Beef Versus Whey Protein: The Gut Showdown Self-Experiment

May 26, 2026 updated by: Efforia, Inc
Test whether a doctor-formulated protein made from real beef is more digestible than standard whey protein powder. For the first 30 days, participants receive either standard whey protein powder or Equip Protein and track how the gut responds weekly. At the 30 day mark, all participants receive the standard Equip protein to track differences in digestability.

Study Overview

Status

Status

Indicates the current recruitment status or the expanded access status.
Active, not recruiting

Conditions

Conditions

The disease, disorder, syndrome, illness, or injury that is being studied. On ClinicalTrials.gov, conditions may also include other health-related issues, such as lifespan, quality of life, and health risks.

Intervention / Treatment

Intervention / Treatment

A process or action that is the focus of a clinical study. Interventions include drugs, medical devices, procedures, vaccines, and other products that are either investigational or already available. Interventions can also include noninvasive approaches, such as education or modifying diet and exercise.

Detailed Description

This remotely administered decentralized trial is designed to critically assess the digestive and overall well-being impact of Equip's Prime Protein, a beef-based protein powder, in comparison to standard whey protein. In an era where nutrition claims are often promoted without rigorous testing, Equip is committed to substantiating the benefits of its protein powder through real-world evidence. Over a span of 60 days, this study will employ a cross-over design whereby participants will document their digestive experiences, energy levels, and overall health, providing valuable insights into how each protein source influences gut comfort and tolerability.

Participants in this study will either start with the standard whey protein and transition to Equip's chocolate-flavored beef protein at the halfway mark or use Equip's product from the outset. This methodology allows for a comprehensive comparison between the two protein sources, aiming to offer individuals a clearer understanding of how different proteins affect their gut health. Through daily structured surveys and feedback, participants will not only learn how their bodies respond to each protein type but also contribute to critical data that could potentially elevate the standard of evidence within the supplement industry.

The significance of this study extends beyond individual health, aiming to challenge and reshape the broader nutrition and supplement landscape. Most companies in the supplement industry base their claims on marketing rather than empirical evidence. By conducting this rigorous, real-world study, Equip is holding itself to a standard of scientific accountability and transparency. The findings from this trial will not only inform participants' choices but also aim to advance the entire field towards cleaner, evidence-based nutrition practices. By identifying which protein source better supports digestion and overall comfort, this study stands to make a meaningful impact on public health and industry standards, moving the focus from marketing claims to measurable, scientifically valid outcomes.

More information can be found on the study recruitment page here: https://app.efforia.com/prime-protein-chocolate-gastrointestinal-health/

Study Type

Study Type

Describes the nature of a clinical study. Study types include interventional studies (also called clinical trials), observational studies (including patient registries), and expanded access.
Interventional

Enrollment (Estimated)

Enrollment

The number of participants in a clinical study. The "anticipated" enrollment is the target number of participants that the researchers need for the study.
100

Phase

Phase

The stage of a clinical trial studying a drug or biological product, based on definitions developed by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The phase is based on the study's objective, the number of participants, and other characteristics. There are five phases: Early Phase 1 (formerly listed as Phase 0), Phase 1, Phase 2, Phase 3, and Phase 4. Not Applicable is used to describe trials without FDA-defined phases, including trials of devices or behavioral interventions.
  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Contact

Study Contact

The name and contact information for the person who can answer enrollment questions for a clinical study. Each location where the study is being conducted may also have a specific contact, who may be better able to answer those questions.

Study Locations

  • United States
    • New York
      • New York, New York, United States, 10003
        • Efforia

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Eligibility Criteria

The key requirements that people who want to participate in a clinical study must meet or the characteristics they must have. Eligibility criteria consist of both inclusion criteria (which are required for a person to participate in the study) and exclusion criteria (which prevent a person from participating). Types of eligibility criteria include whether a study accepts healthy volunteers, has age or age group requirements, or is limited by sex.

Ages Eligible for Study

  • Adult
  • Older Adult

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Yes

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Can read and understand English.
  • US resident.
  • Willing and able to follow the requirements of the protocol.
  • Willing to purchase study materials.

