Protein makers claims vs. actual content

TwoPointZero

First, the original post with backstory and lots of links:

http://redd.it/tcpmt

and the data generated by /u/physicistjedi:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/lv?key=0Ag9uT-E4EIL7dFZPZnR0WVZybGtFWnRKNzdKNm9XOVE&toomany=true#gid=0

(N.B.: His methodology is presented here: http://redd.it/uva9t. He also notes that this post was discussed all over the place, especially in the bb.com forums, so some of you have undoubtedly seen this. I hadn't though, and I couldn't find it after doing some searches here, so I thought I would post it.)

Results:

* N.B.: The metric he devised was a ratio, that being (measured protein)/(advertised protein). Thus, the higher, the better. Generally speaking, he considered anything over 0.7 fine.

* Optimum Nutrition has 3 in the top 10. The top ten spanned an interval of around 0.9 to 0.78.

* Bottom: Gaspari (who apparently responded a in rational manner, but I can't find the response), and American Pure Whey. APW had values of 0.15 and 0.01. If those are correct, that is crazy . . . Interestingly, he didn't actively test what the substance he was measuring actually was.

Enjoy!


tl;dr: Optimum Nutrition, good. American Pure Whey, bad.