ArticlePDF Available

Effects of High vs. Low Protein Intake on Body Composition and Maximal Strength in Aspiring Female Physique Athletes Engaging in an 8-Week Resistance Training Program

Authors:

Abstract and Figures

Aspiring female physique athletes are often encouraged to ingest relatively high levels of dietary protein in conjunction with their resistance-training programs. However, there is little to no research investigating higher vs. lower protein intakes in this population. This study examined the influence of a high vs. low protein diet in conjunction with an 8-week resistance training program in this population. Seventeen females (21.2±2.1 years; 165.1±5.1 cm; 61±6.1 kg) were randomly assigned to a high protein diet (HP: 2.5g/kg/day; n=8) or a low protein diet (LP: 0.9g/kg/day, n=9) and were assessed for body composition and maximal strength prior to and after the 8-week protein intake and exercise intervention. Fat-free mass (FFM) increased significantly more in the HP group as compared to the LP group (p=0.009), going from 47.1 ± 4.5kg to 49.2 ± 5.4kg (+2.1kg) and from 48.1 ± 2.7kg to 48.7 ± 2 (+0.6kg) in the HP and LP groups, respectively. Fat mass significantly decreased over time in the HP group (14.1 ± 3.6kg to 13.0 ± 3.3kg; p<0.01) but no change was observed in the LP group (13.2 ± 3.7kg to 12.5 ± 3.0kg). While maximal strength significantly increased in both groups, there were no differences in strength improvements between the two groups. In aspiring female physique athletes, a higher protein diet is superior to a lower protein diet in terms of increasing FFM in conjunction with a resistance training program.
Content may be subject to copyright.
Effects of High vs. Low Protein Intake on Body Composition and Maximal Strength in Aspiring Female Physique Athletes
Engaging in an 8-Week Resistance Training Program” by Campbell BI et al.
International Journal of Sport Nutrition and Exercise Metabolism
© 2018 Human Kinetics, Inc.
Note: This article will be published in a forthcoming issue of the
International Journal of Sport Nutrition and Exercise
Metabolism. This article appears here in its accepted, peer-
reviewed form; it has not been copyedited, proofed, or formatted
by the publisher.
Section: Original Research
Article Title: Effects of High vs. Low Protein Intake on Body Composition and Maximal
Strength in Aspiring Female Physique Athletes Engaging in an 8-Week Resistance Training
Program
Authors: Bill I. Campbell1, Danielle Aguilar1, Laurin Conlin1, Andres Vargas1, Brad Jon
Schoenfeld2, Amey Corson1, Chris Gai1, Shiva Best1, Elfego Galvan2, and Kaylee Couvillion1
Affiliations: 1Physique and Performance Enhancement Laboratory, University of South Florida,
Tampa, FL. 2Lehman College, Bronx, NY. 3University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston, TX.
Running Head: Protein intake for female physique athletes
Journal: International Journal of Sport Nutrition and Exercise
Acceptance Date: January 14, 2018
©2018 Human Kinetics, Inc.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1123/ijsnem.2017-0389
Effects of High vs. Low Protein Intake on Body Composition and Maximal Strength in Aspiring Female Physique Athletes
Engaging in an 8-Week Resistance Training Program” by Campbell BI et al.
International Journal of Sport Nutrition and Exercise Metabolism
© 2018 Human Kinetics, Inc.
Title Page
Title of Article: Effects of high vs. low protein intake on body composition and maximal
strength in aspiring female physique athletes engaging in an 8-week resistance training program.
Submission Type: Original Research
Authors: Bill I. Campbell1, Danielle Aguilar1, Laurin Conlin1, Andres Vargas1, Brad Jon
Schoenfeld2, Amey Corson1, Chris Gai1, Shiva Best1, Elfego Galvan2, Kaylee Couvillion1.
Author Affiliations:
1Physique and Performance Enhancement Laboratory, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL
33620
2Lehman College, Bronx, NY 10468
3University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston, TX 77555
Corresponding Author:
Bill I. Campbell, PhD
University of South Florida
PED 206
Tampa, FL, 33620
813-974-4766
email: bcampbell@usf.edu
Running Head: Protein Intake for Female Physique Athletes
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA on 02/08/18, Volume ${article.issue.volume}, Article Number ${article.issue.issue}
Effects of High vs. Low Protein Intake on Body Composition and Maximal Strength in Aspiring Female Physique Athletes
Engaging in an 8-Week Resistance Training Program” by Campbell BI et al.
International Journal of Sport Nutrition and Exercise Metabolism
© 2018 Human Kinetics, Inc.
Abstract:
Aspiring female physique athletes are often encouraged to ingest relatively high levels of dietary
protein in conjunction with their resistance-training programs. However, there is little to no
research investigating higher vs. lower protein intakes in this population. This study examined the
influence of a high vs. low protein diet in conjunction with an 8-week resistance training program
in this population. Seventeen females (21.2±2.1 years; 165.1±5.1 cm; 61±6.1 kg) were randomly
assigned to a high protein diet (HP: 2.5g/kg/day; n=8) or a low protein diet (LP: 0.9g/kg/day, n=9)
and were assessed for body composition and maximal strength prior to and after the 8-week protein
intake and exercise intervention. Fat-free mass (FFM) increased significantly more in the HP group
as compared to the LP group (p=0.009), going from 47.1 ± 4.5kg to 49.2 ± 5.4kg (+2.1kg) and
from 48.1 ± 2.7kg to 48.7 ± 2 (+0.6kg) in the HP and LP groups, respectively. Fat mass
significantly decreased over time in the HP group (14.1 ± 3.6kg to 13.0 ± 3.3kg; p<0.01) but no
change was observed in the LP group (13.2 ± 3.7kg to 12.5 ± 3.0kg). While maximal strength
significantly increased in both groups, there were no differences in strength improvements between
the two groups. In aspiring female physique athletes, a higher protein diet is superior to a lower
protein diet in terms of increasing FFM in conjunction with a resistance training program.
Keywords: sports nutrition, bodybuilding, hypertrophy
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA on 02/08/18, Volume ${article.issue.volume}, Article Number ${article.issue.issue}
Effects of High vs. Low Protein Intake on Body Composition and Maximal Strength in Aspiring Female Physique Athletes
Engaging in an 8-Week Resistance Training Program” by Campbell BI et al.
International Journal of Sport Nutrition and Exercise Metabolism
© 2018 Human Kinetics, Inc.
INTRODUCTION
Dietary protein is an essential component of the human diet. The constituent amino acids
(AA) of dietary proteins are used to build body tissues, and thus protein consumption directly
influences the accretion of muscle mass (Atherton and Smith, 2012). Acute nitrogen balance
studies indicate that individuals involved in regimented resistance training require 1.6 to 1.8
g/kg/day to maximize anabolism approximately double that of sedentary individuals (Lemon,
2000). More recently, research using the indicator amino acid oxidation technique showed these
requirements may be as high as 2.2 g/kg/day in young male bodybuilders (Bandegan et al., 2017).
Interestingly, there is some evidence that protein requirements may be attenuated in resistance-
trained individuals. Moore et al. (2007) found that consumption of ~1.4 g/kg/day was adequate to
maintain a positive nitrogen balance following 12 weeks of regimented resistance training,
suggesting that the body becomes more efficient at using AAs for lean tissue synthesis with
continued performance of resistive exercise.
Despite the compelling acute research showing increased protein needs with resistance
training, there is a paucity of longitudinal studies investigating optimal daily protein intakes to
maximize body composition. In a very short-term study, Lemon et al. (1992) found that protein
intake of 1.35 versus 2.62 g/kg/day produced similar increases in lean body mass and thigh muscle
cross sectional area in novice lifters following a 4-week intensive resistance training program. The
higher protein condition slightly reduced body fat while the lower protein condition showed a
small increase, but these changes were not statistically significant. Antonio et al. (2014) reported
similar body composition changes in resistance trained men and women consuming 4.4 vs 1.8
g/kg/day over the course of an 8-week RT program. Follow-up work from the same lab showed
that resistance-trained individuals lost more body fat with a protein intake of 3.4 versus 2.3
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA on 02/08/18, Volume ${article.issue.volume}, Article Number ${article.issue.issue}
Effects of High vs. Low Protein Intake on Body Composition and Maximal Strength in Aspiring Female Physique Athletes
Engaging in an 8-Week Resistance Training Program” by Campbell BI et al.
International Journal of Sport Nutrition and Exercise Metabolism
© 2018 Human Kinetics, Inc.
g/kg/day after 8 weeks RT; while lean mass increases were similar between groups (Antonio et
al., 2015). The training programs in both of these studies were unsupervised, confounding the
ability to draw causality.
Given the limited research on the topic, significant gaps in the literature remain to be
addressed. In particular, a dearth of evidence exists on protein requirements for resistance-trained
women. This is especially true of female physique athletes, such as those aspiring to compete in
bikini and figure contests. Judging for these contests is based in part on a combination of muscle
symmetry, shape and definition. Lower body fat levels and ample muscle mass are therefore
requisites for success. Accordingly, progressive resistance training is an important component in
preparation for competition. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of higher
versus lower daily protein intakes on body composition changes in aspiring female physique
athletes following a supervised daily undulating periodized resistance training program. We
hypothesized that a higher daily protein consumption would result in greater improvements in fat-
free mass.
