Search

Background We previously reported that consuming a food bar (FB) containing whey protein and the plant fiber isomalto-oligosaccharides [IMO] had a lower glycemic (GI) but similar insulinemic response as a high GI carbohydrate. Therefore, we hypothesized that ingestion of this FB before, during, and following intense exercise would better maintain glucose homeostasis and performance while hastening recovery in comparison to the common practice of ingesting carbohydrate alone. Methods Twelve resistance-trained males participated in an open label, randomized, counterbalanced, crossover trial with a 7-d washout period. Participants consumed a carbohydrate matched dextrose comparitor (CHO) or a FB containing 20 g of whey, 25 g of IMO, and 7 g of fat 30-min before, mid-way, and following intense exercise. Participants performed 11 resistance-exercises (3 sets of 10 repetitions at 70% of 1RM) followed by agility and sprint conditioning drills for time. Participants donated blood to assess catabolic and inflammatory markers, performed isokinetic strength tests, and rated perceptions of muscle soreness, hypoglycemia before, and following exercise and after 48 h of recovery. Data were analyzed using general linear models (GLM) for repeated measures and mean changes from baseline with 95% confidence intervals (CI) with a one-way analysis of variance. Data are reported as mean change from baseline with 95% CI. Results GLM analysis demonstrated that blood glucose was significantly higher 30-min post-ingestion for CHO (3.1 [2.0, 4.3 mmol/L,] and FB (0.8 [0.2, 1.5, mmol/L, p = 0.001) while the post-exercise ratio of insulin to glucose was greater with FB (CHO 0.04 [0.00, 0.08], FB 0.11 [0.07, 0.15], p = 0.013, η2 = 0.25). GLM analysis revealed no significant interaction effects between treatments in lifting volume of each resistance-exercise or total lifting volume. However, analysis of mean changes from baseline with 95% CI’s revealed that leg press lifting volume (CHO -130.79 [− 235.02, − 26.55]; FB -7.94 [− 112.17, 96.30] kg, p = 0.09, η2 = 0.12) and total lifting volume (CHO -198.26 [− 320.1, − 76.4], FB -81.7 [− 203.6, 40.1] kg, p = 0.175, η2 = 0.08) from set 1 to 3 was significantly reduced for CHO, but not for the FB. No significant interaction effects were observed in ratings of muscle soreness. However, mean change analysis revealed that ratings of soreness of the distal vastus medialis significantly increased from baseline with CHO while being unchanged with FB (CHO 1.88 [0.60, 3.17]; FB 0.29 [− 0.99, 1.57] cm, p = 0.083, η2 = 0.13). No significant GLM interaction or mean change analysis effects were seen between treatments in sprint performance, isokinetic strength, markers of catabolism, stress and sex hormones, or inflammatory markers. Conclusion Pilot study results provide some evidence that ingestion of this FB can positively affect glucose homeostasis, help maintain workout performance, and lessen perceptions of muscle soreness. Trial registration clinicaltrials.gov, #NCT03704337. Retrospectively registered 12, July 2018.

In a double-blind, crossover, randomized and placebo-controlled trial; 28 men and women ingested a placebo (PLA), 3 g of creatine nitrate (CNL), and 6 g of creatine nitrate (CNH) for 6 days. Participants repeated the experiment with the alternate supplements after a 7-day washout. Hemodynamic responses to a postural challenge, fasting blood samples, and bench press, leg press, and cycling time trial performance and recovery were assessed. Data were analyzed by univariate, multivariate, and repeated measures general linear models (GLM). No significant differences were found among treatments for hemodynamic responses, clinical blood markers or self-reported side effects. After 5 days of supplementation, one repetition maximum (1RM) bench press improved significantly for CNH (mean change, 95% CI; 6.1 [3.5, 8.7] kg) but not PLA (0.7 [−1.6, 3.0] kg or CNL (2.0 [−0.9, 4.9] kg, CNH, p = 0.01). CNH participants also tended to experience an attenuated loss in 1RM strength during the recovery performance tests following supplementation on day 5 (PLA: −9.3 [−13.5, −5.0], CNL: −9.3 [−13.5, −5.1], CNH: −3.9 [−6.6, −1.2] kg, p = 0.07). After 5 days, pre-supplementation 1RM leg press values increased significantly, only with CNH (24.7 [8.8, 40.6] kg, but not PLA (13.9 [−15.7, 43.5] or CNL (14.6 [−0.5, 29.7]). Further, post-supplementation 1RM leg press recovery did not decrease significantly for CNH (−13.3 [−31.9, 5.3], but did for PLA (−30.5 [−53.4, −7.7] and CNL (−29.0 [−49.5, −8.4]). CNL treatment promoted an increase in bench press repetitions at 70% of 1RM during recovery on day 5 (PLA: 0.4 [−0.8, 1.6], CNL: 0.9 [0.35, 1.5], CNH: 0.5 [−0.2, 0.3], p = 0.56), greater leg press endurance prior to supplementation on day 5 (PLA: −0.2 [−1.6, 1.2], CNL: 0.9 [0.2, 1.6], CNH: 0.2 [−0.5, 0.9], p = 0.25) and greater leg press endurance during recovery on day 5 (PLA: −0.03 [−1.2, 1.1], CNL: 1.1 [0.3, 1.9], CNH: 0.4 [−0.4, 1.2], p = 0.23). Cycling time trial performance (4 km) was not affected. Results indicate that creatine nitrate supplementation, up to a 6 g dose, for 6 days, appears to be safe and provide some ergogenic benefit.