# Rich Protein foods



## Rlo (Jun 12, 2002)

What are some foods stacked full of natural protein? thanx


----------



## Cenox (Jun 12, 2002)

Tuna is always a winner - 26% protein

All meats, especially Beef and red meat in general are high on Protein.

But why not just read the label?


----------



## w8lifter (Jun 12, 2002)

> _*Originally posted by Rlo *_
> What are some foods stacked full of natural protein? thanx



Obviously all animal meats are protein. 

Dairy such as cottage cheese, cheese, milk, etc has protein, but also comes w/ carbs...mostly sugar.

You can also find protein of varying qualities in foods such as beans, tofu, nuts, etc.


----------



## john992 (Jun 12, 2002)

Complete Proteins:  Lean cuts of beef, chicken, Ostrich, Duck, venison,  tuna (80% of energy as protein), salmon, orange roughy, trout, other fish, eggs, milk, lean cuts of pork etc.

Incomplete proteins:  Peanuts, Walnuts, Almonds, other nuts, Whole wheat pasta, kidney beans, many types of grains and cereals etc. 

It is also important to note that mixing an incomplete protein with another incomplete protein will inturn create a complete protein if the right proteins are mixed together.  The key is knowing the missing amino acid in one food and picking it up in another.

Definitions:

Complete Protein:  Are proteins that contain all 8-9(*) essential amino acids.

Incomplete Protein:  Are proteins that are missing one or more of the 8-9(*) essential amino acids.

Good mixes for incomplete proteins to make complete proteins are:  red beans/rice, Soybeans/sesame seeds, Green Beans/Almonds, Corn Tortillas/Pinto Beans etc.

*=Infants require 9 essential amino acids while adults only need 8.  Histidine is the amino acid that is essential to infants  and  is not for adults do not.


Athlete Protein intake ranges from 1.2-1.6 grams of protein per kilogram of body weight.

This is just a brief overview of protein if you have anymore questions just ask. GOOD LUCK!!!


----------



## john992 (Jun 13, 2002)

I should also add that 1 gram of protein=4 Kcal.


----------



## TJohn (Jun 13, 2002)

I believe they've all pretty much been mentioned. 

TJohn


----------



## Mudge (Jun 13, 2002)

> _*Originally posted by john992 *_
> Athlete Protein intake ranges from 1.2-1.6 grams of protein per kilogram of body weight.



Are you sure? I've heard of people intaking much more than me, I'm using the 1.0 gram per pound "rule". I've heard anything from .8 grams per pound, to 3 grams per kilogram bodyweight.

1.6 per kilogram would put me at about only 156 grams per day, weighing 215 pounds.

I remember Flex Wheeler claiming 500 grams per day which was an insane amount even compared to guys alot larger than him, although he did have a fast metabolism, not sure that had anything to do with his decision.


----------



## Jodi (Jun 13, 2002)

I am by far an expert but that sounds awfully low to me as well.  I weigh 114 and I eat 180 - 200 grams protein a day.


----------



## w8lifter (Jun 13, 2002)

Actually it is too low for BB standards. John likes to go by the book and only believes in what has been scientifically proven.

I think you'll find him in the minority in that belief in regards to BB.

Most in this sport eat at least 1-2 g lb of LBM. It has been shown that athletes under physical stress require more than the RDA for protein. Also, your needs for protein increase under calorie restriction.


----------



## Mudge (Jun 13, 2002)

Oh, ok, so were talking based on a 1970's study of a college student and thier caloric needs, that clears it up


----------



## john992 (Jun 13, 2002)

W8, your right in saying that athletes under stress ( being an athlete basically states that you are being put under some kind of physical stress) require more then the RDA, which is 0.8 grams of protein  per kilogram of body weight for sedentary individuals.  But if you are referring to the RDA for atheltes, which is 1.2-1.6 grams of protein per kilogram of bodyweight I will have to disagree with your statement.  I can post many articles/position statements/scientific studies proving this if someone could tell me how to post them on here.


If a individual is experiencing DISEASE, ILLNESS or SEVERE MENTAL/PHYSICAL STRESS this may cause an individual to increase these numbers but only slightly.  ANd when your health returns to normal it is important that you also  return your protein intake to normal.  EXcessive protein can cause your body to produce toxic byproducts like ammonia and uric acid. A very probable effect of excessive protein intake is the onset of bone demineralization (osteoporosis), Dehydration, kidney dysfunction etc.


----------



## Mudge (Jun 13, 2002)

Lets not forget, that scientific study also proved that the 4 minute mile was not possible.

It seems the enthusiast often finds what is truth, before the feds.


----------



## john992 (Jun 13, 2002)

Lets also not forget that thousands of people die every day because they are going against science and experimenting with what science has proved dangerous.


----------



## Mudge (Jun 13, 2002)

True as well.



> Studies show weight lifters might need .72g/lb. of bodyweight, highly trained cyclists might need .8g/lb., rigorous exercise training might require 1.3g/lb., and world-class weight lifters may use upwards of 1.6g/lb.


----------



## john992 (Jun 13, 2002)

The methodology that "more is better" is the basic theorizing of many protein supplement users, especially in the bodybuilding scene. Athletes(bodybuilders) often base their meal planning on nutritional advice from their friends, nonscientific mentors, heroes, or idols-rather than scientific evidence.

There has not been any evidence showing a constant, linear increase in muscle mass or performance when consuming high-protein diets as opposed to using the RDA athlete protein requirements (1.2-1.6 grams per kg of bodyweight) .


----------



## Jodi (Jun 13, 2002)

Well I know I am doing fine with my protein intake at being 180-200 and I keep getting great gains so I don't give a crap what science says as long as it works for me.


----------



## kuso (Jun 13, 2002)

Where is TCD??


----------



## john992 (Jun 13, 2002)

> _*Originally posted by mochy *_
> Well I know I am doing fine with my protein intake at being 180-200 and I keep getting great gains so I don't give a crap what science says as long as it works for me.



I dont know what your current body weight is, so its hard to judge whether that is a reasonable amount of protein or not.  But im guessing by the demeanor of your statement that you are going with or  beyond the typical bodybuilder scheme of things (1 gram of protein per body pound) correct me if im wrong.   With that being said I suggest lowering your protein intake and seeing if your still receiving the same gains.  Remember that You should still consume your daily caloric requirements, so, if you had that properly configured in the first place, replace the protein calories with carbohydrate calories.  Also think about your future, just because your not experiencing any adverse side effects from the excessive protein intake now, doesnt mean you wont later down the road.  

The following may be of use to you:
1 gram of protein= 4 Kcal
1 gram of carbohydrate=4 Kcal
1 gram of fat=9 Kcal
1 gram of alcohol=7 Kcal


----------



## w8lifter (Jun 13, 2002)

May I suggest, Mochy, that you not listen to John, lol.

John...is ABC back up yet?

and where the FUQ is Chicken Baby!


----------



## Dr. Pain (Jun 13, 2002)

> _*Originally posted by w8lifter *_
> May I suggest, Mochy, that you not listen to John, lol.
> 
> John...is ABC back up yet?
> ...




I agree!


DP


----------



## Jodi (Jun 14, 2002)

> I dont know what your current body weight is



I guess if you actually read the whole thread you would have seen that I already posted my body weight above.  I also don't believe that I should be lowering my protein intake.  I have come to trust w8 and DP's suggestions since I have joined IM and if my intake was too high I think they would have said something by now.  Thanks anyway.


----------



## Robboe (Jun 14, 2002)

> _*Originally posted by john992 *_
> A very probable effect of excessive protein intake is the onset of bone demineralization (osteoporosis), Dehydration, kidney dysfunction etc.



People recommend calcium intake of up to 1500mg to prevent osteoporosis and recommend increased water intake to fade off dehydration. Oh, and can you find me a study showing high protein causes kidney damage in an individual who doesn't already have shot kidneys?



> _*Originally posted by john992 *_
> Lets also not forget that thousands of people die every day because they are going against science and experimenting with what science has proved dangerous.



Yeah. Protein - it'll kill you as you sleep. I hear Hollywood are making a big budget horror movie about it.



> _*Originally posted by john992 *_
> if you had that properly configured in the first place, replace the protein calories with carbohydrate calories.



Now let's just think about this for a second. if someone is rather large, then they need a high calorie count to maintain weight and more to gain weight. If they need to replace protein with carbs, on top of all the other carbs they'll be eating for calories...well let's just say, that's a lot of carbs. Now, high carb intake cause more metabolites via the hexamine pathway of carbohydrate metabolism which contribute towards insulin resistance. Potentially (and that is a rather large "potentially", folks) leading to diabetes.

So on one side of the scale, we have too much protein which has been shown to worsen (is that a word?) kidney damage in patients with kidney damage. On the other side, we have carbohydrate - a non-essential nutrient which can cause muscle-building (a relatively healthy proceedure, except for extra free radicals - which can be delt with from a heathy diet of fruit and vegetables) to become harder via insulin resistance, and fat gaining (unhealthy, except for increased leptin) to become rather easy. Not to mention the pyschological degradation you feel when you get fat.

Now don't get me wrong, I'm not saying carbs are evil, but i AM saying that proper carbohydrate management can be pivotal towards health benefits and accquiring the body you want.


----------



## Mudge (Jun 14, 2002)

...the ocean was parted, people were healed, and the curse was broken, when TCD and John disagreed, seemingly for the first time.


----------



## w8lifter (Jun 14, 2002)

lmfao! 

TCD...meet John....I think you'll like him a lot, he'll give you so much material you might not have time for gp and DP  lol


----------



## Robboe (Jun 14, 2002)

It's not so much that i disagree (except for the apparent damage towards kidneys, which i'll happily reconsider if he can find studies showing problems in "normal" individuals, cause sure as hell can't find any) because it is possible to still gain weight (_and_ muscle) on lower protein intakes providing your calories are in surplus.

I was merely pointing out that by trying to avoid one potential danger you open the door towards another one.


----------



## Mudge (Jun 14, 2002)

I know my dad has mentioned the kidney thing, but I don't know where that theory came from. Another reason to drink lots of water.


----------



## Robboe (Jun 14, 2002)

> _*Originally posted by john992 *_
> There has not been any evidence showing a constant, linear increase in muscle mass or performance when consuming high-protein diets as opposed to using the RDA athlete protein requirements (1.2-1.6 grams per kg of bodyweight) .



well that's maybe not entirely true.

I've been shuffling around and found two studies:

Consolazio GF, et al. Protein metabolism during intensive physical training in the young adult. Am J Clin Nutr 1975; 28:29-35

Dragan GI, Vasiliu A, Georgescu E. Effects of increased supply of protein on elite weightlifters. In: Galesloot TE, Tinbergen BJ, eds. Milk Proteins. Pudoc, Wageningen, The Netherlands 1985:99-103

Only problem is that i can't get the full studies. Only short summaries. Anyone have access to medline where they may be able to get the entire studies?


