ECA stack and fish oil to shrink fat cells and build more lean muscle???

kshama2001 wrote: »

angmarie28 wrote: »

Fatty_Nuff wrote: »

I suspect your friend was contaminated by bad advice from some fitness trainer. If ECA (ephedra, caffeine, aspirin) "shrank" fat cells and caused weight loss, do you really think any of us would still be here?

Shes a victim of the internet "fitness experts"

What ephedra is she taking? I thought that was banned in the US now but I see the legal status is complicated. Does she know about the gastrointestinal, psychiatric, and autonomic side effects?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ephedra

There is a difference between ephedra and ephedrine - ephedrine is banned and ephedra is legal. It is important to note that it is banned during competition on the WADA list... so anyone competing at that level needs to stop taking it at least a few days before the competition to be sure it is fully metabolized before going into competition. Otherwise, you get in trouble for doping.

OP, I've taken an ECA stack at various times. It does 2 things:
1. It increases RMR by a few percentage points. This comes from both the ephedra and the caffeine.
2. It helps to mobilize "stubborn fat." I'll explain because I know this community will tell you that the idea of "stubborn fat" is a fairy tale, but it is an actual thing. *Yes, I expect this to get tons of "Woos," but I believe it will also help those who are open minded enough to keep reading.

Our fat cells contain mitochondria, like other cells. Fat cell mitochondria has 2 receptors that are relevant to storage and release of fat - alpha-2 receptors and beta-2 receptors. Alpha-2 keep fat stored / blocks release of fat while beta-2 helps release fat from storage to be used as energy. Not all fat cells contain the same ration of A2:B2 receptors. Specifically, fat with a higher ration of A2:B2 is the last to be lost when trying to lose weight... and some of us find it very difficult to get our bodies to mobilize that fat at all. For me, I suspect it is related to a health condition I have, but am not entirely familiar with the complexities as to why/how and there isn't likely much I can do about it. Anyway, the reason people lose fat in large amounts from certain body areas first and seem to lose little or nothing in other areas is a result of the A2:B2 ratio in certain fat cells.

Ephedra helps to block alpha-2 receptors. So it blocks the receptors that block release of fat. Thing is, someone who is very over-fat is not likely in need of such a thing. This is most helpful when getting down to the last body fat - the "stubborn fat" that is last to leave. It sounds like she doesn't need that just yet. Still, the increased RMR helps a little bit. Often, an ECA stack is taken along-side yohimbe / yohimbine, which is a beta-2 agonist... it increases effectiveness of the receptors that release fat.

ETA: Legal issue about ephedra/ephedrine is for U.S. I can't say about other countries because I don't know.

An excerpt from the biomedcentral paper:
"Both of these intravenous infusion studies found that BCAAs decreased muscle protein synthesis as well as protein breakdown, meaning a decrease in muscle protein turnover. The catabolic state in which the rate of muscle protein breakdown exceeded the rate of muscle protein synthesis persisted during BCAA infusion. We conclude that the claim that consumption of dietary BCAAs stimulates muscle protein synthesis or produces an anabolic response in human subjects is unwarranted."

So, not only do 2 studies conclude that BCAAs do not preserve muscle, they actually work against muscle protein synthesis.

jasonpoihegatama wrote: »

mmapags wrote: »

An excerpt from the biomedcentral paper:
"Both of these intravenous infusion studies found that BCAAs decreased muscle protein synthesis as well as protein breakdown, meaning a decrease in muscle protein turnover. The catabolic state in which the rate of muscle protein breakdown exceeded the rate of muscle protein synthesis persisted during BCAA infusion. We conclude that the claim that consumption of dietary BCAAs stimulates muscle protein synthesis or produces an anabolic response in human subjects is unwarranted."

So, not only do 2 studies conclude that BCAAs do not preserve muscle, they actually work against muscle protein synthesis.

Sure this debate has been around for 20 years it was due to how much protein the body can absorb and how much could be absorbed into the muscle due to some protein can not last long and some are slower to absorb and some are fast to absorb than others protein this So protein synthesis could not take place in the muscle.

All groups had a 100% compliance with the study protocol. The BCAA group experienced a significantly greater gain in body weight than the whey group (2 ± 1 kg vs. 1 ± 1 kg; p < 0.02) and the carbohydrate group (2 ± 1 kg vs. 1 ± 1 kg; p < 0.01). For lean mass, the BCAA group gained significantly greater lean mass than the whey group (4 ± 1 kg vs. 2 ± 1 kg; p < 0.01) and the carbohydrate group (4 ± 1 kg vs. 1 ± 1 kg; p < 0.01). The whey group also gained significantly more lean mass than the carbohydrate group (2 ± 1 kg vs. 1 ± 1 kg; p < 0.02). BCAA group decreased their percent body fat significantly more than the whey group (2 ± 1% vs. 1 ± 1%; p = 0.039) and the carbohydrate group (2 ± 1% vs. 1 ± 1%; p < 0.01). Muscular strength was significantly greater in the BCAA group on the 10-RM bench press than the whey group (6 ± 3 kg vs. 3 ± 2 kg; p < 0.01) and the carbohydrate group (6 ± 3 kg vs. 2 ± 2 kg; p < 0.01). For the squat, the BCAA group gained significantly more strength on their 10-RM than the whey group (11 ± 5 kg vs. 5 ± 3 kg; p < 0.01) and the carbohydrate group (11 ± 5 kg vs. 3 ± 2 kg; p < 0.01).

