Protein!?
Replies
-
Sam_I_Am77 wrote: »Sam_I_Am77 wrote: »Sam_I_Am77 wrote: »Not sure.
Regardless, it's wrong.
MFP is neither wrong nor right to be honest. Protein consumption is one of those things that for a lack of better words, "optimal" is up-in-the-air. There are SSSSOOOO many studies that say anything from 1.4 gm's / kg of bodyweight for recreational resistance trained individuals, up to 2.3 gm's / kg, as high as 3gm's / kg (pre-contest bodybuilders), to a study that evaluated the effects of 4gm's / kg as excessive calories and the effect on weight gain. The one thing that I would say researchers know, and I use that loosely, is that above 2.2gm's / kg (~1gm / LB) is not useful unless you're a pre-contest bodybuilder and I think the quantity of those studies is limited at that. If the OP is 132lbs then that's approximately 59.6 kg's and at a protein multiplier of 1.4 gm's / kg, that's approximately 83.4 gm's of protein.
Incorrect.
The most current studies all echo the effectiveness of the range I provided. The results are all the same; the only difference is the way the studies measure those results, e.g. lean body mass vs. bodyweight or kilograms vs. lbs.
Dude, check your math.
0.6 gm's / 1LB (low end of what you've read): 132lbs x 0.60 = 79.2
1.4 gm's / 1KG: 59.55kg's (132 lbs) x 1.4 = 83.4
Kinda' talking the same thing no? I just finished my MS degree, I promise that I'm speaking about current research too, our professors had very strict standards on what is current and what's not.
I don't need to check my math. I know I am accurate.
Your quoted target is simply incorrect when you incorporate the combined results from all of theses studies.
1 to 1.2 grams protein per 1 lb. lean body mass or 0.6 to 0.8 grams protein per 1 lb. bodyweight is what is typically echoed in these studies as optimal... They work out to roughly the same protein goal.
Do they test ranges less or more than this? Of course, but they are not as effective.
Here's the thing and this is what I learned while working on my MS degree, there are very few absolutes in research. You can only "bank" on the quantity of research that implies the same thing in the results and also, if those results are repeatable. I don't discount what you said, I believe there are studies that support exactly what you're saying. But what I'm saying is also accurate as we specifically studied protein consumption in one of my classes.
Good for you. That's why I gave a range based on 40 years of scientific research. I didn't throw out a single figure or a specific percentage to set your protein macro.
No, then what's this?0.6 to 0.8 grams protein per 1 lb. bodyweight.
Again, there's nothing wrong with that range. You're just using your findings as the absolute gospel of protein consumption and that is a very incorrect way of looking at it. I think if you would do some in-depth research on more than a couple pieces of research you would see what I'm saying. Unfortunately I've read close to 400 pieces of peer-reviewed literature in the last 18-months and I can tell you that the data is very very skewed, on most subjects at that.0 -
Sam_I_Am77 wrote: »Sam_I_Am77 wrote: »Sam_I_Am77 wrote: »Sam_I_Am77 wrote: »Not sure.
Regardless, it's wrong.
MFP is neither wrong nor right to be honest. Protein consumption is one of those things that for a lack of better words, "optimal" is up-in-the-air. There are SSSSOOOO many studies that say anything from 1.4 gm's / kg of bodyweight for recreational resistance trained individuals, up to 2.3 gm's / kg, as high as 3gm's / kg (pre-contest bodybuilders), to a study that evaluated the effects of 4gm's / kg as excessive calories and the effect on weight gain. The one thing that I would say researchers know, and I use that loosely, is that above 2.2gm's / kg (~1gm / LB) is not useful unless you're a pre-contest bodybuilder and I think the quantity of those studies is limited at that. If the OP is 132lbs then that's approximately 59.6 kg's and at a protein multiplier of 1.4 gm's / kg, that's approximately 83.4 gm's of protein.
Incorrect.
The most current studies all echo the effectiveness of the range I provided. The results are all the same; the only difference is the way the studies measure those results, e.g. lean body mass vs. bodyweight or kilograms vs. lbs.
Dude, check your math.
0.6 gm's / 1LB (low end of what you've read): 132lbs x 0.60 = 79.2
1.4 gm's / 1KG: 59.55kg's (132 lbs) x 1.4 = 83.4
Kinda' talking the same thing no? I just finished my MS degree, I promise that I'm speaking about current research too, our professors had very strict standards on what is current and what's not.
I don't need to check my math. I know I am accurate.
Your quoted target is simply incorrect when you incorporate the combined results from all of theses studies.
1 to 1.2 grams protein per 1 lb. lean body mass or 0.6 to 0.8 grams protein per 1 lb. bodyweight is what is typically echoed in these studies as optimal... They work out to roughly the same protein goal.
Do they test ranges less or more than this? Of course, but they are not as effective.
Here's the thing and this is what I learned while working on my MS degree, there are very few absolutes in research. You can only "bank" on the quantity of research that implies the same thing in the results and also, if those results are repeatable. I don't discount what you said, I believe there are studies that support exactly what you're saying. But what I'm saying is also accurate as we specifically studied protein consumption in one of my classes.
Good for you. That's why I gave a range based on 40 years of scientific research. I didn't throw out a single figure or a specific percentage to set your protein macro.
No, then what's this?0.6 to 0.8 grams protein per 1 lb. bodyweight.
Again, there's nothing wrong with that range. You're just using your findings as the absolute gospel of protein consumption and that is a very incorrect way of looking at it. I think if you would do some in-depth research on more than a couple pieces of research you would see what I'm saying. Unfortunately I've read close to 400 pieces of peer-reviewed literature in the last 18-months and I can tell you that the data is very very skewed, on most subjects at that.
That's called a range, my friend.
Here is some research that should put your mind at ease about protein intake:
Tarnopolsky et al. (1992) observed no differences in whole body protein synthesis or indexes of lean body mass in strength athletes consuming either 0.64g/lb or 1.10g/lb over a 2 week period. Protein oxidation did increase in the high protein group, indicating a nutrient overload.
Walberg et al. (1988) found that 0.73g/lb was sufficient to maintain positive nitrogen balance in cutting weightlifters over a 7 day time period.
Tarnopolsky et al. (1988) found that only 0.37g/lb was required to maintain positive nitrogen balance in elite bodybuilders (over 5 years of experience, possible previous use of androgens) over a 10 day period. 0.45g/lb was sufficient to maintain lean body mass in bodybuilders over a 2 week period. The authors suggested that 0.55g/lb was sufficient for bodybuilders.
Lemon et al. (1992) found no differences in muscle mass or strength gains in novice bodybuilders consuming either 0.61g/lb or 1.19g/lb over a 4 week period. Based on nitrogen balance data, the authors recommended 0.75g/lb.
Hoffman et al. (2006) found no differences in body composition, strength or resting hormonal concentrations in strength athletes consuming either 0.77g/lb or >0.91g/lb over a 3 month period.
Also see:
Effect of protein intake on strength, body composition and endocrine changes in strength/power athletes. Hoffman JR, Ratamess NA, Kang J, Falvo MJ, Faigenbaum AD. J Int Soc Sports Nutr. 2006 Dec 13;3:12-8.
Macronutrient content of a hypoenergy diet affects nitrogen retention and muscle function in weight lifters. Walberg JL, Leidy MK, Sturgill DJ, Hinkle DE, Ritchey SJ, Sebolt DR. Int J Sports Med. 1988 Aug;9(4):261-6.
Protein requirements and muscle mass/strength changes during intensive training in novice bodybuilders. Lemon PW, Tarnopolsky MA, MacDougall JD, Atkinson SA. J Appl Physiol. 1992 Aug;73(2):767-75.
Influence of protein intake and training status on nitrogen balance and lean body mass. Tarnopolsky MA, MacDougall JD, Atkinson SA. J Appl Physiol. 1988 Jan;64(1):187-93.
Dietary protein for athletes: From requirements to optimum adaptation. Phillips SM, Van Loon LJ. J Sports Sci. 2011;29 Suppl 1:S29-38.
Protein and amino acid metabolism during and after exercise and the effects of nutrition. Rennie MJ, Tipton KD. Annu Rev Nutr. 2000;20:457-83.
Hartman, J. W., Moore, D. R., & Phillips, S. M. (2006). Resistance training reduces whole-body protein turnover and improves net protein retention in untrained young males. Applied Physiology, Nutrition and Metabolism, 31, 557–564.
Moore, D. R., Del Bel, N. C., Nizi, K. I., Hartman, J. W., Tang, J. E., Armstrong, D. et al. (2007). Resistance training reduces fasted- and fed-state leucine turnover and increases dietary nitrogen retention in previously untrained young men. Journal of Nutrition, 137, 985–991.
Effects of exercise on dietary protein requirements. Lemon PW. Int J Sport Nutr. 1998 Dec;8(4):426-47.
Effects of high-calorie supplements on body composition and muscular strength following resistance training. Rozenek R, Ward P, Long S, Garhammer J. J Sports Med Phys Fitness. 2002 Sep;42(3):340-7.
Increased protein maintains nitrogen balance during exercise-induced energy deficit. Pikosky MA, Smith TJ, Grediagin A, Castaneda-Sceppa C, Byerley L, Glickman EL, Young AJ. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2008 Mar;40(3):505-12.
Dietary carbohydrate-to-fat ratio: influence on whole-body nitrogen retention, substrate utilization, and hormone response in healthy male subjects. McCargar LJ, Clandinin MT, Belcastro AN, Walker K. Am J Clin Nutr. 1989 Jun;49(6):1169-78.
Macronutrient Intakes as Determinants of Dietary Protein and Amino Acid Adequacy. Millward, DJ. J. Nutr. June 1, 2004 vol. 134 no. 6 1588S-1596S.0 -
Sam_I_Am77 wrote: »Sam_I_Am77 wrote: »Sam_I_Am77 wrote: »Sam_I_Am77 wrote: »Not sure.
Regardless, it's wrong.
MFP is neither wrong nor right to be honest. Protein consumption is one of those things that for a lack of better words, "optimal" is up-in-the-air. There are SSSSOOOO many studies that say anything from 1.4 gm's / kg of bodyweight for recreational resistance trained individuals, up to 2.3 gm's / kg, as high as 3gm's / kg (pre-contest bodybuilders), to a study that evaluated the effects of 4gm's / kg as excessive calories and the effect on weight gain. The one thing that I would say researchers know, and I use that loosely, is that above 2.2gm's / kg (~1gm / LB) is not useful unless you're a pre-contest bodybuilder and I think the quantity of those studies is limited at that. If the OP is 132lbs then that's approximately 59.6 kg's and at a protein multiplier of 1.4 gm's / kg, that's approximately 83.4 gm's of protein.
Incorrect.
The most current studies all echo the effectiveness of the range I provided. The results are all the same; the only difference is the way the studies measure those results, e.g. lean body mass vs. bodyweight or kilograms vs. lbs.
Dude, check your math.
0.6 gm's / 1LB (low end of what you've read): 132lbs x 0.60 = 79.2
1.4 gm's / 1KG: 59.55kg's (132 lbs) x 1.4 = 83.4
Kinda' talking the same thing no? I just finished my MS degree, I promise that I'm speaking about current research too, our professors had very strict standards on what is current and what's not.
I don't need to check my math. I know I am accurate.
Your quoted target is simply incorrect when you incorporate the combined results from all of theses studies.
1 to 1.2 grams protein per 1 lb. lean body mass or 0.6 to 0.8 grams protein per 1 lb. bodyweight is what is typically echoed in these studies as optimal... They work out to roughly the same protein goal.
Do they test ranges less or more than this? Of course, but they are not as effective.
Here's the thing and this is what I learned while working on my MS degree, there are very few absolutes in research. You can only "bank" on the quantity of research that implies the same thing in the results and also, if those results are repeatable. I don't discount what you said, I believe there are studies that support exactly what you're saying. But what I'm saying is also accurate as we specifically studied protein consumption in one of my classes.
Good for you. That's why I gave a range based on 40 years of scientific research. I didn't throw out a single figure or a specific percentage to set your protein macro.
No, then what's this?0.6 to 0.8 grams protein per 1 lb. bodyweight.
Again, there's nothing wrong with that range. You're just using your findings as the absolute gospel of protein consumption and that is a very incorrect way of looking at it. I think if you would do some in-depth research on more than a couple pieces of research you would see what I'm saying. Unfortunately I've read close to 400 pieces of peer-reviewed literature in the last 18-months and I can tell you that the data is very very skewed, on most subjects at that.
That's called a range, my friend.
Here is some research that should put your mind at ease about protein intake:
Tarnopolsky et al. (1992) observed no differences in whole body protein synthesis or indexes of lean body mass in strength athletes consuming either 0.64g/lb or 1.10g/lb over a 2 week period. Protein oxidation did increase in the high protein group, indicating a nutrient overload.
Walberg et al. (1988) found that 0.73g/lb was sufficient to maintain positive nitrogen balance in cutting weightlifters over a 7 day time period.
Tarnopolsky et al. (1988) found that only 0.37g/lb was required to maintain positive nitrogen balance in elite bodybuilders (over 5 years of experience, possible previous use of androgens) over a 10 day period. 0.45g/lb was sufficient to maintain lean body mass in bodybuilders over a 2 week period. The authors suggested that 0.55g/lb was sufficient for bodybuilders.
Lemon et al. (1992) found no differences in muscle mass or strength gains in novice bodybuilders consuming either 0.61g/lb or 1.19g/lb over a 4 week period. Based on nitrogen balance data, the authors recommended 0.75g/lb.
Hoffman et al. (2006) found no differences in body composition, strength or resting hormonal concentrations in strength athletes consuming either 0.77g/lb or >0.91g/lb over a 3 month period.
Also see:
Effect of protein intake on strength, body composition and endocrine changes in strength/power athletes. Hoffman JR, Ratamess NA, Kang J, Falvo MJ, Faigenbaum AD. J Int Soc Sports Nutr. 2006 Dec 13;3:12-8.
Macronutrient content of a hypoenergy diet affects nitrogen retention and muscle function in weight lifters. Walberg JL, Leidy MK, Sturgill DJ, Hinkle DE, Ritchey SJ, Sebolt DR. Int J Sports Med. 1988 Aug;9(4):261-6.
Protein requirements and muscle mass/strength changes during intensive training in novice bodybuilders. Lemon PW, Tarnopolsky MA, MacDougall JD, Atkinson SA. J Appl Physiol. 1992 Aug;73(2):767-75.
Influence of protein intake and training status on nitrogen balance and lean body mass. Tarnopolsky MA, MacDougall JD, Atkinson SA. J Appl Physiol. 1988 Jan;64(1):187-93.
Dietary protein for athletes: From requirements to optimum adaptation. Phillips SM, Van Loon LJ. J Sports Sci. 2011;29 Suppl 1:S29-38.
Protein and amino acid metabolism during and after exercise and the effects of nutrition. Rennie MJ, Tipton KD. Annu Rev Nutr. 2000;20:457-83.
Hartman, J. W., Moore, D. R., & Phillips, S. M. (2006). Resistance training reduces whole-body protein turnover and improves net protein retention in untrained young males. Applied Physiology, Nutrition and Metabolism, 31, 557–564.
Moore, D. R., Del Bel, N. C., Nizi, K. I., Hartman, J. W., Tang, J. E., Armstrong, D. et al. (2007). Resistance training reduces fasted- and fed-state leucine turnover and increases dietary nitrogen retention in previously untrained young men. Journal of Nutrition, 137, 985–991.
Effects of exercise on dietary protein requirements. Lemon PW. Int J Sport Nutr. 1998 Dec;8(4):426-47.
Effects of high-calorie supplements on body composition and muscular strength following resistance training. Rozenek R, Ward P, Long S, Garhammer J. J Sports Med Phys Fitness. 2002 Sep;42(3):340-7.
Increased protein maintains nitrogen balance during exercise-induced energy deficit. Pikosky MA, Smith TJ, Grediagin A, Castaneda-Sceppa C, Byerley L, Glickman EL, Young AJ. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2008 Mar;40(3):505-12.
Dietary carbohydrate-to-fat ratio: influence on whole-body nitrogen retention, substrate utilization, and hormone response in healthy male subjects. McCargar LJ, Clandinin MT, Belcastro AN, Walker K. Am J Clin Nutr. 1989 Jun;49(6):1169-78.
Macronutrient Intakes as Determinants of Dietary Protein and Amino Acid Adequacy. Millward, DJ. J. Nutr. June 1, 2004 vol. 134 no. 6 1588S-1596S.
That's awesome and you just proved my point. Look at some of the information you provided, and hopefully you're reading more than the abstracts, but there is a wide range of protein recommendations in there. Look at the Tarnopolsky reference, look how low those values are compared to the "range" you mentioned and even some of the values I mentioned; it's exactly what I'm talking about. Also, the ranges you're referring to in these references were measured in grams per pound, whereas I'm referring to grams per kilogram. I'm not arguing or disagreeing with you, I'm just saying there's no absolutes and you should see that in the references you provided.
Really, if you want current research you should keep it within the last 10 years unless it's something that was ground-breaking and 100% proven to be true. If you presented most of the above research to a professor they would fail you. In the case of protein consumption, there is no absolute and again; the references you provided above reflect just that. I'm not going to argue, I have a feeling you're stuck on something and being too dogmatic on this subject so I'm out.
@OP, make your best choices based on the information provided in this thread. When in doubt, go to a licensed dietitian.0 -
Sam_I_Am77 wrote: »Sam_I_Am77 wrote: »Sam_I_Am77 wrote: »Sam_I_Am77 wrote: »Sam_I_Am77 wrote: »Not sure.
Regardless, it's wrong.
MFP is neither wrong nor right to be honest. Protein consumption is one of those things that for a lack of better words, "optimal" is up-in-the-air. There are SSSSOOOO many studies that say anything from 1.4 gm's / kg of bodyweight for recreational resistance trained individuals, up to 2.3 gm's / kg, as high as 3gm's / kg (pre-contest bodybuilders), to a study that evaluated the effects of 4gm's / kg as excessive calories and the effect on weight gain. The one thing that I would say researchers know, and I use that loosely, is that above 2.2gm's / kg (~1gm / LB) is not useful unless you're a pre-contest bodybuilder and I think the quantity of those studies is limited at that. If the OP is 132lbs then that's approximately 59.6 kg's and at a protein multiplier of 1.4 gm's / kg, that's approximately 83.4 gm's of protein.
Incorrect.
The most current studies all echo the effectiveness of the range I provided. The results are all the same; the only difference is the way the studies measure those results, e.g. lean body mass vs. bodyweight or kilograms vs. lbs.
Dude, check your math.
0.6 gm's / 1LB (low end of what you've read): 132lbs x 0.60 = 79.2
1.4 gm's / 1KG: 59.55kg's (132 lbs) x 1.4 = 83.4
Kinda' talking the same thing no? I just finished my MS degree, I promise that I'm speaking about current research too, our professors had very strict standards on what is current and what's not.
I don't need to check my math. I know I am accurate.
Your quoted target is simply incorrect when you incorporate the combined results from all of theses studies.
1 to 1.2 grams protein per 1 lb. lean body mass or 0.6 to 0.8 grams protein per 1 lb. bodyweight is what is typically echoed in these studies as optimal... They work out to roughly the same protein goal.
Do they test ranges less or more than this? Of course, but they are not as effective.
Here's the thing and this is what I learned while working on my MS degree, there are very few absolutes in research. You can only "bank" on the quantity of research that implies the same thing in the results and also, if those results are repeatable. I don't discount what you said, I believe there are studies that support exactly what you're saying. But what I'm saying is also accurate as we specifically studied protein consumption in one of my classes.
Good for you. That's why I gave a range based on 40 years of scientific research. I didn't throw out a single figure or a specific percentage to set your protein macro.
No, then what's this?0.6 to 0.8 grams protein per 1 lb. bodyweight.
Again, there's nothing wrong with that range. You're just using your findings as the absolute gospel of protein consumption and that is a very incorrect way of looking at it. I think if you would do some in-depth research on more than a couple pieces of research you would see what I'm saying. Unfortunately I've read close to 400 pieces of peer-reviewed literature in the last 18-months and I can tell you that the data is very very skewed, on most subjects at that.
That's called a range, my friend.
Here is some research that should put your mind at ease about protein intake:
Tarnopolsky et al. (1992) observed no differences in whole body protein synthesis or indexes of lean body mass in strength athletes consuming either 0.64g/lb or 1.10g/lb over a 2 week period. Protein oxidation did increase in the high protein group, indicating a nutrient overload.
Walberg et al. (1988) found that 0.73g/lb was sufficient to maintain positive nitrogen balance in cutting weightlifters over a 7 day time period.
Tarnopolsky et al. (1988) found that only 0.37g/lb was required to maintain positive nitrogen balance in elite bodybuilders (over 5 years of experience, possible previous use of androgens) over a 10 day period. 0.45g/lb was sufficient to maintain lean body mass in bodybuilders over a 2 week period. The authors suggested that 0.55g/lb was sufficient for bodybuilders.
Lemon et al. (1992) found no differences in muscle mass or strength gains in novice bodybuilders consuming either 0.61g/lb or 1.19g/lb over a 4 week period. Based on nitrogen balance data, the authors recommended 0.75g/lb.
Hoffman et al. (2006) found no differences in body composition, strength or resting hormonal concentrations in strength athletes consuming either 0.77g/lb or >0.91g/lb over a 3 month period.
Also see:
Effect of protein intake on strength, body composition and endocrine changes in strength/power athletes. Hoffman JR, Ratamess NA, Kang J, Falvo MJ, Faigenbaum AD. J Int Soc Sports Nutr. 2006 Dec 13;3:12-8.
Macronutrient content of a hypoenergy diet affects nitrogen retention and muscle function in weight lifters. Walberg JL, Leidy MK, Sturgill DJ, Hinkle DE, Ritchey SJ, Sebolt DR. Int J Sports Med. 1988 Aug;9(4):261-6.
Protein requirements and muscle mass/strength changes during intensive training in novice bodybuilders. Lemon PW, Tarnopolsky MA, MacDougall JD, Atkinson SA. J Appl Physiol. 1992 Aug;73(2):767-75.
Influence of protein intake and training status on nitrogen balance and lean body mass. Tarnopolsky MA, MacDougall JD, Atkinson SA. J Appl Physiol. 1988 Jan;64(1):187-93.
Dietary protein for athletes: From requirements to optimum adaptation. Phillips SM, Van Loon LJ. J Sports Sci. 2011;29 Suppl 1:S29-38.
Protein and amino acid metabolism during and after exercise and the effects of nutrition. Rennie MJ, Tipton KD. Annu Rev Nutr. 2000;20:457-83.
Hartman, J. W., Moore, D. R., & Phillips, S. M. (2006). Resistance training reduces whole-body protein turnover and improves net protein retention in untrained young males. Applied Physiology, Nutrition and Metabolism, 31, 557–564.
Moore, D. R., Del Bel, N. C., Nizi, K. I., Hartman, J. W., Tang, J. E., Armstrong, D. et al. (2007). Resistance training reduces fasted- and fed-state leucine turnover and increases dietary nitrogen retention in previously untrained young men. Journal of Nutrition, 137, 985–991.
Effects of exercise on dietary protein requirements. Lemon PW. Int J Sport Nutr. 1998 Dec;8(4):426-47.
Effects of high-calorie supplements on body composition and muscular strength following resistance training. Rozenek R, Ward P, Long S, Garhammer J. J Sports Med Phys Fitness. 2002 Sep;42(3):340-7.
Increased protein maintains nitrogen balance during exercise-induced energy deficit. Pikosky MA, Smith TJ, Grediagin A, Castaneda-Sceppa C, Byerley L, Glickman EL, Young AJ. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2008 Mar;40(3):505-12.
Dietary carbohydrate-to-fat ratio: influence on whole-body nitrogen retention, substrate utilization, and hormone response in healthy male subjects. McCargar LJ, Clandinin MT, Belcastro AN, Walker K. Am J Clin Nutr. 1989 Jun;49(6):1169-78.
Macronutrient Intakes as Determinants of Dietary Protein and Amino Acid Adequacy. Millward, DJ. J. Nutr. June 1, 2004 vol. 134 no. 6 1588S-1596S.
That's awesome and you just proved my point. Look at some of the information you provided, and hopefully you're reading more than the abstracts, but there is a wide range of protein recommendations in there. Look at the Tarnopolsky reference, look how low those values are compared to the "range" you mentioned and even some of the values I mentioned; it's exactly what I'm talking about. Also, the ranges you're referring to in these references were measured in grams per pound, whereas I'm referring to grams per kilogram. I'm not arguing or disagreeing with you, I'm just saying there's no absolutes and you should see that in the references you provided.
Really, if you want current research you should keep it within the last 10 years unless it's something that was ground-breaking and 100% proven to be true. If you presented most of the above research to a professor they would fail you. In the case of protein consumption, there is no absolute and again; the references you provided above reflect just that. I'm not going to argue, I have a feeling you're stuck on something and being too dogmatic on this subject so I'm out.
You really don't know how to assess a very basic conclusion for 40 years of combined research, do you? Unfortunately, based on this, a professor would fail you.
The average results of all of these studies suggest a range of 0.60 - 0.80 grams of protein per 1 lb. bodyweight.0 -
Sam_I_Am77 wrote: »Sam_I_Am77 wrote: »Sam_I_Am77 wrote: »Sam_I_Am77 wrote: »Sam_I_Am77 wrote: »Not sure.
Regardless, it's wrong.
MFP is neither wrong nor right to be honest. Protein consumption is one of those things that for a lack of better words, "optimal" is up-in-the-air. There are SSSSOOOO many studies that say anything from 1.4 gm's / kg of bodyweight for recreational resistance trained individuals, up to 2.3 gm's / kg, as high as 3gm's / kg (pre-contest bodybuilders), to a study that evaluated the effects of 4gm's / kg as excessive calories and the effect on weight gain. The one thing that I would say researchers know, and I use that loosely, is that above 2.2gm's / kg (~1gm / LB) is not useful unless you're a pre-contest bodybuilder and I think the quantity of those studies is limited at that. If the OP is 132lbs then that's approximately 59.6 kg's and at a protein multiplier of 1.4 gm's / kg, that's approximately 83.4 gm's of protein.
Incorrect.
The most current studies all echo the effectiveness of the range I provided. The results are all the same; the only difference is the way the studies measure those results, e.g. lean body mass vs. bodyweight or kilograms vs. lbs.
Dude, check your math.
0.6 gm's / 1LB (low end of what you've read): 132lbs x 0.60 = 79.2
1.4 gm's / 1KG: 59.55kg's (132 lbs) x 1.4 = 83.4
Kinda' talking the same thing no? I just finished my MS degree, I promise that I'm speaking about current research too, our professors had very strict standards on what is current and what's not.
I don't need to check my math. I know I am accurate.
Your quoted target is simply incorrect when you incorporate the combined results from all of theses studies.
1 to 1.2 grams protein per 1 lb. lean body mass or 0.6 to 0.8 grams protein per 1 lb. bodyweight is what is typically echoed in these studies as optimal... They work out to roughly the same protein goal.
Do they test ranges less or more than this? Of course, but they are not as effective.
Here's the thing and this is what I learned while working on my MS degree, there are very few absolutes in research. You can only "bank" on the quantity of research that implies the same thing in the results and also, if those results are repeatable. I don't discount what you said, I believe there are studies that support exactly what you're saying. But what I'm saying is also accurate as we specifically studied protein consumption in one of my classes.
Good for you. That's why I gave a range based on 40 years of scientific research. I didn't throw out a single figure or a specific percentage to set your protein macro.
No, then what's this?0.6 to 0.8 grams protein per 1 lb. bodyweight.
Again, there's nothing wrong with that range. You're just using your findings as the absolute gospel of protein consumption and that is a very incorrect way of looking at it. I think if you would do some in-depth research on more than a couple pieces of research you would see what I'm saying. Unfortunately I've read close to 400 pieces of peer-reviewed literature in the last 18-months and I can tell you that the data is very very skewed, on most subjects at that.
That's called a range, my friend.
Here is some research that should put your mind at ease about protein intake:
Tarnopolsky et al. (1992) observed no differences in whole body protein synthesis or indexes of lean body mass in strength athletes consuming either 0.64g/lb or 1.10g/lb over a 2 week period. Protein oxidation did increase in the high protein group, indicating a nutrient overload.
Walberg et al. (1988) found that 0.73g/lb was sufficient to maintain positive nitrogen balance in cutting weightlifters over a 7 day time period.
Tarnopolsky et al. (1988) found that only 0.37g/lb was required to maintain positive nitrogen balance in elite bodybuilders (over 5 years of experience, possible previous use of androgens) over a 10 day period. 0.45g/lb was sufficient to maintain lean body mass in bodybuilders over a 2 week period. The authors suggested that 0.55g/lb was sufficient for bodybuilders.
Lemon et al. (1992) found no differences in muscle mass or strength gains in novice bodybuilders consuming either 0.61g/lb or 1.19g/lb over a 4 week period. Based on nitrogen balance data, the authors recommended 0.75g/lb.
Hoffman et al. (2006) found no differences in body composition, strength or resting hormonal concentrations in strength athletes consuming either 0.77g/lb or >0.91g/lb over a 3 month period.
Also see:
Effect of protein intake on strength, body composition and endocrine changes in strength/power athletes. Hoffman JR, Ratamess NA, Kang J, Falvo MJ, Faigenbaum AD. J Int Soc Sports Nutr. 2006 Dec 13;3:12-8.
Macronutrient content of a hypoenergy diet affects nitrogen retention and muscle function in weight lifters. Walberg JL, Leidy MK, Sturgill DJ, Hinkle DE, Ritchey SJ, Sebolt DR. Int J Sports Med. 1988 Aug;9(4):261-6.
Protein requirements and muscle mass/strength changes during intensive training in novice bodybuilders. Lemon PW, Tarnopolsky MA, MacDougall JD, Atkinson SA. J Appl Physiol. 1992 Aug;73(2):767-75.
Influence of protein intake and training status on nitrogen balance and lean body mass. Tarnopolsky MA, MacDougall JD, Atkinson SA. J Appl Physiol. 1988 Jan;64(1):187-93.
Dietary protein for athletes: From requirements to optimum adaptation. Phillips SM, Van Loon LJ. J Sports Sci. 2011;29 Suppl 1:S29-38.
Protein and amino acid metabolism during and after exercise and the effects of nutrition. Rennie MJ, Tipton KD. Annu Rev Nutr. 2000;20:457-83.
Hartman, J. W., Moore, D. R., & Phillips, S. M. (2006). Resistance training reduces whole-body protein turnover and improves net protein retention in untrained young males. Applied Physiology, Nutrition and Metabolism, 31, 557–564.
Moore, D. R., Del Bel, N. C., Nizi, K. I., Hartman, J. W., Tang, J. E., Armstrong, D. et al. (2007). Resistance training reduces fasted- and fed-state leucine turnover and increases dietary nitrogen retention in previously untrained young men. Journal of Nutrition, 137, 985–991.
Effects of exercise on dietary protein requirements. Lemon PW. Int J Sport Nutr. 1998 Dec;8(4):426-47.
Effects of high-calorie supplements on body composition and muscular strength following resistance training. Rozenek R, Ward P, Long S, Garhammer J. J Sports Med Phys Fitness. 2002 Sep;42(3):340-7.
Increased protein maintains nitrogen balance during exercise-induced energy deficit. Pikosky MA, Smith TJ, Grediagin A, Castaneda-Sceppa C, Byerley L, Glickman EL, Young AJ. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2008 Mar;40(3):505-12.
Dietary carbohydrate-to-fat ratio: influence on whole-body nitrogen retention, substrate utilization, and hormone response in healthy male subjects. McCargar LJ, Clandinin MT, Belcastro AN, Walker K. Am J Clin Nutr. 1989 Jun;49(6):1169-78.
Macronutrient Intakes as Determinants of Dietary Protein and Amino Acid Adequacy. Millward, DJ. J. Nutr. June 1, 2004 vol. 134 no. 6 1588S-1596S.
That's awesome and you just proved my point. Look at some of the information you provided, and hopefully you're reading more than the abstracts, but there is a wide range of protein recommendations in there. Look at the Tarnopolsky reference, look how low those values are compared to the "range" you mentioned and even some of the values I mentioned; it's exactly what I'm talking about. Also, the ranges you're referring to in these references were measured in grams per pound, whereas I'm referring to grams per kilogram. I'm not arguing or disagreeing with you, I'm just saying there's no absolutes and you should see that in the references you provided.
Really, if you want current research you should keep it within the last 10 years unless it's something that was ground-breaking and 100% proven to be true. If you presented most of the above research to a professor they would fail you. In the case of protein consumption, there is no absolute and again; the references you provided above reflect just that. I'm not going to argue, I have a feeling you're stuck on something and being too dogmatic on this subject so I'm out.
@OP, make your best choices based on the information provided in this thread. When in doubt, go to a licensed dietitian.
You really don't know how to read research, do you?
The average results of all of these studies suggest a range of 0.60 - 0.80 grams of protein per 1 lb. bodyweight.
Okay, I'll bite at that one... Yes I do, I have a Masters degree in Exercise Science; graduated with honors actually., wrote a meta-analysis too. You cannot average the results of multiple studies especially when the studies evaluate different populations; you cannot do that it is incorrect. If you want to take studies of just "power athletes" and take the average of that, then that would be reasonable. The OP isn't a Power Athlete, so the results of those studies are out-of-context to what the OP needs. The OP needs information related to recreational resistance training individuals, not bodybuilders, not powerlifters, not strength athletes, not power athletes; those results are pretty much out-of-context because they do not address the population represented by the OP of this thread. To get a more accurate protein recommendation for the OP, you would need to find a bulk of current (2005 to 2015) peer-reviewed research that discusses protein consumption for recreational resistance trained individuals within her age group. That is the only way to get an accurate conclusion for her. Just about anything else is out-of-context.0 -
Sam_I_Am77 wrote: »Sam_I_Am77 wrote: »Sam_I_Am77 wrote: »Sam_I_Am77 wrote: »Sam_I_Am77 wrote: »Sam_I_Am77 wrote: »Not sure.
Regardless, it's wrong.
MFP is neither wrong nor right to be honest. Protein consumption is one of those things that for a lack of better words, "optimal" is up-in-the-air. There are SSSSOOOO many studies that say anything from 1.4 gm's / kg of bodyweight for recreational resistance trained individuals, up to 2.3 gm's / kg, as high as 3gm's / kg (pre-contest bodybuilders), to a study that evaluated the effects of 4gm's / kg as excessive calories and the effect on weight gain. The one thing that I would say researchers know, and I use that loosely, is that above 2.2gm's / kg (~1gm / LB) is not useful unless you're a pre-contest bodybuilder and I think the quantity of those studies is limited at that. If the OP is 132lbs then that's approximately 59.6 kg's and at a protein multiplier of 1.4 gm's / kg, that's approximately 83.4 gm's of protein.
Incorrect.
The most current studies all echo the effectiveness of the range I provided. The results are all the same; the only difference is the way the studies measure those results, e.g. lean body mass vs. bodyweight or kilograms vs. lbs.
Dude, check your math.
0.6 gm's / 1LB (low end of what you've read): 132lbs x 0.60 = 79.2
1.4 gm's / 1KG: 59.55kg's (132 lbs) x 1.4 = 83.4
Kinda' talking the same thing no? I just finished my MS degree, I promise that I'm speaking about current research too, our professors had very strict standards on what is current and what's not.
I don't need to check my math. I know I am accurate.
Your quoted target is simply incorrect when you incorporate the combined results from all of theses studies.
1 to 1.2 grams protein per 1 lb. lean body mass or 0.6 to 0.8 grams protein per 1 lb. bodyweight is what is typically echoed in these studies as optimal... They work out to roughly the same protein goal.
Do they test ranges less or more than this? Of course, but they are not as effective.
Here's the thing and this is what I learned while working on my MS degree, there are very few absolutes in research. You can only "bank" on the quantity of research that implies the same thing in the results and also, if those results are repeatable. I don't discount what you said, I believe there are studies that support exactly what you're saying. But what I'm saying is also accurate as we specifically studied protein consumption in one of my classes.
Good for you. That's why I gave a range based on 40 years of scientific research. I didn't throw out a single figure or a specific percentage to set your protein macro.
No, then what's this?0.6 to 0.8 grams protein per 1 lb. bodyweight.
Again, there's nothing wrong with that range. You're just using your findings as the absolute gospel of protein consumption and that is a very incorrect way of looking at it. I think if you would do some in-depth research on more than a couple pieces of research you would see what I'm saying. Unfortunately I've read close to 400 pieces of peer-reviewed literature in the last 18-months and I can tell you that the data is very very skewed, on most subjects at that.
That's called a range, my friend.
Here is some research that should put your mind at ease about protein intake:
Tarnopolsky et al. (1992) observed no differences in whole body protein synthesis or indexes of lean body mass in strength athletes consuming either 0.64g/lb or 1.10g/lb over a 2 week period. Protein oxidation did increase in the high protein group, indicating a nutrient overload.
Walberg et al. (1988) found that 0.73g/lb was sufficient to maintain positive nitrogen balance in cutting weightlifters over a 7 day time period.
Tarnopolsky et al. (1988) found that only 0.37g/lb was required to maintain positive nitrogen balance in elite bodybuilders (over 5 years of experience, possible previous use of androgens) over a 10 day period. 0.45g/lb was sufficient to maintain lean body mass in bodybuilders over a 2 week period. The authors suggested that 0.55g/lb was sufficient for bodybuilders.
Lemon et al. (1992) found no differences in muscle mass or strength gains in novice bodybuilders consuming either 0.61g/lb or 1.19g/lb over a 4 week period. Based on nitrogen balance data, the authors recommended 0.75g/lb.
Hoffman et al. (2006) found no differences in body composition, strength or resting hormonal concentrations in strength athletes consuming either 0.77g/lb or >0.91g/lb over a 3 month period.
Also see:
Effect of protein intake on strength, body composition and endocrine changes in strength/power athletes. Hoffman JR, Ratamess NA, Kang J, Falvo MJ, Faigenbaum AD. J Int Soc Sports Nutr. 2006 Dec 13;3:12-8.
Macronutrient content of a hypoenergy diet affects nitrogen retention and muscle function in weight lifters. Walberg JL, Leidy MK, Sturgill DJ, Hinkle DE, Ritchey SJ, Sebolt DR. Int J Sports Med. 1988 Aug;9(4):261-6.
Protein requirements and muscle mass/strength changes during intensive training in novice bodybuilders. Lemon PW, Tarnopolsky MA, MacDougall JD, Atkinson SA. J Appl Physiol. 1992 Aug;73(2):767-75.
Influence of protein intake and training status on nitrogen balance and lean body mass. Tarnopolsky MA, MacDougall JD, Atkinson SA. J Appl Physiol. 1988 Jan;64(1):187-93.
Dietary protein for athletes: From requirements to optimum adaptation. Phillips SM, Van Loon LJ. J Sports Sci. 2011;29 Suppl 1:S29-38.
Protein and amino acid metabolism during and after exercise and the effects of nutrition. Rennie MJ, Tipton KD. Annu Rev Nutr. 2000;20:457-83.
Hartman, J. W., Moore, D. R., & Phillips, S. M. (2006). Resistance training reduces whole-body protein turnover and improves net protein retention in untrained young males. Applied Physiology, Nutrition and Metabolism, 31, 557–564.
Moore, D. R., Del Bel, N. C., Nizi, K. I., Hartman, J. W., Tang, J. E., Armstrong, D. et al. (2007). Resistance training reduces fasted- and fed-state leucine turnover and increases dietary nitrogen retention in previously untrained young men. Journal of Nutrition, 137, 985–991.
Effects of exercise on dietary protein requirements. Lemon PW. Int J Sport Nutr. 1998 Dec;8(4):426-47.
Effects of high-calorie supplements on body composition and muscular strength following resistance training. Rozenek R, Ward P, Long S, Garhammer J. J Sports Med Phys Fitness. 2002 Sep;42(3):340-7.
Increased protein maintains nitrogen balance during exercise-induced energy deficit. Pikosky MA, Smith TJ, Grediagin A, Castaneda-Sceppa C, Byerley L, Glickman EL, Young AJ. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2008 Mar;40(3):505-12.
Dietary carbohydrate-to-fat ratio: influence on whole-body nitrogen retention, substrate utilization, and hormone response in healthy male subjects. McCargar LJ, Clandinin MT, Belcastro AN, Walker K. Am J Clin Nutr. 1989 Jun;49(6):1169-78.
Macronutrient Intakes as Determinants of Dietary Protein and Amino Acid Adequacy. Millward, DJ. J. Nutr. June 1, 2004 vol. 134 no. 6 1588S-1596S.
That's awesome and you just proved my point. Look at some of the information you provided, and hopefully you're reading more than the abstracts, but there is a wide range of protein recommendations in there. Look at the Tarnopolsky reference, look how low those values are compared to the "range" you mentioned and even some of the values I mentioned; it's exactly what I'm talking about. Also, the ranges you're referring to in these references were measured in grams per pound, whereas I'm referring to grams per kilogram. I'm not arguing or disagreeing with you, I'm just saying there's no absolutes and you should see that in the references you provided.
Really, if you want current research you should keep it within the last 10 years unless it's something that was ground-breaking and 100% proven to be true. If you presented most of the above research to a professor they would fail you. In the case of protein consumption, there is no absolute and again; the references you provided above reflect just that. I'm not going to argue, I have a feeling you're stuck on something and being too dogmatic on this subject so I'm out.
@OP, make your best choices based on the information provided in this thread. When in doubt, go to a licensed dietitian.
You really don't know how to read research, do you?
The average results of all of these studies suggest a range of 0.60 - 0.80 grams of protein per 1 lb. bodyweight.
Okay, I'll bite at that one... Yes I do, I have a Masters degree in Exercise Science; graduated with honors actually., wrote a meta-analysis too. You cannot average the results of multiple studies especially when the studies evaluate different populations; you cannot do that it is incorrect. If you want to take studies of just "power athletes" and take the average of that, then that would be reasonable. The OP isn't a Power Athlete, so the results of those studies are out-of-context to what the OP needs. The OP needs information related to recreational resistance training individuals, not bodybuilders, not powerlifters, not strength athletes, not power athletes; those results are pretty much out-of-context because they do not address the population represented by the OP of this thread. To get a more accurate protein recommendation for the OP, you would need to find a bulk of current (2005 to 2015) peer-reviewed research that discusses protein consumption for recreational resistance trained individuals within her age group. That is the only way to get an accurate conclusion for her. Just about anything else is out-of-context.
Good for you. You seem to be very proud about that yet you advise people to hire dieticians (lol) and you do not seem to understand how research works.
Our physiology and the way our bodies function does not vary greatly from person to person. What you are suggesting is that active individuals with different workout routines will require vastly different amounts of protein from each other. I hope you don't believe in gender-specific protein powder, too... but it seems like you probably do.
Sorry, but when it comes to nutrition, hormone health, new muscle synthesis, etc. you are not comparing an elephant to a human, a plant to a human, a worm to a human.... you are comparing humans to humans. It isn't as complicated as you're trying to make it.
Lastly, the results for optimal protein intake haven't really changed in the last 40 years. Even so, I did reference a study done in 2011 above... In that study, they determined that 0.80 grams of protein per 1 lb. bodyweight was the upper end of what can be utilized to promote new muscle synthesis, even in bodybuilders.0 -
in for the "debate"!0
-
Sam_I_Am77 wrote: »And NO... it was found in my graduate school's library but you might find on the internet via Google located on PubMed or Google Scholar or XYZ web-site that provides peer reviewed studies. Nice try though...
Fair enough ...I'll retract my snark on the Google comment. Though I might respectfully suggest referring to Google Scholar, etc instead of just saying "Google it" (which you have to admit, is far too often used to justify outright false premises) in the future. The former I would have had a much different reaction to.
In the end though, in re: the OP - it seems we're all in about the same ballpark...so I'm not exactly sure what we're bickering about any more (other than it's MFP and that's what we do).0 -
ceoverturf wrote: »Sam_I_Am77 wrote: »And NO... it was found in my graduate school's library but you might find on the internet via Google located on PubMed or Google Scholar or XYZ web-site that provides peer reviewed studies. Nice try though...
Fair enough ...I'll retract my snark on the Google comment. Though I might respectfully suggest referring to Google Scholar, etc instead of just saying "Google it" (which you have to admit, is far too often used to justify outright false premises) in the future. The former I would have had a much different reaction to.
In the end though, in re: the OP - it seems we're all in about the same ballpark...so I'm not exactly sure what we're bickering about any more (other than it's MFP and that's what we do).
because the +/-25g protein spread matters!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! It means I get one less serving of cereal.0 -
ceoverturf wrote: »
In the end though, in re: the OP - it seems we're all in about the same ballpark...so I'm not exactly sure what we're bickering about any more (other than it's MFP and that's what we do).
I'm not sure either. I never said he was wrong, I just there's no abolute because the available data lends to many different results. The only things I do know, not think, that's he wrong about is averaging results. Results must be applied in-context to the population that is studied, period. We can debate the human is a human all day long but there is a huge difference between the needs to an olympic weight lifting athlete and a recreational lifter.0 -
LolBroScience wrote: »ceoverturf wrote: »Sam_I_Am77 wrote: »And NO... it was found in my graduate school's library but you might find on the internet via Google located on PubMed or Google Scholar or XYZ web-site that provides peer reviewed studies. Nice try though...
Fair enough ...I'll retract my snark on the Google comment. Though I might respectfully suggest referring to Google Scholar, etc instead of just saying "Google it" (which you have to admit, is far too often used to justify outright false premises) in the future. The former I would have had a much different reaction to.
In the end though, in re: the OP - it seems we're all in about the same ballpark...so I'm not exactly sure what we're bickering about any more (other than it's MFP and that's what we do).
because the +/-25g protein spread matters!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Well I suppose you're right. I mean if Newman from Seinfeld just had eaten one more Quest bar a day, he could've been the next Ah-nold.0 -
ceoverturf wrote: »In the end though, in re: the OP - it seems we're all in about the same ballpark...so I'm not exactly sure what we're bickering about any more (other than it's MFP and that's what we do).
This is what I'm wondering about. The difference between a range of .6-.8 g per lb of body weight and 1.4-2.2 g per kg of body weight isn't that significant, especially since there's no harm from getting protein in the .81-1 g per lb of bodyweight range.
Where it becomes problematic is if people are really obese and have much less LBM than you'd expect from their bodyweights. Then I'd focus on goal weight or try to estimate LBM.0 -
ceoverturf wrote: »In the end though, in re: the OP - it seems we're all in about the same ballpark...so I'm not exactly sure what we're bickering about any more (other than it's MFP and that's what we do).
So then you do understand what we're bickering about.0 -
Sam_I_Am77 wrote: »ceoverturf wrote: »
In the end though, in re: the OP - it seems we're all in about the same ballpark...so I'm not exactly sure what we're bickering about any more (other than it's MFP and that's what we do).
I'm not sure either. I never said he was wrong, I just there's no abolute because the available data lends to many different results. The only things I do know, not think, that's he wrong about is averaging results. Results must be applied in-context to the population that is studied, period. We can debate the human is a human all day long but there is a huge difference between the needs to an olympic weight lifting athlete and a recreational lifter.
Fun little fact... all plants on the planet Earth thrive best with a 3-1-2 ratio of nitrogen-phosphorous-potassium. From a house fern, to a tree, to an ocean plant, to a cactus.... size, strength, and harsh environments are not factors.
For humans, there have been countless studies done on protein intake and how it relates to maintaining muscles and promoting new muscle synthesis while training. 0.80 grams per 1 lb. bodyweight is the upper register of that... plain and simple. These results hold true for a variety of populations, assuming they are active and not extremely sedentary or obese.
There is not a huge protein intake difference between the needs of an olympic weightlifter and a recreational lifter... There is not even a small difference. The only difference is the volume of their workout, their activity level, and their overall diet or caloric intake. Protein intake has a ceiling as it relates to assisting muscles. Anything that you have said to the contrary thus far is not based in actual science.0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »ceoverturf wrote: »In the end though, in re: the OP - it seems we're all in about the same ballpark...so I'm not exactly sure what we're bickering about any more (other than it's MFP and that's what we do).
This is what I'm wondering about. The difference between a range of .6-.8 g per lb of body weight and 1.4-2.2 g per kg of body weight isn't that significant, especially since there's no harm from getting protein in the .81-1 g per lb of bodyweight range.
Where it becomes problematic is if people are really obese and have much less LBM than you'd expect from their bodyweights. Then I'd focus on goal weight or try to estimate LBM.
yep0 -
ceoverturf wrote: »In the end though, in re: the OP - it seems we're all in about the same ballpark...so I'm not exactly sure what we're bickering about any more (other than it's MFP and that's what we do).
So then you do understand what we're bickering about.
0 -
Fun little fact... all plants on the planet earth thrive best with a 3-1-2 ratio of nitrogen-phosphorous-potassium. From a house fern, to a tree, to an ocean plant, to a cactus.... size, strength, and harsh environments are not factors.
The OP is'n't a plant, your comparison is irrelevant.For humans, there have been countless studies done on protein intake and how it relates to maintaining muscles and promoting new muscle synthesis while training. 0.80 grams per 1 lb. bodyweight is the upper register of that... plain and simple. These results hold true for a variety of populations, assuming they are active and not extremely sedentary or obese.
Yes there have been, I don't disagree with you and I'm still trying to figure out what your problem is.There is not a huge protein intake difference between the needs of an olympic weightlifter and a recreational lifter... There is not even a small difference. The only difference is the volume of their workout, their activity level, and their overall diet or caloric intake. Protein intake has a ceiling as it relates assisting muscles. Anything that you have said to the contrary thus far is not based in actual science.
I don't mean this is a sarcastic or mean way either, but if you believe that then you really need to read more peer-reviewed research. I can assure you, everything I've stated is based on a peer-reviewed (mostly primary source material at that) literature.
0 -
Sam_I_Am77 wrote: »Fun little fact... all plants on the planet earth thrive best with a 3-1-2 ratio of nitrogen-phosphorous-potassium. From a house fern, to a tree, to an ocean plant, to a cactus.... size, strength, and harsh environments are not factors.
The OP is'n't a plan, your comparison is irrelevant.For humans, there have been countless studies done on protein intake and how it relates to maintaining muscles and promoting new muscle synthesis while training. 0.80 grams per 1 lb. bodyweight is the upper register of that... plain and simple. These results hold true for a variety of populations, assuming they are active and not extremely sedentary or obese.
Yes there have been, I don't disagree with you and I'm still trying to figure out what your problem is.There is not a huge protein intake difference between the needs of an olympic weightlifter and a recreational lifter... There is not even a small difference. The only difference is the volume of their workout, their activity level, and their overall diet or caloric intake. Protein intake has a ceiling as it relates assisting muscles. Anything that you have said to the contrary thus far is not based in actual science.
I don't mean this is a sarcastic or mean way either, but if you believe that then you really need to read more peer-reviewed research. I can assure you, everything I've stated is based on a peer-reviewed (mostly primary source material at that) literature.
Again, you seem to be missing the basic point. You also have a tendency for misinterpreting results from the majority of published peer-reviewed studies, or perhaps not understanding them from the very start.0 -
I took .9 grams / lb today, am I dead now? I'd like both Sam and Six's opinions.0
-
Sam_I_Am77 wrote: »Fun little fact... all plants on the planet earth thrive best with a 3-1-2 ratio of nitrogen-phosphorous-potassium. From a house fern, to a tree, to an ocean plant, to a cactus.... size, strength, and harsh environments are not factors.
The OP is'n't a plan, your comparison is irrelevant.For humans, there have been countless studies done on protein intake and how it relates to maintaining muscles and promoting new muscle synthesis while training. 0.80 grams per 1 lb. bodyweight is the upper register of that... plain and simple. These results hold true for a variety of populations, assuming they are active and not extremely sedentary or obese.
Yes there have been, I don't disagree with you and I'm still trying to figure out what your problem is.There is not a huge protein intake difference between the needs of an olympic weightlifter and a recreational lifter... There is not even a small difference. The only difference is the volume of their workout, their activity level, and their overall diet or caloric intake. Protein intake has a ceiling as it relates assisting muscles. Anything that you have said to the contrary thus far is not based in actual science.
I don't mean this is a sarcastic or mean way either, but if you believe that then you really need to read more peer-reviewed research. I can assure you, everything I've stated is based on a peer-reviewed (mostly primary source material at that) literature.
Again, you seem to be missing the basic point. You also have a tendency for misinterpreting results from the majority of published peer-reviewed studies, or perhaps not understanding them from the very start.
Alright, you win I give-up... I've can't continue arguing with ignorance.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392.9K Introduce Yourself
- 43.7K Getting Started
- 260.1K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.8K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 415 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.9K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.6K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.5K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions