PDA

View Full Version : Excessive protein..........not good?



snow
04-25-2004, 03:29 PM
I've always read here and elsewhere to take 1g for 1lb of bodyweight for muscle building purposes, but i just read in my nutrition course that excessive protein is bad for you, and supplements aren't as good as real food, and really aren't very beneficial because they aren't usually broken down right. it says the max protein you should have per day is 1.6 for 1kg, which is much less than i've been shooting for.

it also said excessive protein is really bad for kidneys.

Spartacus
04-25-2004, 08:29 PM
its not all that bad for you, but can make the body more acidic, is more expensive, less variety in diet, and causes more environmental strain. more protein that you need will just be converted to glocose anywya.

if your kidneys are healthy it shouldn't cause a problem for them though.

snow
04-25-2004, 09:17 PM
its not all that bad for you, but can make the body more acidic, is more expensive, less variety in diet, and causes more environmental strain. more protein that you need will just be converted to glocose anywya.

if your kidneys are healthy it shouldn't cause a problem for them though.

well it was sayin amino acids like arginine, trytophan, etc. were bad for you. of course it didn't say in what amount though.

snow
04-27-2004, 11:47 AM
high use of amino acids (don't know what high is considered) brings these effects supposedly

arginine - low BP, increas tumor growth, more blood acidity, increased blood potassium, heart failure
cysteine - increased blood cholesterol, fatty liver, nerve toxicity
leucine - hypoglycemia, mental ******ation, increased blood ammonia
phenylalanine - mental ******ation, worsened symptoms of schizophrenia
tryptophan - altered brain serotonin, toxicity from impurities

just to name a few


wwhat the hell is considered high level?

Spartacus
04-27-2004, 01:47 PM
where are you getting this data from??

snow
04-27-2004, 03:38 PM
where are you getting this data from??

My college nutrition course..

NUTRITION: Concepts and Controversies. 9th edition. Sizer, Francis and Elearnor Whitney.

phatmonky
04-27-2004, 03:48 PM
1>I've always read here and elsewhere to take 1g for 1lb of bodyweight for muscle building purposes,

2> but i just read in my nutrition course that excessive protein is bad for you,

3>and supplements aren't as good as real food,

4>and really aren't very beneficial because they aren't usually broken down right.

5> it says the max protein you should have per day is 1.6 for 1kg, which is much less than i've been shooting for.


6>it also said excessive protein is really bad for kidneys.


1> bodybuilding isn't the same as your average joe with a sedantary lifestyle
2>What is excessive? Excessive IS bad for you.
3>Well, that can be true if you want to play semantics. Whole food have their place, and are a requirement for a healthy diet. Supplements do just that...they SUPPLEMENT your diet, they don't just replace the whole thing.
4>This is just ridiculous. nutrients, are nutrients, are nutrients.
5>For your average person, this is true. Your average person also doesn't do an intense workout 3+ times a week. They eat the carbs or fat ratios you do. They don't drink 2 gallons of water a day.
6>Excessive, sure. Excessive is in relation to everything else in your body. Ratios, Ratios, Ratios. If you need to up your protein, you need everything else to come up with it to keep a healthy balance. This includes water. The by porduct of protein breakdown is Uric acid, and yes that is tough on yoru kidneys and liver. Drink your water!

phatmonky
04-27-2004, 03:48 PM
high


wwhat the hell is considered high level?

EXACTLY ;)

snow
04-27-2004, 04:09 PM
1> bodybuilding isn't the same as your average joe with a sedantary lifestyle
2>What is excessive? Excessive IS bad for you.
3>Well, that can be true if you want to play semantics. Whole food have their place, and are a requirement for a healthy diet. Supplements do just that...they SUPPLEMENT your diet, they don't just replace the whole thing.
4>This is just ridiculous. nutrients, are nutrients, are nutrients.
5>For your average person, this is true. Your average person also doesn't do an intense workout 3+ times a week. They eat the carbs or fat ratios you do. They don't drink 2 gallons of water a day.
6>Excessive, sure. Excessive is in relation to everything else in your body. Ratios, Ratios, Ratios. If you need to up your protein, you need everything else to come up with it to keep a healthy balance. This includes water. The by porduct of protein breakdown is Uric acid, and yes that is tough on yoru kidneys and liver. Drink your water!

ok , ok.. well don't get me wrong, i'm not picking sides, just stating what the textbook says.. but i'll rebutt with some of the things they say..

1-"For healthy adults the 1989 RDA protein has been set at 0.8 grams for each kilogram (or 2.2 pounds) of body weight. Athletes need slightly more, but the increased need is well covered by a regular diet... U.S. protein recommendations set an upper limit for protein intake of no more than twice the 1989 RDA amount, or 1.6 grams per kilogram of body weight per day." This applies to athletes as well, so on here and other bodybuilding resources, I've been told I should match protein grams with my weight (175), while the RDA says I should take no more than 127 grams per day, even as an athlete.

2-This is what I'm wondering about when I talk about excessive, which is 1g for 1lb of bodyweight. For me, I am getting roughly 50 grams more than the maximum amount of protein recommended, and they speak of excessive protein use as potentially very dangerous. Of course, I suck with my diet, so I'm not getting 175 anyways. :(

4-"One problem with taking supplements of single amino acids, though, is that the body is designed to handle whole proteins. It breaks them into manageable pieces (dipeptides and tripeptides), then splites these few at a time, simultaneously releasing them into the blood. This slow bit-by-bit assimiliation is ideal because groups of chemically similar amino acids compete for the carriers that absorb them into the blood. An excess of one amino acid can tie up a carrier and prevent the absorption of another similar amino acid; as a result, needed amino acids may pass through the body unabsorbed. The result is a deficiency. The human body evolved without encountering the unbalanced arrays of highly concentrated amino acids found in supplements and therefore lacks the equipment to handle them."

Also, it goes on and on about how an excess of arginine, tryptophan, phenylalanine, etc. (which are in my weight gainer & protein supp) are very bad for you, and have impurities on some brands on the market, making them toxic. Some people have even died from them. Also, they are working on setting daily recommneded intakes for these amino acids, but right now they say "supplements of all sorts go to market in a largely untested state, and consumers become unsuspecting experimental subjects, with sometimes dire results."

I really don't know what to think, maybe the book is right, maybe it has an agenda, who knows.

snow
04-27-2004, 04:09 PM
and sorry, that was long winded :clown:

phatmonky
04-27-2004, 07:17 PM
ok , ok.. well don't get me wrong, i'm not picking sides, just stating what the textbook says.. but i'll rebutt with some of the things they say..

1-"For healthy adults the 1989 RDA protein has been set at 0.8 grams for each kilogram (or 2.2 pounds) of body weight. Athletes need slightly more, but the increased need is well covered by a regular diet... U.S. protein recommendations set an upper limit for protein intake of no more than twice the 1989 RDA amount, or 1.6 grams per kilogram of body weight per day." This applies to athletes as well, so on here and other bodybuilding resources, I've been told I should match protein grams with my weight (175), while the RDA says I should take no more than 127 grams per day, even as an athlete.

2-This is what I'm wondering about when I talk about excessive, which is 1g for 1lb of bodyweight. For me, I am getting roughly 50 grams more than the maximum amount of protein recommended, and they speak of excessive protein use as potentially very dangerous. Of course, I suck with my diet, so I'm not getting 175 anyways. :(

4-"One problem with taking supplements of single amino acids, though, is that the body is designed to handle whole proteins. It breaks them into manageable pieces (dipeptides and tripeptides), then splites these few at a time, simultaneously releasing them into the blood. This slow bit-by-bit assimiliation is ideal because groups of chemically similar amino acids compete for the carriers that absorb them into the blood. An excess of one amino acid can tie up a carrier and prevent the absorption of another similar amino acid; as a result, needed amino acids may pass through the body unabsorbed. The result is a deficiency. The human body evolved without encountering the unbalanced arrays of highly concentrated amino acids found in supplements and therefore lacks the equipment to handle them."

Also, it goes on and on about how an excess of arginine, tryptophan, phenylalanine, etc. (which are in my weight gainer & protein supp) are very bad for you, and have impurities on some brands on the market, making them toxic. Some people have even died from them. Also, they are working on setting daily recommneded intakes for these amino acids, but right now they say "supplements of all sorts go to market in a largely untested state, and consumers become unsuspecting experimental subjects, with sometimes dire results."

I really don't know what to think, maybe the book is right, maybe it has an agenda, who knows.

I don't get you wrong at all. It's always good to know why things are the way they are, and question the best way to hit your goals for your body :) Don't take me laughing at some of the info as laughing at you - it's not at all!



1>What they are saying is possibly true. To an extent, you can get away with that amount, but I wouldn't count on it. The 1 gram/1lb is a general rule to make sure you are getting enough - excess protein will either be wasted through your urine, or turned to glucose and used/stored as energy/fat. In either case, there is no evidence to show high protein diets cause kidney damage in people with normal renal function. In fact, several recent studies show that a high protein diet does not affect renal function at all - however, those same studies show that mild problem can be increased with high protein. This lends us to beleive three things.
First, your book is quoting a 1989 RDA amount as it's base, and working from there. This doesn't take into effect the MASS amount of advances that happened during the 90's, and now, regarding the understanding of the human body
Second, you should always consult a doctor before starting a workout or diet program to make sure that you are in working order so your body can handle the diet.
Third, drinking an amount of water that brings your body's uric acid levels back to normal would counter any effect the high protein diet would have onyour kidneys and liver.
2>The amount would be excessive if you had unrelated kidney problems, or didn't keep up the rest of your diet - including fiber, water, vitamins, and everthing else. A 40/40/20 split of Protein/mixed carbs/healthy fat is a VERY healthy diet. I bet you don't worry this much when you eat a bag of fries, but all studies say you should ;)
3>Aminos acids are supplements,but not all supplements are amino acids. Whey protein, casein protein, and whole food proteins should all be part of ones diet.
As for what the book says, it is VERY misleading. Again, it is accurate that a deficit or surplus of the wrong nutrient in your body can be bad. However, the text ignores the fact that the normal diet is typically missing out on many nutrients and it IS healthy to supplement them in a reasonable manner. I take fish oil tablets for the EFA. Reading the text would make me think I was insane for it! However, if I look at the nutrient breakdown of my diet, I would not get that fatty acid anywhere else in it (usually). In this case, it is perfectly fine. The main problem with the text lies in:
"The human body evolved without encountering the unbalanced arrays of highly concentrated amino acids found in supplements and therefore lacks the equipment to handle them."
The human body evolved while encountering all kinds of deficits of amino acids and nutrients that we now know are helpful. What if I told you that you weren't getting enough vitamin C in your regular diet, but DON'T take vitamins because the human body got this far without it?? Of course that would be ridiculous. Vitamins typically contain a higher number of nutrients than you need, and the remainder is released in your urine. The text also ignores the fact that you are not on a typical diet with the typical sedentary lifestyle.

phatmonky
04-27-2004, 07:17 PM
and sorry, that was long winded :clown:

Apologize for nothing! ;)

prof
04-28-2004, 03:35 AM
gov recommendations don't really apply to weightlifters and all of their charts are miles out

I am clinically obese according to my doctors wall chart, what at 12% bf, i don't think so

phatmonky
04-28-2004, 07:21 AM
gov recommendations don't really apply to weightlifters and all of their charts are miles out

I am clinically obese according to my doctors wall chart, what at 12% bf, i don't think so


I'm on the edge of being obese based on the chart, and I'm considered skinny by everyone I know! haha

AllUp
04-28-2004, 02:35 PM
RDA's for protein are BS. :)
current RDA for protein based on a 2000 cal diet is 50g. :p

You also have to wonder what their definition of "Athletic" is.

Haha, phat, about the obese thing, that happened to a friend of mine.
He is shredded at like 11%Bf, 6', roughly 200lbs, 30 or 32" waist.

The doctor was like "According to the chart, You're Obese."

I was like dude, You should have told your doc to take that card, shine it up real good, and.. stick---

Those stupid cards only go by height and weight, they put no measured diameters or area specific BF%'s into consideration. what BS.

snow
04-28-2004, 05:58 PM
ok ok people, i think we get the fact that you all think that the RDA is nonsense and athletes can handle more protein (as i'm inclined to think),

BUT

now give me your thoughts on the dangers of the amino acid supplement consumption.

phatmonky
04-28-2004, 09:09 PM
ok ok people, i think we get the fact that you all think that the RDA is nonsense and athletes can handle more protein (as i'm inclined to think),

BUT

now give me your thoughts on the dangers of the amino acid supplement consumption.


There are WAY too many for me to give you my opinion.

Chances are you are eating beef and/or chicken everyday. Eat some eggs, take some fish oil tablets. Be done with it. For everything else, I would ask specfically. The prementioned will suffice for your Omega 6 and 3's. You don't need to worry about taking a million supplements until later (and some would argue EVER).

The REAL truth is that you will see gains with:

A diet of proper calories and a good caloric split.
A heavy workout routine.
Lots of water.
Lots of sleep.

DONE. Everything else is either filling in the holes in your lifestyle to accompolish the above, or trying to get every little bit your body will do for whatever reason/goal you have.

snow
04-28-2004, 09:26 PM
yeah i really try not to supplement, but i workout rather late at night, and it's hard to cook a chicken, or do something prepared post-workout, so i take my protein supplement. but now that this book listed all these side effects of these supplemented amino acids, i'm worried! :(

i also take weight gainer cuz i miss a meal here and there sometimes, which also has the same aminos :(

phatmonky
04-28-2004, 10:03 PM
yeah i really try not to supplement, but i workout rather late at night, and it's hard to cook a chicken, or do something prepared post-workout, so i take my protein supplement. but now that this book listed all these side effects of these supplemented amino acids, i'm worried! :(

i also take weight gainer cuz i miss a meal here and there sometimes, which also has the same aminos :(


Your normal food as amino acids in it.
If you can't get it in your diet, that is what supplements are for.

Keep taking in what you are taking in!post your diet somewhere on here, drink and sleep plenty! You'll be fine, seriously.

snow
04-28-2004, 11:46 PM
well i have this horrible complex where if i read something negative my mind proceeds to assume it's going to come true..

so if i read that 1 person did a swan dive off a cliff because they took ibuprofen, after i pop the pill i put on a strait jacket to restrain myself!

lol :(

Paul Stagg
04-29-2004, 07:23 AM
The RDA is developed using information from lobbying groups.

Do you think they really care if you are healthy, or do they want the government to endorse whatever it is they sell?

For someone with healthy kidney function, it would be virtually impossible to eat enough protein to do damage, and your main issue would be the immense weight gain form eating that many calories.

Based on what you are saying, the book you are using is either very poorly researched, or has an agenda. People dont DIE from taking amino acids and weight gainer supplements.

Take the time to look at the book and see if they site where they found their information, ie. the study or research showing these deaths, and the studies and research showing adverse reactions to high protein intake.

aka23
04-29-2004, 03:42 PM
The RDA is developed using information from lobbying groups.

Do you think they really care if you are healthy, or do they want the government to endorse whatever it is they sell?.

The RDAs are defined as "the levels of intake of essential nutrients that are judged to be adequate to meet the known needs of practically all healthy persons." Note that they are defined as "adequate", not optimal.

The RDAs are generally set at 2 standard deviations above the average nutrient needs of healthy, sedentary persons. They do not apply to persons doing strenuous physical activity (such as weightlifting). This is clearly stated in Recommended Daily Allowances (RDA) by the National Research Council.

The RDAs are primarily based on...
-- studies with low or deficient levels of a nutrient, followed by correction
-- studies measuring nutrient status in relation to intake
-- studies of tissue saturation or molecular function
-- observations of nutrient intakes of healthy people from their food supply
-- observations of nutrient status in populations in relation to intake
-- animal studies

The National Research Council's publication is full of references to studies and explanations of how they arrived at their conclusions. The section on protein and amino acids has ~70 references to supporting studies.

Focused70
04-29-2004, 05:20 PM
I think, that with some exceptions, much of what the general public takes as conventional wisdom does not in general apply to bodybuilding, at least with respect to diet and nutrition.

As with most things (*nods to Paul*), a little knowledge goes a long way.

Soba

snow
04-29-2004, 08:41 PM
can anybody show me actual scientific evidence that says bodybuilders are alotted much more protein, and it won't affect them. all i'm seeing is a lot of people saying their own 2 cents that they've picked up here and there. any articles not from bb website?

i'm really trying to see both sides.

Beast
04-29-2004, 10:20 PM
I don't think anyone has done real scientific research toward that, snow. There just isn't any financial incentive.

Spartacus
04-29-2004, 10:47 PM
humans ate large quantites of meat until the advent of agriculture.

WaterWalker
04-30-2004, 03:26 AM
Is that so? I was informed that the diets of early hominids consisted mainly of nuts and fruits. Nuts were eaten frequently because minimal energy was expended collecting them compared to their high caloric content. Large game was not eaten as frequently because the caloric gains were small compared to the energy expended.

restless
04-30-2004, 06:38 AM
Is that so? I was informed that the diets of early hominids consisted mainly of nuts and fruits. Nuts were eaten frequently because minimal energy was expended collecting them compared to their high caloric content. Large game was not eaten as frequently because the caloric gains were small compared to the energy expended.

You have been missinformed. For the last 150 000 years humanity diet was the diet still eaten today by hunther gatherer populations, which is up to 65% animal calories.

Your information doesn't even need much to be proven wrong. Fruit is seasonal (as are some nuts), so it couldn't be a regular source of calories.Try going into the woods and getting enough calories to mantain your bodyweight with nuts, you'll do nothing else all day. Hunt one mammal and you'll have calories to keep a few people feeded for a few days.


Check out this thread:

http://www.wannabebigforums.com/showthread.php?t=21295&highlight=hunther+gatherer

It has some link to places where you can learn proper information about ancient diets.

restless
04-30-2004, 06:42 AM
can anybody show me actual scientific evidence that says bodybuilders are alotted much more protein, and it won't affect them. all i'm seeing is a lot of people saying their own 2 cents that they've picked up here and there. any articles not from bb website?

i'm really trying to see both sides.


Not much more protein, but the regular 2 grs per pound lean BW. Go to pubmed and do a search for "dietary protein nitrogen athletes" and you should come up with something. There's a lot of research done, but not really on bodybuilders that I know off.

phatmonky
04-30-2004, 07:59 AM
can anybody show me actual scientific evidence that says bodybuilders are alotted much more protein, and it won't affect them. all i'm seeing is a lot of people saying their own 2 cents that they've picked up here and there. any articles not from bb website?

i'm really trying to see both sides.


I've tried to help you out, but you jsut won't hear it.

www.google.com

The information is ALL there, do your own footwork.
Everything I have posted is from science journals, not from WBB.
There are no two sides. What I have posted is the full picture (save for not going into the details behind it all).

AllUp
04-30-2004, 08:42 AM
Like my sig says...
Research that s*** up son. :p

snow
04-30-2004, 10:14 AM
I've tried to help you out, but you jsut won't hear it.

www.google.com

The information is ALL there, do your own footwork.
Everything I have posted is from science journals, not from WBB.
There are no two sides. What I have posted is the full picture (save for not going into the details behind it all).

well when i don't see ne links to ur scientific evidence, i'm a little more inclined to believe a book of nutritionists over regular people. i ask you this because on the same token, i've seen scientific evidence from my OWN FOOTWORK saying that regardless of lifestyle, there is a maximum amount of protein that should be consumed because it can effect ur kidneys, and others. i've also read from plenty of professionals that excess protein isn't even beneficial for muscle growth.

i've told you, i'm not on either side, i'd much rather be on the side of more protein being beneficial and safe, but i'm weighing both sides here.

it seems you may be the one who doesn't want 2 look at both sides because if it is true then you realize u've been wasting ur time and health, and you'd rather live in the world where protein makes ur ripped.

snow
04-30-2004, 10:16 AM
Like my sig says...
Research that s*** up son. :p

and yeah, i know u do that in good humor, lol.. but on the same token.. a few people are saying this to me in here seriously, and it seems it's a copout to not wanting to argue the point.

if everyone were to research that shyt up, then there wouldn't be very many threads here. hell, i wouldn't even be doing papers in school cuz i'd tell the professor to research that shyt up himself.

aka23
04-30-2004, 10:40 AM
can anybody show me actual scientific evidence that says bodybuilders are alotted much more protein, and it won't affect them. all i'm seeing is a lot of people saying their own 2 cents that they've picked up here and there. any articles not from bb website?

I am not at all surprised that your nutrition text gave a different recommended range than bodybuilding messageboards. General nutrition recommendations often are meant for the general population, not bodybuilders. Bodybuilders often overestimate their protein needs and often have beliefs about protein that are not supported by research or exercise physiology.

The 2x the RDA recommended upper limit has been suggested by a number of nutritional boards and the authors of one of the studies listed below (Lemon, 1995). Lemon suggested that the higher intakes might increase risk of renal degeneration, cancers, or heart disease. It is important to note that much of these increased risks are based on empirical studies of diets high in protein. Such diets are also usually high in saturated fats and other things that are more likely to be related to the cancer or heart disease. I am not aware of any evidence of renal degeneration in persons without preexisting medical conditions. However, a significant portion of Americans have diabetes and other conditions, which could influence renal function. Such reasoning has led some groups to make a conservative recommendation, especially since there is little evidence of improved muscle growth or athletic performance with higher intakes than 2x the RDA in natural athletes.

-- Here are some studies on bodybuilders and protein: --

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=3356636
"Experiments were performed on six elite bodybuilders, six elite endurance athletes, and six sedentary controls during a 10-day period of normal protein intake followed by a 10-day period of altered protein intake. The nitrogen balance data revealed that bodybuilders required 1.12 times and endurance athletes required 1.67 times more daily protein than sedentary controls. Lean body mass (density) was maintained in bodybuilders consuming 1.05 g protein.kg-1.day-1."

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=1400008
"These data indicate that, during the early stages of intensive bodybuilding training, PRO needs are approximately 100% greater than current recommendations but that PROIN increases from 1.35 to 2.62 g.kg-1.day-1 do not enhance muscle mass/strength gains, at least during the 1st mo of training."


-- Here are some more general recommendations: --

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=9841962&dopt=Abstract
"Those involved in strength training might need to consume as much as 1.6 to 1.7 g protein x kg(-1) x day(-1) (approximately twice the current RDA) while those undergoing endurance training might need about 1.2 to 1.6 g x kg(-1) x day(-1) (approximately 1.5 times the current RDA). Future longitudinal studies are needed to confirm these recommendations and asses whether these protein intakes can enhance exercise performance. Despite the frequently expressed concern about adverse effects of high protein intake, there is no evidence that protein intakes in the range suggested will have adverse effects in healthy individuals."

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=7550257&dopt=Abstract
"The current recommended daily allowance (RDA) for protein is based primarily on data derived from subjects whose lifestyles were essentially sedentary. More recent well-designed studies that have employed either the classic nitrogen balance approach or the more technically difficult metabolic tracer technique indicate that overall protein needs (as well as needs for some specific individual amino acids) are probably increased for those who exercise regularly. Although the roles of the additionally required dietary protein and amino acids are likely to be quite different for those who engage in endurance exercise (protein required as an auxiliary fuel source) as opposed to strength exercise (amino acids required as building blocks for muscle development), it appears that both groups likely will benefit from diets containing more protein than the current RDA of 0.8 g.kg-1.day-1. Strength athletes probably need about 1.4-1.8 g.kg-1.day-1 and endurance athletes about 1.2-1.4 g.kg-1.day-1."

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Retrieve&list_uids=1895363&dopt=Abstract
"Although definitive dietary recommendations for various athletic groups must await future study, the weight of current evidence suggests that strength or speed athletes should consume about 1.2-1.7 g protein/kg body weight.d-1 (approximately 100-212% of current recommendations) and endurance athletes about 1.2-1.4 g/kg.d-1 (approximately 100-175% of current recommendations). These quantities of protein can be obtained from a diet which consists of 12-15% energy from protein, unless total energy intake is insufficient. There is no evidence that protein intakes in this range will cause any adverse effects. Future studies with large sample sizes, adequate controls, and performance as well as physiological/biochemical measures are necessary to fine tune these recommendations"

snow
04-30-2004, 11:34 AM
ahh yes, now this is what i like to say. i will read into those, thanks. :clap: