The Protein Myth

Bob on Biggest Loser told a contestant that they should eat protein after a workout to help rebuild the muscles.

Lol. Bob is a tool and consistently gives very poor info.

I have read that we may suggest too much protein. However, given our hugely carb world, it's probably generally good advice to suggest that people increase protein, but it's based on the individuals situation. It shouldn't just be a standard answer to everyone. I think protein is overrated.

but we'll trust random GuitarJerry on the interwebs!

Maybe you should trust the results of multiple peer-reviewed studies. Just a thought.

backed by the very industries that stand to benefit from those studies? see the flaw?

I can't be the only one who sees the humor in that comment being made by someone who has a conflict of interest on this topic.

Nope, you are not :happy:

I have only heard of people being advised to do this if they are strength training or struggling with the mfp protein setting. I know I was way over when I started using the site.

If mfp's setting works for you then use it. If it isn't working for you and you ask about it - people are going to offer you advice, seems a bit arsey to then moan about it.

I just don't see why even bother to have mfp if everyone is going to say the macros they give you are wrong. That's my point on that. Why would it be effed up?

Because they follow the RDA, which is based on an average sedentary individual maintaining weight.

And the RDA is created by a government that is so heavily in the grain industry's pocket that they put them on the bottom of the food pyramid.

The science is absolutely clear: if you are losing weight, or you are training hard, you need much more protein than the RDA in order to maintain or grow your muscles most effectively. There's zero ambiguity.

a lot of people tout the .7-1g of protein per pound of lean body mass, but I'm actually not even sure where that originated from.

I personally feel that since people feel the need to constrict carbs to such a huge degree to lose weight, they offset that by raising their protein intake so they can feel like they aren't starving themselves. even if the excess protein doesn't get used, it still helps them feel full.

It originated from science:
http://www.jissn.com/content/3/1/7

Anyway, if you don't eat enough protein your muscles will grow more slowly/break down more quickly. That's all there is to it.

I talked with a very good dietician and .7-1 gm/kg of weight is what is generally recommended for a person that is active and healthy.

Isn't it .7-1kg per lb of lean body mass... meaning... amount of muscle... minus bone fat and organs etc?...
Not whole body weight.

I am a heavy lifter and I do not drink protein shakes or eat protein bars bc they taste awful and I am not willing to waste calories on awful-tasting things.

I think I'm doing just fine without any special attention to protein.

45 years old, 5'4 135 lbs. - 155 lb. squats and deadlifts thankyouverymuch.

a lot of people tout the .7-1g of protein per pound of lean body mass, but I'm actually not even sure where that originated from.

I personally feel that since people feel the need to constrict carbs to such a huge degree to lose weight, they offset that by raising their protein intake so they can feel like they aren't starving themselves. even if the excess protein doesn't get used, it still helps them feel full.

It originated from science:
http://www.jissn.com/content/3/1/7

Anyway, if you don't eat enough protein your muscles will grow more slowly/break down more quickly. That's all there is to it.

I talked with a very good dietician and .7-1 gm/kg of weight is what is generally recommended for a person that is active and healthy.

Isn't it .7-1kg per lb of lean body mass... meaning... amount of muscle... minus bone fat and organs etc?...
Not whole body weight.

No, LBM is everything except fat. It includes bones, organs, water, muscle etc etc

I find the 'protein thing' to be a straw man - the standard western diet, and certainly the SAD, contains more than sufficient protein to support life. This dogma that is promulgated relentlessly here - that one must consume x/g lbm - is silly - like lecturing people that they need x% of oxygen for every breath they take. It's good to know, and useful in certain extreme situations, but generally not something that your regular run-of-the-mill healthy western adult needs to fret over, because they get plenty of protein without even thinking about it. And it should be even less of a concern for overweight adults, who are more than likely consuming protein well in excess of what their body will utilise.

If you are intent on rapidly building muscle, building large mass of muscle, or are generally very lean with minimal bodyfat and low muscle mass, by all means increase your protein intake. For the 'regular' MFP user, I think it's an unnecessary diversion and complication for what is intended to be a simple 'set and forget' program.

Excess protein does indeed load the kidneys heavily, but most healthy adults can compensate with no problems. I do not know if a lifetime or prolonged interval of eating very high protein would eventually damage the kidneys. It seems as though this is certainly possible, physiologically, but I'm not an urologist or an endocrinologist so I don't know.

Excess protein does indeed load the kidneys heavily, but most healthy adults can compensate with no problems. I do not know if a lifetime or prolonged interval of eating very high protein would eventually damage the kidneys. It seems as though this is certainly possible, physiologically, but I'm not an urologist or an endocrinologist so I don't know.

How many elderly bodybuilders can you think of that died of kidney related diseases?

I think its a moot point, old wives tale, based on decades old research - certainly from all the old bodybuilders from the 70s/80's I can't think of any that this had been a problem for?

Like I said, I am not a kidney expert. But this a relatively recent (2008, so not brand new) review of high protein diets - this is the abstract, but if you'd like the full text I would be happy to send it to you. Note the last few lines - basically there is little data on long term exposure, but they suggest it might lead to disease. There may be newer studies actually testing that, I searched only quickly.


High-protein Weight-loss Diets: Are They Safe and Do They Work? A Review of the Experimental and Epidemiologic Data (Nutrition Reviews)

Abstract:
Recommendations for increased consumption of protein are among the most common approaches of popular or fad diets. This review summarizes the effects of dietary protein on satiety, energy intake, thermogenesis, and weight loss, as well as its effect on a variety of health outcomes in adults. In short-term studies, dietary protein modulates energy intake via the sensation of satiety and increases total energy expenditure by increasing the thermic effect of feeding. Whereas these effects did not contribute to weight and fat loss in those studies in which energy intake was fixed, one ad libitum study does suggest that a high-protein diet results in a greater decrease in energy intake, and therefore greater weight and fat loss. In terms of safety, there is little long-term information on the health effects of high-protein diets. From the available data, however, it is evident that the consumption of protein greater than two to three times the U.S. Recommended Daily Allowance contributes to urinary calcium loss and may, in the long term, predispose to bone loss. Caution with these diets is recommended in those individuals who may be predisposed to nephrolithiasis or kidney disease, and particularly in those with diabetes mellitus.

Do regular high protein diets have potential health risks on kidney function in athletes?
Poortmans JR, Dellalieux O.

Source
Department of Physiological Chemistry, Institute of Physical Education and Kinesiotherapy, Free University of Brussels, Belgium.
Abstract
Excess protein and amino acid intake have been recognized as hazardous potential implications for kidney function, leading to progressive impairment of this organ. It has been suggested in the literature, without clear evidence, that high protein intake by athletes has no harmful consequences on renal function. This study investigated body-builders (BB) and other well-trained athletes (OA) with high and medium protein intake, respectively, in order to shed light on this issue. The athletes underwent a 7-day nutrition record analysis as well as blood sample and urine collection to determine the potential renal consequences of a high protein intake. The data revealed that despite higher plasma concentration of uric acid and calcium, Group BB had renal clearances of creatinine, urea, and albumin that were within the normal range. The nitrogen balance for both groups became positive when daily protein intake exceeded 1.26 g.kg but there were no correlations between protein intake and creatinine clearance, albumin excretion rate, and calcium excretion rate. To conclude, it appears that protein intake under 2. 8 g.kg does not impair renal function in well-trained athletes as indicated by the measures of renal function used in this study

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10722779

Agreed - before embarking on any weight loss/diet/lifting regime, always consult your doctor.

This topic and the fear of health risk comes up about every other day. Acg67 put together some great info that addresses this in a couple of posts. I'm am putting it here as I think it is relevant and helpful to this discussion. The bottom line is there have been multiple studies that indicate high protein intake is not harmful at all in otherwise healthy individuals.

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


QUOTE:

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


QUOTE:

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.



QUOTE:

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


QUOTE:

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.[

I have never in my life had a protein shake. I think they are unnecessary. I prefer real foods.

Protein is protein, it is real food.

It comes from cheese or milk.

No more or less real than anything made from grain. Unless people are going to say that bread and similar are not real food?

I have to rattle a cage. It seems to be "common knowledge" on mfp that everyone needs loads of protein to A. Lose fat, and B. Increase strength and that it's imperative that normal people have a protein shake after each strength work out. I'm not talking about heavy lifting, I'm talking about your basic run of the mill strength workouts so if you want to lecture about heavy lifting and protein move along as that is not what I'm talking about. So I'm wondering why that is and why everyone says mfp's settings for protein are "too low" for most people. When someone asks about protein, someone had to come in and say their setting is "too low" because it's what mfp set for them. Why would mfp set it too low really? If it was too low wouldn't they have corrected it? Wouldn't there be a huge disclaimer about it being "too low"? Is it impossible for someone to lose fat and get stronger with 50g -70g of protein? To most mfp "experts" yes, how did this rumor come about that mfp settings are too low and that people need 100g of protein to lose fat?

I agree with you. The amount of protein you can get from salads is good enough.

I have never in my life had a protein shake. I think they are unnecessary. I prefer real foods.

Protein is protein, it is real food.

It comes from cheese or milk.

No more or less real than anything made from grain. Unless people are going to say that bread and similar are not real food?

Its a powder made in a factory. No thanks. Unless i dont understand what is meant by "protein shake"? All i have seen is powder in can sold on a shelf.

You know cheese, right?

When they make cheese the parts of the milk leftover are whey.

They dry it up and sell it as a powder.

Suddenly it's not food because they dry it up first?

I have to rattle a cage. It seems to be "common knowledge" on mfp that everyone needs loads of protein to A. Lose fat, and B. Increase strength and that it's imperative that normal people have a protein shake after each strength work out. I'm not talking about heavy lifting, I'm talking about your basic run of the mill strength workouts so if you want to lecture about heavy lifting and protein move along as that is not what I'm talking about. So I'm wondering why that is and why everyone says mfp's settings for protein are "too low" for most people. When someone asks about protein, someone had to come in and say their setting is "too low" because it's what mfp set for them. Why would mfp set it too low really? If it was too low wouldn't they have corrected it? Wouldn't there be a huge disclaimer about it being "too low"? Is it impossible for someone to lose fat and get stronger with 50g -70g of protein? To most mfp "experts" yes, how did this rumor come about that mfp settings are too low and that people need 100g of protein to lose fat?

Somehow, as usual, this thread got way off track from the original post.

It is possible to lose fat on 50 to 70g or protein. It isn't necessary to gulp down a protein shake after 20 minutes of 30 Day Shred. There's a huge difference between an athlete eating to perform to their fullest potential and an overweight housewife sweatin' to the oldies.

The OP is right, as soon as someone asks about nutrition out come the big guns with suggestions to eat more protein and which protein powder is the best. If that's the way you choose to get your nutrition, fine but you can be fit and healthy without making the sellers of all this stuff rich.