Hydrolized Whey vs. Hydrolyzed Casein

Diet and Nutrition
21

[quote]silverhydra wrote:

[quote]ens-perfectum wrote:

[quote]silverhydra wrote:

What would you define as a ‘huge difference’?

Vague term is vague.[/quote]

Forty-five minutes to an hour…[/quote]

45-60 minute difference in absorption between two hydroslates? Where did you hear that?
[/quote]

He asked if there was huge difference, then he described what he would consider to be a huge difference.

No, they are not off by 45 minutes, therefore they are not hugely different as you describe it. But the fact we have several PhDs on this thread who can’t agree which is “better” lends far more credence to the thought that there is no “huge” difference.

22

[quote]Tim Ziegenfuss PhD wrote:

[quote]PB Andy wrote:

[quote]Tim Ziegenfuss PhD wrote:
If I may…the “secret” is in the specific blend of di and tripeptides (which are absorbed intact) as well as the amino acid profile of Biotest’s CH. It’s tops in the industry, no question about it. As I’ve said before though, the only sample size that matters is an “N of 1”. IOW, how YOU feel when you use it. The answer is simple - take CH for a test drive for a month and see how you like it.

TZ

[quote]ens-perfectum wrote:
I’m asking if it’s worth spending the extra dough for CH. That’s all. I was always under the impression that hydrolyzed whey was the protein that your body assimilated fastest. If there is really no difference, which seems to be the case, than I’ll just stick with the hydro-whey. I just wanted to see if there was some secret that made CH better than H-W.

After all, TC gave CH something like a “Ten Nutsack Rating” last week so obviously HE thinks it’s especially awesome…[/quote]
[/quote]
I don’t get the ‘see how you like it’ comment… there’s an obvious difference (both in the effects and how it feels in your stomach) between a low quality and high quality protein powder, or between a whey concentrate and hydrolyzed whey, but I don’t see how anyone would see/feel the difference between whey hydrolysate or casein hydrolysate.[/quote]

Simple: some people have undiagnosed food intolerances to whey or casein. Aside from paying $ to have the blood work done, the other option is to take it for a test run.

Also, let’s say a WH has 2-3 grams of leucine per serving and Biotest’s CH has double that, plus other key aminos to spike insulin. Each of those factors would make a big difference in how a person responds to the protein.

Make sense?
[/quote]
Yes.

23

I used whey hydro until MAG-10 came out. I have since used MAG-10 and CH. The difference, for me, between WH and CH is significant. CH is far superior in my experience in terms of ease of digestion, speed of absorption, increased recovery, gaining muscle mass, and reduction of bodyfat.

24

I think something to consider is which protein source tastes better. I know that the Biotest powders and bars that I’ve tried have been delicious. I’ve tried a bunch of different protein bars, and Metabolic Drive chocolate chunk bars are by far the best tasting. Isolates tend to have less of a “protein” taste.

I don’t know if CH gives a performance enhancement, but something Biotest is great at is making good tasting food. I think that’s because they use quality ingredients and are manufactured in smaller batches.

I wish Biotest would make a ready to drink protein drink, like several other companies (there’s an RTD which shall not be named, but also tastes great, however, it’s made from whey protein concentrate).

25

Just though of something else: whey tends to incr CCK (and thus blunt hunger). For me, I eating enough during the day is a chore to begin with!

26

Anyway, OP, you can’t go wrong with a high quality protein supplement (Biotest offers a few) and some creatine monohydrate (again Biotest offers this as well). In terms of supplements, high quality protein powders, creatine, and some health related supplements (fish oil/multi/etc) are really the bread and butter. You really don’t get much better than those. And even in those cases, it’s not as if they have magical effects (protein powder is just a high quality and convenient protein source and creatine won’t really make a huge difference in the span of a few years or even months). I personally find from the evidence that is out there (research) and from a theoretical standpoint, taking supplemental BCAAs is unnecessary if you already have a large protein intake (1g protein/pound of LBM or more if you’re weight training).

27

The supplement I have recently been taking has Hydrolized Whey and I have noticed some good gains.

28

[quote]Tim Ziegenfuss PhD wrote:
Authority #1. answer - Hard to say but probably the amped up version of CH since it has more leucine and also casein hangs around longer in the bloodstream which can be very beneficial during resistance training in the post-exercise recovery period.

Darryn S. Willoughby, Ph.D., FACSM, FISSN, CSCS, CISSN, CNC, CPS
Associate Professor of Exercise/Nutritional Biochemistry and Molecular Physiology
Associate Professor, Baylor Biomedical Science Institute
Department of Health, Human Performance, and Recreation
Director, Exercise and Biochemical Nutrition Laboratory
Director, Exercise Nutrition and Resistance Training Research Unit
Director, Exercise and Healthy Aging Research Unit
Baylor University
[/quote]

This thread turned into a pretty awesome discussion. Thanks Dr. Z for chiming in! I have a few comments/questions…

I haven’t personally delved into the research on this, but my understanding was that the faster absorbing the protein, the shorter it will be in the bloodstream. So micellar casein or any caseinate will stick around in the bloodstream because of the slower stomach absorption. Casein hydrolysate (at least Biotest’s CH) is supposed to absorb faster than even WH because it is mainly comprised of di- and tripeptides. I thought it would empty out fastest as well. Is that not true?

Also, I once read (via online article, not research) that more of micellar casein’s amino acids go towards building muscle when compared to whey concentrate. Is this true? And more importantly does it hold true for hydrolysates?

29

[quote]Tim Ziegenfuss PhD wrote:

[quote]Davinci.v2 wrote:

[quote]Josh Rider wrote:
If you would ask any neutral scientific authority, they would say that there is little difference between them two aside from moderately different amino acid profiles. We are talking of percentage points in difference here, and one is not really clearly more positive/negative than the other.[/quote]

Agreed.[/quote]

Er um maybe. Also, I am not being argumentative here, I enjoy a good debate.

The way I see it, CH and WH are either equal in their effects on body comp, or the edge goes to an amped up version of CH (b/c of the additional stim on protein synthesis via leucine and the additional reduction in protein breakdown via enhanced insulin secretion). To be honest, no research has ever compared the two head-to-head, so we are merely speculating here. But from my perspective, the guys I work with (NFL, NHL, MMA) are looking for every possible advantage they can get. That’s why this version of CH gets the nod unless as I mentioned earlier they have a food intolerance to it. Now if you take WH and add extra leucine to it, etc…that’s a different story. Then its a bona fide crapshoot. Agreed!

BTW, I asked 3 “neutral scientific authorities” their opinion, and it looks like we are all going to “agree to disagree”. This is what they said:

Authority #1. answer - Hard to say but probably the amped up version of CH since it has more leucine and also casein hangs around longer in the bloodstream which can be very beneficial during resistance training in the post-exercise recovery period.

Darryn S. Willoughby, Ph.D., FACSM, FISSN, CSCS, CISSN, CNC, CPS
Associate Professor of Exercise/Nutritional Biochemistry and Molecular Physiology
Associate Professor, Baylor Biomedical Science Institute
Department of Health, Human Performance, and Recreation
Director, Exercise and Biochemical Nutrition Laboratory
Director, Exercise Nutrition and Resistance Training Research Unit
Director, Exercise and Healthy Aging Research Unit
Baylor University

Authority #2. answer - WH
Joey Antonio, PhD, CSCS, FASCM, FISSN
CEO of the International Society of Sports Nutrition

Authority #3. answer - they are the same
Douglas S. Kalman PhD, RD, FACN
Director, Business Development
Phase I Unit & Applied Clinical Trials
Miami Research Associates

It looks like we may need TP to fund a clinical…! :slight_smile:
[/quote]

Jesus dude, it sounds to me like we need to run some studies! In the mean time, I’ll just stack my shake w/ some extra leucine, stick w/ the bcaa and eat my usual mountain of food every day. Thanks, fellas(especially you Ziegenfuss), for the advice

30

Glad to provide some insight…

31

[quote]Fezzik wrote:

[quote]Tim Ziegenfuss PhD wrote:
Authority #1. answer - Hard to say but probably the amped up version of CH since it has more leucine and also casein hangs around longer in the bloodstream which can be very beneficial during resistance training in the post-exercise recovery period.

Darryn S. Willoughby, Ph.D., FACSM, FISSN, CSCS, CISSN, CNC, CPS
Associate Professor of Exercise/Nutritional Biochemistry and Molecular Physiology
Associate Professor, Baylor Biomedical Science Institute
Department of Health, Human Performance, and Recreation
Director, Exercise and Biochemical Nutrition Laboratory
Director, Exercise Nutrition and Resistance Training Research Unit
Director, Exercise and Healthy Aging Research Unit
Baylor University
[/quote]

This thread turned into a pretty awesome discussion. Thanks Dr. Z for chiming in! I have a few comments/questions…

I haven’t personally delved into the research on this, but my understanding was that the faster absorbing the protein, the shorter it will be in the bloodstream. So micellar casein or any caseinate will stick around in the bloodstream because of the slower stomach absorption. Casein hydrolysate (at least Biotest’s CH) is supposed to absorb faster than even WH because it is mainly comprised of di- and tripeptides. I thought it would empty out fastest as well. Is that not true?

Also, I once read (via online article, not research) that more of micellar casein’s amino acids go towards building muscle when compared to whey concentrate. Is this true? And more importantly does it hold true for hydrolysates?[/quote]

Yes, you are right. CH is absorbed very quickly. Dr. W’s comments were (I think) directed towards casein, not CH.

Regarding MC being preferentially directed towards muscle, I’ve never heard or read that. If you can find the source, I’d like to check it out.

32

What are the effects of frequent use of CH and WH (without the addition of sugary carbs) on insulin sensitivity in the long run?