Hack75
Member
- Awards
- 0
Looking for thoughts on ALR Humapro. Anyone tried?
Specifically the sweet tea flavor.
Specifically the sweet tea flavor.
I love Humapro! The Southern Sweet Tea is one of my new favorites. I use it everyday. There are logs here somewhere for it.Looking for thoughts on ALR Humapro. Anyone tried?
Specifically the sweet tea flavor.
The Sweat Tea is very refreshing!!!! I give it two thumbs WAY UP!!!!!!!!Never had the sweet tea flavor....but i use humapro basically every morning...its been in my aresenal for awhile now
It looks like an EAA product to me? EAAs are nice, but I would also like to know how it's any different than any other EAA supplement (besides the bitter melon and green coffee bean). I mean, I guess that EAAs (with high leucine content) can stimulate MPS to a similar degree as a higher amount (in grams) of a "whole" protein source, but that should be applicable to just about any EAA blend.I disappear for a year and we're shilling humapro here now?
It's 5gs of amino acids.
There is no magic ratio.
There is no magic bioavailability.
Plz stahp.
There's like 20 other better protein/amino acid products in the Hi-Tech ecosystem that aren't hilariously overpriced for what they are.
my address is...The Sweat Tea is very refreshing!!!! I give it two thumbs WAY UP!!!!!!!!
my address is...The Sweat Tea is very refreshing!!!! I give it two thumbs WAY UP!!!!!!!!
Even if we take your claims to be true, which I am not saying they are, just for the sake of continuing the discussion, what then makes HumaPro different from any other EAA supplement?I completely disagree. of course working for Hi-Tech I am biased, but I think singular amino acids are utilized differently from peptides and HumaPro may indeed have some benefit over peptide based formulas and protein.
One need only look at Creatine to see the obvious benefits over eating the same creatine content in red meat. My theory is that the body sees a free form amino acid as a natural signaling molecule opposed to a peptide. This is why using small amounts of L-Carnitine for example or L-Theanine have a vastly different effect than their food based equivalents.
I mean, I love steaks, but I'm not sure I could stomach the 22.5 ounces of lean beef per day I'd have to eat to get my creatine needs.I completely disagree. of course working for Hi-Tech I am biased, but I think singular amino acids are utilized differently from peptides and HumaPro may indeed have some benefit over peptide based formulas and protein.
One need only look at Creatine to see the obvious benefits over eating the same creatine content in red meat. My theory is that the body sees a free form amino acid as a natural signaling molecule opposed to a peptide. This is why using small amounts of L-Carnitine for example or L-Theanine have a vastly different effect than their food based equivalents.
I don't even know what he's talking about with the creatine topic. Is he trying to say that creatine obtained via foods (meat) is inferior to taking creatine monohydrate (matched to the same creatine content)? I completely agree that it's not always feasible (macros, cost, etc) to obtain that much creatine from foods, but that doesn't mean that creatine found in foods is ineffective. Clearly creatine obtained via food does have beneficial effects and is absorbed/bioavailable, as vegetarians have lower creatine levels, people who eat large amounts of foods high in creatine (meats) have higher creatine levels than people who don't, and people who eat more creatine-containing foods also notice less increase in muscle storage of creatine from creatine supplementation compared to people who eat less, as they already have higher levels to begin with, and can't be increased to the same degree (even if they end up at the same level after supplementation). Long story short, if anything, this creatine comparison supports my previous claim that the benefit here (as is the case with creatine) isn't really so much superiority per se, but the ability to get the same effects with a "smaller dose" that has less calories/macros/etc, and is also likely more affordable.I mean, I love steaks, but I'm not sure I could stomach the 22.5 ounces of lean beef per day I'd have to eat to get my creatine needs.
On the other hand, amino acids are abundantly available through food and or protein supplements.
That's a nice false equivalence though.
the tablets are solid, I've used them in the past when on the run or with a crappy meal out.....currently use aminomax 8000 by gaspari, always keep them nearby......your wife takes you shopping and your forced to eat something like a Panera bread or something, pop some of them to supplement the protein content of the mealOP, I use the tablets. I find them quick, easy, and convenient at random times of the day to take when I am busy.
I disappear for a year and we're shilling humapro here now?
It's 5gs of amino acids.
There is no magic ratio.
There is no magic bioavailability.
Plz stahp.
