Protein, Protein, Protein -enough Protein
Replies
-
cmriverside wrote: »The multiplier is POINT 8 grams per KILOGRAM of body weight.
That gets misread here all. the. time. as point 8 grams per pound. Not so.
Reading is fundamental.
I don't think it's being misread very often. I think that many are genuinely suggesting the consumption of 2.2 times the government recommended goal amount for protein.
We need to be sure to get enough protein so I aim for at least the RDA every day and 25 grams above that most days.0 -
cmriverside wrote: »The multiplier is POINT 8 grams per KILOGRAM of body weight.
That gets misread here all. the. time. as point 8 grams per pound. Not so.
Reading is fundamental.
Some of us prefer to get more protein than the minimal RDA values. Personally, based on research I have read, I prefer to get 0.8 grams per pound of healthy body weight. Just because that "0.8" number is in there does not mean I can't read, or that I can't distinguish kilograms from pounds.
I can read. I just disagree with you. Others may share my preference, or may not. But don't assume that all of us fail to read, or fail to mean what we type.9 -
cmriverside wrote: »The multiplier is POINT 8 grams per KILOGRAM of body weight.
That gets misread here all. the. time. as point 8 grams per pound. Not so.
Reading is fundamental.
I don't think it's being misread very often. I think that many are genuinely suggesting the consumption of 2.2 times the government recommended goal amount for protein.
We need to be sure to get enough protein so I aim for at least the RDA every day and 25 grams above that most days.
FYI - the RDA is based on an average weight and hight for gender. So unless you are close to that average then it comes out to 0.8 x kg.0 -
cmriverside wrote: »The multiplier is POINT 8 grams per KILOGRAM of body weight.
That gets misread here all. the. time. as point 8 grams per pound. Not so.
Reading is fundamental.
I don't think it's being misread very often. I think that many are genuinely suggesting the consumption of 2.2 times the government recommended goal amount for protein.
We need to be sure to get enough protein so I aim for at least the RDA every day and 25 grams above that most days.
FYI - the RDA is based on an average weight and hight for gender. So unless you are close to that average then it comes out to 0.8 x kg.
Extra fat doesn't need to be supplied protein. Only lean body mass needs protein.
The RDA is stated to be fine for 98% of the population and can be used as a goal. Using it as a minimum goal and eating a bit more than that every day should provide enough protein.1 -
I do better with higher protein goals. I'd love to have every day 150+!0
-
Partly, I think there's some miscommunication here about what we're talking about when someone asks for a protein recommendation.
If one says "The US RDA is 0.8g per pound of lean body weight" then that's incorrect. If one says "I recommend 0.8 per pound of lean body weight" then they may be saying exactly what they mean.
There are some studies suggesting that amounts greater than the RDA can be beneficial if one is losing weight, trying to gain muscle, or even aging.
So, some people decide to get more than the RDA, and - absent an unusual medical condition - it seems that extra protein isn't harmful.7 -
cmriverside wrote: »The multiplier is POINT 8 grams per KILOGRAM of body weight.
That gets misread here all. the. time. as point 8 grams per pound. Not so.
Reading is fundamental.
No it doesn't @cmriverside
It isn't misread
The multiplier you're talking about is RDA for sedentary people who are not dieting
The multiplier of 0.64-0.8g is for peak training for bodybuilders in a cut and is a reaction to the gymbro 1g per lb
http://bayesianbodybuilding.com/the-myth-of-1glb-optimal-protein-intake-for-bodybuilders/
"Pikosky et al. in 2008. The researchers took a group of endurance trained subjects and had them consume either 0.41 or 0.82 g/lb of protein per day. They also added a thousand calories worth of training on top of their regular exercise. So these guys were literally running on a 1000 calorie deficit while drastically increasing their training volume. Talk about a catabolic state… Of course the nitrogen balance in the low protein group plummeted. However, the protein intake of 0.82 g/lb in the other group completely protected the subjects from muscle loss. Nitrogen balance, whole-body protein turnover and protein synthesis remained unchanged."
