Toxic Protein Supplements: EAS Myoplex and Muscle Milk

  • swimbikerun

    Posts: 2835

    Jul 13, 2010 2:18 AM GMT
    The supplements have been found to contain unhealthy levels: arsenic and lead!

    I use Myoplex (or did)

    http://www.foodconsumer.org/newsite/Nutrition/Supplements/avoid_these_toxic_protein_powders_2206100532.html

    Clearly, getting a potentially toxic dose of heavy metals with your daily protein drink is not what you had in mind, but based on these results, that may indeed be what you're getting…


    http://www.webmd.com/food-recipes/news/20100603/report-protein-drinks-have-unhealthy-metals
  • calibro

    Posts: 8888

    Jul 13, 2010 4:45 AM GMT
    this is kinda old news
  • swimbikerun

    Posts: 2835

    Jul 13, 2010 5:03 AM GMT
    calibro saidthis is kinda old news


    This is from July 2010:

    We purchased 15 protein powders and drinks mainly in the New York metro area or online and tested multiple samples of each for arsenic, cadmium, lead, and mercury. The results showed a considerable range, but levels in three products were of particular concern because consuming three servings a day could result in daily exposure to arsenic, cadmium, or lead exceeding the limits proposed by USP.

    We found that three daily servings of the ready-to-drink liquid EAS Myoplex Original Rich Dark Chocolate Shake provides an average of 16.9 micrograms (µg) of arsenic, exceeding the proposed USP limit of 15 µg per day, and an average of 5.1 µg of cadmium, which is just above the USP limit of 5 µg per day. Concentrations in most products were relatively low, but when taking into account the large serving size suggested, the number of micrograms per day for a few of the products was high compared with most others tested.

    The samples of Muscle Milk Chocolate powder we tested contained all four heavy metals, and levels of three metals in the product were among the highest of all in our tests. Average cadmium levels of 5.6 µg in three daily servings slightly exceeded the USP limit of 5 µg per day, and the average lead level of 13.5 µg also topped the USP limit of 10 µg per day. The average arsenic level of 12.2 µg was approaching the USP limit of 15 µg per day, and the average for mercury was 0.7 µg, well below the USP's 15 µg-per-day limit. Three daily servings of Muscle Milk Vanilla Crème contained 12.2 µg of lead, exceeding lead limits, and 11.2 µg of arsenic. A fourth product, Muscle Milk Nutritional Shake Chocolate (liquid), provided an average of 14.3 µg of arsenic per day from three servings, approaching the proposed USP limit.

    Cadmium raises special concern because it accumulates in and can damage the kidneys, the same organs that can be damaged by excessive protein consumption. And it can take 20 years for the body to eliminate even half the cadmium absorbed today.

    "This is a highly toxic metal, and while there are some cases where decisions have to be weighed against relative risks, accepting that you have to be exposed to any cadmium at all in your protein drink after your workout is definitely not one of them," says Michael Harbut, M.D., director of the Environmental Cancer Initiative at the Karmanos Cancer Institute in Royal Oak, Mich.

    "When these toxic heavy metals are combined in a product that is marketed for daily use, that raises serious public health concerns, especially for pregnant women, children, and young adults," says Burns, who has been a toxicology consultant to state and federal government agencies.

    For most people, protein drinks are not the only possible source of exposure to heavy metals, but they are an easily avoidable one, since most people can meet their protein needs, help minimize exposure to contaminants, and save money by choosing the right foods.

    Shellfish and organ meats such as liver can be high in cadmium, and some plant foods such as potatoes, rice, sunflower seeds, spinach, and other leafy greens can also take in significant amounts of the metal from the environment, due in large part to the use of cadmium-containing phosphate fertilizers, according to Bruce A. Fowler, a researcher at the federal Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. Food and Drug Administration research suggests that foods such as milk, yogurt, eggs, poultry, and red meats are generally good protein sources that seem to contain little or no cadmium, lead, arsenic, or mercury. For perspective about the relative risks exposure to those metals can pose, consider the agency's list of 275 hazardous substances at toxic waste sites: Arsenic, lead, and mercury rank Nos. 1, 2, and 3, and cadmium is No. 7, based on risks to people around those sites.

    Robert Wright, M.D., an associate professor at Harvard Medical School, who is conducting research on the health effects of exposure to toxic metals, says, "Small amounts of exposure are inevitable, but a product that exceeds the USP limit is clearly doing something wrong."

    Being exposed simultaneously to a mixture of toxins can also potentially increase health risks, particularly when they target the same organs or systems, as some metals we detected do, according to Harbut. He says that this is the result of a synergistic effect, meaning the effects of two toxic substances together can be even greater than those of the sum of the two, and not enough research has been done to determine whether that occurs from multiple exposures to even relatively low levels of those heavy metals.

    http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/magazine-archive/2010/july/food/protein-drinks/what-our-tests-found/index.htm
  • calibro

    Posts: 8888

    Jul 13, 2010 5:05 AM GMT
    http://www.realjock.com/gayforums/988857/
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 13, 2010 5:08 AM GMT
    i guess its time to find alternative protein.... where are them darn bison meat at?icon_twisted.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 13, 2010 5:12 AM GMT
    this makes me crave a protein shake right now.
  • swimbikerun

    Posts: 2835

    Jul 13, 2010 5:16 AM GMT
    I looked for previous postings but this one slipped past me. I personally don't consider it "old news" since it is less than a month ago and this is not a news site. Do you have a more productive opinion to add calibro?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 13, 2010 5:17 AM GMT
    Which were the brands tested and what was the results? We are just getting the top 3 worst, did anyone find the whole study? is it on Pubmed?

    I usually buy Gold Standard and wonder the process it goes through.
  • shoelessj

    Posts: 511

    Jul 13, 2010 5:21 AM GMT
    you know, i'm thinking that unless you're a real competitive athlete, at best, protein supplements are a placebo that make you believe you're getting more strength, endurance, etc. And at worst, well, there's that study, and all of the studies that have yet to be done.
  • swimbikerun

    Posts: 2835

    Jul 13, 2010 5:22 AM GMT
    Here's another good thread:
    http://www.realjock.com/gayforums/973203/
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 13, 2010 5:31 AM GMT
    So where are the control samples, such as random selections of "organic" or any other foods. It's old news if you consider the composition of the earth, which has been known for a long time.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 13, 2010 5:50 AM GMT
    Oh great....
  • manpit209

    Posts: 213

    Jul 13, 2010 6:05 AM GMT
    You guys should read this counter article by Jim Stoppani, a well known bodybuilder and has Ph.D in this field. He also cites several articles and links to them for you to reference and come up with your own conclusions.

    http://www.muscleandfitness.com/protein_drink_consumer_reports_magazine/features/334
  • swimbikerun

    Posts: 2835

    Jul 13, 2010 6:18 AM GMT
    manpit209 saidYou guys should read this counter article by Jim Stoppani, a well known bodybuilder and has Ph.D in this field. He also cites several articles and links to them for you to reference and come up with your own conclusions.

    http://www.muscleandfitness.com/protein_drink_consumer_reports_magazine/features/334
    Well that's an interesting response! Thanks for posting this...
    I agree that the Consumer Reports article does not go into enough detail about the testing methods.
    If it is true, might not other sources report similar findings?
  • manpit209

    Posts: 213

    Jul 13, 2010 6:22 AM GMT
    swimbikerun said
    manpit209 saidYou guys should read this counter article by Jim Stoppani, a well known bodybuilder and has Ph.D in this field. He also cites several articles and links to them for you to reference and come up with your own conclusions.

    http://www.muscleandfitness.com/protein_drink_consumer_reports_magazine/features/334
    Well that's an interesting response! Thanks for posting this...
    I agree that the Consumer Reports article does not go into enough detail about the testing methods.
    If it is true, might not other sources report similar findings?


    I agree. There are many articles out there about the benefits of protein shakes but there's only a handful about how its harmful. Those handful also doesn't have a lot of backup to make strong claims.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 14, 2010 9:17 PM GMT
    Well damn... Those EAS Myoplex and Muscle Milk shakes played
    a major role in my on-the-go diet. icon_sad.gif

    Are there any other healthier alternatives?
  • swimbikerun

    Posts: 2835

    Jul 14, 2010 9:25 PM GMT
    Cambrosia saidWell damn... Those EAS Myoplex and Muscle Milk shakes played
    a major role in my on-the-go diet. icon_sad.gif

    Are there any other healthier alternatives?
    Please read the response posting manpit209 referenced.
    I'm not convinced Consumer Reports did a proper study.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 14, 2010 10:23 PM GMT
    manpit209 saidYou guys should read this counter article by Jim Stoppani, a well known bodybuilder and has Ph.D in this field. He also cites several articles and links to them for you to reference and come up with your own conclusions.

    http://www.muscleandfitness.com/protein_drink_consumer_reports_magazine/features/334


    I did read it, the musclefitness article is an opinion article, not a factual one.
    It mostly attempt to discretit the consumer report.
    The funny part is how Dr Stoppani seems iritated by the lack of references to scientific publications in the consumerreport, but fail to provide any himself to make is point.

    He questions the qualification of the people cited in the report, but it seems to me he think that if you are not doing studies to prove the benifit of high protein diet, you don't qualify to say they may be dangerous. Strange and self serving argument.

    His only link is for the NFS, and, after going to NFS site, it seems to me they make a business of selling testing/quality insurance to firm doing dietetary supplement. I may have read too fast, but, for me, they are service provider, not regulatory authority,
    I am bad to be carefull about a compagny who get payement for putting it mark on your product ? Their business interest is not to disqualify their clients.
    Interestingly, the NFS provide PDF about the kind of testing they use. Informative, because you can read the average adult weight is 60kg (132lbs), instead of some 160 and 185 for adult american women and men. Yet Stoppani describe those guys as world leader in those testing. In market share, may be, in scientific accuracy, they can improve a bit.

    I could rant a lot on both Stoppani argumentation and NFS, my point is that both are more biased than the consumer report article.

    What matter is that dietetary product don't have to follow regulations as strict as the ones imposed on drug making. It means you can occasionaly find bad things in your protein supplement, but it's not linked to a given brand. Poor quality control gives just that, result and quality changing over time.

    But it's also true for most processed food.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 14, 2010 10:59 PM GMT
    swimbikerun saidThe supplements have been found to contain unhealthy levels: arsenic and lead!


    The reporting on this study is crap. These elements occur naturally in common foods at much higher levels. An honest reporter would have said that the protein drinks are technically LESS TOXIC than many natural protein sources.

    foodchart206-02-10.jpg