Is too much protein really an issue?

Sarauk2sf

The only thing you dont want too much of is Carbs no matter what wisdom and websites tell you , too much of it will keep your weight on.

I'm sorry, but that's just a stupid response*. Too much of anything will keep the weight on.



* before you get all butthurt, I said the answer was stupid, not the person.

Sorry just going on the proof I see when carbs are cut/reduced from food intake it helps you lose more weight then say loading on carbs in place of meats! I refuse to carbo-load anything.

So you make a statement that goes against 'wisdom' (and actually peer reviewed studies btw), citing it in a categorical way as if its fact because of your sample of n=1. You do realize that weight loss =/= fat loss. Lower carbs = lower water weight = lower weight loss, not lower body fat.

AlexandraLynch

The only caveat with protein is that it needs to be no more than 30 percent of your total calories, or you will get protein poisoning, or "rabbit starvation". The rest needs to be fat or carbs.

AsellusReborn

The only caveat with protein is that it needs to be no more than 30 percent of your total calories, or you will get protein poisoning, or "rabbit starvation". The rest needs to be fat or carbs.

Do you have a source on this?

Feisty_Red

If it is..I'm screwed..

planetshark

I love this site but it is always off when it comes to peoples' protein needs - as in WAY TOO LOW! Shoot for 1 gm per lb. of desired body weight and try to get 25-30 gms with each meal/snack ... Anything over about 30 gms is wasted and could be stored as fat since the body can't metabolize it in one sitting/meal ...

corpus_validum

It's pretty scary how much general opinion gets pushed around here in these MFP forums as though it were matter of fact:

"MFP recommends far too little protein"
"too much protein is not an issue"
"The default protein settings on MFP are very very low. Going over is a good thing"
"MFP guidelines for protein are too low"
"I love this site but it is always off when it comes to peoples' protein needs - as in WAY TOO LOW"

The default ratio of proteins on MFP is 15%. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services' Dietary Guideline for Americans recommends that 10-35% of daily calories should come from protein. MFP default is within that range. How is it WAY too low?

If increasing protein ratio was the obvious best way to lower weight/increase health, why wouldn't MFP have already adjusted the default ratio years ago? Hmmmm......

It's quite possible that there are increased health risks with higher protein levels, particularly in regards to red meat:
http://www.diseaseproof.com/archives/green-living-red-meat-consider-your-health-and-the-environments-as-well.html
The link makes reference to a large, long-term study from the Harvard School of Public Health.

There are increasing number of studies linking decreased lifespan with higher levels of IGF-1 (which results from having higher levels of protein).

Now I don't know if there are conclusive studies to determine if non-meat proteins have lower health risks than animal proteins, but if you are concerned with getting sufficient protein, know that PER calorie, veggies can provide more protein than even beef:
http://www.drfuhrman.com/faq/question.aspx?sid=16&qindex=9

My own opinion to the OP's Q is that it depends on what your goals are. If one wanted to gain muscles for bodybuilding or increased athletic prowess, then they should increase protein intake to a higher level. For the average MFP Joe or Jane who merely desires to lose weight and get in "shape", I'd suggest they stick with the MFP defaults until they are at or near their desired body composition. And no one here truly knows if too much protein is really an issue for you. The only person I'd rely on to tell me that is my doctor upon seeing my blood test results.

MelSabourin

Wow - thanks to all of you for your feedback. To put things in perspective (and I should have noted this earlier) - MFP is telling me to eat FORTY FIVE gs of protein per day. Even with small amounts of chicken and/or fish, it sure doesn't take much to exceed this number. I'm not on an all-protein diet and am not in the 100s of grams - but when I kept seeing "red" numbers and sometimes bordering at 100, just wanted to get some thoughts.

@AlichiaMJohns - thanks for the chart, and yes I am falling in that range.

meeper123

glad someone asked it is the only thing I am always over in

Acg67

It's pretty scary how much general opinion gets pushed around here in these MFP forums as though it were matter of fact:

"MFP recommends far too little protein"
"too much protein is not an issue"
"The default protein settings on MFP are very very low. Going over is a good thing"
"MFP guidelines for protein are too low"
"I love this site but it is always off when it comes to peoples' protein needs - as in WAY TOO LOW"

The default ratio of proteins on MFP is 15%. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services' Dietary Guideline for Americans recommends that 10-35% of daily calories should come from protein. MFP default is within that range. How is it WAY too low?

