Layne Norton is a Scientist-Bodybuilder and I enjoy his analytical approach. One subject that has interested me in the past year is supplements. There are endless claims for a bunch of different ones and cutting through the BS can be tricky.
One of those ones that seems to have some press, attention, and controversy is HMB. HMB (beta-hydroxy-beta-methylbutyrate) is a metabolite of leucine, and leucine is the most effective of the amino acids for triggering muscle growth. So, many have jumped to the conclusion that HMB is therefor an effective supplement for triggering muscle growth. However, many studies have found that HMB is only mildly effective as a muscle growth supplement and more effective as an anti-catabolic one.
Last year, some studies made some seemingly fantastical claims about HMB indicating that it was more effective at building muscle than anabolic steroids.
This is not easy for me to post. I am actually on a paper with the lab in question and I was involved in discussions with this lab about their research from 2010-2012. However, I began to have questions about their results and at a certain point, it is no longer sufficient to rely on your degree or behind a scientific publication. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence