What are the pros and cons vs. infinite, Carbo pro or Perpetuum?
Thanks.
It sounds delicious!
It’s really popular in the bodybuilding world, give it a try and let us know…
That’s the carb source in Vitargo right?
My training buddy used it and like it but it’s real expensive. If you go to competitorradio.com Babbit and Huddle interview the Vitargo creator but it was more like a 30 min infomercial.
.
I hear ya. One of guys at the gym chuckled when I was talking about carbo pro etc… He was like- YOU DON’T KNOW ABOUT WAXY MAISE AND YOUR AN IRONMAN? I felt like a jackass to be honest…but I was intrigued. Does anyone have any stories or references about it?
Thanks…Joe
I started using it right at the end of last season, so I’ve only limited experience to call on, with only one race (Clearwater), where I also took other stuff on board. Longer races are normally a bit of a battle nutritionally for me, as “stomach cramps” usually hit me on the run, and I certainly didn’t have that problem. I’ve been using it since then with no problems, and like it, but given the sessions I’ve been doing, I would have been suprised if I had any problems. So overall, too early to tell, but I like the concept - particularly post workout.
JorgeM has been using it for longer, so you can get a better idea from him**… **it was discussed here… http://forum.slowtwitch.com/gforum.cgi?post=2061433;search_string=vitargo;#2061433
For what it’s worth its in E-Loads carb products http://www.medioncorp.com/hm/fly/inside.php?sid=59
It’s also in GenR8 who sponsor Major and Cartnell
Thanks!
Thanks!
One thing I forgot to mention. The one I use at least is not terribly water soluable, and is in fact more of a suspension. That’s not really a problem apart from if you leave some in a water bottle, where it will solidify into a cement like substance at the bottom. Plus you get weird looks at the gym as it looks like you’re drinking milk.
Supposedly Vitargo and GENr8 are much more soluable that most WMS though.
That’s the carb source in Vitargo right?
My training buddy used it and like it but it’s real expensive. If you go to competitorradio.com Babbit and Huddle interview the Vitargo creator but it was more like a 30 min infomercial.
.
First off, I am the CEO of the company that has the exclusive for Vitargo in the USA and Canada: GENr8. I am NOT the creator of Vitargo (see below). I’m trained as a nutritional and exercise biochemist (grad school at Berkeley), I introduced most of the sports nutrition world to creatine (being the co-founder of EAS in late 1992), and have been a co-investigator on about 75 university-based human research studies examining a wide variety sports nutrition supplements in a variety of training conditions (swimming, cycling, high intensity running, resistance training). Secondly, yeah, I know this is a long post–almost as long as the Academy Awards last night–but there is so much disinformation and confusion about Waxy Maize Starch (and Vitargo) I hammered it out in one posting–my first one on ST.
If you want to read this as an “infomercial”, no worries–everyone has a bias and many have a conflict of interest that they DON’T reveal, but you know mine. I suggest you focus on the SCIENCE so you can make a decision informed with evidence, not hype, evangelism, ‘bro logic’ (see below), or if you like me or not.
Waxy maize starch (WMS) is NOT Vitargo. It never has been (more on that below). WMS has been shown in FOUR university studies to be 1) slow digesting, 2) low glycemic (slow rise in blood sugar AND slow rate of rise of blood sugar), 3) low insulinemic (thus likely slower in replacing muscle and liver glycogen than a high insulin fuel; the low insulin response reinforces it being a slow digesting/absorbing carb), 4) no better than maltodextrin or dextrose in relation to cycling time trial performance, and 5) no better than maltodextrin in relation to 24 hour post-exercise glycogen repletion. The glycogen and cycling time trial studies were published THIRTEEN years ago, and done at one of the world’s leading carb metabolism/endurance labs, from Ball State University (David Costill’s lab). One recently completed cycling time trial study done at a US university found WMS to AGAIN be low glycemic, slow glycemic, and low insulinemic, and to be no better than maltodextrin in a cycling time trial performance. A different, soon to be published study from Purdue University, showed WHITE BREAD to be have an identical glycemic profile to WMS (maltodextrin + a small amount of sugars had a three times higher glycemic index and glycemic rate), and to be twice as insulinemic (if you REALLY want to save money eat white bread–you’ll get protein and “fast carbs” in the same bits, and can buy a family size 5 pound bag for less than a water bottle or a few Roctane gel packets). Lastly, WMS has never been tested for its gastric emptying rate–if anyone claims that ask for just ONE study to prove this. Good luck. If you want to read about WMS and have it come from someone else (an exercise scientist, by the way), go to this link: http://www.bodybuilding.com/..._starch_myth.htm . Try to overlook the “muscle” orientation and focus on the overall facts.
If WMS is not Vitargo, and is not a “fast” fuel (exactly the OPPOSITE of what LOTS of people are saying and writing), how did WMS become a “hot new carb”? About 15 years ago a starch manufacturer in Sweden was asked by some Swedish elite endurance athletes to come up with a carb that would help them perform and recover better. This starch company created an EXTRACT from POTATO starch and then had the SAME laboratory that invented carb/glycogen loading in the 60’s, and creatine loading in the late 80’s (Eric Hultman’s lab at the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm) put it to the test. Then about 4-5 years ago Vitargo, which uses a patented process to EXTRACT a designer starch from ANY high starch food source (like potato, wheat, corn, or barley starch, and still gets the same designer starch), used WMS as the starting material. The Vitargo extracted from WMS is VERY different from the WMS used in products today. It’s like comparing whey protein isolate to whole milk powder–both come from milk but one (whey protein isolate) has been extracted, filtered, centrifuged, etc. They are chemically VERY different and (more importantly) are VERY different when you ingest them.
In the early 2000’s two bodybuilding-oriented supplement companies had the rights to Vitargo in the USA. They were then selling Vitargo EXTRACTED from WMS. In the mid-2000’s the Swedish starch manufacturer found that BARLEY served as a better starch from which to extract Vitargo (easier to mix, too) and WMS-extracted Vitargo was discontinued. In December 2006 both of these companies lost the rights to Vitargo for the USA and we (GENr8) obtained exclusive rights for North America. We didn’t launch Vitargo S2 until March 2008. That 14 month period in between led a LOT of companies to make the massive leap of faith: "Gee, if Vitargo is (extracted) from WMS and we can’t get Vitargo let’s just sell WMS! Those consumers will never know the difference as long as we say, “It’s just like Vitargo!” What they all did NOT realize (or do there homework to become informed) is that WMS–the kind that is on the market under all of the brands–performs exactly the opposite of Vitargo. WMS is an inexpensive carb–but not as cheap as dextrose or maltodextrin–and is used to make textiles and paste. Yep–the kind of paste you used when you were in art class as a kid, and that you may have inadvertently eaten as a post-recess fuel.
The first university study done on Vitargo (in the Stockholm lab) used POTATO starch-extracted Vitargo and found it to be (compared to a mixture of (mostly) maize starch maltodextrin + sugars) 1.7 times faster and greater in replacing muscle glycogen two hours after glycogen-depleting brick work (running, cycling, and then sprinting until exhaustion). If you see any company marketing WMS and they refer to THIS study (Piehl Aulin K, et al. Muscle glycogen resynthesis rate in humans after supplementation of drinks containing carbohydrates with low and high molecular masses. Eur J Appl Physiol (2000) 81: 346-351) then you have PROOF they 1) didn’t read the study because “WAXY” isn’t mentioned ANYWHERE in the article, and 2) they don’t know science any more than an actor playing a crime scene scientist on any CSI show. Just like companies who claim they have “L-glycine” or “L-taurine”–no such thing.
The second university study done on Vitargo (in the same Stockholm lab) used POTATO starch-extracted Vitargo (again) and found it, compared to a mixture of (mostly) maize starch maltodextrin + sugars, to be almost twice as fast as exiting from the stomach and over twice as fast as getting into the small intestine (where ALL carbs are digested and absorbed). This was measured at rest. If you see any company marketing WMS and they refer to THIS study (Leiper JB, et al. Improved gastric emptying rate in humans of a unique glucose polymer with gel-forming properties. Scand J Gastroenterol 2000;35:1143–1149) then you have PROOF they 1)…no need to repeat myself.
The third university study was done in the lab of Professor Paul Greenhaff, who did most of the pioneering work on creatine (and now on carnitine). They compared Vitargo (extracted from corn starch) to maltodextrin + sugars as a post-exhaustive/glycogen depleting exercise recovery fuel (electrically braked cycle ergometer with a 75% VO2 max work rate, with intermittent rest-cycle intervals, until exhaustion). After a dose of either carb (or a calorie-free, flavored placebo) the subjects sat on a hospital bed and watched videos for 2 hours. They then got onto the same ergometer and had a max endurance ride for 15 minutes. When they got Vitargo their work output was up to 23% higher (average of 10% higher output) than when they got maltodextrin + sugars. This study also showed a two times higher rate of rise of blood glucose, and a 1.8 times higher insulinemic response in just ten minutes after the dose of Vitargo, compared to malto + sugars. If you see this study referred to in relation to WMS (Stephens FB, et al. Post-exercise ingestion of a unique, high molecular weight glucose polymer solution improves performance during a subsequent bout of cycling exercise. J Sports Sci 2008;26:149–154), you know what it means.
We don’t have ALL of the studies done on Vitargo–it is a constant work in progress–but we ARE DOING THEM. One 2005 study from PowerBar-sponsored researcher Dr. Asker Jeukendrup’s lab compared Vitargo extracted from WMS to corn starch maltodextrin and measured fuel burning (oxidation) rates during low intensity cycling exercise (55% of max work rate, for 150 minutes) and found no difference. We don’t have any studies showing Vitargo is faster into the blood DURING exercise (the Jeukendrup study measured this but did not REPORT it), or if Vitargo is faster out of the gut and into the blood right after exhaustive exercise–but these studies are already in the works. We’re also measuring the rate of LIVER glycogen repletion (a greatly overlooked glycogen store that CAN influence performance). We have done head to head comparisons at a major university lab, between Vitargo S2 (extracted from barley starch) and THREE national brands of WMS, and used continuous glucose monitoring to measure (EVERY 5 minutes) how quick the glycemic response was–and Vitargo blew them all away. You veteran STers should know that STer Andy Coggan’s lab has conducted the only DIRECT measure of the speed of glucose entry into the blood in the context of a glycemic index test and found that (much to many people’s surprise or dismay) INSULIN is what made All Bran cereal LOW glycemic compared to Corn Flakes, as BOTH cereals delivered their glucose to the blood at the SAME RATE. That should mess up your head for a few days…
Whatever your take away, consider this: VERY FEW sports nutrition products have ANY PROOF IN HUMANS that they work better than the current standard, let alone better than a placebo–about 1 in 1,000 DO have such evidence. There just aren’t enough FDA and FTC cops out there to police the highway of false claims, so EVERYONE pretty much says, writes, and claims what they want. Before you consider buying anything call up the company on their toll free line and ask them for the published scientific evidence in HUMANS on the ACTUAL product they are selling (IF they DO have the proof it should be a 2 minute conversation with a study waiting in your email inbox by the time you hang up…). This also takes a lot less time than doing an online search for “knowledge”. Alternatively you could rely on what my friend Will Brink calls ‘bro logic’: “Bro, I don’t care what the studies say or don’t say, it works like da bomb for me!” and then think of what products you were using two years ago–that you raved about–and see if you’re still using them by brand name today…
-Anthony L. Almada, MSc