I recently came across a suspicious (but interesting) site at http://www.plasmanutrition.com/. I don’t see any names of experts attached to the project and the studies they quote from seem to be irrelevant or at least not directly supporting their claims.
I have been consuming a lot of whey protein lately and I know that quality does range quite a bit. That said, the claims being made on this site seem highly suspect to me. Here is what they’re claiming:
We have over 5 patents pending on our method of using plasma to make Whey Protein better. Only our process can break down protein peptides in a manner similar to hydrolysis while being as cost effective as an isolate or concentrate.
They later claim:
Traditionally there have been three types of protein powder: Isolate, Concentrate and Hydrolysis. With 5 patents pending, Aurora Whey Protein™ has created a fourth state of protein powder. Using plasma, we are able to efficiently break down the protein peptides in a manner similar to hydrolysis while being as cost effective as an isolate or concentrate. Our process also gives us greater control over the protein powder which allows us to alter characteristics such as surface tension/surface energy, surface wettability to change the degree of hydrophilicity, and increase the protein powder’s adhesion characteristics. We are further able to change the surface morphology of the protein powder by causing micro lacerations that increase surface area.
Is there any possible these claims are not complete and utter BS?
You can certainly break a peptide bond with strong ionization. In mass spectrometry it’s used as a basis for blasting apart proteins into fragments that can be identified by having a unique mass. I don’t know much more about the details of how that works – from my perspective, everything after the protein sample prep can nearly be summed up by “… and then a magician tells you what’s in your sample”.
I have no idea at all whether ionization or plasma is a useful industrial process for breaking down protein, nor if it makes any substantial difference to the final product.
Just registered to answer the thread since I actually invented this process and the patents are in my name. I wanted to clarify a few things. Happy to answer any questions you guys have (and cite with sources if I can so its not “bogus”)!
This is atmospheric plasma.
Semi correct on half. Its a proprietary process we developed and its closer to atmospheric plasma. However, not bogus at all. Not only will plasma break down a protein peptide but it will actually destroy it if left exposed to the plasma long enough. Here is an article that appeared in the Journal of Applied Physics that can explain more.
I *wish. * The real thing is so, um, industrial. Though the difficulty in making whey protein isolate is new to me. I thought it was just dried out whey.
stephenm01: Nice job with the media monitoring, you’re on the ball!
I wish I was in a position to ask you intelligent questions myself but unfortunately this is so far beyond the scope of my expertise that I will defer to some smarter dopers to try and clarify the work you’re doing.
I do maintain that there appears to be no significant insights provided by the studies cited on your website that support your claims. Can you explain why you chose those studies to cite?
Also, can you share a bit about your academic or professional background?
If you turn out to be legit, then not only do I echo andrea_green’s compliments to you personally, but I also want to compliment the SDMB as a whole. I’ve seen some quick responses, but catching the eye of the inventor himself is just incredible.
What do you mean the studies don’t provide significant insights? Here are some of the ones we source:
Baylor University - shows an identical formulation has a significant increase in lean muscle gain over 100% whey.
Netherlands study - shows 2.6% higher fat loss vs. whey
Brigham Hospital - shows significant increase in strength over whey
Department of Physics & Materials Science, City University of Hong Kong - admittedly more of a meta study so we didn’t have to link to 8 others but shows the increase in cellular adhesion biocompatability, surface morphology, ect.
If you can find a claim online that we didnt back up with an independent 3rd party study, please let me know and ill put one on the site.
My background is more in mechanical engineering (where I have used plasma in the past) so I had to partner with a medical researcher and nutritional supplement manufacturer to bring it to market.
Let me check with my attorney, this is so different from anything done before that we are filing tons of patents. Want to make sure I only disclose what he tells me so as not to jeopardize our chances of getting them.
Thank you! We are in a hard spot as the nutritional supplement industry is known to peddle “snake oil”. Thats why we tried to link to studies on our website and back all our claims up with science (our biggest complaint from customers is that we are too scientific). We are going to have a very uphill battle with marketing!
Also, traveling today so may not be able to answer any questions till tomorrow night but I will respond to everyone in this thread!
Just coincidental as it was published today. Do you have a link to the original white paper or anything directly from the University of Granada?
Its difficult, while it is a badge of honor for the minority who understand our value proposition, we also don’t want to alienate the vast majority who don’t necessarily fully understand terms like wettability or biocompatibility.
As I understand it, there is a short period immediately after strenuos exercise when you can seriously help muscle recovery. Like a 20 minute window. In that period I take whey isolate mixed with full milk and it does seem to dramatically speed the time until I can next exercise.
So whey seems to have particular qualities; convenience, immediacy, effectivensss.
Honestly the way to deal with that is to use plain English.
What you are claiming with “wettability” (and “hydrophilicity” and “adhesion characteristics”) is simply that the process you use makes it easy to mix. Why not just say that?
Biocompatibility? Not an issue that needs fixing with any whey product. Whey is biocompatible.
The sales pitch with whey, backed up with some actual research, is that because whey is both relatively highly concentrated in certain amino acids that are more strongly associated with muscle growth and is fairly rapidly absorbed (in contrast to the more slowly absorbed other major dairy protein, casein), whey will give a spike in a window that correlates with optimizing the amount of new protein synthesis in muscle - that window generally considered the first few hours after significant exercise. What casein does better is reduction of the ongoing breakdown of existing muscle protein. The net impact on muscle growth is the balance between the two processes. Most of the research cited touting the benefits of whey (either before, during, or immediately after weight training) demonstrate the advantage it has in new protein synthesis; not much out there comparing protein sources on net muscle protein gain over the 24 hour cycle.
The differences between whey concentrate, isolate, and hydrolyzed whey … Concentrate is not just whey protein; it also contains some fat and some lactose. A serving size aimed at X grams of whey protein is thus a larger scoop than whey isolate, which not completely just whey but much more so. Per X grams of whey protein though it still may be cheaper and the amount of fat and lactose is not a major deal in dietary intake. And they may have some beneficial effects. Hydrosylates take the big whey protein and break it down into small chunks of several amino acids each. Those small chunks get called peptides. Babies who are milk protein allergic often get formula with hydrolyzed whey with serious quality control to make sure the individual peptides are all small enough that they do not cause an allergic reaction. That formula essentially wipes out starting any college fund. The sales pitch for this most expensive form of ingesting whey is that it can get in even a few seconds faster, as if that matters. There is no evidence that it (or any claimed stronger stimulus for insulin release) does matter for net muscle gain.
This product seems to be aiming for a marketing sweet spot - superior mixability, and partially broken down so able to lay claim to the same marketing bits out there for hydrosylates at a lower price point.
I actually dismissed this based on the title but just read it now and its amazing! There are claims in here we wanted to make (based on our own internal testing) but didn’t because we couldn’t find any 3rd party study to back it up. Awesome find, ill give you a free bag when we start shipping again!
While it does become easier to mix, that isnt really that big of a deal. Changing these characteristics modifies the susceptibility of aurora protein to trypsin hydrolysis. Changing the enzymatic hydrolysis of protein give you an improved digestibility of the protein powder.