Charles Polinquin and post workout carbs

[Yanick]

nni,

very interesting study. Thanks for sharing. My big question was how glycogen synthesis would be stimulated without any glycogen being supplied? The rise in glucagon is an interesting phenomenon.

Poliquin is still a quack IMO.

Oh and Jugg, Built is a smart lady, no doubt about it but I don't care who you are I like to see sound reasoning (based on accepted physiology) and/or research to back up claims. Especially some of the more, 'out there,' claims.

 

[Built]

Oh, do I hear you on the "out there" claims.

I figure if I cite sources, no only do I appear credible, I can assign blame!

 

[juggernaut]

very close, but it is a very worthwhile compound. it is however much more expensive than glycine. i would go with k-rala or na-rala.

why? I do understand the cost thing; however, if it is the same compound, doesnt it do the same thing?

 

[juggernaut]

Oh, do I hear you on the "out there" claims.

I figure if I cite sources, no only do I appear credible, I can assign blame!

lol

 

[nni]

why? I do understand the cost thing; however, if it is the same compound, doesnt it do the same thing?

they both create an insulin response, but im not certain that they do it in the same way. i have done more research into the end results, not the way they got there.

 

[Yanick]

Oh, do I hear you on the "out there" claims.

I figure if I cite sources, no only do I appear credible, I can assign blame!

Haha, nice way to look at it.

In reality we all have a certain method we have both grown accustomed to, feel comfortable with and like to advice people with. The key is how you present your information (give it a shot vs. death will ensue shortly after intaking 100g of dextrose before bed). You become a quack when you start throwing out these blanket statements and using the 'magic bullet' approach, like carbs and HFCS made you fat, 75% of people are carb intolerant, or you can't eat yams for three weeks but berries are okay, or replace breakfast with meat and nuts to lose weight. Quackery I tell ya.

they both create an insulin response, but im not certain that they do it in the same way. i have done more research into the end results, not the way they got there.

Going from the cited study alone (I haven't done any more reading on the subject) I'd say the mechanism is glucose/nutrient shuttling independent of insulin concentration...probably some sort of transient increase in insulin sensitivity or, as they propose in the paper, a yet undiscovered gut hormone which mediates blood sugar levels.

Insulin concentration
The mean fasting serum insulin concentration was 48 ± 6 pmol/L (8.1 ± 1 µU/mL) (Figure 3, top). Glycine ingestion stimulated a modest increase in insulin concentration. After glucose ingestion, there was a rapid rise in insulin concentration, which corresponded with the rise in glucose concentration. When glycine was ingested with glucose, the insulin peak occurred later and was slightly less than when glucose was ingested alone.

The fact that glycine alone led to a small, and probably a physiologically insignificant rise in insulin, while glycine and glucose together led to a later and smaller rise in insulin and a smaller and shorter rise in glucose (also in the glucose+glycine group) would lead me to believe that its not really the insulin that is doing the work but some other factor...ie the gut hormone they propose or something akin to a transient increase in insulin sensitivity or whatever else.