Recommendation for protein intake - based on height better?

kommodevaran
kommodevaran Posts: 17,890 Member
edited December 3 in Food and Nutrition
I have been thinking about the elaborate formula we use to prescribe appropriate protein intake - 0.8 grams per pound of body weight at a healthy BMI or one gram per pound of lean body mass. Isn't this way too complicated, difficult, and unnecessarily so? After all, a healthy BMI is a good weight for your height, and weight is variable, but height isn't, after you've reached adulthood. Cookie cutter recommendations like FDA's based on sex or total calorie intake isn't going to cut it either - protein (and fat) needs seems to be pretty static even at different calorie/activity levels; protein need increases only with serious strength training. (Am I way off here?)

@happyfeetrebel1 reminded me of this just now. She has been taught one gram protein per inch in height. This sounds pretty reasonable to me; I'm 63 inches tall and I feel 70 grams protein is plenty for me.

It could be interesting to hear if this is viable, and also if need for fat can be formulated similarly, and if women and men have different needs - for instance, I get a feeling that men need more protein (for muscles), but women need more fat (for homones). Nutritional science will never be exact, it doesn't have to be, but the implementation of it could be better than it is now. What do ya'll think?

Replies

  • fr33sia12
    fr33sia12 Posts: 1,258 Member
    I always thought the formula 0.8 per pound of body weight was ridiculous, as that would mean I should be eating 144g of protein. I average 60g so would have to eat twice as much meaning pretty much everything I eat would need to be high in protein for me to get enough with my calorie allowance. That being said whenever any questions arise on here about protein everyone has their opinion and fact about the amount we should eat, so much so I just get confused and lost. I then decided to eat the amount I feel I need rather than go with anyone else's suggestions as I do this with the rest of my diet, why not protein. So I stick to my average of 60g a day, this keeps me full enough, active enough and it's doable.
  • StealthHealth
    StealthHealth Posts: 2,417 Member
    kommodevaran wrote: »
    protein (and fat) needs seems to be pretty static even at different calorie/activity levels; protein need increases only with serious strength training. (Am I way off here?)

    You're probably not way off but I am laboring under the impression (possibly false?) that protein requirements rise with age and when in calorific deficit. I suspect that the increases required are not massive.

  • Damien_K
    Damien_K Posts: 783 Member
    kommodevaran wrote: »
    I have been thinking about the elaborate formula we use to prescribe appropriate protein intake - 0.8 grams per pound of body weight at a healthy BMI or one gram per pound of lean body mass. Isn't this way too complicated, difficult, and unnecessarily so? After all, a healthy BMI is a good weight for your height, and weight is variable, but height isn't, after you've reached adulthood. Cookie cutter recommendations like FDA's based on sex or total calorie intake isn't going to cut it either - protein (and fat) needs seems to be pretty static even at different calorie/activity levels; protein need increases only with serious strength training. (Am I way off here?)

    @happyfeetrebel1 reminded me of this just now. She has been taught one gram protein per inch in height. This sounds pretty reasonable to me; I'm 63 inches tall and I feel 70 grams protein is plenty for me.

    It could be interesting to hear if this is viable, and also if need for fat can be formulated similarly, and if women and men have different needs - for instance, I get a feeling that men need more protein (for muscles), but women need more fat (for homones). Nutritional science will never be exact, it doesn't have to be, but the implementation of it could be better than it is now. What do ya'll think?

    Your height tells very little about your muscle mass and therefore would be an inaccurate representation of how much protein you should consume. Honestly the best is to consume a set amount of calories and adjust your macros accordingly after every few weeks to bring in line with your goals; whether it be building muscle mass, cutting down on fat or doing a body recomp.

  • StealthHealth
    StealthHealth Posts: 2,417 Member
    edited August 2016
    OK, to put my view in some context: I'm a believer that the 0.8g rule is about right for someone not strength training or on a cut. I eat more than that because I strength train and then add a bit in to account for my advancing years*. When cutting I don't add more protein because I assume that I'm already at the top end of the scale (typically eat around 180-200g per day).

    *likely that at my age (48) the increased protein requirements are not yet applicable but as you'll see below I'm eating that protein anyway!

    My stance is that because I enjoy protein and I am fortunate enough to be able to afford to indulge in excess, and given my state of health excess protein is not likely to be an issue for me, the downside, if there is one at all, is minimal.

    So, all that means that I feel the height calculation of one gram protein per inch in height is very low (I'm a shorty and a 5'8" that puts me on less than 70g per day).

    That doesn't mean that I disagree with the concept of using height as part or all of the calculation but more that I think the multiplier is low (and if we are looking for a tool for all we probably need factors to account for strength type activity, calorific deficit, and age).

    TL:DNR version: One size fits all calculations tend to fail because they don't fit all.
  • LazSommer
    LazSommer Posts: 1,851 Member
    tfw manlet
  • StealthHealth
    StealthHealth Posts: 2,417 Member
    That's me. Taller lying down.
  • Return2Fit
    Return2Fit Posts: 226 Member
    I think the high protein recommendations stem from the bodybuilding community where you need all those grams or protein to roid up properly.
    And bodybuilder magazines sell protein supplement to wanna-be bodybuilders, so every article is about getting more protein.
    I stopped worrying about protein and most people on a normal diet get plenty.
  • kommodevaran
    kommodevaran Posts: 17,890 Member
    I guess maybe male/female is a good distinction because of men's natural lower body fat/more muscle mass? But of course women can also want to build more muscles.

    What I'm after is not the exact number, that would be impossible, and we can thrive on a wide range, but a good ballpark for that range. While keeping eyes on the ball - what works for the individual, in real life.

    I'm reading, keep'em coming!
  • cee134
    cee134 Posts: 33,711 Member
    kommodevaran wrote: »
    I have been thinking about the elaborate formula we use to prescribe appropriate protein intake - 0.8 grams per pound of body weight at a healthy BMI or one gram per pound of lean body mass. Isn't this way too complicated, difficult, and unnecessarily so? After all, a healthy BMI is a good weight for your height, and weight is variable, but height isn't, after you've reached adulthood. Cookie cutter recommendations like FDA's based on sex or total calorie intake isn't going to cut it either - protein (and fat) needs seems to be pretty static even at different calorie/activity levels; protein need increases only with serious strength training. (Am I way off here?)

    Correction - It's 0.8g per kg of body weight. Or 0.36g per pound of body weight.

    My 2 cents:
  • joelo_83
    joelo_83 Posts: 218 Member
    I've always done 1g per pound goal body weight. That throws me into the 180-220g per day, which is easily attainable if you plan your meals right.
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    edited August 2016
    The height thing makes sense to me, at least for women, as it should be reasonably correlated with lean mass in the average person (which is what basing it on a lesser percentage of goal weight is also about). As with BMI, it will be limited in its application to people outside the average, but those people are more likely to know it, know LBM, or simply be eating plenty of protein already.

    The one lb/inch doesn't seem enough to optimize muscle maintenance at a deficit -- or at least I'd rather err on the side of getting more as a possible protective -- but it's certainly enough for good health.

    For me (I'm also 5'3, had a DEXA last year, weight hasn't changed much), my lean mass is around 95. ,8 g/that = 76, which is a bit lower than the lowest range (the .65-.85 g/lb) based on my current (healthy) weight of 80, and both are above 63, which seems too low to me. (I've recently been reading some about Robert Cheeke, a vegan bodybuilder, and he recommends 1.2-2 kg/lb when training, which comes to about .55-.9 g/lb, same basic range.)

    Anyway, the main mistake I see is people basing it on an overweight body weight rather than correcting for LBM or, if that's not known, goal weight. Height would help with that.
  • fr33sia12
    fr33sia12 Posts: 1,258 Member
    joelo_83 wrote: »
    I've always done 1g per pound goal body weight. That throws me into the 180-220g per day, which is easily attainable if you plan your meals right.

    Yeh maybe, if you eat loads of meat and protein shakes, but not all of us do.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories