Protein that works?

[123jake123z]

From any of your personal experience, what are some of the most effective weight/mass gainers you have used? taking into mind both calories and protein..
I'm trying to find a gainer with at least 300+ calories, more than 25g of protein and low fat..

I just haven't found the right one..

Input please?

Thanks,

T.

 

[Blergs]

fuk premade mass gainers.
get a tube of whey protien (spend you money on that)
and throw in 3tbs of peanutbutter that =300cals just the peanutbutter then add another 100-150cals per scoop of whey protein thow in a banana and blend it up.

 

[Blergs]

From any of your personal experience, what are some of the most effective weight/mass gainers you have used? taking into mind both calories and protein..
I'm trying to find a gainer with at least 300+ calories, more than 25g of protein and low fat..

I just haven't found the right one..

Input please?

Thanks,

T.

why the hell do you want low fat?
you realize what will make you fat faster is CARBS/SUGAR not fats right? what you want is something high in fat and protein and MILD on carbs.

 

[mr.cooper69]

why the hell do you want low fat?
you realize what will make you fat faster is CARBS/SUGAR not fats right? what you want is something high in fat and protein and MILD on carbs.

LOL

How are you talking down to someone spitting this nonsense?

 

[MakaveliThaDon]

at least 300 cals....dude that's nothing. Most protein bars are 300 cals. That's basically 3 tbps of peanut butter

 

[Rodja]

LOL

How are you talking down to someone spitting this nonsense?

How is it nonsense? Carbs are extremely overrated in their efficacy of gaining LBM and, often times, lead to excessive adipose via hyperinsulemia.

 

[mr.cooper69]

How is it nonsense? Carbs are extremely overrated in their efficacy of gaining LBM and, often times, lead to excessive adipose via hyperinsulemia.

So just to be clear, ignoring TEF, if one is in a 500 calorie surplus comprised of more carbs than another individual in a 500 calorie surplus with more fats, the former will gain more fat? If your answer is yes, I suggest you go back and read the literature. Overall energy state over a broad window (24-48 hours), incidentally the same window that coincides with elevated MPS following a training bout, is constant, so fat gain is constant.

 

[seccsi]

So just to be clear, ignoring TEF, if one is in a 500 calorie surplus comprised of more carbs than another individual in a 500 calorie surplus with more fats, the former will gain more fat? If your answer is yes, I suggest you go back and read the literature. Overall energy state over a broad window (24-48 hours), incidentally the same window that coincides with elevated MPS following a training bout, is constant, so fat gain is constant.

While we can probably both post numerous studies that would lend credence to our points, the fact is a lot of good science is out there regarding the success of lowering your carb intake. Read about anything by Jeff Volek to get you started. I completely agree with Rodja, carbs are overrated in terms of gaining LBM and I would say overall energetic feeling as well.

 

[mr.cooper69]

While we can probably both post numerous studies that would lend credence to our points, the fact is a lot of good science is out there regarding the success of lowering your carb intake. Read about anything by Jeff Volek to get you started. I completely agree with Rodja, carbs are overrated in terms of gaining LBM and I would say overall energetic feeling as well.

I can't believe what I'm reading. We are not talking about life extension or general health benefits. We are talking about body composition. There is no proven benefit of low carb diets in relevant populations.

http://alanaragon.com/carbs-fat-friends-after-all.html

Acute/transient fluxes in insulin will not increase bodyfat any more than an isocaloric (ignoring TEF) diet full of fats.

Carbs may be overrated, but if I were bulking, I would want most of my macronutrients coming from carbs. So in OPs case, a carb+protein shake sounds spot-on.

 

[Powercage]

:wtf1:

 

[seccsi]

I can't believe what I'm reading. We are not talking about life extension or general health benefits. We are talking about body composition. There is no proven benefit of low carb diets in relevant populations.

http://alanaragon.com/carbs-fat-friends-after-all.html

Acute/transient fluxes in insulin will not increase bodyfat any more than an isocaloric (ignoring TEF) diet full of fats.

Carbs may be overrated, but if I were bulking, I would want most of my macronutrients coming from carbs. So in OPs case, a carb+protein shake sounds spot-on.

I missed the bulking part, my bad.

But the idea that low carb is bunk for body composition is flat wrong. http://www.t-nation.com/free_online_article/sports_body_training_performance_interviews/the_new_lowcarb_guru

You can't find studies that say high carb/low fat creates more weight loss because they don't exist.

 

[mr.cooper69]

I missed the bulking part, my bad.

But the idea that low carb is bunk for body composition is flat wrong. http://www.t-nation.com/free_online_article/sports_body_training_performance_interviews/the_new_lowcarb_guru

You can't find studies that say high carb/low fat creates more weight loss because they don't exist.

First of all, that tnation article is woeful lol.

Second of all, I never asserted that high carb is better for weight loss. I asserted that an isocaloric diet, ignoring TEF, would produce the same amount of weightloss. And there IS rsearch supporting this...plenty:

http://www.ajcn.org/content/86/3/580.long

And of course an irrelevant population here, but just showing that the general health benefits of low carbing are also blown out of proportion:

http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0735-1097(07)03259-7

 

[Rodja]

So just to be clear, ignoring TEF, if one is in a 500 calorie surplus comprised of more carbs than another individual in a 500 calorie surplus with more fats, the former will gain more fat? If your answer is yes, I suggest you go back and read the literature. Overall energy state over a broad window (24-48 hours), incidentally the same window that coincides with elevated MPS following a training bout, is constant, so fat gain is constant.

There are so many other factors that play into this other than just the caloric intake. Type, timing, genetics, insulin sensitivity, insulin index, glycemic load, etc. also play a major role. Unless he's an endurance-based performance athlete, he won't need more than 20-25% TDEI from carbs.

 

[seccsi]

First of all, that tnation article is woeful lol.

Second of all, I never asserted that high carb is better for weight loss. I asserted that an isocaloric diet, ignoring TEF, would produce the same amount of weightloss. And there IS rsearch supporting this...plenty:

http://www.ajcn.org/content/86/3/580.long

And of course an irrelevant population here, but just showing that the general health benefits of low carbing are also blown out of proportion:

http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0735-1097(07)03259-7

Volek is pretty highly regarded so I don't know exactly what you think is "woeful." I apologize for perhaps putting words in your mouth.

Still you said there is no proven benefit of low carb diets in relevant populations. This is demonstrably false.

 

[MidwestBeast]

So, back to the OP's question...lol

As has been stated, 300 calories is nothing, man. I agree with getting some basic protein and adding whatever ingredients you want to it to get the desired macronutrient load. The protein gives you your protein and add fruit, oats and/or WMS in for your carbs and natural peanut butter, coconut oil and/or olive oil in for your fats.

 

[Rodja]

Here's the main problem with the empirical data in these types of studies: relevant populations. I have seen very few, if any, applicable studies on athletes that have a low-carb vs low-fat comparison over 10-12 weeks and looking at body composition, performance, etc.

My main stance in this field comes from my experiences and my athletes' experience in MMA, which is arguably the most physically demanding sport.

 

[mr.cooper69]

There are so many other factors that play into this other than just the caloric intake. Type, timing, genetics, insulin sensitivity, insulin index, glycemic load, etc. also play a major role. Unless he's an endurance-based performance athlete, he won't need more than 20-25% TDEI from carbs.

How can you make a broad statement like that regarding daily carbohydrate intake? He technically doesn't NEED any carbs since they are a nonessential nutrient. But dieting is preference. Concepts like glycemic load, insulin index, and timing are from the stone-age as far as modern research is concerned. As for genetics and insulin sensitivity, he would have to have a pretty serious insulin disorder for the difference in carb intake to make any significant impact on body composition.

Volek is pretty highly regarded so I don't know exactly what you think is "woeful." I apologize for perhaps putting words in your mouth.

Still you said there is no proven benefit of low carb diets in relevant populations. This is demonstrably false.

You know I mean from a body composition standpoint. I said above that we are ignoring general health benefits.

I also don't think Volek is woeful. I think that article is woeful.

 

[mr.cooper69]

Here's the main problem with the empirical data in these types of studies: relevant populations. I have seen very few, if any, applicable studies on athletes that have a low-carb vs low-fat comparison over 10-12 weeks and looking at body composition, performance, etc.

My main stance in this field comes from my experiences and my athletes' experience in MMA, which is arguably the most physically demanding sport.

I understand that your stance comes from your experiences, but please remember that n=1.

My stance is derived from years of studying the research reviews of Alan Aragon, and also some of Lyle's work. These two men are arguably the best sources that exist in terms of bodybuilding nutrition.

 

[DaveGabe24]

While we're are it, I would love to see someone post any research that proposes that caloric surplus due to carbs causes higher adipose accrual compared to caloric surplus due to fat intake.




