Anabolic GoldInformation and discussion for people looking to put on lean weight. Please keep discussions relevant to gaining. Please read the FAQ and use the search function. Do not blatantly accuse people of steroids. You will be banned.
Calories in Matrix Anabolic Gold and Nutrition Facts
Information and discussion for people looking to put on lean weight. Please keep discussions relevant to gaining. Please read the FAQ and use the search function. Do not blatantly accuse people of steroids. You will be banned. You may politey ask, but do not outright accuse. Asking for medical advice. We are not a replacement for a doctor. If you have a special condition or need advice on an injury, consult your physician.
Achievements that will not lead to a constructive discussion, instead post in the weekly Success Sundays thread. Do not post titles that force people to open the thread to view the question. Temporary bans will be handed out. Please refer to the FAQ section covering shakes as well as searching previous threads via the Search Function for additional recipes.
What's the quality like on Matrix Anabolic Gold? The taste is so-so, but then again I got chocolate mint which was a mixed idea at best. The tub is starting to look empty and I'm looking to get some more protein. The supposed protein content. Matrix claim that there is about 43g of protein per serving. I'm not looking for a heavy gainer shake I prefer to get my calories from food. Well, my inner cynic alarm is going off. I've learned a shitload since I got the last tub and I'm starting to question whether the quality can really be as good as they say at that price.
The website has a CoA on it but it has Matrix letterhead which makes me suspicious to say the least. I've been googling for ages but nobody is talking about the anabolic gold; only the older, inferior anabolic line.
I'm really struggling to find any information. I've had a look at myprotein but it doesn't quite stack up as far as protein per calorie per pound goes, as it were. Off the cuff on the label information, they have to list the serving size. Check how big the serving is.
This is usually done as a cost saver. Then they use Soy protein isolate, together with some godawful fatty milk concentrates. Then, a trick on labels is to add BCAA's to "enrich protein quality", which allows them to boost the percentage of claimed whole proteins. Stabilisers Citric Acid, Malic Acid.
So I'm guessing out the gate that their target range was mid's, and bcaa's are added to get higher protein claim at no additional calories. They used cheap proteins to sell the blend in high volume; the BCAA's are just what make the label look good.
If you want to make your own shake of this kind, buy pounds of protein. Not OP, but I'm in a similar situation. What do you think about them in relation to each other? Both of them are standard WPI's, I'm almost positive they are from the same supplier. They are using different assay methods to verify their label claim and make it look "more potent".
The difference is likely a combustion assay dry protein count; whereas the other is a WET kejdal assay. Both test methods will tell you how much protein is in the powder, but one count adds water weight, and the other does not list water weight. This is one of those things in the industry, there aren't that many gigantic dairy companies. There are really only about really big ones from the united states. Any company that sells a Whey isolate "90", or is "microfiltrated" or "cold filtrated", is probably relying on one of 2 US suppliers.
So that same powder gets to manufacturers. They add their unique flavoring sold to them from flavoring companies. They add their marketing phrases, they make their label claim, and the rest is marketing and product branding. Most powders appear so similar in consistency, texture and flavor -- promoting brand loyalty has caused so much confusion for the average joe.
This is one of such instances. Looking at the difference between the powders, it looks like "ultimate nutrition" bought a higher grade of ISO powder from that same supplier and used a dry assay, whereas the other used a "wet assay" method and probably WPI Due to an NDA, I am not allowed to publicly state the supplier name; but if you PM me I can tell you who else sells the same powder at a cheaper price ;.
If I had to pick between the two, I would probably try out Ultimate nutrition, looks to have a better amino acid composition and slightly higher protein count even with moisture and dry assay factored in ; so either they're using the same type powders and exaggerating the label claim, they skimped a little bit on flavor, or they spiked it with some BCAA's.
Thanks for the advice. I was leaning towards the Ultimate Nutrition, so the information helps. It's kind of sneaky how some measurements include the water weight and some don't. Since the final product has the water included, including the water weight for the lower percentage is more "honest", right? According to the label it has as its ingredients: A lot of those ingredients are amino acids, so is that a smoking gun? They'll spike protein counts using BCAA's in this case, mostly glutamine.
So if you're looking for proteins from a whole food source; you don't want to see BCAA's in the ingredients list, and usually want fewer ingredients. This is a little misleading with label claims, because most whole proteins are balanced between about amino acids, whereas as seen in this case there are only 1 type of amino acid added -- making for an uneven distribution for the profile.
Some people dig the "holistic" health approach; and some people just want to get proteins in their body. I don't mind using a spiked product for a single shake per day; because I'm getting other nutrients from other food sources. Thanks, I had a feeling something was up but I don't have that experience in the field. Couldn't find them on there. Certainly, there are some brands on there that I haven't seen in the UK before.
I'll add this product to our long-term testing pipeline. This year, we will likely focus exclusively on US-based supplements, since our scientists still have so many products and categories to cover. We are still recording these requests and measuring which other countries we're hearing from the most.
Hope to have new data for you soon! This is why I love reddit. Post about a protein quality, expect a lot of broscience. Instead, an actual nutrient lab organisation get back to me. While Labdoor is an interesting site, I don't like it that they have "buy it now" links with their own referral codes to the sellers.
To me, that looks like it's marketing disguised as complex test results. I'd personally prefer the raw data. I believe you can buy a higher level of access to the data. Also, there is consumerlab. For paying dollars, you could get about 10 protein assay tests gone through a 3rd party lab. It also looks like that site stands to gain affiliate-sales through the amazon sellers by a code specific to the labdoor website.
I think that is a for-profit company pretending to be for the consumer, when they're really ripping off a little bit. Definitely understand the skepticism. Our goal is to keep as much key consumer-focused data outside of the paywall without making the site too complex for the average consumer. What specific data would you like to see published outside the paywall? Regarding the affiliate links, we've always been very clear about why we sell products.
A link to that page sits next to every "Buy it now" button on our site. FYI — Accurate protein testing is very expensive. The current industry standard is nitrogen-based protein assays, which don't account for protein spiking. The only solution is to use amino acid profiles.
LabDoor has completed amino acid profiles on 60 protein supplements, and will be releasing these results in September. After spending about 45 minutes on your site, I respect what you doing a lot more than my initial impression. I first thought you were doing simple, cheap testing and passing on oversimplified data for a high cost; but it now looks much more extensive than I previously thought. As it currently looks, protein per serving seems to be from a kejdal assay.
I'm seeing this from "Protein per serving". I only thought this because It did not tell me what test type was used. It might help to tell what kind of testing they would get on the "insiders view" amino acid profiling , what test types were used; or how the algorithms take that raw data to determine their product scores. This is not passing along any of the raw data which is behind the paywall; it's only telling more about what is on the other side. Again, I would not have jumped to this conclusion if I had seen which test types were conducted on the products.
Instead of seeing just "12 tests I will be passing on your site to my higher-ups.