Protein powder vs Meat

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.
 
jimbuick said:
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.
Click to expand...
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.
 
MusclesFrogs said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
Invalid Link Removed
 
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.
 
MusclesFrogs said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
MusclesFrogs said:
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.
Click to expand...

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..
 
Jiigzz said:
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..
Click to expand...

That's rational
 
MusclesFrogs said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
Jiigzz said:
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..
Click to expand...

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.
 
Jiigzz said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
Jiigzz said:
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...
Click to expand...

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.
 
MusclesFrogs said:
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.
Click to expand...

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 .
 
MusclesFrogs said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
Jiigzz said:
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.
Click to expand...
Blimes
 
Jiigzz said:
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 .
Click to expand...

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.
 
Jiigzz said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
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.
 
MusclesFrogs said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
MusclesFrogs said:
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.
Click to expand...

These are just words; show me a study that an increase in fat won't equate to an increase in muscle.
 
Jiigzz said:
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.
Click to expand...

You don't have to, I was just curious if anyone has seen a study or just follows the masses blindly.
 
Jiigzz said:
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.
Click to expand...
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.
 
MusclesFrogs said:
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.
Click to expand...

Ok, you prove me wrong by suggesting this study protocol to a group of researchers and see how they respond.
 
Jiigzz said:
Ok, you prove me wrong by suggesting this study protocol to a group of researchers and see how they respond.
Click to expand...
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.
 
MusclesFrogs said:
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.
Click to expand...

Ok, i'll go back to your original statement

But my question is, can anyone link me to any "scientific data" that shows eating meat increases muscle growth more/faster than the equivalent amount of protein taken via WPI.
Click to expand...

Now; protein is not the sole determinant factor of muscle growth, you know this I assume? Had the statement read, "can anyone link me to any "scientific data" that shows eating meat increases muscle growth more/faster than the equivalent calorie amount taken via WPI" then thats a whole other point.

Then you went on about how atkins doesn't promote the use of vegetables and then further onto the point that, for some reason, you seem to assume that a calorie excess is not needed for muscle growth

Rodja said:
Let me try this again: what would you propose to make up for the caloric difference? You can't make comparisons amongst groups with different caloric consumption.
Click to expand...

MusclesFrogs said:
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.
Click to expand...

Rodja said:
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.
Click to expand...

You cannot compare data and draw conclusions that one is better than the other when calorie intake is not the same. Thats like comparing a high carb diet at 700 kcals per day against a low carb diet at 1800 kcals per day and, even if they are both in deficit, making the assumption that high carb is better because it yielded better weight loss. That is illogical.
 
JudoJosh said:
Cliff notes anyone?
Click to expand...

-Don't eat veges in aktins
-Eating in excess is not needed for muscle growth
-Studies that compare different calorie intakes should be used to compare meat and whey and total muscle growth (read my post above)
-Protein is the sole determinant of muscle mass gain and not overall calorie intake
-We are meatheads and juicers

Oh and i'm waiting for a scientific study that Oranges are indeed orange and not blue.
 
Jiigzz said:
Ok, i'll go back to your original statement Now; protein is not the sole determinant factor of muscle growth, you know this I assume? Had the statement read, "can anyone link me to any "scientific data" that shows eating meat increases muscle growth more/faster than the equivalent calorie amount taken via WPI" then thats a whole other point. Then you went on about how atkins doesn't promote the use of vegetables and then further onto the point that, for some reason, you seem to assume that a calorie excess is not needed for muscle growthYou cannot compare data and draw conclusions that one is better than the other when calorie intake is not the same. Thats like comparing a high carb diet at 700 kcals per day against a low carb diet at 1800 kcals per day and, even if they are both in deficit, making the assumption that high carb is better because it yielded better weight loss. That is illogical.
Click to expand...
That was a mouthful. Still back where we started. Will repeat succinctly. Does whey protein isolate produce the same, less or more muscle growth than eating meat/egg proteins of the same protein value, regardless of fat content. That's the question. Show me a study or everything else is nonsense.
 
MusclesFrogs said:
That was a mouthful. Still back where we started. Will repeat succinctly. Does whey protein isolate produce the same, less or more muscle growth than eating meat/egg proteins of the same protein value, regardless of fat content. That's the question. Show me a study or everything else is nonsense.
Click to expand...

You're such a tool I don't know where to begin. All this energy spent on banter and you could have spent it on cross checking research and comparing information in studies and fitness articles all over the Internet. Argumentative lil prick that I'm willing to bet is about 165lbs at best and soft as a bitch and I'd say in the age group of 18-21 with that attitude . How do I know this? Well, your complete lack of experience is evident based upon your complete lack of knowledge that would have been gained through experience which in turn shows how dumb and immature you are with your senseless carrying on. Do us a favor. Post a pic of yourself that's real and show us where your at physically. Post some stats and change your attitude alil bit and you may get some respect on here otherwise go back to that other BB site and troll there. Kick rocks dip shlt!
 
mikeg313 said:
You're such a tool I don't know where to begin. All this energy spent on banter and you could have spent it on cross checking research and comparing information in studies and fitness articles all over the Internet. Argumentative lil prick that I'm willing to bet is about 165lbs at best and soft as a bitch and I'd say in the age group of 18-21 with that attitude . How do I know this? Well, your complete lack of experience is evident based upon your complete lack of knowledge that would have been gained through experience which in turn shows how dumb and immature you are with your senseless carrying on. Do us a favor. Post a pic of yourself that's real and show us where your at physically. Post some stats and change your attitude alil bit and you may get some respect on here otherwise go back to that other BB site and troll there. Kick rocks dip shlt!
Click to expand...

Aww you're cute Mike. Bet your girlfriends love when you rage incoherently. Sorry I'm just someone online so you can't flex your inexhaustible absurdities at me. It's so adorable that you've literally conceded the argument so primitively to the point, that you literally said "show me your muscles" Ooh ooh, me caveman, only way to know someone smart is if have muscle big ooh ooh! You're a treat for the academic world. How about this as an alternative plan. How about you go find your tweezers, so you can then find your remnant of a "member". Once that's done, say, "Juice no good for Mikey. maybe me work on brains instead ooh!"

Your target demo of me is completely wrong, sorry you like thinking about about skinny young boys as your default - might want to look into that. In response to your opening statement, that's what this whole conversation has been about - there are no studies comparing the two. So, what do we take away from this? Rage and muscle is worthless and has no value on the Internet, so you trying to play that card is laughable. Two, write intelligently, don't embarrass yourself.
 
MusclesFrogs said:
That was a mouthful. Still back where we started. Will repeat succinctly. Does whey protein isolate produce the same, less or more muscle growth than eating meat/egg proteins of the same protein value, regardless of fat content. That's the question. Show me a study or everything else is nonsense.
Click to expand...

Now I understand where you are coming from; I think that message got jumbled up. Ok, from a purely protein standpoint, no. I doubt you will notice any difference WRT muscle gains.

FWIW, I do think it is a good thing you are challenging people by asking where they obtained that information, but some of the things you posted earlier do not make sense from a research point of view. I get where you are coming from now but that wasn't so clear earlier, it was made to seem as though simply getting enough protein was more important than calories however I don't think this point was your intention.

I will say that, although I doubt this is how you approach things, that it is important to mix up protein sources. Yes, animal derived proteins are complete in that they contain all aminos but they contain varying amounts with products being more dominant in certain aminos and others being more dominant in others.
 
MusclesFrogs said:
Aww you're cute Mike. Bet your girlfriends love when you rage incoherently. Sorry I'm just someone online so you can't flex your inexhaustible absurdities at me. It's so adorable that you've literally conceded the argument so primitively to the point, that you literally said "show me your muscles" Ooh ooh, me caveman, only way to know someone smart is if have muscle big ooh ooh! You're a treat for the academic world. How about this as an alternative plan. How about you go find your tweezers, so you can then find your remnant of a "member". Once that's done, say, "Juice no good for Mikey. maybe me work on brains instead ooh!"

Your target demo of me is completely wrong, sorry you like thinking about about skinny young boys as your default - might want to look into that. In response to your opening statement, that's what this whole conversation has been about - there are no studies comparing the two. So, what do we take away from this? Rage and muscle is worthless and has no value on the Internet, so you trying to play that card is laughable. Two, write intelligently, don't embarrass yourself.
Click to expand...

Spin it any way you like douche bag. Won't be long before you're banned.
 
mikeg313 said:
You're such a tool I don't know where to begin. All this energy spent on banter and you could have spent it on cross checking research and comparing information in studies and fitness articles all over the Internet. Argumentative lil prick that I'm willing to bet is about 165lbs at best and soft as a bitch and I'd say in the age group of 18-21 with that attitude . How do I know this? Well, your complete lack of experience is evident based upon your complete lack of knowledge that would have been gained through experience which in turn shows how dumb and immature you are with your senseless carrying on. Do us a favor. Post a pic of yourself that's real and show us where your at physically. Post some stats and change your attitude alil bit and you may get some respect on here otherwise go back to that other BB site and troll there. Kick rocks dip shlt!
Click to expand...



What does his size, bench, weight, age, or anything else about him personally matter in regards to his questions or comments?
 
hardwork25 said:
What does his size, bench, weight, age, or anything else about him personally matter in regards to his questions or comments?
Click to expand...

I smelled a scrawny lil troll and decided to call him out after reading through the thread. It happens. Why? U mad?
 
Jiigzz said:
-Don't eat veges in aktins
Click to expand...

never read atkins

Jiigzz said:
-Eating in excess is not needed for muscle growth
Click to expand...

I have followed logs where one would actually gain lbm on a PSMF type diet so I suppose its possible but it will be no where near as effective as a caloric surplus diet

Jiigzz said:
-Studies that compare different calorie intakes should be used to compare meat and whey and total muscle growth (read my post above)
Click to expand...

thats just silly

Jiigzz said:
-Protein is the sole determinant of muscle mass gain and not overall calorie intake
Click to expand...

fat and carbs dont contribute?

Jiigzz said:
-We are meatheads and juicers
Click to expand...

pretty much sums up my life

Jiigzz said:
Oh and i'm waiting for a scientific study that Oranges are indeed orange and not blue.
Click to expand...
 
This has been an entertaining thread to say the least.. why cant we get along???? have your protein powder and your meals together.. :D
 
Is that a new thread? lol
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top