Hypertrophy 3

Question 1

What did the Meta-analysis from Cermak et al (2012) show ??

Answer 1

That protein augments resistance training induced hypertrophy
- occurred in both old and young, there is a favourable turn to protein over placebo for both lean body mass and strength.

Question 2

Discuss the key literature from Phillips (2004)??

Answer 2

Stated that a source of amino acids is required to promote muscle protein accretion after resistance exercise.

Resistance exercise alone leads to a negative NPB.
AA increases synthesis and decreases breakdown at rest.
When AA is paired with RE, further increases in synthesis occurs and a lower breakdown level, all leading to positive NPB.

Question 3

What did Dreyer et al (2008) show ??

Answer 3

That protein ingestion following resistance exercise enhances MPS and anabolic signalling.
2hr post exercise , the group fed with EAA and CHO was significantly higher to control for FSR, phe net balance, S6k1 phosphorylation and mTOR phosphorylation.

Question 4

Discuss Moore et al (2009)??

Answer 4

Found that maximal MPS was achieved with 20g of egg protein over 40g.
This includes ~8.6gEAA or 0.25g protein /kg/meal

Question 5

Discuss Witard et al (2014)??

Answer 5

Found myofibrillar FSR to be significantly more in exercise individuals post RE compared to rested controls.

• this increased uniformly from 0,10,20 to 40g whey protein
• phe oxidation rate was significantly highest for 40g whey protein.

Question 6

Discuss Moore et al (2014)??

Answer 6

Concluded that 0.24g/kg of protein was an optimal dose per meal relative to body weight in young adults - where the line for myofibrillar FSR tapers off.

Question 7

Discuss MacNaughton et al (2016)?

Answer 7

Looked at 30 resistance trained males, and divided them according to LBM.
Showed that following a full body workout, 40g of protein stimulates a greater MPS response than 20g regardless of LBM.

Question 8

Discuss Tipton et al (1999)???

Answer 8

Showed that only EAA are needed to increase MPS after resistance training.
With EEA, NPB was significantly higher than placebo and mixed AA were not as high, hence conclusion that EEA more important than MAA.

Question 9

Discuss Josse et al (2010)??

Answer 9

Showed that milk was more effective than CHO 1h post exercise at changing lean mass (g) and decreasing fat mass (g). N=10 and study was on healthy women.

Milk contains 20% whey and 80% casein

Question 10

Discuss Tang et al (2009)??

Answer 10

Showed greater blood leucinemia with whey compared to soy and casein proteins.

• significantly higher in whey at 30-60 min time points , AUC sig higher for whey than others
• showed FSR (MPS) was sig higher for whey in rest and ex compared to soy and casein.

Question 11

Discuss West, Burd et al (2011)??

Answer 11

Found a bolus (1x25g) whey ingestion promotes superior anabolic effects to a pulsed ingestion (10x2.5g)

Myofibrillar FSR sig higher in bolus at 1-3h and 3-5h
Also showed p-S6K1 to be significantly higher in bolus at 1hr post

Question 12

Discuss the role of slow proteins before we sleep (Res et al, 2012)??

Answer 12

16 young males performed a bout of res ex in the evening and ingested either 40g of casein or a non caloric placebo 30min prior to sleep.
The casein was significantly higher than placebo for overnight mixed MPS, and showed a PNPB, which placebo did not.

Question 13

What did Sneijders et al (2015) find when looking at casein??

Answer 13

Had 39 participants drink either a no calorie placebo or 27.5g of casein protein before they slept over 12 weeks of res training.

They found that type II muscle fibre size increased in both conditions, but the relative change was much higher for protein condition.

Question 14

What did Rennie et al (2006) show??

Answer 14

Considered the idea that leucine may direct the peak activation of MPS by AA infusion, and led upto 1.75fold increases in MPS, when given 261mg/kg/h.

Question 15

What did Atherton et al (2010) find??

Answer 15

Showed significantly greater phosphorylation for mTOR(ser2448), 4E-BP1, p70S6K1 (thr389) and rpS6 comapared to other essential amino acids.

Question 16

What did moberg et al (2014) find??

Answer 16

Had 8 females leg press , and then took biopsies at r/1h post and 3h post. Fed them either 260mg/kg EAA with leucine or EAA without leucine.
Showed that post exercise anabolic signalling is abolished when leucine is abolished.

Question 17

What did Kroopman et al (2015) find??

Answer 17

Found that adding further leucine to an optimal dose of high quality rapidly digested protein following resistance exercise does not appear to enhance the anabolic response.

Question 18

Discuss the key literature from Churchward-Venne et al (2012)??

Answer 18

Had 24 res trained males perform single leg ext for 4 sets of 10-12reps @95%10RM.
They ingested either I) 25g of whey(3g leu) II) 6.25g of whey(3g leu) III) 6.25g whey (0.75 leu).

Found no differences in FSR in the rested leg
Found whey to be significantly higher than EEA+LEU and LEU for FSR 3-5hr post exercise
- concluding the addition of free leucine to a suboptimal dose of intact protein can enhance the MPS response to feeding.

Question 19

What is HMB (Wilkinson et al, 2013)???

Answer 19

HMB is a metabolite of leucine, where cystolic enzyme (a-KICD) generates HMB from leucine, occurring in the liver and kidney.

Question 20

Discuss the Nissen et al (1996) study looking at HMB???

Answer 20

Supplemented HMB enhanced lean mass gains with resistance training, after subjects consumed a placebo or 3g HMB. 7 week protocol.

Showed significant differences for total body strength following 1g or 3g HMB compared to controls.
Also showed significant decreases in %3-MH (proxy of breakdown) change from basal compared to 1g and control

Question 21

Discuss Wilkinson, breen et al (2013)??

Answer 21

Wanted to look at determining the muscle anabolic and anti-catabolic potential of supplemental HMB with no exercise.

• both HMB and Leu significantly increased myofibrillar FSR from 0-150min
• MPB decreased in both HMB and LEU from 0-150 mins
• Leucine higher at 100mins for p70S6K1/GAPDH

Question 22

Discuss Atherton et al (2010)??

Answer 22

Considered that the bulk postprandial rise in MPS may be attributable to leucine and/or HMB.

• it appears possible to stimulate MPS with leucine and even HMB alone
• the muscle anabolic response to leucine and HMB will persist until amino acid substrate depletion becomes limiting to MPS

Question 23

Discuss Rasmussen et al (2000)??

Answer 23

Had 6 adults consume an EAA + CHO drink at different time points.
When nutrients were consumed 1hr post ex, 1-2hr post ex protein synthesis rates peak.
When consumed 3hr post ex, 3-4 post ex protein synthesis rates peak

Question 24

Discuss briefly the key finding from Phillips et al (1997)??

Answer 24

Shows that alterations in MPS and NPB remain at 1-2 days post exercise.

Question 25

What did Churchward-Venne et al (2012) say regarding RE?

Answer 25

RE prolongs muscle anabolic sensitivity to protein provision

Question 26

Briefly, what did Atherton et al (2010) state???

Answer 26

Showed that MPS response to feeding is relatively transient (myofibrillar FSR 46-90 mins), following a 48g protein bolus.

Question 27

Discuss the key paper from Areta et al (2013)??

Answer 27

Found that an intermediate frequency was optimal to maximise the muscle anabolic response compared to pulse (8x10g) or bolus (2x40g) over a 12 hour time period.
Average myo FSR sig higher for intermediate (4x20g) over the course of 12h