Too much protein?

Options
145791012

Replies

  • OMP33
    OMP33 Posts: 308 Member
    Options
    eeejer wrote: »
    OMP33 wrote: »
    What works for me might not work for you. What works for you might not work for me, so I'm not wrong, it's just that I'm the minority.

    I mean you are alive, so I guess it is "working", but imagine what you could have achieved with proper nutrition.

    I have proper nutrition for the kind of lifestyle I live. I need carbs for the energy during my intense workouts, I need moderate protein to recover, and I don't have a need for fat because I do not train for endurance, I interval train.
  • richln
    richln Posts: 809 Member
    Options
    If you are serious about improving your performance at any physically demanding activity, then you should be consuming well over the US RDA protein minimums.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/men/active/10989101/How-to-get-legs-like-track-cyclist-Jason-Kenny.html

    "6: DRIP-FEED YOUR BODY WITH PROTEIN
    I try to have lots of protein with each meal – anything from meat and fish to protein shakes and milk shakes. I struggle to gain weight so I chuck as much down my neck as I can. Tuna is great because you can throw a tin into any meal and the protein box is ticked.”
  • Wetcoaster
    Wetcoaster Posts: 1,788 Member
    Options
    eeejer wrote: »
    eeejer wrote: »
    this is all you need to read about protein controversy. Read everything by Lyle if you want science. http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/nutrition/protein-controversies.html/

    This article gives some good insight. Now I have a better understanding of all this. Thanks for posting the link!

    my pleasure, Lyle is one of the few guys you can really trust, he posts sources for everything, and he knows his stuff. His website is a gold mine of valuable information.

    Lyle,Layne Norton,Alan Agaron,Eric Helms,Brad Schofield are all great sources of information as is Stuart Phillips who is a guru of protein.
  • eeejer
    eeejer Posts: 339 Member
    Options
    OMP33 wrote: »
    It honestly depends on the person as to how much protein they need. Protein is subjective.
    It does depend on your activity level, but there is a minimum and you eat under it.

  • OMP33
    OMP33 Posts: 308 Member
    Options
    richln wrote: »
    If you are serious about improving your performance at any physically demanding activity, then you should be consuming well over the US RDA protein minimums.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/men/active/10989101/How-to-get-legs-like-track-cyclist-Jason-Kenny.html

    "6: DRIP-FEED YOUR BODY WITH PROTEIN
    I try to have lots of protein with each meal – anything from meat and fish to protein shakes and milk shakes. I struggle to gain weight so I chuck as much down my neck as I can. Tuna is great because you can throw a tin into any meal and the protein box is ticked.”

    Meat is out of question. I'd rather not play russian roulette with my food, too many risks of getting cancer, high cholesterol, and heart disease.
  • eeejer
    eeejer Posts: 339 Member
    Options
    Wetcoaster wrote: »
    Lyle,Layne Norton,Alan Agaron,Eric Helms,Brad Schofield are all great sources of information as is Stuart Phillips who is a guru of protein.

    I agree, and those make up the rest of the few pretty much hehe.
  • OMP33
    OMP33 Posts: 308 Member
    Options
    Wetcoaster wrote: »
    eeejer wrote: »
    eeejer wrote: »
    this is all you need to read about protein controversy. Read everything by Lyle if you want science. http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/nutrition/protein-controversies.html/

    This article gives some good insight. Now I have a better understanding of all this. Thanks for posting the link!

    my pleasure, Lyle is one of the few guys you can really trust, he posts sources for everything, and he knows his stuff. His website is a gold mine of valuable information.

    Lyle,Layne Norton,Alan Agaron,Eric Helms,Brad Schofield are all great sources of information as is Stuart Phillips who is a guru of protein.

    Layne Norton is a goof, definitely not a good source of info.
  • OMP33
    OMP33 Posts: 308 Member
    Options
    eeejer wrote: »
    OMP33 wrote: »
    It honestly depends on the person as to how much protein they need. Protein is subjective.
    It does depend on your activity level, but there is a minimum and you eat under it.

    If I eat under it yet still can train very hard and long, then why should I up my intake?
  • eeejer
    eeejer Posts: 339 Member
    Options
    OMP33 wrote: »
    Meat is out of question. I'd rather not play russian roulette with my food, too many risks of getting cancer, high cholesterol, and heart disease.

    Don't worry about cholesterol from food http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/02/19/nutrition-panel-calls-for-less-sugar-and-eases-cholesterol-and-fat-restrictions/
  • DaddieCat
    DaddieCat Posts: 3,646 Member
    Options
    Wetcoaster wrote: »
    eeejer wrote: »
    eeejer wrote: »
    this is all you need to read about protein controversy. Read everything by Lyle if you want science. http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/nutrition/protein-controversies.html/

    This article gives some good insight. Now I have a better understanding of all this. Thanks for posting the link!

    my pleasure, Lyle is one of the few guys you can really trust, he posts sources for everything, and he knows his stuff. His website is a gold mine of valuable information.

    Lyle,Layne Norton,Alan Agaron,Eric Helms,Brad Schofield are all great sources of information as is Stuart Phillips who is a guru of protein.

    Have you read any of Greg Nuckols? If not, I recommend it as well as the above.
  • eeejer
    eeejer Posts: 339 Member
    Options
    OMP33 wrote: »
    eeejer wrote: »
    OMP33 wrote: »
    It honestly depends on the person as to how much protein they need. Protein is subjective.
    It does depend on your activity level, but there is a minimum and you eat under it.

    If I eat under it yet still can train very hard and long, then why should I up my intake?

    Because you will not get the results you would with proper macronutrient intake. Endurance does not equal benefit from exercise and nutrition.
  • OMP33
    OMP33 Posts: 308 Member
    Options
    eeejer wrote: »
    OMP33 wrote: »
    Meat is out of question. I'd rather not play russian roulette with my food, too many risks of getting cancer, high cholesterol, and heart disease.

    Don't worry about cholesterol from food http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/02/19/nutrition-panel-calls-for-less-sugar-and-eases-cholesterol-and-fat-restrictions/

    So you're saying dietary cholesterol doesn't raise or lower cholesterol levels..? Wow.
  • eeejer
    eeejer Posts: 339 Member
    Options
    OMP33 wrote: »
    eeejer wrote: »
    OMP33 wrote: »
    Meat is out of question. I'd rather not play russian roulette with my food, too many risks of getting cancer, high cholesterol, and heart disease.

    Don't worry about cholesterol from food http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/02/19/nutrition-panel-calls-for-less-sugar-and-eases-cholesterol-and-fat-restrictions/

    So you're saying dietary cholesterol doesn't raise or lower cholesterol levels..? Wow.

    It is very minor. You should do some reading about it.
  • Carlos_421
    Carlos_421 Posts: 5,132 Member
    Options
    OMP33 wrote: »
    eeejer wrote: »
    OMP33 wrote: »
    What works for me might not work for you. What works for you might not work for me, so I'm not wrong, it's just that I'm the minority.

    I mean you are alive, so I guess it is "working", but imagine what you could have achieved with proper nutrition.

    I have proper nutrition for the kind of lifestyle I live. I need carbs for the energy during my intense workouts, I need moderate protein to recover, and I don't have a need for fat because I do not train for endurance, I interval train.

    So now only endurance athletes need dietary fat???

    So if you don't train for endurance, you don't need brain health, healthy hormone function (including testosterone production), skin, hair and nail health, or healthy joints?

    b6488ee3.gif
  • eeejer
    eeejer Posts: 339 Member
    Options
    OMP33 wrote: »
    eeejer wrote: »
    OMP33 wrote: »
    Meat is out of question. I'd rather not play russian roulette with my food, too many risks of getting cancer, high cholesterol, and heart disease.

    Don't worry about cholesterol from food http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/02/19/nutrition-panel-calls-for-less-sugar-and-eases-cholesterol-and-fat-restrictions/

    So you're saying dietary cholesterol doesn't raise or lower cholesterol levels..? Wow.

    Quote: "Research is beginning to show that your genetic makeup – not diet – is the driving force behind cholesterol levels, says cardiologist Steven Nissen, MD.

    The body creates cholesterol in amounts much larger than what you can eat, Dr. Nissen says. So avoiding foods that are high in cholesterol won’t affect your blood cholesterol levels very much." http://health.clevelandclinic.org/2015/02/why-you-should-no-longer-worry-about-cholesterol-in-food/
  • sheermomentum
    sheermomentum Posts: 827 Member
    edited February 2016
    Options
    AnvilHead wrote: »
    I was mostly smh at some of the arguments in here. It's become apparent to me in this thread, after reading its entirely, and a few others, that some people are going to keep spouting bad advice no matter what evidence is shown to them. It frustrates me because it's patently untrue, and while it may work for some, can be dangerous for many others... but what gets me is just a wonder... what kind of bold faced bravado does one need when the masses are providing ample explanation and evidence that your position is not only wrong, but seemingly completely founded solely on personal opinion, to continue denying it and be completely unwilling to stop for just one moment and consider the fact that if, say 30 people are telling me I'm wrong, there might be a possibility that my position is worth examining.

    I think it's usually referred to as 'extreme fanaticism' or 'cultism'.

    At this point, I'm pretty sure its pure trolling. I don't believe that he is an athlete at any level, and I don't really believe that he has any particular feelings about anything related to nutrition or performance unless its food for attention and starting or sustaining an argument.
  • FunkyTobias
    FunkyTobias Posts: 1,776 Member
    Options
    OMP33 wrote: »
    eeejer wrote: »
    OMP33 wrote: »
    Meat is out of question. I'd rather not play russian roulette with my food, too many risks of getting cancer, high cholesterol, and heart disease.

    Don't worry about cholesterol from food http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/02/19/nutrition-panel-calls-for-less-sugar-and-eases-cholesterol-and-fat-restrictions/

    So you're saying dietary cholesterol doesn't raise or lower cholesterol levels..? Wow.


    A small percentage of the population are hyperresponders, and need to watch dietary cholesterol. For the rest of us, it doesn't matter.


  • OMP33
    OMP33 Posts: 308 Member
    Options
    Carlos_421 wrote: »
    OMP33 wrote: »
    eeejer wrote: »
    OMP33 wrote: »
    What works for me might not work for you. What works for you might not work for me, so I'm not wrong, it's just that I'm the minority.

    I mean you are alive, so I guess it is "working", but imagine what you could have achieved with proper nutrition.

    I have proper nutrition for the kind of lifestyle I live. I need carbs for the energy during my intense workouts, I need moderate protein to recover, and I don't have a need for fat because I do not train for endurance, I interval train.

    So now only endurance athletes need dietary fat???

    So if you don't train for endurance, you don't need brain health, healthy hormone function (including testosterone production), skin, hair and nail health, or healthy joints?

    b6488ee3.gif

    You use energy from fat when endurance training while interval training depletes glycogen storages from carbs.
  • AnvilHead
    AnvilHead Posts: 18,344 Member
    Options
    AnvilHead wrote: »
    I was mostly smh at some of the arguments in here. It's become apparent to me in this thread, after reading its entirely, and a few others, that some people are going to keep spouting bad advice no matter what evidence is shown to them. It frustrates me because it's patently untrue, and while it may work for some, can be dangerous for many others... but what gets me is just a wonder... what kind of bold faced bravado does one need when the masses are providing ample explanation and evidence that your position is not only wrong, but seemingly completely founded solely on personal opinion, to continue denying it and be completely unwilling to stop for just one moment and consider the fact that if, say 30 people are telling me I'm wrong, there might be a possibility that my position is worth examining.

    I think it's usually referred to as 'extreme fanaticism' or 'cultism'.

    At this point, I'm pretty sure its pure trolling. I don't believe that he is an athlete at any level, and I don't really believe that he has any particular feelings about anything related to nutrition or performance unless its food for attention and starting or sustaining an argument.

    He's only 19 years old and apparently very convinced of what he believes in - even though it defies science and basic physiology. But I agree that it does seem to have degenerated to basic trolling/attention seeking at this point.
  • OMP33
    OMP33 Posts: 308 Member
    Options
    eeejer wrote: »
    OMP33 wrote: »
    eeejer wrote: »
    OMP33 wrote: »
    Meat is out of question. I'd rather not play russian roulette with my food, too many risks of getting cancer, high cholesterol, and heart disease.

    Don't worry about cholesterol from food http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/02/19/nutrition-panel-calls-for-less-sugar-and-eases-cholesterol-and-fat-restrictions/

    So you're saying dietary cholesterol doesn't raise or lower cholesterol levels..? Wow.

    Quote: "Research is beginning to show that your genetic makeup – not diet – is the driving force behind cholesterol levels, says cardiologist Steven Nissen, MD.

    The body creates cholesterol in amounts much larger than what you can eat, Dr. Nissen says. So avoiding foods that are high in cholesterol won’t affect your blood cholesterol levels very much." http://health.clevelandclinic.org/2015/02/why-you-should-no-longer-worry-about-cholesterol-in-food/

    "CONCLUSIONS: In typical diets replacing 60% of saturated fats by other fats and avoiding 60% of dietary cholesterol would reduce blood total cholesterol..."

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2125600/
This discussion has been closed.