Caffeine & Bicarbonate - Individuality is Key: Using Supps That Work for You Make a >90% Performance Difference

Caffeine & Bicarbonate - Individuality is Key: Using Supps That Work for You Make a >90% Performance Difference

bicarbonate caffeine cycling endurance ergogenic ergogenics NAHCO3 natural ergogenic performance sodium bicarbonate time to exhaustion

Right vs. wrong supps can make a victory or defeat difference of >90%.

I've written about the individual response to caffeine and bicarbonate before. To tackle both of these ergogenic supplements I can actually recommend, however, based on a single study that as just been published in the Applied Physiology, Nutrition, and Metabolism is news. The study was conducted at the Derby University's Department of Life Sciences, Sport, Outdoor & Exercise Science (Higgins. 2016) and evaluated the effects of ingesting sodium bicarbonate (NaHCO3) or caffeine individually or in combination on high-intensity cycling capacity.

In a counterbalanced, crossover design, 13 healthy, noncycling trained males (age: 21 ± 3 years, height: 178 ± 6 cm, body mass: 76 ± 12 kg, peak power output (Wpeak): 230 ± 34 W, peak oxygen uptake: 46 ± 8 mL·kg−1·min−1) performed a graded incremental exercise test, 2 familiarisation trials, and 4 experimental trials.

You can learn more about bicarbonate and pH-buffers at the SuppVersity

The Hazards of Acidosis

Build Bigger Legs W/ Bicarbonate

HIIT it Hard W/ NaCHO3

Creatine + BA = Perfect Match

Bicarb Buffers Creatine

Instant 14% HIIT Boost

Trials consisted of cycling to volitional exhaustion at 100% W peak (TLIM) 60 min after ingesting a solution containing either

• 0.3 g·kg−1 body mass sodium bicarbonate (BIC), 
• 5 mg·kg−1 body mass caffeine plus 0.1 g/kg body mass sodium chloride (CAF), 
• 0.3 g·kg−1 body mass sodium bicarbonate plus 5 mg/kg body mass caffeine (BIC-CAF), or 
• 0.1 g·kg−1 body mass sodium chloride (PLA). 

Experimental solutions were (supposedly) administered double-blind (which is difficult imho, because bicarb and salt taste different, but alas).

Figure 1: Tabular overview of the rate of perceived exertion (RPE_L = legs, RPE_O = overall cardiovascular strain | left) and blood pH over time (right) during the four trials (Higgins. 2016).

The first and most obvious effect of treatments (BIC) and (BIC-CAF) was a significant increase in pH, base excess, and bicarbonate ion concentration ([HCO3−]) compared to the CAF and PLA trials.

Another new study supports lower dose (0.3g/kg) bicarbonate for resistance training: The study was conducted by a Bachelor student from the University of Tempa. The purpose of the study was to investigate whether the ingestion of sodium bicarbonate (SB) pre-exercise improved athletic performance during resistance training (RT) and reduced fatigue in male college students. In the study, ,ale college students performed 1RM and endurance tests before their own individualized RT program 4 times a week during the 4 week study. The SB group produced higher increases in mean weight used in each of the 1RM tests (P < 0.05) compared to the placebo group. The SB group also produced a higher amount of repetitions in the IDP, LP, and LPD endurance tests (P < 0.05). There was a significant difference in each self-report scale (P < 0.05) between the SB group and the placebo group. "These findings suggest that the supplementation of SB prior to RT in college male students could enhance performance," (Indorato. 2016) the author concludes.

The effect on TLIM (time to volitional exhaustion) was unfortunately less obvious - for all three active treatments, by the way. When all subjects were considered, ...

• 

  A high amount of alkali in your diet could have general health and performance benefits | learn more

  there was a significant increase in TLIM for CAF (399; 350–415 s; P = 0.039; r = 0.6) and BIC-CAF (367; 333–402 s; P = 0.028; r = 0.6), but only compared with BIC (313: 284–448 s), yet not compared with PLA (358; 290–433 s; P = 0.249, r = 0.3 and P = 0.099 and r = 0.5, respectively), 
• there were no differences between PLA and BIC (P = 0.196; r = 0.4) or between CAF and BIC-CAF (P = 0.753; r = 0.1), and 
• there was no effect whatsoever on the rate of perceived exertion (RPE | Figure 1, left).

