PDA

View Full Version : Drinking Protein Shake DURING Training.



Rob of Oz
11-07-2009, 11:27 PM
Just want to get peoples thoughts on this. I read somewhere that you can drink a shake during training, especially if the training is very intense and drink another one as normal, post workout...
I considered doing this because I need about the calories from that shake to get me to my 4000cal/day.
Any ideas/suggestions.
All advise greatly appreciated!!
Cheers.

VikingWarlord
11-08-2009, 07:56 AM
Before, during, and after training, you want a quick digesting carbohydrate plus protein with high bioavailability...if you're going that route.

The recommendations are usually 2:1, 3:1, or sometimes 4:1 carb:protein. I always used 3:1 using powdered Powerade since it's maltodextrin. Some people like using dextrose instead, some like doing a combination of both.

CainMcCloud
11-08-2009, 10:17 AM
I drink a whey shake for breakfast, then one pre-workout. Not sure if that's the most effective way, but it's how I do it. I have always heard 1 before, and 1 after, not sure.

SkyeD
11-08-2009, 10:36 AM
I don't reccomended drinking a shake while traning or before. Protein takes the longest to break down and absorb, especially if your working out. 65% approx of your blood supply is needed for digestion. If your working out your unable to digest as efficently.

Mercuryblade
11-09-2009, 10:11 AM
65% approx of your blood supply is needed for digestion.

Would this number vary considerably depending on the size and nutrient make-up of the meal?

dynamo
11-09-2009, 10:29 AM
I don't reccomended drinking a shake while traning or before. Protein takes the longest to break down and absorb, especially if your working out. 65% approx of your blood supply is needed for digestion. If your working out your unable to digest as efficently.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7315967?ordinalpos=1&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_SingleItemSupl.Pubmed_Discovery_RA&linkpos=3&log$=relatedarticles&logdbfrom=pubmed

thats what i found out about new born lambs...I seriously doubt anyone is using 65% of their blood supply to digest food. If anything, I would suspect doing strenuous activity after eating would only increase nutrient uptake since the efficiency of o2 extraction would be increased, and while you have your GI tract using more oxygen compared to fasting periods lifting weights is a primarily an anaerobic activity(not using much o2), so coupling the increased heart rate (therefore blood flow) from lifting weights with the increased o2 uptake by the GI tract I would venture to guess that digestion is probably optimized by drinking a protein shake while lifting. Not to mention the maximum o2 uptake by the GI tract doesn't happen until 1 hour after consumption if you were to start drinking your shake right when you lift you'll be done lifting before that hour is up in most cases, and you would probably alter the o2 uptake profile to actually digest your food faster and more effectively as a result of the overall increase in blood flow. If you're a lamb between 9-15 days old anyway. In conclusion, I would say the ideal time to drink your protein is during your workout, or even before, as opposed to the usual post work out.

edit: i would actually say, based on this pubmed entry that an hour before you work out is probably the best time to have your periworkout shake that way the increased blood flow from lifting is directly supporting nutrient uptake and not catalysis and passage of the shake from the stomach to the intestine. Of course just getting some food in you is better than nothing at all and I usually dont give two ****s about when I have my PWO shake. I just shoot for daily protein intake and it happens to be convenient to drink a shake while im walking out of the gym most days.

SkyeD
11-09-2009, 10:44 AM
Nice find my brother but that sounds a bit in accurate. Depending on what you consume mercury yes it will vary but protein out of the 3 macros is the third hardest to digest. The protein has to be denatured before transported to the small intestine than a large amount of metobolic water is needed to metabolize it. It sits in your stomach for your workout unless your workout is longer than 2 hrs. Since a large amount of blood is needed for digestion and and working out its going to supply your mucsles for fight or flight response. Most people feel tired after a high protein meal like on thanks giving because of the large blood supply needed. This is also why a lion will eat a nd than go take a nap. Carbs on the other hand will rocket your energy upward because there digested so quickly

SkyeD
11-09-2009, 10:56 AM
Dynamo your edit is correct. Results show a pre workout meal of high protein moderate fat and moderate carbs is best. A post workout should be low protein high carb moderate fat to restore your atp and glycogen stores after the brutal beating. I actually just did a chapter on this in my nutrition class. If you guys want the read I can scan the chapter. Has some pretty neat things to wrap your mind around

dynamo
11-09-2009, 12:10 PM
Dynamo your edit is correct. Results show a pre workout meal of high protein moderate fat and moderate carbs is best. A post workout should be low protein high carb moderate fat to restore your atp and glycogen stores after the brutal beating. I actually just did a chapter on this in my nutrition class. If you guys want the read I can scan the chapter. Has some pretty neat things to wrap your mind around

Yeah that'd be cool to see. You also have to realize we're talking protein shake here alot of the work is done fo our bodies as we don't actually need to break down any connective tissue we only need to cleave amino acids for individual uptake. I have a test in 20 minutes but I'll rape you with math later tonight on my thoughts of uptake as it pertains to long chains of AAs.

vdizenzo
11-09-2009, 05:58 PM
I get about 15 grams in during my workout. It's part of the nutrient timing protocol I follow.

bodyforum1
11-11-2009, 10:16 AM
I would suggest taking your protein shakes as soon as possible after a weight training session. That will build muscle mass more effectively. After weight training, your muscles are starving for protein

Sean S
11-11-2009, 10:31 AM
Based on the latest research as best I can tell it seems optimal to have some sort of protein or essential amino acid intake before, during, and after training. This may be more important for those training in a "fasted" state. A meal containing protein 2-3 hours before you train will likely have your blood levels of amino acids high already, so protein intake before and during training may be less important. Keep in mind most of the research done in this area involve fasted subjects simply because they need to standardize and control the conditions as much as possible.
Of course most people can't eat a truckload of food right before or during a tough training session. Modest doses of easy to digest protein before or during training shouldn't be problem for most people, but there is likely some individual tolerance involved here as well. Personally I would use primarily amino acid mixtures immediately before and during training to minimize the digestive load and decrease the likelihood of stomach upset.

Holto
11-11-2009, 10:19 PM
I've used just about every protocol over the years and now I'm all about getting it before. 25g's of whey and about 60g's of carbs. Right before the session. Then I have amino's entering my blood by the time the session is over. Even though significant blood is diverted away from the hepatic circulation, your body is still capable of digestion.

Judas
11-12-2009, 06:08 AM
I just keep it simple... a protein "meal" ov some kinda every 2-3 hours. I eat slow-digesting carbs before a workout, with some meat if i can kind some. My workouts are long... they average 3-5 hours long, so i end up downing a smaller shake (30gr) about halfway though, then a big one after my PWO shake. Then i go home and eat a massive meal. If my workouts were only 2 hours or less i wouldn't bother with the intra-workout shake.

J.C.
11-12-2009, 02:56 PM
My workouts are long... they average 3-5 hours long.

Why are they so long? You've mentioned you train the Olympic lifts. Are you competing?

Judas
11-15-2009, 06:22 AM
Why are they so long? You've mentioned you train the Olympic lifts. Are you competing?

I just make better gains that way. I've heard it all, and i've listened to others and tried shorter sessions... i just do better this way, always have. Having a LOT ov energy helps...

What i would LIKE to do... and really SHOULD be doing... is doing two sessions a day, shorter ones, instead ov one big brutal one. But i live too far from the gym, have no money and well, there are a handful ov reasons... It pisses me off. I think my lifting would go to a new level with two sessions a day.

What can a say? i just like to lift. I train 6 days a week too.

And no. I never did (or will) in powerlifting, and i'm still not sure about weightlifting. I might someday. If i could lift at CPU (powerlifting) nationals i might compete in powerlifting... but i'll never compete locally.

given'er
11-15-2009, 09:06 AM
3-5 hr sessions 6 days a week? really:confused: I really enjoy working out too but to spend that much time lifting seems a little excessive. You may actually be limiting your gains. I guess if it works for you go for it. I can't imagine where I would find the time.

VikingWarlord
11-15-2009, 09:40 AM
I guess if it works for you go for it.

The universal truth.


I can't imagine where I would find the time.

I think a lot of people are in this group.

cichlidfort
11-15-2009, 12:41 PM
I don't understand why people get so caught up with protein shakes. Your body can only convert so much protein during a given time period and the rest is stored as fat. Personally, eating a lean chicken breast and some pasta before or after your workout is much better for you than a shake since it's natural and more nutrient dense. Supplements do very little and can be toxic if too much is taken in a given time period. Putting unknown powdery forms in your body that isn't FDA approved isn't my idea of health.

Mercuryblade
11-15-2009, 01:42 PM
I don't understand why people get so caught up with protein shakes. You're body can only convert so much protein during a given time period and the rest is stored as fat. Personally, eating a lean chicken breast and some pasta before or after your workout is much better for you than a shake since it's natural and more nutrient dense. Supplements do very little and can be toxic if too much is taken in a given time period. Putting unknown powdery forms in your body that isn't FDA approved isn't my idea of health.

I wasn't aware protein powders aren't natural or nutrient dense.

J.C.
11-15-2009, 02:15 PM
I don't understand why people get so caught up with protein shakes. You're body can only convert so much protein during a given time period and the rest is stored as fat. Personally, eating a lean chicken breast and some pasta before or after your workout is much better for you than a shake since it's natural and more nutrient dense. Supplements do very little and can be toxic if too much is taken in a given time period. Putting unknown powdery forms in your body that isn't FDA approved isn't my idea of health.

There are several things wrong with this statement, but you'll learn more if you go and do the research yourself. I was also unaware that protein powder (ie powdered forms of natural food; powdered egg albumin, powdered whey...) were unapproved by the FDA. I know the FDA are idiots but you'd think they'd have noticed all those powders being sold.

cichlidfort
11-15-2009, 02:29 PM
There are several things wrong with this statement, but you'll learn more if you go and do the research yourself. I was also unaware that protein powder (ie powdered forms of natural food; powdered egg albumin, powdered whey...) were unapproved by the FDA. I know the FDA are idiots but you'd think they'd have noticed all those powders being sold.

Ok what is incorrect with what I said? If something is wrong then point it out instead of saying "do the research yourself."

Sure, some powders have natural substances but many of the protein powders that promise you "increased muscle mass" and "strength" have all type of unknown substances. Calling the FDA idiots to prove your point shows your ignorance and lack of knowledge on the subject.

given'er
11-15-2009, 03:19 PM
I'm still amazed at how often this comes up lol. I think that any sentence or statment on this form that starts with "the body can only process" or "the body can only convert" should be automatically deleted. LOL . Nobody can agree on it anyway.

tom183
11-15-2009, 03:34 PM
I don't understand why people get so caught up with protein shakes. You're body can only convert so much protein during a given time period and the rest is stored as fat. Personally, eating a lean chicken breast and some pasta before or after your workout is much better for you than a shake since it's natural and more nutrient dense. Supplements do very little and can be toxic if too much is taken in a given time period. Putting unknown powdery forms in your body that isn't FDA approved isn't my idea of health.

