• All new members please introduce your self here and welcome to the board:
    http://www.professionalmuscle.com/forums/showthread.php?t=259
Buy Needles And Syringes With No Prescription
M4B Store Banner
intex
Riptropin Store banner
Generation X Bodybuilding Forum
Buy Needles And Syringes With No Prescription
Buy Needles And Syringes With No Prescription
Mysupps Store Banner
IP Gear Store Banner
PM-Ace-Labs
Ganabol Store Banner
Spend $100 and get bonus needles free at sterile syringes
Professional Muscle Store open now
sunrise2
PHARMAHGH1
kinglab
ganabol2
Professional Muscle Store open now
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
azteca
granabolic1
napsgear-210x65
esquel
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
ashp210
UGFREAK-banner-PM
1-SWEDISH-PEPTIDE-CO
YMSApril21065
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
advertise1
tjk
advertise1
advertise1
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store

Interesting in regards to protein.

Exercise causes the body to use protein at a much faster rate. You need to kip your body`s nitrogen balance in positive range, how much protein? depend on how long, how many times per day and how intense is your training. It can be from 1g to up to 3g per 2.2lbs body weight.

Exercise only causes higher rates of protein usage if carbohydrate intake is insufficient, if muscle damage occurs, or if adaptation is required (growth).

I may have missed it, but I see no plant protein in this chart - which is kind of what the article was about...hehehe- The article purports to dispel the "source" of protein as a myth also. Ive read so much on protein I feel like I...well..I don't know what I feel like. Mostly retarded.

That article is full of pseudo science. The most extraordinary claim he makes in the entire article he doesn't even have a proper source for- Throwing out the entire concept of "complete" protein. His only citation is a BOOK, not anything peer reviewed.

This whole article stinks of BS vegetarian propaganda, like that show "Forks over knives."

Believe what you will, if I feel motivated, I will meticulously debunk the ENTIRE thing with proper references.
 
Last edited:
Google/Pubmed, the official recommendation, even for strength-training athletes, is much lower than that: 1.2 to 1.7 grams per KILOGRAM of body weight, not per pound. That's 0.55 to 0.77 grams per pound. This is referenced in my article. I'm not aware of any peer-reviewed research that has found a benefit for bodybuilders at protein intakes above that level.

idk about that.

Right now shelby has me eating 40g of protein 6 times a day...I would trust him waaaay more than those guys in the article.

Nutrition intake are different and I have been on .55-.77g of protein/kg of body (I trusted those articles when I started out bbing) and I can tell you that I have put on A LOT more size and strength on 1g/LB-2g/LB of body.

I don't even know why are we even talking about such basic basic thing.
 
Well - my original post was "interesting in regards to protein"...I don't necessarily know enough to make an empirical, fact based decision. I can tell an anecdotal story about my wife being vegetarian, and me switching to a veggie diet half way through one of my race seasons and completely bombing. I mean I couldn't recover after workouts, or even get up for workouts on a lot of days. It was horrible, but I've also looked at stuff from the vegan body builders website, and heard different accounts. I would love it if you would impart some of your knowledge. Let it flow if you are bored.

Exercise only causes higher rates of protein usage if carbohydrate intake is insufficient, if muscle damage occurs, or if adaptation is required (growth).



That article is full of pseudo science. The most extraordinary claim he makes in the entire article he doesn't even have a proper source for- Throwing out the entire concept of "complete" protein. His only citation is a BOOK, not anything peer reviewed.

This whole article stinks of BS vegetarian propaganda, like that show "Forks over knives."

Believe what you will, if I feel motivated, I will meticulously debunk the ENTIRE thing with proper references.
 
That article is full of pseudo science. The most extraordinary claim he makes in the entire article he doesn't even have a proper source for- Throwing out the entire concept of "complete" protein. His only citation is a BOOK, not anything peer reviewed. This whole article stinks of BS vegetarian propaganda, like that show "Forks over knives."

Believe what you will, if I feel motivated, I will meticulously debunk the ENTIRE thing with proper references.

Excuse me, you completely ignored my best evidence: looking at its amino acid content and comparing it to actual human needs. I even made a nice chart to show it in graphic detail; how could you have missed that? Everyone claiming that plant proteins are incomplete has skipped the crucial step of actually tallying the numbers.

You actually have it backwards about the peer-review since, as I explained, it's the *original* idea of protein combining that didn't come from science, it was promulgated by a layperson in a popular diet book in 1971.

idk about that. Right now shelby has me eating 40g of protein 6 times a day...I would trust him waaaay more than those guys in the article.

Do you realize that the "guys in the article" you don't trust represent 100% of the peer-reviewed science on the topic? My article on protein for athletes lists *every single* study I could find on the subject, and *every one* concluded with no more than 1.8 g/KG of body weight, except for one that found that athletes training at high altitudes "may" need "as much as" 2.2 g/KG. Again, this is per KG, not per pound.

After a review of all this peer-reviewed evidence, the American Dietetic Association, the Dietitians of Canada, and the American College of Sports Medicine jointly recommended 1.2 to 1.7 g/kg for athletes (0.55 to 0.77 g/lb).

It's funny, one poster here complains that I'm not using peer-reviewed research, and another complains that I *am* using peer-reviewed research (distrusting the science). Looks like there's no way I can win.
 
Excuse me, you completely ignored my best evidence: looking at its amino acid content and comparing it to actual human needs. I even made a nice chart to show it in graphic detail; how could you have missed that? Everyone claiming that plant proteins are incomplete has skipped the crucial step of actually tallying the numbers.

You actually have it backwards about the peer-review since, as I explained, it's the *original* idea of protein combining that didn't come from science, it was promulgated by a layperson in a popular diet book in 1971.



Do you realize that the "guys in the article" you don't trust represent 100% of the peer-reviewed science on the topic? My article on protein for athletes lists *every single* study I could find on the subject, and *every one* concluded with no more than 1.8 g/KG of body weight, except for one that found that athletes training at high altitudes "may" need "as much as" 2.2 g/KG. Again, this is per KG, not per pound.

After a review of all this peer-reviewed evidence, the American Dietetic Association, the Dietitians of Canada, and the American College of Sports Medicine jointly recommended 1.2 to 1.7 g/kg for athletes (0.55 to 0.77 g/lb).

It's funny, one poster here complains that I'm not using peer-reviewed research, and another complains that I *am* using peer-reviewed research (distrusting the science). Looks like there's no way I can win.

How long was the training with the weight lifters / bodybuilders? 1 hour 2 hours 3 hours and how many times per day?
 
It is possible to obtain sufficient indispensable amino acids from a diet that excludes complete protein foods entirely by combining grains, vegetables and fruits, this requires some knowledge of which foods to combine. As a result, vegetarians, especially those that exclude eggs and dairy products, when they adopt a physically active lifestyle constitute a group that is likely at greater risk for insufficient dietary protein intake.
 
The term "incomplete protein" doesn't mean that said protein doesn't contain at least some of all amino acids, it is just lacking in certain ones.

Amino acid requirements are not based on some book that some sociologist wrote in the 70s, they are based on extensive research done by the Institute of Medicine's Food and Nutrition Board.

Your salesmanship of this is just careful wording, as found in this article:
**broken link removed**

This is pure slight of hand, trying to ignore the science of amino acid profiles- based on someone mistakenly saying that some amino acids are missing completely, instead of saying they are just in lower quantities in certain foods.

Now some vegetable proteins have pretty good amino acid profiles, but nothing CLOSE to what animal proteins have. Therefor you would have to eat much more of this vegetable protein to get the same effect.

I don't get your charts at all, you show how much people "need" compared to how much is in vegetable protein sources. So what you are saying is: eat WAY MORE than you need and your individual amino acid profiles will be more than you need? Yeah we know that, but what happens to all that extra amino acids that you had to overeat to get enough of the deficient ones? Answer: gluconeogenesis.

So yeah, I don't know why you wanna keep talking about a MYTH that isn't a myth at all, you KNOW what people mean when they say combining proteins. They are after more complete ratios, and YEAH we KNOW we could just eat WAY, WAY more of some vegetable protein and eventually get enough of every amino acid.

I'm actually a preacher of low protein for bodybuilders, but what you are saying goes directly against this. The only way you can get away with very low protein is to also make it very complete. As in ratios of amino acids that have been proven in both science and practice to be superior for building muscle tissue.
 
