Lysl oxidase is a copper-dependent enzyme that participates in the formation of collagen and elastin. Fructose seems to interfere with copper metabolism to such an extent that collagen and elastin cannot form in growing animals.

Snip
In the past, fructose was considered beneficial to diabetics because it is absorbed only 40 percent as quickly as glucose and causes only a modest rise in blood sugar.5 However, research on other hormonal factors suggests that fructose actually promotes disease more readily than glucose. Glucose is metabolized in every cell in the body but all fructose must be metabolized in the liver.6 The livers of test animals fed large amounts of fructose develop fatty deposits and cirrhosis, similar to problems that develop in the livers of alcoholics.

So, it is diffrent than sugar.
Both should be avoided in my opinion.

Any person that thinks this is acceptable in the diet is sadly mistaken.
This in theory can promote insulin resistance.
Simple sugars should be avoided anyway, along with processed carbohydrates.
There is not an arguement against that to warrent its use.

Simple sugars should be avoided, eating whole foods offers much better benefits and nutritional profiles along with lower glycemic loading.

Anyone that feels simple sugars are acceptable for a daily portion of the diet is clueless.
This arguement is not solid in both areas.

Nothing wrong with mowing down a steak, and some sweat potatoe.

If lactose is not tollerant with many people how come this isnt part of the arguement?
Lets say 30% of people cant digest lactose then how can any arguement support those that are in the 30% range?
I’m sorry, I just dont get the math.

If approx 50% of the people are insulin resistant (not post workout) how can anyone push simple sugars PWO?

Both sides are flawed, and HFCS is maddness defending that one, just like simple sugars are madness in any healthy diet.

And HFCS not the devil. It’s no different than sucrose. So that’s wrong.
http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/research-review/straight-talk-about-high-fructose-corn-syrup-what-it-is-and-what-it-aint-research-review.html

High Fructose Corn Sweatener, that should be avoided all together.

The cholesterol means nothing as all sex hormones are made from cholesterol, including testosterone.

If one wants to drink milk it whould be whole milk anyway, like it was ment to be.

1. Milk is actually a mix of whey and casein proteins (in a roughly 20/80 ratio of whey/casein). Part of why milk has always been good for growth. Interesting, some work has shown that higher fat milk is more anabolic than skim. Your son is growing and needs calories, get him 2%.

2. The potential issue with milk is that, if you need a LOT of calories, quantities can be daunting. But the ratios are good in terms of protein/carbs and it can certainly work assuming it can be digested (the other potentially major drawback of milk is intolerance).

There’s a research review on the site about Milk as teh New Sports Drink that addresses similar issues to Alan’s review. In short, milk following practice would be an excellent way for your son to rehydrate, get protein and carbs, calcium, etc. Cheaper and as effective as overpriced supplements.

Some questions. I’m not a bodybuilder. Just a broken down old jock and coach trying to give his son good advice for his football strength workouts.

1) It would appear that you feel whey does not provide any advantage over milk in equivalent quantities of protein. Is that correct? I have a son whose buddy on the HS football team has convinced him he needs to buy the whey powder because it is supposed to be of better quality. He’s always complaining about the taste and I keep telling to drink skim milk (we’ve always used skim milk in the house and he drinks a lot).

2) About ten years ago I read a book by Bob Arnot in which he discussed some of Dr Ivy’s research from the early 90s at Texas. Arnot advised consuming 1 g of protein per 5lbs of body weight and 1 g of simple sugar carbs per 2 lbs of body weight within 30 mins of finishing the workout. Looking around my kitchen, skim milk and gatorade (separately) looked like an easy way to get it done. So at 240 lbs, I’d bring along a quart and a half of skim milk and a 20oz bottle of gatorade when I went to lift. The numbers worked out pretty close.

I’ve lifted off and on to stay in shape ever since I retired, but never in an effort to get real big (I’m 6-4 and played WR in football and OF in baseball). I decided to try to get in 4 good workouts of 45 min each week (in a split routine) while sipping the skim milk and gatorade during and after each workout. Immediately, I noticed that I was a lot less sore. I was about 45 yrs old. Within two months, I was benching more than I ever had. I was seeing noticeable gains in my arms and chest. My wife asked me to stop, however, because she didn’t like a look she thought was too bulky.

This was so easy. Just take a couple sips of skim milk and a sip of gatorade every so often and finish it all off at the end of the workout. And it obviously worked.

So — would you endorse that for my 16 yr old son? Or make changes in the quantities, etc.?

Thanks for your help.

What a tease. It’s not the entire book. Google books rarely gives away the entire book for free. Just when the book is about to get into the important stuff (incorporating nutrient timing into your training), the book preview ends. The preview is the first 80 pages, but the entire book is 224 pages.

Your math is off. It’s 177% more expensive than chocolate milk.