PDA

View Full Version : I dont have money for a tub of protein



vc416
03-25-2003, 04:58 PM
I weigh about 150 pounds, maybe a little more, I ll check 2morrow, but I need to know what I could eat to get that much protein without paying for protein powder!

bradley
03-25-2003, 05:00 PM
dairy products, eggs, lean beef, chicken, fish...

Ironman8
03-25-2003, 05:16 PM
Ya, protein shakes aren't the only things that contain alot of protein.

captain piddles
03-25-2003, 05:30 PM
go the tuna fish route
30grams per can
and its like not as expensive as the big tubs o' powder

Berserker
03-25-2003, 08:32 PM
Actually protein powder is cheaper than food. Optimum whey 5lb at the most costs $35. 72 servings. 22g protein. Do the math.

aka23
03-25-2003, 08:55 PM
This thread got me thinking about how much I spend on protein. The costs for some of the different types of protein in my diet are listed below. I do not consume any protein supplements and rarely eat beef.

Black Beans (dry, uncooked) -- 1.0 cents/g
Roasted Peanuts -- 1.5 cents/g
Canned Tuna -- 1.5 cents/g
Oatmeal -- 1.5 cents/g
Skim Milk -- 2.5 cents/g
Turkey Breast -- 3.0 cents/g
Pollock Fillet -- 3.5 cents/g
Chicken Breast -- 3.5 cents/g
Canned Salmon -- 6.0 cents/g

I was surprised at the results. Black beans are likely to be the least expensive source of protein in my diet. A package of dry, uncooked beans costs $1 and has 108 grams protein. Animal meats were generally among the most expensive sources in my diet. Canned tuna is a noteworthy exception.

bradley
03-26-2003, 03:09 AM
Originally posted by Berserker
Actually protein powder is cheaper than food. Optimum whey 5lb at the most costs $35. 72 servings. 22g protein. Do the math.

If you had to pick one or the other I would go with the whole food though.

aka23
03-26-2003, 04:05 AM
Originally posted by Berserker
Actually protein powder is cheaper than food. Optimum whey 5lb at the most costs $35. 72 servings. 22g protein. Do the math.

3,500 cents / (72*22g) = 2.2 cents per gram

Using the numbers in my post canned tuna, beans, and a couple other sources are less expensive. For example a can of tuna costs about 50 cents when purchased on sale or in bulk, and has about 32 g protein. 50 cents / 32g ~= 1.5 cents per gram.

Mystic Eric
03-26-2003, 04:38 AM
I don't know where you're from but there's no way in hell one can find tuna for 50 cents a can in Vancouver. Cheapest when it's on sale is at least 99 cents. And there's closer to 30 g of protein in a a can of tuna.

And beans aren't a complete source of protein I believe.


Correction, I believe one can find a can of tuna for 79 cents, however, it's usually the cheaper brands with added filler.

Ironman8
03-26-2003, 07:05 AM
Aren't packs of tuna around $5 or so?

aka23
03-26-2003, 08:51 AM
Originally posted by Mystic Eric
I don't know where you're from but there's no way in hell one can find tuna for 50 cents a can in Vancouver. Cheapest when it's on sale is at least 99 cents. And there's closer to 30 g of protein in a a can of tuna.

I am from the United States. You are from Canada. $1 Candian ~= $0.65 US. A 99 cent can of tuna in Canada would be about 65 cents when converted to US currency. A 50 cent can of tuna in the US would be about 77 cents in Canadian currency. I have seen 50 cent prices in several cities of California and upstate NY. My supermarket actually goes down to 33 cents per can (3 for $1) for the cheapest types of tuna during sales, but I purchase the 50% less salt style which is a bit more expensive. The Casamar Tuna Fishing newsletter states, "The U. S. market has traditionally been the 50-cents-a-can tuna."

The label on my can says 13g and 2.5 servings 13*2.5 = 32.5g . They may be rounding, but 32g is certainly a good estimate. According to fitday.com , a water packed can of tuna has 35.2g grams protein. If anything I was underestimating the total.

PaulB
03-26-2003, 09:26 AM
you can buy off brand tuna where i live for 25-30cents a can. they are better than the green fish in the sea brand, but not as good as the blue cans of starkist. tuna taste so ****ty after a month of eating nothing but that. i wont eat anything but them already drained bags of albacore for like 1.20 a bag.

Berserker
03-26-2003, 09:50 AM
For me Starkist cost $.83/can. 83/32=.026. $32 for 5lbs whey is 32/1584=.02. So for me its cheaper. I should check out Sams. But the local stores don't have it in bulk.
My real point is protein powder is not as expenive a source of protein as people think. I see post like this all the time, you need to run the numbers.
Personally I don't consider non meat/fish/diary in my protein intake. Its just bonus.

Berserker
03-26-2003, 09:51 AM
Originally posted by bradley


If you had to pick one or the other I would go with the whole food though.
Completely agree.

aka23
03-26-2003, 10:00 AM
Originally posted by Mystic Eric
And beans aren't a complete source of protein I believe.

Originally posted by Berserker
Personally I don't consider non meat/fish/diary in my protein intake. Its just bonus.

It depends what type of beans. As was recently mentioned in another thread, soybeans meet the FDA's criteria for a "complete protein." I believe they were changed from incomplete to complete in the early 1990's after the FDA started using a new way of mesuaring protein quality, indicating that we need less methionine than they used to think. Most other beans are classified as incomplete proteins. This does not mean the protein is wasted or useless. It means the ratio of the amino acid methionine is less than the optimal level.

When you eat proteins, the liver breaks them down into amino acids recombines them in the right proportions to form your body's proteins and do activities like build muscle. Grains and animal products have extra methionine. If you regularly eat grains or animal proteins, they would supply much of the lacking methionine from the beans. It is true that you are likely to utilize a larger portion of easily digestible, "complete protein." However, even when the digestibility, absorbtion, and completeness are factored in; I think that beans are one of least expensive sources of utilized protein. I am not saying that people should only consume beans for protein. I think it is beneficial to consume a variety of both animal and vegatable proteins to help get a variety of nutrients. Beans contain many nutrients that animal proteins do not and vice versa.

aka23
03-26-2003, 10:18 AM
Originally posted by Berserker
Actually protein powder is cheaper than food. Optimum whey 5lb at the most costs $35. 72 servings. 22g protein. Do the math.

Originally posted by Berserker
For me Starkist cost $.83/can. 83/32=.026. $32 for 5lbs whey is 32/1584=.02. So for me its cheaper. I should check out Sams. But the local stores don't have it in bulk.

Your first post said the whey was $35. In your later post, the price changed to $32. This is why our numbers came out differently. I agree that you can get protein powder for $32, or even less depending on brand and where it is purchased.

My supermarket usually has a sale on any particular brand of canned tuna once every couple months. Most of the time there is a sale going on with at least one of the brands. When the tuna that I like is on sale, I stock up.

Berserker
03-26-2003, 10:39 AM
What I said in my orginal post was at the most it cost $35, gnc. You can order it for $32, which very common price, not on sale. Orginal was just worst case scenario.
For some reason they don't seem to put tuna on sale here.

Also the problem with problem with nonmeat protein is the carb/protein ratio. I just don't beleive in it for me. For the most part stong animals, predators, eat meat.
I consider whatever protein I get from nonmeat as a bonus, not my required intake.

aka23
03-26-2003, 11:10 AM
Originally posted by Berserker
Also the problem with problem with nonmeat protein is the carb/protein ratio. I just don't beleive in it for me.

You do not have to consume beans as your only source of protein in a meal. You might consider it a low GI carb. Beans have a lower GI than almost all whole grains. You can still reach a high protein/carb ratio if you eat meals that contain a combination of animal and vegatable proteins. When I eat a meal containing beans+rice, I usually also eat some chicken or fish in the same meal. Consuming animal proteins in the same meal is a good way to supply the missing amino acids, as well as up the protein ratio. Note that some non-meat foods have significantly higher protein percentages than black beans. Some soy products derive the majority of their calories from protein.


For the most part stong animals, predators, eat meat.

It depends how you define "strong animals." According to the Guiness Book of World Records, The Rhinocerous Beetle is the strongest animal relative to its body size. Beetles that are on an all potato leaf diet can support 800 times their body weight on their back. This would be like a human who could do a squat with 100,000 pounds on his back. I realize that this is not what you meant. You were probably thinking of mammals that are more evolutionarily similar to humans. I agree that the mammals who are strongest for their size tend to use there strength to kill other animals. I think this has little to do with protein utilization or muscle developement in humans. Also note that I was not suggesting vegetarianism in my post. I was advocating eating both animal and vegetable proteins.

AJ_11
03-26-2003, 10:11 PM
I hate beans. yuck

Ironman8
03-26-2003, 10:44 PM
I use to hate beans also, but try porn & beans, you'll be hooked :)

PeterParker
03-27-2003, 01:24 AM
milk and plenty of it, also if you buy dried milk and add that to milk , that would give you some cheap protien.