Last edited:
So the reason I bombed during my switch from meat to vegetarian is probably because I would have needed to eat a lot more to get the same benefit? Meat is more efficient?

Ive often looked at my families horses and wondered how these big muscular animals can develop as they do, and basically never eat meat.....is it because they just basically eat grasses, and oats all damn day?
 
So the reason I bombed during my switch from meat to vegetarian is probably because I would have needed to eat a lot more to get the same benefit? Meat is more efficient?

Ive often looked at my families horses and wondered how these big muscular animals can develop as they do, and basically never eat meat.....is it because they just basically eat grasses, and oats all damn day?

You can't really compare a herbivore(horses) to a carnivore(humans). Most land based carnivores are smaller, because they have to hunt. If carnivores had meat that grew on trees for millions of years we'd see a different result.
 
You can't really compare a herbivore(horses) to a carnivore(humans). Most land based carnivores are smaller, because they have to hunt. If carnivores had meat that grew on trees for millions of years we'd see a different result.

Actually humans are Omnivores.
 
Humans are carnivores?? My brain is turning to mush.

You can't really compare a herbivore(horses) to a carnivore(humans). Most land based carnivores are smaller, because they have to hunt. If carnivores had meat that grew on trees for millions of years we'd see a different result.
 
I pointed out the KG and LB. I am not from US so I understand kg. I have done what the article said before and my gains and recovery were nowhere close to what I am achieving from 1-2g/lb (again I have done the .5-.7g/KG).

Also do you know how long it takes to publish a paper? If the 1-2g/lb of body has been proven it will take YEARS before it is published.

Also my friend from duke university that is studying nutrition has says that 1-2g/lb is acceptable and one should consume that much for bodybuilding/power lifting.
 
Tried the 2g per lb of BW years ago and what a waste of time that shit was...


1g/lb at most with a ton of carbs = growth for me.
 
“How much protein?” This has probably been the single most asked question in muscle-building and sports nutrition history. What better place to go for answers than straight to one of the world’s top researchers in the field – Dr. Peter Lemon

Kostas: let’s start off now with the most basic question on protein – how much? What does the latest research say? In particular, we’re most interested in protein needs for strength and hypertrophy.

Dr. Lemon: Well, there’s still a controversy as to how much is really needed. Starting back in the mid 1980s, there was quite a bit of interest in that area. Through the 1990′s and early 2000s, there was some pretty good evidence that protein needs were a little bit higher for exercising individuals than for non-exercising individuals. But the protein needs as determined by researchers weren’t quite as high as what a lot of athletes were using.

If you look at the methods that are used trying to measure muscle growth acutely, which means, over a short time period immediately following ingestion of food and training, the requirements are probably under two grams per kilogram of body weight per day. And, of course, as you know, many body builders consume way more than that.

One of the problems is that the scientists have been looking at acute measures; short term measures. It’s very difficult to do a study over months or years to really see what’s happening over the long term. The big problem is, if I do a study and I measure the effect of a training bout or the effect of food intake on acute muscle growth, the changes I get over a two or three hour study period may not be repeated if I studied a person for weeks.

In other words, there is often an adaptation and that’s why I’m not so sure that the results we have are necessarily accurate for elite body builders – certainly not if somebody is taking some anabolic agents, which we know is occurring.


It’s also very difficult to determine because most of the studies are done in novice lifters not in advanced body builders and there are adaptations over time that probably change the requirements. What you might need when you start a program might be very different from what you need later on. And what you need to be a really elite bodybuilder could be very different than a novice.

We did a series of studies through the 1980′s and 1990′s showing that the needs for bodybuilding athletes not taking any anabolic agents were on the order of about 1.6 to 1.8 grams per kg of body mass. However, a number of people that we studied were taking three or four grams per kg per day and certainly were seeing large increases in hypertrophy.

I would say that certainly in the range of 2 grams per kg is where you should start. But, it might be higher than that and we just don’t have the science to answer that question definitively. I guess the short answer to your question is that we still don’t really know exactly how much protein is optimal.

Kostas: I see your point about why we still don’t have definitive answers and that’s probably why “how much protein” is still one of the most common questions, especially, “how much protein should I consume if I want to gain muscle.”

Dr. Lemon: Yes. And you’ll get scientists all the time that say, “Well, 1.5-2.0 grams per kg is all an athlete needs” but I’m not sure it’s as simple as that. It might be that this amount is adequate to maintain a positive nitrogen balance, but it might be that larger amounts actually stimulate growth and there just isn’t a lot of data to support that, because it’s not an easy thing to measure.

Kostas: In the strength and bodybuilding community, a common recommendation I hear all the time is “one gram per pound of body weight” as the minimum.

Dr. Lemon: Yes, and that’s in the same range because, of course, there’s just a little over two pounds in a kilogram. So, one gram per pound of bodyweight would be a little over 2 grams per kilogram of bodyweight, which is probably in the range where most people will be fine.

There’s probably some other caveats, too when making these recommendations. It depends on what type of protein, and it probably depends on when you’re consuming it much more so than how much you’re consuming.

We’ve been more interested in the timing relative to training than we’ve been with the total amount. Or, put another way, it’s probably possible to do better with less protein if you get the protein at the right time of the day. And by time of day, we me the time relates to your training sessions.

Kostas: So you’re saying that timing is more important than quantity?

Dr. Lemon: I’m saying that I think you can get by with less if you consume it in close proximity to the training bout, as opposed to other times in the day.

Kostas: What is your current position stand on pre- and post-workout protein intake?

Dr. Lemon: I think it’s very important. The first three hours following exercise are very important. One should be consuming some carbohydrate and high-quality protein during that time period. The closer to the exercise bout, the better. I also think that within an hour or so prior to working out, a carbohydrate/protein mixture is beneficial.

I even think by extrapolation, if before and after are beneficial, and those have both been shown to be beneficial in the research, then probably during the training bout is important, as well.

All of these things are difficult to study, so I’m going a little bit beyond the data that we have in making that statement, but I think it’s a logical conclusion that some carbohydrate and amino acids before, during, and immediately following training are probably the most important – even more important than how much carbohydrate and protein you get for the day.

Kostas: Do you think protein consumption should depend on the body fat level? For example, will a strength training athlete with lower body fat utilize protein more efficiently than someone who is obese?

Dr. Lemon: I’ve never been asked that question before. If somebody has higher body fat and they’re dropping their energy intake to try and lose body fat, then more protein is important to prevent loss of muscle mass while you’re losing fat mass. But everything being equal, I don’t see why somebody with a higher percentage of fat would handle protein any differently.

Kostas: Considering the differences between an athlete and overweight person, do you think the recommendations for protein per kilo or pound should be based on lean body mass instead of total body weight?

Dr. Lemon: In the strength athletes, there’s a very good relationship between lean mass and total body weight, so I don’t think it really makes much difference. Probably it’s a little bit better if you’re relating protein recommendations to lean mass because obviously, if there’s a big difference in body fat content, then you’re going to be getting a different protein intake if you relate it to total body weight instead of lean mass.

The general recommendations today that go out to the masses are in terms of grams of protein per kilogram of body weight or per pound of body weight. That’s because in the general population, everybody knows their body weight, but a lot of people don’t know their lean body mass, and that’s why it’s historically been done that way.

Obviously, the numbers would change a little bit with each recommendation because your lean mass is a smaller number than your body mass, but there’s a very close relationship between the two in a lean person. Since bodybuilders have such low body fat, I don’t think it really matters if you prescribe by pounds of total bodyweight or pounds of lean bodyweight.

Kostas: Do you think a longer duration study on the effects of a high-protein diet might play a role in justifying higher protein intakes like the amounts that some of the bodybuilders are using successfully? For example, above 2 grams per kilogram per day up to even 3 or 4 grams per kilogram?

Dr. Lemon: That’s a good question. If I could do a study comparing someone consuming 2 grams of protein per day versus someone consuming 4 or 5 grams per kg over several months, I would love to do that because most people find it hard to believe that those high intakes are really beneficial. And yet, for many, many years, many strength athletes have done that.

My philosophy is: where there’s smoke, there’s probably some fire. I think there’s some stimulus that bodybuilders have discovered over months and years of training that the scientists who study weeks or a few months can’t find. And so, there probably is some adaptation that we’re missing in the short term studies. It’s just too difficult to do these types of studies for that length of time.


Kostas: should protein recommendations change for hypocaloric weight loss diets as compared to isocaloric and hypercaloric conditions?

Dr Lemon: Absolutely. There’s some very good evidence showing that if you increase your protein when you’re on a low-calorie diet, you will preserve your muscle mass better than those who don’t. There’s another reason why this is recommended, though. protein has a higher satiety value, so that you feel full even having eaten less total energy. That gives us a couple reasons for more protein on hypocaloric diets: One, you won’t be hungry on that diet, and if you’re hungry on a diet, you’re not going to stick with it. And two, when you lose weight, you’ll lose a higher percentage from the fat component than from the muscle component.

This is critical because if you start losing muscle, then it’s going to be easier to regain that weight as fat, and, of course, what happens to a large percentage of people who lose a lot of body fat by dieting is they regain it all back and more. So, six months to a year after the diet, they actually weigh more and have a higher body fat than they had before they started.

So, increasing dietary protein is critical and also engaging in some type of strength exercise with a weight loss diet is very important as well, because the higher dietary protein and the strength exercise will really protect muscle so you can actually gain muscle while you’re losing fat.

Kostas: Why are so many people still worried that high-protein diets are unhealthy?

Dr Lemon: That’s a good question. The original data came from the fact that high-protein diets require more work for the kidney in order to excrete the excess Nitrogen. However, a number of studies have shown that a normally functioning kidney can easily handle intakes of protein into the two, three grams per kg range, maybe even higher. I’m not sure where or why that fear continues to be out there. I think a bigger concern with high-protein intakes is the possibility of dehydration.

Kostas: It seems there are always debates on all these subjects even after all thse years of research and even the experts don’t agree.

Dr. Lemon: It’s very difficult to answer these questions. You talk to me and I give you my ideas of how it works, then you talk to someone else who is equally qualified and they’ll have a different opinion. For the average strength trainer, that makes it all really confusing.

I can propose a lot of theoretical things that would be beneficial, but when we actually test them, they’re ultimately not beneficial because there are a lot of redundancies in the bodily system that prevent these things from working the way that we think they will. In other words, it’s just a lot more complex than many people propose.

That’s why I think the best experiments are these more longitudinal studies where we take two groups, and one group gets the treatment, while the other group doesn’t, and we keep every other variable controlled as best as we can. Then at the end we see whether one group did better than the other. But very few studies are performed like that.

Also, many of them are done in novice strength trainers and not in individuals who have trained for ten years, because the response is so much greater in novices and researchers want to maximize their opportunity to find a significant change.

I guess the good news is a lot of things work because it’s relatively easy to get big and strong if you’re going to work hard at it. I came to the conclusion with all the different training programs out there — and there are thousands of training programs – that every expert has a different idea of how to train, and yet they all can work. So that’s the good news.

If you just put an overload on the muscle, we know that it’s going to respond, and some of the finer points of exactly how to do that don’t seem to really matter as much. It might be true with food intake, too. There’s a lot of ways that will work as long as you get the basic nutrients in place.

But the real problem part is that they want to get the results faster without having to work hard, too. That’s why the supplement industry has taken off because people think, “Well, gee, I can just ingest these pills and that will make me big and strong.”

A lot of the early work we did showed clearly that very few of these supplements work unless you’re training very hard. So, it’s not just the supplement, it’s the interaction. You benefit more from your training if you have the right nutrient mixture, but if you’re not training hard, it really doesn’t make any difference. You certainly can’t just pop these pills and drink these shakes and get big and strong. If you could, everyone would be looking like that.
 
Note by Dante: Since ive already had this discussion numerous times on this board, im just going to cut and paste.... Im a large believer in the thermic effect of food...im also a large believer in doing things the way you want to do them....and thats in regards to "yea I like DC training obviously but TRAIN THE WAY YOU WANT TO TRAIN!" and also with dieting....if you want to gain wight with carbs...then do so with carbs....I feel its slightly more difficult to keep lean while gaining that way but hey doing it with predominantly protein has its downfalls too...dehydration and carbs are cheaper and usually easier to eat.......so simply said do it the way you prefer because you can skin the cat both ways pretty much.....with that said

------------------------------------

There is evidence (see papers by Peter Lemon) that intense activity may increase protein requirements in order to maintain a positive nitrogen balance and avoid the loss of lean muscle tissue. The most recent requirements for athletes in intensive training (a term which requires definition as it may be that some threshold may exist for when additional protein above the RDA of .8 g/kg bodyweight is required) are: Strength athletes: 1.8 g/kg bodyweight and I've seen up to 2g/kg suggested as possible more effective. Dr Peter Lemon has been at this for over a decade now and his g/kg bodyweight figure is constantly going upwards. Data from Tarnpolosky with European athletes shows that massive protein intakes of up to 3.5 g/kg further increase lean mass gains. In the early 1970’s, a study of weightlifters showed that these athletes needed at least 2.2 gr/kg. Two decades later Russian research demonstrated better muscle increases with 4.2 gr/kg.

----------------------------------------------------------------

Study: The Thermic Effect of Food

---------------------------------------------------------------

Dr. Lonnie Lowery: Now might be a good time to discuss the potential for protein over-consumption. As you both know, there's no consensus (or even a single study to my knowledge) that excess protein (> 0.8 g/kg) does any measurable damage to healthy kidneys. Most of the scare tactics stem from the data on renal patients.

These patients end up with rapid loss of kidney function on normal high protein diets. Interestingly, the very professionals who point out every mistaken extrapolation in the dietary supplement world conveniently forget that they're doing the same "leap of faith" bullshit by applying this patient data to healthy athletes.

Having said that, I think there are real body composition advantages to eating upwards of 1.5 g/ lb. That's right, overfeed protein! First off, overeating protein, within reason, will not make you fat. A calorie is not a calorie! That is, excess protein calories aren't as likely to be stored as body fat compared to carbs and most fats.

This is because protein has to have its nitrogen ripped off in the liver (the urea cycle), which is an energy costly process. To boot, protein kicks up glucagon secretion and glucagon antagonizes the lipogenic (fat storage) effects of insulin.

Carbs don't lend people the same favor; they just jack insulin levels sky high. The net result is that the thermic effect of food is about 30% of the intake for proteins, while it's just 4 to 6% for fats and carbohydrates. This means that for a 100 calorie meal, protein will require a full 30 calories just to process it, compared to a mere 4 to 6 calories expended to process those yummy gut-expanding carbs and fats.

The bottom line is that it appears better to overeat than to under-eat protein when you're trying to add muscle mass while keeping the body fat off.

------------------------

**broken link removed**

-----------------------

Welle et al. (1981) and Robinson et al (1990) demonstrated that during a normal six hour period of rest and fasting (basal metabolism), subjects burn about 270kcal. When eating a single 400kcal meal of carbs alone (100g) or fat alone (44g), the energy burned during this six hour period reached 290kcal (an additional 20kcal). Interestingly, when eating 400kcal of protein alone (100g) the subjects burned 310kcal during this six hour period (an additional 40kcal). Therefore, protein alone had double the thermogenic power vs. fat or carbs alone!
 
Last edited:
Marking thread to follow.
 
Serrano

Interviewer: Let's start with some basic questions, Dr. Serrano. How much protein does a guy need if he's training heavy for strength and size?

Dr. Eric Serrano: That's an easy answer: if you're a male, 1 to 1.5 grams per pound. The maximum would be two grams per pound if you're training extremely heavy plus doing aerobic exercise. If you're female, 0.8 grams per pound is sufficient. These recommendations are for people who aren't taking anabolic steroids, of course.



-------------------------------------------


Connelly

QUESTION: In an off-season scenario, in a 24 hour period...how many grams of protein per pound of bodyweight do you think is required to
gain the maximum amount of muscle?
Dr. Connelly you said you need a 30 gram dose of animal protein every 3 to 4 hours to get your 3 grams of leucine.


DR SCOTT CONNELLY's RESPONSE:


The optimal averaged 24 hour intake of dietary protein to maximize lean body mass gains induced by RT is not precisely known. The best sophisticated data comes from a study in which daily protein intake was varied from 1-3 grams per kilogram of body weight and stable isotope methodology was used to assess protein "turnover" (composite rates of synthesis vs breakdown).

This study was significant in that:

Rates of both synthesis and breakdown (hence total turnover) increased linearly with increasing protein dose.
Increases in synthesis and breakdown when plotted produced virtually super-imposable graphics, thus suggesting that the two metrics of protein balance literally cancelled one another out.
Despite the above, increases in lean body mass gain basically doubled with every increment in protein intake. What this suggests is that the relationship between total 24 hour intake of protein and muscle gain with effective RT protocols is essentially linear (at least within the range of this study, i.e. 3 gr/kg/day).

The subjects in the study struggled to get to 3 gr/kg/day and thus no data was collected beyond this point.

Another important point is that the protein that was ingested was usual and customary whole food cooked protein sources which reliably produced superior nitrogen retention than do proteins with very rapid digestion and assimilation characteristics and thus cannot be extrapolated to elemental protein diets (free form aminos or hydrolysates) or rapidly assimilated proteins such as whey and soy.

whey is useful in one context in particular and that is the post workout period (from immediately after training up to 3 hours later) in which the exercise induced increment in fractional rates of muscle protein synthesis can be synergistic-ally augmented by the ingestion of a rapidly assimilated complete protein source (with a PDCAAS of > 1.0 or greater) that delivers net 3 grams of leucine. The duration of this threshold dose of whey lasts only about 3 hours in humans, so it is more efficient to use the whey post workout and then load up on more slowly assimilated proteins during the rest of the day to optimize whole body protein metabolism and nitrogen retention.
 
Last edited:
Google/Pubmed, the official recommendation, even for strength-training athletes, is much lower than that: 1.2 to 1.7 grams per KILOGRAM of body weight, not per pound. That's 0.55 to 0.77 grams per pound. This is referenced in my article. I'm not aware of any peer-reviewed research that has found a benefit for bodybuilders at protein intakes above that level.

J. Bosse, B. Dixon. Dietary protein to maximize resistance training: a review and examination of protein spread and change theories
. Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition 2012, 9:42 doi:10.1186/1550-2783-9-42
Published: 8 September 2012

“The ‘lay’ recommendation to consume 1 g protein/lb of bodyweight/day (2.2 g/kg/day) while resistance training has pervaded for years. Nutrition professionals often deem this lay recommendation excessive and not supported by research. However, as this review shows, this “lay” recommendation aligns well with research that assesses applied outcome measures of strength and body composition…”


Abstract

“An appreciable volume of human clinical data supports increased dietary protein for greater gains from resistance training, but not all findings are in agreement. We recently proposed “protein spread theory” and “protein change theory” in an effort to explain discrepancies in the response to increased dietary protein in weight management interventions. The present review aimed to extend “protein spread theory” and “protein change theory” to studies examining the effects of protein on resistance training induced muscle and strength gains.

Protein spread theory proposed that there must have been a sufficient spread or % difference in g/kg/day protein intake between groups during a protein intervention to see muscle and strength differences.

Protein change theory postulated that for the higher protein group, there must be a sufficient change from baseline g/kg/day protein intake to during study g/kg/day protein intake to see muscle and strength benefits.

Seventeen studies met inclusion criteria. In studies where a higher protein intervention was deemed successful there was, on average, a 66.1% g/kg/day between group intake spread versus a 10.2% g/kg/day spread in studies where a higher protein diet was no more effective than control. The average change in habitual protein intake in studies showing higher protein to be more effective than control was +59.5% compared to +6.5% when additional protein was no more effective than control. The magnitudes of difference between the mean spreads and changes of the present review are similar to our previous review on these theories in a weight management context.
Providing sufficient deviation from habitual intake appears to be an important factor in determining the success of additional protein in enhancing muscle and strength gains from resistance training. An increase in dietary protein favorably effects muscle and strength during resistance training.”
 

Staff online

  • Big A
    IFBB PRO/NPC JUDGE/Administrator
  • rAJJIN
    Moderator / FOUNDING Member

Forum statistics

Total page views
559,800,742
Threads
136,142
Messages
2,780,760
Members
160,448
Latest member
Jim311
NapsGear
HGH Power Store email banner
your-raws
Prowrist straps store banner
infinity
FLASHING-BOTTOM-BANNER-210x131
raws
Savage Labs Store email
Syntherol Site Enhancing Oil Synthol
aqpharma
YMSApril210131
hulabs
ezgif-com-resize-2-1
MA Research Chem store banner
MA Supps Store Banner
volartek
Keytech banner
musclechem
Godbullraw-bottom-banner
Injection Instructions for beginners
Knight Labs store email banner
3
ashp131
YMS-210x131-V02
Back
Top