Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 13 to 24 of 24
  1. #13
    Elite Jin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    Land of the Rising Sun
    Posts
    4,096
    Thanks
    3,921
    Thanked 5,235 Times in 2,412 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by HDH View Post
    I've got it up on a few boards, I'm going to ask the question on all of them.
    All you need to do is say “RippedZilla”, bro.

    Blood, sweat and years.
    *and tren


  2. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Jin For This Useful Post:

    HDH (09-19-2018),MrRippedZilla (09-19-2018)

  3. #14
    Senior Member DevilDoc87's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Location
    SoFla
    Posts
    1,098
    Thanks
    984
    Thanked 641 Times in 452 Posts
    I think you have to say it three times Jin.. at least that’s how it works in the movies
    /Doc

  4. #15
    Elite HDH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    1,010
    Thanks
    183
    Thanked 332 Times in 230 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Jin View Post
    All you need to do is say “RippedZilla”, bro.
    Ya, he was my next move

    I did get this from Mike_RN over at TID-

    The egg is the bench mark for bioavailability. Hence the 100 rating. So refined proteins like whey can be above 100% because the figure is comparing every other specimen to egg. Its like the Anabolic/Androgenic ratios we all love. Test is 100:100 and every derivative is measured against it.
    It's not what you lift... It's how you lift it!

  5. The Following User Says Thank You to HDH For This Useful Post:

    Jin (09-19-2018)

  6. #16
    Veteran Seeker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Under your bed
    Posts
    6,258
    Thanks
    2,394
    Thanked 6,102 Times in 2,787 Posts
    one thing to take into consideration is that with whey, manufacturing practices will lower the bioavailability. Not taking away whey as a good source of protein, because it is. But manufacturing will definitely lower it. Some more than others.
    I'm alot of shit but fake ain't it...

    THERE IS NO PAIN
    that I cannot and will not fight through.

    Strength First.

  7. #17
    Elite HDH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    1,010
    Thanks
    183
    Thanked 332 Times in 230 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Seeker View Post
    one thing to take into consideration is that with whey, manufacturing practices will lower the bioavailability. Not taking away whey as a good source of protein, because it is. But manufacturing will definitely lower it. Some more than others.
    I would agree with that along with Biochemical Individuality and each persons ability to process it.

    That would also account for ISO showing 100 to 159.
    It's not what you lift... It's how you lift it!

  8. #18
    Veteran MrRippedZilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    1,142
    Thanks
    397
    Thanked 1,714 Times in 694 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by HDH View Post
    Anyone know anything about the wheys being above 100%.
    I'm guessing it has to do with the bodies ability to utilize it.
    If this is supposed to be biological value (BV) then no protein source has a score of a 100. Never mind above that.
    Did the original article actually cite a source for this information? Or did they just regurgitate from someone else? Or did they just severely misinterpret 1 specific paper that doesn't come to mind right now? My guess will be the latter. You can't take in 1g of protein and somehow end up storing 1.4g - that isn't how this shit works.

    BV is determined under conditions of very low protein intake. Lower than the general norm & certainly lower than what we consume. This is done because BV is adaptable. It goes up in a caloric surplus. It goes down in a caloric deficit, which is one of many reasons why you need more protein dieting vs bulking. It goes down when total protein intake is bumped up. Sex matters. Etc. Etc.
    So even if those numbers were accurate, which they are NOT, they would still mean jackshit in the grand scheme of things
    Last edited by MrRippedZilla; 09-19-2018 at 02:56 PM.
    If you can't win, be spectacular.

  9. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to MrRippedZilla For This Useful Post:

    BRICKS (09-19-2018),HDH (09-19-2018),jennerrator (09-19-2018),Jin (09-19-2018)

  10. #19
    Elite HDH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    1,010
    Thanks
    183
    Thanked 332 Times in 230 Posts
    Thanks man, I will post this at the other places as well.

    That is actually on several charts.

    The only charts that don't that I have seen only show whey, not iso or concentrate.
    Last edited by HDH; 09-19-2018 at 02:19 PM.
    It's not what you lift... It's how you lift it!

  11. #20
    Elite HDH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    1,010
    Thanks
    183
    Thanked 332 Times in 230 Posts
    Also, all charts, even studies show eggs as 100%.
    It's not what you lift... It's how you lift it!

  12. #21
    Veteran MrRippedZilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    1,142
    Thanks
    397
    Thanked 1,714 Times in 694 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by HDH View Post
    Also, all charts, even studies show eggs as 100%.
    Again, it's an interpretation & methodological issue.

    Interpretation:
    100 SHOULD mean all of the protein being utilized as nitrogen.
    The shitty articles that claim numbers above that are misinterpreting an old paper that did use Egg as the standard 100 (as Mike pointed out on another board). But since Egg doesn't actually have a 100 score, and you're using that as a benchmark, it doesn't work. At least, it doesn't work if you actually want to take the specific numbers seriously. Works great if you plan on selling some protein powders though...

    Methodological:
    The BV scale was applied under very specific conditions that do not, at all, reflect real life. Therefore the specific numbers are only useful for folks consuming very low amounts of protein with calories at maintenance. That's it. Overall, It gives you a rough idea of a quality protein source (none of which should be a surprise) and nothing more AFAIC.

    I'd recommend picking up Lyle McDonald's protein book because that goes into all of this in plenty of detail. Or, if you're a cheap ass, this paper (PM me if you can't find the full thing) does a decent job at discussing the pros & cons of measuring protein quality, which includes the BV method.
    Last edited by MrRippedZilla; 09-19-2018 at 03:03 PM.
    If you can't win, be spectacular.

  13. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to MrRippedZilla For This Useful Post:

    HDH (09-19-2018),jennerrator (09-19-2018),Jin (09-19-2018)

  14. #22
    Elite HDH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    1,010
    Thanks
    183
    Thanked 332 Times in 230 Posts
    Just a couple questions to help clear my head if you don't mind.

    Would you place whey over eggs?

    Even though the numbers don't matter, would you place the chart in the same order?

    Or, going by real world our standards, is there really no way to determine the order?

    Thanks for putting in the time.
    It's not what you lift... It's how you lift it!

  15. #23
    Veteran MrRippedZilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    1,142
    Thanks
    397
    Thanked 1,714 Times in 694 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by HDH View Post
    Just a couple questions to help clear my head if you don't mind.
    Would you place whey over eggs?
    Even though the numbers don't matter, would you place the chart in the same order?
    Or, going by real world our standards, is there really no way to determine the order?
    Thanks for putting in the time.
    Sorry for the late response.

    1) Depends. Whey if you need access to quick source of protein - quick source prewo if you're on the move or whatever. Eggs in general because I like eating actual food. Regardless, the protein BV numbers wouldn't be something I'd consider when choosing between the two.

    2) I would place the chart in the same order because we don't have data investigating the issue in a more practical setting.

    2) There is a way to determine the order but no interest from researchers, or more specifically those who fund research, to determine the order.
    I don't think this stuff matters in real life man. Unless you're a vegan or on another really shitty diet plan. Then it matters quite a bit.
    If you can't win, be spectacular.

  16. The Following User Says Thank You to MrRippedZilla For This Useful Post:

    HDH (09-28-2018)

  17. #24
    Senior Member Gadawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Posts
    653
    Thanks
    10
    Thanked 447 Times in 274 Posts
    I have a feeling that real food trumps supplents 24/7 and 365. I dont monkey with powders of any kind much. Just eat meat.


  18. The Following User Says Thank You to Gadawg For This Useful Post:

    HDH (09-28-2018)

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Similar Threads

  1. NPP vs DECA comparison chart
    By goodfella in forum Anabolic Steroids
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 02-03-2014, 12:56 PM
  2. Body Fat Percentage Chart
    By Popeye in forum Dieting, Nutrition and Supplements
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 02-03-2013, 07:51 PM
  3. OTC Hormone Chart
    By gymrat827 in forum Pro Hormone - Natural Steroids and Steroid Alternatives
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-16-2011, 05:25 PM
  4. The Steroid Ranking Chart
    By admin in forum Anabolic Steroids
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-24-2011, 11:45 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •