# Recovery Drink (that doesn't cost $50 from beachbody.com...)



## jwtg (23 Mar 2011)

Hey all,
I searched for topics on recovery drinks (using both the in-house and google search methods), and as you can imagine, I got linked to many threads about drinking BEER, or recovery (vehicular, or medical.)  So, if I missed the boat and there's a good thread somewhere, feel free to point me in the right direction.

Otherwise,
I was wondering if anybody knows of a good recovery drink substitute when pursuing the P90X or INSANITY workouts?  I just picked up Insanity (nice on cheap- thanks Kijiji!) and it recommends a recovery drink within an hour of the workout, with a 4:1 carb to protein ratio.  I don't wanna break the bank to buy the stuff their brand sells...also I just feel stupid if I start buying every accessory from a company that they recommend but don't include with their product.

I've heard chocolate milk..but I think I might vomit if I try to down milk right after working out hardcore.  Any other cost-effective suggestions?
As far as my goals- I'm 5'7, 170 lbs (apparently right at the edge of the 'safe-zone' before being obese by CFLRS fitness guide standards!!) and in good shape.  I wanna trim the fat and build the muscle, to be in better shape.  Not overly concerned about weight loss/gain, just reaching optimal size for my body.


----------



## prima6 (23 Mar 2011)

Chocolate milk is a pretty good one.  I've never had any problems with drinking milk post-workout, but you might, I can't say.  Egg whites are pretty easy to digest.  Whey protein can be pretty affordable if you don't go for the really expensive, heavily marketed types.  You know, the ones with several 4 page ads in every issue of every muscle mag that exists.  The whey isolate I use is $39.99 for 2 kg.  If milk makes you think you're gonna vomit then you may not have any better luck with protein powder in water.

Bananas are a pretty quick digesting carb and are pretty inexpensive.  I've also seen PB&J on white recommended as a quick digesting carb.

Just my opinion, but a lot of people get really wrapped up in post-workout nutrition.  I can't see it making that big of a deal if you have the fastest digesting protein or the best digesting carb that gives you the best insulin response, etc.  The post-workout window is also mostly a myth.  There's no magical 30 minute, 1 hour or 90 minute window.  If you don't get your food in within some arbitrary time from when you completed your workout you're not going to lose any gains.  The only hard evidence for it came from a study on elderly people performing cardiovascular exercise.  A study on trained individuals found that the so-called window (where protein synthesis is increased) lasts for about 24 hours following exercise.  You find that a lot of the stuff that supplement companies throw in your face is from studies done on elderly, sedentary people.  Gain 200% more muscle! Increase strength 642%!  Yeah, if you're 85 years old.


----------



## dangles (23 Mar 2011)

Honestly just go with the chocolate milk...it has everything you're going to need after a workout.

4% good fat
7% saturated fat
9% carbs
25g sugar - extremely important after an intense workout
7 g protein
vitamins etc.

And that is only for 250ml serving size of it....if you're like me you'd be drinking the 500ml and thus you'd have to double the above numbers.
If you're worried about getting in a few more carbs just eat some fruit as they have sugars too. Unless you want to be extremely big [which I can't see having practical use for any CF job as you need strength not pure size...then again this is an assumption] then you should be fine.

But yeah just try n get the milk down, it's never really an issue for me...you have like a 45 minute window after a workout to get those essential sugars/proteins/carbs in so you can wait for awhile after the workout and see if it helps. [and yeah I do believe in this window, if for no other reason then because you're body needs a whole lot of sugar to kickstart its system after a workout]


----------



## jwtg (23 Mar 2011)

I used to do protein/meal replacement shakes, not as a recovery drink but for general nutritional value while pursuing a heavy workout regimen.  I guess I did those ok without any stomache trouble, and they're about the same consistency as milk.  I get plenty of protein in my normal diet (lots of chicken breast, egg/egg white, milk) and I guess chocolate milk will get me the sugars and good card/protein ratio after a run through insanity.  
I'll give that a try- but of course, other options are welcome!!


----------



## MikeL (23 Mar 2011)

IMO protein shakes are great if you want to spend a lot of money and have expensive piss.  You can get all the nutrients you need from real food, plus it'll be natural stuff.

Post work out a slice of bread or half bagel with peanut butter and jam(or just PB) with chocolate milk and bananas is good to go.  And just keep up a good diet and you will get all the required nutrients(protein, carb, fat, etc). Also, drink plenty of water as well.


----------



## prima6 (23 Mar 2011)

-Skeletor- said:
			
		

> IMO protein shakes are great if you want to spend a lot of money and have expensive piss.  You can get all the nutrients you need from real food, plus it'll be natural stuff.



Since whey protein is extracted from milk, I don't see how it's not natural.  Also, unless you're taking an ultra expensive protein powder, it's pretty cost competitive with milk as far as protein goes.  For instance, a scoop of Kaizen Whey Isolate has 35g of protein, about the same amount as in 1 L of milk.  4L of milk around here is about $4.50, so $1.12/L per serving.  The Kaizen is $39.99+ tax for 2 kg ($43.99 w/tax) and a container has 49 servings, making it $0.90 per equivalent serving.  110g of chicken breast has about 35g of protein and would cost about $1.50 here ($13.49/kg).  7 XL eggs have about 35 g of protein and I pay around $3/dozen.  It would seem your piss is more expensive with most other quality protein sources.


----------



## dangles (23 Mar 2011)

prima6 said:
			
		

> Since whey protein is extracted from milk, I don't see how it's not natural.  Also, unless you're taking an ultra expensive protein powder, it's pretty cost competitive with milk as far as protein goes.  For instance, a scoop of Kaizen Whey Isolate has 35g of protein, about the same amount as in 1 L of milk.  4L of milk around here is about $4.50, so $1.12/L per serving.  The Kaizen is $39.99+ tax for 2 kg ($43.99 w/tax) and a container has 49 servings, making it $0.90 per equivalent serving.  110g of chicken breast has about 35g of protein and would cost about $1.50 here ($13.49/kg).  7 XL eggs have about 35 g of protein and I pay around $3/dozen.  It would seem your piss is more expensive with most other quality protein sources.



First of all [About how much protein the body can take in at one time]: 

"Whey protein for example will be absorbed and broken down into the amino-acids VERY quickly meaning that any more than around 20-25 grams will be passed through the system and urinated out (the body doesn't store protein well). However, if a gradually releasing protein such as egg or milk (whether in shake form or not) is consumed, anything up to 30 grams can be consumed as it takes longer for the body to consume meaning less is wasted. By taking a protein shake in water you can absorb protein at a faster rate than with milk."

Second of all: Your Kaizen Whey Isolate protein mix is purely protein...nothing else is even in it. Natural food has tons of healthy vitamins/carbs/sugars/proteins etc. So although it may be more "cost-effective" in terms of AMOUNT of protein [not quality], it still does nothing to offset the other nutritional aspects real food has.


----------



## MikeL (23 Mar 2011)

Like dangles said, depending on what you take some of it will be urinated out. 

Not all, but it seems like a lot of the protein powders and other supplements have some pretty big ingredient list and not all is going to be natural stuff. Also some are a lot more expensive than that Kaizen Protein mentioned above.  I used to use some of the protein powders, and I really saw no difference when I took that compared to not doing the powder -of course everyone's body reacts differently I'm not saying they don't work.  I just don't see any real bonus in paying for expensive powders compared to eating food, milk, etc and for me anyways it's cheaper and I actually know what is going into my body.  Plus, depending on where you are you won't always have access to supplements.


----------



## Container (23 Mar 2011)

For myself it assists in controlling calories. I eat whole foods and alot of them. But I supplement with protein because at 1.5 grams of protein a pound in order to not exceed my calorie requirements I need it.


----------



## prima6 (23 Mar 2011)

dangles said:
			
		

> First of all [About how much protein the body can take in at one time]:
> 
> "Whey protein for example will be absorbed and broken down into the amino-acids VERY quickly meaning that any more than around 20-25 grams will be passed through the system and urinated out (the body doesn't store protein well). However, if a gradually releasing protein such as egg or milk (whether in shake form or not) is consumed, anything up to 30 grams can be consumed as it takes longer for the body to consume meaning less is wasted. By taking a protein shake in water you can absorb protein at a faster rate than with milk."
> 
> Second of all: Your Kaizen Whey Isolate protein mix is purely protein...nothing else is even in it. Natural food has tons of healthy vitamins/carbs/sugars/proteins etc. So although it may be more "cost-effective" in terms of AMOUNT of protein [not quality], it still does nothing to offset the other nutritional aspects real food has.



I'm not sure what your point is with your first post.  35 g is the amount per scoop from the container and was simplest to do the math.  35 g/serving is pretty large, most protein powders have serving sizes in the 25g range which is why I use the smaller scoop from another protein powder instead of the very large one in the Kaizen.

I stated in my earlier post that I was posting purely about protein comparison (even though I've never seen a protein powder that was 100% protein).  Additionally I didn't suggest whey as the only source of protein, only that it's cost effective.  You claim it isn't "natural food".  It is a single food.  Any single food is insufficient for providing everything that your body requires.  Out of the 9 times I eat in a day, 1 meal has the non-"natural food" along with milk, 2 bananas and an apple.


----------



## prima6 (23 Mar 2011)

-Skeletor- said:
			
		

> Like dangles said, depending on what you take some of it will be urinated out.
> 
> Not all, but it seems like a lot of the protein powders and other supplements have some pretty big ingredient list and not all is going to be natural stuff. Also some are a lot more expensive than that Kaizen Protein mentioned above.  I used to use some of the protein powders, and I really saw no difference when I took that compared to not doing the powder -of course everyone's body reacts differently I'm not saying they don't work.  I just don't see any real bonus in paying for expensive powders compared to eating food, milk, etc and for me anyways it's cheaper and I actually know what is going into my body.  Plus, depending on where you are you won't always have access to supplements.



Some do have pretty big ingredient lists, no doubt.  The Kaizen I mentioned has 5 (cocoa, stevia, sucralose and soy lecithin are the others).  Of course most food at the supermarket has non natural ingredients.  

I agree that most supplement companies make insane claims about results.  The more realistic way to look at it is as a protein source that can be convenient.


----------



## dangles (23 Mar 2011)

prima6 said:
			
		

> I'm not sure what your point is with your first post.  35 g is the amount per scoop from the container and was simplest to do the math.  35 g/serving is pretty large, most protein powders have serving sizes in the 25g range which is why I use the smaller scoop from another protein powder instead of the very large one in the Kaizen.
> 
> I stated in my earlier post that I was posting purely about protein comparison (even though I've never seen a protein powder that was 100% protein).  Additionally I didn't suggest whey as the only source of protein, only that it's cost effective.  You claim it isn't "natural food".  It is a single food.  Any single food is insufficient for providing everything that your body requires.  Out of the 9 times I eat in a day, 1 meal has the non-"natural food" along with milk, 2 bananas and an apple.



Well I don't know how you missed the first point, but it is to show you that you are not receiving all 35g's of protein that it has listed on the label due to the aforementioned reasons. This negates your argument about it being more cost-effective since you will take in and retain more protein from real food. 

 The second part is also to show that whey is not as cost-effective as other food because other food have more stuff in them that is better for you instead of just protein...so instead  of having to buy your protein powder and use it with: milk/2 bananas and an apple you could just replace that all by only drinking chocolate milk. 

Cost:                         >            
protein powder                just chocolate milk *you may be missing some protein here but you can easily get it through way cheaper ways then the   powder                 
milk
2 bananas
apple

But hell do whatever you want because it's your body. I am not saying protein powder is bad, just negating your argument that it is more cost-effective.


----------



## Chilme (23 Mar 2011)

Any kind of milk is an excellent post workout meal/supplement.  Blend it up with some fresh fruit/yogurt and it even better.  Last November I was at the conference for the Canadian Society of Exercise Physiology (csep.ca) and there was a presenter their that had scientifically validated Chocolate milk as a post workout meal.  It is cheap and readily available.

Whey protein does come from milk, however, the supplement industry is highly unregulated and many supplements contain a lot of substances that aren't advertised on the label or symply disguised with a unique name.  I would caution people to find out what everything is on the label and understand what the effects are.


----------



## prima6 (23 Mar 2011)

dangles said:
			
		

> Well I don't know how you missed the first point, but it is to show you that you are not receiving all 35g's of protein that it has listed on the label due to the aforementioned reasons. This negates your argument about it being more cost-effective since you will take in and retain more protein from real food.
> 
> The second part is also to show that whey is not as cost-effective as other food because other food have more stuff in them that is better for you instead of just protein...so instead  of having to buy your protein powder and use it with: milk/2 bananas and an apple you could just replace that all by only drinking chocolate milk.
> 
> ...



Again, I was quoting a number off of a label.  I never made a claim of ingesting 35 g of protein in the first place.  It was illustrating cost.  Also, I didn't argue that it was more cost effective, my words were "pretty cost competitive".  I don't know how you missed that.  

Anyway, do you have an actual link to the study where they measured protein absorption (or more likely nitrogen retention) that you're taking your quote from?  Without evidence nothing's actually been shown.


----------



## dangles (23 Mar 2011)

prima6 said:
			
		

> Again, I was quoting a number off of a label.  I never made a claim of ingesting 35 g of protein in the first place.  It was illustrating cost.  Also, I didn't argue that it was more cost effective, my words were "pretty cost competitive".  I don't know how you missed that.
> 
> Anyway, do you have an actual link to the study where they measured protein absorption (or more likely nitrogen retention) that you're taking your quote from?  Without evidence nothing's actually been shown.



Here is where you argued that it was more cost-effective:



			
				prima6 said:
			
		

> Since whey protein is extracted from milk, I don't see how it's not natural.  Also, unless you're taking an ultra expensive protein powder, it's pretty cost competitive with milk as far as protein goes.  For instance, a scoop of Kaizen Whey Isolate has 35g of protein, about the same amount as in 1 L of milk.  4L of milk around here is about $4.50, so $1.12/L per serving.  The Kaizen is $39.99+ tax for 2 kg ($43.99 w/tax) and a container has 49 servings, making it $0.90 per equivalent serving.  110g of chicken breast has about 35g of protein and would cost about $1.50 here ($13.49/kg).  7 XL eggs have about 35 g of protein and I pay around $3/dozen. * It would seem your piss is more expensive with most other quality protein sources.*



I got that information from a website and I do not plan on searching for it again. Also, I hear similar stories through word of mouth from personal trainers and my friends in kinesiology. But, basically everyone has a different opinion on nutrition and especially working out, so it does not matter what they or a website says at this point. But, if you look at most websites and other sources of information they will give you a limit similar to that. Regardless, even if they say the body can absord higher amounts in one sitting, they do say that you need to train your body to get to that point, or else you are using your protein less efficiently. At 5'7 170 pounds I can tell you are not a big bodybuilder so you will probably want to look into consuming a gradual increase in protein per meal instead of consuming like 50 g at one time, because I doubt you have built yourself up to that point yet. Think of it like lifting weights...you don't start curling 50's, you work your way up to it...the same should be the case for the amount of food you eat/protein content.


----------



## jwtg (23 Mar 2011)

dangles said:
			
		

> ...I got that information from a website and I do not plan on searching for it again. Also, I hear similar stories through word of mouth from personal trainers and my friends in kinesiology.


These 'sources' are hardly enough to support anything...


> But, basically everyone has a different opinion on nutrition and especially working out, so it does not matter what they or a website says at this point.


So why are we even having this conversation?  What makes what we have to say matter any more than these websites or these people that constitute 'everyone'?  


> At 5'7 170 pounds I can tell you are not a big bodybuilder so you will probably want to look into consuming a gradual increase in protein per meal instead of consuming like 50 g at one time, because I doubt you have built yourself up to that point yet. Think of it like lifting weights...you don't start curling 50's, you work your way up to it...the same should be the case for the amount of food you eat/protein content.


My height/weight are hardly enough to tell you anything about me.  Honestly, out of curiosity, I'm wondering what exactly you're picturing right now?  A short, chubby kid?  You also have no information regarding my lifestyle and fitness habits, how often and how intensely I train, or what my current intake of protein is...
I really am not convinced you're in a position to be making determinations based on my current body.  You have no idea what my body type is.  Think of it like lifting weights...you don't just walk up to a machine someone else was using and start going at it...you examine it first, determine if the amount of weight set on the machine is appropriate for your ability...otherwise, you could get hurt.

EDIT: I should add, I think I've settled on chocolate milk for after a work-out.  My question, then, is answered...but I guess the banter is always welcome to continue...


----------



## dangles (23 Mar 2011)

jwtg said:
			
		

> These 'sources' are hardly enough to support anything...So why are we even having this conversation?  What makes what we have to say matter any more than these websites or these people that constitute 'everyone'?  My height/weight are hardly enough to tell you anything about me.  Honestly, out of curiosity, I'm wondering what exactly you're picturing right now?  A short, chubby kid?  You also have no information regarding my lifestyle and fitness habits, how often and how intensely I train, or what my current intake of protein is...
> I really am not convinced you're in a position to be making determinations based on my current body.  You have no idea what my body type is.  Think of it like lifting weights...you don't just walk up to a machine someone else was using and start going at it...you examine it first, determine if the amount of weight set on the machine is appropriate for your ability...otherwise, you could get hurt.
> 
> EDIT: I should add, I think I've settled on chocolate milk for after a work-out.  My question, then, is answered...but I guess the banter is always welcome to continue...



Yes, by saying you are 5"7, 170 pounds I can clearly determine you are not a big bodybuilder. I am not saying you're fat, skinny, normal, I am saying you're not a big bodybuilder. I also get this from the fact that you said you are 170 and still cutting fat. Maybe at 170 muscle you could be considered a big bodybuilder, but even that is a stretch. I was just reading the numbers and trying to give helpful advice, don't think I am being offensive.

The point I was making there is that everyone will have their own opinions, but each opinion generally fell in the scope of my original argument. As for the sources, at least they are educated in the subject. But I do submit that you do not know me and thus I could be lying, so my sources for all intents and purposes are not credible. 

Anyways, I am glad you have reasoned to try chocolate milk, and this thread should get back on topic or I bet it will be locked and we will be warned. If you have any other problems with what I said I suggest you PM me.


----------



## prima6 (24 Mar 2011)

dangles said:
			
		

> Here is where you argued that it was more cost-effective:
> 
> I got that information from a website and I do not plan on searching for it again. Also, I hear similar stories through word of mouth from personal trainers and my friends in kinesiology. But, basically everyone has a different opinion on nutrition and especially working out, so it does not matter what they or a website says at this point. But, if you look at most websites and other sources of information they will give you a limit similar to that. Regardless, even if they say the body can absord higher amounts in one sitting, they do say that you need to train your body to get to that point, or else you are using your protein less efficiently. At 5'7 170 pounds I can tell you are not a big bodybuilder so you will probably want to look into consuming a gradual increase in protein per meal instead of consuming like 50 g at one time, because I doubt you have built yourself up to that point yet. Think of it like lifting weights...you don't start curling 50's, you work your way up to it...the same should be the case for the amount of food you eat/protein content.



Really?  The validity of your claim is that you got it from a website and word of mouth from some students... credible references.  I was considering something more like this:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC25140/
http://www.uni.edu/dolgener/Advanced_Sport_Nutrition/protein_intake.pdf
http://www.cscca.org/document/proteinissue

I'm not advocating eating more than 20-25 g of protein in one sitting.  Most guys go overboard on the amount of protein they consume and the highest I've ever seen recommended for strength training athletes is about 1.2 - 1.5g/kg (it in a reference above as well), whereas I've seen diet plans going up to about 4g/kg.  My typical meals only include about 15-20 g of protein as I'm eating about 8-9 times a day.

Can you provide more information on training your body to absorb more protein?

To jwtg: chocolate milk's a good choice.  Worst case scenario is that it does make you sick, but at least you should figure that out on your first try.


----------



## dangles (24 Mar 2011)

prima6 said:
			
		

> Really?  The validity of your claim is that you got it from a website and word of mouth from some students... credible references.  I was considering something more like this:
> 
> http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC25140/
> http://www.uni.edu/dolgener/Advanced_Sport_Nutrition/protein_intake.pdf
> ...



I got the training your body to take in more protein directly from bodybuilding.com. And I already admitted my references were shady, and quite frankly as a student with a ridiculous amount of work right now I did not plan to do a mini research project on this, simply searched for what I looked for based on what my friends and trainers have told me, found it and said it.


----------

