Search Results

We propose that there is a link between muscle protein synthesis and breakdown that is regulated, in part, through maintenance of the free intracellular pool of essential amino acids. For example, we propose that muscle protein breakdown is paradoxically elevated in the anabolic state following resistance exercise in part because the even greater stimulation of synthesis would otherwise deplete this pool. Thus, factors regulating muscle protein breakdown must be evaluated in the context of the prevailing rate of muscle protein synthesis. Further, the direct effect of factors on breakdown may depend on the physiological state. For example, local hyperinsulinemia suppresses accelerated muscle protein breakdown after exercise, but not normal resting breakdown. Thus, factors regulating muscle protein breakdown in human subjects are complex and interactive.

There is likely no other dietary component that inspires as much debate, insofar as athletes are concerned, as protein. How much dietary protein is required, optimal, or excessive? Dietary guidelines from a variety of sources have settled on an adequate dietary protein intake for those over the age of 19 of ~0.8–0.9 g protein·kg body weight⁻¹·d⁻¹. According to U.S. and Canadian dietary reference intakes (33), the recommended allowance for protein of 0.8 g protein·kg⁻¹·d⁻¹ is “the average daily intake level that is sufficient to meet the nutrient requirement of nearly all [~98%] . . . healthy individuals” (p. 22). The panel also stated, “in view of the lack of compelling evidence to the contrary, no additional dietary protein is suggested for healthy adults undertaking resistance or endurance exercise” (33, p. 661). Currently, no group or groups of scientists involved in establishing dietary guidelines see a need for any statement that athletes or people engaging in regular physical activity require more protein than their sedentary counterparts. Popular magazines, numerous Web sites, trainers, and many athletes decry protein intakes even close to those recommended. Even joint position stands from policy-setting groups state that “protein recommendations for endurance athletes are 1.2 to 1.4 g/kg body weight per day, whereas those for resistance and strength-trained athletes may be as high as 1.6 to 1.7 g/kg body weight per day” (1, p. 1544). The divide between those setting dietary protein requirements and those who might be making practical recommendations for athletes appears substantial, but ultimately, most athletes indicate that they consume protein at levels beyond even the highest recommendations. Thus, one might conclude that any debate on protein “requirements” for athletes is inconsequential; however, a critical analysis of existing and new data reveals novel ideas and concepts that may represent some common ground between these apparently conflicted groups. The goal of this review was to provide a critical and thorough analysis of current data on protein requirements in an attempt to provide some guidance to athletes, trainers, coaches, and sport dietitians on athletes’ protein intake. In addition, an effort was made to clearly distinguish between “required” dietary protein, “optimal” intakes, and intakes that are likely “excessive,” perhaps not from the standpoint of health, but certainly from the standpoint of potentially compromised performance.

Including protein in a carbohydrate solution may accelerate both the rate of glycogen storage and the restoration of exercise capacity following prolonged activity. Two studies were undertaken with nine active men in study A and seven in study B. All participants performed 2 trials, each involving a 90 min run at 70% VO_2max followed by a 4 h recovery. During recovery, either a 9.3% carbohydrate solution (CHO) or the same solution plus 1.5% protein (CHO-PRO) was ingested every 30 min in volumes providing either 1.2 g CHO · kg⁻¹ · h⁻¹ (study A) or 0.8 g CHO · kg⁻¹ · h⁻¹ (study B). Exercise capacity was then assessed by run time to exhaustion at 85% VO_2max. Ingestion of CHO-PRO elicited greater insulinemic responses than CHO (P ≤ 0.05) but with no differences in run times to exhaustion. Within the context of this experimental design, CHO and CHO-PRO restored running capacity with equal effect.

Post-exercise nutrition is critical to facilitate recovery from training. To determine if added protein (P) or increased carbohydrate (CHO) differentially improves recovery, eight runners ingested: 6% CHO (CHO6), 8% CHO + 2% protein (CHOP), and isocaloric 10% CHO (CHO10) following a 21-km run plus treadmill run to fatigue (RTF) at 90% VO_2max. RTF was repeated after 2 h recovery. After 24 h, a 5 km time trial was performed. Insulin and blood glucose were higher (P < 0.05) following CHO10 compared to CHO-P and CHO6, but did not affect improvement from the first to second RTF (29.6% ± 6, 40.5% ± 8.8, 40.5% ± 14.5) or 5 km time (1100 ± 36.3, 1110 ± 37.3, 1118 ± 36.5 s). CK was not different, but perceived soreness with CHO-P (2.1 ± 0.5) was lower than CHO10 (5.2 ± 0.7). Additional calories from CHO or P above that provided in sports drinks does not improve subsequent performance after recovery; but less soreness suggests benefits with CHO-P.

Increasing the plasma glucose and insulin concentrations during prolonged variable intensity exercise by supplementing with carbohydrate has been found to spare muscle glycogen and increase aerobic endurance. Furthermore, the addition of protein to a carbohydrate supplement will enhance the insulin response of a carbohydrate supplement. The purpose of the present study was to compare the effects of a carbohydrate and a carbohydrate-protein supplement on aerobic endurance performance. Nine trained cyclists exercised on 3 separate occasions at intensities that varied between 45% and 75% VO_2max for 3 h and then at 85% VO_2max until fatigued. Supplements (200 ml) were provided every 20 min and consisted of placebo, a 7.75% carbohydrate solution, and a 7.75% carbohydrate / 1.94% protein solution. Treatments were administered using a double-blind randomized design. Carbohydrate supplementation significantly increased time to exhaustion (carbohydrate 19.7 ± 4.6 min vs. placebo 12.7 ± 3.1 min), while the addition of protein enhanced the effect of the carbohydrate supplement (carbohydrate-protein 26.9 ± 4.5 min, p < .05). Blood glucose and plasma insulin levels were elevated above placebo during carbohydrate and carbohydrate-protein supplementation, but no differences were found between the carbohydrate and carbohydrate-protein treatments. In summary, we found that the addition of protein to a carbohydrate supplement enhanced aerobic endurance performance above that which occurred with carbohydrate alone, but the reason for this improvement in performance was not evident.

Gain or loss of skeletal muscle mass is due largely to the establishment of an imbalance between rates of protein synthesis and degradation. A key determinant of the rate of protein synthesis is translation initiation, a process regulated in part through binding of initiator methionyl-tRNA (met-tRNA_i) and messenger RNA (mRNA) to a 40S ribosomal subunit. Either the met-tRNA_i or mRNA binding step can become limiting for protein synthesis. Furthermore, the mRNA binding step can modulate translation of specific mRNAs with or without changes in the overall rate of protein synthesis. This report highlights molecular mechanisms involved in mediating control of the mRNA binding step in translation initiation. Particular attention is given to the effect of exercise on this step and to how the branched-chain amino acid leucine stimulates muscle protein synthesis after exercise. Potential mechanisms for exercise induced increase in muscle mass are discussed.

Protein recommendations by some professional organizations for young adults engaged in resistance training (RT) are higher than the recommended dietary allowance (RDA), but recommendations for resistance-training older adults (>50 years old) are not well characterized. Some argue that the current RDA is adequate, but others indicate increased protein needs. Although concerns have been raised about the consequences of high protein intake, protein intake above the RDA in older adults is associated with increased bone-mineral density when calcium intake is adequate and does not appear to compromise renal health in older individuals with normal renal function. Individual protein needs for older adults in RT are likely highly variable according to health and training regimen, but an intake of 1.0–1.3 g · kg⁻¹ · day⁻¹ should adequately and safely meet the needs of older adults engaged in RT, provided that their energy needs are met.