Folks, I just put up on the BrinkZone that covers the facts behind this popular carb source. See the main page. However, it can also be read on Muscular Development’s web site here:
As you all know, I like to burst myths, and this one is no different….enjoy!
Since you have never recommended WMS I wouldn’t have considered it anyway. Now I have even better to avoid wasting time and $$$ on it.
Thanks for the great info on Vatargo too.
….. I mean “Vitargo”
Will, a short while ago you mentioned growth hormones as a possible remidy for joint problems (arthritus) Can you explain it further ????
Thanks
John
very god article, what about the fast digesting product Karbolin? it is certainly different in appearance than WMS, but makes the same bold claims.
I don’t know what’s in Karbolin so I can’t comment, but I do know if it’s real Vitargo, it will say so as that’s a licensed product.
I ued Vitargo some 4 years, when try Waxy Maize mostly because it was lower in price I see better results, are they because I use 30% in grams more Waxy Maize then I used Vitargo I don’t know but carb working fantastic, I used to drik it during the middle of workout to end, I receive enormus pump and muscle fullness, few times I used 100g of Waxy Maize and receive hipoglicemic worst than on fast insulin which I tray few time. I reccomend Waxy Maize to manny in my gym an all have great results. Carb is apsolutli fantastic. I don’t care who push which brand and about secret manufacturing systems of Vitargo. I use Waxy Maize et least one year and it is fantastic!
Use what ever makes you happy Vederan. I just report the objective science, which finds waxy maize inferior in every way to dextrose, maltodextrin, and even white bread, much less Vitargo. It’s your money….good luck.
Here I am lifting weights and I see reviews of studies of cyclists. Why can’t I see studies of weightlifters?
Because they didn’t do any studies on weight lifters, and due to the nature of the studies, etc, I made it clear in the conclusion of the article the results may or may not apply well to weight lifters. I did outline however how the results may apply to weight lifters based on the effects seen on glycogen re synthesis, insulin levels, etc. Hope that helps.
Will I like to read Your texts and sscience, but always try products, I have used glucose some 10 years today I have total aversion to glucose when see bad sideefects like fat and digestive problems… Vitarg is expencive, but Waxy Maize here is like 21 USD 1kg, if I use 50g which is enough for 78-80kg lifter it is for 20 trainings, per training it is cc 1 USD. Little firm in Croatia import cooked Waxy Maize and I usually use neutral with out flavor and sweeteners. Till now IO tryed tons of supplements, I have newer make important carbs always to buy best price protein. Today Waxy Maize is for me fantastic supplement, try to drink it 50g with 5g Cretine and 10g Glutamine during workout and You will change stand.
Thank you for forwarding the two articles on Creatine and Waxy Maize. The timing couldn’t be any better. I was planning to purchase this product by North Star called Ultimate Bionic Plus. It has Betaine (500 mg), Taurine (250 mg) and Creatine (2,000 mg). It also has Calcium, Magnesium, Stevia and vitamin D. What is your opinion on this product? My second question is about any possible side effects from Betaine, Creatine and Taurine. Since I have a heart condition which is part of my heart’s wall is a bit thicker, I have to be careful about supplements. I jog three days a week and lift weights three. My cardiologist tells me that exercise is suppose to help this condition. Also what product with Creatine gives the best result. Thank you for your input.
I would simply purchase creatine monohydrate and be done with it. If you want the additional stuff, they should not do you any harm, but I doubt they will add much either. Read my free ebook on creatine at http://www.creatine-report.com for pretty much everything you could ever need to know on the topic. Other free ebooks can be downloaded from the main site here.
Vedran, although I am all for experimentation, and such, the objective science always trumps the “just try it” approach. If it works for you great, but (1) there’s a placebo group in studies for a reason and (2) as i said, objective science trumps anecdotal reports, and when I see a handful of well conducted studies showing me something to be clearly inferior, I have no reason to try it. I don’t have to drink bleach to know it’s bad for me, or hop up and down in place to know it wont build muscles, and so on.
“…I made it clear in the conclusion of the article the results may or may not apply well to weight lifters. I did outline however how the results may apply to weight lifters based on the effects seen on glycogen re synthesis, insulin levels, etc. …”
I know you did Will. and I thank you. I just wish the firms that advertise products to weightlifters would study their products on weightlifters; preferably 56-year-old male weightlifters that are somewhat overweight.
And I wish they would compare their products to the competition rather than to placebos.
We must all remember that not everyone’s chemistry is the same, so it is possible one these works better than the others, which opposes the study. What is good about getting the info from Will is, now you are better informed to make better purchasing decisions or to try other alternatives instead of soley relying on Marketing. It doesn’t mean waxy maize is not effective for “you”. Personally I can tolerate waxy maize more than than the other ones. It doesn’t make me feel Nausea or crash when I do opt to use some carbs in my protein drink.
