chingyvang Posted May 25, 2011 Share Posted May 25, 2011 Being unemployed and with gas prices rising, I consider rotisserie chicken my main source of protein and will explain why below but I want your guy's opinion on it. I think it's great because it's cheap, $7 at my local supermarket. One chicken can last me a few days refrigerated so I wont have to keep running to the store. I eat all parts of the chicken but throw out the skin since im cutting belly fat and doing HIIT Training, but I'm worried about the butter or whatever it is that the store injects into the chicken. I consider it the best bang for the buck, most protein packed food source I can get for $7. But with $7, do you think I'll do better with 79 cent 5oz canned Tuna? I eat whole foods only, no protein powder or supplements. Is there a better Protein source out there for me? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RatioFitness Posted May 25, 2011 Share Posted May 25, 2011 You should weigh all the chicken you pick off and see how much protein you are actually getting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joshua Naterman Posted May 25, 2011 Share Posted May 25, 2011 I agree, just to know what you're getting. The cheapest animal protein ounce for ounce is a 10 lb bag of chicken leg quarters. At 59-69 cents per pound it's a really good deal. You're probably looking at 1/3 of that being bone maybe, but that's not bad at all. You still end up a little over 1 buck per pound of meat. You DO have to cook it, but just bake it at 350 degrees F in the oven, uncovered, for 1 hour. Then leave it in the warm oven (TURN OFF THE OVEN!!! but leave the chicken in there) for 30-60 additional minutes to make it just perfect. I put 3 layers of spice on mine: layer 1 is curry. Layer 2 is a light sprinkling of cajun seasoning and layer 3 is jerk seasoning. I just sprinkle those on, fairly heavy on the curry and fairly light with the cajun and between light and medium for the jerk. This makes an incredible and easy chicken dish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joshua Naterman Posted May 25, 2011 Share Posted May 25, 2011 Also, for the money whey protein and milk protein supplements are by far the best value per ounce of protein even on a raw scale, and when adjusted for biological value (what your body can actually DO with the stuff) there is no comparison. It's half the cost or less and all it is (basically) is freeze-dried milk without the lactose or pus. All the good stuff and pretty much none of the bad. Only people with casein allergies need to stay away from milk protein and just stick with whey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guillaume Ponce Posted May 25, 2011 Share Posted May 25, 2011 Should'nt whey be a supplement and not a replacement, which means you should take it in addition to real whole food, and not as a substitution? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joshua Naterman Posted May 25, 2011 Share Posted May 25, 2011 That depends. Technically yes, because you NEED the fat that comes along with meat. However, it doesn't take much meat to give you what you need. As far as trying to meet your protein requirements for muscle growth and all that jazz the whey is more effective AND cheaper.In my book, and everyone's going to have their own opinion on this one, whey is a very good replacement for around 50% of dietary protein. If you have a fantastic diet you could probably go more like 60-70%, but I would never suggest full replacement. You will pretty much always benefit from animal fat in your diet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Svend Posted May 25, 2011 Share Posted May 25, 2011 Slizz, just out of curiosity what sort of flavours do you use for your protein powder? Most protein powders have quite the synthetic sweet taste which is okay for just a PWO shake but sipping it all day I think would make me kind of sick. Also, should I go for isolates or are concentrates just fine? - the difference seems to be so little, at least if the concentrate is of good quality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Razz Posted May 25, 2011 Share Posted May 25, 2011 1) Go for concentrates, they giver a better quality product generally 2) For flavours I'd stay away from any artificial sweeteners if it's something you're gonna be drinking all day long. I guess this means it should be neutral taste if you're on a budget, as naturally sweetened stuff is usually more expensive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joshua Naterman Posted May 25, 2011 Share Posted May 25, 2011 I agree. I have found that the vitamin shoppe brand does great for me but I hear that Costco has an even better deal, 6 lbs for 26 bucks or something crazy like that! So my next purchase will probably be there. Anyways, I always get regular chocolate flavor. It seems to have the least sweetener of every flavor. If I had unflavored available to me at the same price I would get that instead.The reason for avoiding even splenda or aspartame is that artificial sweeteners still reduce insulin sensitivity, even though they are not sugar and have few to no calories. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chingyvang Posted May 25, 2011 Author Share Posted May 25, 2011 Thank you all for the advice. I will certainly look for the 10lbs of chicken leg quarters next time im grocery shopping. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Razz Posted May 26, 2011 Share Posted May 26, 2011 The reason for avoiding even splenda or aspartame is that artificial sweeteners still reduce insulin sensitivity, even though they are not sugar and have few to no calories.And they are bad for you according to the expert Dr. Mark Schauss carcinogenic and what not.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guillaume Ponce Posted May 26, 2011 Share Posted May 26, 2011 Where I live, in France, "cheap proteins" would be a synonym for "eggs", so that's what I would suggest to someone on a budget.Plus, it seems they contain all of the essential amino acids and they do have animal fats (if you don't throw out the yolks as do many bodybuilders, which I think is a pity).Are eggs expensive in the USA? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chingyvang Posted May 26, 2011 Author Share Posted May 26, 2011 Where I live, in France, "cheap proteins" would be a synonym for "eggs", so that's what I would suggest to someone on a budget.Plus, it seems they contain all of the essential amino acids and they do have animal fats (if you don't throw out the yolks as do many bodybuilders, which I think is a pity).Are eggs expensive in the USA?Eggs taste great, high protein and not that costly, about $3.50 a dozen over here in America. But the thing is I eat about 2-3 eggs per meal so that wouldnt last me long enough. Hold on, so you guys are saying I should stop drinking proccessed orange juice as my main source of Vitamin C? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joshua Naterman Posted May 26, 2011 Share Posted May 26, 2011 You will do better with raw oranges, aomething like 80% of the vitamin C in orange juice gets denatured during pasteurization. That's why some brands have to add vitamin C. Ask yourself this: If one orange is enough Vitamin C for the day and it takes like 3 to 5 oranges to make a glass of orange juice, why the heck do they have to put MORE vitamin C in the juice?!The vitamin C isn't the only thing getting destroyed by pasteurization. OJ is not pure evil, but you would be much better off with straight oranges. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Razz Posted May 27, 2011 Share Posted May 27, 2011 If you're on a budget I'd definately throw out the orange juice..that stuff is just junk food masked as healthy food. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Roseman Posted May 30, 2011 Share Posted May 30, 2011 Being unemployed and with gas prices rising, I consider rotisserie chicken my main source of protein and will explain why below but I want your guy's opinion on it. I think it's great because it's cheap, $7 at my local supermarket. One chicken can last me a few days refrigerated so I wont have to keep running to the store. I eat all parts of the chicken but throw out the skin since im cutting belly fat and doing HIIT Training, but I'm worried about the butter or whatever it is that the store injects into the chicken. I consider it the best bang for the buck, most protein packed food source I can get for $7. But with $7, do you think I'll do better with 79 cent 5oz canned Tuna? I eat whole foods only, no protein powder or supplements. Is there a better Protein source out there for me?Also, a whole turkey can sometimes be found for like .30 a pound on special. It's not hard to cook - it may be hard to cook well - but mostly it's just (time * the weight). Plus you'll have some big honking breasts to chow down on for a long time.I agree that milk/whey protein is a good buy and makes sense to consider. Generally I do prefer chewableprotein, and try to max that out, before filling the gap from other sources. In a pinch though a powder could act as a mealreplacement for sure. It's hard to find unsweetened unless you get a custom blend from a source like trueprotein.com, or wheydepot.com. But the studies that I'm aware of that show ill effects (beyond gas and headaches) from artificial sweetners are when given in large quantities relative to bodyweight, so I personally don't worry about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Roseman Posted May 30, 2011 Share Posted May 30, 2011 The reason for avoiding even splenda or aspartame is that artificial sweeteners still reduce insulin sensitivity, even though they are not sugar and have few to no calories.And they are bad for you according to the expert Dr. Mark Schauss carcinogenic and what not..Splenda has a high GI (80) from the maltodextrin but a low glycemic load having a teaspoon here or there. Sucralose itself is notthe culprit.The "pure" sugar alcohols vary in terms of GI. I recently purchased a bag of xylitol which is ostensibly natural with a GI of 7.So even having an ounce or so in a desert will have negligible effect on blood sugar. Others have more of an effect, suchas malitol. Again the amount eaten is a factor to consider.Stevia has a zero GI. Polquin does not think it has an impact on insulin according to what I've read.No studies to the contrary that I've seen.Generally all non-sucrose sweetners are safe in terms of cancer. When it does occur it's caused by eating theequivilent of pounds per day over the course of a year or some absurdity like that. That's not to say there is zero risk,but chances are 1000's of times greater dying in a car or plane accident, being stuck by lightning or cracking your neck whileupside-down on the rings All are acceptable risks that we learn to live with... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Razz Posted May 30, 2011 Share Posted May 30, 2011 Yes Futureisnow, I agree to a point. The thing is though this stuff all adds up with whatever other toxins we're getting from the environment. Because of that I'd rather minimize any exposure to anything carcinogenic that I can. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Roseman Posted May 30, 2011 Share Posted May 30, 2011 Yes Futureisnow, I agree to a point. The thing is though this stuff all adds up with whatever other toxins we're getting from the environment. Because of that I'd rather minimize any exposure to anything carcinogenic that I can.I'm just in a weight loss phase now so looking to substitute. Normally I would choose natural sugars, an still prefer natual withStevia and Xylitol. I'm a bit disappointed with Stevia though and may return it. Spenda is as sweet andhas less aftertaste to me. Health is #1 though for sure.FIN Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joshua Naterman Posted June 2, 2011 Share Posted June 2, 2011 It's not just about glycemic index or load, it's also about the impact on insulin sensitivity that all sweet-tasting substances seem to have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Roseman Posted June 4, 2011 Share Posted June 4, 2011 It's not just about glycemic index or load, it's also about the impact on insulin sensitivity that all sweet-tasting substances seem to have.My insulin feels fine Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joshua Naterman Posted June 4, 2011 Share Posted June 4, 2011 It's not just about glycemic index or load, it's also about the impact on insulin sensitivity that all sweet-tasting substances seem to have.My insulin feels fine This wasn't a question or statement about your insulin. It was a statement about why sweeteners of all kinds are detrimental to health, particularly in people who are already insulin resistance. I have no idea why you would say something like that, it's like you are intentionally trying to be annoying. I don't know if that's the message you meant to send, but that's what you sent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joshua Naterman Posted June 5, 2011 Share Posted June 5, 2011 There is no study showing that a kick in the balls hurts either.We should seriously consider remedying this situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Roseman Posted June 5, 2011 Share Posted June 5, 2011 It's not just about glycemic index or load, it's also about the impact on insulin sensitivity that all sweet-tasting substances seem to have.My insulin feels fine This wasn't a question or statement about your insulin. It was a statement about why sweeteners of all kinds are detrimental to health, particularly in people who are already insulin resistance. I have no idea why you would say something like that, it's like you are intentionally trying to be annoying. I don't know if that's the message you meant to send, but that's what you sent.I just meant it as a play on the "sensitivity" term. No offense intended :oops: But maybe I was annoyed, because there are always things that can be better in health and fitness.. It never is 100% and there are small compromises that people make, and perhaps even should make, in the interest of overall satisfaction and shouldn't have to feel bad about making them.In regards to insulin and artifical sweetners, there is no chemical reason that I am aware of that would would cause any artifical sweetner to have an input on insulin, as it does not raise glucose. And if it does, raise insulin by a minisule amount, and If this is a concern to people who have I suppose have an extreme senstivity to insulin, if one can actually determine this through tests, or whatever, then obviously they shouldn't use them. The question I woulld have in regards to IF is, does it break the fast? In regards to LG, Martin says up to 50 cals of food will have a miniscule impact on insulin, and is not a problem. Thus far I have only had a splash of milk in my morning tea and/or coffee with some artifical sweetner. Because given the 50 cal exception, I am now leaning towards using a spoon of sugar, which is only like 15 cals. Although I've come to like xyitol in mint tea before bed, since it's anti-cavity so don't have to get up to brush my teeth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joshua Naterman Posted June 5, 2011 Share Posted June 5, 2011 Lol, yes xylitol rules! I don' t know if there is any particular caloric marker that determines breaking the fast, there is most likely a sliding scale. We aren't made out of on/off switches, you know? It's more like a dial.As for the sweeteners, that shocked the researchers too! There is a direct link to hormone production and taste + smell. If you think about it, you get hungry just from smelling food which means ghrelin is being produced despite you never having touched the food. If you see a picture of a hot nekkid woman your body will start kicking out testosterone and pheromones even though you can not touch her or smell her. Apparently if your sweet receptors on the taste buds get triggered there is a hormonal response as well. Crazy, right? That is what recent research has uncovered. There is more to us than we think, and if we just step back and think about these other responses that require no direct contact with anything that should stimulate us then we should be able to accept this much more easily.You don't even need a direct stimulus, I mean who here has never gotten hungry or started salivating when someone starts talking about one of your favorite meals? It happens pretty quickly. It's happening to me right now and I'm not even directly thinking of any food! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts