Whey protein is a good source of protein, if it isn't loaded up with sugars. Why would that be considered a cheat? It is just eating protein.

I tend to be over my protein goal even without supplementing, but I wouldn't consider whey a cheat. (80 per meal seems pretty high anyway -- I also couldn't eat that much meat -- but maybe you only eat 1-2 meals? My goal is around 100 g of protein total, and I eat 3, so it's easy.)

Eggs, cheese and nuts are also decent sources of protein. What you might also consider doing when you do use protein powders is to use a combination of say (1) Whey protein, (2) Pea protein; and (3) Casein (if you are okay with Casein as some people choose not to ingest it) because each type of protein is metabolized at different rates so using a combination of protein powders can actually keep you satiated for longer periods of time. I don't mind eating meat myself, but I find I go through these cycles and periods where I just get sick of eating meat to the point where I just can't make myself eat much of it and when that happens to me, I do resort to and rely on protein powder which I often add or hide in things I cook and bake. lol

Adi4Fitness wrote: »

i find it hard consuming huge quantities of meat .... so i figured why not 2 scoops of chocolate whey protein with a meal then bamm close to 80 grams of protein in a meal.

What is your protein goal and what do you consider "huge amounts of meat"?

I am pretty good about checking glucose levels. I am doing the low carb really for regulation of glucose as a T2D. The weight loss is a benefit, but even if I were not losing, I would still be doing low carb for the BG readings. I was paranoid about protein raising glucose levels and tried to keep at about 40(ish) g of protein for each of three meals a day. My goal is 125. I seem to have discovered for me that protein does not have much short term impact on BG. It may have a small (good) impact on fasting glucose the morning after a supper of 50 or 60 g of protein as compared to 40, but that may be my imagination too. It does not seem to be problematic anyway.

My take is that much of the blood glucose and response to various things is very dependent on the individual. You don't really know unless you are checking ketones or glucose or something.

So if you are consumimg mostly ketogenic amino acids, does the body use triglyceride back bones for glucose then? Or does it use/catabolize your muscles more?

Must read more....

This is interesting...

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2129159/

kpk54 wrote: »

With the strong representation in the forum regarding "Oh don't worry about too much protein intake and GNG", I might suggest those who are interested and concerned AND ARE NOT doing their own N=1 experimentation, should take a look at the studies or listen to podcasts and videos of experts who represent the other side of the debate. A starting point might be Dr. Dom D'Agostino. A great deal of info is available via the internet.

While his research tends to be related to ketogenic diets as related to medical issues such as cancer, epilepsy, BG etc I began listening to him regarding his research for the US Dept. of Navy as related to seizures experienced by deep sea divers (and only because my favorite Uncle was a Master Chief Diver with the US Navy many years ago). Dr. Agostino's research is quite diverse.

For the record: I am aware of perceived differences/need for compliance regarding Ketosis for weight loss and ketosis for other medical issues. For many reading this forum ketosis for obesity or morbid obesity could be a medical issue and not just a desire to lose a few pounds. Also, I am currently not eating a ketogenic diet but when I was it was "Medically Therapeutic" so there lies my personal research of exploring "the other side" of the "too much protein" debate as well as what is presented so frequently in the forum given protein intake in the diets I looked at, was limited.

I keep confusing myself with my n=1. I like ketosis for how it makes me feel, the ease of weight loss and low BG during the day. I used to take a protein powder in my coffee because I had a tough time with meeting my protein macro. Once I stopped losing I cut it as a possible insulin elevator, extra source of calories, and because my fasting BG was going up again.

Now I started usin it again because whey powder IS insulogenic and I can't figure out any other way to lower my fasting BG without fasting half the week or taking metformin... And to top it off I can't even figure out if high fasting BG is even a bad thing when I am on a sub 10g carb diet.

BUT it does help me chea and get protein up to where most people say it should be. Above minimum needs. Or the minimum needs that the typical, sugar-burner would need.

So confused. I need more research but I also need someone to dumb it all down for me. LOL

kpk54 wrote: »

With the strong representation in the forum regarding "Oh don't worry about too much protein intake and GNG", I might suggest those who are interested and concerned AND ARE NOT doing their own N=1 experimentation, should take a look at the studies or listen to podcasts and videos of experts who represent the other side of the debate. A starting point might be Dr. Dom D'Agostino. A great deal of info is available via the internet.

While his research tends to be related to ketogenic diets as related to medical issues such as cancer, epilepsy, BG etc I began listening to him regarding his research for the US Dept. of Navy as related to seizures experienced by deep sea divers (and only because my favorite Uncle was a Master Chief Diver with the US Navy many years ago). Dr. Agostino's research is quite diverse.

For the record: I am aware of perceived differences/need for compliance regarding Ketosis for weight loss and ketosis for other medical issues. For many reading this forum ketosis for obesity or morbid obesity could be a medical issue and not just a desire to lose a few pounds. Also, I am currently not eating a ketogenic diet but when I was it was "Medically Therapeutic" so there lies my personal research of exploring "the other side" of the "too much protein" debate as well as what is presented so frequently in the forum given protein intake in the diets I looked at, was limited.

I think there's a fair bit of misunderstanding regarding protein intake and how it affects ketosis.

Protein affects ketosis primarily through it being insulinogenic. That is, protein consumption prompts a release of insulin. This happens because of the protein itself, not GNG.

Ketone production is regulated by insulin, the same way glucose is. More insulin means reduced ketone production. Reduced ketone production (with no decrease in energy expenditure) means lower readings. Lower ketone readings do not necessarily mean GNG is going on.

Dragonwolf wrote: »

Protein affects ketosis primarily through it being insulinogenic. That is, protein consumption prompts a release of insulin. This happens because of the protein itself, not GNG.

This is an oft-overlooked distinction!!

I think it's important to keep in mind that personalized medicine is all about acknowledging that we're all different. From my understanding, making blanket statements about protein intake is ignoring the fact that the body's ability to recycle protein, aka. "protein turnover"...is HIGHLY individual. F.ex. I think this ties to people who are trying to build muscle fibres needs more amino acids. But very sedentary people has less demand for tissue repairs. Making a cheap point: The protein need for a young bro at the gym is NOT the same as an old hen like me I think this also explains at least some of the anecdotes about people reporting they can thrive on total carnivore lifestyle. Just like some people can tolerate insane amounts of carbs without seeming ill effects....it would be logic that minorities of gen pop need more of either protein or fat to feel well and keep appetite at bay. Myself, I need proteins to feel full. I can eat an astonishing amount of fat before it registers in the tummy. Maybe it's the incretin effect that Dr Fung talks about in his book, I don't know.

Another point is that overconsuming proteins beyond what your body actually needs is probably not a good idea for long-term health reasons due to chronic high levels of insulin and igf-1. This can possibly be somehow mitigated by IF eating windows though. But the main takeaway is...if one chooses to eat very high protein levels or high volume of food in general, one should make sure to mitigate the flux of energy with physical activity. Overdoing whey shakes as a sedentary, may do more harm than good. It's weight bearing activity that retains or builds muscle mass. I might be wrong but: drinking protein shakes alone will not stop sarcopenia, instead you skyrocket insulin.

Think about it: When you're overwhelmed or get overrun with too many job tasks or responsibility at work. How do you feel? You get erratic and do things haphazardly. Or for us untidy people. When forced to clear because of guests, I tend to be left with some stuff I don't know where to put, shove it into a bag and toss it into a closet. It works on the surface, but it's not a solution to my problem. Then, think about how your body feels if you keep shovelling down food it doesn't need or want. Maybe the body gets overwhelmed too? Maybe it also chooses short-term solutions at the expense of outcomes you actually want such as lipolysis? (mobilizing fat for energy production).

It's all about a balance of opposing goals: look youthful with explosive muscles intact or longevity. I think it's only logic that someone who tries to build muscle mass must eat and train differently than someone fighting cancer, at least according to Seyfried and D'Agostino. Ultimately, we all have to find our own path or preferences.

As a sidenote: We should have an own thread about hunger. It seems to me that at the core of both fat loss and weight maintenance is HOW TO EAT WITHOUT GETTING TOO HUNGRY? (or snacky)

Foamroller wrote: »

I think it's important to keep in mind that personalized medicine is all about acknowledging that we're all different. From my understanding, making blanket statements about protein intake is ignoring the fact that the body's ability to recycle protein, aka. "protein turnover"...is HIGHLY individual. F.ex. I think this ties to people who are trying to build muscle fibres needs more amino acids. But very sedentary people has less demand for tissue repairs. Making a cheap point: The protein need for a young bro at the gym is NOT the same as an old hen like me I think this also explains at least some of the anecdotes about people reporting they can thrive on total carnivore lifestyle. Just like some people can tolerate insane amounts of carbs without seeming ill effects....it would be logic that minorities of gen pop need more of either protein or fat to feel well and keep appetite at bay. Myself, I need proteins to feel full. I can eat an astonishing amount of fat before it registers in the tummy. Maybe it's the incretin effect that Dr Fung talks about in his book, I don't know.

Another point is that overconsuming proteins beyond what your body actually needs is probably not a good idea for long-term health reasons due to chronic high levels of insulin and igf-1. This can possibly be somehow mitigated by IF eating windows though. But the main takeaway is...if one chooses to eat very high protein levels or high volume of food in general, one should make sure to mitigate the flux of energy with physical activity. Overdoing whey shakes as a sedentary, may do more harm than good. It's weight bearing activity that retains or builds muscle mass. I might be wrong but: drinking protein shakes alone will not stop sarcopenia, instead you skyrocket insulin.

Think about it: When you're overwhelmed or get overrun with too many job tasks or responsibility at work. How do you feel? You get erratic and do things haphazardly. Or for us untidy people. When forced to clear because of guests, I tend to be left with some stuff I don't know where to put, shove it into a bag and toss it into a closet. It works on the surface, but it's not a solution to my problem. Then, think about how your body feels if you keep shovelling down food it doesn't need or want. Maybe the body gets overwhelmed too? Maybe it also chooses short-term solutions at the expense of outcomes you actually want such as lipolysis? (mobilizing fat for energy production).

It's all about a balance of opposing goals: look youthful with explosive muscles intact or longevity. I think it's only logic that someone who tries to build muscle mass must eat and train differently than someone fighting cancer, at least according to Seyfried and D'Agostino. Ultimately, we all have to find our own path or preferences.

As a sidenote: We should have an own thread about hunger. It seems to me that at the core of both fat loss and weight maintenance is HOW TO EAT WITHOUT GETTING TOO HUNGRY? (or snacky)

While I agree on the extremes, one of the issues I frequently see (especially here and in other keto forums) are people actively avoiding protein and artificially keeping it down, "because GNG" or "because insulin." This is on par with the "drink water even if you're not thirsty" and "eat every 2 hours even if you're not really hungry" mantras in that while there are certain, specific circumstances where someone might need to do that, generally speaking it's unnecessary and even counterproductive.

I think a lot of it has to do with debate over how much protein is "enough" versus how much is "too much," and people have been increasingly lowering that threshold of "too much" lately, to the point that there's this fear in a lot of people of breaking the 50-100g range (even for people who would naturally sit in the 100s and whose lean mass justifies it). I'm of the opinion that unless you need to restrict protein for specific, verifiably-protein-reactive (ie - seizure control, kidney disease), your body will compel you to eat the right amount (seriously, trying to get a large amount of protein in, especially from whole-food sources is hard). Don't specifically seek out protein and don't specifically seek to avoid it, and you'll generally fall about where you need to be.

Roughly 1-2g/kg of lean body mass isn't really generally considered a "high" level of protein, and it frequently works out to the amount you get if you eat to satiety using whole foods with meat without artificially restricting things (such as doing things like having a giant bowl of salad for the purpose of filling up on greens and restricting intake of more calorically-dense foods). You can get 66g of protein from a single 3oz serving of beef per meal for a three meal day, for example.

As for the high insulin and IGF-1 concerns, I suspect that if you're not artificially inflating your protein intake, it's an overrated concern as well, because I've actually seen the opposite. For the past decade, I've dealt with hyperinsulinemia (chronically high insulin). When I went total carnivore and was eating primarily bison, eggs, and pork (among the top insulin-producing proteins out there), my fasting insulin actually went down to more ideal levels. And no, carnivore isn't overly protein-heavy. My intake stayed pretty steady when I switched to it from keto, at around 120g of protein, which is about .7-.8g/lb or ~1.7g/kg of lean mass for me. At the time, the extent of my working out was a daily hour walk at 3mph and a couple dozen pushups 2-3 days a week, while the rest of my day was spent at a computer (in other words, not a "gym bro").

Foamroller wrote: »

Dragonwolf wrote: »

Foamroller wrote: »

I purposefully avoided any numbers, lol. 1.2 g/kg LBM is still pretty low. For me it would amount to 48g. I didn't advocate a ridiculously LOW protein number. I'm myself a high protein eater. But I don't assume that what works for me must work for everybody else too. I think it's ok to respect that people who has diagnoses like T2D or cancer or Alzheimer's ...may do better for health reasons from time to time to restrict protein due to the fact that some proteins are up to 58% insulinogenic according to Phinney and Volek. If carbs are almost 100% insulinogenic and protein is up to 58% insulinogenic. The difference might be only 42% less insulin response with proteins than carbs. What's the logic in promoting very high protein intake for people who try to limit insulin surge? If carbs are the enemy based on the argument of high insulin...then people who can eat insane amounts of protein are not much better off than high carbeaters. Yes, yes I get that most people can naturally eat protein to satiety. But some of us can't. I can eat a whole 400g packet of bacon plus 2 liters of soup over a couple of hours. My argument was that protein intake should be adjusted based on INDIVIDUAL goals (that might change). I'm a longstanding advocate for self experiments and knowing your own body.

My real target for posting today is the misconception that taking several whey shakes per day somehow miraculously retains muscle fibers. Nope. Sarcopenia is mostly loss of type 2xb. The explosive power. Having protein shakes doesn't stop muscle from atrophy due to unused. There are at least 3 excellent lectures on theIMHC channel on utube about aging, muscle building and sarcopenia. I highly recommend them !

I'm leaving the thread but thx for the exchange

.

You make good points and your concerns are valid.

As for the bolder area, the difference is the action the insulin has on amino acids is not comparable to action it has on carbohydrate.
Hyperinsulinemia or Diabetes isn't just high insulin alone. It's also, even in the visibly lean people with it, a fat storage issue... IR. Meaning your body's individual threshold for fat cell growth. Some people can become morbidly obese and still now show signs of increasing blood sugar or fatty organs because their body is handling the fat storage in adipose well. Other people are visibly normal weight but have full blown diabetes because their body does not handle the fat storage well.
So having higher insulin due to protein isn't a fat storage function and therefore is unlike having higher insulin for glucose handling. They are not comparable but they are being compared quite often and some people are afraid to eat "too much" protein because of it.

Also, advocating for "eating your protein" as I do, is definitely not saying to eat high protein.
The numbers @Dragonwolf and yourself noted are both good moderate protein amounts. Not high. I know you both also agree with that as you said so. I eat the same amount myself. I don't think anyone "needs" more than that but it's also completely ok to have more as long as their isn't a specific health concern not to.
The point is, don't be afraid of eating all or over your protein recommendations because you think it's the same as carbs. It's just NOT.