Re: Protein isolates

[Guest guest]

Chris-

Chemically I couldn't tell you, except that stomach hydrolysis is different

from other forms, and while other forms reduce indigestion, they supposedly

don't aid nutrient absorption. (This, I believe, is per _Why Stomach Acid

Is Good For You_, which I haven't read yet.)

>Ok, but since the hydrolysis occurs in the stomach, isn't the end product the

>same by the time it is absorbed, unlike oxidized fats? So what's the

>difference?

-

[Guest guest]

>> Say rather that I doubt there's anything like the degree of hydrolysis

>> you'd find in commercial hydrolyzed powders in fermented whey.

For what it is worth, hydrolyzed casein seems to be better

for mice than regular casein ... I don't have the references

handy, but when they give plain casein to baby rats it

tends to incude T1 diabetes, but hydrolyzed does not.

And I suspect they used the cheap manufactured hydrolyzed

version, not something really healthy like kefir (which would

be hydrolyzed, I would think).

-- Heidi

[Guest guest]

Hi Kathy,

Found it where? Sitting in the bottom of his centrifuge tube? ;-)

I said he invented the centrifuged butter oil, not the x factor (nor vitamin

E, nor CLA, nor any other nutrient found *in* the butter oil.)>>

>>

No matter where he found it that is what he did- find it, discover, it but i

don't see that he invented it. Not to nit pick but you said he invented

" butter oil " . To back up and now say that he didn't " invent " the x factor

etc is odd since the reason that people buy butter oil is for the X factor,

yourself included IIRC.

<<I didn't say it was NT-- Judith had said that processing was destructive,

and

I pointed out that NT was founded on processing of all sorts of foods, on

the

assumption that all of us on the list share the " NT " perspective>>

I reread your response and your right you did not specifically say this.

However your reply, in my mind left the impression that you felt that DW fit

right in with the NT concept. If you remember even replied with this

" Yes, but these kinds of processing are fundamentally different from most

of

the mechanisms used in agribusiness, so it's a pretty good rule of thumb to

avoid any modern processing. "

<Sure. There's about 8 times more of it in the same amount of butter oil

though.>>

More is not always better and many times nutrients work synergistically. To

isolate butter oil may be good or may not but it seems to be a good

marketing ploy. And as in long ago discussions i still maintain that

isolating single nutrients rather than using the whole unless you are

treating for a specific problem is not really very NT.

<<Then I think you may have misunderstood my reply to Judith. I meant what

I

rewrote above, whether that was communicated well or not. I never said

protein

powder was NT, but rather responded to Judith's claim that all processing

destroys nutrients by saying " NT is founded on the principle that... " >>

Again your reply left me with different impressions and again processing as

already mentioned, the types of processing that NT uses such as sprouting,

fermenting, soaking are not the same as modern day processing.

<<Why do you keep calling it " highly " processed? If you know something

about

the processing that I don't, I'd be greatful if you could share it, because

I

don't want to use a product harmful to my health. If you don't, then could

you

please explain what is so " highly processed " about low-temperature

dehydration and hydrolysis by the addition of enzymes?>>

To be honest my concern is not about your health. If this is something that

you want to use i have no problem with it. My concern is that your replies

which are on an NT list seem to imply that this product is NT compatible

which i don't feel that it is, nor apparently does Sally Fallon. From your

earlier remarks i gather that you don't like her stance <shrug> While i

don't see her as infallible i do give her more credence than what either you

or i have to say. Highly processed?? Whey is a liquid that is taken from a

product such as yogurt. This product is dried at unknown temps for unknown

lengths of time then various enzymes are added back in. Hmm i wonder why. If

the temps are so low and the enzymes are already there then they shouldn't

need to be added back in.

The ads for this product proudly proclaim how it is new improved, patent

pending breakthrough

Ingredient Details:

APT - Full Spectrum Whey Peptides (whey protein concentrate, ion-exchange

whey), whey glutamine peptide blend, D-glucose, lecithin, natural &

artificial flavoring, magnesium oxide, malic acid, cellulose gum, momordica

extract, sodium chloride, potassium chloride, xanthan/sodium alginate,

annatto, acesulfame-K, stevia, calcium pantothenate, pyridoxine HCL,

thiamin, riboflavin, cyanocobalamin, Vitamin E, lactoperoxidase.

This selling hype does not do much for me either.

Enhanced Strength, Power and Recovery for Men and Women*

ZinMag-6 ingredients are proven in clinical reasearch to help increase

performance, including improved strength, power and recovery. (Brilla LR,

Haley TF. J

My guess is that is something that is used mainly by builders. It might your

preferred product and more power to you but i don't see it as NT

compatible.

Kathy A.

[Guest guest]

Quoting Kathy <kacheson@...>:

> No matter where he found it that is what he did- find it, discover, it

> but i

> don't see that he invented it. Not to nit pick but you said he invented

> " butter oil " . To back up and now say that he didn't " invent " the x

> factor

> etc is odd since the reason that people buy butter oil is for the X

> factor,

> yourself included IIRC.

There's nothing inconsistent about these statements. Price created a

product--centrifuged butter oil--which had never previously existed;

therefore we say that he invented it. He was the first to identify the

existence of a natural compound--activator X--present in certain foods;

therefore we say that he discovered it.

> <Sure. There's about 8 times more of it in the same amount of butter oil

> though.>>

>

> More is not always better and many times nutrients work synergistically.

> To

> isolate butter oil may be good or may not but it seems to be a good

> marketing ploy. And as in long ago discussions i still maintain that

> isolating single nutrients rather than using the whole unless you are

> treating for a specific problem is not really very NT.

The reason for taking supplements (and that's what the " superfoods "

recommended in NT are) is that, for various reasons, such as expense,

availability, and palatability, it may be difficult for many people to

include foods rich in certain nutrients in their diets.

> Again your reply left me with different impressions and again processing

> as

> already mentioned, the types of processing that NT uses such as

> sprouting,

> fermenting, soaking are not the same as modern day processing.

What is the fundamental difference?

> Whey is a liquid that is taken from a product such as yogurt.

> This product is dried at unknown temps for unknown

> lengths of time then various enzymes are added back in. Hmm i wonder why.

Who said anything about adding them back in? These are proteolytic enzymes

not originally present in the whey, are they not? Not all enzymes are not

interchangeable.

--

Berg

bberg@...

[Guest guest]

--- In

<><<><><><>>CLIPPING DONE BY DENNIS

Commercially whey is a byproduct of mozz, cheddar, provolone, and

other hard and semi-hard cheeses. Coloring agents are added to color

some cheeses and salt is added to almost all cheeses to dry the cheese

(separates curds and whey). Curds and whey are warmed to 100F or so

to drive off whey so hard cheeses get hard. So far ok? Then lactose

is removed from whey leaving de-lactosed whey usually for animal feed

but not always. Salt may or may not be removed from whey. Much of it

stays with the cheese. And this is sort of how it's supposed to

work..... Sometimes there's anti-biotics in the milk and the vat

(20000 pounds of milk)is dead so lactic acid is added in an attempt

to make cheese. This doesn't work well and this cheese almost always

goes into pasteurized process cheese. Get the idea of overprocessed.

<grins> This doesn't usually happen of course. Oh and where did the

antibiotics go. Well maybe it wasn't antibiotics. It must have been

BAD (cheese) starter!!! SHIP it to .....

> > Whey is a liquid that is taken from a product such as yogurt.

> > This product is dried at unknown temps for unknown

> > lengths of time then various enzymes are added back in. Hmm i

wonder why.

>

> Who said anything about adding them back in? These are proteolytic

enzymes

> not originally present in the whey, are they not? Not all enzymes

are not

> interchangeable.

>

> --

> Berg

> bberg@c...

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 12/15/03 10:29:52 PM Eastern Standard Time,

kacheson@... writes:

> No matter where he found it that is what he did- find it, discover, it but

> i

> don't see that he invented it.

Kathy,

You'll have to forgive me, but I really cannot understand how you can

possibly be seriously saying this. Price put cream in a centrifuge, centrifuged

it,

and created a nutritional supplement that isolated certain factors of the

cream and discarded MOST of the cream. To my knowledge, Price was the first to

do

this. If so, I call that inventing something. If not, then he simply copied

it from someone else who invented it.

Not to nit pick but you said he invented

> " butter oil " . To back up and now say that he didn't " invent " the x factor

> etc is odd since the reason that people buy butter oil is for the X factor,

> yourself included IIRC.

Yes. I could get the x-factor from butter, and do, but it is in vastly

higher concentration in the centrifuged butter oil that Price invented than in

butter.

For an analogy, I use the internet to get information, but the internet was

invented, while information was not.

Butter oil did not exist before Price created it, but the x-factor did, and

butter oil is a carrier for the x-factor (assuming the x-factor exists, which

questions.)

> <<I destructive,

> and

> I pointed out that NT was founded on processing of all sorts of foods, on

> the

> assumption that all of us on the list share the " NT " perspective>>

>

> I reread your response and your right you did not specifically say this.

> However your reply, in my mind left the impression that you felt that DW fit

> right in with the NT concept.

I'm sorry for the confusion.

If you remember even replied with this

> " Yes, but these kinds of processing are fundamentally different from most

> of

> the mechanisms used in agribusiness, so it's a pretty good rule of thumb to

> avoid any modern processing. "

's reply doesn't even mention NT. It continues to discuss processing,

which is what I believe the issue was.

> <Sure. There's about 8 times more of it in the same amount of butter oil

> though.>>

>

> More is not always better and many times nutrients work synergistically.

True, but since we know that Price was able to stop and reverse tooth decay

in his patients while using cod liver oil and butter oil, it seems reasonable

to believe that butter oil is a valuable supplement at the recommended dose.

To > isolate butter oil may be good or may not but it seems to be a good

> marketing ploy. And as in long ago discussions i still maintain that

> isolating single nutrients

Butter oil is not a singular nutrient.

rather than using the whole unless you are

> treating for a specific problem is not really very NT.

You keep saying this, but if Price created it and used it and recommended it,

since Sally, who wrote NT, uses it every day, not to treat a specific

problem, since WAPF and NT recommend it, it is thoroughly beyond my

comprehension how

you can consider it " not really very NT. "

> <<Then I think you may have misunderstood my reply to Judith. I meant what

> I

> rewrote above, whether that was communicated well or not. I never said

> protein

> powder was NT, but rather responded to Judith's claim that all processing

> destroys nutrients by saying " NT is founded on the principle that... " >>

>

> Again your reply left me with different impressions and again processing as

> already mentioned, the types of processing that NT uses such as sprouting,

> fermenting, soaking are not the same as modern day processing.

Until someone elucidates a fundamental difference, we might want to simply

drop this particular issue.

> <<Why do you keep calling it " highly " processed? If you know something

> about

> the processing that I don't, I'd be greatful if you could share it, because

> I

> don't want to use a product harmful to my health. If you don't, then could

> you

> please explain what is so " highly processed " about low-temperature

> dehydration and hydrolysis by the addition of enzymes?>>

>

> To be honest my concern is not about your health. If this is something that

> you want to use i have no problem with it. My concern is that your replies

> which are on an NT list seem to imply that this product is NT compatible

> which i don't feel that it is, nor apparently does Sally Fallon.

That seems to indicate, as I said before, that your view of NT is entirely

philosophical. And clearly your philosophical conception of what NT is, is a

little off-kilter, since you believe butter oil to be " not very NT. "

But if your complaint is that it is being discussed on this list, I would

point out that 1) I brought up the issue to get the advice of list-members with

common concerns about processing as I have as to whether or not this product is

processed in a destructive way and 2) If it's true that it is not processed

in a desctructive way, this is an example of a product that is deliberately

processed to be *more* in line with NT than other products of its kind.

I would further point out that since Price was pro-grain, low-carb and

gluten-free are not exactly " NT " either, but are discussed endlessly on this

list.

From your

> earlier remarks i gather that you don't like her stance <shrug> While i

> don't see her as infallible i do give her more credence than what either you

> or i have to say.

I think her stance has logic to it, but doesn't apply to my use of the

protein powder. Sally's two objections to protein powders, that I'm aware of

(and

are you agreeing with her objections without even knowing what they are?), are

1) they have no fat, and protein should always be consumed with fat, and

protein depletes vitamin A, especially with no fat and 2)Americans do not need

protein supplements, because we can get all the protein we want from our

abundance

of meat.

Point 1 doesn't apply to me, because I eat tons of vitamin A in my diet, and

I consume either butter oil or cod liver oil, which have vitamin A, with my

protein drink. Point 2 doesn't apply either, because I don't use protein drinks

to increase the quantity of protein I use. As I have stated innumerable

times, the only reason I use them is to get quickly digested protein before and

after my workout, which is hard or impossible to do from whole foods.

Highly processed?? Whey is a liquid that is taken from a

> product such as yogurt. This product is dried at unknown temps for unknown

> lengths of time then various enzymes are added back in. Hmm i wonder why. If

> the temps are so low and the enzymes are already there then they shouldn't

> need to be added back in.The ads for this product proudly proclaim how it is

> new improved, patentpending breakthrough

What enzymes? The only enzyme in the product is lactoperoxidase. If you

read the information more carefully, you would find that the protein is

dehydrated at temps that do not produce cross-linking, which are the same as

those that

produce enzyme denaturation.

>

> Ingredient Details:

> APT - Full Spectrum Whey Peptides (whey protein concentrate, ion-exchange

> whey), whey glutamine peptide blend, D-glucose, lecithin, natural &

> artificial flavoring, magnesium oxide, malic acid, cellulose gum, momordica

> extract, sodium chloride, potassium chloride, xanthan/sodium alginate,

> annatto, acesulfame-K, stevia, calcium pantothenate, pyridoxine HCL,

> thiamin, riboflavin, cyanocobalamin, Vitamin E, lactoperoxidase.

This is not the product I use. It is missing several ingredients, and the

one I use contains neither artificial flavoring, acesulfame-K, nor, I think,

momordica extract, whatever that is.

> My guess is that is something that is used mainly by builders. It might

> your

> preferred product and more power to you but i don't see it as NT

> compatible.

As I said, the only reason I would use it is to build muscle. While this is

not a body-building list, numerous people on the list have expressed the

desire for themselves or their husbands to gain muscle. That is, of course, a

perfectly valid health concern, and will greatly improve some health problems

talked about on this list, such as insulin resistance, or problems with your

body

parts going numb.

Again, when I posted this I was asking a question from people who were both

scientifically knowledgeable and shared an NT perspective. I'm not claiming

the product is " NT " but I do claim that it is " NT-compatible, " if a distinction

can be made, because as of yet, I do not see how it compromises the value of

an NT diet, and it seems to me that the modes of processing that differentiate

this product from most others of its kind, make it one of the most

NT-compatible products of its kind.

Chris

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 12/16/03 12:45:30 AM Eastern Standard Time,

dkemnitz2000@... writes:

> Commercially whey is a byproduct of mozz, cheddar, provolone, and

> other hard and semi-hard cheeses. Coloring agents are added to color

> some cheeses and salt is added to almost all cheeses to dry the cheese

> (separates curds and whey). Curds and whey are warmed to 100F or so

> to drive off whey so hard cheeses get hard. So far ok? Then lactose

> is removed from whey leaving de-lactosed whey usually for animal feed

> but not always. Salt may or may not be removed from whey. Much of it

> stays with the cheese. And this is sort of how it's supposed to

> work..... Sometimes there's anti-biotics in the milk and the vat

> (20000 pounds of milk)is dead so lactic acid is added in an attempt

> to make cheese. This doesn't work well and this cheese almost always

> goes into pasteurized process cheese. Get the idea of overprocessed.

> <grins> This doesn't usually happen of course. Oh and where did the

> antibiotics go. Well maybe it wasn't antibiotics. It must have been

> BAD (cheese) starter!!! SHIP it to .....

Dennis, thanks for your posts. Where the whey came from *before* it was

powdered was something I didn't think of. I suspect that they *might* make the

whey themselves, since they must insure the proteins are not denatured, but I

don't know. That's a new avenue to look into.

Do you know anything about the process that separates lactose from the whey?

Chris

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 12/16/03 1:51:32 PM Eastern Standard Time,

bberg@... writes:

> If they're just going to hydrolyze the proteins, why does it matter

> whether or not they're denatured?

>

They aren't hydrolyzed into amino acids, they're hydrolyzed into small

peptides. In some sense that's denatured, but what they mean is that

cross-linking

does not occur. I don't know anything about the detrimental effects of

cross-linking but it is apparently widely believed to be harmful, and is one of

the

negative effects of pasteurization that raw milk advocates cite.

Chris

[Guest guest]

----- Original Message -----

From: <ChrisMasterjohn@...>

> Yes. I could get the x-factor from butter, and do, but it is in

vastly

> higher concentration in the centrifuged butter oil that Price invented

than in

> butter.

>

> For an analogy, I use the internet to get information, but the

internet was

> invented, while information was not.

So does that mean that Al Gore discovered information?

[Guest guest]

> Dennis, thanks for your posts. Where the whey came from *before* it

was

> powdered was something I didn't think of. I suspect that they

*might* make the

> whey themselves,

Some simple calculations:

They seem to sweet whey. So assuming 0.7% protein, you need 143l of

whey/kg protein. Assuming that goes for $30 retail (wild guess), 10%

of that goes toward whey as one of the ingredients. So they can spend

2 cent per liter of whey. That means they must get it as a waste

product (almost free).

\\

I would take their studies (about producing more weight gain because

the protein quality is better) with a huge grain of salt. A couple

years back I had one of their protein powders and it had a few

hormones (IGF1 and some other things) and stuff like gamma-oryzanol

added. Those addatives may be responsible for any difference there is.

(Some of the addatives did sound problematic.)

--

[Guest guest]

----- Original Message -----

From: <ChrisMasterjohn@...>

> Dennis, thanks for your posts. Where the whey came from *before* it

was

> powdered was something I didn't think of. I suspect that they *might*

make the

> whey themselves, since they must insure the proteins are not

denatured, but I

> don't know. That's a new avenue to look into.

If they're just going to hydrolyze the proteins, why does it matter

whether or not they're denatured?

[Guest guest]

<Kathy,

You'll have to forgive me, but I really cannot understand how you can

possibly be seriously saying this. Price put cream in a centrifuge,

centrifuged it, >>

Chris-

You'll have to forgive me but i don't understand how you can keep running

off on tangents that have little to do with what the original question was

( do you plan on politics?) and is the extent of my interest. Here again

is your reply below.

<<'s reply doesn't even mention NT. It continues to discuss processing,

which is what I believe the issue was.>>

Perhaps you might want to read s response again???

-----

in reply to Judith:

>NT is founded on the principle that much processing increases nutrient

value.

> For example sprouting, soaking, and cooking, and fermenting.

:

Yes, but these kinds of processing are fundamentally different from most of

the mechanisms used in agribusiness, so it's a pretty good rule of thumb to

avoid any modern processing.

Also, none of the NT-style forms of processing involve such a great degree

of refining.

>>>

<<Until someone elucidates a fundamental difference, we might want to simply

drop this particular issue.>>

If you would stop introducing dead trojan horses that draws away from the

original point i would be more than happy to drop the issue. But your

original reply was specific to how DW compared to and was appropriate to

NT. I simply feel that it isn't. Doesn't mean that DW or vitamins or any

other supplement is bad, but leaving the impression that it is NT seems to

be something that you really want to be true and if that makes you happy

<shrug> its OK with me. Your opinion is just that, your opinion, and to

belittle my opinion and telling me " that your right " is nothing more than

rude.

Kathy A

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 12/16/03 10:38:02 PM Eastern Standard Time,

kacheson@... writes:

> If you would stop introducing dead trojan horses that draws away from the

> original point i would be more than happy to drop the issue. But your

> original reply was specific to how DW compared to and was appropriate to

> NT. I simply feel that it isn't. Doesn't mean that DW or vitamins or any

> other supplement is bad, but leaving the impression that it is NT seems to

> be something that you really want to be true and if that makes you happy

> <shrug> its OK with me. Your opinion is just that, your opinion, and to

> belittle my opinion and telling me " that your right " is nothing more than

> rude.

Kathy,

I'm perfectly happy to agree to disagree, especially since neither of us can

agree on any standard by which to judge any given products NT-ness.

However, in regards to rudeness, I'd point out that I begun this sub-thread

by asking a question about DW. You proceeded to argue the product wasn't NT,

whatever that means, which I never said it was. It was implicit that I was

asking the question of people who understood the processing it went through, and

you demonstrated in the thread that you don't even understand the fundamentals

of the processing. And moreover, told me you didn't care about my health

(while clearly the reason I brought up the question was because of my concern

for

my health), but were arguing simply for the sake of proving the product was

not NT. And I'm being rude?

Chris

[Guest guest]

--- In , " Kathy " <kacheson@q...>

wrote:

> If you would stop introducing dead trojan horses that draws away

from the original point i would be more than happy to drop the

issue. But your original reply was specific to how DW compared to

and was appropriate to NT. I simply feel that it isn't. Doesn't mean

that DW or vitamins or any other supplement is bad, but leaving the

impression that it is NT seems to be something that you really want

to be true and if that makes you happy <shrug> its OK with me.

Your opinion is just that, your opinion, and to belittle my opinion

and telling me " that your right " is nothing more than rude.

> Kathy A

Kathy,

You haven't offered anything substantive to the topic, but have only

been interested in debating Chris' method of discussion. His last

post was quite clear to his intent as was his original post on the

subject. You seem to be taking the debate a little too personally -

IMO. Your hostilility toward appears to be clouding your

ability to read his posts. I haven't got the impression that Chris

is trying to push this product as NT. Get over it, please. Geeesh!

What is with people lately.

[Guest guest]

Where are you getting the Designer Whey from? The places I checked on the

web all had artificial flavorings or colorings added. I remember you saying

that yours had none of these. I've been looking for a decent post workout

concentrated protein. I used to use Shaklee's Physique but Shaklee was

using milk and whey protein isolates as their protein source and dextrose

and maltodextrin as the carbs. While I personally don't have a major

problem with protein isolates I feel that the dextrose was giving me

problems. No doubt about it, Physique worked great for muscle buildup and

fat loss but I didn't care for the carb source,

thanks

danny

Creek Bend Dairy Farm

Harry & Peggy Strite

11917 Snug Harbor Lane

port, MD 21795

301-582-4135

cbdfarm@...

> Kathy,

>

> I'm perfectly happy to agree to disagree, especially since neither of us

can

> agree on any standard by which to judge any given products NT-ness.

>

> However, in regards to rudeness, I'd point out that I begun this

sub-thread

> by asking a question about DW. You proceeded to argue the product wasn't

NT,

> whatever that means, which I never said it was. It was implicit that I

was

> asking the question of people who understood the processing it went

through, and

> you demonstrated in the thread that you don't even understand the

fundamentals

> of the processing. And moreover, told me you didn't care about my health

> (while clearly the reason I brought up the question was because of my

concern for

> my health), but were arguing simply for the sake of proving the product

was

> not NT. And I'm being rude?

>

> Chris

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

We carry an exceptional whey protein powder from New Zealand made by

Metagenics. www.cedarcanyonclinic.com

DMM

>

> Where are you getting the Designer Whey from? The places I checked

on the

> web all had artificial flavorings or colorings added. I remember

you saying

> that yours had none of these. I've been looking for a decent post

workout

> concentrated protein. I used to use Shaklee's Physique but Shaklee

was

> using milk and whey protein isolates as their protein source and

dextrose

> and maltodextrin as the carbs. While I personally don't have a

major

> problem with protein isolates I feel that the dextrose was giving me

> problems. No doubt about it, Physique worked great for muscle

buildup and

> fat loss but I didn't care for the carb source,

>

> thanks

> danny

>

> Creek Bend Dairy Farm

> Harry & Peggy Strite

> 11917 Snug Harbor Lane

> port, MD 21795

> 301-582-4135

> cbdfarm@i...

>

>

> > Kathy,

> >

> > I'm perfectly happy to agree to disagree, especially since

neither of us

> can

> > agree on any standard by which to judge any given products NT-

ness.

> >

> > However, in regards to rudeness, I'd point out that I begun this

> sub-thread

> > by asking a question about DW. You proceeded to argue the

product wasn't

> NT,

> > whatever that means, which I never said it was. It was implicit

that I

> was

> > asking the question of people who understood the processing it

went

> through, and

> > you demonstrated in the thread that you don't even understand the

> fundamentals

> > of the processing. And moreover, told me you didn't care about my

health

> > (while clearly the reason I brought up the question was because

of my

> concern for

> > my health), but were arguing simply for the sake of proving the

product

> was

> > not NT. And I'm being rude?

> >

> > Chris

> >

> >

> >

[Guest guest]

Dr. Mike wrote:

" We carry an exceptional whey protein powder from New Zealand made by

Metagenics. "

How many g protein per serving and servings per bottle?

Chris

[Guest guest]

if I had to have one complaint about this product it would be

the container should be at least 30 serv.

15 serv./cont.

16g/serv.

DMM

> " We carry an exceptional whey protein powder from New Zealand made

by

> Metagenics. "

>

> How many g protein per serving and servings per bottle?

>

> Chris

[Guest guest]

DW uses pressure-driven ultrafiltration to separate the whey protein, which they

claim is vastly superior to what most companies use, and allows them to include

the immunoglobulins and various other constituents that are separated out from

most protein isolates.

The whey is a byproduct of cheese-making involving rennet, which they say is

probably present in the whey protein at a concentration of 0.1% or under.

I did a search on pressure-driven ultrafiltration and it seems to be a

top-of-the-line process. I mostly found links to books, one of which costs

$145, but it appears that UF allows molecules to be sorted more accurately based

on molecular weight. DW claims that after this filtration process the proteins

are 100% non-denatured.

Chris

[Guest guest]

Chris-

>DW uses pressure-driven ultrafiltration to separate the whey protein,

>which they claim is vastly superior to what most companies use, and allows

>them to include the immunoglobulins and various other constituents that

>are separated out from most protein isolates.

How much do you pay for DW? I notice that the LEF charges the same for DW

as they do for their own whey powder, which IMO is substantially

superior. It's about $25 per 1kg bottle at the member rate, and each 20g

scoop serving has 18g of protein.

Here's their description:

>Note:

>Athletes were the first to use whey protein as an anti-catabolic

>supplement to build lean muscle mass. Cancer and AIDS patients now use

>whey protein to protect against lethal catabolic wasting syndrome.

>

>Recently, a new production method has produced a whey protein isolate that

>provides even better health maintenance and disease prevention benefits

>than previous products. Using a low temperature micro-filtration

>technique, it is now possible to produce a 98% undernatured whey protein

>isolate that retains all the important sub-fractions, such as lactoferrin,

>a strong antioxidant, having anti-microbial and anti-viral properties,

>that also may be a powerful immune stimulant.

>

>Enhanced Life Extension Protein is a third generation whey protein

>containing 4 times as much lactoferrin as most other whey protein

>supplements on the market, and is, to our knowledge, the only such whey

>protein supplement that contains added lactoferrin.

>

>Other ingredients: natural vanilla or chocolate flavor, lecithin and

>stevia extract.

I realize the DW you get has different sweeteners, but the LEF's

ingredients sound much better than this listing of DW's:

>1 scoop (23.2 grams) contains:

>84% protein from the following ingredients: whey peptides, whey protein

>concentrate, ion-exchanged whey, whey glutamine peptide blend, calcium

>pantothenate, pyridoxine HCL, thiamin, riboflavin, cyanocobalamin,

>acesulfame-K, vitamin E, lactoperoxidase.

-

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 12/17/03 1:28:22 PM Eastern Standard Time,

Idol@... writes:

> How much do you pay for DW? I notice that the LEF charges the same for DW

> as they do for their own whey powder, which IMO is substantially

> superior. It's about $25 per 1kg bottle at the member rate, and each 20g

> scoop serving has 18g of protein.

I pay $29 for a 5 pound bottle, which has roughly 1.5 Kg of total protein, 95

servings of 17.5 g. DW claims to be the only one on the market using UF,

which they claim maximizes lactoferrin, immunoglobulins, etc, more than other

filtration process.

The list has to be old, because DW does *not* use ion exchange filtration,

listed in what you cited, and it is not listed in the ingredients list on my DW.

It seems slightly safer than DW in some respects I suspect are minor; DW

seems a little better equipped to maximize workout recovery and to maximize

workout performance because of the specificity of some of the peptides.

Thanks for the tip. Where do you get LEF from?

Chris

[Guest guest]

> We carry an exceptional whey protein powder from New Zealand made

by

> Metagenics. www.cedarcanyonclinic.com

>

> DMM

>

I researched this product a bit, and it indeed looks good. I think

I'll try some.

Any reason that you would recommend this over goatein, for instance?

Another one that looks pretty good is Quantum Rx Lean/Slim Body Whey,

from qnlabs (www.qnlabs.com), the same people who make Premier cod

liver oil.

[Guest guest]

Exactly what I was going to say: the abstract and reported results or

conclusion of a study are subject to the researchers' interpretation,

and if they have bias, it will probably show up. Ninety-nine percent

of people who hear about or cite a study never actually read the study

and just read the abstract or a dumbed-down synopsis reported in a

periodical, so the study's " results " are accepted readily.

Tom

> Chris-

>

> The mere fact of double-blindedness is no protection at all, for two

> reasons. First, bias can be introduced into the design of the

study, and

> second, bias can be introduced into the reporting of the results, peer

> review notwithstanding. It happens all the time.

>

> >In a double blind study, there's

> >no way for anyone to introduce bias, because neither the patients

nor those

> >administering the independent variable or measuring the dependent

variables

> >know who is getting what. If the study were not double blind, I would

> >certainly

> >be more suspicious of a study the company funded itself, or worse,

conducted

> >itself.

>

>

>

> -

[Guest guest]

Tom-

And even the abstracts are often misreported, but the vast majority of that

99% of people isn't to blame for not reading the actual studies -- they're

written in Obfuscatese, but more importantly, they're generally very

expensive to read.

>Ninety-nine percent

>of people who hear about or cite a study never actually read the study

>and just read the abstract or a dumbed-down synopsis reported in a

>periodical, so the study's " results " are accepted readily.

-

[Guest guest]

It seems to me that studies are deliberately designed to confuse the average

Jane or Joe. And anyone else who may want to know what they really said.

And is right, they can be expensive to read.

Judith Alta

-----Original Message-----

Tom-

And even the abstracts are often misreported, but the vast majority of that

99% of people isn't to blame for not reading the actual studies -- they're

written in Obfuscatese, but more importantly, they're generally very

expensive to read.

>Ninety-nine percent

>of people who hear about or cite a study never actually read the study

>and just read the abstract or a dumbed-down synopsis reported in a

>periodical, so the study's " results " are accepted readily.

-