Calorie Counter

You are currently viewing the message boards in:

New review: RDA protein intake is too low, 1.5-2.2g/kg recommended for everyone.

WetcoasterWetcoaster Posts: 1,790Member Member Posts: 1,790Member Member
Abstract

A novel method has been developed to determine protein requirements, which is called Indicator amino acid oxidation (IAAO). This technique has been validated by comparison with the “gold standard” nitrogen balance”. Using IAAO we have shown that minimum protein requirements have been under estimated by 30-50%. The National Academy of Sciences have for macro-nutrients proposed “Acceptable Macronutrient Distribution Ranges”, which for protein is 10 to 35% of total energy. In practice, we suggest 1.5-2.2 g/kg/d of a variety of high-quality proteins.


Full study

http://www.nrcresearchpress.com/doi/pdf/10.1139/apnm-2015-0549
«1

Replies

  • zyxstzyxst Posts: 9,145Member Member Posts: 9,145Member Member
    Does this mean the people who've been eating their body weight in protein have been right all along? If I can find decent tasting chocolate protein, I'd easily hit 140 protein a day.
  • senecarrsenecarr Posts: 5,377Member Member Posts: 5,377Member Member
    zyxst wrote: »
    Does this mean the people who've been eating their body weight in protein have been right all along? If I can find decent tasting chocolate protein, I'd easily hit 140 protein a day.

    Not to make this another protein recommendation thread, but I think decent tasting is in the eye of the beholder. If Godiva chocolate's taste is something you say is definitively and discernibly worth the premium, I'd venture nothing in the world of protein powder is going to be something you'll call decent.
    I think AnvilHead was quite vociferous for Trutein, but I can't personally vouch.
  • zyxstzyxst Posts: 9,145Member Member Posts: 9,145Member Member
    senecarr wrote: »
    zyxst wrote: »
    Does this mean the people who've been eating their body weight in protein have been right all along? If I can find decent tasting chocolate protein, I'd easily hit 140 protein a day.

    Not to make this another protein recommendation thread, but I think decent tasting is in the eye of the beholder. If Godiva chocolate's taste is something you say is definitively and discernibly worth the premium, I'd venture nothing in the world of protein powder is going to be something you'll call decent.
    I think AnvilHead was quite vociferous for Trutein, but I can't personally vouch.

    It's easier for me to fit in a dessert/sweet than "normal" high protein foods like tuna, chicken, Greek yogurt. I've never been a huge meat eater, even less so now with HBP cutting out a few of my high protein foods (jerky and cottage cheese), which puts me into looking at protein supplements.

    Sorry for the derail. I'm sure Wetcoaster was looking for scientific talk rather than me being a smartypants.
    SMARTY-PANTS-CLOTHING-ACCESSORIES_148133_image.gif
  • WetcoasterWetcoaster Posts: 1,790Member Member Posts: 1,790Member Member
  • senecarrsenecarr Posts: 5,377Member Member Posts: 5,377Member Member
    zyxst wrote: »
    senecarr wrote: »
    zyxst wrote: »
    Does this mean the people who've been eating their body weight in protein have been right all along? If I can find decent tasting chocolate protein, I'd easily hit 140 protein a day.

    Not to make this another protein recommendation thread, but I think decent tasting is in the eye of the beholder. If Godiva chocolate's taste is something you say is definitively and discernibly worth the premium, I'd venture nothing in the world of protein powder is going to be something you'll call decent.
    I think AnvilHead was quite vociferous for Trutein, but I can't personally vouch.

    It's easier for me to fit in a dessert/sweet than "normal" high protein foods like tuna, chicken, Greek yogurt. I've never been a huge meat eater, even less so now with HBP cutting out a few of my high protein foods (jerky and cottage cheese), which puts me into looking at protein supplements.

    Sorry for the derail. I'm sure Wetcoaster was looking for scientific talk rather than me being a smartypants.
    SMARTY-PANTS-CLOTHING-ACCESSORIES_148133_image.gif

    16 pages on protein. He was going to need to give people time to digest.
  • alanatkin9alanatkin9 Posts: 6Member Member Posts: 6Member Member
    i personally think its nonsense, the average person does not need any where near 2g per pound of body weight, and protein powder should be used to a minimum anyway, everybody seems to be over thinking things theses days. high protein and fats is the way to go with carbs if and when you think their needed, thats my opinion anyway...
  • WetcoasterWetcoaster Posts: 1,790Member Member Posts: 1,790Member Member
    alanatkin9 wrote: »
    i personally think its nonsense, the average person does not need any where near 2g per pound of body weight, and protein powder should be used to a minimum anyway, everybody seems to be over thinking things theses days. high protein and fats is the way to go with carbs if and when you think their needed, thats my opinion anyway...

    Have any studies to back up your opinion?
  • stealthqstealthq Posts: 4,307Member Member Posts: 4,307Member Member
    alanatkin9 wrote: »
    i personally think its nonsense, the average person does not need any where near 2g per pound of body weight, and protein powder should be used to a minimum anyway, everybody seems to be over thinking things theses days. high protein and fats is the way to go with carbs if and when you think their needed, thats my opinion anyway...

    Re-read. Recommendation is per kg, not lb.
  • juggernaut1974juggernaut1974 Posts: 6,212Member Member Posts: 6,212Member Member
    senecarr wrote: »
    zyxst wrote: »
    Does this mean the people who've been eating their body weight in protein have been right all along? If I can find decent tasting chocolate protein, I'd easily hit 140 protein a day.

    Not to make this another protein recommendation thread, but I think decent tasting is in the eye of the beholder. If Godiva chocolate's taste is something you say is definitively and discernibly worth the premium, I'd venture nothing in the world of protein powder is going to be something you'll call decent.
    I think AnvilHead was quite vociferous for Trutein, but I can't personally vouch.

    I ordered a few samples base on his recommendation.

    My favorite so far was the shamrock shake flavor. Cinnamon bun and Chocolate Peanut Butter were OK.

    I still have a few more to try
  • lithezebralithezebra Posts: 3,684Member Member Posts: 3,684Member Member
    Coincidentally, 1.5 grams protein per kg of my bodyweight is exactly what my protein goal is, although I've been coasting along thinking it's okay if I only get 3/4 of it. I'd love to have a serving of fish every day.
    edited March 2016
  • kommodevarankommodevaran Posts: 17,960Member Member Posts: 17,960Member Member
    I don't know, I love meat, but not that much. The old protein recommendations were very low, and now this. Nobody likes the middle ground it seems.
  • Nony_MouseNony_Mouse Posts: 4,635Member Member Posts: 4,635Member Member
    I don't know, I love meat, but not that much. The old protein recommendations were very low, and now this. Nobody likes the middle ground it seems.

    I guess it depends where you are weight-wise. The low end of that range (1.5g per kg) is smack bang on what I aim for as a minimum (and mostly hit), and I'm vegetarian, so it's definitely doable.
  • lynn_glenmontlynn_glenmont Posts: 7,012Member Member Posts: 7,012Member Member
    This paper says that the "normal rate of energy expenditure" for an adult is 42 kcal/kg/d. I would have to burn 1000 calories a day from intentional exercise to hit 42 kcal/kg/d. So I guess I'm not normal and therefore it's unlikely that the other statements in the paper apply to me.

    What I did not know and find disturbing is that the methodologies used to reach both the current .8 kcal/kg/d RDA recommendation from the National Academies of Science and this paper's recommended 1.5 to 2.2 kcal/kg/d appear to be completely divorced from any studies of the health effects of eating different amounts of protein. Apparently both methods just look for the point where based either on nitrogen balance or IAAO it seems that the body is no longer using all the protein you're feeding it? If somebody understands this better (and differently) from me, please explain.
  • JruzerJruzer Posts: 3,310Member Member Posts: 3,310Member Member
    What I did not know and find disturbing is that the methodologies used to reach both the current .8 kcal/kg/d RDA recommendation from the National Academies of Science and this paper's recommended 1.5 to 2.2 kcal/kg/d appear to be completely divorced from any studies of the health effects of eating different amounts of protein. Apparently both methods just look for the point where based either on nitrogen balance or IAAO it seems that the body is no longer using all the protein you're feeding it? If somebody understands this better (and differently) from me, please explain.

    I'm puzzled by this as well. I just scanned the paper as I'm not totally conversant with the subject. But does the maximum rate of protein that can be utilized based on nitrogen balance mean that that's the optimum uptake of protein? Or are they stealing a base?

    There does appear to be some conflict of interest as well, although that should obviously not discount the publication.

    And I'm not sure what they call "reasonable." I have a hard time getting in 120 g of protein per day, well below 2.2 g/kg, and I eat a lot of protein-rich foods.
  • senecarrsenecarr Posts: 5,377Member Member Posts: 5,377Member Member
    senecarr wrote: »
    zyxst wrote: »
    Does this mean the people who've been eating their body weight in protein have been right all along? If I can find decent tasting chocolate protein, I'd easily hit 140 protein a day.

    Not to make this another protein recommendation thread, but I think decent tasting is in the eye of the beholder. If Godiva chocolate's taste is something you say is definitively and discernibly worth the premium, I'd venture nothing in the world of protein powder is going to be something you'll call decent.
    I think AnvilHead was quite vociferous for Trutein, but I can't personally vouch.

    I ordered a few samples base on his recommendation.

    My favorite so far was the shamrock shake flavor. Cinnamon bun and Chocolate Peanut Butter were OK.

    I still have a few more to try

    I had to give away the mint chocolate chip sample of Cellucor I had. I don't care for mint at all.
  • psuLemonpsuLemon Posts: 35,080Member, MFP Moderator, Greeter, Premium MFP Moderator Posts: 35,080Member, MFP Moderator, Greeter, Premium MFP Moderator
    I don't know, I love meat, but not that much. The old protein recommendations were very low, and now this. Nobody likes the middle ground it seems.

    Just want to make sure, you do realize that there is more than meat as a source of protein right. And 1.5kg isn't that much. For a 150lb per, it's roughly 102g of protein. Some studies might even see that as light, especially if you are lean.



    Tagging to read the full study.
    edited March 2016
  • kommodevarankommodevaran Posts: 17,960Member Member Posts: 17,960Member Member
    psuLemon wrote: »
    I don't know, I love meat, but not that much. The old protein recommendations were very low, and now this. Nobody likes the middle ground it seems.

    Just want to make sure, you do realize that there is more than meat as a source of protein right. And 1.5kg isn't that much. For a 150lb per, it's roughly 102g of protein. Some studies might even see that as light, especially if you are lean.

    Yes, I know there's protein in lots of foods, but I believe I would have to increase my meat intake to increase my protein intake without increasing total calories? I don't fear protein, but I want to just eat the amount I need, and not "too much" meat. Last time I checked/tracked, I ate 1.25 grams of protein per kg of my bodyweight. 70 grams of protein and 70 grams of fat seems to be a sweet spot where I feel healthy and satiated, and it's easy to prepare tasty meals, even if I reduce or increase carbs. (It sounds a bit confused, lol, I'm not good with maths today, but this works for me.)
    edited March 2016
  • vansnydervansnyder Posts: 20Member, Premium Member Posts: 20Member, Premium Member
    This is an interesting area, I have been dieting and as such it is difficult to get enough protein sometimes. I am not well educated in vitamin and protein levels but I recently read "The bowflex body plan" by Ellington Darden, Ph.D, in there he points out research he did on himself while in graduate school working with Dr Schendel at Florida State.

    Ellington was a body builder at the time and was consuming large quantities of protein for energy and muscle development. Dr Schendel advised him to research how much his body was consuming and how much was being excreted. After 2 months of monotoring his total intake, energy burned, and collecting and sampling all of his urine, he found anything over 0.8 grams of protein per Kilogram of body weight was being excreted in his urine. He stated that his range of protein intake during the testing ran from 70g in a day to 380g, mostly through high protein powders. His calorie intake was approximatly 4,100 per day and he could not tell any difference in energy or muscle development when consuming more.

    New studies may be finding new things, so I will continue reading to see what is recomended but as just an average guy, I will stick with the old guidlines for now. Thank you for posting the information because to stay informed is important whether any of us take the new advice or not its still good to know what is current news on our health.
  • JruzerJruzer Posts: 3,310Member Member Posts: 3,310Member Member
    psuLemon wrote: »
    I don't know, I love meat, but not that much. The old protein recommendations were very low, and now this. Nobody likes the middle ground it seems.

    Just want to make sure, you do realize that there is more than meat as a source of protein right. And 1.5kg isn't that much. For a 150lb per, it's roughly 102g of protein. Some studies might even see that as light, especially if you are lean.

    The authors appear to think that meat, eggs, and dairy are the preferred sources:
    High-quality animal proteins require far less energy intake to meet essential amino acid needs than lower quality plant proteins.
  • psuLemonpsuLemon Posts: 35,080Member, MFP Moderator, Greeter, Premium MFP Moderator Posts: 35,080Member, MFP Moderator, Greeter, Premium MFP Moderator
    Jruzer wrote: »
    psuLemon wrote: »
    I don't know, I love meat, but not that much. The old protein recommendations were very low, and now this. Nobody likes the middle ground it seems.

    Just want to make sure, you do realize that there is more than meat as a source of protein right. And 1.5kg isn't that much. For a 150lb per, it's roughly 102g of protein. Some studies might even see that as light, especially if you are lean.

    The authors appear to think that meat, eggs, and dairy are the preferred sources:
    High-quality animal proteins require far less energy intake to meet essential amino acid needs than lower quality plant proteins.

    Not really surprising as many of them are complete sources of proteins, while many plant-based proteins are incomplete. But it's a good observation.
Sign In or Register to comment.