We're excited to welcome Examine.com editor Nick Milazzo to this week's podcast. In Nick's role, he scrutinizes research in the realm of health and human performance, specifically involving dietary supplements. Some of the observations in this interview will blow your mind and make you take a close look at the supplements you take and recommend.

In lieu of a sponsor for this podcast, I'm going to encourage you to check out Examine 2.0, the newly launched update to their flagship offering. Examine offers unbiased reviews of supplements with no conflicts of interest, distilling thousands of studies into actionable insights. They also include monthly updates of the latest research, helping you to stay on top of what's new in the industry (and get CEUs in the process). Through 8/25, you can get a big discount as one of my listeners at http://examine.news/cressey.

Podcast Feedback

If you like what you hear, we'd be thrilled if you'd consider subscribing to the podcast and leaving us an iTunes review. You can do so HERE.

And, we welcome your suggestions for future guests and questions. Just email elitebaseballpodcast@gmail.com.

Thank you for your continued support!

Sign-up Today for our FREE Baseball Newsletter and Receive Instant Access to a 47-minute Presentation from Eric Cressey on Individualizing the Management of Overhead Athletes!

Today's guest post comes from the team at Examine.com, my top resource for cutting-edge research in health and performance. As a member, I get monthly updates/summaries on a variety of topics in this regard - and it's been invaluable for helping me to stay on top of what's new in my field.

This post is timely, as they have a 30% off sale to celebrate the 13th anniversary of their site launching (you can learn more HERE). In today's post, they touch on a popular - but often misunderstood- supplement: branched chain amino acids (BCAAs).  Enjoy! -EC

Given the importance of protein for exercise, branched chain amino acids (BCAAs; isoleucine, leucine, and valine), which contribute heavily to muscle synthesis, are commonly marketed by supplement companies as being able to provide benefits for resistance training performance, recovery, and body composition. Are they effective, or a waste of money?

The Study

This systematic review of 12 randomized controlled trials assessed the effects of BCAA supplementation on physical performance, muscle damage, and body composition.

Studies that met the following criteria were included:

• Assessed healthy people who were at least 18 years old, without chronic disease.
• Utilized BCAA supplementation in isolation compared to a matched control group.
• Assessed physical performance, muscle damage, or body composition as an outcome.

The sample size of the included studies ranged from 9 to 46, with an average of about 22 participants per study. The studies were published between 2008 to 2018, and study length varied from 1 day to 8 weeks. The average BCAA dose was 19.5 grams per day and was compared to either water, carbohydrate, artificial sweetener, or taurine (a non-essential amino acid). Ten of the studies recruited nonathlete participants, one recruited experienced runners, and one recruited soccer and rugby athletes.

Blood Parameters

Eight studies assessed the effects of BCAA supplementation on blood parameters associated with muscle damage. Seven of them assessed creatine kinase (CK), three assessed lactate dehydrogenase, two assessed lactate, two assessed aldolase, and one article assessed myoglobin and interleukin 6 (IL-6).

Of the seven studies assessing CK, three reported a decrease in CK in the BCAA group compared to placebo following an exercise protocol designed to induce muscle damage (24, 72–96, and 48 hours after exercise in each study, respectively).[4][11][12]

Of the three studies assessing lactate dehydrogenase and of the two studies assessing aldolase, one reported that both markers were lower 72 and 96 hours after an exercise protocol designed to induce muscle damage in a BCAA group, compared to placebo.[11]

Of the two studies assessing lactate, one found that it was lower in the BCAA group than the placebo group immediately after a cycling exercise protocol.[6]

The only study assessing myoglobin and IL-6 found no effect of BCAAs following an exercise protocol designed to induce muscle damage.[2]

Body Composition

Two studies evaluated participant body weight and lean mass. One of these studies found that BCAAs prevented body weight and lean mass loss during an 8-week calorie-restricted diet, compared to a control group consuming a carbohydrate supplement.[9] Notably, the supplement used in the study demonstrating an effect of BCAAs also contained 1,000 mg of citrulline malate and 2,500 mg of L-glutamine. The placebo was a standard electrolyte sports beverage.

Performance:

• Repetitions performed: Three studies assessed repetitions performed, one of which reported that the BCAA group performed more squat exercise repetitions than a placebo group. The same study reported improvements in body composition.[9]
• Total distance performed: Two studies assessed distanced performed, with no differences between groups in either study.
• Strength: Five studies assessed strength, one of which reported a greater increase in 3RM strength on squats and bench press in the BCAA group, compared to the placebo group. The same study reported improvements in body composition.[9]
• Vertical jump: Three studies assessed vertical jump performance, none of which found an effect of BCAAs.
• Power: Three studies assessed power, none of which found an effect of BCAAs.
• Perceived exertion: Two studies assessed perceived exertion, one of which found an improvement at 75 and 90 minutes during a cycling protocol in a group consuming BCAAs, compared to a group consuming a carbohydrate-based electrolyte beverage.[3]
• Muscle soreness: Six studies assessed muscle soreness and pain, four of which found a reduction in subjective muscle pain in groups consuming BCAAs, compared to a placebo.[2][4][7][11] One reported an effect of BCAAs, as compared to an artificially-sweetened beverage 48 and 72 hours following an eccentric exercise protocol.[2] A second study reported that BCAAs reduced muscle soreness 24 and 48 hours after an exercise protocol designed to induce muscle damage, compared to an artificially-sweetened beverage.[4] A third study reported that consuming BCAAs with taurine reduced muscle soreness 48 hours after an exercise protocol designed to induce muscle damage as compared to a carbohydrate-based placebo,[7] and in another study, consuming BCAAs before an eccentric bicep curl protocol reduced muscle soreness at 72 and 96 hours, as compared to a starch-based placebo.[11]

Note

While several studies demonstrated positive effects of BCAAs, several points must be considered:

• The background protein intake of the participants probably moderated the benefits of BCAAs. Since BCAAs are three essential amino acids, and therefore found in protein food sources, BCAAs might be less useful for individuals already consuming adequate protein. Of the eight studies reporting benefits of BCAAs, three did not utilize a dietary control or report participants’ total protein intake, only requiring that participants maintain their usual dietary habits, [4] [11][7] and another study did not control participants’ dietary intakes nor provide information on their intake.[6] In one study, participants maintained an overall protein intake of about 1.2 grams per kg of body weight per day (g/kg/day), which the authors noted was lower than the recommended range for resistance training individuals (1.4–2.0 g/kg/day).[12] Another study utilized a calorie and carbohydrate-restricted diet, providing 35–40% of calories from protein.[9] One study asked participants to maintain their habitual intake while assessing their calorie and macronutrient intake during the study, reporting that the BCAA group derived about 69% of total energy from carbohydrates, while information was not provided on fat or protein intake.[3] One study provided all food to participants, providing 1.5 g/kg/day of protein to both BCAA and placebo groups.[2]
• None of the studies compared BCAAs to another source of amino acids (e.g., a protein supplement or protein from food) except for one study utilizing both taurine and starch in comparator groups.[7]
• Even if BCAAs were to provide a small benefit on markers of muscle damage or soreness, using BCAAs for this purpose might become redundant if training volume is managed appropriately to avoid excessive muscle damage in the first place.

The Big Picture

Several other review papers have been published assessing the utility of BCAAs for resistance-trained individuals. Here are a few that were published recently:

A 2021 meta-analysis[13] previously reviewed in Study Summaries assessing the effects of BCAAs on muscle soreness and markers of muscle damage found that BCAA supplementation reduced CK levels at less than 24 hours after exercise, as well as 24 and 48 hours after exercise, while improving muscle soreness at less than 24 hours only. However, the observed effects were small.

A 2021 narrative review[14] assessing the effects of BCAAs on muscle strength and hypertrophy concluded that “... the proposed benefits of BCAA used in the marketing of supplements appears to be at odds with the overall state of the current literature, which does not support the efficacy of supplementation on muscle strength and hypertrophy."

A 2017 meta-analysis[15] assessing the effects of BCAAs on muscle soreness and markers of muscle damage, reported that BCAAs reduces CK at less than 24 hours and 24 hours after exercise compared to a placebo, with no effects on lactate dehydrogenase or muscle soreness.

In a 2017 systematic review[16] assessing the effects of BCAAs on markers of muscle damage, 6 of 11 studies reported a beneficial effect of BCAAs.

At the end of the day, limited evidence suggests that BCAAs might reduce muscle soreness and indirect markers of muscle damage in resistance-training people. However, studies demonstrating the benefits of BCAAs utilized non-protein comparator groups, and often failed to report information on participants’ total protein intake. BCAAs probably don’t have utility for people already consuming adequate protein and managing training volume appropriately.

Note: We'll link to the studies referenced in this article in the first comment below.

Wrap-up

If you're looking for more detailed reviews like this, I'd strongly encourage you to check out Examine.com. Their membership offering is second-to-none and is something I review every month to stay on top of the latest research. And, it's on sale for 30% off through Monday to celebrate their 13th anniversary. You can learn more HERE.

Sign-up Today for our FREE Newsletter and receive a four-part video series on how to deadlift!

I pride myself on having a training philosophy that is rooted in both “in the trenches” anecdotal experience and evidence-based practice. Both can be challenging to develop, but for different reasons.

Building a sample size in your head helps you to make judgment calls when the research isn’t necessarily there, or you need to make inferences based on limited information. As an example, as I've written previously here, research has demonstrated that lat strains that are managed conservatively have a return to pitching timeline of ~100 days. That information is great if you’re seeing an athlete from Day 0 post injury, but where should that individual’s progress be at Day 40? That’s where in the trenches experience helps. Unfortunately, it takes a ton of time - and learning from mistakes along the way.

Evidence-based information can be accessed much easier and without the need for years of experience. Unfortunately, though, there is a ton of it to sift through. There are countless scholarly journals out there, and full-text access isn’t always easy to come by. Moreover, We often take for granted that study designs are all acceptable if something makes it to publication. The truth is that some scholarly journals have much lower publication standards than others. it could be a full-time job just pouring over all these journals, but it could be five full-time jobs to make sure they’re all legitimate.

Who has time for that? Certainly not me. Luckily, the good folks at Examine.com have built out an amazing team whose focus is particularly in this evidence based arena. And, they’ve got an awesome resource - Examine Personalized - I’m excited to tell you about because I utilize it myself. Here's how it works:

I love this approach because it's both curated content: just like you follow certain people on social media to get the information you want, this allows you to select which categories mean the most to you. Here are the 25 categories you can select from for your targeted education:

One recent update covered 275 studies over 149 pages in these 25 categories. This is going to save me a lot of time and, more importantly, make me a more informed professional. And, it'll help me to come up with ideas for content for my writing and videos on this site, as some of my most popular articles of all time have related to me building on what I've learned from evidence-based research. You can learn more HERE - and save big on monthly/yearly/lifetime subscriptions during their current 13th anniversary sale.

Sign-up Today for our FREE Newsletter and receive a four-part video series on how to deadlift!

We're excited to welcome sports dietitian Angie Ashe to this week's podcast. Angie does an outstanding job with nutritional counseling for a variety of athletes, and has a lot of experience working with baseball players in particular. In this episode, we delve into the controversial topic of nutrition supplementation.

A special thanks to this show's sponsor, Marc Pro. Head to www.MarcPro.com and enter the coupon code CRESSEY at checkout to receive 10% off on your order.

Show Outline

• How Angie goes about starting nutritional conversations with her athletes and teaching them what they can do before looking to dietary supplements
• Why athletes should be maximizing what they are eating and drinking before worrying about what supplements they should be taking
• What supplement story initially sparked Angie’s interest in the world of supplements as a dietician
• Where athletes can be misguided by the hype around supplements
• What supplements Angie sees as must-haves in all peoples’ diets
• What boxes Angie looks to check before recommending dietary supplementation in youth athletes
• Why individuals need to be aware of the post-market testing model exploited by the supplement industry in order to understand the importance of buying third party verified products
• How being conscious of ingredients on supplement labels can make it easier for consumers to identify safe and ethical supplements
• What supplements are a complete waste of money
• What athletes need to know about popular supplements such as BCAAs, collagen powders, probiotics, and glutamine
• What to look for and stray away from when investing in protein powders
• What guidelines Angie recommends for consuming creatine and how it can be used to improve athletic performance
• With the heightened popularity of preworkout and energy drinks, why athletes should be cognizant of the source of their caffeine consumption and what Angie recommends for caffeine intake in one’s diet
• What research says about the benefits of drinking coffee and how obtaining caffeine from healthy sources is often overlooked for healthy living and improving human performance
• How individuals should be concerned about consuming more processed protein sources as more people are moving away from animal consumption and towards alternative diets
• Where Angie goes to learn more about nutrition and stay up to date on the research of the field
• What Angie’s go-to smoothie is for skinny individuals looking to gain weight
• Where Angie sees future research in the nutrition community heading

You can follow Angie on Twitter at @EleatNutrition and on Instagram at @EleatNutrition.

Sponsor Reminder

This episode is brought to you by Marc Pro, a cutting-edge EMS device that uses patented technology to create non-fatiguing muscle activation. Muscle activation with Marc Pro facilitates each stage of the body’s natural recovery process- similar to active recovery, but without the extra effort and muscle fatigue. Athletes can use it for as long as they need to ensure a more full and quick recovery in between training or games. With its portability and ease of use, players can use Marc Pro while traveling between games or while relaxing at home. Players and trainers from every MLB team - including over 200 pro pitchers - use Marc Pro. Put Marc Pro to the test for yourself with their new "Try Before you Buy" program, and use promo code CRESSEY at checkout at www.MarcPro.com for 10% off on your order.

Podcast Feedback

If you like what you hear, we'd be thrilled if you'd consider subscribing to the podcast and leaving us an iTunes review. You can do so HERE.

And, we welcome your suggestions for future guests and questions. Just email elitebaseballpodcast@gmail.com.

Thank you for your continued support!

Sign-up Today for our FREE Baseball Newsletter and Receive Instant Access to a 47-minute Presentation from Eric Cressey on Individualizing the Management of Overhead Athletes!

Today's guest post comes from the bright minds at Examine.com, who just released their new continuing education resource, Examine Research Digest. I love their stuff, and I'm sure you will, too. -EC

The internet is one of the last true democracies.

It’s a place where anybody with the necessary tools (a computer and an internet connection) can actively shape the perception of information...even if they have no qualification to do so.

Though the democratization of information is a good thing, one would assume that certain topics like scientific research would remain steeped in their foundations, because...well...that's how they remain reliable.

Unfortunately, in efforts to keep up with the demands for new, sexy content, many writers have taken to regurgitating information with little to no understanding of its context or how it affects you: the end reader. This is one of the many ways information gets skewed.

It’s often said that misinformation is a symptom of misinterpretation. The very definition of words can mean different things to different people.

One example of this is during research when a conclusion is reported as "significant." When scientists use this term, it implies "statistical significance." What this means is that the probability of the observations being due to the intervention is much greater than simply by chance.

This is very different than the general understanding of “significant.” Think of it this way: if your deadlift goes up from 405 to 410, that could be considered statistically significant in science. Would you say "my deadlift went up significantly," though? Probably not!

Now imagine how this simple misunderstanding of a term can impact the interpretation of a study. Something that may mean very little to a researcher is taken out of context by a well meaning blogger, eventually ending up as a eye-catching headline in your Facebook timeline.

A second way that information becomes misinformation is through the process of simplification.

When scientific studies are written, they are done so to most effectively relay their findings to other scientists, facilitating future studies and discoveries on the topic in question. If you’ve ever read a research study, you know that this approach to writing hinges on the use of precise terminology and complex verbiage so that nothing gets misinterpreted.

Unfortunately, this approach is less than ideal for relaying important findings to the people who can apply it. This leaves a few options:

1. "Dumb down" the content, hoping nothing gets lost in translation.

2. Keep as-is, with the understanding that it won't be able to reach as many people as intended.

3. In the most egregious option, data gets turned into "sound bites" that are easily transmitted by traditional media outlets.

Once one or more of these things happen, all traces of relevance to the original source get lost and misinformation starts to get spread. Moreover, another equally insidious way misinformation gets spread is by shifting focus onto one study (cherry-picking) rather than the entire body of evidence.

The internet has rapidly increased the speed of the news cycle. Information that once had time to be verified has taken a backseat to "as-it-happens" tidbits on Twitter. For the media to keep up, more factually inaccurate information gets disseminated in far less time.

Now, appreciate the fact that a news organization only has so much air time or so many words to talk about a new publication, and you can see how there isn't enough time to allow an adequate in-depth analysis of past studies or how the new study fits into the overall body of evidence.

Remember the media screaming “a high-protein diet is as bad as smoking?” Or that “fish oil caused prostate cancer?” These are perfect examples of two well-intentioned studies blown way out of proportion.

This leads to the fourth and final way misinformation gets spread: the reliance on controversy to gain an audience.

Earlier this year a blog post theorizing the connection between creatine consumption and cancer took social media by storm. The writers were savvy enough to understand that a title proclaiming creatine to be harmful had far more appeal than yet another post confirming its athletic performance benefits.

This sort of thing isn’t a new occurrence, but for some strange reason, audiences never tire of it. Once an controversial article starts getting shared, a case of broken telephone comes into play, transforming once-quality research into misinformation. As an industry, this is a problem we need to address.

"Epilogue" from EC

In spite of all this misinformation, there are people still fighting the good fight - and that's why I’m a big fan of Examine.com. They wrote our most popular guest post ever (on the science of sleep). And, whenever people ask me about supplementation, I refer them to Examine.com.

To that end, for those who want to be on the cutting edge of research, and want something that counters the overwhelming amount of misinformation, I'd recommend Examine.com's fantastic new resource, the Examine Research Digest (ERD).

Before a study is presented in ERD, it's analyzed and reviewed by the researchers, then all references and claims are double-checked by a panel of editors. Subsequently, a final pass is done by a review panel of industry and academic leaders with decades of experience. Because you have a panel from different backgrounds, you know that you’re getting the complete picture, not the analysis of a single person.

Needless to say, I'm excited to take advantage of this resource personally to stay on up-to-date on some of the latest nutrition and supplementation research - and its practical applications for my clients and readers. I'd strongly encourage you to do the same, especially since it's available at a 20% off introductory price this week only. You can learn more HERE.

Sign-up Today for our FREE Newsletter and receive a four-part video series on how to deadlift!

Today, we've got a guest post from Kamal Patel on the ever-controversial topic of supplementation. Kamal was instrumental in creating the great new resource, the Examine.com Stacks Guide. Enjoy! -EC

Science is a process used to uncover the truth, or at least get as close to the truth as possible. It isn’t the only option out there, but it is definitely the best one currently available to us and has served humanity very well.

Thing is, with all the praise science gets (deservingly so), people sometimes forget it is a process. Just because something is “unproven” does not mean it’s crap - it just means that enough research hasn’t been conducted. People are too quick to think that “proven” is synonymous with “effective” and that “unproven” is synonymous with “not effective.”

Consider creatine. We all know that it works for increasing power output because of the mountain of evidence and anecdotes for it, but what if we went back in time to 5 years before creatine had human evidence? What if we also took a few kilograms of our favorite white powder with us in this time machine; would the fact that no evidence existed at this point somehow render the powder completely useless?

No. Things work whether you like them or not, and things fail whether you like them or not. Science just shows us which is which, it doesn’t make them so. The only real difference is in the questions left unanswered.

These ‘unproven’ supplements can still be really good, but they have to be approached differently from other ‘proven’ supplements. In the end they are both potential options for your usage, but the body of evidence needs to be considered.

How to approach unproven agents for yourself

When you come across a supplement which looks promising but doesn’t have much evidence for it, ultimately the choice of whether or not to use it is up to you. You can honestly run out and buy anything if you want, but at the least: look into the toxicology of it.

Take something like arginine - if you overdose on it, the side effects are diarrhea. Then you take something like Thunder God Vine, where the side-effect is gradual death of the immune system. Big difference!

How to responsibly approach unproven agents for others

It is difficult to recommend unproven supplements for others because unproven supplements tend to also have less safety data. There’s a difference between modifying your own body and recommending something to someone else. It’s something to approach cautiously.

You can easily tell somebody to “just take 5 grams of creatine a day and forget about it” - since it’s well researched that’s a safe statement. In the case of unproven supplements, you need to read over the evidence with them and let them come to their own decisions. A lot more prudency is needed here.

In the end though, unproven options could be amazing. Take cissus for example (which we’ve talked about here before): the one study on it was conducted in men with work-related muscle and joint soreness (a rare population to get studied in regards to joint health, almost everything is in osteoarthritis) and it has a very good reputation with athletes. It is a prototypical “unproven supplement that could be great but we do not have enough evidence yet.”

Stacking the known and the unknown

It is clear that stacks should be focused primarily around what is known to work and is known to be safe, but given the possibilities out there for personalizing your own stack, you can be smart about it. At the very least learn how to approach these things so you remain safe, add in new compounds so you can clearly attribute what supplement did what, and use a trial and error approach to find what works for you.

Eric said that the question he hates being asked the most is: “What supplements should I take?” That’s pretty much the same question we get: “What supplements should I take for ______?”

And that’s why we created our Stack Guides. It’s not just about “take this” and “don’t take that” - it’s a lot more subtle than that. There are promising supplements out there (like cissus), and you need to be a bit more nuanced than that.

We’re an independent, 100% transparent and unbiased source. Since we don’t sell any supplements, you know that our recommendations are all based on sound science, not us trying to make a quick buck.

Each stack also includes:

• Stacks catered not only to a goal (ie. fat loss) but also demographics (ie. for people who cannot easily tolerant stimulants)
• Nonsupplemental tips to help maximize efficacy
• Practical considerations when dealing with the components, like how to easily avoid minor side-effects of inconveniences
• Safety information on possible drug-drug interactions (although not all could be mentioned, referring to your medical doctor is still mandatory)
• Tips to help future supplement additions
• Free lifetime updates - as new research comes out, the stack guides will be updated accordingly

Note from EC: I've reviewed the resource and it's fantastic. I really could have used something this incredibly thorough when I was an "up and comer"in the industry and blowing far too much money on supplements that simply didn't work. If you're someone who purchases supplements regularly, I view this guide as an investment and not an expense; it'll actually save you a lot of money (especially since it's on sale at an introductory price this week). Click here to learn more.

About the Author

Kamal Patel is the director of Examine.com. He has an MBA and an MPH (Master of Public Health) from Johns Hopkins University, and was pursuing his PhD in nutrition when he opted to go on hiatus to join Examine.com. He is dedicated in making scientific research in nutrition and supplementation accessible to everyone.

Sign-up Today for our FREE Newsletter and receive a four-part video series on how to deadlift!

Today's guest post comes from the guys at Examine.com, who take unbiased looks at all sorts of topics related to health and fitness.  They'll be discussing a supplement of which you may have never heard, but should be aware. This post is timely, as their popular Supplement-Goals Reference Guide is now on sale to celebrate their hiring of new researchers to kick out great new content.

Cissus Quadrangularis is a traditional medicine used to reduce inflammation and accelerate post-fracture bone regeneration. It is one of the "go-to" recommendations for athletes struggling with joint pain.

However, many authorities have not taken official positions on cissus because, despite the vast collection of anecdotal benefits, there have been few human studies on the supplement.

Studies published in eastern journals have suggested cissus speeds up bone healing, but the dosage amount was not disclosed. Also available as evidence is a documented failure to ease hemorrhoids and a study suggesting cissus can reduce weight in obese people. Researchers in the second study had funding issues and dosed the supplement in the form of gum, taken with water before a meal. Gum and water before a meal will reduce food intake, regardless of the kind of gum taken. Not very compelling evidence!

There is good news, however. The first preliminary human trial on joint pain in adult athletes and cissus has finally been published and results are promising. Adults with nonpathological joint pain due to exercise took 3,200mg of cissus daily. After eight weeks, subjects reported a reduction in joint symptoms by about a third.

The study lacked a placebo control, and cissus was not tested against a reference drug, so more evidence will be required determine cissus’ true efficacy.

Muscles and Joints

Cissus has a few properties that may benefit the musculoskeletal system. The following has been observed in rats:

• Cissus is anti-inflammatory agent, though with questionable potency.

• It is a painkiller with a quick onset.

• It has minor muscle relaxant and sedative properties, which occur within 30 minutes of supplementation.

Due to its mild sedative effect, high doses of cissus should not be used as a preworkout.

Effects on Bone

Cissus increases IGF signalling in bone cells, which promotes mineral retention and growth. These effects have been observed in low concentrations, which suggests oral supplementation is a suitable way to take cissus. Rodent studies have shown that cissus promotes bone growth, mineral density and increases the bone’s ability to withstand force.

There are numerous studies published in eastern journals that support cissus’ positive effects on bone regeneration, but methodologies vary and actual evidence is scant.

Other properties

The sedative effects associated with cissus supplementation are not well studied, but it has been observed to enhance sleep time in benzodiazepine-induced animals. This suggests that cissus might best be supplemented before bed.

The herb has also traditionally been used to reduce stomach ulceration. Animal studies support this property.

Take-aways:

• Cissus quadrangularis is a well-known supplement for reducing exercise-induced joint pain.

• There is a serious lack of scientific evidence for the effects of cissus quadrangularis.

• It is a potentially relaxing compound, not suited for a preworkout.

• Cissus quadrangularis has promising but unproven benefits for bone regeneration.

• It the future, it may be used to treat and prevent ulcers.

Looking for more unbiased reviews of supplements - both popular and obscure - to which you'll constantly be referring for years to come?  Check out the Supplement-Goals Reference Guide; it's a fantastic product that is "Cressey Approved" - and on sale through this Friday at midnight. Perhaps the coolest part is that you get a lifetime of updates, so when new research emerges, the reviews are updated to reflect this new information.

Sign-up Today for our FREE Newsletter and receive a four-part video series on how to deadlift!

Earlier this week, I heard that "XYZ is the official juice of ABC and JKL swears by it" - where ABC is a MLB team.  I couldn't help but laugh, as 74% of my athletes are baseball players (many of them pros) - so you could say that I know nutrition at the pro level pretty well.  If there is going to be an official drink of Major League Baseball, it's probably some kind of beer.  If you think they are pounding this magical Kool-Aid, you've got another thing coming.

Perhaps my favorite marketing scheme is when a magazine publishes a workout program from some pro athlete - and I know it's just flat-out untrue.  How can I be so sure?  I know their strength coach!  We've known for quite some time that editors write the programs for pro bodybuilders in some of the older muscle magazines out there, but nobody seems to grasp that they often do the same for the athletes they profile.  About two years ago, I heard that a 6-10 NBA guy notorious for his long arms and defense and rebounding prowess could bench press 455 pounds.

First off, I knew his strength coach, who told me that he would be lucky to do half that amount.

Second, the risk-reward of that 455 bench press is completely out of whack, and I know there is no way a strength coach (at least one who would like to keep his job at the pro level) would even let an athlete with a huge contract attempt that weight.

Third, I can count on one hand the number of times I've seen anyone bench that much raw.  In each case, they were shorter guys with short arms and big bellies to shorten the range-of-motion.  A 455-bench press is a HUGE raw bench, and the chances of an athlete in a sport with such a huge aerobic component hitting it are slim to none.

Just some food for thought: buyer beware when you hear claims like these.  Feel free to share some of your favorite examples below.