[sheavi]

http://ylmsportscience.blogspot.co.uk/2015/04/protein-ingestion-before-sleep.html

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25926415

[duncan]

As is often the case, what happened in the control group of the study is as interesting as what happened to the group that got the supplement. In this case the control arm got a placebo (so called - I bet it was obviously not the active ingredient) which contained no nutritional value. So eating protein compared to nothing at all helps. Well there's a thing!

How about comparing with a cheese sandwich or a bowl of meusli or (insert your favourite late night snack here) and cup of herbal tea? Of course they don't do this because the results would almost certainly be non-significant.

More nutrition industry sponsored science-marketing. Study was funded by DSM - supplement and processed food multinational.

[Lund]

So eating protein compared to nothing at all helps. Well there's a thing!

Harsh.  Even "obvious" things need proving.

[Coops_13]

My question is how did they make a placebo that appeared like it had 27.5 g of protein and 15g of carbs but was actually "non-caloric".


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[SA Chris]

Sawdust? Mud?

[sheavi]

http://jn.nutrition.org/content/145/6/1178.long


Dietary protein supplementation.
Throughout the 12-wk intervention period, subjects consumed a 300-mL bottle containing either a placebo drink (PLA group) or protein drink (PRO group) daily immediately before sleep. The protein beverage contained 13.75 g of casein hydrolysate (Peptopro), 13.75 g of casein, 15 g of carbohydrate, and 0.1 g of fat (DSM), providing 746 kJ of energy. The control drink was a noncaloric placebo beverage. Beverages were masked for taste and smell by adding citric and vanilla additives. In addition, beverages were masked for color by adding titanium dioxide (food-grade E171) to the placebo drink. Placebo and protein drinks were provided in a randomized, double-blind manner. On average, subjects consumed 98% ± 1% of the beverages, with no differences between groups.

Dietary intake, physical activity standardization, and sleep records.
All participants received a snack immediately after every training session, including a cheese sandwich, an apple, and a noncaloric beverage (total energy intake, 1151 kJ; 37 g of carbohydrates, 10 g of protein, and 9 g of fat). Furthermore, all participants consumed a standardized meal the evening before each test day. Participants were instructed to refrain from vigorous physical activity for at least 5 d before testing. At the different test days, participants arrived at the laboratory by car or public transportation after an overnight fast. Throughout the intervention program, participants were encouraged to maintain their habitual dietary intake and physical activity pattern. Participants recorded 3-d (Thursday–Saturday) weighted dietary intake records to assess potential changes in daily food intake that might have occurred during the intervention period before the onset of the intervention program and in week 11 of the exercise intervention. Dietary intake records were analyzed with Eetmeter Software 2005 (version1.4.0; Voedingscentrum). All participants recorded the time they went to sleep at night and woke up in the morning, on both training and nontraining days, throughout the entire intervention period.

[sheavi]

Choose your form of nutrition be it a supplement drink or cheese sandwich etc doesn't matter. How different the results would be with a protein vs carbohydrate vs fat based 'meal' not sure.  The point is it is something to think about if your training especially bouldering. Eat protein before bed to enhance your training/recovery? Maybe

[finbarrr]

i read "protein injection", and was a bit interested as to the dosage and the intended users, until i read "it had 27.5 g of protein and 15g of carbs "
 

and then i read the title and  first post more closely
 

[petejh]

As is often the case, what happened in the control group of the study is as interesting as what happened to the group that got the supplement. In this case the control arm got a placebo (so called - I bet it was obviously not the active ingredient) which contained no nutritional value. So eating protein compared to nothing at all helps. Well there's a thing!

How about comparing with a cheese sandwich or a bowl of meusli or (insert your favourite late night snack here) and cup of herbal tea? Of course they don't do this because the results would almost certainly be non-significant.

More nutrition industry sponsored science-marketing. Study was funded by DSM - supplement and processed food multinational.

Bit cynical that - all that I took away as important is the study's 28g protein and 15g carbs before bed proved to be beneficial for muscle gain. Doesn't matter where the pro/carbs it comes from - some tuna and banana or whatever.
Didn't make me think 'supplemet drink'. Supplement drinks are popular becasue a lot of people are lazy and clueless when it comes to learning what's in real food. Same reason ready meals are popular.

[rodma]

Supplement drinks are popular becasue a lot of people are lazy

that and it's awfully convenient

[Oldmanmatt]

Supplement drinks are popular becasue a lot of people are lazy

that and it's awfully convenient

At my age, that much liquid before bed would be highly inconvenient around 2am...

And probably again around 5...


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[rodma]

Hehe

Sent from my E5823 using Tapatalk

[TobyD]

Doesn't matter where the pro/carbs it comes from - some tuna and banana or whatever.
Didn't make me think 'supplemet drink'. Supplement drinks are popular becasue a lot of people are lazy and clueless when it comes to learning what's in real food. Same reason ready meals are popular.

Not entirely true, Pete. Your body will absorb different proteins at different rates, in a similar manner to different complexities of carbohydrate. I acknowledge the differences will not be as marked as sport supplement makers would like us all to believe but it does make a difference. However, I'd agree there's likely to be bugger all difference between consuming a whey protein shake and an equivalent protein / calorie quantity of real food rich in whey protein.

Generally, I don't think Duncan's being too over cynical, if research is easily available 'for free' online and turns up early in a google search, I'd be a least a little suspiscious of why.

[petejh]

Sure, don't disagree with that. Actually my default setting is probably 'ultra-cynical' to the point of total acceptance that somebody is usually trying either to sell something, gain more power for themselves or gain themselves some other benefit in some way. So I tend to accept that fact as an inevitability of life and focus instead on what's useful and relevant.

So rather than 'a bit cynical' maybe what I meant was more like: 'why focus on inevitable and obvious potential biases?' - in this case a recovery drink which isn't mandatory for the measured outcome because you can just eat some other protein/carbs instead (quality of macro-nutrients being equal).
Why not focus instead on what is useful knowledge - i.e. protein before bed in this study led to a better muscle response than not protein before bed. Like Duncan says - well there's a thing! But it is still interesting, because I assume the control group didn't starve in the evenings e.g. I assume the group taking pro/carbs before bed was taking it extra to the usual evening meal that both groups ate.

Too much of that sort of thinking on here sometimes - someone posts some chunk of knowledge that may have at least some potential merit but that also comes with, often fairly obvious, potential 'negatives'; and the default setting often seems to be to jump on the negatives at the risk of disregarding potentially beneficial knowledge.

[Oldmanmatt]

Too much of that sort of thinking on here sometimes - someone posts some chunk of knowledge that may have at least some potential merit but that also comes with, often fairly obvious, potential 'negatives'; and the default setting often seems to be to jump on the negatives at the risk of disregarding potentially beneficial knowledge.

Sums up humanity, really.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Rocksteady]

Too much of that sort of thinking on here sometimes - someone posts some chunk of knowledge that may have at least some potential merit but that also comes with, often fairly obvious, potential 'negatives'; and the default setting often seems to be to jump on the negatives at the risk of disregarding potentially beneficial knowledge.

Sums up humanity, really.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Seems to me it's a type of confirmation bias. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias
People jump on the 'wrong' bits and strengthen their existing worldview, and pay far too little attention to the other elements. Unless we really pay attention, we all do it.

[spam]

For me, the outcome of the study falls under no big surprise.

I thought it was fairly well accepted that if you are training hard to build muscle then regularly getting ~20 grams of proteins every few (4?) hours is a good idea.  Many people won't eat a steak before going to bed, so throwing back a protein shake at night should be better than not ingesting a significant amount of protein from after dinner through to breakfast, which could be 12 hours.  Makes sense for climbers to do this during a strength building phase, if you are trying to build muscle.  Not sure I am understanding the controversy here?

[a dense loner]

I'm with you there Habrich, I've used concrete weights before now. Didn't taste any different if I'm honest!

[petejh]

I am all for cynicism, as long as it is even-handed. As far as I am concerned, almost every thread on nutrition topics is rendered less valuable by the endless moralising about the food industry and corresponding romanticising of "real food". Imagine how useless the training threads would be if every discussion of, say, deadlifting, had to involve suspicion of the fitness gym business or the waste of scarce global resources involved in deploying iron to rarely-used weight plates, rather than, say, H-beams to construct low-cost housing in the third world?

 
And the concept applies in both directions. Plenty of 'scientific cynicism' seems to melt away at the suggestion of examining personal habits in the light of new knowledge.