Recommend me a recovery drink.

Trev The Rev

Charlie Potatoes wrote:

thegreatdivide wrote:

http://www.myprotein.com/uk/products/im ... ey_protein

I like those prices

Simon Masterson wrote:

Do we have to discuss that documentary again?

This is always a subject which is going to divide opinion


The great thing is that there is plenty of information available for us each to make an informed decision.

The problem with 'information' is it depends on who paid for it.

Trev The Rev

TakeTurns wrote:

I use both High5 recovery drinks and milk + banana. I don't know about yourself, but I go for a ride in the evenings most of the time and don't eat afterwards. Therefore, some form of recovery fluid is imperative.

I opt for the recovery drink after a hard ride, in order to get that many carbs/protein into me through a meal would be too much for my stomach to handle. It's also convenient. Besides, £25 for 1-2 months is hardly much.

If I've gone for a more subtle ride I'll have a milk + banana smoothie. It works well as I feel replenished immediately.

You should eat afterwards.

moscowflyer

A FGS or a Frijj strawberry milkshake (60p in Tesco at the moment) is my treat of choice after a long ride.

gthyer

DavidJB wrote:

Chocolate Nesquik with a little bit of protein powder from myprotien.

Nesquik has the perfect 4:1 carb to protein ratio for recovery. Ignore all over priced 'recovery drinks'

Another one for Chocolate Nesquik. A lovely big one. If it's good enough for Jon Tiernon Locke (apparently), it's good enough for me.

squibnocket

I've got a juicer, 6 apples 2 bananas 1tbsp peanut butter.

Juice the apples then add all the ingredients in a blender, I don't drink milk any more infact I've been having a juice in the morning a juice for lunch (today's is 3 carrots, 3 large tomatoes, 1 orange and 1 red chili) and then a meal at night I've got down to my target weight not lossed any performance on the bike actually seen an improvement. I did the Colomba Chemo Classic on Sat had the banana juice for breakfast and a similar one when i'd done a meal at 7pm and didn't feel hungry.

t.m.h.n.e.t

iPete wrote:

Do enlighten us with your evidence

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-18863293

Milk gets a great mention. Was training on average 12-14 hours a week for most of this year, the difference between supplements and good old milk wasn't noticeable.

No matter how many times this fucking stupid program or link is quoted or referred to. It is still worthy of a massive facepalm.

But I don't currently have any facepalm pics.

Trev The Rev

T.M.H.N.E.T wrote:

iPete wrote:

Do enlighten us with your evidence

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-18863293

Milk gets a great mention. Was training on average 12-14 hours a week for most of this year, the difference between supplements and good old milk wasn't noticeable.

No matter how many times this ******* stupid program or link is quoted or referred to. It is still worthy of a massive facepalm.

But I don't currently have any facepalm pics.

Is it Dr Carl Henegan, or the BBC program you feel needs the face palm? Dr Carl Henegan is well respected. At least he is not in the pay of the likes of Gatorade.

simon_masterson

The program preaches that plebs who use the treadmill a couple of times a week for half an hour don't need to drink Lucozade... That's perfectly true, but hardly relevant to what we discuss here. The fact is that people who participate in high-intensity endurance athletics need to care about their intake of carbs and protein, in that order.

I don't see what's to argue about. It just so happens that I personally use bulk ingredients - mainly for economic reasons - but I could just as easily decide to use mixed powders for my energy and recovery (SiS/High5/Powerbar/etc), basing my choice on what's in them. Does that make me a sheep; yet another who dutifully uses sports products because he thinks it will make him faster, or at the very least like a 'serious athlete'? No, it does not. I use what I use because it works...

If one is to be sceptical of anything, it's the claims like 'additive x increases muscle performance' or 'this drink will make you 20% faster on race day', etc etc etc, but I was not under the impression that we were discussing that subject here...

Trev The Rev

I think people should read the research rather than base their views on the BBC program or what people say about the program.

What the research found
As part of the BMJ’s analysis of the evidence underpinning sports performance products, it asked manufacturers to supply details of the studies. Only one manufacturer, GlaxoSmithKline provided a comprehensive bibliography of the trials used to underpin its product claims for Lucozade—a carbohydrate containing sports drink.45 Other manufacturers of leading sports drinks did not and in the absence of systematic reviews we surmise that the methodological issues raised apply to all other sports drinks.
Carl Heneghan, Rafael Perera, David Nunan, Kamal Mahtani, and Peter Gill set out to appraise the evidence and found a series of problems with the studies (see online for full article).9
Small sample sizes limit the applicability of results—Only one of the 106 studies —in 257 marathon runners—exceeded the acceptable target for a small study of 100 participants per group. The next largest had 52 participants and the median sample size was nine. Thus the results cannot be generalised beyond people with the study group characteristics
Poor quality surrogate outcomes undermine the validity—Many studies used time to exhaustion or other outcomes that are not directly relevant to performance in real life events
Poorly designed research offers little to instil confidence in product claims—Most studies (76%) were low in quality because of a lack of allocation concealment and blinding, and often the findings contrasted with each other. The studies often had substantial problems because of use of different protocols, temperatures, work intensities, and outcomes
Data dredging leads to spurious statistical results—Studies often failed to define outcome measures before the study, leaving open the possibility of numerous analyses and increasing the risk of finding a positive result by chance.
Biological outcomes do not necessarily correlate with improved performance—Reductions in use of muscle glycogen, for example, did not correlate with improved athletic performance. Physiological outcomes such as maximal oxygen consumption have also been shown to be poor predictors of performance, even among elite athletes
Inappropriate use of relative measures inflates the outcome and can easily mislead—One study inflated the relative effect of carbohydrate drinks from 3% to 33% by excluding from the analysis the 75 minutes of exercise both groups undertook before an exhaustion test
Studies that lack blinding are likely to be false—Studies that used plain water as the control found positive effects whereas those that used taste matched placebos didn’t
Manipulation of nutrition in the run-in phase significantly affects subsequent outcomes—Many studies seemingly starve participants the night before and on the morning of the research study
Changes in environmental factors lead to wide variation in outcomes—Although dilute carbohydrate drinks may have some benefit in heat, studies found no effect in cold environments. No plausible reason given for benefits
There was no substantial evidence to suggest that liquid is any better than solid carbohydrate intake and there were no studies in children. Given the high sugar content and the propensity to dental erosions children should be discouraged from using sports drinks. Through our analysis of the current sports performance research, we have come to one conclusion: people should develop their own strategies for carbohydrate intake largely by trial and error.

Another problem with the research is transparency. Even though a large proportion of the studies have been conducted by scientists with financial ties to Gatorade (PepsiCo), GSK, and Coca-Cola, the authors’ individual conflicts of interest are either not published or not declared. Conflicts of interest also exist within the key journals in sports medicine—GSSI funded scientists pepper their editorial boards and editorships.
Around half of the studies supplied by GSK appeared in four journals—the Journal of Applied Physiology (20), Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise (24),International Journal of Sport Nutrition and Exercise Metabolism (11) and the Journal of Sports Science (9). Several of these journals belong to organisations that have long relationships with Gatorade (box).

Most of the scientists identified as being on the GSSI board have prominent roles in journals. Even its global senior director, Asker Jeukendrup, professor of exercise metabolism at Birmingham University, is an editor of the European Journal of Sport Science—the official journal of the European College of Sport Science. His biography states that “he has been a member of the advisory editorial board of theJournal of Sports Sciences, and served on the editorial board of the International Journal of Sports Medicine and Medicine and Science in Sport and Exercise. To date, Asker has served as a reviewer for 35 different scientific journals.”53Jeukendrup is one of the main authors of a series of research papers given to theBMJ by GSK to demonstrate the effectiveness of its sports drinks.9

http://www.bmj.com/content/345/bmj.e4797?

http://www.bmj.com/content/345/bmj.e4737#ref-9

http://www.bmj.com/content/345/bmj.e4797

http://www.bmj.com/content/345/bmj.e4868

http://www.bmj.com/content/345/bmj.e4737#ref-9

http://www.bmj.com/content/345/bmj.e4797?

simon_masterson

Who is trying to argue that the sports drinks that they use increase their performance? The body needs carbohydrates and protein in order to 'perform' at all, and even that isn't the primary topic of this thread.

thegreatdivide

Groundhog Day

Wrath Rob

Back to recovery drinks. I was at a training seminar recently and the nutritionist who spoke was the nutritionist for Cervelo Test Team in 2008-9 and he covered recovery nutrition. The aim of a recovery drink or food is to get protein and carbs into your body to start the repair and replenishment process ASAP. The first 30 mins after exercise is the best to target and has the biggest impact. One thing that he highlighted was that protein from milk, which is 80% casein, is very slowly absorbed by the body, typically taking 6-8 hours. Whey protein, the other 20% of milk protein, is very quickly absorbed by the body, taking ~2.5 hours with the first traces seen as quickly as 15 mins. There's some more detail here. Personally, I was using a whey protein shake but making it with milk, thereby slowing down the absorption and the benefits in terms of recovery.

To eat for recovery, you should therefore aim to take on board easy to digest food within (ideally) 15 mins of completing your exercise. Pro teams, according to the nutritionist, therefore do 3 things. 1 - whey based protein shake immediately after the race. Then something with lots of quickly digested carbs, in their case they used fruit salad as there are other benefits of eating fruit too. Finally, some pasta or rice based simple dish to get carbs into the system to start the recovery ahead of a shower, massage and dinner.

I've taken this on and now have a recovery drink made of whey protein, water, a ripe banana and some honey to sweeten it which I take as soon as I get home or off the trainer. Simple, quick and easy to digest. I've been trying it for a week and so far so good, subjectively my legs don't feel so bad the next day after a session, particularly 2 back to back. I'll be sticking with it.

RandG

Great post above ^^^ but now has me even more confused :?


I'm at pains to pat £15 for something that I can get similar for £2 :roll:

Wrath Rob

But that's the point, you can't get whey protein for £15, the stuff you get for 80p comes with lots of casein for free. You only need ~20-40g of protein for recovery, so a 1kg tub will get you around 33 servings (assuming 30g scoop). If the tub costs you £15 then that's 50p a time, close to the price of a pint of milk. Alternatively there are other drinks that include carbs and other additives such as creatin and glucosamine to further boost recovery. Something like this is £27 for 2.2kg, though its close to a 1:1 ratio of protein to carbs where as I'd prefer a 2:1 ratio so that you've got ~70g carbs for ~30g protein.

Yes its a bigger up front investment but actually it works out cheaper and better for recovery than a milk based drink.

RandG

Wrath Rob wrote:

But that's the point, you can't get whey protein for £15, the stuff you get for 80p comes with lots of casein for free. You only need ~20-40g of protein for recovery, so a 1kg tub will get you around 33 servings (assuming 30g scoop). If the tub costs you £15 then that's 50p a time, close to the price of a pint of milk.

Call me stoopid but I'm missing your point altogether there :?


What are you suggesting, the £15 tub or the £2 tub ?

sungod

high5 choc, tastes lovely, it's only a bit more expensive than the cheapest tesco milk, fast digestion, and on a personal note milk makes me feel sick, high5 doesn't

the formatting didn't survive, but i'm sure you can figure it out, units are cc, g, or pence as appropriate...

product, serving, price p, carbs, protein, fat, price per g carbs, pro, con
high5+water 66g+400cc 92 39 18 1 2.36 tastes lovely slightly higher price
whole milk 400cc 34.4 18.8 13.6 16 1.83 slightly lower price slow digestibility, fat

high5 price based on: what I pay for 1.6kg tub, chocolate of course
milk price based on: tesco 2 pint farmer screwing price
nutrition info: high5 label, the daily council

Grill

Just had my High5 recovery shake after a 50+ miler. I now feel strong enough to hit my back-to-back Street Dance and Yoga classes. Placebo or not, it works for me.

I7 Extreme

Smoothie - add fruit in blender - blend - drink - recieve all the recovery vitimans and anti-toxins

simon_masterson

Wrath Rob wrote:

Back to recovery drinks. I was at a training seminar recently and the nutritionist who spoke was the nutritionist for Cervelo Test Team in 2008-9 and he covered recovery nutrition. The aim of a recovery drink or food is to get protein and carbs into your body to start the repair and replenishment process ASAP. The first 30 mins after exercise is the best to target and has the biggest impact. One thing that he highlighted was that protein from milk, which is 80% casein, is very slowly absorbed by the body, typically taking 6-8 hours. Whey protein, the other 20% of milk protein, is very quickly absorbed by the body, taking ~2.5 hours with the first traces seen as quickly as 15 mins. There's some more detail here. Personally, I was using a whey protein shake but making it with milk, thereby slowing down the absorption and the benefits in terms of recovery.

To eat for recovery, you should therefore aim to take on board easy to digest food within (ideally) 15 mins of completing your exercise. Pro teams, according to the nutritionist, therefore do 3 things. 1 - whey based protein shake immediately after the race. Then something with lots of quickly digested carbs, in their case they used fruit salad as there are other benefits of eating fruit too. Finally, some pasta or rice based simple dish to get carbs into the system to start the recovery ahead of a shower, massage and dinner.

I've taken this on and now have a recovery drink made of whey protein, water, a ripe banana and some honey to sweeten it which I take as soon as I get home or off the trainer. Simple, quick and easy to digest. I've been trying it for a week and so far so good, subjectively my legs don't feel so bad the next day after a session, particularly 2 back to back. I'll be sticking with it.

Perfect, thanks Rob. Interesting point about the milk and the fruit; I'll have to try that.

iPete

Trev The Rev wrote:

T.M.H.N.E.T wrote:

iPete wrote:

Do enlighten us with your evidence

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-18863293

Milk gets a great mention. Was training on average 12-14 hours a week for most of this year, the difference between supplements and good old milk wasn't noticeable.

No matter how many times this ******* stupid program or link is quoted or referred to. It is still worthy of a massive facepalm.

But I don't currently have any facepalm pics.

Is it Dr Carl Henegan, or the BBC program you feel needs the face palm? Dr Carl Henegan is well respected. At least he is not in the pay of the likes of Gatorade.

This. No offence to the OP but I thnk milk and fruit is perfectly good advice. If he said I'm doing back to back sessions, 10+ hour weeks it might differ but face it, for the majority recovery and sports drinks are overpriced but they are convenient!

This is road beginners, a good diet is much better IMO than telling someone to eat x scoops of x supplement.

t.m.h.n.e.t

iPete wrote:

Trev The Rev wrote:

T.M.H.N.E.T wrote:

iPete wrote:

Do enlighten us with your evidence

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-18863293

Milk gets a great mention. Was training on average 12-14 hours a week for most of this year, the difference between supplements and good old milk wasn't noticeable.

No matter how many times this ******* stupid program or link is quoted or referred to. It is still worthy of a massive facepalm.

But I don't currently have any facepalm pics.

Is it Dr Carl Henegan, or the BBC program you feel needs the face palm? Dr Carl Henegan is well respected. At least he is not in the pay of the likes of Gatorade.

This. No offence to the OP but I thnk milk and fruit is perfectly good advice. If he said I'm doing back to back sessions, 10+ hour weeks it might differ but face it, for the majority recovery and sports drinks are overpriced but they are convenient!

This is road beginners, a good diet is much better IMO than telling someone to eat x scoops of x supplement.

The link and sunsequent program had nothing to do with endurance sport. Its not too difficult to figure out,yet its thrown around everytime the word "supplement" is used.

But you knew that pete.

RandG

Tell ye, you guys dont half know how to confuse someone with a simpke question. If im being honest i still dont know what to take.....milk with high5, water with high5, milk with nesquik, just a bloody banana ffs....

Trev The Rev

Whey is a waste product produced during the manufacture of cheese.

It used to be thrown away in the garbage. Then it was used as a cheap cattle feed.

Now it is heavily processed using chemicals then sold in pretty packaging and advertised quoting very limited scientific research and sold to the gullible. Take the advertising claims with a large pinch of electrolyte.

It is better in the long run to get ones protein from a wide variety of high quality sources such as eggs, shellfish, crustaceans, fish, meat, nuts etc etc.

Good quality whey protein free from chemical contamination and additives should only be used occasionally and in specific circumstances. It should not be your major source of protein or ever make up a substantial percentage of your total protein intake.

iPete

RandG wrote:

Tell ye, you guys dont half know how to confuse someone with a simpke question. If im being honest i still dont know what to take.....milk with high5, water with high5, milk with nesquik, just a bloody banana ffs....

Try them all, see what works best for you... but make sure you have an ice bath after each ride and get those compression socks on

simon_masterson

RandG wrote:

Tell ye, you guys dont half know how to confuse someone with a simpke question. If im being honest i still dont know what to take.....milk with high5, water with high5, milk with nesquik, just a bloody banana ffs....

Unfortunately denial is a cruel mistress, and people love to find creative excuses to not have to change their lives or give credence to something that somebody else uses to improve theirs. Read Wrath Rob's post and mix up something based on that.

Meanwhile, we'll carry on heading down the mindless 'supplements' tangent that has nothing to do with this thread.

simon_masterson

Trev The Rev wrote:

Whey is a waste product produced during the manufacture of cheese.

It used to be thrown away in the garbage. Then it was used as a cheap cattle feed.

Now it is heavily processed using chemicals then sold in pretty packaging and advertised quoting very limited scientific research and sold to the gullible. Take the advertising claims with a large pinch of electrolyte.

It is better in the long run to get ones protein from a wide variety of high quality sources such as eggs, shellfish, crustaceans, fish, meat, nuts etc etc.

Good quality whey protein free from chemical contamination and additives should only be used occasionally and in specific circumstances. It should not be your major source of protein or ever make up a substantial percentage of your total protein intake.

A) Who said that whey was to be the primary - or a major - source of one's protein? The premise of recovery nutrition is that the body is more receptive immediately after exercise. Even if you can (which many cannot) manage to eat a meal straight after intense exercise, said meal has to be there immediately available for you. A recovery drink is very easy to prepare, and uses ingredients that are very easy for the body to absorb.

The above aside, Wrath Rob mentions the benefits of whey protein for this purpose, and he quotes a credible source. Your word against his, and it isn't a difficult choice!

C) You're still leaning heavily on the 'advertising claims' that no-one is talking about.

D) You've also told us in another thread that you've noticed no change in performance from clipless pedals to flats, which only leads me to assume until informed otherwise that you aren't working hard enough to need any sort of specialised nutrition for your own cycling!

Trev The Rev

A. I did not say anyone did but I am pointing out that it should not become a major percentage of your protein intake.
B. Lets not get into personalities. What exactly have I said that is wrong?
C. The sellers of recovery drinks lean heavily on advertising claims.
D. I'm also quoting Dr Andrew Coggan's research - you should read it. I did use clipless pedals for match sprint and kilo on the track though.

http://www.academia.edu/238318/Coyle_EF ... _2622-2630


As for this

http://www.bodybuilding.com/fun/casein_ ... ID=3640728

This is not information it is advertising.

simon_masterson

You are telling us to accept your opinion with no basis. Wrath Rob on the other hand quotes a credible source. I therefore have good reason to give credence to his opinion but no reason to give any to yours. I'm perfectly willing to accept your points if you can prove them...

And whilst I accept that sports products manufacturers do [like all businesses] rely on advertising, I say that this is not the concern here because no-one is citing their claims. All that's being proposed is that certain things are needed after intensive exercise, and the suggestions are products that contain them.

I've also perused that research, and whilst interesting it tells us only that clipless pedals and clips and straps cannot increase performance; the reason to use them is that they facilitate pedalling rhythm and high cadence.

Trev The Rev

Simon Masterson wrote:

You are telling us to accept your opinion with no basis. Wrath Rob on the other hand quotes a credible source. I therefore have good reason to give credence to his opinion but no reason to give any to yours. I'm perfectly willing to accept your points if you can prove them...

And whilst I accept that sports products manufacturers do [like all businesses] rely on advertising, I say that this is not the concern here because no-one is citing their claims. All that's being proposed is that certain things are needed after intensive exercise, and the suggestions are products that contain them.

I've also perused that research, and whilst interesting it tells us only that clipless pedals and clips and straps cannot increase performance; the reason to use them is that they facilitate pedalling rhythm and high cadence.

I am not telling people to accept my opinion I am merely expressing my opinion. I do not think I need to prove that one can get all ones protein needs from a wide variety of good quality protein rich foods.

It is for those selling and promoting whey protein to 'prove' their products improve recovery and back up their claims. I don't have to prove anything - I'm not selling anything only stating my opinion.

Re the pedals, the whole idea is to increase performance. If you wish to argue with Dr Andrew Coggan please do so over on timetrialling forum. He has an annoying habit of being proved right.

simon_masterson

Trev The Rev wrote:

Re the pedals, the whole idea is to increase performance. If you wish to argue with Dr Andrew Coggan please do so over on timetrialling forum. He has an annoying habit of being proved right.

I'm sure that some people are under the mistaken impression that they should use clipless because it will make them faster, but as I said, that isn't the point; the reason to restrain your feet is to improve rhythm and facilitate higher cadence.