I've been using waxy maize starch from np for about 2 weeks now and used tp.com waxy maize for a month before that. I figured all the supp company's got there product from the same place, so i would go with the least expensive.

The diffrence between tp and np that i have noticed is tp is a finer powder almost looks like water when you pour it. nps is more course like a protein powder. Also tps taste like flour, and nps doesn't really have any taste to it. Both are not filling at all and i am able to eat a full meal only 30-60 minutes after my post workout shake. The biggest diffrence that i have noticed is the pumps, on tps I would get huge pumps like i was on creatine and my vascularty was the best it had ever been. On nps i feel nothing. I personally dont care much for being overly pumped so i will stick with np.com since i bought 10lbs of it.. I may end up useing both tps and nps as a 50/50 mix.


tp= trueprotein.com
np= nutraplanet.com

Edit: forgot to mention that tps wms sticks to everything!! like it has some kind of static charge or something..

I havent had a chance to try the NP version yet, as I have a shitload of it still from TP. Im looking forward to trying it though. Thanks for the review.

Jason

Just ordered a custom mix from TP with WMS in it. When I get it I'm going to also mix Supercarb into it so that they're roughly 50/50. We'll see how it goes.

What is the idea of WMS? It should be used post workout like dextrose? What does this do to blood sugar? What the hell animal/plant does it come from?

its just a component of regular old starch. Cornstarch (I think its cornstarch) comes in at about an 85/15 ratio of its two main constituents....WMS is just an isolate of the 15% component that is amylopectin. It is rapidly assimilated and increases gastric emptying/does not require digestion/enters the bloodstream osmotically through the small intestine. Basically, mix 50g or so up with some BCAAs and creatine and you are good to go for PWO. Wait about 20 mins and then have your protein shake. It hydrates and replenishes muscle glycogen like nothing I have ever experienced. You may already know it as "Vitargo."

I also noticed the same differences regarding tp vs np. While I do still get ok pumps on np's brand, tp's pumps were incredible and almost painful. Muscle fullness is about equal between the two. Based on price alone, I think I'll stick with np. Not to mention, their shipping is cheaper, it comes in a container for free, and it gets to my doorstep way faster (often with free samples!)

I couldn't agree more.. the first time you get an arm pump brushing your teeth you think. "cool". after a week you think this sucks...

So do you have whey in that mix?? BCAA's?

How important is it to separate the time between ingesting the protein from the WMS?

Per serving (approx):

20g BCAA
20g WMS
20g Supercarb (adding this myself)
20g Hydrolyzed Whey
3g Taurine

I don't think it's important at all. If anything the WMS should help with gastric emptying of the other ingredients.

Ahh okay, thanks. Think I'm going to do something similar to this next time I order from TP.

I'm getting ready to ask for testers of a during working and PWO drink. Any takers?

whats in it?

I was hoping you would ask, quinc....I had my eye on you. I would rather not say right now, but I will through PMs. They are Kwik Karb based formulas with some extras....nothing TOO fancy.

I can PM you if you would like.

You're sort of right. Starch generally has both amylose and amylopectin. Most of the starch available for baking has a higher content of amylose to amylopectin.

Amylose is denser and is hard to break down, whereas amylopectin is easily broken down and absorbed.

Grains are grown with high amylopectin (waxy), in the case of waxy maize, it is 99% amylopectin and less than 1% amylose..no extract needed.

I'd get in on this, since you're offering.

Is it a during WO and post WO drink? Or are they going to be two seperate formulations?

I'm down.

definitely bro, I'd be very interested to check it out.

So does this waxy stuff not raise insulin or something? If you're looking for a quick carb source why not just use sugar?

Totally different animal, with very little insulin spike (theoretically.)

The key lies in the osmolity. Having a different osmolity than blood, WMS is emptied into the bloodstream VERY fast - way faster than table sugar.

Does the pope love little boys? Im in!!

Jason

What can I say, I love WMS....I'm in

Is there really any proof that plain old corn starch isn't just as good as WMS while being much cheaper and more readily available?

I've googled a little and read that "commercial cornstarch ( [is] 70% amylopectin)" here :

http://jn.nutrition.org/cgi/content/full/127/7/1349#SEC2

This study also seems to imply that regular cornstarch did as well in increasing body weight as dextrose and is 100% digestible. The study actually seems to imply that modified "high amylose" maize starch is potentially OK for nutritional drinks because it's quite digestible and has other benefits...(lower insulin spike?)

Here : http://www.rcub.bg.ac.yu/monograph/2003/rad16.htm is it written that cornstarch is 28% Amylose and 72% amylopectin.

I also found this :
Effect of long-term consumption of amylose vs amylopectin starch on metabolic variables in human subjects

KM Behall and JC Howe
Beltsville Human Nutrition Research Center, US Department of Agriculture, MD 20705-2350.

Long-term consumption of high-amylose starch on insulin and glucose response was investigated in 24 men: 10 control and 14 hyperinsulinemic (HI) subjects. Subjects consumed products made with standard (70% amylopectin, 30% amylose) or high-amylose (70% amylose, 30% amylopectin) cornstarch for two 14-wk periods in a crossover pattern. Starch products replaced usual starches in the self-selected diet for 10 wk followed by 4 wk of a controlled diet. After a starch-tolerance test with bread made from the starch consumed during that period, the insulin response curve area was significantly lower in all subjects after amylose consumption (P < 0.002). Glucose responses in HI and control subjects were similar and did not vary with the type of starch. Fasting triglyceride concentrations were significantly lower in subjects who consumed the high-amylose compared with the standard- starch diet throughout the study. Chronic consumption of high-amylose foods normalized the insulin response of hyperinsulinemic subjects and showed a potential benefit for diabetic subjects.

Soluble Amylose Cornstarch Is More Digestible than Soluble Amylopectin Potato Starch in Rats

Manuscript received 19 June 1996. Initial reviews completed 29 July 1996. Revision accepted 4 March 1997.
Xiaohan Zhou and Murray L. Kaplan

Food Science and Human Nutrition Department, Iowa State University, Ames, IA 50011

In liquid enteral formulations, high molecular weight soluble starches may be able to replace glucose and low molecular weight glucose polymers that have high glycemic indices. Male rats were fed either commercial cornstarch, dextrose, modified soluble potato (70-75% amylopectin) starch, or modified soluble amylomaize-7 (70% amylose) starch for 4 wk. Body weights did not differ among the groups. Food consumption was significantly higher in the two modified starch-fed groups than in the two control groups. Commercial cornstarch, dextrose, modified potato starch and modified amylomaize-7 starch were 100 ± 0, 100 ± 0, 69.0 ± 1.0 and 91.5 ± 0.8% digestible, respectively (n = 9, mean ± SEM). The modified potato starch-fed group deposited the least fat, protein and energy. In both modified starch-fed groups, liver weights were significantly greater than in the two control groups. In food-deprived rats, serum free fatty acid concentrations in the modified potato starch-fed group were significantly higher than in the two control groups, and serum glucose concentrations were significantly higher in the two modified starch-fed groups than in the controls. The insulin to glucagon ratios were significantly lower in the modified potato starch-fed and amylomaize-7 starch-fed groups than in the dextrose-fed control group. Serum protein concentrations, measured after food deprivation, were significantly lower in the modified potato starch-fed group than in the other three groups. Gluconeogenesis from fermentation products might account for the high serum glucose concentrations in the two experimental groups. These data indicate that only the modified amylomaize-7 starch may be useful in the development of food products for liquid nutritional supplements because of the high digestibility and the low resultant insulin levels.


I've bought and tried both - the second for around 10% of the WMS price...- and I must say they really REALLY seem the same, exact same consistency and aspect, same effect (great pump pwo)...The content label says both have 87% or 85% carbs...

Also, from other research I've found, isn't it true that sticky rice is almost 100% amylopectin, could this be a cheaper source for pwo nutrition?

I'm really not a nutrition expert so please be indulgent, I'm just trying to make some sense and not waste too much money because of supplement company BS (btw I highly respect supplement companies, just not the BS)...

From reading the research as well as some other websites (for example http://www.nutritionandmetabolism.com/content/1/1/8), I seem to understand that resistant starch ie amylose is useful for burning fat...

I've also read that :"
« Waxy » corn, which is almost totally lacking in amylose, is a favorite of the food industry precisely because its starch is particularly viscous. It is commonly used as a thickening agent for fruit jellies and as texturizing agent for canned or frozen foods. It is labeled as “cornstarch” and its Glycemic Index is one of the highest (near the 100 value). Cornstarch is thus one of the ingredients which cause industrial food preparations to evoke high blood sugar responses. "

here: http://www.montignac.com/en/ig_fact_modif.php

It also gets a little scary:

"Amylopectin starch induces nonreversible insulin resistance in rats"

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.f...p;dopt=Abstract

There are many other pubmed articles in this vein.

Any comments / clarifications welcome.

So I guess one question I have is, does WMS provide enough of an insulin spike to be beneficial WRT increased protein synthesis? I'm of the opinion that the answer is "yes", since I don't believe that a huge spike is necessary, but I was wondering what others thought.

I am very interested in trying this one. Count me in!

I thought that working out stimulated protein synthesis enough?

Factoring in additional leucine, I don't think stimulating PS is the bottleneck, but getting nutrients to the muscle is instead; in order to repair the muscle. And this is where a product like WMS would seem superior; getting the nutrients, and glycogen, to the muscle faster than other carb sources could to begin the rebuilding process sooner.

Vitargo (WMS) (carbohydrate with a high molecular weight) has gone through 2 scientific studies at the Karolinska Institute, Stockholm where comparisons were made with an ordinary carbohydrate sport drink consisting of starch syrup (low molecular weight). These studies were:

Muscle glycogen resynthesis rate after supplementation of drinks containing carbohydrates with low and high molecular weight. (Study 1)

In plain English: The rate that glycogen is stored in the muscles through the in-take of fluids containing carbohydrates with low and high molecular weight respectively.

and

Improved gastric emptying rate in humans of a unique glucose polymer with gel forming properties. (Study 2)

In plain English: How quickly a unique glucose polymer (Vitargo®), with gel forming properties, passes through the stomach.

Study 1

The rate that glycogen is stored in the muscles through the in-take of fluids containing carbohydrates with low and high molecular weight respectively.

Link to summary in the "European Journal of Applied Physiology. Volume 81 Issue 4 (2000) pages 346-351 :
Muscle glycogen resynthesis rate in humans after supplementation of drinks containing carbohydrates with low and high molecular masses,

Karin Piehl-Aulin, Uppsala University, Karin Söderlund, Karolinska Institute, och Eric Hultman, Karolinska Institute were responsible for the studies.

Method:

The Karolinska Institute, Stockholm carried out clinical tests on Vitargo®. Thirteen healthy and well-trained men participated in the studies. They were between the ages of 21-33 years old, had an average height of 190cm and an average weight of 82.1 kg. On two occasions the test subjects ran and cycled until they were exhausted. Five minutes after their workout muscle samples were taken.

The test subjects then drank a carbohydrate drink. On one occasion they were given a drink which contained a carbohydrate of low molecular weight (starch syrup) and on the other occasion they drank Vitargo®, with its hundred times greater carbohydrate molecular weight.

Directly after the first muscle sample they drank 75 grams of carbohydrates diluted in a half litre of water. The same amount was drunk after a further 30, 60 and 90 minutes. Each subject drank a total of 300 grams of carbohydrates.

Further muscle samples were taken at two and four hours respectively after the initial in-take of carbohydrates. During this time the subjects rested.

After two hours the glycogen levels in the muscles were significantly higher in the case of Vitargo®.

The results: Vitargo® loaded glycogen 70% quicker than the "ordinary" standard carbohydrate (starch syrup) during the first two hours after the completed activity.
Between 2-4 hours there were no significant differences between the two carbohydrates glycogen loading.

What does this mean to the sportsman? Directly after training (within around ½-1 hour) the loading of glycogen is particularly beneficial. It is NOW you should eat and drink your carbohydrates!

Vitargo® is outstanding with regard to the reloading of glycogen after training and loading occurs 70% faster with Vitargo® than other carbohydrates. Your body is able to load more glycogen with Vitargo® which helps you avoid a negative energy-balance. A body in energy-balance has a better immune system against infections and the risk for "over training symptoms" are minimised.

For those of you who load carbohydrates by starting with an emptying phase i.e. eating very little carbohydrates for a few days and then finish off with a hard training session. This is done to completely empty all glycogen stocks and thereby increase the muscle carbohydrate loading capacity. In this case Vitarg® is a sensible choice. Studies show that Vitargo® is in a class of its own with the most effective carbohydrate.

study 2
What does this mean to the sportsman? A quick passage through the stomach during activity is important because a working body requires energy (carbohydrates) and fluid replacement as quickly as possible. Vitargo® passes through the stomach 80% quicker than ordinary sport drinks.

Since Vitargo® passes through the stomach quickly it minimises the risk of stomach problems during activity. Energy (carbohydrates) enters the small intestine quicker and then out into the bloodstream.

The water that is taken in with Vitargo® will pass through the stomach, in principle, just as quickly as if one had just drunk water. If we compare this with the in-take of a carbohydrate with a low molecular weight mixed with water, even the passage of water to the small intestine can be slowed down and cause a temporary dehydration problem. Dehydration can also occur if one drinks a too concentrated carbohydrate solution. The word OSMOLALITY describes how quickly a solution passes through the stomach. If the osmolality is low the passage is quick, if high – the passage is slow.

Osmolality is dependent on the solution’s concentration, that is to say that an ordinary carbohydrate solution’s concentration, because of its chemical make-up, should not exceed 5-8% because then the osmolality level is too high. Vitargo® has with a 5% concentration an osmosis level of 11, which is very low. The recommended fluid in-take during sporting activities is 1.5-2dl every 10 minutes. So there is a real need for this fluid to be emptied from the stomach quickly otherwise it will soon be like a balloon and can lead to vomiting.

A lot of athletes have at some time had stomach-churning experiences in connection to competition. What do we mean by this?
We know it is not enough to just look at the fluid in-take during long physical activities, but also energy supplements in the form of carbohydrates.
The choice of carbohydrate is essential if you are to achieve your best results and avoid stomach problems. If you choose a carbohydrate which is well broken down i.e. a short molecular structure such as sugar or glucose syrup, the possibility of experiencing stomach problems is increased. On the other hand if you choose a carbohydrate which is of similar structure to starch i.e. a long molecular structure like VitargoÒ, you have made a winning choice.

To explain this more simply, the more broken-down a starch is the higher osmolality it has in a water solution. Osmolality affects the stomach in such a way that a high osmolality gives a slower rate of passage through the stomach. Besides that water is retained in the stomach longer as a high osmolality binds water to it through something called osmotic effect.

Solutions that have a lower osmolality than blood are called hypotonic. The more hypotonic a solution is the quicker it passes through the stomach into the intestine where energy uptake occurs. It is also possible that a low osmolality can have a beneficial effect working as a pump into the blood stream.

Vitargo has the lowest osmolality on the market that gives an ultra-hypotonic solution.

Vitargo minimises the risk of stomach problems and yet is a winning choice in the hunt for quick energy!


Osmolality results

Sport drinks 5% solution 10% solution 15% solution
VitargoÒ CARBOLOADER 11 24 39
Maxim Original 48 100 165
IsostarÒ Long Energy 89 181 306

Osmolality results in prepared drinks at recommended concentration

Sport drinks 10% solution Drink at rec. conc.
VitargoÒ+ELECTROLYTE 69 60*
VitargoÒ+PROTEIN 41 51x
MAXIM ELECTROLYTE 301 205y

* 70g powder diluted in 700ml water
x 75g powder diluted in 500ml water
y 60g powder diluted in 750ml water

Osmolality results are given in mOsm/kg
These results were achieved by mixing the products in distilled water. This was done because tap water's hardness varies and can affect the osmolality values by about 5 - 15 units.Recommended carbohydrate concentration in a solution during activity is 5-8%. Note that VitargoÒCARBOLOADER has a lower osmolality at 15% tthan Maxim Original has at 5%.

Loading / re-loading
Clinical studies at the Karolinska Institute, Sweden, shows that Vitargo loads and re-loads carbohydrates more effectively than ordinary sport/carbohydrate drinks. The explanation as to why Vitargo is so much better than the others differs according to different researchers, but the fact remains that VitargoÒ is the quickest and most effective way to reset the energy balance in the body.

Those who first noticed the difference between Vitargo and other carbohydrate supplements were athletes in physically demanding endurance sports such as triathlon, marathon, cross country skiing and cycling. They found that they lasted longer, recovered quicker and the number of infections and over training symptoms decreased.

In other words if you try Vitargo products once, then you're locked. Elite athletics is all about winning, with focused training and Vitargo you have all the tools you need for success.

Studies show that an insulin response + aminos = better protein synthesis than aminos alone, although yes, leucine by itself will increase protein synthesis.

Getting nutrients to the muscle is important, but I haven't seen anything yet to suggest that faster glycogen replenishment = higher protein synthesis rates.

I've been using PWO while doing mild recovery

scoop WMS (from Nutraplanet) w/ 1 tablespoon orange gatorade
25-30g whey isolate
10g Leucine
1-2g Taurine
5g Creatine Mono


Solid. BTW I'd be down DSade.

try using a scoop pre workout as well. my recovery between sets is great!

Ozz - thanks for clearing up the specifics. I didn't realize that there was a variety which naturally had a high amylopectin content.

2. From both personal trials and massive amounts of brotelligence, I would strongly suggest that you try to keep the WMS separate from your PWO whey intake. The main reason for this being that we are trying to get the WMS to pass through to the intestine ASAP, bypassing the normal digestion, and whey and whatever else you add to this is only going to impede its progress. I would try to stick to just WMS, Creatine, and some BCAAs if need be and then wait it out for 15 mins or so. At least give both methods a try before you settle on one. I personally think that taking the 2 together is a waste of my WMS.


And DSade, I'll try some of your concoction...though I'm wondering how much it will differ from mine!

From what I understand, WMS helps to "drag" other nutrients along with it, improving absorption of everything. I doubt it would hurt to use it with whey, particularly if it's hydro whey or even whey iso.

You got it.

Why can't we just run around mainlining our macros straight into the bloodstream via IV admin? To hell w/ the GI.

Wonder if anyone has actually tried this (other than Drago).

Steve-o did it with vodka.