Another IIFYM post?

mmapags

I don't think you've made that point at all. Setting you macros is actually pretty easy as I laid out in my first post. But I guess not if one in prone to paralysis by over analysis. But that would just be my opinion.

kyodi

Bump

Sublog

Again, reading comprehension. If it shows no evidence then that is evidece by defination of a lack of a problem. Do you have anything but your own opinion to back up your statements? If so, do share by all means! If not, your "opinion" is duly noted.

So, a lack of study on a subject = proof that said subject is safe? Sorry, I'll have to disagree again.

Here's an article from a guy who's studied protein a lot. In fact, he wrote an entire book dedicated to protein.

http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/nutrition/protein-controversies.html


"Empirically, it’s worth considering that athletes have been habitually consuming large amounts of protein for at least several decades without any reported increase in the incidence of kidney problems. If such a problem were going to occur, it seems likely that it would have shown up by now. While this certainly doesn’t prove that high protein intakes aren’t potentially detrimental to kidney function, the data in support of that idea would seem to be lacking both from a scientific and real-world point of view.

Interestingly, while it’s always been stated that high dietary protein intakes increases fluid requirements, this idea appears to have originated from a military study examining nitrogen balance under conditions of water and energy restriction (1). There is no indication that individuals who are sufficiently hydrated need to go out of their way to increase fluid intake when they are consuming large amounts of protein."

The bottom line is the general population of MFP requires more protein because they are DIETING, and protein requirements go up when dieting.

mmapags

Again, reading comprehension. If it shows no evidence then that is evidece by defination of a lack of a problem. Do you have anything but your own opinion to back up your statements? If so, do share by all means! If not, your "opinion" is duly noted.

So, a lack of study on a subject = proof that said subject is safe? Sorry, I'll have to disagree again.

Here's an article from a guy who's studied protein a lot. In fact, he wrote an entire book dedicated to protein.

http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/nutrition/protein-controversies.html


"Empirically, it’s worth considering that athletes have been habitually consuming large amounts of protein for at least several decades without any reported increase in the incidence of kidney problems. If such a problem were going to occur, it seems likely that it would have shown up by now. While this certainly doesn’t prove that high protein intakes aren’t potentially detrimental to kidney function, the data in support of that idea would seem to be lacking both from a scientific and real-world point of view.

Interestingly, while it’s always been stated that high dietary protein intakes increases fluid requirements, this idea appears to have originated from a military study examining nitrogen balance under conditions of water and energy restriction (1). There is no indication that individuals who are sufficiently hydrated need to go out of their way to increase fluid intake when they are consuming large amounts of protein."

The bottom line is the general population of MFP requires more protein because they are DIETING, and protein requirements go up when dieting.

Great post man! The only thing I'd add to the last sentence is "if you hope to maintian lean muscle mass."

bcattoes

Again, reading comprehension. If it shows no evidence then that is evidece by defination of a lack of a problem. Do you have anything but your own opinion to back up your statements? If so, do share by all means! If not, your "opinion" is duly noted.

So, a lack of study on a subject = proof that said subject is safe? Sorry, I'll have to disagree again.

Here's an article from a guy who's studied protein a lot. In fact, he wrote an entire book dedicated to protein.

http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/nutrition/protein-controversies.html


"Empirically, it’s worth considering that athletes have been habitually consuming large amounts of protein for at least several decades without any reported increase in the incidence of kidney problems. If such a problem were going to occur, it seems likely that it would have shown up by now. While this certainly doesn’t prove that high protein intakes aren’t potentially detrimental to kidney function, the data in support of that idea would seem to be lacking both from a scientific and real-world point of view.

Interestingly, while it’s always been stated that high dietary protein intakes increases fluid requirements, this idea appears to have originated from a military study examining nitrogen balance under conditions of water and energy restriction (1). There is no indication that individuals who are sufficiently hydrated need to go out of their way to increase fluid intake when they are consuming large amounts of protein."

The bottom line is the general population of MFP requires more protein because they are DIETING, and protein requirements go up when dieting.

dieters =/= athletes (which was pretty much my point)

mmapags

Again, reading comprehension. If it shows no evidence then that is evidece by defination of a lack of a problem. Do you have anything but your own opinion to back up your statements? If so, do share by all means! If not, your "opinion" is duly noted.

