Protein?? How do I eat less of it
Replies
-
MFP defaults protein levels really low IMO. I wouldn't actively try and go lower, maybe adjust your settings to a different % (up protein, lower fats or carbs)0
-
LOL this again? The last time I seen you post this people argued with you for 6 pages and noted you had incorrect info from the beginning, changed it again (group info), got the results wrong, and others also noted info was left out (they were also taking creatine) and Acg67 kept telling you why you were incorrect over everything you said. If anyone wants to discuss it they should check out the thread you posted it in:
So, I personally do not know of any vegan builders but there are some...But I just went through my vegetarian lifter friends diary she eats significantly more protein then me that is higher then the recommendation. And then I checked my non lifting vegan friends diary and she also eats more then the recommendation. There was also a vegan guy who stopped by my parents house who is big on protein...it solved allot of his health problems.Just eat your food and stop worring about "starches or fats"
weight loss is about calories nothing else.
Protein consumption is overrated. Ask any vegan bodybuilders (cough cough).
If you eat normally, you will get what you need, if you don't your body will make sure whatever you get in is optimized. People keep on saying "you need protein for your muscles blah blah blah" Yet they don't know carbs are more muscle sparing than protein.
Also, all studies I have ever read comparing a high protein diet to any other seems to indicate that you retain more muscle with a high protein diet. I've yet to see one that shows increasing any of the other macro-nutrients retains muscle any better.
Steroids and muscle growth
There was a steroid study that contained 43 men who were experienced weight lifters. There were 4 groups in the study.
* Group 1: NO EXERCISE + NO STERIODS
* Group 2: EXERCISE + NO STERIODS
* Group 3: NO EXERCISE + WEEKLY STEROID INJECTION
* Group 4: EXERCISE + WEEKLY STEROID INJECTION.
Each member of this study consumed roughly 120g of protein (which is on the lower side of current recommendations) and about 16calories per pound of bodyweight.
Group 1: no gain in LBM
Group 2: gained 4.5lbs
Group 3: gained more than group 1
Group 4: gained over 13lbs of LBM
120g of protein was sufficient protein to be able to build up to 13lbs of LBM.
[Bhasin S, 1996].
Lacto-ovo vegeterians
Lacto-ovo vegeterians(I’ll just call them veggie’s for short) Consume about 79g of protein and about 450 calories less than non-vegetarians. Non veggie’s consume about 138g of protein on a daily basis. Both groups in this study gained between 2-5lbs of LBM. The point of this study is to show once you meet the minimum requirements you don’t need more protein. Remember 5lbs of LBM is what can be gained with a good resistance plan. In this study both groups came close to average results, even the veggies who ate very low amounts of protein.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14600563
Renal Disease
People with renal disease must consume low amounts of protein to delay their disease. They must under 0.3g of protein per pound of body weight. A man of 160lbs would consume 48g of protein. Their disease is highly catabolic(breaks down their muscles). One group lifted weights while the other group did not. Even with ridiculous low amount of protein the group that lifted weights had a slight increase of LBM. The group who didn’t do any resistance training? They lost 7lbs of LBM. This shows how powerful resistance training can be.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11730397
Excessive calories
In this study both groups consumed 2010 calories in addition to their normal daily intake. Group 1 also consumed an additional 106g of protein and group 2 consumed only an extra 24g of protein. The results are group 1 gained 6lbs of lBM and group 2 gained 7.5lbs while consuming roughly 120g of protein total. Yes the LOWER protein group gained LBM than the higher protein group.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11591884
I think there is 10 studies all together.
• 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.
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/787083-muscle-growth-protein-recommendations-highly-over-rated
Given that those intelligent scientific minded people I know read it still agree the protein recommendations are low, I'm not going to read all that all over again. Not to mention since I upped my protein my nails and hair got nicer
Or we can check the thread when i proved both of them wrong, I don't remember the title of it though. We had a debate about this again. If you want to take the alan aragon approach, he recommends things by a dexa scan which is flawed. So that blows that out of the water.
What makes one person study more credible than another? You can't pick favorites in science.
I also offer this question to anyone who is talking about higher protein intake. Are they talking from education or experience? I am speaking from both.
I wouldn't call them scientifically minded. I would call it pick a favorite guru and parrot him.
Legit request - could you see if you can find that post where you apparently proved everyone wrong. I would love to read it.0 -
If you are avoiding sugar don't eat too much protein as it does turn to glucose in your blood. I know not many folks here are doing "low carb" but if you are, you shouldn't avoid good fats. You can get energy from fat vs carbs. Not sure that makes any sense...I have to watch and not go over on my protein.0
-
LOL this again? The last time I seen you post this people argued with you for 6 pages and noted you had incorrect info from the beginning, changed it again (group info), got the results wrong, and others also noted info was left out (they were also taking creatine) and Acg67 kept telling you why you were incorrect over everything you said. If anyone wants to discuss it they should check out the thread you posted it in:
So, I personally do not know of any vegan builders but there are some...But I just went through my vegetarian lifter friends diary she eats significantly more protein then me that is higher then the recommendation. And then I checked my non lifting vegan friends diary and she also eats more then the recommendation. There was also a vegan guy who stopped by my parents house who is big on protein...it solved allot of his health problems.Just eat your food and stop worring about "starches or fats"
weight loss is about calories nothing else.
Protein consumption is overrated. Ask any vegan bodybuilders (cough cough).
If you eat normally, you will get what you need, if you don't your body will make sure whatever you get in is optimized. People keep on saying "you need protein for your muscles blah blah blah" Yet they don't know carbs are more muscle sparing than protein.
Also, all studies I have ever read comparing a high protein diet to any other seems to indicate that you retain more muscle with a high protein diet. I've yet to see one that shows increasing any of the other macro-nutrients retains muscle any better.
Steroids and muscle growth
There was a steroid study that contained 43 men who were experienced weight lifters. There were 4 groups in the study.
* Group 1: NO EXERCISE + NO STERIODS
* Group 2: EXERCISE + NO STERIODS
* Group 3: NO EXERCISE + WEEKLY STEROID INJECTION
* Group 4: EXERCISE + WEEKLY STEROID INJECTION.
Each member of this study consumed roughly 120g of protein (which is on the lower side of current recommendations) and about 16calories per pound of bodyweight.
Group 1: no gain in LBM
Group 2: gained 4.5lbs
Group 3: gained more than group 1
Group 4: gained over 13lbs of LBM
120g of protein was sufficient protein to be able to build up to 13lbs of LBM.
[Bhasin S, 1996].
Lacto-ovo vegeterians
Lacto-ovo vegeterians(I’ll just call them veggie’s for short) Consume about 79g of protein and about 450 calories less than non-vegetarians. Non veggie’s consume about 138g of protein on a daily basis. Both groups in this study gained between 2-5lbs of LBM. The point of this study is to show once you meet the minimum requirements you don’t need more protein. Remember 5lbs of LBM is what can be gained with a good resistance plan. In this study both groups came close to average results, even the veggies who ate very low amounts of protein.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14600563
Renal Disease
People with renal disease must consume low amounts of protein to delay their disease. They must under 0.3g of protein per pound of body weight. A man of 160lbs would consume 48g of protein. Their disease is highly catabolic(breaks down their muscles). One group lifted weights while the other group did not. Even with ridiculous low amount of protein the group that lifted weights had a slight increase of LBM. The group who didn’t do any resistance training? They lost 7lbs of LBM. This shows how powerful resistance training can be.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11730397
Excessive calories
In this study both groups consumed 2010 calories in addition to their normal daily intake. Group 1 also consumed an additional 106g of protein and group 2 consumed only an extra 24g of protein. The results are group 1 gained 6lbs of lBM and group 2 gained 7.5lbs while consuming roughly 120g of protein total. Yes the LOWER protein group gained LBM than the higher protein group.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11591884
I think there is 10 studies all together.
• 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.
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/787083-muscle-growth-protein-recommendations-highly-over-rated
Given that those intelligent scientific minded people I know read it still agree the protein recommendations are low, I'm not going to read all that all over again. Not to mention since I upped my protein my nails and hair got nicer
Or we can check the thread when i proved both of them wrong, I don't remember the title of it though. We had a debate about this again. If you want to take the alan aragon approach, he recommends things by a dexa scan which is flawed. So that blows that out of the water.
What makes one person study more credible than another? You can't pick favorites in science.
I also offer this question to anyone who is talking about higher protein intake. Are they talking from education or experience? I am speaking from both.
I wouldn't call them scientifically minded. I would call it pick a favorite guru and parrot him.
Legit request - could you see if you can find that post where you apparently proved everyone wrong. I would love to read it.
You and sidesteel where in it, our last debate, i don't remember the topic, if you do please go get it.
You have never proved yourself right in any protein debate with me and/or SideSteel so I have no idea what you are talking about - a link would be good.0 -
The only reason I don't ignore people like him is because I've seen so many sweet not so analytical people end up severely depressed on advice of the close minded.LOL this again? The last time I seen you post this people argued with you for 6 pages and noted you had incorrect info from the beginning, changed it again (group info), got the results wrong, and others also noted info was left out (they were also taking creatine) and Acg67 kept telling you why you were incorrect over everything you said. If anyone wants to discuss it they should check out the thread you posted it in:
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/787083-muscle-growth-protein-recommendations-highly-over-rated
Given that those intelligent scientific minded people I know read it still agree the protein recommendations are low, I'm not going to read all that all over again. Not to mention since I upped my protein my nails and hair got nicer
Just ignore him, he's MFP's anti-protein troll. The worst part is, even if he was right, he's got no point. If we pretend he's right, and you don't REQUIRE lots of protein to build or maintain muscle, having MORE than the recommended amount is not detrimental. All of the studies that show that a high protein diet will build more muscle, make better gains in the gym, maintain LBM better, etc will even concede that if you eat more than their recommended amount, there are diminishing returns but THERE ARE STILL RETURNS WITH NO NEGATIVES. Read carefully: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2129150/ (most recommendations were in the 1.2g-2.2g per kg of body mass, I believe averaging out to 1.8g/kg)
Long story short, there is no downside to eating lots of protein, barring a rare medical condition. I repeat, there is no reason NOT to consume lots of protein. I recommend at least 1g per lb of lean body mass, personally. Even if you never go in the gym a day in your life, at the bare minimum it will help with satiety which can be PARAMOUNT to most people adhering to their diet.
Also, from the following link http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/823505-research-on-protien-intake1.4-2g of protein per kg of bodyweight is beneficial for individuals engaged in intense exercise:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20048505
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19278045
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17908291
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18500966
2-3g/kg is beneficial for athletes:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14971434
Older subjects lost lean mass getting the RDA protein recommendations (.8g/kg):
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11382798
Double the RDA outperformed the RDA for individuals in a calorie deficit:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/495538
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16046715
Triple the RDA outperformed the RDA for individuals in a calorie deficit: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19927027
Subjects with a 1.5g/kg protein intake lost fat and gained lean mass:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10838463
Of people that don't exercise, high protien intake causes less lean-mass loss:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/172991160 -
You have never proved yourself right in any protein debate with me and/or SideSteel so I have no idea what you are talking about - a link would be good.
With you I asked you if you are speaking from experience or education. You said something like you'd never lower your protein intake. Implying you're only speaking from education.
There is 2 parts to knowledge education and experience. Remember the eat 6x a day thing. People would do it all the time. They did it out of "education" someone told them to do so. Then probably a few guys stopped and said "wow that was a big load of crap."
I have lowered protein without any issues at all.
Please stop changing the subject - what thread were you referring to and what does my comment that I probably did make have to do with the topic at hand...you 'proving' you were right?.
And you should know as well as anyone your assertions in a non -controlled study are meaningless.0 -
http://www.jissn.com/content/3/1/7
This should be enough for everyone.
If you're losing weight, you need more protein. If you exercise vigorously, you need more protein.
If you're losing weight and exercising vigorously, you need a lot more protein.
Bottom line is you should be getting at least 1.5 g per kg of bodyweight.0 -
Oh here is some really really basic physiology for you guys.
When we lift the energy comes from glucose, this is what produces the ATP for our lifting. Once we're done, we recover wit glucose. SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO WHERE IS THE PROTEIN???!?!?!?! (cough cough)
Oh rly?0 -
Oh here is some really really basic physiology for you guys.
When we lift the energy comes from glucose, this is what produces the ATP for our lifting. Once we're done, we recover wit glucose. SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO WHERE IS THE PROTEIN???!?!?!?! (cough cough)If you are avoiding sugar don't eat too much protein as it does turn to glucose in your blood. I know not many folks here are doing "low carb" but if you are, you shouldn't avoid good fats. You can get energy from fat vs carbs. Not sure that makes any sense...I have to watch and not go over on my protein.
:happy:0 -
Oh here is some really really basic physiology for you guys.
When we lift the energy comes from glucose, this is what produces the ATP for our lifting. Once we're done, we recover wit glucose. SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO WHERE IS THE PROTEIN???!?!?!?! (cough cough)
..... You're kidding, right?
You know literally nothing whatsoever about human metabolism or metabolic pathways. Seriously. You have no idea.
I'll give you something to ponder: where does the "glucose" come from in people who following a ketogenic diet?0 -
Actually you can have too much, as with any nutrient, the body gets rid of what it doesn't use. See if you lacking in another nutrient and try and up it.0
-
If you are avoiding sugar don't eat too much protein as it does turn to glucose in your blood. I know not many folks here are doing "low carb" but if you are, you shouldn't avoid good fats. You can get energy from fat vs carbs. Not sure that makes any sense...I have to watch and not go over on my protein.
Protein never turns to glucose, carbs become glucose. That is a medical fact!0 -
If you are avoiding sugar don't eat too much protein as it does turn to glucose in your blood. I know not many folks here are doing "low carb" but if you are, you shouldn't avoid good fats. You can get energy from fat vs carbs. Not sure that makes any sense...I have to watch and not go over on my protein.
Protein never turns to glucose, carbs become glucose. That is a medical fact!
It's called gluconeogenesis.0 -
I have never seen such a thread. Not that it matters but I do find Sara and Sidesteel more credible then you. They don't tend to botch things up constantly like I see you do (see example of that thread I posted where you constantly made mistakes). That aside, I don't listen to them unless it makes sense. I've questioned Sara many a times and went out and read my own info...and so far...Sara's usually if not always right lol. I always question things though. And I've questioned Sara many times. And the longer period of time that goes by, the more likely I am to look at her response over someone like you. And after reading sidesteels arms...and then looking at his posts lol...everything he said just made sense to me.Or we can check the thread when i proved both of them wrong, I don't remember the title of it though. We had a debate about this again. If you want to take the alan aragon approach, he recommends things by a dexa scan which is flawed. So that blows that out of the water.
What makes one person study more credible than another? You can't pick favorites in science.
I also offer this question to anyone who is talking about higher protein intake. Are they talking from education or experience? I am speaking from both.
I wouldn't call them scientifically minded. I would call it pick a favorite guru and parrot him.
And terrible to admit it but after doing something for an extended period of time people will trust you more if you look the part. Many people will choose the fit personal trainer over the obese one even if the larger one is a whole lot more knowledgeable and sensible. Perhaps why I've met many dumb ones that are doing so well. Sara and Sidesteel are both in incredible shape. They are both in inspirable shape and practice what they preach and can back it up. Not saying looks should have all baring at all...A friend of mine is incredibly intelligent but never practices what he preaches.
I'm a terrible parrot. How many times did I ignore and question weights and more protein and increasing calories etc etc etc before I actually did it because I didn't have a doubt left. If I took your side my finger nails would probably still be constantly cracking off.
If someone says something I can find something on google scholar that agrees with them and it makes sense, I'll believe them. Why wouldn't I?0 -
read more carefully we're not talking about gluconeogenesis, read more carefully next time. (Even the gluconeogenesis theory is being challenged just so you're update on research)
Why people with low glycogen levels suffer wit performance, you thik they can build muscle with crappy performance. think about that one.
This doesn't even make any sense. You don't know anything about human metabolism, biochemistry, metabolic pathways, or nitrogen balance.0 -
I went to post and saw the list of studies done about protein. When you decrease one macro you increase another macro. That confounds the results. Whose to say that the increase/decrease in other macronutrients didn't affect the results in some way.
Did they all eat the exact same foods?
The ADA guidelines have protein set too low. Protein is important for more than just LBM. Amino acids are a critical part of our cellular structure - repair and maintenance. It's used for more than just muscle cells. (And using that info, how the heck can we apply this protein towards energy intake? It's not being used as energy. It's being used as cellular repair and maintenance.
And if you are avoiding sugar, don't worry about avoiding protein. Your body will make protein from glucose ONLY IF IT NEEDS GLUCOSE at the time it is processing it. We only carry a teaspoon's worth of glucose in the entire blood volume so that isn't much. The brain needs glucose but not 130g a day (it actually runs better on a combo of glucose/ketones). How many times have you heard that if you eat so much protein in one sitting your body will use so much of it and then pee it out (this is why high protein isn't good for "dead" kidneys). What about those calories? We're peeing them out apparently.
I'm pre-diabetic. I have an impaired glucose tolerance (I've had my DNA analyzed and it's in the genes for me. Unfortunately the healthiest version of the SAD was making me diabetic.
Since about a third of this nation is overweight and a third is obese then my guess is about a third of this nation won't get fat following the Standard American Diet.
Eat real food. Eat whole food. When I stopped following the guidelines and started following Primal Blueprint I learned so many things about myself. N=1!!!0 -
You have never proved yourself right in any protein debate with me and/or SideSteel so I have no idea what you are talking about - a link would be good.
With you I asked you if you are speaking from experience or education. You said something like you'd never lower your protein intake. Implying you're only speaking from education.
There is 2 parts to knowledge education and experience. Remember the eat 6x a day thing. People would do it all the time. They did it out of "education" someone told them to do so. Then probably a few guys stopped and said "wow that was a big load of crap."
I have lowered protein without any issues at all.
Please stop changing the subject - what thread were you referring to and what does my comment that I probably did make have to do with the topic at hand...you 'proving' you were right?.
And you should know as well as anyone your assertions in a non -controlled study are meaningless.
Here is food for thought, nothing in science is controlled. I told you I don't remember the name of the topic, i asked you what was the last topic we debated on???
You made the assertion - you provide the link.
Why on earth would I recall the title if you cannot?0 -
The only reason I don't ignore people like him is because I've seen so many sweet not so analytical people end up severely depressed on advice of the close minded.LOL this again? The last time I seen you post this people argued with you for 6 pages and noted you had incorrect info from the beginning, changed it again (group info), got the results wrong, and others also noted info was left out (they were also taking creatine) and Acg67 kept telling you why you were incorrect over everything you said. If anyone wants to discuss it they should check out the thread you posted it in:
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/787083-muscle-growth-protein-recommendations-highly-over-rated
Given that those intelligent scientific minded people I know read it still agree the protein recommendations are low, I'm not going to read all that all over again. Not to mention since I upped my protein my nails and hair got nicer
Just ignore him, he's MFP's anti-protein troll. The worst part is, even if he was right, he's got no point. If we pretend he's right, and you don't REQUIRE lots of protein to build or maintain muscle, having MORE than the recommended amount is not detrimental. All of the studies that show that a high protein diet will build more muscle, make better gains in the gym, maintain LBM better, etc will even concede that if you eat more than their recommended amount, there are diminishing returns but THERE ARE STILL RETURNS WITH NO NEGATIVES. Read carefully: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2129150/ (most recommendations were in the 1.2g-2.2g per kg of body mass, I believe averaging out to 1.8g/kg)
Long story short, there is no downside to eating lots of protein, barring a rare medical condition. I repeat, there is no reason NOT to consume lots of protein. I recommend at least 1g per lb of lean body mass, personally. Even if you never go in the gym a day in your life, at the bare minimum it will help with satiety which can be PARAMOUNT to most people adhering to their diet.
Also, from the following link http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/823505-research-on-protien-intake1.4-2g of protein per kg of bodyweight is beneficial for individuals engaged in intense exercise:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20048505
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19278045
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17908291
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18500966
2-3g/kg is beneficial for athletes:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14971434
Older subjects lost lean mass getting the RDA protein recommendations (.8g/kg):
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11382798
Double the RDA outperformed the RDA for individuals in a calorie deficit:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/495538
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16046715
Triple the RDA outperformed the RDA for individuals in a calorie deficit: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19927027
Subjects with a 1.5g/kg protein intake lost fat and gained lean mass:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10838463
Of people that don't exercise, high protien intake causes less lean-mass loss:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17299116
close minded is not looking it from both angles, i already did the high protein thing, now i am lower. Which angle are you looking at things from? just 1.
Way to lie on a public form by making made up assumptions. This is why I do not listen to you. I'm doing the higher intake because 1. when I had low protein my hair was falling out and my nails were cracking off. 2. When I upped my protein that stopped. 3. every controlled study I read on it sides with what happened, and not what you extrapolated very poorly from a drug (not protien) study that you seemed to repeatedly manipulate in that thread.0 -
read more carefully we're not talking about gluconeogenesis, read more carefully next time. (Even the gluconeogenesis theory is being challenged just so you're update on research)
Why people with low glycogen levels suffer wit performance, you thik they can build muscle with crappy performance. think about that one.
This doesn't even make any sense. You don't know anything about human metabolism, biochemistry, metabolic pathways, or nitrogen balance.
Talk is cheap, all you say "that dosn't make sense" anyone can say that... Prove it..
The studies prove it. Negative nitrogen balance with lower protein levels for people who exercise or are losing weight. End of story.0 -
I have never seen such a thread. Not that it matters but I do find Sara and Sidesteel more credible then you. They don't tend to botch things up constantly like I see you do (see example of that thread I posted where you constantly made mistakes). That aside, I don't listen to them unless it makes sense. I've questioned Sara many a times and went out and read my own info...and so far...Sara's usually if not always right lol. I always question things though. And I've questioned Sara many times. And the longer period of time that goes by, the more likely I am to look at her response over someone like you. And after reading sidesteels arms...and then looking at his posts lol...everything he said just made sense to me.Or we can check the thread when i proved both of them wrong, I don't remember the title of it though. We had a debate about this again. If you want to take the alan aragon approach, he recommends things by a dexa scan which is flawed. So that blows that out of the water.
What makes one person study more credible than another? You can't pick favorites in science.
I also offer this question to anyone who is talking about higher protein intake. Are they talking from education or experience? I am speaking from both.
I wouldn't call them scientifically minded. I would call it pick a favorite guru and parrot him.
And terrible to admit it but after doing something for an extended period of time people will trust you more if you look the part. Many people will choose the fit personal trainer over the obese one even if the larger one is a whole lot more knowledgeable and sensible. Perhaps why I've met many dumb ones that are doing so well. Sara and Sidesteel are both in incredible shape. They are both in inspirable shape and practice what they preach and can back it up. Not saying looks should have all baring at all...A friend of mine is incredibly intelligent but never practices what he preaches.
I'm a terrible parrot. How many times did I ignore and question weights and more protein and increasing calories etc etc etc before I actually did it because I didn't have a doubt left. If I took your side my finger nails would probably still be constantly cracking off.
If someone says something I can find something on google scholar that agrees with them and it makes sense, I'll believe them. Why wouldn't I?
They are more credible than a biochemistry major, NASM CPT(National Academy Of Sports Medicine) who has lost 163lbs? okay.
You never even questioned me, you don't know what I know.
Big muscles limit performance in a survival situation, as humans we're designed to survive, so bigger muscles are pointless for humans.
I train some people who look better than both of them combined, just so you know. Advice listen to both sides and make your conclusion, don't be narrow minded.
To quote you....Talk is cheap,0 -
I really doubt that biochem major is you, or is here to argue what you pulled out of your bum. No, I didn't question you, because I don't want to know what you know, because constantly spit out things that make no sense that you are constantly correcting isn't useful to me. And when you're lying and pulling things out of thin air and making assumptions, I don't see the point of questioning you, or trying to know what you know.
I have never seen such a thread. Not that it matters but I do find Sara and Sidesteel more credible then you. They don't tend to botch things up constantly like I see you do (see example of that thread I posted where you constantly made mistakes). That aside, I don't listen to them unless it makes sense. I've questioned Sara many a times and went out and read my own info...and so far...Sara's usually if not always right lol. I always question things though. And I've questioned Sara many times. And the longer period of time that goes by, the more likely I am to look at her response over someone like you. And after reading sidesteels arms...and then looking at his posts lol...everything he said just made sense to me.Or we can check the thread when i proved both of them wrong, I don't remember the title of it though. We had a debate about this again. If you want to take the alan aragon approach, he recommends things by a dexa scan which is flawed. So that blows that out of the water.
What makes one person study more credible than another? You can't pick favorites in science.
I also offer this question to anyone who is talking about higher protein intake. Are they talking from education or experience? I am speaking from both.
I wouldn't call them scientifically minded. I would call it pick a favorite guru and parrot him.
And terrible to admit it but after doing something for an extended period of time people will trust you more if you look the part. Many people will choose the fit personal trainer over the obese one even if the larger one is a whole lot more knowledgeable and sensible. Perhaps why I've met many dumb ones that are doing so well. Sara and Sidesteel are both in incredible shape. They are both in inspirable shape and practice what they preach and can back it up. Not saying looks should have all baring at all...A friend of mine is incredibly intelligent but never practices what he preaches.
I'm a terrible parrot. How many times did I ignore and question weights and more protein and increasing calories etc etc etc before I actually did it because I didn't have a doubt left. If I took your side my finger nails would probably still be constantly cracking off.
If someone says something I can find something on google scholar that agrees with them and it makes sense, I'll believe them. Why wouldn't I?
They are more credible than a biochemistry major, NASM CPT(National Academy Of Sports Medicine) who has lost 163lbs? okay.
You never even questioned me, you don't know what I know.
Big muscles limit performance in a survival situation, as humans we're designed to survive, so bigger muscles are pointless for humans.
I train some people who look better than both of them combined, just so you know. Advice listen to both sides and make your conclusion, don't be narrow minded.
Who said I had big muscles, I have no idea what you are going on with or why you are going on with it lol.
And I don't doubt that you train people who look better then both of them combined. I feel sorry for those people though.
I've listened to the advice on both sides, looked up some biology and chemistry, was on the other side of the low protein fence, made a conclusion, benefited from it and showed results and increased my health. I wouldn't call that being narrow minded.0 -
My RD tells me that we need about 0.8g of protein per 2.2lb of body weight. I get my blood tests at the doctor every 6 months, and so long as my kidney and liver tests come back fine, then having a little over the RDA of protein would not hurt me, as my kidneys will flush it out of my body.
So, right now I don't worry too much about going over my protein every day. It's hard not too when protein comes in so many forms other than meat. I get so much from my egg whites, milk, beans, not to mention the chicken and fish I eat regularly...0 -
Most people don't waist energy trying to make sense of someone who never makes sense and is constantly messing up and changing his mind on what he said (see link where you changed the study several time). If someone sensible and logical stepped into the form, I'd be happy to listen and argue. Perhaps they could conjure up something that makes sense. Unfortunately, you're not that person.read more carefully we're not talking about gluconeogenesis, read more carefully next time. (Even the gluconeogenesis theory is being challenged just so you're update on research)
Why people with low glycogen levels suffer wit performance, you thik they can build muscle with crappy performance. think about that one.
This doesn't even make any sense. You don't know anything about human metabolism, biochemistry, metabolic pathways, or nitrogen balance.
Talk is cheap, all you say "that dosn't make sense" anyone can say that... Prove it..0 -
Here is food for thought, nothing in science is controlled....
So, the fact that most studies are (clue: Its called 'the control' in the study) has evaded you?0 -
So, is this one of those threads where PU gets has been drinking and argues with everyone or just one of the threads where he just argues with everyone without the drinking part? It's hard to tell the difference.0
-
There you go, see that's an argument that makes sense. Good for you. Except that my protein was from the same sources. Complete protein, mostly chicken.
The only reason I don't ignore people like him is because I've seen so many sweet not so analytical people end up severely depressed on advice of the close minded.LOL this again? The last time I seen you post this people argued with you for 6 pages and noted you had incorrect info from the beginning, changed it again (group info), got the results wrong, and others also noted info was left out (they were also taking creatine) and Acg67 kept telling you why you were incorrect over everything you said. If anyone wants to discuss it they should check out the thread you posted it in:
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/787083-muscle-growth-protein-recommendations-highly-over-rated
Given that those intelligent scientific minded people I know read it still agree the protein recommendations are low, I'm not going to read all that all over again. Not to mention since I upped my protein my nails and hair got nicer
Just ignore him, he's MFP's anti-protein troll. The worst part is, even if he was right, he's got no point. If we pretend he's right, and you don't REQUIRE lots of protein to build or maintain muscle, having MORE than the recommended amount is not detrimental. All of the studies that show that a high protein diet will build more muscle, make better gains in the gym, maintain LBM better, etc will even concede that if you eat more than their recommended amount, there are diminishing returns but THERE ARE STILL RETURNS WITH NO NEGATIVES. Read carefully: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2129150/ (most recommendations were in the 1.2g-2.2g per kg of body mass, I believe averaging out to 1.8g/kg)
Long story short, there is no downside to eating lots of protein, barring a rare medical condition. I repeat, there is no reason NOT to consume lots of protein. I recommend at least 1g per lb of lean body mass, personally. Even if you never go in the gym a day in your life, at the bare minimum it will help with satiety which can be PARAMOUNT to most people adhering to their diet.
Also, from the following link http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/823505-research-on-protien-intake1.4-2g of protein per kg of bodyweight is beneficial for individuals engaged in intense exercise:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20048505
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19278045
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17908291
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18500966
2-3g/kg is beneficial for athletes:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14971434
Older subjects lost lean mass getting the RDA protein recommendations (.8g/kg):
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11382798
Double the RDA outperformed the RDA for individuals in a calorie deficit:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/495538
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16046715
Triple the RDA outperformed the RDA for individuals in a calorie deficit: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19927027
Subjects with a 1.5g/kg protein intake lost fat and gained lean mass:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10838463
Of people that don't exercise, high protien intake causes less lean-mass loss:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17299116
close minded is not looking it from both angles, i already did the high protein thing, now i am lower. Which angle are you looking at things from? just 1.
Way to make assumptions. I'm doing the higher intake because 1. when I had low protein my hair was falling out and my nails were cracking off. 2. When I upped my protein that stopped. 3. every controlled study I read on it sides with what happened, and not what you extrapolated very poorly from a drug (not protien) study that you seemed to repeatedly manipulate in that thread.
It could have easily be a specific amino acid, which can also be found in non animal sources. Just because you ate protein and your nails got better, doesn't mean it was the protein. Could have been something else within the protein source.0 -
I have never seen such a thread. Not that it matters but I do find Sara and Sidesteel more credible then you. They don't tend to botch things up constantly like I see you do (see example of that thread I posted where you constantly made mistakes). That aside, I don't listen to them unless it makes sense. I've questioned Sara many a times and went out and read my own info...and so far...Sara's usually if not always right lol. I always question things though. And I've questioned Sara many times. And the longer period of time that goes by, the more likely I am to look at her response over someone like you. And after reading sidesteels arms...and then looking at his posts lol...everything he said just made sense to me.Or we can check the thread when i proved both of them wrong, I don't remember the title of it though. We had a debate about this again. If you want to take the alan aragon approach, he recommends things by a dexa scan which is flawed. So that blows that out of the water.
What makes one person study more credible than another? You can't pick favorites in science.
I also offer this question to anyone who is talking about higher protein intake. Are they talking from education or experience? I am speaking from both.
I wouldn't call them scientifically minded. I would call it pick a favorite guru and parrot him.
And terrible to admit it but after doing something for an extended period of time people will trust you more if you look the part. Many people will choose the fit personal trainer over the obese one even if the larger one is a whole lot more knowledgeable and sensible. Perhaps why I've met many dumb ones that are doing so well. Sara and Sidesteel are both in incredible shape. They are both in inspirable shape and practice what they preach and can back it up. Not saying looks should have all baring at all...A friend of mine is incredibly intelligent but never practices what he preaches.
I'm a terrible parrot. How many times did I ignore and question weights and more protein and increasing calories etc etc etc before I actually did it because I didn't have a doubt left. If I took your side my finger nails would probably still be constantly cracking off.
If someone says something I can find something on google scholar that agrees with them and it makes sense, I'll believe them. Why wouldn't I?
They are more credible than a biochemistry major, NASM CPT(National Academy Of Sports Medicine) who has lost 163lbs? okay.
You never even questioned me, you don't know what I know.
Big muscles limit performance in a survival situation, as humans we're designed to survive, so bigger muscles are pointless for humans.
I train some people who look better than both of them combined, just so you know. Advice listen to both sides and make your conclusion, don't be narrow minded.
To quote you....Talk is cheap,
That's why we show with results :-)
lolwut??0 -
class time, have fun!
I do hope you are taking a rudimentary science class....0 -
I have never seen such a thread. Not that it matters but I do find Sara and Sidesteel more credible then you. They don't tend to botch things up constantly like I see you do (see example of that thread I posted where you constantly made mistakes). That aside, I don't listen to them unless it makes sense. I've questioned Sara many a times and went out and read my own info...and so far...Sara's usually if not always right lol. I always question things though. And I've questioned Sara many times. And the longer period of time that goes by, the more likely I am to look at her response over someone like you. And after reading sidesteels arms...and then looking at his posts lol...everything he said just made sense to me.Or we can check the thread when i proved both of them wrong, I don't remember the title of it though. We had a debate about this again. If you want to take the alan aragon approach, he recommends things by a dexa scan which is flawed. So that blows that out of the water.
What makes one person study more credible than another? You can't pick favorites in science.
I also offer this question to anyone who is talking about higher protein intake. Are they talking from education or experience? I am speaking from both.
I wouldn't call them scientifically minded. I would call it pick a favorite guru and parrot him.
And terrible to admit it but after doing something for an extended period of time people will trust you more if you look the part. Many people will choose the fit personal trainer over the obese one even if the larger one is a whole lot more knowledgeable and sensible. Perhaps why I've met many dumb ones that are doing so well. Sara and Sidesteel are both in incredible shape. They are both in inspirable shape and practice what they preach and can back it up. Not saying looks should have all baring at all...A friend of mine is incredibly intelligent but never practices what he preaches.
I'm a terrible parrot. How many times did I ignore and question weights and more protein and increasing calories etc etc etc before I actually did it because I didn't have a doubt left. If I took your side my finger nails would probably still be constantly cracking off.
If someone says something I can find something on google scholar that agrees with them and it makes sense, I'll believe them. Why wouldn't I?
They are more credible than a biochemistry major, NASM CPT(National Academy Of Sports Medicine) who has lost 163lbs? okay.
You never even questioned me, you don't know what I know.
Big muscles limit performance in a survival situation, as humans we're designed to survive, so bigger muscles are pointless for humans.
I train some people who look better than both of them combined, just so you know. Advice listen to both sides and make your conclusion, don't be narrow minded.
To quote you....Talk is cheap,
That's why we show with results :-)
lolwut??
I got my results and getting them, are you?
Ummm...lolz0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K 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
- 426 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