METHODS
This study utilized a parallel groups, repeated measures design where participants were
randomized to ingest either a high protein diet or a low protein diet in conjunction with a
supervised resistance training program for 8-weeks. Participants visited the laboratory on two
occasions, immediately prior to and after an 8-week supervised resistance-training program.
Before each laboratory visit the participants were instructed to fast for 10-hours (an overnight fast)
and refrain from physical activity for the previous 36 hours. The primary dependent variable (DV)
measured before and after the 8-week resistance training program was body composition (fat-free
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA on 02/08/18, Volume ${article.issue.volume}, Article Number ${article.issue.issue}
Effects of High vs. Low Protein Intake on Body Composition and Maximal Strength in Aspiring Female Physique Athletes
Engaging in an 8-Week Resistance Training Program” by Campbell BI et al.
International Journal of Sport Nutrition and Exercise Metabolism
© 2018 Human Kinetics, Inc.
mass, fat mass, and body fat percentage). Secondary DVs included maximal strength (back squat
and deadlift) and resting metabolic rate (RMR).
Participants
Healthy, young, aspiring female physique athletes volunteered to participate in the study.
In order to qualify for participation into the study, all participants were required to have resistance
trained for the previous three months or longer and needed to be able to deadlift 1.5x bodyweight.
All participants gave written informed consent before enrollment in the study. The study was
approved by the University of South Florida Institutional Review Board and is in compliance with
the Declaration of Helsinki as revised in 1983. Figure 1 summarizes the participant study flow.
There were no differences between groups at pre-training for any dependent variable.
Resting Metabolic Rate, Body Composition, and Maximal Strength
Upon entering the laboratory, participants urinated and then had their body weight
measured on a physician beam scale (Health-O-Meter, Model 402KL, McCook, IL, USA). Next,
RMR testing procedures were conducted in a manner as previously described (Campbell et al.,
2016). Intra and inter-day test-retest correlation calculated for the device used in the present study
were as follows: intra-day RMR Pearson correlation was r = 0.96 (p < 0.01) and the inter-day RMR
Pearson correlation was r = 0.90 (p < 0.01). Intra-day RMR ICC was 0.981 and the inter-day RMR
ICC was 0.946.
After RMR assessments were completed, body composition was assessed using the Body-
Metrix™ BX-2000 A-mode ultrasound (IntelaMetrix, Livermore, CA) with a standard 2.5 MHz
probe according to procedures as previously described (Colquhoun et al. 2017). All body
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA on 02/08/18, Volume ${article.issue.volume}, Article Number ${article.issue.issue}
Effects of High vs. Low Protein Intake on Body Composition and Maximal Strength in Aspiring Female Physique Athletes
Engaging in an 8-Week Resistance Training Program” by Campbell BI et al.
International Journal of Sport Nutrition and Exercise Metabolism
© 2018 Human Kinetics, Inc.
composition assessments were completed by the same technician whose calculated fat-free mass
test-retest reliability was: ICC 0.99; SEM 0.37 kg; minimal difference 1.03kg.
Maximal strength testing took place approximately 24 hours after the body composition
assessment. After completing a body mass warm-up, participants followed the National Strength
and Conditioning Association’s 1RM testing protocol (Sheppard and Triplett, 2016) for the back
squat and deadlift. For both lifts, the same research personnel observed each maximal repetition
attempt.
Dietary Intervention
In the week prior to initiating the resistance-training program, each participant met with a
nutrition counselor to receive instructions on how to track their food intake using a smartphone
app (MyFitness Pal®). After a three-day food tracking familiarization and baseline assessments
were completed, participants were matched according to total fat mass and randomized to the high
protein group (HP; n = 8) or the low protein group (LP; n = 9). Participants in the high protein
group were instructed to ingest at least 2.4 grams of protein/kg body mass per day and participants
in the low protein group were instructed to ingest no more than 1.2 grams of protein/kg body mass.
While the participants were instructed to track all food intake, there were no restrictions or
guidelines placed on dietary carbohydrate or fat intake during the study intervention for either
group. Pre and post-workout protein intake was standardized throughout the study. Participants in
the HP group consumed 25 grams of whey protein isolate (Dymatize ISO-100) immediately before
and another 25 grams immediately after each resistance exercise bout in the presence of research
personnel. Participants in the LP group consumed 5 grams of whey protein isolate (Dymatize ISO-
100) immediately before and another 5 grams immediately after each resistance exercise bout in
the presence of research personnel. Also, in addition to meeting with a nutrition coach at the
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA on 02/08/18, Volume ${article.issue.volume}, Article Number ${article.issue.issue}
Effects of High vs. Low Protein Intake on Body Composition and Maximal Strength in Aspiring Female Physique Athletes
Engaging in an 8-Week Resistance Training Program” by Campbell BI et al.
International Journal of Sport Nutrition and Exercise Metabolism
© 2018 Human Kinetics, Inc.
beginning of the study, each participant had access to their individual nutrition coach throughout
the study duration to answer any nutrition questions related to selection of food choices and
adhering to the assigned low or high protein diet.
Resistance and High Intensity Interval Training Program
After 1RM strength testing, participants began an 8-week resistance-training program.
Twenty-eight workouts were scheduled to be completed over the 8-week period, with four
workouts per week during weeks 1-3 and 5-7, and two workouts per week during the midpoint of
the training program (week 4) and last week of the training program (week 8). The reduced training
frequency during weeks 4 and 8 was a pre-planned reduction in volume and served as a taper. In
order to maintain compliance with the training program, participants had to attend at least 85% of
all scheduled supervised workouts.
The resistance-training program consisted of two upper-body focused days and two lower-
body focused days per week. The lower-body workouts consisted of five exercises per session
and required that each participant complete back squats, deadlifts, and hip thrusts and then choose
from a list of other lower-body exercises to complete the required number of exercises for the
workouts. Upper-body workouts consisted of six exercises per session and required that the
participants complete barbell rows, overhead press, and assisted pull-ups and then choose from a
list of other upper-body exercises to complete the required number of exercises for the workouts.
The set and repetition ranges varied throughout the program, including five sets of 3-5 repetitions,
four sets of 9-11 repetitions, and three sets of 14-16 repetitions. Participants self-selected the load
that would allow them to complete the appropriate number of repetitions within the specified
repetition ranges while allowing for approximately one additional repetition with good form. Each
workout was supervised by two to three research assistants in the Performance and Physique
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA on 02/08/18, Volume ${article.issue.volume}, Article Number ${article.issue.issue}
Effects of High vs. Low Protein Intake on Body Composition and Maximal Strength in Aspiring Female Physique Athletes
Engaging in an 8-Week Resistance Training Program” by Campbell BI et al.
International Journal of Sport Nutrition and Exercise Metabolism
© 2018 Human Kinetics, Inc.
Enhancement Laboratory at the University of South Florida, equating to a supervisor:participant
ratio of approximately 1:6.
The high intensity interval training program consisted of a progressive increase in the
number of sets of 30-second, maximal intensity sprints. For the first two weeks of the intervention,
participants engaged in four sets of 30-second high intensity interval exercise sets. The number of
sets increased to five sets for the third and fourth weeks, to six sets for the fifth and sixth weeks,
and to seven sets for the final two weeks of the intervention. Participants could choose their mode
of exercise (treadmill, outdoor sprinting, cycle ergometer, rowing machine, etc.) and were
instructed to rest two minutes between each set.
Statistics
Descriptive statistics (mean ± sd) for all DVs were calculated. The distribution of each
body composition, strength, and resting metabolic rate measure was examined with the Shapiro-
Wilk test (Razali and Wah, 2011; Shapiro and Wilk, 1965). Data for nutrition intake was
analyzed via an independent samples t-test. Data for all other DVs was analyzed via a 2 group
(high protein vs. moderate protein) × 2 time (pre- and post-training) between-within factorial
ANOVA with repeated measures on the second factor. For each outcome, an effect size (ES) was
calculated as the pretest-posttest change, divided by the pooled pretest SD. All analyses were
completed using SPSS (Version 22, IBM. Armonk, NY) software and the alpha criterion for
significance was set at 0.05.
RESULTS
In both protein intake groups for all dependent variables, the skewness and kurtosis
coefficients were within a range of ±1.5 and a Shapiro-Wilk’s test (p > 0.05) and a visual inspection
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA on 02/08/18, Volume ${article.issue.volume}, Article Number ${article.issue.issue}
Effects of High vs. Low Protein Intake on Body Composition and Maximal Strength in Aspiring Female Physique Athletes
Engaging in an 8-Week Resistance Training Program” by Campbell BI et al.
International Journal of Sport Nutrition and Exercise Metabolism
© 2018 Human Kinetics, Inc.
of their histograms, normal Q-Q plots, and box plots showed that data were normally distributed.
There were no differences in any dietary intake variable between the two groups at baseline.
Macronutrient intake and diet composition is summarized in table 1. Body composition, maximal
strength, and resting metabolic rate data are summarized in table 2 and figure 2. There were no
differences between the two groups for upper body training volume, lower body training volume,
or total body training volume.
DISCUSSION
To the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study to assess the effects of different levels of
protein intake on body composition in resistance-trained women in conjunction with a supervised
resistance training program. A primary and novel finding of our study is that a high protein diet
(2.5 g/kg/day) significantly increased FFM compared to a lower protein diet (0.9 g/kg/day) in the
cohort of aspiring female physique athletes. Our results are somewhat in contrast with those of
Lemon et al. (1992), who found that novice male lifters realized similar resistance training-induced
increases in lean mass with protein intakes of 1.35 versus 2.62 g/kg/day, although non-significantly
greater changes were seen with the higher protein consumption. Given that the study lasted just 4
weeks, it is plausible that differences might have reached significance with a longer study period,
as with the 8-week duration employed in our protocol. In addition, the lower protein intake of 1.35
g/kg/day used in this comparison study (Lemon et al., 1992) was still greater than the 0.9 g/kg/day
ingested in our investigation. This level of protein may have been enough protein to elicit a positive
change in fat-free mass.
A recent large-scale meta-analysis encompassing 49 studies with 1,863 participants found
that protein supplementation in conjunction with prolonged resistance training significantly
increased measures of muscle hypertrophy; however, beneficial effects reached a threshold when
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA on 02/08/18, Volume ${article.issue.volume}, Article Number ${article.issue.issue}
Effects of High vs. Low Protein Intake on Body Composition and Maximal Strength in Aspiring Female Physique Athletes
Engaging in an 8-Week Resistance Training Program” by Campbell BI et al.
International Journal of Sport Nutrition and Exercise Metabolism
© 2018 Human Kinetics, Inc.
total protein intakes exceeded ~1.6 g/kg/day (Morton et al. 2017). Therefore, our findings of
greater increases in lean mass with the higher protein condition may be due to suboptimal protein
intake in those consuming lower daily amounts of protein. Recent evidence shows when
resistance-trained individuals consume at least 2 grams of protein/kg body mass during periods of
unsupervised resistance training, additional intake does not enhance lean mass gains (Antonio et
al., 2014; Antonio et al., 2015).
Another important finding from the study was the high protein group lost a significant
amount of fat mass whereas reductions in the low-protein group were not statistically significant.
These results held true despite the fact that those the higher protein group ingested significantly
more kilocalories (approximately 400 kcals) in the form of protein. These results are consistent
with those of Antonio et al. (2015), who reported a loss of 2.4% body fat with consumption of 3.4
g/kg/day versus only a 0.7% decrease when consuming 2.3 g/kg/day. Considering that weight loss
is a function of energy balance (Thomas et al., 2009), these findings may seem counterintuitive.
However, dietary protein has been shown to have a much higher thermic effect (25-30% of total
calories) compared to less than 10% for carbohydrate or lipid (Halton and Hu, 2004). Thus, a
substantial portion of protein calories consumed are lost as heat. Moreover, increases in non-
exercise activity thermogenesis also have been observed following overfeeding (Levine et al.,
1999), and it is conceivable that higher protein intakes may enhance this effect. Therefore,
differences in fat loss may be explained by a greater portion of energy from the additional protein
to be used for lean tissue building as opposed to adipose storage, as well an ability for higher levels
of protein intake to positively influence the energy expenditure side of the energy balance equation.
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA on 02/08/18, Volume ${article.issue.volume}, Article Number ${article.issue.issue}
Effects of High vs. Low Protein Intake on Body Composition and Maximal Strength in Aspiring Female Physique Athletes
Engaging in an 8-Week Resistance Training Program” by Campbell BI et al.
International Journal of Sport Nutrition and Exercise Metabolism
© 2018 Human Kinetics, Inc.
Both training groups experienced a body recomposition (the gaining of fat-free mass while
simultaneously losing fat mass). While this finding has been repeatedly observed in overweight
and obese populations undergoing a resistance training program (Longland et al., 2016; Josse et
al. 2011), this outcome is not typically observed in well-trained individuals that are not classified
as overweight/obese. Garthe and coworkers (2011) recruited elite male and female athletes to
follow a slow vs. fast weight loss program in which both groups ingested approximately 1.5 grams
of protein/kg body mass and resistance trained four days per week. Athletes in the slower weight
loss group realized significant increases in lean body mass (~1kg) and significant reductions in fat
mass (~4.9kg) during the 8.5-week study intervention. When taken together, the Garthe study
(2011) and the present investigation indicate that body recompositiion is possible during both a
hypocaloric and hypercaloric state provided that a structured exercise and nutritional protocol is
followed.
Both protein intake groups experienced significant increases in maximal strength.
However, the influence of higher protein intake did not improve maximal strength in comparison
to the lower protein intake. This finding was consistent with the data reported by Josse and
coworkers (2010) in which non-resistance trained females did not increase lower-body strength
when additional protein was ingested (in the form of milk) in conjunction with a 12-week
resistance training program. The finding was also consistent with data reported by Hida et al.
(2012) in which collegiate female athletes did not increase maximal strength when additional
protein was ingested (in the form of egg white protein) in conjunction with an 8-week training
regimen. Also, non-resistance trained overweight females increasing protein intake (in the form of
yogurt supplementation) did not improve maximal strength as compared to a lower protein
ingestion group (Thomas et al., 2011). Despite the difference in FFM between the two protein
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA on 02/08/18, Volume ${article.issue.volume}, Article Number ${article.issue.issue}
Effects of High vs. Low Protein Intake on Body Composition and Maximal Strength in Aspiring Female Physique Athletes
Engaging in an 8-Week Resistance Training Program” by Campbell BI et al.
International Journal of Sport Nutrition and Exercise Metabolism
© 2018 Human Kinetics, Inc.
intake groups, there was no associated difference in resting metabolic rate. While males tend to
realize an increase in resting metabolic rate with an increase in resistance-training induced fat-free
mass, females are void of such elevations in resting metabolic rate (Lemmer et al., 2001; Bonganha
et al. 2011). The present study reinforces this observation.
Although our study had several notable strengths (supervised workouts, high adherence to
daily food tracking, and personalized nutritional counseling), there nevertheless are some
limitations that must be considered when drawing practical inferences. For one, there was a large
discrepancy between the two protein intakes investigated. Prudent follow-up research would
compare protein intakes of approximately 1.6 to 1.8 g/kg/day (a likely zone of optimality) to a
super-optimal daily intake of approximately 2.4 g/kg/day as was investigated in the present study.
Also, we did not attempt to control for the subjects’ menstrual cycles when testing. This may have
influenced body water and thus assessment of lean mass (Stachoń, 2016). While it can be
speculated that random distribution in the cohort would render any observed differences small, we
nevertheless cannot rule out confounding effects on body composition. Another potential
confounding issue was that the high protein group consumed 25 g of whey protein immediately
before and after the workouts while the low protein group consumed only 5 grams during these
periods. It has been suggested that there is an “anabolic window of opportunity” whereby pre- and
post-workout protein consumption heightens the accretion of muscle proteins, and that intake of
at least 20 grams of high quality protein is needed to maximize this response (Ivy and Ferguson-
Stegall, 2014; Macnaughton et al., 2016). This raises the possibility that the timing of consumption
may have been at least partly attributable to results. However, recent meta-analytic data indicates
that total protein intake, not precise peri-workout timing, is the determining factor in exercise-
induced muscular adaptations (Schoenfeld et al., 2013). Further, given that the intent of the
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA on 02/08/18, Volume ${article.issue.volume}, Article Number ${article.issue.issue}
Effects of High vs. Low Protein Intake on Body Composition and Maximal Strength in Aspiring Female Physique Athletes
Engaging in an 8-Week Resistance Training Program” by Campbell BI et al.
International Journal of Sport Nutrition and Exercise Metabolism
© 2018 Human Kinetics, Inc.
methodological design was to implement dietary changes to only protein (while keeping dietary
carbohydrate and fat consistent between the two groups), this also resulted in a difference in total
caloric intake between the two groups, with the high protein group ingesting significantly more
kcals per day as compared to the low protein group. It is possible that the changes in lean body
mass observed in both groups were, at least in part, due to the elevated caloric intake in the high
protein group and the decreased caloric intake in the low protein group during the 8-week dietary
intervention. Finally, our findings are specific to young, resistance-trained women; results cannot
necessarily be extrapolated to other populations.
SUMMARY AND PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS
This is the first study to demonstrate that an under-represented population (female physique
athletes) engaging in resistance training benefit from higher protein intakes. Specifically, the
findings suggest that higher protein intakes are advisable for these types of athletes seeking to
optimize body composition. As there is a large discrepancy between 0.9g/kg/day and 2.5g/kg/day,
additional research is required to determine the necessity of intakes as high as 2.5g/kg/day in order
to achieve the body recompositiion observed in the present study.
Acknowledgement, authorships, declarations:
This study was funded by Dymatize Athletic Nutrition Institute (DANI). The study was designed
by BIC, DA, LC, AV, AC, CG, and SB. Data interpretation and manuscript preparation were
undertaken by BIC, BJS, EG, and KC. BIC is on the scientific advisory board for Dymatize
Athletic Nutrition Institute.
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA on 02/08/18, Volume ${article.issue.volume}, Article Number ${article.issue.issue}
Effects of High vs. Low Protein Intake on Body Composition and Maximal Strength in Aspiring Female Physique Athletes
Engaging in an 8-Week Resistance Training Program” by Campbell BI et al.
International Journal of Sport Nutrition and Exercise Metabolism
© 2018 Human Kinetics, Inc.
References
Antonio, J., Peacock, C.A., Ellerbroek, A., Fromhoff, B., & Silver, T. (2014). The effects of
consuming a high protein diet (4.4 g/kg/d) on body composition in resistance-trained individuals.
Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition, 12;11:19.
Antonio, J., Ellerbroek, A., Silver, T., Orris, S., Scheiner, M., Gonzalez, A., et al. (2015). A high
protein diet (3.4 g/kg/d) combined with a heavy resistance training program improves body
composition in healthy trained men and women--a follow-up investigation. Journal of the
International Society of Sports Nutrition, 20;12:39.
Atherton, P.J. & Smith, K. (2012). Muscle protein synthesis in response to nutrition and exercise.
The Journal of Physiology, 590(5):1049-57.
Bandegan, A., Courtney-Martin, G., Rafii, M., Pencharz, P.B., & Lemon, P.W. (2017). Indicator
amino acid-derived estimate of dietary protein requirement for male bodybuilders on a
nontraining day is several-fold greater than the current recommended dietary allowance. The
Journal of Nutrition, 147(5):850-857.
Bonganha, V., Conceicao, M.S., Chacon-Mikahil, M.P.T., & Madruga, V.A. (2011). Response of
the resting metabolic rate after 16 weeks of resistance training in postmenopausal women.
Revista da Associao Mdica Brasileira, 17:350353.
Campbell, B., Zito, G., Colquhoun, R., Martinez, N., Kendall, K., Buchanan, L., et al. (2016).
The effects of a single-dose thermogenic supplement on resting metabolic rate and hemodynamic
variables in healthy females--a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, cross-over trial.
Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition, 13:13.
Colquhoun, R., Gai, C., Walters, J., Brannon, A.R., Kilpatrick, M.W., D’Agostino, D.P., et al.
(2017). Comparison of powerlifting performance intrained men using traditional and flexible
daily undulating periodization. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 31(2):283-91.
Garthe, I., Raastad, T., Refsnes, P.E., Koivisto, A., & Sundgot-Borgen, J. (2011). Effect of two
different weight-loss rates on body composition and strength and power-related performance in
elite athletes. International Journal of Sport Nutrition and Exercise Metabolism, 21(2):97-104.
Halton, T.L., & Hu, F.B. (2004). The effects of high protein diets on thermogenesis, satiety and
weight loss: a critical review. Journal of the American College of Nutrition, 23(5):373-85.
Hida, A., Hasegawa, Y., Mekata, Y., Usuda, M., Masuda, Y., Kawano, H., et al. (2012). Effects
of egg white protein supplementation on muscle strength and serum free amino acid
concentrations. Nutrients, 4(10):1504-17.
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA on 02/08/18, Volume ${article.issue.volume}, Article Number ${article.issue.issue}
Effects of High vs. Low Protein Intake on Body Composition and Maximal Strength in Aspiring Female Physique Athletes
Engaging in an 8-Week Resistance Training Program” by Campbell BI et al.
International Journal of Sport Nutrition and Exercise Metabolism
© 2018 Human Kinetics, Inc.
Ivy, J.L., & Ferguson-Stegall, L.M. (2014). Nutrient timing: the means to improved exercise
performance, recovery, and training adaptation. American Journal of Lifestyle Medicine,
8(4):246-59.
Josse, A.R., Atkinson, S.A., Tarnopolsky, M.A., & Phillips, S.M. (2011). Increased consumption
of dairy foods and protein during diet- and exercise-induced weight loss promotes fat mass loss
and lean mass gain in overweight and obese premenopausal women. The Journal of Nutrition,
141(9):1626-34.
Josse, A.R., Tang, J.E., Tarnopolsky, M.A., and Phillips S.M. (2010). Body composition and
strength changes in women with milk and resistance exercise. Medicine and Science in Sports
and Exercise, 42(6):1122-30.
Lemmer, J.T., Ivey, F.M., Ryan, A.S., Martel, G.F., Hurlbut, D.E., Metter, J.E., et al. (2001).
Effect of strength training on resting metabolic rate and physical activity: age and gender
comparisons. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 33(4):532-41.
Lemon, P.W. (2000). Beyond the zone: protein needs of active individuals. Journal of the
American College of Nutrition, 19(5 Suppl):513S-521S.
Lemon, P.W., Tarnopolsky, M.A., MacDougall, J.D., & Atkinson, S.A. (1992). Protein
requirements and muscle mass/strength changes during intensive training in novice bodybuilders.
Journal of Applied Physiology (1985). 73(2):767-75.
Levine J.A., Eberhardt N.L., & Jensen M.D. (1999). Role of nonexercise activity thermogenesis
in resistance to fat gain in humans. Science, 283(5399):212-4.
Longland, T.M., Oikawa, S.Y., Mitchell, C.J., Devries, M.C., & Phillips, S.M. (2016). Higher
compared with lower dietary protein during an energy deficit combined with intense exercise
promotes greater lean mass gain and fat mass loss: a randomized trial. American Journal of
Clinical Nutrition, 103(3):738-46.
Mcnaughton, L.S., Wardle, S.L., Witard, O.C., McGlory, C., Hamilton, D.L., Jeromson S, et al.
(2016). The response of muscle protein synthesis following whole-body resistance exercise is
greater following 40 g than 20 g of ingested whey protein. Physiological Reports, 4(15).
Moore, D.R., Del Bel, N.C., Nizi, K.I., Hartman, J.W., Tang, J.E., Armstrong, D, et al. (2007).
Resistance training reduces fasted- and fed-state leucine turnover and increases dietary nitrogen
retention in previously untrained young men. The Journal of Nutrition, 137(4):985-91.
Morton, R.W., Murphy, K.T., McKellar, S.R., Schoenfeld, B.J., Henselmans, M., Helms, E., et
al. (2017). A systematic review, meta-analysis and meta-regression of the effect of protein
supplementation on resistance training-induced gains in muscle mass and strength in healthy
adults. British Journal of Sports Medicine [epub ahead of print].
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA on 02/08/18, Volume ${article.issue.volume}, Article Number ${article.issue.issue}
Effects of High vs. Low Protein Intake on Body Composition and Maximal Strength in Aspiring Female Physique Athletes
Engaging in an 8-Week Resistance Training Program” by Campbell BI et al.
International Journal of Sport Nutrition and Exercise Metabolism
© 2018 Human Kinetics, Inc.
Razali, N.M. and Wah, Y.B. (2011). Power comparisons of Shapiro-Wilk, Kolmogorov-
Smirnov, Lilliefors and Anderson-Darling tests. Journal of Statistical Modeling and Analytics,
2(1):21-33.
Schoenfeld, B.J., Aragon, A.A., Krieger, J.W. (2013). The effect of protein timing on muscle
strength and hypertrophy: a meta-analysis. Journal of the International Society of Sports
Nutrition. 10(1):53.
Shapiro, S.S, and Wilk, M.B. (1965). An analysis of Variance Test for Normality (Complete
Samples). Biometrika, 52(3/4):591-611.
Sheppard, J.M. and Triplett, N.T. Program design for resistance training. (2016). In G.G. Haff
and N.T. Triplett (Eds.), NSCA’s essentials of strength training and conditioning, 4th Edition (pg.
452). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
Stachoń, A.J. (2016). Menstrual Changes in Body Composition of Female Athletes. Collegium
Antropologicum. 40(2):111-22.
Thomas, D.M., Ciesla, A., Levine, J.A., Stevens, J.G., and Martin, C.K. (2009). A mathematical
model of weight change with adaptation. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering. 6(4):873-
87.
Thomas, D.T., Wideman, L., Lovelady, C.A. (2011). Effects of a dairy supplement and
resistance training on lean mass and insulin-like growth factor in women. International Journal
of Sport Nutrition & Exercise Metabolism, 21(3):181-8.
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA on 02/08/18, Volume ${article.issue.volume}, Article Number ${article.issue.issue}
Effects of High vs. Low Protein Intake on Body Composition and Maximal Strength in Aspiring Female Physique Athletes
Engaging in an 8-Week Resistance Training Program” by Campbell BI et al.
International Journal of Sport Nutrition and Exercise Metabolism
© 2018 Human Kinetics, Inc.
Figure 1. CONSORT Participant Flow
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA on 02/08/18, Volume ${article.issue.volume}, Article Number ${article.issue.issue}
Effects of High vs. Low Protein Intake on Body Composition and Maximal Strength in Aspiring Female Physique Athletes
Engaging in an 8-Week Resistance Training Program” by Campbell BI et al.
International Journal of Sport Nutrition and Exercise Metabolism
© 2018 Human Kinetics, Inc.
Figure 2. Individual Fat-Free Mass Responses
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA on 02/08/18, Volume ${article.issue.volume}, Article Number ${article.issue.issue}
Effects of High vs. Low Protein Intake on Body Composition and Maximal Strength in Aspiring Female Physique Athletes
Engaging in an 8-Week Resistance Training Program” by Campbell BI et al.
International Journal of Sport Nutrition and Exercise Metabolism
© 2018 Human Kinetics, Inc.
Table 1. Macronutrient Intake at Baseline and During the 8-Week Dietary Intervention
High Protein (n=8)
Low Protein (n=9)
Baseline
8-Week
Average
Baseline
8-Week
Average
Kcals
1,588 ± 438
1,839 ± 316#
1,708 ± 419
1,416 ± 204#
CHO (grams)
157 ± 61
156 ± 47
188 ± 62
177 ± 33
PRO (grams)
89 ± 23
157 ± 18*
90 ± 35
56 ± 5*
Fat (grams)
67 ± 24
65 ± 21
66 ± 23
54 ± 13
Kcal/kg body mass
27 ± 10
30 ± 5#
28 ± 9
24 ± 3#
CHO (g/kg/day)
2.7 ± 1.3
2.5 ± 0.3
3.1 ± 1.2
2.9 ± 0.2
PRO (g/kg/day)
1.5 ± 0.5
2.5 ± 0.2*
1.5 ± 0.5
0.9 ± 0.1*
Fat (g/kg/day)
1.1 ± 0.4
1.1 ± 0.3
1.1 ± 0.4
0.9 ± 0.2
CHO/PRO/Fat (%)
40-22-38
34-34-32
44-21-35
50-16-34
CHO = carbohydrate; PRO = protein; g/kg/day = grams/kilogram body mass/day.
Significant difference (independent samples t-test); * = p < 0.001; # = p < 0.05
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA on 02/08/18, Volume ${article.issue.volume}, Article Number ${article.issue.issue}
High Protein (n=8)
Low Protein (n=9)
Pre
Post
Change
Cohen’s d
Pre
Post
Change
Cohen’s d
Body Weight (kg)
61.2 ± 7.9
62.2 ± 8.2
+1.0
0.12
61.4 ± 4.4
61.2 ± 4.6
-0.2
0.04
Fat-Free Mass (kg)
47.1 ± 4.5
49.2 ± 5.4#
+2.1
0.42
48.1 ± 2.7
48.7 ± 2.0
+0.6
0.25
Fat Mass (kg)
14.1 ± 3.6
13.0 ± 3.3*
-1.1
0.32
13.3 ± 3.7
12.5 ± 3.0
-0.8
0.24
Body Fat (%)
22.7 ± 3.0
20.7 ± 3.1#
-2.0
0.66
21.4 ± 5.2
20.3 ± 3.9
-1.1
0.24
1RM Squat (kg)
69.3 ± 18.4
78.7 ± 16.0#
+9.4
0.55
72.0 ± 15.1
81.8 ± 20.1#
+9.8
0.56
1RM Deadlift (kg)
86.9 ± 14.8
102.8 ± 18.5#
+15.9
0.95
97.2 ± 16.7
111.4 ± 17.6#
+14.2
0.83
RMR (kcals/day)
1,466 ± 152
1,446 ± 151#
-20
0.13
1,451 ± 104
1,510 ± 196
+59
0.39
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA on 02/08/18, Volume ${article.issue.volume}, Article Number ${article.issue.issue}
... CT introduces added complexity not only to the training distribution but to the nutritional requirements for athletes as well. This is particularly important in instances where athletes are in negative energy balance, either as part of weight loss strategies (6) or because of an inadequate nutritional understanding (18). This raises the concern regarding muscle mass loss especially when protein intake is suboptimal (6), which can be detrimental for athletic performance (3,18) and skeletal muscle remodeling (17). ...
... This is particularly important in instances where athletes are in negative energy balance, either as part of weight loss strategies (6) or because of an inadequate nutritional understanding (18). This raises the concern regarding muscle mass loss especially when protein intake is suboptimal (6), which can be detrimental for athletic performance (3,18) and skeletal muscle remodeling (17). Therefore, careful consideration of dietary strategies that can support training adaptations while optimizing performance and recovery is necessary (77). ...
Article
Concurrent training (CT), which combines resistance exercise and energy systems conditioning, is the default approach to preparation in high-intensity intermittent (“stop and go”) team sports. This review provides an overview of CT, emphasizing its complexities and challenges in managing fatigue and optimizing performance. These complexities are specifically compounded by the variability in game demands across the season, where the presence of intensified and nonintensified competition periods necessitates a flexible and adaptive training approach. In this context, there are essential training variables to consider, including intensity, volume, session order, and recovery intervals between sessions. In addition, nontraining variables such as travel, sleep, and nutrition play a role in the fatigue experienced while training and competing. These variables interact to influence acute performance and training adaptations and can be strategically adjusted by strength and conditioning practitioners. The aim of this review is to provide a comprehensive understanding of fatigue management for practitioners in team sports, emphasizing the complexities and challenges of CT and offering simplified practical recommendations for adjusting training variables within any given microcycle.
... On the one hand, Rosenbloom et al. determined that increasing protein intake may decrease carbohydrate intake, causing athletes to feel exhausted and perform poorly during training (15). On the other hand, several researchers reported that increased protein intake (higher than or equal to 1.5 g/kg daily) had no additional benefits or drawbacks for athletes' athletic performance, such as endurance or maximum strength (16)(17)(18)(19)(20). Knuiman et al. also mentioned that the evidence of the role of protein on endurance training adaptations and performance is scarce, and there is still no direct evidence that individuals performing endurance training benefit from additional protein (21). ...
... This metaanalysis analyzed data from 373 participants. A total of 14 studies included cyclists as participants, while one study (18) did not specify the type of athletes involved. Participants in 2 studies were soccer players (28,31), and 2 studies' participants were triathletes (23,33). ...
Article
Full-text available
Background The impact of a protein-rich diet and protein supplements on athletic performance remains a topic of debate. Does protein intake offer benefits for athletes? If so, which specific aspects of athletic performance are most influenced by protein? Methods This study aimed to explore the relationship between protein intake and athletic performance. A systematic database search was conducted to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) examining the effects of protein intake on athletes’ performance. The databases searched included PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, EBSCO, and Ovid. The meta-analysis included a total of 28 studies involving 373 athletes. The meta-analysis employed both the fixed-effects model and the random-effects model to investigate the impact of protein intake on sports performance. Subgroup analyses were conducted to provide solid evidence to explain the results of the meta-analysis. Sensitive analysis and funnel plots were used to assess the risk of bias and data robustness. Results Overall, protein intake did not show a statistically significant improvement in athletic performance (standardized mean difference [SMD] = 0.12, 95% confidence interval [CI]: −0.01 to 0.25). However, in subgroup analysis, the protein group demonstrated a statistically significant improvement in endurance performance, as indicated by the forest plot of final values (SMD = 0.17, 95% CI: 0.02 to 0.32). Additionally, the change value in the forest plot for endurance performance showed even greater statistical significance than the final value (SMD = 0.31, 95% CI: 0.15 to 0.46). In the subgroup analysis based on physiological indices, muscle glycogen showed a statistically significant improvement in the protein group (standardized mean difference [SMD] = 0.74, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.02 to 0.32). Furthermore, subgroup analyses based on protein supplementation strategies revealed that co-ingestion of protein and carbohydrates (CHO) demonstrated statistically significant improvements in endurance performance (SMD = 0.36, 95% CI: 0.11 to 0.61), whereas high protein intake alone did not. Conclusion Protein intake appears to provide modest benefits to athletes in improving their performance, particularly by enhancing endurance. Subgroup analysis suggests that protein intake improves muscle glycogen levels and that the co-ingestion of protein with CHO is more effective for endurance athletes than high protein intake alone. Systematic review registration https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, Identifier CRD42024508021.
... We are the only study to report an increase in FM [2,3,5,28], but that was also anticipated, given our hypercaloric design. Non-TRE RE training studies of a similar length and population pool with caloric surplus targets from ~380-1,250 kcal/day and protein intakes between 2.4 and 4.4 g/kg/bw all report similar changes in FFM (0.5-2.0 kg) and FM (−1.5-1.5 kg) [56][57][58][59][60]. The pronounced difference in fat accumulation between groups most likely highlights the existence of accidental differences in nutritional intake. ...
Article
Full-text available
Background: The effectiveness and practicality of time-restricted eating (TRE) when trying to maximize muscle mass and strength is unclear. Thus, we examined the effects of a hypercaloric 16:8 TRE approach during supervised progressive resistance exercise. Methods: Seventeen healthy and well-trained men (n = 10) and women (n = 7) were randomly assigned to TRE or control (FED). Both groups consumed a 10% hypercaloric high-protein (2.2 g/kg/d) diet and performed supervised resistance exercise 4× per wk for 8 wk. TRE consumed all calories within an 8 h window starting at least 1 h post-exercise, while FED consumed the same number of calories throughout the day. Results: Eating windows were significantly different (TRE: 7.9 ± 0.1 h vs. FED: 13.2 ± 0.6 h). Calorie, carbohydrate, fat, and protein intake did not differ statistically between groups. Total exercise volume was significantly lower in TRE than FED (6,960 ± 287 vs. 7,334 ± 289 repetitions), as were subjective daily energy ratings (week 4 = -1.41; p = 0.04, week 8 = -1.04; p = 0.06). Both groups increased maximal upper and lower body strength (1RM) and muscular endurance (ME); however, gains in squat 1RM were 4.0 ± 1.9 kg lower in TRE (p = 0.05). Both groups increased fat-free mass similarly (TRE: 2.67 kg; FED: 1.82 kg, p = 0.04), but FED added 1.4 ± 0.6 kg more fat mass (p = 0.04). Subjective mood and sleep ratings did not change in either group. Conclusions: 16:8 TRE is viable during periods of muscle size, strength, and endurance development in well-trained young men and women when engaging in progressive resistance exercise and eating in a caloric surplus with adequate protein. However, the differences in total training volume, squat 1RM, fat mass accumulation, and energy are notable and practically relevant. These findings should be considered within the broader context of an individual's goals, lifestyle, preferences, and exercise demands.
... These findings suggest that while the thermogenic supplement enhanced fat loss, it did not hinder the preservation of lean tissue or impact body weight significantly beyond what is typically observed with RT alone. It was observed that both groups experienced insignificant increases in overall body mass and LBM, aligning with prior reports highlighting the importance of standardized protein intake in conjunction with RT for muscle hypertrophy [37]. It is important to reiterate that all subjects were instructed to maintain their current dietary habits throughout the duration of the investigation and were provided with a dietary protein supplement following the cessation of each supervised RT bout. ...
Article
Full-text available
Featured Application This study demonstrates that chronic ingestion of a thermogenic supplement in conjunction with a resistance training program can significantly enhance fat loss while maintaining strength gains in trained individuals. These findings may inform the development of targeted supplementation strategies for individuals seeking to optimize fat loss while engaging in resistance training. Abstract As interest in weight management and metabolic health grows, thermogenic supplements have gained attention for their potential to enhance caloric expenditure and fat loss. This study aimed to investigate the effects of chronic thermogenic supplement ingestion on body composition and strength outcomes during an 8-week periodized resistance training program. Thirty-four resistance-trained males were randomized into thermogenic supplementation (TS) (n = 18) or placebo (n = 16) groups in a double-blind, placebo-controlled design. Participants consumed thermogenic or placebo capsules daily, with dosage adjusted midway through the intervention. Body composition was assessed using ultrasound-based body fat analysis, and strength was measured via bench press and back squat one-repetition maximum (1-RM) tests. Results indicated that TS experienced significantly greater reductions in fat mass (−0.65 kg vs. 0.12 kg, p = 0.029) and body fat percentage (−0.89% vs. −0.08%, p = 0.039) compared to the placebo. Both groups demonstrated significant and comparable improvements in squat (TS: 16.87 kg, placebo: 18.47 kg) and bench press strength (TS: 7.80 kg, placebo: 7.13 kg). These findings suggest that thermogenic supplement ingestion can enhance fat loss without impeding strength adaptations. Future research should explore the dose–response effects and applicability of thermogenics in different populations and over extended durations.
... Previously, studies have shown that nutrition by itself can decrease FM to lose weight (Benito et al., 2017;Foster-Schubert et al., 2012). Other studies show that if a diet is incorporated into an exercise intervention then decreases in FM are observed (Campbell et al., 2018;Garthe et al., 2011). Regional FM was also analyzed in our study but no significant differences were observed compared to baseline. ...
Article
Full-text available
Manual Resistance Training (MRT) is a mode of Resistance Training (RT) primarily used as a training method for improving muscular strength and body composition. MRT is a form of training that requires minimal equipment due to the use of a partner who provides external resistance. The purposes of this study were 1) to investigate the effects of an 8-week MRT intervention on body composition and muscular strength, and 2) to compare the changes observed in MRT to a traditional Weight Resistance Training (WRT) and control groups. Thirty young adults (n = 30) were randomly assigned to either a MRT (n = 10), WRT (n = 10) or control (n = 10) group. The MRT and WRT groups engaged in twice-a-week training for 1 hour with 2 circuits composed of 3 exercises per circuit while the control group was instructed not to engage in any exercise for 8 weeks. Body composition was measured via Dual-energy X-ray Absorptiometry and Muscular Strength was measured via Isokinetic Knee Extension/Flexion, Isometric Bench Press, Isometric Mid-thigh Pull, One-Repetition Maximum (1RM) Bench Press (1RMBP), and 1RM Leg Press (1RMLP) before and after the intervention. The MRT and WRT groups showed no change in body composition from pre to post-testing. However, an increase in Strength was seen in MRT through 1RMLP (p < 0.01) and in WRT through 1RMBP (p < 0.01) and 1RMLP (p < 0.01) from pre to post-testing. No changes in the control group were observed for any of the variables of interest (p > 0.05). An 8week MRT or WRT intervention increases muscle strength without changes in body composition.
... Since then, it was slightly adjusted to improve the suitability of the analysis with the available data. Only 5 studies (5,19,35,49,68) involving experimental comparisons of higher versus lower protein intakes qualified for meta-analysis. This was deemed to be an insufficient amount of data to justify conducting the meta-analysis. ...
Article
Full-text available
Individuals often restrict energy intake to lose fat mass (and body mass [BM]) while performing resistance training (RT) to retain fat-free mass (FFM). Therefore, the aim of the present systematic review with meta-regression was to explore (a) the pattern and strength of the dose-response relationship between daily dietary protein intake and FFM change, and (b) whether intervention duration, energy deficit magnitude, baseline body fat percentage (BF%), and participant sex influence this relationship. Studies were included if they involved a standardized RT protocol with nonobese, energy-restricted (experiencing fat mass loss) individuals with a minimum of 3 months RT experience. Of 916 retrieved studies, data were extracted from a total of 29 studies. Bayesian methods were used to fit linear and nonlinear meta-regression models and estimate effect sizes, highest density credible intervals, and probabilities. Results suggest a >97% probability of a linear dose-response relationship between daily protein intake [g/kgBM: β = 0.07 (95% highest density interval [HDI]: −0.01 to 0.14), and g/kg/FFM: β = 0.06 (95% HDI: 0.01 to 0.12)] and favorable FFM changes. The relationship is stronger when protein intake is expressed relative to FFM, in interventions longer than 4 weeks, in men, and when BF% is lower. Overall, the heterogeneity between studies renders our findings exploratory.
... When a nutritional protocol is carried out, the changes can be substantially greater than when only training is taken into account [142]. The possibility of producing a body recomposition is given regardless of the level of fitness [143], for both men [144] and women [145]. Body recomposition exists for all populations, only that some of them, can take greater advantage of it while, in others, it would be more interesting to perform classic processes of muscle mass gain and fat loss. ...
Chapter
Full-text available
The present chapter delves into the topic of muscle hypertrophy in detail, focusing on defining what muscle hypertrophy is, the types of hypertrophy, the mechanisms, and the relationship with resistance training, as well as the variables affecting hypertrophy such as nutrition, rest, exercise selection, training volume, and training frequency, among others. The importance of mechanical tension, metabolic stress, and muscle damage as triggers for muscle hypertrophy is emphasized. Various types of muscle hypertrophy are explored, including connective tissue hypertrophy and sarcoplasmic and myofibrillar hypertrophy. The text also delves into how hypertrophy mechanisms relate to resistance training, highlighting the significance of mechanical tension and metabolic stress as stimuli for muscle hypertrophy. In a practical point of view, the text also discusses factors like nutrition and recovery, highlighting the importance of maintaining a positive energy balance and adequate protein intake to promote muscle growth optimally. Training variables such as exercise selection, exercise order, intensity, volume, frequency, and tempo of execution are discussed in detail, outlining their impact on muscle hypertrophy. The text provides a comprehensive overview of muscle hypertrophy, analyzing various factors that influence the ability to increase muscle mass. It offers detailed information on the biological mechanisms, types of hypertrophy, training strategies, and nutritional and recovery considerations necessary to achieve optimal results in terms of muscle hypertrophy.
Article
Context: Despite the progress toward gender equality in events like the Olympic Games and other institutionalized competitions, and the rising number of women engaging in physical exercise programs, scientific studies focused on establishing specific nutritional recommendations for female athletes and other physically active women are scarce. Objective: This systematic review aimed to compile the scientific evidence available for addressing the question "What dietary strategies, including dietary and supplementation approaches, can improve sports performance , recovery, and health status in female athletes and other physically active women?" Data Sources: The Pubmed, Web of Science, and Scopus databases were searched. Data Extraction: The review process involved a comprehensive search strategy using keywords connected by Boolean connectors. Data extracted from the selected studies included information on the number of participants and their characteristics related to sport practice, age, and menstrual function. Data Analysis: A total of 71 studies were included in this review: 17 focused on the analysis of dietary manipulation, and 54 focused on the effects of dietary supple-mentation. The total sample size was 1654 participants (32.5% categorized as competitive athletes, 30.7% as highly/moderately trained, and 37.2% as physically active/recreational athletes). The risk of bias was considered moderate, mainly for reasons such as a lack of access to the study protocol, insufficient description of how the hormonal phase during the menstrual cycle was controlled for, inadequate dietary control during the intervention, or a lack of blinding of the researchers. Conclusion: Diets with high carbohydrate (CHO) content enhance performance in activities that induce muscle glycogen depletion. In addition, pre-exercise meals with a high glycemic index or rich in CHOs increase CHO metabolism. Ingestion of 5-6 protein meals interspersed throughout the day, with each intake exceeding 25 g of protein favors anabolism of muscle proteins. Dietary supplements taken to enhance performance, such as caffeine, nitric oxide precursors, b-alanine, and certain sport foods supplements (such as CHOs, proteins, or their combination, and micronutrients in cases of nutritional deficiencies), may positively influence sports performance and/or the health status of female athletes and other physically active women. Systematic Review Registration: PROSPERO registration no. CRD480674.
