Protein powder vs Meat

Page 2 of 3 First 123 Last

  1. Quote Originally Posted by Rodja View Post
    Yeah....if you have one group consuming more calories than the other group, then the study design is completely flawed and irrelevant. You would need to have equal caloric intakes for the results to be valid.
    What are you basing this on? You gave me no reason why it would be invalid, you just said it would be.


  2. Quote Originally Posted by McCrew530 View Post
    A study that shows meat breaks down slower then whey protein?...read thisIf your still arguing your point Iím going to take you for a troll who just wants to argue for the sake of arguing
    Did I miss something in this article? Let me know which part of this article was making your point - not sure what you're referring to. And who said anything about a study showing meat breaking down slower than WPI, I know it does, what is your point?

  3. Quote Originally Posted by MusclesFrogs View Post
    What are you basing this on? You gave me no reason why it would be invalid, you just said it would be.
    Study design 101: you have to make caloric intakes equal. Otherwise, you can't determine whether or not the caloric difference or the supplement is making the difference. For someone wanting scientific validation, you are severely lacking knowledge on how to properly design a study.
    M.Ed. Ex Phys

    •   
       


  4. Quote Originally Posted by Rodja View Post
    Study design 101: you have to make caloric intakes equal. Otherwise, you can't determine whether or not the caloric difference or the supplement is making the difference. For someone wanting scientific validation, you are severely lacking knowledge on how to properly design a study.
    Sorry, you're misinformed. When the point of the study is to test whether caloric intake as well as other macronutrients found in meats actually helps contribute to muscle growth/size vs WPI and its low caloric value, then there is no need for this. That's like saying I want to test a weight loss study testing high calorie diet vs a low calorie diet...but the calories need to be the same. Flawed logic.

  5. Quote Originally Posted by MusclesFrogs View Post
    Did I miss something in this article? Let me know which part of this article was making your point - not sure what you're referring to. And who said anything about a study showing meat breaking down slower than WPI, I know it does, what is your point?
    are you Glawry reincarnate?
    SNS REP
    Hit me up with any questions any time.

  6. Quote Originally Posted by McCrew530 View Post
    are you Glawry reincarnate?
    Are you able to respond to my questions without adhominem?

  7. Quote Originally Posted by MusclesFrogs View Post
    Sorry, you're misinformed. When the point of the study is to test whether caloric intake as well as other macronutrients found in meats actually helps contribute to muscle growth/size vs WPI and its low caloric value, then there is no need for this. That's like saying I want to test a weight loss study testing high calorie diet vs a low calorie diet...but the calories need to be the same. Flawed logic.
    I give up with you.
    M.Ed. Ex Phys


  8. Quote Originally Posted by MusclesFrogs View Post
    Are you able to respond to my questions without adhominem?
    Ill take that as a yes
    SNS REP
    Hit me up with any questions any time.

  9. Quote Originally Posted by Rodja View Post
    I give up with you.
    You're allowed to give up. Doesn't mean a legitimate answer has been given.

  10. Quote Originally Posted by McCrew530 View Post
    Ill take that as a yes
    Crew, you sent me an article that in no way discussed being able to fully substitute WPI for meat with the same result, and yet you sent it saying this answers everything and if I question that Im a troll. You can't just send irrelevant things and expect people to clap.

  11. Quote Originally Posted by Rodja View Post
    I give up with you.
    Dude this guy just got banned and it looks like he made a new profile... Hes a troll nothing less
    SNS REP
    Hit me up with any questions any time.

  12. Quote Originally Posted by McCrew530 View Post
    Dude this guy just got banned and it looks like he made a new profile... Hes a troll nothing less
    I got banned? Check my IP man, never been on this site

  13. Quote Originally Posted by MusclesFrogs View Post
    I got banned? Check my IP man, never been on this site
    Though it is funny how people get angry and defensive when they don't have a legitimate answer, so instead they attack the guy. Giving bodybuilders a good name guys.

  14. They gave plenty of legitimate answers. More calories = more growth.

    If you give one group whole foods (meat + eggs) and another only WPI the caloric total will not be the same.

    If the caloric total is not the same then it is more likely the growth from the meat group (or lack thereof with the WPI group) comes from the total calorie difference; not the protein source.

  15. Quote Originally Posted by jimbuick View Post
    They gave plenty of legitimate answers. More calories = more growth.If you give one group whole foods (meat + eggs) and another only WPI the caloric total will not be the same.If the caloric total is not the same then it is more likely the growth from the meat group (or lack thereof with the WPI group) comes from the total calorie difference; not the protein source.
    Hi Jim, you are saying more calories = more growth. I'm asking for a study that proves that. Obviously more calories will give you more mass, but will it be more muscle mass or just more fat mass than WPI of the same protein levels. You're saying "more likely" - that's been my whole point. There are a lot of guys on here saying "more likely" - but none of them have been able to point to a scientific study. That is the whole reason for this thread is to separate conjecture from scientific fact backed by evidence.

  16. Quote Originally Posted by MusclesFrogs View Post
    Though it is funny how people get angry and defensive when they don't have a legitimate answer, so instead they attack the guy. Giving bodybuilders a good name guys.
    This is going to be my last answer to you and I hope it isn’t met with some crazy nonsense reply.
    Have you heard of the Velocity diet? read up on it people go on a 5 MULTI protine shake a day diet supplemented in with all the healthy nutrients that your body needs with 1 cheat meal a week and lose fat but they don’t gain muscle! Thus proving that a whey only consumption of protein is not beneficial for building muscle and here is a documented log for proof.
    http://www.rearickstrength.com/2011/...city-diet.html
    SNS REP
    Hit me up with any questions any time.

  17. Crew, look, stop threatening that you're going to leave the conversation - it doesn't matter to me whether you're here or not - that doesn't lend any validity to the points you're trying to make, it just means you don't have the patience or resources to back up your claims. With regards to what you're saying about velocity is completely unfounded. Since Im a newb here it won't let me link articles in posts, but just google "velocity diet muscle gain" and you'll see many articles saying exactly the opposite of what you proposed here. Yeah, people won't gain muscle if they do the velocity diet...and don't work out. You need to lift to gain, that's not the question. The people who lifted on the velocity diet, gained muscle. What you're proposing is nonsense - you're saying if you lift weights everyday and drink a ton of protein shakes, but no fruits veggies or carbs you won't gain muscle - eye roll. Please. You're scraping here. Guys here's the thing, I don't know why everyone is getting DEFENSIVE. Why would it have an emotional effect on you? All I want to know is if there has been a scientific study. It's a yes or no answer. I don't want your opinions or conjecture, I just want a link pointing to a legitimate scientific study proving one way or the other if WPI is more or less effective than meats/eggs alone in building muscle mass. That is all. Black and white. Either you have a link or you don't. If you don't, then in the scientific community's eyes, there's no real evidence. If you do, wonderful.

  18. Quote Originally Posted by MusclesFrogs View Post
    Crew, look, stop threatening that you're going to leave the conversation - it doesn't matter to me whether you're here or not - that doesn't lend any validity to the points you're trying to make, it just means you don't have the patience or resources to back up your claims. With regards to what you're saying about velocity is completely unfounded. Since Im a newb here it won't let me link articles in posts, but just google "velocity diet muscle gain" and you'll see many articles saying exactly the opposite of what you proposed here. Yeah, people won't gain muscle if they do the velocity diet...and don't work out. You need to lift to gain, that's not the question. The people who lifted on the velocity diet, gained muscle. What you're proposing is nonsense - you're saying if you lift weights everyday and drink a ton of protein shakes, but no fruits veggies or carbs you won't gain muscle - eye roll. Please. You're scraping here. Guys here's the thing, I don't know why everyone is getting DEFENSIVE. Why would it have an emotional effect on you? All I want to know is if there has been a scientific study. It's a yes or no answer. I don't want your opinions or conjecture, I just want a link pointing to a legitimate scientific study proving one way or the other if WPI is more or less effective than meats/eggs alone in building muscle mass. That is all. Black and white. Either you have a link or you don't. If you don't, then in the scientific community's eyes, there's no real evidence. If you do, wonderful.
    Do you even lift?

    Or are you one of those guys that tells other people how to lift based solely on a study?

    Serious question.

  19. Quote Originally Posted by jimbuick View Post
    Do you even lift?

    Or are you one of those guys that tells other people how to lift based solely on a study?

    Serious question.
    I lift.

  20. Quote Originally Posted by MusclesFrogs View Post

    I lift.
    Bro

  21. Quote Originally Posted by theOCdude View Post
    Bro
    Well put.

  22. Quote Originally Posted by MusclesFrogs View Post
    Yes, you can. If calories in the meat are increasing muscle mass moreso than the WPI alone - then there's your answer, meat is more effective. However if the calories are only adding to the fat/overall mass as compared to WPI, then it's not relevant.
    What are you on about? You're coming off as ignorant. This study you hope to have could not exist; not without major limitations and it doesn't replicate at al real world conditions. Ergo, there is no reason to have this study.

    Also, meat contains a vast amount of fats and proteins; not mere protein alone. Therefore comparing protein shakes with meat would have to be balanced by adding something like EVOO into the mix to account for the saturated fats in meat.

    This is not even accounting for the amino acid profile of have WPI continually as your only protein source. You need a diverse range of aminos...

    If you have one group consuming more calories than the other (which will happen when ONLY comparing protein content of meat and WPI without accounting for total caloric intake) then the study is flawed. More calories = more potential for growth..

  23. Quote Originally Posted by Jiigzz View Post
    What are you on about? You're coming off as ignorant. This study you hope to have could not exist; not without major limitations and it doesn't replicate at al real world conditions. Ergo, there is no reason to have this study.

    Also, meat contains a vast amount of fats and proteins; not mere protein alone. Therefore comparing protein shakes with meat would have to be balanced by adding something like EVOO into the mix to account for the saturated fats in meat.

    This is not even accounting for the amino acid profile of have WPI continually as your only protein source. You need a diverse range of aminos...

    If you have one group consuming more calories than the other (which will happen when ONLY comparing protein content of meat and WPI without accounting for total caloric intake) then the study is flawed. More calories = more potential for growth..
    That's rational

  24. Quote Originally Posted by MusclesFrogs View Post
    Hi Jim, you are saying more calories = more growth. I'm asking for a study that proves that. Obviously more calories will give you more mass, but will it be more muscle mass or just more fat mass than WPI of the same protein levels. You're saying "more likely" - that's been my whole point. There are a lot of guys on here saying "more likely" - but none of them have been able to point to a scientific study. That is the whole reason for this thread is to separate conjecture from scientific fact backed by evidence.
    How about you provide a study which demonstrates greater muscle growth with less calories.

    And not just people gained mass on the 'velocity diet', I want a study that compares the velocity diet with a caloric excess at a minimum of 1.7-1.8g/kg/BW for protein.

  25. Quote Originally Posted by Jiigzz View Post
    What are you on about? You're coming off as ignorant. This study you hope to have could not exist; not without major limitations and it doesn't replicate at al real world conditions. Ergo, there is no reason to have this study.

    Also, meat contains a vast amount of fats and proteins; not mere protein alone. Therefore comparing protein shakes with meat would have to be balanced by adding something like EVOO into the mix to account for the saturated fats in meat.

    This is not even accounting for the amino acid profile of have WPI continually as your only protein source. You need a diverse range of aminos...

    If you have one group consuming more calories than the other (which will happen when ONLY comparing protein content of meat and WPI without accounting for total caloric intake) then the study is flawed. More calories = more potential for growth..
    Those are words you are saying - show me a study that proves that or it's not accepted as fact. If you have the same exact amount of protein, but meat gives you more calories, show me something that proves you will gain more MUSCLE mass as opposed to just taking the same amount of protein through WPI. Need to see a study, otherwise you're just repeating everyone else.

  26. Quote Originally Posted by Jiigzz View Post
    How about you provide a study which demonstrates greater muscle growth with less calories.

    And not just people gained mass on the 'velocity diet', I want a study that compares the velocity diet with a caloric excess at a minimum of 1.7-1.8g/kg/BW for protein.
    Yes, I too would like to see a study like that - that's what I'm asking if someone has seen, because I haven't.

  27. Quote Originally Posted by Jiigzz View Post
    Also, meat contains a vast amount of fats and proteins; not mere protein alone. Therefore comparing protein shakes with meat would have to be balanced by adding something like EVOO into the mix to account for the saturated fats in meat.
    This is not even accounting for the amino acid profile of have WPI continually as your only protein source. You need a diverse range of aminos...
    No, it wouldn't. You haven't read the full thread so you're missing information as to what we're discussing. I KNOW meat has fats. I want to know if that matters for muscle growth/size. So I don't want to add EVOO to the protein shake, I want the protein shake to be low fat and see how the MUSCLE gains compare, not mass gains, muscle gains only.

  28. Quote Originally Posted by MusclesFrogs View Post
    Those are words you are saying - show me a study that proves that or it's not accepted as fact. If you have the same exact amount of protein, but meat gives you more calories, show me something that proves you will gain more MUSCLE mass as opposed to just taking the same amount of protein through WPI. Need to see a study, otherwise you're just repeating everyone else.
    You show me something that proves the opposite.

    Eating in excess to gain muscle (think: Bodybuilder) is a given; as you appear to opposing it or doubting it, you find a study that shows that eating in excess is not needed (which it is) to gain muscle mass (not merely developing muscle, but accumulating a large volume of muscle.

    You're the one challenging the 'status quo' here, you provide a study that contradicts that status quo .

  29. Quote Originally Posted by MusclesFrogs View Post
    No, it wouldn't. You haven't read the full thread so you're missing information as to what we're discussing. I KNOW meat has fats. I want to know if that matters for muscle growth/size. So I don't want to add EVOO to the protein shake, I want the protein shake to be low fat and see how the MUSCLE gains compare, not mass gains, muscle gains only.
    Of course it does. Saturated fats are known to increase testosterone levels and lipids are NEEDED for the development of steroidal hormones (i.e. testosterone): more test = more muscle. Not to mention the other basic functions of fat.

    Read a text book about basic physiology then come back and see if that changes your mind.

    While you're at it, find me a study that validates that an Orange is indeed Orange and not blue.

  30. Quote Originally Posted by Jiigzz View Post
    Of course it does. Saturated fats are KNOWN to increase testosterone levels and fats are NEEDED for the transport of steroidal hormones (i.e. testosterone)

    Read a bloody text book about basic physiology.
    Blimes

  31. Quote Originally Posted by Jiigzz View Post
    You show me something that proves the opposite.

    Eating in excess to gain muscle (think: Bodybuilder) is a given; as you appear to opposing it or doubting it, you find a study that shows that eating in excess is not needed (which it is) to gain muscle mass (not merely developing muscle, but accumulating a large volume of muscle.

    You're the one challenging the 'status quo' here, you provide a study that contradicts that status quo .
    Hi, you're incorrect - You are the one proposing you know an answer that meat creates more gains as a fact. The only thing I have said from the beginning is that I do NOT know which is better. That's why I want to see proof. So if you're claiming to know something as fact, then substantiate it with a scientific study, and not words. If meat is better, I won't care, I'll just know that it's better. If WPI is just as effective, then I'll know that. But until someone shows me a study, no matter how wildly insistent you are - it's irrelavent.

  32. Quote Originally Posted by Jiigzz View Post
    Of course it does. Saturated fats are known to increase testosterone levels and lipids are NEEDED for the development of steroidal hormones (i.e. testosterone): more test = more muscle. Not to mention the other basic functions of fat.

    Read a text book about basic physiology then come back and see if that changes your mind.

    While you're at it, find me a study that validates that an Orange is indeed Orange and not blue.
    I know more about basic physiology than you would care to know. As for your logic, again, it's flawed and unsubstantiated. Just because fat can increase it doesn't mean it's signifigantly so or would even register as a calculatable gain - leaving the counter argument, if it doesn't increase muscle growth measurably, than again the argument stands that WPI can be a replacement and not a supplement, keeping fat/calories down and still maintaining equivalent muscle growth.

    Guy, it's very simple - there's a study proving it, or there's not. And by all this back and forth, it's quickly becoming apparent that there is not a study. (that we know of) Therefore - no one knows the answer to this question. Regardless of how vehement they are.

  33. I'm not going to do research for you. If you are merely going to try undermine everything everyone has said, then we are not going to go out of our way for you.

    I guess you'll never know which is better.

  34. Quote Originally Posted by MusclesFrogs View Post
    I know more about basic physiology than you would care to know. As for your logic, again, it's flawed and unsubstantiated. Just because fat can increase it doesn't mean it's signifigantly so or would even register as a calculatable gain - leaving the counter argument, if it doesn't increase muscle growth measurably, than again the argument stands that WPI can be a replacement and not a supplement, keeping fat/calories down and still maintaining equivalent muscle growth.

    Guy, it's very simple - there's a study proving it, or there's not. And by all this back and forth, it's quickly becoming apparent that there is not a study. (that we know of) Therefore - no one knows the answer to this question. Regardless of how vehement they are.
    There is no study that shows intakes of exclusive whey and exclusive meat; simple. End of. Noone would undertake it such a study as Rodja as already stated.

    If you want one, you are more than welcome to conduct one yourself, although I suspect that won't end well.

  35. Quote Originally Posted by MusclesFrogs View Post
    I know more about basic physiology than you would care to know. As for your logic, again, it's flawed and unsubstantiated. Just because fat can increase it doesn't mean it's signifigantly so or would even register as a calculatable gain - leaving the counter argument, if it doesn't increase muscle growth measurably, than again the argument stands that WPI can be a replacement and not a supplement, keeping fat/calories down and still maintaining equivalent muscle growth.

    Guy, it's very simple - there's a study proving it, or there's not. And by all this back and forth, it's quickly becoming apparent that there is not a study. (that we know of) Therefore - no one knows the answer to this question. Regardless of how vehement they are.
    These are just words; show me a study that an increase in fat won't equate to an increase in muscle.

  36. Quote Originally Posted by Jiigzz View Post
    I'm not going to do research for you. If you are merely going to try undermine everything everyone has said, then we are not going to go out of our way for you.

    I guess you'll never know which is better.
    You don't have to, I was just curious if anyone has seen a study or just follows the masses blindly.

  37. Quote Originally Posted by Jiigzz View Post
    There is no study that shows intakes of exclusive whey and exclusive meat; simple. End of. Noone would undertake it such a study as Rodja as already stated. If you want one, you are more than welcome to conduct one yourself, although I suspect that won't end well.
    You saying no one would undertake it is conjecture, not fact. It's not torture, it's just eating only meat or only WPI for a month. People do much more intense experiments - that's tame.

  38. Quote Originally Posted by Jiigzz View Post
    These are just words; show me a study that an increase in fat won't equate to an increase in muscle.
    Correct, I too would like to see that study - I never claimed it as a fact, just a possibility.

  39. Quote Originally Posted by MusclesFrogs View Post
    You saying no one would undertake it is conjecture, not fact. It's not torture, it's just eating only meat or only WPI for a month. People do much more intense experiments - that's tame.
    Ok, you prove me wrong by suggesting this study protocol to a group of researchers and see how they respond.

  40. Quote Originally Posted by Jiigzz View Post
    Ok, you prove me wrong by suggesting this study protocol to a group of researchers and see how they respond.
    My goal here isn't to prove you wrong, nor is it to go out and create a study, it's just to see if there have been studies done. It seems not. So when people say "get most of your protein from food and only use shakes as supplements", remember, they're basing that on absolutely nothing. I say do whatever the hell you want until someone shows you a scientific study - absurd watching one meathead say something and everyone else follows like ducks. It's one big game of telephone. No one cares to look at scientific data. As is evident by the amount of juice the community uses - seems like rational went out the window a long time ago.
  

  
 

Similar Forum Threads

  1. Egg protein powder?
    By chainsaw2 in forum Weight Loss
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 01-07-2012, 09:54 PM
  2. Replies: 23
    Last Post: 05-19-2010, 03:41 PM
  3. Can protein powder go bad?
    By marshmallow man in forum Supplements
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 07-17-2009, 10:10 AM
  4. Can excess meat protein be toxic??!!
    By mirabelly in forum Nutrition / Health
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 12-11-2008, 12:52 PM
  5. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-07-2008, 06:17 PM
Log in
Log in