Eight weeks of resistance training in conjunction with glutathione and L-Citrulline supplementation increases lean mass and has no adverse effects on blood clinical safety markers in resistance-trained males

BACKGROUND

Supplementation of combined glutathione (GSH) with L-citrulline in response to a single bout of resistance exercise has been shown to increase plasma nitric oxide metabolites, nitrite and nitrate and cyclic guanosine monophosphate (cGMP), which may play a role in muscle protein synthesis. As a result, in response to resistance training (RT) these responses may establish a role for GSH + L-citrulline to increase muscle mass. This study attempted to determine the effects of an 8-week RT program in conjunction with GSH (Setria®) + L-citrulline, L-citrulline-malate, or placebo supplementation on lean mass and its association with muscle strength. The secondary purpose was to assess the safety of such supplementation protocol by assessing clinical chemistry markers.

METHODS

In a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled design, 75 resistance-trained males were randomly assigned to ingest GSH + L-citrulline (GSH + CIT), L-citrulline-malate, or cellulose placebo daily while also participating in 8 weeks of RT. The full dose of each supplement was delivered in capsules that were identical in weight, size, shape, and color. Participants completed testing sessions for body composition and muscle strength before and after 4 and 8 weeks of RT and supplementation. Venous blood samples were obtained before and after 8 weeks.

RESULTS

Leg press was increased with RT but was not significantly different between groups (p > 0.05); however, bench press strength was not increased with RT (p > 0.05). There were no significant changes in total body mass, fat mass, or total body water during 8 weeks of RT and supplementation. Lean mass increased in both GSH + CIT when compared to PLC; however, the increase was significant only after 4 weeks. Lean mass and strength were positively correlated (p < 0.05) in GSH + CIT, but not CIT-malate or PLC. Neither RT nor supplementation had any significant effects on blood clinical chemistry variables (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Compared to PLC, supplementation of GSH + CIT during resistance training increased lean mass after 4 weeks of RT and was positively associated with muscle strength. However, after 8 weeks of RT there were no significant differences in any of the measured variables.

Effects of 2% Dehydration on Lactate Concentration During Constant-Load Cycling

Green, JM, Miller, B, Simpson, J, Dubroc, D, Keyes, A, Neal, K, Gann, J, and Andre, T. Effects of 2% dehydration on lactate concentration during constant-load cycling. J Strength Cond Res 32(7): 2066-2071, 2018-The lactate [La] threshold (LT) can predict endurance performance potential. Dehydration may alter LT. This study examined effects of dehydration on [La] response during constant-load cycling. Recreationally fit (V[Combining Dot Above]O2peak = 48.7 ± 5.2 ml·kg·min) male participants (n = 9) completed 2 × 40-minute constant-load cycling trials; euhydrated (HYD) and after previous evening passive (water bath) dehydration (2% body weight, DEH) (HYD and DEH counterbalanced). Lactate, heart rate (HR), 10-point Omni ratings of perceived exertion (RPE), and rectal temperature (Trec) were measured after warm-up (WU) and at 10, 20, 30, and 40 minutes. Before cycling, urine specific gravity (USG) was measured and participants estimated perceived recovery status (PRS). Urine specific gravity DEH (1.027 ± 0.004) was significantly greater than HYD (1.013 ± 0.007). After WU, [La] was significantly greater (all time points) for DEH (∼4.1 mmol·L) vs. HYD (∼3.5 mmol·L) with similar results for HR (DEH: ∼167, HYD: ∼158 b·min). For DEH, RPE was significantly greater (∼1 unit) at 20, 30, and 40 minutes, and Trec was significantly greater at 30 and 40 minutes (∼0.4° C). DEH (vs. HYD) also resulted in significantly different resting HR (93 ± 6, vs. 85 ± 7 b·min), significantly greater session RPE (7.7 ± 1.1 vs. 5.3 ± 1.1), and significantly lower subjective feelings of recovery (PRS = 6.4 ± 2.9, vs. 9.0 ± 1.5). Current results indicate systematic changes in [La] and associated physiological responses result from previous day dehydration. Hydration status should be a concern in paradigms where [La] assessment is used.