The "average" effect does yet not tell you the full truth about the potential ergogenic effects of caffeine and bicarbonate. Why? Higgins et al. found very large inter- and intra-individual variations, when they compared the individual treatments (see Figure 2, right).

Figure 2: Mean +/- SD (left) and individual (right) response to the treatments (Higgins. 2016).

Accordingly, the scientists rightly highlight that optimal supplementation strategies require individualization. Using supplements that work for you can, after all, make a performance difference of 81%, 92% and 63% (max. vs. min responders) for bicarbonate, caffeine and the combination of both (all values relative to T_LIM in the placebo trial).

Caffeine has many benefits, but also potential downsides you should know about to make an educated decision based on science and your individual response to caffeine | learn more

Fine. So shall I use bicarbonate and caffeine or not? I cannot tell you that. Why? Well, it depends on how you react to these proven ergogenics. The only way to find out is to testdrive both - on their own and together. Plus: A study investigating the maximal cycling time at 100% of your peak wattage doesn't tell you sh*t about the effects on your performance during other physical activities like resistance training (the study in the red box, does, though).

Luckily, the new study by Indorato is not the only one to show bicarbonate (example) has, just like caffeine, by the way (example), ergogenic effects . This doesn't mean that either of them will necessarily work for you, but it is a good reason to trial both | Leave a comment on Facebook!

References:

• Higgins, et al. "Evaluating the effects of caffeine and sodium bicarbonate, ingested individually or in combination, and a taste-matched placebo on high-intensity cycling capacity in healthy males." Appl. Physiol. Nutr. Metab. (2016).
• Indorato, Daniel. "Enhanced Resistance Training Performance via the Neutralization of Lactic Acid with Sodium Bicarbonate." Student Pulse 8.03 (2016).

HMB for Every, Not Just Strength Athletes? Lower Body Fat, Improved VO2, Muscle, Testosterone in 2x12 Week Study

HMB for Every, Not Just Strength Athletes? Lower Body Fat, Improved VO2, Muscle, Testosterone in 2x12 Week Study

build muscle Ca-HMB cortisol endurance HMB lean muscle lose fat performance testosterone VO2 vo2max watt

Lean muscle for athletes? HMB could help, irrespective of exercise type - by increasing strength, lean mass and VO2. In the study at hand, all three increased and that is / was in highly trained athletes.

You've read all articles about HMB at the SuppVersity? In that case you will be aware that HMB has hitherto been perceived rather as a strength / bodybuilding than an endurance supplement. Against that background it may come as a surprise that researchers from the Poznán University of Life Sciences in Poland chose to study the effects of HMB on the aerobic capacity (Burkalec-Michalski. 2016), instead of the usual study outcome, the subjects' strength. Is that a bad thing? Not at all!

After all, there are  more sports that require optimal aerobic performance than sports that require (only) optimal strength performance. It thus makes perfect sense that Krzysztof Durkalec-Michalski and Jan Jeszka chose aerobic performance as their primary, but not only study outcome.

Learn more about the potential beneficial effects of HMB at the SuppVersity:

HMB For Fat Loss?

Hica & HMB in Yogurt

More on HMB Free Acid

Breakthrough HMB Science

HMB + Whey = Useless?!

HMB Hampers Fat Loss?

Don't worry, though! With the body composition (unfortunately only BIA data) as second outcome measure, the results the scientists derived in an experiment that involved 58 male athletes aged 22 ± 6 years, with body weight of 82.9 ± 12.3 kg and height of 181 ± 7 cm, practicing wrestling (n = 12), judo (n = 10), Brazilian jiu-jitsu (n = 14), karate (n = 6), and rowing (n = 16) are still interesting and relevant for those of you who don't care that their aerobic conditioning forces them to take the elevator.

The subjects were asked to complete dietary records every second week to ensure that they did not change their dietary habits during the two 12-week supplementation periods during which the subjects alternately consumed HMB or a placebo supplement (for 12 weeks each with 10 days wash-out inbetween).

"The experiments were conducted using a preparation of calcium salt of β-hydroxy-β- methylbutyric acid, produced by Olimp Laboratories. A single capsule contained 1250 mg Ca-HMB, which corresponds to 1000 mg β-hydroxy-β-methylbutyrate. The producer also prepared a placebo preparation containing maltodextrin. The tested group of athletes was administered 3 capsules of the assigned preparation a day, in 3 doses as follows: upon waking, immediately after training, and before sleep. On nontraining days, the participants were instructed to consume one serving with each of three separate meals throughout the day" (Burkalec-Michalski. 2016 | my emphasis).

As you will remember based on previous SuppVersity articles, the HMB dose of 3g per day (in 3x1g doses) is what previous studies have shown to trigger significant improvements in performance and body composition in even shorter times-spans (Nissen. 1996; Lamboley. 2007; Wilson. 2008; Portal. 2011; Zanchi. 2011).

Ca-HMB or free acid? There is no doubt that this is another study to put a questionmark behind the necessity of buying the expensive free acid gel of HMB. More than 90% of the previous (mostly promising) HMB studies have been conducted with calcium HMB consumed either once or, as in this case, thrice a day. In contrast to the functionality of Ca-HMB, however, the increased speed of absorption scientists have observed for the free acid form of HMB has yet to be proven to have practical relevance.

In conjunction with the previously not mentioned blood draws, the weighing and BIA measurements, as well as the ergometer tests that were performed at the beginning and end each of the 12-week study periods clearly support the scientists conclusion that...

"[t]he results indicate that supplying HMB promotes advantageous changes in body composition and stimulates an increase in aerobic capacity, while seeming not to significantly affect the levels of the analyzed blood markers" (Burkalec-Michalski. 2016).

Here, the scientists refer to the observed beneficial effects on fat-free mass (+0.2 kg HMB vs. -1.0 kg PLA, P = 0.021), with a simultaneous reduction of fat mass (-0.8 kg HMB vs. +0.8 kg PLA, P < 0.001), as well as the augmented increases in maximal oxygen uptake (VO2max: +0.102 L·min-1 HMB vs. -0.063 L·min-1 PLA, P = 0.013), time to reach ventilatory threshold (TVT: +1.0 min HMB vs. -0.4 min PLA, P < 0.0001), and the threshold load and heart rate at ventilatory threshold (WVT: +20 WHMB vs. -7 WPLA, P = 0.001 // HRVT: +8 bpm HMB vs. -1 bpm PLA, P < 0.0001).

Figure 1: HMB supplementation lead to sign. improvements in body composition (BIA | Burkalec-Michalski. 2016)

If and to which extent these effects were related to statistically significant increase in testosterone levels (P = 0.047), which, in contrast to the increase in cortisol, occurred only in the HMB group, is difficult to say (see Figure 1).

Figure 2: Changes in testosterone and cortisol during the treatment phase; * p < 0.05 (Burkalec-Michalski. 2016).

In view of the fact that the testosterone to cortisol ratio did not differ significantly in the two groups, it is yet very unlikely that the hormonal changes played a decisive role in terms of the previously discussed study outcomes.

As you can see, the study at hand confirmed that HMB is not a "strength supplement"; increases in VO2max, the ventilatory threshold and even the maximal wattage in trained athletes are an argument in favor of Ca-HMB for every, not just endurance athletes. I mean, who wouldn't want to get faster, stronger, and in better shape.

Bottom line: Even though the supplement company that produced the HMB product that was used in the study is explicitly mentioned in the methodology section of the paper, the authors report "no conflicts of interest with this work". It does therefore appear unwarranted to question the results based on potential bias. What you should question, though, is your own interpretation of the results. The use of HMB did, after all, not provide a steroid-like advantage to the athletes.

What's even more relevant than the effect sizes, though, is the fact that the benefits occurred in the absence of protein supplementation. If we assume that the differences persist and that similar effects would be observed if HMB is consumed on top of three whey protein shakes per day, though, the study at hand provides one of the most convincing arguments in favor of a supplement that is close to being unpalatable (buy caps, boys & girls ;-) | Comment!

References:

• Durkalec-Michalski, Krzysztof, and Jan Jeszka. "The Effect Of Hmb On Aerobic Capacity And Body Composition In Trained Athletes." The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research (2016).
• Lamboley, Cédric RH, Donald Royer, and Isabelle J. Dionne. "Effects of beta-hydroxy-beta-methylbutyrate on aerobic-performance components and body composition in college students." International journal of sport nutrition and exercise metabolism 17.1 (2007): 56.
• Nissen, S., et al. "Effect of leucine metabolite β-hydroxy-β-methylbutyrate on muscle metabolism during resistance-exercise training." Journal of Applied Physiology 81.5 (1996): 2095-2104.
• Portal, Shawn, et al. "The effect of HMB supplementation on body composition, fitness, hormonal and inflammatory mediators in elite adolescent volleyball players: a prospective randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study." European journal of applied physiology 111.9 (2011): 2261-2269.
• Wilson, Gabriel J., Jacob M. Wilson, and Anssi H. Manninen. "Effects of beta-hydroxy-beta-methylbutyrate (HMB) on exercise performance and body composition across varying levels of age, sex, and training experience: A review." Nutrition & metabolism 5.1 (2008): 1.
• Zanchi, Nelo Eidy, et al. "HMB supplementation: clinical and athletic performance-related effects and mechanisms of action." Amino acids 40.4 (2011): 1015-1025.