I'm with you on this one coop (as usual), and fwiw I do low carb all week and refeed on Sunday. lol

 

[mr.cooper69]

While we're are it, I would love to see someone post any research that proposes that caloric surplus due to carbs causes higher adipose accrual compared to caloric surplus due to fat intake.




I'm with you on this one coop (as usual), and fwiw I do low carb all week and refeed on Sunday. lol

I really don't think studies are the way to go on this topic, simply because overall science dictates what will occur unless we are dealing with special populations.

http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/pmidlookup?view=long&pmid=16600931

High carb vs high fat. High carb gained LESS fat due to physiological adaptations (or so the authors think).

 

[Rodja]

I understand that your stance comes from your experiences, but please remember that n=1.

My stance is derived from years of studying the research reviews of Alan Aragon, and also some of Lyle's work. These two men are arguably the best sources that exist in terms of bodybuilding nutrition.

Actually, n=~25

 

[DaveGabe24]

I really don't think studies are the way to go on this topic, simply because overall science dictates what will occur unless we are dealing with special populations.

http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/pmidlookup?view=long&pmid=16600931

High carb vs high fat. High carb gained LESS fat due to physiological adaptations (or so the authors think).

Nice find, and my request was more or less to point out the fact that there is very little evidence in general supporting what is being said in here. I haven't heard some of the terms mentioned in here for quite some time lol

It's always important for people to be on the same page as well though, if others are referring to performance, energy, etc. then they're debating something completely different with regards to carbs.

Body composition alone is a beast in and of itself and tends to ignore many other variables people tend to consider (health, performance, etc.).

 

[mr.cooper69]

Actually, n=~25

huh? I was saying that your experiences amount to one test subject..

Nice find, and my request was more or less to point out the fact that there is very little evidence in general supporting what is being said in here. I haven't heard some of the terms mentioned in here for quite some time lol

It's always important for people to be on the same page as well though, if others are referring to performance, energy, etc. then they're debating something completely different with regards to carbs.

Body composition alone is a beast in and of itself and tends to ignore many other variables people tend to consider (health, performance, etc.).

Precisely. I'm not saying low carbs won't get you to where you wanna go. That is preference. I am saying they pose no benefits from a body composition standpoint over an isocaloric diet.

Performance-wise, you may run better on more carbs or less carbs. 100% user dependent. I don't want to hear one edge of the coin or the other. I personally run better on more carbs, but it would be naive of me to extend this to other people.

 

[DaveGabe24]

huh? I was saying that your experiences amount to one test subject..



Precisely. I'm not saying low carbs won't get you to where you wanna go. That is preference. I am saying they pose no benefits from a body composition standpoint over an isocaloric diet.

Performance-wise, you may run better on more carbs or less carbs. 100% user dependent. I don't want to hear one edge of the coin or the other. I personally run better on more carbs, but it would be naive of me to extend this to other people.

I think he's clarifying his experience + the people he worked with = 25.

Personally, when I first started lean gains I thought training fasted would suck and it didn't. However now that I'm carb cycling as well my performance has taken a bit of a hit, especially towards the end of the week.

 

[Rodja]

huh? I was saying that your experiences amount to one test subject...

Yes, but the total with my athletes is around 25.

 

[mr.cooper69]

Yes, but the total with my athletes is around 25.

If you have any literature on the topic, I'd be interested. If it's not double-blind, placebo-controlled, and just generally controlled for other variables, I can't take it into consideration.

 

[Rodja]

If you have any literature on the topic, I'd be interested. If it's not double-blind, placebo-controlled, and just generally controlled for other variables, I can't take it into consideration.

Pretty hard to do a gold-standard study with food. This is the main problem with this field: the actual field experience from professionals with degrees and certifications is ignored.

 

[mr.cooper69]

Pretty hard to do a gold-standard study with food. This is the main problem with this field: the actual field experience from professionals with degrees and certifications is ignored.

I'm not ignoring you, I'm just putting much greater weight in the research of various universities, Alan Aragon, and Lyle McDonald.

 

[Rodja]

I'm not ignoring you, I'm just putting much greater weight in the research of various universities, Alan Aragon, and Lyle McDonald.

And how many athletes do you see flocking to these people? Maybe not ignoring, but definitely disregarding.

 

[mr.cooper69]

And how many athletes do you see flocking to these people? Maybe not ignoring, but definitely disregarding.

Alan Aragon gives nutritional advices to hundreds of professional athletes.

Regardless, this discussion isn't about them. If you have valid literature to post, I would gladly accept and read it.

 

[Rodja]

Alan Aragon gives nutritional advices to hundreds of professional athletes.

Regardless, this discussion isn't about them. If you have valid literature to post, I would gladly accept and read it.

I have yet to see you post valid literature regarding macronutrient consumption in athletes and subsequent performance. Whether or not you personally agree with low-carb, being dogmatically opposed to it is foolish.

 

[mr.cooper69]

I have yet to see you post valid literature regarding macronutrient consumption in athletes and subsequent performance. Whether or not you personally agree with low-carb, being dogmatically opposed to it is foolish.

Maybe you haven't been reading my posts .

A. I have been arguing about body composition, NOT PERFORMANCE

B. I have said three times now that I AM NOT AGAINST LOW-CARBING, it is a matter of preference! I am, however, against people saying that it's the carbs that cause fat gain (i.e. the first post I quoted ITT that sparked this whole debate).

 

[DaveGabe24]

I have yet to see you post valid literature regarding macronutrient consumption in athletes and subsequent performance. Whether or not you personally agree with low-carb, being dogmatically opposed to it is foolish.

Really??

 

[Colbert]

I have a nutritionist, a NPC bodybuilder, and he suggest high carbs waaaaay over high fat! I've never talk to a professional nutritionist that suggest high fat over high carbs. I'm going to go with what a professional bodybuilder says over what somebody says over a forum.

Carbs do volumizing...not fats.

 

[mr.cooper69]

I have a nutritionist, a NPC bodybuilder, and he suggest high carbs waaaaay over high fat! I've never talk to a professional nutritionist that suggest high fat over high carbs. I'm going to go with what a professional bodybuilder says over what somebody says over a forum.

Carbs do volumizing...not fats.

Again, PREFERENCE. Carbs and fats both have their place. IMO, a balanced diet > all. HOWEVER, that is in MY OPINION AND PREFERENCES.

The take home message is no macronutrient makes you more prone to fat storage over another (protein is not in this discussion).

 

[chocolatemilk]

Rodja I have never been impressed with your body composition...

 

[Cocaine4PWO]

SNS >>

 

[Rodja]

Rodja I have never been impressed with your body composition...

And when have you seen my body composition lately?

 

[JudoJosh]

Rodja I don't know why you continue to fight this battle. The majority of people will never let go of their conventional beliefs. I gave up on trying to educate people a while ago

 

[mr.cooper69]

Rodja I don't know why you continue to fight this battle. The majority of people will never let go of their conventional beliefs. I gave up on trying to educate people a while ago

Excuse me?

I was once like Rodja. I thought carbs were the enemy. You know what I did? I educated myself. And guess what? I LET GO OF MY CONVENTIONAL BELIEFS.

Science > personal beliefs. And that is exactly what I am arguing in favor of.

In fact, it appears that Rodja and others are not letting go of conventional beliefs. I am more than happy to change mine if the literature is in favor of your arguments. Unfortunately, it is not. And neither is conventional physiology. Both my undergraduate AND graduate physiology courses touched on this matter.

 

[seccsi]

http://www.ajcn.org/content/86/3/580.long

Am I missing something? You say low carb is bunk for composition, but in a study you posted it mentions right there: "The LCHF diet resulted in significantly greater weight loss than did the HCLF diet." That was from a link you posted...

I'll fully admit I haven't read both of those full links because I'm really short on time right now, but I just glanced at that.

Also: http://archinte.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/full/164/19/2141

http://jama.ama-assn.org/content/297/9/969.full

Cutting carbohydrate intake is something a LOT of respected trainers, coaches, nutritionists try immediately when looking to make favorable changes in body composition.

I certainly don't think carbs are "the enemy" or whatever, but it does work for a lot of people. Largely because when people are cutting carbs they usually cut their sugar intake as well.

 

[mr.cooper69]

Am I missing something? You say low carb is bunk for composition, but in a study you posted it mentions right there: "The LCHF diet resulted in significantly greater weight loss than did the HCLF diet." That was from a link you posted...

I'll fully admit I haven't read both of those full links because I'm really short on time right now, but I just glanced at that.

Also: Arch Intern Med -- The National Cholesterol Education Program Diet vs a Diet Lower in Carbohydrates and Higher in Protein and Monounsaturated Fat: A Randomized Trial, October 25, 2004, Aude et al. 164 (19): 2141

Comparison of the Atkins, Zone, Ornish, and LEARN Diets for Change in Weight and Related Risk Factors Among Overweight Premenopausal Women, March 7, 2007, Gardner et al. 297 (9): 969

Cutting carbohydrate intake is something a LOT of respected trainers, coaches, nutritionists try immediately when looking to make favorable changes in body composition.

I certainly don't think carbs are "the enemy" or whatever, but it does work for a lot of people. Largely because when people are cutting carbs they usually cut their sugar intake as well.

Crap lol, I obviously had the wrong link on my clipboard. I actually had that up because I was going to comment on how studies will show both sides of the coin, so using studies in this case isn't the best approach. Physiological principles, on the other hand, are key.

Anyway, I don't have the time or energy for this discussion anymore. And it was just that: a discussion. I still think it was wrong of the PP rep to tell OP not to put carbs in a mass gainer being used for bulking, but I won't be arguing for it any longer. It's OP call. In the end, direct effects no body composition should be insignificant.

 

[seccsi]

Crap lol, I obviously had the wrong link on my clipboard. I actually had that up because I was going to comment on how studies will show both sides of the coin, so using studies in this case isn't the best approach. Physiological principles, on the other hand, are key.

Anyway, I don't have the time or energy for this discussion anymore. And it was just that: a discussion. I still think it was wrong of the PP rep to tell OP not to put carbs in a mass gainer being used for bulking, but I won't be arguing for it any longer. It's OP call. In the end, direct effects no body composition should be insignificant.

Fair enough and as I previously stated I missed the part about him adding them to a mass gainer. Clearly being "afraid" for lack of a better word about carbs is somewhat stupid if you're trying to gain some mass. I guess we will have to agree to disagree on the effects on body composition Have a good one.

 

[123jake123z]

well well well, a long day at the beach and I come back to this! I have gained alot of info just from you guys' debate..
This post was never intended to ignite a flame, so sorry about that guys,

I just realized how selfish I have been, I didn't even post up any of my stats.
Currently I am
157.6 lbs
5'9.5"
and my bf is around 7-10%
17 yrs old.

That being said I made my own shake filled with all the ingredients stated above and it seems to have satisfied me, you guys also saved me alot of money! thanks!

 

[Colbert]

Again, PREFERENCE. Carbs and fats both have their place. IMO, a balanced diet > all. HOWEVER, that is in MY OPINION AND PREFERENCES.

The take home message is no macronutrient makes you more prone to fat storage over another (protein is not in this discussion).

Bro I was just saying I wasn't trying to diss you. Your big on BB.com though...I run around with different usernames

Excuse me?

I was once like Rodja. I thought carbs were the enemy. You know what I did? I educated myself. And guess what? I LET GO OF MY CONVENTIONAL BELIEFS.

Science > personal beliefs. And that is exactly what I am arguing in favor of.

In fact, it appears that Rodja and others are not letting go of conventional beliefs. I am more than happy to change mine if the literature is in favor of your arguments. Unfortunately, it is not. And neither is conventional physiology. Both my undergraduate AND graduate physiology courses touched on this matter.

I let all my **** go...I got tired of trying to study about nutrition cause of stuff like this and I got tired of trying new things...I got engineering and MCAT to worry about and that leaves no time for studying nutrition or researching it. Hire a nutritionist...it will be the greatest investment EVER!!!!

ATM I'm trying to get Kai's nutritionist but home boy cost A LOT! Plus they'll teach you while giving your diet...it's a win win....well...except the ass load of money you pay them.

 

[mr.cooper69]

Bro I was just saying I wasn't trying to diss you. Your big on BB.com though...I run around with different usernames



I let all my **** go...I got tired of trying to study about nutrition cause of stuff like this and I got tired of trying new things...I got engineering and MCAT to worry about and that leaves no time for studying nutrition or researching it. Hire a nutritionist...it will be the greatest investment EVER!!!!

ATM I'm trying to get Kai's nutritionist but home boy cost A LOT! Plus they'll teach you while giving your diet...it's a win win....well...except the ass load of money you pay them.

No offense intended bro . Who are you on BB.com btw? And I am also studying for the mcat! 3 days!

 

[123jake123z]

I am about to start my first semester of college in the fall, I will be studying chemistry and biology... I wanna be a nutritionist or something related.. I actually just learned loads of new ****.. Kudos!