T Nation

Whey Concentrate vs Whey Isolate?

forget the crap, I want to know results-wise what’s the difference. I’ve heard whey isolate is the choice protein powder among bodybuilders, especially pre-contest. what’s the difference then? and if so, what’s the difference between WPC and the best selling protein i know which is optimum nutrition 100% whey?

Isolate has less carbs and is lactose free, but has a higher % of allergenic protein. I wouldn’t bother with it unless you’re lactose intolerant.

Isolate and concentrate is basically the same protein, but the isolate is filtrated more. The upside is that you have a bit more protein (like 1-2g per scoop) and a bit less fat or carbs (1-2g per scoop) which, to me, is insignificant.

However since isolate is basically only protein, it also lost it’s active microfraction content (like lactoferrin) which have immune-system boosting effects.

I used isolate back in the days because I thought that only nutrients were important, but now I don’t. First isolate is way more expensive without actually giving you a lot more protein.

[quote]Christian Thibaudeau wrote:
Isolate and concentrate is basically the same protein, but the isolate is filtrated more. The upside is that you have a bit more protein (like 1-2g per scoop) and a bit less fat or carbs (1-2g per scoop) which, to me, is insignificant.

However since isolate is basically only protein, it also lost it’s active microfraction content (like lactoferrin) which have immune-system boosting effects.

I used isolate back in the days because I thought that only nutrients were important, but now I don’t. First isolate is way more expensive without actually giving you a lot more protein.[/quote]

CT,

I recently switched from whey protein concentrate to whey protein isolate cause I’m lactose intolerant, and the switch definitely helped. Before I couldn’t drink one concentrate drink, but now I can drink three isolate shakes no prob. Do you think that Grow! Whey would give me the problems concentrate did?

~Rafiki

[quote]Rafiki wrote:
Christian Thibaudeau wrote:
Isolate and concentrate is basically the same protein, but the isolate is filtrated more. The upside is that you have a bit more protein (like 1-2g per scoop) and a bit less fat or carbs (1-2g per scoop) which, to me, is insignificant.

However since isolate is basically only protein, it also lost it’s active microfraction content (like lactoferrin) which have immune-system boosting effects.

I used isolate back in the days because I thought that only nutrients were important, but now I don’t. First isolate is way more expensive without actually giving you a lot more protein.

CT,

I recently switched from whey protein concentrate to whey protein isolate cause I’m lactose intolerant, and the switch definitely helped. Before I couldn’t drink one concentrate drink, but now I can drink three isolate shakes no prob. Do you think that Grow! Whey would give me the problems concentrate did?

~Rafiki[/quote]

Yes, sadly.

No one has really mentioned how fast Isolate is absorbed in comparison to Whey Concentrate. According to this study ( http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/content~db=all~content=a792984092 ) Isolate is absorbed even faster than Whey Hydrolosate.

“Ingesting the β-lactoglobulin-enriched WPI drink resulted in significantly greater plasma leucine concentrations at 45-120 min and significantly greater branched-chain amino acid concentrations at 60-105 min post ingestion compared with hydrolysed WPI.”

That is something to consider, in addition to the lower lactose.

[quote]Christian Thibaudeau wrote:
Rafiki wrote:
Christian Thibaudeau wrote:
Isolate and concentrate is basically the same protein, but the isolate is filtrated more. The upside is that you have a bit more protein (like 1-2g per scoop) and a bit less fat or carbs (1-2g per scoop) which, to me, is insignificant.

However since isolate is basically only protein, it also lost it’s active microfraction content (like lactoferrin) which have immune-system boosting effects.

I used isolate back in the days because I thought that only nutrients were important, but now I don’t. First isolate is way more expensive without actually giving you a lot more protein.

CT,

I recently switched from whey protein concentrate to whey protein isolate cause I’m lactose intolerant, and the switch definitely helped. Before I couldn’t drink one concentrate drink, but now I can drink three isolate shakes no prob. Do you think that Grow! Whey would give me the problems concentrate did?

~Rafiki

Yes, sadly.[/quote]

CT,

What would the common culprit be that gives me problems digesting Lactaid milk, Lactaid cottage cheese, yogurt, and concentrate, but no problems with isolate or hard cheeses?
Obviously it can’t be the lactose since it’s taken care of with these brands of milk and cheese or am I missing something?

[quote]MonkeyO wrote:
No one has really mentioned how fast Isolate is absorbed in comparison to Whey Concentrate. According to this study ( http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/content~db=all~content=a792984092 ) Isolate is absorbed even faster than Whey Hydrolosate.

“Ingesting the Ã?²-lactoglobulin-enriched WPI drink resulted in significantly greater plasma leucine concentrations at 45-120 min and significantly greater branched-chain amino acid concentrations at 60-105 min post ingestion compared with hydrolysed WPI.”

That is something to consider, in addition to the lower lactose.

[/quote]

That is what I was going to bring up. Isn’t isolate also cost a lot more because it is absorbed much faster than whey concentrate?

[quote]S C 0 0 Z E wrote:
MonkeyO wrote:
No one has really mentioned how fast Isolate is absorbed in comparison to Whey Concentrate. According to this study ( http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/content~db=all~content=a792984092 ) Isolate is absorbed even faster than Whey Hydrolosate.

“Ingesting the Ã??Ã?²-lactoglobulin-enriched WPI drink resulted in significantly greater plasma leucine concentrations at 45-120 min and significantly greater branched-chain amino acid concentrations at 60-105 min post ingestion compared with hydrolysed WPI.”

That is something to consider, in addition to the lower lactose.

That is what I was going to bring up. Isn’t isolate also cost a lot more because it is absorbed much faster than whey concentrate?

[/quote]

I’d wager it costs more because it has gone through more processing than concentrate would have. There’s also the likely hood that marketing has led people to believe superiority claims to be vastly greater than then probably are in reality. This would drive up demand, which would then drive up market prices. Price doesn’t always correlate with the superiority of a product. some products can be had for dirt cheap and are way better than alternatives.

[quote]
I’d wager it costs more because it has gone through more processing than concentrate would have. There’s also the likely hood that marketing has led people to believe superiority claims to be vastly greater than then probably are in reality. This would drive up demand, which would then drive up market prices. Price doesn’t always correlate with the superiority of a product. some products can be had for dirt cheap and are way better than alternatives. [/quote]

I would agree that it costs more due to the extra processing involved, but I wouldn’t say that all the marketing behind it is necessarily unfounded. The study I linked to suggests it’s even faster than hydrolyzed proteins.

The question should really be, why is whey hydrolosate so expensive in comparison to isolate if there isn’t an advantage?

[quote]MonkeyO wrote:

The question should really be, why is whey hydrolosate so expensive in comparison to isolate if there isn’t an advantage?
[/quote]

The problem with the study is that it doesn’t appear, at least based on the abstract, to specify the degree of hydrolysis. It’s relatively meaningless without knowing this.

Besides that, the study didn’t evaluate which was more effective for building muscle. It simply looked at absorption of leucine and branched-chain amino acids. While these are no doubt important, there may be other issues involved that would make another protein source more effective for body composition purposes.

Hydrolysates are more expensive because the are processed in a different manner than WPC and standard WPI.

[quote]Rafiki wrote:

[quote]Christian Thibaudeau wrote:
Isolate and concentrate is basically the same protein, but the isolate is filtrated more. The upside is that you have a bit more protein (like 1-2g per scoop) and a bit less fat or carbs (1-2g per scoop) which, to me, is insignificant.

However since isolate is basically only protein, it also lost it’s active microfraction content (like lactoferrin) which have immune-system boosting effects.

I used isolate back in the days because I thought that only nutrients were important, but now I don’t. First isolate is way more expensive without actually giving you a lot more protein.[/quote]

CT,

I recently switched from whey protein concentrate to whey protein isolate cause I’m lactose intolerant, and the switch definitely helped. Before I couldn’t drink one concentrate drink, but now I can drink three isolate shakes no prob. Do you think that Grow! Whey would give me the problems concentrate did?

Rafiki[/quote]

That’s cool, buddy…how’s experience and by the way…what’s specially benefits you have to got from that track…

thib

speaking of which, do know approx. how long it takes WPC to go into the bloodstream compared to WPI or WPH?

The problem is, the only product i get my hands on at the moment is ON Gold Standard with only a little amound of WPH, rest some peptides and stuff… i’m using it during workout and after, before the workout i use ricecakes and workoutfuel because i can’t get no FINiBARs either through the EU-border.

i used like

-50 4-5 ricecakes
-30 2sc workout fuel
-15 2 to 3 scoops of surge

  • during workout 3-4 scoops of workoutfuel + 2scoops of ON Gold Whey standard
    +30 2 scoops Surge + 1 scoop of Gold Whey

sometimes i skipped the Surge after the workout cause i felt i didn’t need it somehow like if my days was ultra-high in carbs, just intuitive.

i have to say i make tremendous gains and i feel pretty good on this routine, and i hope it respects the rules of the original protocol, but as I said, it bothers me somehow cause i don’t know if WPC or WPI can somehow comepare to WPH in terms of release into the bloodstream, because of that I maybe should rearrange the timing shouldn’ I ?

[quote]HK24719 wrote:

[quote]MonkeyO wrote:

The question should really be, why is whey hydrolosate so expensive in comparison to isolate if there isn’t an advantage?
[/quote]

The problem with the study is that it doesn’t appear, at least based on the abstract, to specify the degree of hydrolysis. It’s relatively meaningless without knowing this.

Besides that, the study didn’t evaluate which was more effective for building muscle. It simply looked at absorption of leucine and branched-chain amino acids. While these are no doubt important, there may be other issues involved that would make another protein source more effective for body composition purposes.

Hydrolysates are more expensive because the are processed in a different manner than WPC and standard WPI.[/quote]

By level of hydrolysis, I assume you mean the molecular weight? If so, that is a good point… all proteins are not created equal. In fact… I do remember being linked to a study from within the protein pulsing thread that suggest whey hydro was absorbed faster than whey iso. Furthermore, whey iso was absorbed faster than whey concentrate.

However, it still worth noting the isolate is absorbed faster than concentrate. And the reason why I emphasize that point is because of all the discussions recently about how protein synthesis can be triggered by a change in blood amino levels from baseline. It would appear isolate would be better for that purpose than concentrate.

Johnny Bowden also suggested isolate over concentrate in his 150 Healthiest Foods book. I can’t recall the reasons, but if anyone is interested, I will be more than happy to look up why.

Faster does not always mean better. See this study where the hydrolyzed protein was digested more poorly and provided less amino acids to muscle tissue compared to its intact form.

Am J Clin Nutr. 2009 Oct;90(4):1011-22. Epub 2009 Aug 19.

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

Deglaire A, Fromentin C, Fouillet H, Airinei G, Gaudichon C, Boutry C, Benamouzig R, Moughan PJ, Tomé D, Bos C.

INRA, CRNH-IdF, UMR914 Nutrition Physiology and Ingestive Behavior, Paris, France.

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 8 h after the IC and HC meals, respectively.

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.

I was just getting ready to post the study above…

From a cost-effectiveness standpoint, I think 99% of the population (other than those that have trouble with lactose) will not notice a difference between concentrate and isolate, even though the manufactuers have led us to believe we will.

I have yet to find any definitive evidence that concludes isolate builds more muscle than concentrate on a gram per gram basis. Sure it may reach the bloodstream quicker, and maybe of higher quality, but do those attributes really contribute to more muscle, which at the end of the day is the ultimate endpoint? I’d be willing to bet no.

Most probably will argue but taste and mixability are far more important than whether the protein is isolate or concentrate.