Guest viewing is limited

The New Product Release Thread

muscleupcrohn said:
Don't you remember that the absorption all depends on how well it mixes in water?

Seriously, for anyone who doesn't know what we're talking about, there's seriously people affiliated with major supplement companies who still believe CEE > creatine monohydrate because it mixes better in water.
Click to expand...

No one ever said all formulators were good or smart.....
 
Distilled Water said:
MPA will be releasing KetOxygen next week. Containing 12gr BHB salts. I'm not to hip to this new supplement nitch.

I do have ketone packets. I took one the other day and it just gave me a belly ache.
Click to expand...
I took a sample of a ketone supplement that a friend of mine gave me, and all I really felt from it was a little dizzy during my workout, although it could have been a coincidence.
 
muscleupcrohn said:
I took a sample of a ketone supplement that a friend of mine gave me, and all I really felt from it was a little dizzy during my workout, although it could have been a coincidence.
Click to expand...

My fiend that gave me the samples goes hypo from taking them? Idk if I fully understand them, yet. However, for some people it's all the craze right now
 
Distilled Water said:
My fiend that gave me the samples goes hypo from taking them? Idk if I fully understand them, yet. However, for some people it's all the craze right now
Click to expand...
I haven't done too much research on them yet either, but I know I won't be spending money on them any time soon haha. Some of them are insanely expensive too! I think PricePlow is doing a comparison/test(s) on various keto products, so that should be interesting,
 
danielmoo said:
So true. Marketing, huh?
Click to expand...
Yeah. A friend of mine sells them for a popular company, and whenever he re-posted/shared something that was just too wrong (as in complete nonsense), I'd text him and he'd take it down, so he just stopped posting the science (see pseudoscience) type posts. Most of it is just people parroting what a few other people say; for most people it's ignorance, with only the people who originally created it knowing it's wrong, if they even know it.
 
This one really annoyed me, it was trying to say how we should not have any carbs/sugar:
Invalid Link Removed
They basically said we should have very low carbs because we only have 4g glucose in our blood.

But, obviously, the whole 4g of glucose in the blood doesn't paint nearly the whole picture, and is incredibly oversimplified and ignores that the majority of glucose/glycogen isn't kept in the blood, but sent to the brain, muscle tissue, etc. For reference, the brain uses about 120g glucose per day. I'm also not sure where that guy is getting his 57tbs sugar recommendation, as the ADA actually recommends avoiding foods with added sugar. Maybe he's talking about 240g of carbs, but we both know 240g of carbs from sweet potatoes and fruits/vegetables is vastly different than 240g carbs from Coke or Pepsi.

Basically, saying that we shouldn't have any carbs because our blood only has 4g glucose is like saying we should only fill up our cars with half a gallon because that's all our fuel line holds (I don't actually know how much gas a fuel line holds).
 
muscleupcrohn said:
This one really annoyed me, it was trying to say how we should not have any carbs/sugar:
Invalid Link Removed
They basically said we should have very low carbs because we only have 4g glucose in our blood.

But, obviously, the whole 4g of glucose in the blood doesn't paint nearly the whole picture, and is incredibly oversimplified and ignores that the majority of glucose/glycogen isn't kept in the blood, but sent to the brain, muscle tissue, etc. For reference, the brain uses about 120g glucose per day. I'm also not sure where that guy is getting his 57tbs sugar recommendation, as the ADA actually recommends avoiding foods with added sugar. Maybe he's talking about 240g of carbs, but we both know 240g of carbs from sweet potatoes and fruits/vegetables is vastly different than 240g carbs from Coke or Pepsi.

Basically, saying that we shouldn't have any carbs because our blood only has 4g glucose is like saying we should only fill up our cars with half a gallon because that's all our fuel line holds (I don't actually know how much gas a fuel line holds).
Click to expand...
Haha the mechanic in me is proud. As half a gallon is pretty close if you included the fuel pump and fuel filter. Obviously varies depending on model. Although I do think that is a perfect anology. Keto has it's benefits but they are over exaggerated and misleading, as you said, by jackasses whom are either lying or have zero clue to begin with. Hell I lose more weight while eating a moderate carb diet than keto.
 
muscleupcrohn said:
Don't you remember that the absorption all depends on how well it mixes in water?

Seriously, for anyone who doesn't know what we're talking about, there's seriously people affiliated with major supplement companies who still believe CEE > creatine monohydrate because it mixes better in water.
Click to expand...

And there's top level "natty" BB'ers who want to bring CLA powder to market. There needs to be a 'God Stick' brought down on the entire Industry, like back in Egypt - if you're around at the end, you must have been an honest, moral company - I'll buy from you :D
 
muscleupcrohn said:
This one really annoyed me, it was trying to say how we should not have any carbs/sugar:

They basically said we should have very low carbs because we only have 4g glucose in our blood.

But, obviously, the whole 4g of glucose in the blood doesn't paint nearly the whole picture, and is incredibly oversimplified and ignores that the majority of glucose/glycogen isn't kept in the blood...
Click to expand...

I love when 'Ketotards' post parroted, incorrect shjt. Luckily, we have very few on here. It's like people don't know that the Google Search Engine exists or something.
 
rtmilburn said:
Haha the mechanic in me is proud. As half a gallon is pretty close if you included the fuel pump and fuel filter. Obviously varies depending on model. Although I do think that is a perfect anology. Keto has it's benefits but they are over exaggerated and misleading, as you said, by jackasses whom are either lying or have zero clue to begin with. Hell I lose more weight while eating a moderate carb diet than keto.
Click to expand...

Amen. There is no 'Metabolic Advantage' when energy equated to a control diet. Great for life extension, great for cancer/epilepsy, great for Insulin Sensitivity etc.. IMO, great to do once a year for all of the preceeding - but not magic or "better".
 
[video=youtube;UH3rgW70y-0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UH3rgW70y-0&app=desktop[/video]

Re1gn Flavor update

Crushers = Sweet/Citrus based flavor
Dragon Mist = Baja Blast replica
Icy Fury = Fruit Juice / Cherry Ice you get in movie theaters
Area 51 = Sour based flavor
Lions Blood = Fruity based flavor

Samples upcoming on Crushers
 
The Solution said:
Re1gn Flavor update

Crushers = Sweet/Citrus based flavor
Dragon Mist = Baja Blast replica
Icy Fury = Fruit Juice / Cherry Ice you get in movie theaters
Area 51 = Sour based flavor
Lions Blood = Fruity based flavor

Samples upcoming on Crushers
Click to expand...

all over this one
 
The_Old_Guy said:
And there's top level "natty" BB'ers who want to bring CLA powder to market. There needs to be a 'God Stick' brought down on the entire Industry, like back in Egypt - if you're around at the end, you must have been an honest, moral company - I'll buy from you :D
Click to expand...

lol...love this
 
Re1gn Flavor update

Crushers = Sweet/Citrus based flavor
Dragon Mist = Baja Blast replica
Icy Fury = Fruit Juice / Cherry Ice you get in movie theaters
Area 51 = Sour based flavor
Lions Blood = Fruity based flavor

Samples upcoming on Crushers[/QUOTE]




The level of douchery in that conference room is unmatched!
 
The_Old_Guy said:
Amen. There is no 'Metabolic Advantage' when energy equated to a control diet. Great for life extension, great for cancer/epilepsy, great for Insulin Sensitivity etc.. IMO, great to do once a year for all of the preceeding - but not magic or "better".
Click to expand...

Slightly off topic (well, way off topic) but I agree. From all the research I've done, if you were to combine fasting with keto/low carb....you may love to be 127. lol seriously seems like health benefits are ample and endless....but even knowing that, I'll take my 7-8 meals every 2ish hours with high carb and ok fat bc I'm trying to be 225 with shredded glutes lol
 
Distilled Water said:
Slightly off topic (well, way off topic) but I agree. From all the research I've done, if you were to combine fasting with keto/low carb....you may love to be 127. lol seriously seems like health benefits are ample and endless....but even knowing that, I'll take my 7-8 meals every 2ish hours with high carb and ok fat bc I'm trying to be 225 with shredded glutes lol
Click to expand...
Haha. You may set yourself up to be 127, but there's a million-and-one things that could cut your life short before then that no diet could prevent. I say live a little; carbs taste good.
 
muscleupcrohn said:
Haha. You may set yourself up to be 127, but there's a million-and-one things that could cut your life short before then that no diet could prevent. I say live a little; carbs taste good.
Click to expand...

Yeah and buy some life insurance from me to take care of the unexpected
 
Haha if we weren't all gonna get some form of cancer from literally our entire modern lifestyle maybe we could live that long. Then again, were all gonna be 200yr old robots soon too
 
muscleupcrohn said:
This one really annoyed me, it was trying to say how we should not have any carbs/sugar:
Invalid Link Removed
They basically said we should have very low carbs because we only have 4g glucose in our blood.

But, obviously, the whole 4g of glucose in the blood doesn't paint nearly the whole picture, and is incredibly oversimplified and ignores that the majority of glucose/glycogen isn't kept in the blood, but sent to the brain, muscle tissue, etc. For reference, the brain uses about 120g glucose per day. I'm also not sure where that guy is getting his 57tbs sugar recommendation, as the ADA actually recommends avoiding foods with added sugar. Maybe he's talking about 240g of carbs, but we both know 240g of carbs from sweet potatoes and fruits/vegetables is vastly different than 240g carbs from Coke or Pepsi.

Basically, saying that we shouldn't have any carbs because our blood only has 4g glucose is like saying we should only fill up our cars with half a gallon because that's all our fuel line holds (I don't actually know how much gas a fuel line holds).
Click to expand...
Who posted that?
 
Jiigzz said:
Who posted that?
Click to expand...
I saw it posted from some random guy selling a keto product. I don't think he made it though. When I do a reverse image search, it seems to originate from a Prof. Grant Schofield. I'd say maybe it was taken out of context, but there is no possible context that could justify this, as there's just so much wrong with it.

Edit:
Invalid Link Removed
 
muscleupcrohn said:
I saw it posted from some random guy selling a keto product. I don't think he made it though. When I do a reverse image search, it seems to originate from a Prof. Grant Schofield. I'd say maybe it was taken out of context, but there is no possible context that could justify this, as there's just so much wrong with it.
Click to expand...
Haha! Grant Schofield works here at AUT. He is eccentric, but incredibly knowledgeable. I wonder what the original context was
 
Seeing as it refers to diabetics, I am assuming that it is meant for that crowd in which case that would make sense given insulin dysfunction. If we cannot store carbs properly in a dysfunctional state, why are we recommending them.

I actually 100% agree with reducing the CHO requirement for diabetics. In that context, the post would be very relevant
 
Jiigzz said:
Haha! Grant Schofield works here at AUT. He is eccentric, but incredibly knowledgeable. I wonder what the original context was
Click to expand...
Jiigzz said:
Seeing as it refers to diabetics, I am assuming that it is meant for that crowd in which case that would make sense given insulin dysfunction. If we cannot store carbs properly in a dysfunctional state, why are we recommending them.

I actually 100% agree with reducing the CHO requirement for diabetics. In that context, the post would be very relevant
Click to expand...
I'm not saying his overall point was invalid, just that that one picture is incredibly misleading and doesn't actually say anything relevant (see my fuel line comparison).

He did say that "A balanced diet [in the context of whole food] is one which normalises blood glucose and prevents the hyper-secretion of insulin," which is reasonable. Also, I don't really see the point of showing 240g sugar, since I highly doubt the ADA is recommending 240g sugar per day.

At the end of the day, he may have had a reasonable and logical message or overall theme/point, but that one image was just silly.
 
muscleupcrohn said:
I'm not saying his overall point was invalid, just that that one picture is incredibly misleading and doesn't actually say anything relevant (see my fuel line comparison).