There's like 20 other better protein/amino acid products in the Hi-Tech ecosystem that aren't hilariously overpriced for what they are.
if you look at the Master Amino Acid Pattern studies, there seems to be more than meets the eye.Even if we take your claims to be true, which I am not saying they are, just for the sake of continuing the discussion, what then makes HumaPro different from any other EAA supplement?
Now, to address your point about comparing the "singular" amino acids to protein or peptides, we actually do have research on various protein/amino sources and their effects on things like MPS. Realistically, there is a maximal level/peak/plateau to which you can stimulate MPS, and that dose can be reasonably obtained from a protein source, peptides, or EAAs with sufficient leucine content. You can't increase MPS more than this, you can only try to get to this point with less calories/fat/etc, which it seems HumaPro aims to do. Of course, something like EAAs (with high leucine content) or even WPH/peptides (with added leucine) can stimulate MPS to the same degree as intact/while protein sources with significantly less calories, and are also easier/lighter on the stomach and faster absorbed/used than Whole Foods, making them ideal for intra-workout use. There are also instances where "whole" Whey has been more effective than isolated EAAs at the same amount as present in the Whey (this was not in the context of peri-workout use, where EAA/WPH really shines). Conversely, there are studies where something "quicker" like WPH was superior to Whey isolate in recovery of peak torque post exercise, and also greater increases in skeletal muscle glycogen levels.
Basically, EAA/WPH with high leucine content can be preferable to whole protein sources in the context of intra/peri-workout use, and can stimulate MPS to the same (maximal) degree as whole protein sources, and can therefore be useful ways to keep MPS high and calories low, but that still doesn't explain what makes HumaPro different than any other EAA supplement. Also, does it have 3+ grams of leucine? You really want at least 3g leucine to maximize MPS.
Summary
EAAs (and, since you mentioned it, WPH/peptides) can stimulate MPS to the same (maximal) degree as a "whole" protein source like why, chicken, etc, and can do this with less calories. EAAs (with high leucine content) would likely be the least calories, as it's only the EAAs and nothing else), but you can still get that same high/ideal MPS from something like WPH with probably 20-25 calories by using a low/suboptimal dose and supplementing additional leucine to 3-5g (again, you brought up the peptides, not me). Also, the quick utilization of EAAs as opposed to intact proteins makes them appealing for intra/peri-workout use (the same thing can also apply to WPH/di/tri-peptides), and it's also "lighter/easier" on the stomach, which is great for when you're working out and don't want a full/bloated stomach. That said, isn't HumaPro basically an EAA product? There's nothing wrong with that by any means, EAAs are great, better than BCAAs according to a lot of research, but lets be realistic about what it is and what to expect from it (i.e. no "magic").
The studies that show that it can be used as an effective replacement for protein while having less calories/macros, therefore facilitating weight loss? That's nothing really new, and as I said, the same thing is almost certainly applicable with EAAs (with sufficient leucine content). Again, EAAs are great, that's not the argument here at all. Maybe link up some other studies, as the only ones I see are using it to replace whole protein, which we know EAAs can do, and we know low doses of Whey + leucine can do (although this still has slightly more calories than just EAAs).if you look at the Master Amino Acid Pattern studies, there seems to be more than meets the eye.
That said...I look at Humapro and say "there's no way...just doesn't add up despite the science" (which is rare for me)
But then the anecdotal reports are INSANE.
I admit I haven't used it, but the user reports on Humapro always blow me away. It's crazy what people seem to experience with it.
do a search for the studies I mentioned above. Master Amino Acid PatternThe studies that show that it can be used as an effective replacement for protein while having less calories/macros, therefore facilitating weight loss? That's nothing really new, and as I said, the same thing is almost certainly applicable with EAAs (with sufficient leucine content). Again, EAAs are great, that's not the argument here at all. Maybe link up some other studies, as the only ones I see are using it to replace whole protein, which we know EAAs can do, and we know low doses of Whey + leucine can do (although this still has slightly more calories than just EAAs).
Also, to Eric's points, what study are you referring to? Also, what synergy are you talking about? I agree that EAAs are superior to intact protein in the context of intra (and maybe even peri) workout use. There is also research that peptides/WPH are superior to intact proteins (di/tri-peptides are absorbed differently) in this intra/peri-workout context (superior to Whey isolate, which is probably the "fastest" high quality intact protein). Now, I am not aware of much research comparing WPH to EAAs in this context, so the only conclusion I can draw is that they're both better than intact proteins for this purpose/use/timing. Also, there is plenty of research on what various doses of EAAs will do for MPS, and also how altering the leucine content of EAAs can effect, and maximize, MPS. There's no magic to it really.
I did, and found these:do a search for the studies I mentioned above. Master Amino Acid Pattern
If you read my initial post, you'll quickly see I have never even CLOSE claimed to be an expert.I did, and found these:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/14964348/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/14669816/
Are there more studies that I'm missing? If you're the expert on the subject, posting some links shouldn't be too difficult, and would greatly help us to understand.
I get that it may be an ideal way to maximize MPS with as few calories as possible, and maybe even with a smaller dose than what is normally used for EAAs, but can it increase MPS beyond what is considered maximal? If so, where is the research showing this? I am only aware of studies showing it can optimize MPS, and can be an effective replacement for intact/whole protein. That said, we can also maximize MPS with 6-10g EAAs (with 3-5g leucine) or ~6g WPH with leucine added to 3-5g. Is there research suggesting this MAP is superior to the above two protocols?
if you look at the Master Amino Acid Pattern studies, there seems to be more than meets the eye.
That said...I look at Humapro and say "there's no way...just doesn't add up despite the science" (which is rare for me)
But then the anecdotal reports are INSANE.
I admit I haven't used it, but the user reports on Humapro always blow me away. It's crazy what people seem to experience with it.
Thanks, just read through them. Again, they can effectively be used in place of intact protein with significantly less calories. I'm not saying that HumaPro/EAAs are ineffective at all, just that MAP is really just EAAs (plus bitter melon etc). EAAs are great though, so that's good. If MAP is somehow superior to any other ratio of EAAs, let's see a study showing increased MPS/etc relative to 10g EAAs containing 5g leucine.If you read my initial post, you'll quickly see I have never even CLOSE claimed to be an expert.
If you google the term I gave you, this is literally the 3rd link: http://masteraminoacidpattern.com/
As my initial post stated:
sounds like it'd be a fun study. would love to see it when Performax is able to afford a study of that magnitude.Thanks, just read through them. Again, they can effectively be used in place of intact protein with significantly less calories. I'm not saying that HumaPro/EAAs are ineffective at all, just that MAP is really just EAAs (plus bitter melon etc). EAAs are great though, so that's good. If MAP is somehow superior to any other ratio of EAAs, let's see a study showing increased MPS/etc relative to 10g EAAs containing 5g leucine.
Frankly, I don't think it's a necessary study for me, as I'm not the one claiming that MAP is the IDEAL/OPTIMAL combination/ratio/etc of amino acids. Wouldn't the burden of proof for that be on the makers of MAP and/or the companies using it? I'll just use the plethora of existing research on maximizing MPS/etc with EAA/WPH and added leucine. I know that this 6-10g EAAs with 3-5g leucine, or ~6g WPH with leucine added to 3-5g will stimulate MPS VERY effectively.sounds like it'd be a fun study. would love to see it when Performax is able to afford a study of that magnitude.
Frankly, I don't think it's a necessary study for me, as I'm not the one claiming that MAP is the IDEAL/OPTIMAL combination/ratio/etc of amino acids. Wouldn't the burden of proof for that be on the makers of MAP and/or the companies using it? I'll just use the plethora of existing research on maximizing MPS/etc with EAA/WPH and added leucine. I know that this 6-10g EAAs with 3-5g leucine, or ~6g WPH with leucine added to 3-5g will stimulate MPS VERY effectively.
Again, not to beat a dead horse, I never said MAP isn't an effective amino acid (EAA) supplement/source. It is, and EAAs are great. I just say that I highly doubt that 10g MAP (the dose used in a lot of the studies) is going to be superior to 10g of "non-MAP" EAAs with 5g leucine. Is there any research that suggests otherwise?
try both out, let me know.
the main selling points is that the product matches the MAP ratios identically, which have proven exceptionally well in all studies performed on them.View attachment 155357
Isn't the big selling point optimizing MPS/nitrogen balance while minimizing calories? I'm bulking, why would I want to minimize calories? Honestly, whole eggs and beef are better for my goals than whey/EAAs any time except intra/peri-workout, there is already a plethora of research supporting the effectiveness of EAAs (and even WPH) and the importance of leucine content in this context. I don't see a point in paying a premium for a "special ratio" of EAAs when numerous studies have shown the effectiveness of EAA/protein with VARIOUS ratios of amino acids, provided that there is optimal leucine content.
