Protein Intake for Athletes?

Diet and Nutrition
21

[quote]IronDude17 wrote:

Prof, where do you find your reputable scientific studies information? The only one I know about is pubmed.com and then I also get my NSCA sports and conditioning journals. There must be more good databases around besides those . . . .

[/quote]

You can sometimes do a direct search on certain journals. You can go to JAMA’s website and do a search of abstracts which is what most people are reading if they are researching info. I also went to school in a very large medical center and often still go back to that library because they have EVERYTHING on file somewhere.

If you can’t find it on the internet, that has been the only other source I go to for reports or personl research. Th library at the clinic here sucks ass compared to what I’ve been used to in the past.

22

[quote]Professor X wrote:
IRoNStaLLion wrote:
Professor X wrote:
IRoNStaLLion wrote:
well the prof. in the original post said that anything over 2g/kg is too much for your kidneys to handle… so despite whether or not excess protein will help you attain the goal of gaining muscle mass, it may still be bad for your kidneys.

I am confused at why you think no one else is educated enough to know whether that was a load of bullshit or not. There is nothing showing this to damage kidneys. While ANYTHING can be taken to an insane extreme, 2gr/kg of body weight is NOT it.

well have there been any studies into the effects of excess long term protein consumption?? no that i;ve found. So either way, you can’t say that it’s “safe”

Most studies are done on people with diseases. It would be very hard to get a grant to conduct a long term study on healthy weight lifters who train regularly who happen to also take in 500gr of protein a day. The variables that introduces would make it almost pointless to begin with.

No, no long term studies have been done on healthy weight training people who get bigger muscles and also take in large amounts of protein to that degree.

There have also been no studies on long term daily gallon of water drinking in healthy individuals so I suggest you stop drinking water as well.

There have been no long term studies on people who do calf raises everyday related to mortality so I suggest you don’t do that either.

There have been no specific studies on people who go to Gold’s gym for 10 years related to mortality so I suggest you give up your membership.

Bottom line, we don’t need a study to guide our every move in life. If protein was so dangerous, everyone taking in more than their weight in grams of it everyday would be showing some signs of it. Learn to observe the world around you instead of waiting to be told what to do.[/quote]

Well the fact of the matter is that trained professionals (ie docs, nutritionists etc) believe that excess protein is harmfull. (by excess we can say over 2 g/lbs). Now while there have been no long term studies you must surely have a little concern on the impact such large amounts of protein have on your body, especially your liver and kidneys.

there are no studies on the long term effects of consuming excess vitamins (such as vitamin A), but yet it is known to be harmfull.

There are no studies into the long term effects of eating loads and loads of aspartame, but yet there is reason to be concerned.

We’re talking about drinking water, or going to a gym here, we’re talking about something that has a valid reason to be concerned about.
You’re just simplying things way too much.

23

Some docs may BELIEVE that a high protein diet is bad for you. Some also believe that weight training stunts your growth. Neither are true. The data on high protein diets being bad for you is extrapolated from data in people with renal failure.

I have discussed this very issue with nephrologists, and none have any concern with my consumption of over 250 grams of protein a day.

The body is not an efficient machine. Amino acids can be used to make glucose, and you need numerous amino acids in correct amounts to build muscle. How can you be sure you have enough of all of them just eating a little bit or protein.

From an evolutionary standpoint, the body is into conservation. It is stingy. The most important thing is to store energy for the next famine. Your body will never build extra muscle at the expense of buring fat stores. Muscle synthesis is not at the top of this list, and will only occur when energy, calories and protein, are present in adequate amounts. To ensure this happens, an excess isn’t a bad idea.

As for your professor, you can tell him there are no good studies looking at very high protein diets in athletes. I have looked, and haven’t found much. This leads to two conclusions. We can’t definitively say it is good for you, and we can’t say it’s bad for you, either. Anecdotally, I can tell you that when i got serious about eating, I put on muscle. Prior to that I just wasn’t getting where I wanted to be. I’m sold on it. My own little study has convinced me. Recall, those who can’t do…teach

24

[quote]IRoNStaLLion wrote:

there are no studies on the long term effects of consuming excess vitamins (such as vitamin A), but yet it is known to be harmfull.

[/quote]

Go eat some polar bear liver and let me know how you are doing. Lots of data on hypervitaminosis A

Here is one small study presented as a poster. See Poster #8
http://bodybuilding.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?zi=1/XJ&sdn=bodybuilding&zu=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.sportsnutritionsociety.org%2Fsite%2Fpdf%2FJISSN-2-1-1-30-05.pdf

another semi-relevant study, not much good information here:
http://www.physsportsmed.com/issues/1997/08aug/muscle.htm

Even if you look on wikipedia it will tell you that the dangers of high protein intake are a myth

25

I think its more to do with the fact that pro athletes are insanely active throughout the day and need like an 8000 calories intake just to maintain/increase performance (I’m using an olympic swimmer as an example).

Since they don’t want any unnecessary fat gain, extensive energy spent on consuming complex carbs like grains, preserve as much energy as possible, and in the end maintaining their performance/muscle despite all their physical stress, they have to consume a high proportion of protein.

And due ot the high caloric need, a heck of a lot of it.

I don’t know if it safe or not (I have a different take on it), but pro athletes definitely need all that protein for their er… livelihood.

26

It depends on the athlete. Endurance athletes, for example, don’t require a heck of a lot more protein than a normal, active person. They need carbs, and lots of them. Bodybuilders are trying to add mass.

You need bricks before you can build a building, and so we have to eat a lot of protein, to make sure we have what the body needs to build that muscle. You can train with great intensity religiously, but if you don’t have what it takes to build muscle, you won’t build any.

27

[quote]IRoNStaLLion wrote:

Well the fact of the matter is that trained professionals (ie docs, nutritionists etc) believe that excess protein is harmfull. (by excess we can say over 2 g/lbs). Now while there have been no long term studies you must surely have a little concern on the impact such large amounts of protein have on your body, especially your liver and kidneys.

[/quote]

This is false. ALL docs do not believe this. I don’t believe this so there goes your statement’s validity out of the window. I had a professor in school who is a doctor and a lawyer tell me that creatine was harmful to kidneys. It isn’t and we all know that now. He also didn’t lift weights. There are many myths believed in medicine about supplements or anything related to bodybuilding that are not true and doctors who do train regularly know this.

If your doctor has never lifted a weight and gets half of his info from late night media, expect for him to be clueless on these subjects as well. They don’t teach “supplements” in any professional or medical school and, being human, many doctors fall for the same crap as the general public on these issues.

28

re: from a few posts ago:

================
Muscle synthesis is not at the top of this list, and will only occur when energy, calories and protein, are present in adequate amounts. To ensure this happens, an excess isn’t a bad idea.

As for your professor, you can tell him there are no good studies looking at very high protein diets in athletes. I have looked, and haven’t found much. This leads to two conclusions. We can’t definitively say it is good for you, and we can’t say it’s bad for you, either. Anecdotally, I can tell you that when i got serious about eating, I put on muscle. Prior to that I just wasn’t getting where I wanted to be. I’m sold on it. My own little study has convinced me. Recall, those who can’t do…teach

I like the honesty of the post above. It reflects that we really don’t know what level of protein we need. Without doubt it varies from one individual to another, depending on many factors including your activity level and intensity level.

Now here’s a mystery: everyone recognizes that you need to be in calorie deficit to lose weight, and conversely, if you eat more calories than you expend, then the extra energy will be stored as fat, or if you want to be fancy, as “adipose tissue”. Why, then, can’t you gain any significant amount of muscle mass by staying in precise energy balance, not one calorie more? Why MUST we gain fat in order to lose muscle?

Note that the expert nutritionists (of which I am not) say that you can’t use more than .9g/lb body weight, not 2g/lb as stated above. They say that protein doesn’t create muscle, exercise does, and as long as you’re getting your .9g/lb, then what you need are carbs and a full muscle glycogen tank to feul a high intensity workout.

…and even then, if you consume even one more calorie than you burn, the excess calorie WILL be stored as fat.

So I consider this a mystery. Every bodybuilder in the world knows that you have to have a positive calorie balance in order to build muscle, and accepts fat accumulation during the build phase as a necessary evil.

but WHY? WHY can’t the body build muscle if you’re in exact energy balance?

pedaler

29

[quote]pedaler wrote:
but WHY? WHY can’t the body build muscle if you’re in exact energy balance?

pedaler[/quote]

How will you know if you are in exact energy balance? How can you know how many calories you need…exactly? What if you forget your tie upstairs before work and have to run back up the steps? What if your wife/girlfriend feels a little frisky in the morning AND in the evening?

As for protein, you need an appropriate balance of amino acids to build human muscle. You may get 300 grams a day of protein, but if that protein is deficient in one amino acid you need, it won’t work. There is no way of saying exactly what you need. It is an inelegant solution, I know, but if you make sure you have an excess, you can be sure you have what you need. G

30

[quote]teratos wrote:
pedaler wrote:
but WHY? WHY can’t the body build muscle if you’re in exact energy balance?

pedaler

How will you know if you are in exact energy balance? How can you know how many calories you need…exactly? What if you forget your tie upstairs before work and have to run back up the steps? What if your wife/girlfriend feels a little frisky in the morning AND in the evening?

As for protein, you need an appropriate balance of amino acids to build human muscle. You may get 300 grams a day of protein, but if that protein is deficient in one amino acid you need, it won’t work. There is no way of saying exactly what you need. It is an inelegant solution, I know, but if you make sure you have an excess, you can be sure you have what you need. G
[/quote]

Good post. It is a little ridiculous to think that you can calculate the EXACT number of calories you will use everyday. There are too many variables involved which is why those not taking in an excess of calories will make no progress. Bottom line, you use a different number of calories every single day. The numbers people post are averages, not exact caloric values.

31

re: exact

I didn’t mean to imply that you could calculate everything exactly, and nobody cares if they’re just a few calories over anyway. It takes a lot of calories to make a pound of fat, but even 100 cal/day will add up to 2.5 lbs of pure blubber over 3 months. If you can net a few lbs of muscle after you cut down again, that’s great, but it’s hard to do, and the faster you lose the fat, the more comes off as muscle.

So my question is more about whether a bodybuilder should strive to maintain as narrow a positive calorie balance as possible, working out with high intensity, or whether the bulk up / cut down cycle is more effective at adding muscle over a full cycle.

Popular wisdom used to be that you couldn’t get big with low bodyfat % without the bulk/cut cycle, but I just wonder whether it’s worth it in the end. Maybe slow and steady growth wins in the end, like the turtle. (there might be some big pecs under that shell)

32

[quote]pedaler wrote:
re: exact

I didn’t mean to imply that you could calculate everything exactly, and nobody cares if they’re just a few calories over anyway. It takes a lot of calories to make a pound of fat, but even 100 cal/day will add up to 2.5 lbs of pure blubber over 3 months. If you can net a few lbs of muscle after you cut down again, that’s great, but it’s hard to do, and the faster you lose the fat, the more comes off as muscle.

So my question is more about whether a bodybuilder should strive to maintain as narrow a positive calorie balance as possible, working out with high intensity, or whether the bulk up / cut down cycle is more effective at adding muscle over a full cycle.

Popular wisdom used to be that you couldn’t get big with low bodyfat % without the bulk/cut cycle, but I just wonder whether it’s worth it in the end. Maybe slow and steady growth wins in the end, like the turtle. (there might be some big pecs under that shell)

[/quote]

This is where experience comes in. I bulk up because it worked for me. The majority of the people I know who claim this is a bad idea are much smaller than me in terms of muscle mass. Therefore, I will continue to believe that bulking up helps build a solid base of muscle mass. Staying lean after that point makes perfect sense, but most people are not gaining tons of muscle mass while staying extremely lean all year long. When speaking of real world results, simply ask those claiming that you should never bulk up to explain or show their results. I know I’ve asked and they very rarely respond with any pictures of their success at massive gains.

33

I think you can put on muscle mass without gaining a lot of fat. You just won’t gain as much. Again, the body wants to conserve energy. It won’t build muscle at the expense of buring fat. To the gods of metabolism, this is absolutely unthinkable. When there is an excess of calories and protein, then you will respond to the pressure of training by building muscle.

Conversely, if you are in a calorie defecit, and you still put pressure on the muscles by training, the gods of metabolism would prefer NOT to use that protein as fuel, so during your cutting cycle, you will not lose a lot of the mass you put on. I know what massive eating has done for me, I won’t go back to trying to put on muscle without a little fat. If you are putting a lot of fat on you are eating too much. It is most certainly inelegant, but it works. G

34

To be quite honest, I think the professor is right.

If I understand the debate correctly, the topic is protein intake for “athletes,” not “bodybuilders.”

From my experience, athletes don’t need as much protein for recovery and seem to recover just fine on low protein amounts. What seems to be of more importance is carb intake. The higher the intake, the better the performance from what I’ve seen.

35

[quote]teratos wrote:
I think you can put on muscle mass without gaining a lot of fat. You just won’t gain as much. [/quote]

This has been my experience…from the other point of view.

I keep my protein intake between 1g/lbs & 1.5g/lbs and the overall diet pretty lean.

I’ve made significant strength gains along with improvements in symmetry and vascularity, etc. But that type of diet does not produce significant muscle mass gains.

36

This is certainly not a study… but here’s why I believe that “excess” protein is helpful when trying to build muscle mass.

So say the body can only use a certain amount of protein to build muscle and the rest goes to waste. Say that number is X. Now, if you only consume X grams of protein per day, how do you know that ALL of that will be going towards muscle synthesis?

This would be especially applicable I think if you ate one or two meals that were especially high in protein. So maybe when you consume X grams of protein, your body only uses .7X grams to build muscle. So right there you are not maximizing your growth potential. Therefore, taking above that “maximum” level might assure that your body will be operating at its maximum muscle synthesis level.

Plus, steak tastes good :slight_smile:

37

Louis Cyr was reported to have eaten up to 12 lbs of meat daily.

38

[quote]uberswank wrote:
Louis Cyr was reported to have eaten up to 12 lbs of meat daily. [/quote]

I tend to believe that’s a myth. The man would be shitting out bricks the size of bowling balls. Maybe he ate that much “once” and they just hyped the rest up. They didn’t even have decent toilet paper back then.

39

[quote]Professor X wrote:
uberswank wrote:
Louis Cyr was reported to have eaten up to 12 lbs of meat daily.

I tend to believe that’s a myth. The man would be shitting out bricks the size of bowling balls. Maybe he ate that much “once” and they just hyped the rest up. They didn’t even have decent toilet paper back then.[/quote]

That was his biographer reporting it. Other reports have stated 6 lbs in one meal. Regardless, even if inflated, it goes to show that you can eat a lot more than 2x your bodyweight. (6lbs = ~900gr protein.)

eta: I’ve also come across articles stating some frontier outposts were rationing 4-5lbs of meat per man.

40

[quote]uberswank wrote:
Professor X wrote:
uberswank wrote:
Louis Cyr was reported to have eaten up to 12 lbs of meat daily.

I tend to believe that’s a myth. The man would be shitting out bricks the size of bowling balls. Maybe he ate that much “once” and they just hyped the rest up. They didn’t even have decent toilet paper back then.

That was his biographer reporting it. Other reports have stated 6 lbs in one meal. Regardless, even if inflated, it goes to show that you can eat a lot more than 2x your bodyweight. (6lbs = ~900gr protein.)

eta: I’ve also come across articles stating some frontier outposts were rationing 4-5lbs of meat per man. [/quote]

Well, I can and have eaten 4-5lbs of meat a day for a while in the past. That is doable, especially for someone very active who is also growing muscle mass. However 12lbs seems to be pushing it and it makes me wonder if he could breath on his own.