He did say that "A balanced diet [in the context of whole food] is one which normalises blood glucose and prevents the hyper-secretion of insulin," which is reasonable. Also, I don't really see the point of showing 240g sugar, since I highly doubt the ADA is recommending 240g sugar per day.

At the end of the day, he may have had a reasonable and logical message or overall theme/point, but that one image was just silly.
Click to expand...
What is the ultimate fate of most ingested CHO?
 
Jiigzz said:
What is the ultimate fate of most ingested CHO?
Click to expand...
You're not going to tell me that 240g/day from added sugar (think soda and sugary snacks) is the same as 240g/day carbs from sweet potatoes and oatmeal, right? Also, surely you agree that mentioning the 4g of glucose in the blood as a comparison to daily carbohydrate intake is misleading, to say the least, especially considering that, as I said earlier, the majority of glucose/glycogen isn't kept in the blood, but sent to the brain, muscle tissue, etc (for reference, the brain uses about 120g glucose per day)?
 
Of course not. But if he referenced diabetics, surely you'd note how ingested CHO won't end up in those places?

That's what the picture tells me
 
Jiigzz said:
Of course not. But if he referenced diabetics, surely you'd note how ingested CHO won't end up in those places?

That's what the picture tells me
Click to expand...
Fair enough, but I still think it's a very misleading picture, and has been perverted even farther on the internet many times (that's not entirely his fault of course). The direct comparison of 4g glucose to 240g sugar is not really a valid comparison IMO, as what can it even be taken to mean? Is he recommending only 4g/day carbs for diabetics instead of 240g/day carbs? I get lowering carb intake, but the image is very misleading IMO. Perhaps it was better explained and contextualized in his seminar/presentation, but even his article/post didn't completely redeem it IMO. I think it was meant to be a bit sensational, more interested in proving a point (not necessarily an invalid one, mind you) than to be completely accurate.
 
Perhaps, I dont know id have to look it up.

He is very biased to a high fat low carb outlook, but most of his work is based in the general population and carbohydrate intake is absolutely ridiculous at the moment, and so are metabolic disorders.

There is a myriad if evidence on high carb vs low carb and cholesterol subfractions and metabolic issues when calories are standardized, showing the latter to be beneficial for improving LDL-p

Anyway, wrong thread for this type of debate ha
 
Jiigzz said:
Perhaps, I dont know id have to look it up.

He is very biased to a high fat low carb outlook, but most of his work is based in the general population and carbohydrate intake is absolutely ridiculous at the moment, and so are metabolic disorders.

There is a myriad if evidence on high carb vs low carb and cholesterol subfractions and metabolic issues when calories are standardized, showing the latter to be beneficial for improving LDL-p
Click to expand...
Oh, I'm not disagreeing that he makes some good points at all, and I agree that fats naturally occurring in foods like meats and cheeses aren't nearly as evil as people make them out to be. Most people do eat way too many carbs, especially bad carbs. I just think that this one image he appears to have created (or at least used), is misleading at best.
 
muscleupcrohn said:
But do you sell Volcano Insurance?
Invalid Link Removed
Click to expand...
Yeah, but more importantly, what about cloud insurance??

hqdefault.jpg
 
muscleupcrohn said:
Haha. You may set yourself up to be 127, but there's a million-and-one things that could cut your life short before then that no diet could prevent. I say live a little; carbs taste good.
Click to expand...

jim fixx...nuff said
 
The Solution said:
[video=youtube;UH3rgW70y-0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UH3rgW70y-0&app=desktop[/video]

Re1gn Flavor update

Crushers = Sweet/Citrus based flavor
Dragon Mist = Baja Blast replica
Icy Fury = Fruit Juice / Cherry Ice you get in movie theaters
Area 51 = Sour based flavor
Lions Blood = Fruity based flavor

Samples upcoming on Crushers
Click to expand...

Not quite man.

I started a Q&A thread for RE1GN.

ISEE Fury is a cherry slushie flavour
Area 51 is a mystery
Dragons Mist is a sweet freezie flavour
Lions Blood is a tropical flavour
KrusherZ is a orange candy flavour
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top