BodyRecomposition Support Forums  

Go Back   BodyRecomposition Support Forums > General information > Supplements
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Unread 12-30-2013, 11:26 AM
BigPecsPeter BigPecsPeter is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 2,275
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by biogilla View Post
Usually in the form of a concise answer or not replying at all, this time choosing the latter.
More to the point, already wrote an article... and a book...
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Unread 12-30-2013, 03:06 PM
MrLL MrLL is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 8
Default

Just buy The Protein Book and educate yourself - it's worth it.

30 mins before a workout, or 30 minutes after a workout, drink your whey with water. No one is 100% sure if it makes a big difference versus taking it with milk during these times, but it may, so you might as well.

Other than that, take it with milk if you can afford the calories. Milk is good for you. It is a great complement to a whey supplement.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Unread 12-31-2013, 01:09 AM
biogilla biogilla is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 118
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrLL View Post
Just buy The Protein Book and educate yourself - it's worth it.

30 mins before a workout, or 30 minutes after a workout, drink your whey with water. No one is 100% sure if it makes a big difference versus taking it with milk during these times, but it may, so you might as well.

Other than that, take it with milk if you can afford the calories. Milk is good for you. It is a great complement to a whey supplement.
I used to focus so much on minutiae. When I found this forum I bathed in the knowledge and science I found. I used to post every question I had after making an earnest effort to find it already asked (usually finding it).

One day, after learning the major fundamentals, I realized that nearly every question I had I could answer on my own. For instance, try it with milk for a month. Try it without for a month. Can you measure a difference? I've saved the forum countless posts, that were in hindsight slightly silly, just by doing this.

Last edited by biogilla : 12-31-2013 at 01:10 AM. Reason: Grammar
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Unread 12-31-2013, 01:51 AM
BigPecsPeter BigPecsPeter is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 2,275
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by biogilla View Post
One day, after learning the major fundamentals, I realized that nearly every question I had I could answer on my own. For instance, try it with milk for a month. Try it without for a month. Can you measure a difference? I've saved the forum countless posts, that were in hindsight slightly silly, just by doing this.
Utter nonsense, in the context of this thread. This is not a question of better performance per se, but quite specifically a question about the digestion speed of protein under certain circumstances. There are no clear established criteria for how you'd measure the difference in self-experimentation. Which is half of the whole point.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Unread 12-31-2013, 05:24 AM
waxer waxer is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 30
Default

Hahaha, this is too much. A user saying 'Lyle is wise' by reading his mind and guessing his acts.

He's a excellent professional, but another thing is saying that kind of things like a kid...

At least now we're all having fun. I think is enough.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Unread 12-31-2013, 07:23 PM
Professor Chaos's Avatar
Professor Chaos Professor Chaos is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 433
Default

Oh to hell with it... I'll play along.

Whey with water will absorb in whole faster than than whey plus milk. However, whey in water will not begin to enter the blood stream any faster than whey plus or with milk.

The other interesting thing to consider in this pointless minutia is that milk plus protein will generate a more profound insulin response as compared to whey with water. So with an iso-caloric situation, say 120 calories in each, with the whey/water being something like a 24g protein, 3g carb and 1g fat blend and then whey/skim-milk blend being something like 18g protein, 11g carb and .5g fat it's hard to say that the whey will be absorb faster than the whey/milk combo. Of course if you add 3/4 cup of milk to the why to make it 180 calories vs 120 calories, the whey/water mix will absorb in total faster.

I'm an economics nerd so this always goes back to TANSTAFL - there ain't no such thing as a free lunch. Basically the premise is, to get something, you have to give something. That's why it's important to look at iso-energy situations as well as iso-protein situations when making comparisons... even looking at the infamous Boirie casein vs whey absorption study. The way the study was setup with to get the leucine levels for whey and casein to be equal, that meant that the there needed to be a slightly higher total protein level for the casein. The study indicated that the casein protein had a higher net leucine balance than the why but of course there was also a higher total amount of protein consumed with the whey so it was not an iso-protein setup.

Either way.... now that I'm through all this pointless crap and will probably get torn to shreds eventually - it's just something to think about.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Unread 01-02-2014, 10:51 AM
biogilla biogilla is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 118
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigPecsPeter View Post
Utter nonsense, in the context of this thread. This is not a question of better performance per se, but quite specifically a question about the digestion speed of protein under certain circumstances. There are no clear established criteria for how you'd measure the difference in self-experimentation. Which is half of the whole point.
Orly? What is the context of the thread? Just pure geek curiosity?

I inferred the goal was better performance. If not, then why would it matter how fast it digests? If you're not going to apply that information then it's useless.

My point was that if you can't notice a difference with experimentation then it doesn't matter. I was very clear how I thought the OP was focusing on minutiae and how I got around it. How bizarre you would question "established criteria" for self-experimentation. You make it seem like I'm trying to write a peer-reviewed study.

The OP is either trolling or just odd and you're nit picking me over semantics. You did the same thing on my thread about cutting intensity. You have this literalist approach that can't see the forest for the trees.

This further proves my point why Lyle selectively responds to questions. He probably has a special kind of radar that sees this crap a mile away.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Unread 01-02-2014, 11:47 AM
BigPecsPeter BigPecsPeter is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 2,275
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by biogilla View Post
Orly? What is the context of the thread? Just pure geek curiosity?
Yes. As OP made quite explicitly clear in subsequent posts.

Quote:
I inferred the goal was better performance. If not, then why would it matter how fast it digests? If you're not going to apply that information then it's useless.
Most information has no useful application. So what. Information is information. There are plenty of such examples in the nutrition field let alone other fields.

Quote:
My point was that if you can't notice a difference with experimentation then it doesn't matter. I was very clear how I thought the OP was focusing on minutiae and how I got around it. How bizarre you would question "established criteria" for self-experimentation. You make it seem like I'm trying to write a peer-reviewed study.
My point was simple. Fast digestion speed does not necessarily equal superior results. Better (or worse) results in gym would therefore not be an indicator of how fast your protein digested. So, performance outcomes would not answer OP's question, and an experiment of the sort you suggested would be useless.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Unread 01-08-2014, 09:53 AM
waxer waxer is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 30
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by biogilla View Post
This further proves my point why Lyle selectively responds to questions. He probably has a special kind of radar that sees this crap a mile away.
If you think this thread is crap, I guess you like crap because you have several posts in this thread.

90% of information in this site is mostly an overkill for 90% of people training. A 10000 word article could be very well referenced, very reasonable, etc; but could improve 3% of total output of whatever you're measuring.

That doesn't mean that it makes no sense 'for practical reasons' not discussing that topic.

Maybe with your reasoning you're trying to improve the crapness of this topic, in that case I must congratulate you, you made your 50 cent.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:08 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.