An industry problem is that far too many people have vested interest. The Bioquest product in question mimics Biotest's formula (Surge) in theory with the hydrolyzed whey and such - and that is the obviously unstated reason of support to quoted "gurus" such as Christian Thibadeau on t-mag and Jeff Zolek in say the Pro Source catalogs which many of you probably also read. These are usually paid endorsements or worked into working contracts working for the parent company - so don't get too crazy for the ole "guru" thumb's up.
Biquest has put money into "sponsored" research (but not being 3rd party independent always leaves much to be desired in this area, so I am NOT overtly excited about the kind of "research" employed by the supplement industry - same can be said for pharmaceuticals in this regard and even far fewer in supplements have double-blind, placebo control...far too little actually merit true ideal study status to be considered legitimate).
So, when I look at TRUE 3rd party testing suggesting of simple macronutrients (one more recently suggested NO need for all the excess carbs ingested by many to get appropriate levels of protein synthesis AND even an insulinomimetic response attributed to ALL macros - no real rationale to overstuff the carbs per se, unless playing on glycogen super-recomps).
Summary: I don't see anything inherently striking about the Myozene formula BUT nothing that suggests it should be a "bad" formula either. Maybe some creatine/glutamine interference, but overall it should "work out" yet doesn't "stand out."
Of course, Bioquest hasn't offered me any money for my virtual support to date either - so in this industry, what do I know?
D_