For those interested in where this came from:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3313152/

With thanks for funding to Scivation Inc. a company that sells supplements.

angmarie28 wrote: »

I share an office with a lady whom I FINALLY convinced to start a lifting program instead of just exercise bike and lifting 5lb dumbells once a week. She wants to lose weight and gain muscle, so I finally got her to do an actual lifting program, so thats great. But now shes an "expert" and keeps informing me I need to start ECA stacking to shrink fat cells and fish oil to build lean muscle, and BCAAs are also needed. And I need protein shakes in the morning. Shes one that wont listen to me so I smile and nod, but seriously, we get free inbody scans at work and we are almost the same height, weight, and body type. My in body scan says I have 4lbs of fat to lose, and have more muscle than that machine says is ideal/recommended. hers however says she has like 30lbs of fat to lose, and 15lbs of muscle to gain to be Ideal.

Im seriously glad shes taking steps in the right direction, but all she talks about is a bunch "woo" and why I need it and how shes gained so much muscle since starting 3 weeks ago.

Anyways, that was long winded, but Im just curious if anyone in here does the ECA stack, and what the actual benefits (if any) are. (and no I have zero intentions of doing it, ive just never heard of it until now)

I agree with the others of just backing away and try to not engage in those conversations. The zealotry of the newly converted is difficult to argue against, because "don't confuse me with facts." You seem to be doing well, so you do you. She'll either crash and burn, or she'll get it eventually. Sometimes people need to slam their fingers in the door a few times before they decide to change how they hold it.

What regulations do the FDA enforce for supplements?

And do they actually regulate supplements?

ETA ref to Orrin Hatch DSHEA of 1994.

jasonpoihegatama wrote: »

nutmegoreo wrote: »

jasonpoihegatama wrote: »

mmapags wrote: »

An excerpt from the biomedcentral paper:
"Both of these intravenous infusion studies found that BCAAs decreased muscle protein synthesis as well as protein breakdown, meaning a decrease in muscle protein turnover. The catabolic state in which the rate of muscle protein breakdown exceeded the rate of muscle protein synthesis persisted during BCAA infusion. We conclude that the claim that consumption of dietary BCAAs stimulates muscle protein synthesis or produces an anabolic response in human subjects is unwarranted."

So, not only do 2 studies conclude that BCAAs do not preserve muscle, they actually work against muscle protein synthesis.

Sure this debate has been around for 20 years it was due to how much protein the body can absorb and how much could be absorbed into the muscle due to some protein can not last long and some are slower to absorb and some are fast to absorb than others protein this So protein synthesis could not take place in the muscle.

All groups had a 100% compliance with the study protocol. The BCAA group experienced a significantly greater gain in body weight than the whey group (2 ± 1 kg vs. 1 ± 1 kg; p < 0.02) and the carbohydrate group (2 ± 1 kg vs. 1 ± 1 kg; p < 0.01). For lean mass, the BCAA group gained significantly greater lean mass than the whey group (4 ± 1 kg vs. 2 ± 1 kg; p < 0.01) and the carbohydrate group (4 ± 1 kg vs. 1 ± 1 kg; p < 0.01). The whey group also gained significantly more lean mass than the carbohydrate group (2 ± 1 kg vs. 1 ± 1 kg; p < 0.02). BCAA group decreased their percent body fat significantly more than the whey group (2 ± 1% vs. 1 ± 1%; p = 0.039) and the carbohydrate group (2 ± 1% vs. 1 ± 1%; p < 0.01). Muscular strength was significantly greater in the BCAA group on the 10-RM bench press than the whey group (6 ± 3 kg vs. 3 ± 2 kg; p < 0.01) and the carbohydrate group (6 ± 3 kg vs. 2 ± 2 kg; p < 0.01). For the squat, the BCAA group gained significantly more strength on their 10-RM than the whey group (11 ± 5 kg vs. 5 ± 3 kg; p < 0.01) and the carbohydrate group (11 ± 5 kg vs. 3 ± 2 kg; p < 0.01).

For those interested in where this came from:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3313152/

With thanks for funding to Scivation Inc. a company that sells supplements.

Yes most studies would be funded by supplements company's. And the products has to meat FDA regulation.

Well more importantly than the group funding the study is how abysmal that actual study is. When I looked up the paper, I thought I was getting the Pubmed extract, but honestly, that's it. There is no real methodology, just "we gave some guys carbs, some guys why, and some BCAA's" - that's it. No explanations of how they assigned people to groups - if there was any coordination for experience with training. No explanation of what extent protein intake was equalized across groups.
Even the numbers just look fishy. What kind of study has results with 1 significant digit in with a ± 1 variance, particularly for some numbers that are a 2, or a 6± 3?
The only thing useful about this study is as an example of how not to present a study.