MFP protein goals seem high

Quite the opposite -- 50 gm is really low. 88 gm is a good goal, especially since you're active.

As a woman who is 5'5" and 125ish pounds, I go for 100g minimum, and usually exceed it. I'm active, older, vegetarian. The national nutritional standards, which sometimes suggest lower minimums, tend to be targeted at average people (who are not losing weight, active, etc.), and with the goal of avoiding deficiency (as contrasted with a goal of optimizing for performance or body composition reasons, for example). Also, some more recent research suggests higher amounts may be beneficial.

This is a useful overview, basically a summary of recent research (from a source generally regarded as science-based and neutral, that does not sell protein supplements or the like):

https://examine.com/guides/protein-intake/

They also have a protein needs estimator based on their view of those findings:

https://examine.com/nutrition/protein-intake-calculator/

If you want to eat more protein, this is a good source here on MFP for finding food sources:

http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10247171/carbs-and-fats-are-cheap-heres-a-guide-to-getting-your-proteins-worth-fiber-also

strebor337 wrote: »

Not to argue, but there is some evidence to support an opposing viewpoint. If you're interested, I recommend a book called the China Study. The author suggests that excess protein intake can increase your levels of free radicals (if I remember correctly) and contribute to a variety of diseases. I don't buy into everything it asserts, but I do think it's wise to be balanced in terms of what we eat.

The china study has been heavily debunked. The information I provide is directly from the top two protein metabolism researchers in the world. That would be Dr. Stuart Philips and Dr. Brad Schoenfeld. There is no one more knowledgeable about protein, than those people.

strebor337 wrote: »

So opposing view points are unwelcome?

Opposing views are welcome. If there is evidence to support it, then its certainly a discussion point. But comparing a book against people who actually conduct research and publish research in the field is not exactly on the same playing field. Research continues to evolve and a person should continue to make decisions based on the current available evidence. The china study was published in 2004 and has received a significant amount of criticism, to include the research not supporting the conclusions.

I would ask, would you want your doctor to be current with the science or basing recommendations base off outdated science?

strebor337 wrote: »

So opposing view points are unwelcome?

It's presented as solid research, which it isn't really. It's a large-scale observational study spun into a book with very black/white conclusions not really supported by the data. The 'study' may raise some good questions for further research, but you can't draw their book conclusions from the data.

strebor337 wrote: »

As I mentioned in my original post, I don't embrace all of the recommendations of that particular book, but it provides some points that are worth considering in a balanced consideration of the question at hand. Several people have suggested that there are absolutely no adverse consequences of eating an unlimited quantity of protein, but anything consumed in excess can be unhealthy including water and oxygen. All I'm recommending is that the original poster consider the benefits of a balanced diet.

I didn't really see anyone - I mean certainly not most people, possibly I overlooked *one* - recommending "an unlimited quantity of protein". There are legitimate questions about whether extremely high levels of protein are unhelpful, perhaps even injurious long term, and of course it would be a bad idea to eat so much protein that it drives out other essential nutrition . . . but the biggest number I saw here was 125g/day, and that as the top end of a range that started at 88g.

I can't speak for OP, but I have no difficulty getting fats at a minimum of .35-.45g/pound of body weight, and a minimum of 5 daily servings of veggies/fruit and usually 10+ or close (80g servings), alongside 100g+ protein daily, even on li'l ol' lady calories. It would be even easier to do that, I think, if I ate meat/fish. That seems like a reasonably balanced diet, to me.

So, where is the "unlimited quantity of protein" being suggested, or "the benefits of a balanced diet" being deprecated, here?

Not unlimited and potentially a problem if you have known or unknown kidney issues. That said I consume protein at about 2x RDI.

Surprisingly this brings my consumption to 0.6 to 0.8g per lb of weight within the normal weight range, which roughly corresponds to about 0.8 to 1g per lb of lean mass for a person with fat reserves commensurate to being within the "normal" weight range. And it roughly corresponds to mfp's percentages which are within nutritional percentage recommendations.

Does this mean I do not sleep at night if my protein consumption is not up there? Nope. I sleep well. But if I notice that I've been undereating protein for a while i just might trade a random chocolate bar for a tub of yogurt... for nutritional purposes and all that, assuming I've already had my way more than 5 servings of veggies and fruits I aim for every day!

It being a bit past 23:00 and being a bit low on protein, instead of hitting the lindt bar, I'm off to munch on my left over dinner salad... which comes equipped with some shrimps and some salmon too!!!! Macros ya know❣️