Link for reference:
So after reading the article from the link above by Dr Layne Norton, a few thoughts came in to my mind. Though this may sound a little silly or redundant, I'm just curious to know out of interest, despite knowing nobody may really, actually do such a thing.
So here it is, hypothetically speaking, lets just say we take an average bodybuilder (bulking with a caloric surplus) who consumes 200-300g of protein from shakes and food in his macros per day. That base protein itself contains roughly 800-1200 calories [200-300g x4 cals per g of protein].
What happens if, for a weird random reason or probably no reason, just theoretically or hypothetically speaking, he decides to switch all his sources of protein from shakes and food to just bcaa supplements with complete EAA's and other NEAA's and considering other macros remains the same.
Due to different protein and bcaa sources and composition, timing and duration of protein synthesis may vary, but he decides to overcome that by consuming enough bcaa's to reach the 3.2g of leucine or the sufficient needed amount to stimulate protein synthesis at proper planned and calculated timings to keep a constant synthesis going as optimal as possible.
Due to the change from 'calorie containing' protein food to almost 'no calorie' bcaa supplements, his total daily caloric content would change to a decrease of around 800-1200 calories, despite everything remains the same from macros taken. If that decrease causes a caloric deficit, would he still be able to gain good optimal lean mass? Or lean out while gaining mass? Or probably turn into a so called "cutting phase" and start losing weight? I'm aware that calories are just units to measure heat expenditure or energy expenditure, but I'm just wondering how that variable would make a difference?
Lets say you need 3.2g of leucine to activate protein synthesis, what difference would any more amounts on top of that make? Increased level of synthesis? Or duration perhaps?