Diet Friendly Fast Food

This image of heavy sled pulls was taken during one of the strongmen training sessions in the study at hand - for the full protocol see Table 1 (Winwood. 2014)

Brad Schoenfelds recent study on the differential effects of 3x10 vs. 7x3 rep x set resistance training regimen (reread corresponding SuppVersity Article) took much of the wind óut of the sails of the proponents of classic hypertrophy training (3-4 sets of 8-12 reps) as the one and only training method for anyone thriving for maximal muscle gains.

An even more recent study by Paul Winwood et al. thats about to be published in the upcoming issue of the #1 journal for everything strength training, i.e. the Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, does not just support the findings of Schoenfeld et al. it claims "that short term strongman training programs are as effective as traditional resistance training programs in improving aspects of body composition, muscular function and performance." (Winwood. 2014)
Next to the fact that the two protocols in the study at hand were neither volume-matched nor based on the same exercises, there is yet another highly significant difference between the study at hand and the aforementioned powerlifting vs. classic resistance training study by Schoenfeld et al. the conclusion of the Winwood study is only "statistically correct". From a practical point of view, on the other hand, the body composition part of it is total bullshit.

If you take a look at the actual "body composition" data, even a blind man sees that the strongman protocol that consisted seven weeks /two obligatory training sessions per week) of the resistance training protocols outlined in Table 1 and two facultative, non-supervised and recorded sessions of prehabilition exercises, as well as two cardiovascular training sessions per week.

Table 1: Outline of the training protocols; * indicates that the exercise is performed explosively (Winwood. 2014)

The first thing you should realize after taking a look at the "traditional" protocol is that its traditional, but not the protocol you would traditionally use if your main goal was to build muscle. The number of repetitions is too low there is no individual training for the arms - both of which are characteristics most hypertrophy regimens share.
This alone wouldnt be that bad, if the conclusion that both training regimen had identical effects on the body composition of the subjects wasnt simply flawed.

Figure 1: Changes in body composition and strength (Winwood. 2014)

Ok, the differences may not be statistically significant, but if one regimen, i.e. the "traditional" training improves, while the strongman training compromises the body composition of young men, I would be very hesitant to state that "strongman training programs are as effective as traditional resistance training programs in improving aspects of body composition" (Winwood. 2014).

If the trend the researchers must obviously have overlooked (or ignored) continues, the guys in the "traditional group" will soon look like ripped mens fitness cover models, while the guys in the strongmen group will develop a pot belly. Not exactly what anyone could want. Even if you dont care about being jacked, looking at the effects on body fat, the "traditional" strength training protocol would also classify as the healthier training regimen.
Reference:

• Winwood, PW, et al. "Strongman  versus  traditional  resistance  training  effects  on  muscular  function  and  performance." Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research (2014). Publish Ahead of Print. DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000000629

Yogurt & Co are good for athletes. But is this due to the bacteria?

As a regular here at the SuppVersity, you are well aware of the far-reaching effects of having the "right" or "wrong" bacteria in your tummy. The claim that having the "right" bacterial make-up in the gut could have beneficial effects on your performance in the gym or on the track is something you should not believe too credulously. If we had a study to prove these benefits, things would be different, though - a study like the one a group of researchers from the National Taiwan Sport University are about to publish in the scientific bible of resistance training, the Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research (Hsu. 2014).

In said study which is still available only as an accepted manuscript, Hsu et al. investigated the association of intestinal bacteria and exercise performance in specific pathogen-free (SPF), germ-free (GF), and Bacteroides fragilis (BF) gnotobiotic mice (animals in which only certain known strains of bacteria and other microorganisms are present).
To this ends, the scientist had the rodents swim to exhaustion to determine whether enteric bacteria alter antioxidant enzyme levels, exercise performance and physical fatigue. In addition, they tested the antioxidant enzyme activities, physical performance and anti-fatigue function after monocolonizing GF mice with B. fragilis (BF).

Figure 1: Time to exhaustion during exercise test and body composition of the miceaccording to the make-up of their gut microbiome; data expressed relative to group means (Hsu. 2014)

What they found was an increased time to exhaustion for the previously germ-free (GF) mice after theyd been colonized with B. fragilis (BF). Similar results were observed for the specific pathogen-free and Bacteroides fragilis gnotobiotic mice, who were also more enduring than the obesity resistant (Bäckhed. 2007) germ-free mice.
As any SuppVersity veteran would expect, the germ-free mice were leaner than the rest of the pack. At the same time, the "sterile" mice did yet also have a lower liver, muscle, brown adipose, and epididymal fat pad weight than the SPF and BF mice.

Figure 2: Selected markers of antioxidant status in serum and liver; expr. rel. to group means (Hsu. 2014)

The markers of antioxidant defenses, the scientists measured were highest in the lean + light germ-free mice and their specific pathogen-free cousins. Against that background its at least somewhat surprising that the performance differences are pretty significant.
References:

• Bäckhed, Fredrik, et al. "Mechanisms underlying the resistance to diet-induced obesity in germ-free mice." Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 104.3 (2007): 979-984.
• Cani, Patrice D., et al. "Gut microbiota fermentation of prebiotics increases satietogenic and incretin gut peptide production with consequences for appetite sensation and glucose response after a meal." The American journal of clinical nutrition 90.5 (2009): 1236-1243.
• Cox, Amanda J., et al. "Oral administration of the probiotic Lactobacillus fermentum VRI-003 and mucosal immunity in endurance athletes." British Journal of Sports Medicine 44.4 (2010): 222-226. 
• DiMarco, N. M., et al. "A–Z of nutritional supplements: dietary supplements, sports nutrition foods and ergogenic aids for health and performance—Part 30." British journal of sports medicine 46.4 (2012): 299-300.
• Gleeson, Michael, et al. "Daily probiotics (Lactobacillus casei Shirota) reduction of infection incidence in athletes." (2011). 
• Hsu et al. "Effect of Intestinal Microbiota on Exercise Performance in Mice." Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research.  DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000000644 | Publish Ahead of Print.
• Martarelli, Daniele, et al. "Effect of a probiotic intake on oxidant and antioxidant parameters in plasma of athletes during intense exercise training." Current microbiology 62.6 (2011): 1689-1696.
• West, Nicholas P., et al. "Lactobacillus fermentum (PCC®) supplementation and gastrointestinal and respiratory-tract illness symptoms: a randomised control trial in athletes." Nutrition journal 10.1 (2011): 30.

What could be better than starting your day with the first rays of the sun? Doing this with a person you love, I suppose.

If you have listened to Super Human Radio earlier this week (download episode), you will have heard that Carl "caught" me off guard calling me without prior notice during the live show. We ended up talking about the use of melatonin and my beloved "daylight lamp" (light therapy lamp), which kept my energy levels up even at the darkest winter mornings over the past couple of months.

If you listened to the show, you may also remember that Carl mentioned that it would be great to have a light-based alarm clock - something like a light therapy lamp that increases its intensity gradually at a given time and will thus wake you up from a deep slumber.
Well, I already mentioned during the show that a corresponding device is already available, but pretty useless for someone who usually uses blindfolds to get a good nights sleep. For the rest of you, who are sleeping in a pitch black room without covering their eyes with a blindfold, on the other hand, Carls suggestion could be a viable means to "improve both cognitive and physical performance after waking." (Thompson. 2014).

This is at least what a recent study from the University College London would suggest. For the corresponding experiment, the researchers from the Department of Epidemiology and Public Health recruited 8 young adults (four males; four females) with a mean age of 24 ± 9 years who had not been involved in nocturnal shift work or undertaken transmeridian travel during the past 30 days (thats important to ensure that their circadian rhythm was not messed up in the first place).
The trials themselves were ordered in a counterbalanced fashion and were separated by 5–9 days. In the two days leading up to the tests, the participants were asked to sleep the exact times in their own homes that they would in the laboratory. to monitor compliance wrist accelerometers were issued.

Did you know that previous studies support the use of dawn simulations to tread seasonal effective disorder, where it was on top of that associated with lower remission rates than regular light therapy (Avery. 1993 & 2001). In addition, dawn simulations have been shown to have beneficial effects on the necessary and natural and healthy (Clow. 2010) early morning increase in cortisol (Thorn. 2004)?

"The experimental trials were identical with the exception of the 30 min prior to waking. During this time par ticipants either slept normally in complete darkness, the control condition (c), or were exposed to dawn simulation (DS).

Each night’s sleep ended with an audible alarm. At the same moment, a researcher entered the room to ensure that the participant was awake. Participants were then allowed to attend the bathroom if required.

After waking, a 75 min testing protocol commenced which consisted of: three bouts of cognitive assessment, one physical performance test and monitoring of physiological and subjective variables." (Thompson. 2014)

In view of the fact that I already gave away the results, its probably not really surprising that the data in Figure 1 confirms that being waken up by artificial sunlight had significant beneficial effects on the cognitive and physical performance of the subjects.

Figure 1: Changes in number of total additions and reaction time in cognitive tests (Thompson. 2014)

What did not differ, though, were the sleep efficiency, sleep latency, and the total sleep time. In a similar vein, the differences in perceived sleepiness and body temperature were visible, but not statistically significant.
References:

• Avery, David H., et al. "Dawn simulation treatment of winter depression: a controlled study." American Journal of Psychiatry 150 (1993): 113-113.
• Avery, David H., et al. "Dawn simulation and bright light in the treatment of SAD: a controlled study." Biological psychiatry 50.3 (2001): 205-216.
• Clow, Angela, et al. "The cortisol awakening response: more than a measure of HPA axis function." Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews 35.1 (2010): 97-103.
• Thompson, Andrew, et al. "Effects of dawn simulation on markers of sleep inertia and post-waking performance in humans." European journal of applied physiology (2014): 1-8.
• Thorn, Lisa, et al. "The effect of dawn simulation on the cortisol response to awakening in healthy participants." Psychoneuroendocrinology 29.7 (2004): 925-930.