[slackline]

Putting together supplement and running shoes is very biased.

Not if the evidence to support the claims made of both is dodgy and/or the effect size of either is tiny.

E.g.

Claim - "This protein shake will make you really strong"

Evidence - "It makes a 0.01% difference compared to placebo"

Claim - "These shoes make you less prone to injury"

Evidence - "Injuries are just as likely to occur as with any other shoe"

[Nibile]

I had taken the article specifically aimed at supplementation, which it's not. Hence my comment. Had read the artcile but not the title.
Sorry.

[stevej]

Jens Voigt drinks chocolate milk, nuff said.

A 1 liter bottle of chocolade milk, i really dig that stuff, its great for my soul and my head. And hey- a happy rider is stronger rider...

[lmarenzi]

What climbers really give a toss about getting bigger muscles though? In the end you want your muscles to be able to do more, who cares what size they are, unless you inflate like a balloon?

And what climber cares about levels of lactic acid 24 hours after exercise? Its about what you can do on the rock that counts, isn't it? Maybe you would be much better off with much higher levels of lactic acid for weeks on end if it gave you better power endurance after 6 weeks. Or maybe it turns out the levels of lactic acid are just not relevant to climbing at all? Who would know this kind of stuff? Certainly not the poor sods doing the actual studies quoted.

In general, drinking liquids with energy in will be less filling than drinking water and eating the same amount of energy, so drinking lots of protein shakes will make you heavier. Other things being equal. Unless they are so gross that you feel ill when you drink them and lose your appetite, which is why I take them when I am doing a proper diet. And the multivitamin pills too, I feel awful after them, can't eat for hours. 

The mention of a study that will allow you to lose 24 pounds in 3 months by drinking milk cause its got calcium in, well, I am sure it doesn't really say that if you bother to read it but whatever, lets face facts here, common sense dictates the conclusion that drinking milk is no way going to make you any slimmer.

Supplements are all well and good if they remain just that, supplements, especially in a sport like climbing where net expenditure of energy is very, very small, and the body adapts at a snail's pace.

Overall the goal of diet must be to provide a wide variety of nutrients that allow intense effort to be put in and then proper recovery to take place, and for a climber, at the lowest possible body fat percentage and weight (I would suggest in that order). How much does weight loss yield? From what I can tell, 5 kgs off is worth in the region of half to one letter grade in sport climbing. In other words, losing a stone will likely get you a gain of no more than single letter grade, and that will be a one off. Despite what some pundits opinion to the contrary, it is clear that if you are a respectable weight and further weight loss is hard, losing a further stone will yield very, very little for the extra effort. Better just MTFU and learn how to climb harder.

Usual disclaimers apply.

[rodma]

Supplements ... a rather expensive way of getting a bit of milk.

Tonight's Panorama deals with 'sports products' and so should be of relevance to this thread.

Am currently watching this prog and it's a bit log.

35g of protein through protein shake is about 175cals whereas through skimmed milk is about 380cals (and is a stomach churning 1litre). I wonder why i opt for the former

[abarro81]

I only saw half of it, but no reference to timing of nutrients unless i missed it. The main reason I use protein is that its easy to have at the wall before I walk home. Same price as milk anyway

[b3n99]

Was looking forward to this program but it was, to put it bluntly, a crock of sh**e. Some bloke from Oxford repeating the fact that they have not found strong evidence to support the claims without looking at any of these studies or showing any results. It seemed to be a normal Panorama style 'slag 'em off' hour to me. Rubbish.

35g of protein through protein shake is about 175cals whereas through skimmed milk is about 380cals (and is a stomach churning 1litre). I wonder why i opt for the former

Is this amount of protein necessary? I have found it hard to find any studies or advice with regards to protein that aren't just about how to fill out your unnecessarily small shirt and actually relate to recovery (avoiding muscle and therefor wight gain)

[andybfreeman]

When I was trying to lose weight last year I supplemented my protein intake with unflavoured whey powder (mixed with yoghurt and eaten with cereal immediately after a session at the wall) as it seemed the easiest way to get to or at least near 30% of my calories coming from protein (as recommended by Matt Fitzgerald in his Racing Weight books, endorsed and sold by Dave Macleod)

I've piled on the kgs since being in Australia (tipped the scales at 76 kg no too long ago  ) and I've recently started to try and reverse the trend. Knowing it worked last time I've gone back to trying to boost my protein % and although I'm being way less anal about it (not a single spreadsheet!) the weight is dropping off

On the amino acid side, I've found that glutamine really helps with recovery. I am back to taking a teaspoon full every morning and night and I noticed (or possibly imagined) that I was able to get much more done training wise on consecutive days...

[slackline]

Some bloke from Oxford repeating the fact that they have not found strong evidence to support the claims without looking at any of these studies or showing any results. It seemed to be a normal Panorama style 'slag 'em off' hour to me. Rubbish.

I didn't watch it but would suggest that going through a systematic review and/or meta-analysis on TV would make for very dull and boring viewing, but if you want to review studies yourself knock yourself out (crude literature search, you'll no doubt want to weed out those that don't focus on healthy people as they won't be of relevance, but you can choose your inclusion/exclusion criteria, from the synopsis the researchers in the program started with the studies provided by the manufacturers, not sure how you'd get that list though.). 

The CONSORT guidelines may be useful if you're not familiar with reporting standards for clinical trials to decide whether a study has been well conducted, and the information at the Cochrane Reviews where systematic reviews/meta-analyses are reported (in particular their Handbook for Reviewers) will likely be useful too.

Tons of stuff out there and Google Scholar is particularly good at finding versions of articles that are not behind paywalls.

EDIT : Might also be worth keeping an eye on one of the reviewers (Carl Heneghan) blogs Trust the Evidence for a write-up/overview of what they did.

EDIT 2 : This might be the starting point you're after as it appears to include the 130 citations they reviewed.... Heneghan C, Gill P, O’Neill B, Lasserson D, Thake M, Thompson M (2012) Mythbusting sports and exercise products BMJ:345:e4848 (or you could ask Fiend as he appears to be a co-author ).

[rodma]

Is this amount of protein necessary? I have found it hard to find any studies or advice with regards to protein that aren't just about how to fill out your unnecessarily small shirt and actually relate to recovery (avoiding muscle and therefor wight gain)

I thought you said you didn't know who i am 

35g of protein isn't exactly a lot, especially if I'm having vegetable soup for dinner. I have the protein shakes for two reasons, one is convenience, the other is to ensure that I actually am getting enough of it, without eating, meat, fish, eggs etc. every day.

No wait, three reasons, protein also helps with satiety, which for me is a big deal, since I've reached an age where I put weight on really easily if I cave in to all of my cravings (Soup also helps with satiety).

[johnx2]

Was looking forward to this program but it was, to put it bluntly, a crock of sh**e. Some bloke from Oxford repeating the fact that they have not found strong evidence to support the claims without looking at any of these studies or showing any results.

Not seen the telly but the research which set the media ball rolling is in this week's brit med journal. You might need an athens account but this paper gives a nice clear summary of the some of the stuff spouted by companies trying to make an dishonest buck:

http://www.bmj.com/content/345/bmj.e4848

(There're also a couple of interesting papers on the current fetish for hydration  and its origin.)

I'll continue my personal long-term single case study research into the effects of post exercise fermented malted barley, accompanied by sodium enriched Arachis hypogaea.

[slackline]

You might need an athens account but this paper gives a nice clear summary of the some of the stuff spouted by companies trying to make an dishonest buck:

Nope I could view that from home when I linked it two posts above earlier.

[johnx2]

... so you did.

It's a problem I have with long posts and my short concentration sp... Look a pigeon!

[slackline]

Its ok, most of what I write is boring crap and of no interest to anyone anyway so I'm not surprised when it gets passed over.

[Sasquatch]

Its ok, most of what I write is boring crap and of no interest to anyone anyway so I'm not surprised when it gets passed over.

If it matters, I love it.  I've been reading more studies than ever  

(wow, I'm a true nerd....)

[slackline]

Cheers glad you're finding some of the links interesting.

Doesn't bother me if I'm ignored, I got used to it many, many years ago.

And besides, I probably shouldn't drone on and on and ariston.