2006/01/01, 09:59 PM
Here is a link to a study done at Baylor. If I read the results correctly, they seem to state that there was insignificant measured diferences between the placebo group and zma group.
Wondering what everyone thinks of this.
|
|
|
2006/01/01, 10:00 PM
oops,
here's the link....
http://www3.baylor.edu/HHPR/ESNL/Presentations/FASEBZMAPosters.pdf
|
2006/01/01, 11:16 PM
oops,
here's the link....
http://www3.baylor.edu/HHPR/ESNL/Presentations/FASEBZMAPosters.pdf
|
2006/01/01, 11:28 PM
Not much new here. ZMA is all about antioxidants and sleep. If you research, and I fell for it in the beginning also, the one study that touts ZMA as effecting test levels, etc. was done by none other than....Conte. V. Ring a bell? As in Victor Conte, Balco labs? Guess what he was marketing to athletes his "supplement" as? You got it, ZMA.
The only effect ZMA could have on test is strictly by default, as zinc supplementation will help control E. So by default, T will be a bit more available.
-------------- Strength and Honor!
|
2006/01/02, 02:16 PM
I found a reference to what you state above in case anyone else is interested.
http://www.t-nation.com/readTopic.do?id=459547
There is so much to learn.
|