Article
Full-text available
Context Despite the progress toward gender equality in events like the Olympic Games and other institutionalized competitions, and the rising number of women engaging in physical exercise programs, scientific studies focused on establishing specific nutritional recommendations for female athletes and other physically active women are scarce. Objective This systematic review aimed to compile the scientific evidence available for addressing the question “What dietary strategies, including dietary and supplementation approaches, can improve sports performance, recovery, and health status in female athletes and other physically active women?” Data Sources The Pubmed, Web of Science, and Scopus databases were searched. Data Extraction The review process involved a comprehensive search strategy using keywords connected by Boolean connectors. Data extracted from the selected studies included information on the number of participants and their characteristics related to sport practice, age, and menstrual function. Data Analysis A total of 71 studies were included in this review: 17 focused on the analysis of dietary manipulation, and 54 focused on the effects of dietary supplementation. The total sample size was 1654 participants (32.5% categorized as competitive athletes, 30.7% as highly/moderately trained, and 37.2% as physically active/recreational athletes). The risk of bias was considered moderate, mainly for reasons such as a lack of access to the study protocol, insufficient description of how the hormonal phase during the menstrual cycle was controlled for, inadequate dietary control during the intervention, or a lack of blinding of the researchers. Conclusion Diets with high carbohydrate (CHO) content enhance performance in activities that induce muscle glycogen depletion. In addition, pre-exercise meals with a high glycemic index or rich in CHOs increase CHO metabolism. Ingestion of 5–6 protein meals interspersed throughout the day, with each intake exceeding 25 g of protein favors anabolism of muscle proteins. Dietary supplements taken to enhance performance, such as caffeine, nitric oxide precursors, β-alanine, and certain sport foods supplements (such as CHOs, proteins, or their combination, and micronutrients in cases of nutritional deficiencies), may positively influence sports performance and/or the health status of female athletes and other physically active women. Systematic Review Registration PROSPERO registration no. CRD480674.
Article
Full-text available
Objective We performed a systematic review, meta-analysis and meta-regression to determine if dietary protein supplementation augments resistance exercise training (RET)-induced gains in muscle mass and strength. Data sources A systematic search of Medline, Embase, CINAHL and SportDiscus. Eligibility criteria Only randomised controlled trials with RET ≥6 weeks in duration and dietary protein supplementation. Design Random-effects meta-analyses and meta-regressions with four a priori determined covariates. Two-phase break point analysis was used to determine the relationship between total protein intake and changes in fat-free mass (FFM). Results Data from 49 studies with 1863 participants showed that dietary protein supplementation significantly (all p<0.05) increased changes (means (95% CI)) in: strength—one-repetition-maximum (2.49 kg (0.64, 4.33)), FFM (0.30 kg (0.09, 0.52)) and muscle size—muscle fibre cross-sectional area (CSA; 310 µm² (51, 570)) and mid-femur CSA (7.2 mm² (0.20, 14.30)) during periods of prolonged RET. The impact of protein supplementation on gains in FFM was reduced with increasing age (−0.01 kg (−0.02,–0.00), p=0.002) and was more effective in resistance-trained individuals (0.75 kg (0.09, 1.40), p=0.03). Protein supplementation beyond total protein intakes of 1.62 g/kg/day resulted in no further RET-induced gains in FFM. Summary/conclusion Dietary protein supplementation significantly enhanced changes in muscle strength and size during prolonged RET in healthy adults. Increasing age reduces and training experience increases the efficacy of protein supplementation during RET. With protein supplementation, protein intakes at amounts greater than ~1.6 g/kg/day do not further contribute RET-induced gains in FFM.
Article
Full-text available
Background: Despite a number of studies indicating increased dietary protein needs in bodybuilders with the use of the nitrogen balance technique, the Institute of Medicine (2005) has concluded, based in part on methodologic concerns, that “no additional dietary protein is suggested for healthy adults undertaking resistance or endurance exercise.” Objective: The aim of the study was to assess the dietary protein requirement of healthy young male bodybuilders ( with ≥3 y training experience) on a nontraining day by measuring the oxidation of ingested L-[1-¹³C]phenylalanine to ¹³CO2 in response to graded intakes of protein [indicator amino acid oxidation (IAAO) technique]. Methods: Eight men (means ± SDs: age, 22.5 ± 1.7 y; weight, 83.9 ± 11.6 kg; 13.0% ± 6.3% body fat) were studied at rest on a nontraining day, on several occasions (4–8 times) each with protein intakes ranging from 0.1 to 3.5 g · kg⁻¹ · d⁻¹, for a total of 42 experiments. The diets provided energy at 1.5 times each individual's measured resting energy expenditure and were isoenergetic across all treatments. Protein was fed as an amino acid mixture based on the protein pattern in egg, except for phenylalanine and tyrosine, which were maintained at constant amounts across all protein intakes. For 2 d before the study, all participants consumed 1.5 g protein · kg⁻¹ · d⁻¹. On the study day, the protein requirement was determined by identifying the breakpoint in the F¹³CO2 with graded amounts of dietary protein [mixed-effects change-point regression analysis of F¹³CO2 (labeled tracer oxidation in breath)]. Results: The Estimated Average Requirement (EAR) of protein and the upper 95% CI RDA for these young male bodybuilders were 1.7 and 2.2 g · kg⁻¹ · d⁻¹, respectively. Conclusion: These IAAO data suggest that the protein EAR and recommended intake for male bodybuilders at rest on a nontraining day exceed the current recommendations of the Institute of Medicine by ∼2.6-fold. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT02621294.
Article
Full-text available
The aim of the study was to determine whether the tendencies and scope of changes in body mass, body composition and body girths across the menstrual cycle were similar or different in women of different body build. Anthropometric examinations were carried out in a group of 40 naturally regularly menstruated females practicing team sports (aged 19–21, B-v 169.3+/–6.4 cm, body mass 59.6+/–7.0 kg), in the follicular, ovulatory and luteal phases of the menstrual cycle. The phases were determined on the basis of data from two consecutive menstrual cycles taking into account the cycle’s length. To establish the type of body build, Body Mass Index, hydration status and skin fold thickness were measured. For a statistical analysis, a multiple comparisons with multiple confidence intervals were applied. The increase in body mass between the follicular and the luteal phases was observed in all groups of women, the biggest gain was recorded in slim women, who in the luteal phase weighted 0.8 kg more. The amount of fat mass increased significantly across the menstrual cycle only in more hydrated (by about 0.66 kg) and slim women (by about 0.54 kg). Significant changes between consecutive phases of the menstrual cycle in waist and hip girths, and suprailiac skinfold thickness in some groups of women also indicate influence of fatness and hydration status and slenderness. In view of the presented results, the body build seems important for an analysis of the pattern of each component’s changes across the menstrual cycle, especially for female athletes. Certain changes can be seen only in some groups of women, therefore somatic features can be considered as a predictor of the intensity of changes.
Article
Full-text available
The currently accepted amount of protein required to achieve maximal stimulation of myofibrillar protein synthesis (MPS) following resistance exercise is 20–25 g. However, the influence of lean body mass (LBM) on the response of MPS to protein ingestion is unclear. Our aim was to assess the influence of LBM, both total and the amount activated during exercise, on the maximal response of MPS to ingestion of 20 or 40 g of whey protein following a bout of whole-body resistance exercise. Resistance-trained males were assigned to a group with lower LBM (≤65 kg; LLBM n = 15) or higher LBM (≥70 kg; HLBM n = 15) and participated in two trials in random order. MPS was measured with the infusion of 13C6-phenylalanine tracer and collection of muscle biopsies following ingestion of either 20 or 40 g protein during recovery from a single bout of whole-body resistance exercise. A similar response of MPS during exercise recovery was observed between LBM groups following protein ingestion (20 g – LLBM: 0.048 ± 0.018%·h−1; HLBM: 0.051 ± 0.014%·h−1; 40 g – LLBM: 0.059 ± 0.021%·h−1; HLBM: 0.059 ± 0.012%·h−1). Overall (groups combined), MPS was stimulated to a greater extent following ingestion of 40 g (0.059 ± 0.020%·h−1) compared with 20 g (0.049 ± 0.020%·h−1; P = 0.005) of protein. Our data indicate that ingestion of 40 g whey protein following whole-body resistance exercise stimulates a greater MPS response than 20 g in young resistance-trained men. However, with the current doses, the total amount of LBM does not seem to influence the response.
Article
Full-text available
Recent investigations have identified that commercially available dietary supplements, containing a combination of thermogenic ingredients, can increase resting metabolic rate (RMR). Thermogenic dietary supplements can have a positive influence on RMR, but the magnitude can vary based on the active ingredient and/or combination of active ingredients. Additionally, further safety evaluation is needed on multi-ingredient supplements that contain caffeine, due to its potential effect on heart rate (HR) and blood pressure (BP). The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of a commercially available dietary supplement on RMR and hemodynamic variables in healthy females. 13 female participants (26.1 ± 11.3 years; 163.4 ± 9.1 cm; 63.7 ± 8.0 kg, and 24 ± 5 BMI) volunteered to participate in this investigation. Participants underwent two testing sessions separated by approximately 7 days. On their first visit, participants arrived to the laboratory after an overnight fast and underwent a baseline RMR, HR, and BP assessment. Next, each participant ingested a thermogenic dietary supplement or placebo and repeated the RMR, HR, and BP assessments at 60, 120, and 180-minutes post-ingestion. Approximately 1-week later, the alternative supplement was ingested and the assessments were repeated in the exact same manner. Data were analyzed via a 2-factor [2x4] within-subjects repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA). Post-hoc tests were analyzed via paired samples t-tests. Repeated measures ANOVA revealed a significant effect for time relative to raw RMR data. Post-hoc analysis revealed that the dietary supplement treatment significantly increased RMR at 60-minutes, 120-minutes, and 180-minutes post ingestion (p < 0.05) as compared to baseline RMR values. No changes in RMR were observed for the placebo treatment (p > 0.05). Heart rate was not significantly affected at any time point with either supplement; however, main effects of treatment and time were observed for both systolic and diastolic blood pressure (p < 0.05). The thermogenic dietary supplement treatment experienced greater elevations in RMR as compared to baseline. Due to the slight elevations in blood pressure, caution should be taken for those with increased risk for hypertension or pre-hypertension. Taken on a daily basis, thermogenic dietary supplementation may increase overall energy expenditure, potentially leading to reductions in fat mass over time.
Conference Paper
Full-text available
There has been debate among athletes and nutritionists regarding dietary protein needs for centuries. Although contrary to traditional belief, recent scientific information collected on physically active individuals tends to indicate that regular exercise increases daily protein requirements; however, the precise details remain to be worked out. Based on laboratory measures, daily protein requirements are increased by perhaps as much as 100% vs. recommendations for sedentary individuals (1.6-1.8 vs. 0.8 g/kg). Yet even these intakes are much less than those reported by most athletes. This may mean that actual requirements are below what is needed to optimize athletic performance, and so the debate continues. Numerous interacting factors including energy intake, carbohydrate availability, exercise intensity, duration and type, dietary protein quality, training history, gender, age, timing of nutrient intake and the like make this topic extremely complex. Many questions remain to be resolved. At the present time, substantial data indicate that the current recommended protein intake should be adjusted upward for those who are physically active, especially in populations whose needs are elevated for other reasons, e.g., growing individuals, dieters, vegetarians, individuals with muscle disease-induced weakness and the elderly. For these latter groups, specific supplementation may be appropriate, but for most North Americans who consume a varied diet, including complete protein foods (meat, eggs, fish and dairy products), and sufficient energy the increased protein needs induced by a regular exercise program can be met in one's diet.
Article
Full-text available
Background: The consumption of a high protein diet (>4 g/kg/d) in trained men and women who did not alter their exercise program has been previously shown to have no significant effect on body composition. Thus, the purpose of this investigation was to determine if a high protein diet in conjunction with a periodized heavy resistance training program would affect indices of body composition, performance and health. Methods: Forty-eight healthy resistance-trained men and women completed this study (mean ± SD; Normal Protein group [NP n = 17, four female and 13 male]: 24.8 ± 6.9 yr; 174.0 ± 9.5 cm height; 74.7 ± 9.6 kg body weight; 2.4 ± 1.7 yr of training; High Protein group [HP n = 31, seven female and 24 male]: 22.9 ± 3.1 yr; 172.3 ± 7.7 cm; 74.3 ± 12.4 kg; 4.9 ± 4.1 yr of training). Moreover, all subjects participated in a split-routine, periodized heavy resistance-training program. Training and daily diet logs were kept by each subject. Subjects in the NP and HP groups were instructed to consume their baseline (~2 g/kg/d) and >3 g/kg/d of dietary protein, respectively. Results: Subjects in the NP and HP groups consumed 2.3 and 3.4 g/kg/day of dietary protein during the treatment period. The NP group consumed significantly (p < 0.05) more protein during the treatment period compared to their baseline intake. The HP group consumed more (p < 0.05) total energy and protein during the treatment period compared to their baseline intake. Furthermore, the HP group consumed significantly more (p < 0.05) total calories and protein compared to the NP group. There were significant time by group (p ≤ 0.05) changes in body weight (change: +1.3 ± 1.3 kg NP, -0.1 ± 2.5 HP), fat mass (change: -0.3 ± 2.2 kg NP, -1.7 ± 2.3 HP), and % body fat (change: -0.7 ± 2.8 NP, -2.4 ± 2.9 HP). The NP group gained significantly more body weight than the HP group; however, the HP group experienced a greater decrease in fat mass and % body fat. There was a significant time effect for FFM; however, there was a non-significant time by group effect for FFM (change: +1.5 ± 1.8 NP, +1.5 ± 2.2 HP). Furthermore, a significant time effect (p ≤ 0.05) was seen in both groups vis a vis improvements in maximal strength (i.e., 1-RM squat and bench) vertical jump and pull-ups; however, there were no significant time by group effects (p ≥ 0.05) for all exercise performance measures. Additionally, there were no changes in any of the blood parameters (i.e., basic metabolic panel). Conclusion: Consuming a high protein diet (3.4 g/kg/d) in conjunction with a heavy resistance-training program may confer benefits with regards to body composition. Furthermore, there is no evidence that consuming a high protein diet has any deleterious effects.
Article
Daily undulating periodization (DUP) is a growing trend, both in practice and in the scientific literature. A new form of DUP, flexible daily undulating periodization (FDUP), allows for athletes to have some autonomy by choosing the order of their training. The purpose of this study was to compare an FDUP model to a traditional model of DUP on powerlifting performance in resistance-trained men. Twenty-five resistance-trained men were randomly assigned to one of 2 groups: FDUP (N = 14) or DUP (N = 11). All participants possessed a minimum of 6 months of resistance training experience and were required to squat, bench press, and deadlift 125, 100, and 150% of their body mass, respectively. Dependent variables assessed at baseline and after the 9-week training program included bench press 1 repetition maximum (1RM), squat 1RM, deadlift 1RM, powerlifting total, Wilks Coefficient, fat mass, and fat-free mass (FFM). Dependent variables assessed during each individual training session were motivation to train, Session Rating of Perceived Exertion (Session RPE), and satisfaction with training session. After the 9-week training program, no significant differences in intensity or volume were found between groups. Both groups significantly improved bench press 1RM (FDUP: +6.5 kg; DUP: +8.8 kg), squat 1RM (FDUP: +15.6 kg; DUP: +18.0 kg), deadlift 1RM (FDUP: +14.8 kg; DUP: +13.6 kg), powerlifting total (FDUP: +36.8 kg; DUP: +40.4 kg), and Wilks Coefficient (FDUP: +24.8; DUP: +26.0) over the course of study (p = <0.001 for each variable). There was also a significant increase in FFM (FDUP: +0.8 kg; DUP: +0.8 kg) for both groups (p = 0.003). There were no differences in motivation to train, session RPE, or satisfaction with training session measurements between groups (p = 0.369-0.702, respectively). In conclusion, FDUP seems to offer similar resistance training adaptations when compared with a traditional DUP in resistance-trained men.
Article
Background: A dietary protein intake higher than the Recommended Dietary Allowance during an energy deficit helps to preserve lean body mass (LBM), particularly when combined with exercise. Objective: The purpose of this study was to conduct a proof-of-principle trial to test whether manipulation of dietary protein intake during a marked energy deficit in addition to intense exercise training would affect changes in body composition. Design: We used a single-blind, randomized, parallel-group prospective trial. During a 4-wk period, we provided hypoenergetic (∼40% reduction compared with requirements) diets providing 33 ± 1 kcal/kg LBM to young men who were randomly assigned (n = 20/group) to consume either a lower-protein (1.2 g · kg(-1) · d(-1)) control diet (CON) or a higher-protein (2.4 g · kg(-1) · d(-1)) diet (PRO). All subjects performed resistance exercise training combined with high-intensity interval training for 6 d/wk. A 4-compartment model assessment of body composition was made pre- and postintervention. Results: As a result of the intervention, LBM increased (P < 0.05) in the PRO group (1.2 ± 1.0 kg) and to a greater extent (P < 0.05) compared with the CON group (0.1 ± 1.0 kg). The PRO group had a greater loss of fat mass than did the CON group (PRO: -4.8 ± 1.6 kg; CON: -3.5 ± 1.4kg; P < 0.05). All measures of exercise performance improved similarly in the PRO and CON groups as a result of the intervention with no effect of protein supplementation. Changes in serum cortisol during the intervention were associated with changes in body fat (r = 0.39, P = 0.01) and LBM (r = -0.34, P = 0.03). Conclusions: Our results showed that, during a marked energy deficit, consumption of a diet containing 2.4 g protein · kg(-1) · d(-1) was more effective than consumption of a diet containing 1.2 g protein · kg(-1) · d(-1) in promoting increases in LBM and losses of fat mass when combined with a high volume of resistance and anaerobic exercise. Changes in serum cortisol were associated with changes in body fat and LBM, but did not explain much variance in either measure. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT01776359.