Jump to content
STENDEC

Proven Non-Hormonal Anabolic Agents

Recommended Posts

The fat loss adjuvants thread reminded me that I wanted to start a similar thread for muscle builders.

 

So here are the rules, for something to make the cut, it has to be non-hormonal/steroidal, legal OTC in the US and been shown to increase lean mass in humans when taken orally in at least one controlled study.

 

No anecdotal reports, no rat or test-tube studies. What really works in real humans?

 

Here is what I can come up with:

 

Creatine

BCAA/HMB

Whey protein

 

If you have others, post them with the supporting science.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You forgot to mention it has to increase LBM without exercise.

 

It has to increase LBM more than exercise alone...if it increases LBM without exercise at all, that is just gravy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Can't we count beta alanine?

 

no, we can't. the latest meta review (http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00726-011-1200-z) shows that it is actually one of the most overrated "ergogenics" and it does NADA to build muscle (and with an average +2.x% increase in performance in the >60s realm, even the 2ndary effects are probably negligible)

 

if we counted BA, we would have to count baking soda x2 ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Betaine?

 

Appears an unlikely candidate.

 

J Strength Cond Res. 2011 Aug;25(8):2235-41.

Effect of 15 days of betaine ingestion on concentric and eccentric force outputs during isokinetic exercise.

Hoffman JR, Ratamess NA, Kang J, Gonzalez AM, Beller NA, Craig SA.

Source

 

Sport and Exercise Science, The University of Central Florida, Orlando, Florida, USA. jrhoffma@mail.ucf.edu

Abstract

 

The purpose of this study was to examine the efficacy of 15 days of betaine supplementation on peak concentric (CON) and eccentric (ECC) force during isokinetic exercise in active college-aged men. Eleven men volunteered for this study (21.7 ± 5.1 years; height: 178.5 ± 6.4 cm; body mass: 79.8 ± 10.3 kg). Subjects were randomly assigned to either a supplement (BET) or placebo (PL) group. Supplementation occurred for 15 days. Subjects reported to the Human Performance Laboratory on 5 occasions during this period, separated by 72 hours, for a testing and exercise session on an isokinetic chest press device. After each exercise protocol, subjects rated their fatigue and muscle soreness on a 15-cm visual analog scale. Subjects then consumed no daily BET for 4 weeks but maintained familiarity with the exercise device once per week. After the washout period, subjects resumed the BET protocol using the opposite drink and repeated the same 15-day protocol. No differences were noted in maximum CON force output between pre (335.9 ± 78.3 and 321.6 ± 63.6 N) and post (330.3 ± 74.8 and 330.2 ± 71.6 N) workouts in both BET and PL, respectively. In addition, no differences were noted in maximum ECC force output between pre (352.0 ± 90.6 and 324.4 ± 85.2 N) and post (353.2 ± 98.2 and 366.9 ± 128.5 N) workouts in BET and PL, respectively. No differences in subjective measures of soreness and fatigue were seen, but a significant reduction in Δ fatigue was observed in BET compared to PL. In conclusion, 15 days of betaine supplementation did not increase peak CON or ECC force outputs during an isokinetic chest press but did appear to reduce subjective measures of fatigue to the exercise protocol.

 

PMID:21747291

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
no' date=' we can't. the latest meta review ([url']http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00726-011-1200-z[/url]) shows that it is actually one of the most overrated "ergogenics" and it does NADA to build muscle (and with an average +2.x% increase in performance in the >60s realm, even the 2ndary effects are probably negligible)

 

if we counted BA, we would have to count baking soda x2 ;)

 

Agreed -- evidence for direct anabolic effect in humans is lacking, but it's efficacy in human exercise performance is supported by the literature. Perhaps we should make yet a third thread titled 'Proven Non-Hormonal Exercise Performance Boosting Agents', or something like that to encompass B-alanine as well as numerous other supplements that have no evidence for direct anabolic effects in human but have evidence for enhancement of human exercise performance. Other examples for this category such as acid-buffers and stimulants come to mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Glad to see you here nightop.

 

And wow, I knew the list wouldn't be very long, but it's even shorter than I thought it would be.

 

Somewhat on topic, I think I recently saw or heard a commercial for an HMB product for use in the elderly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Agreed -- evidence for direct anabolic effect in humans is lacking' date=' but it's efficacy in human exercise performance is supported by the literature. Perhaps we should make yet a third thread titled 'Proven Non-Hormonal Exercise Performance Boosting Agents', or something like that to encompass B-alanine as well as numerous other supplements that have no evidence for direct anabolic effects in human but have evidence for enhancement of human exercise performance. Other examples for this category such as acid-buffers and stimulants come to mind.[/quote']

 

Great idea!

 

http://warriorstrengthclub.com/forum/showthread.php?286-Proven-Non-Hormonal-Exercise-Performance-Boosting-Agents

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I think of all the money I've dropped over the years on crap that doesn't work, I am really frustrated...especially now that I know how well steroidal anabolic agents work...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently, Gaspari SizeOn...

 

J Int Soc Sports Nutr. 2010 Dec 16;7:40.

Nine weeks of supplementation with a multi-nutrient product augments gains in lean mass, strength, and muscular performance in resistance trained men.

Schmitz SM, Hofheins JE, Lemieux R.

Source

 

Supplement Safety Solutions, 47 Wildwood Drive, Bedford, MA 01730, USA. MD@supplementsafetysolutions.com.

Abstract

 

BACKGROUND:

The purpose of this study was to compare the effects of supplementation with Gaspari Nutrition's SOmaxP Maximum Performance™ (SOmaxP) versus a comparator product (CP) containing an equal amount of creatine (4 g), carbohydrate (39 g maltodextrin), and protein (7 g whey protein hydrolysate) on muscular strength, muscular endurance, and body composition during nine weeks of intense resistance training.

 

METHODS:

Using a prospective, randomized, double-blind design, 20 healthy men (mean ± SD age, height, weight, % body fat: 22.9 ± 2.6 y, 178.4 ± 5.7 cm, 80.5 ± 6.6 kg, 16.6 ± 4.0%) were matched for age, body weight, resistance training history, bench press strength, bench press endurance, and percent body fat and then randomly assigned via the ABBA procedure to ingest 1/2 scoop (dissolved in 15 oz water) of SOmaxP or CP prior to, and another 1/2 scoop (dissolved in 15 oz water) during resistance exercise. Body composition (DEXA), muscular performance (1-RM bench press and repetitions to failure [RTF: 3 sets × baseline body weight, 60-sec rest between sets]), and clinical blood chemistries were measured at baseline and after nine weeks of supplementation and training. Subjects were required to maintain their normal dietary habits and follow a specific, progressive overload resistance training program (4-days/wk, upper body/lower body split) during the study. An intent-to-treat approach was used and data were analyzed via ANCOVA using baseline values as the covariate. Statistical significance was set a priori at p ≤ 0.05.

 

RESULTS:

When adjusted for initial differences, significant between group post-test means were noted in: 1-RM bench press (SOmaxP: 133.3 ± 1.3 kg [19.8% increase] vs. CP: 128.5 ± 1.3 kg [15.3% increase]; p

 

CONCLUSIONS:

These data indicate that compared to CP, SOmaxP administration augments and increases gains in lean mass, bench press strength, and muscular performance during nine weeks of intense resistance training. Studies designed to confirm these results and clarify the molecular mechanisms by which SOmaxP exerts the observed salutary effects have begun. Both SOmaxP and the CP were well-tolerated, and no supplement safety issues were identified.

 

PMID: 21162744

 

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3016253/?tool=pubmed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WRT HMB, IIRC XYZPDQ OMGWTFBBQ most if not all the studies on it were sponsored by a company that has a vested interest in it... Are there any independent studies that show efficacy?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
when i think of all the money i've dropped over the years on crap that doesn't work' date=' i am really frustrated...especially now that i know how well steroidal anabolic agents work...[/quote']

 

this!

 

Protein, creatine, and PH's are all I plan on bothering with.

 

(Unless Biotest comes out with a really cool new supplement!! )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
this!

 

Protein, creatine, and PH's are all I plan on bothering with.

