Scientific Research

[victory229]

In all my research I have yet to find any substantial studies to support 1 - 2 grams of protein per pound of body weight.

In fact most of what I have found recommends a high of 1.6 grams per KG. (Almost half of what I see in the forums) for endurance athletes and even lower for body building.

I have watched "Secrets of the pros". If I saw it correctly he was recommending a minimum of 2 grams per pound. Although, he did not provide any evidence to why.

Stats:

5'9"
182 up from 173 when I started the bulk 5 weeks ago.
11 % BF

BMR = 1804 x 1.55 = maintenance of 2796 cal.

cycle is HRT based 250 test / 200 deca thurs and 200 test on monday.

Here is my problem:

I am on a bulking diet of 3000 cal per day.

300 g of protein

250 grams of carbs

90 grams of fat

3010 cal.

Another trainer that I know recommends this:

106 g of protein

550 g carbs

150 g of fat

3974 cal (with moderate to high intensity cardio 7 days a week)

I tend to believe the guy that is 250 lbs of ripped steel versus the skinny lab rat. However, where are the scientific studies to support higher protein. I am in a debate with this guy and sorry to say have no evidence to support my position.

[Twist]

Sweet an Interesting debate!! (or potentially I guess...) I love these topics!

NOTE: for the people who don't give a shit about what I am about to ramble on about, skip to the bold...

Before we talk about the issue of how much protein to consume, we should first lay down a basic outline for the type of person we are talking about. So lets set out some ground rules.
1. Fat doesn't need much protein at all (if any), so people at with high bf percentages should not take into account their fat stores when calculating protein requirements. This leaves us with...
2. Lean Body Mass or LBM. Because LBM is going to be the greatest indicator to how much protein we take in, we should use our lean body mass as the base.
3. Underestimating protein requirements. Because in the case of bbers, powerlifters, endurance athletes etc, it is detrimental to leave the body high and dry when it comes to protein, we don't ever want to leave the body short on an amino acid profile. This means that using LBM as an indicator could possibly leave each athlete lacking those potential building blocks.
4. Overestimating protein intake. Well what if we eat too much protein? We will get fat! Actually no, we won't get fat from protein. However it could possibly have some effects on the diet that I will discuss below. But basically if you eat too much protein, it doesn't matter.

So what is the final result? I would advise athletes to create a protein intake around your LBM PLUS 10%bf (which is a reasonable number). This will leave you with a surplus of protein, but not a huge amount. This is easier on your wallet and also on your organs that have to do all of the breaking down and deaminating.

Before we get into the exciting, and actually very short, explanation of how much protein to eat, I would like to discuss the types of protein to eat. I will split this into two groups, complete proteins and incomplete proteins.

I feel that people are losing the need to consume quality protein. I see the use of shakes and, with women especially, the use of certain grains as primary protein sources in daily diets. I have a personal problem with this. I hold a strong belief that the protein requirements should be based only on COMPLETE PROTEINS (proteins coming from animals). Further, I feel the need to state that if you are eating on the lower end of the protein spectrum, you should be getting all of your protein from meats that have not gone through any sort of processing or deep frying etc. I strongly believe, with no evidence to back it up (for reasons of ruining the fast food industry), that taking in food that is processed to death or deep fried, actually prevents the absorption of essential nutrients. Now I have nothing to back that claim up but skinny guys should know what I am talking about.

How about digestion speeds? I would like to make clear that other than Post Workout (PWO) and possibly breakfast and before bed, your protein source doesn't matter at all AS LONG AS IT IS COMING FROM A COMPLETE PROTEIN SOURCE. It is arguable, with reason, that after a workout and after a long fast (sleep), you must give your body the nutrients that is so badly requests in the most bioavailable form possible. This means eggs, fish and of course muscletech or whatever your favorite bodybuilder says he takes (along with some dbol only cycles...), is the best thing to have at these meal periods. Before a long fast (workout, sleep etc) it is also worth recommending someone to eat a slow digesting protein to ensure a constant amino acid flow throughout the fast. I would like to make something clear though, it is always going to be better to use both slow and faster digesting proteins in combination than it will be to use only one source of protein. It is also best for each individual athlete to find out which protein their body uses most effectively. I have found with most clients that these sources are either fish or chicken. It is also important to mix up your protein sources to get a variety of the nutrients that come with the protein (iron etc).

What have we established so far?
1. Use lbm and add a little fat as a buffer when calculating protein per lb.
2. Use complete (animal) proteins to meet protein macro requirements.
3. It is better to use a mixture of protein sources than it is to use one primary source.

Let us move on...


The final answer to the question, "how much protein should an athlete consume?" is clouded by one big issue: HOW DO YOU MEASURE PROTEIN REQUIREMENTS?

The possible ways protein requirements are quantified is by measuring nitrogen balance (which is a flawed way to measure protein needs), amino acid uptake, and I have even seen studies that measure muscle growth. Well since everybody is different there are too many variables to come to a definite conclusion. Further, because muscles are not the only thing in the body that uses nitrogen and amino acids (ligaments, immune system etc) that too is an inaccurate way of measuring protein needs. Athletes often have an increase in the immune system and other beneficial biology that parallels exercise.

Both sides of the debate bring terrible arguments to the table as to how much protein is required. However, both sides of the debate bring good arguments as to why the other side is incorrect or flawed. I will skip most of this and just tell you what I personally agree with.


A cool study here: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14971434
shows that basically:

1. Eating 1.4g (2-3g/kg/lb) of protein per pound of bodyweight does not have any negative impact on the individual

2. Eating 1.4 g of protein per pound of bodyweight may have other beneficial attributes that are too small to be measured by the research methods performed

and finally

3. As long as eating 1.4g of protein per pound of bodyweight does not require the individual to lower other macronutrients (carbs and healthy fats), there is no point in eating low amounts of protein other than to save money.

In Conclusion:
I would say eating 1g/lb of bodyweight (lbm + 10%bf) is high enough to to get all of the benefits of protein as long as the protein sources are from animal proteins. There is also no reason, other than to save money, not to increase this amount to 1.4g/lb.


Worth mentioning:
Although there is no research on protein needs of steroid users, I think it is safe to assume that you might want to double protein to 2g/lb when "on." Steroids help up-regulating nutrient absorption so I see no harm in sticking with 2g/lb when "on."

[UberSteroids]

[gbrice75]

Twist is the man!!! Love the science bro!

[Twist]

Lol... Yeah I guess I put a little too much effort into it...

Twist is the man!!! Love the science bro!

At least someone appreciates the effort haha

[BGC123]

nah that was intersting man, cheers.

This means eggs, fish and of course muscletech or whatever your favorite bodybuilder says he takes (along with some dbol only cycles...), [/B]

best bit btw lol

[victory229]

Twist, thank you for the information. I respect you and the information you provide and even more importantly, I am a believer. With that said, this guy has a degree in exercise science and only believes information that comes from a text book. He is a bit of a know it all. Never mind the fact that I am bigger, stronger, and faster than he is by applying the very information you provide.

I am not sure where i would be if I followed his recommendation. For starters 7 days of moderate to high intensity cardio on a bulking diet is not my idea of smart. While cardio is important, I think 7 days is a bit much especially when bulking. I also think it way too many carbs.

I have gained 8 pounds in 5 weeks doing it my way. I think I should be gaining more. So, I think I need to step up the calories a bit.

I am thinking of going with:

300 g protein
300 g carbs
100 g fat

this will take me to 3300 cal (I am on 3010 now).

I guess I will tell him twist said and he just needs to believe?

[Twist]

The point of the matter is that there is no evidence proving either way is better. Somebody is no far off to assume he is right than you are right, therefore you both are wrong equally and you both are right equally. For example, if we are talking about life on other planets, and you say there is and I say there isn't, neither of us is more correct than the other. We both can point to facts that support our position, but both arguments are flawed.

So this comes down to what makes more sense. In the case of protein consumption, if you eat too much protein nothing bad happens, if you don't eat enough bad things happen. So why eat too little?

People think they have degrees and that makes them all knowing. They are wrong. Doctors and other professionals could maintain this god complex before there was internet because they had access to information that others didn't. Now that I can read pubmed and anyone can look up studies, doctors are sometimes (more often than not in my experience) behind the times. THis is because:
1. the info they studied is outdated
2. by the time it gets published and implemented it is outdated
3. things are generalized
4. they graduated and since then info has changed leaving their knowledge outdated
5. they cannot retain all of the information in their heads so they must use rules to application, but individuals can search via the internet, solutions to their specific situation
6. the information we are utilizing to make our decisions (bodybuilding, anabolics etc) is simply not studied
6.5 if it is studied, it isn't studied enough to be printed in a school book
7. most degrees won't tell you that they don't know the answer to question "x" they simply pretend and call their solution a theory but then continue to present the theory as if it were no different from a rule.

But, your friend is also an idiot judging by what he says. Print this out and hand it to him. Oh yeah, tell him to do some more research. If he actually learned anything by studying the human body, it should be that we know absolutely nothing about it.

[Times Roman]

much of our evidence is anecdotal, not clinical. And the other thing is that everyone is different. We are not machines with standardized parts. So take what you learn here, use it as a guideline, then play around with it. That's about all you really can do.
btw... I hate know it alls. I was on the other BB the other day, and was blasted because I said no need to cycle creatine. I had all these "vets" coming at me telling me how important it is to cycle down and allow the body to desensitize and blah blah blah.... I felt like saying.... chill mates! we are NOT splitting atoms here.... just talking about creatine!! (next thing you know, they'll be telling me the importance of cycling food!!!)

My point is... it is sometimes very difficult to get a straight answer and have a good general consensus in agreement. Unless we are looking for a cure for a disease, and the cure is going to make big $$$ for the pharma companies, it is doubtful we will ever have the comprehensive clinical data we crave to back up our anecdotal evidence.

[MuscleScience]

All this shit means nothing. No study has ever shown a connection between increase in protein intake and increase in morbidity/mortality. Most that show any connections neglect the source of protein such as red meats that are loaded with fat. In theory one could eat as much as they wanted and the body would simply shed the extra protein as waste. It is very hard for the body to convert protein to fat or protein to energy. There has to be some pretty extreme physiological conditions to force this to happen. Having said that, 400grams of protein a day is a retarded amount of protein to take in a day for anyone.

[tembe]

good read

[Twist]

All this shit means nothing. No study has ever shown a connection between increase in protein intake and increase in morbidity/mortality. Most that show any connections neglect the source of protein such as red meats that are loaded with fat. In theory one could eat as much as they wanted and the body would simply shed the extra protein as waste. It is very hard for the body to convert protein to fat or protein to energy. There has to be some pretty extreme physiological conditions to force this to happen. Having said that, 400grams of protein a day is a retarded amount of protein to take in a day for anyone.

After writing all that I thought to myself, "I hope Musclescience chimes in"
Wish you were around in here more cuz I wanna pick your brain haha.

[MuscleScience]

After writing all that I thought to myself, "I hope Musclescience chimes in"
Wish you were around in here more cuz I wanna pick your brain haha.

PM me anytime or post up in my Q&A thread. I love to hear myself type...LOL

BTW, I hope you didnt think I trashed your write up. It was very good and I agree with it completely. My only point I guess is that get enough protein in to keep your nitrogen balance in the positive but dont go overboard with a boat load of protein. The body is very very good at recycling amino acids from protein turnover. I think some physiology books say as high as 80+ Percent.

[Twist]

PM me anytime or post up in my Q&A thread. I love to hear myself type...LOL

BTW, I hope you didnt think I trashed your write up. It was very good and I agree with it completely. My only point I guess is that get enough protein in to keep your nitrogen balance in the positive but dont go overboard with a boat load of protein. The body is very very good at recycling amino acids from protein turnover. I think some physiology books say as high as 80+ Percent.

No dude I didn't think you trashed it at all lol. I was bored and hear this question asked a lot and I have done a little research on it but the whole right up was completely pointless, that's why I wrote in the beginning: NOTE: for the people who don't give a shit about what I am about to ramble on about, skip to the bold...

But I am on to your thread to hear about this protein turnover as I know little about it.