Hydrolyzed dietary casein as compared with intact protein

Have some data\research to share? Throw it in here for discussion and persual from all members!

Hydrolyzed dietary casein as compared with intact protein

Postby cleaver on Sun Nov 29, 2009 2:01 pm

Am J Clin Nutr (August 19, 2009). doi:10.3945/ajcn.2009.27548
© 2009 American Society for Clinical Nutrition

Hydrolyzed dietary casein as compared with the intact protein reduces postprandial peripheral, but not whole-body, uptake of nitrogen in humans
1,2,3,4

Amélie Deglaire, Claire Fromentin, Hélène Fouillet, Gheorghe Airinei, Claire Gaudichon, Claire Boutry, Robert Benamouzig, Paul J Moughan, Daniel Tomé and Cécile Bos
1 From the INRA, CRNH-IdF, UMR914 Nutrition Physiology and Ingestive Behavior, Paris, France (AD, CF, HF, CG, C Boutry, RB, DT, and C Bos); AgroParisTech, CRNH-IdF, UMR914 Nutrition Physiology and Ingestive Behavior, Paris, France (AD, CF, HF, CG, C Boutry, RB, DT, and C Bos); Riddet Institute, Massey University, Palmerston North, New Zealand (AD and PJM); and the Department of Gastroenterology, Avicenne Hospital, CRNH-IdF, Bobigny, France (GA and RB).

2 Presented in part in abstract form at Experimental Biology, San Diego, CA, 4–9 April 2008.

3 Supported by grants from the INRA (France) and the Riddet Institute (NZ).

4 Address correspondence to C Bos, UMR914 INRA-AgroParisTech Nutrition Physiology and Ingestive Behavior, AgroParisTech, 16 rue Claude Bernard, F-75005 Paris, France. E-mail address: cecile.bos@agroparistech.fr.

ABSTRACT

Background: Compared with slow proteins, fast proteins are more completely extracted in the splanchnic bed but contribute less to peripheral protein accretion; however, the independent influence of absorption kinetics and the amino acid (AA) pattern of dietary protein on AA anabolism in individual tissues remains unknown.

Objective: We aimed to compare the postprandial regional utilization of proteins with similar AA profiles but different absorption kinetics by coupling clinical experiments with compartmental modeling.

Design: Experimental data pertaining to the intestine, blood, and urine for dietary nitrogen kinetics after a 15N-labeled intact (IC) or hydrolyzed (HC) casein meal were obtained in parallel groups of healthy adults (n = 21) and were analyzed by using a 13-compartment model to predict the cascade of dietary nitrogen absorption and regional metabolism.

Results: IC and HC elicited a similar whole-body postprandial retention of dietary nitrogen, but HC was associated with a faster rate of absorption than was IC, resulting in earlier and stronger hyperaminoacidemia and hyperinsulinemia. An enhancement of both catabolic (26%) and anabolic (37%) utilization of dietary nitrogen occurred in the splanchnic bed at the expense of its further peripheral availability, which reached 18% and 11% of ingested nitrogen, respectively, 8 h after the IC and HC meals.

Conclusions: The form of delivery of dietary AAs constituted an independent factor of modulation of their postprandial regional metabolism, with a fast supply favoring the splanchnic dietary nitrogen uptake over its peripheral anabolic use. These results question a possible effect of ingestion of protein hydrolysates on tissue nitrogen metabolism and accretion. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCTNCT00873951.

Received for publication January 27, 2009. Accepted for publication August 3, 2009.


Fast is not always better it seems ;)
Rilla wrote:Up the dose.
That's the only way you fucking junkies overcome adversity.

"I think it's all to do with influences from the Bollywood film industry," says Mr Patel.
Use code BSD10 to get 5% off your first order
User avatar
cleaver
Ultimate Contributor
 
Posts: 3478
Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2008 7:59 pm

Re: Hydrolyzed dietary casein as compared with intact protein

Postby Dtlv74 on Sun Nov 29, 2009 7:25 pm

Am glad you found this - have for a while been wondering exactly why the increased speed of uptake of hydrolyzed proteins over isolates or EAAs is always claimed to be more anabolic as I've never found anything convincing to actually back the claim up.

Still need more comparative info though to get a full picture.
User avatar
Dtlv74
Ultimate Contributor
 
Posts: 3048
Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2008 8:50 pm
Location: SW England

Re: Hydrolyzed dietary casein as compared with intact protein

Postby Alex on Mon Nov 30, 2009 6:40 pm

Ease of digestion may be a better indication around workout as you wouldn't want some of the body's resources being used to digest when they could be utilised for training. I would sau other than during this period then fast acting makes little odds.
'Behave like you are the best...and you'll have the best chance of being the best you can be.'

'Be effective: do what works...and keep doing it.'

'Bask in the turbulence of my magnificence.'
User avatar
Alex
Ultimate Contributor
 
Posts: 10604
Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2008 10:05 am

Re: Hydrolyzed dietary casein as compared with intact protein

Postby Dtlv74 on Mon Nov 30, 2009 7:33 pm

Alex wrote:Ease of digestion may be a better indication around workout as you wouldn't want some of the body's resources being used to digest when they could be utilised for training. I would sau other than during this period then fast acting makes little odds.


Agree completely - is only really important around the workout. A good whey isolate or free form EAA's should be fast enough for this process though. The tiny extra advantage possibly offered by some of the much more expensive hydroslyzed options would be a low priority for me now as I just don't think it's enough of a difference to justify the cost - money could be more effectively spent elsewhere imo. If a decent trial and penty of clear anecdotal evidence proves me wrong then I'll happily eat my hat - just not seen anything to this effect yet.
User avatar
Dtlv74
Ultimate Contributor
 
Posts: 3048
Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2008 8:50 pm
Location: SW England

Re: Hydrolyzed dietary casein as compared with intact protein

Postby Alex on Mon Nov 30, 2009 10:26 pm

I've been trialing PeptoPro for a little while instead of Free Form Aminos and find it decent enough around workout. Hard to say if it's superior but I have noticed less of an Insulin response over Aminos when dosing fairly high, like for like. Mixability is far better and due to this and the touted superior absorption you can dose a little lower than Aminos so cost wise they're pretty similar.
'Behave like you are the best...and you'll have the best chance of being the best you can be.'

'Be effective: do what works...and keep doing it.'

'Bask in the turbulence of my magnificence.'
User avatar
Alex
Ultimate Contributor
 
Posts: 10604
Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2008 10:05 am

Re: Hydrolyzed dietary casein as compared with intact protein

Postby health4ni on Tue Dec 01, 2009 9:22 am

I know that this info is interesting and useful; heck that's one benefit of having such a forum to learn about such things.

But to pick up on both your points, Alex & para, and yet to twist it slightly, I feel that the greater benefits will come from training hard and training smart rather than the next greatest supplement (a la T-Nation's ridiculously expensive Anaconda & Mag-10 stack :roll: ). I'm sure that once you train hard, train smart, eat the best solid foods, recover well, sleep enough etc etc then this stack (and other such supps) will help somewhat, but for people reading this thread that think it's all about the supps need a wake up call.

Now I know you and indeed must here at ESN know that, but I thought I'd throw that out there.

I have been guilty of being too into supps. I still take a fair amount. Indeed, I'm constantly re-evaluating my peri-workout supp protocol. But I feel my own training has benefited most from training smarter (better designed progs) with a lot of attention paid to good warm-ups, mobility drills and self-myofacial release (and other recovery methods); areas that I used to know nothing about. Of course, it's what you do in the training session itself that really matters though :)
Cluster Training
http://health4ni.com/ :: BSD Discount Code: BSD6505
User avatar
health4ni
Ultimate Contributor
 
Posts: 5532
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2008 9:58 am
Location: Belfast, UK

Re: Hydrolyzed dietary casein as compared with intact protein

Postby cleaver on Tue Dec 01, 2009 10:46 pm

Here is Lyle McDonald's review of the study above :D

My Comments: Ever since the pioneering work in the 90’s on fast and slow proteins, there has been continued interest in the digestion speed of proteins and how that impacts on metabolism, performance and, of course, muscle growth. In recent years, there have been many claims made for the superiority of faster proteins to slower in terms of ’speeding amino acids to muscle’ in terms of promoting growth.

As well, as many may note, a recent commercial product (T-nations Anaconda), who’s anabolic claims were analyzed in perhaps the most commented article on the site in Alan’s Aragon’s guest article Supplement Marketing on Steroids, has recently been released to the market.

For background, hydrolysates are simply whole proteins that have been pre-digested (through the addition of enzymes during production) to some degree. The theory being that, due to this pre-digestion, the hydrolysate will be digested in the stomach faster, getting aminos into the bloodstream faster and, presumably, having a better effect on skeletal muscle than slower proteins.

But is it true? Guess.

The above study examined this issue by feeding 21 subjects 2 test meals containing either intact casein or it’s hydrolysate; the protein had been marked with radioactive nitrogen so that it’s fate after ingestion could be tracked over the next 8 hours. The test meals also contained 96 grams of carbohydrate and 23 grams of fat; this is worth noting as adding other nutrients to fast proteins often makes them behave more like slow proteins. I’ll spare you the methodology, sufficed to say that tracking protein after it enters the body is brutally complicated and involves a lot of modelling and various measurements of blood amino acid levels and such.

Here’s what the study found. Over the time course studied (8 hours after ingestion), the hydrolyzed casein product showed greater losses from digestion (that is, less was absorbed). As well, a greater amount of the hydrolysate was oxidized for energy through deamination (a process by which the amino group is stripped off the carbon backbone). Finally, a larger amount of the casein hydrolysate was used by the splanchnic bed (gut and intestines) with significantly LESS of the total protein reaching the bloodstream or peripheral tissues (muscles).

To quote the researchers:

Despite similar overall net postprandial protein utilization, our results indicate important differences in metabolic partitioning and kinetics between protein sources characterized by a preferential utilization of dietary nitrogen by for splanchnic protein syntheses after HC [hydrolyzed casein] ingestion at the expense of the incorporation into peripheral tissues.

Translating that into English: hydrolyzed casein is digested more poorly, get burned for energy to a greater degree and gets used more by the gut than intact casein; the end result of this is that hydrolyzed casein provides LESS amino acids to skeletal muscle after ingestion than intact casein protein.

So not only is the claim that hydrolysates are better at providing aminos faster to skeletal muscle wrong, the reality is actually exactly reversed: intact casein is better for providing aminos to the muscle. I’d note that other studies have found this as well: in one, intact protein provided MORE branched-chain amino acids into the bloodstream than a hydrolyzed form.

I’d add to this that, as I discussed in The Protein Book, other data supports the idea that slower proteins may actually be superior to faster proteins for muscle growth; in one set of studies, for example, milk protein (a mix of slow and fast proteins) resulted in greater hypertophy than soy (a fast protein) over 8 weeks of training and supplementation. As well hydrolyzed proteins tend to taste like bleach; it’s no coincidence that Anaconda has to come with a separate flavoring intensifier: hydrolysates are gag-inducing. They can’t be consumed straight.

Summing up: Hydrolysates are not only not superior to intact protein in terms of providing amino acids to skeletal muscle, they are distinctly inferior. Their fast digestion speed leads to greater digestive losses, more oxidation via deamination and provides less amino acids to skeletal muscle. That’s on top of tasting like vomit. Or at least making you want to.
Rilla wrote:Up the dose.
That's the only way you fucking junkies overcome adversity.

"I think it's all to do with influences from the Bollywood film industry," says Mr Patel.
Use code BSD10 to get 5% off your first order
User avatar
cleaver
Ultimate Contributor
 
Posts: 3478
Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2008 7:59 pm

Re: Hydrolyzed dietary casein as compared with intact protein

Postby Craig on Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:17 pm

The important part of using fast aminos or hydro at the right time is the hormonal effect and the change in amino levels, the whole idea of comparing these two protein sources is retarded. Its like complaining that a Lambo can't hold as many passengers as a estate car.
User avatar
Craig
Ultimate Contributor
 
Posts: 3083
Joined: Sun Jan 27, 2008 1:51 pm

Re: Hydrolyzed dietary casein as compared with intact protein

Postby kp1512 on Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:22 pm

another thing that needs to be mentioned is capitlising on the body and what it needs via peal hormonal responses. that was clear also from that other article on sythetek I linked - but outside of that - more obvious
kp1512
Ultimate Contributor
 
Posts: 10517
Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2008 9:26 am
Location: London \ Manchester - UK

Re: Hydrolyzed dietary casein as compared with intact protein

Postby Craig on Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:25 pm

kp1512 wrote:another thing that needs to be mentioned is capitlising on the body and what it needs via peak hormonal responses. that was clear also from that other article on sythetek I linked - but outside of that - more obvious



I need to read that when I'm in the right frame of mind
User avatar
Craig
Ultimate Contributor
 
Posts: 3083
Joined: Sun Jan 27, 2008 1:51 pm

Re: Hydrolyzed dietary casein as compared with intact protein

Postby kp1512 on Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:41 pm

Craig wrote:
kp1512 wrote:another thing that needs to be mentioned is capitlising on the body and what it needs via peak hormonal responses. that was clear also from that other article on sythetek I linked - but outside of that - more obvious



I need to read that when I'm in the right frame of mind


agree its long ass but worth the read.
kp1512
Ultimate Contributor
 
Posts: 10517
Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2008 9:26 am
Location: London \ Manchester - UK

Re: Hydrolyzed dietary casein as compared with intact protein

Postby cleaver on Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:53 pm

Craig wrote:The important part of using fast aminos or hydro at the right time is the hormonal effect and the change in amino levels, the whole idea of comparing these two protein sources is retarded. Its like complaining that a Lambo can't hold as many passengers as a estate car.



But HC is being sold as the most anabolic supplement out there. This surely is not true??
Rilla wrote:Up the dose.
That's the only way you fucking junkies overcome adversity.

"I think it's all to do with influences from the Bollywood film industry," says Mr Patel.
Use code BSD10 to get 5% off your first order
User avatar
cleaver
Ultimate Contributor
 
Posts: 3478
Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2008 7:59 pm

Re: Hydrolyzed dietary casein as compared with intact protein

Postby Dtlv74 on Wed Dec 02, 2009 4:03 am

My understanding of the scientific consensus on comparing slow and fast proteins is that, assuming proteins of equal quality are compared, fast proteins stimulate greater protein synthesis but slow proteins are more anticatabolic.

This leads most people to conclude that fast proteins are generally superior... but it occurs to me that it's very possible that the anticatabolic effect of slow proteins may actually spare a greater amount of muscle protein than the extra PS from the fast protein - thus actually making the slower protein the more effective one... especially since the slow protein also has an anabolic element and the fast protein an anticatabolic one too.

Craig is of course right though that hormonal manipulation is a vital consideration - different proteins are better at different times as you are not just looking at PS or anticatabolism in the immediate hours following the feed, but also how these proteins set off anabolic pathways like mTOR etc, the effects of which take days (and possibly weeks) to be seen.
User avatar
Dtlv74
Ultimate Contributor
 
Posts: 3048
Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2008 8:50 pm
Location: SW England

Re: Hydrolyzed dietary casein as compared with intact protein

Postby health4ni on Wed Dec 02, 2009 11:43 am

I think you need to find out what protein works for you with regards to making you feel good before and after training sessions. And also the medium and long-term effects on the body.

If you look at the physiques of those pre-90's (natural trainees) then I see little difference to those in 2009. In fact I think on the whole it's worse now. How can that be with the advances in supplementation? The advances in information sharing (internet) and thus supposed knowledge of the trainee?

For me it's mainly the way people train. The exercises chosen and the programs they use. Most people want the easiest way out; but there is no easy way to get big & ripped (naturally... and even with AAS it takes a lot of work esp when you come off to maintain it all).

Again, I know many here know this, and that this thread is about protein sources. In retrospect I've personally found little difference between protein sources consumed on their own peri-workout. I have however found when consumed with other supps, namely carbs, that it is different. For example, I've recently found that rice &/or pea protein & vitargo at the same time would appear to be a little too stodgy (for want of a better word). BUT consume the protein 30mins pre training, and carbs 15mins later, then all seems to be fine (for me that is).

So, having tried all the protein types of the years (except PeptoPro) I personally favour the, imo, healthier protein sources of rice &/or pea protein pre training. Then the same after &/or with hemp protein (or just a decent meal).

I guess what I've personally found is that almost all protein sources work pre training, except the very slow sources like hemp (due to fibre content) and casein. And so I seriously doubt much difference will be seen between those that take PeptoPro (and it's like) compared to standard WPC or rice or pea protein.

I do enjoy the research and the theories on such matters, but wonder if it makes a difference? Although as mentioned at the start of this thread, if one source appears to make you feel better (more alert, more energised etc) then that is a good bet.
Cluster Training
http://health4ni.com/ :: BSD Discount Code: BSD6505
User avatar
health4ni
Ultimate Contributor
 
Posts: 5532
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2008 9:58 am
Location: Belfast, UK


Return to Supplement Research

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 57 guests

cron