Will Brink
Member
Something I have been saying a while. The reason this article is worth a read for you all is, the authors are the people who have actually done the research on BCAA's, whey etc. It's not a third person article based on some cherry picked research, and several of the authors the primary researchers of the very studies they link to in the article, written for non scientists and egg heads like me. The money quote for me was:
"Under very similar lab conditions to the latter whey study, we gave a similar group of male subjects 5.6g of BCAAs following a session of lifting weights – the equivalent to 20g of whey. The resulting protein synthesis response was only about 22% – or about half what would be achieved with the equivalent dose of whey."
The article is not a whey vs BCAA article, but focused on BCAA's being over hyped and way overrated written in easy to understand language:
BCAA supplements are just hype – here’s a better way to build muscles
Full article:
https://theconversation.com/bcaa-supplements-are-just-hype-heres-a-better-way-to-build-muscles-84411
"Under very similar lab conditions to the latter whey study, we gave a similar group of male subjects 5.6g of BCAAs following a session of lifting weights – the equivalent to 20g of whey. The resulting protein synthesis response was only about 22% – or about half what would be achieved with the equivalent dose of whey."
The article is not a whey vs BCAA article, but focused on BCAA's being over hyped and way overrated written in easy to understand language:
BCAA supplements are just hype – here’s a better way to build muscles
Full article:
https://theconversation.com/bcaa-supplements-are-just-hype-heres-a-better-way-to-build-muscles-84411
