Pure PF3: Patent Pending Pharma Protein - Loggers Needed

[Resolve]

Did those colostrum studies use colostrum or are you referring to the colostrinin study (colostrinin is basically strictly the PRPs from colostrum). The colostrinin study is where I've seen the results where there was tangible positive effects on auto-immune, Alzheimer, and allergies, but colostrinin is not colostrum, it's extracted from colostrum but it's not colostrum.

The only studies I'm referring to were the ones in the write-up for PF3

 

[kissdadookie]

The only studies I'm referring to were the ones in the write-up for PF3

So then, MAN Reps/The Science, what was the colostrum study you were referring to? Did you actually mean the colostrinin study?

 

[thescience]

Because you're not letting me determine the validity of the study. You're feeding me the data without showing me the study. If you have no context, no methods, how can you be sure the experiments were performed properly? Controlled properly? Results can be misinterpreted or faked - checking the methods and the figures allows for validation of the responsible conduct of science. After all, if PF3 performs no different from whey, why take it? That's the importance of that control, which was not included.

If it would be linking to a site that could be construed as competitor to AM, I'm curious, is this "study" even peer reviewed? Or is it simply proprietary data from this "drug company/"

But I'm done. It took me sitting down and wading through 30+ papers myself when I should been able to ask a simple question and receive a simple forthright answer from MAN reps. But that was not the case. I was told to essentially figure it out for myself. So I did.

And no it's not colostrum. that's why I said "basically like colostrum" - it's an immuno-peptide enriched protein isolate, similar in immunological composition to the colostrum and sprayed-freeze dried pigs blood used in your references.

im not "keeping you from determining" anything about anything; just because you havent researched something further doesnt make it invalid. sadly, most people who consider themselves skeptics are that way because theyre lazy; by dismissing everything, no attention has to be paid and nothing has to be done. believing in something is the hardest thing in the world. a true skeptic doubts the impossibility of anything. now you are saying the study could have been "faked", which is a sure way to deny everything anyone presents to you; i've heard this song before man: rep from another company sits there and abnegates everything i say, pushing me for more and more data (presumably to determine the extent to which im not omniscient) dodging the points i make while hoping to find something more to find fault in, instead of asserting so much as a shred of information that has created this doubt. i could understand if you just wanted more information because youre curious, but your claim that this drug company just waltzed through with fake studies and got their fake product into hospitals for fake treatment for multiple conditions is absurd and totally unjustified; what this drug company is using is the best, most effective, and most sensible approach to IBS-D bar none.

 

[kissdadookie]

im not "keeping you from determining" anything about anything; just because you havent researched something further doesnt make it invalid. sadly, most people who consider themselves skeptics are that way because theyre lazy; a true skeptic doubts the impossibility of anything. now you are saying the study could have been "faked", which is a sure way to deny everything i present to you; i've heard this song before man: rep from another company sits there and abnegates everything i say, pushing me for more and more data (presumably to determine the extent to which im not omniscient) dodging the points i make while hoping to find something more to find fault in, instead of asserting so much as a shred of information that has created this doubt. i could understand if you just wanted more information because youre curious, but your claim that this drug company just waltzed through with fake studies and got their fake product into hospitals for fake treatment for multiple conditions is absurd and totally unjustified; what this drug company is using is the best, most effective, and most sensible approach to IBS-D bar none.

I wouldn't consider this the most sensible approach to IBS-D at all. From what we have learned in the field of microbiology and the human GI, IBS is essentially mainly an issue caused by a GI environment which is out of whack and has become so mostly due to the modern diet. This is why probiotics and digestive enzymes have become so popular in the past 10 or so years. Honestly, one should be using probiotics and digestive enzymes as the first remedy to relieve something like IBS (along with a monitoring of diet). IgG would NOT be high on the list of things to supplement with to alleviate something like IBS. SOMETHING is causing the GI inflammation, IgG supplementation MAY relieve the inflammation but only temporarily since you're still not getting to the root of the problem, a out of whack GI environment.

 

[thescience]

I wouldn't consider this the most sensible approach to IBS-D at all. From what we have learned in the field of microbiology and the human GI, IBS is essentially mainly an issue caused by a GI environment which is out of whack and has become so mostly due to the modern diet. This is why probiotics and digestive enzymes have become so popular in the past 10 or so years. Honestly, one should be using probiotics and digestive enzymes as the first remedy to relieve something like IBS (along with a monitoring of diet). IgG would NOT be high on the list of things to supplement with to alleviate something like IBS. SOMETHING is causing the GI inflammation, IgG supplementation MAY relieve the inflammation but only temporarily since you're still not getting to the root of the problem, a out of whack GI environment.

that's the beauty of it; this is IBS-D (not ibs, but diarrhea predominant IBS), so probiotics arent really practical with people as most strains will increase bowel movements. i had a friend, and she used this probiotic blend 300billion units taken 3x daily, as opposed to the 1-5 billion usually recommended (which also increased motility with her at that dose); they said the digestive upset would pass and it was only a herx reaction, but the fact is the months went by on it and the increased runs from it never stopped, except when she discontinued. the exception with probiotics is something called b. infantis, which we found (consistant wiht its claims) that it slowed digestion, but only when not taken with other strains. anyway, the stuff in PF3 is not only anti-inflammatory, but there are MANY substances in it that are strongly anti-pathogenic and beneficial to the healthy flora which would only improve the GI environment you have correctly referrenced as a major issue with IBS. anyway, i dont know anyone who has been prescibed suitable amounts of b. infantis in this country; sadly, doctors just offer the funkiest of drugs to treat it. immunoglobins were actually used as antibiotics before we had antibiotics. nowadays, hospitals are offering surgeries that destroy the nerves in the gi tract to prevent spasms ect; crazy stuff. if a doctor is going to write a script, the stuff in that study is the way to go, and some otc b. infantis on the side would definately help

 

[kissdadookie]

that's the beauty of it; this is IBS-D (not ibs, but diarrhea predominant IBS), so probiotics arent really practical with people as most strains will increase bowel movements. i had a friend, and she used this probiotic blend 300billion units taken 3x daily, as opposed to the 1-5 billion usually recommended (which also increased motility with her at that dose); they said the digestive upset would pass and it was only a herx reaction, but the fact is the months went by on it and the increased runs from it never stopped, except when she discontinued. the exception with probiotics is something called b. infantis, which we found (consistant wiht its claims) that it slowed digestion, but only when not taken with other strains. anyway, the stuff in PF3 is not only anti-inflammatory, but there are MANY substances in it that are strongly anti-pathogenic and beneficial to the healthy flora which would only improve the GI environment you have correctly referrenced as a major issue with IBS. anyway, i dont know anyone who has been prescibed suitable amounts of b. infantis in this country; sadly, doctors just offer the funkiest of drugs to treat it. immunoglobins were actually used as antibiotics before we had antibiotics. nowadays, hospitals are offering surgeries that destroy the nerves in the gi tract to prevent spasms ect.

So would the following study be suggesting that IgG is higher in people with IBS-D vs non-D?

Invalid Link Removed

Because looking at that, it would suggest to me that higher serum IgG is linked with diarrhea.

