This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
Added forms and usage information for whey protein supplements (ie: where it is commonly found in stores, and what it’s used for) Name: Jordan Chall, User: tuj63550 Tuj63550 ( talk) 16:15, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
Wasn't sure how to add it to the main page and didn't want to mess it up, but the consumer reports reference in 21 does have a URL if someone wants to post the link: http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/magazine-archive/2010/july/food/protein-drinks/overview/index.htm —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.86.8.7 ( talk) 22:38, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
MM, why is it that wheyprotein.com cannot be on the page? It has relevant research information, new information and doesn't hock any products or services. There are two small banner ads on the site but I didn't consider them to be an issue..
MM, Thank you. Sorry for the delay in response. I did see the change in reference to outside links after my note to you. Also, I was unaware of the author, reference peice. I thought that since SupplementData.com was built for the purpose of "unbiased" (my intention and belief not statement of fact) knowledge sharing, it wasn't so much a reference of "my work." Moot point, I'm sure at this point but worth clarifying.
I do hope that the link to the the "wheyprotein.org" site which is a paper thin commerical coverup is also removed. Thank you! ~Shawn
"Whey protein is loaded with the essential and non-essential amino acids with few carbohydrates and little fat content." What are the amino acids? -- Abdull 12:15, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
I have read claims (Dr. Mercola, for example) that whey protein isolates are very high in reverse-form (right-handed or D-) amino acid isomers, whereas whey protein concentrates are not. Is this true? Has anyone actually done the analysis? I'd like to see this issue addressed in the main article. (D-Form amino acids are not biologically active and they accumulate in the body, so if true, long-term use of isolates may not be good.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 150.195.11.31 ( talk) 17:32, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
"Excessive use of protein can cause liver problems." -- I am almost sure that the liver problem dilemma is not valid anymore.
"However, Whey protein that has been sufficiently diluted will not be absorbed by the body. The ideal ratio of water to whey protein changes from person to person, so balance must be found on an individual basis." -- What? So too much water in my shake will worsen the uptake? I have never heard of that. Where can I find more information? -- 81.216.196.144 22:08, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
You could have liver problems if you constantly have too much protien and not enough carbs/fat so your body is forced to use proteins for energy, which is toxic and strains the liver. I don't have sources Elie 21:24, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
Also i think this page can be merged with the page about whey most of the text is repeated anyway Elie 21:24, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
The source for this article is questionable and does not give much information regarding the production of whey protein. There are various methods used to produce whey that provide important insight. Specifically there are 3 methods used to produce whey isolate, each with its' own pro's and con's. This article should be pulled. Most of it has been directly copied from the cited source. -Unsigned
"Whey protien isolate" is ok for lactose intolerant people. -- Raygunfun ( talk) 14:55, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
Whey protein has high cholesterol. In fact, one serving of GNC's Whey Protein powder mix has almost 25% of your daily intake of cholesterol. My doctor warned me that it is one aspect in my diet contributing to higher levels of cholesterol (Which, in turn, can cause heart attacks). Does anyone have any references which show this particular risk in whey protein? It should be mentioned in this article. I won't edit the article until everyone is in consensus about it. Thanks 72.68.200.244 22:40, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
Below is a link to a study that I did on whey protein products wherein I attempt to evaluate performance of various whey protein products as glutathione supplements in a manner as scientific as possible given the extent of available research. Some people would like to use an affordable whey protein powder product as a glutathione supplement but there is little guidance on the pros and cons of such use or characteristics to consider in selecting a product. Therefore, a resource such as this report might be helpful if included in the external links. (In a section called "quantitative validation" I describe a simulation that, as of this date has not yet been completed. The report as a whole is still a rough draft.)
report. Any comments? Entropy7 ( talk) 03:41, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
I've moved the list of "Further reading" from the article. This is the sort of laundry list of journal citations which at best are ignored and at worst provide an erroneous air of legitimacy to some of this article's more outlandish and poorly sourced claims. There may well be good, useable encyclopedic material in these sources, but it's our job to find that material and distill it rather than dumping a laundry list on the article page. If these references actually contain useful, encyclopedic information about whey protein, then they should be cited individually, in the article text, along with a summary of that information. I've brought the list here so that it's not lost, and so that anyone interested in undertaking such a project will have a starting point. Thoughts? MastCell Talk 17:56, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
Reviews:
{{
cite journal}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link) (review){{
cite journal}}
: Unknown parameter |month=
ignored (
help) (review)In the Major forms section it mentions the differing levels of bioactive compounds is different types. What are these and why are they relivent? Raygunfun ( talk) 12:07, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
Under the health section it states:
"Health experts have criticized protein shakes as being unnecessary for most people that consume them, since most users already get enough protein in the normal diet."
However, the phrase "health experts" is the same phrase used in the cited article and it is vague. Also, "normal diet" is also vague but clearly some persons will benefit from additional protein if building muscle. A person who has a purpose of building muscle probably requires higher protein and this distinction should be made so as not to confuse readers who consider extra muscle a health benefit (clearly this is true for rehab programs). I can find citations if needed for the assertion that extra protein is needed to build muscle efficiently. Also, it would be useful to include the name of the brand that contained relatively high levels of toxins and when they were manufactured. I think this info. may be included in the cited article if anyone has it.
I've never posted here before so if any suggestions didn't make sense, I would be interested in knowing what the policy is so I can read it.
Externalmonologue ( talk) 04:01, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
I've heard the isolate is the best? Anyone know? Also, is it true that whey protein is not a complete protein source with all the necessary amino acids? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.95.185.139 ( talk) 17:41, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
Whey protein does possess all 20 amino acides, though I'm not sure about the relevance to vegetarianism. The Cap'n ( talk) 19:37, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
Most of this article lacks reliable citations, instead citing the "Whey Protein Institute" (an industry advocate), "Davisco Foods" (a vendor with an obvious vested interest), and "BodyBuilding.com" (ditto). There are ample journal articles, now listed under Further reading. It should be a simple matter to support any of the assertions ftrom these and dispense with the advertisers. LeadSongDog come howl 17:23, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
"In particular, leucine plays a key role in initiating the transcription of protein synthesis.[21]" This sentence doesn't make any sense. Does leucine contribute to transcription initiation (first step of RNA synthesis), or to translation initiation (the first step of protein synthesis)? Since it's an amino acid, and amino acids are the constituents of proteins, I would assume the latter, in which case the word "transcription" doesn't belong. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.48.199.93 ( talk) 05:16, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
The Whey page is neutral whereas this Whey-protein page is not. I seems to sound like a large advertisement for whey protein. Stateing, "preclinical studies in rodents have suggested that whey protein may possess anti-inflammatory or anti-cancer properties" in the first paragraph is not neutral. The rodent study could easily be finished and correlated with numbers of other rodent studies to be verified. Making these claims without one reference is marketing at best. —Preceding unsigned comment added by BryonV ( talk • contribs) 06:00, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
I agree this article seems biased. There is also quiet a bit of use of the word "some" as in "some people" and "some studies". The particular studies should be stated and the statements about "some people" should be clarified. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Soirat ( talk • contribs) 17:54, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
I've been reading the summary of the article '16', and i think the quote that has been choosen is kinda misleading. If we take the line before, it states "Results showed that protein supplementation during resistance training, independent of source [they are comparing whey, soy and placebo], increased lean tissue mass and strength over isocaloric placebo and resistance training (P < 0.05). We conclude that young adults who supplement with protein during a structured resistance training program experience minimal beneficial effects in lean tissue mass and strength." I'm not a native speaker so maybe i don't understand correctly (please forgive me in that case). But the quote in the article seems to suggest whey protein has no effet and the longer quote says the contrary to me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.178.15.156 ( talk) 21:44, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
The visual section cites a personal video as proof of the efficacy of whey protein in regards to muscle building. This video is purely circumstantial and provides very little if any scientific evidence.
The effects section goes off-topic and discusses the risks of Gynecomastia in men which is completely irrelevant to the main topic and is simply cherry picking one of the many health problems that can occur if you live an unhealthy lifestyle.
Suggesting either a rework of these sections or possible removal entirely, while merging the "benefits" subsection into the main paragraph as it contains valid research. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.51.200.82 ( talk) 20:57, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
Although I'm sure most people know this cheese waste product as an over-priced body building supplement, it might be pertinent to mention that most whey protein is/has always been utilized in the animal feed production industry, and this sector likely has much better studies on nutritional qualities than some of these dubious studies citing exceptional health benefit claims. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.171.204.45 ( talk) 18:40, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
The link I provided to the full article actually goes to the library database of Rowan University (my alma matter) and access is limited to current or matriculated students. I was wondering if anyone could provide an alternative link to the full-text which can be accessed publically? -- Sanjev Rajaram ( talk) 19:35, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Never mind I rectified the issue. -- Sanjev Rajaram ( talk) 19:39, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia now says: "Whey has approximately three grams of leucine per Serving and the Threshold for optimal protein synthesis is three grams".
How does one define a "serving" here?
And what about the "Threshold"? For average sized man, is 3 grams optimal or is it just a threshold for minimum benefits, with more benefits with a bigger "serving"?