Lactate and GH relationship...

**Dale Mabry** · 04-10-2006, 01:38 PM

There is a solid relationship between the two, but is it the lactate concentration, or just the presence of lactate?

Found 2 articles...
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...&dopt=Abstract

This one shows that GH response is greater in upper body movements than lower body movements. I bet this has to do with the fact that we are always on our feet so our body has adapted.

Second one...

http://nsca.allenpress.com/nscaonlin...O%3E2.3.CO%3B2

Now this one is the interesting one to me. They conclude that the greater hormonal response is a result of volume. I don't know that this will explain everything. I bet if you had the second group do the same volume, just in a circuit rather than 3 sets of each exercise in a row, the first group would still have a significantly greater response. I think it is the local concentration of lactate that causes GH to be released, not total body lactate levels. If you do 3 consecutive sets of the same exercise with a short rest interval, obviously there is going to be a greater concentration of lactate in that area than if you were to go through 8 different exercises and then come back to that one again. Resting that muscle for a few sets would allow the local ATP to be recharged and lactate to be shuttled away.

Who knows, anyone got any ideas?

**P-funk** · 04-10-2006, 02:10 PM

that first study is strange. it would appear to go against anything that has been published in books.

*i wanted to take another look at it but I keep getting a server error when I click on the link? *

**Dale Mabry** · 04-10-2006, 02:11 PM

They must be on to us...

I always thought using larger muscle groups lead to greater release myself.

**P-funk** · 04-10-2006, 02:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dale Mabry

They must be on to us...

I always thought using larger muscle groups lead to greater release myself.

yea, especially the legs.

i wanted to look because I wanted to see what exercise the used for the lower body.....was it pedalling on a bike? I can't remeber.....I read that one and then I read the second one about the bitches and now I can't get the first one to work again.

**Dale Mabry** · 04-10-2006, 02:23 PM

Got it to work, it was with upper/lower cycle ergometers and a treadmill at equivalent O2 consumption. I imagine the LT to be much lower for the arms than the legs, interesting. Holding O2 consumption equivalent prolly make certain that the same amount of muscle mass is being used.

**CowPimp** · 04-10-2006, 04:12 PM

I found this quote in the first article:

"It seems likely that the stimulation of these chemoreceptors is more pronounced when smaller muscle groups are engaged at a given work load."

Is this implying that the work rate was held constant among the different modes of exercise? If so, I think that would explain the higher lactate concentrations in the arm ergometer exercise. If the arms are forced to produce the same amount of work as the legs, then the lactate concentrations are definitely going to be a Hell of a lot higher. Not to mention that the arms are not as well adjusted to working this much on a regular basis.

I think that volume is certainly part of the equation in the second study. However, I think it would have been interesting to see a third group where the exercises were performed in a circuit fashion, but at the same level of volume. All we can do is speculate, and I think it's nearly impossible to do so accurately.

**Dale Mabry** · 04-10-2006, 06:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CowPimp

I think that volume is certainly part of the equation in the second study. However, I think it would have been interesting to see a third group where the exercises were performed in a circuit fashion, but at the same level of volume. All we can do is speculate, and I think it's nearly impossible to do so accurately.

My thinking is that the amplitude of the local stress is what causes the GH release, prolly via GHRH activity, not just the presence of lactate.

**Dale Mabry** · 04-10-2006, 06:15 PM

The 5th slide of this presentation seems to theorize the same thing...

http://www.healthsystem.virginia.edu...sting-2003.ppt

Yanick · 04-10-2006, 09:03 PM

fuckin nerds.

**P-funk** · 04-10-2006, 09:04 PM

who the fuck are you? were have you been? did you check out that link I PM'd you?

Yanick · 04-10-2006, 09:09 PM

i got that PM, just forgot to reply to you...my bad!

i'm busy as all fuck right now, my teachers must have decided to torture us before we get our well deserved spring break (i have like big 4 tests in a period of 3 weekdays).

i'm on here but usually just lurking and spontaneously posting irrelevant shit. come wednesday i'm officially on spring break and i'll be here probably 24/7.

shiznit2169 · 04-10-2006, 09:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yanick

fuckin nerds.

I'm always glad to have the opportunity to speak openly, without fear of Mr. Yanick twisting our words in a vile attempt to control your bank account, your employment, your personal safety, and your mind. But before I continue, allow me to explain that we've never bothered him. Yet he wants to censor any incomplicitous fairy tales. Whatever happened to "live and let live"? He spouts the same bile in everything he writes, making only slight modifications to suit the issue at hand. The issue Yanick's excited about this week is priggism, which says to me that he may have access to weapons of mass destruction. Then again, I consider Yanick to be a weapon of mass destruction himself. The credentialism "debate" is not a debate. It is a harangue, a politically motivated, brilliantly publicized, insincere attack on progressive ideas. Anyway, I hope I've made my point, which is that Mr. Yanick has long served as a cheerleader for snobbism.

Yanick · 04-10-2006, 10:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shiznit2169

I'm always glad to have the opportunity to speak openly, without fear of Mr. Yanick twisting our words in a vile attempt to control your bank account, your employment, your personal safety, and your mind. But before I continue, allow me to explain that we've never bothered him. Yet he wants to censor any incomplicitous fairy tales. Whatever happened to "live and let live"? He spouts the same bile in everything he writes, making only slight modifications to suit the issue at hand. The issue Yanick's excited about this week is priggism, which says to me that he may have access to weapons of mass destruction. Then again, I consider Yanick to be a weapon of mass destruction himself. The credentialism "debate" is not a debate. It is a harangue, a politically motivated, brilliantly publicized, insincere attack on progressive ideas. Anyway, I hope I've made my point, which is that Mr. Yanick has long served as a cheerleader for snobbism.

**CowPimp** · 04-10-2006, 10:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dale Mabry

My thinking is that the amplitude of the local stress is what causes the GH release, prolly via GHRH activity, not just the presence of lactate.

I'm not really suggesting you are wrong, that's definitely a strong possbility. I'm just saying I don't want to jump to any conclusions yet myself.

**Dale Mabry** · 04-10-2006, 10:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CowPimp

I'm not really suggesting you are wrong, that's definitely a strong possbility. I'm just saying I don't want to jump to any conclusions yet myself.

Oh, I gotcha.

**CowPimp** · 04-12-2006, 10:35 PM

Regarding the test where they used upper and lower body exercises and measured the GH response:

I discovered some interesting information in the NSCA-CPT textbook. The following could explain why the GH response was greater in the upper body exercises. First of all, for a given workload, exercise done using upper body musculature will result in a higher heart rate. Also, your VO2 max is lower during upper body exercises as opposed to what you can achieve with lower body exercises. Both of these facts result in hitting the lactate threshold at a lower intensity when performing upper body exercises.

This would seem to support your theory Dale. Perhaps at this workload they were not reaching the lactate threshold with the lower body exercises, but they did reach it with the upper body exercises. The greater lactate response lead to the greater GH response, or so I would speculate.

04-10-2006, 01:38 PM	#1
Dale Mabry Moderator Moderator Join Date: May 2003 Location: Elsewhere Posts: 14,335 Photos: 10	Lactate and GH relationship... There is a solid relationship between the two, but is it the lactate concentration, or just the presence of lactate? Found 2 articles... http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...&dopt=Abstract This one shows that GH response is greater in upper body movements than lower body movements. I bet this has to do with the fact that we are always on our feet so our body has adapted. Second one... http://nsca.allenpress.com/nscaonlin...O%3E2.3.CO%3B2 Now this one is the interesting one to me. They conclude that the greater hormonal response is a result of volume. I don't know that this will explain everything. I bet if you had the second group do the same volume, just in a circuit rather than 3 sets of each exercise in a row, the first group would still have a significantly greater response. I think it is the local concentration of lactate that causes GH to be released, not total body lactate levels. If you do 3 consecutive sets of the same exercise with a short rest interval, obviously there is going to be a greater concentration of lactate in that area than if you were to go through 8 different exercises and then come back to that one again. Resting that muscle for a few sets would allow the local ATP to be recharged and lactate to be shuttled away. Who knows, anyone got any ideas? If sense were common, everyone would have it. 4/2007-Current 75th Ranked most popular image 1 spot behind Prince's bulge...

04-10-2006, 02:10 PM	#2
P-funk Patrick Super Moderator Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: AZ Posts: 31,700	that first study is strange. it would appear to go against anything that has been published in books. i wanted to take another look at it but I keep getting a server error when I click on the link? E-Book: Take Charge! Everything You Need To Know To Write Your Own Training Programs Online Consulting/Program Design Reality Based Fitness Podcast Check me out on Twitter! Subscribe to our free monthly newsletter! "In the beginners mind there are many possibilities, in the experts there are few." -Buddha's Little Instruction Book

04-10-2006, 02:11 PM	#3
Dale Mabry Moderator Moderator Join Date: May 2003 Location: Elsewhere Posts: 14,335 Photos: 10	They must be on to us... I always thought using larger muscle groups lead to greater release myself. If sense were common, everyone would have it. 4/2007-Current 75th Ranked most popular image 1 spot behind Prince's bulge...

04-10-2006, 02:23 PM	#5
Dale Mabry Moderator Moderator Join Date: May 2003 Location: Elsewhere Posts: 14,335 Photos: 10	Got it to work, it was with upper/lower cycle ergometers and a treadmill at equivalent O2 consumption. I imagine the LT to be much lower for the arms than the legs, interesting. Holding O2 consumption equivalent prolly make certain that the same amount of muscle mass is being used. If sense were common, everyone would have it. 4/2007-Current 75th Ranked most popular image 1 spot behind Prince's bulge...

04-10-2006, 04:12 PM	#6
CowPimp Fueled by Testosterone Moderator Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Silver Spring, MD Posts: 15,615	I found this quote in the first article: "It seems likely that the stimulation of these chemoreceptors is more pronounced when smaller muscle groups are engaged at a given work load." Is this implying that the work rate was held constant among the different modes of exercise? If so, I think that would explain the higher lactate concentrations in the arm ergometer exercise. If the arms are forced to produce the same amount of work as the legs, then the lactate concentrations are definitely going to be a Hell of a lot higher. Not to mention that the arms are not as well adjusted to working this much on a regular basis. I think that volume is certainly part of the equation in the second study. However, I think it would have been interesting to see a third group where the exercises were performed in a circuit fashion, but at the same level of volume. All we can do is speculate, and I think it's nearly impossible to do so accurately. The only time it's bad to feel the burn is when you're peeing... Belligerent Bovine badass YouTube Videos

04-10-2006, 06:15 PM	#8
Dale Mabry Moderator Moderator Join Date: May 2003 Location: Elsewhere Posts: 14,335 Photos: 10	The 5th slide of this presentation seems to theorize the same thing... http://www.healthsystem.virginia.edu...sting-2003.ppt If sense were common, everyone would have it. 4/2007-Current 75th Ranked most popular image 1 spot behind Prince's bulge...

04-10-2006, 09:03 PM	#9
Yanick Amor Fati Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 4,231	fuckin nerds. "The greatest obstacle to knowledge is not ignorance but the illusion of knowledge." -Barry Marshall, Nobel Laureate

04-10-2006, 09:04 PM	#10
P-funk Patrick Super Moderator Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: AZ Posts: 31,700	who the fuck are you? were have you been? did you check out that link I PM'd you? E-Book: Take Charge! Everything You Need To Know To Write Your Own Training Programs Online Consulting/Program Design Reality Based Fitness Podcast Check me out on Twitter! Subscribe to our free monthly newsletter! "In the beginners mind there are many possibilities, in the experts there are few." -Buddha's Little Instruction Book

04-10-2006, 09:09 PM	#11
Yanick Amor Fati Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 4,231	i got that PM, just forgot to reply to you...my bad! i'm busy as all fuck right now, my teachers must have decided to torture us before we get our well deserved spring break (i have like big 4 tests in a period of 3 weekdays). i'm on here but usually just lurking and spontaneously posting irrelevant shit. come wednesday i'm officially on spring break and i'll be here probably 24/7. "The greatest obstacle to knowledge is not ignorance but the illusion of knowledge." -Barry Marshall, Nobel Laureate

04-12-2006, 10:35 PM	#16
CowPimp Fueled by Testosterone Moderator Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Silver Spring, MD Posts: 15,615	Regarding the test where they used upper and lower body exercises and measured the GH response: I discovered some interesting information in the NSCA-CPT textbook. The following could explain why the GH response was greater in the upper body exercises. First of all, for a given workload, exercise done using upper body musculature will result in a higher heart rate. Also, your VO2 max is lower during upper body exercises as opposed to what you can achieve with lower body exercises. Both of these facts result in hitting the lactate threshold at a lower intensity when performing upper body exercises. This would seem to support your theory Dale. Perhaps at this workload they were not reaching the lactate threshold with the lower body exercises, but they did reach it with the upper body exercises. The greater lactate response lead to the greater GH response, or so I would speculate. The only time it's bad to feel the burn is when you're peeing... Belligerent Bovine badass YouTube Videos

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode