All you health masters out there, I apologize for this novice question.

I am trying to gain weight and I have purchased a GNC Pro Performance Weight Gainer powder (3 kgs). It said that I should use three "heaped scoops", so I was using a kitchen spoon for the heaped scoops. Well, I reached halfway through the powder, and I was not finding too much weight gain (too soon to see effects I guess - also please note I am not depending on the powder alone, I am also eating well and exercising as well). In any case, after reaching halfway through the powder, I struck some hidden treasure inside the powder - a spoon!!

However I am SHOCKED by the size of the spoon. By its measure, three heaped scoops from my kitchen spoon is hardly a half of its scoop.

So my question is - am I supposed to use three heaped scoops from this MASSIVE spoon? Have I been doing to wrong all these weeks?

As you can see, I am pretty bad with this...any advice is greatly appreciated!

  • 3
    use the scoop provided in the protein powder container, that's the correct measure.
    – Luciano
    Sep 7, 2021 at 12:44
  • "[Am] I supposed to use three heaped scoops from this MASSIVE spoon? Have I been doing to wrong all these weeks?" --> Yes. However, most people I know that tried mass gainer for the first time have had a similar reaction. It's a large amount of powder (even compared to protein).
    – C. Lange
    Sep 7, 2021 at 13:30
  • 3
    @C.Lange - Yes. Which basically boils down to "mass gain = more calories". Eat more is a better solution, but nobody has time for that.
    – JohnP
    Sep 7, 2021 at 14:54
  • Good luck on the gainings. As a younger person, I was a hard gainer, and I didn't really understand some of the things I do now, but I was downing anything in the cupboard with calories: baby formula, syrup, PB, etc. My problem is I didn't have a regimen, and I had no concept of how many calories are in so much food, etc. Nowadays, my metabolism has slowed down and I have to be careful. Either way, I'd recommend a calorie tracker. I use one and it probably has a margin of error of several hundred calories a day. Good enough for me, I don't need to measure very molecule I eat. Sep 7, 2021 at 22:27
  • The other thing is just to pound food like a beast. Not indiscriminately, mind you, but you can get away with a diet that is a bit more, shall we say, inclusive, than someone like me who is very efficient at making fat. Unsolicited advice, but there you go. Sep 7, 2021 at 22:31

2 Answers 2


A typical serve of protein powder is 30g, or around 1/4 cup. Weight gainers have larger serving sizes, because they need to fit significant amounts of both protein and carbohydrates into a serving. According to the GNC website, a serve of their Pro Performance Weight Gainer is 182g, which would be about 3/4 cup.

So yes, a serving of this product would be a very large volume of powder, if you were to compare it to typical servings of sugar, instant coffee, etc. But it's 700 kcal per serving, so they're effectively fitting a whole large meal into a single serving, and a whole meal simply cannot fit into a teaspoon.

If you're unsure about the serving size, or the imprecise instructions to use "heaped" spoonfuls, then using a kitchen scale to weigh the serving will guarantee that you are using the correct amount.

  • I'm not sure about 30g as typical. I'd say it falls within the range of 20-30g per scoop, which range is itself somewhat arbitrary. My unflavored Whey Protein Isolate has a 26g scoop, for example. The product you link has 50g/serving, which is just ludicrous for protein usage since the body can't make use of more than between 20-40ish grams of protein per meal depending on the individual, based on Nippard's videos and the studies he cites and the internet in general (I am not a dietician). Sep 7, 2021 at 22:21
  • @MrBoJangles note that I'm talking about the weight of the powder, not the amount of protein in a single serve. A serving of the mass gainer linked is 162g, of which 50g is protein. So a WPC powder might have 22-23g of protein in a 30g serve, and a WPI powder might have 25-26g of protein in a 30g serve. Sep 8, 2021 at 1:05
  • that's a good clarification I failed to make clear in my comment. Sep 9, 2021 at 22:28

Yes, you've been doing it wrong ;)

Note that the serving information (for one of the Pro weight gainers) looks like the following:

enter image description here

182g is 0.4 lbs 👏 per 👏 serving 👏.

Weight gainers work by throwing calories at you like the pool at the bottom of a water park log ride.

The nutrition facts and serving size info are there to tell you both how much is considered a serving size, and what is contained in that serving size.

I personally cannot drink almost any weight gainer at its recommended levels. On the rare occasions I've used them I've done a half-serving (or less) twice a day (or more). Partially because I generally don't need that many extra calories, but also because they're gross.

  • Huh, that's only 380kcal/100 gram. I expected that a weight gainer would be like double of that. That's not even on the level of chocolate. More like lean chicken.
    – Davor
    Sep 7, 2021 at 20:23
  • 1
    @Davor It's roughly in line w/ other mainstream powders, e.g., 334g/1250cal, 100g/365cal, 333g/1280cal, 230g/830cal, etc. Dark chocolate is 100g/500cal, chicken thigh is 100g/245cal, breast is 100g/195cal. There's only so many calories you can fit in a physical volume--you have to move to "pure" fat sources to get there; bacon fat is 100g/900cal, butter is 100g/720cal. Sep 7, 2021 at 20:38
  • 4
    @Davor recall: pure protein is about 4 kcal/gram, carbs are also about 4 kcal/gram. Pure fat is about 9 kcal/gram. There honestly aren’t any more calorically dense things that are compatible with human digestion. They effectively can’t beat 400 kcal/100 grams without adding significant amounts of fat. Sep 7, 2021 at 23:57
  • 2
    @fyrepenguin, alcohol is about 7 kcal/gram, but consuming sufficient quantities for significant weight gain would have side effects.
    – Mark
    Sep 8, 2021 at 1:40
  • 1
    @J... Labels have been metric-only since 1992; I’ve been watching the metric struggle since the Metric Conversion Act (?) circa 1975. You are, however, roughly correct: consumerworld.org/pages/nutritionlabelprs.htm Sep 8, 2021 at 11:25

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.