Quote:
Originally Posted by hackskii  This dude is pushing poison. |
While I appreciate the depth of conversation here, I must respectfully disagree with the accusation that I am “Pushing Poison”. Indeed, arachidonic acid offers no value to a sedentary population, which commonly suffers from metabolic syndrome or low-grade systemic inflammation. In fact, it can be used here by the body to increase the inflammatory response. This is something an inactive sedentary person has no need or desire for.
On the other hand, one cannot forget that AA is vital to the muscle building process. Furthermore, regular exercise depletes AA stores in muscle tissue. So the statement that people eat plenty is not entirely true. Regular sedentary people in Western nations usually eat enough AA, but bodybuilders are often deficient due to heavy training. This means that with less available AA, training adaptations are harder to produce, and results slow or stagnate.
I think you need to look at the Baylor study and the effect AA + training had on IL-6, a central regulator of inflammation, before jumping to any conclusions. Resting levels of IL-6 were actually decreased in the supplemented group, not increased. We believe this is caused by AA improving insulin sensitivity in skeletal muscle (by improving the localized training response), which in turn helps better control insulin. This in turn is linked to lower, not higher, systemic inflammation.
Furthermore, one cannot exclude the large volume of safety data on the use of AA. Over and over again, the supplementation of 1.5grams per day or less has been shown to have absolutely no effect on any relevant marker of health. In doses up to 2grams per day (give or take based on weight) the U.S. FDA has even granted Generally Recognized As Safe (GRAS) status on AA. No other serious muscle-building supplement, not even creatine, has ever been granted such safety approval.