"Best" protein supplement?

TexasTroy

oh and BTW...at my heaviest, I was only 170-175 pounds..

lol you were over eating protein 400grams ed at 170-175lbs :laugh:

I wasnt over eating....at least not for me......I was eating 3500- 4000 calories a day and was at about 10% bodyfat

slkehl

That whole 1 g protein per body weight thing is a myth.

Let me see a peer study review on those who strength train. I strength train and I would rather have more protein than not enough. :drinker:

[/quote]

Oh, there are plenty.

• Tarnopolsky et al. (1992) observed no differences in whole body protein synthesis or indexes of lean body mass in strength athletes consuming either 0.64g/lb or 1.10g/lb over a 2 week period. Protein oxidation did increase in the high protein group, indicating a nutrient overload.
• Walberg et al. (1988) found that 0.73g/lb was sufficient to maintain positive nitrogen balance in cutting weightlifters over a 7 day time period.
• Tarnopolsky et al. (1988) found that only 0.37g/lb was required to maintain positive nitrogen balance in elite bodybuilders (over 5 years of experience, possible previous use of androgens) over a 10 day period. 0.45g/lb was sufficient to maintain lean body mass in bodybuilders over a 2 week period. The authors suggested that 0.55g/lb was sufficient for bodybuilders.
• Lemon et al. (1992) found no differences in muscle mass or strength gains in novice bodybuilders consuming either 0.61g/lb or 1.19g/lb over a 4 week period. Based on nitrogen balance data, the authors recommended 0.75g/lb.
• Hoffman et al. (2006) found no differences in body composition, strength or resting hormonal concentrations in strength athletes consuming either 0.77g/lb or >0.91g/lb over a 3 month period.

Your turn. Show me peer reviewed studies that show you need to be consuming at least 1g/lb.

Chadomaniac

0.91g per pound , u fkn joking? thats basically 1g per pound

and lets see phil heath or kai greene come on stage a year later with 0.5g per pound protein a day LMAO

TexasTroy

oh and BTW...at my heaviest, I was only 170-175 pounds..

lol you were over eating protein 400grams ed at 170-175lbs :laugh:

I wasnt over eating....at least not for me......I was eating 3500- 4000 calories a day and was at about 10% bodyfat

if I was "over eating protein " , where would you like me to get my calories from??? Carbs??? I was roughly eating about 1600 calories in protein a day....and another 2400 in carbs and fats.

Shock_Wave

That whole 1 g protein per body weight thing is a myth.

Let me see a peer study review on those who strength train. I strength train and I would rather have more protein than not enough. :drinker:

Oh, there are plenty.

• Tarnopolsky et al. (1992) observed no differences in whole body protein synthesis or indexes of lean body mass in strength athletes consuming either 0.64g/lb or 1.10g/lb over a 2 week period. Protein oxidation did increase in the high protein group, indicating a nutrient overload.
• Walberg et al. (1988) found that 0.73g/lb was sufficient to maintain positive nitrogen balance in cutting weightlifters over a 7 day time period.
• Tarnopolsky et al. (1988) found that only 0.37g/lb was required to maintain positive nitrogen balance in elite bodybuilders (over 5 years of experience, possible previous use of androgens) over a 10 day period. 0.45g/lb was sufficient to maintain lean body mass in bodybuilders over a 2 week period. The authors suggested that 0.55g/lb was sufficient for bodybuilders.
• Lemon et al. (1992) found no differences in muscle mass or strength gains in novice bodybuilders consuming either 0.61g/lb or 1.19g/lb over a 4 week period. Based on nitrogen balance data, the authors recommended 0.75g/lb.
• Hoffman et al. (2006) found no differences in body composition, strength or resting hormonal concentrations in strength athletes consuming either 0.77g/lb or >0.91g/lb over a 3 month period.

Your turn. Show me peer reviewed studies that show you need to be consuming at least 1g/lb.

[/b]

Problems are in bold and also these do NOT show the stats and calories of those in the study.

slkehl

0.91g per pound , u fkn joking? thats basically 1g per pound

Exactly, that's what they were comparing those who consumed .75g too. The .91 was considered the high range.

slkehl

That whole 1 g protein per body weight thing is a myth.

Let me see a peer study review on those who strength train. I strength train and I would rather have more protein than not enough. :drinker:

Oh, there are plenty.

• Tarnopolsky et al. (1992) observed no differences in whole body protein synthesis or indexes of lean body mass in strength athletes consuming either 0.64g/lb or 1.10g/lb over a 2 week period. Protein oxidation did increase in the high protein group, indicating a nutrient overload.
• Walberg et al. (1988) found that 0.73g/lb was sufficient to maintain positive nitrogen balance in cutting weightlifters over a 7 day time period.
• Tarnopolsky et al. (1988) found that only 0.37g/lb was required to maintain positive nitrogen balance in elite bodybuilders (over 5 years of experience, possible previous use of androgens) over a 10 day period. 0.45g/lb was sufficient to maintain lean body mass in bodybuilders over a 2 week period. The authors suggested that 0.55g/lb was sufficient for bodybuilders.
• Lemon et al. (1992) found no differences in muscle mass or strength gains in novice bodybuilders consuming either 0.61g/lb or 1.19g/lb over a 4 week period. Based on nitrogen balance data, the authors recommended 0.75g/lb.
• Hoffman et al. (2006) found no differences in body composition, strength or resting hormonal concentrations in strength athletes consuming either 0.77g/lb or >0.91g/lb over a 3 month period.

Your turn. Show me peer reviewed studies that show you need to be consuming at least 1g/lb.

[/b]

Problems are in bold and also these do NOT show the stats and calories of those in the study.

I am not going to post the entire studies here. You have the source, you can look up the calories and stats. Also I don't see what's wrong with the time frames-those with short time frame are measuring protein OXIDATION and nitrogen balance, and we've got 1-3 months in the studies as well for body comp. It's just a range of studies that lead to the same overall conclusion. And why did you bold "novice bodybuilders consuming either 0.61g/lb or 1.19g/lb over a 4 week period"? Seems like a valid comparison of protein consumption to me.

And I would still like to see peer reviewed studies supporting your argument.

Chadomaniac

point is that u cannot go months and months lifting heavy weights and literally tearing muscle fibres with under 1g per pounds of LBM and expect growth and repair . wont happen . theres a reason your body needs high protein if u want to "build" muscle or atleast maintain!

slkehl

point is that u cannot go months and months lifting heavy weights and literally tearing muscle fibres with under 1g per pounds of LBM and expect growth and repair . wont happen . theres a reason your body needs high protein if u want to "build" muscle or atleast maintain!

Why do you think this? Is that what the ads for protein supplements tell you? Is it just a gut feeling?

I'll go by the scientific proof and by what my physiology and biochemistry professors have taught me.

Shock_Wave

That whole 1 g protein per body weight thing is a myth.

Let me see a peer study review on those who strength train. I strength train and I would rather have more protein than not enough. :drinker:

Oh, there are plenty.

• Tarnopolsky et al. (1992) observed no differences in whole body protein synthesis or indexes of lean body mass in strength athletes consuming either 0.64g/lb or 1.10g/lb over a 2 week period. Protein oxidation did increase in the high protein group, indicating a nutrient overload.
• Walberg et al. (1988) found that 0.73g/lb was sufficient to maintain positive nitrogen balance in cutting weightlifters over a 7 day time period.
• Tarnopolsky et al. (1988) found that only 0.37g/lb was required to maintain positive nitrogen balance in elite bodybuilders (over 5 years of experience, possible previous use of androgens) over a 10 day period. 0.45g/lb was sufficient to maintain lean body mass in bodybuilders over a 2 week period. The authors suggested that 0.55g/lb was sufficient for bodybuilders.
• Lemon et al. (1992) found no differences in muscle mass or strength gains in novice bodybuilders consuming either 0.61g/lb or 1.19g/lb over a 4 week period. Based on nitrogen balance data, the authors recommended 0.75g/lb.
• Hoffman et al. (2006) found no differences in body composition, strength or resting hormonal concentrations in strength athletes consuming either 0.77g/lb or >0.91g/lb over a 3 month period.

Your turn. Show me peer reviewed studies that show you need to be consuming at least 1g/lb.

[/b]

Problems are in bold and also these do NOT show the stats and calories of those in the study.

I am not going to post the entire studies here. You have the source, you can look up the calories and stats. Also I don't see what's wrong with the time frames-those with short time frame are measuring protein OXIDATION, and we've got 1-3 months in the studies as well for body comp. It's just a range of studies that lead to the same overall conclusion.

And I would still like to see peer reviewed studies supporting your argument.

uhh what argument did I raise? That it was cheaper and easier to eat 1g of protein per lb of body weight supplementing a protein shake or two if you are over 200+lbs rather than to eat it from just foods alone?.....really?

Chadomaniac

iv actually done tests myself , i went from 90g - 150g and my lbm increased 7pounds , bf% dropped 4% over a 3 month period ... calories stayed at maintanance . went on a cut , lost another 3% bf and 1pound lbm even at 150g a day

slkehl

^And I'm sure there were no confounders, right? Had nothing to do with lifting heavier?

uhh what argument did I raise? That it was cheaper and easier to eat 1g of protein per lb of body weight supplementing a protein shake or two if you are over 200+lbs rather than to eat it from just foods alone?.....really?

You seem to be insinuating that it's necessary to eat 1g protein/lb to build muscle. I said you don't and provided articles to prove this when you asked. The optimal levels in the study can easily be achieved through a normal diet.

Chadomaniac

That whole 1 g protein per body weight thing is a myth.

Let me see a peer study review on those who strength train. I strength train and I would rather have more protein than not enough. :drinker:

Oh, there are plenty.

• Tarnopolsky et al. (1992) observed no differences in whole body protein synthesis or indexes of lean body mass in strength athletes consuming either 0.64g/lb or 1.10g/lb over a 2 week period. Protein oxidation did increase in the high protein group, indicating a nutrient overload.
• Walberg et al. (1988) found that 0.73g/lb was sufficient to maintain positive nitrogen balance in cutting weightlifters over a 7 day time period.
• Tarnopolsky et al. (1988) found that only 0.37g/lb was required to maintain positive nitrogen balance in elite bodybuilders (over 5 years of experience, possible previous use of androgens) over a 10 day period. 0.45g/lb was sufficient to maintain lean body mass in bodybuilders over a 2 week period. The authors suggested that 0.55g/lb was sufficient for bodybuilders.
• Lemon et al. (1992) found no differences in muscle mass or strength gains in novice bodybuilders consuming either 0.61g/lb or 1.19g/lb over a 4 week period. Based on nitrogen balance data, the authors recommended 0.75g/lb.
• Hoffman et al. (2006) found no differences in body composition, strength or resting hormonal concentrations in strength athletes consuming either 0.77g/lb or >0.91g/lb over a 3 month period.

Your turn. Show me peer reviewed studies that show you need to be consuming at least 1g/lb.

[/b]

Problems are in bold and also these do NOT show the stats and calories of those in the study.

I am not going to post the entire studies here. You have the source, you can look up the calories and stats. Also I don't see what's wrong with the time frames-those with short time frame are measuring protein OXIDATION, and we've got 1-3 months in the studies as well for body comp. It's just a range of studies that lead to the same overall conclusion.

And I would still like to see peer reviewed studies supporting your argument.

uhh what argument did I raise? That it was cheaper and easier to eat 1g of protein per lb of body weight supplementing a protein shake or two if you are over 200+lbs rather than to eat it from just foods alone?.....really?

this is true

Chadomaniac

lets see if i would have lost only 1 pound lbm on 70-90g protein a day . i highly doubt it , more like 4 pounds

slkehl

lets see if i would have lost only 1 pound lbm on 70-90g protein a day . i highly doubt it , more like 4 pounds

Makes no physiological sense why you wouldn't. Plenty of evidence and tests to back that up.

Shock_Wave

Honestly every ones protein synthesis is different so I would rather be in the .91g per lb than .77 but again I am a bigger active guy so I say again I would rather have more protein than not enough. Also its easier just consuming 1g per lb than trying to add .91g per lb lol just saying I personally eat 1.3 g per lb :drinker:

Chadomaniac

lets see if i would have lost only 1 pound lbm on 70-90g protein a day . i highly doubt it , more like 4 pounds

Makes no physiological sense why you wouldn't. Plenty of evidence and tests to back that up.

lol i know that i need high protein in my diet for calorie purposes aswel , what i must eat 400g of carbs and 100g of fat a day and expect to get shredded because my protein is at 70g lol ... need to make up for the calories from either fats or carbs .
at 400g of carbs and 100g of fat ill look like a seal

slkehl

Honestly every ones protein synthesis is different so I would rather be in the .91g per lb than .77 but again I am a bigger active guy so again I would rather have more protein than not enough. Also its easier just consuming 1g per lb than trying to add .91g per lb lol just saying :drinker:

Keep in mind that those are strength althetes that we're talking about. And that was just the low range they chose; other studies have gone lower and found no increased advantage in protein supplements. Again, I have no problem with them being convenient. What I do have a problem with is people buying into the marketing guise that they're necessary. For you they might be cheap, but as a college student, they're not. I have to stick to eggs, milk, chicken, peanut butter...basically, I'm poor, and I take comfort in knowing my budget isn't holding me back from building muscle.

You ask me for studies to support that you don't need 1g protein/lb; now, I ask you for studies that less than that is not enough. Sounds fair enough to me.

Shock_Wave

Honestly every ones protein synthesis is different so I would rather be in the .91g per lb than .77 but again I am a bigger active guy so again I would rather have more protein than not enough. Also its easier just consuming 1g per lb than trying to add .91g per lb lol just saying :drinker:

Keep in mind that those are strength althetes that we're talking about. And that was just the low range they chose; other studies have gone lower and found no increased advantage in protein supplements. Again, I have no problem with them being convenient. What I do have a problem with is people buying into the marketing guise that they're necessary. For you they might be cheap, but as a college student, they're not. I have to stick to eggs, milk, chicken, peanut butter...basically, I'm poor, and I take comfort in knowing my budget isn't holding me back from building muscle.

You ask me for studies to support that you don't need 1g protein/lb; now, I ask you for studies that less than that is not enough. Sounds fair enough to me.

Another positive of having a high protein diet allows me to eat lower carbs keeping that water weight off and keeping me fuller longer.

Chadomaniac

im also not a millionaire (at the moment) but i can def say that protein powder is a saving ... 30g of protein from a shake and 30g of protein from chicken is a big difference in price