T Nation

Breaking News: Waxy Mazie is Slow


#1

I've cut the sugars out of my PWO drink, it use to be creatine, beta-alanine 75g dextrose. i liked it...sort of but figured w/ waxy i could get the response w/ out the excess sugar.

BAM!!!!!!!!! don't need the sugar w/ waxy mazie because of the fast absorption anabolic response thing.

Muscular Development posted finding that this is not true, Wazy is actually a very slow carb! WTF?

i was sold it's a complex but delivers into the bloodstream like a quick carb or so i thought.

SOMEONE REVIEW THE FINDINGS ON MD, and let me know.

this shit isn't rocket science but should i go back to simple carbs post workout, or is this waxy mazie thing off base?

here's the link: Finds by David Barr

musculardevelopment.com/content/view/1442/51/1/3/


#2

Never did make sense to me that it would be a fast carb.

I have not checked the MD article and so can’t comment there.


#3

Hmmm…Very interesting. Thanks for the link. It made me glad I played it safe with Surge because I was really tempted to jump on the WMS bandwagon.

Still, there a lot of guys that advocate for WMS and they are a lot bigger than I am so I would be hesitant to dump the stuff just yet.


#4

It’s a BS cover up thing going on over at MD. Blechman recently fired the Editor in CHief from the last 18 years, John Romano, as he was working with Dave Palumbo on his supplement line (rumor has it that Blechman wanted Palumbo to assist in developing his own new supplement line, but Dave said no thanks). Dave’s a big proponent of Waxy Maize, as well as Ketogenic Diets. He preps a lot of the top Olympia competitors.

Anyway, since he was fired, suddenly all these bodybuilders who a few months ago were touting Palumbo as the best prep guy around are being “quoted” in MD as dismissing anything he had good words about in the past. I believe I’ve read enough to realize that both Waxy Maize, and Vitargo are ‘faster’ than dextrose, but when you’re trying to put out a supplement line, and you don’t carry a certain product, you try to convince everyone that the particular product is inferior, or ineffective.

S


#5

From my understanding. It was always a “slow carb” at least according to the Glycemic Index. However it had a low osmolarity (spelling?) and was able to leave the small intestine quickly to replenish glycogen. I think I’ve read something from Justin Harris about this.


#6

Stu’s right, it’s based on the controversy that went down at MD


#7

[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:
but when you’re trying to put out a supplement line, and you don’t carry a certain product, you try to convince everyone that the particular product is inferior, or ineffective.

S
[/quote]

makes sense, but couldn’t a company then just develop their own rather than trying to dismiss it?


#8

Given the definition of glycemic index, how could something be slow in terms of glycemic index but fast in practice?

Might it be the other way around and the spin was for marketing reasons to sell waxy maize, instead of spin for the purpose of “discrediting competitors”?

I really never checked into it as I was not interested, but again the osmolarity-makes-it-fast argument never made a lick of sense to me.


#9

[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:
It’s a BS cover up thing going on over at MD. Blechman recently fired the Editor in CHief from the last 18 years, John Romano, as he was working with Dave Palumbo on his supplement line (rumor has it that Blechman wanted Palumbo to assist in developing his own new supplement line, but Dave said no thanks). Dave’s a big proponent of Waxy Maize, as well as Ketogenic Diets. He preps a lot of the top Olympia competitors.

Anyway, since he was fired, suddenly all these bodybuilders who a few months ago were touting Palumbo as the best prep guy around are being “quoted” in MD as dismissing anything he had good words about in the past. I believe I’ve read enough to realize that both Waxy Maize, and Vitargo are ‘faster’ than dextrose, but when you’re trying to put out a supplement line, and you don’t carry a certain product, you try to convince everyone that the particular product is inferior, or ineffective.

S
[/quote]

x2. Theres lots of shady shit going on over there lately. Its another great site, but lots of side taking and politics going on there.


#10

[quote]jehovasfitness wrote:
The Mighty Stu wrote:
but when you’re trying to put out a supplement line, and you don’t carry a certain product, you try to convince everyone that the particular product is inferior, or ineffective.

S

makes sense, but couldn’t a company then just develop their own rather than trying to dismiss it?[/quote]

What? You mean it’s not incredibly hard to just decide to switch some percentage – pull a number out of a hat if need be – of the carbs in one’s product to waxy maize and then just buy the stuff and put it in there? It can’t be done without a specific person, so if he won’t work for you then that’s that?


#11

[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
Given the definition of glycemic index, how could something be slow in terms of glycemic index but fast in practice?

Might it be the other way around and the spin was for marketing reasons to sell waxy maize, instead of spin for the purpose of “discrediting competitors”?

I really never checked into it as I was not interested, but again the osmolarity-makes-it-fast argument never made a lick of sense to me.[/quote]

Maybe you can explain it better, because you definitly know the science behind this more than I do. From my understanding, the High molecular weight of the starch (which is heavily branched) makes it very low in osmolarity which in turns makes it pull water with it through the gut. This makes it leave the intestine quickly.

Now, I’ve read before that it has a low glycemic index (as do most heavily branched starches), but still replenished glycogen very quickly. I know this is counter intuitive. Also, have you ever tried WMS? I can DEFINITLY vouche that it leaves the gut faster than glucose or maltodexrin (at least it feels that way).

I’ve had shakes with 25 grams protein and 100grams dextrose/malto and felt bloated during the workout. I’ve had the same ratio with WMS and felt no sluggish feelings at all 15 mintues later. I would say it definitly feels lighter on the gut. Also, when I had initially made the switch to WMS I noticed pumps that were much harder and fuller than before (peri workout). The pumps can definitly be placebo, but like I said, Im interested in your take on this.


#12

Glycemic index measures the time course of glucose levels in the bloodstream.

By definition it’s impossible to be slow as measured by glycemic index but fast in terms of delivering glucose to the muscles.

And no, waxy maize itself is not going to be delivered to the muscles. It will be as glucose that it gets there.

The two claims are just totally inconsistent. One has to be wrong, it seems to me.

As for the argument presented to you and I suppose the target audience for waxy maize of " the igh molecular weight of the starch (which is heavily branched) makes it very low in osmolarity which in turns makes it pull water with it through the gut" this makes no sense.

It’s words that string together and sound scientific perhaps, but make no sense.

It is low in osmolarity for any given amount of total glucose unit content (upon hydrolysis) because that is a function of the number of molecules in solution. One starchy molecule per volume of water has lower osmolarity than many glucose molecules, so long as the starch has not hydrolyzed.

That part is true.

But this does not drag in water with it.

Even if it did that would not speed delivery to your muscles.

What it does do is allow water to be absorbed more easily, which is a good thing for hydration. But it is not a mechanism yielding faster delivery of glucose.

Again, I haven’t looked into it specifically. I have just not seen an argument for waxy maize being as fast as glucose that made a lick of sense, and the claims of it being low or moderate in GI but “fast in practice” (or another phrase to describe it) are contradictory.


#13

Also, “sluggish feeling” or lack thereof is not a measure of speed of glucose delivery.


#14

Elusive, doesn’t WMS need to be taken alone (or only with a few BCAA’s) because whey, especially the amount you mentioned, actually makes it “slower” and pretty much the same as a dextrose/malto blend?


#15

[quote]Trenchant wrote:
Elusive, doesn’t WMS need to be taken alone (or only with a few BCAA’s) because whey, especially the amount you mentioned, actually makes it “slower” and pretty much the same as a dextrose/malto blend?[/quote]

I’ve seen people (i think even our own CT) mention that as long as the ratio was in the 1:3 area, the solution would not slow down.


#16

[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
Also, “sluggish feeling” or lack thereof is not a measure of speed of glucose delivery.[/quote]

But can it be a guage of how quickly it leaves the gut? Also, things like ice cream and milk have a low glycemic index but yeild a high insulin response. Can WMS play to a theme similar to this?


#17

How does it leave the gut without going into the bloodstream? And it will not go into the bloodstream as waxy maize, but as glucose.

If you want to know the time profile of how it delivers glucose to muscles, the GI would be the way to get a single-number representation of that. Not how the gut feels.


#18

Btw, I’m not saying that if you like the stuff you should stop using it as a complex carb.

Only that it doesn’t make sense to me that this branched-chain complex starch is going to hydrolyze super-rapidly to glucose units, that it will deliver glucose to muscle as fast as glucose does, or that it can possibly be both low-or-moderate GI and simultaneously very fast delivery.


#19

i’ll show this thread to my wife, she’s finishing her MD/Phd this summer (duel program) she’s wicked smart! She trains and does figure too so she gets all this shit.

you guys are really that crazy about Surge?

my protein is set, creatine and beta-alanine are in pill form their set, bcaa’s set. I was mixing dextrose w/ my creatine (all in powder form) previously, i switched to waxy mazie, and truthfully now i don’t know what the F to do post work out.

i shoot for 75-100 quick carbs or equal amount of waxy. i attest as well, less bloat w/ the waxy but my concern is the anabolic response and the time frame post work out.

as for combining…unsure whether mixing in a glass w/ whey will change the bonds composition thus affecting absorption rate.

as i said i’ll ask my wife, other s w/ insight please reply.

thanks


#20

[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
Btw, I’m not saying that if you like the stuff you should stop using it as a complex carb.

Only that it doesn’t make sense to me that this branched-chain complex starch is going to hydrolyze super-rapidly to glucose units, that it will deliver glucose to muscle as fast as glucose does, or that it can possibly be both low-or-moderate GI and simultaneously very fast delivery.[/quote]

a well thought out answer, as i said i’ll review all this w/ my wife to get her opinion. you answer kind of nails it, but how then have they been selling it as a fast absorbing carb???