Heya guys. I've just joined today and have had a great time reading through the forums. I've just started a blog myself, which is sort of like a forum.
I'm a scientist and am just about to confer my PhD. During my PhD I looked at the effects of dietary supplementation (whey and creatine) and resistance training on muscle strength, endurance and antioxidant capacity in aged males (60+ years). I'm currently writing up my thesis and have been thinking that all the information that I have gathered over the years is going to go to waste if just scientists get to read it. So.....I've started writing articles about various topics that are in plain English whilst still sticking to the science.
For some reason I feel compelled to share the knowledge Share the love.
I noticed that alot of people are asking questions about what to take and how to take it. So here is a collection of articles that I have written outlining the basic science behind whey protein and how to take it.
I would say, that's far from the PhD level writing
Referencing one guy three times and providing his conclusions from the abstracts and not even trying to analyze the actual data of the research...
Give me a break.
Any undergrad can type "protein resistance training" into the PubMed search and find more info.
Posted by: Prince
you spelled protein incorrectly on the thread title, I fixed it for you.
Posted by: Amphetish
Etherlord I'm deliberately trying to move away from scientific writing. Referencing a researcher 3 times is nothing beyond the norm. considering that most of the research has been conducted by Tipton.
hey would you care to analyse the research then for us?
I'm sorry I'm not up to your standards matey <laughs> you play it out like you GOD
Most people have enjoyed the read.
Thanks Prince for the correction. My spelling is sometimes a little sloppy. My grammar is even worse. It's something that I'm working on.
Posted by: Etherlord
Originally Posted by Amphetish
Referencing a researcher 3 times is nothing beyond the norm. considering that most of the research has been conducted by Tipton.
Yeah, sure...
If you are writing a PhD thesis on the subject, there is no way you haven't noticed this one:
Postexercise muscle glycogen recovery enhanced with a carbohydrate-protein supplement Entrez PubMed
or this one:
The effect of resistance training combined with timed ingestion of protein on muscle fiber size and muscle strength Entrez PubMed
or this one:
Effects of supplement timing and resistance exercise on skeletal muscle hypertrophy Entrez PubMed
or this one:
Protein ingestion prior to strength exercise affects blood hormones and metabolism. Entrez PubMed
... etc.
Why haven't you used these reviews if you try to write "in plain English"?
The role of protein and amino acid supplements in the athlete's diet: does type or timing of ingestion matter? Entrez PubMed
Human muscle protein synthesis after physical activity and feeding Entrez PubMed
Doesn't this point on some kind of bias?
Why would you choose one guy out of dozen others?
I do not say that Tipton is totally wrong. The matter is that he is the only source of data in your writing and your conclusions are biased towards him.
And guess what, here is an article from Tipton which says that you get increased protein synthesis from AA plus carbs postexercise. Moreover, it's irrelevant if you take postexercise AA plus carbs drink immediately or three hours after exercise. That kind of contradicts your conclusions. Entrez PubMed
Share the love.
Originally Posted by Amphetish
