From the time that the first physique enthusiasts & bodybuilders ever started choking down extra chicken breasts, steaks, and vile concoctions to increase their protein intake for the purposes of gaining muscle; the question of just how much protein is optimal has been debated.  Fast forward more than half a century and people still debate the same question without much of a consensus.  Many people believe that protein is already over consumed by the typical person and bodybuilders and athletes have no need to take in extra, while there are those who will tell you that there is no upper limit to the benefits of protein.  In reality the answer to this question probably lies well within the middle of these two extremes.  The question of protein quantity at a meal and frequency of protein consumption has been debated almost as often as total protein consumption.  Quite often we see the question, “what is the max level of protein that one can benefit from at a meal and how long often should I consume it?” Fortunately for us, this question actually has some data that we can start picking apart to get some general guidelines for protein size and frequency at meals.

Many ‘experts’ or gym know-it-alls out there who will tell you to only consume “X” amount of protein at a meal because only “X” amount of protein can be absorbed by the body at a meal (I’m sure you’ve all heard this one before).  Let this nonsense stop here and now.  To begin with, this entire train of thought isn’t even on the correct track.  Hell it didn’t even depart from the right train station!  Assuming that you have a healthy digestive system, the absorption of the amino acids from a meal containing protein is very efficient and almost never a limiting factor.  Absorption only refers to nutrient uptake & absorption via the digestive track (most absorption occurring in the small intestine).  If our digestive systems didn’t absorb most of what we eat than anytime you had a big meal you would have diarrhea like clockwork from the undigested material in the gut!  It also makes very little sense from an evolutionary standpoint to be very wasteful with nutrients when primitive man may have only been able to eat one large meal in a day at times.  Our species would not have survived very long if we were wasteful with nutrients and did not absorb amino acids beyond a certain level.  In reality, the body has an extremely high capacity for amino acid absorption.  What these people who spout this nonsense are really referring to is amino acid utilization.  You see, even if we absorb 100% of the amino acids we ingest, that doesn’t mean they will all reach the skeletal muscle and input towards building muscle mass.  In actuality a very small percentage are used for that role.  The cells of the small intestine and liver extract a huge amount of amino acids for energy and their own synthesis of new proteins in first pass metabolism before they ever reach the bloodstream!  Once in the bloodstream amino acids can also be taken up and utilized by other tissues such as the kidneys, heart, skin, etc.  So it is not a question of how much protein/amino acids can be absorbed at a meal, rather the question is what level of protein at a meal gives the maximum benefit for muscle building?  Essentially anything below this level would not maximally support muscle building, while at a protein intake above this level, the body would merely oxidize the excess amino acids for energy.

In order to start answering this question of optimal protein intake at a meal we first must make clear as to what defines a “maximum level of benefit” from protein intake.  Using rates of protein synthesis as a measure for this definition is logical as increased rates of protein synthesis would be required for the addition of new skeletal muscle tissue.  To put it more plainly, in order to build muscle the body must increase the rate at which it synthesizes muscle tissue above the baseline rate.  Decreasing the rate of skeletal muscle breakdown also can lead to increased tissue accrual, unfortunately data on protein breakdown is much more difficult to obtain, interpret, and it is much more variable than the synthesis data.  It is very difficult to measure short term changes in skeletal muscle breakdown as it has a very slow turnover rate so the focus on this article will be on protein synthesis, which likely plays more of a regulatory role in tissue accrual/loss in muscle than degradation since synthesis is the more regulated energy dependant process.

To find the optimal level of protein intake at a meal we must determine what the optimal level of protein at a meal for stimulating muscle protein synthesis is.  It appears that maximizing skeletal muscle protein synthesis requires approximately  ~15g of an essential amino acids^1,2.     It has been postulated that the amino acid leucine is responsible for the stimulatory effect of dietary protein on protein synthesis³ and 15g of essential amino acids would contain 3.2g of leucine.  Thus in order to determine how much protein from a specific source is required to elicit the maximal response it may be useful to back calculate how much leucine is contained in the source.  One could then determine how much of the source must be consumed in order to reach the leucine threshold.  For example, whey protein is approximately 12% leucine per gram protein, therefore about 27g of protein from whey would need to be consumed to reach the threshold for maximal anabolism, whereas a source like chicken, which has a protein content of about 7.5% leucine would require 43g of protein to reach the leucine threshold required for maximal stimulation.   So it appears that the maximum benefit level for protein at a meal is varies depending upon the source of protein.  It is important to note that most of these studies were done on individuals who weighed approximately 155-165 lbs on average.  So if you weigh less than this you might want to aim for the lower end of the threshold whereas if you weigh more you may want to aim for the higher end of the threshold.

Now there is the issue of meal frequency and time between meals.  Assuming we maximize protein synthesis by achieving the required leucine/protein threshold, how long does the effect last?  Several studies have shown that the duration of protein synthesis in response to an oral leucine dose or an essential amino acid infusion is approximately two hours long^4,5.  However, these are purified amino acid solutions and are likely to be digested rapidly and in the case of an infusion, no digestion is required at all.  So it is possible that a whole food meal will have a different impact on the duration of protein synthesis than pure amino acids.  Our lab has recently shown that the duration of protein synthesis in response to a complete meal containing protein, carbohydrates, and fats is approximately 3 hours long⁶.  Therefore, it appears that a complete meal slightly prolongs the duration of protein synthesis.  What is interesting about our findings is that while protein synthesis had returned to baseline after 3 hours, plasma amino acid levels were still elevated above baseline and plasma leucine was elevated almost 3x above baseline!  Accordingly, the phosphoryation of the initiation factors 4E-BP1 & p70S6K followed plasma leucine levels and maintained elevated levels of phosphorylation at 3 hours (phosphorylation of these initiation factors is required to start the process of protein synthesis).  Thus it appears that the signal to maintain elevated protein synthesis is still being ‘transmitted’ but for some reason protein synthesis is becomes refractory after a certain period of time.  This is also supported by data from Bohe et al which showed that the duration of protein synthesis in response to an infusion of essential amino acids was only 2 hours long even though the essential amino acids were infused for six hours⁵!  It is unlikely that eating another meal 2-3 hours after the first meal would be sufficient to induce another rise in protein synthesis since amino acid/leucine levels are already elevated anyway.  It may therefore be more useful to consume larger amounts of protein at a meal and wait longer between protein doses than the typical 2-3 hours that is typically recommended in the bodybuilding community.

Now I know you’ve probably spit your protein shake out all over your magazine, ruining it and now you are cursing me for 1) ruining your magazine and 2) telling you the bodybuilding meal eating protocol you’ve been following for so long may not be optimal for making gains.  Well I apologize for ruining your magazine but I won’t apologize for busting on musclehead dogma; that is just what I do.  There is some precedent for what I am recommending however.  Arnal et al⁷ compared elderly women consuming either 4 small meals per day with their total protein intake evenly spaced out verses those that consumed the same amount of protein but with 80% of their total protein coming in one meal.  The researchers found that the women consuming the large single dose of protein actually had greater nitrogen balance, protein turnover, and protein synthesis rates than the group consuming their protein across four evenly spaced meals.  Now the total protein intake for both groups was only 60g so the group consuming protein evenly only consumed 15g at each meal.  Still it is interesting that the group eating almost all of their total protein in one meal had better results.  Perhaps the group consuming the small meals never reached the threshold required to initiate a significant response of protein synthesis at any meal whereas the bolus dose group ate enough protein in at least one meal to initiate have one significant increase in protein synthesis above baseline during the day.  Now I am not in any way shape or form implying that we are better off just consuming one large protein meal per day.  What I am implying is that it is better to consume larger protein doses spaced further apart and maximize protein synthesis, rather than consume smaller doses of protein throughout the day, since research has shown that protein synthesis will become refractory to constantly elevated levels of amino acids.  It may be that a period where amino acids return to baseline or near baseline is required in order to initiate another bout of protein synthesis.  I therefore suggest that one consume 4-6 larger protein doses per day instead of 6-8 meals and wait 4-5 hours between meals rather than 2-3 hours.

At the moment, there is no clear way to overcome the refractory response.  However, there is evidence that supplementing with free form amino acids with carbohydrates between meals may improve protein synthesis compared to normal meals alone⁸.  It is possible that a free form amino acid supplement could spike plasma levels of amino acids to a far greater level than can be achieved with whole foods and perhaps this supraphysiological response is enough to overcome the refractory response.  It is also possible that the carbohydrates in the supplement have an effect.  The insulin time course in the experiment we performed lasted 3 hours, the same as protein synthesis.  Additionally, Wolfe et al. also showed that the timecourse of insulin seemed to track protein synthesis during an essential amino acid infusion⁵.  Perhaps maintaining elevated plasma insulin levels is required to prolong protein synthesis in response to a meal.  In either case, it appears that supplementing with an amino acid supplement containing ~2-3g of leucine along with some carbohydrates (~20-30g) is an effective way to maximize muscle protein synthesis.

