Newbie fitness/protein shake question

Sorry if this is the wrong forum to post this. I'm a 37 year old
male, 5' 10" and about 200lbs...I'm a life long couch potato with
pretty much no muscle. Been using free weights and the treadmill for
the past 2 weeks...alternating days with one day a week totally off.
I've changed my diet as well...no more soda (all water), wheat bread
instead of white, less fatty foods...etc. but I admittedly don't count
calories and am probably not getting enough protein in a day. I've
lost about 9 lbs in the past 2 weeks so I'm happy so far. My goal is
two fold...I'd like to gain some muscle mass (not alot...I guess a
"normal" amount) and lose the gut. So, my question is if protein
shakes are a good idea. I've read about the increase in protein
helping muscle growth but am concerned it'll stunt my efforts to get
rid of my gut. In my situation, any advice? If the shakes are a good
idea, how often? Thanks in advance.

The Other Mike <Noone@nowhere.com> wrote:

>Sorry if this is the wrong forum to post this. I'm a 37 year old
>male, 5' 10" and about 200lbs...I'm a life long couch potato with
>pretty much no muscle. Been using free weights and the treadmill for
>the past 2 weeks...alternating days with one day a week totally off.
>I've changed my diet as well...no more soda (all water), wheat bread
>instead of white, less fatty foods...etc. but I admittedly don't count
>calories and am probably not getting enough protein in a day. I've
>lost about 9 lbs in the past 2 weeks so I'm happy so far. My goal is
>two fold...I'd like to gain some muscle mass (not alot...I guess a
>"normal" amount) and lose the gut. So, my question is if protein
>shakes are a good idea. I've read about the increase in protein
>helping muscle growth but am concerned it'll stunt my efforts to get
>rid of my gut. In my situation, any advice? If the shakes are a good
>idea, how often? Thanks in advance.

Quickly absorbed protein (whey) and simple sugars (preferably high in
glucose) immediately before, during, and immediately after training
are beneficial. The rest of the time, they really aren't any more
beneficial than any other dietary protein and carbohydrates, and they
may just constitute unnecessary additional calories if they are dumped
on top of an already eucaloric diet.

The Other Mike wrote:
[...]

re shakes

> <snip> I've read about the increase in protein
> helping muscle growth but am concerned it'll
> stunt my efforts to get rid of my gut. In my
> situation, any advice? If the shakes are a good
> idea, how often? Thanks in advance.

I'd nix the shakes, fwiw.

http://theabsdiet.com/

Or:

1. Eat 1,500 calories a day.
2. Utilize superhydration.
3. Incorporate high-intensity exercise three times per week.

See Ellington Darden's _The New High Intensity Training_ for details.

http://www.amazon.com/New-High-Inten...560302-6975262
aka http://tinyurl.com/y7swos

--
Curt

"JMW" <jmwilliams@enforcergraphics.f2s.com> wrote in message
news:t6t1n2hqpkfdi5ogrpbgu7ntum0i63f81s@4ax.com...
> The Other Mike <Noone@nowhere.com> wrote:
>
>>Sorry if this is the wrong forum to post this. I'm a 37 year old
>>male, 5' 10" and about 200lbs...I'm a life long couch potato with
>>pretty much no muscle. Been using free weights and the treadmill for
>>the past 2 weeks...alternating days with one day a week totally off.
>>I've changed my diet as well...no more soda (all water), wheat bread
>>instead of white, less fatty foods...etc. but I admittedly don't count
>>calories and am probably not getting enough protein in a day. I've
>>lost about 9 lbs in the past 2 weeks so I'm happy so far. My goal is
>>two fold...I'd like to gain some muscle mass (not alot...I guess a
>>"normal" amount) and lose the gut. So, my question is if protein
>>shakes are a good idea. I've read about the increase in protein
>>helping muscle growth but am concerned it'll stunt my efforts to get
>>rid of my gut. In my situation, any advice? If the shakes are a good
>>idea, how often? Thanks in advance.
>
> Quickly absorbed protein (whey) and simple sugars (preferably high in
> glucose) immediately before, during, and immediately after training
> are beneficial. The rest of the time, they really aren't any more
> beneficial than any other dietary protein and carbohydrates, and they
> may just constitute unnecessary additional calories if they are dumped
> on top of an already eucaloric diet.
>

Show some cites, hack, I mean, jack.
Of course, you could offer up yer whey/gluc/*creatine* st-st-st-study, but
if the OP has one milligram more brainmatter than you do, he'll ask the very
obvious Q:
WTF does whey/gluc/**creatine** have to do w/ whey??????????????

*Not saying this timing issue isn't true*, just that it doesn't make oodles
of a priori sense--unless you make some proviso's.
1. Not sure about the digestion rates of protein vs. glucose, but if timing
were valid, that would have to be factored in.
2. What would glucose/whey do *before* a workout? Possibly a little
carb-loading-ish glycogen synthesis?
Which seems to me not to be a big deal in lifting, they way it would be in
running.
And then, how much before? Ask a runner?
3. During?? digestion is way-suppressed during exertion. What would be
the point? And digestion likely wouldn't be completed until considerably
later. Likely no increased benefit over eating before/after.
4. Afterwards? OK... but how much after? Right after? And why?
When does muscle repair/synthesis actually start after a workout?
My urge to eat protein comes the day *after*, usually along w/ whatever doms
I've incurred.

Can't really comment on bonafide bulk-up strategies, but from a pure
*fitness* pov, there are advantages to *not* eating before a workout (and
certainly not during, ferchrissakes), and having one's regular meal a short
time afterwards.
The reason is that the now more-depleted muscle tissue directly takes up
nutrients, apparently bypassing or reducing the storage of excess nutrients
into fat tissue--which can be problematic for some.
Not to mention in many cases suppressing appetite in varying degrees.

The RDA for protein is approx. .8 g/kg BW per day, for you about 70 gm,
easily met by 1.5 cans of tuna.
Many here will claim you need more, but it really depends on a lot of
factors.
Athletes certainly need more protein, but then they could be expending
10,000 cals or more a week in training. The average lifting joe will barely
crack 1,000, often far from it.
Someone doing a Bowflex "20 min/day 3x/wk" will do mebbe 300-400, *per
week*.
Many say you don't need any more at all, that the RDA is *already* too high.

I believe if you are not overly-addicted to the lousy American diet, your
body will sort of tell you what it needs, as circumstance/exertion changes.

