Thanks for the great leads. I have managed to get the recent Inter J Obesity abstracts. The search on the journal’s site only goes back to 1997.
The Boozer article was well done and fulfils my criteria for dependable, rigorous research. The group studied (167 individuals in 2 almost equal groups) was obese, with a body mass index of 31.6 . Now, would the same results be expected for a well trained athlete who is maintaining a diet similar to the various t-mag recommended diets who is trying to cut?
The weight loss over 6 months for the experimentals taking the herb and caffiene was 5 kg+ or - 5 kg and 2.3 ± 3.something for the placebo. To me, that is not a very big difference in results. Would such a small difference in results in a time period as long as 6 months be a reasonable tradeoff for the possible side effects and cost of the treatment?
I noticed that some of the articles I have not had an opportunity to peruse were also in Obesity journals. Thus, I am left with the question as to the efficacy with non-obese athletes.
But, I really feel I am getting somewhere with all your help. Thanks.
One article I just read is from the January 2002 Journal of Forensic Sciences by Dumestre-Toulet et al. Several international class bodybuilders were just busted in France for bringing in International Olympic Committee banned substances including beta-adenergic compounds, various steroids, antidepressants and ephedrine. Ephedrine is an amphetiminic derivative and is regulated by the Olympics as well as professional bicycling and other sports. Why are sympathomimetic drugs like ephedrine illegal in these competitive sports, yet casually marketed to bodybuilders? I can understand delivery to obese people under supervised conditions (like the papers sited in this discussion), but why to casual or competitive bodybuilders?
I understand your healthy skepticism. My philosophy on training, diet and supplementation is a mix of 3 points of view.
1) What is the scientific published research?
2) What is the anecdotal evidence and who is this coming from?
3) What is the mechanism of action? Is there a scientific rationale for something to work?
Hopefully, there is positive scientific evidence, positive anecdotal evidence and a logical mechanism of action. All three point of view are worthy of consideration and I usually like to see 2 out of 3 met before I go full force into something. Unfortunately, the scientific evidence is usually the last to come. But if there is reasonable logic for something to work and good anecdotal evidence, then I'll usually give something a shot before the journals are full of supporting articles.
Just thought I'd add my two cents.
I agree with Jason on this one…keeping in mind that I don’t disagee with Ron. I think that the three things Jason mentioned are sort of a good “checks and balances”.
Research dollars are scarce and hard to come by…and writing grant proposals is an “art” in and of itself. If history is a good indicator, like Jason said, valid research will often lag far behind anecdotal findings coupled with a REASONABLE mechanism of action. However…as Ron is indicating…we should ALWAYS keep a skeptical eye open!
I agree that we all can develop a “second sense” about a product after fulfilling 2 out of 3 of Jason’s criteria. I’m putting a lot of energy into examining the details because of a special iterest - my son.
He is 20 and tends to be in the mindset that if someone in the gym or on t-mag says a product is good and even works miracles, he is ready to try it. I know from experience (whoops, anecdotal, there I go) that there were and are always guys in the gym who are the way they are in spite of what they do rather than because of what they do. They then prostelytize about their particular miracuous diet or training regime.
I want my son to become skeptical, even cynical and to think for himself rather than to blindly follow some self appointed training Guru. I want him to ask the right questions and challenge the self proclaimed know-it-alls that appear in every gym.
I must admit that I trust the likes of Mr. Norcross and the trainers that write for t-mag more than any other popular paper or internet publication.
Ephedra/ephedrine based products have been outlawed in certain sports (ie Olympics) but successfully marketed to casual/competitive bodybuilders for the same reasons…because they work, and they work very well (apparently to well).
I believe that you are right, Heb. As an amphetimine derivative, ephedra/ephedrine is the proverbial “shot in the arm.” It’s a stimulant that could enhance most athletes’ performance. Of course the question remains whether any athlete’s performance should be enhanced by the miracle of pharmacy, but I won’t go any further than that. The last thing I want to do is get in on the 'roids contreversy. Heaven knows, at my age, I could use some extra testosterone ;~) .
If you want info on E+C in healthy fit people, look at the studies done by Douglas Bell and Ira Jacobs (3 or so in the last few years). They are available via Medicine in Science Sports & Exercise (www.acsm.org)
I’d like to see the same type of control/placebo group studies done for all of the cystoseria canariensis (Myostat) products coming into the market. Interesting that there would be so much hype for them without the human studies on the actual herb to back it up.