential information search after preliminary decisions: an expansion of dissonance theoretical research on selective exposure to information.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed....VDocSum

Reducing confirmation bias in clinical decision-making.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed....VDocSum

[Are experts immune to cognitive bias? Dependence of "confirmation bias" on specialist knowledge]
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed....VDocSum

Sensible reasoning in two tasks: rule discovery and hypothesis evaluation.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed....VDocSum
 
After a bit of research on my own (and help from some freinds) I believe I found the problem I may have been thinking of. Basically:
Ketosis = liver glycogen depletion (which means catabolism) and dehydration in most cases (stimulates catabolic pathways).
That leaves me considering less extreme forms of diet than strictly noncarb. If catabolism elevates beyond it's minimal duties, no other advantage to a diet will do any good IMO. My whole point is protein sparing on a cut, something that is hard to do at my age. I'm studying further. Or hoping for Testosterone, the actual problem.
 
Woah. The Ol' Lady's givin' me heck about the protein farts as it is...
laugh.gif
 
<div>
(quadancer @ Mar. 24 2008,20:23)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Woah. The Ol' Lady's givin' me heck about the protein farts as it is...
laugh.gif
</div>
Haha. Yeah, I know what you mean. Sometimes I wish I had a dog so I could blame him for it.

&quot;What's that horrible stench? It smells like someone is dying inside, and that is the stench of decay escaping!&quot;

&quot;Oh, the dog farted, hun...&quot;
 
<div>
(Totentanz @ Mar. 24 2008,20:21)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Don't forget the other problems you'd have with no carbs - constipation, for instance.</div>
Yeah, Quad and his &quot;poop fluctuations&quot;...
laugh.gif
 
A low carb diet spares protein while it sheds fat. I posted a link to one paper on that. Here:

Very Low Carbohydrate Diet and Preservation of Muscle Mass
http://nmsociety.org/index.p....emid=44
bottom of page


About liver glycogen and catabolism.

Liver glycogen:

Mobilization of glucose from the liver during exercise and replenishment afterward.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed....VDocSum


Gluconeogenesis, link from wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gluconeogenesis
Quote:
&quot;Gluconeogenesis is the generation of glucose from non-sugar carbon substrates like pyruvate, lactate, glycerol, and glucogenic amino acids.&quot;


Glucose can be made using more than just protein. For instance glycerol, the binding agent in triglycerides (dietary fat or stored fat), can be used, sparing protein. Also, by definition, a low carb diet includes more protein and more fats. So, if protein is used, more is coming in from food. Same with fats. If glycerol is used, more is coming from food. We can also look at it the other way. If more protein and fats are coming in, then that is what will be used instead.

When I think of catabolism, I think of protein breakdown without an equivalent protein synthesis to compensate. I don't include protein intake but we should consider it in the overall balance. I'd like it if you could elaborate on what you mean by catabolism. Also, what's your specific concern so I can pinpoint what I'm looking for. I'm thinking you mean especially cortisol as the catabolic agent to avoid. Is that correct?


Role of cortisol in the metabolic response to stress hormone infusion in the conscious dog.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed....VDocSum
Quote from the abstract:
&quot;The role of cortisol in directing the metabolic response to a combined infusion of glucagon, epinephrine, norepinephrine, and cortisol (stress hormones) was investigated.&quot;


Note that cortisol is not the only hormone that can stimulate gluconeogenesis. Glucagon is made by the pancreas (it's like the anti-insulin) and is particularly effective at sparing protein because it also stimulates fat mobilization so there's more glycerol available to do the job.

I should note that cortisol is more elevated overall and over the long term in a high carb diet than in a low carb diet because of the wildly fluctuating blood glucose levels especially during and after a high carb meal. When blood glucose level drops, cortisol is released to bring it back up. If we eat high carb all the time, blood glucose level constantly drops and cortisol is constantly being released to bring it back up. Up and down day in day out.

Acute glucocorticoid effects on glycogen utilization, O2 uptake, and endurance.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed....VDocSum

Role of cortisol on the glycogenolytic effect of glucagon and on the glycogenic response to insulin in fetal hepatocyte culture.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed....VDocSum

Divergent effects of actinomycin d on cortisol and on glucose stimulation of glycogenesis in mouse liver.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed....VDocSum


I didn't read much of the papers I linked. I just figured from the abstracts they were somehow relevant here. Some are available in full text for free. See a link upper right.


