PDA

View Full Version : New article blasting protein supplementation



JesseM
02-09-2010, 07:40 AM
Claims that anything over .5 grams of protein per pound of BW is a waste and is also a threat to our health. Mentions bodybuilders in it as well.

I think the whole thing is probably BS, but it caught my attention, and I thought some of you might be interested in checking it out.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/livescience/20100205/sc_livescience/proteinsupplementmythrevealedbybodyofwork

nejar462
02-11-2010, 07:11 AM
I wouldn't be very surprised if this turns out to be true. However, I think 1 gram per pound per day is usually a good rule of thumb. I also noticed I gained a lot more strength when I went to the 1 gram per pound per day. I think when I was taking in 0.5 gram per pound per day (back then I didn't count nutrition) I wasn't gaining too much at all. However, I also increased my overall caloric intake and changed my regimen. I also feel like if you drink like 1 gallon or water more a day you significantly if not completely nullify damage done by excess protein to the digestive track.

Guido
02-11-2010, 07:48 AM
I'd like to see which studies are referenced by this article. The whole "excess protein can cause kidney disfunction" myth has been debunked for a long time. That was based on one outdated study from the 70's that looked at the effects of additional protein on individuals that already had EXISTING kidney disfunction. Yeah, like that applies in any way to normal, healthy populations without such disfunctions.

The article also says:


"You do need protein when you exercise, particularly when you try to build muscle through weightlifting or other forms of resistance training. The process of building muscle involves causing damage to muscle filaments and then rebuilding them, and this requires more protein. Yet unless the Mr. Universe competition is in your future, your diet likely supplies all the protein you need."

Umm, is that not what most serious lifters are shooting for (Maybe not the Olympia, but to get as big and strong as possible). Keep in mind this is not most CASUAL lifter's goals. They just want to look good on the beach. Most people on this website do not fall into that category. If you are serious about gaining a lot of muscle mass and strength then it's been proven in countless studies that our bodies need MORE protein. I don't think anybody here is striving for "normal".

AKMass
02-11-2010, 09:58 AM
I think the article is fine, it's just not relevant for 99% of the WBB population. I was in GNC a few weeks ago, and a couple of elementary school kids (who probably weighed 100 lbs together), were in there looking to buy protein bars. It bothered me that these kids were there, unsupervised, buying this stuff. I guess maybe GNC is advertising on Nickelodeon now?? I hate to think of what these kids will be buying/putting in their bodies in the future...

Guido
02-11-2010, 01:38 PM
Eh. There's nothing wrong with a few protein bars. It's almost certainly 100% better than what they would be eating most of the time. If they are doing it in the hopes of actually gaining muscle, then I say it's worthwhile and I'm glad they are on the right path.

4g64fiero
02-11-2010, 11:39 PM
No references to studies. Hmmm......

When I ate .5 grams per lb of BW I couldnt recover or even maintain strength and I only work out 3 times aweek.

Saying 1g per lb of BW protein can hurt you is.............its just stupid. Its really, really, stupid.

We are made with the adaptation that protein would be the most abundant macro in our diet. I our ancestors ate mostly meat. At no point until recent history have we had the luxury of eating so many carbs.

So now, since fat gives you heart attacks, carbs give you diabetes, I guess protein has "kidney,bone, and heart disease" to claim.

The guy who wrote this has also written such masterpieces as "bad medicine" and various others proposing that he is saving us from snake oil salesman. Seems to be a trend in his products.


On a side note, the guy writes for Jay leno. I thought that was funny.

Mercuryblade
02-12-2010, 12:23 AM
N

We are made with the adaptation that protein would be the most abundant macro in our diet. I our ancestors ate mostly meat. At no point until recent history have we had the luxury of eating so many carbs.


You also have to keep in mind that natural selection didn't favor living that late in life, the driving force is reproduction, not old age.
I'm not saying that this article holds any kind of weight, but the idea that because our ancestors did it it is somehow healthier, is incorrect.

4g64fiero
02-12-2010, 08:19 AM
You also have to keep in mind that natural selection didn't favor living that late in life, the driving force is reproduction, not old age.
I'm not saying that this article holds any kind of weight, but the idea that because our ancestors did it it is somehow healthier, is incorrect.

Thats a very good point but older males are still able to reproduce. I dont think evolving to the point that the main macro in your diet causes kidney failure would make sense from a reproduction or longevity point of view.

Holto
02-12-2010, 11:42 AM
Just chiming in here:

The human evolutionary process was driven from consumption of fat, not protein. Our bodies are designed based on a diet that derives 50% of it's calories from fat. If you're eating 100grams of fat and 200 grams of protein, you're still getting more calories from fat.