this post was submitted on 24 Oct 2025
659 points (97.0% liked)
science
22250 readers
331 users here now
A community to post scientific articles, news, and civil discussion.
rule #1: be kind
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
It doesn't look like they had a control group of people doing the strength training without any protein supplement. I would assume that group would also perform the same.
My assumption is the non-supplement group would actually perform better. Actual food has tons of other nutrients the body uses for countless other tasks that are directly and indirectly related to muscle building
Typically protein supplements are in addition to regular food not a meal replacement when trying to build muscle.
Typically studies equate protein intake
The study participants were given protein supplements, not a dietary replacement.
Correct, and my assumption is they would perform even better if they were given that protein from food rather than from supplements
Notably, they would need to do that, otherwise the study would just be comparing higher/lower protein intake and not protein sources
That's not what you said above, you said you thought a group with a regular diet would perform better than a group with a regular diet + protein supplements, which is why you're getting argued with.
What an interesting way of phrasing why you personally felt the need to make it into an argument rather than simply a discussion of a point that may need clarification.
Also interesting that “what I said” is totally different from your summary. I stand by what I said. I don’t know why anyone would assume the researches comparing protein sources in this hypothetical would bafflingly allow the control group to consume less protein. Regardless, now that the clarification has been provided, do you have any interest in the topic? Or are you just in an arguing mood today?
Depends what they eat.