T Nation

Plazma

So…it is released now, and no thread about it ? :slight_smile:

I don’t see a big difference with Anaconda. Some CHO and caseine hydrolysat, sodium.

Any thought ?

Mat’

There is a difference in ratios and the particular di and tri peptides aren’t the same as any basic CH. So it’s similar, but not the same.

[quote]corstijeir wrote:
There is a difference in ratios and the particular di and tri peptides aren’t the same as any basic CH. So it’s similar, but not the same.[/quote]

So what do theses peptides do differently than “basic CH”?

Other than this slight difference, the ingredient list looks identical.

Mat_Angus, trust your detective nose, it is correct.

[quote]ColinD624 wrote:

[quote]corstijeir wrote:
There is a difference in ratios and the particular di and tri peptides aren’t the same as any basic CH. So it’s similar, but not the same.[/quote]

So what do theses peptides do differently than “basic CH”?

Other than this slight difference, the ingredient list looks identical.
[/quote]
Christian Thibaudeau: @ PB… it’s not just the ratio… PLAZMA’s protein are di and tri-peptides that are absorbed even faster and that actually have physiological effects beside simply being used to build muscle and spike blood amino acid levels

[quote]PB Andy wrote:

[quote]ColinD624 wrote:

[quote]corstijeir wrote:
There is a difference in ratios and the particular di and tri peptides aren’t the same as any basic CH. So it’s similar, but not the same.[/quote]

So what do theses peptides do differently than “basic CH”?

Other than this slight difference, the ingredient list looks identical.
[/quote]
Christian Thibaudeau: @ PB… it’s not just the ratio… PLAZMA’s protein are di and tri-peptides that are absorbed even faster and that actually have physiological effects beside simply being used to build muscle and spike blood amino acid levels[/quote]

Such as…?

[quote]Tom240 wrote:

[quote]PB Andy wrote:

[quote]ColinD624 wrote:

[quote]corstijeir wrote:
There is a difference in ratios and the particular di and tri peptides aren’t the same as any basic CH. So it’s similar, but not the same.[/quote]

So what do theses peptides do differently than “basic CH”?

Other than this slight difference, the ingredient list looks identical.
[/quote]
Christian Thibaudeau: @ PB… it’s not just the ratio… PLAZMA’s protein are di and tri-peptides that are absorbed even faster and that actually have physiological effects beside simply being used to build muscle and spike blood amino acid levels[/quote]

Such as…?[/quote]
I dunno.

Used it for 3months.

Works better than all ive tried for

A) recovery
B) pump
C) recovery between sets/exercises

And it doesnt give any bloat

There are a few logs starting, so you can follow people results http://tnation.T-Nation.com/free_online_forum/reactive_pump_training?pageNo=1&s=forumsNavTop

I have no doubt it works great, as Anaconda has been a staple in my training. I just dont see enough difference in ingredients to claim its such a step up. However, I will reserve my judgements till I try it. Zraw is in amazing shape and no doubt knows his body well so I trust his reports. My only question is, really how much quicker can di and tri peptides get into the bloodstream as compared to the CH in Anaconda?

[quote]PB Andy wrote:

[quote]Tom240 wrote:

[quote]PB Andy wrote:

[quote]ColinD624 wrote:

[quote]corstijeir wrote:
There is a difference in ratios and the particular di and tri peptides aren’t the same as any basic CH. So it’s similar, but not the same.[/quote]

So what do theses peptides do differently than “basic CH”?

Other than this slight difference, the ingredient list looks identical.
[/quote]
Christian Thibaudeau: @ PB… it’s not just the ratio… PLAZMA’s protein are di and tri-peptides that are absorbed even faster and that actually have physiological effects beside simply being used to build muscle and spike blood amino acid levels[/quote]

Such as…?[/quote]
I dunno.[/quote]

And ya didn’t ask? I see.

[quote]PB Andy wrote:

[quote]ColinD624 wrote:

[quote]corstijeir wrote:
There is a difference in ratios and the particular di and tri peptides aren’t the same as any basic CH. So it’s similar, but not the same.[/quote]

So what do theses peptides do differently than “basic CH”?

Other than this slight difference, the ingredient list looks identical.
[/quote]
Christian Thibaudeau: @ PB… it’s not just the ratio… PLAZMA’s protein are di and tri-peptides that are absorbed even faster and that actually have physiological effects beside simply being used to build muscle and spike blood amino acid levels[/quote]

I think PLAZMA reaches its potential only when combined with a pumping training strategy like what CT and John Meadows have been doing. I’ve indicated this in the spill, but I truly believe that either PLAZMA or Anaconda would work for the reactive pump concept as both have the ability to supersaturate the blood with aminos and carbs. The pumping elements in the layering methods is what gets those nutrients into the muscle.

PLAZMA and its differing ratios might just get the nutrients more quickly into the bloodstream, but the OP is right, Anaconda and PLAZMA don’t look significantly different.

[quote]zraw wrote:
Used it for 3months.

Works better than all ive tried for

A) recovery
B) pump
C) recovery between sets/exercises

And it doesnt give any bloat[/quote]

Just curious…did you train differently when using PLAZMA versus Anaconda? Did you use the layering system?

[quote]infinite_shore wrote:

[quote]PB Andy wrote:

[quote]Tom240 wrote:

[quote]PB Andy wrote:

[quote]ColinD624 wrote:

[quote]corstijeir wrote:
There is a difference in ratios and the particular di and tri peptides aren’t the same as any basic CH. So it’s similar, but not the same.[/quote]

So what do theses peptides do differently than “basic CH”?

Other than this slight difference, the ingredient list looks identical.
[/quote]
Christian Thibaudeau: @ PB… it’s not just the ratio… PLAZMA’s protein are di and tri-peptides that are absorbed even faster and that actually have physiological effects beside simply being used to build muscle and spike blood amino acid levels[/quote]

Such as…?[/quote]
I dunno.[/quote]

And ya didn’t ask? I see.[/quote]
Nope. I saw that answer sometime later. I rarely post in the livespills these days.

[quote]buffd_samurai wrote:

[quote]zraw wrote:
Used it for 3months.

Works better than all ive tried for

A) recovery
B) pump
C) recovery between sets/exercises

And it doesnt give any bloat[/quote]

Just curious…did you train differently when using PLAZMA versus Anaconda? Did you use the layering system?[/quote]

I using DC when I used Anaconda and that was a long time ago, when it was released.

Ive been working with John Meadows ever since starting to use Plazma, I havent look much into the layering system stuff, not interested tbh

I do think Anaconda and Plazma are similar and would give similar results, never tried the new anaconda formula either… they come out to pretty much the same price anyways

[quote]zraw wrote:

[quote]buffd_samurai wrote:

[quote]zraw wrote:
Used it for 3months.

Works better than all ive tried for

A) recovery
B) pump
C) recovery between sets/exercises

And it doesnt give any bloat[/quote]

Just curious…did you train differently when using PLAZMA versus Anaconda? Did you use the layering system?[/quote]

I using DC when I used Anaconda and that was a long time ago, when it was released.

Ive been working with John Meadows ever since starting to use Plazma, I havent look much into the layering system stuff, not interested tbh

I do think Anaconda and Plazma are similar and would give similar results, never tried the new anaconda formula either… they come out to pretty much the same price anyways[/quote]

Yeah. If you’re ordering 2 tubs of Anaconda a month (you need more than 1 to train 5 days/week), you might as well pay an extra $50 a month to get both Plazma and Indigo in one go, which is what the math comes to if I did it correctly ish.

It’s whatever though.

Yeah I get it all but like you all have said - don’t see alot of difference. Despite the innovation I’d trade it all for the old Mag-10 prohormone. That stuff worked better than Biotest has ever done. I’ll give Plazma a try and but it through a nice leg workout with drop sets and see if it eliminates the week long gimp following such a session.

[quote]lothos wrote:
Yeah I get it all but like you all have said - don’t see alot of difference. Despite the innovation I’d trade it all for the old MAG-10 prohormone. That stuff worked better than Biotest has ever done. I’ll give Plazma a try and but it through a nice leg workout with drop sets and see if it eliminates the week long gimp following such a session. [/quote]

I will second your opinion here.
No nutritional supplement or food will ever compare with the muscle and strength building prowess of anabolics when using similar nutrition and training programs.
Advanced nutrition and supplementation AND anabolics though? There’s the ticket. :slight_smile: