Guest viewing limit reached
  • You have reached the maximum number of guest views allowed
  • Please register below to remove this limitation

Protein....

MusclesFrogs

New member
Guys, there have been a LOT of vague answers here based simply on what you do as opposed to the factual science of it. Got it, meat has more nutrients, oils, etc. 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. I don't want to hear any anecdotal data about what you do and how it helps, Im just curious if there's a link to a scientific study that compares the two - that is all that matters.
 
Now would this be a study that involves trolls or actual men that actually lift?

Oooh ooh ooh me like meat! me like protein! Me lift big weight to make muscle!
 
I cant believe this retard doesn't get that you can't do a study on this shiz..And why the fug wud anyone wanna live off protein shakes?! Here's one variable that no study will be able to pinpoint. No two people metabolize food the exact same way.
 
musclefool said:
I haven't had a protein shake in about 6 months and I have been doin better without it. Meats all day
Click to expand...

Nice, I'd love to be able to do that instead of shakes , do you eat larger portions of meat with breakfast, lunch and dinner or do you eat say 6 meals a day with meat every one. Just seems you'd have to do ALOT of eating to get even 1g per lb of BW and on top of that seems pricey not to mention time consuming.
 
MusclesFrogs said:
Guys, there have been a LOT of vague answers here based simply on what you do as opposed to the factual science of it. Got it, meat has more nutrients, oils, etc. 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. I don't want to hear any anecdotal data about what you do and how it helps, Im just curious if there's a link to a scientific study that compares the two - that is all that matters.
Click to expand...

Use common sense here, when you eat something, think about each step of digestion. Your body is designed for solid real food.
 
rugger48 said:
Use common sense here, when you eat something, think about each step of digestion. Your body is designed for solid real food.
Click to expand...

I don't think this guy has much of that otherwise he wouldn't be pressing such a dumb ass topic so persistently.
 
mikeg313 said:
Nice, I'd love to be able to do that instead of shakes , do you eat larger portions of meat with breakfast, lunch and dinner or do you eat say 6 meals a day with meat every one. Just seems you'd have to do ALOT of eating to get even 1g per lb of BW and on top of that seems pricey not to mention time consuming.
Click to expand...

That's your opinion.
And I have mine :)
 
mikeg313 said:
Nice, I'd love to be able to do that instead of shakes , do you eat larger portions of meat with breakfast, lunch and dinner or do you eat say 6 meals a day with meat every one. Just seems you'd have to do ALOT of eating to get even 1g per lb of BW and on top of that seems pricey not to mention time consuming.
Click to expand...

Dude chicken breast is 1.99 per lb.. 1lb of chickens got about 100g of protein. I eat at least 8oz for at least 3 meals. Not difficult or expensive and only takes about 45 min to cook up my food for the day
 
mikeg313 said:
Nice, I'd love to be able to do that instead of shakes , do you eat larger portions of meat with breakfast, lunch and dinner or do you eat say 6 meals a day with meat every one. Just seems you'd have to do ALOT of eating to get even 1g per lb of BW and on top of that seems pricey not to mention time consuming.
Click to expand...

Hitting protein goals with all whole foods isn't really that hard. Chicken breast man. Even a grilled cheese sandwich with two slices of cheese elicits roughly 20g of protein. Have two 40g. Drink 16 oz of milk 16 more. 6 eggs for breakfast 36g. Two cans of tuna 44g without bread... that's roughly 130g without meat. Add in some grilled chicken, steak, lean ground beef, Turkey, salmon and you'll be surprised.

Rough estimations but the point remains the same
 
machorox123 said:
Dude chicken breast is 1.99 per lb.. 1lb of chickens got about 100g of protein. I eat at least 8oz for at least 3 meals. Not difficult or expensive and only takes about 45 min to cook up my food for the day
Click to expand...

I just can't get that much chicken down anymore. I've cooked it every which way under the sun and can't do it in that quantity.
 
Spaniard said:
Hitting protein goals with all whole foods isn't really that hard. Chicken breast man. Even a grilled cheese sandwich with two slices of cheese elicits roughly 20g of protein. Have two 40g. Drink 16 oz of milk 16 more. 6 eggs for breakfast 36g. Two cans of tuna 44g without bread... that's roughly 130g without meat. Add in some grilled chicken, steak, lean ground beef, Turkey, salmon and you'll be surprised.

Rough estimations but the point remains the same
Click to expand...

Yeah , you're right, I was thinking of the meats I eat and was thinking damn that would be hard to get all that in. I also didn't consider dairy since I've cut that out completely from my diet. I'm so burnt on chicken and tuna I barely touch either anymore. So mainly my whole food protein intake consists of eggs, steak and ground turkey with snacks like almonds , natty PB ,etc throughout the day. On average I get probably 120-140 grams a day from food and the rest from shakes 2-3 times a day to account per lb of BW. Once I start bulking again ill have to get over my taste buds and dairy bloating issues.
 
snagencyV2.0 said:
and this is what happens when we get all sciency

the body is not a textbook
Click to expand...

Well, you do have the right to be an attorney if you want to.

Gotta use all tools available to us: science, anecdotal feedback, experience, etc... If you're one sided biased (which I know you're not) you miss out on A LOT of possibilities, period.
 
MusclesFrogs said:
Guys, there have been a LOT of vague answers here based simply on what you do as opposed to the factual science of it. Got it, meat has more nutrients, oils, etc. 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. I don't want to hear any anecdotal data about what you do and how it helps, Im just curious if there's a link to a scientific study that compares the two - that is all that matters.
Click to expand...

Those two can't really be compared fairly and you sort of stated that. A piece of meat that is equivalent in protein content to a protein shake has many additional factors (fat, calories, etc.).
 
another whole food-protein shake debate......sigh
 
machorox123 said:
I cant believe this retard doesn't get that you can't do a study on this shiz..And why the fug wud anyone wanna live off protein shakes?! Here's one variable that no study will be able to pinpoint. No two people metabolize food the exact same way.
Click to expand...

By your grammar, you're far too intelligent for me to compete with.
 
Touey said:
MuscleFrogs... I will try to be honest wiff you, there are NNOOOOOOOOOOOOO Studies ASSSS noone would take on such a thing... You NEED WHOLE FOODS FROGER......... There is No Way WPI is going 2 fit dat bill..
Click to expand...
Hi Touey, you're basing that on nothing. Quite literally, by definition, you are basing that on nothing.
 
snagencyV2.0 said:
and this is what happens when we get all sciency

the body is not a textbook
Click to expand...

Love it when people use the word "sciency" - you're right, there's nothing "sciency" about the human body, and there's definitely no textbooks about the human body. Such valid points you've made. Hope next time you go to the doctor, you tell him not to be sciency when examining your body
 
Aleksandar37 said:
Those two can't really be compared fairly and you sort of stated that. A piece of meat that is equivalent in protein content to a protein shake has many additional factors (fat, calories, etc.).
Click to expand...

Hi Aleks, I know, would like to see if those additional factors, fat, calories, etc. actually have a significant difference in muscle growth.
 
MusclesFrogs said:
Hi Touey, you're basing that on nothing. Quite literally, by definition, you are basing that on nothing.
Click to expand...

I know, actually maybe some will have a base for studying the comparison & who knows it shall turn up with wpi having for the better than wholefoods, but when I have too much whey for my personally I feel less from the benefit vs wholefoods...
 
Touey said:
I know, actually maybe some will have a base for studying the comparison & who knows it shall turn up with wpi having for the better than wholefoods, but when I have too much whey for my personally I feel less from the benefit vs wholefoods...
Click to expand...
That's at least fair and rational - unlike some members on this thread.
 
MusclesFrogs said:
Hi Aleks, I know, would like to see if those additional factors, fat, calories, etc. actually have a significant difference in muscle growth.
Click to expand...

You're seriously questioning whether or not extra calories contribute to muscle growth!? What's next...questioning whether testosterone makes a significant difference?
 
Rodja said:
You're seriously questioning whether or not extra calories contribute to muscle growth!? What's next...questioning whether testosterone makes a significant difference?
Click to expand...

That is what he was saying in the other thread. I think he is under the illusion that protein alone dictates weight gain, at least this is how I interpreted it
 
Rodja said:
You're seriously questioning whether or not extra calories contribute to muscle growth!? What's next...questioning whether testosterone makes a significant difference?
Click to expand...

Yes, that is exactly what I am questioning. If there is not a scientific study proving it does, it would be irrational to not question it. Does that not make sense to you. And I am not talking about mass, I am talking about muscle mass. Obviously more calories will increase mass, but which.
 
MusclesFrogs said:
Yes, that is exactly what I am questioning. If there is not a scientific study proving it does, it would be irrational to not question it. Does that not make sense to you. And I am not talking about mass, I am talking about muscle mass. Obviously more calories will increase mass, but which.
Click to expand...

FFS, you're just a lost cause. There are an incalculable number of factors that play into the hypertrophic response beyond a specific macronutrient. It's irrational to not understand how mutlifaceted this equation is and that there will never be a definitive statement that will apply to everyone based on simple percentages and genetics. You first need to initiate an appropriate metabolic response before any hypertrophy can occur and, again, there will never be a universal approach to this. You then have to take into account genetic factors, lifestyle, age, work capacity, caloric intake, insulin responses, etc.. However, what you're essentially questioning is thermodynamics and those are proven laws of physics.
 
Rodja said:
FFS, you're just a lost cause. There are an incalculable number of factors that play into the hypertrophic response beyond a specific macronutrient. It's irrational to not understand how mutlifaceted this equation is and that there will never be a definitive statement that will apply to everyone based on simple percentages and genetics. You first need to initiate an appropriate metabolic response before any hypertrophy can occur and, again, there will never be a universal approach to this. You then have to take into account genetic factors, lifestyle, age, work capacity, caloric intake, insulin responses, etc.. However, what you're essentially questioning is thermodynamics and those are proven laws of physics.
Click to expand...
You're wrong, you're just obfuscating the issue by misdirecting the intent. You can definitely do studies with a large enough sample group to account for variable that still shows a consistent value. And the averaged data will account for anomalies.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top