whats going on with the peanuts

**mr. bubbles** · 12-02-2003, 03:21 PM

i know peanuts is not a supplement but i hear bodybuilders love to eat them between meals my question is the fat that is in peanuts is it the same as meat because peanuts are very high in fat will you have a heart attack if you eat them alot.

**dito** · 12-02-2003, 03:43 PM

Originally posted by mr. bubbles
i know peanuts is not a supplement but i hear bodybuilders love to eat them between meals my question is the fat that is in peanuts is it the same as meat because peanuts are very high in fat will you have a heart attack if you eat them alot.

Nuts have good fats and are caloric dense, hence why bbers eat nuts a lot.

**GhostfaceKillah** · 12-02-2003, 07:25 PM

I eat more walnuts and almonds than peanuts.

**theHULK9281** · 12-02-2003, 08:32 PM

Originally posted by mr. bubbles
i know peanuts is not a supplement but i hear bodybuilders love to eat them between meals my question is the fat that is in peanuts is it the same as meat because peanuts are very high in fat will you have a heart attack if you eat them alot.

It contains (mostly) the "good" fats.....poly/monounsaturated which have a wealth of benefits. EAT UP

**NO MERCY** · 12-02-2003, 08:33 PM

Originally posted by theHULK9281
It contains (mostly) the "good" fats.....poly/monounsaturated which have a wealth of benefits. EAT UP

yup

**theHULK9281** · 12-02-2003, 09:13 PM

Originally posted by theHULK9281
It contains (mostly) the "good" fats.....poly/monounsaturated which have a wealth of benefits. EAT UP

I would like to add that when I say "EAT UP," that doesn't mean eat half a jar in one sitting. PB is a calorie dense food, and it is very easy to over eat when consuming it (I personally can eat about half a jar in about 5 minutes with nothing but a spoon

). Just keep that in mind.

**bachovas** · 12-03-2003, 08:35 AM

Originally posted by GhostfaceKillah
I eat more walnuts and almonds than peanuts.

Compare to those two, peanuts are crap, profile wise.

Don't we have a nutrition section?

**sawastea** · 12-03-2003, 08:42 AM

Originally posted by bachovas
Don't we have a nutrition section?

Hmm, not sure. Do we?

* Walnuts
* Almonds
* Brazils
* Cashews

http://www.annecollins.com/dietary-f...fa-6-chart.htm

http://www.nutritiondata.com/

**RippedUp** · 12-03-2003, 08:55 AM

Originally posted by bachovas
Compare to those two, peanuts are crap, profile wise.

Indeed. Peanuts is the most overrated food..

**Dabinsky** · 12-03-2003, 12:08 PM

peanuts are pretty healthy though, low in sugar, it has fat but good, fat, affordable and filling. plus packed with protein, much cheaper than bars.

**theHULK9281** · 12-03-2003, 12:24 PM

Originally posted by Dabinsky
peanuts are pretty healthy though, low in sugar, it has fat but good, fat, affordable and filling. plus packed with protein, much cheaper than bars.

You shouldn't count the protein from peanuts/nuts towards your total daily amount because peanuts/nuts are an incomplete source of protein. Their BV is relatively low. The fat is the main macro that should be counted.

**Dabinsky** · 12-03-2003, 12:28 PM

huh?

**theHULK9281** · 12-03-2003, 12:51 PM

Originally posted by Dabinsky
huh?

What part did you not understand?

The biological value (BV) of foods refers to it's completeness for supplying essential amino acids. Animal sources contribute to high-quality protein, whereas vegetables, lentils, beans, peas, nuts and cereals remain incomplete in one or more essential amino acids; thus, these have a relatively lower biological value.

BV of peanuts is around 40, whereas eggs are a 100 protein rating. Hope this clarified things for you.

**sawastea** · 12-03-2003, 01:02 PM

Originally posted by theHULK9281

BV of peanuts is around 40, whereas eggs are a 100 protein rating. Hope this clarified things for you.

To touch up a bit, the original BV was based on a scale of 100 where eggs were the 'supreme being.' Since then, whey has taken over and is classified in the upper 110/120's, if I'm not mistaken

**theHULK9281** · 12-03-2003, 01:23 PM

Originally posted by sawastea
To touch up a bit, the original BV was based on a scale of 100 where eggs were the 'supreme being.' Since then, whey has taken over and is classified in the upper 110/120's, if I'm not mistaken

Whey Protein Isolate: 159
Whey Protein Concentrate: 104

Dabinsky, here is a link that you should read:

http://www.bodybuildingpro.com/proteinrating.html

**bachovas** · 12-03-2003, 08:47 PM

Originally posted by theHULK9281
Whey Protein Isolate: 159
Whey Protein Concentrate: 104

Dabinsky, here is a link that you should read:

http://www.bodybuildingpro.com/proteinrating.html

I remember reading something John Benz posted about how those ratings of BV 100+ are all false, supplements companies invented that to draw peoples attention to their "revolutionary" whey protein.

**John Benz** · 12-03-2003, 09:38 PM

I posted this a while back, but here it is again.

There is a lot more to the article, but I just pulled out the first part on bv ratings...

An objective and unbiased comparison

By Tom Venuto

June, 1999 | editorial -- Are protein supplements really better than protein foods?

Before attempting to answer this question, I should first preface it by mentioning that I do not sell supplements, nor am I associated with any supplement company, so you're getting an honest and unbiased opinion. Don't get me wrong; I am not anti-supplement by any means. It would simply be more accurate to say that I am "pro-food." There are a lot of good supplements on the market, and I use many of them, including a multi vitamin, creatine, thermogenic agents and essential fatty acid (EFA) supplements such as Flaxseed oil. Protein powders and meal replacements can also be indispensable if you don't have time to eat every three hours. However, protein supplements are not the master key to your success, real food is!

Did you ever notice how articles about protein in certain bodybuilding magazines are seldom objective? Instead, they all seem to be slanted towards hyping some "revolutionary" new product. Did you ever wonder why? In my opinion, most articles on protein supplements are nothing more than thinly disguised advertisements (some very thinly). Sometimes they give you a very persuasive-sounding argument, replete with dozens of references from scientific studies (mostly done on rodents, of course). They even give you an 800 number at the end of the article to order. (How convenient!)

When protein manufacturers throw around fancy words like cross flow microfiltration, oligopeptides, ion-exchange, protein efficiency ratio, biological value, nitrogen retention and glycomacropeptides, it sure sounds convincing, especially when scores of scientific references are cited. But don't forget that the supplement industry is big business and most magazines are the supplement industry. Lyle McDonald, author of "The Ketogenic Diet," hit the nail on the head when he wrote "Unfortunately, the obsession that bodybuilders have with protein has made them susceptible to all kinds of marketing hype. Like most aspects of bodybuilding (and the supplement industry in general), the issue of protein is driven more by marketing hype than physiological reality and marketing types know how to push a bodybuilder's button when it comes to protein "

Many nutrition "experts" (read: people who sell supplements), state that there are distinct advantages of protein supplements (powders and amino acid tablets) over whole foods. For example, they argue that whey, a by-product of the cheese-making process, is a higher quality protein than most whole food sources. There are many different methods of determining protein quality, including biological value (BV), protein efficiency ratio (PER), Net Protein Utilization (NPU), chemical score, and protein digestibility corrected amino acid score (PDCAAS). If you have ever seen advertisements for protein powders and supplements, you have undoubtedly heard of one or more of these measures of protein quality.
BV is one of the most commonly used and is arguably, the best measure of a protein's quality. BV is based on how much of the protein consumed is actually absorbed and utilized by the body. The higher the amount of protein (nitrogen) that is actually retained, the greater the BV. If a protein has a BV of 100, it means that all of the protein absorbed has been utilized with none lost. Whole eggs score the highest of all foods with a BV of 100, while beans have a BV of only 49.

Protein quality is certainly an important issue, but it is one that has been enormously overstated and even distorted for marketing purposes. Whey protein is truly an excellent protein with a biological value at or near 100. Many advertisements list whey as having a BV between 104 and 157, but if you look in any nutrition textbook it will tell you that it is impossible to have a BV over 100. In "Advanced Nutrition and Human Metabolism," BV is defined as "a measure of nitrogen retained for growth and/or maintenance that is expressed as a percentage of nitrogen absorbed." When a protein supplement is listed as having a BV over 100, the company has intentionally manipulated the number for marketing purposes or unintentionally confused BV with another method of rating protein quality. Certain whey proponents claim that whey is "superior to whole egg" so the percentage sign on BV had to be dropped and the scale extended beyond 100. It was noted by bodybuilding writer Jerry Branium in IRONMAN magazine that in a study where the BV of whey was reported to be 157, the author confused BV with chemical score. Chemical score is a comparison of the amino acid pattern in an ideal reference protein to a test protein and therefore the number can exceed 100. 157 was actually the chemical score and not the BV.

.......
References
1) Groff, James, et al, Advanced Nutrition and Human Metabolism, West Publishing company, 1995.
2) Fruhbeck, Gema. Slow and fast dietary proteins. Nature, 391: 843-844
3) Boirie, Y. et al. Slow and fast dietary proteins differently modulate postprandial protein accretion. Proc National Acad Sci, 94: 14930-14935, 1997
4) Lemon, Peter, Protein and Exercise: update, Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, Vol 19, No. 5, S179 - S190, 1987
5) Carraro, F., et at, Effect of exercise and recovery on muscle protein synthesis in human subjects. Amer Journal of physiology, 259: E470, 1990
6) Lemon, Peter, Is increased dietary protein necessary or beneficial for individuals with a physically active lifestyle? Nutrition reviews, 54:S 169-175, 1996 7) Bounous, G., et al, The immunoenhancing property of dietary whey protein concentrate. Clinical and Investigational Medicine, 11: 271-278. 1988.
8) Sadler, R., The benefits of dietary whey protein concentrate on the immune response and health. S Afr. J Dairy Sci, 24: No 24, 1992
9) Bounous, G., Dietary whey protein inhibits the development of dimethylhydrazine-induced malignancy. Clinical and Investigational Medicine, 12: 213-217, 1988
10) Bounous, G., et al, The biological activity of undenatured dietary whey protein; role of glutathione. Clinical and Investigational Medicine, 14: 4, 296-309, 1991
11) Netzer, Corinne. The Complete Book of Food Counts. Dell Publishing, 1997
12) Katch, Katch & McArdle, Exercise Physiology; Energy, Nutrition and Human Performance, Wiliams and Wilkins, 1996.

**John Benz** · 12-03-2003, 09:42 PM

Originally posted by theHULK9281
Whey Protein Isolate: 159
Whey Protein Concentrate: 104

This is a common misconception. All whey protein is basically the same. Whey isolate is just whey concentrate that has had the whey protein isolated and all by-products and additives, etc. disposed of. The actual protein quality, biological value, and absorption rate is EXACTLY the same, only you get a fraction more whey protein per scoop, as there is nothing but whey in there. This confusion is due to dishonest marketing hype�plain and simple!

Milk protein isolate and it's cousin casein have a lower bv than whey, but most current research shows these will build muscle better than any form of whey. Beverly says to acheive the most anabolic protein shake possible, combine 2 scoops of hydrolyzed whey with 1 scoop 100% egg, while Berardi at T-Mag says a 50/50 blend whey/casein is the most potent blend. Regardless of which theory is most correct, it is apparent that the top protein gurus feel whey either needs a more complete amino profile or needs to have the absporption slow down a bit (or both) to be at its best.

And whole eggs are the single most anabolic protein on the planet. No protein powder comes close!

**theHULK9281** · 12-03-2003, 11:29 PM

Interesting post JB. Thanks.

I guess I shouldn't believe everything I read (referring to the link I provided).

**Dabinsky** · 12-04-2003, 10:46 AM

which part of the egg has all the protein? and i still believe non animal protein is just as good as animal protein only without all the risk factors, gnc is bull****.

**theHULK9281** · 12-04-2003, 02:02 PM

Originally posted by Dabinsky
which part of the egg has all the protein?

The yolk and egg white each contain protein. The yolk about 3g and the white about 3.5g.

Originally posted by Dabinsky
and i still believe non animal protein is just as good as animal protein ?

Believe what you want, but your WRONG!

Thread: whats going on with the peanuts

Thread Tools

Search Thread

whats going on with the peanuts

Re: whats going on with the peanuts

Re: whats going on with the peanuts

Re: Re: whats going on with the peanuts

Re: Re: whats going on with the peanuts

Protein Supplements Vs. Protein Foods

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions