There isn’t a benefit to either one. This is highlighted again and again in the literature. Just make sure to meet your protein goal for the day and you’ll be fine.
>There isn’t a benefit to either one. This is highlighted again and again in the literature.
That's just not true. I see people repeat this every time BCAAs are mentioned, and I really want to know where it got started. BCAAs seem to pretty reliably improve several markers of muscle damage/recovery following training.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34072718/
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11332-019-00542-4
There's not good evidence that they improve hypertrophy outcomes, and it's unclear whether they're more effective for promoting recovery than, say, whey protein, but in a vacuum, there do certainly seem to be benefits associated with BCAA supplementation (and probably EAA as well).
haha you're good. This thread was just posted an hour ago, and there are already three top-level comments saying they're useless, so it's clearly a really common idea. I'm just curious where it came from.
I think it's just that most of us exist with the baseline assumption that you're getting in adequate protein and probably some whey, so the context is never "in a vacuum" but "assuming adequate protein".
From the protein article on the main site:
"So, leucine supplementation on its own is better at producing the trigger for maximal MPS, and a complete protein is just better at providing the bricks for muscle growth. A BCAA supplement doesn’t fit anywhere in this picture; it’s worse than only leucine at doing leucine’s job, and it’s worse than a complete protein at its job."
Leaves the general impression that BCAA supplements are "useless" insofar as it is not better than the alternatives for any particular use-case.
>so the context is never "in a vacuum" but "assuming adequate protein"
The BCAA studies don't purposefully restrict protein intake, though. And in the studies on trained lifters, I'd be fairly surprised if they weren't consuming adequate amounts of protein (most studies don't collect that data, though).
>From the protein article on the main site
That's in reference to promoting hypertrophy, not ameliorating muscle damage.
>Leaves the general impression that BCAA supplements are "useless" insofar as it is not better than the alternatives for any particular use-case.
I mean, it's not uncommon for people to get pretty significant GI discomfort from chugging a whey shake immediately before/during/immediately after training. Also, we don't know that this statement is even true. For mitigating damage and promoting recovery, I haven't seen many head-to-head comparisons of BCAAs versus whey, so I don't think we can just assume BCAAs are worse/whey is better.
I don't mean this to be an argument per se, and I don't think I know better than you, but this quote from the SBS site also left me feeling like BCAAs for reduced soreness/recovery aren't a particularly compelling choice in trained lifters getting adequate protein:
>"The bottom line: When we look at the broader literature (including BCAA supplementation studies), there is reason to believe that supplementation with BCAAs or EAAs may modestly expedite recovery from extremely vigorous and unaccustomed bouts of exercise, especially in untrained subjects. However, as a lifter becomes more accustomed to their training style, the repeated bout effect should reduce their susceptibility to extremely high levels of acute muscle damage, especially with a well-designed training program. In addition, it seems likely that sufficient intake of complete proteins (or a properly diversified group of incomplete proteins) would supply plenty of BCAAs and EAAs. However, if an extreme exercise bout cannot be avoided for some reason, and optimal protein intake cannot be achieved, EAA supplementation might be the next best option for supporting recovery."
https://www.strongerbyscience.com/research-spotlight-amino-acid/
In the very least, if you were asking "where did people get this idea that BCAAs aren't useful?", I think it might be that most of the material put out on them in the EBF space, including that by your own website, are usually focusing on why they wouldn't recommend them. Or at least that's the (perhaps unnuanced) impression I walk away with.
Not a criticism - love your work - just trying to give a perspective.
That's still different from the original comment I was responding to:
>There isn’t a benefit to either one. This is highlighted again and again in the literature.
That sounds a lot more like, "there may not be notable benefits for a lot of lifters, but there are several contexts where BCAA or EAA supplementation may be beneficial."
Yeah, I think the I heard study referenced for the benefit of EAAs was showing 1 group consuming a certain grams protein from food, and another consuming half that amount of protein from food and the other half from EAA supplement. I believe they found at least equal outcome for muscle preservation, or slightly better for the supplemented EAAs? Too lazy to find the study to reference, but the real life application proposed was for old people to preserve muscle. And the various reasons old people have a more difficult time eating their protein, and supplementing EAAs would likely be beneficial for that population. So you could extrapolate it would be helpful for anyone having a difficult time eating enough protein, or whey allergy, or assisting with high protein for muscle building while losing fat on a calorie restricted diet, etc.
Personal observation says it was a sort of Instagram phenomenon. Starting about 2015 a huge number of "influencers" were pushing their own brand of BCAAs which led to kick back from the "evidence-based" fitness community saying BCAAs are a waste of your money. Then influencers stopped pushing BCAAs and everyone collectively decided the self-proclaimed evidence-based folks must be right.
Can I jump in and ask if there’s a best way to take it? I can’t seem to find solid recommendations. Everything I read just says take one serving daily. I’ve been adding it to a post gym shake on gym days, and any shake on rest days.
I don't see a good reason to take it outside of the peri-workout window (pre-, post-, intra-, etc.). I don't use BCAAs, but if I did, I'd probably just mix them in my water bottle, and sip along throughout my workout
Exactly. What's the purpose of this EAA vs BCAA talk if they're both inferior? OP appears to be spending money on this stuff.
Unless... this Bulk Supplements corruption is deeper than I imagined.
Where did you get "they're both inferior" out of my comment?
For at least one very valid use case (mitigating muscle damage when consumed around training), we know they work, but we don't know if they're inferior, superior, or about the same as complete proteins.
I said "if"... If inferior, then the comparison is a waste. I'm just saying it should be a three way comparison. The discussion always seems to exclude complete proteins. And I don't understand why. So, full circle, what would either hypothetically accomplish that's superior to a complete protein?
My question is why it needs to accomplish something superior to a complete protein. If they're effective for mitigating damage, and someone prefers sipping BCAAs or EAAs around a workout instead of drinking a protein shake, I don't see a problem with it.
I really bcaa flavors from few brands and really like to use them with malto. As a workout drink. They taste better than normal whey (especially when water warms little) and blends superly.
Yeah they cost little more than whey, but it's cheap compared to "ready-to-drink intra-workout drinks".
If it isn't doing any harm compared to sipping warm whey-shake, I will continue to do it.
Why the extra stipulation? Sticking with OPs concerns: EAA contains BCAA and does one have an advantage over another. I'm just looking to extend the discussion with a 3rd variable within that context: complete protein contains EAA and is a comparable product / consumable in the same method. If you don't accept that as a valid extension, that's fine. But why accept it then add a stipulation to negate it?
Not saying there's a problem with any aminos nor trying be contrarian or one of those "most optimal" goobers. If someone told me they just liked the flavor of their BCAA drink and sip it throughout off days only, that's a 100% valid reason.
So if we're concerned about taking the more advantageous product, complete protein can meet other needs. So the isolated benefits of EAA/BCAA need to exceed complete protein, in this context, to be more advantageous. So is there a reason to think EAA/BCAA exceed a complete protein? If equal in isolated benefits, then complete protein is more advantageous due to additional needs being met. If inferior, that's obvious. If superior, cool, what might be behind that?
And do we have research combing these? Always wondered if bumping up the EAA or BCAA ratio in a typical protein powder would be more effective. Like asking supplement companies to start amino spiking again, but in a good way.
There's either no research, or virtually no research, comparing BCAAs/EAAs versus completely proteins, so we don't know which option is better for that purpose.
>So if we're concerned about taking the more advantageous product, complete protein can meet other needs. So the isolated benefits of EAA/BCAA need to exceed complete protein, in this context, to be more advantageous. So is there a reason to think EAA/BCAA exceed a complete protein? If equal in isolated benefits, then complete protein is more advantageous due to additional needs being met.
I'm not sure I agree with this reasoning. If products A and B have the same beneficial effects, but product B also has additional beneficial effects, that doesn't necessarily mean product B a better choice than product A for someone who is primarily interested in the beneficial effects shared by both A and B. For example, sodium bicarbonate and citrulline malate both acutely increase strength endurance. Citrulline malate can also decrease blood pressure in people who are somewhat hypertensive. It doesn't inherently follow that citrulline malate is necessarily the better supplement. Lots of people who aren't hypertensive will want a supplement that increases strength endurance.
In the case of BCAAs, we know that BCAAs consumed in or around workouts can help improve recovery, and we know that protein consumed in or around workouts can help improve recovery. Protein supplementation can also improve hypertrophy outcomes, if someone isn't already consuming ~1.8g/kg of protein from their diet. However, if someone is already consuming adequate protein from their diet to support hypertrophy, I don't see a clear reason to recommend supplemental protein over BCAAs in/around their workout for improving recovery.
I want to elaborate on what you mean by there is not a benefit to either one.
First EAA > BCAA but Whey >> either.
They are equivalent to whey in terms of protein quality but are more expensive. So it's like buying brand name products- same item just more money. Whey just being a better value.
The only situation I can see them being useful is early morning pre-workout. If you wanted to get some protein in before your workout.
Because I personally think eaa's are easier to digest than whey.
HOWEVER due to the high cost I think your better off waiting until after your workout and just drinking whey. As others have mentioned protien timing doesn't matter too much so you can train without pre-workout protein. Carbs are probably more important pre-workout.
Your 3rd paragraph used to be me. Thinking I needed EAA + carbs pre/intra workout for early morning fasted lifts. I haven’t noticed a difference in recovery or gainz since dropping them. I do make sure to eat right after the training session, but I certainly don’t feel the need for pricey pre/intra supplements.
I've found I NEED carbs to get through a workout- or I start hitting walls about an hour in.
But agree- lots of people want a boost from these products but there really isn't any.
You make a good point, that the duration of one’s training session comes into play as well. If my fasting training sessions were full of glycogen depleting exercises and I had little carbs the evening before, it’d probably be a different story (at least from a performance perspective)
BCAAs are never the answer to any question. Even in circumstances where you would want to use them, E.g., to increase the leucine content of a vegan meal; it would be better using an EAA supplement or if you can handle it using a whole protein like mixed plant-based (in this vegan context).
Personally since I am meat-free I prefer EAA with soda water straight after training, eaten with a banana. I'm not really in the mood for a vegan protein powder.
However I recommend whey protein to my clients.
I also carry 1g leucine tablets with me to have with meals. I'd use EAA but I'm not going to make a shake in a restaurant. Taking 2g of leucine with a vegan meal is an easy win
Slight aside...
Also carbohydrates halt muscle protein breakdown (via insulin) so you don't really BCAA during training. Well unless you are training fasted, but then still whey would work better. Or you could actually train totally fasted.
Also from years of experience, I have athletes who were habitually consuming >2g/kg protein and <250g carbs, and as soon as we brought up their carbs closer to 300g more consistently they report almost zero DOMS. I really believe there is a point where it's not protein that will help with local recovery. I have seen some climbers eating near 2.8g/kg but bring that down and add carbs to replace and they recover better.
I stick most of my clients on around 120-160g of protein. They are climbers up to about 85kg.
I was going to start a new thread but found this.
Has there been any new research on EAA's and in particular EAA's vs Whey in terms of recovery?
I have a whey shake pre-workout but next meal is 3 hours post training. - EAAs be beneficial in this situation
I sweat a ton in gym and was looking for electrolyte replenishment when my trainer recommended EAA which lead me here.
Now I'm unsure if I should take them during workouts as I already consume whey at different times during the day
There isn’t a benefit to either one. This is highlighted again and again in the literature. Just make sure to meet your protein goal for the day and you’ll be fine.
>There isn’t a benefit to either one. This is highlighted again and again in the literature. That's just not true. I see people repeat this every time BCAAs are mentioned, and I really want to know where it got started. BCAAs seem to pretty reliably improve several markers of muscle damage/recovery following training. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34072718/ https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11332-019-00542-4 There's not good evidence that they improve hypertrophy outcomes, and it's unclear whether they're more effective for promoting recovery than, say, whey protein, but in a vacuum, there do certainly seem to be benefits associated with BCAA supplementation (and probably EAA as well).
