ONLINE DRIVERS MEDIA

A personal trainer who knows what hes doing is that he will push you exactly so far as it is necessary to make maximal progress. Interestingly, even the best trainers will fail doing the same for themselves.

The more is better mentality thats so characteristic of our lives in the Western world of affluence is imho the most important obstacle trainees all around the world meet on their way to increased muscle strength, size and performance. Against that background its a pity that the results of a recent study from the School of Kinesiology and Health Studies at the Queen’s University relate to sprint training, only. So, after having a look at Jason G. E. Zelt, I will briefly take a look at similar evidence from the more popular field of "working out to look good naked" and to be as strong as Superman.

But lets not waste any more time and sprint straight to the point! Zelt et al. published the results of the initially mentioned study in the peer-reviewed European Journal of Applied Physiology (Zelt. 2014).
As Zelt et al. point out, the purpose of this study was twofold: (1) to confirm that reductions in SIT work-interval duration do not result in reduced adaptations in aerobic and anaerobic capacity, and (2) to examine the effects of reduced work interval duration on submaximal determinants of exercise performance, namely lactate threshold and critical power.

In accordance with previous studies where aerobic capacity and aerobic performance were measured (Burgomaster. 2008; Hazell. 2010), the scientists hypothesized that reducing SIT work interval duration would have no effect on training-induced increases in lactate threshold and critical power.

Figure 1: Effects of high (SIT30) and lower volume (SIT15) training on power output and lactate threshold (Zelt. 2014)

And indeed, it hadnt. While there was a significant main effectof training on VO2peak such that VO2peak was elevated post-training, no significant difference was observed in the improvements observed between groups (ET ~13 %, SIT 30–4 %, SIT 15–8 %; not shown in Figure 1).

"A significant main effect of training was observed such that lactate threshold and critical power were higher during post-testing across all groups (p  <  0.05). There was a main effect of training (p  <  0.05) on Wingate peak power with no differences observed between groups at post training."

As the researchers point out, these results clearly indicate that "reducing SIT work-interval duration from 30 to 15 s had no impact on training-induced increases in aerobic or anaerobic power, or on increases in lactate threshold (absolute) and critical power."
The initially hinted at question that remains is yet: "Is this true for the more popular training goal of getting strong, ripped and buffed, as well?" The answer to this question is certainly not easy to answer, as it may easily depend on your training status, your exact goals and maybe even the body parts youre training. You dont get it? Well, I guess its best Ill provide you with a few examples:

• Look at his legs, Ronnie Coleman must have done something right... and guess what, the study at hand suggests that part of it could have been his insane training volume.

  the legs of advanced trainees may need a little more hammering -- Maybe you remember this being the take-home message from a previous article, i.e. "Advanced Trainees Benefit from Increased Training Volume! Greater & Steadier Strength Gains with 8 Sets of Squats. Plus: Over 6 Weeks, 1 Set and 4 Sets Equally (In-)Effective." | read more
• the classic single vs. three set debate is still not settled -- While Starky et al.s 1996 study is one of the studies that appears to tip the scale in favor of studies suggests that there is no significant different in the strength and muscle gains in response to increasing the number of sets on a given exercise from one to three sets. Unfortunately, Starky et al. as well as most of their successors picked untrained noobs to test their hypothesis. And we all know: Noobs grow from simply looking at a barbell, right?
  
  So what do other studies say? Studies that used subjects like you and me? People who have been training regularly for ten or more years? People like the fifty-one experienced (>3 years), trained junior lifters who were randomly assigned to low, medium and high volume resistance training in a 2005 study by Juan J. Gonzalez-Badillo et al.
  

  Figure 2: Number of repetitions per week and average intensity (AI) during the 10-week training period in the low-volume (LVG), moderate-volume (MVG), and high-volume (HVG) training groups (left); EEffect size for the snatch, clean & jerk, and squat performances. LVG low volume group; MVG medium volume group; HVG high volume group (Gonzalez-Badillo. 2005)

  As you can see in Figure 2 (right), there is a highly significant advantage of the medium vs. both the low and high volume group who trained at significantly lower, respectively higher volumes (see Figure 2, left) than the guys in the medium volume group for squats and clean & jerks. The snatch, on the other hand, probably because it is the most demanding exercise, technically speaking, benefited from a "little" more volume (~ 100 reps per week).
• the lower the volume, the higher the frequency -- Furthermore, the overview in Table 1, which was originally published as part of a review of the determinants of strength training success by Tan (1999) shows that another volume-related parameter, i.e. the training frequency, figures, as well; with high(er) frequencies producing greater increases in strength gains.

