Layne Norton

[Klaus Urine]

Why not use both? Because if one is significantly better than the other then you would get better gains just using the more effective method.

Actually, I happen to agree that they both have their merits.

It seems to me that the momentum in power training would generate the most force (especially the transition between the eccentric and concentric parts of any given movement) and would strengthen the connective tissue more and damage more muscle fibres (particularly the IIb fibres that have the most potential for size), resulting in more growth. The only trade off is the increased risk of injury.

Case in point: Ronnie Coleman. His style of training seems to be pretty sloppy, but as far as muscle growth is concerned it's obviously very effective and is what I'd term a power training style. Seems to be catching up to him now though! How he remained injury free so long is pretty amazing...

For the natural the weights lifted would generally be much lighter than what someone like Ronnie would use, thus resulting in less force on the body, meaning less chance of injury. Even so, I think some periodisation is in order to stay injury free.

So I have a few ideas of my own on the matter but I'm curious about whether any studies have been done on this and also curious as to what others think.

[lakastao]

How ya doin Layne? Just wanted to ask how much did you weigh in your avatar and what was your starting weight? very impressive though being natural and all.

[Canuck_Muscle]

Hey Layne how's it going man?? I was wondering how much protein u need on a daily basis? Do u go by the 1 gram per pound of bodyweight or something different? I have been trying to get at least 1 gram the last few months I have been training but was wondering if that is enough or if I am possibly robbing myself of potential gains. I am 254 right now at 6 ' 1. Getting the majority of my protein from meats such as Chicken, beef, and some pork. Take 2 shakes a day as well.

Thx

[str8flexed]

How ya doin Layne? Just wanted to ask how much did you weigh in your avatar and what was your starting weight? very impressive though being natural and all.

i was about 192-195 (somewhere in there) and I was 227 when i started dieting

-Layne

[str8flexed]

Hey Layne how's it going man?? I was wondering how much protein u need on a daily basis? Do u go by the 1 gram per pound of bodyweight or something different? I have been trying to get at least 1 gram the last few months I have been training but was wondering if that is enough or if I am possibly robbing myself of potential gains. I am 254 right now at 6 ' 1. Getting the majority of my protein from meats such as Chicken, beef, and some pork. Take 2 shakes a day as well.

Thx

well what you "need" is one thing, how much you need is actually very little, how much is beneficial is much higher. As of now there are no studies indicating that anything higher than 2.2g/kg is beneficial (1g/lb) so I think 1g/lb is plenty, I eat slightly more just because I like the taste of meat myself.

-Layne

[Canuck_Muscle]

Cool thx for responding Layne. I am with u on the meat issue. Could never be a vegan, that would ruin me. Have a good one and good luck in 07.

[Dark Knight]

layne have you read this book?

what do you think of john hansen??

[str8flexed]

no i have not.

I've never directly corresponded with John, but from what I can see he seems like a good guy.

Not to sound cocky but I don't read many books by bodybuilders because I'm doing my PhD in nutritional biochemistry specializing in skeletal muscle protein metabolism... and to be honest most books don't teach me much. Most stuff I just research myself

I know that sounds very arrogant but I'm not sure how to sugar coat it... when I do read bodybuilding stuff it is purely for entertainment value.

-Layne

[bbjeff86]

Layne, You mentioned that no studies have ever proven that more than 1g of protein/lb of bodyweight is any more effective... but do you think that this could possible be because of the lack of intensity, and or volume that the studeid subjects involved?

I just ask, because in most studies it seems to me that it is hard and rare for them to have a group of people who train like serious/hardcore bodybuilders or strength athletes.

-Jeff

[str8flexed]

Layne, You mentioned that no studies have ever proven that more than 1g of protein/lb of bodyweight is any more effective... but do you think that this could possible be because of the lack of intensity, and or volume that the studeid subjects involved?

I just ask, because in most studies it seems to me that it is hard and rare for them to have a group of people who train like serious/hardcore bodybuilders or strength athletes.

-Jeff

Actually in most strength athletes they find they use protein more effectively and thus 'need' less. However, the real question is does eating more provide metabolic benefits? That has yet to be seen. Most of these studies have looked at nitrogen balance which only tells you whether a person is anabolic or catabolic and doesn't really give you an idea to the degree they are and it also doesn't let you know what tissues are retaining or losing the nitrogen. The other method is whole body amino acid fluxes, essentially using 'labeled' amino acids isotope and looking at what tissues they flux into and out of. The problem with both of these is they do not account for recycling of the amino acids within various tissues, nor do they take into account that tissues like the gut turnover very rapidly and so much of the whole body flux of amino acids is from the gut. Skeletal muscle turns over comparatively slowly and thus has much smaller effects on whole body amino acid fluxes. For example, the researchers who concluded casien is better than whey looked at whole body amino acid fluxes and concluded that casein reduced breakdown better than whey... BUT THEY LOOKED AT WHOLE BODY PROTEIN BREAKDOWN, which tells you very little about the breakdown occurring specifically in skeletal muscle. In order to get good information you have to look at fractional rates of synthesis and degradation within the skeletal muscle which 1) is much more difficult 2) more expensive 3) requires more skill and 4) requires a biopsy. Thus it is often not used in studies.

In our lab we are measure fractional synthesis rates. Two main questions we are looking at is 1) how much protein at a meal does it take to maximize protein synthesis? 2) how long does the effect last 3) how long after an initial meal can you trigger synthesis again.

This will likely be the crux of my PhD thesis

As far as your question, we simply don't know as of now.
-Layne

[The True Adonis]

actually in most strength athletes they find they use protein more effectively and thus 'need' less. again does eating more provide metabolic benefits? That has yet to be seen. Most of these studies have looked at nitrogen balance which only tells you whether a person is anabolic or catabolic and doesn't really give you an idea to the degree they are and it also doesn't let you know what tissues are retaining or losing the nitrogen. The other method is whole body amino acid fluxes, essentially labeling amino acids and watching where they go. The problem with both of these is they do not account for recycling of the amino acids nor do they take into account that tissues like the gut turnover very rapidly and so much of the flux of amino acids is from the gut whereas skeletal muscle turns over comparatively slowly. For example, the people concluding casien is better than whey looked at whole body amino acid fluxes and concluded that casein reduced breakdown better than whey... BUT THEY LOOKED AT WHOLE BODY PROTEIN BREAKDOWN. that tells you jack shit. In order to get good information you have to look at fractional rates of synthesis and degradation in the skeletal muscle which 1) is much more difficult 2) more expensive 3) requires more skill and 4) requires a biopsy. Thus it is oft not used in studies.

Right now we are developing a rat model where we are measuring fractional synthesis rates. 2 main questions we are looking at is 1) how much protein at a meal does it take to max the system? 2) how long does the effect last 3) how long after an initial meal can you trigger synthesis again.

We have characterized #2 as of now... still working on the other 2.
This is the crux of my PhD thesis

As far as your question, we simply don't know as of now.
-Layne

One day, Electron Laser Imaging will finally render the Biopsy obsolete.

[bodyfx2]

layne have you read this book?

what do you think of john hansen??

John is a really nice guy. He is actually currently using my training system, tweaked a bit to his own needs.

[str8flexed]

One day, Electron Laser Imaging will finally render the Biopsy obsolete.

not sure what that is but how will it be able to measure isotopic enrichment in a muscle? Or are you saying labeled isotopes won't be needed and if so I'd like to hear the reasoning behind it.

[onemorerep]

layne have you read this book?

what do you think of john hansen??

I don't know how good this book could be for "natural bodybuilding" when the author, who openly used steroids and competed in non-tested shows, is now promoting himself as lifetime drug-free. I have absolutely nothing against guys who use gear, and openly compete as naturals later on if they're upfront about it. I give them mad respect, but I have a problem with people who try and promote themselves as something they're not. I don't want to come off as an out of line dick, so here's the reasoning behind my post.

A couple of summers a ago (I think 2005 but it could have been 2004?) I was planning on attending the FAME expo in Toronto - an event I had competed in back in 2000 (when it was just known as Musclemania). I had been to the expo several times throughout the years, and looked forward to going again. I noticed on their website that John Hansen was a featured guest, and was there to plug his then new book. They were promoting him as a "lifetime natural" on their website. Figuring they made an honest mistake, I pm'ed him on Ironage (where he's a mod) telling him I didn't want to make a big fuss and contact FAME or even mention it on the boards, assuming he would contact FAME himself being a stand up guy and have them simply remove the "lifetime natural" moniker from his advertisement. I was pretty surprised when I never got a response, and the FAME expo went on without the ad ever being changed. I didn't bother going after all even though in hind sight I wish I would have contacted FAME in the interests of their own reputation. I didn't bring it up at the time, because I enjoyed Ironage.us, and didn't want to get banned with him being a mod. Now that Joe Meeko has his own thread on Mayhem, I really don't care even though I still have nothing against the site at all and think it serves a good niche really well (Irongage).

I don't want to sound like I'm attacking the guy on a site he doesn't post (not that I know of anyway) so for anybody reading this, feel free to invite him here to post his response. I would myself but he doesn't respond to my pm's

[bbjeff86]

Layne once your thesis is all done, will it be available to the public... or atleast the info in it... sounds like some really good info will be involved.

-Jeff