Low carb diet and cortisol papers:

Dietary macronutrient content alters cortisol metabolism independently of body weight changes in obese men.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed....VDocSum
Duration 4 weeks.

The metabolic response to a high-protein, low-carbohydrate diet in men with type 2 diabetes mellitus.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed....VDocSum
Duration 5 weeks.

Body composition and hormonal responses to a carbohydrate-restricted diet.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed....VDocSum
Duration 6 weeks.

The effects of carbohydrate variation in isocaloric diets on glycogenolysis and gluconeogenesis in healthy men.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed....VDocSum
Duration 11 days.


Note the duration of the studies. From 11 days to 6 weeks. Earlier, I pointed out that a low carb diet takes some getting used to before things begin to go back to normal. The period where things don't look normal is about 2-4 weeks. Only after this period can we draw solid conclusion about most everything that goes on hormone wise.

But, if you only want to know what happens when you cycle carbs every week, then those studies should give you some good answers. I suspect that the carb cycling diets are based on the fact that the only studies available on that subject are of short duration and so can only tell us what happens during that &quot;abnormal&quot; period.


A note on dehydration. Water is lost during the first week or so when switching to a low carb diet. This is normal. Glycogen requires about 2-3 times its weight in water. Once the gycogen is gone, the water is not needed anymore so it's excreted. It's not a dehydration in the classical sense. It's merely a discarding of unneeded water. Dehydration is the loss of needed water.
 
<div>
(Totentanz @ Mar. 24 2008,20:21)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Don't forget the other problems you'd have with no carbs - constipation, for instance.</div>
Constipation is one such thing that is abnormal during that 2-4 week period. It goes back to normal once the body gets used to the new diet.
 
Studies:

&quot;New&quot; hepatic fat activates PPARalpha to maintain glucose, lipid, and cholesterol homeostasis.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed....VDocSum

Brain fatty acid synthase activates PPARalpha to maintain energy homeostasis.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed....VDocSum


The first study is done with mice and so can't immediately translate to humans but it does allow us to formulate a hypothesis. -edit- Both studies are done with mice. -edit-

The first says new fat is needed to activate PPAR-alpha. The second says PPAR-alpha is induced by starvation. It's been known for some time that eating low carb and thus high fat creates the same physiological state as starvation. Although, I think, with the exception of energy expenditure which would be lower in starvation and higher with a corresponding intake. But it's only been observed recently with the first study that to induce this starvation state without starving requires new fat. In other words, to get rid of old fat, we must eat new fat.

And so, if it applies to humans as it does to the mice in the first study, it's one argument against the hypothesis that dietary fat makes us fat. By extrapolation, it's also an argument for the contention that a carbohydrate metabolism is abnormal. It can also be used as an argument against the Positive Caloric Balance hypothesis that say we must eat more (or do less) to grow fat and eat less (or do more) to grow lean since it shows that dietary fat stimulates fat mobilization while the absence of dietary fats inhibits fat mobilization.
 
Studies:

Effects of high-fat and high-carbohydrate diets on metabolism and performance in cycling.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed....VDocSum


Effects of diet on muscle triglyceride and endurance performance
http://jap.physiology.org/cgi/content/full/82/4/1185


Effect of Fat Adaptation and Carbohydrate Restoration on Metabolism and Performance During Prolonged Cycling
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed....VDocSum


Effects of fat adaptation and carbohydrate restoration on prolonged endurance exercise.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed....VDocSum


Ketogenic diets and physical performance
http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/article....5507148
Quote:
&quot;That these subjects' peak aerobic power did not decline despite 6 weeks of a carbohydrate-free, severely hypocaloric diet implies that the protein and mineral contents of the diet were adequate to preserve functional tissue.&quot;
 
Keep in mind that rats and morbidly obese lardasses have no correlation to us for the most part. The studies done on athletes are IMO the only ones with merit, due to the many differences. I only had time to study the paper on the catabolism, the main issue for me. Looking into what he says is &quot;no opposition at this time&quot;.
Oh, and I do believe the turkey study was flawed, yes, but it's NOT the &quot;only&quot; study done that researchers get their info from as he claimed. That was freakin' bizarre to say.
 
Yes, mice and men are different and we can't immediately draw conclusions. Instead, we use mice to formulate hypothesis that we can test on ourselves without cutting up parts of our own brain and such.

We can conclude from the turkey study that we must either drink the broth (that is extracted when we cook the meat) or supplement with potassium and salt if we want to be able to use the protein we eat. A good way to drink the broth is to make it delicious by adding a bit of water while the skillet is still hot and a bit of heavy cream then pouring the whole thing on top of the steak in our plate. That's what I do. We'll see.

Carbs cycling/loading has its own problem. We load on carbs once a week and adapt to low carb the rest of the week. We load on carbs to prevent catabolism. At least, that's what we believe will happen if we don't have enough glycogen. Then we eat low carb to take advantage of that diet. At least, that's what we believe. But there's a problem. As we do all that, we're in a continuous state of adaptation to both the carb loading and the low carbing. Nothing is ever normal.

See the last paper I linked to.
 
Yeah, that was interesting to a point. I personally don't care how far I can ride a bike or if my Vo2max stays up or not or if I'm losing fat. I can lose fat (as now) on carbs. I'm investigating some of the conflicting info and checking into some lowfat BB'ers.
Funny that the last lines in that study were (copy and paste):
<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Therapeutic use of ketogenic diets should not require constraint of most forms of physical labor or recreational activity, with the one caveat that anaerobic (ie, weight lifting or sprint) performance is limited by the low muscle glycogen levels induced by a ketogenic diet, and this would strongly discourage its use under most conditions of competitive athletics.</div> Hm. Back to where we were, huh?
 
Martin,

I see you too have studied the topic in detail. I agree with ya!

Having done a raw and low carb diet for 2 years now constipation is NOT an issue. lol.

In fact many dont realize that FIBER is NOT good for the body. Fermentation in the gut is not a good thing. I have helped many overcome digestive issues and things like leaky gut etc and the first step is to stop eating fiber.

Upping the fat lubes up the system and if one eats raw, digestion is very fast and waste very minimal. The little that there is comes out very easily and regular.

Having said that, my experience is that ectos dont do well on ketosis. (For some obvious reasons.) They should eat more carbs like raw honey while exercising to spare muscles as they usually oxidize too slow to produce ready energy. Mesos I have found do very well on ketosis style diets.

In any event low carb is the more &quot;natural&quot; way to eat and thus far healthier. High carb diets are a product of modern times that are not in tune with the body.

Martin, how do you eat by the way? (I am assuming low carb...but raw or cooked?)

Jeff
 
<div>
(quadancer @ Mar. 25 2008,21:57)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">I'm investigating some of the conflicting info and checking into some lowfat BB'ers.</div>
quad,

low fat is one of the worst thing you can do for health and body building. Saturated fat is absolutely necessary to move protein efficiently after digestion.

There are a zillion reasons that fats are healthy, but that should be a big one for a body builder. No fat = poor protein utilization.

There is a reason that meat comes with fat attached naturally lol. They go together!
smile.gif


Jeff
 
I eat mostly meat. I cook it in the pan.

I don't get the point about ectomorph. Why would the shape of the body mean anything to the hormones in the body? Hormones don't mean anything when it comes to the shape. All I see is an abnormal metabolism created by eating carbs. It doesn't matter what shape the body is. When we're fat, our body has a different shape then when we're lean. Does that make a difference then? The metabolism is just as abnormal when we're lean as when we're fat. What differs is the genetic propensity to get fat or the insulin resistance built up which gives us no choice but to grow fat.

The picture is much more complex than just body type. Even body type is affected by eating carbs. A child grows because of growth hormone. Carbs inhibit GH and the child grows shorter, weaker and fatter than otherwise. Does that mean that because he's changed his body type that it becomes the determining factor? No. It's the carbs that changed his body type. The underlying cause is the same regardless of what he grew up to become.

Even then, genes only give us the propensity to develop the problem. Genes are not the cause of the problem. For instance, a fetus will develop according to the diet of the mother. So, if the mother eats carbs during pregnancy, her blood sugar is elevated and this metabolic state transfers to the fetus who will in turn have elevated blood sugar and all the accompanying hormonal changes such as high insulin and high insulin resistance. If his mother is fat during pregnancy, the child is born with the predisposition to grow fat himself.

So when we speak of body type, do we speak of the genetic predisposition to grow in that shape or do we speak of the fetal environment and/or the diet the child grew up with? Or what?

See the research on isolated populations. How these people grew up to be and what they ate. See if they had wild variations in body type as we do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top