Also bear in mind that gains in muscle mass may not occur for several
months, as motor-neuron recruitment is completed.
It's nature's way of flipping on "stength switches" so it doesn't waste
valuable resouces building perhaps unnecessary muscle. To tell her
otherwise takes a while.
Which is in part why all these infomercials are full of shit.

jmw is full of shit for other reasons, probably mostly having to do with his
mom, and all the other women in Ohio who will have nothing to do with him.
My three neutered cats get more action than jmw.
--
------
Mr. P.V.'d (formerly Droll Troll), Yonkers, NY

Stop Corruption in Congress & Send the Ultimate Message:
Absolutely Vote, but NOT for a Democrat or a Republican.
Ending Corruption in Congress is the *Single Best Way*
to Materially Improve Your Family's Life.
The Solution is so simple--and inexpensive!

entropic3.14decay at optonline2.718 dot net; remove pi and e to reply--ie,
all d'numbuhs

> jmw is full of shit for other reasons, probably mostly having to do with
> his mom, and all the other women in Ohio who will have nothing to do with
> him. My three neutered cats get more action than jmw.

Well, not totally true.
$5, Snickers, and a pack of ciggies go a long way in a female detention
center.
Uh, Guard, can we have a little privacy, please.....
--
------
Mr. P.V.'d (formerly Droll Troll), Yonkers, NY

Stop Corruption in Congress & Send the Ultimate Message:
Absolutely Vote, but NOT for a Democrat or a Republican.
Ending Corruption in Congress is the *Single Best Way*
to Materially Improve Your Family's Life.
The Solution is so simple--and inexpensive!

Proctologically Violated©® wrote:
> "JMW" <jmwilliams@enforcergraphics.f2s.com> wrote in message
> news:t6t1n2hqpkfdi5ogrpbgu7ntum0i63f81s@4ax.com...
> > The Other Mike <Noone@nowhere.com> wrote:
> >
> >>Sorry if this is the wrong forum to post this. I'm a 37 year old
> >>male, 5' 10" and about 200lbs...I'm a life long couch potato with
> >>pretty much no muscle. Been using free weights and the treadmill for
> >>the past 2 weeks...alternating days with one day a week totally off.
> >>I've changed my diet as well...no more soda (all water), wheat bread
> >>instead of white, less fatty foods...etc. but I admittedly don't count
> >>calories and am probably not getting enough protein in a day. I've
> >>lost about 9 lbs in the past 2 weeks so I'm happy so far. My goal is
> >>two fold...I'd like to gain some muscle mass (not alot...I guess a
> >>"normal" amount) and lose the gut. So, my question is if protein
> >>shakes are a good idea. I've read about the increase in protein
> >>helping muscle growth but am concerned it'll stunt my efforts to get
> >>rid of my gut. In my situation, any advice? If the shakes are a good
> >>idea, how often? Thanks in advance.
> >
> > Quickly absorbed protein (whey) and simple sugars (preferably high in
> > glucose) immediately before, during, and immediately after training
> > are beneficial. The rest of the time, they really aren't any more
> > beneficial than any other dietary protein and carbohydrates, and they
> > may just constitute unnecessary additional calories if they are dumped
> > on top of an already eucaloric diet.
> >
>
> Show some cites, hack, I mean, jack.

Cribb PJ, Hayes A. Effects of supplement timing and resistance exercise
on skeletal muscle hypertrophy. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2006
Nov;38(11):1918-25.

Cribb PJ, Williams AD, Carey MF, Hayes A. The effect of whey isolate
and resistance training on strength, body composition, and plasma
glutamine. Int J Sport Nutr Exerc Metab. 2006 Oct;16:494-508

Tipton KD, Elliott TA, Cree MG, Aarsland AA, Sanford AP, Wolfe RR.
Stimulation of net muscle protein synthesis by whey protein ingestion
before and after exercise. Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab. 2006 Aug 8;
[Epub ahead of print]

Tipton KD, Elliott TA, Cree MG, Wolf SE, Sanford AP, Wolfe RR.
Ingestion of casein and whey proteins result in muscle anabolism after
resistance exercise. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2004 Dec;36(12):2073-81.

Tipton KD, Wolfe RR. J Sports Sci. 2004 Jan;22(1):65-79. Review.

Miller SL, Tipton KD, Chinkes DL, Wolf SE, Wolfe RR. Independent and
combined effects of amino acids and glucose after resistance exercise.
Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2003 Mar;35(3):449-55.

Tipton KD, Borsheim E, Wolf SE, Sanford AP, Wolfe RR. Acute response of
net muscle protein balance reflects 24-h balance after exercise and
amino acid ingestion. Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab. 2003
Jan;284(1):E76-89.

Tipton KD, Rasmussen BB, Miller SL, Wolf SE, Owens-Stovall SK, Petrini
BE, Wolfe RR. Timing of amino acid-carbohydrate ingestion alters
anabolic response of muscle to resistance exercise. Am J Physiol
Endocrinol Metab. 2001 Aug;281(2):E197-206.

> Of course, you could offer up yer whey/gluc/*creatine* st-st-st-study, but
> if the OP has one milligram more brainmatter than you do, he'll ask the very
> obvious Q:
> WTF does whey/gluc/**creatine** have to do w/ whey??????????????

If you had the mental capacity to understand all the other studies
cited above, you might experience a revelation. Lacking that, I guess
you'll just have to flounder in your own ignorance.

At least you have a lot of practice in that regard.

> *Not saying this timing issue isn't true*, just that it doesn't make oodles
> of a priori sense

It makes perfect /a priori/ sense if you understand the physiology of
muscle protein synthesis. It simply conflicts with your chatty
phonetic blatherings. Go play with your HollowBar.

"JMW" <jmwilliams_56@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1165037119.537329.217890@j44g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...
Proctologically Violated©® wrote:
> "JMW" <jmwilliams@enforcergraphics.f2s.com> wrote in message
> news:t6t1n2hqpkfdi5ogrpbgu7ntum0i63f81s@4ax.com...
> > The Other Mike <Noone@nowhere.com> wrote:
> >
> >>Sorry if this is the wrong forum to post this. I'm a 37 year old
> >>male, 5' 10" and about 200lbs...I'm a life long couch potato with
> >>pretty much no muscle. Been using free weights and the treadmill for
> >>the past 2 weeks...alternating days with one day a week totally off.
> >>I've changed my diet as well...no more soda (all water), wheat bread
> >>instead of white, less fatty foods...etc. but I admittedly don't count
> >>calories and am probably not getting enough protein in a day. I've
> >>lost about 9 lbs in the past 2 weeks so I'm happy so far. My goal is
> >>two fold...I'd like to gain some muscle mass (not alot...I guess a
> >>"normal" amount) and lose the gut. So, my question is if protein
> >>shakes are a good idea. I've read about the increase in protein
> >>helping muscle growth but am concerned it'll stunt my efforts to get
> >>rid of my gut. In my situation, any advice? If the shakes are a good
> >>idea, how often? Thanks in advance.
> >
> > Quickly absorbed protein (whey) and simple sugars (preferably high in
> > glucose) immediately before, during, and immediately after training
> > are beneficial. The rest of the time, they really aren't any more
> > beneficial than any other dietary protein and carbohydrates, and they
> > may just constitute unnecessary additional calories if they are dumped
> > on top of an already eucaloric diet.
> >
>
> Show some cites, hack, I mean, jack.

Cribb PJ, Hayes A. Effects of supplement timing and resistance exercise
on skeletal muscle hypertrophy. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2006
Nov;38(11):1918-25.

Cribb PJ, Williams AD, Carey MF, Hayes A. The effect of whey isolate
and resistance training on strength, body composition, and plasma
glutamine. Int J Sport Nutr Exerc Metab. 2006 Oct;16:494-508

Tipton KD, Elliott TA, Cree MG, Aarsland AA, Sanford AP, Wolfe RR.
Stimulation of net muscle protein synthesis by whey protein ingestion
before and after exercise. Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab. 2006 Aug 8;
[Epub ahead of print]

Tipton KD, Elliott TA, Cree MG, Wolf SE, Sanford AP, Wolfe RR.
Ingestion of casein and whey proteins result in muscle anabolism after
resistance exercise. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2004 Dec;36(12):2073-81.

Tipton KD, Wolfe RR. J Sports Sci. 2004 Jan;22(1):65-79. Review.

Miller SL, Tipton KD, Chinkes DL, Wolf SE, Wolfe RR. Independent and
combined effects of amino acids and glucose after resistance exercise.
Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2003 Mar;35(3):449-55.

Tipton KD, Borsheim E, Wolf SE, Sanford AP, Wolfe RR. Acute response of
net muscle protein balance reflects 24-h balance after exercise and
amino acid ingestion. Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab. 2003
Jan;284(1):E76-89.

Tipton KD, Rasmussen BB, Miller SL, Wolf SE, Owens-Stovall SK, Petrini
BE, Wolfe RR. Timing of amino acid-carbohydrate ingestion alters
anabolic response of muscle to resistance exercise. Am J Physiol
Endocrinol Metab. 2001 Aug;281(2):E197-206.

> Of course, you could offer up yer whey/gluc/*creatine* st-st-st-study, but
> if the OP has one milligram more brainmatter than you do, he'll ask the
> very
> obvious Q:
> WTF does whey/gluc/**creatine** have to do w/ whey??????????????

If you had the mental capacity to understand all the other studies
cited above, you might experience a revelation. Lacking that, I guess
you'll just have to flounder in your own ignorance.

At least you have a lot of practice in that regard.

> *Not saying this timing issue isn't true*, just that it doesn't make
> oodles
> of a priori sense

It makes perfect /a priori/ sense if you understand the physiology of
muscle protein synthesis. It simply conflicts with your chatty
phonetic blatherings. Go play with your HollowBar.

====================

I notice your whey/gluc/*creatine* site is not on that list.....

OK, let's assume that the above cites support your thesis.

How does this concept make a priori sense?
Do you have links to the arts/abstracts?

It's HoloBarre. Would you like to be a beta-tester?
--
------
Mr. P.V.'d (formerly Droll Troll), Yonkers, NY

Stop Corruption in Congress & Send the Ultimate Message:
Absolutely Vote, but NOT for a Democrat or a Republican.
Ending Corruption in Congress is the *Single Best Way*
to Materially Improve Your Family's Life.
The Solution is so simple--and inexpensive!

entropic3.14decay at optonline2.718 dot net; remove pi and e to reply--ie,
all d'numbuhs

Kristofer Hogg <entropic3.14decay@optonline2.718.net> wrote:
>
>I notice your whey/gluc/*creatine* site is not on that list.....

It was the first one on the list.

>OK, let's assume that the above cites support your thesis.

They do.

>How does this concept make a priori sense?

Insulin ... leucine ... mammalian target of rapamycin. Magic words.
Learn their meaning and get a clue.

>Do you have links to the arts/abstracts?

The abstracts can be found on PubMed. The articles might be found at
your local university library. Since you live in one of the largest
cities in the world, I assume you can access to them somewhere. If
they're not in walking distance, you may want to call a taxi.

>It's HoloBarre. Would you like to be a beta-tester?

There's a HollowBar in my gym. I use it for weighted chin-ups. Its
useful purposes are otherwise pretty limited.

Hmmmmm......

Cribb PJ, Hayes A. Effects of supplement timing and resistance exercise
on skeletal muscle hypertrophy. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2006
Nov;38(11):1918-25.

This study was funded by AST Sports Science, a supplement company.

AND, it WAS your whey/glucose/***creatine*** study, that you embarrassed
yourself with earlier.

AND, it is a single-, not double-blind study.

And.... and.... and..... I haven't even READ IT yet.
Course, then, neither, likely, have you.
Course, not that that would make much of a difference.

Ahm thinkin, mebbe you cain't even score in a women's detention center, w/
$$, chocolate, and ciggies....
--
------
Mr. P.V.'d (formerly Droll Troll), Yonkers, NY

Stop Corruption in Congress & Send the Ultimate Message:
Absolutely Vote, but NOT for a Democrat or a Republican.
Ending Corruption in Congress is the *Single Best Way*
to Materially Improve Your Family's Life.
The Solution is so simple--and inexpensive!

entropic3.14decay at optonline2.718 dot net; remove pi and e to reply--ie,
all d'numbuhs

"JMW" <jmwilliams_56@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1165037119.537329.217890@j44g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...
Proctologically Violated©® wrote:
> "JMW" <jmwilliams@enforcergraphics.f2s.com> wrote in message
> news:t6t1n2hqpkfdi5ogrpbgu7ntum0i63f81s@4ax.com...
> > The Other Mike <Noone@nowhere.com> wrote:
> >
> >>Sorry if this is the wrong forum to post this. I'm a 37 year old
> >>male, 5' 10" and about 200lbs...I'm a life long couch potato with
> >>pretty much no muscle. Been using free weights and the treadmill for
> >>the past 2 weeks...alternating days with one day a week totally off.
> >>I've changed my diet as well...no more soda (all water), wheat bread
> >>instead of white, less fatty foods...etc. but I admittedly don't count
> >>calories and am probably not getting enough protein in a day. I've
> >>lost about 9 lbs in the past 2 weeks so I'm happy so far. My goal is
> >>two fold...I'd like to gain some muscle mass (not alot...I guess a
> >>"normal" amount) and lose the gut. So, my question is if protein
> >>shakes are a good idea. I've read about the increase in protein
> >>helping muscle growth but am concerned it'll stunt my efforts to get
> >>rid of my gut. In my situation, any advice? If the shakes are a good
> >>idea, how often? Thanks in advance.
> >
> > Quickly absorbed protein (whey) and simple sugars (preferably high in
> > glucose) immediately before, during, and immediately after training
> > are beneficial. The rest of the time, they really aren't any more
> > beneficial than any other dietary protein and carbohydrates, and they
> > may just constitute unnecessary additional calories if they are dumped
> > on top of an already eucaloric diet.
> >
>
> Show some cites, hack, I mean, jack.

Cribb PJ, Hayes A. Effects of supplement timing and resistance exercise
on skeletal muscle hypertrophy. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2006
Nov;38(11):1918-25.

Cribb PJ, Williams AD, Carey MF, Hayes A. The effect of whey isolate
and resistance training on strength, body composition, and plasma
glutamine. Int J Sport Nutr Exerc Metab. 2006 Oct;16:494-508

Tipton KD, Elliott TA, Cree MG, Aarsland AA, Sanford AP, Wolfe RR.
Stimulation of net muscle protein synthesis by whey protein ingestion
before and after exercise. Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab. 2006 Aug 8;
[Epub ahead of print]

Tipton KD, Elliott TA, Cree MG, Wolf SE, Sanford AP, Wolfe RR.
Ingestion of casein and whey proteins result in muscle anabolism after
resistance exercise. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2004 Dec;36(12):2073-81.

Tipton KD, Wolfe RR. J Sports Sci. 2004 Jan;22(1):65-79. Review.

Miller SL, Tipton KD, Chinkes DL, Wolf SE, Wolfe RR. Independent and
combined effects of amino acids and glucose after resistance exercise.
Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2003 Mar;35(3):449-55.

Tipton KD, Borsheim E, Wolf SE, Sanford AP, Wolfe RR. Acute response of
net muscle protein balance reflects 24-h balance after exercise and
amino acid ingestion. Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab. 2003
Jan;284(1):E76-89.

Tipton KD, Rasmussen BB, Miller SL, Wolf SE, Owens-Stovall SK, Petrini
BE, Wolfe RR. Timing of amino acid-carbohydrate ingestion alters
anabolic response of muscle to resistance exercise. Am J Physiol
Endocrinol Metab. 2001 Aug;281(2):E197-206.

> Of course, you could offer up yer whey/gluc/*creatine* st-st-st-study, but
> if the OP has one milligram more brainmatter than you do, he'll ask the
> very
> obvious Q:
> WTF does whey/gluc/**creatine** have to do w/ whey??????????????

If you had the mental capacity to understand all the other studies
cited above, you might experience a revelation. Lacking that, I guess
you'll just have to flounder in your own ignorance.

At least you have a lot of practice in that regard.

> *Not saying this timing issue isn't true*, just that it doesn't make
> oodles
> of a priori sense

It makes perfect /a priori/ sense if you understand the physiology of
muscle protein synthesis. It simply conflicts with your chatty
phonetic blatherings. Go play with your HollowBar.

>
>>How does this concept make a priori sense?
>
> Insulin ... leucine ... mammalian target of rapamycin. Magic words.
> Learn their meaning and get a clue.

This is not much of an explanation--it's the bandying about of words.
If you don't want to explain it to me, then how bout to the OP, or others?
--
------
Mr. P.V.'d (formerly Droll Troll), Yonkers, NY

Stop Corruption in Congress & Send the Ultimate Message:
Absolutely Vote, but NOT for a Democrat or a Republican.
Ending Corruption in Congress is the *Single Best Way*
to Materially Improve Your Family's Life.
The Solution is so simple--and inexpensive!

entropic3.14decay at optonline2.718 dot net; remove pi and e to reply--ie,
all d'numbuhs



>
>>Do you have links to the arts/abstracts?
>
> The abstracts can be found on PubMed. The articles might be found at
> your local university library. Since you live in one of the largest
> cities in the world, I assume you can access to them somewhere. If
> they're not in walking distance, you may want to call a taxi.
>
>>It's HoloBarre. Would you like to be a beta-tester?
>
> There's a HollowBar in my gym. I use it for weighted chin-ups. Its
> useful purposes are otherwise pretty limited.
>

A jmw cite:
]
Tipton KD, Elliott TA, Cree MG, Wolf SE, Sanford AP, Wolfe RR.
Ingestion of casein and whey proteins result in muscle anabolism after
resistance exercise. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2004 Dec;36(12):2073-81.

Lessee if I got this right:
The abstract below shows that amino acids are absorbed, presumably by
muscle, after you exercise, from food eaten after you exercise.
wow.....
So lessee, ahm just guesssin here, but I guess that means that if you
exercise, lessee, mebbe you should EAT??? !!!!

And, if I understand the protocol correctly (femoral blood analysis), one
can't even be really sure WHAT accounted for the difference in aa balance.
Amino acids could have been used elsewhere, as well. You'd have to
radio-label everything, and assay *multiple* tissues to say what went where,
and when.

Wonder who funded this study?
================
Purpose: Determination of the anabolic response to exercise and nutrition is
important for individuals who may benefit from increased muscle mass. Intake
of free amino acids after resistance exercise stimulates net muscle protein
synthesis. The response of muscle protein balance to intact protein
ingestion after exercise has not been studied. This study was designed to
examine the acute response of muscle protein balance to ingestion of two
different intact proteins after resistance exercise.
Methods: Healthy volunteers were randomly assigned to one of three groups.
Each group consumed one of three drinks: placebo (PL; N = 7), 20 g of casein
(CS; N = 7), or whey proteins (WH; N = 9). Volunteers consumed the drink 1 h
after the conclusion of a leg extension exercise bout. Leucine and
phenylalanine concentrations were measured in femoral arteriovenous samples
to determine balance across the leg.

Results: Arterial amino acid concentrations were elevated by protein
ingestion, but the pattern of appearance was different for CS and WH. Net
amino acid balance switched from negative to positive after ingestion of
both proteins. Peak leucine net balance over time was greater for WH (347
+/- 50 nmol[middle dot]min-1[middle dot]100 mL-1 leg) than CS (133 +/- 45
nmol[middle dot]min-1[middle dot]100 mL-1 leg), but peak phenylalanine
balance was similar for CS and WH. Ingestion of both CS and WH stimulated a
significantly larger net phenylalanine uptake after resistance exercise,
compared with the PL (PL -5 +/- 15 mg, CS 84 +/- 10 mg, WH 62 +/- 18 mg).
Amino acid uptake relative to amount ingested was similar for both CS and WH
(~10-15%).

Conclusions: Acute ingestion of both WH and CS after exercise resulted in
similar increases in muscle protein net balance, resulting in net muscle
protein synthesis despite different patterns of blood amino acid responses.

PubMed don't seem to have any of these journals. I got the Med Sci Sports
Ex from the ms-se.com website.

Still waiting for *explanations*, jmw.

--
------
Mr. P.V.'d (formerly Droll Troll), Yonkers, NY

Stop Corruption in Congress & Send the Ultimate Message:
Absolutely Vote, but NOT for a Democrat or a Republican.
Ending Corruption in Congress is the *Single Best Way*
to Materially Improve Your Family's Life.
The Solution is so simple--and inexpensive!

entropic3.14decay at optonline2.718 dot net; remove pi and e to reply--ie,
all d'numbuhs

"JMW" <jmwilliams_56@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1165037119.537329.217890@j44g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...
Proctologically Violated©® wrote:
> "JMW" <jmwilliams@enforcergraphics.f2s.com> wrote in message
> news:t6t1n2hqpkfdi5ogrpbgu7ntum0i63f81s@4ax.com...
> > The Other Mike <Noone@nowhere.com> wrote:
> >
> >>Sorry if this is the wrong forum to post this. I'm a 37 year old
> >>male, 5' 10" and about 200lbs...I'm a life long couch potato with
> >>pretty much no muscle. Been using free weights and the treadmill for
> >>the past 2 weeks...alternating days with one day a week totally off.
> >>I've changed my diet as well...no more soda (all water), wheat bread
> >>instead of white, less fatty foods...etc. but I admittedly don't count
> >>calories and am probably not getting enough protein in a day. I've
> >>lost about 9 lbs in the past 2 weeks so I'm happy so far. My goal is
> >>two fold...I'd like to gain some muscle mass (not alot...I guess a
> >>"normal" amount) and lose the gut. So, my question is if protein
> >>shakes are a good idea. I've read about the increase in protein
> >>helping muscle growth but am concerned it'll stunt my efforts to get
> >>rid of my gut. In my situation, any advice? If the shakes are a good
> >>idea, how often? Thanks in advance.
> >
> > Quickly absorbed protein (whey) and simple sugars (preferably high in
> > glucose) immediately before, during, and immediately after training
> > are beneficial. The rest of the time, they really aren't any more
> > beneficial than any other dietary protein and carbohydrates, and they
> > may just constitute unnecessary additional calories if they are dumped
> > on top of an already eucaloric diet.
> >
>
> Show some cites, hack, I mean, jack.

Cribb PJ, Hayes A. Effects of supplement timing and resistance exercise
on skeletal muscle hypertrophy. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2006
Nov;38(11):1918-25.

Cribb PJ, Williams AD, Carey MF, Hayes A. The effect of whey isolate
and resistance training on strength, body composition, and plasma
glutamine. Int J Sport Nutr Exerc Metab. 2006 Oct;16:494-508

Tipton KD, Elliott TA, Cree MG, Aarsland AA, Sanford AP, Wolfe RR.
Stimulation of net muscle protein synthesis by whey protein ingestion
before and after exercise. Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab. 2006 Aug 8;
[Epub ahead of print]

Tipton KD, Elliott TA, Cree MG, Wolf SE, Sanford AP, Wolfe RR.
Ingestion of casein and whey proteins result in muscle anabolism after
resistance exercise. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2004 Dec;36(12):2073-81.

Tipton KD, Wolfe RR. J Sports Sci. 2004 Jan;22(1):65-79. Review.

Miller SL, Tipton KD, Chinkes DL, Wolf SE, Wolfe RR. Independent and
combined effects of amino acids and glucose after resistance exercise.
Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2003 Mar;35(3):449-55.

Tipton KD, Borsheim E, Wolf SE, Sanford AP, Wolfe RR. Acute response of
net muscle protein balance reflects 24-h balance after exercise and
amino acid ingestion. Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab. 2003
Jan;284(1):E76-89.

Tipton KD, Rasmussen BB, Miller SL, Wolf SE, Owens-Stovall SK, Petrini
BE, Wolfe RR. Timing of amino acid-carbohydrate ingestion alters
anabolic response of muscle to resistance exercise. Am J Physiol
Endocrinol Metab. 2001 Aug;281(2):E197-206.

> Of course, you could offer up yer whey/gluc/*creatine* st-st-st-study, but
> if the OP has one milligram more brainmatter than you do, he'll ask the
> very
> obvious Q:
> WTF does whey/gluc/**creatine** have to do w/ whey??????????????

If you had the mental capacity to understand all the other studies
cited above, you might experience a revelation. Lacking that, I guess
you'll just have to flounder in your own ignorance.

At least you have a lot of practice in that regard.

> *Not saying this timing issue isn't true*, just that it doesn't make
> oodles
> of a priori sense

It makes perfect /a priori/ sense if you understand the physiology of
muscle protein synthesis. It simply conflicts with your chatty
phonetic blatherings. Go play with your HollowBar.

On Fri, 01 Dec 2006 22:43:42 -0500, JMW
<jmwilliams@enforcergraphics.f2s.com> wrote:

>Quickly absorbed protein (whey) and simple sugars (preferably high in
>glucose) immediately before, during, and immediately after training
>are beneficial. The rest of the time, they really aren't any more
>beneficial than any other dietary protein and carbohydrates, and they
>may just constitute unnecessary additional calories if they are dumped
>on top of an already eucaloric diet.

John do you take the whey only on training day or everyday? Do you
take any other protein supplements on the other days? If so what
kind? Also wondering how many scoops for a normal size man.

Right now I am trying to burn fat off so I want to conserve calories.
But I read somewhere the protein supplements can help minimize muscle
loss during that period. So I don't want to cut it out all together.
Maybe just one scoop after the workout.

Shute wrote:
> On Fri, 01 Dec 2006 22:43:42 -0500, JMW
> <jmwilliams@enforcergraphics.f2s.com> wrote:
>
>> Quickly absorbed protein (whey) and simple sugars (preferably high in
>> glucose) immediately before, during, and immediately after training
>> are beneficial. The rest of the time, they really aren't any more
>> beneficial than any other dietary protein and carbohydrates, and they
>> may just constitute unnecessary additional calories if they are
>> dumped on top of an already eucaloric diet.
>
> John do you take the whey only on training day or everyday?

I take it everyday for breakfast.

> Do you take any other protein supplements on the other days?

You only need supplements to...supplement your diet !!!

> If so what
> kind? Also wondering how many scoops for a normal size man.

How big are the scoops? Define "normal size"!

>
> Right now I am trying to burn fat off so I want to conserve calories.

Er, you're not wanting to conserve calories, you're wanting to lose them.

> But I read somewhere the protein supplements can help minimize muscle
> loss during that period.

Not protein supplements, but protein intake.

> So I don't want to cut it out all together.
> Maybe just one scoop after the workout.

My advise based on personal experience [sorry PV, no cites just a good
muscular physique] is to shoot for the classis 1g of protein per pound of
body weight per day with approx. 30-50g of this coming post workout.


--
Bully
Protein bars: http://www.proteinbars.co.uk

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't
matter, and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss

<entropic3.14decay@optonline2.718.net> wrote:
>
>PubMed don't seem to have any of these journals.

You mean "abstracts"? If so, then you're wrong.

>I got the Med Sci Sports
>Ex from the ms-se.com website.

All you got was the abstract. Obtaining and reading the articles
requires work.

>Still waiting for *explanations*, jmw.

Learning muscle physiology also requires work. I don't intend to
teach you.

<entropic3.14decay@optonline2.718.net> wrote:
>>
>>>How does this concept make a priori sense?
>>
>> Insulin ... leucine ... mammalian target of rapamycin. Magic words.
>> Learn their meaning and get a clue.
>
>This is not much of an explanation--it's the bandying about of words.
>If you don't want to explain it to me, then how bout to the OP, or others?

When others ask, I'll explain to them. I'm not going to teach someone
who pretends that he already knows everything.

Shute <Shute@nowhere.com> wrote:

>On Fri, 01 Dec 2006 22:43:42 -0500, JMW
><jmwilliams@enforcergraphics.f2s.com> wrote:
>
>>Quickly absorbed protein (whey) and simple sugars (preferably high in
>>glucose) immediately before, during, and immediately after training
>>are beneficial. The rest of the time, they really aren't any more
>>beneficial than any other dietary protein and carbohydrates, and they
>>may just constitute unnecessary additional calories if they are dumped
>>on top of an already eucaloric diet.
>
>John do you take the whey only on training day or everyday? Do you
>take any other protein supplements on the other days? If so what
>kind? Also wondering how many scoops for a normal size man.
>
>Right now I am trying to burn fat off so I want to conserve calories.
>But I read somewhere the protein supplements can help minimize muscle
>loss during that period. So I don't want to cut it out all together.
>Maybe just one scoop after the workout.

I use two scoops and consume it *during* training. The additional
calories are pretty modest. The rest of the time, my protein
consumption comes from common foods, which includes a fairly
substantial amount of low-fat cottage cheese (casein).

"JMW" <jmwilliams@enforcergraphics.f2s.com> wrote in message
news:9903n2h1tgig38tvcovnulfrhpc78kijed@4ax.com...
> <entropic3.14decay@optonline2.718.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>How does this concept make a priori sense?
>>>
>>> Insulin ... leucine ... mammalian target of rapamycin. Magic words.
>>> Learn their meaning and get a clue.
>>
>>This is not much of an explanation--it's the bandying about of words.
>>If you don't want to explain it to me, then how bout to the OP, or others?
>
> When others ask, I'll explain to them. I'm not going to teach someone
> who pretends that he already knows everything.

Quite the contrary--which is why I ask questions.
Didn't say nutrient timing was bullshit--I said it didn't make a priori
sense, posted my reasoning, and waited for yours.
Looks like I'll be waiting for a long time, dudnit?

And just what part of "supplement company funding supplement research" don't
you understand?
What part of whey/gluc/creatine being largely irrelevant to whey/gluc timing
don't you understand?
I can't believe you cited that article *again*!!

Another bullshitter stalking off with his toys.... Except in your case,
it's *imaginary toys*.
--
------
Mr. P.V.'d (formerly Droll Troll), Yonkers, NY

Stop Corruption in Congress & Send the Ultimate Message:
Absolutely Vote, but NOT for a Democrat or a Republican.
Ending Corruption in Congress is the *Single Best Way*
to Materially Improve Your Family's Life.
The Solution is so simple--and inexpensive!

entropic3.14decay at optonline2.718 dot net; remove pi and e to reply--ie,
all d'numbuhs



>

"JMW" <jmwilliams@enforcergraphics.f2s.com> wrote in message
news:huv2n2pmhukchvibsm3ta5roiua18h6f7a@4ax.com...
> <entropic3.14decay@optonline2.718.net> wrote:
>>
>>PubMed don't seem to have any of these journals.
>
> You mean "abstracts"? If so, then you're wrong.
>
>>I got the Med Sci Sports
>>Ex from the ms-se.com website.
>
> All you got was the abstract. Obtaining and reading the articles
> requires work.

In your case, futile work.

>
>>Still waiting for *explanations*, jmw.
>
> Learning muscle physiology also requires work. I don't intend to
> teach you.

<WAAAAAAAAAAAAAA>
--
------
Mr. P.V.'d (formerly Droll Troll), Yonkers, NY

Stop Corruption in Congress & Send the Ultimate Message:
Absolutely Vote, but NOT for a Democrat or a Republican.
Ending Corruption in Congress is the *Single Best Way*
to Materially Improve Your Family's Life.
The Solution is so simple--and inexpensive!

entropic3.14decay at optonline2.718 dot net; remove pi and e to reply--ie,
all d'numbuhs




>

Proctologically Violated wrote:
> And just what part of "supplement company funding supplement
> research" don't you understand?

I don't necessarily distrust that. It's only an a priory issue, if the
whole enterprise is a fraud to start with. Company with a legit
business would be interested in getting all the information out there,
both positive and negative. It's better for the business if it comes
from them, than from competitors or academics (which it will,
eventually). In the cases like V10XX, a company would rather openly
research side effects than get the drug busted from the market, after
billions are spent on development and marketing.

<entropic3.14decay@optonline2.718.net> wrote:
>
>And just what part of "supplement company funding supplement research" don't
>you understand?

It makes it suspect, but it's far from conclusive ... unless, of
course, one is pathologically paranoid. Given what we have seen of
your persona, I can see how you might be rather dogmatic in that
regard.

>What part of whey/gluc/creatine being largely irrelevant to whey/gluc timing
>don't you understand?
>I can't believe you cited that article *again*!!

When it's consistent with the findings of all the previous articles I
cited, *nonwe* of which involved creatine? Until you have read those
and are conversant in their findings, I'm not the one who is speaking
from ignorance. Neither is it my fault that I have been researching
this subject for a long time, whereas you have just started; the
recency of your interest does not place a burden on me to educate you.

But just so you understand, the *sole* issue which caused me to post
that article was the issue of timing. The other issues were discussed
in detail years ago, most prominently in a long thread between myself
and Lyle McDonald, where my arguments were supplemented with copious
cites and quotations from the actual studies. The fact that you may
have been busy trying to sell people HollowBars at that time is not my
problem.

>Another bullshitter stalking off with his toys....

You are, indeed. Nobody here is going to spoon-feed you the research,
then ask you to argue a subject which had to be explained to you in
the first place.

Well, lessee, one art rests *heavily* on creatine, and in the earlier thread
you claimed much more than timing, iirc.
The other concluded that, well, exercisers should eat after they
exercise..... OK, sounds reasonable.....
I can't wait to get to the rest.
Well, actually, I can....

Me, paranoid? Please...
You: Criminally assaholic, like other paralegals/DAs who refuse to release
people when cleared by DNA, etc.
Omigod, my reputation.....
You are probably biomechanically incapable of backpedaling.

So, I assume you won that debate w/ Lyle? I doubt it.
And you are *artful*!
A natural obligation to explain/justify one's position (above and beyond
bullshit cites) has been twisted into a refusal to "educate" a perceived
antagonist.
Really very good, very clever!

> Nobody here is going to spoon-feed you the research,
> then ask you to argue a subject which had to be explained to you in
> the first place.

Not spoonfeed: discuss, as opposed to just throwing out bullshit cites.
But I see your point:
It would be pretty embarrassing to claim to have been studying this shit for
years, and have a newcomer point out all your elementary errors in reading,
logic, and science.
But I'm pretty sure that most here see thru your inability to comprehend
your own cites, not even the abstracts.

And DZ: integrity of a *supplement company*?????
Can't wait to see what research Xyience (the UFC sponsors) funds.
I can't cite all the details, but the buzz in the news is that these drug
companies invented the bogus research scam. It is claimed that the profits
they make on a bogus, even dangerous drug more than justifies the future
legal expense of lawsuits.
--
------
Mr. P.V.'d (formerly Droll Troll), Yonkers, NY

Stop Corruption in Congress & Send the Ultimate Message:
Absolutely Vote, but NOT for a Democrat or a Republican.
Ending Corruption in Congress is the *Single Best Way*
to Materially Improve Your Family's Life.
The Solution is so simple--and inexpensive!

entropic3.14decay at optonline2.718 dot net; remove pi and e to reply--ie,
all d'numbuhs

"JMW" <jmwilliams@enforcergraphics.f2s.com> wrote in message
news:bgl3n2thpcijif30con3f50b6ql0n0ivbb@4ax.com...
> <entropic3.14decay@optonline2.718.net> wrote:
>>
>>And just what part of "supplement company funding supplement research"
>>don't
>>you understand?
>
> It makes it suspect, but it's far from conclusive ... unless, of
> course, one is pathologically paranoid. Given what we have seen of
> your persona, I can see how you might be rather dogmatic in that
> regard.
>
>>What part of whey/gluc/creatine being largely irrelevant to whey/gluc
>>timing
>>don't you understand?
>>I can't believe you cited that article *again*!!
>
> When it's consistent with the findings of all the previous articles I
> cited, *nonwe* of which involved creatine? Until you have read those
> and are conversant in their findings, I'm not the one who is speaking
> from ignorance. Neither is it my fault that I have been researching
> this subject for a long time, whereas you have just started; the
> recency of your interest does not place a burden on me to educate you.
>
> But just so you understand, the *sole* issue which caused me to post
> that article was the issue of timing. The other issues were discussed
> in detail years ago, most prominently in a long thread between myself
> and Lyle McDonald, where my arguments were supplemented with copious
> cites and quotations from the actual studies. The fact that you may
> have been busy trying to sell people HollowBars at that time is not my
> problem.
>
>>Another bullshitter stalking off with his toys....
>
> You are, indeed. Nobody here is going to spoon-feed you the research,
> then ask you to argue a subject which had to be explained to you in
> the first place.
>

"Proctologically Violated©®" <entropic3.14decay@optonline2.718.net>
wrote:

>Well, lessee, one art rests *heavily* on creatine, and in the earlier thread
>you claimed much more than timing, iirc.

ydnrc.

>The other concluded that, well, exercisers should eat after they
>exercise..... OK, sounds reasonable.....
>I can't wait to get to the rest.
>Well, actually, I can....

You don't know how to look for them and are too lazy to ride the bus
to the library.

>Me, paranoid? Please...
>You: Criminally assaholic, like other paralegals/DAs who refuse to release
>people when cleared by DNA, etc.

<heh> No, nothing paranoid about that statement.

>Omigod, my reputation.....

As a HollowBar scammer?

>So, I assume you won that debate w/ Lyle? I doubt it.
>And you are *artful*!
>A natural obligation to explain/justify one's position (above and beyond
>bullshit cites) has been twisted into a refusal to "educate" a perceived
>antagonist.
>Really very good, very clever!

I'll explain my position to someone who understands the underlying
science.

>> Nobody here is going to spoon-feed you the research,
>> then ask you to argue a subject which had to be explained to you in
>> the first place.
>
>Not spoonfeed: discuss, as opposed to just throwing out bullshit cites.

You would need to understand what I'm talking about first. You simply
don't.

>But I see your point:
>It would be pretty embarrassing to claim to have been studying this shit for
>years, and have a newcomer point out all your elementary errors in reading,
>logic, and science.

<yawn>

>But I'm pretty sure that most here see thru your inability to comprehend
>your own cites, not even the abstracts.

Oh, I'm sure that most here see through something. I don't think you
know or would appreciate what is so transparent to them.

Proctologically Violated wrote:
> And DZ: integrity of a *supplement company*?????

Well, in this case it's research *sponsored* by a company. There is
still personal integrity of scientists at stake.

For example, I trust RA Fisher's research that was partly sponsored by
tobacco industry.

In article <1165037119.537329.217890@j44g2000cwa.googlegroups .com>, "JMW"
<jmwilliams_56@yahoo.com> wrote:

Take your own advice: killfile. I took your advice on that subject BTW.
Your turn dude.


>
> Cribb PJ, Hayes A. Effects of supplement timing and resistance exercise
> on skeletal muscle hypertrophy. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2006
> Nov;38(11):1918-25.
>
> Cribb PJ, Williams AD, Carey MF, Hayes A. The effect of whey isolate
> and resistance training on strength, body composition, and plasma
> glutamine. Int J Sport Nutr Exerc Metab. 2006 Oct;16:494-508
>
> Tipton KD, Elliott TA, Cree MG, Aarsland AA, Sanford AP, Wolfe RR.
> Stimulation of net muscle protein synthesis by whey protein ingestion
> before and after exercise. Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab. 2006 Aug 8;
> [Epub ahead of print]
>
> Tipton KD, Elliott TA, Cree MG, Wolf SE, Sanford AP, Wolfe RR.
> Ingestion of casein and whey proteins result in muscle anabolism after
> resistance exercise. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2004 Dec;36(12):2073-81.
>
> Tipton KD, Wolfe RR. J Sports Sci. 2004 Jan;22(1):65-79. Review.
>
> Miller SL, Tipton KD, Chinkes DL, Wolf SE, Wolfe RR. Independent and
> combined effects of amino acids and glucose after resistance exercise.
> Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2003 Mar;35(3):449-55.
>
> Tipton KD, Borsheim E, Wolf SE, Sanford AP, Wolfe RR. Acute response of
> net muscle protein balance reflects 24-h balance after exercise and
> amino acid ingestion. Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab. 2003
> Jan;284(1):E76-89.
>
> Tipton KD, Rasmussen BB, Miller SL, Wolf SE, Owens-Stovall SK, Petrini
> BE, Wolfe RR. Timing of amino acid-carbohydrate ingestion alters
> anabolic response of muscle to resistance exercise. Am J Physiol
> Endocrinol Metab. 2001 Aug;281(2):E197-206.
>
> > Of course, you could offer up yer whey/gluc/*creatine* st-st-st-study, but
> > if the OP has one milligram more brainmatter than you do, he'll ask the v=
> ery
> > obvious Q:
> > WTF does whey/gluc/**creatine** have to do w/ whey??????????????
>
> If you had the mental capacity to understand all the other studies
> cited above, you might experience a revelation. Lacking that, I guess
> you'll just have to flounder in your own ignorance.
>
> At least you have a lot of practice in that regard.
>
> > *Not saying this timing issue isn't true*, just that it doesn't make oodl=
> es
> > of a priori sense
>
> It makes perfect /a priori/ sense if you understand the physiology of
> muscle protein synthesis. It simply conflicts with your chatty
> phonetic blatherings. Go play with your HollowBar.

willbrink@comcast.net (Will Brink) wrote:

> "JMW" <jmwilliams_56@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>Take your own advice: killfile. I took your advice on that subject BTW.
>Your turn dude.

He's back in the bin. I just let him play blustering bigmouth for a
bit.

Oh, the brink/jmw duo, again. What do I hear?

<MMmmmmmmmmmmmmm> <MMMMMMMMMmmmmmmmmmmmmm> <gulp> <aaaaaahhhh>

Run along now, the both of you.
Come back, brink, when you figger out the very interesting--but very
simple--kinetics of your fav. "no adverse reactions" creatine --->
creatinine.
Come back, jmw, when you figger out fukndigestion. Oh, and how to use
conversely.
<WAAAAAA>
I know, I know, you don't wanna play any more.
--
------
Mr. P.V.'d (formerly Droll Troll), Yonkers, NY

Stop Corruption in Congress & Send the Ultimate Message:
Absolutely Vote, but NOT for a Democrat or a Republican.
Ending Corruption in Congress is the *Single Best Way*
to Materially Improve Your Family's Life.
The Solution is so simple--and inexpensive!

entropic3.14decay at optonline2.718 dot net; remove pi and e to reply--ie,
all d'numbuhs

"JMW" <jmwilliams@enforcergraphics.f2s.com> wrote in message
news:j514n2dua53fc0qpmlk7c34hn8ejhdjbf9@4ax.com...
> willbrink@comcast.net (Will Brink) wrote:
>
>> "JMW" <jmwilliams_56@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>Take your own advice: killfile. I took your advice on that subject BTW.
>>Your turn dude.
>
> He's back in the bin. I just let him play blustering bigmouth for a
> bit.
>

On Sat, 02 Dec 2006 18:00:56 -0500, JMW
<jmwilliams@enforcergraphics.f2s.com> wrote:

>willbrink@comcast.net (Will Brink) wrote:
>
>> "JMW" <jmwilliams_56@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>Take your own advice: killfile. I took your advice on that subject BTW.
>>Your turn dude.
>
>He's back in the bin. I just let him play blustering bigmouth for a
>bit.

As usual, they (Little Willy and Old Johnny) hurl out a lot of
pseudo/scientific/medical bullshit, get called on it, bully and