HMB supplement

[trojandogg]

Hey guys

I was wondering if anyone was using HMB supplements of any sort and what their thoughts were on it. I am pretty uneducated in the supplement world and it might be complete 'bro science knowledge' but a couple people really swear by it. If the benefits are there i might consider it but if not, i would not rather not waste my money like so many other supplements cause you to do.

Thanks

[homonunculus]

There is some new research out there on HMB. Who are the "couple people who swear by it" that you're referring to?...

-S

[dakota1981]

I tried HMB several times in the past, on paper it looked too good to be true. My experience proved this the case.

[trucelt]

Ive used it in the past during contest prep to help retain muscle...

[LG1]

Isnt hmb a metabolite of leucine or vice versa?

[trojandogg]

There is some new research out there on HMB. Who are the "couple people who swear by it" that you're referring to?...

-S

Scott.. I have a friend who likes it a lot. Although he does not compete i think he could. The others.. i heard in passing who use it. I searched this site for the supplement and didn't find anything and the little bit i did read about it on other sites, the articles were a bit dated. Just a little curious if anyone else really liked using it.

[homonunculus]

Scott.. I have a friend who likes it a lot. Although he does not compete i think he could. The others.. i heard in passing who use it. I searched this site for the supplement and didn't find anything and the little bit i did read about it on other sites, the articles were a bit dated. Just a little curious if anyone else really liked using it.

What did he "like" about HMB?... What was his experience?...

-S

[trojandogg]

What did he "like" about HMB?... What was his experience?...

-S

Very good question but I didn't ask him. Next time i see him, i will do that. Personally, i think a lot of supplements are fluff (minus maybe a placebo effect) but i am definitely no professional like yourself when it comes to this stuff.

[pantherhare]

There is some new research out there on HMB. Who are the "couple people who swear by it" that you're referring to?...

-S

Is this the research you're referring to?

Wilson, J. M., et al, The effects of 12 weeks of beta-hydroxy-beta-methylbutyrate free acid supplementation on muscle mass, strength, and power in resistance-trained individuals: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2014 Mar 6.

In a nutshell, subjects with training experience gained about 15 pounds of LBM and lost about 11 pounds of fat in 12 weeks using a newer form of HMB (perhaps coincidentally, a supplement company recently released a product containing this new form of HMB).

I'm sure you've read this study, Scott. What are your thoughts on it? The author doesn't seem to be a fraud, but 15 pounds of LBM (gained somewhat consistently throughout the study) concurrent with 11 pounds of fat loss in 12 weeks seems a bit far-fetched, even for someone taking all the gear they could get their hands on, much less a couple of grams of HMB.

Dr. Wilson admitted in another forum that they hand-picked "super responders" for test subjects, but even if these were genetically gifted guys, and even if they were coming off a layoff and a lot of these gains were muscle memory, it still wouldn't explain the delta between the placebo and test groups (the placebo group also gained LBM and lost fat, albeit at a comparatively reduced rate).

There was a similar study done by Kraemer in 2009, using "regular" HMB that also had similar results.

I tend to discard any notion of a miracle supplement, but I am curious how reputable scientists could come up with these results.

[homonunculus]

Is this the research you're referring to?

Wilson, J. M., et al, The effects of 12 weeks of beta-hydroxy-beta-methylbutyrate free acid supplementation on muscle mass, strength, and power in resistance-trained individuals: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2014 Mar 6.

In a nutshell, subjects with training experience gained about 15 pounds of LBM and lost about 11 pounds of fat in 12 weeks using a newer form of HMB (perhaps coincidentally, a supplement company recently released a product containing this new form of HMB).

I'm sure you've read this study, Scott. What are your thoughts on it? The author doesn't seem to be a fraud, but 15 pounds of LBM (gained somewhat consistently throughout the study) concurrent with 11 pounds of fat loss in 12 weeks seems a bit far-fetched, even for someone taking all the gear they could get their hands on, much less a couple of grams of HMB.

Dr. Wilson admitted in another forum that they hand-picked "super responders" for test subjects, but even if these were genetically gifted guys, and even if they were coming off a layoff and a lot of these gains were muscle memory, it still wouldn't explain the delta between the placebo and test groups (the placebo group also gained LBM and lost fat, albeit at a comparatively reduced rate).

There was a similar study done by Kraemer in 2009, using "regular" HMB that also had similar results.

I tend to discard any notion of a miracle supplement, but I am curious how reputable scientists could come up with these results.

Yes, Kraemer's study showed just about the same increase in Lean Body Mass, too (nearly 10kg going form the bar graph).

There seem to be multiple mechanisms involved here (including hormonal effects per the Kraemer study), but HMB doesn't seem to be much more effective than leucine as far as affecting protein balance acutely (Wilkinson et al., 2013).

The real world experience doesn't pan out with these kinds of crazy effects and the obvious criticism is that these are drug-like effects that simply don't happen with any OTC supplement except perhaps designer steroids.

Where did you see Jake W. post about the study?...

-S

[pantherhare]

Yes, Kraemer's study showed just about the same increase in Lean Body Mass, too (nearly 10kg going form the bar graph).

There seem to be multiple mechanisms involved here (including hormonal effects per the Kraemer study), but HMB doesn't seem to be much more effective than leucine as far as affecting protein balance acutely (Wilkinson et al., 2013).

The real world experience doesn't pan out with these kinds of crazy effects and the obvious criticism is that these are drug-like effects that simply don't happen with any OTC supplement except perhaps designer steroids.

Where did you see Jake W. post about the study?...

-S

He responded in a bb dot com forum thread entitled "12 weeks training with HMB Free Acid: 7 kg lean body mass gain, 5 kg fat loss." I'd post the link, but I don't have enough posts to do it. I'll cut and paste one of his posts regarding recruiting extreme responders:

"The only fair critique someone can make about our study is that it does not apply to 95 % of the population. Because 1 we recruited only extreme responders to training, and second we exposed them to a training volume that no one in the literature is exposing subjects too, and that 99% of the population would not be willing to do. My hypothesis is not that hmb is super anabolic, only that hmb speeds recovery and allows you to handle more volume and more weight and THAT is what causes the gains. So its simply HMB facilitated the anabolic effects of extreme training."

He also posted a video explaining the study, the link comes at post #148 of that thread. He gives other responses too, but there's a lot of idiocy to wade through from the other posters.

The guy from Suppversity corresponded with Dr. Wilson and learned that all subjects were also given a whey protein supplement and also provides the actual workout (I don't think that was in the text of the study, I could be wrong). Again, can't post the link, but it's under the post, "Breakthrough HMB Research: Additional(!) 10% Reduction in Body Fat, 5% Higher Lean Mass + 2x Higher Strength Gains After 12W of Heavy Lifting in Trained Individuals"

For anyone that is interested, the full text of the study is also available on the internet. A google search should turn it up.

I agree with you that you don't see these results in the real world. What I don't get is that both Wilson and Kraemer aren't what I consider to be supplement shills, but how else can these results be explained?

[homonunculus]

He responded in a bb dot com forum thread entitled "12 weeks training with HMB Free Acid: 7 kg lean body mass gain, 5 kg fat loss." I'd post the link, but I don't have enough posts to do it. I'll cut and paste one of his posts regarding recruiting extreme responders:

"The only fair critique someone can make about our study is that it does not apply to 95 % of the population. Because 1 we recruited only extreme responders to training, and second we exposed them to a training volume that no one in the literature is exposing subjects too, and that 99% of the population would not be willing to do. My hypothesis is not that hmb is super anabolic, only that hmb speeds recovery and allows you to handle more volume and more weight and THAT is what causes the gains. So its simply HMB facilitated the anabolic effects of extreme training."

He also posted a video explaining the study, the link comes at post #148 of that thread. He gives other responses too, but there's a lot of idiocy to wade through from the other posters.

The guy from Suppversity corresponded with Dr. Wilson and learned that all subjects were also given a whey protein supplement and also provides the actual workout (I don't think that was in the text of the study, I could be wrong). Again, can't post the link, but it's under the post, "Breakthrough HMB Research: Additional(!) 10% Reduction in Body Fat, 5% Higher Lean Mass + 2x Higher Strength Gains After 12W of Heavy Lifting in Trained Individuals"

For anyone that is interested, the full text of the study is also available on the internet. A google search should turn it up.

I agree with you that you don't see these results in the real world. What I don't get is that both Wilson and Kraemer aren't what I consider to be supplement shills, but how else can these results be explained?

Jake makes some good points here in this video: http://ut.mediasite.com/mediasite/Pl...af92174dc93f1d

Did you watch that?...

------------

The main issue I have is the validity of picking out hyper (extreme) responders from how they look...

Also, it's interesting that the placebo groups slipped performance-wise quite a bit during the overreaching period and did no recover during the taper (the taper failed to improve performance - just the opposite).

---------------

Another issue can be the PLACEBO effect: That the HMB subjects finally figured out what they were getting (and vice versa for the placebo). This can be a very powerful effect (I think can attach this study if someone wants it):

1. Ariel G, and Saville W. Anabolic steroids; The physiological effects of placebos. Med Sci Sports 4: 124-126, 1972.
Fifteen male varsity athletes were informed that some of them would be selected to receive an anabolic steroid (Dianabol). Instead, six selected subjects were given placebo pills. Taking the placebo apparently supplied the psychological inducement to increase strength gains above and beyond reasonable progression. Greater training gains were made during the placebo period in three out of four weight lifting exercises. The gains were statistically significant when comparing the two regression lines for the pre-placebo and placebo periods.

----------

Page 18 here has the download link for the actual program: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/arti...0/#!po=70.0000

I've listened to Jake speak on training a good bit and do agree with him on damn near everything I can recall hearing. (If you look at that training program, it's pretty high frequency. )
---------

You might look around online to see what this person thinks, too. http://www.biolayne.com/news/co-auth...-of-nutrition/

-S

[martin_h]

That Placebo study reminds me of the study you posted about the hypnotising study on trainees and how the trained individual taking part in the study, thought he had reached failiure - but the Dr snaps his fingers and boom, perfect reps pumped out.

I guess there is something to this mental block and fearing weight after all.
Or could you say its the brain protecting you from harm, if it thinka its in danger? Fight or flight?


P.s. I like Layne and Jakes teaching..but goddamn my head hurts!
There should be a heirachy of learning about training in certain stages..ie - Read Science and Practice of Strength Training - next read Starting Strength - Next read Performace Nutrition etc!
Thats the problem, in my humble opinion, with articles on training and nutrition, most folks (myself included) don't have the education to understand what is being taught sometimes..your getting a snippet of a massive piece of art..
Sent from my GT-I9100P using Tapatalk 2

[pantherhare]

Jake makes some good points here in this video:

Did you watch that?...


You might look around online to see what this person thinks, too.

-S

I did watch the video. Which points did you think were good? The crux of his argument seemed to be 1. Previous studies with HMB can be discounted because they were linear or non-periodized in nature; 2. They used extreme responders and a hardcore, DUP program; and 3. HMB helped with recovery, allowing for amazing gains.

My issue with these points is that 1. DUP programs don't sidestep the repeated bout effect. Mike Zourdos, one of the preeminent guys on DUP programs (and I believe a sometime collaborator with Dr. Wilson) doesn't believe changing reps, intensities or even exercises will negate the RBE (he actually embraces it as a good thing). I believe the research also backs that up, although I cannot say that I've actually reviewed that myself, just taking the word of guys like Zourdos and Lyle McDonald on that subject. 2. The placebo guys were extreme responders and on the same program. Which leads to the argument that HMB is really THAT great of a supplement that it could account for the delta between the two groups of genetically gifted individuals. As I said, I cannot point to a smoking gun other than basic skepticism of extraordinary claims and I am certainly no expert (people like you and Dr. Wilson have forgotten more about science than I know).

As for Layne Norton, I believe he would fall into the category of an extreme responder and someone who is willing to train with high volume and frequency. However, I don't believe he has attributed any recent dramatic improvements to his physique to HMB (I could be wrong, I don't follow him too closely).

It will be interesting to see those logs of people testing the Muscletech Clear product at the end of 12 weeks. So far the ones I have been able to wade through don't seem to have that much of a dramatic effect.

[homonunculus]

I did watch the video. Which points did you think were good? The crux of his argument seemed to be 1. Previous studies with HMB can be discounted because they were linear or non-periodized in nature; 2. They used extreme responders and a hardcore, DUP program; and 3. HMB helped with recovery, allowing for amazing gains.

I don't think he's discounting previous studies, but just suggesting and interaction between the growth stimulus and this particular supplement, which - I think - would require another study to test. (4 groups: HMB vs. Placebo with and without different training regimens).

The strongest point was probably that there was a similar change in muscle LBM in Kraemer's study. This is weak however, in that those changes were just so extraordinary, too.

My issue with these points is that 1. DUP programs don't sidestep the repeated bout effect. Mike Zourdos, one of the preeminent guys on DUP programs (and I believe a sometime collaborator with Dr. Wilson) doesn't believe changing reps, intensities or even exercises will negate the RBE (he actually embraces it as a good thing). I believe the research also backs that up, although I cannot say that I've actually reviewed that myself, just taking the word of guys like Zourdos and Lyle McDonald on that subject. 2. The placebo guys were extreme responders and on the same program. Which leads to the argument that HMB is really THAT great of a supplement that it could account for the delta between the two groups of genetically gifted individuals. As I said, I cannot point to a smoking gun other than basic skepticism of extraordinary claims and I am certainly no expert (people like you and Dr. Wilson have forgotten more about science than I know).

The RBE isn't negated by changing training stimulus, but you certainly can get sore by doing so. (On the other hand, some trained individuals get sore all the time and have been so for years.) Training causes the RBE, protecting against muscle injury, but it does not eliminate the possibility. This is what Dr. W. is refereeing to with the bullet analogy

As for Layne Norton, I believe he would fall into the category of an extreme responder and someone who is willing to train with high volume and frequency. However, I don't believe he has attributed any recent dramatic improvements to his physique to HMB (I could be wrong, I don't follow him too closely).

Actually, my thought about Layne was that he was involved with the research personally, and is presence on the net who might have a publicly stated opinion. (Maybe somewhere on BB.com.)

It will be interesting to see those logs of people testing the Muscletech Clear product at the end of 12 weeks. So far the ones I have been able to wade through don't seem to have that much of a dramatic effect.

Without a doubt!

I will say this: An effect on cortisol may be an under appreciated one. An article that will be up on John Meadows site any time now covered my take on this, but this study is a big one:

1. Tarpenning KM, Wiswell RA, Hawkins SA, and Marcell TJ. Influence of weight training exercise and modification of hormonal response on skeletal muscle growth. J Sci Med Sport 4: 431-446, 2001.
To investigate the influence of carbohydrate (CHO) consumption on the acute hormonal response, and chronic adaptation to weight lifting exercise, two studies were conducted. Following a four-hour fast, seven young men (21.3 +/- 3.5 y) performed (on two occasions) a nine-station weight lifting protocol, completing 3 sets of 10 repetitions at 75% of 1RM (series 1). Randomly assigned, one session included the ingestion of a non-caloric placebo, and the other, a 6% CHO solution. For series 2, two groups of young men (21.3 +/- 1.5 y) participated in 12 weeks of progressive resistance weight training. Training for one group included the ingestion of a non-caloric placebo, and the other, a 6% CHO solution. In series 1, weight lifting exercise with CHO ingestion significantly (p < 0.05) elevated blood glucose and plasma insulin levels above baseline, as well as that occurring with the placebo. This resulted in a significant blunting of the cortisol response (7% with CHO compared to 99% with placebo). These findings indicate that CHO consumption during weight lifting exercise can modify the acute hormonal response to exercise. With series 2, CHO consumption continued to blunt the cortisol response to exercise during the twelve weeks of training. This is in contrast to significantly elevated cortisol levels observed for the placebo control group. Corresponding with the modified response patterns were differences in muscle growth. Weight training exercise with CHO ingestion resulted in significantly greater gains in both type I (19.1%) and type II (22.5%) muscle fibre area than weight training exercise alone. The difference in the cortisol response accounted for 74% of the variance (r = 0.8579, p = 0.006) of change in type I muscle fibre area, and 52.3% of the variance (r = 0.7231, p = 0.043) of change in type II muscle fibre area. These findings suggest that the modification of the cortisol response associated with CHO ingestion can positively impact the skeletal muscle hypertrophic adaptation to weigh training.

-----------------

-S