John Hodgson

Paul booth brought this to my attention whilst ordering our superb products of which he buys, sells and uses. I have actually contacted our main man Phil Connolly who is behind the developement of Pro Peptide/MR and is considered one of the most prominent protein experts in the world, below is his reply.

Sure I can help you John. We made the original label – well ahead of any government requirements because we are way ahead of bureaucrats when it comes to the health of our customers. All milkfat contains a small amount of trans fat. For that matter, all animal fat contains a small amount of trans fat. In the case of ProPeptide, Pro MR, etc, the fat in the products comes from the natural milkfat that is actually attached to the protein. There is not much fat there, but it is enough to require labeling. By calculation, the quantity of milkfat present means that there would be a few milligrams of trans fat present per serving. One time, when we were printing labels, we knew that in a few years down the road, most governments were going to require trans fat labeling. I called the US FDA and asked them how trans fat should be labeled. Their response at the time was that they hadn’t reached a final decision, but if we had any in our product, we should warn the consumer on our label. By nutritional label “rounding up” rules, even a few milligrams of trans fat would have to be labeled as 1 gram – so we labeled it that way. Finally, the US government published their rules for trans fat labeling. Those rules stated that if a product contained less than 0.25 grams trans fat, the label could show 0, zero, nada. The next time we printed up labels, we removed the trans fat declaration to show zero. Our products contain the same amount of trans fat as any sports supplement out there that is manufactured from milk based proteins. We were just way ahead of our competitors, as a concern for the health of our customers, in labeling trans fats and had to guess at what the law would read when finalized.

So there you have it. I have been using Pro peptide since its inception in 1999 and well its served me very well I think!!

The below images from my last guest appearance at the Stars of Tomorrow 30th October 2006, five weeks after my last show.
http://www.cnpprofessional.com/view-...aspx?album=32#

Remember KEEP IT SIMPLE - train hard, eat well and with time and consistency you can only improve.

genesis

Well thats answered the trans fat question!
Thats some quality mass by the way John

chrisj22

This is totally off subject, but damn.....you look quality.

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Nine Pack

The Pro Peptide seems to have done John no harm then!!

He's a constant source of inspiration to me & has been helping me ever since I began competing. I use all the same priciples John & Kerry taught me and have made more than double the progress in the last five years than i did in the ten years before that. Nuff said.

Pscarb

cheers John for clearing that up but you can see where the confusion would come from...so the new pro pep has no amount of trans fat in it??

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Garbs

Jesus wept, you are in some seriously great shape mate, fair play to you.

Nine Pack

Paul,
Phil Connolly did say thet there were just a few milligrams in each serving of trans fat:

''By calculation, the quantity of milkfat present means that there would be a few milligrams of trans fat present per serving.''

Due to the law stating that less than 0.25mg could be labelled as zero, they eventually labelled it exactly that. The same is true though for any protein product using any type of milk protein as a base. I'm certainly glad you raised the question though as it has shed some light on the matter accross the board regarding all protein supplements, and especially the info on CLA being a trans fat. Not many of us were aware of that, myself included.

I think it's good that CNP had the honesty to declare it on the label just in case even though it wasn't actually required to do so. Like I say, this is a company that clearly has a no bullsh*t policy. Not something we see often in this industry.

Pscarb

Paul i fully respect both John and CNP for their honesty but you can see where the confusion would come from concerning the trans fats...

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

EXTREME

Pardon me for returning to the original question, snorbitz1uk you asked for a product similar to Pro-Pep but cheaper, our Extreme Protein is a 4 protein blend with 22 aminos and is 76.5% protein, 5.8% carbs and 4.2% fat. Sodium is 0.1% and lactose is 0.2%, thus allowing our athletes to use it right up to show day and enabling them to have a full spectrum of amino acids being supplied to their muscles in a time release manner, it's also 22% Glutamine.

Forum members get 1.75 kg of this for £31.46 including shipping. The vast majority of users like it because of taste, consistency, easy digestion and the fact its such a quality product at a good price.

Extreme Protein has been around since December 1999, we've never played with the formula because we don't think anything out there is better, in value for money or in taste considering we keep artificial sweetners to a minimum in any of our products we don't sweeten with sucralose.

__________________

Great White

John, Looking in damn good shape mate.

Serious mass you got there.

Also agree with Doug - Ive used there pro whey for months now, mixes great, tastes good and got everything you need in it.

Also makes really good protein jelly

__________________
Welcome to Uk-Muscle.co.uk

"I was born perfect, and just like the great white shark, have never had to evolve!"


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
- Hardcore Bodybuilding & Powerlifting Community!

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
- Bodybuilding & Sports Video Sharing Community!

Nytol

How do you do that?

Great White

1 x Rowtree Sugar Free Jelly (Rasberry is nicest for this)
250ml boling water
300ml cold water
2 x scoops of extreme strawberry whey.

1. Make up the jelly as per packet (pour into boiling water, stir untill dissolved, then add cold water)

2. Pour into a blender and add whey protein

3. Blend carefully - use the "burst" on your blender if it has it, as it goes very frothy! - only takes a couple of bursts to mix.

4. Pour into tub and put in fridge to set.

5. Enjoy!!

Im addicted to this stuff - like 5g carbs from the whey and the rest is just pure protein - 50g protein per pint

Mmmmmm Mmmmmmmm

__________________
Welcome to Uk-Muscle.co.uk

"I was born perfect, and just like the great white shark, have never had to evolve!"


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
- Hardcore Bodybuilding & Powerlifting Community!

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
- Bodybuilding & Sports Video Sharing Community!

Snorbitz1uk

Already ordered from you earlier this week, arrived yesterday, very nice

__________________
[quote]I very much doubt a 4 week cycle of anything apart from chips is going to cause super huge gains and stretch marks mate.[quote]

Nine Pack

Regarding pro pep ' equivalents'. I would strongly urge everyone to read the following which was sent by Phil Connolly, one of the worlds leading protein experts. It will dispel a few misconceptions about proteins & how different types are absorbed. It's a long read, but the best info you will EVER get on protein:

Having looked through the pages of a competitors product brochure, will not mention who but lets just say they don't inform the truth through their literature.

They mention about Whey protein being possibly the kings of protein. Upon reading this I was dismayed by some of what was printed. Not being a protein genius I forwarded the article over to Phil Connolly who is one of the leading protein experts today and is behind the development of CNP's Pro peptide & Pro MR for his expert analysis on what was printed. Here is what he said:

In reading over the ******* brochure, I can only conclude that it was written by a person with a third grade understanding of the science of proteins.

See below Phil’s comments on the claims made by ‘brand X’:

"Shellfish, milk, beef, and soya are prime examples of proteins with low biological values." - False.

The proteins listed all have the high BV's. The BV of milk is in the 90's. The BV of beef is in the 90's. The BV of shellfish is in the 90's. The BV of soya protein is in the 90's (that's the reason they go with BV... it was originally instituted by the soy isolate people so that they could make soya protein look as good as animal based proteins). The BV of whey protein is in the 90's. The only person (aside from *******) who ever insisted that the BV of whey protein was above 100 was David Jenkins. He did so with bad mathematics. By definition, BV is a percentage - what percent of the protein you consume is actually used by the body within 24 hours. We all know that the mathematically maximum possible percentage is 100. It is impossible, through an actual scientific assay to come up with a BV above 100.

"Whey protein on the other hand (a refined and isolated protein derived from cow's milk) is considered by scientists to be the ultimate protein ... and has a higher BV than casein, chicken, or egg protein."

First of all, the only whey protein utilized in sports nutrition that is derived from cow's milk is in our line of products. There is no other line that can make that claim. The whey protein that ********** uses is derived from cheese whey, not cow's milk, hence the name "whey" protein. 99.99% of all of the whey protein manufactured in this world comes from cheese whey. Cheese whey protein is no longer in it's natural, native structure and it has been at least partially denatured by multiple heat pasteurizations during manufacture. Secondly, the differences in actual BV are so slight as to be ridiculous. I do not know of too many scientists that would go out on a limb to state that whey protein is the ultimate protein. The vast majority of scientists and nutritionists would firmly state that the ultimate protein is a mixture of proteins - all have good points and bad points. A mixture would take advantage of the good points while negating the bad points. In truth, egg protein has a higher BV than whey protein, higher quantities of BCAA's, and higher essential AA's.

"Whey's high BV means that consuming small amounts can have greater muscle building / toning results than eating double the amount of steak or triple the amount of soya."

True! - as long as one is talking about eating steak and not pure steak protein. Steak is only about 15% to 20% protein. The rest is water, fat, etc. If one were to eat a serving of ******* whey protein (perhaps 32 grams) and compare it to 64 grams of steak, one would be getting 24 grams of protein from ******* and only 13 grams from the steak. Steak protein in its pure form, on the other hand, would be very near to equal to whey protein for BV and perhaps superior for muscle building/toning because of its high carnosine and carnitine levels - whey protein does contain these compounds. We all know that soy protein is cr*p! Although, Peter Lemon, the man quoted at the start of the ******* article, did release a study a few years ago wherein he found that soy protein isolate resulted in better muscle growth in college aged men than did whey protein (it is the only study out there with those results). Usually studies show that soy protein does not promote muscle growth to anywhere near the same extent as animal based proteins.

Further on this subject of consuming smaller amounts of whey protein - if whey protein has a BV of 98%, then when consuming 20 grams of it, one could rely on the fact that 19.6 grams of that whey protein would be remain in the body for 24 hours when consumed. If casein's BV were lowered all the way down to 90%, then when eating 20 grams of casein, the body would retain 18 grams. By my calculations, that means that in their stupid isolation of scientific facts, one could consume 18.4 grams of whey protein to equal the retention of 20 grams of casein. All of this nonsense, however, is negated because BV only measures how much of the total protein nitrogen stays in the body for a small period of time and it does not measure what the body does with various proteins once consumed. You see, the body may spit out slightly more of the casein nitrogen within the first 24 hours after consumption because casein contains slightly more non-essential amino acids than does whey protein. The body first spits out what it cannot use at all, so casein shows a slightly higher loss of protein nitrogen in the first 24 hours compared to whey protein. However, casein has been shown to remain in the body longer than whey protein over the long term. BV does not measure the quantities of each of the essential amino acids of each protein that are retained long term by the body - it can't … there is no mechanism for it in the testing method. Does whey protein hold up better long term compared to casein? No. Better studies have shown that slow digesting proteins result in better long term retention of the valuable amino acids. Further, the BV testing methods were developed by soy protein people with an eye towards making casein look as nutritionally bad as possible. The very BV testing method is skewed towards giving a low result for casein (Oh yes, such tricks are constantly being put forth as scientific fact - the older PER studies used casein as the standard by which all other proteins were rated. The soy people screwed around with the feed mix that was fed to the subject rats until they found a mix that favoured soya and gave a significantly lower result for casein in rats. The same can be done with humans.).

There are better studies to quote from than BV studies - studies that actually demonstrate what the human body does with proteins once consumed. Such studies as those performed by the European Center for Human Nutrition Research in France - Boire, Tome et al. Basically, these studies go beyond an eat-then-examine-the-***-after-24-hours approach, and tracked radio-labelled amino acids through the body to see where they are sent and how they are utilized. Also, how much is retained in the body after 3 days. These studies show that slow digesting proteins are superior to fast digesting proteins - it is a mechanical concern of the human body. The liver is the body's filter - the body's blood is circulated through the liver and the liver removes anything that is in excess in the blood. A fast digesting protein (whey protein is a fast digesting protein) releases a glut of amino acids into the bloodstream. That amino acid saturated blood flows through the liver and the liver begins oxidizing the amino acids for energy to remove their excess from the blood, thereby eliminating those amino acids from use for making lean tissue. A far higher percentage of fast digesting protein amino acids are oxidized by the liver than are those from slow digesting proteins. Boire's paper contains graphs that show that bloodstream amino acid levels actually drop below baseline levels within hours after consuming whey protein. When the bloodstream amino acid levels drop below baseline like that, the body believes that it is starving for amino acids and starts cannibalizing lean tissue for amino acids (catabolism). Sure, whey protein triggers more intense protein synthesis in the body, but it also, without the assistance/presence of a good slow digesting protein like casein, will trigger muscle catabolism after the liver oxidizes a large percentage of what was consumed. After three days, significantly higher levels of casein derived amino acids are still being utilized in the body than are those from whey protein.

Now, guys like David Jenkins tried to attack these studies by telling the consumer to counteract the catabolism of whey protein consumption by eating whey protein more often, every few hours - just as ******* does in this article. The Boire group, however, performed a follow-up study in which they concluded that to match the anti-catabolic properties of casein, one would have to consume a few grams of whey protein every 10 minutes - not practical and certainly expensive over 16 hours. Consuming 20 grams of whey protein every 2 to 3 hours throughout the day (and night - don’t forget that to avoid catabolism at night, they would have to get up and consume the whey protein all night) will not help to avoid the catabolic effect of whey protein consumption and would be more expensive to the consumer than drinking 2 to 3 Pro Peptide or Pro MR shakes per day (the cost of 2 or 3 servings of our shakes versus 6 servings of ******* Whey Protein).
On to more bad information in the article:

"Whey or Casein - which is superior?"

"You may have seen some sports nutrition products containing a new slow digesting protein called micellular casein." - OK first of all, it is MICELLAR casein, not the very retarded "micellular casein" used in the article. Using the word "micellular" is equivalent to saying "Nucular bomb" instead of nuclear bomb. Only a complete scientific goof would use a word like that. If he can't get the very simple scientific term correct, how can anyone trust his scientific advice? Secondly, it is true that casein has been around for years - but not casein in its natural micellar form. Micellar casein is so new that there are only two locations on this planet that are capable of manufacturing it. Whey protein, on the other hand is manufactured by every farmer who makes cheese. Also, cottage cheese is virtually pure casein, but it is not the micellar form casein - it has been curded out of milk with acid and has, therefore, lost much of its valuable biological activity.

"Canadian scientists found that whey protein was six times more effective at improving exercise performance than casein." - the study they quote is the Lands, Grey, Smountas study. It has been thrown out in the USA as not being a valid, impartial scientific study and cannot be used in claims. It was paid for by the Immunotec people and was purposely set up to show the superiority of Immunocal whey protein. They used a hospital staff from Children's Hospital in Montreal (Canada) to execute the study - the same staff that they have used for all of their studies that have been biased and deemed not valid by the scientific community. To show you how invalid the study was, Immunotec supplied the casein that was used as a control in the study. They have refused to state the source of the casein or its quality - although reports have it that it was straight acid casein, a product that looks and behaves like sand, would be like eating sand when consumed, and would digest and get utilized very poorly when consumed (like sand). For that reason, a poor experimental control, the study has been scientifically invalidated. For these guys to actually quote it is equivalent to making a false claim.

"However, many people experience wind and discomfort with casein products." - True.
Just like any protein may cause wind and discomfort. Whey protein is no better at this than casein. That is why we have viable probiotic organisms in our products. Wind and discomfort result from nutrients that are hard-to-digest. Probiotic organisms help digestion thereby significantly reducing wind and discomfort. For the record, casein in its micellar form is easily digested by the human body and rarely imparts wind or discomfort.

There is a large violator (technical graphic arts jargon) on the second page of the article that says, "Whey is particularly high in the amino acid glutamine, which is the most abundant amino acid in muscle tissue and may boost muscle growth and prevent muscle wasting." - False!!!!! - This is a gross false claim. They provide no reference for their "quote" and they don’t even make that statement anywhere in their article. They just inserted that violator into the pages to make it look official without any basis for it being there. In actual fact, what they say about glutamine is correct -it is that valuable an amino acid. Glutamine is an "essential" non-essential amino acid. We need to consume a supplemental 20 grams every day. That is why we fortify our products with glutamine. Whey protein, however, is not "particularly high in the amino acid glutamine" as they state. Whey protein, in actual fact, is relatively low in glutamine content compared to other readily available proteins in our food supply. Whey protein contains about 7% to 8% glutamine. Casein contains about 9% to 10% glutamine. Soy protein contains about 14% glutamine. Wheat protein contains about 35% glutamine. For obvious reasons, animal meat proteins (being muscle tissue) contain in excess of 20% glutamine. My guess is that the bozo who wrote this article was confusing the two amino acids glutamine and glutamic acid. Whey protein contains about 20% glutamic acid. Glutamic acid cannot be converted by the body into glutamine and it does not have the same beneficial effects as glutamine. Given the rest of his misunderstanding of proteins and amino acids, it is no surprise that he would make this very ignorant mistake.

The rest of his article makes claims about taking whey protein more often and we have already covered why consuming whey protein more often is not practical for the consumer. We do, however, have to cover (one more time) the differences between what the article claims and real life. The beneficial claims being made for whey protein in the article are based on studies performed with natural, native structured whey proteins that were isolated directly from skim milk without use of any chemicals or pH changes. Numerous studies have tried to show that whey proteins derived from cheese whey will provide the same metabolic benefits as native whey proteins that are derived directly from skim milk. None have yet been able to do so. In fact, the definitive, original study on the benefits of whey protein (Bounous and Gold) concluded that while a natural, native whey protein that they named Protein X provided the widely quoted health benefits of whey protein, those whey proteins that were manufactured from cheese whey (they actually used 8 commercial brands) were no better than the casein control at providing the benefits. In simple terms, the closest whey protein to Protein X is in our products. The cheese whey proteins being utilized by everyone else are really no better than casein for the reputed health benefits - that includes ******* whey protein - and that is based on scientific evidence.

As for their last claim that whey protein has been shown to be effective when dieting as it can reduce appetite and increase CCK production - casein outperforms whey protein every time in weight loss studies. Casein dulls the appetite far longer than whey protein and consuming micellar casein results in significantly higher levels of CCK production. You see, CCK production is triggered when the stomach detects the presence of a small peptide sequence of kappa casein, otherwise known as glycomacropeptide (GMP). During the cheese making process kappa casein is cleaved by rennet or rennin enzyme. That releases the GMP from the kappa casein and causes a destabilization of the casein micelle, resulting in cheese curds precipitating out of the milk. The GMP stays with the cheese whey protein. When the cheese whey protein is consumed, GMP triggers release of CCK. The problem, however, is that GMP is a small peptide and is not always preserved during the manufacture of the whey protein (it goes out with the effluent). I have analyzed whey proteins with no GMP and most with very little. On the other hand, the whey protein we use has one little twist (to match the way Bounous and Gold made Protein X) - we start with skim milk at cold temperature, add rennin enzyme and cleave off the GMP. Because of the cold temperature, there is no casein curd production. The skim is then filtered in such a way to preserve GMP with the whey protein. The whey protein that we use has been analyzed at 14% GMP (compared to the average cheese whey protein content of about 4% GMP). Our customers get a double whammy of GMP and CCK production - a high GMP whey protein and micellar casein (the stomach contains a natural rennin type enzyme that will cleave GMP off of casein that is consumed in the micellar structure). Yes, GMP will help to reduce hunger and generate a leaner body - we provide way more of a dose than any cheese whey protein out there.

Lastly, please remember that we are not anti-whey protein. In fact, we love whey protein! We think that real whey protein is terrific. We just love high quality, natural structure whey protein - the healthy whey protein. We don’t use that cheap, low quality cheese whey protein. Pro Peptide contains almost 15 grams of high quality whey protein per serving. We simply go along with the preponderance of scientific thought that is of the opinion that the ultimate protein is a mixture of proteins. Whey protein and micellar casein make one heck of an ultimate mix.

Sorry about the length. It is a complicated subject.

Philip Connolly