Understanding Muscle Supplements

[nicknite86]

Muscle Building means hard work, and like many other things in life there is no quick fix. However, hard work and dedication isn’t always the miracle solution for gaining muscle mass, because no matter how hard some people try they just can’t get the right amount of muscle or that “bodybuild” they are looking for. This is where Bodybuilding supplements come in. In regards to buying supplements and using them, there is no one all powerful supplement, and it takes using about a few to get an effective combination. Of course eating naturally and supplementing with natural foods is the best way, but with the massive wave of supplements out in the market it is worth doing your research to see which ones can be safe and effective for taking training to another level.

Here are three categories for bodybuilding supplements that are important to know in order to get the best out of them.

1.) Muscle Recovery

2.) Muscle Building

3.) Energy Production

So, what are the best supplements in each category?

Ultimately it comes down to what has been time tested and is scientifically proven.

Muscle Recovery-

After getting all pumped in the gym this is the best time to recover and nurture your muscles in order to enable the growth process. In other words, the way a muscle grows in size is during the phase of recovering. After working out your body automatically repairs and protects its own muscle by making more of it, and so this continues as you exercise more and more until the repairing process builds muscle to the point of attaining a ripped appearance. Supplementing this repairing process is exactly what glucosamine does. In essence, the supplement glucosamine aids recovery of your muscles from heavy workouts. There are literally hundreds of glucosamine products out in the market, so it really comes down to research and learning more about the body to get the right one for a current workout stage.

Muscle Building-

Supplementation in building muscle is really overrated in regards to supplement advertising. The reality is a routine for building muscle requires a sufficient amount of protein on a regular basis. Protein; in the supplement world, is the fuel and builder of muscle and could be taken through many means including protein foods. Eggs, chicken, vegetables, fruits, red meat, protein powders, or making your own meal replacements are all great ways to get protein. Also, there is creatine, which is possibly an enormous contributor to building muscle mass when combined with lots of protein. Creatine could be found in supplements, pills, protein powders, and meal replacements. Creatine is typically found in the body’s skeletal muscle system and therefore getting amounts of this with the necessity that is protein, then ultimately these could be a potent combination for gaining muscle.

Energy Production-

When it comes to energy there is almost nothing that can surpass carbohydrates. Carbohydrates can come from many foods and sources, two of them being breads and pasta. What carbohydrates do is provide energy and stamina during a workout, so it is much like a source of fuel. In addition to foods carbohydrates could also be found in various formulas such as that of powder-like supplements being added to liquid.

These are the supplements that anyone can use to increase performance and build greater looking muscles, not just bodybuilders.

[mobsterone]

As someone who sells supplements I have some knowledge in this area. You've made some very basic and fundemental mistakes.

Points 1 and 2 are the same. Indeed you almost say as much. One repairs and recovers at the same time and this process is what builds. They are not separate processes.

Glucosomine is NOT a muscle recovery product. It is used for tendon and connective tissue repair. Some say it's a joint formula product but it doesn't build or repair bone or joints per se.

Creatine does not build muscle in and of itself. It acts in two ways. The first is a cell volumizer (in simple terms water is pulled into muscle cells thus increasing their size. The second is by it's effect on ATP which, when released during exercise, allows for more intense training. Like coffee it is an indirect action which helps build muscle.

Even your comment on carbs is wrong. Fat is better. Gram for gram fats have more energy and are just as easily utilized. And carbs are not 'much like' a fuel source they ARE a fuel source. Too much fat, as with too much carbs or protein, is bad. But used right they can and do act as well in fueling a good workout. You gave no examples of 'good' carb products (waxy maize starch, maltodextrin and others would have been useful examples).

[The Natural]

Steve knows his stuff about supplements and nutrition, man. I'd listen to him.

[mobsterone]

Cheers Rex. I'm a big believer in the KISS principle but unfortunately our new member has managed to avoid that one.

[The Mac]

Of course eating naturally and supplementing with natural foods is the best way, but with the massive wave of supplements out in the market it is worth doing your research to see which ones can be safe and effective for taking training to another level.

Does this sentence even make sense?

[mobsterone]

One doesn't supplement with natural foods. One just eats. At least in the context in which it was suggested. So the first line is nonsensical.

Edited May 6, 2010 by mobsterone

[JohanB]

As someone who sells supplements I have some knowledge in this area. You've made some very basic and fundemental mistakes.

Points 1 and 2 are the same. Indeed you almost say as much. One repairs and recovers at the same time and this process is what builds. They are not separate processes.

Glucosomine is NOT a muscle recovery product. It is used for tendon and connective tissue repair. Some say it's a joint formula product but it doesn't build or repair bone or joints per se.

Creatine does not build muscle in and of itself. It acts in two ways. The first is a cell volumizer (in simple terms water is pulled into muscle cells thus increasing their size. The second is by it's effect on ATP which, when released during exercise, allows for more intense training. Like coffee it is an indirect action which helps build muscle.

Even your comment on carbs is wrong. Fat is better. Gram for gram fats have more energy and are just as easily utilized. And carbs are not 'much like' a fuel source they ARE a fuel source. Too much fat, as with too much carbs or protein, is bad. But used right they can and do act as well in fueling a good workout. You gave no examples of 'good' carb products (waxy maize starch, maltodextrin and others would have been useful examples).

As some one with a masters degree in sportsnutrition, a Phd i nutrition (dietitian) and years of experience of working with athletes I must point out that you´re wrong on the carb-fat statement.

Fatty acids and carbs absolutley differ to a high degree in terms of oxidation rates. They also require different cellular enviroments for producing ATP. Carbs are way easier for the cells to utilise as energy as for one, they do not need to be "cut down" in smaller pieces the same way fatty acids need to be.

