Is there a 'best time' to take protein shakes?

TRS30

I work out in the evening about 6-7pm, have a bigish meal after (protein heavy) and then have a protein shake and a bit more protein (peanut butter) about 9/9.30pm. I try to eat regularly through out the day with each meal having some protein.

I am thinking of upping to two shakes a day to increase protein intake.

Is there a 'best time' to take protein shakes?

Hanley

How many grams of protein per day are you taking in currently, and what are your goals?

deadybai

I dont think there actually is a best time. I usually only have a shake immediately after I workout. I think that this is the best time as it gives my muscles more time to recover. Outside of that I think protein timing is a bit of a myth. I could be wrong but thats my view.

jimmii

Best time is straight after your workout when your muscles are looking to recover and grow. How much and how often is going to be mostly dictated by your weight and goals though. If you are already on a protein heavy diet additional protein might not give much extra benefit.

Alf Veedersane

Lads, this craic of needing it straight aftera workout...its not true.

Your best get is to try get some in at every meal. How much depends on your goals and intake

TRS30

Thanks for the replies.

To be honest don't know how much protein I consume each day. I just try to eat some with each meal, more in the evenings as have turkey/chicken/Quorn mince stir fries.

I don't really have a goal as much, just to bulk up.

Since the consensus seems to be it doesn't matter when you take them, think I'll stick to one before bed and one first thing in the morning.

Skuxx

I have to agree that protein timing really seems to be a myth! I think it would be more beneficial for you to work out how much you are consuming per day (myfitnesspal is perfect for this) vs how much you should be eating, roughly!
If you can get close to this figure consistently then you'll do alright!

If you are having dinner quite soon after the gym then I wouldn't worry about trying to get the shake in!

colossus-x

Your muscles continue to grow up to 10 days after the damage you did to them during your workout. Not just the few hours after your workout. Therefore the best policy is to eat a high protein meal most of the time and you'll be fine.

Have given up protein shakes completely and improved my diet even further over the last 6 months and have got much improved results. I eat when I feel like it.

edit: this youtube trainer on supplements ! https://youtu.be/D0esA_7Jd5k?t=118

Transform

TRS30 wrote: »

Thanks for the replies.

To be honest don't know how much protein I consume each day. I just try to eat some with each meal, more in the evenings as have turkey/chicken/Quorn mince stir fries.

I don't really have a goal as much, just to bulk up.

Since the consensus seems to be it doesn't matter when you take them, think I'll stick to one before bed and one first thing in the morning.

if you dont know then you need to log and check dude.

whats your gender, height, weight and current level of activity?

ThinkProgress

TRS30 wrote: »

Is there a 'best time' to take protein shakes?

My best time would be NEVER!

Protein shakes are not necessary. They're a waste of money imo!

You can get all the protein you require from healthy whole foods. Excess protein is not converted into muscle - it's released in the toilet. (so literally pissing away your money)

Real food is better for you than supplements. That's some of the best advice I've ever received. (You're welcome!)

Zillah

Whey is food though. It's currently marketed as a supplement but that's an arbitrary definition.

"Little Miss Mufftet, sat on a tuffet, eating her curds and whey..."

I don't think I'll ever stop having regular whey shakes, I'm vegetarian so my protein options are much more limited.

Jan Laco

Before(with milk) and after workout(with water) And one on your rest day. That worked for me when I was into weights.

MartyMcFly84

Protein shakes are not necessary. They're a waste of money imo!

I disagree with this point. Shakes per gram are often one of the cheapest forms of protein out there.

50g protein in the form of whey powder would cost significantly less than getting this from other animal sources (particularly meat). I suppose you could look at dried legumes as an option but for price but for sheer convenience I would be surprised if you could list many price per gram alternatives.

I agree your main sources should come from whole foods, however if you have a high protein requirement shakes are an easy was to get this into your diet and help keep the cost down.

ThinkProgress

Zillah wrote: »

Whey is food though. It's currently marketed as a supplement but that's an arbitrary definition.

"Little Miss Mufftet, sat on a tuffet, eating her curds and whey..."