More nutrient dense??

That (bolded) statement is very very vague and does little to support your argument. Heck, too much water, the very element that gives life, can kill if you take too much.

SkyeD
11-15-2009, 03:55 PM
Yes. Protein supplements can be bad as pointed out so can water in
to much of an excess. if the lifter is cautious, it will not be an issue.
Most documented problems due to protein consumption is cuped
with dehydration. I also do not agree with digesting something that
is not FDA approved. Its not right for me, but I can't make that decision
for someone else and either can you. So in essance all you can do
is suggest to one to take more water in while supplementing for protein.
Technically your body does not know the difference between casein protein
and the natrual source its found in, or any protein for that matter. Your body
digests it and transports it the same exact way. Most people do not
need the extra protein via supplement. My last fit day chart I ate 146g of protein
with no supplementation and was un aware. If I had added a shake it would have
boosted it to 220 which yes is un necessary and can cause the issues outlined above in
SOME individuals. So I would go do a little bit more reading before making
such a blanket claim bud.

VikingWarlord
11-15-2009, 04:48 PM
I wasn't aware protein powders aren't natural or nutrient dense.

I would imagine that something being more nutrient dense would cause more of the problem if this was for real.

For the poster to whom this was addressed: if more protein is bad, then something being more nutrient dense means there are MORE NUTRIENTS. Thus, something being more nutrient dense would mean that would be the less ideal situation since, according to you, it all gets stored as fat anyway.

Please stop posting about things you don't understand.


Nobody can agree on it anyway.

Physiologically, there must be a limit. The problem is that said limit is impossible to measure since it's going to be different for every person.

The "too much protein can kill you" **** is ridiculous. I'm not aware of anyone spouting this nonsense that has ever provided a single documented case where this is true, let alone a statistically significant number of them. They might be out there but I don't care enough to look and the burden of proof isn't on me anyway.

SkyeD
11-15-2009, 06:04 PM
^^ I had a problem with protein but it was linked to other issues. People for the most part will not be affected unless they have a underlying condition. For me it was an electrolyte balance that has been resolved. If I supplemented again prob wouldn't be a issue at all.

cichlidfort
11-16-2009, 03:54 PM
I would imagine that something being more nutrient dense would cause more of the problem if this was for real.

For the poster to whom this was addressed: if more protein is bad, then something being more nutrient dense means there are MORE NUTRIENTS. Thus, something being more nutrient dense would mean that would be the less ideal situation since, according to you, it all gets stored as fat anyway.

Please stop posting about things you don't understand.





Gram for gram, ounch for ounce and bite for bite, foods with a high nutrient density such as chicken, and fish deliver more nutrients than protein powders.

Because the body builds muscle protein from amino acids, many athletes take protein powders with the false hope of stimulating muscle growth. Muscle work builds muscle however protein supplements DO NOT and athletes do not need them. Taking protein supplements does not improve athletic performance. Protein powders supply amino acids to the body, but natures protein sources-lean meat, milk, eggs and legumes supply all these amino acids and more...hence nutrient density.

Whey protein is a particulary popular powder among athletes hoping to achieve greater muscle gains. A waste product of cheese manufacturing, whey protein is a common indgredient in many low-cost protein powders. When combined with strength training, whey supplements may increase protein sythesis slightly, but they do not seem to enhance athletic performance. To build stronger muscles, athletes need to consume food with adequate energy and protein to support the weight-training work that does increase muscle mass. Those who still think they need more whey should pour a glass of milk. For the record, one cup provides 1.5 grams of whey.

Purified protein preparations contain none of the other nutrients needed to support the building of muscle, and the protein they supply is not needed by athletes who eat food. It is excess protein, and the body dismantles it and uses it for energy or stores it as body fat. The deamination of excess amino acids places an extra burden on the kidneys to excrete unused nitrogen.

I find it ironic here that when someone goes against the norm of the "benefits of protein powders" the typical bandwagon joins up and becomes real defensive. And to VIKINGWARLORD, maybe you should conduct some research yourself before calling others out that know 10 times the amount of knowledge on understanding Nutrition then you do.

Good day.

SkyeD
11-16-2009, 04:02 PM
^^ very much agreed and what I've been trying to stress to people lol. But they don't listrn

J.C.
11-16-2009, 05:40 PM
You're ignoring variables.

Firstly, yes of course the average person needs less protein. We're not talking average people here. I know that supposedly the body (only) needs 1.5-2.2grams of protein/kg of body-weight. But what if the person is trying to gain mass? Then that person would have to increase all macronutrients, to keep a balanced diet, which would probably increase protein amounts in the process. Besides, a 200lb person using the 2.2g/kg formula - the upper beneficial limit postulated by some medical sources - would still yield 200g of protein. 1kg = 2.2lbs. What if the person weighed over 200? What if the person was trying to be over 200, or 250 or 300 for that matter? Then obviously the amount of protein consumed would increase. Are you saying these guys should stop eating more protein, keep it exactly the same as at a lower body mass and just increase carb and fat. Because that makes no sense.

I broadly agree with the sentiment that lifters get too caught up on protein and protein powders but you're spinning the argument out too far. If you're not too worried about body composition then total calories are going to be far more important. Quick story; I had a friend who was a bouncer at a club, very lean and couldn't gain weight, he finally started gaining when he bought carbohydrate powder instead of protein powder. He needed more total calories, not necessarily more protein, and the carbs helped him get those calories.

Athletes? Who are we talking about here? And in what way won't protein help them, increased performance, increased mass, increased recovery? What exactly? I'm pretty sure that countless athletes have found protein powders to be beneficial in some form. That doesn't mean they're necessary because people coped without them, but to try and say that they are intrinsically worthless, and that the body will for some reason reject protein powder is ludicrous.

FWIW, I don't use even protein powder. I prefer food. But you're still wrong.

SkyeD
11-16-2009, 06:40 PM
^^ your missing the context. Were not arguing that protein in supplement form does not yield any results, were arguing it can be achieved in a halthier more nutrient balanced way through food. The highest rda for protein anyone should recommend is 2.0g. This was disputed by me and sean s who have a solid background on sports nutrition and we settled on that conclusion, and that figure is still higher than what's stated in our nutrition guide handbooks for 2009's RDA. Did you know in most protein pwders 16 amino acids are found. Did you know our body only needs 9 from food sources and in fact manufactures the rest? What their adding to protein supplements is not approved by the FDA or even the USP. Doesn't that make you wonder a little bit? Why do you even think your body needs 150g of protein for muscle synthesis? Protein is fat soliuble and fat solids only need to be replaced in your body every 3 days or so depending on your athletic level. There was a study done that stated 4oz of beef yielded the same restoration results as 8 ounces. This means you could cut your protein in half and still not be effected. I don't reccomend going that low but it proves that even 50g of protein being taken from your diet does not mean anything. Were saying that people who weight under 200 pounds should not be consuming 200 g of protein which we regularly see.

Lones Green
11-16-2009, 06:45 PM
Gram for gram, ounch for ounce and bite for bite, foods with a high nutrient density such as chicken, and fish deliver more nutrients than protein powders.

Because the body builds muscle protein from amino acids, many athletes take protein powders with the false hope of stimulating muscle growth. Muscle work builds muscle however protein supplements DO NOT and athletes do not need them. Taking protein supplements does not improve athletic performance. Protein powders supply amino acids to the body, but natures protein sources-lean meat, milk, eggs and legumes supply all these amino acids and more...hence nutrient density.

Whey protein is a particulary popular powder among athletes hoping to achieve greater muscle gains. A waste product of cheese manufacturing, whey protein is a common indgredient in many low-cost protein powders. When combined with strength training, whey supplements may increase protein sythesis slightly, but they do not seem to enhance athletic performance. To build stronger muscles, athletes need to consume food with adequate energy and protein to support the weight-training work that does increase muscle mass. Those who still think they need more whey should pour a glass of milk. For the record, one cup provides 1.5 grams of whey.

Purified protein preparations contain none of the other nutrients needed to support the building of muscle, and the protein they supply is not needed by athletes who eat food. It is excess protein, and the body dismantles it and uses it for energy or stores it as body fat. The deamination of excess amino acids places an extra burden on the kidneys to excrete unused nitrogen.

I find it ironic here that when someone goes against the norm of the "benefits of protein powders" the typical bandwagon joins up and becomes real defensive. And to VIKINGWARLORD, maybe you should conduct some research yourself before calling others out that know 10 times the amount of knowledge on understanding Nutrition then you do.

Good day.

Please man.

VikingWarlord
11-16-2009, 08:37 PM
Gram for gram, ounch for ounce and bite for bite, foods with a high nutrient density such as chicken, and fish deliver more nutrients than protein powders.

Because the body builds muscle protein from amino acids, many athletes take protein powders with the false hope of stimulating muscle growth. Muscle work builds muscle however protein supplements DO NOT and athletes do not need them. Taking protein supplements does not improve athletic performance. Protein powders supply amino acids to the body, but natures protein sources-lean meat, milk, eggs and legumes supply all these amino acids and more...hence nutrient density.

Whey protein is a particulary popular powder among athletes hoping to achieve greater muscle gains. A waste product of cheese manufacturing, whey protein is a common indgredient in many low-cost protein powders. When combined with strength training, whey supplements may increase protein sythesis slightly, but they do not seem to enhance athletic performance. To build stronger muscles, athletes need to consume food with adequate energy and protein to support the weight-training work that does increase muscle mass. Those who still think they need more whey should pour a glass of milk. For the record, one cup provides 1.5 grams of whey.

Purified protein preparations contain none of the other nutrients needed to support the building of muscle, and the protein they supply is not needed by athletes who eat food. It is excess protein, and the body dismantles it and uses it for energy or stores it as body fat. The deamination of excess amino acids places an extra burden on the kidneys to excrete unused nitrogen.

I find it ironic here that when someone goes against the norm of the "benefits of protein powders" the typical bandwagon joins up and becomes real defensive. And to VIKINGWARLORD, maybe you should conduct some research yourself before calling others out that know 10 times the amount of knowledge on understanding Nutrition then you do.

Good day.

First off, I don't have to qualify myself to you. I've spent a couple of years now studying metabolic physiology and nutrition. Second, you missed my entire point. I'll break down your post one point at a time here.

Grammatical issues aside, your claim is that less is better, as is evidenced here.


You're body can only convert so much protein during a given time period and the rest is stored as fat.

Let's also ignore the fact that "a given time period" is so vague as to be worthless and calls into question more variables than are possible to isolate.

You then go on to say:


Personally, eating a lean chicken breast and some pasta before or after your workout is much better for you than a shake since it's natural and more nutrient dense.

As you said, "more nutrient dense" means it contains MORE nutrients. If you can "only convert so much protein during a given time period and the rest is stored as fat", why would it then be better to consume something that contains more of what you JUST finished saying you can't process without it being stored as fat?

For example, a 4oz chicken breast has 27g of protein. A scoop of whey protein will be between 21-24 usually. These "other nutrients" of which you speak are found in trace amounts AT BEST.

This claim is contradictory. A smaller amount is better but eat real food because it gives you a bigger amount.


Supplements do very little and can be toxic if too much is taken in a given time period. Putting unknown powdery forms in your body that isn't FDA approved isn't my idea of health.

Unknown? You just said what it was. I have a feeling that was just a poor choice of words on your part.

Whey protein is a complete protein. It contains all essential amino acids. What, precisely, is so horribly wrong with it as compared to something else? Please cite current and credible sources. Since you have "10 times the amount of knowledge on understanding Nutrition" (again, very poorly worded) as myself, this should be no problem at all.

The extra stress on the kidneys...well, I've seen studies for and against. Even the ones I've seen for it suggested that drinking enough water mitigated that risk anyway, making it a moot point.

Your argument seems to be entirely based on people that use protein powders as the sole source of nourishment. NO ONE DOES THAT. All the other micro and macronutrients will come from the rest of the diet, ideally from vegetables.

In case blackboard happens to be reading this, THIS is a perfect example of a straw man argument. Exaggerating an opposing position and taking it out of context in order to make it easier to undermine is the very definition of the phrase.

SkyeD
11-16-2009, 09:26 PM
Viking, your first statment aims to convey the point you don't need to qualify
yourself to us. With that said, stop trying to argue your point and direct your
knowledge to another thread where they will take you as a credited source
with no intrest in where your knowledge stems from. Quit wasting your time
not having to qualify yourself cause until you do your arguing points we can't verify
that you have a correct influence on. Enough said.

* goes on to read more nutritional facts from self proclaimed nutritionists and metabolic
researchers*

cichlidfort
11-16-2009, 11:43 PM
First off, I don't have to qualify myself to you. I've spent a couple of years now studying metabolic physiology and nutrition. Second, you missed my entire point. I'll break down your post one point at a time here.

Sorry, but when you say to me "please stop posting things you don't understand" then yes, you DEFINITELY need to qualify yourself.




Let's also ignore the fact that "a given time period" is so vague as to be worthless and calls into question more variables than are possible to isolate.

Exactly my point! Everyone consumes different foods throughout the day at different times. Some people like to spread out their protein intakes throughout the day while others focus on more specific. It's hard to be specific when everyone has different calorie needs. Sure I could be specific if I wanted to talk about myself but my needs probably don't apply to you. I am assuming I am younger, have a different body weight, have different workout goals, and much taller. Then of course my metabolic rate is different. Those are all major factors that come into play in weight gain. That's why I was VAGUE!



As you said, "more nutrient dense" means it contains MORE nutrients. If you can "only convert so much protein during a given time period and the rest is stored as fat", why would it then be better to consume something that contains more of what you JUST finished saying you can't process without it being stored as fat?

No that's not necessarily true. You have your macro and micronutrients. I see the logic in what you're saying but nutrient density refers to as a measure of the nutrients a food provides relative to the energy it provides. The more nutrients and the fewer kcalories, the higher the nutrient density. It's a ratio concept. Understand?



The extra stress on the kidneys...well, I've seen studies for and against. Even the ones I've seen for it suggested that drinking enough water mitigated that risk anyway, making it a moot point.


It's not just a kidney issue; some protein powders have been linked to forms of heart failure and the triggering Thyroid Disease. There are only 9 essential amino acids that your body requires and if you look at some of the ingredients that are on these protein tubs, there are all kinds of stuff that isn't FDA approved. And then the question of whether it affects you long term comes into play. My rule of thumb is, if it didn't grow out of the ground or come from an animal, then stay away from it. I know a lot of these powders help with weight gain but you can STILL gain weight through foods that are more nutrient dense and healthier for you long term.

SkyeD
11-17-2009, 12:12 AM
^^ I like this guy haha. All mine and your information is the same and conciece when reading through our posts. But when someone defends the protein supplement argument stating that it is a benefit over food ever notice how there information differs?

peepingtomcrip
11-17-2009, 12:23 AM
I think it is better to get your protein from natural foods over drinking protein shakes. However, I would kind of compare it to taking a vitamin c pill instead of drinking a big glass of orange juice. As long as you get the protein thats the important thing.

J.C.
11-17-2009, 05:17 AM
SkyeD and cichlidfort,

Don't get too carried away with the whole "we study nutrition and are all-knowing" argument. Its really good to have people with academic knowledge on the board, and its good to have your perspective. Honestly, welcome aboard. :) But you are seriously under-estimating the knowledge of many, many members here. Its a huge mistake to think nobody else knows about these things and simply comes across as very rude.

And NOBODY is saying that protein powder is better than food. You're just making a problem here so that you can argue with people. Its the other things in your post that come across as a bit naive.


Did you know our body only needs 9 from food sources and in fact manufactures the rest?

Yes. Yes I did. I can even name them for you if you want me to. I could then go on to describe certain meal combinations of incomplete proteins which will result in a complete amino acid profile when eaten. I could even go get a book off my shelf and find various references for what each one does if you really want me to.

All I'm saying is; be respectful, and don't take that holier than thou attitude.

If you still have issues with the things in this thread, then I'll go and find some articles written by sports nutritionists who work with strength athletes and flood this thread with copious information regarding protein. You might learn something.

Daniel Roberts
11-17-2009, 05:30 AM
Well said drummer. Zealous, sanctimonious and patronising is not a good combination.

Oh and good posts vikingwarlord.

SkyeD
11-17-2009, 09:52 AM
No one is being holier than thou, as you put it. We believe our ideas forumlated by years of school and practical study. You believe them because a book saidbetter. I once read a fiction book back in grade school about a kid with a lightning bolt scar on his forhead. Do I believe it or do I take my practical knowledge of what I've seen in life and apply it?..... I've been the victum of electrolyte imbalance and tachycardia episodes related to protein supplements so why would I disregard what I have personally experienced. Try and over supplement vs. Eating abundent amount of protein, see which will cause more damage quicker.

Mercuryblade
11-17-2009, 10:15 AM
I've been the victum of electrolyte imbalance and tachycardia episodes related to protein supplements so why would I disregard what I have personally experienced. Try and over supplement vs. Eating abundent amount of protein, see which will cause more damage quicker.

This was more than likely due to additives in the protein substance, not simply because you were getting protein from a powder versus protein from a cut of meat.
I don't quite understand where this vendetta against supplements is coming from, there is no-one in this thread advocating over-supplementation or claiming that powders are better than whole foods.

Can you elaborate on your eloctrolyte imbalance/tachycardia experience and how it related to protein supplementation? I'm not being snarky, I'm actually curious.

Mercuryblade
11-17-2009, 10:48 AM
My rule of thumb is, if it didn't grow out of the ground or come from an animal, then stay away from it. I know a lot of these powders help with weight gain but you can STILL gain weight through foods that are more nutrient dense and healthier for you long term.

Cichlidfort, if this is your stance, that is fine, but you are making over-reaching and generalized claims without any kind of scientific backing. Of course it is advisable to be cautious about supplementation, as there are all kinds of nasty things thrown in lots of the body-building supplements out there, but that doesn't mean all supplements are bad.

I work in full-time in medical research, I can tell you that the doctors I work with advise all kinds of supplementation for their patients. In fact my mother, who is a cancer survivor, took quite a few things in addition to her regular medications per the suggestion of her physician, who would literally have a stack of literature on-hand and show her what the latest research was showing about certain supplements.

This "natural" vs "chemical" rheotoric is getting quite tiring. Just because something is found in nature it does not, in any way, ensure its safety. And just because something was manufactured or processed doesn't mean it's necessarily bad.

SkyeD
11-17-2009, 10:52 AM
^^ to answer your inquiry. Basically what it amounted to is I was consuming about 80g protein a day in supplemental form plus another 100g from food sources. My body began using metabolic water to flush the excess protein. This caused the extra and inner cellular electrolytes to be removed from hemostasis. My heart beat jumped to 156 bpm at resting rate. When I went to the hospital my electrolytes were dangerously low. I was not over supplementing. There are things in supplements that cause this in some individuals but are ruled out because by the time someone ends up in the hospital its allready been flushed or the body has excreeted it and by doing so its cause other problems like tachycardia but sports industry than blames it on other outside sources. I eat about 150 to 180g in protein now daily from food sources. The same I was eating when supplementing and have never agin had that issue. Go figure eh.

Mercuryblade
11-17-2009, 11:10 AM
^^ to answer your inquiry. Basically what it amounted to is I was consuming about 80g protein a day in supplemental form plus another 100g from food sources. My body began using metabolic water to flush the excess protein. This caused the extra and inner cellular electrolytes to be removed from hemostasis. My heart beat jumped to 156 bpm at resting rate. When I went to the hospital my electrolytes were dangerously low. I was not over supplementing. There are things in supplements that cause this in some individuals but are ruled out because by the time someone ends up in the hospital its allready been flushed or the body has excreeted it and by doing so its cause other problems like tachycardia but sports industry than blames it on other outside sources. I eat about 150 to 180g in protein now daily from food sources. The same I was eating when supplementing and have never agin had that issue. Go figure eh.

A few things:
Was there anything else in this protein supplement besides protein?

You said your body was using water to "flush" the excess protein, was there protein in your urine or stool?

What kind of protein was this: whey only? blend? casein?

Where you consuming anything else during this period?

What was the rest of your diet like? Were you taking a multi-vitamin?

How much water were you drinking?

VikingWarlord
11-17-2009, 11:11 AM
Exactly my point! Everyone consumes different foods throughout the day at different times. Some people like to spread out their protein intakes throughout the day while others focus on more specific. It's hard to be specific when everyone has different calorie needs. Sure I could be specific if I wanted to talk about myself but my needs probably don't apply to you. I am assuming I am younger, have a different body weight, have different workout goals, and much taller. Then of course my metabolic rate is different. Those are all major factors that come into play in weight gain. That's why I was VAGUE!

And that vagueness just has no place in the discussion. Since it can't be quantified, it's of no use to anyone.


No that's not necessarily true. You have your macro and micronutrients. I see the logic in what you're saying but nutrient density refers to as a measure of the nutrients a food provides relative to the energy it provides. The more nutrients and the fewer kcalories, the higher the nutrient density. It's a ratio concept. Understand?

What's hilarious about this part is that you clipped out the part where I addressed this and ignored the majority of my rebuttal. I'll repeat it here.

I used chicken breast because that's what you mentioned in your post. 4oz of chicken breast has 130kCal and 27g protein. A scoop of protein powder has between 110-130 kCal and 20-25g protein. The micronutrients aren't that far off. They both contain trace amounts of vitamins and minerals...except whey protein, which tends to contain fairly decent amounts of dietary calcium. Chicken takes the edge in B vitamins, but those can also be gotten from almost any unprocessed food. Beans, potatoes, bananas, and brewer's yeast are a few of the higher concentrated food items. Incidentally, that means that beer is actually a pretty decent source of B vitamins.

As I said before, most macronutrients are going to come from OTHER sources. You know, the rest of the diet.

This argument has no legs whatsoever.


It's not just a kidney issue; some protein powders have been linked to forms of heart failure and the triggering Thyroid Disease. There are only 9 essential amino acids that your body requires and if you look at some of the ingredients that are on these protein tubs, there are all kinds of stuff that isn't FDA approved. And then the question of whether it affects you long term comes into play. My rule of thumb is, if it didn't grow out of the ground or come from an animal, then stay away from it. I know a lot of these powders help with weight gain but you can STILL gain weight through foods that are more nutrient dense and healthier for you long term.

First off, I picked kidney failure because, again, that's the only one you mentioned specifically. Please source the heart failure thing.

Thyroid disorder has been linked to soy proteins, but in all fairness, it's also been linked to ALL non-fermented soy products. Soy is some horrible ****. The discussion was about whey proteins, not soy. Whey protein is natural. You get it when you drink milk. Its processing just means your body doesn't have to extract it. Structurally, it's precisely the same as it is when it comes out of the cow.

Also, just because something isn't FDA approved doesn't mean it hasn't been studied to some degree. Source specific ingredients being linked to specific conditions.

Now I'm not saying I don't agree that it's unnecessary. Personally, I rarely use protein supplements these days. Now and again if I need a boost at the end of the day or something really fast before a workout is pretty much it.

My issue is with, as Daniel said above, zealotry. The fact of the matter is that you're not only taking things out of context, there's no compelling evidence to back up your claims. Until you can do that, you're spinning in circles.

SkyeD
11-17-2009, 11:21 AM
^^ there was a large amount of creatine and protein in my UA. My diet was in check. I was drinking about 80oz of water daily, slightly low. It was a whey isolate. Most protein supplements have unknown things in them anyways. No multi vit. No other supplementation. My body just wanted that stuff out,and quickly.

Travis Bell
11-17-2009, 11:27 AM
lol if they are unknown, how do you know they are in there?

Where some people get this stuff is beyond me

SkyeD
11-17-2009, 11:33 AM
^^ that's why they are not fda or usp approved. If it was only a weigh isolate or casein or whatever it would have been approved years ago, dontchya think.

Travis Bell
11-17-2009, 11:39 AM
^^ that's why they are not fda or usp approved. If it was only a weigh isolate or casein or whatever it would have been approved years ago, dontchya think.

Dietary supplements don't even seek FDA approval. It's not required by law so that's not exactly proof that there is "unknown substances" in most protein powders.

SkyeD
11-17-2009, 11:43 AM
Another question than. Why do some of these supplementation company's make promises to their buyers that they won't test positive for banned substances while taking their product. It would be likely to assume that by claiming that some companies do use banned unknown substances wouldn't it.

Mercuryblade
11-17-2009, 11:44 AM
^^ there was a large amount of creatine and protein in my UA. My diet was in check. I was drinking about 80oz of water daily, slightly low. It was a whey isolate. Most protein supplements have unknown things in them anyways. No multi vit. No other supplementation. My body just wanted that stuff out,and quickly.


I'm sure I'm not the only one here that is thinking this is not because your protein was in powder form, but that there was something else in your powder.
Whey isolate is one of the purest substances out there, and also more expensive than other sources (due to the extra-processing needed). I would hazard a guess that, in order to save costs, the company either was getting their isolate from a dubious manufacturer with poor quality control, or was cutting the protein themselves with other cheaper things.

Was this protein strictly a protein/creatine blend or did it have other things added (ie taurine etc.)?

EDIT: Protein in your UA indicates improper kidney function, as does high creatinine (not creatine, but I'm assuming that was a typo, the words are so similar it's an easy one to make). Do you happen to remember what your creatinine levels were?

Travis Bell
11-17-2009, 11:46 AM
Another question than. Why do some of these supplementation company's make promises to their buyers that they won't test positive for banned substances while taking their product. It would be likely to assume that by claiming that some companies do use banned unknown substances wouldn't it.

Are we still talking about protein here?

Your question as a whole just lacks some logic. You're basing your opinions on assumptions that are incorrect.

If you are referring to hormone based products that some companies make, that'd be something to discuss in an entirely different thread.

VikingWarlord
11-17-2009, 11:54 AM
Another question than. Why do some of these supplementation company's make promises to their buyers that they won't test positive for banned substances while taking their product. It would be likely to assume that by claiming that some companies do use banned unknown substances wouldn't it.

You're really grasping at straws here. This discussion is about protein supplements. Your buddy was working hard to set up a Straw Man (http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/straw-man.html) argument and you're throwing up a beautiful Red Herring (http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/red-herring.html).

SkyeD
11-17-2009, 12:03 PM
It was strictly a whey protein supplement... if there was creatine in it, there shouldn't have been because it was not stated on the tub. It was manufactured by cytosport I think. I don't care who they were dealing with or what was being cutt into it. If there substance was not quality controlled why would I trust another companies to be is my point and why would other people. I get that it was an additive to the whey and I sincearly doubt it was the whey itself but for a company to do that is not in the best intrests of the consumers health and for that I do have a personal vendetta. How can I as a consumer test other brands to verify there not making the same mistakes at home. I can not so might as well do away with it. Wouldn't you, with that experience?

SkyeD
11-17-2009, 12:10 PM
I was strictly talking about protein supplements. Sorry for not clarifying

Mercuryblade
11-17-2009, 12:19 PM
It was strictly a whey protein supplement... if there was creatine in it, there shouldn't have been because it was not stated on the tub. It was manufactured by cytosport I think. I don't care who they were dealing with or what was being cutt into it. If there substance was not quality controlled why would I trust another companies to be is my point and why would other people. I get that it was an additive to the whey and I sincearly doubt it was the whey itself but for a company to do that is not in the best intrests of the consumers health and for that I do have a personal vendetta. How can I as a consumer test other brands to verify there not making the same mistakes at home. I can not so might as well do away with it. Wouldn't you, with that experience?

Have you contacted cytosport about this?

Also, I understand your caution about supplement companies, but you are taking one experience (and an awful one at that, don't get me wrong) and using it to paint a broad stroke across all companies.
So, as I said I can sympathize with your emotional ordeal, but your logic isn't sound.

Just an FYI I have no vested personal interest in whether or not you or chiclid want to take protein supplements, but I am an empiricist and don't like bad science. Certain supplements can be very beneficial as well as life-saving for different people, as well as dangerous and life-threatening for others. It's all about making the most informed decisions you can. I doubt there is anyone out there that can guaruntee the safety of anything 100%.

SkyeD
11-17-2009, 12:26 PM
I believe in supplementation for people who's diet can not make up for the nutrients they need such as cancer patients and so on. I will just never use a protein or creatine supplement again. Why would I when I can achieve the same protein goals through a diet. Plus I love food vs the taste of protein powders. If it works for you do it. Just be cautious is all I'm saying. And to where you can't gaurentee 100 percent saftey with supplements you can with 8oz of steak. Mashed patatos and steamed vegtables. Ya know?

Travis Bell
11-17-2009, 12:47 PM
And to where you can't gaurentee 100 percent saftey with supplements you can with 8oz of steak. Mashed patatos and steamed vegtables. Ya know?

Yeah nobody ever got sick from some meat.....

I think you misunderstood supplementation as a whole when you first started, hence why you are overreacting a bit.

Supplements are intended to go hand in hand with a quality diet

For those cutting, it can often be quite difficult to get the correct amount of protein intake in while staying within their caloric limit for the day

For others, especially larger people, it's a) very time consuming to get your total protein intake from food alone and b) sometimes a pain in the neck to even eat that much.


I love my meats as much as any red blooded man. In fact I've got 2lbs of ground beef and 4 chicken breasts in store for me and my wife tonight (most of it for me lol) but I still take protein and creatine products. Amazingly enough I have yet to fall over from kidney failure

VikingWarlord
11-17-2009, 03:09 PM
And to where you can't gaurentee 100 percent saftey with supplements you can with 8oz of steak. Mashed patatos and steamed vegtables. Ya know?

Travis already handled the meat (teehee!).

Are you aware of the toxic glycoalkaloids that are found in potatoes? They contain varying amounts of solanine and chaconine. These can cause headache, cramping, nausea, diarrhea, and in extreme cases, comas or death. Potatoes that age will contain more of these. If they're left in the light, they'll produce more as well.

Are you aware of ammonium-hydroxide (http://jas.fass.org/cgi/content/abstract/86/4/967) processing (http://www.reeis.usda.gov/web/crisprojectpages/212769.html) that goes into many beef products (http://www.beefproducts.com/the_process/index.cfm)?

Print those out, read them, then jam them in your pipe and smoke away.

SkyeD
11-17-2009, 03:48 PM
I've never experienced any of what your talking about from good old potatoes and have been eating them since as early as 3 until just last night. I have experienced problems with whey and whatever else was in it in the 6 months I supplemented. Thus I would conclude the protein supplement is worse and to be more noted than my spuds.

1. I don't have a pipe
2. I don't smoke.....

But thanks for the offer, was a friendly gesture

Are you aware of the barrium and aluminum found in our breatjing air? Maybe you should stop breathing.

The point is. Pick your poision. Spuds or whey. Ill pick spuds

VikingWarlord
11-17-2009, 04:12 PM
Finally, you acknowledge the point everyone else has been trying to make for 3 pages. About ****ing time.