Our body continually renews part of its tissues. This process, essential for maintaining health, relies in particular on proteins, whose role extends far beyond the usual attribution to muscle development and maintenance.
Yet despite their biological importance, proteins remain at the center of numerous misconceptions. Between nutritional recommendations, concerns about their consumption, and differences between food sources, it is not always easy to distinguish the body’s real needs from the discourses surrounding this essential nutrient.
The Role of Proteins in the Structure and Functioning of the Body
Proteins consist of chains of amino acids whose arrangement largely determines their structure and function. The body can break down these proteins, recover their amino acids, and reuse them to build new ones according to its needs.
There exists an immense diversity of proteins, each with a particular structure and functions. Collagen, for example, contributes to the resilience of skin, tendons, and ligaments. Other proteins participate in substance transport, hormonal regulation, immunity, or blood clotting.
Proteins contribute to the constitution and renewal of numerous tissues: muscles, organs, skin, tendons, ligaments, hair, nails, and mucous membranes. The intestinal wall, for instance, renews itself rapidly. It requires a sufficient supply of amino acids to renew its cells, repair micro-lesions, produce mucus, and preserve the integrity of the intestinal barrier.
Proteins also intervene in the manufacture of enzymes, those molecules that accelerate the chemical reactions indispensable to the body’s functioning. Without them, essential processes such as digestion, energy production, or cellular repair could not occur at a speed compatible with life.
They also play a major role in communication between cells.
Several hormones and biological messengers consist of proteins or peptides, that is, short chains of amino acids.
Insulin, for example, is a protein hormone that notably promotes the use of glucose by certain tissues such as muscles and adipose tissue.
It also intervenes in amino acid metabolism.
When cellular sensitivity to insulin decreases, as in insulin resistance, several metabolic regulation mechanisms can become disrupted.
The immune system likewise depends on proteins. Antibodies are specialized proteins capable of recognizing elements foreign to the body. Other proteins participate in the complement system, a set of immune mechanisms that help identify, neutralize, or eliminate certain pathogens.
In the blood, proteins fulfill essential functions as well. Albumin, produced by the liver, contributes to maintaining oncotic pressure, which retains part of the water within the blood vessels. Hemoglobin, present in red blood cells, ensures oxygen transport.
Fibrin intervenes in the formation of blood clots, indispensable for limiting bleeding after an injury. It can also be involved in certain imbalances, as we explain in greater detail in our article dedicated to fibrin.
From Protein Intake to Absorption and Utilization
Dietary proteins are not directly usable by the body in their initial form. They must first be broken down during digestion to release the amino acids necessary for building new proteins.
Protein digestion begins in the stomach and continues in the small intestine, where they are decomposed into amino acids and small peptides. After absorption through the intestinal wall, these elements become available to the body, which can use them to manufacture new proteins, produce other molecules, or supply energy according to its needs.
It is important to distinguish three phenomena: digestion, absorption, and utilization of proteins.
Insufficient gastric acidity, called hypochlorhydria, can disrupt protein digestion. Chronic stress can also affect digestive function.
Malabsorption, for its part, corresponds to difficulty for the intestine to properly absorb nutrients. It can notably be associated with certain digestive diseases or damage to the intestinal mucosa.
Finally, even when amino acids are correctly digested and absorbed, their utilization by tissues may be less effective. This is notably the case with anabolic resistance, when muscles respond less strongly to the presence of amino acids and the signals that normally stimulate the synthesis of new muscle proteins.
Do Recommended Intakes Correspond to Real Needs?
The reference recommendation of approximately 0.8 g of protein per kilogram of body weight per day is often interpreted as the ideal quantity to consume. Yet this figure corresponds above all to an intake intended to cover the nutritional needs of the vast majority of healthy adults.
This reference rests notably on nitrogen balance, a method that compares nitrogen supplied by dietary proteins with that eliminated by the body.
It does not, however, allow determination on its own of the intakes most favorable for maintaining muscle mass, recovery, or tissue repair.
Needs can notably increase with age, during illness, during convalescence, or when it is necessary to rebuild lost muscle mass.
These differences in needs have led several expert groups to propose protein intakes adapted to age and health status.
For healthy adults, the benchmark of 0.8 to 0.83 g/kg/day remains a nutritional reference. In contrast, after age 65, recommendations from the PROT-AGE expert group and the European Society for Clinical Nutrition (ESPEN) propose intakes of 1 to 1.2 g/kg/day to better preserve muscle mass and physical capacities.
For older adults presenting an acute or chronic illness, notably when exposed to muscle loss or malnutrition, intakes can reach 1.2 to 1.5 g/kg/day, or even more in certain particular situations.
For a person weighing 70 kg, this represents:
- At 0.8 g/kg/day: 56 g of protein per day.
- At 1.2 g/kg/day: 84 g of protein per day.
- At 1.5 g/kg/day: 105 g of protein per day.
These differences are explained notably by the progressive decrease in muscle response to amino acids with age, a phenomenon called anabolic resistance. A higher protein intake can help compensate for this lesser response, particularly when associated with adapted physical activity, notably resistance exercises.
Needs must nevertheless be individualized, notably in the presence of kidney disease requiring adaptation of intakes.
Thus, an intake sufficient to cover reference nutritional needs is not necessarily the one that best responds to needs for tissue maintenance or reconstruction.
Protein Needs in Athletes
For people who regularly practice physical activity, and particularly weight training, protein needs increase to support recovery, repair, and development of muscle tissues.
The International Society of Sports Nutrition (ISSN) generally recommends 1.4 to 2 g of protein per kilogram of body weight per day for physically active people. For those who practice weight training with the goal of muscle development, scientific work places interesting intakes around 1.6 to 2.2 g/kg/day.
For a person weighing 70 kg, this represents approximately 112 to 154 g of protein per day.
These intakes promote muscle protein synthesis in association with resistance exercises. However, increasing protein beyond this range does not necessarily lead to additional muscle growth.
In certain situations, notably during caloric restriction intended to lose fat while preserving muscle mass, higher intakes may present an interest.
Needs therefore depend on training intensity, pursued objectives, age, and overall energy intake.
The Kidneys Adapt Perfectly to a Higher Protein Intake
Proteins are accused of fatiguing or even damaging the kidneys when consumed in large quantities. This concern rests on a misinterpretation of renal function.
When protein intake increases, the kidneys can increase their glomerular filtration rate, that is, the quantity of blood they filter. This physiological adaptation notably allows elimination of waste from protein metabolism.
In people whose renal function is normal, this increase in filtration is simply a physiological response to protein intake.
In contrast, when kidney disease is present, intakes must be adapted to kidney function.
Proteins for Strong Bones
Contrary to a long-held idea, proteins do not weaken bones. They play, on the contrary, an important role in their construction and maintenance.
Bone is not solely composed of calcium and other minerals. It also possesses an organic matrix, composed primarily of collagen, a protein that contributes to its resistance and flexibility. Minerals ensure its rigidity, while this protein structure participates in its capacity to support mechanical stresses.
Proteins also intervene in the regulation of bone formation, notably through IGF-1, a growth factor that stimulates the activity of cells responsible for bone formation.
The old theory according to which a protein-rich diet would cause bone demineralization rested notably on the increase in calcium eliminated in urine. Today, this increase is explained notably by better intestinal absorption of calcium.
In older adults, a sufficient protein intake contributes to preserving muscles and bone structure. Studies also suggest that a higher intake could be associated with better bone density and a reduction in hip fracture risk, particularly when calcium intakes are adequate.
Proteins therefore participate in skeletal solidity, and insufficient consumption can compromise bone health, notably with advancing age.
When Protein Intakes Become Insufficient
An insufficient protein intake can have consequences on muscle mass, recovery, healing, and tissue renewal. These effects vary according to the importance of the deficit and its duration.
In severe forms of malnutrition, such as kwashiorkor, consequences can be significant: edema, loss of muscle mass, weakening of immune defenses, and general deterioration of condition.
But protein insufficiency can also be more discreet. Without presenting a serious deficiency, a person can consume too little protein to preserve musculature, recover after effort, or effectively ensure tissue repair.
Healing, for example, requires amino acids to produce new tissues. It also depends on other nutrients, notably zinc, vitamin C, and iron, as well as good blood circulation.
Skin, hair, and nails can also be affected by prolonged protein deficit. However, their fragility can also be linked to micronutrient deficiencies, hormonal disturbances, or chronic inflammation.
Loss of strength, difficult recovery, or poor healing therefore merit attention to protein intakes as well as other factors likely to intervene.
Animal and Plant Proteins: Differences That Matter
Not all protein sources have the same nutritional value. Their quality depends notably on their composition in essential amino acids, their digestibility, and the quantity necessary to cover the body’s needs.
Essential amino acids are those our body cannot manufacture itself in sufficient quantity. They must therefore be supplied by the diet. Their presence and proportions play an important role in the body’s capacity to manufacture and renew its own proteins.
Animal proteins, present notably in eggs, meat, fish, and dairy products, generally present good digestibility and a complete profile of essential amino acids.
These foods also supply other important nutrients. Meat notably provides heme iron, particularly well absorbed, as well as zinc and vitamin B12. Eggs supply choline, while certain fish constitute an interesting source of omega-3.
Plant proteins present greater diversity of profiles. Cereals are generally poor in lysine, while legumes are often more limited in sulfur amino acids, notably methionine. Their combination improves the balance of essential amino acid intakes.
Soy occupies a particular place among plants: it possesses an interesting essential amino acid profile and superior protein quality to that of many other plant sources.
However, the comparison does not stop at the presence of amino acids. The quantity of food necessary to obtain the same protein intake, its digestibility, and the other nutrients consumed simultaneously are also important elements.
The Same Quantity of Proteins, Very Different Portions
To obtain approximately 25 g of proteins, food quantities vary considerably according to their origin:
| Food | Approximate Quantity |
|---|---|
| Roasted chicken breast | 84 g |
| Whole eggs | 200 g (approximately 4 eggs) |
| Extra-firm tofu | 250 g |
| Cooked lentils | 277 g |
These values come from USDA nutritional data and may vary according to products and their preparation.
This comparison highlights an important difference: not all foods present the same protein density. But it does not yet take into account protein digestibility or the availability of their essential amino acids.
The quantity of proteins is not sufficient to determine their nutritional quality.
Animal proteins, notably those from eggs, meat, and fish, generally present high digestibility and a favorable profile of essential amino acids.
Plant proteins can be less digestible and present lower proportions of certain essential amino acids. Lentils, for example, are relatively poor in methionine, while cereals are generally more limited in lysine.
The combination of different plant sources improves the balance of essential amino acid intakes. It is not indispensable to combine them during the same meal, provided the diet supplies sufficient of each essential amino acid throughout the day. However, to effectively stimulate muscle synthesis, the quantity and quality of proteins consumed at each meal remain important, particularly with advancing age.
Carbohydrates and Antinutrients: What Accompanies Proteins
At equivalent protein quantity, foods do not necessarily supply the same nutrients.
Meat, fish, and eggs supply high-quality proteins, with very little or no carbohydrates. Cereals and legumes, such as lentils, chickpeas, beans, or flageolets, also supply proteins, but these are accompanied by sometimes substantial quantities of starch.
To obtain 25 g of proteins from these plants, it is generally necessary to consume larger portions, which simultaneously increase carbohydrate intakes.
These foods also contain antinutritional factors, notably phytates and tannins, likely to reduce absorption of certain minerals or protein digestibility. Their content varies according to species, preparations, and cooking methods.
Soaking, germination, fermentation, and cooking reduce part of these compounds.
Food processing also influences the way starch is digested. Grinding and certain industrial processes can make carbohydrates more rapidly accessible to digestive enzymes, leading to a faster elevation of blood glucose and more significant glycemic peaks.
Thus, 25 g of proteins from meat, eggs, or a preparation based on cereals and legumes do not necessarily present the same digestibility, the same essential amino acid profile, or the same carbohydrate load.
These differences must be taken into account, particularly when seeking to cover protein needs while limiting carbohydrate consumption.
Protein Quality Beyond the Numbers
To evaluate the nutritional quality of a protein, researchers notably use DIAAS (Digestible Indispensable Amino Acid Score), an index that takes into account the digestibility of essential amino acids and their capacity to cover the body’s needs.
This index helps better understand why 25 g of proteins from different food sources do not necessarily present the same biological value.
The quantity of proteins indicated on a label therefore does not, by itself, inform about their digestibility, their essential amino acid profile, or the other nutrients that accompany them.
What Influences the Body’s Utilization of Proteins
Consuming sufficient proteins is important, but their utilization by tissues also depends on the body’s metabolic state and needs.
Physical activity plays a major role. Resistance exercises stimulate muscle protein synthesis and improve muscle response to amino acids. Conversely, sedentariness and periods of immobilization favor muscle loss and diminish this response.
Leucine is an essential amino acid particularly important for muscles. It participates in activating mechanisms that trigger new muscle protein synthesis. Insufficient leucine intake, or more broadly essential amino acids, can limit this reconstruction, even when total protein intake seems satisfactory.
Insulin also intervenes in protein metabolism. It notably contributes to limiting muscle protein breakdown and participates in regulating energy resources necessary for their renewal.
When cellular sensitivity to insulin decreases, as in insulin resistance, certain mechanisms involved in maintaining muscle mass can become disrupted. A diet regularly supplying excessive quantities of carbohydrates, particularly in a context of sedentariness and energy imbalance, can contribute to this situation.
Chronic inflammation can also disrupt protein utilization. It modifies amino acid metabolism and can favor muscle breakdown. The body then mobilizes more resources to support immune reactions, which can compromise tissue maintenance and reconstruction.
In these conditions, increasing protein intakes can be beneficial, but other factors must also be taken into account.
Sleep, overall energy intake, and availability of certain micronutrients also participate in tissue renewal and repair.
Adapted protein intake therefore constitutes an important base, whose benefits also depend on muscular activity and the body’s metabolic functioning.
The Myth of 30 Grams of Proteins per Meal
For decades, an idea spread widely: the body could not efficiently use more than 25 to 30 g of proteins per meal. Beyond this quantity, the surplus would be wasted or simply eliminated.
This affirmation contributed to encouraging multiplication of protein meals and snacks, notably among athletes and people seeking to develop their musculature.
Yet scientific research today challenges this limit.
In December 2023, a study conducted by Jorn Trommelen and the team of Professor Luc van Loon, published in Cell Reports Medicine, compared the effects of 25 g and 100 g doses of proteins consumed after muscle training.
Researchers observed that 100 g of proteins provoked a more important and prolonged protein synthesis response, lasting more than 12 hours.
The body is therefore capable of digesting, absorbing, and utilizing a significant quantity of proteins consumed during the same meal. Their utilization does not stop abruptly after 30 g.
These results challenge recommendations that impose systematic fractionation of protein intakes into small portions.
Other research over several weeks also shows that a diet organized around two daily meals can be compatible with comparable progression of muscle mass and strength to that observed with three meals or more.
The priority is therefore not to multiply meals, but to cover daily protein needs with quality sources, while maintaining sufficient muscular activity.
For a healthy adult, it is possible to organize intakes around a number of meals adapted to appetite, lifestyle rhythm, and digestive tolerance, without seeking to artificially respect a 30 g protein ceiling per intake.
High-Protein Drinks: When Nutritional Promise Masks Composition
High-protein drinks are widely used in care establishments, notably among older adults, malnourished individuals, or those in convalescence. They are presented as practical solutions to supply proteins and energy when usual diet no longer suffices.
But behind this nutritional promise, the composition of certain preparations merits much more attentive analysis.
Take the example of Fortimel Protein 2 kcal.
A 200 ml bottle contains:
- 20.2 g of proteins
- 41.2 g of carbohydrates, including 30.8 g of sugars
- 17.2 g of lipids
- 400 kcal
In other words, this preparation contains twice as many carbohydrates as proteins, including a particularly large quantity of sugars.
And this is not an isolated case.
Fresubin 2 kcal Drink, also marketed for nutritional needs linked to malnutrition, supplies 20 g of proteins for 45 g of carbohydrates per 200 ml bottle.
These products therefore contain a substantial quantity of proteins, but also an important carbohydrate load, often little highlighted when emphasis is placed on their “high-protein” character.
Ingredients That Merit Examination
In Fortimel Protein 2 kcal, proteins come from cow’s milk, primarily in the form of casein. According to examined composition data, approximately 97% of proteins come from casein, the remainder consisting of whey proteins.
Casein has nutritional value, but its digestive tolerance varies according to individuals. Milk proteins can provoke reactions in allergic people, independently of possible lactose intolerance.
Not all caseins are identical. Beta-casein A1 can release, during digestion, a peptide called beta-casomorphin-7 (BCM-7), capable of interacting with opioid receptors present notably in the intestine.
This mechanism presents certain similarities with that of peptides from gluten digestion. Studies have also associated consumption of beta-casein A1 with digestive disorders, slowed transit, and intestinal inflammatory manifestations, comparatively to beta-casein A2.
This difference is particularly important when examining the composition of preparations intended for people whose digestive health is already weakened.
The formula also contains glucose syrup, sucrose, rapeseed and sunflower oils, emulsifiers, flavors, as well as added vitamins and minerals.
In Fresubin, one also finds dairy proteins, vegetable oils, glucose syrup or maltodextrin according to references, as well as sucrose in certain preparations.
Maltodextrin merits particular attention. This ingredient derived from starch transformation can be rapidly digested into glucose and provoke an important elevation of blood glucose. Its presence can therefore strongly contribute to the carbohydrate load of a preparation, even when the quantity indicated under the “of which sugars” mention appears relatively moderate.
Vegetable Oils Whose Stability Merits Our Attention
The rapeseed and sunflower oils used in these industrial preparations also raise the question of their refining and stability.
Thermal processes can modify their composition and favor certain degradation reactions. Polyunsaturated fatty acids are particularly sensitive to oxidation, which can generate undesirable compounds, notably certain aldehydes.
This oxidation can begin during transformation stages and continue during storage, according to manufacturing, conservation, and oxygen exposure conditions.
Their incorporation into liquid preparations, in emulsion form, therefore requires particular mastery of their stability.
The simple mention “vegetable oils” does not allow the consumer to know their extraction method, degree of refining, or oxidation state.
A preparation intended to support health should be evaluated on the quantity and quality of its proteins, but also on the nature and quantity of carbohydrates it contains, as well as the origin, quality, and stability of its fats.
A drink supplying 20 g of proteins for more than 40 g of carbohydrates, including a significant proportion of sugars, raises a real question about its nutritional relevance. The intended energy intake should not make one forget the metabolic consequences of the ingredients used, particularly when other possibilities exist to supply proteins and energy.
Correcting Malnutrition Without Neglecting Metabolic Health
In a malnourished person, the objective is to reestablish sufficient intakes of energy, proteins, and micronutrients. But this necessity should not lead to considering all calorie sources as equivalent.
A preparation containing more than 40 g of carbohydrates, including a large quantity of sugars, can provoke an important elevation of blood glucose. The extent of this response depends on the product’s composition, quantities consumed, and the person’s metabolic functioning.
The quality and quantity of carbohydrates concern the entire population, and not only people with diabetes. They must be examined with particular attention when a diet is supposed to contribute to preserving or restoring health.
Studies comparing classic nutritional preparations to formulas adapted for people with diabetes moreover show that the latter generally allow reduction of glycemic elevations after consumption.
Malnutrition should not be considered solely as a lack of calories. It also requires searching for causes: loss of appetite, chewing or swallowing difficulties, digestive disorders, chronic diseases, medication treatments, isolation, or insufficiently nutritious diet.
When the person can still eat, improving their diet should occupy a central place, with foods rich in quality proteins, micronutrients, and energy adapted to their needs.
Eggs, meat, fish, and other nutritious foods can be prepared in forms easy to consume, according to the person’s capacities.
Medical nutritional supplements can be useful when diet remains insufficient. But their use should not dispense with examining their composition or seeking dietary solutions adapted to the person.
Prices That Raise Questions
The economic question also merits addressing.
In Switzerland, a pack of four bottles of Fortimel Protein 2 kcal can be marketed around 23 CHF, or more depending on pharmacies.
This represents nearly 6 CHF per bottle, for approximately 20 g of proteins.
At two bottles daily, expenditure can exceed 300 CHF per month.
These rates raise questions, particularly when the main protein sources are dairy proteins and other ingredients include glucose syrup, sugar, and common vegetable oils.
Manufacturing, control, packaging, and distribution costs must naturally be taken into account. But the final price merits comparison with that of other nutritional solutions, notably dietary ones.
Possible coverage by health insurance also does not dispense with questioning the relationship between product cost, its composition, and benefits actually supplied.
Prioritizing Quality Over Commercial Promise
SLAKE defends a diet founded as much as possible on real foods, rich in nutrients and coming from sources whose quality can be appreciated.
This also implies interest in the origin of animal proteins, breeding conditions, and animal feed.
An egg from hens raised in good conditions, meat from farms with high animal welfare standards, or quality fish supply far more than a figure inscribed in a “proteins” column.
They fit into a dietary approach that considers both the body’s needs, nutrient quality, and respect for living beings.
High-protein drinks should therefore not be judged solely on the 20 or 30 g of proteins announced on the front.
A preparation can be rich in proteins while presenting a nutritional composition that one can legitimately contest.
For SLAKE, the priority remains searching for causes of nutritional deficits and privileging quality diet adapted to each person’s real needs.
Age, by itself, should never justify systematic prescription of high-protein drinks. Before proposing these preparations, it is indispensable to evaluate existing dietary intakes, nutritional status, and the person’s needs, then consider solutions based on foods rich in quality proteins.
The response to a nutritional problem should never become an automatic prescription, without examination of its necessity or the composition of the proposed product.
Proteins, an Essential Pillar of Our Health
Proteins intervene in almost all functions of the body: maintenance and renewal of tissues, production of enzymes and hormones, immune defenses, healing, and maintenance of muscle mass.
Covering protein needs therefore does not consist simply of reaching a daily figure. The quality of food sources, their essential amino acid composition, their digestibility, and their utilization by the body have just as much importance.
A diet sufficiently rich in quality proteins, associated with regular physical activity, contributes to preserving strength, autonomy, and the body’s capacity to maintain and renew its tissues.
Prioritizing minimally processed foods, knowing their provenance, and taking into account the conditions in which they are produced also forms part of a dietary approach respectful of our health and living beings.
Sovereignty also begins in our dietary choices. It implies the freedom to choose, but also the responsibility for our choices and their consequences, both for our health and for living beings.
DISCLAIMER: This article is for informational purposes only and does not replace personalized medical advice. The information presented aims to clarify documented biological mechanisms; any decision about your health, especially with medical conditions, ongoing treatment, or scheduled surgery, should be discussed with a qualified healthcare professional.
Sources and References
-
FAO/WHO/UNU (2007) — Protein and amino acid requirements in human nutrition
-
Bauer et al. (2013) — Evidence-Based Recommendations for Optimal Dietary Protein Intake in Older People
-
Volkert et al. (2022) — ESPEN practical guideline: Clinical nutrition and hydration in geriatrics
-
Moore et al. (2015) — Protein ingestion to stimulate myofibrillar protein synthesis requires greater relative protein intakes in healthy older versus younger men
-
Jäger et al. (2017) — International Society of Sports Nutrition Position Stand: protein and exercise
-
Morton et al. (2018) — A systematic review, meta-analysis and meta-regression of the effect of protein supplementation on resistance training-induced gains in muscle mass and strength in healthy adults
-
Cuthbertson et al. (2005) — Anabolic signaling deficits underlie amino acid resistance of wasting, aging muscle
-
Katsanos et al. (2006) — A high proportion of leucine is required for optimal stimulation of the rate of muscle protein synthesis by essential amino acids in the elderly
-
Trommelen et al. (2023) — The anabolic response to protein ingestion during recovery from exercise has no upper limit in magnitude and duration in vivo in humans
-
Mamerow et al. (2014) — Dietary protein distribution positively influences 24-h muscle protein synthesis in healthy adults
-
Effect of 3 Different Daily Protein Intakes in a 2-Meal Eating Pattern on Protein Turnover in Middle Age and Older Adults (2025)
-
Devries et al. (2018) — Changes in Kidney Function Do Not Differ between Healthy Adults Consuming Higher- Compared with Lower- or Normal-Protein Diets: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
-
Darling et al. (2019) — Dietary protein and bone health across the life-course: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis over 40 years
-
FAO (2013) — Dietary protein quality evaluation in human nutrition
-
Herreman et al. (2020) — Comprehensive overview of the quality of plant- and animal-sourced proteins based on the digestible indispensable amino acid score
-
Modifying of non-nutritional compounds in legumes: Processing strategies and new technologies (electronic publication 2024, Food Chemistry January 2025)
-
USDA — FoodData Central
-
Role of insulin in the regulation of human skeletal muscle protein synthesis and breakdown: a systematic review and meta-analysis (2015)
-
Milk A1 β-casein and health-related outcomes in humans: a systematic review (2019)
-
Systematic Review of the Gastrointestinal Effects of A1 Compared with A2 β-Casein (2017)
-
Effects of milk containing only A2 beta casein versus milk containing both A1 and A2 beta casein proteins on gastrointestinal physiology, symptoms of discomfort, and cognitive behavior of people with self-reported intolerance to traditional cows' milk (2016)
-
Unravelled facets of milk derived opioid peptides: a focus on gut physiology, fractures and obesity (2019)
-
Difficulties in Establishing the Adverse Effects of β-Casomorphin-7 Released from β-Casein Variants—A Review
-
Hennebelle et al. (2024) — Lipid oxidation in emulsions: New insights from the past two decades
-
Elia et al. (2005) — Enteral nutritional support and use of diabetes-specific formulas for patients with diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis
-
Nutricia — Fortimel Protein 2 kcal
-
Fresenius Kabi — Fresubin 2 kcal Drink