anybody else going to watch Panorama tomorrow?

Soldato
Joined
16 Sep 2005
Posts
7,897
Location
What used to be a UK
The Truth About Sports Products. Could save you some money ;)

Edit: I bet it doesn't mention it but I would be interested in knowing whether compression tops really work? Or whether taking Ibuprofen really does have a negative effect on muscle growth? The protein issue will get brought up

As many of us try to get fitter in this Olympic summer, Panorama investigates the sports products that promise to boost your performance. Are those pricey trainers worth the money? Can sports drinks really help you work out for longer? Are protein shakes any more effective at honing the physique than ordinary food?

With exclusive access to the findings from a unique study by the British Medical Journal and Oxford University, reporter Shelley Jofre tests the science behind the bold advertising claims made by some of sport's biggest brands.
 
Last edited:
If it's on the iPlayer (I'm assuming it will be) then I'll be watching it later on in the evening and see what arguments they put across.
 
I expect some shocking revelations like:
The sports nutrition industry is full of overpriced rubbish and claims of efficiacy that are not backed by evidence
Athletes will happily back things for £££
You are better off eating whole foods than supplements
Magic Ion balancing bands don't work
 
No doubt it will be full of information anyone who does even the slightest bit of their own research will know yet will appear like a revelation to the masses.
 
I expect some shocking revelations like:
The sports nutrition industry is full of overpriced rubbish and claims of efficiacy that are not backed by evidence
Athletes will happily back things for £££
You are better off eating whole foods than supplements
Magic Ion balancing bands don't work

Tbh I'm hoping it can be a lot more specific and detailed than this ;)
 
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-18863293
Dr Heneghan said: "The evidence does not stack up and the quality of the evidence does not allow us to say these do improve in performance or recovery and should be used as a product widely."

Nutrition expert Professor Mike Lean of the University of Glasgow described what little evidence there is that certain amino acids, which form part of proteins, may improve muscle strength as "absolutely fringe evidence and I think that that is almost totally irrelevant, even at the top level of athletics".

This guy clearly has not done his research and later goes on to describing it as expensive milk, it is clearly a one-sided assessment and does not look into the other factors such as the speed of absorption and the anabolic signaling effect of leucine.
 
Last edited:
Lol@'expensive milk' - 5kg of MP's Impact Whey is looking like it will last me a good 4-6 months (a single two-scoop shake a day) - for roughly £40 - at roughly 40g of protein per serving, compare that to the price of eating 200g extra tuna or chicken a day (20g protein p/100g)...
 
Lol@'expensive milk' - 5kg of MP's Impact Whey is looking like it will last me a good 4-6 months (a single two-scoop shake a day) - for roughly £40 - at roughly 40g of protein per serving, compare that to the price of eating 200g extra tuna or chicken a day (20g protein p/100g)...

Might last you longer than that if we get some decent or accurate indication regarding suitable protein intake.
 
As somnambulist has pointed out, protein is an effective supplement because its just cheaper than having to buy animal protein in traditional forms.

They also seem to be focusing on the likes of Lucozade Sport, but the article thus far (and hopefully Panorama) will allude to the fact that its not that its bad, its just irrelevant to most people. Sports drinks certainly replenish vital fluids and help give you energy, I myself only ever use them on long cycle rides though, where I will fill a bottle with one. Having one every time you go to the gym, or having a kick about with friends is pointless, but then that's how they market them.

That said, I fully expect them to show that a lot of the other supplements which have lots of claims are complete guff and unnecessary for even athletes.
 
Apparently Whey is a "rather expensive fashion accessory."

Hah.

Edit: Turns out they were talking about BCAA's. Good news for Creatine sales though.
 
Last edited:
Apparently Whey is a "rather expensive fashion accessory."

Hah.

I think they were referring to supplements in general there and I personally think he is right.

Just look at the sponsorship that sports drinks put into athletes and sporting events.

Secondly if you look at sports/fitness magazines and gyms they are all advertising and selling supplements.

I've seen loads of people down the gym who are using all kinds of the supplements they sell (and Im not talking just whey) and yet they aren't really doing body building or serious athletes. Its because they've been convinced by the gym and marketing that they should be. There are certainly a lot of young guys at the gym I use who seem to love showing off that they are taking supplements.
 
So are we gonna find out if taking protein shakes, amino acids and creatine etc is a waste or will they suprise us and say go for it?

The problem is when they say 'protein shakes' in the media they will mean this stuff
tbprT.jpg


not this stuff
tHMvq.jpg
 
Lucozade and all that is probably a waste of time outside of actual competition. Except if you're sweating a great deal and need a little bit of sugar/electrolytes to maximize hydration.

In fact you can get better results training in a glycogen depleted state (as an endurance athlete). If you stress your body it turns on all kinds of genes and becomes more efficient in that stressed state, so when you go back to the "easy" carbed-up state you'll obviously perform better. Same idea as training at high altitude.

http://www.pponline.co.uk/encyc/spo...est-research-into-low-glycogen-training-42067

that site has all kinds of interesting articles btw.

Here's one on BCAAs

http://www.pponline.co.uk/encyc/nut...aa-and-its-effect-on-sports-performance-40852

WptvN.png
 
I'm still waiting for the prog to become available? When I click to watch, Crime watch keeps coming on instead?
 
On protein

http://www.pponline.co.uk/encyc/recommended-protein-intake-to-build-muscle-mass-40541

So, why do many athletes and coaches maintain that much higher protein intakes are desirable for increased muscle mass? The answer probably lies in the nitrogen balance method. Athletes desiring increased muscle mass should be in positive nitrogen balance, thus the conclusion is that protein intakes above 1.6g/kgBW/d are considered necessary. Furthermore, when nitrogen balance is measured in athletes, the greater the protein intake, the greater the nitrogen balance(2), thus athletes conclude that the more protein they eat, the bigger they’ll get.

Unfortunately, the increase in muscle mass that would be associated with these very high nitrogen balances is simply not possible (see box 1), even if anabolic drugs were administered. If this level of nitrogen were actually incorporated into muscle, these athletes would gain around 100kg of muscle mass in a year(1,7)! Clearly, there are problems with this method for determining nitrogen balance, especially at high levels of protein intake.
Box 1: Why positive nitrogen balance is not the same as muscle gain

Suppose an athlete eats 2.5g protein/kg/d; this would result in a positive nitrogen balance of around 15g of nitrogen per day;
But nitrogen constitutes only around 16% of protein by weight, therefore actual protein gain = 15g N x 1g protein/0.16g N = around 94g of protein per day;
Since muscle is 75% water, amount of muscle accretion per day = 94g protein x 25% protein in muscle (75% water) = 282g muscle per day;
Per year = 282g protein per day x 365 days = 102930g/yr or 103kg of muscle gained in one year!

More direct evidence that high positive nitrogen balance is disassociated from gains in lean mass has accumulated. Several studies demonstrate that athletes may have a very high nitrogen balance, but lean body mass does not increase(1,7). Thus, the basis for very high levels of protein intake is unsound.

So if you weigh 70k you'd only need about 112g according to science. Like 4 boiled eggs, a tuna sandwich and a couple glasses of milk. They rest would be ££ peed down the toilet.

Unless you're not eating enough carbs/fat then you're going to be using more protein but not for muscle building, you're burning it off through gluconeogensis. Carbs are much cheaper though so why not just eat some potatoes? Not as glamorous though is it?

Although I'm sure this info is far less reliable than whats printed on the back of a whey protein tub.
 
I'll watch but I personally don't use any of these supplements. My supplement intake stops at the multivitamin and Omega 3,6 & 9 caplets. Anything else my body needs it gets from my diet.
 
On protein

http://www.pponline.co.uk/encyc/recommended-protein-intake-to-build-muscle-mass-40541



So if you weigh 70k you'd only need about 112g according to science. Like 4 boiled eggs, a tuna sandwich and a couple glasses of milk. They rest would be ££ peed down the toilet.

Unless you're not eating enough carbs/fat then you're going to be using more protein but not for muscle building, you're burning it off through gluconeogensis. Carbs are much cheaper though so why not just eat some potatoes? Not as glamorous though is it?

Although I'm sure this info is far less reliable than whats printed on the back of a whey protein tub.

Protein is typically more satiating than carbs though, and the least likely macro to be stored as fat. I think everyone agrees mega-dosing on protein is silly, but in response to your link:

http://www.marksdailyapple.com/dear...u-absorb-and-use-from-one-meal/#axzz205AjEWEj
 
I'll watch but I personally don't use any of these supplements. My supplement intake stops at the multivitamin and Omega 3,6 & 9 caplets. Anything else my body needs it gets from my diet.

I only use whey to top off my macros along with 5g creatine, BCAAs purely for pre-workout when fasted (which is once a week, sometimes not at all), 5ml omega 3 a day, high strength vitamin D (a tenner for a year's supply) and MP had a year's supply of Alpha Men multi-vit for around £40 so I thought why not? I only take one with each of my two meals a day as the recommended 4 a day seems excessive.
 
Back
Top Bottom