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Individuals with Beef Allergy
  • Individuals with Whey Allergy
  • Individuals with Dairy Allergy
  • Individuals with Serious Digestive Disorders
  • Individuals on a Vegan Diet
  • Individuals with Chronic Kidney Disease
  • Pregnant or Nursing Individuals
  • Individuals with Gout

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Health Services Research
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Crossover Assignment
  • Masking: Single

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm

Participant Group / Arm

A group or subgroup of participants in a clinical trial that receives a specific intervention/treatment, or no intervention, according to the trial's protocol.
Intervention / Treatment

Intervention / Treatment

A process or action that is the focus of a clinical study. Interventions include drugs, medical devices, procedures, vaccines, and other products that are either investigational or already available. Interventions can also include noninvasive approaches, such as education or modifying diet and exercise.
Sham Comparator: Crossover longitudinal where participants act as their own control - whey arm
30 % of participants receive a standard chocolate whey protein, followed by the Equip chocolate beef protein.
Dietary supplement: Beef protein
Original beef protein powder chocolate flavor, manufactured by Equip, packed with 21g of complete protein, plus naturally occurring collagen and gelatin
Dietary supplement: Chocolate whey protein
Whey protein isolate is a dairy-derived protein powder containing ≥90% protein by weight, with minimal lactose and fat. The product is provided as a flavored powder and administered orally when mixed with water. The product does not contain added bioactive ingredients beyond standard whey protein isolate.
Experimental: Crossover longitudinal where participants act as their own control - beef arm
70 % of participants receive Equip chocolate protein followed by another Equip chocolate protein.
Dietary supplement: Beef protein
Original beef protein powder chocolate flavor, manufactured by Equip, packed with 21g of complete protein, plus naturally occurring collagen and gelatin

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Primary Outcome Measures

In a clinical study's protocol, the planned outcome measure that is the most important for evaluating the effect of an intervention/treatment. Most clinical studies have one primary outcome measure, but some have more than one.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
PROMIS® Scale v1.0 - Gastrointestinal Constipation 9a
Time Frame: Change from baseline (Day 1-5) in gastrointestinal constipation at 4 weeks after the start of the intervention (Day 25-35)

Outcome Measure Description: Change from baseline in gastrointestinal constipation as assessed by the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System® (PROMIS®) Gastrointestinal Constipation 9a Scale, Version 1.0, which evaluates constipation frequency, severity, and impact over the past 7 days.

Scoring: Each item is scored 1-5; total raw scores are converted to a T-score metric (range ~25-85). Higher scores indicate more severe constipation (worse outcome).
Change from baseline (Day 1-5) in gastrointestinal constipation at 4 weeks after the start of the intervention (Day 25-35)
PROMIS® Scale v1.0 - Gastrointestinal Belly Pain 5a Survey
Time Frame: Change from baseline (Day 1-5) in gastrointestinal belly pain at 4 weeks after the start of the intervention (Day 25-35)

Outcome Measure Description: Change from baseline in gastrointestinal belly pain as assessed by the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System® (PROMIS® Gastrointestinal Belly Pain 5a Scale, Version 1.0), measuring frequency and intensity of abdominal pain over the past 7 days.

Scoring: Each item scored 1-5; T-score conversion range ~25-80. Higher scores indicate more severe belly pain (worse outcome).
Change from baseline (Day 1-5) in gastrointestinal belly pain at 4 weeks after the start of the intervention (Day 25-35)
PROMIS® Scale v1.0 - Gastrointestinal Bowel Incontinence 4a Survey
Time Frame: Change from baseline (Day 1-5) in gastrointestinal bowel incontinence at 8 weeks after the start of the intervention (Day 55-65)

Outcome Measure Description: Change from baseline in gastrointestinal bowel incontinence as assessed by the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System® (PROMIS® Gastrointestinal Bowel Incontinence 4a Scale, Version 1.0), evaluating frequency and impact of bowel incontinence over the past 7 days.

Scoring: Each item scored 1-5; T-score conversion range ~25-80. Higher scores indicate more severe bowel incontinence (worse outcome).
Change from baseline (Day 1-5) in gastrointestinal bowel incontinence at 8 weeks after the start of the intervention (Day 55-65)
PROMIS Scale v1.1 - Gastrointestinal Gas and Bloating 13a
Time Frame: Change from baseline (Day 1-5) in gastrointestinal gas and bloating at 4 weeks after the start of the intervention (Day 25-35)

Outcome Measure Description: Change from baseline in gastrointestinal gas and bloating as assessed by the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System® (PROMIS® Gastrointestinal Gas and Bloating 13a Scale, Version 1.1), which evaluates frequency and intensity over the past 7 days.

Scoring: Each item scored 1-5; T-score conversion range ~25-85. Higher scores indicate more severe gas and bloating (worse outcome).
Change from baseline (Day 1-5) in gastrointestinal gas and bloating at 4 weeks after the start of the intervention (Day 25-35)

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Sponsor

Sponsor

The organization or person who initiates the study and who has authority and control over the study.
Efforia, Inc

Publications and helpful links

The person responsible for entering information about the study voluntarily provides these publications. These may be about anything related to the study.

Helpful Links

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Actual)

Study Start

The actual date on which the first participant was enrolled in a clinical study. The "anticipated" study start date is the date that the researchers think will be the study start date.
February 6, 2026

Primary Completion (Estimated)

Primary Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention to collect final data for the primary outcome measure. Whether the clinical study ended according to the protocol or was terminated does not affect this date. For clinical studies with more than one primary outcome measure with different completion dates, this term refers to the date on which data collection is completed for all the primary outcome measures. The "anticipated" primary completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the primary completion date for the study.
June 6, 2026

Study Completion (Estimated)

Study Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention/treatment to collect final data for the primary outcome measures, secondary outcome measures, and adverse events (that is, the last participant's last visit). The "anticipated" study completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the study completion date.
June 6, 2026

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

First Submitted

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submitted a study record to ClinicalTrials.gov. There is typically a delay of a few days between the first submitted date and the record's availability on ClinicalTrials.gov (the first posted date).
February 24, 2026

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submits a study record that is consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. The sponsor or investigator may need to revise and submit a study record one or more times before NLM's QC review criteria are met. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
March 13, 2026

First Posted (Actual)

First Posted

The date on which the study record was first available on ClinicalTrials.gov after National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review has concluded. There is typically a delay of a few days between the date the study sponsor or investigator submitted the study record and the first posted date.
March 17, 2026

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

Last Update Posted

The most recent date on which changes to a study record were made available on ClinicalTrials.gov. There may be a delay between when the changes were submitted to ClinicalTrials.gov by the study's sponsor or investigator (the last update submitted date) and the last update posted date.
May 28, 2026

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator submitted changes to a study record that are consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
May 26, 2026

Last Verified

Last Verified

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator confirmed the information about a clinical study on ClinicalTrials.gov as accurate and current. If a study with a recruitment status of recruiting; not yet recruiting; or active, not recruiting has not been confirmed within the past 2 years, the study's recruitment status is shown as unknown.
May 1, 2026

More Information

Terms related to this study

Keywords

Other Study ID Numbers

Other Study ID Numbers

Identifiers or ID numbers other than the NCT number that are assigned to a clinical study by the study's sponsor, funders, or others. These numbers may include unique identifiers from other trial registries and National Institutes of Health grant numbers.
  • 47731

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Digestion

Clinical Trials on Beef protein

Search Similar Trials

Sponsors and Collaborators

Medical Conditions

Drug Interventions

Conditions

Rare Diseases

Drug Interventions

Dietary Supplements

Sponsor/Collaborators

Locations

Cookie Settings

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. For more details carefully read our Privacy and Cookies Policy. ...>>>You can change your preferences or withdraw your consent at any time by deleting the cookies from your website or computer as described in the policy. Please accept it and choose your preferences by ticking the corresponding boxes in the "Manage Settings" section below. Please carefully read our Terms of Service before you proceed with using any part of this website.
«Manage Settings