Protein intake affects Lean Mass during deficit (new study)
Options
Azdak
Posts: 8,281 Member
I heard about this study listening to a podcast featuring the author and I thought it came to some interesting conclusions.
The abstract is here: http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/early/2016/01/26/ajcn.115.119339
You might be able to find a complete copy somewhere--I found one on ResearchGate, but that requires a (free) registration. Don't know if it is available anywhere else.
Authors are Thomas Longland, Sara Oikawa, Cameron Mitchell and Stuart Phillips. Phillips headed up the project and he was the one who did the podcast interview.
Researchers looked at the effects of higher protein supplementation on subjects with a) restricted calorie diet and b) high volume of resistance and high-intensity training.
2 Groups: Both fed diets with a 40% calorie deficit from maintenance levels. Trained 6d/wk--4 days resistance training (10 exercise circuit, 3x10 reps @80% 1 RM) + 2 days HIIT/sprint training on a bike. Control Grp was given 1.2 g protein per Kg of body weight; Experimental group given 2.4g protein per kg body weight.
After 4 weeks of training, both groups significantly increased in all fitness measurements and there was no difference between the two groups.
However, the High protein group gained 1.2 kg LBM (vs NC for lower-protein group), and lost 4.5 kg fat (vs 3.5kg for lower-protein group). Both of these differences were statistically significant.
The author made clear in the interview that while the subjects were technically "untrained"--meaning they weren't currently engaged in a structured training program--they were not "newbies". The avg starting 1 RM bench press for all subjects was around 220lbs and avg leg press was about 375lbs.
Like all studies of this type, it is not absolutely conclusive. No one study can do that. There are plenty of variables to be explored with further research to confirm these findings.
It does indicate that, with adequate protein supplementation and resistance exercise, it is possible to follow a substantial calorie deficit and not lose lean mass.
My practical question is being able to consume that much protein and still follow a balanced diet. In this case, subjects calorie intake averaged about 2560 calories per day. The high-protein group had a macro breakdown of 38% Protein, 13% fat, and 49% carbohydrate (311g of CHO per day).
For someone keeping to a 2000 kcal/day intake at the same size, protein would have to make up 50% of total calories. I have been trying to consciously up my intake and I am struggling to get 100g per day and still eat what I consider to be a "normal" diet.
Anyhow, FWIW, I thought this was a well-done study with some interesting conclusions.
The abstract is here: http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/early/2016/01/26/ajcn.115.119339
You might be able to find a complete copy somewhere--I found one on ResearchGate, but that requires a (free) registration. Don't know if it is available anywhere else.
Authors are Thomas Longland, Sara Oikawa, Cameron Mitchell and Stuart Phillips. Phillips headed up the project and he was the one who did the podcast interview.
Researchers looked at the effects of higher protein supplementation on subjects with a) restricted calorie diet and b) high volume of resistance and high-intensity training.
2 Groups: Both fed diets with a 40% calorie deficit from maintenance levels. Trained 6d/wk--4 days resistance training (10 exercise circuit, 3x10 reps @80% 1 RM) + 2 days HIIT/sprint training on a bike. Control Grp was given 1.2 g protein per Kg of body weight; Experimental group given 2.4g protein per kg body weight.
After 4 weeks of training, both groups significantly increased in all fitness measurements and there was no difference between the two groups.
However, the High protein group gained 1.2 kg LBM (vs NC for lower-protein group), and lost 4.5 kg fat (vs 3.5kg for lower-protein group). Both of these differences were statistically significant.
The author made clear in the interview that while the subjects were technically "untrained"--meaning they weren't currently engaged in a structured training program--they were not "newbies". The avg starting 1 RM bench press for all subjects was around 220lbs and avg leg press was about 375lbs.
Like all studies of this type, it is not absolutely conclusive. No one study can do that. There are plenty of variables to be explored with further research to confirm these findings.
It does indicate that, with adequate protein supplementation and resistance exercise, it is possible to follow a substantial calorie deficit and not lose lean mass.
My practical question is being able to consume that much protein and still follow a balanced diet. In this case, subjects calorie intake averaged about 2560 calories per day. The high-protein group had a macro breakdown of 38% Protein, 13% fat, and 49% carbohydrate (311g of CHO per day).
For someone keeping to a 2000 kcal/day intake at the same size, protein would have to make up 50% of total calories. I have been trying to consciously up my intake and I am struggling to get 100g per day and still eat what I consider to be a "normal" diet.
Anyhow, FWIW, I thought this was a well-done study with some interesting conclusions.
0
Replies
-
If anyone wants to listen to the podcast: http://guruperformance.com/episode-74-gaining-muscle-losing-fat-in-an-energy-deficit-with-professor-stu-phillips/0
-
Going to send this around the block one more time.0
-
Bump because this is interesting. Agree about this being a tough target to hit.
I'm also targeting 100 grams of protein a day and it is a PITA. Per this calculation for the high protein group I would need to eat 194 grams of protein a day which would be a bit over half my daily calories.0 -
Here is the full paper (thanks EvgeniZyntx):
https://www.dropbox.com/s/fqrvn62mahzfs8y/Longland Clin Nutr 2016.pdf
The results are consistent with previous studies of a similar nature.
ETA: There is a discussion on this paper here:
http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10343909/lose-fat-gain-muscle-in-before-newbie-gains#latest0 -
Thanks for the link to the other discussion. I completely missed that. Too bad we can't combine the comments.0
-
Interesting. I wonder if the beneficial level of protein would depend on existing weight or LBM, which would seem to make sense.0
-
The author describes this as a "proof of principle" study which I take to mean it is a short-term, smaller scale study used to determine whether the basic principle (in this case, high protein supplementation) shows enough viability to warrant additional research.0
-
Interesting, thanks for the post.....0
-
Thanks for posting the podcast. There was an article on Runner's World talking about this study as well, and I think if it's the same study Alex Hutchinson on Sweat Science (ongoing science series on Runner's World) had an article a couple weeks ago as well.
I find it pretty fascinating but wonder what happens if you take older men, or any women. Thinking the testosterone has to come into play somehow. I can't even get up to the "low" protein level of 1.2g/lb of body weight that they consumed so it's encouraging me to work on that. Rereading your post sounds like you are struggling at the same point I am, the 100g barrier. If I was willing to cut out more stuff I liked for dinner I don't think it would be a problem, but what tends to happen is if I increase my protein my total calories go up too because I'm not willing to 'cut back' on my usual dinner foods. Protein powder is getting me in the 70-90g range consistently which is better than it used to be, but still a long ways to go. Oh and I am bad about lifting weights consistently...so this study is at least inspirational in that I know I need to make some changes. Still I wonder what a non-testosterone machine like myself could do.0 -
blues4miles wrote: »Thanks for posting the podcast. There was an article on Runner's World talking about this study as well, and I think if it's the same study Alex Hutchinson on Sweat Science (ongoing science series on Runner's World) had an article a couple weeks ago as well.
I find it pretty fascinating but wonder what happens if you take older men, or any women. Thinking the testosterone has to come into play somehow. I can't even get up to the "low" protein level of 1.2g/lb of body weight that they consumed so it's encouraging me to work on that. Rereading your post sounds like you are struggling at the same point I am, the 100g barrier. If I was willing to cut out more stuff I liked for dinner I don't think it would be a problem, but what tends to happen is if I increase my protein my total calories go up too because I'm not willing to 'cut back' on my usual dinner foods. Protein powder is getting me in the 70-90g range consistently which is better than it used to be, but still a long ways to go. Oh and I am bad about lifting weights consistently...so this study is at least inspirational in that I know I need to make some changes. Still I wonder what a non-testosterone machine like myself could do.
I cannot answer about the effects of Testosterone (which to be sure, greatly effects), but I have heard/read some researchers talk about Sarcopenia in aging population and how even more protein is needed and evenly spread due to the blunting of MPS (so it takes more Leucine than "normal" to stimulate muscle protein synthesis) in older men and women.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2760315/0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 389 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 919 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions