Casein Importance

Page 2 of 2 First 12

  1. it has it place, but think about lean gains and IF protocols. That's way more time than just sleep ie 16+ without a meal and no ill effects there so....... If you need it for macro's go for it, otherwise it's effect are negligible IMO. Now if you're pro than i guess that's a different story.


  2. From what I've read Casein promotes the growth of cancer. Personally I don't consume it in supplement form for this reason. I will enjoy some raw cheese once in a while though.
    •   
       


  3. Quote Originally Posted by skunkman
    From what I've read Casein promotes the growth of cancer. Personally I don't consume it in supplement form for this reason. I will enjoy some raw cheese once in a while though.
    So does being in the sun. Do you avoid the outdoors to?

  4. Quote Originally Posted by Jim2542

    So does being in the sun. Do you avoid the outdoors to?
    I love the outdoors but I'm not going to go strip naked and bake myself in the sun for hours everyday.

  5. Quote Originally Posted by skunkman

    I love the outdoors but I'm not going to go strip naked and bake myself in the sun for hours everyday.
    I also have to brig up cell phones. I'm not bashing our decision because i don't use casein either I just don't understand the reasoning. Do you ever talk on a cell phone?

    I've honestly come to the conclusion that everything causes cancer and there is no escaping it. But I almost feel like (prepare for the broscience) if it promotes the growth of cancer then it would make sense that ( and no I'm not implying that the human body makes sense) it promotes the growth of other cells also. So I can't imagine it promoting cancer growth more than anything else that I ingest. Inb4studies

  6. Quote Originally Posted by skunkman View Post
    From what I've read Casein promotes the growth of cancer. Personally I don't consume it in supplement form for this reason. I will enjoy some raw cheese once in a while though.
    Link to study?

  7. Obviously the study was done on rats that were also administered aflatoxins, but for me its enough reason to not go out of my way to make it a huge part of my diet considering the amount of environmental toxins the typical American is exposed to.

  8. In rats (as are most studies) so not necessarily relevant to humans. Based on high protein not necessarily the casein. Therefore it is concluded that protein promotes cancer growth. Do you avoid all proteins then?

  9. Quote Originally Posted by Jim2542 View Post
    In rats (as are most studies) so not necessarily relevant to humans. Based on high protein not necessarily the casein. Therefore it is concluded that protein promotes cancer growth. Do you avoid all proteins then?
    It doesn't mention what the rest of the diet consisted of in that excerpt but the protein source was specifically casein, that fluctuated between %5-%20 of their diet. It would be nice to have the whole study to further examine the rest of the diet but I do not have them.

    To answer your question no I do not avoid all protein, but I do try and keep it at .8-.9 grams per pound.
    •   
       


  10. Quote Originally Posted by skunkman

    It doesn't mention what the rest of the diet consisted of in that excerpt but the protein source was specifically casein, that fluctuated between %5-%20 of their diet. It would be nice to have the whole study to further examine the rest of the diet but I do not have them.

    To answer your question no I do not avoid all protein, but I do try and keep it at .8-.9 grams per pound.
    Well it said when lowering total protein intake from high protein to low protein.

  11. You base your entire argument on that ONE study? One that isnt even conducted on humans in relation to a normal diet?

  12. Take from it what you want. As others have mentioned, we don't NEED a slow digesting protein to stave catabolism and it has the POTENTIAL to grow cancerous cells. By all means continue to use it. I personally will be buying free range meat instead of casein.

  13. Quote Originally Posted by skunkman View Post
    Take from it what you want. As others have mentioned, we don't NEED a slow digesting protein to stave catabolism and it has the POTENTIAL to grow cancerous cells. By all means continue to use it. I personally will be buying free range meat instead of casein.
    ^This.. We've done experiments in my biochemistry and microbiology classes showing that casein does cause unrestricted cell growth when administered to bacteria. For those that want human studies just know that there's a reason why bacteria/mice/other animals are used in experiments. We will never see a human study that promotes the growth of any chronic disease and anything that does come out will be correlation at best. Yes, everything gives you cancer these days but given that there's other options this is one that I also prefer to stay away from

  14. True. But many things have the potential to cause cancer. Burnt toast, processed ham etc. I think your blowing it out of proportion. I dont mind (obviously) if you choose not to use casein, each to their own. But there are far more cases for Casein and Whey than against

  15. Quote Originally Posted by cj784 View Post
    ^This.. We've done experiments in my biochemistry and microbiology classes showing that casein does cause unrestricted cell growth when administered to bacteria. For those that want human studies just know that there's a reason why bacteria/mice/other animals are used in experiments. We will never see a human study that promotes the growth of any chronic disease and anything that does come out will be correlation at best. Yes, everything gives you cancer these days but given that there's other options this is one that I also prefer to stay away from
    Bacterial cells and human derived cells are different. Hell, one is eukaryotic and one is prokaryotic. If you want to get results that are more applicable to humans via in vitro research then you need to use human derived cells.

    Next, the natural diet of mice is considerable different than that of humans. The proportion of starch to fat to protein consumed by a mice is much higher than those consumed by humans. The typical lab rat is a herbavour, not omnivours such as humans. We see the same thing when feeding mice a high fat/low CHO diet, they quickly develop symptoms of metabolic syndrome. However, when fed a high fat low CHO diet to humans, symptoms of MX are often improved upon.

    Br

  16. Quote Originally Posted by ZiR RED View Post
    Bacterial cells and human derived cells are different. Hell, one is eukaryotic and one is prokaryotic. If you want to get results that are more applicable to humans via in vitro research then you need to use human derived cells.

    Next, the natural diet of mice is considerable different than that of humans. The proportion of starch to fat to protein consumed by a mice is much higher than those consumed by humans. The typical lab rat is a herbavour, not omnivours such as humans. We see the same thing when feeding mice a high fat/low CHO diet, they quickly develop symptoms of metabolic syndrome. However, when fed a high fat low CHO diet to humans, symptoms of MX are often improved upon.

    Br
    Correct but the normal bacterial flora of humans contain several species of prokaryotes both on skin surfaces and within the various cavities/tracts/etc. All I'm saying is that introducing a known carcinogen that has direct effects upon those same prokaryotic organisms within our bodies will lead to problems. Is it all that relevant? Probably not considering we're all gonna get cancer from something anyways lol. I was just trying to shed a little more light on the study that was referenced earlier.

  17. Quote Originally Posted by cj784 View Post
    Correct but the normal bacterial flora of humans contain several species of prokaryotes both on skin surfaces and within the various cavities/tracts/etc. All I'm saying is that introducing a known carcinogen that has direct effects upon those same prokaryotic organisms within our bodies will lead to problems. Is it all that relevant? Probably not considering we're all gonna get cancer from something anyways lol. I was just trying to shed a little more light on the study that was referenced earlier.
    The fact that bacteria reside in the colon is irrelevant to whether or not casein will cause cancer in human cells lines. Even if it leads to uncontrolled proliferation of the bacteria, this will have no effect on the cell cycle of enterocytes or other human cells (and let's not forget what "cancer" truly means with respect to unicellular vs multicellular organisms). Casein is not a "known carcinogen" considering there isn't a shred of human data conducted en vivo. Furthermore, casein is the primary protein in all dairy products, so you better stop using those as well.

    Do I think casein should be used as a dedicated, slow-digesting protein supplement? Hell no. Net anabolism/catabolism will determine body composition, not to mention that the bioavailability of casein is potentially lower than other protein products due to the wasteful agglutination known as paracasein that can inhibit digestion of the protein prior to entry in the colon. However, I am not going to avoid casein due to carcinogenic potential. If you're worried about cancers of the GI tract, curcumin + bioperine may be up your alley.

  18. Quote Originally Posted by mr.cooper69 View Post
    The fact that bacteria reside in the colon is irrelevant to whether or not casein will cause cancer in human cells lines. Even if it leads to uncontrolled proliferation of the bacteria, this will have no effect on the cell cycle of enterocytes or other human cells (and let's not forget what "cancer" truly means with respect to unicellular vs multicellular organisms). Casein is not a "known carcinogen" considering there isn't a shred of human data conducted en vivo. Furthermore, casein is the primary protein in all dairy products, so you better stop using those as well.

    Do I think casein should be used as a dedicated, slow-digesting protein supplement? Hell no. Net anabolism/catabolism will determine body composition, not to mention that the bioavailability of casein is potentially lower than other protein products due to the wasteful agglutination known as paracasein that can inhibit digestion of the protein prior to entry in the colon. However, I am not going to avoid casein due to carcinogenic potential. If you're worried about cancers of the GI tract, curcumin + bioperine may be up your alley.
    Got to rep this. Even though my rep power is low, this is a great response.
  

  
 

Similar Forum Threads

  1. IMPORTANCE OF QC
    By sking6464 in forum Supplements
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 08-25-2011, 11:15 PM
  2. The importance of water
    By John Smeton in forum Supplements
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 08-01-2009, 11:19 AM
  3. Importance of PCT
    By cmp007 in forum Post Cycle Therapy
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 02-07-2008, 11:12 PM
  4. Phosphatidylcholine - and importance
    By hardasnails1973 in forum Male Anti-Aging Medicine
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 09-05-2007, 11:14 PM
  5. Before bed: Casein only or a mix of Whey/Casein/Egg
    By Gaf Knee in forum Weight Loss
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 09-09-2003, 11:08 PM
Log in
Log in