|
2009/01/12, 05:37 PM
Hey, Im just looking for some info/tips/discussions on what the best pre workout product is out there. Obviously its all relevant to what you want to do and what your goals are. Myself personally I train fairly hard more so for sports than anything else. I would say I work out roughly 10 times/week doing a wide variety of weights, cardio and HIIT stuff.
Right now all im specially doing is drinking a whey protien shake right after work outs and muscle milk before bed. My goals are to build speed/explosivness/stamina before bulk although gaining more lean muscle is always a good thing too. Any advice on your personal favorite products? Or what you think would/could help me most in reaching the next levels?
|
|
|
|
2009/01/12, 10:59 PM
caffeine, possibly chocamine(a bit milder), pseudo-ephedrine(milder still)....both give boost in endurance sports/conditioning....
beta-alanine helps with recovery after hard conditioning/sports workouts...
-up to 5mg per kg for caffeine...
-chocamine is more mild so u can go with a bit higher dosages than caffeine
-60mg of pseudo-e is pretty safe....a standard cold dosage..
-5g of BA a couple times a day...(watch out for skin tingling when u start...for first week...it's normal)
|
|
2009/01/12, 11:00 PM
consult a doctor tho...because people have diff tolerance levels of supplements...or start with smaller dosages and slowly see if u can build up...
|
|
2009/01/13, 02:34 PM
Simple and cheap....1/2 hour before workout, have a cup of coffee and a bit of candy.....or a hostess pie.
--------------
Baseball is the only field of endeavor where a man can succeed three times out of ten and be considered a good performer
|
|
2009/01/13, 03:28 PM
anybody ever try that 5 hour energy stuff
i used to take an no2 supp but stopped because it gave me massive headaches.that pepsi with the ginsing works ive used that before dont forget that carbohydrates are the bodys main source of fuel.
|
|
2009/01/14, 11:33 AM
Thanks for the info all. What about something like no-xplode or xpand? Figure its worth the band for the buck?
|
|
2009/01/14, 02:30 PM
NO
============
Quoting from icedearth168:
Thanks for the info all. What about something like no-xplode or xpand? Figure its worth the band for the buck?
=============
|
|
2009/01/14, 02:52 PM
I don't know what it is, but marketers love you guys. So many people think they have to buy some fancy jug with a ton of scientific sounding stuff to have a good workout.
My post was simply ignored with the poster still looking to buy something expensive.
Subsequently, they find as they get 'smarter' that just nutrition that you probably have at home on your shelf will give more of a boost with correct timing.
--------------
Baseball is the only field of endeavor where a man can succeed three times out of ten and be considered a good performer
|
|
2009/01/14, 03:57 PM
============
Quoting from bb1fit:
I don't know what it is, but marketers love you guys. So many people think they have to buy some fancy jug with a ton of scientific sounding stuff to have a good workout.
My post was simply ignored with the poster still looking to buy something expensive.
Subsequently, they find as they get 'smarter' that just nutrition that you probably have at home on your shelf will give more of a boost with correct timing.
=============
ok really? I asked a simple question. If all I was interested in doing was buying some expensive product I would have just gone out and done it, not inquired about the value of actually doing it.
Why would you take such offense? Your post was hardly ignored it just wasnt very informative. No explainations why or anything, all you said was "just drink coffee" to a guy who hates coffee.
|
|
2009/01/14, 08:04 PM
Honestly save your money and have a meal 1 1/2 before your workout , like protein and oats , along the lines of that , i get the best energy and pumps just from that . I have tried a few preworkout powders and had good energy effects but food will do you just as good . You will be able to buy alot more of also. :dumbbell:
|
|
2009/01/15, 12:50 PM
And I did not mean NO for no-xplode. I meant NO!! its not worth it. Edit button please !!!!!!
============
Quoting from KA:
NO
=============
|
|
2009/01/15, 01:53 PM
I have no-xplode... Trust me, it's a waste of your money. All these companies want to do is make money.. They'll even tell you to take their product at times when it has absolutely no upside effect on you/your body! How trustworthy is that!?
If you want the "best pre-workout product" the best place to look is in your own kitchen.. get some carbs & caffeine, I like good protein source too.. That will be your best bet. No product on the market is going to make a big enough difference to be worth even half of what they charge! Don't waste your money!
And if you really don't believe me, buy the smallest container you can or find samples.. That will do enough for you to realize it isn't worth the $$
|
|
2009/01/18, 12:11 PM
Offense? I took no offense. I just find it ironic how the suplement industry has folks snowed.
Fact in point...if you want to take the time to read it. Biotest, one of the 'premier' supplement companies. When chocolate milk was compared to their flagship product...
Copied from Alan Argon......
In the brown corner, we have chocolate milk. The ingredients of chocolate milk vary slightly across brands, but in general, the ingredients are: milk, sugar (or high fructose corn syrup), cocoa processed with alkali, natural and artificial flavors, salt, carrageenan, vitamin A palmitate, vitamin D3. Like regular milk, chocolate milk is available in varying levels of milk fat. For the purposes of this comparison, I?ll use the one most consumers are most likely to choose, the low-fat variety.
In the red corner, we have Surge Recovery (which I?ll continue to abbreviate as Surge). The ingredient list is as follows: d-glucose (dextrose), whey-protein hydrolysate, maltodextrin, natural and artificial flavors, sucralose. Other ingredients include L-leucine and DL-phenylalanine.
Research behind the products
What?s exciting about this comparison is that both of these products have been highly heralded and hyped in their respective arenas. Surge in its exact formulation doesn?t have any peer-reviewed research behind it. However, Berardi et al reported that a solution of similar construction to Surge (33% whey hydrolysate, 33% glucose and 33% maltodextrin) was slightly superior for glycogen resynthesis at 6 hrs postexercise compared to a 100% maltodextrin solution. Effects on muscle protein flux were not measured.
Chocolate milk has thus far had an impressive run in the research examining its applications to various sporting goals . It has performed equally well for rehydration and glycogen resynthesis compared to carb-based sports drinks, and it has outperformed them (and soy-based drinks) for protecting and synthesizing muscle protein. A standout study in this area was a comparison of chocolate milk, Gatorade, and Endurox R4 (a sports drink with a 4:1 carb to protein ratio) . Chocolate milk was equally effective as Gatorade for total work output and prolonging time to exhaustion. Interestingly, both of the latter products outperformed Endurox R4 in both tests. The researchers speculated that the use of maltodextrin rather than sucrose (yes, you read that correctly) as the dominant carbohydrate source was the Achilles heel of Endurox R4. More on the virtues of sucrose instead of straight glucose for exercise applications will be covered.
When isocalorically matched, Surge and lowfat chocolate milk have the expected similarities and differences. The suggested serving of Surge has 7.7 g more protein than chocolate milk, while chocolate milk has 10.3 g more carbohydrate. While the lesser protein content of chocolate milk might on the surface seem like a point scored for Surge, this is actually a non-issue.
Recent research by Tang et al found that as little as 10g whey plus 21 g fructose taken after resistance exercise was able to stimulate a rise in muscle protein synthesis . Considering that an isocaloric serving of lowfat chocolate milk has 17.3 g protein plus 56.3 g carbohydrate, a hike in muscle protein synthesis (as well as inhibition of protein breakdown) would be easily achieved. Chocolate milk has 4g more fat than Surge. Again, this might be viewed as a detriment for those conserving fat calories, but it?s still a low absolute amount of fat. This also may have a potential benefit which I?ll discuss in a minute. Bottom line: there?s no clear winner in this department; there?s too many contingencies to make a blanket judgement.
QUALITATIVE MACRONUTRIENT COMPARISON
Protein
Surge uses whey protein hydrolysate (WPH). In theory, WPH is favorable because it?s already broken down into peptide fragments. This spurred the assumption that it would have faster absorption and uptake by muscle, which in turn would result in greater net anabolism. However, a recent study by Farnfield et al observed the exact opposite when WPH was compared with whey protein isolate (WPI), which consists of intact whole protein . WPH not only was absorbed more slowly, but its levels in the blood also declined more rapidly, resulting in a much weaker response curve. Leucine and the rest of the BCAAs were significantly better absorbed from WPI than WPH. The researchers concluded that total amino acid availability of WPI was superior to WPH.
Of note, Surge is fortified with leucine, a branched chain amino acid (BCAA) that plays a critical role in muscle protein synthesis. An isocaloric serving of chocolate milk has 1.7g leucine. This may or may not have any impact, especially within the context of a high protein intake typical of the athletic population. It?s important to keep in mind that most high-quality animal-based protein is 18-26% BCAA . Adding a few grams of supplemental BCAA to a pre-existent high intake within the diet is not likely to yield any magic. Surge is also fortified with phenylalanine, presumably for the purpose of enhancing the insulin response. Again, this is an unnecessary tactic since insulin?s primary action is the inhibition of muscle protein breakdown. This antiproteolytic effect of nutrient-mediated insulin response is maximal at elevations just slightly above fasting levels .
Chocolate milk?s protein is no different than that of regular milk. Milk protein is roughly 20% whey and 80% casein. Thus far in the scientific literature, comparisons of casein-dominant proteins with whey for sports applications are evenly split. Some studies show casein as superior (in spite of a higher leucine content in the whey treatments) , while others point to whey as the victor . The only certainty is that it can?t be assumed that faster is better when it comes to promoting net anabolism. An acute study on post-ingestion amino acid kinetics by LaCroix suggests that milk protein is best left as-is rather than isolating its protein fractions . Compared to total milk protein, whey?s amino acid delivery was too transient, and underwent rapid deamination during the postprandial period. The authors concluded that milk proteins had the best nutritional quality, which suggested a synergistic effect between its casein and whey. Bottom line: chocolate milk gets the edge; WPH has thus far bit the dust compared to WPI in a head-to-head comparison, and whey has not been consistently superior to total milk protein.
============
Quoting from icedearth168:
=============
--------------
Baseball is the only field of endeavor where a man can succeed three times out of ten and be considered a good performer
|
|
2009/01/18, 12:16 PM
Continuing....
Carbohydrate
Surge has dextrose (synonymous with glucose) as its sole carbohydrate source, while chocolate milk has an even mix of sucrose (in the form of either sucrose or high-fructose corn syrup) and lactose. While it?s common to assume that dextrose is superior to sucrose for postexercise glycogen resynthesis, research doesn?t necessarily agree. A trial by Bowtell et al showed a glucose polymer to synthesize more glycogen by the 2-hr mark postworkout . However, two other trials whose postexercise observation periods were 4 and 6 hours respectively saw no significant difference in glycogen storage between sucrose and glucose .
Perhaps the most overlooked advantage of a fructose-containing carbohydrate source (sucrose is 50% fructose) is that it supports liver glycogen better than a glucose-only source, as in the case of Surge. A little-known fact is that hepatic glycogenolysis (liver glycogen use) occurs to a significant degree during exercise, and the magnitude of glycogenolysis is intensity-dependent . Illustrating the potential superiority of sucrose over glucose, Casey et al saw no difference in muscle glycogen resynthesis 4 hrs postexercise . However, there was more liver glycogen resynthesis in the sucrose group, and this correlated with a slightly greater exercise capacity.
One of the potential concerns of consuming a large amount of sucrose instead of glucose is how the 50% fructose content in sucrose might be metabolized from a lipogenic standpoint. Answering this question directly, McDevitt saw no difference in de novo lipogenesis (conversion to fat) between the massive overfeeding of either glucose or sucrose at 135g above maintenance needs . Another potential concern is the use of high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS) in chocolate milk. The common fear of HFCS being some sort of special agent that undermines health is simply not grounded in science. HFCS is virtually identical to sucrose both in chemical structure and metabolic effect . Independent researcher John White eloquently clarified HFCS misconceptions in a recent review, which I?ll quote .
?Although examples of pure fructose causing metabolic upset at high concentrations abound, especially when fed as the sole carbohydrate source, there is no evidence that the common fructose-glucose sweeteners do the same. Thus, studies using extreme carbohydrate diets may be useful for probing biochemical pathways, but they have no relevance to the human diet or to current consumption. I conclude that the HFCS-obesity hypothesis is supported neither in the United States nor worldwide.?
It bears mentioning that lactose intolerance can prohibit regular milk use for certain susceptible individuals. However, this can be remedied by using Lactaid brand milk, or by using lactase pills or drops. Bottom line: For those who can digest lactose or are willing to take the extra step to make it digestible, chocolate milk wins. But since there are those who can?t or won?t do what?s required to tolerate lactose, I?m calling this a tie.
Fat
Coincidentally, Surge and chocolate milk have identical proportions of saturated fat. Lowfat chocolate milk has more fat than Surge, which would cause some folks to call a foul for postworkout purposes. However, a trial by Elliot et al found that postexercise ingestion of whole milk was superior for increasing net protein balance than fat-free milk . The most striking aspect about this trial was that the calorie-matched dose of fat free milk contained 14.5g protein, versus 8.0 g in the whole milk. Apparently, postworkout fat intake (particularly milk fat) is nothing to fear, and may even be beneficial from the standpoint of synthesizing muscle protein. Bottom line: it?s a tie, since there is very little evidence favoring one fat profile/amount versus the other. On one hand, you can be saving fat calories by going with Surge. On the other hand, postworkout milk fat might potentially enhance protein synthesis. Things come out even.
MICRONUTRIENT COMPARISON (per 340 kcal serving)*
Surge Recovery Chocolate Milk
Calcium 180 mg 624 mg
Cholesterol 75 mg 16 mg
Leucine 4000 mg 1714 mg
Magnesium 20 mg 70 mg
Phenylalanine 2000 mg 844 mg
Phosphorous 120 mg 558 mg
Potassium 400 mg 920 mg
Sodium 200 mg 329 mg
*This comparison is limited to the micronutrients on the Surge label. And yes, I realize that not all of the above are technically micronutrients.
A quick glance at the above chart shows that chocolate milk is markedly more nutrient-dense, with the exception of a higher content of leucine and phenylalanine in Surge, whose significance (or lack of) I discussed earlier. As an interesting triviality, both have a low cholesterol content, but Surge has 4.6 times more. Chocolate milk has more sodium, but it also has a significantly higher potassium-to-sodium ratio. Bottom line: chocolate milk wins this one decisively.
OTHER CONSIDERATIONS
Price
Chocolate milk by the half gallon (64oz, or about 2000 ml) is approximately $3.00 USD. Sticking with our 340 kcal figure, this yields 3.7 servings, which boils down to $0.81 per serving. A tub of Surge costs $36.00 and yields 16 servings (3 scoops, 340 kcals per serving). This boils down to $2.25 per serving. That?s 277% more expensive than chocolate milk. Even on a protein-matched basis, Surge is still roughly double the price. Bottom line: chocolate milk is many times easier on your wallet.
Convenience & taste
Convenience is the single area where Surge wins. Being a powder, it?s non-perishable, requiring no refrigeration. This makes it more easily portable. Taste will always be, well, a matter of taste. I highly doubt that in a blinded test that Surge would win over chocolate milk. Bottom line: Surge is more convenient, but I?ll go out on a limb and guess that chocolate milk would taste better to most people.
--------------
Baseball is the only field of endeavor where a man can succeed three times out of ten and be considered a good performer
|
|
2009/01/18, 04:32 PM
hey bblift....a great post once again. U r so right!!! i used to depend a lot on supplements before. I was surely seeing some gains but honestly I was not happy abt it b'cos i kind of figured tht i was rather puttin on fat bulk rather than lean mass which obviously is the best thing to go for. I am just taking it once in a day now and taking more of whole foods like chicken, meat n lots of fruits n vegetables whenever i feel like snacking.
icedearth even i will suggest go for good quality whole foods. U will save money n get the result which u r looking for.
|
|
2009/01/18, 05:58 PM
Nothing I mean nothing kick ass in my workouts compared to CARBS!
Not some bullshit powdered carb like waxy maze but I'm talking about real Oats, Brown Rice, Bread, Pasta and etc.
I do take supplements but all are pretty cheap.
Sups I take are
Vitamins
Milk Protein Isolate for PWO and any damn time I please
Brown Rice Carb PWO this is the only time I use a powder carb and only time it makes sense
Fish Oil
Beta Alanine
German Creatine Monohydrate
Caffeine Anhydrous Powder Pre workout at about 1g although this is the best, strongest and purest for of caffeine it does shit whit out food and is better with whole food carbs not powdered carbs
You should listen to BB1Fit young one where do you think I learned this from except the Caffeine Anhydrous Powder he dislikes that Idea but I'm hard headed.
--------------
Knock-Um Down & Keep-Um Down!
http://www.freetrainers.com/FT/jsp/Message.jsp?f_ix=15&t_ix=1609
Squat 285
Deadlift 355
Bench 260x2
|
|
2009/01/19, 11:11 AM
icedearth168...please do not take my posting as a 'knock' or anything against you. Was just striving to save folks unneeded waste of money. Times are tough for everyone, and I am sure you are not the exception. No sense in making the supplement companies richer.
--------------
Baseball is the only field of endeavor where a man can succeed three times out of ten and be considered a good performer
|
|
2009/02/12, 12:32 AM
speaking of such i was told a cup of black coffee and a baby aspirin (80mg) does wonders for post workout boost please correct me if I'm wrong
|
|
2009/02/12, 06:04 AM
My pre workout supplement is some carbs(something like whole grain bread or a complex carb) and a protein, I eat that about a hour before. On the way to the gym I drink a strong cuppa coffee.....works for me and is CHEAP.
--------------
FOR MY WIFE:
Her little ring was a little thing
but it was all that i could afford
now shes mine all mine
till the day i die
and i never wanted nothing more
7707mutt@freetrainers.com
|
|
2009/08/26, 05:56 PM
wow, not to necro-post or anything but this answered a few questions i had in a post i wrote earlier. thank you for the info!! guess i need a few more hours of reading :D
|
|
2009/09/29, 12:32 PM
Some one said no-xplode is a waist of money
w/e I love no-xplode
ya it's not cheap but the amount of weight i can lift while taking it makes it worth it
but thats just my opinion
--------------
When you get to the end of your rope, tie a knot, and hang on.
~pres. Roosevelt
|
|
2009/11/11, 10:16 PM
Kre Alkalyn-EFX Pro by AAEFX is my favorite.
--------------
All American EFX \\"Natural Freak\\"
http://www.aaefx.com
AAEFX Sponsored Natural Bodybuilder
|