 

(Unless Biotest comes out with a really cool new supplement!! )

although I would not suggest that everyone starts taking PH's I would wish that the rest of the world would follow your example and stop buying useless products; what is particularly mad about this, is that many people then don't want to acknowledge that they wasted money (or the placebo effect is so huge) so that they go to AN, BB.COM & co and tell everyone how great their latest supp is

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
When I think of all the money I've dropped over the years on crap that doesn't work' date=' I am really frustrated...especially now that I know how well steroidal anabolic agents work...[/quote']

Stung

In my teens I got sucked into the cybergenix hype which made me feel really stupid. The workouts were good however and taught me that I could turn up the intensity considerably.

 

Since then I have been very suspicious of most branded supp blends.

 

Evidence

One problem I have in participating in these threads is that most of the strongest agents I use are not OTC and often have little evidence by way of gold standard studies.

 

The other problem is that I do not usually think in terms of the efficacy of a single agent on growth, but in terms of the efficacy of a stack or protocol.

 

Slin has extremely different effects depending on diet, supra physiological androgen conc, cortisol status, activity levels, etc. Some combinations make one very fat faster than you can say cheesecake, others will make you lean and big.

 

Alcar in isolation had some mild cognitive effects in isolation [ IME ] but with slin, dnp and bicarbonate boosts the effect of the other components. IMO this effect is sometimes down to a stack exposing a new rate limiting step to be overcome, whereas other times it is down to synergy between components eg( slin + leu ).

 

Whilst one needs to be guarded wrt shills, I also believe in not restricting oneself to only those of gold standard studies. Body engineering is often a matter of invention, using studies for possible lines of enquiry and as a means to understand some of the mechanisms at play.

 

 

 

 

J

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
although I would not suggest that everyone starts taking PH's I would wish that the rest of the world would follow your example and stop buying useless products; what is particularly mad about this' date=' is that many people then don't want to acknowledge that they wasted money (or the placebo effect is so huge) so that they go to AN, BB.COM & co and tell everyone how great their latest supp is[/quote']

 

I believe thats called the sunk cost fallacy. Or sunk cost dilemma. Something like that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I believe thats called the sunk cost fallacy. Or sunk cost dilemma. Something like that.

 

Right. Admitting that I spent $50 on a bucket of overhyped crap when $10 of generic creatine mono would have worked better is admitting that I am a gullible idiot so better to tell everyone how hyoooge it made me...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Appears an unlikely candidate.

 

J Strength Cond Res. 2011 Aug;25(8):2235-41.

Effect of 15 days of betaine ingestion on concentric and eccentric force outputs during isokinetic exercise.

Hoffman JR, Ratamess NA, Kang J, Gonzalez AM, Beller NA, Craig SA.

Source

 

Sport and Exercise Science, The University of Central Florida, Orlando, Florida, USA. jrhoffma@mail.ucf.edu

Abstract

 

 

 

PMID:21747291

 

There's also a handful of studies that shows it does increase power and/or work load.

 

See the attached excel file broken down into methods (subjects, dose, testing, exercise protocol - if any) and results.

 

Br

 

EDIT: You may want to switch the view on the excel file from "page view" to "normal view"

conv_46.xlsx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Right. Admitting that I spent $50 on a bucket of overhyped crap when $10 of generic creatine mono would have worked better is admitting that I am a gullible idiot so better to tell everyone how hyoooge it made me...

 

Always annoys me when people post something like, "I just bought xyz, is it any good???"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There's also a handful of studies that shows it does increase power and/or work load.

 

See the attached excel file broken down into methods (subjects, dose, testing, exercise protocol - if any) and results.

 

Br

 

EDIT: You may want to switch the view on the excel file from "page view" to "normal view"

can you give us a breakdown on HOW those effects come about (if there are any) - I am do lazy to dig through the studies atm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I didn't get a chance to read the article yet...but I would think its along the lines of some exercise induced inflammation is needed to trigger the hypertrophic response..but more is not better.

 

Br

 

Possibly. Although there was not much of a difference in the effects of 4g/day paracetamol and 1.2g/day ibuprofen and given that the latter has a much more pronounced anti-inflammatory action than the former, I suspect there is something else at work here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...