20 Grams of Protein Per Sitting

It’s incorrect to say that near 100% is absorbed no matter the dose or form.

The greater part of fecal matter is, what?

Fiber? Nope.

Any other non-digestible component of food? Nope.

Bile? No…

Shed intestinal cells? Uh-uh.

Bacteria that beat you to the absorption of nutrients?

Ding-ding-ding-ding-ding!

Try a protein powder and oil (and optionally maltodextrin) or MRP based diet for a couple of days where EVERYTHING ought to be absorbable, having 50 g or so of protein at a time, and then try explaining how the toilet bowl contents are compatible with a theory that all the protein was absorbed.

Your body can absord more protein with Anabolics so they throw a lot of the science of the regular joe out of the window… look at Kai eating a pound of meat at every setting! Wow he sure doesn’t buy this…

[quote]jolopez wrote:
You still need the calories for building mass. Calories are either going to come from fat, protein, or carbs. Regardless of anabolic response, absorption, etc. You still need the calories and people trying to minimize fat gains are going to focus on ingesting protein as the prefered source for the kcals.[/quote]

QFT! Anybody that reads this article and decides they’re only going to eat 20g of protein in one sitting have shit for brains…where are you going to get the rest of your calories from, Einstein? Carbs? Let me know how that works out for ya…you might as well follow the EDA recommendations of those dinosaurs over at the FDA.

[hijack]
On a related note, I got a funny e-mail from Gold’s today about this…

[/hijack]

[quote]Efuchs7 wrote:
Your body can absord more protein with Anabolics [/quote]

Evidence please?

[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
Efuchs7 wrote:
Your body can absord more protein with Anabolics

Evidence please?

[/quote]

Utilize more protein maybe…

Absorption is your digestive track, and steroids cant make that “stronger”.

i am confused on some terms now. what is the difference between absorption, utilization, synthesis??
this will definitely clear some stuff up

Absorbtion is step one, the actual entry of amino acids into your bloodstream. Utilization is using the amino acids for whatever purpose, one of which may be protein syntesis.

And people should stop claiming that AAS enables you to absorb more. It does not. I will however agree that studys done on fast transit protein, like whey shakes, on empty stomachs is not providing realistic models for how protein behaves. You will never be fasting, and you will rarely be eating only protein.

This is one of the main reasons preworkout nutrition is claiming to be more important than postworkout. In my opinion, people should just stay fed throughout the training session.

Im gonna drink a liter of whole milk now.

[quote]kickureface wrote:
assuming a majority of those are juiced, they have the advantage of protein synthesis over the rest though.[/quote]

The body can’t syntheseise protein unless you take AAS?!

[quote]plateau wrote:
kickureface wrote:
assuming a majority of those are juiced, they have the advantage of protein synthesis over the rest though.

The body can’t syntheseise protein unless you take AAS?![/quote]

Of course it can. But protein synthesis increases greatly with anabolic steroid use. That’s one of the primary reasons people use AAS, the scientific reason I mean, most folks just know it adds muscle.

The increased synthesis aids in healing much faster, hence the insane volume folks on AAS can get away with.

The 20g/meal thing isn’t for the real world, we can certainly use more protein than 20g at each sitting to positively affect protein synthesis.

There are many bodybuilders, powerlifters etc from days gone by who ate only 3 huge meals per day, there are still guys who do this.

If only 20g protein from each meal positively affected protein synthesis then these guys whether 100lb or 300lb would need only 60g protein/day (assuming total caloric needs are met).

Obviously a solid meal of fats, carbohydrates (including fiber) and proteins will behave differently than a shake, because liquid meals clear the digestive tract faster than solid meals do. This leaves you with less time for absorbtion. And yet again, if subjects are fasting, the results are not applicable on every one else. Will you be fasting before a streneous leg workout?

Like rich points out, this could not possibly be true if you look at huge guys only eating three times a day.

[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
It’s incorrect to say that near 100% is absorbed no matter the dose or form.

The greater part of fecal matter is, what?

Fiber? Nope.

Any other non-digestible component of food? Nope.

Bile? No…

Shed intestinal cells? Uh-uh.

Bacteria that beat you to the absorption of nutrients?

Ding-ding-ding-ding-ding!

Try a protein powder and oil (and optionally maltodextrin) or MRP based diet for a couple of days where EVERYTHING ought to be absorbable, having 50 g or so of protein at a time, and then try explaining how the toilet bowl contents are compatible with a theory that all the protein was absorbed.[/quote]

no thanks. Let’s just cut to the chase:

According to you, eating a lot of protein at once vs. spreading it throughout the day will impact protein absorption?

Considering that this is YOUR profession, I highly recommend actually you know… learning about physiology and digestion and stuff.

Lyle Mcdonald’s website is an excellent resource of scientific material on nutrition and fitness that truly expanded my knowledge base. Reading some of the articles on this website might help to prevent other future embarrassing incidents of making shit up and supporting it with anecdotal evidence involving eating a 0 fiber diet and inspecting fecal matter.

I’m about to hit the hay, and I’m not sure if this has been said yet, so I’ll toss it out there:

I don’t know about bulking since I’ve never done it for any extended period of time, but for cutting, eating tons of protein is very helpful. Protein has a very high thermic effect (it costs your body a lot of energy to digest and absorb), it ensures that your body will spare muscle protein if you’re on a low/no-carb diet, and protein is damn tasty!

It may not help much with anabolism past the 20g/protein mark, but it does have tons of other uses.

[quote]Mikael LS wrote:
Obviously a solid meal of fats, carbohydrates (including fiber) and proteins will behave differently than a shake, because liquid meals clear the digestive tract faster than solid meals do. This leaves you with less time for absorbtion. And yet again, if subjects are fasting, the results are not applicable on every one else. Will you be fasting before a streneous leg workout?

Like rich points out, this could not possibly be true if you look at huge guys only eating three times a day.[/quote]

=> lots of nutrients are wasted in liquid (blended) meals?

kick in the face: depends on the state of the rest of the digestive system and especially on the amount. Im fairly certain most carbohydrate is absorbed, but protein i dont know. I am however convinced that large amounts of liquid protein without any fat or fiber added, will be at least partly left for the colon to digest.

20 g in a non-fasting individual seems low to me.

[quote]actionjeff wrote:
Bill Roberts wrote:
It’s incorrect to say that near 100% is absorbed no matter the dose or form.

The greater part of fecal matter is, what?

Fiber? Nope.

Any other non-digestible component of food? Nope.

Bile? No…

Shed intestinal cells? Uh-uh.

Bacteria that beat you to the absorption of nutrients?

Ding-ding-ding-ding-ding!

Try a protein powder and oil (and optionally maltodextrin) or MRP based diet for a couple of days where EVERYTHING ought to be absorbable, having 50 g or so of protein at a time, and then try explaining how the toilet bowl contents are compatible with a theory that all the protein was absorbed.

no thanks. Let’s just cut to the chase:

According to you, eating a lot of protein at once vs. spreading it throughout the day will impact protein absorption?[/quote]

Why don’t you try taking what I actually said and going with that, rather than putting words into my mouth, and then arguing that those words are wrong.

[quote]Considering that this is YOUR profession, I highly recommend actually you know… learning about physiology and digestion and stuff.

Lyle Mcdonald’s website is an excellent resource of scientific material on nutrition and fitness that truly expanded my knowledge base. Reading some of the articles on this website might help to prevent other future embarrassing incidents of making shit up and supporting it with anecdotal evidence involving eating a 0 fiber diet and inspecting fecal matter. [/quote]

I’m sorry, but sometimes a simple demonstration – like dropping a light rock and a heavy rock off of a tower and seeing them hit at the same time thus proving Aristotle wrong about gravity – overcomes any number of references. (If references to the contrary even exist.)

That is, overcomes it to a reasonable person. There is also the type of person who will ignore the clear demonstration.

If Mr McDonald has information on his website claiming that protein, particularly when taken in quantity such as I stated, is absorbed 100% which I stated above is wrong, which I highly doubt he has, then that “information” is wrong.

But I highly expect that the error is yours, not his, or in his cited information.

To “cut to the chase” as you put it: You must never have read a protein bioavailability study at any time, otherwise you would never even begin to dispute a person saying that absorption is not 100%.

By the way, what do you think the bacteria in the GI tract live on? What is their nitrogen source if not dietary protein? Even after I brought this general point up, you did not stop to think about this?

When fecal matter is chemically analyzed – and this has of course been done very many times, as you would know if you had read protein bioavailability studies – where do you think the very considerable nitrogen content comes from if not from that percentage of protein that was NOT absorbed by the GI tract? (Yes, a trace comes from shed intestinal cells but not much.)

You dismiss the direct evidence, both that which you can see with your own eyes if you want, and that which has been scientifically analyzed many times in the course of studying the PRECISE matter in question.

Whether you like it or not, the nitrogen content of the stool quantitates non-absorbed protein, and for the person wanting to see for himself whether all protein is absorbed, it indeed can be done as simply as I stated.

If 100% of protein were absorbed as claimed, stool volume on the diet described would consist only of shed intestinal cells, and bile. But that is not the case.

QED, to a reasonable person.

And, side note: Yes, I know, Galileo used ramps. But you can see the same thing for yourself by dropping rocks, and the point is, don’t buy what you’ve read, whether on McDonald’s website or elsewhere, if what you can see with your own eyes CLEARLY and unequivocally disproves it.

Question for Bill Roberts,

I have not heard you state too much on the current protein pulsing phenomenon. Can you give us your take on whether hyperaminoacidemia is a valid strategy to pursue? For the record, I employ it using whey hydrosylate upon rising, and 5g BCAAs between breakfast and late lunch. I confess I do this more based on faith than knowledge of scientific studies. Any feeback would be appreciated.

JB

I did comment on it on one or two of the threads in CT’s forum, and maybe once in the bb’ing or T-cell Alpha forums. But of course with so many things being posted and the search engine often not finding things, it’s no wonder that it wasn’t readily findable.

For a period of six or eight weeks I followed Coach Thibaudeau’s pulsing protocol (approximately) with 2 pulses per day and stopped doing so only out of having run out of creatine hydrolysate and being in a situation where getting more was really not the thing to do given other pressing needs.

Now, when doing it I was also new to his overall paraworkout protocol as well. It was really surprising to me how well I did in terms of gym performance while cutting up faster than I’d have ever have expected from total calories.

After running out, I continued with the paraworkout protocol and things continued to be better than without that protocol, but not so good as when I had the amino pulsing as well.

I really can comment only on my own personal experience, not having that of others… CT has much information on how others have done with it.

all hail bill roberts. show your true self, finally post that pic and reveal that you are truly an alien with a large brain.

@ mikael, nice back, thanks for the info