Cellucor/ON/Allmax/BSN - You've Got Some Explaining to Do...

[blokpost]

Its a leucine dehydrogenase so they are probably measuring so their assay probably measures a byproduct of the enzymes activity on leucine and then they can correlate that back to the absolute leucine content. This is just speculation, this group hasn't published on their work.

Oh I see now. Didn't read it carefully.

[Vinny82]

not sure if srs...


http://intraweb.stockton.edu/eyos/pa...21&layout=full

It's mostly a commuter/online school. I have friends who go there

[thackes1]

not sure if srs...


http://intraweb.stockton.edu/eyos/pa...21&layout=full

The expressions of the kids on the banner lol

[LoudyRowdy]

It's mostly a commuter/online school. I have friends who go there

Ahhhhh. Got it

[Geoforce]

Supplement with BCAA to make up for the loss of BCAA claimed by protein companies?

EZ game.

[MikeWines]

Not saying I'm on one side or another but here's something else to consider from someone very knowledgeable in the whey industry.

Thoughts from Dante Trudel on ********: "I am having a very very hard time with this study. Optimum Nutrition is owned by Glanbia one of the largest producers of cheese in the world and also is (as of last year) the largest producer of whey protein isolate in the world. I very much doubt the largest supplier in the world which also supplies 1000's upon 1000's of other companies has a scamming campaign going on. Something is amiss."

Also, anyone know how much it would cost to get an independent lab to run a sample? Curious to hear thoughts on labdoor.com as well. I've heard mixed reviews honestly.

[Hyruliangoat]

thus far this is like the equivalent to the reddit protein test lol

[Misctake7]

thus far this is like the equivalent to the reddit protein test lol

My chemistry set in my mom's basement says it's legit

[Kajjan]

Are they trying to ultimately measure protein content or just the "added BCAA" content?

BCAA;s are protein content. ON golds amino profile, based on this study, contains approximately half the BCAAs that a milk protein should. BCAA is about 20% of the protein in milk, which is consistent with ON:s BCAA claim (5g per 24). But according to this, ON has extracted half of the BCAA that is naturally occurring in milk and we are left with 2.9 per 24g instead.

So, no it's not that they are lying about "added BCAAs"- they are extracting the natural occurring BCAAs in the protein. Which I guess they selling as a separate BCAA supplement later to make double profit.

End result: We, the consumers, are left with two useless products.

[hellstorm2004]

Not saying I'm on one side or another but here's something else to consider from someone very knowledgeable in the whey industry.

Thoughts from Dante Trudel on ********: "I am having a very very hard time with this study. Optimum Nutrition is owned by Glanbia one of the largest producers of cheese in the world and also is (as of last year) the largest producer of whey protein isolate in the world. I very much doubt the largest supplier in the world which also supplies 1000's upon 1000's of other companies has a scamming campaign going on. Something is amiss."

Also, anyone know how much it would cost to get an independent lab to run a sample? Curious to hear thoughts on labdoor.com as well. I've heard mixed reviews honestly.

We had a detailed discussion on labdoor a few days ago, with the CEO chipping in. Search for it.

[MikeWines]

We had a detailed discussion on labdoor a few days ago, with the CEO chipping in. Search for it.

This thread?

[thackes1]

BCAA;s are protein content. ON golds amino profile, based on this study, contains approximately half the BCAAs that a milk protein should. BCAA is about 20% of the protein in milk, which is consistent with ON:s BCAA claim (5g per 24). But according to this, ON has extracted half of the BCAA that is naturally occurring in milk and we are left with 2.9 per 24g instead.

So, no it's not that they are lying about "added BCAAs"- they are extracting the natural occurring BCAAs in the protein. Which I guess they selling as a separate BCAA supplement later to make double profit.

End result: We, the consumers, are left with two useless products.

oh man...

This is not what is going on at all. ON isn't extracting any BCAAs from their whey, nor is that what the study is alleging. The study alleges that the companies' amino acid profiles for their protein (this is often advertised on the tub somewhere) do no accurately reflect their BCAA content (free form BCAAs are linked together via peptide bonds with other amino acids (20 traditional amino acids) to form protein fyi). The problem with this assertion is none of us here can evaluate their research because it hasn't been published. There methods could have led to variability and there could be perfectly acceptable reasons fro variability in the total BCAA content without there being anything incorrect about the nutritional facts of a company's protein.

[shockrock3]

Who uses those 7 crap protons anyway lol...surely no smart member here

[Mrpb]

Also, anyone know how much it would cost to get an independent lab to run a sample?

"For detecting of amino spiking we use an amino acid analysis. Total costs for a nitrogen and amino acid analysis are € 325 excl. purchase and shipping costs."
http://www.supplementlabtest.com/info

Curious to hear thoughts on labdoor.com as well. I've heard mixed reviews honestly.

They don't test for individual amino acids, only total protein. Pretty much worthless.

[Kajjan]

oh man...

This is not what is going on at all. ON isn't extracting any BCAAs from their whey, nor is that what the study is alleging. The study alleges that the companies' amino acid profiles for their protein (this is often advertised on the tub somewhere) do no accurately reflect their BCAA content (free form BCAAs are linked together via peptide bonds with other amino acids (20 traditional amino acids) to form protein fyi). The problem with this assertion is none of us here can evaluate their research because it hasn't been published. There methods could have led to variability and there could be perfectly acceptable reasons fro variability in the total BCAA content without there being anything incorrect about the nutritional facts of a company's protein.

The study is not alleging anything.

But the facts are:

ON claims BCAA 5g per 24g. (20.8%)
Study says it's 2.9 per 24g. (12%).
Milk protein contains approximately 20-21% BCAAs.

Based on this study almost half of the BCAAs that should be in a milk protein is not there. Am I missing something?

[Hyruliangoat]

"Again: those results have to be validated through HPLC-DAD MS or other detector or eventually LC-MS. The leucine dehydrogenase method was validated against a standard protein or proteins. Validating a method through a standard protein like BSA or others doesn't mean it is validated against a complex food matrix like whey. After these results they should have confirmed the detected amounts in commercial whey against a standard method meaning HPLC or LC with a MS detector. When we developed the method for protein spiking we had to confirm the results by chromatography (in our case HPLC coupled with DAD). The use of the Lowry method is also debatable although it would theoretically avoid spiking, it is a colorimetric method therefore interference might occur. Albeit having limits Kjeldahl and Dumas tests are still the best tests for total protein (off course they have limits in which concerns spiking)."

[hellstorm2004]

This thread?

Yup that one. It's a fun read. Go through it and make your conclusions about labdoor.

[MikeWines]

"For detecting of amino spiking we use an amino acid analysis. Total costs for a nitrogen and amino acid analysis are € 325 excl. purchase and shipping costs."
http://www.supplementlabtest.com/info

They don't test for individual amino acids, only total protein. Pretty much worthless.

Thanks for the heads up, probably won't be running any of my own tests soon I guess. ha

"Again: those results have to be validated through HPLC-DAD MS or other detector or eventually LC-MS. The leucine dehydrogenase method was validated against a standard protein or proteins. Validating a method through a standard protein like BSA or others doesn't mean it is validated against a complex food matrix like whey. After these results they should have confirmed the detected amounts in commercial whey against a standard method meaning HPLC or LC with a MS detector. When we developed the method for protein spiking we had to confirm the results by chromatography (in our case HPLC coupled with DAD). The use of the Lowry method is also debatable although it would theoretically avoid spiking, it is a colorimetric method therefore interference might occur. Albeit having limits Kjeldahl and Dumas tests are still the best tests for total protein (off course they have limits in which concerns spiking)."

Aware.

Yup that one. It's a fun read. Go through it and make your conclusions about labdoor.

A disappointing but informative read. Thanks.

[thackes1]

The study is not alleging anything.

But the facts are:

ON claims BCAA 5g per 24g. (20.8%)
Study says it's 2.9 per 24g. (12%).
Milk protein contains approximately 20-21% BCAAs.

Based on this study almost half of the BCAAs that should be in a milk protein is not there. Am I missing something?

No that is what the study is asserting, but these companies are NOT removing BCAAs from protein in these products like your post said. Additionally, my posts make it clear that their methodologies may be worth questioning (leucine dehydrogenase assay and SDS-PAGE followed by lowry assay for validation) because they aren't the gold standard of mass spec based tests. Until they publish, folks should chill down on this studies claims.

See Hyruliangoat's post - not sure who he is quoting though it looks like someone commenting on the poster presentation attached to the abstract and it provides more info on protein testing.

[BrennanMWhite]

oh man...

This is not what is going on at all. ON isn't extracting any BCAAs from their whey, nor is that what the study is alleging. The study alleges that the companies' amino acid profiles for their protein (this is often advertised on the tub somewhere) do no accurately reflect their BCAA content (free form BCAAs are linked together via peptide bonds with other amino acids (20 traditional amino acids) to form protein fyi). The problem with this assertion is none of us here can evaluate their research because it hasn't been published. There methods could have led to variability and there could be perfectly acceptable reasons fro variability in the total BCAA content without there being anything incorrect about the nutritional facts of a company's protein.

This. Until we see actual data, there is no way to determine if the conclusions are statistically significant.

[BrennanMWhite]

This thread?

Thanks for linking. I've always wondered how reliable they are. Going read now!

[Mike McCandless]

Testing BCAA's is a bitch. We fought for years over testing methods. No comments on this study, but to use any 1 study as an absolute is difficult. For anything.

[muruku]

found a link to a better resolution pic of the poster; http://www.slideshare.net/DanielLame...nd-kyle-poster

[Mrpb]

Thanks for the heads up, probably won't be running any of my own tests soon I guess. ha

In case you're interested: if you set up the funding they can buy a sample and test it for you.

They've done the same thing with MyProtein and it came out as promised: http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showth...hp?t=168281493

[yuncker]

Unfortunately, it is impossible for there to be any thorough evaluation of the study's method, design, analysis and conclusion based solely on a blurry image of a poster presentation. But based on what we do know, this does does not appear to have been published in a peer reviewed journal. Most importantly, none of the samples seem to have been measured by comparison against HPLC analysis, which is the current gold standard. Therefore, despite the author’s attempt to utilize a novel assay and method for measuring BCAA content, any conclusions drawn from the data without a head-to-head comparison with HPLC are simply unreliable. Our protein products are analyzed by HPLC and consistently meet the BCAA content listed on our labels, which has been tested and verified by two of the most reputable laboratories in the country.

[MikeWines]

Unfortunately, it is impossible for there to be any thorough evaluation of the study's method, design, analysis and conclusion based solely on a blurry image of a poster presentation. But based on what we do know, this does does not appear to have been published in a peer reviewed journal. Most importantly, none of the samples seem to have been measured by comparison against HPLC analysis, which is the current gold standard. Therefore, despite the author’s attempt to utilize a novel assay and method for measuring BCAA content, any conclusions drawn from the data without a head-to-head comparison with HPLC are simply unreliable. Our protein products are analyzed by HPLC and consistently meet the BCAA content listed on our labels, which has been tested and verified by two of the most reputable laboratories in the country.

Got any up to date links you can share with that testing information?

[Mike McCandless]

I agree the methods are likely off on this. It's sad if that's the case, because the negative implications on the companies is monumental. It's careless and reckless. I'd fully expect these companies to absolutely bury this place if the method ends up being off.

Understand, I'd stand to benefit as much as anyone from any of these companies suffering a big economic loss, but this isn't right.

[thackes1]

found a link to a better resolution pic of the poster; http://www.slideshare.net/DanielLame...nd-kyle-poster

This posters looks pretty bad - nothing that would ever pass peer review without major improvements. The gels they ran are all messed up. The layout of the poster is clearly amateurish too.

This is work done by clueless undergrads for some conference they probably have to go to in order to get credit for a class. We shouldn't be wasting time or putting any company's reputation at risk discussing this.

It is worth discussing BCAA testing methods though and the quality control and assurance that supplement companies are doing in order to ensure a high proportion (or whatever the proportion they advertise) of BCAAs in the protein they sell.

[TMac26]

I doubt any person off the street in a gym has even heard of this issue.

[Mike McCandless]

I doubt any person off the street in a gym has even heard of this issue.

That doesn't matter. The lawsuits that are being written up right now, do. This will be a 6 figure cost out of pocket minimum for each company mentioned, some 7 figures.