Why do shakes get a bad rap ?

**dehydromethandrotren** · 02-05-2009, 06:08 PM

For example, how is this shake inferior to a meal with the same macros:

cottage cheese
lowfat milk
peanut butter (natural)
blueberries

50g protein - 200 cals
15g fat - 135 cals
35g carbs - 140 cals
475 cals.

I can down it in a second. Why is this not as good as eating solid foods?

**jimmyinkedup** · 02-05-2009, 06:12 PM

little to no thermogenic effect from a shake - also ...macros do not = micronutrient contents (vitamins etc....) Also there are benefits to slower digetion re: continued availibility of nutrients .....
That said at times maybe a shake is a good choice - PWO for ex ...but id follow it up with a pwo meal as well ...JMO

**dehydromethandrotren** · 02-05-2009, 06:14 PM

Why is there no thermogenic effect? How is that possible?

How is the availability effected?

Sorry, I just like explanation with answers.

**jimmyinkedup** · 02-05-2009, 06:41 PM

Digestion expends energy - liquid shakes do not require near the same expenditure of energy to digest as solid foods (btw i said little to no - not no thermogenic effect). Because digestion process occurs more slowly with solid foods - nutrients are made avail over a longer period of time ...

**FallenWyvern** · 02-05-2009, 07:27 PM

What are the carbs in that shake? Maltodextrin/Dextrose? That's like pure sugar, why not just have a milkshake from McDonald's.

**FallenWyvern** · 02-05-2009, 07:40 PM

NM you are drinking the above stuff. Looks good to me.

**jimmyinkedup** · 02-05-2009, 07:48 PM

WAIIITTTT - i think i misunderstood - u are making a shake from those ingredients? Oh the ony diff would then be thermogenic effect and speed of digestion- thats it....

**Rugger02** · 02-05-2009, 07:52 PM

Originally Posted by jimmyinkedup

WAIIITTTT - i think i misunderstood - u are making a shake from those ingredients? Oh the ony diff would then be thermogenic effect and speed of digestion- thats it....

I thought the same as you. Good answers for both versions of the question.

To the OP, the bad rep that shakes get is mostly due to the fact that people think that they can get all of their daily protein from whey. So jimmy answered your question as if it were whey shakes you were asking about.

**MuscleScience** · 02-05-2009, 07:53 PM

Protein shakes are merely a dietary supplement and should be treated as such.

**Rugger02** · 02-05-2009, 07:54 PM

^Well put.

**novastepp** · 02-05-2009, 08:01 PM

how long have people been ingesting food in liquid form? do you think we are able to properly digest liquids? just a thought...

**MuscleScience** · 02-05-2009, 08:02 PM

Originally Posted by novastepp

how long have people been ingesting food in liquid form? do you think we are able to properly digest liquids? just a thought...

Yeah

**novastepp** · 02-05-2009, 08:04 PM

Originally Posted by MuscleScience

Yeah

i mean i understand it is actually protein, in an extremely basic form and it would seem readily digestible, but i'm just skeptical. i do the PWO shake because it's tried and true i suppose.

**jimmyinkedup** · 02-05-2009, 08:05 PM

^^^ we have been nursing as babies since the beginning of time ....*L* but as far as adult consumption yes that is correct....
Brings up a good point you would wonder if we can truly utilize all the nutrients while taking "food" in that manner....

**MuscleScience** · 02-05-2009, 08:09 PM

Logically it would make sense that it would absorb better. Because there is less time for the bolus to mix and then be degraded by pancreatic enzymes and bile salts. Then you get into the fact that transit time would be increased so maybe it is not absorbed as fast.

Guess I should actually go to the literature and see.....LOL

**novastepp** · 02-05-2009, 08:10 PM

Originally Posted by jimmyinkedup

^^^ we have been nursing as babies since the beginning of time ....*L* but as far as adult consumption yes that is correct....
Brings up a good point you would wonder if we can truly utilize all the nutrients while taking "food" in that manner....

absolutely we nurse, for the immunity (most of all IMO), and essential vitamins and minerals that are generated by the woman that brought us into this world. i understand that and have researched it actually. nothing better for a baby IMO, however that doesn't even hold a flame to what we are "drinking" pwo.

**novastepp** · 02-05-2009, 08:12 PM

Originally Posted by MuscleScience

Logically it would make sense that it would absorb better. Because there is less time for the bolus to mix and then be degraded by pancreatic enzymes and bile salts. Then you get into the fact that transit time would be increased so maybe it is not absorbed as fast.

Guess I should actually go to the literature and see.....LOL

not only that, but our body is a complex machine that has those digestive processes in place for a reason. we've evolved into them. they are essentially unneeded due to the fact that we're ingesting liquids as calories. i can't speak from literature, but from my education i'm merely hypothesizing.

**jimmyinkedup** · 02-05-2009, 08:14 PM

Originally Posted by novastepp

absolutely we nurse, for the immunity (most of all IMO), and essential vitamins and minerals that are generated by the woman that brought us into this world. i understand that and have researched it actually. nothing better for a baby IMO, however that doesn't even hold a flame to what we are "drinking" pwo.

it was a joke bro ....

**novastepp** · 02-05-2009, 08:15 PM

Originally Posted by jimmyinkedup

it was a joke bro ....

eh. in any case, its nice to get these thoughts out there, so even if you were joking, your point was taken.

**jimmyinkedup** · 02-05-2009, 08:17 PM

Originally Posted by MuscleScience

Logically it would make sense that it would absorb better. Because there is less time for the bolus to mix and then be degraded by pancreatic enzymes and bile salts. Then you get into the fact that transit time would be increased so maybe it is not absorbed as fast.

Guess I should actually go to the literature and see.....LOL

id be interested ...since he was talking about a whole food shake. Should be info avail i would think - given broken jaws , mouth cancer patients etc ...

**MuscleScience** · 02-05-2009, 08:19 PM

Originally Posted by jimmyinkedup

id be interested ...since he was talking about a whole food shake. Should be info avail i would think - given broken jaws , mouth cancer patients etc ...

Yeah very true, I will probably do a search in a few weeks when my studies subside a bit.

**novastepp** · 02-05-2009, 08:20 PM

Originally Posted by jimmyinkedup

id be interested ...since he was talking about a whole food shake. Should be info avail i would think - given broken jaws , mouth cancer patients etc ...

yeah, that is a diff question, and an interesting one. blending "whole" food. does make me wonder. i'm sure musclescience is on the case.

**novastepp** · 02-05-2009, 08:21 PM

Originally Posted by jimmyinkedup

id be interested ...since he was talking about a whole food shake. Should be info avail i would think - given broken jaws , mouth cancer patients etc ...

also, that may be just a "HAVE TO" situation. i mean they can't really shove whole food in, so maybe they are just dealing with what they have and doing the best they can. again, just putting thoughts out there you jokester...

**MuscleScience** · 02-05-2009, 08:26 PM

Originally Posted by novastepp

yeah, that is a diff question, and an interesting one. blending "whole" food. does make me wonder. i'm sure musclescience is on the case.

I would be but i am busy with test and I heard about a new paper out there that has described a different neurotransmitter at the neuromuscular junction other than acetylcholine. If that is the case it would be huge, there have been theories that state that acetylcholine cant be the only one because of timing issues between acetylcholine release and the enzyme that degrades it or something to that effect.

So I have been spending free time trying to track down the paper and emailing former professors and colleagues of mine to find it.....

**novastepp** · 02-05-2009, 08:37 PM

Originally Posted by MuscleScience

I would be but i am busy with test and I heard about a new paper out there that has described a different neurotransmitter at the neuromuscular junction other than acetylcholine. If that is the case it would be huge, there have been theories that state that acetylcholine cant be the only one because of timing issues between acetylcholine release and the enzyme that degrades it or something to that effect.

So I have been spending free time trying to track down the paper and emailing former professors and colleagues of mine to find it.....

i'll talk to the people i know on campus and see if they've heard anything. i doubt they have. but that would be incredible. i basically taught human biology for 3 years and good ol ACh was always a player.

haha in any case, im sure there's some kind of info out there, we'll stumble across it sometime.

**jimmyinkedup** · 02-05-2009, 08:40 PM

^^^ ill look around as well ...as i said im curious....

**jimmyinkedup** · 02-05-2009, 08:43 PM

i suspect simply a faster absorption of nutrients - total speculation....
*L* then again maybe not - enzymes are still needed etc.... i guess we will find out...
pure curiosity on my part - prob wont change anything i currently do....just wanna know...

**novastepp** · 02-05-2009, 08:58 PM

Originally Posted by jimmyinkedup

i suspect simply a faster absorption of nutrients - total speculation....
*L* then again maybe not - enzymes are still needed etc.... i guess we will find out...
pure curiosity on my part - prob wont change anything i currently do....just wanna know...

yeah i'll keep the PWO whey and milk.

**Rugger02** · 02-05-2009, 10:12 PM

Originally Posted by MuscleScience

I would be but i am busy with test and I heard about a new paper out there that has described a different neurotransmitter at the neuromuscular junction other than acetylcholine. If that is the case it would be huge, there have been theories that state that acetylcholine cant be the only one because of timing issues between acetylcholine release and the enzyme that degrades it or something to that effect.

So I have been spending free time trying to track down the paper and emailing former professors and colleagues of mine to find it.....

You spend your free time doing that and I'll just be over here in Dumbville trying to figure out just what "that" is for the next six weeks...

LOL, If anybody needs me I'll be Googling...

**DSM4Life** · 02-05-2009, 10:13 PM

because people abuse them.

**dehydromethandrotren** · 02-06-2009, 01:29 PM

Thanks for the in depth response and explanation.

Yes I was talking about blending those whole foods into a "shake".

The only thing I understand that would change, which some of you mentioned, in comparison to eating solid foods, is:

1. Increased absorption rate due to the food being essentially partially broken down in the blending process. Am I right or wrong?

2. Lessened thermogenic effect since, less energy needed to expend to digest. I get that, totally makes sense to me.

But, I would think that if you have a hard time getting in extra calories, a shake like the one I listed, would be a decent and rather convenient way of getting them in? Doesn't seem to inferior really, but I'll let you guys do your research etc

**MuscleScience** · 02-06-2009, 04:38 PM

Originally Posted by Rugger02

You spend your free time doing that and I'll just be over here in Dumbville trying to figure out just what "that" is for the next six weeks...

LOL, If anybody needs me I'll be Googling...

Yeah I am a dork, I dont think your dumb. I bet you know alot about something that i wouldnt have a clue about. Plus I have spent my entire adult life studying this stuff. I should know something at this point.....LOL