Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 1 of 1 items for

  • Author: Edward Jo x
Clear All Modify Search
Restricted access

Adam D. Osmond, Dean J. Directo, Marcus L. Elam, Gabriela Juache, Vince C. Kreipke, Desiree E. Saralegui, Robert Wildman, Michael Wong and Edward Jo

Context: Of the 3 branched-chain amino acids (BCAA), leucine has arguably received the most attribution for the role of BCAA supplementation in alleviating symptoms of exercise-induced muscle damage and facilitation of acute performance recovery. Purpose: To examine whether enrichment of a standard BCAA supplement with additional leucine or a standalone leucine (LEU) supplement differentially affects exercise-induced muscle damage and performance recovery compared with a standard BCAA supplement. Methods: A total of 22 recreationally active male and female subjects were recruited and assigned to consume a BCAA, leucine-enriched BCAA (LBCAA), or LEU supplement for 11 d. On the eighth day, subjects performed eccentric-based resistance exercise (ECRE). Lower-body mean average and peak power, plasma creatine kinase, soreness, and pain threshold were measured before and 24, 48, and 72 h after ECRE. Results: LEU showed decreased mean average power (P = .02) and mean peak power (P = .01) from baseline to 48 h post-ECRE, whereas LBCAA and BCAA only trended toward a reduction at 24 hours post-ECRE. At 48 h post-ECRE, BCAA showed greater recovery of mean peak power than LEU (P = .04). At 24 h post-ECRE, LEU demonstrated a greater increase in plasma creatine kinase from baseline than BCAA (P = .04). Area under the curve for creatine kinase was greater in LEU than BCAA (P = .02), whereas BCAA and LBCAA did not differ. Only LEU demonstrated increased soreness during rest and under muscular tension at 24 and 48 h post-ECRE (P < .05). Conclusions: LBCAA failed to afford any advantages over a standard BCAA supplement for postexercise muscle recovery, whereas a LEU supplement was comparatively ineffective.