I don't think I'll ever stop having regular whey shakes, I'm vegetarian so my protein options are much more limited.

Protein should be consumed in balance with the other three macro nutrients. So in that sense it's an unbalanced/unnaturally high concentrated food supplement. (just like those carb energy gels people consume during sports events)

So when you take something like a whey protein shake, your body is expecting carbs and fat too... but it's only getting one third of that equation.

This usually leads to an unbalanced diet. You're filling up on protein, but your body will still be craving carbs and fat. It often leads to weight gain... but not the kind of weight gain that many people would want.

Mr. CooL ICE

Zillah wrote: »

"Little Miss Mufftet, sat on a tuffet, eating her curds and whey..."

I always wondered what happened to her. Doing protein from such a young age couldn't have ended well.


edit -> found her

Alf Veedersane

ThinkProgress wrote: »

Protein should be consumed in balance with the other three macro nutrients. So in that sense it's an unbalanced/unnaturally high concentrated food supplement. (just like those carb energy gels people consume during sports events)

So when you take something like a whey protein shake, your body is expecting carbs and fat too... but it's only getting one third of that equation.

This usually leads to an unbalanced diet. You're filling up on protein, but your body will still be craving carbs and fat. It often leads to weight gain... but not the kind of weight gain that many people would want.

So if your body expects carbs and fat but doesn't get any at that particular time, what happens?

Disappointment?

No one suggests that a diet doesn't need to be balanced but having a protein shake to top up protein doesn't lead to putting on fat or physiological disappointment just because there aren't carbs and fat accompanying it.

Zillah

ThinkProgress wrote: »

Protein should be consumed in balance with the other three macro nutrients. So in that sense it's an unbalanced/unnaturally high concentrated food supplement. (just like those carb energy gels people consume during sports events)

So when you take something like a whey protein shake, your body is expecting carbs and fat too... but it's only getting one third of that equation.

This usually leads to an unbalanced diet. You're filling up on protein, but your body will still be craving carbs and fat. It often leads to weight gain... but not the kind of weight gain that many people would want.

Yeah this is just stuff you kind of made up. A diet needs to be well balanced with macros, it doesn't matter if an individual meal or snack is one-macro-heavy.

That said, who says I take it alone? My breakfast consists of a whey milkshake (protein), mixed with powdered oats (carbs), and full fat milk (fat). Does that sound unbalanced to you?

ThinkProgress

MartyMcFly84 wrote: »

I disagree with this point. Shakes per gram are often one of the cheapest forms of protein out there.

50g protein in the form of whey powder would cost significantly less than getting this from other animal sources (particularly meat). I suppose you could look at dried legumes as an option but for price and sheer convenience I would be surprised if you could list many price per gram alternatives.

I agree your main sources should come from whole foods, however if you have a high protein requirement shakes are an easy was to get this into your diet and help keep the cost down.

It's a waste of money, because it's unhealthy and highly concentrated rubbish.

It's an unnatural way of eating. You'll pay a bigger cost in the long run when it comes to your health. It's just fast food that's marketed as a health food. It's all muck!

Real protein sources are more filling and digest slower. Something like chicken breast actually has natural fiber within it that aids digestion. (not the same type of fiber found in grains etc)

Protein powders lead to many digestion problems because they're 'fake food'. If you care about your body and health, I would stay well clear of them.

Zillah

You have no idea what you're talking about - your opinion is based on ideology, not evidence.

Alf Veedersane

ThinkProgress wrote: »

It's a waste of money, because it's unhealthy and highly concentrated rubbish.

It's an unnatural way of eating. You'll pay a bigger cost in the long run when it comes to your health. It's just fast food that's marketed as a health food. It's all muck!

Real protein sources are more filling and digest slower. Something like chicken breast actually has natural fiber within it that aids digestion. (not the same type of fiber found in grains etc)

Protein powders lead to many digestion problems because they're 'fake food'. If you care about your body and health, I would stay well clear of them.

Of course protein in food is different but that doesn't mean that whey protein is unhealthy.

Whey is naturally occurring. Do you pour off the watery stuff when you open a yoghurt? No? That's whey. You've just shaved a few years off your life expectancy.

I don't disagree that it's preferable to get protein from food. Food is more enjoyable than shakes. But there nothing wrong with using a decent whey protein (one that has a high protein content and little else added)

Hanley

ThinkProgress wrote: »

It's a waste of money, because it's unhealthy and highly concentrated rubbish.

It's an unnatural way of eating. You'll pay a bigger cost in the long run when it comes to your health. It's just fast food that's marketed as a health food. It's all muck!

Real protein sources are more filling and digest slower. Something like chicken breast actually has natural fiber within it that aids digestion. (not the same type of fiber found in grains etc)

Protein powders lead to many digestion problems because they're 'fake food'. If you care about your body and health, I would stay well clear of them.

Everyone's entitled to an opinion. But your opinion probably couldn't be more wrong or misinformed.

ThinkProgress

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

So if your body expects carbs and fat but doesn't get any at that particular time, what happens?

Disappointment?

No one suggests that a diet doesn't need to be balanced but having a protein shake to top up protein doesn't lead to putting on fat or physiological disappointment just because there aren't carbs and fat accompanying it.

If you want optimal health. (and not just big arms), everything you eat should balanced. Every meal. Every snack.

And also have the highest quality foods. Protein powder is not a high quality food. It's junk food.

Zillah wrote: »

Yeah this is just stuff you kind of made up. A diet needs to be well balanced with macros, it doesn't matter if an individual meal or snack is one-macro-heavy.

That said, who says I take it alone? My breakfast consists of a whey milkshake (protein), mixed with powdered oats (carbs), and full fat milk (fat). Does that sound unbalanced to you?

Actually it does matter. You'll reach higher levels of health and fitness the more balanced your meals and snacks are. (and the higher quality of those foods too, obviously)

Your meal example is not the healthiest thing I've seen. But it's ok, I guess...

I'd have to see the exact quantities and quality of ingredients - but just at a glance, it would probably be a bit too high in protein and too low in fat. Many powdered oats are also high on the glycemic index too - so there are healthier options you could pick there too.

So yes, you could get healthier and more balanced. But overall not the worst breakfast I've seen. But it wouldn't be something I'd consume... I'd need better quality foods and slightly more fat from more varied sources.

Zillah wrote: »

You have no idea what you're talking about - your opinion is based on ideology, not evidence.

Most of our ideas come from personal experimentation and experience. Of course science and "evidence" is important too.

But there is tonnes of research out there that conflicts/contradicts each other. And both can come from reputable sources. So who do you believe? Who's "evidence" do you trust?

I could show you "evidence" to back up my points, but I could also show you more evidence that contradicts it. This whole industry is about opinions and personal experimentation.

My greatest fitness gains have come from my own experimentation mostly. As is the same with many other people I'm sure.

MartyMcFly84

It's a waste of money, because it's unhealthy and highly concentrated rubbish.

It's an unnatural way of eating. You'll pay a bigger cost in the long run when it comes to your health. It's just fast food that's marketed as a health food. It's all muck!

Real protein sources are more filling and digest slower. Something like chicken breast actually has natural fiber within it that aids digestion. (not the same type of fiber found in grains etc)

Protein powders lead to many digestion problems because they're 'fake food'. If you care about your body and health, I would stay well clear of them.

Whey is a natural product. It is just separated to make certain dairy products. Cottage cheese for example is a mix of curds and whey, for other cheese the whey is drained off. This is what whey powder is made from.

As mentioned above you seem to be basing your opinions on an ideology as opposed to facts. I agree replacing whole foods completely is a terribly idea but no one is suggesting that. You can still eat chicken breasts, but instead of eating an extra 2 chicken breasts a day on top what you have already had you have a shake instead.

There are by far much much worse things you can be ingesting than Whey protein , which is actually not bad at all as part of a daily diet.

Alf Veedersane

ThinkProgress wrote: »

If you want optimal health. (and not just big arms), everything you eat should balanced. Every meal. Every snack.

And also have the highest quality foods. Protein powder is not a high quality food. It's junk food.



Actually it does matter. You'll reach higher levels of health and fitness the more balanced your meals and snacks are. (and the higher quality of those foods too, obviously)

Your meal example is not the healthiest thing I've seen. But it's ok, I guess...

I'd have to see the exact quantities and quality of ingredients - but just at a glance, it would probably be a bit too high in protein and too low in fat. Many powdered oats are also high on the glycemic index too - so there are healthier options you could pick there too.

So yes, you could get healthier and more balanced. But overall not the worst breakfast I've seen. But it wouldn't be something I'd consume... I'd need better quality foods and slightly more fat from more varied sources.



Most of our ideas come from personal experimentation and experience. Of course science and "evidence" is important too.

But there is tonnes of research out there that conflicts/contradicts each other. And both can come from reputable sources. So who do you believe? Who's "evidence" do you trust?

I could show you "evidence" to back up my points, but I could also show you more evidence that contradicts it. This whole industry is about opinions and personal experimentation.

My greatest fitness gains have come from my own experimentation mostly. As is the same with many other people I'm sure.

I trust the evidence of scientists who have no agenda.

I also did not know that whey went straight to your arms.

So, if you're looking for a macro breakdown of 50/30/20 (C/P/F), then every meal and every snack should have that breakdown? Really.

Mr. CooL ICE

ThinkProgress wrote: »

It's a waste of money, because it's unhealthy and highly concentrated rubbish.

It's an unnatural way of eating. You'll pay a bigger cost in the long run when it comes to your health. It's just fast food that's marketed as a health food. It's all muck!

Real protein sources are more filling and digest slower. Something like chicken breast actually has natural fiber within it that aids digestion. (not the same type of fiber found in grains etc)

Protein powders lead to many digestion problems because they're 'fake food'. If you care about your body and health, I would stay well clear of them.

200g of smoked salmon in Aldi contains 234 calories and 36g of protein. It costs €3.75.

A 43g serving (less than 2 scoops) of Myprotein Impact Whey unflavoured contains 178 calories and also 36g of protein. Works out at about 75c.

Whey protein is not a waste of money.

ThinkProgress

MartyMcFly84 wrote: »

Whey is a natural product. It is just separated to make certain dairy products. Cottage cheese for example is a mix of curds and whey, for other cheese the whey is drained off. This is what whey powder is made from.

As mentioned above you seem to be basing your opinions on an ideology as opposed to facts. I agree replacing whole foods completely is a terribly idea but no one is suggesting that. You can still eat chicken breasts, but instead of eating an extra 2 chicken breasts a day on top what you have already had you have a shake instead.

There are by far much much worse things you can be ingesting than Whey protein , which is actually not bad at all as part of a daily diet.

Would you walk around taking big bites out of a block of cheese? Or would you add some to a meal/snack as one part of a balanced dish?

I never said it was the worst thing you could could consume. But I also wouldn't consider it a health food either. Compared to real whole food, I would consider it junk.

If whole food is better, why consume anything else? If your answer is convenience or cost - they're not the answers of someone who is looking for optimal results!

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

I trust the evidence of scientists who have no agenda.

I also did not know that whey went straight to your arms.

So, if you're looking for a macro breakdown of 50/30/20 (C/P/F), then every meal and every snack should have that breakdown? Really.

Scientists can have agendas. And they are frequently wrong too.

Practically everything in the fitness industry gets contradicted by someone else eventually. So which experts are you going to believe?

Yes - if you're looking for optimal results, everything you put in your mouth should be perfectly balanced. (in an ideal scenario). Everything you eat effects your body in some way. All three macros have slightly different physiological effects... so the ideal way to consume them is together in perfect balance. (not in isolation and certainly not in poor quality)

Nicolas Cage wrote: »

200g of smoked salmon in Aldi contains 234 calories and 36g of protein. It costs €3.75.

A 43g serving (less than 2 scoops) of Myprotein Impact Whey unflavoured contains 178 calories and also 36g of protein. Works out at about 75c.

Whey protein is not a waste of money.

It is if you consider your health to be worth something to you!

White sugar is even cheaper. Go stock up on some of that too... don't worry about buying wholegrains.

Transform

ThinkProgress wrote: »

Would you walk around taking big bites out of a block of cheese? Or would you add some to a meal/snack as one part of a balanced dish?

I never said it was the worst thing you could could consume. But I also wouldn't consider it a health food either. Compared to real whole food, I would consider it junk.

If whole food is better, why consume anything else? If your answer is convenience or cost - they're not the answers of someone who is looking for optimal results!



Scientists can have agendas. And they are frequently wrong too.

Practically everything in the fitness industry gets contradicted by someone else eventually. So which experts are you going to believe?

Yes - if you're looking for optimal results, everything you put in your mouth should be perfectly balanced. (in an ideal scenario). Everything you eat effects your body in some way. All three macros have slightly different physiological effects... so the ideal way to consume them is together in perfect balance. (not in isolation and certainly not in poor quality)



It is if you consider your health to be worth something to you!

White sugar is even cheaper. Go stock up on some of that too... don't worry about buying wholegrains.

ill be over here drinking my protein shake thanks

so much tin foil hat wearing that's going on here.

whey protein or a protein shake is no better than real food = absolutely right

whey protein shake used as a means to increase protein intake because the individual struggles to get in enough protein so they mix it in with fruit and veg in a nutribullet = absolutely right

Alf Veedersane

ThinkProgress wrote: »

Scientists can have agendas. And they are frequently wrong too.

Practically everything in the fitness industry gets contradicted by someone else eventually. So which experts are you going to believe?

Yes - if you're looking for optimal results, everything you put in your mouth should be perfectly balanced. (in an ideal scenario). Everything you eat effects your body in some way. All three macros have slightly different physiological effects... so the ideal way to consume them is together in perfect balance. (not in isolation and certainly not in poor quality)

I did say scientists that don't have an agenda.

I'm not really sure what you're suggesting when you say that everything in the fitness industry is contradicted eventually. Do you disregard everything on the basis that it will be proven wrong at some point in the future?

Give me an idea for a 200kcal snack with a 50/30/20 macro split. I'm all out of ideas.

Transform

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

I did say scientists that don't have an agenda.

I'm not really sure what you're suggesting when you say that everything in the fitness industry is contradicted eventually. Do you disregard everything on the basis that it will be proven wrong at some point in the future?

Give me an idea for a 200kcal snack with a 50/30/20 macro split. I'm all out of ideas.

disproved ideas in fitness e.g.

progressive overload,
creating calorie deficit or excess for weight loss or gain
training just under lactate threshold can increase VO2 max
The quality of your movement depends on the quality of your muscle tissue and base strength
caffeine improves sports performance in pretty much every single sport
drink more water y'all
plyometrics help with improving explosive power and best supported with building a strength base first

yes i expect all these to get contradicted eventually

ford2600

Bar your at the elite end of sport, getting diet 100% right isn't necessary for optimal health. In fact worrying about it and stressing is probably counter productive.

Majoring in the minors comes to mind.

Get it 90% right, don't worry about a little convenient whey, reduce stress improve sleep, enjoy your work, have some fun etc would be more in the major ballpark

Zillah

Sifting good science from bad science is hard, so I'm just going to make something up that seems to feel right to me, and then I'll go on the internet and lecture people as though I am an authority.

TRS30

Wow, didn't think my question would start such a debate!!

I eat a pretty healthy balanced diet, get lots of carbs and fats and of course protein. I just want to increase my protein intake in an easier manner. With a young child, work etc its hard to find the time to cook extra chicken, meat etc on top of what I already cook. I am not replacing natural food with shakes more complimenting what I am already taking.

For a poster who asked earlier, I'm male, 6 1' about 87kg and work out at home four nights a week. Two arms and chest and two legs and back.

Transform

TRS30 wrote: »

Wow, didn't think my question would start such a debate!!

I eat a pretty healthy balanced diet, get lots of carbs and fats and of course protein. I just want to increase my protein intake in an easier manner. With a young child, work etc its hard to find the time to cook extra chicken, meat etc on top of what I already cook. I am not replacing natural food with shakes more complimenting what I am already taking.

For a poster who asked earlier, I'm male, 6 1' about 87kg and work out at home four nights a week. Two arms and chest and two legs and back.

cool so at maintenance (ie not looking to gain muscle or drop fat) this would breakdown to about -

260g carbs
195g protein
87g fat

per day.

This is why guessing aint a good idea. Track and record for a week just to see where you're at re those numbers

Zillah

TRS30 wrote: »

Two arms and chest and two legs and back.

Weirdo.

TRS30

Transform wrote: »

cool so at maintenance (ie not looking to gain muscle or drop fat) this would breakdown to about -

260g carbs
195g protein
87g fat

per day.

This is why guessing aint a good idea. Track and record for a week just to see where you're at re those numbers

Thanks. I see if I can do this from next Monday for a whole week and come back with the numbers.

Zillah wrote: »

Weirdo.

Go on I'll bite, why am I weirdo?

Zillah

I am making an amusing joke. Joke time is ovah. Return to regular posting.

TRS30

Zillah wrote: »

I am making an amusing joke. Joke time is ovah. Return to regular posting.

Ah, sorry bit slow up on the uptake. Protein shakes killing the brain cells

ThinkProgress

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

I did say scientists that don't have an agenda.

I'm not really sure what you're suggesting when you say that everything in the fitness industry is contradicted eventually. Do you disregard everything on the basis that it will be proven wrong at some point in the future?

Give me an idea for a 200kcal snack with a 50/30/20 macro split. I'm all out of ideas.

My point is that science is not completely sure about anything regarding nutrition and fitness.

I'm not saying science is unimportant. I constantly read new research all the time... but people shouldn't be so quick to disregard personal experience and their own gut instincts.

But my opinion on protein powders is not completely without scientific backing. I just don't share some people's obsession with proving everything with "research" because in this industry there is always conflicting research about everything!

Nutrition and fitness is more art than science imho.

ford2600 wrote: »

Bar your at the elite end of sport, getting diet 100% right isn't necessary for optimal health. In fact worrying about it and stressing is probably counter productive.

That's just a cop out really. If my diet is better than yours, everything else being equal... i'll be fitter and healthier than you. (maybe significantly so)

And I don't stress about it. It's just something I enjoy experimenting with and understanding better.

Zillah wrote: »

Sifting good science from bad science is hard, so I'm just going to make something up that seems to feel right to me, and then I'll go on the internet and lecture people as though I am an authority.

My opinions are not completely "made up". I may not be trying to back them up with hard science, but I do understand nutrition very well. I've studied it for a very long time.

I could start throwing "research" at you to back up my assertions. But I don't feel the need to do that. As I've already explained, there is constant contradictions in this industry regarding the "science" of nutrition.

Those authorities you speak of, very rarely agree on anything. And even when they do... some other authority comes along and disputes it.

So, I trust my knowledge and my instincts. I see the results. I feel the results... that's important to me. I don't disregard science - but I don't put all my trust in it either!

TRS30 wrote: »

I am not replacing natural food with shakes more complimenting what I am already taking.

Same difference. It's a compromise... and it comes with consequences.

Apologies, it's just that I'm a perfectionist. But I understand not everyone is aiming for such an extreme standard as me!

Alf Veedersane

ThinkProgress wrote: »

My point is that science is not completely sure about anything regarding nutrition and fitness.

I'm not saying science is unimportant. I constantly read new research all the time... but people shouldn't be so quick to disregard personal experience and their own gut instincts.

But my opinion on protein powders is not completely without scientific backing. I just don't share some people's obsession with proving everything with "research" because in this industry there is always conflicting research about everything!

Nutrition and fitness is more art than science imho.

Well, no it's science.

But the human body is ridiculously complex so there is a lot of conflicting research to solid principles but when you look behind these 'studies' and the parameters used or in some cases, the agendas of the researchers you understand why the conclusions differ but why one is still a solid, science-based principle.

That said, there may be outliers so absolutely use your own experience and direct results but they should be based on the starting point of good research and established, science-based principles rather than applying your own ideas and retrofitting some/any 'research' to back it up.

ThinkProgress

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

Well, no it's science.

But the human body is ridiculously complex so there is a lot of conflicting research to solid principles but when you look behind these 'studies' and the parameters used or in some cases, the agendas of the researchers you understand why the conclusions differ but why one is still a solid, science-based principle.

That said, there may be outliers so absolutely use your own experience and direct results but they should be based on the starting point of good research and established, science-based principles rather than applying your own ideas and retrofitting some/any 'research' to back it up.

Where did I say I was just retrofitting things?

I'm fully aware of what many experts think regarding protein powders, and the so called evidence they use to support those theories.

I didn't just wake up one day and decide protein powders were bad, and then find people who agreed with me. There are many different factors that influence my opinion on them. (probably too many to even mention)

I'm far too open minded regarding nutrition to just write off something completely with little or no basis for doing so.

My current opinion is that protein powders are a very poor substitute for whole food. But something may cause my opinion to change on that in the future!

Transform

ThinkProgress wrote: »

My point is that science is not completely sure about anything regarding nutrition and fitness.

I'm not saying science is unimportant. I constantly read new research all the time... but people shouldn't be so quick to disregard personal experience and their own gut instincts.

But my opinion on protein powders is not completely without scientific backing. I just don't share some people's obsession with proving everything with "research" because in this industry there is always conflicting research about everything!

Nutrition and fitness is more art than science imho.



That's just a cop out really. If my diet is better than yours, everything else being equal... i'll be fitter and healthier than you. (maybe significantly so)

And I don't stress about it. It's just something I enjoy experimenting with and understanding better.





My opinions are not completely "made up". I may not be trying to back them up with hard science, but I do understand nutrition very well. I've studied it for a very long time.

I could start throwing "research" at you to back up my assertions. But I don't feel the need to do that. As I've already explained, there is constant contradictions in this industry regarding the "science" of nutrition.

Those authorities you speak of, very rarely agree on anything. And even when they do... some other authority comes along and disputes it.

So, I trust my knowledge and my instincts. I see the results. I feel the results... that's important to me. I don't disregard science - but I don't put all my trust in it either!



Same difference. It's a compromise... and it comes with consequences.

Apologies, it's just that I'm a perfectionist. But I understand not everyone is aiming for such an extreme standard as me!

"very rarely agree on anything"

dude i personally know many of the best trainers in the country and we would agree on 90% of the way in which nutrition and exercise is coached.

If you operate out of principles then they become the foundation of whats taught

Ive a sports science degree but practical experience over 20yrs is whats given me the principles so yes science can be a little slow to pick up on established practice by many but the basics are still the basics

ThinkProgress

Transform wrote: »

"very rarely agree on anything"

dude i personally know many of the best trainers in the country and we would agree on 90% of the way in which nutrition and exercise is coached.

If you operate out of principles then they become the foundation of whats taught

Ive a sports science degree but practical experience over 20yrs is whats given me the principles so yes science can be a little slow to pick up on established practice by many but the basics are still the basics

Ok dude... since we're throwing around credentials as proof of knowledge, I guess I should start boasting about all my achievements now, right? (WRONG!!)

Like I said, this industry is full of ideas... but very little of it can be called factual.

I know of many different "experts" who have very different ideas and approaches. Some I agree with, some I don't. That's life and that's the fitness industry.

If these things were stone cold irrefutable facts, we wouldn't be debating them. And other people wouldn't be debating them on other forums... but they are!

Transform

ThinkProgress wrote: »

Ok dude... since we're throwing around credentials as proof of knowledge, I guess I should start boasting about all my achievements now, right? (WRONG!!)

Like I said, this industry is full of ideas... but very little of it can be called factual.

I know of many different "experts" who have very different ideas and approaches. Some I agree with, some I don't. That's life and that's the fitness industry.

If these things were stone cold irrefutable facts, we wouldn't be debating them. And other people wouldn't be debating them on other forums... but they are!

the reference to the sports science degree was to emphasize that i agree with you re qualifications and science.

No worries back to work for me

Zillah

Pretty sure I should outright dismiss the claims of someone that puts the words research and evidence in quotation marks every time.

Zillah

Pff, "scientists" with their "facts" and "clinical studies", what do they know anyway? I feel like something is true and that's more important than your lauded "research". You know, my gut, my instinct - that's how people get the right answers when it comes to the body. That's how they discovered penicillin, isn't it? He had this gut feeling that it would work so they rolled it out into all the hospitals? Pretty sure that's what happened, I had a dream about it, which is more reliable that your fancy "history books".

ThinkProgress

Zillah wrote: »

Pretty sure I should outright dismiss the claims of someone that puts the words research and evidence in quotation marks every time.

Do whatever you wish. I don't give sh!t...

Nobody is forcing you to take my advice. Or anybody else's for that matter.

You don't seem to have much interest in discussion. And you don't appear to have much of an opinion, other than discrediting mine! (but work away, I know my methods/ideas work very well)

ThinkProgress

Zillah wrote: »

Pff, "scientists" with their "facts" and "clinical studies", what do they know anyway? I feel like something is true and that's more important than your lauded "research". You know, my gut, my instinct - that's how people get the right answers when it comes to the body. That's how they discovered penicillin, isn't it? He had this gut feeling that it would work so they rolled it out into all the hospitals? Pretty sure that's what happened, I had a dream about it, which is more reliable that your fancy "history books".

Ah, yes... all those irrefutable "facts" in the nutrition industry.

Like all those diet plans backed by scientific research that are blasting away the obesity problems of the world.

Right you are sir! :rolleyes:

Alf Veedersane

ThinkProgress wrote: »

I know my methods/ideas work very well)

For you.

No one disagrees that food would be a better source of protein for the most part.

But your labelling of whey protein as rubbish is off the mark.

Hanley

I love a good n=1 thread.

ThinkProgress

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

For you.

No one disagrees that food would be a better source of protein for the most part.

But your labelling of whey protein as rubbish is off the mark.

Whey protein IS rubbish compared with whole food sources.

There is little or no fiber in protein powder. (unlike many whole food alternatives) This means it's digested far too quickly - not unlike refined simple carbs in that respect. (although obviously not as quickly as carbs)

It's often packed with sweeteners/preservatives/sugars/artificial flavors etc.

Our bodies were not designed to consume so much protein and in such concentrated forms... it's unnatural and unhealthy. Most whole foods are very difficult to consume in excess like that, because of their slower digestion. (which is nature's built-in defense against this type of thing)

All sorts of crazy stuff have been found in protein powders over the years. And because it's such a fine powdered product, you may be consuming bad things without ever even knowing it. (including heavy metal particles from the production process)

Over consumption of protein (very likely if you lift weights often and consume protein shakes), can and does lead to premature organ failure in later life.

I could go on and on with my reasons, but why bother? Some people will say I'm talking nonsense because they like drinking their cow powder... those people will defend it no matter what "evidence" I use to back it up!

Good luck to them. I wouldn't touch the stuff anymore if you paid me to... it's not worth the health risks and it has no nutritional value to me that can't be better sourced from whole foods.

And if I'm giving advice, that's what I say. People can take it or leave it. Everyone's body/health is ultimately their own responsibility.

Zillah

ThinkProgress wrote: »

You don't seem to have much interest in discussion. And you don't appear to have much of an opinion, other than discrediting mine! (but work away, I know my methods/ideas work very well)

If someone did not form their opinion based on reason then you can't change their position using reason. Your views are ideological (nature good, manmade bad) - you essentially have faith. You openly mock the idea of, say, providing evidence for your claim that whey is unhealthy fast food muck. It doesn't matter to you in the slightest what the facts or studies say, you base your views on your ideological beliefs and rationalise everything else later, to the extreme of trying to make the idea of providing evidence sound pointless.

So I've resorted to just mocking you instead, because it has as much chance of changing your mind as making any argument, or banging my head against the wall for that matter.