 

[Resolve]

im not "keeping you from determining" anything about anything; just because you havent researched something further doesnt make it invalid. sadly, most people who consider themselves skeptics are that way because theyre lazy; by dismissing everything, no attention has to be paid and nothing has to be done. believing in something is the hardest thing in the world. a true skeptic doubts the impossibility of anything. now you are saying the study could have been "faked", which is a sure way to deny everything anyone presents to you; i've heard this song before man: rep from another company sits there and abnegates everything i say, pushing me for more and more data (presumably to determine the extent to which im not omniscient) dodging the points i make while hoping to find something more to find fault in, instead of asserting so much as a shred of information that has created this doubt. i could understand if you just wanted more information because youre curious, but your claim that this drug company just waltzed through with fake studies and got their fake product into hospitals for fake treatment for multiple conditions is absurd and totally unjustified; what this drug company is using is the best, most effective, and most sensible approach to IBS-D bar none.

Let's say someone comes up to you and says "I have magic beans!" and you say "wow, what do these magic beans do?" They say "They make your wishes come true! Here's proof!" And they show you numbers.

Now you don't know where these numbers came from or how they got those numbers, so you ask "Can I see HOW you got those numbers?"

If the magic bean seller repeatedly failed to tell you HOW they got those numbers, would you be inclined to believe his beans were really magic?

All I'm asking, and all you won't tell me, is HOW you got those numbers.

Edit: and I'm not CLAIMING ANYTHING was faked. But it does occur, and peer review is a huge mechanism for keeping that in check. But since you dodged the question, I take it it was just proprietary data?

Also, I do not appreciate the personal attacks. I have kept my comments pertaining to the subject at hand and I would appreciate you doing the same.

My skepticism is the result of CAVEAT EMPTOR - it's your job to sell me your Magic Beans. Just tell me HOW you got those numbers.

Calling my skepticism lazy is astounding considering I spent a valuable chunk of my own limited free time to review the references of the product in question. I did the research and even was kind enough to relate what those studies suggested to the other users in this thread. I familiarized myself with the subject when I found my own knowledge was lacking and came to my own conclusions after studying this for myself from the primary sources. Calling me lazy is just, well, simply not true.

Neither is saying skecptism means dismissing everything and is easy. Have my questions and involvement in this thread been easy? Not by a long shot. I just wanted to know what the deal was with PF3 and it's been like pulling the proverbial 5 year olds teeth.

 

[hvactech]

Are these the same magic beans that willow used to turn the troll into stone....

 

[bdcc]

that's the beauty of it; this is IBS-D (not ibs, but diarrhea predominant IBS), so probiotics arent really practical with people as most strains will increase bowel movements. i had a friend, and she used this probiotic blend 300billion units taken 3x daily, as opposed to the 1-5 billion usually recommended (which also increased motility with her at that dose); they said the digestive upset would pass and it was only a herx reaction, but the fact is the months went by on it and the increased runs from it never stopped, except when she discontinued. the exception with probiotics is something called b. infantis, which we found (consistant wiht its claims) that it slowed digestion, but only when not taken with other strains. anyway, the stuff in PF3 is not only anti-inflammatory, but there are MANY substances in it that are strongly anti-pathogenic and beneficial to the healthy flora which would only improve the GI environment you have correctly referrenced as a major issue with IBS. anyway, i dont know anyone who has been prescibed suitable amounts of b. infantis in this country; sadly, doctors just offer the funkiest of drugs to treat it. immunoglobins were actually used as antibiotics before we had antibiotics. nowadays, hospitals are offering surgeries that destroy the nerves in the gi tract to prevent spasms ect; crazy stuff. if a doctor is going to write a script, the stuff in that study is the way to go, and some otc b. infantis on the side would definately help

I stay as a lurker in threads that garner a lot of controversial discussion because my intention is never a rep war.

I have suffered from severe inflammatory bowel disease on two separate occasions so my interest in PF3 is perhaps more relevant than most.

I just wanted to say that the sentences in bold are not true. "Most" probiotics do not increase bowel movement frequency. I can provide you with research on probiotics which demonstrates decreased stool frequency.

Invalid Link Removed

"We have searched for as many of these trials as possible and collected together the data in a systematic way to try to discover whether or not probiotics are beneficial in acute diarrhoea. We identified 63 trials, which included a total of 8014 people ‐ mainly infants and children. Probiotics were not associated with any adverse effects. Nearly all studies reported a shortened duration of diarrhoea and reduced stool frequency in people who received probiotics compared to the controls. Overall, probiotics reduced the duration of diarrhoea by around 25 hours, the risk of diarrhoea lasting four or more days by 59% and resulted in about one fewer diarrhoeal stool on day 2 after the intervention"

Summary of research in a multitude of pathologies: Invalid Link Removed

There are people who are genuinely interested in the research who are not simply trying to stir up drama. You are making it hard for people to ask questions because your answers are very vague. Despite the way you have handled the thread I am still interested in reading the research because it is pertinent to my interests (external to bodybuilding).

That is my only contribution to the thread.

 

[kissdadookie]

So, anything on the study I linked to? Am I reading that study incorrectly? I am after all, not a scientist. My interpretation of the study was that IBS-D subjects were found to have higher levels of IgG in their bloodwork which would (I assume) be contradicting to the anti-inflammation and IBS-D alleviating properties of IgG which suggestions being made here.

 

[Resolve]

Alright let's clear the air - let's pretend we're coming at this fresh. I already understand that there is some indication PF3 has anti-inflammatory effects on the gut. Fantastic.

Here's my only remaining question, laying everything else aside:

Do you have scientific evidence of PF3 stimulating (at the 5g dosage) more anabolism than normal whey (at it's normal ~30-50g dosage) in people?

 

[kissdadookie]

Anything on the study I linked? ( Invalid Link Removed )

I've reread it and I'm pretty sure that what it's saying is that there is a higher concentration of IgG in the bloods of IBS-D subjects when compared to IBS subjects. So if the claim on this thread is being made that IgG is anti-inflammatory for the gut and should lead to LESS bowel movement caused by the inflammation, then why is the IgG concentration found to be higher in the bloods of the IBS-D subjects? I find it conflicting that the bloods shows a higher concentration of IgG in IBS-D subjects yet on this thread the claim is being made that increased IgG should actual reduce the IBS-D symptoms. Wouldn't increased IgG ingestion lead to increased IgG serum concentrations? Wouldn't that mean that IgG may actually be the opposite of what a person suffering from IBS-D should be supplementing with?

 

[Resolve]

Anything on the study I linked? ( Invalid Link Removed )

I've reread it and I'm pretty sure that what it's saying is that there is a higher concentration of IgG in the bloods of IBS-D subjects when compared to IBS subjects. So if the claim on this thread is being made that IgG is anti-inflammatory for the gut and should lead to LESS bowel movement caused by the inflammation, then why is the IgG concentration found to be higher in the bloods of the IBS-D subjects? I find it conflicting that the bloods shows a higher concentration of IgG in IBS-D subjects yet on this thread the claim is being made that increased IgG should actual reduce the IBS-D symptoms. Wouldn't increased IgG ingestion lead to increased IgG serum concentrations? Wouldn't that mean that IgG may actually be the opposite of what a person suffering from IBS-D should be supplementing with?

Serum levels and gut levels don't necessarily correspond. This study is using antibodies raised against specific foods as an assay to detmermine which food the people were allergic to and as a readout for the severity of that allergy (i.e. more antibody in serum = more allergic).

Oral IgG consumption, as I found in reading for this thread, does exhibit some improvement in several IBS-D models. However, oral IgG consumption will never lead directly to increased serum IgG levels.

The serum IgG levels in the IBS-D group could be because of higher systemic inflammation than in the constipated group, but I'd have to read the full text to be sure.

 

[kissdadookie]

Serum levels and gut levels don't necessarily correspond. This study is using antibodies raised against specific foods as an assay to detmermine which food the animals were allergic to and as a readout for the severity of that allergy (i.e. more antibody in serum = more allergic).

Oral IgG consumption, as I found in reading for this thread, does exhibit some improvement in several IBS-D models. However, oral IgG consumption will never lead directly to increased serum IgG levels.

Gotcha gotcha. Thanks for clearing that up. So I'm guessing that the IgG will not actually be absorbed into the bloodstream then? Instead it will act on the GI lining instead where it can help reduce GI inflammation?

 

[Resolve]

Gotcha gotcha. Thanks for clearing that up. So I'm guessing that the IgG will not actually be absorbed into the bloodstream then? Instead it will act on the GI lining instead where it can help reduce GI inflammation?

Exactly. I haven't seen a definite mechanism, but one reference postulated that the antibodies (the IgG) are actually binding bacterial antigens in the gut as they pass through and before they are digested. I think this is an interesting idea, but the gut is such a harsh environment I'd want to see it empirically before I believe it.

 

[kissdadookie]

Exactly. I haven't seen a definite mechanism, but one reference postulated that the antibodies (the IgG) are actually binding bacterial antigens in the gut as they pass through and before they are digested. I think this is an interesting idea, but the gut is such a harsh environment I'd want to see it empirically before I believe it.

Gotcha, understood. Good info.

 

[Misfit28]

Exactly. I haven't seen a definite mechanism, but one reference postulated that the antibodies (the IgG) are actually binding bacterial antigens in the gut as they pass through and before they are digested. I think this is an interesting idea, but the gut is such a harsh environment I'd want to see it empirically before I believe it.

Thanks for the good info!

 

[thescience]

I stay as a lurker in threads that garner a lot of controversial discussion because my intention is never a rep war.I have suffered from severe inflammatory bowel disease on two separate occasions so my interest in PF3 is perhaps more relevant than most.I just wanted to say that the sentences in bold are not true. "Most" probiotics do not increase bowel movement frequency. I can provide you with research on probiotics which demonstrates decreased stool frequency.Invalid Link Removed"We have searched for as many of these trials as possible and collected together the data in a systematic way to try to discover whether or not probiotics are beneficial in acute diarrhoea. We identified 63 trials, which included a total of 8014 people ‐ mainly infants and children. Probiotics were not associated with any adverse effects. Nearly all studies reported a shortened duration of diarrhoea and reduced stool frequency in people who received probiotics compared to the controls. Overall, probiotics reduced the duration of diarrhoea by around 25 hours, the risk of diarrhoea lasting four or more days by 59% and resulted in about one fewer diarrhoeal stool on day 2 after the intervention" Summary of research in a multitude of pathologies: Invalid Link RemovedThere are people who are genuinely interested in the research who are not simply trying to stir up drama. You are making it hard for people to ask questions because your answers are very vague. Despite the way you have handled the thread I am still interested in reading the research because it is pertinent to my interests (external to bodybuilding).That is my only contribution to the thread.

feel free to contribute anything; im just busting Resolves chops in kind; i dont feel the need to be less "vague" when refraining from backing up the efficacy of a drug when "all substances sold as drugs in the United States must be approved by the federal Food and Drug Administration. THis approval process that requires a series of phased drug trials. The first phases involve in vitro and animal testing. If no adverse side effects are observed and significant ameliorative effects are found, testing on human subjects is undertaken." sure i know probiotics help. i shouldnt talk about them as necessarily speeding up digestion in an unwanted way; i see probiotic products that make pitches that they will both stop diarrhea and stop constipation (thus speeding things up in some cases), but when i typically talk to somebody who has been on a probiotic protocall for ibs-d, they tell me they have only had limited success using various probiotic blends that are out there. the thought that people just arent taking enough may have merit, but the megadoses that, say, customprobiotics brand makes are hard for people to tolerate (the diarrhea i was referencing). i dont believe a megadose of b. subtilus would have that effect necessarily, as smaller amounts affect me very differently; while my digestion is normally rock solid, taking various probiotics i find comprimises that (loose stools), with the exception of the b. subtilus strain which has a constipating effect. with regards to inflammatory bowel disease, another interesting avenue to explore would be the adrenals; stuff like hordenine is said to have a bowel slowing effect, and the adrenals are involved with how water is used and the adrenal hormones can be very anti-inflammatory; i alot of people's adrenals are worse off than they know; look at how popular coffee is; ephedra was the most popular supplement of all time, and one of the things the fda used to prohibit it was that peoples bowels got messed up (presumably when they crashed from it after their adrenals got more exhausted.)

 

[thescience]

Alright let's clear the air - let's pretend we're coming at this fresh. I already understand that there is some indication PF3 has anti-inflammatory effects on the gut. Fantastic.

exactly!. proven anti-inflammatory and its used as a medical food in hospitals . i needed to here you say that man. you know, with reference to how pf3 compares to whey, i havent seen any studies on that, but i dont really see how to compare them, since they contain different ingredients. im one of these guys who has no intention of ditching his regular protein powder since i know what it can do. my plan is to use it to complement what im already doing. i know somebody who is going to switch, i think, so i will be paying attention to that. there are people who dont think taking protein is necessary for bodybuilding; they lift and say they make gains; i guess you could say im the opposite of that, and im way too paranoid about my protein to stop taking it

 

[Misfit28]

exactly!. proven anti-inflammatory and its used as a medical food in hospitals . i needed to here you say that man. you know, with reference to how pf3 compares to whey, i havent seen any studies on that, but i dont really see how to compare them, since they contain different ingredients. im one of these guys who has no intention of ditching his regular protein powder since i know what it can do. my plan is to use it to complement what im already doing. i know somebody who is going to switch, i think, so i will be paying attention to that. there are people who dont think taking protein is necessary for bodybuilding; they lift and say they make gains; i guess you could say im the opposite of that, and im way too paranoid about my protein to stop taking it

I haven't used any protein powders since I started. I have had a couple of protein bars here and there just to make up some calories, so I guess I'm not off of ALL whey like I intended.

However, the last week or so I have consumed ~95% of my protein via food.

 

[kissdadookie]

feel free to contribute anything; im just busting Resolves chops in kind; i dont feel the need to be less "vague" when refraining from backing up the efficacy of a drug when "all substances sold as drugs in the United States must be approved by the federal Food and Drug Administration. THis approval process that requires a series of phased drug trials. The first phases involve in vitro and animal testing. If no adverse side effects are observed and significant ameliorative effects are found, testing on human subjects is undertaken." sure i know probiotics help. i shouldnt talk about them as necessarily speeding up digestion in an unwanted way; i see probiotic products that make pitches that they will both stop diarrhea and stop constipation (thus speeding things up in some cases), but when i typically talk to somebody who has been on a probiotic protocall for ibs-d, they tell me they have only had limited success using various probiotic blends that are out there. the thought that people just arent taking enough may have merit, but the megadoses that, say, customprobiotics brand makes are hard for people to tolerate (the diarrhea i was referencing). i dont believe a megadose of b. subtilus would have that effect necessarily, as smaller amounts affect me very differently; while my digestion is normally rock solid, taking various probiotics i find comprimises that (loose stools), with the exception of the b. subtilus strain which has a constipating effect. with regards to inflammatory bowel disease, another interesting avenue to explore would be the adrenals; stuff like hordenine is said to have a bowel slowing effect, and the adrenals are involved with how water is used and the adrenal hormones can be very anti-inflammatory; i alot of people's adrenals are worse off than they know; look at how popular coffee is; ephedra was the most popular supplement of all time, and one of the things the fda used to prohibit it was that peoples bowels got messed up (presumably when they crashed from it after their adrenals got more exhausted.)

Probiotics have a cleansing effect especially when your gut flora is out of whack. Another thing that people completely ignore whilst taking probiotics is to also make dietary changes. Dietary changes needs to go hand in hand with probiotics as there are certain things that the healthy probiotics needs to sustain themselves. If what you ingest from food ends up being things that feeds the bad bacteria, all you're going to end up doing is have the good bacteria constantly fighting the bad bacteria for resources. The bad bacteria will continue to thrive due to a pro-bad bacteria diet and then the good bacteria will constantly give you a cleansing/detox effect as it continues to flush the bad stuff out.

 

[Resolve]

feel free to contribute anything; im just busting Resolves chops in kind; i dont feel the need to be less "vague" when refraining from backing up the efficacy of a drug when "all substances sold as drugs in the United States must be approved by the federal Food and Drug Administration. THis approval process that requires a series of phased drug trials. The first phases involve in vitro and animal testing. If no adverse side effects are observed and significant ameliorative effects are found, testing on human subjects is undertaken." sure i know probiotics help. i shouldnt talk about them as necessarily speeding up digestion in an unwanted way; i see probiotic products that make pitches that they will both stop diarrhea and stop constipation (thus speeding things up in some cases), but when i typically talk to somebody who has been on a probiotic protocall for ibs-d, they tell me they have only had limited success using various probiotic blends that are out there. the thought that people just arent taking enough may have merit, but the megadoses that, say, customprobiotics brand makes are hard for people to tolerate (the diarrhea i was referencing). i dont believe a megadose of b. subtilus would have that effect necessarily, as smaller amounts affect me very differently; while my digestion is normally rock solid, taking various probiotics i find comprimises that (loose stools), with the exception of the b. subtilus strain which has a constipating effect. with regards to inflammatory bowel disease, another interesting avenue to explore would be the adrenals; stuff like hordenine is said to have a bowel slowing effect, and the adrenals are involved with how water is used and the adrenal hormones can be very anti-inflammatory; i alot of people's adrenals are worse off than they know; look at how popular coffee is; ephedra was the most popular supplement of all time, and one of the things the fda used to prohibit it was that peoples bowels got messed up (presumably when they crashed from it after their adrenals got more exhausted.)

Not sure how what this has to do with anything... Nor how it's supposedly "busting my chops..."

exactly!. proven anti-inflammatory and its used as a medical food in hospitals . i needed to here you say that man. you know, with reference to how pf3 compares to whey, i havent seen any studies on that, but i dont really see how to compare them, since they contain different ingredients. im one of these guys who has no intention of ditching his regular protein powder since i know what it can do. my plan is to use it to complement what im already doing. i know somebody who is going to switch, i think, so i will be paying attention to that. there are people who dont think taking protein is necessary for bodybuilding; they lift and say they make gains; i guess you could say im the opposite of that, and im way too paranoid about my protein to stop taking it

Yeah, I've said that there's evidence for the anti-inflammation in the gut now several times...

So there is no evidence that this is anabolic at the dose given. All this is is an anti-diarrhetic gut aid by your own admission. The only gains you'll see from this are if you have such an inflamed gut that it's messing with your nutrient absorption - if that, since I don't recall nutrient absorption actually being assayed in any of the references. Not superior to whey at all for muscle gain. As you said "I needed to (sic) 'here' you say that."

Because what that means is that the "Only 3% of your whey actually does anything" graph on the first page of this thread is grossly inaccurate and misleading. It specifically asks "Why are you putting this crap in your body?" in regard to normal whey - and says that less than one-tenth of whey is beneficial.

So the message of the image is that I could replace my plain old whey with PF3 and still makes gains because I'd still be getting that "3% that actually does something!" But now you've admitted there is absolutely no reason to believe that.

Thank you for finally making this clear to me.

 

[Resolve]

This image, just to be clear:

Invalid Link Removed

 

[thescience]

Not sure how what this has to do with anything... Nor how it's supposedly "busting my chops..."

its very relevant; you made several statements that there were possibly no significant anti-inflammatory effects, and you challenged me that there were proven medical benefits. when i showed you information from the study, you described what you saw as possibly "invalid" and "fake." i put the statement about the fda requirements of any drug to demonstrate that the studies performed on that DRUG were totally acceptable to the FDA, and onto hospitals and doctors as indicative of a significant benefit; that totally trumps your wild speculation that the benefits described by that company are "invalid" or "fake."

All this is is an anti-diarrhetic gut aid by your own admission.

i have not limited it to that; i raised that aspect of it to counter your unfounded charges that it perhaps didnt exhibit any medical benefit. its hard to get past the degree of contention you had just about that. anyway, its good to see youve totally changed your stance on all that nonsense about the study/claimed benefits being "fake."

Not superior to whey at all for muscle gain. As you said "I needed to (sic) 'here' you say that."

i didnt make any claim whether its worse or better. i said i dont compare them and i dont intend to quit my protein, since i figure why not include both.

So the message of the image is that I could replace my plain old whey with PF3 and still makes gains because I'd still be getting that "3% that actually does something!" But now you've admitted there is absolutely no reason to believe that.

there are guys who make gains without taking any supplements, and there are guys who have taken protein powder to no avail, or worse, to bloating or digestive upset, so yeah i have reason enough to believe that. i believe things freely to form ongoing hypothesis that will motivate me to actually try a product and get beyond mere postulation. contrary to what youve previously stated, im not selling you anything; im spreading the word, and i will defend a product from undue and postulated criticisms from competing companies, so that it will have a chance to let the market decide its fate. any business faces a thousand threats to the survival of their product offering, even when its the best stuff on earth it will be necessary to talk about best case scenarious, the reality is this: THERE IS A HUGE MARKET FOR THIS TYPE OF PRODUCT, as evidenced by the MANY results people are getting from their MANY repeat orders of oral immunoglobin/growth factor products, so you can dump all of your efforts to make this look like its only intended for a small few. none of us can say the extent of how much inflammation affects us, except perhaps the many people who take this sort of product to great benefit and you havent presented an arguement to support your efforts to downplay the advantage of countering that inflammation is such a crucial area.

 

[Resolve]

Ah yes, the good ole "Let the market sort it out..."

There's a huge market for homeopathy and scientology too...

As far as I'm concerned, no evidence = no go. And you didn't even address the issue of your misleading graphic. You specifically stated you wouldn't give up whey for this product, and yet that's exactly what it suggests. Do you honestly believe 97% of whey does NOTHING?

But I don't even know why I'm bothering anymore - I got my answer. These beans ain't magic.

Unsubb'ing, don't expect another reply.

 

[thebigt]

feel free to contribute anything; im just busting Resolves chops in kind; i dont feel the need to be less "vague" when refraining from backing up the efficacy of a drug when "all substances sold as drugs in the United States must be approved by the federal Food and Drug Administration. THis approval process that requires a series of phased drug trials. The first phases involve in vitro and animal testing. If no adverse side effects are observed and significant ameliorative effects are found, testing on human subjects is undertaken." sure i know probiotics help. i shouldnt talk about them as necessarily speeding up digestion in an unwanted way; i see probiotic products that make pitches that they will both stop diarrhea and stop constipation (thus speeding things up in some cases), but when i typically talk to somebody who has been on a probiotic protocall for ibs-d, they tell me they have only had limited success using various probiotic blends that are out there. the thought that people just arent taking enough may have merit, but the megadoses that, say, customprobiotics brand makes are hard for people to tolerate (the diarrhea i was referencing). i dont believe a megadose of b. subtilus would have that effect necessarily, as smaller amounts affect me very differently; while my digestion is normally rock solid, taking various probiotics i find comprimises that (loose stools), with the exception of the b. subtilus strain which has a constipating effect. with regards to inflammatory bowel disease, another interesting avenue to explore would be the adrenals; stuff like hordenine is said to have a bowel slowing effect, and the adrenals are involved with how water is used and the adrenal hormones can be very anti-inflammatory; i alot of people's adrenals are worse off than they know; look at how popular coffee is; ephedra was the most popular supplement of all time, and one of the things the fda used to prohibit it was that peoples bowels got messed up (presumably when they crashed from it after their adrenals got more exhausted.)

ephedra got banned because people were using it to make meth....the same reason you have to sign for pseudoephedrine.

all it did was make it more difficult for people who have legit reasons[allergies]to get it.....they don't post results of this ban because the amount of available meth has gone up!!! i hope one day the government will realize they can't legislate behavior.....
i know this is off topic....sorry bout that!!!!

 

[ricroc]

ephedra got banned because people were using it to make meth....the same reason you have to sign for pseudoephedrine.

all it did was make it more difficult for people who have legit reasons[allergies]to get it.....they don't post results of this ban because the amount of available meth has gone up!!! i hope one day the government will realize they can't legislate behavior.....
i know this is off topic....sorry bout that!!!!

No worries bigt, this was a welcome relief.

 

[thescience]

Ah yes, the good ole "Let the market sort it out..."There's a huge market for homeopathy and scientology too...

not sure why you would want to insult everybody who believes in Scientology, but your flippant dismissal of the entirety of a belief system is consistant with the kind of unfounded criticisms youve posted in this thread. with regards to the free market, i have more respect for the consumer than to agree with you that everyone buying supplements is a senseless idiot who doesnt know what works and what doesnt. people become ALOT more observant when they are paying for high-end supplements month after month. placebo is real, but its not the be all end all of everything like a certain strain of people can act like it is on these forums. the fact is, most of the time the placebo group doesnt feel anything. again, people who train tend to be more in tune with their physiologies than say, people who just study words and these products are geared toward people who train.

As far as I'm concerned, no evidence = no go.

ok, so because you couldnt find data to support YOUR idea that PF3 should replace whey, you have concluded that theres no benefits whatsoever. I say the idea of switching pf3 for whey is your idea, because all the ad does is poke alittle fun at some problems with typical protein that some people experience, while comparing the percentage each one has of bioactives. . nowhere in the ad does it say "everybody stop taking your protein, it is now useless and we are promising that there is no further benefit in taking extra protein!" on the contrary, the first round of beta-testers were encouraged to ad pf3 to their regular protein. not sure why you have a need to compare the supplement to another supplement to buy it; by that logic, it would be impossible to ever start taking supplements, since the first supplement would have no comparison. all i know is that you shifted your arguement to a strange demand for whey to pf3 comparison data exactly when your argument against the validity of the drug's studies was smashed.

Do you honestly believe 97% of whey does NOTHING?

my interpretation of that ad is that bioactive protein is so called because it acts on the body and produces effects, whereas regular protein is a substance that the body/genes act on and utilize. anyway, im not sure why you keep referring to me as the author of that ad. If I knew everything that he knew, id be making the big bucks doing that. one thing that differentiates me from some readers of ad claims though is that i make an effort to understand what someone is saying, instead of leaping to the worst conclusion i can about everything

 

[thescience]

ephedra got banned because people were using it to make meth....the same reason you have to sign for pseudoephedrine.all it did was make it more difficult for people who have legit reasons[allergies]to get it.....they don't post results of this ban because the amount of available meth has gone up!!! i hope one day the government will realize they can't legislate behavior.....i know this is off topic....sorry bout that!!!!

i agree and i know they they really banned it to stop people from making their own meth, so the cia could drive the price up for it in their drug-rings. i remember seeing studies though they had performed as a show to add justification to banning it. the amounts they used were really high and some happened to crap more or get higher blood pressure. ; i dont believe for a second the gov is concerned about my health. for some reason, theres a constant effort to take energy producing substances away from people (the attempt at 16 oz sodas in nyc, redbull, dmaa ephedra).

 

[Resolve]

I know I said I wasn't gonna post anymore, but it just irks me when someone claims my concerns are unfounded and simply dismisses my questions without answering them. So let's see if I am, in fact, without grounds. If I am wrong - AWESOME! Then PF3 is awesome stuff and I want it - but I want to understand why I'm wrong, which no one has been able to explain to me.

I'm just going to present the references and let them do the job for me. Here's an annotated list of the first 12 references from the write-up for PF3. If there is interest in this, I'll do it with the rest as well. It summarizes what each study was and what it found.

I highly encourage any and all of you to review these yourself so that you can come to your own conclusions. The lucky thing is, most of these studies are open access, so most of you should be able to get full text, so you don't have take me at my word or live in a molecular bio lab like I pretty much do.

Just copy/paste the title of the paper you are interested into Google and you should be good to go.

Anyways, here goes:

From Invalid Link Removed

1. Aoi W, Naito Y, Yoshikawa T. Exercise and functional foods. Nutr J 2006;5:15.
- Promotes the use of whey, amino acids and glutamine. No mention of bio-active isolates
- Whey and amino acids promote anabolism - real shocker there, I know

2. Tipton KD, Elliott TA, Cree MG, Wolf SE, Sanford AP, Wolfe RR. Ingestion of casein and whey proteins result in muscle anabolism after resistance exercise. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2004;36(12):2073-2081.
- Supports the use of whole whey, no mention of bio-active isolates

3. Tang JE, Moore DR, Kujbida GW, Tarnopolsky MA, Phillips SM. Ingestion of whey hydrolysate, casein, or soy protein isolate: effects on mixed muscle protein synthesis at rest and following resistance exercise in young men. J Appl Physiol 2009;107(3):987-992.
- Compares whey hydrolysate, soy and casein proteins. No mention of bio-active isolates
- Whey hydrolysate induced more muscle protein synthesis than either other protein which supports the use of pre-digested proteins. Note: PF3 is not pre-digested and hydrolysis would ablate it’s anti-inflammatory effect.

4. Schmitz SM, Hofheins JE, Lemieux R. Nine weeks of supplementation with a multi-nutrient product augments gains in lean mass, strength, and muscular performance in resistance trained men. J Int Soc Sports Nutr 2010;7:40.
- Compares performance of Gaspari’s Sizeon Max Perf against a generic product. No mention of bio-active isolates
- Sizeon performed better than the generic whey hydrolysate product, but methods section and assays are too vague to determine mechanism.

5. Cribb PJ, Williams AD, Stathis CG, Carey MF, Hayes A. Effects of whey isolate, creatine, and resistance training on muscle hypertrophy. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2007;39(2):298-307.
- Compares the use of Whey and CreMono alone and in combination and their effects on body composition, muscle strength and fiber specificity.
- Use of either or both resulted in increased strength. No mention of immunopeptide isolates.

6. Coburn JW, Housh DJ, Housh TJ et al. Effects of leucine and whey protein supplementation during eight weeks of unilateral resistance training. J Strength Cond Res 2006;20(2):284-291.
- Compares a leucine-enriched whey protein with a placebo.
- Found that two set without supps = 1 set with supps = 1 set with placebo
- Suggests that carbs could replace your aminos intra-workout!

7. Perez-Bosque A, Pelegri C, Vicario M et al. Dietary plasma protein affects the immune response of weaned rats challenged with S. aureus Superantigen B. J Nutr 2004;134(10):2667-2672.
- Finally we see some immunopeptides come into play! Uses spray-dried animal plasma and IGG concentrates as an anti-diarrhea therapy.
- Immunoglobulin’s did reduce inflammation, but there was no change in body weight between the different experimental groups

8. Nofrarias M, Manzanilla EG, Pujols J et al. Effects of spray-dried porcine plasma and plant extracts on intestinal morphology and on leukocyte cell subsets of weaned pigs. J Anim Sci 2006;84(10):2735-2742.
- Pigs were fed spray-dried pig plasma supplemented with carvacrol, cinnemaldehyde and capsicum
- Pigs fed the plasma instead of soy protein gained more weight per week, but were fed equivalent amounts. Both plasma diet and soy diet also included whey as well.
- Supports the superiority of an equivalent dose of plasma over extruded soy beans for anabolism. But only in 60g/kg doses!

9. Corl BA, Harrell RJ, Moon HK et al. Effect of animal plasma proteins on intestinal damage and recovery of neonatal pigs infected with rotavirus. J Nutr Biochem 2007;18(12):778-784.
- Compares the effects of high calorie vs low calorie formula on newborn pigs infected with a diarrhea causing virus. No in depth description of the formula diets were provided, but no mention of immunopeptide isolates, plasma isolates or anything similar was made.
- Malnutrition had no significant change on the weight gain or intestinal function or nutritional status of infected animals

10. Jiang R, Chang X, Stoll B et al. Dietary plasma protein is used more efficiently than extruded soy protein for lean tissue growth in early-weaned pigs. J Nutr 2000;130(8):2016-2019.
- Young pigs were fed either extruded soy beans or an equivalent intake of animal plasma.
- Animals fed plasma gained more weight than those fed soy.
- Supports the superiority of plasma protein over an equivalent dose of soy, as in ref 8.

11. Gleeson M, Nieman DC, Pedersen BK. Exercise, nutrition and immune function. J Sports Sci 2004;22(1):115-125.
- A review of the effects of exercise on the immune system. No mention of immunopeptide isolates. Does support the use of carbs to decrease intra-workout cortisol levels, though.
- Exercise induces immune suppression, which is rectified through proper nutrition, and the resulting inflammation is circulatory, not in the gut where PF3 has its effect.

12. Bishop NC, Walsh NP, Haines DL, Richards EE, Gleeson M. Pre-exercise carbohydrate status and immune responses to prolonged cycling: I. Effect on neutrophil degranulation. Int J Sport Nutr Exerc Metab 2001;11(4):490-50
- CHO consumption before an exhaustive cycling bout reduced neutrophil trafficking – a readout for inflammation. No mention of immunopeptide isolates.
- In other words, carbs reduced inflammation

As I said, if people find this helpful, I'd be happy to do the rest. And again, I'm not saying anything one way or the other here - I'm just gonna present the conclusions of these studies.

If, however, one reference in particular stands out to anyone, we can go into all the depth you like discussing its findings.

 

[thebigt]

i agree and i know they they really banned it to stop people from making their own meth, so the cia could drive the price up for it in their drug-rings. i remember seeing studies though they had performed as a show to add justification to banning it. the amounts they used were really high and some happened to crap more or get higher blood pressure. ; i dont believe for a second the gov is concerned about my health. for some reason, theres a constant effort to take energy producing substances away from people (the attempt at 16 oz sodas in nyc, redbull, dmaa ephedra).

lol...it's because energy producing substances keep people alert and aware, the government would prefer us drowsy and unaware of what they are up to, lol.

 

[ricroc]

Resolve, I've been curious if your primary concern with all is is the way that MAN has advertised PF3, with regards to other proteins being 97% filler, or if you're interested in what PF3 is capable of doing?

I get the sense that you seem to have qualms about how this product is being marketed, yet I do not this know for certain.

 

[Resolve]

Resolve, I've been curious if your primary concern with all is is the way that MAN has advertised PF3, with regards to other proteins being 97% filler, or if you're interested in what PF3 is capable of doing?

I get the sense that you seem to have qualms about how this product is being marketed, yet I do not this know for certain.

Great question! Here's exactly what I'm looking for:

- Is there scientific reason to believe that PF3 can stimulate anabolism (through whichever mechanism, be it MPS or anti-inflammation) in a manner equivalent or superior to other proteins at the dose it's presented in?

- Is there scientific reason to believe that other protein powders are "97% ineffective" and that it's only the 3% bio-active fraction has any effect?

- Finally, how well do the references provided answer these two questions?

Edit: so in other words, I guess its both - What can it do and what justified it being promoted as it was.

 

[kissdadookie]

I know I said I wasn't gonna post anymore, but it just irks me when someone claims my concerns are unfounded and simply dismisses my questions without answering them. So let's see if I am, in fact, without grounds. If I am wrong - AWESOME! Then PF3 is awesome stuff and I want it - but I want to understand why I'm wrong, which no one has been able to explain to me.

I'm just going to present the references and let them do the job for me. Here's an annotated list of the first 12 references from the write-up for PF3. If there is interest in this, I'll do it with the rest as well. It summarizes what each study was and what it found.

I highly encourage any and all of you to review these yourself so that you can come to your own conclusions. The lucky thing is, most of these studies are open access, so most of you should be able to get full text, so you don't have take me at my word or live in a molecular bio lab like I pretty much do.

Just copy/paste the title of the paper you are interested into Google and you should be good to go.

Anyways, here goes:

From Invalid Link Removed

1. Aoi W, Naito Y, Yoshikawa T. Exercise and functional foods. Nutr J 2006;5:15.
- Promotes the use of whey, amino acids and glutamine. No mention of bio-active isolates
- Whey and amino acids promote anabolism - real shocker there, I know

2. Tipton KD, Elliott TA, Cree MG, Wolf SE, Sanford AP, Wolfe RR. Ingestion of casein and whey proteins result in muscle anabolism after resistance exercise. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2004;36(12):2073-2081.
- Supports the use of whole whey, no mention of bio-active isolates

3. Tang JE, Moore DR, Kujbida GW, Tarnopolsky MA, Phillips SM. Ingestion of whey hydrolysate, casein, or soy protein isolate: effects on mixed muscle protein synthesis at rest and following resistance exercise in young men. J Appl Physiol 2009;107(3):987-992.
- Compares whey hydrolysate, soy and casein proteins. No mention of bio-active isolates
- Whey hydrolysate induced more muscle protein synthesis than either other protein which supports the use of pre-digested proteins. Note: PF3 is not pre-digested and hydrolysis would ablate it’s anti-inflammatory effect.

4. Schmitz SM, Hofheins JE, Lemieux R. Nine weeks of supplementation with a multi-nutrient product augments gains in lean mass, strength, and muscular performance in resistance trained men. J Int Soc Sports Nutr 2010;7:40.
- Compares performance of Gaspari’s Sizeon Max Perf against a generic product. No mention of bio-active isolates
- Sizeon performed better than the generic whey hydrolysate product, but methods section and assays are too vague to determine mechanism.

5. Cribb PJ, Williams AD, Stathis CG, Carey MF, Hayes A. Effects of whey isolate, creatine, and resistance training on muscle hypertrophy. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2007;39(2):298-307.
- Compares the use of Whey and CreMono alone and in combination and their effects on body composition, muscle strength and fiber specificity.
- Use of either or both resulted in increased strength. No mention of immunopeptide isolates.

6. Coburn JW, Housh DJ, Housh TJ et al. Effects of leucine and whey protein supplementation during eight weeks of unilateral resistance training. J Strength Cond Res 2006;20(2):284-291.
- Compares a leucine-enriched whey protein with a placebo.
- Found that two set without supps = 1 set with supps = 1 set with placebo
- Suggests that carbs could replace your aminos intra-workout!

7. Perez-Bosque A, Pelegri C, Vicario M et al. Dietary plasma protein affects the immune response of weaned rats challenged with S. aureus Superantigen B. J Nutr 2004;134(10):2667-2672.
- Finally we see some immunopeptides come into play! Uses spray-dried animal plasma and IGG concentrates as an anti-diarrhea therapy.
- Immunoglobulin’s did reduce inflammation, but there was no change in body weight between the different experimental groups

8. Nofrarias M, Manzanilla EG, Pujols J et al. Effects of spray-dried porcine plasma and plant extracts on intestinal morphology and on leukocyte cell subsets of weaned pigs. J Anim Sci 2006;84(10):2735-2742.
- Pigs were fed spray-dried pig plasma supplemented with carvacrol, cinnemaldehyde and capsicum
- Pigs fed the plasma instead of soy protein gained more weight per week, but were fed equivalent amounts. Both plasma diet and soy diet also included whey as well.
- Supports the superiority of an equivalent dose of plasma over extruded soy beans for anabolism. But only in 60g/kg doses!

9. Corl BA, Harrell RJ, Moon HK et al. Effect of animal plasma proteins on intestinal damage and recovery of neonatal pigs infected with rotavirus. J Nutr Biochem 2007;18(12):778-784.
- Compares the effects of high calorie vs low calorie formula on newborn pigs infected with a diarrhea causing virus. No in depth description of the formula diets were provided, but no mention of immunopeptide isolates, plasma isolates or anything similar was made.
- Malnutrition had no significant change on the weight gain or intestinal function or nutritional status of infected animals

10. Jiang R, Chang X, Stoll B et al. Dietary plasma protein is used more efficiently than extruded soy protein for lean tissue growth in early-weaned pigs. J Nutr 2000;130(8):2016-2019.
- Young pigs were fed either extruded soy beans or an equivalent intake of animal plasma.
- Animals fed plasma gained more weight than those fed soy.
- Supports the superiority of plasma protein over an equivalent dose of soy, as in ref 8.

11. Gleeson M, Nieman DC, Pedersen BK. Exercise, nutrition and immune function. J Sports Sci 2004;22(1):115-125.
- A review of the effects of exercise on the immune system. No mention of immunopeptide isolates. Does support the use of carbs to decrease intra-workout cortisol levels, though.
- Exercise induces immune suppression, which is rectified through proper nutrition, and the resulting inflammation is circulatory, not in the gut where PF3 has its effect.

12. Bishop NC, Walsh NP, Haines DL, Richards EE, Gleeson M. Pre-exercise carbohydrate status and immune responses to prolonged cycling: I. Effect on neutrophil degranulation. Int J Sport Nutr Exerc Metab 2001;11(4):490-50
- CHO consumption before an exhaustive cycling bout reduced neutrophil trafficking – a readout for inflammation. No mention of immunopeptide isolates.
- In other words, carbs reduced inflammation

As I said, if people find this helpful, I'd be happy to do the rest. And again, I'm not saying anything one way or the other here - I'm just gonna present the conclusions of these studies.

If, however, one reference in particular stands out to anyone, we can go into all the depth you like discussing its findings.

That list of references along with the summary of the findings essentially feels like a bunch of random studies strewn together to market a product that has nothing to do with any of the listed studies (ok, at least nothing to do with 90% or so of the listed studies). Wow.

In other news, I started on PF3 yesterday, let's see if there's any fall off on recovery compared to the Bio-Gro I was using before it. Yes, I am a card holding voluntary guinea pig

 

[thebigt]

Great question! Here's exactly what I'm looking for:

- Is there scientific reason to believe that PF3 can stimulate anabolism (through whichever mechanism, be it MPS or anti-inflammation) in a manner equivalent or superior to other proteins at the dose it's presented in?

- Is there scientific reason to believe that other protein powders are "97% ineffective" and that it's only the 3% bio-active fraction has any effect?

- Finally, how well do the references provided answer these two questions?

Edit: so in other words, I guess its both - What can it do and what justified it being promoted as it was.

ok, this post made me think about another compound...divanill was being touted at 95%, but turned out it was only around 5%.

turns out that 5% was enough to cause for me at least some great results...this would make the label info that was on those divanill products false...

so:
A-i should never buy divanill again!!!!
B-an error was made and corrected and since i got great results continue to buy and use!!!

all this science for me is just gobbledegook, i go by results....but in all honestly i haven't seen results from loggers [so far] that would convince me i need to buy this. this is my unbiased opinion, because i am a big fan of MAN products!!!!

 

[Resolve]

ok, this post made me think about another compound...divanill was being touted at 95%, but turned out it was only around 5%.

turns out that 5% was enough to cause for me at least some great results...this would make the label info that was on those divanill products false...

so:
A-i should never buy divanill again!!!!
B-an error was made and corrected and since i got great results continue to buy and use!!!

all this science for me is just gobbledegook, i go by results....but in all honestly i haven't seen results from loggers [so far] that would convince me i need to buy this. this is my unbiased opinion, because i am a big fan of MAN products!!!!

Believe me, I'm a fan too - I have several tubs of Body Octane in my stash right now - it and Clout are industry standards! My first post in this thread was about how excited I was that this wasn't (according to the reps at the time) just another bio-active product - about how excited I was at a MAN protein, which sounds much more like an innuendo than expected...

You go by results and so does science! But I do see how wading through all the data can be overwhelming - it's taken a long time for me to get used to all of it.

 

[Touey]

Great question! Here's exactly what I'm looking for:

- Is there scientific reason to believe that PF3 can stimulate anabolism (through whichever mechanism, be it MPS or anti-inflammation) in a manner equivalent or superior to other proteins at the dose it's presented in?

- Is there scientific reason to believe that other protein powders are "97% ineffective" and that it's only the 3% bio-active fraction has any effect?

- Finally, how well do the references provided answer these two questions?

Edit: so in other words, I guess its both - What can it do and what justified it being promoted as it was.

lol the never ending quest to fathoming PF3 continues

 

[thebigt]

lol the never ending quest to fathoming PF3 continues

your use of the english language is improving....dramatically!!!

nice!!!!

 

[ricroc]

I was fortunate enough to sample PF3 currently, so I'm getting firsthand experience with its efficacy and abilities. It's been a little over a week, which I hardly think qualifies for formulating an adequate decision.

I got two tubs worth and by the time I'm done, I think I should have a good idea of its value.

Time shall tell.

 

[thebigt]

I was fortunate enough to sample PF3 currently, so I'm getting firsthand experience with its efficacy and abilities. It's been a little over a week, which I hardly think qualifies for formulating an adequate decision.

I got two tubs worth and by the time I'm done, I think I should have a good idea of its value.

Time shall tell.

indeed...that is why i qualified my remak with a...so far!!!

 

[Budman7811]

I like being molecularly dumb.... Because it increases my Internet porn viewing.

 

[willib]

How was bio-grow?

 

[Misfit28]

Believe me, I'm a fan too - I have several tubs of Body Octane in my stash right now - it and Clout are industry standards! My first post in this thread was about how excited I was that this wasn't (according to the reps at the time) just another bio-active product - about how excited I was at a MAN protein, which sounds much more like an innuendo than expected...

You go by results and so does science! But I do see how wading through all the data can be overwhelming - it's taken a long time for me to get used to all of it.

Thanks for sifting through all of that!

I am very interested in reading more, I am relatively new to fitness/sups and enjoy learning as much as I can. I too am logging two tubs, and am impressed thus far. As ricroc said, time will tell. I know placebo effect can indeed be powerful. I'm quite excited to see what results I will get by the end of the two tubs.

I strive to be as unbiased as possible, so I will definitely do my best to provide honest feedback. Honestly, I have had great results so far.

 

[pete8407]

How was bio-grow?

Colostrum is great, I think protein factory sells it by the tub

 

[pete8407]

Thanks for sifting through all of that!

I am very interested in reading more, I am relatively new to fitness/sups and enjoy learning as much as I can. I too am logging two tubs, and am impressed thus far. As ricroc said, time will tell. I know placebo effect can indeed be powerful. I'm quite excited to see what results I will get by the end of the two tubs.

I strive to be as unbiased as possible, so I will definitely do my best to provide honest feedback. Honestly, I have had great results so far.

Love to hear about great results

 

[willib]

I also have pf3

 

[thescience]

i think its possible to derive conclusions from parts of studies that the studies themselves do not highlight or use in their title. for example, when i see studies describing the unique benefits of colostrum, i know that i can weigh that against the talk that such components are uselessly unabsorbed or that bioactive proteins have nothing to do with exersize:

Invalid Link Removed

Invalid Link Removed



i also like the idea of providing immune factors to the gi in order to lessen the body's need to produce more in response to athletic stress. heres something that talks about how exercise triatheletes perform lessens IGg ect levels:

Invalid Link Removed.

heres something concerning the "improved nutrient absorption" issue i had come across; it also talks about how peptides are produced when these bioactive proteins are consumed and hit with acid/stomach enzymes:

Invalid Link Removed

 

[Resolve]

Thank you TheScience! You're actually providing references! Progress! :head: I'll go through them sometime in the next couple of days - I have a big lecture to give on Monday that I have prep for - but once that's done I'll have more time.



But to be honest, just from your descriptions of them - I'm not sure they're bringing much new info to the discussion. Here's why:

- Like I said, Colostrum's been around since the nineties - hardly innovative or the anabolic PF3 is touted as. It's had 20+ years to show its stuff if it had any...

- We've already established with multiple references that overexertion can suppress the immune system. Still no link to how that makes PF3 anabolic.

- I went ahead and read just the abstract of the last study because it looked more interesting than the others - like I said I'll get to the full text later - but all its talking about is hypothetical. It specifically states, "Intact absorption of these smaller peptides is more likely than that of the larger proteins. Consequently, other organs than the gastrointestinal tract are possible targets for their biological functions." (italics added for emphasis) I.e. it may occur, but they don't know if it does because they haven't tested it. Very interesting concept though, that peptide fragments could retain some semblance of function.

Oh and just for the record, many of the things I pointed out in my annotated bibliography were not in either the "highlights" or the title of the studies, but were from the tables, figures and methods sections therein. Which is where the science gets real.

 

[thescience]

[

- Like I said, Colostrum's been around since the nineties - hardly innovative or the anabolic PF3 is touted as. It's had 20+ years to show its stuff if it had any...

yeah, and people have been using colostrum for at least 20+ years too. longer than that. bodybuilders have always been decades ahead of the scientific community. incidentally, olympic athletes have seen fit to use it in training. i guess those athletes dont have the same standard preventing them from training better as you do -

We've already established with multiple references that overexertion can suppress the immune system.

and yet you talk as if putting immunoglobins into your system would have no relevance to exercise. if the stuff is being used up by exercise, and we can reduce the need for producing more by providing it, we could have more for exercise

- I went ahead and read just the abstract of the last study because it looked more interesting than the others - like I said I'll get to the full text later - but all its talking about is hypothetical.

hypothetical like the limitations you attribute to pf3?

but it just irks me when someone claims my concerns are unfounded

look, when i say your claims are unfounded, i mean just that. when someone has an honest doubt, they have some information that appears contrary to the claim in question or reason to doubt and that reason can be provided for a respectable discussion. for example, if someone selling an anti-pathogenic supplement claimed their supplement would kill all unwanted organisms, someone could state they used it and it didnt noticably reduce their symptoms caused by bugs or site a study where it didnt kill any bugs ect and then we would have a discussion. what youre doing is simply spreading unfounded doubt. theres alot of great products i never would have tried if i had listened to statements such as yours. the fact is that things can work whether theres a study or not; if you dont have any reason to have your doubts, why incessantly spread them? i respect any company that wants to get something out there for the people who want to try it, otherwise, i respect a company for making something available to the people who want to try it instead of waiting a few decades for the scientific community (which doesnt have alot of finacial incentive to study the benefits of supplements for exercise) to catch up.

It specifically states, "Intact absorption of these smaller peptides is more likely than that of the larger proteins.

yes, likely because of their size. can you think of a good reason to support your doubt that a peptide of the right size would not be absorbed? there are bioactive peptides which have been shown to be absorbed through the gut, unlike regular protein.

 

[Resolve]

Your points just don't even make sense man...

Your references don't support your product - That is the foundation of my complaint. Therefore, my complaint is not unfounded - your lousy references are what its based off of!

Yes, the ANABOLIC benefits of PF3 are hypothetical - as in, you have no data to support it, so all you can do is hypothesize.

Every reference I can find and that you have provided only finds benefit for IGG/immunopeptide supplementation with ENDURANCE training or with IBS patients. When you start showing me ANABOLISM, then we're on the right track! How many ENDURANCE trainees we got on AM? How many of you guys are out there running marathons on a regular basis?

Oh and don't think I've forgotten about annotating the rest of the write-up refs - that's still coming for all you interested guys. I just gotta find the time for it...