Catalyst Athletics Forums

Catalyst Athletics Forums (http://www.catalystathletics.com/forum/index.php)
-   Fitness, Strength & CrossFit (http://www.catalystathletics.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=16)
-   -   Lyle and GH (http://www.catalystathletics.com/forum/showthread.php?t=2306)

Mike ODonnell 03-26-2008 09:00 AM

Lyle and GH
 
I found this comment very interesting from Lyle at his new blog
http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/blog/

Quote:

Q: I just read your review of EPOC. Probably 16 years ago I read a study done at Laval U. It compared fat loss from steady exercise vs short bouts of intense exercise all done on a stat bike. Like the article, there was little difference in calorie burn between the two groups. But the intense group had significantly greater fat loss than the steady group. The researchers has no real answer as to why that happened. I wondered back then if it could be explained by the intense exercise stimulating growth hormone (GH). GH has a steroid-like effect on the body, accelerating fat loss among other effects.

A: I doubt it. GH is pretty irrelevant as an anabolic, studies have clearly shown that even injecting GH does nothing to improve strength or muscle gains. So the small GH pulse from interval training is unlikely to explain the results of that original interval study.

Rather, alterations in fat oxidation enzymes, muscle glycogen depletion, and the fact that, in untrained individuals, high intensity interval work can probably stimulate increases in muscle mass are more likely to explain the studies results.

But GH is pretty worthless here.

Chris Bardwell 03-26-2008 09:14 AM

Interesting find, I am no pro in the field but assume he could be right about HIIT training being enough to elicit an adequate hormonal response. Whereas I am sure weight training is a different story.....

I am reading through his blog now, some great stuff up....

Neill Smith 03-26-2008 10:28 AM

I've always been impressed by Lyle. I'm not knowledgeable enough to know if he's full of s--t or not, but he puts out a lot of information, contributes most of it cheaply or for free, and certainly sounds like he knows his stuff. I'm curious to hear others' opinions.

Mike ODonnell 03-26-2008 10:35 AM

I find it hard to believe that "GH is pretty irrelevant as an anabolic, studies have clearly shown that even injecting GH does nothing to improve strength or muscle gains."

If that was the fact, I don't think you would have an issue with athletes using GH as a "performance enhancing drug".....which apparently is a big deal so they say nowadays. I know it can help increase recovery, which in turn can increase training volume....but have no direct effect on muscle increase? (Or is the muscle increase just a result of the abillity to increase training volume?)

Also that statement would negate anything that DeVany or others state about needing to train in the lactate threshold, as lactate increases GH output, and then not eating pwo immediately so as to take advantage of elevated GH for elevated fat loss.

Hard to argue the real world results of fat loss and muscle gain with those that do interval based training. I just don't think GH has that small of a role in the process.

Garrett Smith 03-26-2008 11:06 AM

Um, maybe we should change the name away from "growth hormone" if it isn't anabolic...sheesh.

Maybe he is only referring to GH as anabolic in regards to muscle tissue, which is a myopic view and likely incorrect.

Dave Van Skike 03-26-2008 11:19 AM

Lyle's nutritional cred and hormonal chops are pretty unimpeachable.

The Vain One OTOH, is *profoundly crazy.

Garrett Smith 03-26-2008 01:15 PM

This is just another example of someone trying to claim they know what is going on inside the Black Box, IMO...

Jeremy Shepard 04-17-2008 01:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dave Van Skike (Post 28505)
The Vain One OTOH, is *profoundly crazy.

Very, very true.

Jeremy Shepard 04-17-2008 01:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike ODonnell (Post 28503)
Also that statement would negate anything that DeVany or others state about needing to train in the lactate threshold, as lactate increases GH output, and then not eating pwo immediately so as to take advantage of elevated GH for elevated fat loss.

This is typical stuff that DeVany misinterprets. Training at the lactate threshold is fine for fat loss due to the amount of energy required. Glycogen depletion never hurts for fat loss, either.

Carbohydrates after resistance training don't blunt GH release, anyway:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1...ubmed_RVDocSum

Steven Low 04-17-2008 06:55 PM

I am actually writing an article on neuroendocrine response... hopefully will finish within the month (I have tonsssss of links studies in pubmed and various journals). Maybe in next months' PMenu. :)

Here's a few things things I have come across:
1. EPOC fails.
2. GH has a variety of uses both anabolic and catabolic (won't go into details). Recovery, as Mike said, is one good way to think of how GH functions though.
3. Glycogen depletion is key vs. B-oxidation with fat reserves (aka high intensity vs steady state).

I'll leave you guys to your own devices now since I don't want to give everything away.. just yet. ;)


Will be interesting to see what Lyle puts up and if it compares to what I've found so far... not that I need the competition from Lyle of all people. :\

edit: oops couple of errors


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:29 PM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.6.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.