Choice

One of the problems that people incur when trying to select various supplements is that they look at the product and its claims, while ignoring their bodies and its reactionary processes. The latter perception has produced far more effective outcomes than the former. This is so much so that people who know nothing about supplementation appear to make better choices just by paying more attention to their bodies relative to the amount of attention given to products. One of the reasons that this appears so is that redirecting one's perception away from a possible array of 5,000+ products to the basic training and nutritional needs of the body forces the elimination of at least 95% of products that would have been under consideration, had one not put his or her needs first. Supplement retailers (notice I didn't say manufacturers here) don't want to hear this, but it's true. Too much selection scales inventory and carrying costs, increases product selection difficulty for the customer, and generates dis-economies of scale on variable costs through suboptimal purchasing arrangements with volumes too low on a unit per unit basis. Inventory optimization and customer targeting strategy can benefit both buyers and sellers, by forcing sellers to make a conscientious effort to merchandise better products, while forcing customers to select from a pre-optimized array of decent products. The difference between choosing from a good array of products versus a bad array of products at the retail level is basically the difference between BioAvail supported products and those of the vast majority of retailers in the sports nutrition industry. BioAvail Knowledge researches better products before endorsing them, while its competition selects inferior products, and showcases those to the public. Buyers in the end are better off doing these two things: (1) Put the needs of the body first, before products, and (2) judge the retailer on the quality of their selection, not the quantity. Subsequently, choosing supplements will be that much easier.


Visit our affiliate Supplements101.com, for better information on targeted products, for fat loss, muscle development, and sports & fitness performance enhancement.


Digg This! | Add to Del.icio.us | Furl It

Add to:

Creatine and HMB

When Metabolic Technologies Inc. asserted that the combination of creatine and HMB had statistical significance in size, power, and strength increases, naysayers tried to attack the HMB side of the equation when in fact the above scientifically proven hypothesis still holds, even to this day. Dr. Steve Nissen is correct: The very best supplement to combine with creatine is HMB. Here's why. The increase in force output in performance generated by creatine also increases the rate of muscle cell breakdown in parallel. There is no way to escape it, except through effective anti-catabolic measures. You want to think of it as a hedge against muscle breakdown. Muscle growth is technically not anabolism in isolation; it is the positive ratio of anabolic stimulation over catabolic response to training. When you diff these factors in favor of anabolism, it equates to growth. Therefore, it makes sense to hedge against creatine's long-term side effects in prolonged breakdown accrual with its desired strength increases, by hedging with HMB. As a matter of fact, HMB reinforces the strength and size enhancing effects of creatine, in large part by compressing the recovery phase of training. It does this through cell membrane integrity reinforcement: If amino acids are not allowed to leak directly into the bloodstream (the first stage of catabolism), then recovery time is compressed, while reinforcing muscle protein accrual through increased amino acid assembly. This is because new amino acid entry is added to retained amino acids instead of only replacing an excessive amount of lost nitrogen, due to catabolism. Nitrogen will always go through replacement, but what supplement users are seeking is the replacement sequence that continuously yields compounding net differences in amino acid accrual over long periods. This is really the reasoning behind protein consumption, in a nutshell. If you're going to use creatine, then do yourself a favor and get some HMB to a least retain your gains, if not further them.


Recommended Product(s):

HMB

Post-Training Creatine Formula

CISSUS - Joint Recovery, Muscle Growth


Visit our affiliate Supplements101.com, for better information on targeted products, for fat loss, muscle development, and sports & fitness performance enhancement.


Digg This! | Add to Del.icio.us | Furl It

Add to:

Power Part 2

Power also has to be defined within an applied context for relevance. It's almost impossible to divorce it from the context, in which it is applied. And the only reason to do so would be to illustrate its theoretical underpinnings. For example, the power required in boxing is very different than that required in powerlifting, although both occupy conceptual space within the realm of explosive force outputs over effort inputs. But they can't be divorced from their context without losing the ability to differentiate one type from the other. There is also a neurological premise that supports this, as well. To maximize power output for a given skill in performance, continued reinforcement of the neurological pathway, for that skill has to be continuously practiced with progressively increasing contraction in split-second timing, in order to maximize (again) the ratio of force outputs to effort inputs. Practice makes perfect. For example, a boxer with an orthodox style will usually be told by his trainer to go into the corner and throw 500 left jabs, before they begin to work on more technical issues. The trainer instinctively understands that repetition reinforces the skill pathway, speed increase and the power output that comes with the improved execution of that punch over a long period of time. In another example, a powerlifter will usually only practice the power movement for something like 75%-90% of his training volume, even through a periodization schedule, and use ancillary movements that neurologically isolate and condition the prime movers (i.e., primary muscles involved) for that movement, thus reinforcing execution. In sum, to improve power practice the actual movement in which it will be executed, and progress will flow smoothly.


Recommended Product(s):

CISSUS - Joint Recovery, Muscle Growth

HMB

Mass Meal

Post-Training Creatine Formula

Pure Whey Protein Isolate


Visit our affiliate Supplements101.com, for better information on targeted products, for fat loss, muscle development, and sports & fitness performance enhancement.


Digg This! | Add to Del.icio.us | Furl It

Add to:

Power Part 1

Considering the inherent broadness of this term, it should be addressed in the form of a question. What is it, and where does it come from? In the context of exercise, can its definition be adequately explained or illustrated in concrete terms? If so, what is the optimal training, nutrition, and supplement combination that can maximize individual peak performance? Power is the multiplicative combination of strength and speed that produces maximum force output over minimum unit(s) of effort input. In the context of exercise, it is the ability to explosively exert maximum strength in the shortest period of time to lift an object for a maximum number of repetitions and/or a maximum load within a set range of repetitions (i.e., 1 to n number of reps). Let's take this definition a bit further. In biological terms, it refers to the maximum contraction of the greatest number of muscle fibers and muscle fiber types (i.e., cross section) in split-second timing required to move an object. Wait! There appears to be a contradiction in this argument. I previously implied that the ratio of force outputs to effort inputs should progressively move in the direction of going higher. How can effort inputs be lower for higher force outputs? It sounds oxymoronic, but it's all relative: Person A does 10 reps with 225lbs. on the bench for maximum power output, while Person B does 8 reps with 225lbs. on the bench for maximum power output. The 25% differential increase in Person A's performance (by repetition) means that he expended less energy at the same 8 rep range where Person B maxed out. Reps 9 and 10 prove that Person A expended less energy from reps 1-8, thus illustrating his superior force output in the max number of reps at a given lifted weight. Of course this assumes that all other variables are hypothetically equal in the above example, and doesn't take bodyweight, bone structure, joint insertion attachment differences into account. But the point is still the same. Higher reps are another proven way to look at the application of power in performance.


Recommended Product(s):

CISSUS - Joint Recovery, Muscle Growth

HMB

Mass Meal

Post-Training Creatine Formula

Pure Whey Protein Isolate


Visit our affiliate Supplements101.com, for better information on targeted products, for fat loss, muscle development, and sports & fitness performance enhancement.


Digg This! | Add to Del.icio.us | Furl It

Add to:

Exercise Selection Model

Sometimes one may be faced with too many different exercises, from which to choose. It just might be better to counter-intuitively use an effective set of de-selection criteria to know what not to do first, before deciding on what to do. Narrowing down the selection to the best or realistically better alternatives inversely optimizes the overall selection, reminiscent of the "Paradox of Choice". Understanding and proper application of this concept in sports nutrition, weight training, food selection, etc. can yield huge results over time compared to conventional approaches in exercise and nutrition. For example, if one wants sheer muscle mass coupled with good conditioning, then a combination of compound movements and controlled eating patterns if best for results optimization. Notice that I didn't mention isolation exercises to address muscle conditioning. This is for the reason that we're addressing the concept of optimization herein as the quality and amount of exercise expended using the most effective movements in descending order of effectiveness (in combination with optimal sports nutrition, caloric selection, and rest) over the amount of time spent on all of the above. Those with a more qualitative bent will state that such reasoning is too logically linear and mathematical to work. But that's precisely my point - That short and long-term effectiveness of exercise selection can be optimized through structural models of conception without having deep domain knowledge of exercise-related theory. Many will be upset reading this, but it has been proven that long-term deployment of basic movements under a fundamental understanding of how those movements work yield superior results to long-term exercise physiology programs that require near expert understanding of their theoretical implications. In a world of increasing complexity, genius will further lie in simplicity more now than it ever did before.


Visit our affiliate Supplements101.com, for better information on targeted products, for fat loss, muscle development, and sports & fitness performance enhancement.


Digg This! | Add to Del.icio.us | Furl It

Add to:

Bodyfat

I think that many of the accepted conventional paradigms in this area, which impede proper understanding of fat loss are sadly going to be around for a very long time, and that's if they ever go away at all. One of the reasons why I advocate active management of the body's repartitioning function is that it optimizes fat loss all year around. Think about its underlying logic: If fat cells are being reduced through targeted cellular starvation in repartitioning on an ongoing basis, then even if more bodyfat has to be eliminated by a certain time (i.e., photo shoot), the actual amount that one would have to discard would be significantly lower if not far lower than that had one not practiced nutrient repartitioning at all. Chance favors not only the prepared mind, but also the prepared body. Optimization does not work if you say that I have to lose a certain amount of fat weight by a particular date, within a highly condensed time frame: The odds are too stacked against you for letting it get this close in the first place, plus the goal is not strong enough if the date refers to some particular event outside of your concept of self. The most effective people do it for themselves regardless of what takes place. Notwithstanding outside conditions that may affect a person's results, the true drivers of accomplishment in this and in most areas of life are [internal]. Everyone talks about eating right, but true progress in this area comes from the consistent application of select principles in the areas of caloric positioning and nutrient partitioning.


Recommended Products:

R-Alpha Lipoic Acid

Chromium Picolinate

Fyre - High Potency Fat Burner

Sports One - Ephedra Fat Burner

HMB


Digg This! | Add to Del.icio.us | Furl It

Add to:

Calories

High calorie weight gainers are still the conventional standard for mass gain in Sports Nutrition, even though the vast majority of them produce inferior if not adverse results compared to more nutrient dense formulas with lower calories. The results I'm referring to are gains in pure muscle mass, not bulk. What's worse is that even with current flavoring and related ingredient placement technologies in packaging and distribution operations, manufacturers still can't get it right. Supplement users would get better results if manufacturers focused on both macro and micro nutrient density, smoothness (in terms of gradient formation from liquid integration), and [taste]. Yes, taste is the most valuable component in sports nutrition sales of RTDs, lean mass gainers, protein shakes, etc. Again, there's quite a bit of room for sellers who can get it right, and customers seeking a wider array of higher quality protein drinks with at least decent taste. But getting it right is easier said than done. Some makers of RTDs add enormous amounts of saturated fat and sodium to spruce up the flavor, when they would better off experimenting with stevia and polyunsaturates, for their mixes. Caloric consistency does need to be within the context of good [taste] for sellers, but not too high for buyers. Beyond a certain point, more calories begin to leverage towards triglyceride conversion (fat storage) and away from myocyte nourishment (muscle cell storage). If supplement users could leverage product purchases towards those lean mass gainers that have the highest nutrient density of output (i.e., ErgoPharm's Mass Meal) per unit of caloric input, then they would attain far better results, and in a much shorter period of time (as the body would not be put in a position to waste metabolic resources on storing excess calories when distributing nutrients to targeted myocytes post-workout).


Recommended Product(s):

Mass Meal

Nitro-Tech RTD - Case Size

EAS Myoplex RTD - Case Size

EAS Carb Sense RTD - Case Size


Digg This! | Add to Del.icio.us | Furl It

Add to: