Too good to be true?

Options
Ophidion
Ophidion Posts: 2,065 Member
in Food and Nutrition
So I'm researching BCAA's as a supplement and one claims...

"1 serving of "product name left blank": 0.02 Calories, *25g Protein, 0g Carbs & 0g Fats.
4 oz. of Chicken Breast: 130 Calories, 24.20g Protein, 0g Carbs & 23.95g Fats.
5 oz. Lean Beef: 361 Calories, 24.38g Protein, 0g Carbs & 28.40g Fats."

because if this were true I can see benefits in taking this supplement not just for myself but anybody watching their carbs/cals/fats etc

Thoughts anyone?
«1

Replies

  • Sean_The_IT_Guy
    Sean_The_IT_Guy Posts: 168
    Options
    BCAAs, if a quality product, are just that. Branched Chain Amino Acids (ie: Protein), and not much else. Similar to whey protein isolate. That's mostly all it is (unless it's also sweetened and flavoured).

    Thats a great way for people to get a big boost of protein without getting fat and carbs that they don't need or want.

    As a supplement, its great. I would be pretty miserable if I lived off it, though. Also, protein starvation is a real thing. You need some fats in your diet just to be able to absorb nutrients.
  • TavistockToad
    TavistockToad Posts: 35,719 Member
    Options
    4 oz. of Chicken Breast: 130 Calories, 24.20g Protein, 0g Carbs & 23.95g Fats.

    is that chicken breast with skin? seems very high in fat?
  • Ophidion
    Ophidion Posts: 2,065 Member
    Options
    Indeed have no plans on starving myself or denying myself of the much needed macros/micro nutrients.

    Just seems to be to good to be true in comparison to the usual protein supplements. (Whey,soy etc)

    Would love to hear some more opinions.
  • Ophidion
    Ophidion Posts: 2,065 Member
    Options
    4 oz. of Chicken Breast: 130 Calories, 24.20g Protein, 0g Carbs & 23.95g Fats.

    is that chicken breast with skin? seems very high in fat?

    Not sure to be honest, as it is a claim by product makers.
  • ironanimal
    ironanimal Posts: 5,922 Member
    Options
    What brand are you looking at? I can't find any with such a low calorie number - ON's BCAA powder has 20g per 5g protein, which makes more sense.

    Also, BCAAs taste bloody awful, so that is part of the reason not everyone uses them :tongue:
  • IdsFknTaken
    IdsFknTaken Posts: 20
    Options
    "1 serving of "product name left blank": 0.02 Calories, *25g Protein, 0g Carbs & 0g Fats.

    I'd say that's a typo. 1g protein is roughly 4 calories, so one serving would be about 100 calories (probably at least 110 and less than 120).
  • IronfitDan
    IronfitDan Posts: 9
    Options
    Also bear in mind the cost.

    I don't know many protein figures off the top of my head but a doctor friend reminded me that versus the content and price of an egg a protein powder is rubbish.
  • kennie2
    kennie2 Posts: 1,171 Member
    Options
    1g protein = 4 calories.
  • y4k4m4n
    y4k4m4n Posts: 9 Member
    Options
    Also bear in mind the cost.

    I don't know many protein figures off the top of my head but a doctor friend reminded me that versus the content and price of an egg a protein powder is rubbish.

    It's not the same thing at all, egg protein is slow releasing while whey is faster releasing, and BCAA is just amino acids (contained in proteins), even faster releasing.
  • Ophidion
    Ophidion Posts: 2,065 Member
    Options
    1g protein = 4 calories.
    bump
    Thank you am well aware of this, hence the confusion happy to send the actual link to people to go over properly...no I do not want to sell or promote it just interested in the validity of the claims and the science behind it.
  • Ophidion
    Ophidion Posts: 2,065 Member
    Options
    "1 serving of "product name left blank": 0.02 Calories, *25g Protein, 0g Carbs & 0g Fats.

    I'd say that's a typo. 1g protein is roughly 4 calories, so one serving would be about 100 calories (probably at least 110 and less than 120).
    A lot of typos all over the site and others selling it than. I reiterate I do know the calorie value of macros hence the confusion.
  • rml_16
    rml_16 Posts: 16,414 Member
    Options
    So I'm researching BCAA's as a supplement and one claims...

    "1 serving of "product name left blank": 0.02 Calories, *25g Protein, 0g Carbs & 0g Fats.
    4 oz. of Chicken Breast: 130 Calories, 24.20g Protein, 0g Carbs & 23.95g Fats.
    5 oz. Lean Beef: 361 Calories, 24.38g Protein, 0g Carbs & 28.40g Fats."

    because if this were true I can see benefits in taking this supplement not just for myself but anybody watching their carbs/cals/fats etc

    Thoughts anyone?
    I'm pretty sure it's impossible to have protein in something and 0 calories. Protein has 4 calories per gram.
  • Ophidion
    Ophidion Posts: 2,065 Member
    Options
    Will reiterate one last time I know the macro values, here is the website so people can go over it

    http://alrindustries.com/products/humapro-tablets

    I would ask that you go over more than the first page and onto FAQ, science etc.

    Looking forward to someone with a solid background in science or nutrition to answer this but appreciate all responses.
  • beekay70
    beekay70 Posts: 214 Member
    Options
    For the BCAAs, they still provide 4 calories per gram of protein. There is no getting around it.

    The chicken doesn't add up. What is listed there for fat and protein would provide about 300 calories.

    0 calories=0 nutritional value.
  • CptJinxx
    CptJinxx Posts: 81 Member
    Options
    Chicken breast without skin has only about 3 grams of fat per 100 gram.
  • BenjaminMFP88
    BenjaminMFP88 Posts: 660 Member
    Options
    If given some time, I could probably dig up the research for you but from my understanding it is because BCAA's are free form Amino Acids. Because they are free form, companies do not have to count these as macro nutrients even if the nutrition label says so. This means the companys do not have to apply the 4 calories per 1 gram calculations. FDA marketing loophole.

    However, your body does digest them the same nontheless and they should be counted towards your caloric goals, so yes, it is too good to be true
  • tigersword
    tigersword Posts: 8,059 Member
    Options
    I'm not sure what answer you're looking for. You know the macro values for protein, you know the information is wrong; what more is there to discuss?
  • Ophidion
    Ophidion Posts: 2,065 Member
    Options
    If given some time, I could probably dig up the research for you but from my understanding it is because BCAA's are free form Amino Acids. Because they are free form, companies do not have to count these as macro nutrients even if the nutrition label says so. This means the companys do not have to apply the 4 calories per 1 gram calculations. FDA marketing loophole.

    However, your body does digest them the same nontheless and they should be counted towards your caloric goals, so yes, it is too good to be true
    OK this makes sense.
  • rml_16
    rml_16 Posts: 16,414 Member
    Options
    I'm not sure what answer you're looking for. You know the macro values for protein, you know the information is wrong; what more is there to discuss?
    That was my question.
  • Ophidion
    Ophidion Posts: 2,065 Member
    Options
    I'm not sure what answer you're looking for. You know the macro values for protein, you know the information is wrong; what more is there to discuss?
    Not really looking for answers more opinions, but answers are welcome. I have no dog in this fight besides not wanting to buy snake oil because of misleading overtly complicated pseudoscience., hence the title of the thread "Too good to be true?"

    I appreciate all the responses.

    Was hoping for an answer similar to BenjaminMFP88's as it went beyond stating the obvious and pointed out how loopholes can cause companies to use misleading facts.

Categories