Now I will be the first to admit that the research is just not specific or broad enough to address the size and frequency issue with absolute certainty, but I believe these recommendations are a good general starting point.  What is clear is that certain protein sources have a stronger impact on protein synthesis than others, and also that it appears that keeping amino acids constantly elevated by smaller protein doses throughout the day may NOT be optimal.  Hopefully future research will address more specifics with regards to these issues.

—

Dr. Layne Norton has won multiple natural pro cards in bodybuilding, competed in pro contests, married the love if his life, and finally graduated with his PhD in Nutritional Sciences. There is one thing, however that he has yet to do … step on the pro natural stage with top athletes n the world.

2.  Tipton KD, Ferrando AA, Phillips SM, Doyle D Jr, Wolfe RR.  Postexercise net protein synthesis in human muscle from orally administered amino acids.  Am J Physiol. 1999 Apr;276(4 Pt 1):E628-34.

3.  Norton LE, Layman DK.  Leucine regulates translation initiation of protein synthesis in skeletal muscle after exercise.  J Nutr. 2006 Feb;136(2):533S-537S.

4.  Anthony JC, Lang CH, Crozier SJ, Anthony TG, MacLean DA, Kimball SR, Jefferson LS.  Contribution of insulin to the translational control of protein synthesis in skeletal muscle by leucine.
Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab. 2002 May;282(5):E1092-101.

5.  Bohe J, Low JF, Wolfe RR, Rennie MJ.  Latency and duration of stimulation of human muscle protein synthesis during continuous infusion of amino acids.  J Physiol. 2001 Apr 15;532(Pt 2):575-9.

6.  Norton LE, Layman DK, Bunpo P, Anthony TG, Brana DV, Garlick PJ.  The leucine content  of a complete meal directs peak activation but not duration of skeletal muscle protein synthesis and Mammalian target of rapamycin signaling in rats.  J Nutr. 2009 Jun;139(6):1103-9.

7. Arnal MA, Mosoni L, Boirie Y, Houlier ML, Morin L, Verdier E, Ritz P, Antoine JM, Prugnaud J, Beaufrere B, Mirand PP. pulse feeding improves protein retention in elderly women.  Am J Clin Nutr. 1999 Jun;69(6):1202-8.

8.  Paddon-Jones D, Sheffield-Moore M, Aarsland A, Wolfe RR, Ferrando AA.  Exogenous amino acids stimulate human muscle anabolism without interfering with the response to mixed meal ingestion.  Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab. 2005 Apr;288(4):E761-7.

An Unbiased Review by Special Ed

I’m not exactly what anyone would call ‘high maintenance’ — I’ve slept on rooftops when tired, drank people’s leftover alcoholic beverages in bars when thirsty (and drunk) and jacked off to my aunt when horny.

But when it comes to meal replacement bars, I think I have a right to be somewhat demanding — after all, if I’m being sold an expensive alternative to Ramen noodles, don’t I at least have the right to expect something more tasty and nutritious??

With the release of their god-awful Syntha-6 Decadence protein bar, BSN’s answer is a resounding NO.

There’s a few ways companies can do protein bars — they can go Promax on us and deliver a bar that tastes so good we assume they’re totally full of shit when claiming 20g of protein per bar. Or they can go the Ohh Yeah! route and pack their bar with real food like peanuts to mask the taste of the interior. And then sadly there’s a few companies that go the LCD way.

And by LCD, I mean Lowest Common Denominator.

As in let’s throw together the cheapest bar possible with the shittiest ingredients imaginable and use the immigrant factory workers as laborers, insect exterminators AND taste-testers.

I don’t know whether to rag on the nasty cocoa xylitol, the excess sodium, or the terrible texture (think chewing gum meets stale peanut butter) but suffice to say there’s not much to like about the BSN Syntha-6 Decadence bar.

Even the wrapper looks like a cheap afterthought.

If BSN is going to follow in Muscletech’s footsteps by bringing us fourth-rate, outsourced, garbage LCD products unfit for consumption by starving Cambodians, then the least they could do is put some effort into the marketing by fabricating 8-page advertorials with great copywriting.

But no. BSN was content to treat Ronnie Coleman like a politician’s Guatemalan whore-servant to convince the hardcore bodybuilding douche that they actually cared about bodybuilders, only to go running into the arms of MMA and every other sport in a full-fledged assault to prove that their true motive was nothing more than to gain entree into the Walmarts of the world to sell the cheapest possible ingredients to the most ignorant possible citizens with margins so slim that to actually have a focus group stop and taste this garbage would probably cause them to lose money.

It may taste like horseshit, but BSN’s Syntha-6 Defecation stands tall as a sad testament to the American marketing machine: If you build it (and package it in shiny red), they will come.

So seeing how I fit in to that category, I decided to take a shot at Jack3d and give myself the most amazing pre-workout EVER!

Being the conservative guy that I am, I decided to stick with the entry-level Lemon-Lime flavor rather than roll the dice with some bastardization of Grape Bubblegum or White Blue Raspberry. I was hoping for something along the lines of Gatorade original, and thankfully, that’s exactly how it smelt when I tore open my sample pack.

But before mixing with water, I noticed a dire warning printed on the label. Yes, the dreaded ‘Black Box Warning’:

This Product Produces An Intense Sensation Of Drive, Focus, Energy, Motiviation & Awareness. In Addition, It Allows For Rapid Increases In Strength, Speed, Power & Endurance. Therefore, Extreme Caution Must Be Exercised & Should Not Be Used By Novice Athletes.

Now I must admit — this made me more than a little nervous. After all, despite my trophy rack consisting of championships earned at Chess, Scrabble, and QuakeCon, I still considered myself something of a Novice Athlete. To be honest, I was slightly dumbfounded.

Was USP Labs trying to imply that one needed to be a Professional Athlete to ingest this wondrous concoction? But then I thought about that pimply-faced, chubby teen who came running into the GNC right before closing, heaving and puffing after having sprinted three stores down from his Hot Topic cashier position, and I thought to myself: If he can use Jack3d, then gosh darn it, so can this pimply-faced, chubby old man who can’t even run the length of two stores without heaving and puffing.

I poured the contents of the pouch into my 8 oz of distilled water because nothing screams ‘Hardcore Bodybuilding’ to the wannabes at Gold’s Venice like a bottle of distilled water — especially when I announce to the camera Levrone-style — ‘Eight Ounces of Jack3d…in yo face!’ with each rep of sipping.

Jack3d tasted better than I expected — not quite Gatorade level, but certainly better than Powerade — but the real test would be the workout.

I cleared out a section of the gym where the incline benches are located (a loud and toxic, pre-workout fart blast can do that) and I got to work. I banged out 20 pushups as a warm up and it felt like butter. I was ready to dig deep.

I loaded the bar up with 135. Sure, it’s “light weight” to Ronnie Coleman but it’s downright “average” to us mortals with low testosterone. BOOM! I rocked out 15 reps with a form so sweet, the gals on the elliptical machines right in front of me were smiling and licking their lips in approval (either that or they were watching a Ryan Reynolds interview on Extra).

I tossed another couple of ‘Magnums’ (45’s) on the bar and braced myself. You know how it goes — if 225 feels heavy, it’s not gonna be a good day. I squeezed my shoulder blades together like Ryan Kennelly and held my breath like Scot Mendelson and screamed like Tori Black as I lifted off. The 225 was steady as I held my arms in the locked position over my erect nipples. Yes, I thought! I’m gonna crush this!

I lowered the bar in a controlled manner so I could feel every fiber in my pecs coming to life, just like Dorian told me to do (or Dorian’s MD article told me. Or Dorian told MD Ghostwriter Ron Harris. Or Ron Harris just made that up.) And then it touched my chest and I exploded. I arched my back, exhaled, and grunted so loud a Planet Fitness lunk alarm went off 12 miles away in the Valley.

But nothing happened.

The 225 just sat there on my chest like a female bodybuilder paid to sit there and spit in my face. Except this time, I wasn’t paying for the humiliation.

Help, I whispered.

But the figure girls on the elliptical had moved on from gossiping about Ryan Reynolds to openly negotiating prices for Trenbolone.

I tried to tilt the bar to make the plates slide off, but then I remembered that I was the ONLY schmuck in the 60 year Gold’s Venice history who had ever placed collars on the barbell. Fuck!!!

My pride stopped me from crying out like a girly-man, but it didn’t stop me from flopping my legs around like those speared-Dolphins from The Cove.

Finally, someone noticed.

And it wasn’t just anyone — it was Rico McClinton!

Yes, THE Rico McClinton — a controversial 3rd place winner at the 1999 NPC Nationals!!

He swooped in like one of Lee Priest’s 37 Superman tattoos and grabbed the bar and in one easy motion, spared my life and won the hearts and minds of MuscleWeekers everywhere.

I graciously thanked him and offered him some of my Jack3d backwash lingering at the bottom of my bottle, but he politely declined.

I stared into the bottle looking for a scapegoat for my faux pas. Could I blame Jack3d for my failed lift?

Of course not. I’d never gone higher than 185 on the incline bench, and even then I needed a spot to move the bar two inches.

But the point is that Jack3d (and its Black Box Warning) gave me the courage to try.

And isn’t that what Bodybuilding is really about? Throwing caution to the wind and putting strange, unknown substances with lengthy warnings into your body in the hopes that you’ll derive some muscular benefit therefrom?

To which I can only respond to myself: HELLZ YEAH!

It made all of us at MuscleWeek sit back and wonder if we were witnessing a seismic shift in the marketing strategies of the supplement companies, and made us ask the question:

Do the relatively new Men’s Fitness Model and Physique Competitions signal the end of the line for Bodybuilding?

Now before we jump on the latest bandwagon of prematurely announcing the death of bodybuilding, let’s look at a few facts:

– Most guys get into bodybuilding to improve their muscularity
– Most guys look up to Pro Bodybuilders because they get the magazine covers and attract the most attention
– Most competitive bodybuilders mention getting their Pro card as one of the reasons they continue to compete
– The perceived benefit of having a Pro card is to obtain sponsorship from an apparel, supplement, or beverage company.

And when one looks at the above facts, one quickly realizes that all of the above can be attained by competing and being successful in the Men’s Fitness Model Competition. Better yet, instead of having a grotesquely large and unhealthy body that is ogled by 90% men and 10% emotionally stunted women (figure, bikini and fitness competitors), a winning men’s fitness model competitor will have a body that 99% of women crave and 1% of men ridicule as being ‘twinks’.

Gregg Plitt is a fitness model who has been sponsored by Met-Rx for the past 3 years. THREE YEARS! That’s an eternity in bodybuilding, where guys typically jump ship every 1-2 years by virtue of their perceived value either rising or falling in the eyes of their sponsor.

If you ask the hardcore bodybuilder to drop weight to compete in Men’s Physique, he might look at you like you’ve gone mad. But that’s his Hulk-smashing ego fronting for him. A quick look at today’s trend in sponsorships reveals that even guys with average physiques like Isaac Hinds are landing contracts (Muscletech) and the guys landing the covers of previously bodybuilder-dominated magazines like Muscle & Fitness are more likely to resemble a physique competitor (i.e. an MMA fighter) than a Mr. Olympia winner.

The numbers show us that magazines like Men’s Health and Men’s Fitness routinely outsell bodybuilding publications by a 10:1 or even 20:1 margin. The main reason you don’t see Muscletech Advertorials and BSN ads (along with the smaller companies) plastered everywhere in those magazines is because their advertising rates are astronomically higher than what you’d find in a bodybuilding rag.

But what does Men’s Physique really mean to most of us?

It means:

– Significantly less drugs (out with the ridiculously high levels of androgens).
– Less food (no more 6000 calorie/day diets).
– More cardio (with less reliance on gh).
– A more attainable physique to sell most guys on how they really want to look.
– A more fit physique capable of walking two flights of stairs without requiring oxygen.
– A body that is much closer to a woman’s idea of manly perfection.
– That Hugh Jackman can walk off a movie set and become a Pro Men’s Physique Champion overnight.

As much as the hardcore bodybuilding fan base has ridiculed the introduction of the Men’s Physique category, the supplement companies that run bodybuilding have clearly thrown their support behind this new division, and if there’s one thing we all know: We’d all rather look 27,583% BETTER than be 27,584% STRONGER.

Congratulations to our good friend Isaac Hinds for the Muscletech sponsorship. Isaac is also the mind behind our sister site Hardbody.