So no ...people recommend 0.8g per lb of bw because preserving muscle is important and because there are no contraindications and really it's far easier to work out your bw than your LBM11 -
cmriverside wrote: »The multiplier is POINT 8 grams per KILOGRAM of body weight.
That gets misread here all. the. time. as point 8 grams per pound. Not so.
Reading is fundamental.
No it doesn't @cmriverside
It isn't misread
The multiplier you're talking about is RDA for sedentary people who are not dieting
The multiplier of 0.64-0.8g is for peak training for bodybuilders in a cut and is a reaction to the gymbro 1g per lb
http://bayesianbodybuilding.com/the-myth-of-1glb-optimal-protein-intake-for-bodybuilders/
"Pikosky et al. in 2008. The researchers took a group of endurance trained subjects and had them consume either 0.41 or 0.82 g/lb of protein per day. They also added a thousand calories worth of training on top of their regular exercise. So these guys were literally running on a 1000 calorie deficit while drastically increasing their training volume. Talk about a catabolic state… Of course the nitrogen balance in the low protein group plummeted. However, the protein intake of 0.82 g/lb in the other group completely protected the subjects from muscle loss. Nitrogen balance, whole-body protein turnover and protein synthesis remained unchanged."
So no ...people recommend 0.8g per lb of bw because preserving muscle is important and because there are no contraindications and really it's far easier to work out your bw than your LBM
I haven't seen on an official site where the RDA recommendation is stated as meant for sedentary people who aren't dieting.
Body weight is fine if you are near an ideal body weight. If you are 50 or 100 or 200 pounds overweight, body weight will give a protein recommendation significantly above government recommendations. Even the broscience websites say to use your goal weight if you are obese. If you are on a low calorie eating plan, it may be more beneficial and attainable to balance calories toward other macros.0 -
cmriverside wrote: »The multiplier is POINT 8 grams per KILOGRAM of body weight.
That gets misread here all. the. time. as point 8 grams per pound. Not so.
Reading is fundamental.
No it doesn't @cmriverside
It isn't misread
The multiplier you're talking about is RDA for sedentary people who are not dieting
The multiplier of 0.64-0.8g is for peak training for bodybuilders in a cut and is a reaction to the gymbro 1g per lb
http://bayesianbodybuilding.com/the-myth-of-1glb-optimal-protein-intake-for-bodybuilders/
"Pikosky et al. in 2008. The researchers took a group of endurance trained subjects and had them consume either 0.41 or 0.82 g/lb of protein per day. They also added a thousand calories worth of training on top of their regular exercise. So these guys were literally running on a 1000 calorie deficit while drastically increasing their training volume. Talk about a catabolic state… Of course the nitrogen balance in the low protein group plummeted. However, the protein intake of 0.82 g/lb in the other group completely protected the subjects from muscle loss. Nitrogen balance, whole-body protein turnover and protein synthesis remained unchanged."
So no ...people recommend 0.8g per lb of bw because preserving muscle is important and because there are no contraindications and really it's far easier to work out your bw than your LBM
I haven't seen on an official site where the RDA recommendation is stated as meant for sedentary people who aren't dieting.
Body weight is fine if you are near an ideal body weight. If you are 50 or 100 or 200 pounds overweight, body weight will give a protein recommendation significantly above government recommendations. Even the broscience websites say to use your goal weight if you are obese. If you are on a low calorie eating plan, it may be more beneficial and attainable to balance calories toward other macros.
My understanding was all RDAs are based on average individuals (median) per age group and the median activity level is sedentary https://www.fitness.gov/resource-center/facts-and-statistics/
Bodyweight at goal if obese hence the "peak training for bodybuilders in a cut" comment
I found the article linked and the source studies interesting
2 -
cmriverside wrote: »The multiplier is POINT 8 grams per KILOGRAM of body weight.
That gets misread here all. the. time. as point 8 grams per pound. Not so.
Reading is fundamental.
Thank you! I just looked up the uk guidelines and over here it's. 75 per kilo - all along I've been thinking it was per pound!
The source I looked at does point out that certain groups need more, including athletes,bodybuilders etc.1 -
Ps and I used a calculator which uses age,height and activity levels as well as bodyweight.1
-
littlechiaseed wrote: »
The RDA is established but there's a lot of wack jobs on here eating like 250g of protein a day for what? Absolutely no rasin.Wheelhouse15 wrote: »littlechiaseed wrote: »Yeah there's a lot of misinformation in general about protein. I gained muscle not eating a crap ton of protein so that myth that you have to eat 100-200g a day to gain muscle is complete crap. Also it doesn't keep me fuller longer.
What was your muscle gain and what was your protein intake during that time in terms of g/lb? You could gain on .6g/lb, I can see this happening for you if your activity is moderate but that's you specifically and not others. The requirements for protein are actually very well established.
I wast eating between 60-100g usually on the lower end so around .4 and .5 per lb body weight.
I assume you are referring to me as you quoted the figure I posted.
Let me break it down for you; I weigh 230lbs and have approximately 195lbs of Lean Body Mass. Therefore my 250g of protein is around 1.3g/lb of LBM which I have found is optimal for my body. Yes this is slightly higher than the generally accepted number but with 7 years of weight training, research and experimenting with calories, macros and supplements, I think I have a decent grasp on what works (for me).7 -
Christine_72 wrote: »littlechiaseed wrote: »
The RDA is established but there's a lot of wack jobs on here eating like 250g of protein a day for what? Absolutely no rasin.Wheelhouse15 wrote: »littlechiaseed wrote: »Yeah there's a lot of misinformation in general about protein. I gained muscle not eating a crap ton of protein so that myth that you have to eat 100-200g a day to gain muscle is complete crap. Also it doesn't keep me fuller longer.
What was your muscle gain and what was your protein intake during that time in terms of g/lb? You could gain on .6g/lb, I can see this happening for you if your activity is moderate but that's you specifically and not others. The requirements for protein are actually very well established.
I wast eating between 60-100g usually on the lower end so around .4 and .5 per lb body weight.
Are you a vegan or vegetarian? I'm not saying you're doing this, but I've noticed that many protein OTT comments come from those eating this way.
IIRC from other threads, yes, she is a vegan or vegetarian.1 -
cmriverside wrote: »The multiplier is POINT 8 grams per KILOGRAM of body weight.
That gets misread here all. the. time. as point 8 grams per pound. Not so.
Reading is fundamental.
No it doesn't @cmriverside
It isn't misread
The multiplier you're talking about is RDA for sedentary people who are not dieting
The multiplier of 0.64-0.8g is for peak training for bodybuilders in a cut and is a reaction to the gymbro 1g per lb
http://bayesianbodybuilding.com/the-myth-of-1glb-optimal-protein-intake-for-bodybuilders/
"Pikosky et al. in 2008. The researchers took a group of endurance trained subjects and had them consume either 0.41 or 0.82 g/lb of protein per day. They also added a thousand calories worth of training on top of their regular exercise. So these guys were literally running on a 1000 calorie deficit while drastically increasing their training volume. Talk about a catabolic state… Of course the nitrogen balance in the low protein group plummeted. However, the protein intake of 0.82 g/lb in the other group completely protected the subjects from muscle loss. Nitrogen balance, whole-body protein turnover and protein synthesis remained unchanged."
So no ...people recommend 0.8g per lb of bw because preserving muscle is important and because there are no contraindications and really it's far easier to work out your bw than your LBM
I haven't seen on an official site where the RDA recommendation is stated as meant for sedentary people who aren't dieting.
Body weight is fine if you are near an ideal body weight. If you are 50 or 100 or 200 pounds overweight, body weight will give a protein recommendation significantly above government recommendations. Even the broscience websites say to use your goal weight if you are obese. If you are on a low calorie eating plan, it may be more beneficial and attainable to balance calories toward other macros.
My understanding was all RDAs are based on average individuals (median) per age group and the median activity level is sedentary https://www.fitness.gov/resource-center/facts-and-statistics/
Bodyweight at goal if obese hence the "peak training for bodybuilders in a cut" comment
I found the article linked and the source studies interesting
To add, we should also not confuse the point, that the RDA is pretty much the bare minimum that needs to be consumed. There is a lot of research that would suggest higher than RDA is beneficial.7 -
cmriverside wrote: »The multiplier is POINT 8 grams per KILOGRAM of body weight.
That gets misread here all. the. time. as point 8 grams per pound. Not so.
Reading is fundamental.
Some of us prefer to get more protein than the minimal RDA values. Personally, based on research I have read, I prefer to get 0.8 grams per pound of healthy body weight. Just because that "0.8" number is in there does not mean I can't read, or that I can't distinguish kilograms from pounds.
I can read. I just disagree with you. Others may share my preference, or may not. But don't assume that all of us fail to read, or fail to mean what we type.
I aim to get this amount as well. And I can also read. I feel better on the higher protein amount and more satiated.2 -
cmriverside wrote: »The multiplier is POINT 8 grams per KILOGRAM of body weight.
That gets misread here all. the. time. as point 8 grams per pound. Not so.
Reading is fundamental.
I don't think it's being misread very often. I think that many are genuinely suggesting the consumption of 2.2 times the government recommended goal amount for protein.
We need to be sure to get enough protein so I aim for at least the RDA every day and 25 grams above that most days.
It should be noted that people who are in a deficit need more than the RDA to preserve LBM. Those recommendations are for people at a healthy body weight. If your're in maintenance, carry on with your preference.
0 -
cmriverside wrote: »The multiplier is POINT 8 grams per KILOGRAM of body weight.
That gets misread here all. the. time. as point 8 grams per pound. Not so.
Reading is fundamental.
No it doesn't @cmriverside
It isn't misread
The multiplier you're talking about is RDA for sedentary people who are not dieting
The multiplier of 0.64-0.8g is for peak training for bodybuilders in a cut and is a reaction to the gymbro 1g per lb
http://bayesianbodybuilding.com/the-myth-of-1glb-optimal-protein-intake-for-bodybuilders/
"Pikosky et al. in 2008. The researchers took a group of endurance trained subjects and had them consume either 0.41 or 0.82 g/lb of protein per day. They also added a thousand calories worth of training on top of their regular exercise. So these guys were literally running on a 1000 calorie deficit while drastically increasing their training volume. Talk about a catabolic state… Of course the nitrogen balance in the low protein group plummeted. However, the protein intake of 0.82 g/lb in the other group completely protected the subjects from muscle loss. Nitrogen balance, whole-body protein turnover and protein synthesis remained unchanged."
So no ...people recommend 0.8g per lb of bw because preserving muscle is important and because there are no contraindications and really it's far easier to work out your bw than your LBM
I haven't seen on an official site where the RDA recommendation is stated as meant for sedentary people who aren't dieting.
Body weight is fine if you are near an ideal body weight. If you are 50 or 100 or 200 pounds overweight, body weight will give a protein recommendation significantly above government recommendations. Even the broscience websites say to use your goal weight if you are obese. If you are on a low calorie eating plan, it may be more beneficial and attainable to balance calories toward other macros.
My understanding was all RDAs are based on average individuals (median) per age group and the median activity level is sedentary https://www.fitness.gov/resource-center/facts-and-statistics/
Bodyweight at goal if obese hence the "peak training for bodybuilders in a cut" comment
I found the article linked and the source studies interesting
To add, we should also not confuse the point, that the RDA is pretty much the bare minimum that needs to be consumed. There is a lot of research that would suggest higher than RDA is beneficial.
After reading through this thread I've started using the RDA recommendation (47g for me) as a base, and then aim to get over that. Today I'm hitting 60g
2 -
littlechiaseed wrote: »
The RDA is established but there's a lot of wack jobs on here eating like 250g of protein a day for what? Absolutely no rasin.Wheelhouse15 wrote: »littlechiaseed wrote: »Yeah there's a lot of misinformation in general about protein. I gained muscle not eating a crap ton of protein so that myth that you have to eat 100-200g a day to gain muscle is complete crap. Also it doesn't keep me fuller longer.
What was your muscle gain and what was your protein intake during that time in terms of g/lb? You could gain on .6g/lb, I can see this happening for you if your activity is moderate but that's you specifically and not others. The requirements for protein are actually very well established.
I wast eating between 60-100g usually on the lower end so around .4 and .5 per lb body weight.
Then you weren't gaining muscle, those guidelines are for minimum protein not optimal. Read the research on muscle hypertrophy and protein requirements, they are quite clear that you are basically just avoiding protein deficiency by being on the low end. I've never seen a reason for 250g a day, as I have always said, but if you want to optimize protein it depends on your level of activity and for a moderately active person that means .5g to .6g/lb if you were below .5g/lb, especially if you were in a deficit than you are fooling yourself to think you were gaining muscle.3 -
cmriverside wrote: »(not you psu, I'm talking about the general guideline of .8g per pound of lean body weight.)
Again, it bears repeating it depends on your activity level. The more active you are the more muscle you will breakdown each day and this has been well established. The max is .8g/lb of body weight but that's only for the most intense strength athletes. You should really read Alan Aragon's blog or Dr. Layne Norton's blog/vlog as they go over this quite a bit and have the background.1 -
cmriverside wrote: »The multiplier is POINT 8 grams per KILOGRAM of body weight.
That gets misread here all. the. time. as point 8 grams per pound. Not so.
Reading is fundamental.
I don't think it's being misread very often. I think that many are genuinely suggesting the consumption of 2.2 times the government recommended goal amount for protein.
We need to be sure to get enough protein so I aim for at least the RDA every day and 25 grams above that most days.
FYI - the RDA is based on an average weight and hight for gender. So unless you are close to that average then it comes out to 0.8 x kg.
Extra fat doesn't need to be supplied protein. Only lean body mass needs protein.
The RDA is stated to be fine for 98% of the population and can be used as a goal. Using it as a minimum goal and eating a bit more than that every day should provide enough protein.
Well, there are lean body calculators but it's not so simple because heavier people breakdown more muscle just by being heavier. There is a bit of a sliding scale on the requirements so it's not a bad idea to shoot a little higher.1 -
cmriverside wrote: »The multiplier is POINT 8 grams per KILOGRAM of body weight.
That gets misread here all. the. time. as point 8 grams per pound. Not so.
Reading is fundamental.
It doesn't get misread. [Edit: oh, I see everyone chimed in already, but I echo this.] There is a higher recommendation for people who are athletic, trying to gain muscle, and/or trying to preserve muscle while eating at a deficit that is often given as .8 g/lb of healthy body weight (goal weight if you are overweight). It's really a range of .65-.85 g/lb. I've also seen it as 1.5-2 g/kg or something similar (roughly the same, bit higher).
In particular, for various groups, especially people at a deficit and, increasingly, older people, more than the RDA is recommended. Lots of studies show a benefit in preserving muscle.
.8-1 g/lb of LBM is also a rec I've seen, but most don't know LBM.3 -
cmriverside wrote: »The multiplier is POINT 8 grams per KILOGRAM of body weight.
That gets misread here all. the. time. as point 8 grams per pound. Not so.
Reading is fundamental.
No it doesn't @cmriverside
It isn't misread
The multiplier you're talking about is RDA for sedentary people who are not dieting
The multiplier of 0.64-0.8g is for peak training for bodybuilders in a cut and is a reaction to the gymbro 1g per lb
http://bayesianbodybuilding.com/the-myth-of-1glb-optimal-protein-intake-for-bodybuilders/
"Pikosky et al. in 2008. The researchers took a group of endurance trained subjects and had them consume either 0.41 or 0.82 g/lb of protein per day. They also added a thousand calories worth of training on top of their regular exercise. So these guys were literally running on a 1000 calorie deficit while drastically increasing their training volume. Talk about a catabolic state… Of course the nitrogen balance in the low protein group plummeted. However, the protein intake of 0.82 g/lb in the other group completely protected the subjects from muscle loss. Nitrogen balance, whole-body protein turnover and protein synthesis remained unchanged."
So no ...people recommend 0.8g per lb of bw because preserving muscle is important and because there are no contraindications and really it's far easier to work out your bw than your LBM
I haven't seen on an official site where the RDA recommendation is stated as meant for sedentary people who aren't dieting.
Body weight is fine if you are near an ideal body weight. If you are 50 or 100 or 200 pounds overweight, body weight will give a protein recommendation significantly above government recommendations. Even the broscience websites say to use your goal weight if you are obese. If you are on a low calorie eating plan, it may be more beneficial and attainable to balance calories toward other macros.
RDA isn't for athletes and that's well known. Athletes require more sodium as well for example, RDA is population standards for minimum health, not optimal nutrition. The only way to tell if you are really getting all of the protein you need for muscle, specifically Leucine, is to intake to the point where you see leucine oxidation and those levels have been established as I've indicated based on gross body weight:
.4g/lb for sedentary
.5g/lb for moderately active
.6g/lb active
.7g/lb endurance athletes and soldiers
.8g/lb strength athletes
Dieting is another thing altogether and adding extra can help maintain according to many studies but I'm not so sure on that.3 -
littlechiaseed wrote: »
The RDA is established but there's a lot of wack jobs on here eating like 250g of protein a day for what? Absolutely no rasin.Wheelhouse15 wrote: »littlechiaseed wrote: »Yeah there's a lot of misinformation in general about protein. I gained muscle not eating a crap ton of protein so that myth that you have to eat 100-200g a day to gain muscle is complete crap. Also it doesn't keep me fuller longer.
What was your muscle gain and what was your protein intake during that time in terms of g/lb? You could gain on .6g/lb, I can see this happening for you if your activity is moderate but that's you specifically and not others. The requirements for protein are actually very well established.
I wast eating between 60-100g usually on the lower end so around .4 and .5 per lb body weight.
Why are they whack jobs? In some individuals there are benefits of high protein, especially if you are cutting weight. This doesn't mean i am suggesting 250g but if i am working to cut fat and maintain or gain muscle in a deficit, i would aim for 1g per lb since i am fairly lean as it is.
ETA: One thing to consider, there are a lot less negatives and more positives eating more protein that you need. The same argument cant be said about too little protein. Too little problem can cause more problems and there arent really positives that i can think of.
I've done my fair share of looking at people's diaries on here and most of what I have seen is people eating pretty much nothing but dense protein foods and then I might see 1 vegetable eaten that day and no fruit. What kind of balance is that? Focusing too much on one macro can cause people to not look at other nutrients they need like those from fruits and vegetables. Not everyone, just saying what I've seen. I don't make the news I just report it.0 -
littlechiaseed wrote: »littlechiaseed wrote: »
The RDA is established but there's a lot of wack jobs on here eating like 250g of protein a day for what? Absolutely no rasin.Wheelhouse15 wrote: »littlechiaseed wrote: »Yeah there's a lot of misinformation in general about protein. I gained muscle not eating a crap ton of protein so that myth that you have to eat 100-200g a day to gain muscle is complete crap. Also it doesn't keep me fuller longer.
What was your muscle gain and what was your protein intake during that time in terms of g/lb? You could gain on .6g/lb, I can see this happening for you if your activity is moderate but that's you specifically and not others. The requirements for protein are actually very well established.
I wast eating between 60-100g usually on the lower end so around .4 and .5 per lb body weight.
Why are they whack jobs? In some individuals there are benefits of high protein, especially if you are cutting weight. This doesn't mean i am suggesting 250g but if i am working to cut fat and maintain or gain muscle in a deficit, i would aim for 1g per lb since i am fairly lean as it is.
ETA: One thing to consider, there are a lot less negatives and more positives eating more protein that you need. The same argument cant be said about too little protein. Too little problem can cause more problems and there arent really positives that i can think of.
I've done my fair share of looking at people's diaries on here and most of what I have seen is people eating pretty much nothing but dense protein foods and then I might see 1 vegetable eaten that day and no fruit. What kind of balance is that? Focusing too much on one macro can cause people to not look at other nutrients they need like those from fruits and vegetables. Not everyone, just saying what I've seen. I don't make the news I just report it.
So quit looking at low carbers and keto17 -
cmriverside wrote: »The multiplier is POINT 8 grams per KILOGRAM of body weight.
That gets misread here all. the. time. as point 8 grams per pound. Not so.
Reading is fundamental.
That is the calculation for the RDA minimum for a sedentary individual. People aren't misreading anything...0.8 grams per Lb of body weight is usually pretty close to 1 gram per Lb of LBM for most people. 1 gram per Lb of LBM is optimal if you are a strength athlete for example...
Anyone who is active should be taking in more than the RDA, particularly if they're doing intensive workouts that are readily breaking down muscle. 1 gram per Lb of LBM for me is a bit overkill, but I do usually get around 0.6 and 0.7 grams per Lb of my body weight as I'm very active, particularly with endurance cycling...0 -
littlechiaseed wrote: »littlechiaseed wrote: »
The RDA is established but there's a lot of wack jobs on here eating like 250g of protein a day for what? Absolutely no rasin.Wheelhouse15 wrote: »littlechiaseed wrote: »Yeah there's a lot of misinformation in general about protein. I gained muscle not eating a crap ton of protein so that myth that you have to eat 100-200g a day to gain muscle is complete crap. Also it doesn't keep me fuller longer.
What was your muscle gain and what was your protein intake during that time in terms of g/lb? You could gain on .6g/lb, I can see this happening for you if your activity is moderate but that's you specifically and not others. The requirements for protein are actually very well established.
I wast eating between 60-100g usually on the lower end so around .4 and .5 per lb body weight.
Why are they whack jobs? In some individuals there are benefits of high protein, especially if you are cutting weight. This doesn't mean i am suggesting 250g but if i am working to cut fat and maintain or gain muscle in a deficit, i would aim for 1g per lb since i am fairly lean as it is.
ETA: One thing to consider, there are a lot less negatives and more positives eating more protein that you need. The same argument cant be said about too little protein. Too little problem can cause more problems and there arent really positives that i can think of.
I've done my fair share of looking at people's diaries on here and most of what I have seen is people eating pretty much nothing but dense protein foods and then I might see 1 vegetable eaten that day and no fruit. What kind of balance is that? Focusing too much on one macro can cause people to not look at other nutrients they need like those from fruits and vegetables. Not everyone, just saying what I've seen. I don't make the news I just report it.
I've been on MFP for years and I do a lot of diary peeking, and I've seen maybe a couple of guys who eat that way, and they were both young PTs who were newbies and jumped into the forum preaching bro-science trying to get clients. Most of the veteran users who post a lot of advice here eat balanced macros and in fact some are vegetarian. Mind you I don't go into the Gaining Weight forum or Chit Chat, so maybe I'm missing out on some interesting food diaries there!
Increasing my protein from @ 50-60 grams per day to @ 80-100 grams per day was a huge factor in finally being able to stay at my calorie goal without being hungry. I can do that on 1600 cals while still eating plenty of fruits and veggies (plus lots of other carbs). I don't find 100 grams of protein to be "a crap ton" of anything, it's a quarter of my calories. As others have said, I'd rather get a little more than I need than not get enough and lose muscle along with fat. I admit I advise trying to get some extra protein all the time here, simply because it helped me out, and my personal experience is that when women try to cut calories (especially middle-aged and older) they tend to end up eating super low-fat and low-protein without meaning too and end up hungry and miserable.8 -
So it seems protein is the next scapegoat du jour... first it was low fat, then low carb, now it seems we have a lot of proponents for a low protein diet. Can't wait to hear all the amazing things that can result from a LP lifestyle... /sarcasmfont10
-
littlechiaseed wrote: »littlechiaseed wrote: »
The RDA is established but there's a lot of wack jobs on here eating like 250g of protein a day for what? Absolutely no rasin.Wheelhouse15 wrote: »littlechiaseed wrote: »Yeah there's a lot of misinformation in general about protein. I gained muscle not eating a crap ton of protein so that myth that you have to eat 100-200g a day to gain muscle is complete crap. Also it doesn't keep me fuller longer.
What was your muscle gain and what was your protein intake during that time in terms of g/lb? You could gain on .6g/lb, I can see this happening for you if your activity is moderate but that's you specifically and not others. The requirements for protein are actually very well established.
I wast eating between 60-100g usually on the lower end so around .4 and .5 per lb body weight.
Why are they whack jobs? In some individuals there are benefits of high protein, especially if you are cutting weight. This doesn't mean i am suggesting 250g but if i am working to cut fat and maintain or gain muscle in a deficit, i would aim for 1g per lb since i am fairly lean as it is.
ETA: One thing to consider, there are a lot less negatives and more positives eating more protein that you need. The same argument cant be said about too little protein. Too little problem can cause more problems and there arent really positives that i can think of.
I've done my fair share of looking at people's diaries on here and most of what I have seen is people eating pretty much nothing but dense protein foods and then I might see 1 vegetable eaten that day and no fruit. What kind of balance is that? Focusing too much on one macro can cause people to not look at other nutrients they need like those from fruits and vegetables. Not everyone, just saying what I've seen. I don't make the news I just report it.
I would say that's probably more the exception than the rule...even when I was eating very high protein, I still got in my 5 or more servings of fruit and veg most every day...my overall carbs were a bit lower though. I would say that most people who know what they're doing are eating plenty of veg and some fruit along with a protein rich diet.3 -
WinoGelato wrote: »So it seems protein is the next scapegoat du jour... first it was low fat, then low carb, now it seems we have a lot of proponents for a low protein diet. Can't wait to hear all the amazing things that can result from a LP lifestyle... /sarcasmfont
I don't see any proponents for a low protein diet.
Eating 1 or 1.5 or 2 times the government-study-determined adequate amount of protein isn't low protein.
Some people like to eat far more than that, and that's fine. However, it's also fine to eat the government recommended amount. It's not fine to eat less than that and I don't see anyone recommending that.1 -
cwolfman13 wrote: »littlechiaseed wrote: »littlechiaseed wrote: »
The RDA is established but there's a lot of wack jobs on here eating like 250g of protein a day for what? Absolutely no rasin.Wheelhouse15 wrote: »littlechiaseed wrote: »Yeah there's a lot of misinformation in general about protein. I gained muscle not eating a crap ton of protein so that myth that you have to eat 100-200g a day to gain muscle is complete crap. Also it doesn't keep me fuller longer.
What was your muscle gain and what was your protein intake during that time in terms of g/lb? You could gain on .6g/lb, I can see this happening for you if your activity is moderate but that's you specifically and not others. The requirements for protein are actually very well established.
I wast eating between 60-100g usually on the lower end so around .4 and .5 per lb body weight.
Why are they whack jobs? In some individuals there are benefits of high protein, especially if you are cutting weight. This doesn't mean i am suggesting 250g but if i am working to cut fat and maintain or gain muscle in a deficit, i would aim for 1g per lb since i am fairly lean as it is.
ETA: One thing to consider, there are a lot less negatives and more positives eating more protein that you need. The same argument cant be said about too little protein. Too little problem can cause more problems and there arent really positives that i can think of.
I've done my fair share of looking at people's diaries on here and most of what I have seen is people eating pretty much nothing but dense protein foods and then I might see 1 vegetable eaten that day and no fruit. What kind of balance is that? Focusing too much on one macro can cause people to not look at other nutrients they need like those from fruits and vegetables. Not everyone, just saying what I've seen. I don't make the news I just report it.
I would say that's probably more the exception than the rule...even when I was eating very high protein, I still got in my 5 or more servings of fruit and veg most every day...my overall carbs were a bit lower though. I would say that most people who know what they're doing are eating plenty of veg and some fruit along with a protein rich diet.
Right. There will always be some bro's out there. The only person I know eating that much protein is the trigden and he is 230. So it's not much more than 1g per lb.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.3K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 424 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions