16 8 principles of success.
Harry Sandhu
21 How can we track body composition changes
with minimal technology and resources?
By Alan Aragon
Copyright © May 1st, 2020 by Alan Aragon
Home: www.alanaragon.com
Correspondence: support@alanaragon.com
2
Carbohydrate for endurance performance:
research update on the fundamentals.
By Alan Aragon
8
Mycoprotein ingestion stimulates protein
synthesis rates to a greater extent than milk
protein in rested and exercised skeletal
muscle of healthy young men: a randomized
controlled trial.
Monteyne AJ, Coelho MO, Porter C, et al. [published
online ahead of print, 2020 May 21]. Am J Clin Nutr.
2020;nqaa092. [PubMed]
11 Meat and mental health: a systematic review
of meat abstention and depression, anxiety,
and related phenomena.
Neelakantan N, Seah JYH, van Dam RM. Circulation.
2020 Mar 10;141(10):803-814. [Taylor & Francis]
13 A plant-based, low-fat diet decreases ad
libitum energy intake compared to an animalbased,
ketogenic
diet:
An
inpatient
randomized controlled trial.
Hall KD, Guo J, Courville AB, Boring J, Brychta R,
Chen KY, et al. [Internet]. NutriXiv; 2020. [NutriXiv]
Alan Aragon’s Research Review – May 2020
[Back to Contents]
Page 1
Carbohydrate for endurance performance:
research update on the fundamentals.
By Alan Aragon
_______________________________________________
Historical overview
Carbohydrate has been referred to as “the largest single
determinant of ensuring optimal performance during
prolonged endurance events” aside from genetic capacity
and training [1]. The ergogenic benefit of carbohydrate
was published in the scientific literature as far back as
1920 [2]. Subsequent milestones in timeline of
carbohydrate research include the 1960’s showing a clear
relationship between glycogen availability and endurance
capacity, the 1980’s showing that performance was
increased via carbohydrate consumption during exercise
[3]. The early 2000’s began a new era of research
investigating the finer details of carbohydrate amount and
type consumed during exercise to optimize performance at
various durations. Novel strides were made in the
understanding of the role of multiple transportable
carbohydrate intake. The most recent decade spawned
larger investigative strides in carbohydrate periodization;
the strategic manipulation of carbohydrate availability for
enhancing endurance performance.
levels, also referred to as glycogen supercompensation.
The classic carbohydrate loading model developed by
Bergström et al [6] involves 3-4 days of glycogen
depletion (10-100 g CHO/day; 5-15% of total kcal)
coupled with exhaustive exercise, followed by 3-4 days of
carb-loading (500-600 g CHO/day; 70% of total kcal or
more) and reducing training volume – also called tapering.
Although carbohydrate loading has effectively resulted in
glycogen supercompensation, endurance performance
advantages compared to control conditions are unlikely to
occur in events that do not exceed 90 minutes [7].
Subsequent models aimed to minimize the adverse effects
on mood seen by depletion phases by focusing more on
tapering and a more linear increase in carbohydrate intake.
Contemporary carbohydrate loading recommendations
omit the depletion phase, and consist of a loading phase
ranging from 8-12 g CHO/day for 1-3 days prior to
competition, while training volume is tapered [8,9].
In the days preceding competition, carbohydrate loading is
a technique used to attain supernormal glycogen storage
In the final 4 hours preceding competition, the objective is
to maximize levels of muscle and liver glycogen. After an
overnight fast, liver glycogen stores can be reduced by as
much as 80% [10]. This illuminates the importance of
relatively immediate pre-exercise carbohydrate intake in
common scenarios where competition initiates in the
morning. However, there is a lack of consensus on amount
and type of pre-exercise carbohydrate feeding within this
timeframe due to the wide variability of individual
circumstances. Large carbohydrate doses (~200-300 g)
ingested 2-4 hours pre-exercise has been shown to enhance
time trial performance and increase time to exhaustion
[10,11]. Carbohydrate ingested within 1 hour pre-exercise
has typically been dosed at approximately 1 g/kg, yielding
a mix of results leaning toward the null [10]. Concern has
been raised over the potential for “rebound hypoglycemia”
during exercise when carbohydrate is ingested during this
timeframe. However, the collective literature has not
indicated this fluctuation in glycemia to threaten
performance. The latter is illustrated by the largest metaanalysis on this topic to date, where Burdon et al [12]
found no clear benefit of low- versus high-glycemic index
pre-exercise meals for endurance performance. It should
be noted that there is a lack of research directly comparing
carbohydrate ingestion 2-4 hours versus 1 hour or less
before exercise. In sum, ergogenic benefit is possible from
a carbohydrate dose ranging 1-4 g/kg within the 4-hour
window preceding higher-intensity (≥ 70% VO2max)
Alan Aragon’s Research Review – May 2020
[Back to Contents]
Pre-exercise
Given the crucial importance of glycogen availability to
endurance performance, the main role of pre-exercise
carbohydrate intake is to “top off” or maximize glycogen
stores. Therefore, the best attempts at optimizing preexercise carbohydrate intake cannot necessarily
compensate for an insufficient chronic intake of total daily
carbohydrate. Current position stands recommend daily
carbohydrate intakes ranging 6-12 g/kg for competitive
endurance sports involving daily training volumes ranging
3-6 hours per day [4,5]. When viewing pre-exercise
carbohydrate intake as pre-competition intake, it can be
viewed as three separate phases: the days preceding the
competition, within approximately 4 hours, and within 1
hour prior to competition.
Page 2
events exceeding 90 minutes [8]. This represents a wide
range of possibilities, so personal trial/error is important
for individualizing protocols to optimize results.
During exercise
Position stands converge on a during-exercise
carbohydrate dosing range of 30-60 g/hour for endurance
events that last 1 hour or longer [8,13]. The 30 g lower-end
figure is not a magic number, nor is it an objective lower
dosing threshold of effectiveness. Smith et al [14] found
that dosing as low as 15 g/hour improved 20-km cycling
time trial performance. On the upper end of the spectrum,
90 g/hour has been recommended for endurance events
exceeding 2.5 hours [3,13]. A multicenter trial by Smith et
al [16] examined the effect of 12 different carbohydrate
doses in 10-gram increments (10-120 g/hour) found that
cycling performance (2 hours at 70.8% VO2max followed
by a 20-km time trial) progressively decreased as
carbohydrate ingestion rates increased above 78 g/hour.
It is important to bear in mind that the research (and thus
the recommendations) on during-exercise carbohydrate
intake is confounded by the testing of subjects in an
overnight-fasted state, which is not representative of realworld race conditions. Colombani et al [17] aimed to
examine real-world conditions in a systematic review that
only included studies involving subjects in the
postprandial/fed-state, in trials whose testing involved a
fixed distance, fixed time, or fixed amount of work, or a
submaximal exercise followed by a time trial – rather than
a time-to-exhaustion model. It was concluded that
carbohydrates ingested prior to, or during exercise would
not likely enhance performance of bouts less than 70
minutes, and “a possible but not compelling ergogenic
effect” with durations longer than 70 minutes. Following
up on Colombani et al’s work, a meta-analysis by
Pöchmüller et al [18] used similar inclusion criteria (a
meal consumed 2-4 hours prior to time trial-type testing)
and found that trained male cyclists, carbohydrate a 6-8%
carbohydrate solution (also containing electrolytes) had
ergogenic benefit for bouts longer than 90 minutes. Taken
together, these findings indicate that immediate pre- or
during-exercise carbohydrate ingestion are not likely to
enhance performance in postprandial conditions unless the
bout exceeds 70-90 minutes.
erroneously built), The specific types of carbohydrate can
impact performance through different mechanisms,
depending on the nature of the bout. Glucose ingestion was
recommended in earlier literature, but eventually,
enhanced endurance performance was found from
ingesting a combination of glucose and fructose. Glucose
and fructose co-ingestion can increase the intestinal
absorption rate of each monosaccharide (and thus total
carbohydrate absorption) by utilizing different transporters
(GLUT5 and SGLT1). This has been called the ‘multiple
transportable carbohydrate’ model,
where improved
absorption leads to increased fuel delivery working muscle
[19]. In addition to a gut/absorption-based mechanism
driving the superior effects of glucose-fructose
coingestion, it is also possible that hepatic production of
lactate facilitates increased carbohydrate oxidation rates
associated with higher work capacity. The preponderance
of evidence supports the consumption of a
glucose:fructose ratio ranging 1-2:1 during exercise, at a
rate of 1.3-2.4 g/minute for maximizing 2.5-3.0-hour
endurance performance compared to ingesting a single
saccharide alone [20].
The advantage of the multiple transportable carbohydrate
model might not be applicable to shorter durations. A
systematic review by Stellingwerff and Cox [21]
concluded that in events less than 60 minutes (nonglycogen-dependent conditions), it is possible that oral
receptor exposure to carbohydrate, via either mouth rinse
or oral consumption, stimulates the CNS reward centers,
leading to enhanced performance. In contrast, events that
are greater than 60 minutes where conditions where
glycogen availability becomes a limiting factor, multiple
transportable carbohydrate intake is warranted. The use of
carbohydrate mouth rinse for enhancing endurance
performance remains an interesting yet unresolved area of
study. A meta-analysis Brietzke et al [22] found that the
use of carbohydrate mouth rinse increased mean power
output in cycling trials, but failed to improve time to
complete the trials compared to placebo.
Post-exercise
Setting aside the issue of fed versus fasted performance
testing (the latter upon which most recommendations are
Post-exercise carbohydrate ingestion in the context of
endurance performance is of utmost importance when
there is time-urgency of restocking depleted glycogen
stores. Classic work by Ivy [23] was perhaps the first to
demonstrate the temporal impact of carbohydrate intake on
Alan Aragon’s Research Review – May 2020
[Back to Contents]
Page 3
post-exercise glycogen resynthesis after depletion. A 30minute delay (as opposed to two hours) of ingesting
carbohydrate (2 g/kg) yielded ~50% faster glycogen
repletion by the end of a 4-hour period. Jentjens and
Jeukendrup [24] recommended that purposeful tactics to
expedite glycogenesis should be employed when there are
8 hours or less between endurance events. Muscle
glycogen synthesis rates are maximized when
carbohydrate is consumed at 1.0-1.85 g/kg are consumed
immediately post-exercise and at 15-60 minute intervals
thereafter, for 3-5 hours. For the goal of maximizing rates
of post-exercise glycogen resynthesis, the collective
findings indicate immediate consumption of 1.2 g/kg/hour
for 4-6 hours post-exercise.
The type of carbohydrate consumed post-exercise can
influence rate of glycogen resynthesis. The glycemic index
(GI) of a given food is a measure of its ability to raise
blood glucose levels, and has therefore been considered a
reflection of its availability and effectiveness at restocking
glycogen. High-GI carbohydrate sources have thus been
recommended in the post-exercise period under urgent
timeframes to recover between endurance exercise bouts
[24]. Glucose has a high GI while fructose has a low GI, so
traditionally, glucose and glucose polymers have been the
prime targets of post-exercise endurance recovery. Indeed,
direct comparison has shown superior glycogenic effects
of post-exercise glucose versus fructose ingestion in
isolation [25] and within mixed meals [26]. Interestingly,
sucrose (a disaccharide composed of an even combination
of glucose and fructose, with a moderate GI), has been
shown to replenish glycogen at a similar rate to glucose
when substantial amounts (≥1.2 g/kg/hour were consumed
[27], while minimizing the gastrointestinal distress.
maintaining a high carbohydrate intake, without specific
timing relative to the exercise bout. Illustrating this,
Starling et al [32] reported that after 24 hours, an intake of
9.8 g/kg restored 93% of the muscle glycogen used during
a prior 2-hour cycling bout at 65% VO2max, while a lowcarbohydrate intake (1.9 g/kg) restored only 13%. There
was no specific carbohydrate timing protocol aside from
evenly distributed energy intake at breakfast, lunch, and
dinner. Along these lines, Friedman et al [33] reported that
complete muscle glycogen resynthesis after prolonged
moderate-intensity exercise is possible in 24 hours if
approximately 500-700 g of carbohydrate is consumed.
Individuals who do not have immediate glycogen repletion
requirements can relax their timing tactics, lift the
emphasis off of high-GI foods, and shift the focus on total
daily intake. On the note of flexibility, physical form of the
carbohydrate source (liquid versus solid) has shown a lack
of influence glycogen synthesis [24], but this is when
consumed in amounts ranging 0.75-0.85 g/kg/hour. If
consumed in amounts known to maximize rates of
glycogen synthesis (~1.2 g/kg/hour), it is likely that the
liquid form would be faster-acting, in addition to providing
hydration.
Emerging carbohydrate periodization strategies
It is noteworthy that a high-molecular weight/lowosmolality carbohydrate (brand name Vitargo) has
outperformed glucose monomers and polymers in trials
examining rate of gastric emptying [28], rate of glycogen
resynthesis [29], work output during a 15-minute cycling
time trial [30], and power output during explosive
resistance exercise preceded by glycogen depletion [31]. In
light of these findings, it is worth reiterating that the speed
of glycogen replenishment is of variable importance. Not
all competitions involve the threat of glycogen depletion
more than once in a day. Full glycogen repletion after
depletion is possible within 24 hours by simply
Jeukendrup [34] recently defined periodized nutrition as
“the strategic combined use of exercise training and
nutrition, or nutrition only, with the overall aim to obtain
adaptations that support exercise performance.” There are
a wide array of manipulations involving variations on the
theme of training and/or recovering with low versus high
exogenous and/or endogenous carbohydrate availability
[35]. The “Train High” model can be into three variants:
1) high glycogen levels; 2) high exogenous carbohydrate;
3) high glycogen & exogenous carbohydrate. The latter
variant has the strongest scientific support, and is thus
reflective of the recommendations of the authoritative
consensus statements and position stands [4,5,8]. The
“Train Low” model can also be divided into three variants:
1) low glycogen levels; 2) fasted training; 3) fasted with
low exogenous carbohydrate. Training with low
carbohydrate availability has the potential to increase the
activation of key cell signaling kinases and transcription
factors which can result in mitochondrial biogenesis and
the upregulation of lipid metabolism, thereby potentially
improving exercise capacity. However, Train Low
strategies (and carbohydrate restriction in general) should
Alan Aragon’s Research Review – May 2020
[Back to Contents]
Page 4
be used with caution due to risks including impaired
exercise performance via decreased exercise economy [36]
and impaired glycogen utilization [37], which could be an
unintended a result of aiming to increase fat oxidation
[38]. Other caveats of the Train Low variants include
reduced training quality, increased risk of overreaching,
and compromised immune response.
More recent models of carbohydrate periodization include
the “Recover Low/Sleep Low” variant [39], involving
purposeful restriction of post-exercise carbohydrate intake
to delay glycogen resynthesis. Post-exercise protein
supplementation promoted muscle protein synthesis while
preserving the effects of the low carbohydrate availability.
10 km running performance and submaximal cycling
efficiency were improved compared to the non-periodized
condition. Impey et al [40] demonstrated the performanceenhancing of a model they call “fuel for the work
required” – which combines elements of the Train Low
variants, but adds the twist of high carbohydrate
availability for higher-intensity work, and low
carbohydrate availability (and high amino acid
availability) for low-intensity/non-exhaustive work. In
contrast, Gejl et al [41] tested a periodized protocol
designed to provide ample glycogen availability for highintensity bouts, and periodic carbohydrate restriction for
the lower-intensity bouts. Despite the strategic
manipulation of carbohydrate, no endurance performance
advantage was seen compared to a non-periodized
carbohydrate intake.
carbohydrate intake (glucose: fructose at a 1-2:1 ratio) in a
608% carbohydrate-electrolyte solution is warranted
during bouts exceeding 60 minutes. To maximize rates of
post-exercise glycogen resynthesis (in cases where there is
an urgent timeframe), the collective evidence indicates
immediate consumption of 1.2 g/kg/hour for 4-6 hours
post-exercise. Carbohydrate periodization models are in a
relatively early stage of evolution, with the results thus far
being mixed but promising. It is likely that the better the
protocols can be tailored to individual preference, gastric
tolerance, and performance goals – the closer they can
come to optimization.
REFERENCES
Current position stands recommend daily carbohydrate
intakes ranging 6-12 g/kg for competitive endurance
sports. Contemporary carbohydrate loading recommendations consist of a loading phase ranging from 8-12 g
CHO/day for 1-3 days prior to competition, while training
volume is reduced/tapered. Carbohydrate intake ranging 14 g/kg within the 4-hour window pre-exercise can benefit
higher-intensity events exceeding 90 minutes. It is unclear
whether carbohydrate ingested within 1 hour pre-exercise
imparts ergogenic benefits, especially in the context of
earlier feeding. Immediate pre- or during-exercise
carbohydrate ingestion are not likely to enhance
performance in postprandial (fed) conditions unless the
bout exceeds 70-90 minutes. Multiple transportable
1. Stellingwerff T, Cox GR. Systematic review:
carbohydrate
supplementation
on
exercise
performance or capacity of varying durations. Appl
Physiol Nutr Metab . 2014 Sep;39(9):998-1011.
[PubMed]
2. Krogh A, Lindhard J. The relative value of fat and
carbohydrate as sources of muscular energy: with
appendices on the correlation between standard
metabolism and the respiratory quotient during rest
and work. Biochem J. 1920;14(3-4):290‐363.
[PubMed]
3. Jeukendrup A. A step towards personalized sports
nutrition: carbohydrate intake during exercise. Sports
Med. 2014 May;44 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):S25-33.
[PubMed]
4. Kerksick CM, Wilborn CD, Roberts MD, Smith-Ryan
A, Kleiner SM, Jäger R, et al. ISSN exercise & sports
nutrition review update: research & recommendations.
J Int Soc Sports Nutr. 2018 Aug 1;15(1):38. [PubMed]
5. Thomas DT, Erdman KA, Burke LM. American
College of Sports Medicine Joint Position Statement.
Nutrition and Athletic Performance [published
correction appears in Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2017
Jan;49(1):222].
Med
Sci
Sports
Exerc.
2016;48(3):543‐568. [PubMed]
6. Bergström J, Hermansen L, Hultman E, Saltin B. Diet,
muscle glycogen and physical performance. Acta
Physiol Scand. 1967;71(2):140‐150. [PubMed]
7. Hawley JA, Schabort EJ, Noakes TD, Dennis SC.
Carbohydrate-loading and exercise performance. An
update. Sports Med. 1997;24(2):73‐81. [PubMed]
8. Kerksick CM, Arent S, Schoenfeld BJ, et al.
International society of sports nutrition position stand:
Alan Aragon’s Research Review – May 2020
[Back to Contents]
Summary & practical applications
Page 5
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
nutrient timing. J Int Soc Sports Nutr. 2017;14:33.
[PubMed]
Burke LM, Hawley JA, Jeukendrup A, Morton JP,
Stellingwerff T, Maughan RJ. Toward a Common
Understanding of Diet-Exercise Strategies to
Manipulate Fuel Availability for Training and
Competition Preparation in Endurance Sport. Int J
Sport Nutr Exerc Metab. 2018;28(5):451‐463.
[PubMed]
Ormsbee MJ, Bach CW, Baur DA. Pre-exercise
nutrition: the role of macronutrients, modified starches
and supplements on metabolism and endurance
performance.
Nutrients.
2014;6(5):1782‐1808.
[PubMed]
Hawley JA, Burke LM. Effect of meal frequency and
timing on physical performance. Br J Nutr. 1997;77
Suppl 1:S91‐S103.[PubMed]
Burdon CA, Spronk I, Cheng HL, O'Connor HT.
Effect of Glycemic Index of a Pre-exercise Meal on
Endurance Exercise Performance: A Systematic
Review
and
Meta-analysis.
Sports
Med.
2017;47(6):1087‐1101. [PubMed]
Thomas DT, Erdman KA, Burke LM. Position of the
Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, Dietitians of
Canada, and the American College of Sports
Medicine: Nutrition and Athletic Performance
[published correction appears in J Acad Nutr Diet.
2017 Jan;117(1):146]. J Acad Nutr Diet.
2016;116(3):501‐528. [PubMed]
Smith JW, Zachwieja JJ, Péronnet F, et al. Fuel
selection and cycling endurance performance with
ingestion of [13C]glucose: evidence for a carbohydrate
dose
response.
J
Appl
Physiol
(1985).
2010;108(6):1520‐1529. [PubMed]
Smith JW, Pascoe DD, Passe DH, et al. Curvilinear
dose-response relationship of carbohydrate (0-120
g·h(-1)) and performance. Med Sci Sports Exerc.
2013;45(2):336‐341. [PubMed]
Smith JW, Pascoe DD, Passe DH, et al. Curvilinear
dose-response relationship of carbohydrate (0-120
g·h(-1)) and performance. Med Sci Sports Exerc.
2013;45(2):336‐341. [PubMed]
Colombani PC, Mannhart C, Mettler S. Carbohydrates
and exercise performance in non-fasted athletes: a
systematic review of studies mimicking real-life. Nutr
J. 2013;12:16. [PubMed]
Pöchmüller M, Schwingshackl L, Colombani PC,
Hoffmann G. A systematic review and meta-analysis
Alan Aragon’s Research Review – May 2020
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
of carbohydrate benefits associated with randomized
controlled competition-based performance trials. J Int
Soc Sports Nutr. 2016 Jul 11;13:27. [PubMed]
Rosset R, Egli L, Lecoultre V. Glucose-fructose
ingestion
and
exercise
performance:
The
gastrointestinal tract and beyond. Eur J Sport Sci.
2017;17(7):874‐884. [PubMed]
Rowlands DS, Houltham S, Musa-Veloso K, Brown F,
Paulionis L, Bailey D. Fructose-Glucose Composite
Carbohydrates and Endurance Performance: Critical
Review and Future Perspectives. Sports Med.
2015;45(11):1561‐1576. [PubMed]
Stellingwerff T, Cox GR. Systematic review:
Carbohydrate
supplementation
on
exercise
performance or capacity of varying durations. Appl
Physiol Nutr Metab. 2014;39(9):998‐1011. [PubMed]
Brietzke C, Franco-Alvarenga PE, Coelho-Júnior HJ,
Silveira R, Asano RY, Pires FO. Effects of
Carbohydrate Mouth Rinse on Cycling Time Trial
Performance: A Systematic Review and MetaAnalysis [published correction appears in Sports Med.
2019 Feb 22;:]. Sports Med. 2019;49(1):57‐66.
[PubMed]
Ivy JL. Glycogen resynthesis after exercise: effect of
carbohydrate intake. Int J Sports Med. 1998;19 Suppl
2:S142‐S145. [PubMed]
Jentjens R, Jeukendrup A. Determinants of postexercise glycogen synthesis during short-term
recovery. Sports Med. 2003;33(2):117‐144. [PubMed]
Conlee RK, Lawler RM, Ross PE. Effects of glucose
or fructose feeding on glycogen repletion in muscle
and liver after exercise or fasting. Ann Nutr Metab.
1987;31(2):126‐132. [PubMed]
Rosset R, Lecoultre V, Egli L, et al. Postexercise
repletion of muscle energy stores with fructose or
glucose in mixed meals. Am J Clin Nutr.
2017;105(3):609‐617. [PubMed]\
Gonzalez JT, Fuchs CJ, Betts JA, van Loon LJ.
Glucose Plus Fructose Ingestion for Post-Exercise
Recovery-Greater than the Sum of Its Parts?.
Nutrients. 2017;9(4):344. [PubMed]
Leiper JB, Aulin KP, Söderlund K. Improved gastric
emptying rate in humans of a unique glucose polymer
with gel-forming properties. Scand J Gastroenterol.
2000;35(11):1143‐1149. [PubMed]
Piehl Aulin K, Söderlund K, Hultman E. Muscle
glycogen resynthesis rate in humans after
supplementation of drinks containing carbohydrates
[Back to Contents]
Page 6
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
with low and high molecular masses. Eur J Appl
Physiol. 2000;81(4):346‐351. [PubMed]
Stephens FB, Roig M, Armstrong G, Greenhaff PL.
Post-exercise ingestion of a unique, high molecular
weight
glucose
polymer
solution improves
performance during a subsequent bout of cycling
exercise. J Sports Sci. 2008;26(2):149‐154. [PubMed]
Oliver JM, Almada AL, Van Eck LE, et al. Ingestion
of High Molecular Weight Carbohydrate Enhances
Subsequent Repeated Maximal Power: A Randomized
Controlled Trial. PLoS One. 2016;11(9):e0163009.
[PubMed]
Starling RD, Trappe TA, Parcell AC, Kerr CG, Fink
WJ, Costill DL. Effects of diet on muscle triglyceride
and endurance performance. J Appl Physiol (1985).
1997;82(4):1185‐1189. [PubMed]
Friedman JE, Neufer PD, Dohm GL. Regulation of
glycogen resynthesis following exercise. Dietary
considerations. Sports Med. 1991;11(4):232‐243.
[PubMed]
Jeukendrup AE. Periodized Nutrition for Athletes.
Sports Med. 2017;47(Suppl 1):51‐63. [PubMed]
Burke LM, Hawley JA, Jeukendrup A, Morton JP,
Stellingwerff T, Maughan RJ. Toward a Common
Understanding of Diet-Exercise Strategies to
Manipulate Fuel Availability for Training and
Competition Preparation in Endurance Sport. Int J
Sport Nutr Exerc Metab. 2018;28(5):451‐463.
[PubMed]
Burke LM, Ross ML, Garvican-Lewis LA, et al. Low
carbohydrate, high fat diet impairs exercise economy
and negates the performance benefit from intensified
training in elite race walkers. J Physiol.
2017;595(9):2785‐2807. [PubMed]
Stellingwerff T, Spriet LL, Watt MJ, et al. Decreased
PDH activation and glycogenolysis during exercise
following fat adaptation with carbohydrate restoration.
Am
J
Physiol
Endocrinol
Metab.
2006;290(2):E380‐E388. [PubMed]
Burke LM. Re-examining high-fat diets for sports
performance: Did we call the 'nail in the coffin' too
soon?. Sports Med. 2015;45 Suppl 1(Suppl
1):S33‐S49. [PubMed]
Marquet LA, Brisswalter J, Louis J, et al. Enhanced
Endurance Performance by Periodization of
Carbohydrate Intake: "Sleep Low" Strategy. Med Sci
Sports Exerc. 2016;48(4):663‐672. [PubMed]
Alan Aragon’s Research Review – May 2020
40. Impey SG, Hearris MA, Hammond KM, et al. Fuel for
the Work Required: A Theoretical Framework for
Carbohydrate Periodization and the Glycogen
Threshold
Hypothesis.
Sports
Med.
2018;48(5):1031‐1048. [PubMed]
41. Gejl KD, Thams LB, Hansen M, et al. No Superior
Adaptations to Carbohydrate Periodization in Elite
Endurance Athletes. Med Sci Sports Exerc.
2017;49(12):2486‐2497. [PubMed]
[Back to Contents]
Page 7
registered at clinicaltrials.gov as 660065600. FUNDING
SOURCE: Marlow Foods Ltd.
Mycoprotein
ingestion
stimulates
protein
synthesis rates to a greater extent than milk
protein in rested and exercised skeletal muscle of
healthy young men: a randomized controlled trial.
Monteyne AJ, Coelho MO, Porter C, et al. [published
online ahead of print, 2020 May 21]. Am J Clin Nutr.
2020;nqaa092. [PubMed]
BACKGROUND: Mycoprotein is a fungal-derived
sustainable protein-rich food source, and its ingestion
results in systemic amino acid and leucine concentrations
similar to that following milk protein ingestion. Objective:
We assessed the mixed skeletal muscle protein synthetic
response to the ingestion of a single bolus of mycoprotein
compared with a leucine-matched bolus of milk protein, in
rested and exercised muscle of resistance-trained young
men. METHODS: Twenty resistance-trained healthy
young males (age: 22 ± 1 y, body mass: 82 ± 2 kg, BMI:
25 ± 1 kg·m-2) took part in a randomized, double-blind,
parallel-group study. Participants received primed,
continuous infusions of L-[ring-2H5]phenylalanine and
ingested either 31 g (26.2 g protein: 2.5 g leucine) milk
protein (MILK) or 70 g (31.5 g protein: 2.5 g leucine)
mycoprotein (MYCO) following a bout of unilateral
resistance-type exercise (contralateral leg acting as resting
control). Blood and m. vastus lateralis muscle samples
were collected before exercise and protein ingestion, and
following a 4-h postprandial period to assess mixed muscle
fractional protein synthetic rates (FSRs) and myocellular
signaling in response to the protein beverages in resting
and exercised muscle. RESULTS: Mixed muscle FSRs
increased following MILK ingestion (from 0.036 ± 0.008
to 0.052 ± 0.006%·h-1 in rested, and 0.035 ± 0.008 to
0.056 ± 0.005%·h-1 in exercised muscle; P <0.01) but to a
greater extent following MYCO ingestion (from 0.025 ±
0.006 to 0.057 ± 0.004%·h-1 in rested, and 0.024 ± 0.007
to 0.072 ± 0.005%·h-1 in exercised muscle; P <0.0001)
(treatment × time interaction effect; P <0.05). Postprandial
FSRs trended to be greater in MYCO compared with
MILK (0.065 ± 0.004 compared with 0.054 ± 0.004%·h-1,
respectively; P = 0.093) and the postprandial rise in FSRs
was greater in MYCO compared with MILK (Delta 0.040
± 0.006 compared with Delta 0.018 ± 0.005%·h-1,
respectively; P <0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The ingestion
of a single bolus of mycoprotein stimulates resting and
postexercise muscle protein synthesis rates, and to a
greater extent than a leucine-matched bolus of milk
protein, in resistance-trained young men. This trial was
Alan Aragon’s Research Review – May 2020
Strengths
This is an interesting study from the ideological standpoint
of the search for a plant-based, sustainable protein source
that is on par quality-wise with the “big boys” such as
dairy and flesh proteins. The subjects were recreationally
active, and what the authors deemed to be “resistancetrained” (≥3 times per week for ≥3 months prior to
participation). All subjects were provided with a
standardized meal that was consumed ∼10.5 hours prior to
the start of testing the following morning. This minimized
the potential for confounding variability in circulating
substrates that could have influenced the results.
Limitations
A limitation of all studies that measure acute response (in
this case 4 hours after ingestion) is that questions remain
as to the longer-term adaptations in body composition and
other longitudinally determined outcomes. The uncertain
applicability of short-term outcomes is illustrated by the
mix of not-necessarily-predictable outcomes in studies on
muscle growth. There are several such studies that
challenge the presumptions surrounding muscle protein
synthesis (MPS) in acute studies. Different protein types
(plant vs. dairy) have shown similar effects on muscle
hypertrophy in some studies,1-5 Superior hypertrophic
effects of whey protein have been seen versus soy protein,6
and superior effects of pea have been seen versus whey.7 A
recent meta-analysis by Messina et al8 included 9 studies
(5 studies compared whey vs soy, 4 studies compared soy
vs animal proteins including beef, milk, or dairy protein),
and found that soy protein results in similar gains in
strength & lean mass compared to whey.
Despite the intentional objective of equating leucine in the
protein doses compared, the greater total amount of protein
(31.5 vs 26.2 g) and kcal (238 vs 108) in the mycoprotein
product potentially confounds the comparison. Although
leucine is a potent and independent driver of MPS,10,11
cofactors within the protein matrix have been implicated in
superseding leucine’s isolated effects. For example,
Churchward-Venne et al12 found that a 25 g dose of whey
protein (containing 3 g leucine) elicited greater MPS than
the 5-g leucine doses within the comparator treatments.
[Back to Contents]
Page 8
Comment/application
References
As shown above, the fungus-derived myocoprotein
outperformed milk protein in the primary outcome, which
was mixed skeletal muscle protein synthesis (MPS). The
left side of the above (A) shows rested and exercised
responses in the fasted and fed conditions. The right side
(B) shows the change/increase in MPS in the rested and
exercised conditions. In addition to MPS, 46 genes were
analyzed for their mRNA expression. Only a single gene,
(TRIM32) showed a significantly different response
between nutritional conditions, greater in the milk protein
compared with mycoprotein in the fed state.
It's noteworthy that the greater kcal load in the
mycoprotein treatment was due to slightly more protein,
but significantly more fat (9 vs 0.3 g). There are at least a
couple of examples in the literature of protein
accompanied by fat being more acutely anabolic than
protein alone. In a protein-matched comparison, van Vliet
et al13 found that whole eggs elicited greater MPS than egg
whites. Along similar lines, Elliot et al14 found that whole
milk stimulated greater MPS than skim milk despite the
latter having a higher protein dose. A more compelling
comparison than the resent study would involve matched
macronutrition between the treatments, and the use of a
more common protein supplement such as whey protein to
increase the external validity (real-world relevance) of the
findings. Milk protein concentrate, which was used in this
study, is vastly less common than whey.
1. Kalman D, Feldman S, Martinez M, Krieger DR,
Tallon MJ. Effect of protein source and resistance
training on body composition and sex hormones. J Int
Soc Sports Nutr. 2007;4:4. Published 2007 Jul 23.
[PubMed]
2. Haun CT, Mobley CB, Vann CG, et al. Soy protein
supplementation is not androgenic or estrogenic in
college-aged men when combined with resistance
exercise training [published correction appears in Sci
Rep. 2018 Aug 10;8(1):12221]. Sci Rep.
2018;8(1):11151. [PubMed]
3. Joy JM, Lowery RP, Wilson JM, et al. The effects of 8
weeks of whey or rice protein supplementation on
body composition and exercise performance. Nutr J.
2013;12:86. [PubMed]
4. Mobley CB, Haun CT, Roberson PA, et al. Effects of
Whey, Soy or Leucine Supplementation with 12
Weeks of Resistance Training on Strength, Body
Composition, and Skeletal Muscle and Adipose Tissue
Histological Attributes in College-Aged Males.
Nutrients. 2017;9(9):972. [PubMed]
5. Denysschen CA, Burton HW, Horvath PJ, Leddy JJ,
Browne RW. Resistance training with soy vs whey
protein supplements in hyperlipidemic males. J Int Soc
Sports Nutr. 2009;6:8. [PubMed]
6. Volek JS, Volk BM, Gómez AL, et al. Whey protein
supplementation during resistance training augments
lean body mass. J Am Coll Nutr. 2013;32(2):122‐135.
[PubMed]
7. Banaszek A, Townsend JR, Bender D, Vantrease WC,
Marshall AC, Johnson KD. The Effects of Whey vs.
Pea Protein on Physical Adaptations Following 8Weeks of High-Intensity Functional Training (HIFT):
A Pilot Study. Sports (Basel). 2019;7(1):12. [PubMed]
Mycoprotein, made from Fusarium venenatum (a naturally
occurring fungus, sold under the brand name of Quorn), is
reported to have a meat-like texture, and a more
environmentally friendly impact than beef and chicken.15
However, a potential barrier to the sustainable use of
mycoprotein could be its cost. Per gram of protein, at
Quorn costs 2-3 times as much as whey. Still, it shows
promise as a First-World solution. :)
8. Messina M, Lynch H, Dickinson JM, Reed KE. No
Difference Between the Effects of Supplementing
With Soy Protein Versus Animal Protein on Gains in
Muscle Mass and Strength in Response to Resistance
Exercise. Int J Sport Nutr Exerc Metab.
2018;28(6):674‐685. [PubMed]
9. Fuchs CJ, Hermans WJH, Holwerda AM, et al.
Branched-chain amino acid and branched-chain
ketoacid ingestion increases muscle protein synthesis
rates in vivo in older adults: a double-blind,
randomized
trial.
Am
J
Clin
Nutr.
2019;110(4):862‐872. [PubMed]
Alan Aragon’s Research Review – May 2020
[Back to Contents]
Page 9
10. Devries MC, McGlory C, Bolster DR, Kamil A, Rahn
M, Harkness L, Baker SK, Phillips SM. Leucine, not
total protein, content of a supplement is the primary
determinant of muscle protein anabolic responses in
healthy older women. J Nutr. 2018;148(7):1088–95.
[PubMed]
11. Churchward-Venne TA, Breen L, Di Donato DM, et
al. Leucine supplementation of a low-protein mixed
macronutrient beverage enhances myofibrillar protein
synthesis in young men: a double-blind, randomized
trial. Am J Clin Nutr. 2014;99(2):276‐286. [PubMed]
12. Churchward-Venne TA, Breen L, Di Donato DM, et
al. Leucine supplementation of a low-protein mixed
macronutrient beverage enhances myofibrillar protein
synthesis in young men: a double-blind, randomized
trial. Am J Clin Nutr. 2014;99(2):276‐286. [PubMed]
13. van Vliet S, Shy EL, Abou Sawan S, et al.
Consumption of whole eggs promotes greater
stimulation of postexercise muscle protein synthesis
than consumption of isonitrogenous amounts of egg
whites in young men. Am J Clin Nutr.
2017;106(6):1401‐1412. [PubMed]
14. Elliot TA, Cree MG, Sanford AP, Wolfe RR, Tipton
KD. Milk ingestion stimulates net muscle protein
synthesis following resistance exercise. Med Sci
Sports Exerc. 2006;38(4):667‐674. [PubMed]
15. Finnigan TJA, Wall BT, Wilde PJ, Stephens FB,
Taylor SL, Freedman MR. Mycoprotein: The Future of
Nutritious Nonmeat Protein, a Symposium Review.
Curr Dev Nutr. 2019;3(6):nzz021. [PubMed]
Alan Aragon’s Research Review – May 2020
[Back to Contents]
Page 10
Meat and mental health: a systematic review of
meat abstention and depression, anxiety, and
related phenomena.
Neelakantan N, Seah JYH, van Dam RM. Circulation.
2020 Mar 10;141(10):803-814. [Taylor & Francis]
OBJECTIVE: To examine the relation between the
consumption or avoidance of meat and psychological
health and well-being. METHODS: A systematic search
of online databases (PubMed, PsycINFO, CINAHL Plus,
Medline, and Cochrane Library) was conducted for
primary research examining psychological health in meatconsumers and meat-abstainers. Inclusion criteria were the
provision of a clear distinction between meat-consumers
and meat-abstainers, and data on factors related to
psychological
health.
Studies
examining
meat
consumption as a continuous or multi-level variable were
excluded. Summary data were compiled, and qualitative
analyses of methodologic rigor were conducted. The main
outcome was the disparity in the prevalence of depression,
anxiety, and related conditions in meat-consumers versus
meat-abstainers. Secondary outcomes included mood and
self-harm behaviors. RESULTS: Eighteen studies met the
inclusion/exclusion
criteria;
representing
160,257
participants (85,843 females and 73,232 males) with
149,559 meat-consumers and 8584 meat-abstainers (11 to
96 years) from multiple geographic regions. Analysis of
methodologic rigor revealed that the studies ranged from
low to severe risk of bias with high to very low confidence
in results. Eleven of the 18 studies demonstrated that meatabstention was associated with poorer psychological
health, four studies were equivocal, and three showed that
meat-abstainers had better outcomes. The most rigorous
studies demonstrated that the prevalence or risk of
depression and/or anxiety were significantly greater in
participants
who
avoided
meat
consumption.
CONCLUSION: Studies examining the relation between
the consumption or avoidance of meat and psychological
health varied substantially in methodologic rigor, validity
of interpretation, and confidence in results. The majority of
studies, and especially the higher quality studies, showed
that those who avoided meat consumption had
significantly higher rates or risk of depression, anxiety,
and/or self-harm behaviors. There was mixed evidence for
temporal relations, but study designs and a lack of rigor
precluded inferences of causal relations. Our study does
Alan Aragon’s Research Review – May 2020
not support meat avoidance as a strategy to benefit
psychological health. FUNDING SOURCE: This study
was funded in part via an unrestricted research grant from
the Beef Checkoff, through the National Cattlemen’s Beef
Association. The sponsor of the study had no role in the
study design, data collection, data analysis, data
interpretation, or writing of the report.
Strengths
Systematic reviews are considered to be a step up from
narrative reviews in the evidence hierarchy due to an
increased level of thoroughness and a higher degree of
rigor in terms of quality assessment of the included
literature. The authors followed the Preferred Reporting
Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis
(PRISMA) guidelines for reporting in systematic reviews
and meta-analyses,1 which is one of the field standards for
bolstering transparency and reducing bias. The studies
were ranked in five categories based on their score in a
100-point quality system. The review included 16 papers
and a large total sample 160,257 participants (73,232 M &
85,843 F), over a broad age range (11-96 yrs).
Limitations
The authors acknowledged the following limitations of
their review:
▪
▪
▪
▪
▪
Non-English language studies were excluded,
which could potentially bias results in favor of
Western patterns which typically include meat
consumption. Nevertheless, the review included a
large sample from China; so, this could
significantly mitigate that limitation.
A large number of papers with potentially useful
data did not meet the inclusion criteria. However,
this may have resulted in more focused & stronger
evidence.
Despite the high confidence in the finding that
meat-abstention is linked to psychological
disorders, the observational nature of the studies
does not allow the demonstration of causation.
Meat consumption is often inaccurately classified
in national surveillance settings, and across
languages.
All studies relied on self-reported dietary intake,
which is subject to a wide range of biases,
inconsistencies, and inaccuracies.
[Back to Contents]
Page 11
▪
Studies of lower-methodological quality utilized a
single questionnaire (as opposed to multiple
assessments of psychological outcomes) and/or a
single tool for examining psychological symptoms
over a short timeframe.
3.
The ideological nature of this topic carries inherent
potential for confounding. I’ll quote the manuscript’s
eloquently put account: “These non-intentional biases in
concert with the potential for a participant to intentionally
misreport outcomes to support his or her ideological
stances or religious beliefs may induce systematic and
non-quantifiable errors when employing self-report
protocols. As such, the oversampling of groups that are
highly invested in their dietary regimes for health,
religious, or ideologic concerns (e.g., animals rights) will
lead to biased recruitment and extremely unreliable data.”
4.
Comment/application
7.
The main findings of this systematic review were what the
authors stated as “clear evidence” associating meatabstention with higher risk of depression, anxiety, and selfharm. Associations with mood states, affective well-being,
stress perception and quality of life were equivocal.
Nevertheless, the present’s review’s findings present
savory food for thought, as it presents a victory for
advocates of meat consumption by showing that the
majority of the existing research supports it for mental
health.2-12 The research in opposition of this conclusion13,15
should not be ignored despite it being outweighed. This is
a complicated topic since there are several classifications
along the spectrum of vegetarianism (strict vegan, lacto-,
lacto-ovo, lacto-ovo-pesco). There are also omnivores who
only avoid singular types of meat (usually red meat). There
are a multitude of diet & non-diet factors that contribute to
mental health status. Abstaining from meat is one potential
factor in a constellation of red flags.
References
1. Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, Mulrow C,
Gøtzsche PC, Ioannidis JP, Clarke M, Devereaux PJ,
Kleijnen J, Moher D. The PRISMA statement for
reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of
studies that evaluate healthcare interventions:
explanation and elaboration. BMJ. 2009 Jul
21;339:b2700. [PubMed]
2. Lavallee K, Zhang XC, Michalak J, Schneider S,
Margraf J. Vegetarian diet and mental health: CrossAlan Aragon’s Research Review – May 2020
5.
6.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
sectional and longitudinal analyses in culturally
diverse samples. J Affect Disord. 2019;248:147‐154.
[PubMed]
Perry CL, Mcguire MT, Neumark-Sztainer D, Story
M. Characteristics of vegetarian adolescents in a
multiethnic urban population. J Adolesc Health.
2001;29(6):406‐416. [PubMed]
Neumark-Sztainer D, Story M, Resnick MD, Blum
RW. Adolescent vegetarians. A behavioral profile of a
school-based population in Minnesota. Arch Pediatr
Adolesc Med. 1997;151(8):833‐838. [PubMed]
Baines S, Powers J, Brown WJ. How does the health
and well-being of young Australian vegetarian and
semi-vegetarian women compare with nonvegetarians? Public Health Nutr. 2007;10(5):436‐442.
[PubMed]
Stokes N, et al. Vegetarian Diets and Mental Health in
Adolescents with Anorexia Nervosa. anuary
2011Journal of Adolescent Health 48(2):S50-S50.
[JAH]
Lindeman M. The state of mind of vegetarians:
Psychological well-being or distress? September
2010Ecology of Food and Nutrition 41(1):75-86.
[EFN]
Forestell CA, Nezlek JB. Vegetarianism, depression,
and the five factor model of personality. Ecol Food
Nutr. 2018;57(3):246‐259. [PubMed]
Baş M, Karabudak E, Kiziltan G. Vegetarianism and
eating disorders: association between eating attitudes
and other psychological factors among Turkish
adolescents. Appetite. 2005;44(3):309‐315. [PubMed]
Hibbeln JR, Northstone K, Evans J, Golding J.
Vegetarian diets and depressive symptoms among
men. J Affect Disord. 2018;225:13‐17. [PubMed]
Matta J, Czernichow S, Kesse-Guyot E, et al.
Depressive Symptoms and Vegetarian Diets: Results
from
the
Constances
Cohort. Nutrients.
2018;10(11):1695. [PubMed]
Michalak J, Zhang XC, Jacobi F. Vegetarian diet and
mental disorders: results from a representative
community survey. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act.
2012;9:67. [PubMed]
Beezhold BL, Johnston CS, Daigle DR. Vegetarian
diets are associated with healthy mood states: a crosssectional study in seventh day adventist adults. Nutr J.
2010;9:26. [PubMed]
Beezhold BL, Johnston CS. Restriction of meat, fish,
and poultry in omnivores improves mood: a pilot
randomized controlled trial. Nutr J. 2012;11:9.
[PubMed]
Beezhold B, Radnitz C, Rinne A, DiMatteo J. Vegans
report less stress and anxiety than omnivores. Nutr
Neurosci. 2015;18(7):289‐296. [PubMed]
[Back to Contents]
Page 12
A plant-based, low-fat diet decreases ad libitum
energy intake compared to an animal-based,
ketogenic diet: An inpatient randomized
controlled trial.
Hall KD, Guo J, Courville AB, Boring J, Brychta R, Chen
KY, et al.
BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: Competing models of
obesity and its treatment often contrast the relative roles of
dietary fat versus carbohydrate. Advocates of lowcarbohydrate diets posit that intake of high glycemic
carbohydrates leads to elevated postprandial insulin
thereby promoting body fat accumulation while increasing
hunger and energy intake according to the carbohydrateinsulin model of obesity. Alternatively, proponents of lowfat diets argue that high fat intake promotes body fat
storage due to passive overconsumption of energy
resulting from the high energy density of dietary fat.
DESIGN: To test these competing models, 20 adults
without diabetes aged (mean±SE) 29.9±1.4 y with
BMI=27.8±1.3 kg/m2 were admitted as inpatients to the
NIH Clinical Center and randomized to consume ad
libitum either a plant-based, low-fat (PBLF) diet (75.2%
carbohydrate, 10.3% fat, non-beverage energy density =
1.1 kcal/g) or an animal-based, ketogenic, lowcarbohydrate (ABLC) diet (75.8% fat,10.0% carbohydrate,
non-beverage energy density = 2.2 kcal/g) for two weeks
followed immediately by the alternate diet for two weeks.
Three daily meals plus snacks amounting to twice each
subject’s estimated energy requirements were provided
and subjects were instructed to eat as much or as little as
desired. RESULTS: The PBLF diet resulted in
substantially greater glucose and insulin levels whereas the
ABLC diet led to increased blood ketones of ~3 mM
which is thought to suppress appetite. However, ad libitum
energy intake was 689±73 kcal/d lower during the PBLF
diet as compared to the ABLC diet (p<0.0001) with no
significant differences in appetite ratings or enjoyment of
meals. CONCLUSIONS: These data challenge the
veracity of the carbohydrate-insulin model of obesity and
suggest that the PBLF diet had benefits for appetite control
whereas the ABLC diet had benefits for lowering blood
glucose and insulin. FUNDING SOURCE: This work
was supported by the Intramural Research Program of the
National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Diabetes
& Digestive & Kidney Diseases.
that restricted their targeted macronutrients (carbohydrate
or fat) a maximum of 10% of total energy. This design
eliminates the possibility that the targeted macronutrient
differences were not disparate enough to reveal the benefit
of either diet, which is a common confounder in this area
of diet research. Another strength was the crossover design
wherein each subject underwent each diet treatment.
Appetite and palatability were assessed, and body
composition was assessed via dual-energy X-ray
absorptiometry (DXA). Energy expenditure was measured
via respiratory chamber, and physical activity was assessed
via accelerometer. Blood ketone levels were also assessed.
Limitations
The authors acknowledged that the study didn’t include a
weight-maintenance run-in period or a washout period
between the test diets. They further conceded that the main
limitation was the controlled inpatient environment (as
opposed to free-living conditions) which leaves questions
about generalizing the results to the real world. The food
environment (in terms of choices) was controlled so that
the only choice available was how much of the presented
foods and beverages could be consumed by the subjects. In
addition, hypocaloric conditions for weight loss were not
addressed; it remains to be seen whether the ad
libitum/non-restrictive results apply to dieting. I would
note that these acknowledged limitations can be
considered strengths, as far as the research question &
purpose go. I would add to this that the duration of each
condition was only 2 weeks. This leaves wide-open
questions about the longer-term effects of each diet.
Comment/application
Strengths
This study was a fresh iteration of the low-carb versus
low-fat battle. It’s the first inpatient study that measured
ad libitum (as desired) food intake comparing two diets
A number of interesting and unexpected results occurred.
As shown above, energy intake was significantly lower in
the plant-based low-fat diet (PBLF) by ~550-700 kcal/day.
Alan Aragon’s Research Review – May 2020
[Back to Contents]
Page 13
outperformed structured low-fat diets for the goal of
weight/fat loss, at least in the short/mid-term.2-5 However,
it should be noted that even in the long-term the at times
statistically significant weight loss superiority of ketogenic
diets still lack clinical or practical significance
(approximately 0.9 kg more weight loss than low-fat
comparators at 12-24 months).6 It should be noted that the
present study’s low-carb diet was also a low-fiber
condition (6.8 g/1000 kcal vs 29.9 g/1000 kcal). This
leaves open questions about how results might have
differed if the keto was also high-fiber. Dietary fiber has
been consistently associated with weight loss7,8 and
cardiovascular risk reduction.9
The present study is just too short to be much more than a
hypothesis-generating conversation piece. Long-term
comparisons thus far have shown little to no difference in
low- versus high-carb comparisons. One of the most
compelling examples is the 12-month DIETFITS trial by
Gardner et al,10 which compared a ‘healthy’ low-fat with a
‘healthy’ low-carb diet which was strictly ketogenic for the
first 8 weeks, with the allowance of a 5-15 g increase in
carbs only as needed to arrive at what the subjects felt was
the lowest sustainable dose. The DIETFITS trial found no
significant difference in weight/fat loss between the diets.
Furthermore, there was no influence of genotype pattern
nor baseline insulin secretion on the results.
References
A particularly interesting aspect of this study’s design was
the ad libitum nature of the diet assignments. Historically
in the research, ad libitum ketogenic diets have largely
1. Rynders CA, Thomas EA, Zaman A, Pan Z, Catenacci
VA, Melanson EL. Effectiveness of Intermittent
Fasting and Time-Restricted Feeding Compared to
Continuous Energy Restriction for Weight Loss.
Nutrients. 2019 Oct 14;11(10) [PubMed]
2. Hashimoto Y, Fukuda T, Oyabu C, et al. Impact of
low-carbohydrate diet on body composition: metaanalysis of randomized controlled studies. Obes Rev.
2016;17(6):499‐509. [PubMed]
3. Sackner-Bernstein J, Kanter D, Kaul S. Dietary
Intervention for Overweight and Obese Adults:
Comparison of Low-Carbohydrate and Low-Fat Diets.
A Meta-Analysis. PLoS One. 2015;10(10):e0139817.
[PubMed]
4. Bueno NB, de Melo IS, de Oliveira SL, da Rocha
Ataide T. Very-low-carbohydrate ketogenic diet v.
low-fat diet for long-term weight loss: a meta-analysis
Alan Aragon’s Research Review – May 2020
[Back to Contents]
Given that energy intake decreased in both groups but
more so in PBLF, it’s not surprising to see the
accompanying significant weight loss and fat loss, but
more so in PBLF (shown above). With a bit of reflection
on the possibility of glycogen reduction, it’s not too
surprising to see the preservation of lean mass in PBLF as
well, while a significant decrease in lean mass occurred in
ABLC. Compounding the chagrin of low-carb/keto
absolutists, these changes occurred despite higher blood
glucose and insulin levels in PBLF. Adding insult to
injury, these result were seen despite a lower protein intake
in PBLF.
Page 14
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
of randomised controlled trials. Br J Nutr.
2013;110(7):1178‐1187. [PubMed]
Hession M, Rolland C, Kulkarni U, Wise A, Broom J.
Systematic review of randomized controlled trials of
low-carbohydrate vs. low-fat/low-calorie diets in the
management of obesity and its comorbidities. Obes
Rev. 2009;10(1):36‐50. [PubMed]
Ting R, Dugré N, Allan GM, Lindblad AJ. Ketogenic
diet for weight loss. Can Fam Physician.
2018;64(12):906. [PubMed]
Clark MJ, Slavin JL. The effect of fiber on satiety and
food intake: a systematic review. J Am Coll Nutr.
2013;32(3):200‐211. [PubMed]
Miketinas DC, Bray GA, Beyl RA, Ryan DH, Sacks
FM, Champagne CM. Fiber Intake Predicts Weight
Loss and Dietary Adherence in Adults Consuming
Calorie-Restricted Diets: The POUNDS Lost
(Preventing Overweight Using Novel Dietary
Strategies) Study. J Nutr. 2019;149(10):1742‐1748.
[PubMed]
Bozzetto L, Costabile G, Della Pepa G, et al. Dietary
Fibre as a Unifying Remedy for the Whole Spectrum
of Obesity-Associated Cardiovascular Risk. Nutrients.
2018;10(7):943. [PubMed]
Gardner CD, Trepanowski JF, Del Gobbo LC, et al.
Effect of Low-Fat vs Low-Carbohydrate Diet on 12Month Weight Loss in Overweight Adults and the
Association With Genotype Pattern or Insulin
Secretion: The DIETFITS Randomized Clinical Trial
[published correction appears in JAMA. 2018 Apr
3;319(13):1386] [published correction appears in
JAMA. 2018 Apr 24;319(16):1728]. JAMA.
2018;319(7):667‐679. [PubMed]
Alan Aragon’s Research Review – May 2020
[Back to Contents]
Page 15
8 Principles of Success
By Harry Sandhu
_______________________________________________
If you asked 100 successful people on what goes into
success, you will discover, the answers they give you,
could easily be divided into 2 parts. Many of the things
will be universally recognized, like Hard Work, Resilience
etc. On the other hand, there will be many which are very
unique and endeared by select few, for example the use of
Self SWOT Analysis that I talk about below, might not be
universally preached, but they still might resonate with
many.
Achieving success has no set, in stone blueprint. It’s a
collection of Philosophies and Principles coming
together, and adhered to with relentless consistency over
time. As cliched as it might sound, you ultimately are a
sum of your collective daily actions.
I am going to share some of my beliefs and philosophies
that are at the core of my belief system, and I believe have
played a huge part in being where I am today.
This is such an area, that if we start going deep into it, we
easily could be here all day. However, to spare you all the
agony of a 5 hour read, I am going to break each of my
Philosophies into condensed, To the Point, Take Home
Message.
So, let’s start with the most common, and perhaps the
oldest one that we all can safely agree on.
1: HARD WORK:
We have often heard the phrase, “There is no alternative to
hard work”. Well, I can’t make it any simpler or clearer.
There indeed is no alternative to hard work.
Now, this is nothing revolutionary that I have shared.
However, things become a little more interesting from the
next line.
See, as important as Hard Work is, I have a very differing
view to how I look at, it’s “importance” to most people.
I’ll try to explain to you via a simple example. When
someone says to me, “Oh, I work so hard”, that does not
impress me 1 bit. This attitude of mine might surprise
some of you.
I am not dissing your efforts, not in the slightest. However,
it’s nothing to glorify either.
Alan Aragon’s Research Review – May 2020
The way I look at Hard Work, is like breathing. As
breathing is to stay alive, likewise Hard Work is to success
– one doesn’t happen without the other. Like you can’t
stay alive without breathing, likewise you can’t become
self – made successful person without hard work.
So, that to me makes Hard Work as something nothing to
glorify, but something that just needs to be and MUST be
done.
If you went out to look, 100% of the successful people will
have insane work ethic, but what you will discover below
is, they will often have all or at least lot of the below
qualities too. And, that’s where the magic begins to
happen.
Remaining of the below principles are in no particular
order of hierarchy, but all are needed in various degrees at
various times.
2: Luck:
Luck, to lot of people on the “surface” doesn’t belong
anywhere in the vocabulary of successful people.
However, let me give you a slightly different perspective
than you might have be used to.
Many times, where you are “born”, or which “country”
you are born in, can seal your fate. For example, you can’t
compare the opportunities most of the Western World
countries present to anyone who’s born in those countries,
versus, say someone born in Syria or war – torn Iraq.
If you are born in a country like America, you already
have fortune smiling brightly on you, and you have no
excuse or reason to not make an absolute fist of your goals.
For example, in a country like America (and most other
developed countries), even the poorest of the poor have
access to basic amenities like, clean water, electricity,
shelter, food and above all, equal opportunity. However,
on the other hand, even such basics can appear to be a
luxury for many, and equal opportunity doesn’t even exist
in many developing countries.
However, in a country like America everyone is allowed
an equal opportunity to pursue their dreams, and that’s
why you have so many stories of rags to millionaires and
billionaires in a country like America versus most
countries.
So, as much as we might like to say luck doesn’t play a
role, many times it does. Sometimes just by the virtue of
where you are born, is a massive head start.
[Back to Contents]
Page 16
Sure, you have to keep putting in the work, and the harder
you work, more you increase your chances of getting
“lucky.”
But to completely rule luck out, where you were born and
especially, if there was no equal opportunity, then saying,
“luck doesn’t matter”, would not be a fair assessment in
my view.
Also, if you are lazy and don’t put in the work, you have 0
right to blame luck.
So, work to the extent, where you take luck out of the
equation.
3: RESILIENCE:
Resilience is another trait most entrepreneurs are acutely
aware of.
However, before I go any further with Resilience, I would
like you keep in mind, resilience is often confused with
being “Thick Skinned”. Although the two terms can sound
same, or at least very similar, there is a vast difference
between the two, as you will discover it in the Point 4.
Now, let’s get back to understanding and appreciating
what Resilience is, and why you need it.
We all know, on your journey of entrepreneurship,
setbacks are absolute part and parcel of the journey and the
process. You pursue your goals for long enough, you will
encounter plenty of failures. Simple reason being, journey
to top is seldom linear a line. You speak to any successful
entrepreneur, and they will tell you 20 stories of the
setbacks they suffered, and how they dusted themselves
and got back up on the proverbial horse to continue their
march towards their goals.
It is this characteristic of “Never Say Die” attitude, what
resilience is & what is needed, if you want to give yourself
the best possible chance of reaching your goals.
As I mentioned above, journey to the top is seldom linear
or smooth. There will always be hiccups and setbacks.
What will separate you from all the “also rans” will be,
your WILL and Resilience in never giving up.
Thick skin is your ability to take all the negativity and/or
slander that might come your way for the choices you
make or the vocal opinions you might have. But, if you are
clear in your conscience and know you are ethically,
morally correct, and you believe in your vision, then I
strongly advise, pay them no mind.
Many times, people will push you and prod you, only
having 1 objective; to get a reaction out of you. And, I can
tell you from 1st hand experience, for passionate people it’s
not always easy to ignore or let go of unfair criticism. But
likewise, you can’t and must not react to everyone who is
trying to have a go at you or bring you down.
Always remember, the more successful you become, more
detractors and naysayers you will draw. And every time
you react and give time to these people, it’s taking those
precious minutes and your creative energies away from
your goals.
This is of course not to say, you become a monk and never
react. Of course, sometimes you need to and must react,
because silence can often be misconstrued as guilt or you
are doing something wrong. When the situation truly does
warrant, you must react, speak up, take action; then you
must. However, if it doesn’t fit the above criteria, and it’s
just another troll, who has nothing better to do – then
simply scroll past and block the person & this metaphor
should also be applied to real life too. Likewise, if you
have energy drainers or unfairly negative people in your
life, no matter how close they are in relation to you, you
must have the courage to severe the ties.
People who aren’t aligned with your goals, vision and
aren’t supportive, or at the very least stay out of your lane,
have no right to stay in your lives either.
Some might say, “oh, that’s a bit harsh”. Well, who told
you, road to the top was rosy and easy?
You will often have to make tough decisions. If you won’t,
then you must also make peace with sacrificing your own
goals and never fulfilling your true potential
You can either be a people pleaser, or you can be ruthless
in cutting people who don’t align. However, you can’t be
both!
4: THICK SKIN & PICK YOUR BATTLES
CAREFULLY:
As I briefly mentioned above, Thick Skin and Resilience
aren’t exactly the same things, but yes, closely related
nonetheless.
5: SELF SWOT ANALYSIS:
This is one of my favorites. For those of you who might
not be familiar with this term. SWOT stands for Strengths
– Weaknesses – Opportunities & Threats. This is
something lot of companies undertake periodically to
assess where exactly they are in each of the above
Alan Aragon’s Research Review – May 2020
[Back to Contents]
Page 17
mentioned 4 areas, and then formulate plans to address
each of the points to become better prepared to make better
decisions.
there have been some fundamental changes in any of the 4
columns – for example, a new skill acquisition is a new
Strength). You must also add your good and bad habits in
there too.
One of things lot of young entrepreneurs struggle with
when they are starting out is “Clarity”. Especially in
today’s day and age, when there is a huge influx of
information overload coming at you. Instead of getting a
clearer picture on any topic or subject, you end up getting
more confused than ever.
This can be an exceptionally powerful tool to take your
self – awareness from 0 to 100 in a very short space, and is
a great tool for continuous improvement in all spheres of
your life.
Now, Self SWOT Analysis is something I really like for
individuals.
6: CRITICAL THINKING – CREATIVE THINKING
– INNOVATION - ADAPTABLITY:
This is what I believe sets apart the ultra – successful from
the rest.
Reason being, over the years I have found, many people
are just sailing through their lives, often having very little
to 0 self – awareness. And, if you aren’t acutely aware of
your Strengths and Weaknesses plus all Opportunities and
Threats you are surrounded with, then the question you
ought to ask yourself is, are you giving yourself the best
possible to chance to achieve your true potential? Answer
probably would be, no. So, if that’s the case, then why not
first identify those, before you embark on your journey,
instead of starting something, and being ill prepared.
Now, I am not saying, there aren’t individuals who are
exceptionally intelligent, have a great deal of natural self –
awareness and, are acutely aware of all their Strengths and
Weaknesses. However, for majority people, especially the
younger age group, it’s a “Conscious” effort of self –
discovery.
Now, the next obvious question is, how do you go about it.
Well, the way to do this is simple.
You grab a pen and paper, draw 4 columns and in each
column, you write down as many, but relevant attributes.
For example, confidence might be 1 of your strengths,
however you don’t know when to keep quiet. Likewise,
your gym’s size has been your strength, however you
know there is a bigger gym coming up near you, and next
thing you realize, that new big gym is your threat now.
So, now you know, confidence is your great strength,
however you need to address the issue of when to keep
quiet and master that skill. Likewise, you know till now
the size of your gym was your strength, but now that there
is a bigger gym coming up, you will need to come up with
strategies to combat that threat.
The Key to SWOT analysis is, you must do these on
regular basis (anything between 3 to 6 months, or
whenever you feel you are ready to do it again, because
Alan Aragon’s Research Review – May 2020
First, we will address critical thinking. There are numerous
definitions and umbrella of what Critical Thinking (CT)
actually is; it depends what textbook/ideology/expert you
choose to follow.
Below is what CT is to me:
1. Forming an opinion/judgement on a presented
piece of Information, situation, story, narrative, by
analysing it and separating Fact from Fiction. It is
to think RATIONALLY & CLEARLY, without
letting your Personal Biases, Likes or Dislikes
& always keeping the PROVEN FACTS as
your central guiding light & never moving
away from that.
2. In simpler language, it is your ability to think
RATIONALLY & CLEARLY & TO CUT
THROUGH ALL THE NOISE.
3. CT is not to think or look at any situation with any
prejudices or preconceived ideas/opinions –
Always coming back to RATIONALITY &
CLARITY – STAYING TRUE TO THE
FACTS.
4. CT is not to let the person’s or story’s
magnanimity cloud your thinking & subsequently,
all important, FINAL JUDGEMENT.
5. CT has no finite time line – Sometimes you might
be able to reach the final conclusion & form a
judgement within seconds & sometimes, it could
take months – It will almost always come down to
the COMPLEXITY OF THE MATTER
PRESENTED – More complex a matter – more
facts and information you need to sift through; the
longer the Critical Thinking Process would (&
should) last. True essence of CT to me is, to NOT
RUSH THE PROCESS & likewise, NOT DRAG
IT UNNECESSARILY – Ultimately, you DO
[Back to Contents]
Page 18
NEED A FINAL JUDGEMENT/OPINION TO
MAKE A DECISION.
6. You are presented with 10’s of situations every
day, that require CT of some level, and you can’t
be a slave to paralysis by analysis – Your ability to
do the REQUIRED CT & REACH THE END
JUDGEMENT/OPINION/DECISION
WILL
ULTIMATELY IMPACT – HOW “EFFICIENT”
YOU ARE. Many people will spend far too long
on trivial matters, and will then try to justify by
saying, “oh, it needed to be thought through
carefully”. For example, you go to buy disposable
paper plates, and if you spend half hour trying to
choose which colour to buy, then that is not CT.
As it does not fit the basic criteria of CT –
RATIONALITY & CLARITY – Does choosing
the colour of paper plate require half hour, when
it’s something you are just going to use once and
throw away. That’s not CT. That’s just a sheer
waste of VALUABLE TIME.
7. CT is not meant to hinder/confused with
CREATIVE THINKING – Critical Thinking is
about SEPARATING FACT FROM BULLSHIT
IN THE MOST EFFICIENT AND TIME
SAVING MANNER, WITHOUT LETTING ANY
PERSONAL BIASES, PREJUDICES AND
PRECONCEIVED OPINIONS – PERIOD.
Now let’s move onto Creative & Innovative Thinking +
Adaptability – All these 3 come under Critical Thinking
Umbrella to me. However, some people might want to put
these 3 in independent classes of their own, and that’s fine
too. Neither diminishes their worth or importance.
One of things that sets super successful people is, not only
they possess the basic universal qualities of Hard Work,
Resilience, Thick Skin, but they also are incredibly
Creative, Innovative and Opportunistic (used here in a
positive tone) and often have a unique gift of “foresight,”
as well as being Adaptive to any sudden situation.
Most ultra-successful people are incredibly intuitive in
seeing trends, and thus planning and taking ACTION
before the crisis hits, or find opportunities during crisis.
Classic Case Study could be shutting down of tons of book
stores when Amazon started creating it’s foothold in the
books segment. The companies which didn’t take notice of
the impending and unavoidable advances in technology,
eventually went out of business.
very big on gourmet coffee and Australia has a huge
breakfast culture. So, staying “ahead” of the curve and
applying Creative & Innovative Thinking, they had the
wherewithal and the foresight to launch their 1st McCafe
style restaurant way back in 1993, and since then it’s taken
a life of its own.
This is a classic example of executing Creative &
Innovative Thinking, and not being tied by certain set
philosophies. Many businesses and entrepreneurs confuse
the need to evolve with changing times with as if they are
selling their soul to the devil.
ADAPTIING to changing times “ethically” is not selling
your soul to the devil, it’s called having the courage and
foresight to ACCEPT the often inevitable.
We are living in incredibly unpredictable and
unprecedented times. Things are changing faster than ever,
and the world we have come to know over our existence,
might never be the same. For example, if you have always
done 1 on 1 PT, and you never looked into Online
Coaching, now might be the time to seriously look into it.
This is being “Responsive/Reactive” to change, which is
already upon you! The most successful ones are generally
“Proactive”, and often have the wherewithal to be prepared
well in advance, before the actual change arrives.
So as an entrepreneur, if you don’t quickly develop these
skills, you might find yourself in real big trouble – as lot of
businesses just found out!
7: PR & SALES SKILLS & ABILITY TO READ
PEOPLE:
This is something many people not only underplay, but
actually many times don’t pay any attention at all. And, I
think it’s one of the biggest mistakes any entrepreneur can
make.
People often ask me what makes a great Fitness
Professional/PT/Coach, and whilst there is no 1 concrete
definition. To me a great Fitness Professional is someone:
1: Who can deliver amazing results in the shortest
possible time and safely.
2: Is evidence based.
3: Is ethical
4: Makes ton of money.
On the other hand, let’s take example of McDonalds
Australia. McDonalds think tank identified, Australians are
Now, I’ll accept, many might not have the 4th as their goal,
and that’s fine. However, if 4th IS also 1 of your
objectives/goals, then unless you develop amazing Public
Relation Skills & Sales Skills, you will struggle to fulfil
your true potential or do justice to your amazing
knowledge.
Alan Aragon’s Research Review – May 2020
[Back to Contents]
Page 19
Likewise, your ability to read people is equally important.
This is not just about reading every person your meet, and
how much of your time and/or energy he/she deserves. It
goes much further. It goes into your hiring of staff, doing
collaborations, forming business partnerships/alliances, so
on and so forth. Last thing you want to do is hire the
wrong staff, spend 3 months training them, only to
discover they are not the right fit for your business.
work or are working, record the duration you are actually
productive, and do this diligently on daily basis for few
days, and you will very quickly discover, your 15 hour
work days, actually only have 5 real Productive Hours, rest
are just being wasted or definitely aren’t anywhere near
optimal productivity, and once you have this knowledge,
you can take steps to increase your productivity.
So, no matter what field or industry you are in, unless you
master these skills, you will always struggle to do justice
to your other skill sets.
Often it is better to spend lesser hours “working”,
especially when you are not being truly productive in all of
those supposed “working hours” and instead focus on
being more “productive” for every hour you put in.
8: TIME MANAGEMENT:
This is might seem an obvious one, but I think this one is
particularly pertinent to the Fitness Industry, especially the
Fit Pros who are very active on Social Media.
How you choose to use your time and how efficiently you
exercise those choices, will often be the difference in your
productivity, and ultimately, it will often determine the
level of success you attain!
Let me share a little something. The 2 of the greatest facts
pertaining to humans are:
1: Death – It’s inevitable – at least, till now.
2: TIME – We all have “FINITE” amount of Time on this
earth – Every moment that is passed, is NEVER COMING
BACK – As well as, each day only has 24 Hours – That is
a FINITE period too.
Formula to success is unfortunately not easy to condense,
and thousand page books have been written on this subject,
I still hope you get something out of this piece, that can
add a positive addition to your day to day life, and
ultimately in your dream chasing.
So, it’s up to us, how we CHOOSE to spend each day.
Harry Sandhu
Team Boss
_______________________________________________
I see so many Fit Pros engaging in unnecessary fights on
the social media, when they could be utilizing that time to
drive their business forward or be spending quality time
with their loved ones. Now, we all have been guilty of this
– me as well, just as much as anyone else. However, not
being “aware” of it and not trying to improve utilization of
time you have is a huge disservice to your goals.
All the best in your endeavors.
Harry is a Contest Prep Coach, who
holds an Under Grad in Exercise &
Sports Science, with Major in
Sports Nutrition from University of
Deakin, Melbourne. Australia.
Editor’s note: more information
can be found at Harry’s website,
teambossfitnessacademy.com
Likewise, so many people are spending one of the most
valuable commodities available to humans, on absolutely
mindless things which add no short, or long term value.
I would like to share a simple strategy to
“PRODUCTIVITY”, because ultimately,
many hours you spend “thinking” you are
key is, out of those hours, how many hours
truly productive.
improve your
it’s not how
working. The
are you being
You might think, you just spent 2 hours on the laptop
working, but out of those 2 hours, if you spent 1 hour just
trolling the internet, the question you must ask yourself is,
“were you truly productive for those entire 2 hours, or
you just ticked a box?”.
To address this, what I recommend is to have a timer on
your desk, or wear a watch. Each time you sit down to
Alan Aragon’s Research Review – May 2020
[Back to Contents]
Page 20
How can we track body composition changes
with minimal technology and resources?
By Alan Aragon
_______________________________________________
I’m frequently asked what’s the “best” way to measure
body composition. The technical answer is best quoted
from the ISSN position stand on diets & body
composition,1in an excerpt from the summary points
which I vividly remember authoring:
“All body composition assessment methods have
strengths and limitations. Thus, the selection of the
method should weigh practicality and consistency with
the prohibitive potential of cost, invasiveness,
availability, reproducibility, and technician skill
requirements. Ultimately, the needs of the client,
patient, or research question should be matched with
the
chosen
method;
individualization
and
environmental considerations are essential.”
Given the above, it’s possible to track progress with lowtech, economical methods as effectively as it is with hightech, expensive instrumentation. All methods have pros
and cons. Lately, I’ve received a lot of questions about
how to track body composition with minimal resources
and technology. My answer is as simple as weight, waist,
and strength. The technology to assess bodyweight, waist
girth, and strength requires no special purchases since
most people already own a bodyweight scale and
measuring tape. A gym membership or home gym would
be the biggest barrier to strength training, but with gyms
reopening gradually, and home gym building becoming
more popular, this barrier is not necessarily a deal breaker.
A multitude of bodyweight scales are available. They are
all pretty straight-forward in their function. If you’re
somewhat OCD, you can buy two of them to see how they
both track, since it takes only seconds to weigh yourself.
Weighing should be done daily, first thing in the morning,
after voiding your bladder. A weekly average (7 days of
data divided by 7) will give you a more accurate picture of
progress, since weight can fluctuate up and down
sometimes on a day-by-day basis. It’s the longer-term
trend that counts.
Measuring waist girth is a matter of being consistent with
how and where on your body it’s done. The objective is to
standardize the protocol so you can avoid potential
confounders such as variance in lung content,
gastrointestinal content, and even muscular contraction vs
relaxation level. Once again, this measurement should be
taken first thing in the morning after voiding the bladder.
After that, blow out as much air as you can, then tighten
your core (or you can think of tightening your “abs’ while
remaining upright). This standardizes the relative
contraction level of measurement, since it’s possible to
introduce significant variance if you “pooch” your
stomach out compared to tightening it up. The objective is
to tighten it up as much as possible, and do the same thing
each time you take the measurement. It’s important to keep
the location of the measurement consistent each time. I use
the very convenient landmark of the navel, and don’t slant
the tape up or down when you take the measurement; keep
the tape parallel to the floor. Measure waist girth weekly,
take a monthly average. If you want to measure this daily
and take a weekly average, I’m not gonna stop you, but
note that the psychological “weight” of such small changes
can be fatiguing to track; it’s like watching paint dry or
grass grow.
I was in private counseling practice for at least a decade. I
had my own office space where I took body comp
assessments using the scale and calipers. I preferred
calipers because I enjoyed the autonomy and control of
choosing the exact subcutaneous locations to track, and I
had enough experience to be very consistent with the
method. However, when I shifted my practice to an online
model, I had clients use the scale, tape, and strength as a
body composition progress gauge. It worked like a charm.
Let’s talk about each component.
Tracking strength changes is a good ballpark indicator of
changes in lean mass. If you’re trending upward in
strength, size gains will not be far behind. If you’re
trending down in strength, lean mass losses will follow.
Note that these changes are specific to the muscles
affected by the exercises you’re tracking. In other words, if
you’re trending up in bicep curl strength, you’re not
automatically going to gain size in the quads, unless of
course strength is trending up in quad training as well.
Alan Aragon’s Research Review – May 2020
[Back to Contents]
Page 21
Tracking strength which is most reflective of lean mass
flux would be the performance of multiple repetitions.
Single-repetition max testing is not necessary, nor is it as
accurate a reflection of potential changes in muscular size
due to its heavy reliance on neurological facilitation. What
better reflects increases in muscle mass are upward trends
in the amount of weight you can use in approximately the
6-12 rep range (5-10 rep range can work for this as well).
This does not mean that all other rep ranges are off the
table to use as proxies for presuming the loss or gain of
lean mass. If you’d rather track your strength changes in
the 10-15 rep range, that can work as well. Let me be clear
that muscular size gains are possible from training in a
wide repetition range.2 In my observations, tracking
strength in rep ranges much higher than 15 or much lower
than 5 do not provide the best surrogates for reflecting
changes in muscular size. I would also add that you don’t
have to track the strength gains for every single lift – only
the lifts involving the muscles you care most about either
growing or maintaining the size of. And note that its
doesn’t have to track all of the exercises you do for those
muscles. Just track the strength trend of one of the
exercises per muscle group you’d like to keep an eye on.
Strength changes are best judged on a monthly basis.
Keep in mind are that daily changes tell you next to
nothing. Weekly changes give you hints at possible trends.
Monthly differences tell the real story of what direction
you’re headed. Adding an extra wrinkle here, you may
choose to take monthly pictures to keep a visual log of
progress in addition to weight, waist, & strength. The best
way to take progress pics is to wear the same clothing
(underwear or bathing suit), same lighting, same location,
and same posture. Take a minimum of front & back view.
Take a side view shot if you specifically want a visual
tracking of changes in the silhouette of your glutes and/or
abdomen. If you want to use the tape to track limb and/or
chest and/or hip circumference in addition to your waist
circumference, be my guest. Just remember that waist
circumference is the girth measurement most closely
reflective of general changes in fat mass.
Ant there you have it: low-tech, high-value progress
tracking that doesn’t require a specific facility or high
degree of technical expertise. Good news for online
practitioners or coaches – you don’t have to be physically
there to help your clients track their body composition
progress.
References:
With the finer points of weight, waist, & strength out of
the way, here’s how to interpret your data:
1. Aragon AA, Schoenfeld BJ, Wildman R, et al.
International society of sports nutrition position stand:
diets and body composition. J Int Soc Sports Nutr.
2017;14:16. Published 2017 Jun 14. [PubMed]
2. Schoenfeld BJ, Grgic J, Ogborn D, Krieger JW.
Strength and Hypertrophy Adaptations Between Lowvs. High-Load Resistance Training: A Systematic
Review and Meta-analysis. J Strength Cond Res.
2017;31(12):3508‐3523. [PubMed]
Alan Aragon’s Research Review – May 2020
[Back to Contents]
Page 22
“You have within you right now, everything you need to
deal with whatever the world can throw at you.”
– Brian Tracy
If you have any questions, comments, suggestions, bones
of contention, cheers, jeers, guest articles you’d like to
submit
for
consideration,
send
it
over
to
support@alanaragon.com.
Alan Aragon’s Research Review – May 2020
[Back to Contents]
Page 23