  Table 1: Summary of studies looking into optimal training frequency (Tan. 1999)

  Up to five training sessions for the upper and up to four for the lower body are possible, but whether theyre in fact as productive as the studies Tan cites would suggest appears questionable and will certainly depend on the volume of the individual sessions.
  
  The fact that it seems as if the upper body would respond more favorably to increases in training frequency than the lower body would albeit stand in line with the previously cited beneficial effects of high(er) volume training on the legs.
  
  

  Figure 3: Generally speaking a 2007 review of the literature by Mathias Wernbom et al. supports the notion that legs (in this case the quadriceps) dont just gain the most strength, but also the most size with ~3 training sessions per week; with the one outlier (12x/week) being a low intensity Kaatsu study by Abe et al. (2005)

  Why? Well, the study by Robins et al. conducted in 2012 (learn more) used a high volume on training days, but a necessarily low training frequency (two session per week, A + B). As Tan points out, ...
  

  "[...a]nother point to note from Table 1 is that previously trained athletes are closer to their strength potential and may require higher frequencies compared with untrained athletes" (Tan. 1999)."

  A statement that takes us back to the simple, but significant assessment that we cannot expect to find a training volume thats perfect for everyone: Individualization is key!

As far as the design of specific routines is concerned the previously cited review by Wernborn et al. offers a neat overview of suggested training principles, most of you will be familiar with.

Table 2: Recommendations for dynamic external resistance training for hypertrophy (Wernborn. 2007)

If you take a look at the middle column, you will hopefully realize that the suggested progression from 1-2 sets to 3-6 sets is specified on a "per muscle group" basis. The three biceps exercise with three sets of 8-12 reps, each, are thus off the charts, already; and youd be better off doing three sets of barbell curls and nosebreakers to end up at your maximum of six sets per body part (in this case the "arms") to return to the gym two days later and hammer your arms with three sets of hammer curls and cable press-downs.
References:

• Abe, Takashi, Charles F. Kearns, and Yoshiaki Sato. "Muscle size and strength are increased following walk training with restricted venous blood flow from the leg muscle, Kaatsu-walk training." Journal of Applied Physiology 100.5 (2006): 1460-1466.
• Robbins, Daniel W., Paul WM Marshall, and Megan McEwen. "The effect of training volume on lower-body strength." The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research 26.1 (2012): 34-39.
• Tan, Benedict. "Manipulating resistance training program variables to optimize maximum strength in men: a review." The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research 13.3 (1999): 289-304.
• Wernbom, Mathias, Jesper Augustsson, and Roland Thomeé. "The influence of frequency, intensity, volume and mode of strength training on whole muscle cross-sectional area in humans." Sports Medicine 37.3 (2007): 225-264.
• Zelt, Jason GE, et al. "Reducing the volume of sprint interval training does not diminish maximal and submaximal performance gains in healthy men." European journal of applied physiology (2014): 1-10.

Do you really need a barbell or will hopping around in a group dance course or working out in the water aka hydrogymnastic suffice to build the 2015 cover model physique thats part of your new years resolution? A recent Portuguese + Brazilian study may hold the answer to this "important" question.

Its about time to think about a good new years resolution; and since any resolution thats aimed at losing weight and/or building a better physique, naturally involves exercise, the latest study from the University of Trás-os-Montes and Alto Douro comes right in time (Soares Costa de Mendonça. 2014).

The study that was conducted by Rosa Maria Soares Costa de Mendonça, Adenilson Targino de Araújo Júnior from the University of Trás-os-Montes and Alto Douro in Portugal, Maria do Socorro Cirilo de Sousa from the Federal Institute of Technology Education in Brazil and Helder Miguel Fernandes from the Research Centre for Sport in Portugal was designed to investigate the possible effects of 16 weeks of practicing different physical exercise programmes (strength training, dance or hydrogymnastics) on the body composition and anthropometric dimensions of adult women.
The sample was comprised of 89 adult women aged 25–55 (41.42 ± 9.23 years), who were used to train at least three times a week and had no history of health issues that may compromise their ability to participate in the study. . Of these, 60% were married, 27% single and 12% divorced, all residing in the northeastern part of Brazil. As the scientists point out, ...

"[t]hese women were selected using a non probabilistic manner in specific locations, such as fitness clubs, hydrogymnastic gyms and a public municipal institution.

The sample was randomly divided into four groups, of which one was designed as the control group consisting of individuals that were sedentary (CG) (n = 25) and three were characterised as experimental groups:

• strength training (SG) (n = 25), in which the ladies trained three times per week under the supervision of a qualified trainer and did 3 sets of 8–12 repetitions (weights were progressively increased) with a 2–3 min rest period on each of the 50–60 workouts in which all the major muscle groups of the upper and lower limbs were exercised with the use of either machines with weights, free weights or resistance equipment,
• dance (DG) (n = 18), which the women trained three times per week at a moderate to vigorous intensity, which was defined as 60 to 85% of the maximum heart rate as identified by the calculation 220 – age for 50 to 60 minutes workouts involving activities activating all the major muscle groups in a continuous manner using basic steps and a minimum of three rhythmic variations of popular dance styles and aerobics per session with songs of a rhythmic cadence of 100 to 160 beats per minute, and
• hydrogymnastics (HG) (n = 21), in which the women trained with a frequency of three days per week at moderate to vigorous intensity, defined as 60 to 85% of the maximum heart rate using exercises that involved the major muscle groups of the upper and lower limbs with a focus on cardiorespiratory exercises, followed by muscular endurance exercises using equipment such as shin pads designed for hydrogymnastics, dumbbells, bars, plates, floating devices and pool edges with each exercise taking from 2 to 3 min to complete and the whole session lasting 45 to 55 min.

All workouts were designed according to the exercise routines from the ACSM guidelines (Garber. 2011) and the adherence to the exercise prescription was monitored by trained personnel. The workout duration and frequency were more or less identical and even the intensity was similar.

Figure 1: Changes in anthropometric parameters after 16 weeks of training (Soares Costa de Mendonça. 2014).

As you can see all training regimen lead to measurable improvements in the anthropometric parameters. Of the three different exercise regimen the "exotic", i.e. the hydrogymnastics training, was yet on overall the most effective "belly fat reducer" among the three training protocols.

Figure 2: Changes in body composition (calculated based on caliper data) after 16 weeks of hydrogymnastics, weight training, dance or idleness (Soares Costa de Mendonça. 2014).

Things look a bit different, when we take the body composition data the scientists calculated based on the skinfold measures into account: Here the strength training has a slight, but not necessarily significant edge over the hydrogymnastics (keep in mind that the efficacy of hydrogymnasticsmay partly be due to a novelty effect, i.e. new exercise = greater response | see fat mass loss after 8 vs. 16 weeks). Every ladies favorite, the group based dance exercise is yet - once again - trailing third.
References:

• Garber, Carol Ewing, et al. "American College of Sports Medicine position stand. Quantity and quality of exercise for developing and maintaining cardiorespiratory, musculoskeletal, and neuromotor fitness in apparently healthy adults: guidance for prescribing exercise." Medicine and science in sports and exercise 43.7 (2011): 1334-1359.
• Soares Costa de Mendonça, Rosa Maria, et al. "The Effects of Different Exercise Programmes on Female Body Composition." Journal of Human Kinetics 43.1 (2014): 67-78.

Compared to liquid beverages, gels have the advantage of causing lower GI stress, when significant quantities of CHOs are consumed during exercise. Bars, can be held in the cheek pouch and chewed during critical phases of a race.

The headline gives it away. Todays SuppVersity article is a brief review of the (mostly sponsored) literature on Gatora.... ah, I mean carbohydrate supplementation during exercise. The headline also implies that the usefulness and efficacy of carbohydrate supplements depends on exercise duration and the type of exercise.

As a seasoned student of the SuppVersity you will know that certain paradox involved with regard to the duration / type of exercise. Short exercise durations, for example, shouldnt require large CHO boluses, long duration exercise, on the other hand, is fueled mostly by fat - so why should you supplement with carbohydrates, anyway?
I promise to answer this and other questions in the following paragraphs, but before I do so, I would like to point out that there is as of now no evidence that the much-praised "fat adaptation" increases the exercise performance to an "Olympia" level. Carbohydrate supplements, on the other hand, are still part of the regular supplementation regimen for the 99% of the top athletes.

That being said, the human physiology dictates that the use of carbohydrate supplements during aerobic workouts that last less than 60 minutes is useless, because muscle glycogen is generally not limiting to performance when exercise durations are less than ~60 minutes.