Two-A-Day Training - That's Bogus, Right? No - Increased Fat Oxidation in Endurance, 2.4x Higher Max. Volume, 2.6x Higher Time to Exhaustion in Resistance Training Study

Two-A-Day Training - That's Bogus, Right? No - Increased Fat Oxidation in Endurance, 2.4x Higher Max. Volume, 2.6x Higher Time to Exhaustion in Resistance Training Study

AM/PM build muscle citric acid synthase endurance fat oxidation intensity techniques performance RER training training frequency two-a-days workout routines

If you feel totally wasted after every workout, I have bad news for you. In the two-a-day studies at hand the rest between the first and second workout was only 2h! Not exactly much time to recover, but the idea is to "train low" (on glycogen) on the second workout.

It sounds like madness or something for the "enhanced" athletes, but an older scientific study I recently dug out, accidentally, says that "training twice every second day may be superior to daily training" (Hansen. 2005). When I tried to learn more about this topic, though, I had to realize that the evidence is scarce. Similar results have been presented by Yeo et al (2008), though, albeit for trained triathletes and cycling.

In their study, Yeo and colleagues determined the effects of a cycle training program in which selected sessions were performed with low muscle glycogen content on training capacity and subsequent endurance performance, whole body substrate oxidation during submaximal exercise, and several mitochondrial enzymes and signaling proteins with putative roles in promoting training adaptation.

Overtraining can obviously still be an issue | Learn how to check your training status:

Heart Rate Variablity (HRV)

ABEL Sports Test + More

Overtraining & Undereating

Calculate your Energy Intake!

Overtraining W/ Only 25min/day?

Reinvent Your Training!

Now, the interesting thing about Yeo's study and the reason I want to discuss their results first is that the scientists from the School of Medical Sciences at the RMIT University in Victoria, Australia used trained subjects - seven endurance-trained cyclists/triathletes who were used to training daily anyway. During the three week study period, however, the subjects had to stick to one of the following training schedules:

• Daily training (Daily - aka "High") - In this group the subjects alternated between 100-min steady-state aerobic rides (AT) one day, followed by a high-intensity interval training session (HIT; 8x5 min at maximum self-selected effort) the next day.
• Twice every second day training (Two-A-Day - aka "Low") - Subject who had been randomly assigned to this group performed the AT, first, then 1–2 h later, the HIT. 

Forty-eight hours before and after the first and last training sessions, all subjects completed a 60-min steady-state ride (60SS) followed by a 60-min performance trial. Muscle biopsies were taken before and after 60SS, and rates of substrate oxidation were determined throughout this ride and the results were... well, let's say interesting:

Figure 1: Markers of fact glycogen use and fat oxidation during steady state exercise after 3 weeks of training (Yeo. 2008)

As you can see markers of mytochondrial beta oxidation (citrate synthase), as well as the glycogen concentrations and whole body fat oxidation during the 60 minute steady state ride pre-/post-test increased exclusively in the "two-a-day" group. That's a relevant results, even though the increase in cycling performance improved by 10% in both Low and High and the performance during the HIIT trials, which were performed after the aerobic rides, suffered in the LOW, i.e. the "Two-a-Day" arm o the study (see Figure 2, right).

Figure 2: During the training sessions the HIIT performance is initally lower, but even then the increased capacity to oxidize fat and thus ability to spare gluocose pays off in slowly increasing performance markers (no sign. difference anymore) after only 7 HIIT sprints - during a race the fat oxidation boost (right) may be even more important (Yeo. 2008)

Why's that beneficial? Well, while it is not relevant for short bouts of HIIT, the significant increase in fat oxidation during the exercise test (see Figure 2, right) indicates that, the subjects' ability to use fuel as substrate during steady state, as well as longer interval rides increased significantly. The spared glycogen may then, during a longer race, for example, decide victory and defeat when the glycogen depleted every-day trainer cannot keep up with the glycogen sparing two-a-day every other day trainer during a sprint at the end of a race.

Want to learn more? At this point you may be reminded of a previous article of mine with the telling title "8x Increase in "Mitochondria Building" Protein PGC1-Alpha W/ Medium Intensity Exercise in Glycogen Depleted Elite(!) Cyclists: Training Revolution or Recipe for Disaster?". If not, I suggest you head back and read it now!

The obvious question that's probably preying on your minds already is: How on earth does that relate to strength training, bro? Well, let's see... so, in the strength training study by Hansen, et al., the authors actually speculated to observe an effect as it was observed in the study I discuss in the article I referenced in the red box, i.e.  that "training at a low muscle glycogen content [during a second workout on the same day] would enhance training adaptation" (Hansen. 2005). Therefore, the Hansen et al performed a study in which seven healthy untrained men performed knee extensor exercises with one leg trained in a two-a-day fashion (2h rest between the 1h sessions), the other one in everyday. Luckily, the study duration in this study was 10 and not just 3 weeks.

Against that background it is not surprising that the training load increased significantly. Since the latter has little to do with the mitochondria, it is also not that surprising that the increase in maximal workload was identical for the two legs. What may be surprising for those who think that training twice a day would be bogus, however, is that the time until exhaustion and total volume during the post-test was "markedly more increased" in the leg that was trained twice a day, albeit only every other day vs. the one that was trained daily, but only once (see Figure 3).

Figure 3: Relative performance increases from pre- to post-test (left) and glycogen levels before and after exhausting bouts of knee extensor exercises (right) | high = daily training, low = twice a day, but only every other day (Hansen. 2005).

Just like in the previously cited cylcling study by Yea et al, the effect may be attributed to (a) increased resting muscle glycogen and (b) higher activities of the mitochondrial enzyme 3-hydroxyacyl-CoA dehydrogenase and citrate synthase which are both involved in the oxidation of fat in the mitochondria of your muscle.

"Just One More Set" (1/2): Metabolic Response to 10,000kg vs. 20,000kg Regimen. EPOC: Do Reps and Loads Both Figure? And What About Elite Athletes Do They Need More? Find answers to these questions, here!

Bottom line: While it should be obvious that (a) further research is necessary and (b) the benefits of two-a-day training will depend on your training goals, the (older) studies presented in this article clearly support what Hansen et al phrase like this: "training twice every second day may be superior to daily training" (Hansen. 2005).

Ok, while the benefits for cyclists are obvious, it will have to be proven that the additional one or two reps or the extra high intensity set you may be able to do due to the improvements in glycogen sparing fatty oxidation will actually increase your muscle gains, but the mere possibility that training twice a day every other day could be better than training everyday, which is something I see people do at the gym regularly, is intriguing, isn't it? Comment!

References:

• Hansen, Anne K., et al. "Skeletal muscle adaptation: training twice every second day vs. training once daily." Journal of Applied Physiology 98.1 (2005): 93-99.
• Yeo, Wee Kian, et al. "Skeletal muscle adaptation and performance responses to once a day versus twice every second day endurance training regimens." Journal of Applied Physiology 105.5 (2008): 1462-1470.

Cardio After Weights! Doing Resistance Before Endurance Training Has More Beneficial Effects on Leptin, Cortisol, Testosterone and Body Composition in Young Men

Cardio After Weights! Doing Resistance Before Endurance Training Has More Beneficial Effects on Leptin, Cortisol, Testosterone and Body Composition in Young Men

build muscle cardio cortisol endurance endurance training exercise order leptin lose fat resistance training testosterone weight training weights

I can almost guarantee that the results of this study are not sex-specific. Ladies, pick up the weights fater you hit the treadmill, stairmaster, elliptical or other torture instrument you like to use!

It has been a while since the last study on exercise order (cardio or weights first) has been published. Now, scientists from the University of Kurdistan have conducted another study to investigate the effects of intrasession sequencing of concurrent resistance and endurance training on the serum leptin, testosterone, cortisol responses and body composition in obese men.

And don't worry, we are not talking about useless acute-phase data that shows no correlation with either strength or muscle gains, or fat loss (West. 2012). Sheikholeslami-Vatani and colleagues conducted an eight-week study on thirty obese young male students without continuous exercise history (age: 23.2±1.4 year, BMI: 31.8±1.6 kg/m²).

You can learn more about the optimal exercise order at the SuppVersity

Before, After or In-Between?

Exercise Order and Leptin Levels

Cardio First for Anabolism?

Large Muscle Groups First?

Combine Cardio & Strength, Right

Exercise Order Reloaded

The subjects were randomly divided into three groups: concurrent resistance-endurance (CRE, n = 10) group, concurrent endurance-resistance (CER, n = 10) group and control (C, n = 10) group (no training program). The concurrent training groups (CER and CRE) trained three times a week on alternate days for 8 weeks. The training itself consisted of which consisted of ...

"running with 70—75% of maximal heart rate (HRmax) for 10 minutes which gradually increased to 80% HRmax for 21.5 minutes [plus] resistance training consisted of 3 sets of 8 repetitions at 80% of 1 repetition maximum (1RM) in 5 resistance exercises (leg extensions, lying leg curl, triceps pushdown, bench press and lateral pull down)" (Sheikholeslami-Vatani. 2015). 

In-between the endurance and resistance (or vice versa) training parts of the workouts, the subjects rested for 5 minutes. Blood sampling and skin-fold measurements to asses the body composition was conducted 48 hours before the start of the course and again 48 hours after the last training session (learn why waiting longer for the body comp test may have been better, but no study does that).

Figure 1: Relative changes in hormone levels (left) and absolute and relative changes in body fat fat free mass and body fat % (right) after 8 weeks of doing nothing (C) or doing cardio (CER) or weights (CRE) first (Sheikholeslami-Vatani. 2015).

I've plotted the most important results in Figure 1a & b. So, let's take a look: The first thing that everyone should see is that both workout regimen had relevant health and physique effects:

• 

  Similar gains w/ weights vs. cardio first in trained men | more.

  normalization of leptin levels (health)
• slight increases in testosterone (health)
• increases in cortisol (which are benign | learn why)
• significant reductions in body fat (health + physique)
• increases in fat free mass (health and physique)

In that, the resistance training first (CER) group came off slightly better in all tested study outcomes. Statistical significant inter-group differences, however, were observed only in comparison to the control group. In view of the fact that the body fat (total and %) improvement reached statistical significance compared to control only in the endurance first, group, yet not in the strength first group, one may still argue that the difference between cardio first (CER) and weights first (CRE) was "almost significant" ;-)

Weights or Cardio? What's the Best Visceral Fat Burner + How Often, Long and Intense Do You Have to Train | Learn more!

So, weights first is the way to go? Well, I assume I should write that doing both on separate days and thus doing having 5-6 workout days per week may have even more pronounced effects on the body composition of obese young men. In the end, though, I have no evidence to prove that doing the same amount of cardio on a separate day would actually have yielded greater improvements in body composition. Against that background and in view of the fact that three workouts per week is everything that fits into the busy schedules of the average trainee, we are left with the confirmation that (a) doing (intense) cardio and weights in one session feasible and effective when the goal are health and physique improvements and that (b) if you or your clients combine both, you better start with the weights, not the cardio part | Comment!

References:

• Sheikholeslami-Vatani, D., et al. "The effect of concurrent training order on hormonal responses and body composition in obese men." Science & Sports (2015).
• West, Daniel WD, and Stuart M. Phillips. "Associations of exercise-induced hormone profiles and gains in strength and hypertrophy in a large cohort after weight training." European journal of applied physiology 112.7 (2012): 2693-2702.

First Study to Demonstrate Ergogenic Effects of Metformin - 14% Increased Time to Exhaustion in Standardized Supra-Maximal Cycling Test With 500mg of Ordinary Metformin

First Study to Demonstrate Ergogenic Effects of Metformin - 14% Increased Time to Exhaustion in Standardized Supra-Maximal Cycling Test With 500mg of Ordinary Metformin

AMPK cycling doping endurance metformin performance time to exhaustion

With the publication of Learsi's latest paper the list of things metformin can do for you has just gotten been expanded with another item: Doping!

You will probably remember my article about the potential, but unproven ergogenic effects of AMPK mimetics (read it). Well, as it is often the case, a new study is released only days after you've published a review of the existing literature. Oftentimes that's not really relevant, but in the case of the latest study from the Federal University of Alagoas this may be different. After all, we are dealing with a human study in  ten healthy, physically active, but non-athletic subjects with a mean (±SD) maximal oxygen uptake (VO2max) o 38.6 ± 4.5 mL/kg per min who performed (i) an incremental test; (ii) six submaximal constant workload tests at 40%-90% V O2max; and (iii) two supramaximal tests (110% V O2max).

All tests were performed twice once with a placebo supplement and once with 500mg of metformin. Both, the placebo and the metformin supplement were ingested 60 minutes before the supramaximal test, in order to investigate the hypothesis that metformin would increase anaerobic capacity and performance during high-intensity, short-duration exercise.

Like antioxidants metformin could blunt the hormetic response & long-term(!) adaptation

Is Vitamin E Good for the Sedentary Slob, Only?

Even Ice-Baths Impair the Adapt. Process

Vit C+E Impair Muscle Gains in Older Men

C+E Useless or Detrimental for Healthy People

Vitamin C and Glucose Management?

Antiox. & Health Benefits Don't Correlate

The authors, Learsi et al. (2015), based this hypothesis on the fact that metformin inhibits aerobic pathway energy production and so the glycolytic energy system could be overloaded during ATP production for muscle contraction.

Figure 1: Overview of the study design. The active / placebo treatment, i.e. 500mg of metformin or an identically looking placebo were administered 60 min before the supramaximal tests. The whole procedure was repeated twice, with at least 72h between the first and the second testing session (Learsi. 2015).

The aim was thus to to determine the effects of metformin on anaerobic capacity and to elucidate whether metformin has any ergogenic effect in intense, short-duration exercise in healthy, physically active men.

Is this really the first study? Yes, it is the first to prove metformin's ergogenic effects in humans. It's yet not the first human study to test the ergogenic effects of metformin. 2008 Johnson et al. made the mistake to assume that taking metformin would affect the VO2max, or ventilatory threshold. Just like Gudat et al. before them, Johnson et al. simply missed the most straight forward practical measure of exercise performance, i.e. total time to exhaustion, while focusing on things like VO2 (Johnson et al. 2008) or lactate (Gudat et al. 1997) which are nice to explain increases in performance, but - if we are honest - still irrelevant, when all that really counts is how fast you run, how long you cycle or how hard you hit.

While many of the variables they assessed didn't change, the already hinted at 14% increase in maximal endurance (see headline) is something that may make the difference between winning an Olympic medal and placing fourth or worse.

Figure 2: Changes in time to exhaustion and EPOC, both stat. significantly w/ metformin (Learsi. 2015).

What is also noteworthy is that the subjects excess post-exercise energy consumption, which was measured for (unfortunately) only 10 min, increased significantly, as well (see Figure 2, right). In contrast to what some bro-scientists may tell you that does not necessarily equal increased fat loss, but it's still interesting, because it may suggest that metformin improved the subjects' performance by increasing the supply of energy via the anaerobic alactic system, i.e. by boosting the efficacy of non-glucose- and thus non-lactic-acid-dependent energy pathways - in short: fat oxidation.

Alpha Lipoic Acid, GABA, Taurine, Green Tea, Gooseberry & Fenugreek. Plus: Metformin the No.1 Drug? Supplements to Improve and Restore Insulin Sensitivity - Read the First Installment of This Series | read more

Bottom line: This is the first human study to confirm that the AMPK-booster and frequently prescribed diabetes drug can trigger statistically and practically relevant increases in endurance performance during a supra-maximal VO2 max test. If we assume that a similar performance increase occurs in trained athletes, the Learsi study makes taking a bunch of grandma's metformin pills before the next race quite attractive. For the WADA, however, it means that they will have to watch and test for yet another commonly prescribed and readily available medication. And last but not least, for the "wonder-drug" metformin, it is yet another area of application: athletic performance enhancement or as we usually call it "doping" | Comment on Facebook!

References:

• Gudat, U., G. Convent, and L. Heinemann. "Metformin and exercise: no additive effect on blood lactate levels in healthy volunteers." Diabetic medicine 14.2 (1997): 138-142.
• Johnson, S. T., et al. "Acute effect of metformin on exercise capacity in active males." Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism 10.9 (2008): 747-754.
• Learsi, et al. "Metformin improves performance in high-intensity exercise, but not anaerobic capacity." in healthy male subjects." Clin Exp Pharmacol Physiol. 2015 Aug 7. doi: 10.1111/1440-1681.12474. [Epub ahead of print]