Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
napsgear
genezapharmateuticals
domestic-supply
puritysourcelabs
sarms-forsaleUGFREAKeudomestic
napsgeargenezapharmateuticals domestic-supplypuritysourcelabsSarms for SaleUGFREAKeudomestic

Veteran Thread How much protein do you need to build muscle? The Protein Confusion

Veteran Discussion

Mobster

Staff
Moderator
VIP
EVO V.I.P.
EVO Logger
Bring on the debate lol

I'll start up front by mentioning I have the advantage of having owned a company that's No1 product was Whey Protein. As in I sold one fella a 1000kg/2200lbs pallet in one deal and we'd our smallest tub was 5kg/11lbs. I HAVE consumed as much as 300g of the powder (so 240g protein) every day plus food.

I'm also more aware than most here will be of the history of the Iron Game. I know when PEDs started and when companies like York Barbell and Weider started pushing protein hard. Irvin Johnson (aka Rheo Blair) came up with a high fat (from cream) and isolated milk protein drink which had a LOT of success. But here are the missing bits of info

1) Weider, York and others sold equipment. But you will NOT need to buy a new Olympic set every week. But you WILL consume protein and need (want) to replenish it when it's gone weekly, monthly etc. Hence you started to see companies stop saying that good food was enough and starting to push protein. That came down to the almighty dollar.

2) PEDs. There has ALWAYS been big muscular men. But seriously big and relatively lean was rare. That started to change when PEDs came to the fore. And even then Arnold et al (@ 230lbs) was NOT hitting 300g protein. I've read of Jay Cutler and others hitting 400g and even as high as 800g protein.

3) I come from strength and I'm talking about athletes in the World's Strongest Man competitions kind of level. Which means I've felt TINY at 290lbs and 6'3" tall when i'm standing next to someone that weighs close to 400lbs and are ALL my height or taller. And yes they can eat and DO consume a LOT of calories. But few are hitting as high as you think protein wise.

4) Studies. One does not proof make. I'd also ask who did it (was it sponsored by a protein selling company?). Did it use PED using athletes and so on

5) Why upping the protein CAN work. How often have we pushed a better diet (and a log lol) on those not gaining over or as well as a solid cycle? The underweight especially over estimate what they think they're eating (all macros) . They GUESS. Then when it's written down they're barely hitting 90g protein as day. So when we say 'eat more protein' and they do... well blow me twice they grow.

6) What we actually need. Stevesmi has written (also based on science) that the (and it's the top end of the numbers) athlete (not av Joes) needs circa 0.9g a lb MAX. The data is 0.7 to 1.1g (so the middle is what Stevesmi says). I'd mention I do NOT do a high volume work load (which would require more) and there's SOME support to a higher ratio of protein to carbs and fat when you're dieting. I'll be getting MORE than the 0.7g figure (comes out to 227g for me) on average.

As I said elsewhere it IS, in my opinion, parroting the idea when EVERYONE says 'up the protein'. Esp if it's just because it's what's been said for a long time and, myself included, using outliers like me at 322-334+ or Jay C using 100's of g of protein when he was 290lbs and winning the O as our evidence.

Bring on the debate!!
 
.9g/lb is probably right. 1g/lb is easier to remember. Probably needs to be adjusted somewhat for non complete plant proteins, but just at the margins. The biggest advantage of protein vs fat and carbs is that being too high in protein has less downsides than being too high in fat or carbs. The latter two are more easily stored as fat on your body, so protein is, for me, a lazy way to get more calories when I need them with less worry about getting just the right number of calories.

ETA: almost every one of the perceived dangers of too much protein, like kidney issues, is nonsense in a normally functioning body. I also don’t believe there is anything wrong with protein powder as long as you are still eating good amounts of normal food. Something simply being unnatural does not make it bad. If it weren’t for our unnatural products, we’d live much shorter, poorer, less healthful lives.

Oh, and one more thing, it probably is good for weight loss because it is high satiety, yet the demands on the body to turn protein into energy are calorically important.
 
in the 80's people got info from magazines
said magazines were owned by supplement company owners who made a fortune selling protein powder
they wrote articles saying how important protein was (which it is to build muscle) but they stretched the truth to the point where they made it seem that you needed way more than you did.
also protein powders are fake food and processed. they didn't admit that real food sources for protein were always superior
from there pro bodybuilders started to get paid to market protein powders
it goes on and on.

in the 90's and 2000's go on a forum and tell someone they don't need 300g of protein a day and they flamed you. that was a direct result of the 80s propaganda.

luckily today we all have access to the info if you just take the time to research and we know that no human being needs anything close to that .. and no athlete or bodybuilder does either. remember our ancestors would go days and weeks without a single gram of protein yet they magically survived it. our bodies know how to get through points of famine so its absurd to think we need that much protein or that much anything when we don't.

people need to pay more attention to avoiding more things then they need to worry about what they are getting. the sugars, refined oils, additives, plastics, etc are gonna destroy your hormones and ability to put on muscle
 
A lot of things we put in our bodies are better because they are processed. Take, for example, metformin or any of the other of the traditional herbal remedies that used to kill people before they were reformulated without their toxins. Likewise, I am not sure protein powder is less healthful overall than protein connected to gobs of saturated beef fat as we find it in “nature.”

And while your point about our bodies being able to handle starvation are true, we have no doubt evolved a good bit in the last 12k years since animal husbandry came about. We didn’t lose our ability to adapt at some prehistoric time, it is an ongoing process.

I do think you make a lot of good, significant points about diet, and about our general omnivore status. I only worry that, societally, we need to continue to be open to advancements while still understanding how we got here. Thankfully this is not a political board, so I will just leave it at saying that partisan neophobia is not conducive to a good society. We can certainly reject new, and old, things, but hopefully for good, and not tribal, reasons.
 
A lot of things we put in our bodies are better because they are processed. Take, for example, metformin or any of the other of the traditional herbal remedies that used to kill people before they were reformulated without their toxins. Likewise, I am not sure protein powder is less healthful overall than protein connected to gobs of saturated beef fat as we find it in “nature.”

And while your point about our bodies being able to handle starvation are true, we have no doubt evolved a good bit in the last 12k years since animal husbandry came about. We didn’t lose our ability to adapt at some prehistoric time, it is an ongoing process.

I do think you make a lot of good, significant points about diet, and about our general omnivore status. I only worry that, societally, we need to continue to be open to advancements while still understanding how we got here. Thankfully this is not a political board, so I will just leave it at saying that partisan neophobia is not conducive to a good society. We can certainly reject new, and old, things, but hopefully for good, and not tribal, reasons.
I agree with (and disagree with Stevesmi in part) that it's fine, if in moderation, to consume SOME processed foods. taken to an extreme ALL cooked food is denatured.

However, we will NOT have evolved much if at all when it comes to food. Cultivating crops and what we'd call recognizable civilization etc is, at best, 20-40000 years against the 2-4m we've existed. We ARE (hence our survival) incredibly adaptive as a species.

I HAVE seen an argument to suggest processed food HAS made changes to our DNA. That can't be good or, at best, is an unknown.
 
Look at (I wanna add a small book he wrote to my collection) what Rheo did. The vast majority of his successes came not just with protein but fixing diets and adding vitamins. Mostly with sick and underweight individuals. He DID work with a few well known bodybuilders such as Larry Scott. Even then he was often fixing gaps in the typical bodybuilding diet of the time. It's also worth noting, as I did above, that this was when PED use added a LOT more muscle than a protein powder. But bodybuilders wanted to say they were drug free when they was not.

Lots of references to this in Muscle, Smoke & Mirrors book III
 
It’s a good question and I am not sure. Theoretically you are already seeing generational adaptations to new technologies that are physiologically adaptive, so we may evolve faster than we can imagine. Really excellent question, though.
 
It’s a good question and I am not sure. Theoretically you are already seeing generational adaptations to new technologies that are physiologically adaptive, so we may evolve faster than we can imagine. Really excellent question, though.
I think it's less evolving and more, as above, about how adaptive we are.

Let me give you an example. Back when we were hunter gatherers we'd either have feast or famine. We did not, unless very good at either, have 3 square meals a day and steady (from food) blood levels of any macros. If we caught game we ate as much as we could while sharing it with the rest of the hunters. Then either slept that off as it was digested and then took it back, before it went rotten to the mother and kids where they did the same. Gathered foods might be seasonal and loads one year and f'all the next. That biology still exists in us. It's why we store fat (and are VERY good at doing so) when there's a plentiful supply (which is very much the case in the developed parts of the world) ready for famine.

The ONLY difference for bodybuilders before protein powders and after (circa 1950's) is PEDs. Most AAS are used precisely because, among other benefits, we have increased nitrogen uptake and retention.

Now the flip side is the science of best athletic performance. Is being able to sleep off a heavy meal of high protein and fat in the form of either primitive mans recent kill of an antelope ideal? No. Esp not any running type event. Arguably either a small meal or an empty gut is.

https://www.evolutionary.org/forums...need-protein-powder.90553/page-2#post-1370471 is also worth a look

Something else worth a mention. Maths lol: If you take an average Joe (circa 155-165lbs or so) and hold them up against me (today 322lbs as I type this) on simple maths you could say I'm 2x as big so I have 2x the requirement. But I do not. SOME of our protein intake is skin and organ repair and construction. My bones, guts, organs etc WILL be more. I suspect, without checking. 'Joe' might have (based on one stat of 185lbs man) 78lbs of lean muscle mass. One online calculator says (if my b/fat is as high 25% - I hope not lol) that my lean mass is 241.5lbs or 3x the muscle. If we kept protein for 'Joe' to 200g I'd need 3x or 600g. But no ones suggesting that. Plus it'd be 2400kcals a day in protein alone. See how it makes no sense.
 
As I said above the absolute reason coaches like Lev, Monstro et al have had success with clients is two fold

1) piss poor diets sorted out by their coaches including good solid protein sources.
2) those who do not have good coaches (see Weight Watchers and the like) losing WEIGHT (inc muscle) and ending up looking kinda stringy.

As an indication of why most use (inc myself probably in the past few days) on WW type plans is water loss from lowering carbs. THEN from eating less and better choices. But we want muscle, strength and looking lean!! I'd agree I want more than someone on a WW diet but... 300+G... not sure.

IF I have to I can drink another shake a day easy (48g per double scoop)
 
I think it's less evolving and more, as above, about how adaptive we are.

Let me give you an example. Back when we were hunter gatherers we'd either have feast or famine. We did not, unless very good at either, have 3 square meals a day and steady (from food) blood levels of any macros. If we caught game we ate as much as we could while sharing it with the rest of the hunters. Then either slept that off as it was digested and then took it back, before it went rotten to the mother and kids where they did the same. Gathered foods might be seasonal and loads one year and f'all the next. That biology still exists in us. It's why we store fat (and are VERY good at doing so) when there's a plentiful supply (which is very much the case in the developed parts of the world) ready for famine.

The ONLY difference for bodybuilders before protein powders and after (circa 1950's) is PEDs. Most AAS are used precisely because, among other benefits, we have increased nitrogen uptake and retention.

Now the flip side is the science of best athletic performance. Is being able to sleep off a heavy meal of high protein and fat in the form of either primitive mans recent kill of an antelope ideal? No. Esp not any running type event. Arguably either a small meal or an empty gut is.

https://www.evolutionary.org/forums...need-protein-powder.90553/page-2#post-1370471 is also worth a look

Something else worth a mention. Maths lol: If you take an average Joe (circa 155-165lbs or so) and hold them up against me (today 322lbs as I type this) on simple maths you could say I'm 2x as big so I have 2x the requirement. But I do not. SOME of our protein intake is skin and organ repair and construction. My bones, guts, organs etc WILL be more. I suspect, without checking. 'Joe' might have (based on one stat of 185lbs man) 78lbs of lean muscle mass. One online calculator says (if my b/fat is as high 25% - I hope not lol) that my lean mass is 241.5lbs or 3x the muscle. If we kept protein for 'Joe' to 200g I'd need 3x or 600g. But no ones suggesting that. Plus it'd be 2400kcals a day in protein alone. See how it makes no sense.
I’ve always been somebody who spends his time arguing with people with whom I agree 99% and disagree 1%, and this is another good example. My mother used to label that being a “shit disturber.”

I like the dichotomy of evolved and adapted, so it’s probably most fair to say we evolved to deal with scarcity, and now have adapted to dealing with plenty. As such, we handle things pretty well on both fronts.

As to the last paragraph, I totally agree. It is a circumstance where we measure what is measurable, not what is meaningful. That isn’t horrible, because it gives us something to go by, but on the edge cases, like your protein needs vs an “average Joe” it produces some ridiculous results. I don’t know if that is harmful w/r/t protein, though, for the reason I mentioned in my first post, that excess protein is the most benign situation of excess.
 
It will take us another millions years to evolve into consuming processed foods. Thankfully I won’t live to see it lol

but seriously one of the first things I tell a client who comes to me for nutritional help is to cut out processed foods entirely. I have yet to have someone come back to me and say anything else other than how much their energy went up and how they feel so much better. I view it as putting fuel in ur car. You can use the cheap fuel in your lambo but it just doesn’t run the same as putting in the high grade shit

training optimally will yield superior results every time. I learned this the hard way when I used to train Ironman. Not only did you need to be anal about what you put inside your body but you had to meal time and time evacuations to a tee to get optimal results. Now transfer that to weight training bodybuilding or any other sport. Diet is so essential. This is why all time greats always had air tight diets. Look at Tom Brady.
 
It will take us another millions years to evolve into consuming processed foods. Thankfully I won’t live to see it lol

but seriously one of the first things I tell a client who comes to me for nutritional help is to cut out processed foods entirely. I have yet to have someone come back to me and say anything else other than how much their energy went up and how they feel so much better. I view it as putting fuel in ur car. You can use the cheap fuel in your lambo but it just doesn’t run the same as putting in the high grade shit

training optimally will yield superior results every time. I learned this the hard way when I used to train Ironman. Not only did you need to be anal about what you put inside your body but you had to meal time and time evacuations to a tee to get optimal results. Now transfer that to weight training bodybuilding or any other sport. Diet is so essential. This is why all time greats always had air tight diets. Look at Tom Brady.
Again, as with Mobster I feel like I am arguing against somebody on the edges with whom I agree on the largest parts. My diet is basically a little meat, yogurt, vegetables, whole grains, fruit and seeds, with some astronaut food around workouts. So in large measure I do as you say.

Where I disagree is with the idea that humans don’t digest processed foods well. We process them amazingly well. You know how I know? Because people who eat a lot of them are generally very fat, which tells me they are getting all of the calories and nutrients possible out of them. When people eat things they can’t process, like actual Celiacs sufferers, they are super skinny. But skinniness is not the American disease, obesity is. It’s that it is too palatable and too digestible, and that people don’t take responsibility for their diets.

But in the whole I agree with you. If you want to actually perform well, you need whole carbs, some protein etc. That’s why I hate keto, because it is running your car on shit fuel, fat. But all of this can be done, because our bodies evolved to digest and get the nutrients from food much less digestible than a Big Mac and a Twinkie.
 
Debate and arguing is what we built this forum for. It’s very important to throw different thoughts and ideas around

this is what gives us today a huge advantage over guys and gals 25 years ago who depended on,y on gym broscience or biased magazines for knowledge
 
I recently needed to fill a couple credit hours at school this summer and I took anatomy and physiology along with diet and nutrition. I learned a lot about all the processes involved in the body's utilization of nutrients. Particularly how the body uses different fuel sources and I learned that you don't burn protein as a fuel source unless you are doing something like running a marathon. The pace and intensity of your workout will determine what you are burning for fuel. Protein is used for recovery and maintenance. And there is a formula based on weight and age as far as how much you can process at a time. I used to think the excess was just expelled but found out that it can actually be converted to triglycerides and stored as fat. With the exception of AAS that optimize nutrient partitioning, your body can only do so much with protein. Excess consumption can be really hard on your liver. This stuff changed the way I ate, particularly portions and the time of day when I ate different nutrients. I eat more carbs now than I ever used to but I eat the right ones (fruit and whole grain) and I plan them around my workout and I'm getting amazing results. It's also about the ratios. I know every meal I eat isn't perfect but in the big picture I'm pretty damn consistent and it's working. Every body is different. You just have to keep honing it in until you find what works for you.
 