----------



## john992 (Jun 14, 2002)

I will bring up some studies for you when I get home i am at work right now.  Regarding the kidney damage, i agree whole heartedly there are no studies done on those without preexisting kidney problems.  However that is not to say that  excessive protein intake does not cause kidney damage in those who have healthy kidneys.


----------



## john992 (Jun 14, 2002)

> _*Originally posted by mochy *_
> 
> 
> I guess if you actually read the whole thread you would have seen that I already posted my body weight above.  I also don't believe that I should be lowering my protein intake.  I have come to trust w8 and DP's suggestions since I have joined IM and if my intake was too high I think they would have said something by now.  Thanks anyway.




You interpreted me wrong, sorry about that.  What I was trying to say was that I have not witnessed a weigh in.  Though you have told me your weight this does not mean it is an accurate weigh in.  Im not dissing you, just stating that there are anomolies that can change the situation.


----------



## Robboe (Jun 14, 2002)

> _*Originally posted by john992 *_
> However that is not to say that  excessive protein intake does not cause kidney damage in those who have healthy kidneys.



it's also not to say that it does.


----------



## john992 (Jun 14, 2002)

In agreeance!  Possibilities of kidney damage due to excessive protein intake are endless though.  The studies have yet to be recorded on individuals with healthy kidneys, to my knowledge.  This, however, is only one of the many possible side effects of excessive protein intake.


----------



## w8lifter (Jun 14, 2002)

> _*Originally posted by john992 *_
> 
> 
> 
> You interpreted me wrong, sorry about that.  What I was trying to say was that I have not witnessed a weigh in.  Though you have told me your weight this does not mean it is an accurate weigh in.  Im not dissing you, just stating that there are anomolies that can change the situation.



lmfao....did someone say anal?


----------



## butterfly (Jun 14, 2002)

> _*Originally posted by john992 *_
> In agreeance!  Possibilities of kidney damage due to excessive protein intake are endless though.  The studies have yet to be recorded on individuals with healthy kidneys, to my knowledge.  This, however, is only one of the many possible side effects of excessive protein intake.


 Did you here something  


Nah... me either


----------



## GardeningGrrl (Jun 14, 2002)

> _*Originally posted by john992 *_
> 
> 
> 
> You interpreted me wrong, sorry about that.  What I was trying to say was that I have not witnessed a weigh in.  Though you have told me your weight this does not mean it is an accurate weigh in.



John, are you calling mochy a liar? Isn't that a little condescending? Or are you suggesting that reading a scale is so difficult that only someone with your exalted capabilities can handle it?


----------



## john992 (Jun 14, 2002)

> _*Originally posted by GardeningGrrl *_
> 
> 
> John, are you calling mochy a liar? Isn't that a little condescending? Or are you suggesting that reading a scale is so difficult that only someone with your exalted capabilities can handle it?



NO, im not in anyway saying that he is a liar, but as a boxing weigh in requires witnesses, so does figuring out someones caloric intake.


----------



## john992 (Jun 14, 2002)

Figuring out someones exact numbers over the net is a difficult and practically impossible thing to do.  All we can do is give them knowledge pertaining to what they are looking for, however to give one exact numbers is completely irresponsible and dangerous.  Equations are the safest way to go in this case.  And referring them to their nearest health professional.


----------



## Robboe (Jun 14, 2002)

> _*Originally posted by john992 *_
> I will bring up some studies for you when I get home i am at work right now.  Regarding the kidney damage, i agree whole heartedly there are no studies done on those without preexisting kidney problems.  However that is not to say that  excessive protein intake does not cause kidney damage in those who have healthy kidneys.



Just thought dude, if you're just gonna show me studies done on those with already shot kidneys then save yourself a job cause i've already seen most of them.


----------



## Jodi (Jun 14, 2002)

Holy Shit!  What the fuq is going on here!

Just thought I also add in.  I'm female.


----------



## ZECH (Jun 14, 2002)

> _*Originally posted by mochy *_
> Holy Shit!  What the fuq is going on here!
> 
> Just thought I also add in.  I'm female.



And very much so I  may add John!


----------



## Mudge (Jun 14, 2002)

How did this turn into getting people's phone numbers? You can get social security numbers if you wanted, but this isn't a discussion on netsec.


----------



## ZECH (Jun 14, 2002)

BTW Mudge, if you weigh 215, you should be getting somewhere between 322 and 430 grams of protein per day at least(1.5 to 2 g/lb)!! And to comment on kidney damage from protein...........that's the biggest crock I've ever heard. We've had this discussion before. If it would hurt you, there would be thousands of bodybuilders dead, including myself!!! John, wise up and quit arguing something that's not arguable!!!


----------



## Mudge (Jun 14, 2002)

I'm definately on the light side of intake compared to many people. I can't imagine how people are eating more than me?! I was thinking of upping it to ~250 or so.

I agree though, with people in the 60s taking roids (lighter than now), and eating like pigs, why are more bodybuilders dropping from abusing dieuretics, not protein?

I think we should all keep in mind too, that alot of people dont intake the amount of water they are supposed to, in the general populus.


----------



## ZECH (Jun 14, 2002)

If you eat six small meals a day and get 40g at each meal you can get 240........


----------



## Mudge (Jun 14, 2002)

Which means that I'm awake for 19 hours of the day. Another thing to 'argue' about, which LAM seems to have disproven (?), is the believe that eating more frequently than 3 hour increments causes the body to throw protein away and end up absorbing only low amounts of it.

If I wake up in the middle of the night to eat, I am going to interupt a REM cycle, which ruins my sleep (which I have enough trouble with already).

6 meals x 3 hours = 18 hours, plus wakeup/sleep time means I'm awake for about 19 hours at best, which means 6 hours of "sleep"...


----------



## w8lifter (Jun 14, 2002)

> _*Originally posted by Mudge *_
> How did this turn into getting people's phone numbers? You can get social security numbers if you wanted, but this isn't a discussion on netsec.




  Am I missing something?


----------



## Mudge (Jun 14, 2002)

> _*Originally posted by w8lifter *_
> 
> 
> 
> Am I missing something?




I think I am retarded  



> Figuring out someones exact numbers over the net is a difficult and practically impossible thing to do.



I kept looking for the post, figured it was edited out or something, guess its just my brain...


----------



## john992 (Jun 14, 2002)

The following came from this website:  http://venus.nildram.co.uk/veganmc/protein.htm#1

Protein Requirements
Eating excess protein is an unhealthy practice, not only does undigested protein serve as soil for putreficative bacteria in the bowels, but use of amino acids for generating energy actually poisons the body: 
"When amino acids are "burned" as a fuel, ammonia (NH3) is the waste product. Ammonia must be carried to the liver, converted to urea and excreted by the kidneys. One of the penalties of amino acid excess is ammonia excess, a potential cause of body malfunction following a high protein meal."
Stephen J. Gislason MD, Environmed Research Inc.
Ammonia, even at trace levels is neurotoxic causing slurred speech, blurred vision and tremor. Therefore our biochemistry has methods of protecting us when excesses are present. This involves detoxification of ammonia and conversion into urea in the liver. Gut bacteria also produce ammonia, but again this occurs more when they are fed nitrogen rich foods. 
More accurate means of measuring amino acid utilisation are being used to suggest that original nitrogen balance estimates for amino acid requirements were too low(4). The researchers concluded: 

"It is concluded that the nitrogen balance-based estimates of amino acid requirement are too low."
Another study(5) has for the first time found that: 
"Similarly, rates of whole body protein synthesis, degradation, and leucine oxidation after long-term therapy with the VLPD regimen did not differ from baseline values, and neutral BN was maintained by a marked suppression of amino acid oxidation and postprandial inhibition of protein degradation. This is the first evidence that the compensatory changes in whole body protein turnover activated in response to dietary protein restriction are sustained during long-term therapy."
So it appears that the body is adapted to eat a very low protein diets (VLPD). With reduced body mass, or increased physical activity, it is easy to see how one could justify lower values. (physical activity lowers protein requirements) 
While Doctor Gislasons 12% of calories figure is reflective of some current mainstream opinion, it is not supported by this analysis (6% is closer to requirements), and it is not supported by orthodox nutritional standards either, for example the National Research Council says an adult male requires 2700 calories and 56 grams of protein per day. The 56 grams of protein represent 224 calories, or about 8.3% of calories as protein. There are many different standards for protein (and calorie) requirements depending on which source you use. I doubt that these variations can be supported by differing demands of amino acids using accurate experimental methods such as amino acid oxidation. Excess protein is harmful, Dr Gislason says: 

"High-protein diets do not have the benefits their advocates have claimed; they are associated with sodium loss, decreased sympathetic activity, increased ketosis, and no improvement in body protein conservation. Protein foods should be eaten as structural foods close to the level of their actual need, about 12 % of total daily calories."
Stephen J. Gislason MD, Environmed Research Inc.
I have not come across any data that suggest that eating protein in excess of metabolic requirements confers any benefits. There is much evidence from biochemical theory and clinical data that excess is harmful.


----------



## Mudge (Jun 14, 2002)

Its a shame no doctors ever agree on anything.


----------



## john992 (Jun 14, 2002)

Also check the following, which came from this website URL:  
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=3356636&dopt=Abstract

Influence of protein intake and training status on nitrogen balance and lean body mass.

Tarnopolsky MA, MacDougall JD, Atkinson SA.

Department of Physical Education and Pediatrics, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.

The present study examined the effects of training status (endurance exercise or body building) on nitrogen balance, body composition, and urea excretion during periods of habitual and altered protein intakes. 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. Endurance athletes excreted more total daily urea than either bodybuilders or controls. We conclude that bodybuilders during habitual training require a daily protein intake only slightly greater than that for sedentary individuals in the maintenance of lean body mass and that endurance athletes require daily protein intakes greater than either bodybuilders or sedentary individuals to meet the needs of protein catabolism during exercise.


So, as you can see the recommendation of 1.2-1.6 grams of protein per kilogram of bodyweight seems very reputable.


----------



## Mudge (Jun 14, 2002)

Glad to read the article, but what is an elite bodybuilder in thier eyes, and how do we know we can trust this data. Too many people out to prove that what they believe is right, that they are willing to fudge data, or flat out lie about it, wether for corporate gain or otherwise, hmm.


----------



## john992 (Jun 14, 2002)

Tarnopolsky is  one of the most respected individuals in this area of study (protein requirements) this info is very credible.


----------



## john992 (Jun 14, 2002)

go to the following link as well:   http://www.supplementwatch.com/supatoz/supplement.asp?supplementId=226


----------



## Mudge (Jun 14, 2002)

More of the same, that was pretty brief. I haven't heard yet of any pros, or amateurs with kidney problems that I can recall. Interesting all the same, just not convinced that the entire bodybuilding community is wrong, and has been wrong for decades.


----------



## Robboe (Jun 14, 2002)

Here's some stuff i got from Lyle McDonald. I'm not exactly sure how old they are, but nevertheless:

Ok, let's get to the nitty gritty of protein intake and athletes. For the sake of completeness, I will quote the RDA for protein which is 0.8 grams of protein per kilogram of bodyweight (1). This works out to .36 grams of protein per pound of bodyweight. So for a 150 pound person, this would be 54 grams of protein. Yeah, sure this is enough for someone exercising vigorously. For all practical purposes, let's just ignore the RDA since it surely doesn't apply to anyone who does more than sit around all day.

First, let me talk about protein requirements (what you must take in to maintain positive nitrogen balance). The minimum necessary is not necessarily the optimal amount but that gets into other issues that I will address later.

Keeping in mind the difficulties in assessing true protein needs, I would like to look at some of the nitrogen balance studies which have been performed. (2) First I will address strength athletes (bodybuilders, etc...) Various studies have been done which have found protein requirements to be anywhere from 250% of the RDA (2g/kg/day) in Polish weightlifters to 112% (.9g/ kg/day) of the RDA for experienced bodybuilders if energy intake is adequate. Other studies found that anywhere from 162% to 200% (1.3 to 1.6g/kg.day) resulted in positive nitrogen balance. For some reason, studies on beginning weight trainers indicate greater protein needs (up to 2.0 g/kg/day to maintain positive nitrogen balance) than for experienced weight trainers. It may be that long term weight training leads to an increase in the body's utilization of protein.

These studies bring another question up which is: is the minimum amount to maintain positive nitrogen balance the optimal amount for increases in muscle mass. Other studies have addressed this as well as is possible. One study found that nitrogen retention was greater at 350% RDA (2.8g/kg) versus 175% RDA (1.4g/kg). In this study, the higher protein group experienced greater gains in lean body mass. Several other studies support this idea. Ultimately the question is this. If some nitrogen retention is good (i.e. positive nitrogen balance), is more nitrogen balance better?? This has not been answered conclusively but seems to be supported by the above studies.

So what about endurance athletes? Well, remember when I made the blasphemous statement a while back that endurance athletes need more protein (at least relatively), than bodybuilders. Well, here's why. During weight training, only glucose is used for energy needs. Due to the high intensity nature of weight-training, fat and protein cannot be utilized for energy production. Protein requirements are increased in weightlifters presumably for tissue rebuilding. Well, during endurance exercise, this is not true and protein can provide 5-10% of total energy needs during exercise. Put this on top of the protein needed for daily use and tissue repair from exercise and you end up with higher protein needs (at least when you're talking about the minimum to maintain nitrogen balance). A hard training cyclist or runner may burn 600-1200 calories (or much more for elite athletes) per hour. If we assume even 5% of this to come from protein we have 30-60 calories from protein which is 8-15 grams per hour at the low end. If 10% of energy needs come from protein, hourly protein usage may be 16-30 grams. When you multiply that by 2-5 hours per day training, you get significantly increased protein needs. Body builders and other strength athletes will still take in more protein on an absolute scale (since they weigh quite a bit more than endurance athletes), but I contend that endurance athletes require more on a pound per pound basis.

For both types of athletes, a good baseline reccomendation is probably is 2.0 grams of protein per kg of bodyweight per day. This works out to about 1 gram per pound of bodyight per day. While this may over-estimate protein needs, better to over-estimate than under-estimate and compromise progress. For most athletes, this actually works out to about 15-20% of total calories from protein assuming that adequate calories are being taken in to support exercise. If fewer calories than needed are eaten, protein needs will go up.

Oh, yeah, for the record, the reference study (2) states that "there is no published evidence that strength athletes have increased incidence of renal (kidney) disease." So, excess protein does not cause kidney stones or other kidney problems unless there is a pre-existing problem.

Next time, what athletes really do take in and a brief discussion of "optimal" protein needs vs. "minimum" protein needs.

References:

1. Contemporary Nutrition: Issues and Insights

2. Lemon et al. "Protein intake and athletic performance"


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ok, last time we looked at the studies on minimum protein requirments in athletes. Well, as I mentioned, minimum levels and optimal levels may not necessarily be the same.

As stated, the minimum levels will provide enough protein so that intake exceeds excretion and muscle mass is at least maintained. A couple of studies found that a higher positive nitrogen balance improved strength and mass gains than a lower positive nitrogen balance. If this doesn't make sense, think of it this way. If one athlete has a nitrogen balance of +1 gram of protein per day, and another has a nitrogen balance of +2 grams per day, the second would have a more positive nitrogen balance and would, at least in theory, be gaining muscle faster. Is this the case?? I don't know.

The study (1) I've been referencing states "..that protein requirements may be as high as 1.6 g/kg/day for some endurance athletes. For most, intakes of 1.2 to 1.4 g/kg/day are probably sufficient. For strength athletes, the data are much less clear. At least for experienced strength athletes (those who are essentially maintaining their mass), it appears that a positive nitrogen balance is possible with protein intakes of 0.9 g/kg/day (112% of the RDA). Higher protein intakes (and more positive nitrogen balances) may enhance muscle development but this is not well documented."

Let's look at a couple of other recommendations from other sources. Micheal Colgan (2) breaks protein recommendations into three classes depending on the particular sport. He reccomends 2.0 g/kg/day for strength athletes, 1.7 g/kg/day for speed athletes, and 1.4 g/kg/day for endurance athletes.

In another textbook (3), the recommendations are 1.2 to 1.5 g/kg/day for endurance and 1.5 g/kg/day for strength athletes.

In MM2000, Dr. Scott Connely recommends protein intakes of 40-60% of total calories.

But what are athletes really takeing in? In surveys (3), many football players and triathletes consume 2.0 g/kg/day routinely. I have seen ads in Muscle and Fitness claiming intakes of 400 grams of protein per day. (Personally, I think this is a ploy to sell Weider protein powder but that's just me). Since most Americans routinely consume 2-3 times the RDA for protein due to the high reliance on meats, most athletes needn't worry about adding protein to their diet. The exception may be endurance athletes who frequently emphasize carbs so much that protein intake may be inadequate.

But, is excess protein intake harmful? Well, in terms of kidney damage, no. However, excess protein does tend to leech calcium out of the bones. The high protein intake in this country is one of the major contributing factors to the high incidence of osteoporosis. So, if you routinely take in excessive protein, a calcium supplement may be necessary.

Colgan also contends that excess protein (excess defined as above his recommendations) will elevate blood urea and ammonia levels which can be toxic.

Ultimately, I suppose the ideal way would be to measue nitrogen balance in the privacy of your own home to determine your personal protein needs. This is the supposed purpose of Weider NitroStix. Basically, you put a drop of urine on a strip, the strip changes color and you compare the color to a chart to indicate protein excretion. You then compare protein excretion to protein intake (based on your daily food intake) to determine if you are in positive or negative nitrogen balance. There is one drawback to this method. Remember when I talked about the nitrogen balance studies? Well, urinary excretion only accounts for maybe 90% of total protein excretion with the rest excreted in feces, sweat, etc. Well, while the NitroStix may provide some type of estimate if protein loss, it is only an estimate and the value may be confounded by outside factors.

What about protein before and after exercise. Well, since it cannot provide energy directly, protein immediately before exercise shoudln't have much impact on the session itself although there is a current movement in cycling for a high-protein breakfast. Some have suggested branch chain amino acids (BCAA's) before and after exercise but I'll talk about that a little later when I get to supplements (and can find some un-biased information on them). One study (5) (which I talked about during the section on carbs) found that 104 grams of carbs + 46 grams of protein immediately after exercise improved glycogen replenishment better than carbs or protein alone.

The general thought about protein and exercise is that immediately after exercise, carbs should be taken in to replenish glycogen levels. Then protein should be taken in 60-90 minutes after that. I haven't seen any real research on this topic and have to sort of trust the human guinea pigs (the bodybuilders) in this case.

Next time, fats and athletics (as well as health). For a catalog of previous posts, send mail to lylemcd@edge.edge.net along with questions, comments, and flames.

References:

1. Lemon et al. "Protein Intake and Athletic Performance"

2. Colgan Optimal Sports Nutrition

3. Berning Sports Nutrition for the 90's

4. "Six sure-fire texhniques for losing bodyfat" pg. 52 MM2000. april-May 1994.

5. Zawadzki et al. "Carbohydrate-Protein complex increases the rate of muscle glycogen storage after exercise" J. Appl. Physiol. 72(5) 1854-1859, 1992.


----------



## Robboe (Jun 14, 2002)

Here's one of the studies that he cites, but i can't get it in it's entirity:

_*J Am Coll Nutr 2000 Oct;19(5 Suppl):513S-521S Related Articles, Books, LinkOut  


Beyond the zone: protein needs of active individuals.

Lemon PW.

Exercise Nutrition Research Laboratory, The University of Western Ontario, London, Canada. plemon@julian.uwo.ca*

There has been debate among athletes and nutritionists regarding dietary protein needs for centuries. Although contrary to traditional belief, recent scientific information collected on physically active individuals tends to indicate that regular exercise increases daily protein requirements; however, the precise details remain to be worked out. Based on laboratory measures, daily protein requirements are increased by perhaps as much as 100% vs. recommendations for sedentary individuals (1.6-1.8 vs. 0.8 g/kg). Yet even these intakes are much less than those reported by most athletes. This may mean that actual requirements are below what is needed to optimize athletic performance, and so the debate continues. Numerous interacting factors including energy intake, carbohydrate availability, exercise intensity, duration and type, dietary protein quality, training history, gender, age, timing of nutrient intake and the like make this topic extremely complex. Many questions remain to be resolved. At the present time, substantial data indicate that the current recommended protein intake should be adjusted upward for those who are physically active, especially in populations whose needs are elevated for other reasons, e.g., growing individuals, dieters, vegetarians, individuals with muscle disease-induced weakness and the elderly. For these latter groups, specific supplementation may be appropriate, but for most North Americans who consume a varied diet, including complete protein foods (meat, eggs, fish and dairy products), and sufficient energy the increased protein needs induced by a regular exercise program can be met in one's diet.

Publication Types: 
Review 
Review, Tutorial 

PMID: 11023001 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] _


----------



## Robboe (Jun 14, 2002)

Here's another snippit from an article:

Another study conducted at the Letterman Army Institute of Research in San Francisco showed that subjects on a higher protein intake (2.8 g/kg/day), coupled with intense strength training, gained a whopping 3.28 kg (7.2 lbs) of lean mass. The study was done over a 40-day period and the subjects were trained to near exhaustion (2). Another study of weightlifters over a 3 month period, with the protein increased from 2.2g/kg/day to 3.5 g/kg/ day, resulted in a 6% increase in muscle mass and a 5% increase in strength (3). Susan M Klieiner, who holds a PhD in nutrition and human performance from Case Western Reserve University, states in her book, Power Eating, that for muscle building an intake of 1.6-2.2 grams per kilogram of bodyweight is recommended. Dr Michael Colgan, in Optimum Sports Nutrition, claims that the RDA doesn't meet the needs of athletes who train in an intense fashion. So, the evidence provided by some of the highly regarded "experts" in this field indicates that the addition of extra protein has been shown to display positive effects which produce muscle growth.


----------



## Robboe (Jun 14, 2002)

And here's something from a Bryan Haycock article:

Common Myths
about Protein

by Bryan Haycock M.Sc., CSCS


Myth #1: High protein intakes will not affect muscle protein synthesis. 

Fact: Greater availability of amino acids means more protein synthesis within muscle cells.1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8 



I will concede that experiments have been performed that indicate that a lab animal can survive on a very limited protein intake assuming that fat and carbohydrate intake is adequate. Simply put, the body begins to reduce that amount of amino acid oxidation in order to spare nitrogen containing compounds. Yet can we really apply this kind of example to adult humans trying to build muscle? I think not. 

When the body begins getting stingy with amino acids because of low protein intake, non essential functions, such as skeletal muscle protein synthesis, drop to minimal levels. Other functions within the body such as the immune system, which uses glutamine primarily of muscle origin for fuel, also begins to suffer.9 


This cripples the body's ability to cope with the stress and tissue damage induced by intense training. Researchers even believe that currently recommended protein intakes may actually predispose people to illness because of the limited reserve of amino acids. Here's what they have to say about current recommendations for protein intake: 

"...It seems reasonable to conclude that the lowered rate of whole-body and perhaps muscle protein turnover that appears to occur in healthy adult subjects when intakes of indispensable amino acids approximate the current international figures, would probably diminish the individuals capacity to withstand successfully a major stressful stimulus. Again, for those reasons, we view the significant reduction in the rate of body protein turnover in healthy adults, which permits them to more closely approach or even achieve amino acid balance at currently accepted amino acid requirement intakes, as an accommodation. Thus we further conclude that these international requirement intakes are probably not sufficient to maintain a desirable or adapted state."(Young VR., Marchini JS. Mechanisms and nutritional significance of metabolic responses to altered intakes of protein and amino acids, with reference to nutritional adaptation in humans. Am J Clin Nutr 1990;51:270-89) Emphasis added. 

Research clearly shows that by increasing blood levels of amino acids you increase protein synthesis in skeletal muscle. It has also been shown that you can maintain a positive nitrogen balance for extended periods of time and that nitrogen accretion will tend to continue as long as protein intake is high.10 Clearly if you want to maximize your gains in the gym you gotta get more protein than the average Joe. 

And here's the references from that article:

References: 

1. Tipton K., Ferrando A., Phillips S., Doyle, JR D., Wolfe R. Post exercise net protein synthesis in human muscle from orally administered amino acids. Am. J. Physiol. 276: E628-E634, 1999 

2. Bennet, W. M., A. A. Connacher, C. M. Scrimgeour, and M. J. Rennie. The effect of amino-acid infusion on leg protein turnover assessed by L-[15N]phenylalanine and L-[1-13C]leucine exchange. Eur. J. Clin. Invest. 20: 37-46, 1989 

3. Castellino, P., L. Luzi, D. C. Simonson, M. Haymond, and R. A. DeFronzo. Effect of insulin and plasma amino acid concentrations on leucine metabolism in man. J. Clin. Invest. 80: 1784-1793, 1987 

4. Fryburg, D. A., L. A. Jahn, S. A. Hill, D. M. Oliveras, and E. J. Barrett. Insulin and insulin-like growth factor-I enhance human skeletal muscle protein anabolism during hyperaminoacidemia by different mechanisms. J. Clin. Invest. 96: 1722-1729, 1995 

5. McNulty, P. H., L. H. Young, and E. J. Barrett. Response of rat heart and skeletal muscle protein in vivo to insulin and amino acid infusion. Am. J. Physiol. 264 (Endocrinol. Metab. 27): E958-E965, 1993 

6. Mosoni, L., M. Houlier, P. P. Mirand, G. Bayle, and J. Grizard. Effect of amino acids alone or with insulin on muscle and liver protein synthesis in adult and old rats. Am. J. Physiol. 264 (Endocrinol. Metab. 27): E614-E620, 1993 

7. Newman, E., M. J. Heslin, R. F. Wolf, P. T. W. Pisters, and M. F. Brennan. The effect of systemic hyperinsulinemia with concomitant infusion of amino acids on skeletal muscle protein turnover in the human forearm. Metabolism 43: 70-78, 1994 


8. Watt, P. W., M. E. Corbett, and M. J. Rennie. Stimulation of protein synthesis in pig skeletal muscle by infusion of amino acids during constant insulin availability. Am. J. Physiol. 263 (Endocrinol. Metab. 26): E453-E460, 1992 

9. Newsholme, A.E., Parry-Billings M. Properties of glutamine release from muscle and its importance for the immune system. JPEN. 14 (4) supplement S63-67 

10. Oddoye EA., Margen S. Nitrogen balance studies in humans: long-term effect of high nitrogen intake on nitrogen accretion. J Nutr 109 (3): 363-77


----------



## john992 (Jun 15, 2002)

TCD, most of the studies you have presented are not very well documented also they fail to present very many references especially the first one.  Having said that, most of the studies are in the vicinity of 1.2-1.6 grams of protein per kilogram of body weight, or they are in question of the numbers they are advising (doesnt seem very safe to me).  THe last article  fails to state what is considered a low-protein diet vs. a high-protein diet, so we must disregard the article all together for the purposes of this debate.  Also many of the references on the last article are done on lab rats not human responses.  If there is a point you wanted to make with the last article please lead us to it, thanks.  ANd just to start another constructive debate, most of your articles state that you must be in a positive nitrogen balance for muscle hypertrophy to occur.  NOw, the  mainstream scientists and bodybuilders seem to agree on this, but there have been studies done that say the opposite, what are your thoughts?


----------



## Robboe (Jun 15, 2002)

I can't get the study abstracts for the last one so i can't tell you what "high" and "low" are.

And i'd hardly called 3 (one being on pigs) out of 12 studies "many"

I was merely scanning through some articles yesterday of highly esteemed folk who recommend higher protein intakes and found these. 

I've never seen studies that show hypertrophy can occur is negative nitrogen balance, so please show me. This is of course, purely because i've never looked for them. I don't really have an opinion on such a matter, but i suspect that being in positive nitrogen balance yields a more productive anabolic environment.


----------



## Jodi (Jun 15, 2002)

WTF has this turned into?


----------



## w8lifter (Jun 15, 2002)

> _*Originally posted by mochy *_
> WTF has this turned into?



A typical 'john' thread


----------



## lina (Jun 15, 2002)

> _*Originally posted by john992 *_Athlete Protein intake ranges from 1.2-1.6 grams of protein per kilogram of body weight.



You keep on using *kilograms* here how much does that compare to lbs??? 

Chicken Daddy, puleeezzz no small print! I can't read it sooo small! thanks!


----------



## Mudge (Jun 15, 2002)

1kilogram = 2.2 pounds


----------



## LAM (Jun 15, 2002)

> _Originally posted by john992_
> Figuring out someones exact numbers over the net is a difficult and practically impossible thing to do. All we can do is give them knowledge pertaining to what they are looking for, however to give one exact numbers is completely irresponsible and dangerous. Equations are the safest way to go in this case. And referring them to their nearest health professional.



dangerous ?  

health professional..would this be the same MD's that say creatine is unsafe (along with most bb supps) and that being over you BMI is unhealthy regardless of your bodyfat ?


----------



## john992 (Jun 15, 2002)

> _*Originally posted by LAM *_
> 
> 
> dangerous ?
> ...



Definetly not the same MD's.  WHo are they? BMI IS an indicator for mainly non-athletes and is widely accepted as that....as for creatine, the studies are still young, and so is the product (1992 was the first documented use). Long term effects of the supplement have yet to be discovered....creatine is an amino acid derivative which makes it a completely natural substance. However, taking creatine in mega doses while supplementing may have adverse effects.  Im neither for or against creatine supplementation as there are no studies that have been finalised (long term).


----------



## LAM (Jun 15, 2002)

I was wondering who you were referring to who is qualified to give out such information...

what do you consider a mega dose of creatine ?


----------



## J'Bo (Jun 16, 2002)

After reading about 20 posts i had to interrupt.

Is 10 liters of water a day not enough to rid of the toxins?

Do BB and fitness chics not take antioxidants to rid of these toxins?

All i know for sure is that with .7 grams of protein for gaining muscle just DO NOT do it for me. Now that i have upped my protein to 1.35grams per bodyweight (130lbs), i am putting the muscle on.

My motto is. "look and learn from the people you admire and hope to look like" and they will take you to where you want to go in life.

Do your own research and know what you are getting yourself into. This is your body and no one should tell you what to do. Try doing the .2  grams of protein and see how you feel. Results? I don't think so! 

I have read many medical reports that tell you unheard of ideas. Do you believe everything you read?


----------



## Robboe (Jun 16, 2002)

Well J'Bo, the body makes uric acid and ammonia anyway, but the theory is that having the body produce more than "usual" makes undue stress on the liver/kidneys to get rid of the stuff.

Antioxidants combat oxidising free radicals. I don;t think uric acid or ammonia actually "attack" with oxygen, so will be uneffected by antioxidants.

Water does dilute the toxins to some degree, however.


----------



## w8lifter (Jun 16, 2002)

> _*Originally posted by john992 *_
> Brief article at espn linking Creatine to cancer: http://espn.go.com/gen/news/2001/0124/1036782.html



John WTF does creatine have to do w/ the topic of protein rich foods! 

Stick to the topic at hand or I'll close this fuking post! you've already pushed your luck w/ me! Don't start your fuking bullshit over here!


----------



## w8lifter (Jun 16, 2002)

Don't add any more creatine info in this thread!

I split the thread, if you want to add stuff about creatine go here!


----------



## john992 (Jun 17, 2002)

the topic of creatine was brought up w8, sorry.


----------



## SpecialK (Jun 17, 2002)

> _*Originally posted by J'Bo *_
> After reading about 20 posts i had to interrupt.
> 
> Is 10 liters of water a day not enough to rid of the toxins?
> ...




I agree, there are so many researches going on, and everyone has their different opinions, I got too confused who to listen to, so I just tried different things until I found something that I was happy with.


----------