Sorry mobster..

[mobsterone]

Isn't there some truth to the idea that the body will adapt and, in time, become more efficient? Hence the high protein, moderate fat, low carb Atkin's etc diets?

It's also been argued that we have adapted to higher carb diets (man being quite good at making do with what is available - hence our Omnivore status). Much has been made of ancient diets which mirror those of caveman over our modern selves.

One further point, applicable in its way to the SAD reference is that the high grain diet is recommended by a country we produces lots of grains. Other countries recommend what they produce well as opposed to what might actually be beneficial. This especially applies to the weight trained athlete. Are we eating in a way that makes us better athletes or as recommended.

Edited May 7, 2010 by mobsterone

[naturalstrength]

As someone who sells supplements I have some knowledge in this area. You've made some very basic and fundemental mistakes.

Points 1 and 2 are the same. Indeed you almost say as much. One repairs and recovers at the same time and this process is what builds. They are not separate processes.

Glucosomine is NOT a muscle recovery product. It is used for tendon and connective tissue repair. Some say it's a joint formula product but it doesn't build or repair bone or joints per se.

Creatine does not build muscle in and of itself. It acts in two ways. The first is a cell volumizer (in simple terms water is pulled into muscle cells thus increasing their size. The second is by it's effect on ATP which, when released during exercise, allows for more intense training. Like coffee it is an indirect action which helps build muscle.

Even your comment on carbs is wrong. Fat is better. Gram for gram fats have more energy and are just as easily utilized. And carbs are not 'much like' a fuel source they ARE a fuel source. Too much fat, as with too much carbs or protein, is bad. But used right they can and do act as well in fueling a good workout. You gave no examples of 'good' carb products (waxy maize starch, maltodextrin and others would have been useful examples).

As some one with a masters degree in sportsnutrition, a Phd i nutrition (dietitian) and years of experience of working with athletes I must point out that you´re wrong on the carb-fat statement.

Fatty acids and carbs absolutley differ to a high degree in terms of oxidation rates. They also require different cellular enviroments for producing ATP. Carbs are way easier for the cells to utilise as energy as for one, they do not need to be "cut down" in smaller pieces the same way fatty acids need to be.

Sorry mobster..

Ouch!!!!!!!!!

[Guest Bullitt]

Three words:

Chicken Fried Bacon! It's what's for dinner.

[Oak_]

As other said Glucosamine is not really doing what you are claiming it does. Glucosamine is for joints, I think you are referring to Glutamine.

If you are referring to Glutamine, I have not read much factual evidence that it really is worth a damn. I think Creatine is the only supplement out there that has been scientifically tested enough to show results.

Eating big with lots of protein intake is probably the best thing you can do for muscle repair and recovery.

[mobsterone]

As other said Glucosamine is not really doing what you are claiming it does. Glucosamine is for joints, I think you are referring to Glutamine.

If you are referring to Glutamine, I have not read much factual evidence that it really is worth a damn. I think Creatine is the only supplement out there that has been scientifically tested enough to show results.

Eating big with lots of protein intake is probably the best thing you can do for muscle repair and recovery.

It's not. It is, as I said, for connective tissue. The joint itself is bone etc and Glucosomine isn't much cop. Calcium might be. In reality most hard training athletes cause damage to their joints and, at best, get relief from the discomfort with joint formulas.

[naturalstrength]

As other said Glucosamine is not really doing what you are claiming it does. Glucosamine is for joints, I think you are referring to Glutamine.

If you are referring to Glutamine, I have not read much factual evidence that it really is worth a damn. I think Creatine is the only supplement out there that has been scientifically tested enough to show results.

Eating big with lots of protein intake is probably the best thing you can do for muscle repair and recovery.

It's not. It is, as I said, for connective tissue. The joint itself is bone etc and Glucosomine isn't much cop. Calcium might be. In reality most hard training athletes cause damage to their joints and, at best, get relief from the discomfort with joint formulas.

Technically speaking, if it's for connective tissue, than you can argue it IS for joints, since the ACL, teres ligament, etc. are indeed connective tissues(ie:ligaments) found in specific joint cavities

As far as whether Chondroitin/Glucosamine work as supplements for joint health, the human medical literature is neither here nor there on its stance. I think that both Chondroitin/Glucosamine are garbage, as are most supplements on the market (remember, that suplements are a multi billion dollar a year industry.)

http://www.free-press-release.com/news-grab-your-piece-of-the-multibillion-dollar-supplement-industry-in-2010-1272956784.html

I have, however, seen excellent evidence for improved joint mobility in canine patients suffering from osteoarthritis(OA) and hip dyplasia when using Chondroitin/Glucosamine supplemented with Methylsulfonylmethane(MSM), and its my belief that the MSM is the truly effective ingredient, since dogs can't throw the "placebo" card at you. Whether or not the MSM has synergistic principles, I can't tell for sure....

Edited May 8, 2010 by naturalstrength

[mobsterone]

From a purely personal stance if I do not take it in about 10 days or less I can barely lay on one side or another when trying to sleep. It's equally as efficient in clearing up once in use.

One issue with recommended amounts is many companies seem to completely miss the 1500mg per day optimal dose. Examples inc supermarket brands stating that the dose is 300mg a day

[naturalstrength]

One issue with recommended amounts is many companies seem to completely miss the 1500mg per day optimal dose. Examples inc supermarket brands stating that the dose is 300mg a day

This is a good point Steve! 300mg does appear to be a very low dose rate, and I too find the 1500mg a much more effective dosing regiment.

[Magnus]

Three words:

Chicken Fried Bacon! It's what's for dinner.