I'm not trying to have a "pissing match," I'm asking what, if anything, makes MAP superior to sufficient EAAs with ideal leucine content? The studies on MAP do not, to my knowledge, address this at all. If we can agree that this is something that we just can't really know based on the existing research, then I agree that we're done with this discussion. I suppose we could go into hypotheses of why it would or wouldn't be superior, but I think that's beyond the scope of this discussion, and not really the topic of this thread. No sense beating a dead horse.the main selling points is that the product matches the MAP ratios identically, which have proven exceptionally well in all studies performed on them.
I'm not going to sit here and having a pissing match with you. As my original post stated (which I've now posted 2x to help with reading comprehension), the science isn't all inclusive...which is what makes me sit and say "man, the results I hear from people are astounding, HOW is this happening"?
I'd love more studies on this product as well as others. The reason more products aren't studied in depth is due to cost. This is why HTP does as many studies as they can while remaining financially feasible, and is why Performax labs performs zero studies as if they were to pay for the exorbitant cost of peer reviewed double blind studies they'd have no money left.
I'm legit not sure how many times I can write the same thing.Uh...VT...
I'm not sure how to put this elegantly, so I'm not even going to try.
Maurizio Lucà-Moretti is a fraud.
Ask him where his doctorate in medicine is from.
Ask for a copy of his dissertation
He claims the title professor, ask him what university he has ever been a professor at.
Ask him why his claimed professional title has changed repeatedly over the years to various different medicine related doctorates.
Ask why every single journal article he has ever published has been published in open acess pay-to-publish rapid peer review journals.
Ask him why he's spent the past 10 years hawking cancer and AIDS treatments on the hippie woo circuit of alternative health bull****.
And if he has anything to do with ALRI, or Hi-Tech, tell him to call me a liar or sue me. Because I'd love to go through court ordered discovery on that guy.
**** him.
You're the one who started citing fraudulent science.I'm legit not sure how many times I can write the same thing.
"man, the results I hear from people are astounding, HOW is this happening"?
How many times do I need to say that the science (aka what you're quoting) doesn't fully add up?
HOW MANY TIMES YALL
One more for good measure.I'm legit not sure how many times I can write the same thing.
"man, the results I hear from people are astounding, HOW is this happening"?
How many times do I need to say that the science (aka what you're quoting) doesn't fully add up?
HOW MANY TIMES YALL
lets review my posts, shall we?You're the one who started citing fraudulent science.
The reason the science doesn't add up because the science is fraudulent.
As in the studies that demonstrated those results were literally never performed.
if you look at the Master Amino Acid Pattern studies, there seems to be more than meets the eye.
That said...I look at Humapro and say "there's no way...just doesn't add up despite the science" (which is rare for me)
But then the anecdotal reports are INSANE.
I admit I haven't used it, but the user reports on Humapro always blow me away. It's crazy what people seem to experience with it.
do a search for the studies I mentioned above. Master Amino Acid Pattern
If you read my initial post, you'll quickly see I have never even CLOSE claimed to be an expert.
If you google the term I gave you, this is literally the 3rd link: http://masteraminoacidpattern.com/
As my initial post stated:
Oh okay, you weren't citing studies, you were just telling someone what studies to look at, that's totally different, how foolish of me.lets review my posts, shall we?
No where did I post/quote studies. I suggested he look them up.
My first post very specifically said "That said...I look at Humapro and say "there's no way...just doesn't add up despite the science" (which is rare for me)"
please, tell me how many more times I can restate that the science DOESN'T add up, yet anecdotal reports are amazing?
5 more? I'll post it 5 more times. Just let me know.
Are you aware of anyone who has compared it directly to 6-10g EAAs with 3-5g leucine (not BCAAs, not EAAs with <3g leucine, etc)? I'm not arguing that it doesn't work well, only that the research suggests that optimal EAA or even low-dose/suboptimal whey/hydro with added leucine would be able to have the same great/ideal/optimal/etc effects on MPS. My question is, simply put, do you believe MAP will increase MPS to a greater degree than what we would consider "optimal" with various protein/amino sources provided ideal leucine content? And if so, why? What science doesn't add up? It's completely logical that EAAs can increase MPS to the same degree as whole/intact protein, and can therefore be a useful replacement with less calories, therefore facilitating weight loss. I don't see anything not adding up here, MAP is doing exactly what EAAs are supposed to do.I'm legit not sure how many times I can write the same thing.
"man, the results I hear from people are astounding, HOW is this happening"?
How many times do I need to say that the science (aka what you're quoting) doesn't fully add up?
HOW MANY TIMES YALL
Oh okay, you weren't citing studies, you were just telling someone what studies to look at, that's totally different, how foolish of me.
Just let me know why a product that's apparently so groundbreaking and effective that it confounds the mind has never actually had a study published on it?
You'd think there'd be a lot of clinical interest in how some free form amino acids as a complete substitute for protein managed to cause someone to gain muscle mass while consuming zero protein and crossing a desert.
Various versions of the HumaPro writeup even cite exactly copied statistics and data from the MAP studies, of course not directly citing them because they're plainly fraudulent to anybody who gives them even a cursory glance.
The current write-ups still claim that the product has been proven in multiple clinical studies.
--
I hope you know this isn't personal, I'm more than happy to say positive things about iForce and Hi-Tech stuff past and present, but you've got a big brand ecosystem, and I don't pull punches.
Why was a product formulated based on fraudulent science that doesn't add up?Please review MY comments (in which I have posted i think 6x now...) stating I don't think the science really adds up.
4 more times now?
I didn't formulate the product.Why was a product formulated based on fraudulent science that doesn't add up?
What doesn't add up? 5.5g > 2.5g leucine content in the same overall quantity of amino acids. That's common sense, and has been shown in numerous studies, which seems to suggest that it is the leucine content that is the key/driving factor/component, not some magic/perfect ratio of amino acids. If they truly had the "perfect ratio" of amino acids that outperformed any other ratio, even if it (all other ratios) also has optimal leucine content and sufficient EAA content, then why wouldn't they test it to prove it? How does the current research show it is any different than any other EAAs? What makes it ideal? I just don't see it. It sounds like good marketing to me, as the results seem to be consistent with what can be expected with EAAs.Why was a product formulated based on fraudulent science that doesn't add up?
If Performax labs had the magic/perfect ratio of magic herbs for boosting testosterone, why isn't it being tested in a peer reviewed and double blind study to prove it?What doesn't add up? 5.5g > 2.5g leucine content in the same overall quantity of amino acids. That's common sense, and has been shown in numerous studies, which seems to suggest that it is the leucine content that is the key/driving factor/component, not some magic/perfect ratio of amino acids. If they truly had the "perfect ratio" of amino acids that outperformed any other ratio, even if it (all other ratios) also has optimal leucine content and sufficient EAA content, then why wouldn't they test it to prove it? How does the current research show it is any different than any other EAAs? What makes it ideal? I just don't see it. It sounds like good marketing to me, as the results seem to be consistent with what can be expected with EAAs.
No where did I post/quote studies. I suggested he look them up.
You sure like citing science that doesn't add up.Please review MY comments (in which I have posted i think 6x now...) stating I don't think the science really adds up.
4 more times now?
The science is fraudulent because the person publishing it is committing academic fraud.I didn't formulate the product.
Nor have I seem proof anywhere that shows MAP is fraudulent science.
Because there is no magic/perfect ratio, you unintentionally just proved my point. There are so many different herbs that will be effective, and different doses, combinations, interactions, MoAs, synergy, antagonism, etc. When did I claim Performax had the "magic/perfect" test booster? Hell, I mention M-Test, Testify, etc in the same sentence as AlphaMax XT all the time, and even say that they all have their own benefits that can give one the edge over another for a particular person and/or goal. Simply put, there is no "magic ratio."If Performax labs had the magic/perfect ratio of magic herbs for boosting testosterone, why isn't it being tested in a peer reviewed and double blind study to prove it?
Because the ingredients individually have been individually shown in human and/or animal studies to have effects that will be desirable in humansIf Performax labs had the magic/perfect ratio of magic herbs for boosting testosterone, why isn't it being tested in a peer reviewed and double blind study to prove it?
Thread starter | Similar threads | Forum | Replies | Date |
---|---|---|---|---|
25% Off ALR HumaPro Sale at M&M | Company Promotions | 3 | ||
ALRI Humapro - Apple Cider | Supplements | 4 | ||
ALRI Humapro log. | Supplement Logs | 8 | ||
ALR INDUSTRIES is giving some Humapro away! | Company Promotions | 73 | ||
USA FS/FT: HiTech Lipodrene Hardcore, ALRI Humapro Orange (90 servings) | Supplement Auction | 1 |