PDA

View Full Version : protein, does lots help?



aggablinky
08-14-2003, 05:40 PM
I posted a similar question to this one the other day. but i put it in the wrong section, so didnt get much response, so i`ll try in the right place this time. My question was, i`m a 240 lb male, I consume on average about 150 grams of protein a day, some of this from powders mixed with milk, but i wondered, if i was to up this by 50-100 grams, would i notice any improvement in my workouts, muscle repair, etc? I would like to grow some more muscle, if i could. Thankyou

Jasonl
08-14-2003, 06:08 PM
it should help your recovery, you also need protien(among others) to build muscle. i would recommend getting it from lean beef, fish(TUNA!!!) chicken, etc... hope this helps

raniali
08-14-2003, 06:11 PM
aim for at least 1 g of protein per lb bodywt -- in your case at least 240g protein/day.

bradley
08-15-2003, 02:38 AM
Originally posted by aggablinky
I posted a similar question to this one the other day. but i put it in the wrong section, so didnt get much response, so i`ll try in the right place this time. My question was, i`m a 240 lb male, I consume on average about 150 grams of protein a day, some of this from powders mixed with milk, but i wondered, if i was to up this by 50-100 grams, would i notice any improvement in my workouts, muscle repair, etc? I would like to grow some more muscle, if i could. Thankyou

More than likely yes, but what do your meals look like around your workout. If you are not taking in carbs and protein around your workout, then I would say you would definitely see more progress if you were to do so.

aggablinky
08-15-2003, 05:48 AM
Thankyou everybody.
My typical daily diet consists of a protein drink for breakfast, some light yoghurt at morning tea, a half chicken for lunch some days. on others a beaf role, and for dinner, steak or fish, and i`m now adding some chicken, or fish, and some yoghurt after my workouts, which are usually done by about 8-8.30 pm

bradley
08-15-2003, 05:56 AM
Originally posted by aggablinky
Thankyou everybody.
My typical daily diet consists of a protein drink for breakfast, some light yoghurt at morning tea, a half chicken for lunch some days. on others a beaf role, and for dinner, steak or fish, and i`m now adding some chicken, or fish, and some yoghurt after my workouts, which are usually done by about 8-8.30 pm

I would have the protein shake and yogurt immediately post workout, and then have a whole food meal about 90 minutes later. The yogurt would not be the ideal carb choice, but it is better than nothing.:)

Also whey protein would not be the best thing to have for breakfast. If you are going to have whey at breakfast I would at least mix it with milk as opposed to water. There is an article on the main page that will explain the reasoning behind what I stated above. I believe the article is entitled "Whey Protein Exposed."

Also don't forget to include some healthy fats in your diet (essential fatty acids).

rgkfit
08-20-2003, 09:18 PM
Our goal is to maintain a positive nitrogen balance. This is in reality a full time job.The most important aspect of a growth producing diet is the amount of protein consumed per day. Protein quality is also an issue. Whole foods are best, with the exception of post workout and possibly early morning. One good way to insure a more favorable amino acid profile to your meals is to supplement with them(amino acids).Try to shoot for a minimum of 1 gr. per lb. of bodyweight per day. Even more will likely not hurt you, better to err on the high side of protein than the low side. It is more than likely that any excess protein will be dispelled from the body, not stored as fat as we all know excess carbs do once manintenance calories are reached. Don't forget also, your intake of the other 2 macros (carbs and fats), will have a big influence on your protein requirements. In other words, carbs can be "protein sparing", so adequate amounts of carbs can change your protein needs to some extent.

atom
08-20-2003, 11:15 PM
at 240 m8 i woud take in 400gms of prot a day, im 80gks and daililng in for a show im on 300gms just to maintain, send me a pm of your deit and ill help as much as poss , see pitures of me in articall 10 weeks out , glad to help m8, keep it hardcore

bradley
08-21-2003, 03:04 AM
Originally posted by rgkfit
This is in reality a full time job.The most important aspect of a growth producing diet is the amount of protein consumed per day. Protein quality is also an issue. Whole foods are best, with the exception of post workout and possibly early morning. One good way to insure a more favorable amino acid profile to your meals is to supplement with them(amino acids).

If you are eating 1g of protein per lb. of bodyweight then protein quality should not be an issue, especailly if you are getting your protein from a variety of souces. I see no reason that amino acid supplements would be needed.



Try to shoot for a minimum of 1 gr. per lb. of bodyweight per day. Even more will likely not hurt you, better to err on the high side of protein than the low side. It is more than likely that any excess protein will be dispelled from the body, not stored as fat as we all know excess carbs do once manintenance calories are reached.

Excess protein is not likely to be stored as fat, but it will cause more dietary fat to be stored as bf (hypercaloric diet), and if you are following a hypocaloric diet then it will cause less fat to be burned. Basically what I am saying is that excess calories, will have an effect on whether you gain/lose weight regardless of what macronutrient the calories come from.

rgkfit
08-21-2003, 08:30 AM
[QUOTE]Originally posted by bradley
[B]

If you are eating 1g of protein per lb. of bodyweight then protein quality should not be an issue, especailly if you are getting your protein from a variety of souces. I see no reason that amino acid supplements would be needed.

You are wrong, protein quality is always an issue. An analogy, we have steak chains here. One is called Ponderosa, which has fast food(salad bar type steak), and then we have Outback. Now both are beef, both are steak. Is there a difference in quality?? You bet, which would you rather have? Saying that quality does not mean anything is totally absurd!

hemants
08-21-2003, 08:46 AM
What Bradly is saying, and I agree with him is that there is no need to MICRO manage amino acids in various proteins.

the difference between Ponderosa and Outback will be in the taste and possibly in the amount of fat

rgkfit
08-21-2003, 10:33 AM
What Bradley implied and what came out are 2 different things. I will re-iterate, our jobs as bodybuilders is to keep a positive nitrogen balance. This related directly to protein consumption. And this in turn relates to quality of protein. It matters as much the QUALITY of the protein, the BV, the useability. You can't say that an inferior whey concentrate that gives you gas is as good as a whey isolate with hydrolosate. And quality of protein at each feeding should be good. This is where a quaility amino acid can be of great value. In our processed world of foods today, we need to be ever more vigilant in our nutrient uptake. Gains are not made in the gym, they are but the vehicle. Your diet determines the gains you make, crappy diet, crappy gains. This is bodybuilding 101, the very basics.

hemants
08-21-2003, 10:39 AM
What you are saying is true but...the 1g per pound of bodyweight "requirement" already takes into account the fact that not all your sources will be ion-exchanged hydrolysed whey isolate.

If you could feed your muscles amino acids in the exact proportion intravenously 24 hours a day, you probably wouldn't need more than 30g of protein.

rgkfit
08-21-2003, 11:05 AM
Exactly the point! This stesses my point even more! Old smart men like Vince Gironda proposed measures as drastic as taking handfuls of dessicated liver and amino acids hourly to stay in a positive nitrogen state. Though this may not be feasible for all of us, the theory is still correct. Our food chain is probably more responsible for the maladies of today than anything else that is being blamed. Supplementation to improve quality of it is essential for your gains. Quality is important, and striving to get it is essential. I train hard, and I want the most out of what I do, as I believe all hard training resistance atheletes would agree.

hemants
08-21-2003, 11:10 AM
I disagree. I think as quanitity increases, quality is less important with respect to protein.

Your body is pretty good at taking amino acids and converting them into exactly what it needs. As long as your protein sources are diverse you will get more than enough of the essential 8 building blocks.

I really don't think that a 200lb bodybuilder taking in 200g of hydrolised whey isolate is going to get any stronger than one taking in 200g of protein from a variety of sources.

dirty-c
08-21-2003, 12:17 PM
Originally posted by aggablinky
I posted a similar question to this one the other day. but i put it in the wrong section, so didnt get much response, so i`ll try in the right place this time. My question was, i`m a 240 lb male, I consume on average about 150 grams of protein a day, some of this from powders mixed with milk, but i wondered, if i was to up this by 50-100 grams, would i notice any improvement in my workouts, muscle repair, etc? I would like to grow some more muscle, if i could. Thankyou

Will you benefit by adding 50-100 grams? Yes, probably. But the most important thing to do is establish how many calories you need a day, THEN determine the macronutrient ratio. The reasons are:

1.) Above all else, total calories consumed will be the single most important factor in wheter or not you gain muscle. Yes, protein is used to build muscle, but your body's energy and glycogen needs will be met before muscle repair & building can take place. Suppose you need 2000 calories a day to sustain body composition, and you're eating only a massive 450gm of protein a day, 450gm x 4 calories/gm = 1800 calories. You're 200 calories short of your basic metabolic rate (MBR), and you will lose weight. This is obviously just an example to illustrate a point. Even if your MBR was 1600 calories, I would certainly not recommend getting all 450gm of your food from protein (wouldnt be possible anyway).

2.) Using BV as the sole determination of protein quality is one of the biggest myths perpetrated by the supplement industry. High BV proteins completely break down into amino acids very quickly. Whey, having the highest BV of all, breaks down quickest. This is only a good thing at certain times of the day, such as:
a.) first thing in the morning (even then, the majority should be whole food).
b.) shortly before a workout
c.) immediately post workout

Any other time of the day, you should prefer a slower release protein, or you risk using the protein for energy or excreting it from the body.
Hemants, I couldn't agree with you more. In fact, I'll bet the bodybuilder taking in 200gm of hydrolised whey will be WEAKER than the bodybuilder who gets 200gms from a variety of sources.

Bottom line here: Whey certainly has its uses. It has definitely helped the progress of bodybuilders everywhere. But should it be the sole protein used, simply because it has the highest BV? Absolutley not.

bradley
08-21-2003, 01:45 PM
Originally posted by rgkfit
You are wrong, protein quality is always an issue. An analogy, we have steak chains here. One is called Ponderosa, which has fast food(salad bar type steak), and then we have Outback. Now both are beef, both are steak. Is there a difference in quality?? You bet, which would you rather have? Saying that quality does not mean anything is totally absurd! [/B]

Protein is composed of amino acids, so how are the amino acids that compose the protein going to be different at the two restuarants? As hemants stated, the amount of fat might be higher, but this still does not change how the protein will be used by the body.

I would like for you to show me something that says the amino acids that make up those two pieces of meat are different. If the amino acids are no different then the protein is not different either, since amino acids make up protein.

bradley
08-21-2003, 01:49 PM
Originally posted by rgkfit
What Bradley implied and what came out are 2 different things. I will re-iterate, our jobs as bodybuilders is to keep a positive nitrogen balance. This related directly to protein consumption. And this in turn relates to quality of protein. It matters as much the QUALITY of the protein, the BV, the useability.

It is related to protein consumption, but protein quality is not going to make any significant difference if you are taking in ~1g per lb. of bw. If you were trying to cut protein intake down to a bare minimum then, yes it might make more of a difference.

The following quote was taken from an article written by Lyle McDonald:
http://www.thinkmuscle.com/articles/mcdonald/protein-02.htm
"Considering the high protein intakes of most strength athletes (2.0 g/kg or higher) it is hard to see how BV will play a meaningful role in rating proteins in this population. In all likelihood, any decent quality protein will be as good as any other at these types of protein intakes. Additionally, even if proteins such as whey have slightly higher BV ratings than protein sources like casein (milk) or egg, such a small difference is unlikely to affect mass gains in the long run."

bradley
08-21-2003, 02:07 PM
Originally posted by rgkfit
Exactly the point! This stesses my point even more! Old smart men like Vince Gironda proposed measures as drastic as taking handfuls of dessicated liver and amino acids hourly to stay in a positive nitrogen state. Though this may not be feasible for all of us, the theory is still correct. Our food chain is probably more responsible for the maladies of today than anything else that is being blamed. Supplementation to improve quality of it is essential for your gains. Quality is important, and striving to get it is essential. I train hard, and I want the most out of what I do, as I believe all hard training resistance atheletes would agree.

Studies have shown that less frequent meals improve protein synthesis, so the idea of taking amino acids every hour would not be beneficial.

Do you have any studies, articles, etc. that state eating every hour would have any more benefit as opposed to eating every 4 hours. Assuming that one is taking in whole foods and not whey, which is not really the ideal protein source unless you are referring to pre/post workout.

http://www.wannabebig.com/article.php?articleid=110

smalls
08-21-2003, 04:50 PM
Originally posted by rgkfit
The most important aspect of a growth producing diet is the amount of protein consumed per day.

LOL@you telling bradley the "bodybuilding basics."

You do realize that glycogen stores greatly impact protein synthesis. If you changed that sentance to "the most important aspect of a growth producing diet is the amount of calories consumed per day" you would be a bit closer to being correct.

Dont come off as an ass and you won't be treated like one.

rgkfit
08-21-2003, 11:46 PM
An ass??? what are your credentials? What have you ever done? You are probably one of those people who agree with whomever, don' t have an open mind of your own, and follow the herd. Probably have never even come close to a competition, and probably never will. I have seen your kind...this was a discussion, this is what these boards are, are they not? Literate folks such as you are a dime a dozen...

dirty-c
08-22-2003, 07:57 AM
I understand how you feel like you're under attack rgkfit. But you speak of open mindedness, so lets display some.

Let's suppose that you do compete and you do have an awesome physique. Does this mean you know a lot about nutrition? Maybe, maybe not. Some people have superior genetics. Maybe you've been able to achieve your physique with a "less than perfect" knowledge of nutrition. Is this not possible? This is certainly not to suggest you know nothing. No one, even the genetically blessed could compete w/o atleast some knowledge of nutrition, but isn't it atleast POSSIBLE that you could be wrong on this point.

You wont find many people on this board who blatantly state "you are wrong", and there's a good reason for that. The second you open you argument with an insult, that person is instantly on the defensive and all the MORE likely to continue to defend that position to save face. Nothing is accomplished when this happens.

I was shocked when I read some scientific studies, posted by bradley, that showed superior protein synthesis from less frequent feeding than more frequent feeding. This went against everything I had been told previously. Does it mean what I knew before was correct? No. There really was no scientific evidence to support it. It was just gym folklore that had become accepted as fact.

All I'm saying is that I've been exposed to so many ideas here in the short time I've been here. Some seem right, some seem wrong, but I hear them all because you never know what kind of knowledge may spawn from the stew of ideas.

smalls
08-23-2003, 03:44 PM
Dirty-c summed it up very well, good post.


I'll admit my post was a bit harsh, I apolagize for that. But noboby was attacking you, yet you attacked others. I find that annoying, especially when the attacker is wrong.

I'm sure you have a far superior physique, that has nothing to do with the topic at hand.

bradley
08-24-2003, 10:55 AM
Leucine kinetics in reference to the effect of the feeding mode as
three discrete meals.

Raguso CA, El-Khoury AE, Young VR.

Laboratory of Human Nutrition, School of Science and Clinical Research Center, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge 02139, USA.

In a recent study, we observed that the 24-hour leucine oxidation
measured when three equal meals providing a generous intake of leucine (approximately 90 mg x kg(-1) x d(-1)) are eaten during the day is 16% lower (P < .01) than that for the same diet given as 10 hourly, equal meals. We hypothesized that the pattern of meal intake at a lower level of dietary leucine would affect the 24-hour rate of leucine oxidation and possibly improve the retention of dietary leucine. A total of 11 healthy adults participated in this investigation. The daily leucine intake was 182 micromol x kg(-1) x d(-1) (38 mg x kg(-1 x d(-1)) given with an L-amino acid diet. All subjects received three discrete meals daily for 6 days prior to a 24-hour intravenous (IV) tracer infusion of L-[1-13C]-leucine on day 7 (study 1). Four of these subjects participated in two additional studies of similar design. Study 2 involved giving [1-13C]-leucine as a constant IV infusion together with tracer added to the amino acid mixture at each meal time. In study 3, subjects received the three meals with added [1-13C]-leucine tracer while [2H3]-leucine was given as a constant IV infusion. Total leucine oxidation in studies 1 and 2 was 238+/-66 and 231+/-85 micromol x kg(-1) x d(-1), respectively. Leucine balance was
positive, amounting to 18% of the total (diet + tracer) intake. The
estimated mean nitrogen balance was +8 mg x kg(-1) x d(-1). Leucine oxidation was higher (P < .01) for breakfast than for the lunch meal. This difference was associated with lower insulin and higher plasma leucine concentrations at breakfast versus lunch periods. The results from study 3 suggest that the higher rate of leucine oxidation observed at breakfast as compared with lunch is not due to a difference in the immediate splanchnic fate of absorbed leucine from each meal. In comparison to our previous small frequent-meal studies, the pattern of meal feeding influences overall leucine utilization at both generous and limiting leucine intakes. Hence, it is possible that the pattern of meal feeding may affect estimations of amino acid requirements using the tracer-balance approach. Longer-term dietary studies will be needed to establish whether and the extent to which this is so.
------------------

The 24-h pattern and rate of leucine oxidation, with particular
reference to tracer estimates of leucine requirements in healthy
adults.

el-Khoury AE, Fukagawa NK, Sanchez M, Tsay RH, Gleason RE, Chapman TE, Young VR.

Laboratory of Human Nutrition, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge 02139.

Daily leucine oxidation and derived values for whole-body leucine
balance, obtained by continuous measurement throughout a 24-h period, were compared with those predicted from short-term measurements during fasted and fed states in five healthy adults studied during two 6-d experimental diet periods, each immediately followed by a 24-h continuous intravenous tracer infusion of L-[1-13C]leucine. Leucine intake was either 14 or 38.3 mg.kg-1.d-1. Mean measured daily leucine oxidation (mg leucine.kg-1.d-1) was 27.8 and 45.2 for the 14- and
38.3-mg intakes, respectively. Oxidation rates predicted by
extrapolation of rates measured during the final hour of fasting (15 h after last meal) and the 5th h of feeding were approximately 12% higher (P < 0.01) than measured rates for both diets. For the prediction based on the 12th h of fasting and 5th h of feeding, it was 4% higher or 0.4% lower than measured rates for the 38.3- and 14- mg intakes, respectively. Hence, relatively small differences exist between measured vs predicted estimates of daily leucine oxidation and balance. These studies support previous conclusions that the current, international requirement value for leucine in healthy adults is far too low.