As an elite amateur masters cyclists that race with the pro’s I use GENR8 – Vitargo exclusively and have noticed a 100% improvement in my recovery and performance. Plus, for all you skeptics, Vitargo has the evidence – data to back up their claims. The other products offered are truly inferior except maybe Cytomax (data). Remember, these high molecular carb molecules empty out of the stomach faster…so…if your using something that isn’t as quick (stays in your stomach) then its not in your muscles, liver and brain.
I use before training/racing, during (with sometimes electrolytes) and immediately after…….
Also I know Will will think I’m crazy. But I have never felt anything off of regular creatine mono or micronized creatine versions as I do with the plain generic bulk CEE version. I know it’s not palcebo effect, because I can feel the strength increase right away. At least for me cee works this way. Maybe cee is not working in the traditional creatine methods. Maybe I should use a combo to get even more benefits.
I found a better strength gains from using GENR8/Vitargo vs creatine. This stuff rushes right to you muscles better than creatine…use before your workout. Amazing………
Will,
Quick question: After drinking WMs and some BCAA immediately following a weight lifting workout, I get very light headed if I don’t eat within an hour of the WMS and BCAA consumption. However, If I consume dextrose and BCAA, I don’t get light headed. I’ve always thought this was due to WMS faster ability to get into my system versus dextrose. But after reading your article, I’m not sure what to attribute the above feeling to. What are your thoughts? Thank you.
Hi Will,
Interestingly your article and a lot of the studies referenced do not specify the Amylopectin content or the molecular weight of the Waxy Maize used in the studies.
There are 1000′s of waxy maizes in the food technology industry and lumping them all together as “Waxy Maize” is a rather gross generalization of the differing properties amongst the various waxy maizes that are available. Comparing a waxy maize with a low molecular weight and a high amylose content against Vitargo would be stacking the deck towards Vitargo. It has been proven that Amylose is the low GI portion of Waxy Maize, yet there are also waxy maizes in the market with Amylopectin contents of 99%.
Why aren’t these 99% Amylopectin WMS being compared to Vitargo?
If the makers of Vitargo would like to fairly compare Waxy Maize starch with Vitargo, surely they would test a Waxy Maize starch with a minimum Amylopectin content of 70% and a Molecular Weight roughly equivalent to the Vitargo to demonstrate that it is not just Vitargo’s Molecular weight and Amylopectin content that stimulates insulin release and speed of transit through the gut etc?
I would think that a true head to head study by an independent lab would settle this issue for the makers of Vitargo once and for all?
Amylopectin content of WMS compared are covered and or discussed at length. The studies were independent and published in peer reviewed journals and showed clear differences between WMS and Vitargo. The article is for the lay public, not scientists, so discussions of molecular weights, Amylopectin contents, etc. are for those who wish to go read the full studies, which I did. I am all for further study, and any company that sells or produces a WMS they feel is th equal to or better then Vitargo, I can personally get the study done. The fact is, to date, what does exist for research, shows WMS to be inferior to Vitargo, in the areas its been compared. That’s what we have to go on so far, so to any and all sellers or manufacturers of WMS, put your $$$$ where your mouth is and fund a study you feel will do WMS justice. As I said, I will personally get that study done. I’m all for the facts and truth via good research being done, but so far, I am getting the distinct impressions it’s about the bottom line for sellers of WMS vs. the hard facts…
Hi Will,
Thanks for your response and I appreciate the statement that the article was presented for the lay person. I am not a scientist but I have realized that there are some important defining factors within the WMS VS Vitargo debate. Key to these discussions seems to be the Molecular Weight and the Amylopectin content.
I don’t have access to the full studies, but the abstract of study number 5 listed in your article seems to indicate that the physical properties of the two carbohydrates were vastly different. Where one carbohydrate source stipulates the 78% Amylopectin and 22% Amylose content the other appears to be unspecified.
Improved gastric emptying rate in humans of a unique glucose polymer with gel-forming properties.
Leiper JB, Aulin KP, Söderlund K.
Dept. of Biomedical Sciences, Aberdeen University, UK.
BACKGROUND: The energy density of a nutrient drink is one of the main factors that affect the gastric emptying of the solution, while osmolality and viscosity are thought to have only a minimal influence. METHOD: The rate of gastric emptying of two isoenergetic carbohydrate solutions with different osmolality and viscosity was determined using a double sampling gastric aspiration technique. Six healthy male subjects were studied on two occasions using approximately 550 ml of a solution containing 13.5% of carbohydrate either in the form of a mixture of monomeric glucose and short chain glucose oligomers (G-drink) or of long chain glucose polymers composed of 78% amylopectin and 22% amylose (C-drink). RESULT: The half emptying time (t(1/2), median and range) for the viscous, markedly hypotonic (62 mosmol/kg) C-drink was faster (17.0 (6.2-31.4) min) than for the moderately hypertonic (336 mosmol/kg) G-drink (32.6 (25.2-40.7) min). The amount (median and range) of carbohydrate delivered to the small intestine was greater during the first 10 min after ingestion of C-drink (31.8 (15.8-55.9) g) than after ingestion of G-drink (14.3 (6.8-22.2) g). However, there was no difference in the blood glucose (P = 0.73) or serum insulin (P = 0.38) concentration at any time point after ingestion of the two test drinks. CONCLUSION: The results of this study show that the carbohydrate present in C-drink, although it has the propensity to form a gel, empties from the stomach faster than that of an isoenergetic carbohydrate solution (G-drink) without potentiating increased circulating blood glucose or insulin levels.
PMID: 11145284 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
I would be interested to hear your thoughts on the following study, where it would seem that Amylopectin content is an important determining factor in a starch’s properties relating to the speed of digestion and absorption.
Amylopectin starch induces nonreversible insulin resistance in rats.
Wiseman CE, Higgins JA, Denyer GS, Miller JC.
Human Nutrition Unit, University of Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Starches that are high in amylopectin are digested and absorbed more quickly than starches with a high amylose content and produce insulin resistance in rats during long-term feeding. The aim of this study was to determine whether amylopectin-induced insulin resistance could be prevented or reversed by a period of high amylose feeding. We employed a randomized design in which two groups of rats were fed either the high amylose and then the high amylopectin diet for two consecutive 8-wk periods or vice versa (high amylopectin and then high amylose). Four other groups were fed either a high amylose or a high amylopectin diet for 8 or 16 wk. All rats were fed two 10-g meals per day (300 kJ/d), and insulin sensitivity was assessed by intravenous glucose tolerance test (IVGTT) after 8 or 16 wk of feeding. We found no difference in glucose tolerance between any group at any time point. Insulin responses, however, were 50% higher (P < 0.01) after 16 wk of high amylopectin feeding [area under the plasma insulin curve (AUC) = 18.1 +/- 1.4 nmol.L-1 x 15 min] compared with high amylose feeding (AUC = 13.0 +/- 1.2 nmol.L-1 x 15 min). The two groups which received both diets developed a similar degree of insulin resistance, equivalent to that after 16 wk of high amylopectin feeding. The findings suggest that amylopectin-induced insulin resistance cannot be reversed or prevented by either a subsequent or previous period of amylose feeding. Taken together, the data suggest that the nature of starch in the Western diet influences the development of noninsulin-dependent diabetes mellitus in humans.
PMID: 8632213 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
Lastly, I look forward to seeing the 2008 study published on the WMS VS Maltodextrin comparison as presented at the Experimental Biology Conference.
Cheers,
Hyp_gnosis
Hi
I`m from Portugal and I`m doing some research about Vitargo.
I`m thinking use this but I have some doubts…
Can it influence the development of diabetes ??
Regards
This technical discussion is wonderful and I hope you people continue it. I wish I could make more use of it. The Waxy Maize Starch I bought from 1FAST400 has no labeling for the amylopectin content. It just reads “Waxy Maize Starch”. (Please excuse me. I bought it before this thread started.)
Hyp_gnosis , you really do need the full papers to get a full picture here. In the materials and methods sections of papers, you will usually find the breakdowns, etc. Amylose is well known as a “resistant” starch and I mention that in the article. Read the conclusion of my article. The most unique thing about Vitargo is not its MW, or it’s Amylose content. It’s the unique branching of the starch molecule, which is why it can be made from so many sources, and does not require any WMS for it’s production. This unique branching structure appears to allows improved enzymatic interactions during digestions vs naturally ocuring polymers, thus why I called Vitargo a “designer carb” as it’s unique structure is found no where in nature. I would track down the full articles if interested, and read my conclusions carefully regarding the patent and such.
Thanks Will, I will do that. Can you point me in the direction of the full studies?
I have tried but can not seem to find them.
Personally I ask around the various researchers I know if they have a paper I need, or I go to the med libraries by me and find them. There are services on line you ca often order full papers from also.
Hi Will,
I have just found your website after carrying out research on creatine and have found your comments extremely useful.
I do have a question for you regarding carbohydates, I am currently using Maltodextrin from a supplement provider called, Myprotein (www.myprotein.co.uk) (i live in the UK). I was wondering what your views were on the best type of carbohydrate to take?
There are various articles on the Brinkzone regarding pre and post workout carb sources, and my opinion on what is potentially the “best” type of carb to use, is covered in the very article you are posting in. I recommend giving that a good read, and you will find in the conclusion I give recs on malto, dextrose, WMS, etc. Good luck.
Cheers Will much appreciated!
Hey! Found your blog on Yahoo and just simply desired to say thanks to you for the exceptional study. Ought to say that I agree with fairly much of what you had to claim. Keep up the good work.
