Queal 5.0 Discussion

[Onno_Queal]

Queal 5.0 is coming!

We are proud to introduce the latest update to our recipe.
Read all about the new recipe on our blog about it here: https://queal.com/queal5.0

When?

We will be launching Queal 5.0 in June.
We're expecting a quick transition from 4.1 to 5.0, with all flavours of all diet types switching over to the new version in fairly rapid succession.

What?

Do you need to see/taste/try it to believe it? You can get a first taste of Queal 5.0 with our latest Limited Edition flavour: Royal Rice Pudding. Buy it here.

Let us know your thoughts!

Do you have questions, comments, or remarks about the new recipe?
Are you happy with the removal of Palm Fat?
What are your thoughts on the lowered GI?

Have you tried Royal Rice Pudding Limited Edition?
What did you think of the recipe (independently of the flavour)?
Does it satiate you, how is your energy level compared to 4.0, does it dissolve well in water, et cetera.

[Onno_Queal]

[Skymirrh]

The proteins have been slightly lowered for nutritional considerations

Three meals provide you with 105g of protein

Three meals of Queal 4.0 was 148g of protein. This is a 33% difference, not "slightly lowered". I'm afraid Queal 5.0 won't meet my personal protein/100kcal requirements...

• Is the 5.0 accompanied by a price reduction due to lower protein contents (IIRC, this is the most costly ingredient)?
• What about the Athletic version?

The fats increase is welcome in my book, but not at the detriment of protein.

[schnor]

Cutting proteins by one third? Are you serious???
One of the reasons I use queal is, that I get the proteins I need. 0.8g per kg of bodywheigt may be nice if you are not moving very much. My goal is at least 130g a day.
So, either I need to ad a protein shake a day (what means that queal is not complete anymore) or I need to find an alternative to queal.

[SilentException]

I hate the protein change, it is very significant and you shouldn't downplay it like that. It is a major change that I presume not many will like. One of the reasons I regularly started with Queal is (or WAS) the protein content.

[Floris_Queal]

Thank you for the replies @SilentException, @schnor and @Skymirrh

We've chosen to focus providing more energy through fats. I believe that it's also a very good source in terms of nutrition and satiation.

At the same time, I do know that the opinions about protein and how much you need vary widely. Could you guys link me to some resources on which you've based your protein need? I would love to discuss them and see if there are very good arguments to change the production of Queal 5.0 or not to.

As a final note, Queal 5.0 Athletic will have 40% more protein than Queal Standard 5.0. So please also know that a very high protein version will still be available.

And unfortunately, for us, the price of fat from sunflower and linseed oils isn't cheaper than high quality whey protein.

[Skymirrh]

Bear in mind I am very active (weightlifting 6 times a week, HIIT 3 times a week) and want to increase my muscle mass in order to meet my goals. Of course my protein needs will be skewed upwards. Just like @SilentException, this is actually one of the main reason I went with Queal in the first place.

 

To answer your question:

The best resource on protein intake for athletes is probably the work of Jorn Trommelen: Perfecting Protein Intake in Athletes: How Much, What, and When? (and Beyond)

Chosen excerpt from the tl;dr:

• Minimalist recommendation (to get the most results with minimal effort): Eat at least 120g of protein per day.
• Optimal recommendation (almost all results, considerable effort): Four meals of 40g of protein, spaced out evenly throughout the day (breakfast, lunch, dinner, and pre-sleep), with the majority of protein from animal-based protein sources.

I also like Examine.com's How much protein do I need per day?, which has numerous pointers.

Chosen excerpt again, from the "Optimal daily protein intake for muscle gain" section:

Assuming progressive resistance overload and a mild hypercaloric diet (370–800 kcal above maintenance), a few studies suggest you’ll gain less fat if you eat more protein (3.3 g/kg rather than 1.8–2.6 g/kg).[13][14]

What’s important to understand is that a daily protein intake of 3.3 g/kg isn’t likely to help you build more muscle than a daily protein intake of 1.8–2.6 g/kg. What the higher number can do is help you minimize the fat gains you’ll most likely experience if you eat above maintenance in order to gain (muscle) weight.

 

To continue on my initial rant:

I still find it puzzling that on one hand, you decided to increase the protein contents/100 kcal of your bars (see WundrBar vs. GO bar, even though WundrBar was already on the high end when compared to the competition), and on the other hand, you decided to decrease the protein contents/100 kcal of your powder.

It doesn't make sense to me, unless you were intending to sell the GO bar to regular protein bars users. In which case why bother with the "complete vitamins profile" stuff?

I was very happy when I found out you decided to increase the protein contents of the GO bar (even though it is soy-sourced, protein is still protein), because I thought that meant you were still riding the "conscious choice to have a relatively “high” level of protein in Queal" train. It seems it isn't the case anymore — or at least not as much —, and I would very much like to be able to wrap my head around your marketing strategy and long term values.

Thanks for reading and for answering to us by the way

[Vernon]

I'm quite happy with the protein cut. 150 gr per day is, IMO, way too much for someone who does not lift weight and this is the reason I drink Queal less than I would like to. I even looked into shakes from competitors which contain less protein, but I rather stay with Queal, so this protein cut is very welcome to me.

[230]

I also just found out about the lowered protein content

I'm with @Skymirrh on this one, I also like Examine.com's writeup on protein needs. It points out that most RDI for protein are outdated and do not hold up to data sourced from current studies - even for sedentary people who just want to keep their weight.

I guess I'll stock up on the remaining V4.1 now, and then wait until the nutrition charts of the new Athletic Version are released... since you mentioned that they have a 40% higher protein content that would put them at about 150g/day (like the old standard version), but at what calorie count?

[gb314]

Disappointing.

More energy through fats

Totally agree, before queal my daily calories intake was about 55% from fats

But not at the expense of proteins.
Reduce carbs instead, so the glycemic index (60-70 was very high!!) will lower consequently.

In conclusion
-33% in proteins
No salty flavours (where are you, Tasty tomato and Banging Bacon) ?
No neutral flavour

...so...

I think I'll go stocking up Queal 4.0 while searching for an alternative. Sad story.

Edit:I am a regular triathlete and do about ten hours of training/week.
I eat about 16-17 meals of Queal /week (all meals of workdays plus one or two during weekends).

[Ophelie]

How about the price ?
Do Queal 5.0 will be at 7,50€ ? As far as I am a student, I won't continue Queal if the price increase....

[Onno_Queal]

Hey @Ophelie!

The price will not be increased, not for any of the types.

[joshzam]

Is the 5.0 accompanied by a price reduction due to lower protein contents (IIRC, this is the most costly ingredient)?

My fear is that €$£ may be the driving factor in many of these changes.

Not meeting your protein needs is a significant concern for many people.

Eating too much protein is not a concern that many people have. Especially when understood that a relatively high protein intake is healthy and safe, and that excess protein will simply be broken down and used for energy.

[Floris_Queal]

Thank you all for your opinions and links to the relevant research. Below I've laid out my interpretation of the research and share some more information about the planned content of Queal Athletic 5.0.

Protein in Queal 5.0 Standard:
- 21g per 100g
- 35,2g per 700kcal
- 105,5g per 2100kcal

Protein need - Average Adam
At Queal we take in various sources when considering our formula. These range from input from our customers to recommendations from production. One other main source is the EFSA recommendations. Especially for vitamins, they make very well reasoned and accurate recommendations. They also make recommendations for protein intake.

The EFSA recommendation is 0.83kg per kg of body weight per day.
(In the US the recommendation is 0.8kg)

This is the recommendation for adults. (see here for the summary and here for full article)

For an individual who weighs 80kg (average in Europe, males 18+) this means you would need 66.4g of protein per day.
Queal Standard 5.0 will provide you with 158% of that.

And before we move on, this is in essence what Queal Standard is made for. To provide you with all the essentials for the day. But at the same time, we also believe that protein is a very good source of energy. And quite some research points to arguments for an increased recommended intake per day.

Examine.com is a great aggregator of excellent research and they recommend that you (Average Adam) should eat 1.2g to 1.8kg of protein per kg of body weight per day. In the cited study they found that eating this amount of protein led to an increase in muscle mass. Two things should be noted however. The first is that all participants ate 40% more calories than they needed to sustain their weight. And that the group in the low protein situation didn't lose a significant amount of muscle mass (note: not significant means that the fluctuation is nothing more than random variation, so for all intents and purposes they stayed at the same amount of muscle mass (and I find it a bit sloppy from them to write it up like this, but on the other side it could reference to a bigger trend)).

With this information in mind. An individual of 80kg should need between 96g and 144g of protein per day.
With Queal you are within this range, but yes it's on the low side.

A final note for Average Adam. An individual who weighs 80kg and is moderately active is probably consuming more than 2100kcal (3 meals of Queal Standard) per day. This can be in the form of calories from drinks, snacks, etc. Depending on the caloric calculator used you would need about 2450kcal to sustain your weight. If you would eat all of this from Queal, you would consume 123g of protein per day (right in the middle of the recommendations from Examine.com)

Protein need - Sports Sam

Protein in Queal 5.0 Athletic:
- 26,8g per 100g
- 49,5g per 766kcal
- 148,5g per 2300kcal

If you're very active you may very well like to increase your protein intake to much higher levels. Also because there aren't many (if any) negative consequences from consuming more protein, you may even want to eat more than needed.

Examine.com recommends between 1.4 and 2.2g per kg per day for very active adults.
They recommend 1.8 to 2.6g per kg per day for muscle gain.
And even 3.3kg to possibly minimise fat gain.

In the article cited by @Skymirrh on strongerbyscience.com they found that the average intake of top athletes was 1.5g per kg per day (which is a bit lower than the recommendation above). The article also gives a recommended minimum for athletes of 120g per day, which Queal Athletic provides (at 2300kcal per day, which is probably less calories than you will consume).

I'm assuming that Sports Sam also weighs 80kg, but is much more active than Average Adam.
This means that the total need for calories per day would be 3100.
If all of that is consumed from Queal Athletic 5.0 (again, most use Queal only for 1 or 2 meals, but this is just to show what it would also mean on average), you would have exactly 200g of protein, or 2.5g of protein per kg per day.

I know that I've taken the favourable case for Queal here, and I invite you to see what the recipe would mean for you. But I hope also that I've been able to show that the protein content is still very high and that Standard maybe is a bit more standard/average, but for everyone that is using Athletic that you can still trust on Queal to provide you with the protein you need.

As a last note on protein. Many sources advise you to take a small protein shake about 30 minutes after your workout and I agree that this could be good advice. This (mini) meal was never intended to be replaced by Queal and I think this could add to your total protein intake for the day (on training days).

Conclusion

Although I know it's hard to change someone's mind, especially online in a forum, I hope the above gives you some insight into the considerations of the total protein content. For anyone reading this discussion, I also encourage you to read more about the fats in Queal and the carbs (and lower GI). And for all who want to try Queal 5.0 Standard, you can already get it with our limited edition Royal Rice Pudding.

[aequis]

Also not a fan of the changes. I'd been intending to buy a new batch, but I'm going to hold off because of them.

[amadeann]

Looking forward to the improved recipe Worst comes to worst you can always go back to the old one after a few months of testing.

Nutritionwise I have better feelings about that. I am only not 100% sure how this will affect the flavor. I've been 'on Soylent' for 4 months last year (around 2/3 of my diet) and Queal was one of the few things I missed about Europe (worrying about duties and long shippment times didn't sound fun, so I just ordered what was easily available in the U.S.). I know that Soylent is around 100g/day of protein, and I hope Queal taste doesn't go in that direction. I haven't had Soylent 'craving' even once, but experience such 'cravings' for Queal pretty regularly (i.e. I am actually excited to go and get a Queal shake). Currently is around a third of my diet.

A side question - are you planning on releasing it in Canada too (with local shipping, not from the European warehouse)?

[230]

Thanks for the long answer, it is interesting to see the rationale behind the change.

You're right with your calculation showing that with Standard Queal the average person is still in the middle of the recommendations.

However since most people do not use Queal for 100% of their caloric intake, it used to provide a good head start into protein requirements. If it is possible to provide "better than average" nutrition with Queal for e.g. one meal per day, it is easier for users to eat "normal" food the other two meals and still get all nutrients required.
This of course holds true for all nutrients, not only protein. But since it seems to be unlikely that over-consuming protein has negative effects it cannot hurt to provide more, in my opinion.

[wmertens]

I'm happy about the lower protein and higher fat, BUT I'm not happy about the fat being even more poly-unsaturated than before.

Poly-unsaturated fatty acids (PUFA) are called "essential" because our body doesn't make them, not because we can't live without them. Glucose is not "essential", but without glucose in your blood, you die. That's why our body can create its own glucose and has a backup in the form of ketones.

PUFA are fragile and are mostly used for messaging and cell membranes. If Omega-6 fat gets oxidized, it becomes a messenger molecule to indicate inflammation. High doses of Omega-3 are bad for you.

How do you protect the oils from oxidizing during manufacturing and storage?

To add to that, plant-based O3 is not the same as from fish; they are shorter and don't necessarily convey the benefits that eating fatty fish conveys.

IMHO, a safe source of energy is a mix of mono-unsaturated and saturated fats (just like the way our body stores excess energy), with no more than 4% of total daily energy coming from PUFA.

I liked the palm oil… Maybe you can look into using olive oil or high-oleic sunflower oil? How about coconut oil?

[jintonicc]

Also not a fan of this change. Protein as one of the main reasons drinking Queal, this change makes me consider switching. I do understand your rationale. It works out - especially for Average Adam - when consuming your whole nutrition through Queal, but that is somewhat misguided. Most people or at least most people I know use Queal for supplementing one or two meals per day and for the purpose of not only replacing meals, but rather supplementing the other meals. When I want a premade drink instead of a meal, I want A+ nutrition, so much so that it offsets "worse" decisions for the other meals. When I drink one of my meals, I want to eat some tasty stuff for my other meals and that oftentimes correlates with lower protein and especially higher fat content. With the last Queal version, a shake would offset that, high protein and low fat in my Queal would offset that delicious spaghetti carbonara with a bunch of fat and low protein. Now it further accentuates the problem. With the new formula, it does not give me any leeway. So the problem does not lay with the nutrition per se, but with the fact that it does not work for it did earlier. If it is just a replacement that is not better than what it should be, but just hits the macros, there are better alternatives. For a cheap, convenient and nutritious alternative, I'd just eat some oat meal with whey directly. Costs a lot less, has lot less fat and more protein. Queal was nice for being basically, but tastier and more convenient with the added bonus of vitamins and other goodies.

As a last point, I do not really see the point of staying at the same price. Protein is the most expensive part and I do not see how reducing protein by a third is leveled by higher quality fat ingredients. To get the same level of protein, I have to change to the higher priced Ahtletic Queal? I mean I can basically add a scoup of whey to my shakes and I have Athletic Queal at a much lower price point, but that kind of eliminates the convenience factor. At this point, I'd much rather just eat the oat meal & whey shake combo. I see your points, but I think you are handling it from the wrong perspective.

[nando_25]

As a company you have all the rights to change the product in any way you see fit, but I think you are not just asking to change just someone's mind here, but to change someone's habits. I am sure many people will have done their homework here and won't argue against that the changes are without any fundament. Nevertheless, election in diet is an opinionated decision, according to science probably the most healthy one is a low fat plant based one. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adventist_Health_Studies and yet not everybody follow it right?. Also, these studies were performed on thousands of people during a big span of time by many scientists. Examine.com, as a good resource for information as it is, is run by a person without any medical qualification whatsoever and most of the articles are signed by someone called kamal. Not trying to be disrespectful here but I think that in order to establish a pattern between diet and health examine.com should be just an initial source of information not the ultimate one. Anyway, I think that the users of the product, being as I would call them early adopters, would have done their research and have decided to use the product with the conditions it had before. With the new conditions I will not order it, I think it would be wise to let users like me the option to have a product on a similar conditions as it had before, the new version of the athlete contains less protein than the current standard one. Will still the price be around 20% higher??

Best wishes and have a nice day,