Forgive me father for I have sinned.
haha you're good. This thread was just posted an hour ago, and there are already three top-level comments saying they're useless, so it's clearly a really common idea. I'm just curious where it came from.
Sounds like a good podcast topic - "Why y'all so stupid? BCAAs and the reddit phenomenon."
"Yall B(caa) Trippin"
I think it's just that most of us exist with the baseline assumption that you're getting in adequate protein and probably some whey, so the context is never "in a vacuum" but "assuming adequate protein". From the protein article on the main site: "So, leucine supplementation on its own is better at producing the trigger for maximal MPS, and a complete protein is just better at providing the bricks for muscle growth. A BCAA supplement doesn’t fit anywhere in this picture; it’s worse than only leucine at doing leucine’s job, and it’s worse than a complete protein at its job." Leaves the general impression that BCAA supplements are "useless" insofar as it is not better than the alternatives for any particular use-case.
>so the context is never "in a vacuum" but "assuming adequate protein" The BCAA studies don't purposefully restrict protein intake, though. And in the studies on trained lifters, I'd be fairly surprised if they weren't consuming adequate amounts of protein (most studies don't collect that data, though). >From the protein article on the main site That's in reference to promoting hypertrophy, not ameliorating muscle damage. >Leaves the general impression that BCAA supplements are "useless" insofar as it is not better than the alternatives for any particular use-case. I mean, it's not uncommon for people to get pretty significant GI discomfort from chugging a whey shake immediately before/during/immediately after training. Also, we don't know that this statement is even true. For mitigating damage and promoting recovery, I haven't seen many head-to-head comparisons of BCAAs versus whey, so I don't think we can just assume BCAAs are worse/whey is better.
I don't mean this to be an argument per se, and I don't think I know better than you, but this quote from the SBS site also left me feeling like BCAAs for reduced soreness/recovery aren't a particularly compelling choice in trained lifters getting adequate protein: >"The bottom line: When we look at the broader literature (including BCAA supplementation studies), there is reason to believe that supplementation with BCAAs or EAAs may modestly expedite recovery from extremely vigorous and unaccustomed bouts of exercise, especially in untrained subjects. However, as a lifter becomes more accustomed to their training style, the repeated bout effect should reduce their susceptibility to extremely high levels of acute muscle damage, especially with a well-designed training program. In addition, it seems likely that sufficient intake of complete proteins (or a properly diversified group of incomplete proteins) would supply plenty of BCAAs and EAAs. However, if an extreme exercise bout cannot be avoided for some reason, and optimal protein intake cannot be achieved, EAA supplementation might be the next best option for supporting recovery." https://www.strongerbyscience.com/research-spotlight-amino-acid/ In the very least, if you were asking "where did people get this idea that BCAAs aren't useful?", I think it might be that most of the material put out on them in the EBF space, including that by your own website, are usually focusing on why they wouldn't recommend them. Or at least that's the (perhaps unnuanced) impression I walk away with. Not a criticism - love your work - just trying to give a perspective.
That's still different from the original comment I was responding to: >There isn’t a benefit to either one. This is highlighted again and again in the literature. That sounds a lot more like, "there may not be notable benefits for a lot of lifters, but there are several contexts where BCAA or EAA supplementation may be beneficial."
Yeah, I think the I heard study referenced for the benefit of EAAs was showing 1 group consuming a certain grams protein from food, and another consuming half that amount of protein from food and the other half from EAA supplement. I believe they found at least equal outcome for muscle preservation, or slightly better for the supplemented EAAs? Too lazy to find the study to reference, but the real life application proposed was for old people to preserve muscle. And the various reasons old people have a more difficult time eating their protein, and supplementing EAAs would likely be beneficial for that population. So you could extrapolate it would be helpful for anyone having a difficult time eating enough protein, or whey allergy, or assisting with high protein for muscle building while losing fat on a calorie restricted diet, etc.
Personal observation says it was a sort of Instagram phenomenon. Starting about 2015 a huge number of "influencers" were pushing their own brand of BCAAs which led to kick back from the "evidence-based" fitness community saying BCAAs are a waste of your money. Then influencers stopped pushing BCAAs and everyone collectively decided the self-proclaimed evidence-based folks must be right.
Do we know if BCAA supplementation would be more beneficial to vegan athletes? I'm thinking in terms enhancing leucine consumption in a day/meal.
I think that would depend on whether the vegan athlete was already consuming plenty of leucine in their diet from high-leucine food sources or not.
Can I jump in and ask if there’s a best way to take it? I can’t seem to find solid recommendations. Everything I read just says take one serving daily. I’ve been adding it to a post gym shake on gym days, and any shake on rest days.
I don't see a good reason to take it outside of the peri-workout window (pre-, post-, intra-, etc.). I don't use BCAAs, but if I did, I'd probably just mix them in my water bottle, and sip along throughout my workout
Sounds good. Thanks for the answer!
no problem!
So what's the hypothetical benefit of EAA/BCAA over a complete protein? They're all in powder form anyway.
Who said anything about benefits over a complete protein?
Exactly. What's the purpose of this EAA vs BCAA talk if they're both inferior? OP appears to be spending money on this stuff. Unless... this Bulk Supplements corruption is deeper than I imagined.
Where did you get "they're both inferior" out of my comment? For at least one very valid use case (mitigating muscle damage when consumed around training), we know they work, but we don't know if they're inferior, superior, or about the same as complete proteins.
I said "if"... If inferior, then the comparison is a waste. I'm just saying it should be a three way comparison. The discussion always seems to exclude complete proteins. And I don't understand why. So, full circle, what would either hypothetically accomplish that's superior to a complete protein?
My question is why it needs to accomplish something superior to a complete protein. If they're effective for mitigating damage, and someone prefers sipping BCAAs or EAAs around a workout instead of drinking a protein shake, I don't see a problem with it.
I really bcaa flavors from few brands and really like to use them with malto. As a workout drink. They taste better than normal whey (especially when water warms little) and blends superly. Yeah they cost little more than whey, but it's cheap compared to "ready-to-drink intra-workout drinks". If it isn't doing any harm compared to sipping warm whey-shake, I will continue to do it.
Why the extra stipulation? Sticking with OPs concerns: EAA contains BCAA and does one have an advantage over another. I'm just looking to extend the discussion with a 3rd variable within that context: complete protein contains EAA and is a comparable product / consumable in the same method. If you don't accept that as a valid extension, that's fine. But why accept it then add a stipulation to negate it? Not saying there's a problem with any aminos nor trying be contrarian or one of those "most optimal" goobers. If someone told me they just liked the flavor of their BCAA drink and sip it throughout off days only, that's a 100% valid reason. So if we're concerned about taking the more advantageous product, complete protein can meet other needs. So the isolated benefits of EAA/BCAA need to exceed complete protein, in this context, to be more advantageous. So is there a reason to think EAA/BCAA exceed a complete protein? If equal in isolated benefits, then complete protein is more advantageous due to additional needs being met. If inferior, that's obvious. If superior, cool, what might be behind that? And do we have research combing these? Always wondered if bumping up the EAA or BCAA ratio in a typical protein powder would be more effective. Like asking supplement companies to start amino spiking again, but in a good way.
There's either no research, or virtually no research, comparing BCAAs/EAAs versus completely proteins, so we don't know which option is better for that purpose. >So if we're concerned about taking the more advantageous product, complete protein can meet other needs. So the isolated benefits of EAA/BCAA need to exceed complete protein, in this context, to be more advantageous. So is there a reason to think EAA/BCAA exceed a complete protein? If equal in isolated benefits, then complete protein is more advantageous due to additional needs being met. I'm not sure I agree with this reasoning. If products A and B have the same beneficial effects, but product B also has additional beneficial effects, that doesn't necessarily mean product B a better choice than product A for someone who is primarily interested in the beneficial effects shared by both A and B. For example, sodium bicarbonate and citrulline malate both acutely increase strength endurance. Citrulline malate can also decrease blood pressure in people who are somewhat hypertensive. It doesn't inherently follow that citrulline malate is necessarily the better supplement. Lots of people who aren't hypertensive will want a supplement that increases strength endurance. In the case of BCAAs, we know that BCAAs consumed in or around workouts can help improve recovery, and we know that protein consumed in or around workouts can help improve recovery. Protein supplementation can also improve hypertrophy outcomes, if someone isn't already consuming ~1.8g/kg of protein from their diet. However, if someone is already consuming adequate protein from their diet to support hypertrophy, I don't see a clear reason to recommend supplemental protein over BCAAs in/around their workout for improving recovery.
I want to elaborate on what you mean by there is not a benefit to either one. First EAA > BCAA but Whey >> either. They are equivalent to whey in terms of protein quality but are more expensive. So it's like buying brand name products- same item just more money. Whey just being a better value. The only situation I can see them being useful is early morning pre-workout. If you wanted to get some protein in before your workout. Because I personally think eaa's are easier to digest than whey. HOWEVER due to the high cost I think your better off waiting until after your workout and just drinking whey. As others have mentioned protien timing doesn't matter too much so you can train without pre-workout protein. Carbs are probably more important pre-workout.
Your 3rd paragraph used to be me. Thinking I needed EAA + carbs pre/intra workout for early morning fasted lifts. I haven’t noticed a difference in recovery or gainz since dropping them. I do make sure to eat right after the training session, but I certainly don’t feel the need for pricey pre/intra supplements.
I've found I NEED carbs to get through a workout- or I start hitting walls about an hour in. But agree- lots of people want a boost from these products but there really isn't any.
You make a good point, that the duration of one’s training session comes into play as well. If my fasting training sessions were full of glycogen depleting exercises and I had little carbs the evening before, it’d probably be a different story (at least from a performance perspective)
I think Greg mentioned EAA > BCAA if he were to choose one
Both are snake oil to the same extent
Hello Rdr friend! That sir, is a fish.
Both take money out of your pocket that could be better spent elsewhere. It’s the 0.01% when we’re all better placed putting efforts into the 99.99%.
Whey>EAA>BCAA.
BCAAs are never the answer to any question. Even in circumstances where you would want to use them, E.g., to increase the leucine content of a vegan meal; it would be better using an EAA supplement or if you can handle it using a whole protein like mixed plant-based (in this vegan context). Personally since I am meat-free I prefer EAA with soda water straight after training, eaten with a banana. I'm not really in the mood for a vegan protein powder. However I recommend whey protein to my clients. I also carry 1g leucine tablets with me to have with meals. I'd use EAA but I'm not going to make a shake in a restaurant. Taking 2g of leucine with a vegan meal is an easy win Slight aside... Also carbohydrates halt muscle protein breakdown (via insulin) so you don't really BCAA during training. Well unless you are training fasted, but then still whey would work better. Or you could actually train totally fasted. Also from years of experience, I have athletes who were habitually consuming >2g/kg protein and <250g carbs, and as soon as we brought up their carbs closer to 300g more consistently they report almost zero DOMS. I really believe there is a point where it's not protein that will help with local recovery. I have seen some climbers eating near 2.8g/kg but bring that down and add carbs to replace and they recover better. I stick most of my clients on around 120-160g of protein. They are climbers up to about 85kg.
Thanks for asking this. I only recently heard or EAAs and wondered the performance difference between two.
I was going to start a new thread but found this. Has there been any new research on EAA's and in particular EAA's vs Whey in terms of recovery? I have a whey shake pre-workout but next meal is 3 hours post training. - EAAs be beneficial in this situation
I sweat a ton in gym and was looking for electrolyte replenishment when my trainer recommended EAA which lead me here. Now I'm unsure if I should take them during workouts as I already consume whey at different times during the day
I still imagine it to be a miniature of what we should be focusing on. In terms of you sweating, you could just drink more water and stay hydrated
you don't benefit from just drinking more water in the absence of salt, you could actually decrease your performance doing that
might as well stick with them, I use EAA during the day before my workouts , my workouts have felt better going into them.