It should not work for short duration exercise, but it still does

Interestingly, 16 out of 23 studies, Trent Stellingwerff and Gregory R. Cox from the Canadian Sport Institute-Pacific and the Australian Institute of Sport reviewed for their recent paper in Applied Physiology have found that carbohydrate supplementation and/or oral (mouth) exposure to carbohydrate can improve performance of tasks less than 1 hour in duration:

You wont fully deplete your muscular glyocogen levels during short duration resistance training (Haff. 2003)

"In 2004 a seminal paper was published showing that a carbohydrate mouth-wash (swirling 25ml of a 6% CHO beverage (only ~1.5g of CHO in 25ml [6.4% maltodextrin solution (CHO)]) around in the mouth for ~10 sec, every 7.5min) significantly improved time trial (TT) performance [in seven male and two female endurance cyclists] by ~3% (Carter et al. 2004a)." (Stellingwerff & Cox. 2014)

This effect of CHO mouth-washing to improve performance in events from 30-60min has now been replicated in several other performance studies (10 of 13 studies) using both cycling and running interventions and with both sweet (sucrose) and non-sweet (maltodextrin) caloric CHO sources,as compared to 5 non-caloric artificial sweetener placebo trials showing no performance enhancing effects.

Figure 1: Hard to believe, but true - In 2010 Pottier et al. observed that CHO mouth-rinsing, but not CHO ingestion increases the 1h high intensity time-trial performance in trained subjects.

 "All these findings have been mechanistically supported with a functional magnetic resonance brain imaging study showing that CHO mouth-washing from both sweet tasting glucose and non-sweet maltodextrin can stimulate the brain areas of the insula/frontal operculum, orbitofrontal cortex and striatum, which are involved with brain centers responsible for reward and motor control (Chambers et al. 2009). Interestingly, if the mouth (oral receptors) and GI tract is by-passed by CHO infusion straight into the blood stream then 1h cycling TT performance was unaltered as compared to no CHO supplementation (Carter et al. 2004b)." (Stellingwerff & Cox. 2014)

Studies evaluating the effects on perceived exertion (Fares et al. 2011) found similar benefits all of which support the idea that the effect does not occur in the musculature, but rather in the head.
It should be obvious that the physiological, or rater intra-muscular benefits of carbohydrate supplements increases with the exercise duration.

CHO supplementation during exercise that lasts 60 minutes or longer

In view of the fact that it is 100% logical and well established by studies by Coyle et al. (Coyle 1992a; Coyle 1992b) that the intake of carbohydrate (glucose alone, and glucose + fructose blends) can significantly improve prolonged endurance capacity and performance (>60min of exercise (Jeukendrup 2010)).

Figure 2: Overview of the performance increases in the 50 studies Stellingwerff & Cox reviewed (2014)

Against that background I will not bother you with another overview of the results, but focus on the efficacy of different carbohydrate supplementation strategies and types of carbohydrate supplements for exercise durations beyond the "magical" hour.

Glucose + fructose - the combination advantage

As a SuppVersity reader youve previously heard about the benefits of combining glucose and fructose in your intra-workout beverage. It is thus only logical that most commercially available formulas are mixtures  glucose + fructose (GLU:FRU) or maltodextrin + fructose - so-called "multi-transportable CHOs". The advantage of using both glucose and fructose is that the carbohydrates will be absorbed via SGLT1 and GLUT5 intestinal transporters.

Specifically during long(er) duration exercise, when the carbohydrate consumption can exceed 60g/h there is a significant performance increase with multi- vs. single source carbohydrate supplements (Stellingwerff & Cox. 2014)

An advantage that has been scientifically established among others by Jeukendrup et al. (2010) who found that this pattern of CHO ingestion results in ~20 to 50% higher CHO oxidation rates compared to the ingestion of a drink that contains nothing but glucose or maltodextrin.


Now an increase in carbohydrate oxidation alone does not sound like something you would aim for as an endurance athlete. In practice, increases in carbohydrate oxidation have yet been shown to increase the performance during prolonged exercise bouts compared to isocaloric glucose-only beverages. (Currell et al. 2008; Triplett et al. 2010; OBrien et al. 2011; OBrien et al. 2013).
Needless to say that there is still research to be done with respect to individual influencing variables of carbohydrate requirements. The currently available evidence, for example, is largely based on results from runners and cyclists. Two other factors / issues that come to mind are...

• the dose-response relationship, which appears to be capped at 75g/h - at least according to a large-scale multi-center study by Smith et al. (Smith. 2013) who found that their subjects, endurance trained cyclists or triathletes experienced significant performance increases, with increasing amounts of carbohydrates (0, 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 90, 100, 110 and 120g of CHO/h) during a 2h constant load ride.
  
  

  Figure 3: Mean log time to complete time trial (natural) as function of CHO treatment condition with fitted quadratic curve (with 95% CI of mean curves). Differences 100 represent percent change in performance. The quadratic function relating CHO ingestion rate to time complete time trial for 43% (95% CI = 11%–75%,P= 0.059) of the variation in mean performance score (Smith. 2013)

  The CHO given was a 1:1:1 glucose:maltodextrin:fructose blend. Results indicated incremental performance improvements of 1.0%, 2.0%, 3.0%, 4.0%, and 4.7% at 9, 19, 31, 48, and 78g CHO/h, respectively, with diminishing performance enhancement seen at CHO levels >78g/h.
  
  The optimal amount for performance (+4.7%) was 78g/h, with a range of 68 to 88g/h. However, even at 10g/h, a 1.0% increase in performance was observed, showing even a small amount of carbohydrate has the potential to positively impact performance. 
• the optimal mix of glucose, dextrose, fructose, maltodextrin or other "special" carbohydrates  - needless to say that waxy maize, hydroxypropyl distarches (learn more) or the expensive fast absorbing highly insulinogenic patented carbohydrate source Vitargo come to mind, when we are talking about finding the optimal mix of different carbohydrate sources - a mix, by the way, of which you can safely assume that it will differ according to the physiological demands of the workout and the exercise duration.
  
  One thing we shouldnt forget, though, is that next to optimal performance, optimal GI tolerance, i.e. the absence of bloating, diarrhea & co would be an important criteria the "optimal" carbohydrate blend would have to meet.

• Figure 4: CHO suppl. ameliorates  testosterone reductions in 800m runners (de Sousa. 2010)

  the impact of carbohydrate supplementation on hormonal changes during and in response exercise - several human studies suggest that CHO supplementation attenuates the suppression of the hypothalamic-pituitary-gonadal axis and the rise in stress hormones during periods of intense training; a recent rodent study shows that the provision of carbohydrate supple- ments can prevent / reverse exercise-associated menstrual dysfunction (de Sousa. 2010; Zhao. 2014)

I guess, I could come up with additional research gabs, but in the end, a list of "gaps" is not exactly useful for you. Much in contrast to a conclusion, which I am about to formulate in the bottom line, now.
References:

• Carter,  J.,  Jeukendrup,  A.E.,  Mundel,  T.,  and  Jones,  D.A.  (2003).  Carbohydrate  supplementation  improves moderate and high-intensity exercise in the heat. Pflügers Archiv : European journal of physiology446: 211-9.
• Carter, J.M., Jeukendrup, A.E., and Jones, D.A. (2004a). The effect of carbohydrate mouth rinse on 1-h cycle time trial performance. Medicine and science in sports and exercise36: 2107-11.
• Carter, J.M., Jeukendrup, A.E.,  Mann, C.H., and  Jones, D.A. (2004b). The effect of glucose infusion on glucose kinetics during a 1-h time trial. Medicine and science in sports and exercise36: 1543-50. 
• Chambers,  E.S.,  Bridge,  M.W.,  and  Jones,  D.A.  (2009). Carbohydrate  sensing  in  the  human  mouth:  effects  on exercise performance and brain activity. The Journal of physiology587: 1779-94. 
• de Sousa, Maysa Vieira, et al. (2010). Effects of carbohydrate supplementation on competitive runners undergoing overload training followed by a session of intermittent exercise." European journal of applied physiology 109.3: 507-516.
• Fares, E.J. and Kayser, B. (2011). Carbohydrate mouthrinse effects on exercise capacity in pre- and postprandial States. J Nutr Metab2011: 385962.   
• Pottier, Andries, et al. (2010). Mouth rinse but not ingestion of a carbohydrate solution improves 1?h cycle time trial performance" Scandinavian journal of medicine & science in sports 20.1: 105-111.
• Sawka,  M.N.,  Burke,  L.M.,  Eichner,  E.R.,  Maughan,  R.J.,  Montain,  S.J.,  and  Stachenfeld,  N.S. (2007).  American College of Sports Medicine position stand. Exerciseand fluid replacement. Medicine and science in sports and exercise39: 377-90.
• Smith, JohnEric W., et al. (2013). Curvilinear dose-response relationship of carbohydrate (0-120 g/h) and performance." Med Sci Sports Exerc 45.2: 336-341. 
• Stellingwerff, T., & Cox, G. R. (2014). Systematic Review: Carbohydrate Supplementation on Exercise Performance or Capacity of Varying Durations. Applied Physiology, Nutrition, and Metabolism (2014). Ahead of Print. 
• Zhao, Can, et al. (2014). Effects of carbohydrate supplements on exercise-induced menstrual dysfunction and ovarian subcellular structural changes in rats." Journal of Sport and Health Science 3.3: 189-195.