Recent Reserch on Citrulline Malate not looking good

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • MR. BMJ
    Moderator
    • Apr 2006
    • 3209

    Recent Reserch on Citrulline Malate not looking good

    Per Brad Schoenfeld:

    The evidence is mounting that citrulline malate is ineffective as an ergogenic supplement. Most alarming was the finding that the product contained only half the citrulline stated on the label!

    "The present investigation also included chemical analysis of the supplement used, which concluded that the ratio of citrulline to malate was not equivalent to the ratio stated by the manufacturer. Analysis suggests that the supplement contained just over half the manufacturers stated dose of citrulline. Subsequent analysis of four additional commercially available CM products, with a purported ratio of 2:1 (citrulline to malate), shows that only one of these products had a value close to the ratio stated by the manufacturers."



    Citrulline malate supplementation does not improve German Volume Training performance or reduce muscle soreness in moderately trained males and females

    Andrew J. Chappell, Daniel M. Allwood, Rebecca Johns, Samantha Brown, Kiran Sultana, Annie Anand and Trevor Simper

    Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition201815:42

    ABSTRACT:

    Background
    Use of supplements to aid performance is common practice amongst recreationally active individuals, including those without a sufficient evidence base. This investigation sought to assess whether acute supplementation with 8 g of citrulline malate (CM) (1.11: 1 ratio) would improve anaerobic performance.

    Methods
    A randomised double blind placebo control trial was employed, using a counterbalanced design. We recruited recreationally active men and women to take part in an isokinetic chair protocol, based on German Volume Training (GVT) whereby participants attempted to perform 10 sets of 10 repetitions against a force representing 70% of their peak concentric force.

    Results
    The number of repetitions achieved over the course of the GVT was 94.0 ± 7.9 and 90.9 ± 13.9 for placebo and CM respectively. There was no significant difference between the placebo and CM treatment for number of repetitions (P = 0.33), isometric (P = 0.60), concentric (P = 0.38), or eccentric (P = 0.65) peak force following the GVT. Total muscle soreness was significantly higher in the CM compared to the placebo treatment following the GVT protocol over 72 h (P = 0.01); although this was not accompanied by a greater workload/number of repetitions in the CM group.

    Conclusions
    We conclude that an acute dose of CM does not significantly affect anaerobic performance using an isokinetic chair in recreational active participants. Practical implications include precaution in recommending CM supplementation. Coaches and athletes should be aware of the disparity between the chemical analyses of the products reviewed in the present investigation versus the manufacturers’ claims.
  • liftsiron
    Administrator
    • Nov 2003
    • 18435

    #2
    I never thought it did much, but perhaps my supplement didn't have what was claimed on the container.
    ADMIN/OWNER@Peak-Muscle

    Comment

    • water43
      Vet
      • Mar 2010
      • 453

      #3
      I thru mine out a while back , it didn't do anything except make my wallet lighter most hyped supps just lighten your wallet by placebo effect
      Last edited by water43; 08-13-2018, 06:16 AM.
      the right to try law is a title besides its all fiction "everything"

      Comment

      Working...