If increasing protein ratio was the obvious best way to lower weight/increase health, why wouldn't MFP have already adjusted the default ratio years ago? Hmmmm......

It's quite possible that there are increased health risks with higher protein levels, particularly in regards to red meat:
http://www.diseaseproof.com/archives/green-living-red-meat-consider-your-health-and-the-environments-as-well.html
The link makes reference to a large, long-term study from the Harvard School of Public Health.

There are increasing number of studies linking decreased lifespan with higher levels of IGF-1 (which results from having higher levels of protein).

Now I don't know if there are conclusive studies to determine if non-meat proteins have lower health risks than animal proteins, but if you are concerned with getting sufficient protein, know that PER calorie, veggies can provide more protein than even beef:
http://www.drfuhrman.com/faq/question.aspx?sid=16&qindex=9

My own opinion to the OP's Q is that it depends on what your goals are. If one wanted to gain muscles for bodybuilding or increased athletic prowess, then they should increase protein intake to a higher level. For the average MFP Joe or Jane who merely desires to lose weight and get in "shape", I'd suggest they stick with the MFP defaults until they are at or near their desired body composition. And no one here truly knows if too much protein is really an issue for you. The only person I'd rely on to tell me that is my doctor upon seeing my blood test results.

fairestthings

Unless you have a family history of kidney stones, I wouldn't worry too much about it. I have a family history of them and still maintain around 50-100 of protein a day. we are huge fish eaters at our house too.

All I would recommend is that you make sure you avoid dark pops, too much caffeine and drink plenty of water if you are eating lots of protein.

meeper123

Unless you have a family history of kidney stones, I wouldn't worry too much about it. I have a family history of them and still maintain around 50-100 of protein a day. we are huge fish eaters at our house too.

All I would recommend is that you make sure you avoid dark pops, too much caffeine and drink plenty of water if you are eating lots of protein.

X.X hopefull they would be avoiding that anyways lol but why out of curiosity

fairestthings

Unless you have a family history of kidney stones, I wouldn't worry too much about it. I have a family history of them and still maintain around 50-100 of protein a day. we are huge fish eaters at our house too.

All I would recommend is that you make sure you avoid dark pops, too much caffeine and drink plenty of water if you are eating lots of protein.

X.X hopefull they would be avoiding that anyways lol but why out of curiosity

Why to avoid those things? They don't necessarily cause kidney stones per se, but they do?.. It's hard to explain for me since I'm not medically intelligent. I do know if my mom drinks dark pop for too long she gets a stone. Caffeine does help produce stones and usually people don't drink enough water so the kidneys don't have enough water to flush out their system and so the crystals develop into bigger stones, the ones that cause lots of pain.

I only mention those because a lot of my new MFP friends seem to hang onto pop, coffee and don't drink enough water :-/

_VoV

There is clear studies that show that high protein consumption results in elevated levels of IGF-1, which in turn is correlated to higher cancer risks and accelerated aging.

Please see my earlier post where I lay out information, notes and sources.

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/729061-alternative-day-diet-and-protein-consumption

IGF-1 is only shown to increase cancer growth in people WITH cancer. IGF increases aging in many organisms - are humans reported to be one of these? I've never seen data to suggest this.

I'm not a mouse, nor a rat and never have and never will be. Whilst data can be suggested, being the digestive and endochrine systems of rodents is somewhat different to your average human being (one being that rats are designed to eat a more seed based life and less protein) whilst we are designed to eat a more meat and fat based existance (based on our teeth which show this).

I'm not sure what else your post shows? I think you've made several leaps with your conclusions.

Look up 'cancer cells' on wiki. You'll find that nearly all individuals are producing cancer cells all of the time. It's just that they don't always turn malignant because of the body's defence mechanism.

So, if you agree that IGF -1 causes more cancer cells then your bodies defences are having to work harder to remove them. As one ages these defences weaken, are more likely to break down and the cancer then becomes malignant.

No, you are not a mouse or rat, or nematode but scientists have altered the IGF-1 receptor genes of these organisms and created life extension and they know that humans carry homologs of the same genes. It's long been known that calorie restriction also increases the life span of rodents in the belief that it mimics some of the same effects of altering IGF receptors.

Of course, this is difficult to test in humans because of our life span. However they have looked at humans on calorie restricted diets and noticed that these humans mimic all the metabolic health markers that appear in rodents that are also calorie restricted, apart for one marker - IGF levels. They found that this marker was elevated because humans on calorie restricted diets tended to have low carb...higher protein diets. When protein was reduced so did the IGF levels. We won't know if these humans will live longer for a good many years....so you are right to say that this is not proof. In this field there are so many variables that it's hard to 'prove' anything. However, it's indicative evidence and people should be aware of the possible pros and cons and draw their own conclusions.

On one hand I see no compelling health reason to have a high protein diet, on the other hand I see evidence, proven or otherwise, that it may cause harm. Therefore, I believe in following current RDA guidelines of 0.8 grams per kilo of body weight. I don't see a need to take any risks, particularly as I'm 51 and cancer is an age related disease. But each to their own.

I agree with your conclusion to stick with the RDA guidelines for protein consumption, rather than exceed them. I don't know if you are referring to Fontana's work, but I thought I would offer this link:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2673798/

xXMollySarusXx

You will be absolutely fine. There are studies showing 2.8g per kg have no negative consequences in anyway, in any markers.

xXMollySarusXx

Yea, however, MFP recommends far to little protein, in my opinion.

atlanticgypsy

I eat more protein and less carbs than MFP, and less calories overall. I think its fine. I listen to my body and I feel great, don't get sick and I'm strong in the gym and that is all that matters!

^ me too!!


Created by MyFitnessPal.com - Free Weight Loss Tools

SethosTBG

It depends on the type of work-out regimen. You will see studies hyping protein consumption and those that don't. Myself I need to consume about 250grams of protein a day, because of my regimen. The standard ratio is 65% carbs, 15% fat and 30% Protein. Although carbs are for energy, too many converts to sugar, hence fat. Too little fat deprives the brain, too much protein, I found that's hard too do, but if you have too much the body disposes of it, albeit it hard on the Liver and kidneys.

What you're doing is just fine. Keep it up.

paintlisapurple

ACG Excellent sources and citations! Thank you for posting. I have been wondering what kind of effect higher protein levels would have on bone mass. Maybe someday there will be further studies to show more positive effects.

ninerbuff

There is clear studies that show that high protein consumption results in elevated levels of IGF-1, which in turn is correlated to higher cancer risks and accelerated aging.

Please see my earlier post where I lay out information, notes and sources.

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/729061-alternative-day-diet-and-protein-consumption

But high intensity exercise also raises IGF-1. Is the correlation the same with cancer here too?

A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 28+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

ninerbuff

There is also a major link to high protein diets having negative impact on renal functions. Specifically linked to overuse of protein supplements, not from actual food consumption. Consistently high levels of protein can cause renal failure. If I were on a computer right now, I would find the studies and link it. I was just reading up on this the other day.

This is usually with people who already suffer with kidney issues. The general population really doesn't have to fear this if they have normal kidney function and fluid intake is adequate.

A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 28+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

LabRat529

WHOA!!! WHAT?!!! Global warming is killing the pirates!!!!!!!

ninerbuff

Protein and amino acids for athletes. J Sports Sci. 2004 Jan;22(1):65-79.
www.uni.edu/dolgener/Advanced_Sport.../protein_intake.pdf

Since there is evidence that protein intakes above the RDA may be beneficial to athletes, a risk–benefit analysis may be useful. An important consideration is the potential harm that may arise from elevated protein intakes. There is little research into the maximum tolerable protein intake in healthy individuals. It has been suggested that excessive protein intakes may increase calcium loss, thus affecting bone health. However, since a major portion of bone is protein, excessive protein does not appear to influence bone health. High protein intakes have been suggested to pose a risk for the kidneys but, in healthy individuals with no underlying kidney disease (presumably most elite athletes), there is no evidence for harm to kidneys with higher intakes. Certainly, it would be detrimental for an athlete to consume excess protein at the expense of other nutrients required to support the necessary level of training and competition. There is a suggestion that intakes greater than 40% of total energy intake might be the upper limit. Protein intakes greater than 40% may limit intake of fat and/or carbohydrates, thus compromising the benefits of these nutrients. However, given the high energy intakes of most elite athletes, protein intakes higher than 40% are unlikely in most. Even a small female restricting energy intake and consuming only 1500 kcal would need to consume 150 g of protein to reach 40%.

High-Protein Weight Loss Diets and Purported Adverse Effects: Where is the Evidence? Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition 2004, 1:45-51 doi:10.1186/1550-2783-1-1-45
http://www.jissn.com/content/1/1/45#B4

Indeed, the recent study Dawson-Hughes et al. did not confirm the perception that increased dietary protein results in urinary calcium loss.[36] According to Dawson-Hughes et al., "Theconstellation of findings that meat supplements containing 55 g/d protein, when exchanged for carbohydrate did not significantlyincrease urinary calcium excretion and were associated withhigher levels of serum IGF-I and lower levels of the bone resorption marker, N-telopeptide, together with a lack of significant correlationof urinary N-telopeptide with urinary calcium excretion in thehigh protein group (in contrast to the low protein) point tothe possibility that higher meat intake may potentially improvebone mass in many older men and women."

Finally, the cross-cultural and population studies that showed a positive association between animal-protein intake and hip fracture risk did not consider other lifestyle or dietary factors that may protect or increase the risk of fracture.[35] It is of some interest that the author of the most cited paper favoring the earlier hypothesis that high-protein intake promotes osteoporosis no longer believes that protein is harmful to bone.[34] In fact, he concluded that the balance of the evidence seems to indicate the opposite.

Despite its role in nitrogen excretion, there are presently no data in the scientific literature demonstrating the healthy kidney will be damaged by the increased demands of protein consumed in quantities above the Recommended Dietary Allowance (RDA). Furthermore, real world examples support this contention since kidney problems are nonexistent in the bodybuilding community in which high-protein intake has been the norm for over half a century.[3] Recently, Walser published comprehensive review on protein intake and renal function, which states: "it is clear that protein restriction does not prevent decline in renal function with age, and, in fact, is the major cause of that decline. A better way to prevent the decline would be to increase protein intake. there is no reason to restrict protein intake in healthy individuals in order to protect the kidney."[4]

Dietary protein intake and renal function. Nutrition & Metabolism 2005, 2:25 doi:10.1186/1743-7075-2-25
http://www.nutritionandmetabolism.com/content/2/1/25

Conclusion

Although excessive protein intake remains a health concern in individuals with pre-existing renal disease, the literature lacks significant research demonstrating a link between protein intake and the initiation or progression of renal disease in healthy individuals. More importantly, evidence suggests that protein-induced changes in renal function are likely a normal adaptative mechanism well within the functional limits of a healthy kidney. Without question, long-term studies are needed to clarify the scant evidence currently available regarding this relationship. At present, there is not sufficient proof to warrant public health directives aimed at restricting dietary protein intake in healthy adults for the purpose of preserving renal function.[

Yep, Can always count on my bros of steel here to post studies.

A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 28+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

ninerbuff

The only caveat with protein is that it needs to be no more than 30 percent of your total calories, or you will get protein poisoning, or "rabbit starvation". The rest needs to be fat or carbs.

Damn where's the carrots because protein macro intake for me has always been between 40%-45%.

A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 28+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

mermer45

But high intensity exercise also raises IGF-1. Is the correlation the same with cancer here too?

If IGF-1 increases the risk of cancer and High intensity Exercise raises IGF-1 then it's reasonable to assume that there is a link. However, I don't know.

Statistically, it's probably the relatively young who do high intense exercise and their bodies are more resistance and better able to adapt to high IGF-1 levels.

mermer45

I've just finished reading the book 'The China Study' - which is very well peer reviewed.

This books makes a convincing case that animal protein rather than plant protein is a major factor in most western style diseases (cancer, heart disease, diabetes etc).

To quote the NY Times

"The book focuses on the knowledge gained from the China Study, a 20-year partnership of Cornell University, Oxford University and the Chinese Academy of Preventive Medicine that showed high consumption of animal-based foods is associated with more chronic disease, while those who ate primarily a plant-based diet were the healthiest.'