So, a lack of study on a subject = proof that said subject is safe? Sorry, I'll have to disagree again.

Here's an article from a guy who's studied protein a lot. In fact, he wrote an entire book dedicated to protein.

http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/nutrition/protein-controversies.html


"Empirically, it’s worth considering that athletes have been habitually consuming large amounts of protein for at least several decades without any reported increase in the incidence of kidney problems. If such a problem were going to occur, it seems likely that it would have shown up by now. While this certainly doesn’t prove that high protein intakes aren’t potentially detrimental to kidney function, the data in support of that idea would seem to be lacking both from a scientific and real-world point of view.

Interestingly, while it’s always been stated that high dietary protein intakes increases fluid requirements, this idea appears to have originated from a military study examining nitrogen balance under conditions of water and energy restriction (1). There is no indication that individuals who are sufficiently hydrated need to go out of their way to increase fluid intake when they are consuming large amounts of protein."

The bottom line is the general population of MFP requires more protein because they are DIETING, and protein requirements go up when dieting.

dieters =/= athletes (which was pretty much my point)

Did you miss this? "The bottom line is the general population of MFP requires more protein because they are DIETING, and protein requirements go up when dieting."

You've spent a lot of time disputing others rcommedations and proof sounrces in this thread. Is that just your M.O. or do you intend to offer anything postive in the way of a recommedation with any proof source to back it up? If not, then it look like you are just blowing smoke based on your own bias.

dieters =/= athletes (which was pretty much my point) Looked back through your posts and this is not stated anywhere. You did state that the level of protein I recommeded could cause a probelm with kidney function though. So which is it? What is your point? And what evidence do you have to substantiate it? Or do you just enjoy being oppositional? Do you have anything positive to contribute in the way of factual information?

bcattoes

Again, reading comprehension. If it shows no evidence then that is evidece by defination of a lack of a problem. Do you have anything but your own opinion to back up your statements? If so, do share by all means! If not, your "opinion" is duly noted.

So, a lack of study on a subject = proof that said subject is safe? Sorry, I'll have to disagree again.

Here's an article from a guy who's studied protein a lot. In fact, he wrote an entire book dedicated to protein.

http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/nutrition/protein-controversies.html


"Empirically, it’s worth considering that athletes have been habitually consuming large amounts of protein for at least several decades without any reported increase in the incidence of kidney problems. If such a problem were going to occur, it seems likely that it would have shown up by now. While this certainly doesn’t prove that high protein intakes aren’t potentially detrimental to kidney function, the data in support of that idea would seem to be lacking both from a scientific and real-world point of view.

Interestingly, while it’s always been stated that high dietary protein intakes increases fluid requirements, this idea appears to have originated from a military study examining nitrogen balance under conditions of water and energy restriction (1). There is no indication that individuals who are sufficiently hydrated need to go out of their way to increase fluid intake when they are consuming large amounts of protein."

The bottom line is the general population of MFP requires more protein because they are DIETING, and protein requirements go up when dieting.

dieters =/= athletes (which was pretty much my point)

Did you miss this? "The bottom line is the general population of MFP requires more protein because they are DIETING, and protein requirements go up when dieting."

You've spent a lot of time disputing others rcommedations and proof sounrces in this thread. Is that just your M.O. or do you intend to offer anything postive in the way of a recommedation with any proof source to back it up? If not, then it look like you are just blowing smoke based on your own bias.

dieters =/= athletes (which was pretty much my point) Looked back through your posts and this is not stated anywhere. You did state that the level of protein I recommeded could cause a probelm with kidney function though. So which is it? What is your point? And what evidence do you have to substantiate it? Or do you just enjoy being oppositional? Do you have anything positive to contribute in the way of factual information?

*le sigh* You seem so nasty and set on twisting my words that I don't know why I'm bothering but here is it again. What I've said is that those that have a need for more protein (I used body builders in my previous example, but athletes could also quality) would likely have no problem eating protein beyond general medical recommendations because they would use the extra protein for muscle repair. Their needs are different than "general" needs. Which is why posting a general recommendation of setting protein levels at the level athletes/body builders need is IMO unwise.

Eating more protein than your body will use will put extra strain on your kidneys. This could cause kidney problems. There is no evidence showing whether it will or will not. In the face of this lack of evidence and that the extra protein will not provide weight loss or health benefits when it is not used and that there is extra strain to process it out of the body, I find it silly and possibly unsafe to recommend that most people eat this much.

That is what I have been saying and now have repeated again. This is my opinion based on that facts (and lack thereof) and logic. As I've also previously stated if you disagree, then I will simply have to agree to disagree. I can not, however, force you to agree to disagree, so feel free to make another nasty reply.

mmapags

Again, reading comprehension. If it shows no evidence then that is evidece by defination of a lack of a problem. Do you have anything but your own opinion to back up your statements? If so, do share by all means! If not, your "opinion" is duly noted.

So, a lack of study on a subject = proof that said subject is safe? Sorry, I'll have to disagree again.

Here's an article from a guy who's studied protein a lot. In fact, he wrote an entire book dedicated to protein.

http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/nutrition/protein-controversies.html


"Empirically, it’s worth considering that athletes have been habitually consuming large amounts of protein for at least several decades without any reported increase in the incidence of kidney problems. If such a problem were going to occur, it seems likely that it would have shown up by now. While this certainly doesn’t prove that high protein intakes aren’t potentially detrimental to kidney function, the data in support of that idea would seem to be lacking both from a scientific and real-world point of view.

Interestingly, while it’s always been stated that high dietary protein intakes increases fluid requirements, this idea appears to have originated from a military study examining nitrogen balance under conditions of water and energy restriction (1). There is no indication that individuals who are sufficiently hydrated need to go out of their way to increase fluid intake when they are consuming large amounts of protein."

The bottom line is the general population of MFP requires more protein because they are DIETING, and protein requirements go up when dieting.

dieters =/= athletes (which was pretty much my point)

Did you miss this? "The bottom line is the general population of MFP requires more protein because they are DIETING, and protein requirements go up when dieting."

You've spent a lot of time disputing others rcommedations and proof sounrces in this thread. Is that just your M.O. or do you intend to offer anything postive in the way of a recommedation with any proof source to back it up? If not, then it look like you are just blowing smoke based on your own bias.

dieters =/= athletes (which was pretty much my point) Looked back through your posts and this is not stated anywhere. You did state that the level of protein I recommeded could cause a probelm with kidney function though. So which is it? What is your point? And what evidence do you have to substantiate it? Or do you just enjoy being oppositional? Do you have anything positive to contribute in the way of factual information?

*le sigh* You seem so nasty and set on twisting my words that I don't know why I'm bothering but here is it again. What I've said is that those that have a need for more protein (I used body builders in my previous example, but athletes could also quality) would likely have no problem eating protein beyond general medical recommendations because they would use the extra protein for muscle repair. Their needs are different than "general" needs. Which is why posting a general recommendation of setting protein levels at the level athletes/body builders need is IMO unwise.

Eating more protein than your body will use will put extra strain on your kidneys. This could cause kidney problems. There is no evidence showing whether it will or will not. In the face of this lack of evidence and that the extra protein will not provide weight loss or health benefits when it is not used and that there is extra strain to process it out of the body, I find it silly and possibly unsafe to recommend that most people eat this much.

That is what I have been saying and now have repeated again. This is my opinion based on that facts (and lack thereof) and logic. As I've also previously stated if you disagree, then I will simply have to agree to disagree. I can not, however, force you to agree to disagree, so feel free to make another nasty reply.

Why would it be that you find someone asking you for data to back up your posts that are in disagreement nasty? The bottom line is you have an opinion. So noted. You have no evidence in the way of a reputable study to back up your opinion. Also, so noted. We agree to disagree.

The issue I have with your posts in thie thread is that you state opinions in oppostion to posts based on research and articles by reputable sources but offer nothing to back up your opinion other than it is how you feel about it. You are welcome to feel anything you want. Your insistence on posting disagreement repeatedly without offering more than your opinion is a waste of time in my opinion.

Kind of looks like you couldn't make any valid points on the facts front so you resort to calling other people nasty. Interesting approach.

Edited to add: This discussion has devolved into a 2 way conversation that is a derail of the thread. I will not post any further response on this topic in order to let the thread get back on track.

bcattoes

Again, reading comprehension. If it shows no evidence then that is evidece by defination of a lack of a problem. Do you have anything but your own opinion to back up your statements? If so, do share by all means! If not, your "opinion" is duly noted.

So, a lack of study on a subject = proof that said subject is safe? Sorry, I'll have to disagree again.

Here's an article from a guy who's studied protein a lot. In fact, he wrote an entire book dedicated to protein.

http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/nutrition/protein-controversies.html


"Empirically, it’s worth considering that athletes have been habitually consuming large amounts of protein for at least several decades without any reported increase in the incidence of kidney problems. If such a problem were going to occur, it seems likely that it would have shown up by now. While this certainly doesn’t prove that high protein intakes aren’t potentially detrimental to kidney function, the data in support of that idea would seem to be lacking both from a scientific and real-world point of view.

Interestingly, while it’s always been stated that high dietary protein intakes increases fluid requirements, this idea appears to have originated from a military study examining nitrogen balance under conditions of water and energy restriction (1). There is no indication that individuals who are sufficiently hydrated need to go out of their way to increase fluid intake when they are consuming large amounts of protein."

The bottom line is the general population of MFP requires more protein because they are DIETING, and protein requirements go up when dieting.

dieters =/= athletes (which was pretty much my point)

Did you miss this? "The bottom line is the general population of MFP requires more protein because they are DIETING, and protein requirements go up when dieting."

You've spent a lot of time disputing others rcommedations and proof sounrces in this thread. Is that just your M.O. or do you intend to offer anything postive in the way of a recommedation with any proof source to back it up? If not, then it look like you are just blowing smoke based on your own bias.

dieters =/= athletes (which was pretty much my point) Looked back through your posts and this is not stated anywhere. You did state that the level of protein I recommeded could cause a probelm with kidney function though. So which is it? What is your point? And what evidence do you have to substantiate it? Or do you just enjoy being oppositional? Do you have anything positive to contribute in the way of factual information?

*le sigh* You seem so nasty and set on twisting my words that I don't know why I'm bothering but here is it again. What I've said is that those that have a need for more protein (I used body builders in my previous example, but athletes could also quality) would likely have no problem eating protein beyond general medical recommendations because they would use the extra protein for muscle repair. Their needs are different than "general" needs. Which is why posting a general recommendation of setting protein levels at the level athletes/body builders need is IMO unwise.

Eating more protein than your body will use will put extra strain on your kidneys. This could cause kidney problems. There is no evidence showing whether it will or will not. In the face of this lack of evidence and that the extra protein will not provide weight loss or health benefits when it is not used and that there is extra strain to process it out of the body, I find it silly and possibly unsafe to recommend that most people eat this much.

That is what I have been saying and now have repeated again. This is my opinion based on that facts (and lack thereof) and logic. As I've also previously stated if you disagree, then I will simply have to agree to disagree. I can not, however, force you to agree to disagree, so feel free to make another nasty reply.

Why would it be that you find someone asking you for data to back up your posts that are in disagreement nasty? The bottom line is you have an opinion. So noted. You have no evidence in the way of a reputable study to back up your opinion. Also, so noted. We agree to disagree.

The issue I have with your posts in thie thread is that you state opinions in oppostion to posts based on research and articles by reputable sources but offer nothing to back up your opinion other than it is how you feel about it. You are welcome to feel anything you want. Your insistence on posting disagreement repeatedly without offering more than your opinion is a waste of time in my opinion.

Unless I missed a post (quite possible), no research has been posted that addresses the general public (dieting or not) eating very high protein so I'm not in opposition to any research that I recall in this thread or elsewhere. And since I've repeatedly stated my opinion is based on the lack of research in the subject, asking me to post research on the lack of research seems ridiculous. But you are correct that I have none of these studies on the lack of research to provide (though Acg's earlier post did allude to it).

beebee0925

bump

balancedbrunette

bookmarking for again, great post.