# I know it's important, but "just" how important are the Bvitamins for



## Johnnny (Aug 22, 2004)

I know it's important, but "just" how important are the Bvitamins for training, strength & growth?

I started taking a B vitamin complex inlcuding Folic Acid (B9) & Niacin (B3).

Since I started it I don't feel as tired as I've been for the past month or so & I have more energy.

Yes I eat a descent amount of citrus fruits like oranges, but I don't feel as tired & I find that I'm sleeping better since I started taking one tablet a day.

I'm just curious as I know that some individuals have total B vitamin deficiency
& in that case obviously it would make a huge difference.

So maybe I was low on B vitamins for some reason?


----------



## Mudge (Aug 22, 2004)

Unless you are deficient I dont know that supplementing would be all that hugely beneficial. One thing to consider is, B vitamins dont stay in the body as they are water soluble.


----------



## Johnnny (Aug 22, 2004)

Mudge



> Unless you are deficient I dont know that supplementing would be all that hugely beneficial. One thing to consider is, B vitamins dont stay in the body as they are water soluble.



Yes you are right. The B vitamins, & vitamin C are water soluable while Vitamin A, D, E & K are thicker & you shouldn't be getting too much of them.

But don't forget that I've had thyroid problems & although my condition is normal, many bodily functions can be disturbed.

& it's more individual which bodily functions can be disturbed.

I've read that thyroid ppl can have B vitamin deficiency problems even with a normal thyroid level.

Maybe my B vitamins were low & supplementing them has helped me?

That's all I can think of at this point.


----------



## Arnold (Aug 22, 2004)

I take a b-complex twice per day.


----------



## Johnnny (Aug 22, 2004)

Robert DiMaggio



> I take a b-complex twice per day.



Do you have a deficiency?

If not, do you find it helps with training, & recovering & so on?


----------



## Arnold (Aug 22, 2004)

well, as Mudge said b vitamins are water soluable so they are not toxic, I feel that it helps quite a bit with my metabolism and energy levels.


----------



## ClintZ28 (Aug 22, 2004)

Johnnny said:
			
		

> Yes you are right. The B vitamins, & vitamin C are water soluable while Vitamin A, D, E & K are thicker & you shouldn't be getting too much of them.



Vitamin A, D, E, and K aren't thicker, they are fat soluble.  So, they can collect in fatty tissues.  Exceeding the RDA by a large amount, and over a long period of time, can cause levels of these vitamins (Vitamin E is an exception) to reach toxic levels.  Vitamin A toxicity can be fatal.


----------



## Arnold (Aug 22, 2004)

ClintZ28 said:
			
		

> Exceeding the RDA by a large amount, and over a long period of time, can cause levels of these vitamins (Vitamin E is an exception) to reach toxic levels.  Vitamin A toxicity can be fatal.



yes, they can be toxic, but please do not go by the RDA, that is a joke.


----------



## ClintZ28 (Aug 22, 2004)

I don't think you can call it a joke.  Millions and millions of dollars goes into research for years and years to establish the RDA.  They first find out how much of each vitamin and mineral is required for thousands of healthy individuals.  Then they set the RDA to meet the requirements of 99% of all people.  Rarely does going beyond the RDA provide any benefit, and often it can cause harm.  Vitamin E, Calcium, chromium, and vitamin C can be taken in larger than RDA quantities and may provide some benefits.  But, much of it is still under debate.


----------



## Arnold (Aug 22, 2004)

here is a Q & A I answered a few months ago:
http://www.ironmagazine.com/viewarticle-972.html


----------



## Johnnny (Aug 22, 2004)

Thanks for the link Robert DiMaggio.

As for those other vitamins being thicker, that's what the pharmacist said.

He was wrong I guess.


----------



## ClintZ28 (Aug 22, 2004)

Heh, that's scary that a pharmacist said that.


Yeah, nutritonal needs of athletes is a relatively new area of research.  Nothing is concrete yet.


----------



## Pirate! (Aug 23, 2004)

ClintZ28 said:
			
		

> I don't think you can call it a joke.  Millions and millions of dollars goes into research for years and years to establish the RDA.  They first find out how much of each vitamin and mineral is required for thousands of healthy individuals.  Then they set the RDA to meet the requirements of 99% of all people.  Rarely does going beyond the RDA provide any benefit, and often it can cause harm.  Vitamin E, Calcium, chromium, and vitamin C can be taken in larger than RDA quantities and may provide some benefits.  But, much of it is still under debate.


Being a "Nutrition & Health" major, I can attest that the above is correct (except it is actually 98%).


----------



## Johnnny (Aug 23, 2004)

clintz28



> Heh, that's scary that a pharmacist said that.
> 
> 
> Yeah, nutritonal needs of athletes is a relatively new area of research. Nothing is concrete yet.



Yeah it is scary that a pharmacist said that. But he did say that the B vitamins & vitamin C are water soluable so I'll give him that.

Robert DiMaggio



> I take a b-complex twice per day.



You don't find that it's too much?

My doctor told me to only take my B-complex once a day.

He said it's bad if you get too much Niacin (B3) & my complex contains Niacin & Folic Acid (B9).


----------



## Arnold (Aug 23, 2004)

PirateFromHell said:
			
		

> Being a "Nutrition & Health" major, I can attest that the above is correct (except it is actually 98%).



well, I took a diet/nutrition class in college, and yes that is what they will teach you...

however, I am also a certified fitness trainer and sports nutrition specialist thru the ISSA, and they teach you quite a bit differently.

*I choose to believe what I have learned thru the ISSA.*


----------



## Arnold (Aug 23, 2004)

Johnnny said:
			
		

> He said it's bad if you get too much Niacin (B3) & my complex contains Niacin & Folic Acid (B9).



you may want to reconsider taking any diet/nutrition/supplement advice from an MD, unless they are specifically involved in sports science.


----------



## Pirate! (Aug 23, 2004)

Robert DiMaggio said:
			
		

> I am also a sports nutrition specialist thru the ISSA, and they teach you quite a bit differently.
> 
> *I choose to believe what I have learned thru the ISSA.*


That is interesting. I was just wondering about this as I was considering getting my SPN from ISSA. I was thinking it might not be worth my money since my degree plan at The University of Texas includes about 40 hrs of nutrition classes and labs. I have also been evaluating how well I could apply the knowledge and credentials to a career. Certification aside, do you feel you learned enough to make the SPN worth it simply for personal enrichment?


----------



## LAM (Aug 23, 2004)

Robert DiMaggio said:
			
		

> yes, they can be toxic, but please do not go by the RDA, that is a joke.



unfortunately the majority of people do not understand that athletes are not "normal" people.  our bodies function at optimum levels and require more nutrients than does the sedentary individual...


----------



## redspy (Aug 23, 2004)

PirateFromHell said:
			
		

> Being a "Nutrition & Health" major, I can attest that the above is correct (except it is actually 98%).


 Pirate, just out of interest what are the assumptions in the RDA regarding rigorous physical exercise?  Surely intense workouts and the associated sweating, muscle micro-trauma and other stress factors must influence the RDA?


----------



## ClintZ28 (Aug 23, 2004)

I just completed a nutrition course at UT of Austin.  NTR 311 through correspondence.  It was a  lot of work, but I learned a great deal.


----------



## Pirate! (Aug 23, 2004)

RDA's are established to meet the needs of 98% of healthy people. If one is not healthy or is a 2 percenter, their needs may be higher. Athletes are factored in. Since B vitamins are an important element of the various processes involving energy production and transfer, the needs of someone athletic will be higher than the needs of someone sedentary. However, the RDA isn't designed for "normal" people, but for most everyone (98%), including bodybuilders and marathoners, etc.


----------



## Pirate! (Aug 23, 2004)

ClintZ28 said:
			
		

> I just completed a nutrition course at UT of Austin.  NTR 311 through correspondence.  It was a  lot of work, but I learned a great deal.


I took that course with the NTR 107 lab. I kept my text because it is a great source of info.


----------



## Arnold (Aug 23, 2004)

PirateFromHell said:
			
		

> That is interesting. I was just wondering about this as I was considering getting my SPN from ISSA. I was thinking it might not be worth my money since my degree plan at The University of Texas includes about 40 hrs of nutrition classes and labs. I have also been evaluating how well I could apply the knowledge and credentials to a career. Certification aside, do you feel you learned enough to make the SPN worth it simply for personal enrichment?



How would I know when I have not gone thru 40hrs of college nutrition courses.


----------



## Pirate! (Aug 23, 2004)

redspy said:
			
		

> Pirate, just out of interest what are the assumptions in the RDA regarding rigorous physical exercise?  Surely intense workouts and the associated sweating, muscle micro-trauma and other stress factors must influence the RDA?


I'm not sure exactly what the assumptions are, just that they factor in everyone in the population with consideration of the types and intensity of physical exercise (or lack of exercise). Most studies are done through universities across the world. Why people tend to think that university scientists are not familiar with athletics, or have simply ignored it in their studies, is an anomaly.


----------



## Pirate! (Aug 23, 2004)

Robert DiMaggio said:
			
		

> How would I know when I have not gone thru 40hrs of college nutrition courses.


I am just asking if you personally are happy with the education you received from your SPN. BTW, I have a long way to go to finish my degree, so my knowlege is just based on my education thus far.


----------



## Arnold (Aug 23, 2004)

PirateFromHell said:
			
		

> I am just asking if you personally are happy with the education you received from your SPN.



Yes, I highly recommend the ISSA CFT and SPN.  

If you do the CFT course you *have* to go to the seminar taught by Tom Platz.


----------



## Pirate! (Aug 23, 2004)

Robert DiMaggio said:
			
		

> Yes, I highly recommend the ISSA CFT and SPN.
> 
> If you do the CFT course you *have* to go to the seminar taught by Tom Platz.


----------



## Johnnny (Aug 23, 2004)

This is all helpful information, but I'm still curious whether you're deficient or not, how import is a Bvitamin complex containing all b vitamins including nicacin & folic acid for muscle growth/recovery, & strength/size?


----------



## Pirate! (Aug 23, 2004)

It is not necessary if you have a balanced diet. If you don't get sufficient B vitamins, folic acid, and niacin from your diet than a supplement could be beneficial. Taking more than your body needs provides no benefits at all. A B-vitamin complex should not be necessary. Examine your diet.


----------



## Arnold (Aug 23, 2004)

PirateFromHell said:
			
		

> It is not necessary if you have a balanced diet. If you don't get sufficient B vitamins, folic acid, and niacin from your diet than a supplement could be beneficial. Taking more than your body needs provides no benefits at all. A B-vitamin complex should not be necessary. Examine your diet.



completely disagree with that "balanced diet" reasoning.

with the way we mass produce food and crop there is no way you can get adequate vitamins and minerals from diet alone, especially if you're athletic.


----------



## redspy (Aug 23, 2004)

Robert DiMaggio said:
			
		

> completely disagree with that "balanced diet" reasoning.
> 
> with the way we mass produce food and crop there is no way you can get adequate vitamins and minerals from diet alone, especially if you're athletic.


 I'm caught in the middle of the arguments either way so I take a multi for 'insurance'.


----------



## LAM (Aug 23, 2004)

Robert DiMaggio said:
			
		

> completely disagree with that "balanced diet" reasoning.
> 
> with the way we mass produce food and crop there is no way you can get adequate vitamins and minerals from diet alone, especially if you're athletic.



ditto...

tracking my diet on fitday.com several years ago provided me with all of the proof that a healthy diet is not sufficient for providing the neccessary vitamins and minerals to satisfy the RDA.


----------



## Arnold (Aug 23, 2004)

LAM said:
			
		

> tracking my diet on fitday.com several years ago provided me with all of the proof that a healthy diet is not sufficient for providing the neccessary vitamins and minerals to satisfy the RDA.



not only that but the RDA is insufficuent for anyone that engages in any type of physical activity.


----------



## Pirate! (Aug 23, 2004)

Well, the RDAs are determined based on everyone in the population, and despite what many believe they consider physically active people part of the population. I agree that it is hard to meet all the RDAs with food. That is why I take a multi-vitamin and suggest that others do the same. Contrary to popular belief, athletes tend to get more vitamins, minerals, and phytochemicals from their diet in general (because they eat more) than do people who are not physically active. For that reason, athletes tend to have less deficiencies then sedentary people, irrespective of supplementation. Also contrary to popular belief, energy expenditure (or body size) is not directly correlated with vitamin and mineral needs. That is to say that a person who burns 5000 calories a day (or weighs 300 lbs) doesn't need twice as much as someone who burns 2500 calories a day (or weighs 150 lbs). There are opinions & there is science. The most extensive and up to date research is what the RDAs are based on. Everyone will always have their own opinions, even if it conflicts with science. Unfortunately, bodybuilder lore has a history of perpetuating many false truths that contradict science.


----------



## Pirate! (Aug 23, 2004)

Robert DiMaggio said:
			
		

> not only that but the RDA is insufficuent for anyone that engages in any type of physical activity.


I disagree, as does almost every dietitian in the civilized world.


----------



## Arnold (Aug 23, 2004)

the RDA's are based more on survival and disease prevention, not optimal health.


----------



## Pirate! (Aug 23, 2004)

Untrue. "Current revisions maintain the original goal of protecting against nutrient deficiencies, but given the abundance of research now linking diet and health, that goal has been broadened to include supporting optimal activities within the body and preventing chronic diseases as well." (Understanding Nutrition. Whitney & Ross. 2002)
Official government site: http://www.nal.usda.gov/fnic/etext/000105.html


----------



## Pepper (Aug 23, 2004)

I don't think I have ever seen someone defend the RDA on this site before. Next someone will be defending the food pyramid..


----------



## LAM (Aug 23, 2004)

PirateFromHell said:
			
		

> I disagree, as does almost every dietitian in the civilized world.



95% of the dietitians I have seen are fat fucks...


----------



## Johnnny (Aug 23, 2004)

Robert DiMaggio



> completely disagree with that "balanced diet" reasoning.
> 
> with the way we mass produce food and crop there is no way you can get adequate vitamins and minerals from diet alone, especially if you're athletic.




I agree with this statement. As I have a balanced diet of plennnnty of protein, fruits, vegatables, banannas & water & since I've started this B complex I feel much more energetic & stronger.

Which brings me to my next question. I'm beginning to think that a B vitamin complex along with food is very important for strength & muscle building/recovery.

Does anyone else feel this way about a b vitamin complex?


----------



## redspy (Aug 23, 2004)

> I'm beginning to think that a B vitamin complex along with *food* is very important for strength & muscle building/recovery.


 Ya think?

 Don't get too hung up on B complex, it's just a chemical catalyst like all other vitamins.  Just maintain a balanced diet, add some basic supplementation and forget about it.


----------



## Pirate! (Aug 23, 2004)

To each, his own. I will put my faith in scientific research over bodybuilder lore any day. Everyone should remember that RDAs are "recommended", not absolute values that apply to everyone's needs. I'm sure there are plenty of fat dietitians, just as there are doctors that drink and smoke. It doesn't mean that they don't know better. It is this idea that because some guy is ripped, everything he says about diet and exercise must be right that causes ignorance to perpetuate itself. People still believe in shit that has been passed down for decades in the gym despite truck loads of contradictory evidence. I don't want to "split hairs" with you guys. I appreciate the advice you have given me on this forum, and I hope that will continue. I feel obligated to other readers to let them know what the widely accepted truth is concerning RDAs. No study has ever conclusively shown there to be any performance benefit to taking extra vitamins when there is no pre-existing deficiency. But, a physically active person could benefit from higher levels of some vitamins than a sedentary; vitamin E being a good example. There are health benefits due to its role as an anti-oxidant in athletes. the RDAs are established with a "margin of safety" that takes into consideration the range of people's needs due to all known factors (including activity level). The more the merrier does not apply to vitamins, though. If your vitamin intake through food and supplements together is sufficient, there is no benefit to taking more. A B-Complex usually has way more than you need. B-Vitamins are as cheap as dirt, so they load them down. People see 1200% RDA and think there must be some extra benefit. There may be, but it has yet to be proved. In fact, there is more science that backs of the placebo effect.


----------



## LAM (Aug 23, 2004)

PirateFromHell said:
			
		

> To each, his own. I will put my faith in scientific research over bodybuilder lore any day. Everyone should remember that RDAs are "recommended", not absolute values that apply to everyone's needs. I'm sure there are plenty of fat dietitians, just as there are doctors that drink and smoke. It doesn't mean that they don't know better. It is this idea that because some guy is ripped, everything he says about diet and exercise must be right that causes ignorance to perpetuate itself. People still believe in shit that has been passed down for decades in the gym despite truck loads of contradictory evidence. I don't want to "split hairs" with you guys. I appreciate the advice you have given me on this forum, and I hope that will continue. I feel obligated to other readers to let them know what the widely accepted truth is concerning RDAs. No study has ever conclusively shown there to be any performance benefit to taking extra vitamins when there is no pre-existing deficiency. But, a physically active person could benefit from higher levels of some vitamins than a sedentary; vitamin E being a good example. There are health benefits due to its role as an anti-oxidant in athletes. the RDAs are established with a "margin of safety" that takes into consideration the range of people's needs due to all known factors (including activity level). The more the merrier does not apply to vitamins, though. If your vitamin intake through food and supplements together is sufficient, there is no benefit to taking more. A B-Complex usually has way more than you need. B-Vitamins are as cheap as dirt, so they load them down. People see 1200% RDA and think there must be some extra benefit. There may be, but it has yet to be proved. In fact, there is more science that backs of the placebo effect.



so by "your" logic and science a 100 lb woman who doesn't exercise needs only slightly lower amounts of vitamins and minerals as a 300 lb body builder ? 

and where do you think the majority of bb info is dereived from ? current medical studies performed on athletes...


----------



## Pirate! (Aug 23, 2004)

I was saying there is not a direct corelation. For example, a 300 lbs man doesn't have 3 times the vitamin needs of a 100 lb. man. The effectiveness of supplementation can be determined by scientific studies done on athletes or amateur studies done on athletes. You are right, most bb info comes from amateur studies (Frank says he gained 10 lbs by taking more B-vitamins).


----------



## Monolith (Aug 23, 2004)

good antioxidant.  take it post w/o w/ some nac.


----------



## Vieope (Aug 23, 2004)

_Vitamins are good for you, doesn´t matter why, so you should take them!_


----------



## Johnnny (Aug 23, 2004)

redspy



> Ya think?
> 
> Don't get too hung up on B complex, it's just a chemical catalyst like all other vitamins. Just maintain a balanced diet, add some basic supplementation and forget about it.



I feel much better since I've started up with my B complex.

Monolith

Yeah anti-oxidants are very good as well. CLA is a good one in fact.


----------



## LAM (Aug 24, 2004)

PirateFromHell said:
			
		

> You are right, most bb info comes from amateur studies (Frank says he gained 10 lbs by taking more B-vitamins).



your are 100% incorrect...

it is great that you are in school and a Nutrition major PirateFromHell but reading a couple of books does not automatically make you an expert in supplementation and human performance...you have a lot to learn about the nutritional needs of athletes esepecially those involved in bb'ing...


----------



## ClintZ28 (Aug 24, 2004)

I agree with everything PirateHell has been saying.  It is exactly the same stuff in my textbook.  It may be the same one since we attend the same University!  haha


----------



## Arnold (Aug 24, 2004)

ClintZ28 said:
			
		

> I agree with everything PirateHell has been saying.  It is exactly the same stuff in my textbook.



and we all know that if it's in print it must be true.


----------



## Johnnny (Aug 24, 2004)

Now don't get me wrong as I belief there are many important & well written books out there, but you can't always belief books especially university books.

The books we had in university were garbage.

The books that I believe in & trust more are books written by ppl themselves who've experienced everything first hand themselves in regards to training, dieting, steroids & supplements & all.

As you're dealing with ppl who have first hand knowledge.

Put it this way, I'd trust a book written by Robert DiMaggio or Arnold Schwarzenegger than by some scientist who's never lifted a barbell in his/her life or eaten a healthy meal in his/her life.

Would you trust 300lb scientist who's never worked out, dieted or ever lifted a barbell?

Certainly not.


----------



## ClintZ28 (Aug 24, 2004)

Well, this was a pretty good debate.


----------



## Johnnny (Aug 24, 2004)

Back to topic at hand I'm guessing that many of you feel that a B vitamin complex is very important in regards to muscle growth & strength?


----------



## LAM (Aug 24, 2004)

it is definetly part of the puzzle...


----------



## Johnnny (Aug 24, 2004)

LAM



> it is definetly part of the puzzle...



I'm guessing it's probably almost as important as protein is.


----------



## Pirate! (Aug 24, 2004)

LAM said:
			
		

> your are 100% incorrect...
> 
> it is great that you are in school and a Nutrition major PirateFromHell but reading a couple of books does not automatically make you an expert in supplementation and human performance...you have a lot to learn about the nutritional needs of athletes esepecially those involved in bb'ing...


I totally agree. I look forward to learning more from school, my personal experiences, and the experiences others share with me.


----------



## redspy (Aug 24, 2004)

Johnnny said:
			
		

> Put it this way, I'd trust a book written by Robert DiMaggio or Arnold Schwarzenegger than by some scientist who's never lifted a barbell in his/her life or eaten a healthy meal in his/her life.
> 
> Would you trust 300lb scientist who's never worked out, dieted or ever lifted a barbell?
> 
> Certainly not.


The individual's physical characteristics bear no relationship to the scientific studies they develop. I'd rather read articles/books written by a couple of PhDs in a relevant field. All too often we see 'supplement reviews' by bodybuilders who say things like "yeah, this product definitely increases my Testosterone levels and my strength has increased dramatically". Where's the control group? Where's the double-blind component attempting to measure placebo affect? Is this consistent across many individuals? Where are the blood tests to prove changes in hormone levels? How strong is the causality in the correlation?



Bodybuilding is a sport dominated by science. We are striving to overcome the limitations of our genetics and good science plays a major part to getting there. Don't dismiss science because it's not what you want to hear or because the scientist in question is a lard-ass. I'm not saying science has all the answers, of course it doesn't. 

Just because Mr Olympia looks great doesn't mean he's the greatest source of bodybuilding knowledge. It's a combination of genetics, quality training, good nutrition, and oh yeah, 2g of juice every week.


----------



## Arnold (Aug 24, 2004)

let's not forget that it was bodybuilders that figured out how well steroids worked long before scientists.


----------



## redspy (Aug 24, 2004)

Robert DiMaggio said:
			
		

> let's not forget that it was bodybuilders that figured out how well steroids worked long before scientists.


I think scientists in the Germany military might disagree with that.  They administered steroids to boost performance of soldiers and to improve the health of POWs.


----------



## Arnold (Aug 24, 2004)

and wasn't it up until recently that the medical community changed their views and now say that weight training is healthy?


----------



## redspy (Aug 24, 2004)

Robert DiMaggio said:
			
		

> and wasn't it up until recently that the medical community changed their views and now say that weight training is healthy?


   I guess up until recently they didn't have confidence in the studies out there.  A good scientist won't make the leap until the data is very persuasive and consistent.  There's nothing wrong with a healthy dose of skepticism though.

 Although I generally trust in science I agree there's conflicting information at times, e.g. one week Vitamin E cures cancer and the week after another study says it causes it (a slight exaggeration of course, but you know what I mean).  Either way, I believe our progress is assisted by science, not hindered.


----------



## Johnnny (Aug 29, 2004)

One thing I've noticed since I started my B vitamin complex once a day is that the involuntary upper eye lid twitch stopped.

I started to develop an involuntary upper eye lid at the beginning of July.

I never had this ever in my life so I went to the doctor & he said it was b/c of fatigue, nervousness & stress but I sleep 7-9hrs a night average which is enough sleep for anyone & my stress level hasn't increased or decreased more than normal.

Since I started my B vitamin about a week ago, this eye lid twitch stopped?

Could this be b/c of my B vitamin? Or just coincedence?


----------