I recently needed to fill a couple credit hours at school this summer and I took anatomy and physiology along with diet and nutrition. I learned a lot about all the processes involved in the body's utilization of nutrients. Particularly how the body uses different fuel sources and I learned that you don't burn protein as a fuel source unless you are doing something like running a marathon. The pace and intensity of your workout will determine what you are burning for fuel. Protein is used for recovery and maintenance. And there is a formula based on weight and age as far as how much you can process at a time. I used to think the excess was just expelled but found out that it can actually be converted to triglycerides and stored as fat. With the exception of AAS that optimize nutrient partitioning, your body can only do so much with protein. Excess consumption can be really hard on your liver. This stuff changed the way I ate, particularly portions and the time of day when I ate different nutrients. I eat more carbs now than I ever used to but I eat the right ones (fruit and whole grain) and I plan them around my workout and I'm getting amazing results. It's also about the ratios. I know every meal I eat isn't perfect but in the big picture I'm pretty damn consistent and it's working. Every body is different. You just have to keep honing it in until you find what works for you.
That's debatable. One study fixated on 19g. Others have different numbers. Then, as you say (age etc) there are variables. Many university studies used students. Other studies used ill people and burn victims.

And then there's that word - process. I can (and have) eat a 32oz Tomahawk steak. It's what I utilize. And it'd be close to 400g of protein. Is my body using all of that? No
 
I recently needed to fill a couple credit hours at school this summer and I took anatomy and physiology along with diet and nutrition. I learned a lot about all the processes involved in the body's utilization of nutrients. Particularly how the body uses different fuel sources and I learned that you don't burn protein as a fuel source unless you are doing something like running a marathon. The pace and intensity of your workout will determine what you are burning for fuel. Protein is used for recovery and maintenance. And there is a formula based on weight and age as far as how much you can process at a time. I used to think the excess was just expelled but found out that it can actually be converted to triglycerides and stored as fat. With the exception of AAS that optimize nutrient partitioning, your body can only do so much with protein. Excess consumption can be really hard on your liver. This stuff changed the way I ate, particularly portions and the time of day when I ate different nutrients. I eat more carbs now than I ever used to but I eat the right ones (fruit and whole grain) and I plan them around my workout and I'm getting amazing results. It's also about the ratios. I know every meal I eat isn't perfect but in the big picture I'm pretty damn consistent and it's working. Every body is different. You just have to keep honing it in until you find what works for you.
I think the body utilizes something around 98% of the nutrients it ingests. The issue with excess protein is not whether it will absorb and utilize it at all, but what will be done with it. For normally functioning human beings excess protein creates basically no stress to the organs. It will either be used as energy or it will be stored as energy (fat.) The upside to excess protein vs fat or carbs is that your body is less able to store it as fat (marginally) than it is the other two, and the conversion process of protein into energy is calorically expensive.

That said, your current approach is, in my opinion, absolutely correct. All I am saying is that if you had to eat excess calories in one of the three macros, protein is probably least bad.

I don’t know how much protein we can absorb for “good” purposes in each sitting. One of the problems is that the human mind thinks in meals, or sittings, while the body just plugs along. It’s probably wise, especially in an enhanced state, to err toward 1g/lb a day, and to do it in a way in which the body has more of a constant flow than all of it at one time.
 
That's debatable. One study fixated on 19g. Others have different numbers. Then, as you say (age etc) there are variables. Many university studies used students. Other studies used ill people and burn victims.

And then there's that word - process. I can (and have) eat a 32oz Tomahawk steak. It's what I utilize. And it'd be close to 400g of protein. Is my body using all of that? No
My number according to the formula was 32g I think. I'll see if I can still access the course material and find that formula.
 
That's debatable. One study fixated on 19g. Others have different numbers. Then, as you say (age etc) there are variables. Many university studies used students. Other studies used ill people and burn victims.

And then there's that word - process. I can (and have) eat a 32oz Tomahawk steak. It's what I utilize. And it'd be close to 400g of protein. Is my body using all of that? No
A lot of that protein is most likely being utilized as conversion to glucose depending on your cal intake on that given day.
 
A lot of that protein is most likely being utilized as conversion to glucose depending on your cal intake on that given day.
If, as suggested, it's a calorie restricted diet or study yes. And easily fixed by either encouraging the stored body-fat to be used or manipulating macros
 
Back
Top Bottom