Protein, Amino acids, and Weight Training Part 1
We all know that to see any growth after a workout, we're going to need massive amounts of protein. But not many understand why so much protein is needed. What's protein's deal anyway? The reasons are simple. First, proteins provide nitrogen, and the body needs more nitrogen coming in than going out to trigger anabolism. Second, protein is made of 20 amino acids, and each one of those aminos has extremely important metabolic functions in the body! The body needs these proteins not just to lay down more muscle fibers after a workout, but also for the functions that amino acids themselves supply.
Of the 20 aminos found in protein, 8 are essential, and 12 are non-essential. Some aminos are considered "conditionally essential". For example, L-histidine is vital for growth and repair in athletes! This makes it "conditionally essential", and thus could be counted as "essential" to avoid confusion. That’s why some people will say there are 7, 8, or 9 "essential" aminos. If you get conflicting information, this is why.
There are several ways to measure the effectiveness of a protein source. These usually take into account the nitrogen absorbed from a source of protein vs. the nitrogen lost, such as Biological Value (BV), the amino profile of the food in question (chemical score), or the amount of weight gained per source of protein consumed (called protein efficiency ratio, or PER). Now this can all get confusing! The good news is that you don’t REALLY need to investigate all these variables anytime you put food in your mouth, since a basic idea of what’s good and what’s not will do.
Most animal and dairy products are complete proteins, so you want to stick with these. Egg protein is the greatest of all proteins on earth - it is complete in all aminos, most of the nitrogen from eggs is kept, and in studies, more muscle weight was gained on egg proteins than any other proteins measured. If you live in an area where eggs are cheap (here in Malaysia you can get 30 of them for 2 US dollars), then it’s a good idea to get the majority of your protein from egg whites (toss most of the yokes). Below eggs are meats. All animal eats have a complete amino profile, which means they don’t lack any amino acids, and are generally good sources of protein. Below meats re plant proteins, which are the worst.
The reason plants aren't a good source of protein is that they are incomplete proteins - they lack one or more essential amino acids. For example, a case study where rats were fed wheat protein, which is deficient in Lysine (an essential amino) found that rats who were given supplemental Lysine experienced more growth with just 20% of the total dietary wheat of other rats!! That’s very little wheat for very much growth, just by correcting the amino deficiency.
Can you be a vegetarian and excel as an athlete at the same time? Good question. Omnivorous (plant and meat eater) athletes were compared to vegetarian athletes to find out if there were any significant differences. The vegetarians ate a variety of plant sources to obtain the protein they needed, AND were assisted by nutritionist to ensure they received a balance in amino profile! So basically, no excuses!
The meat eaters saw a significant increase in fat free mass (muscle), and a drop in body fat. The vegetarians saw a drop in fat free mass (muscle) and an increase in fat mass! How did this happen??? It turns out that if you're getting your proteins from plants, even if you get a mix of plants to cover the deficiencies, the essential aminos found in plants are still so small that you'd have to eat significantly more to equal what a meat eater gets in his diet. And we're not talking an extra meal here or there, we're talking MASSIVE quantities, which brings the risk of fat gain due to all the extra calories. In short, it may not be practical to be a vegetarian while trying to make serious muscle gains. (In fact, it might not be practical to be vegetarian at all - see my articles).
And that concludes part 1. In part 2, we'll look at exactly what all these pesky aminos do, which ones you need, which ones you don’t, and why.
Bookmark/Search this post with:
Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Technorati
huh
Well I've read each and every one of those links, along with the links they were linked to and some more links after that. It looks like you really CAN get by with less than 1g per pound of bodyweight. And to think I was wrong... oh well, guess there's a first time for everything.
Hey Everyone
Great debate everyone! We'll be posting part 2 of the article tomorrow. Thanks everyone for taking the time to keep the discussions positive and healthy.
I like ..
..debates.. this is what makes blogging interesting ..BUT PLEASE I DON'T WANT YOU STARTING TO DISRESPECT EACH OTHER .. IF ANY OF YOU START STUFF HERE HE IS OUT !!! So please stay cool and talk in a diplomatic way thank you
Topic discussed in comments has been moved.
Follow the link :)
protein/carbs/fats
Great discussion! I just want to remind everyone that its not just the ratios of the different food types, its also importantly the quality of the food! I think more than 40-50% carbs is not a good idea in terms of heart health and inflammation unless the person is buring a lot of calories on a daily basis and the carbs are low glycemic carbs. Eating 60% of your calories as bread, pasta and the like will greatly increase your risk of heart disease, diabetes, arthritis and other chronic diseases and lets face it, there is nothing cool about being 45 and an invalid from a stroke or major heart attack.
Darren Clair, MD
Vibrance Health Services
Agreed!
One simply has to be cautious about what one consumes based on health & the other factors you mentioned. Afterall, health is the most important aspect of all this...
informative
I know sometimes we just want the basics, but I myself like to know the science behind what I do, andnot just why it works, but how it works. This helped a lot, thanks!!
Im looking forward to the indepth explanations of the amino acids as well, i'll definately have that article bookmarked :)
"Obsession is a term the lazy use to describe the dedicated" - Anon.
"Shoot for the stars, you might just reach the sky" - Unknown
Its done already
I've already written the amino section. Wrote it long time ago in fact. Jamo just hasn't posted it yet :P
?
Cant you post it?
Part 2 right?
"Obsession is a term the lazy use to describe the dedicated" - Anon.
"Shoot for the stars, you might just reach the sky" - Unknown
A few comments...
Hi Kasey,
Massive amounts of protein are NOT needed to stimulate muscle protein synthesis post-exercise. Check out the studies done by Tipton and Wolf showing success with only 6 gms EAA's. FYI--this would be about 16gms of a complete protein. A general guideline is to consume 0.3 gms /kg body weight...not that much when you consider typical daily protein intakes for resistance-trained folks.
It is generally accepted that there are 9 EAA's...with histidine being included.
The PER estimates the amount of weight gained in rats. The "gold standard" for measuring protein quality is the Protein Digestibility Corrected Amino Acid Score, which is based on the amino acid needs of humans. 1 is the highest score and 0 is the lowest...
The values for some common proteins appear below:
Whey----1
Egg-----1
Casein-----1
Milk-----1
Soy protein isolate----1
Beef-----0.92
Lentils----0.52
Can you be a vegetarian and excel as an athlete?? Hell yeah!!!!
From bodybuilders to tennis players to NFL players to marathon champs to powerlifting champions to discus throwers to boxing champions to a 4-time Mr. Universe....
Keep in mind, many of these athletes, as well as several others, are actually vegans and not just vegetarians. Vegetarians encompass some of the best athletes we've seen in competition.
Time to go eat the chicken pot pie dinner my wife just made (the healthy version)...
Take care,
B
Brian Zehetner MS,RD,CSSD,CSCS
JamCore and Myfittribe "Nutrition Guy"
Cool
I didn't say massive amounts were needed post exercise, I simply said "massive amounts", as in "generally speaking". Conventional wisdom says 1 gram of protein per pound of body weight - this isn't wrong, and I'm sure a little less could be used depending on the protein sources, but this is what I was referring to.
And in a practical sense... you are going to need lots of protein anyway. So post workout, why bother with as few EAAs as possible? I'm sure just a few could elicit growth, but you might as well stick with commercially available Mass Recovery drinks which have closer to 30 grams of protein per bottle. You need the protein anyway, plus its fast absorbing.
And yes, if you put enough time and effort into it... and if you had the financial resources and access to such foods and supplements, you could be a pro-athlete and a vegetarian. I didn't say this was impossible, I just say its impractical. Most people dont have the time, money, resources or access to what they need to excel as a vegetarian athlete. Its a lot cheaper and far more convenient to allow meat as a primary source of protein.
A few more comments...LOL
No...you didn't say it, I did. I mentioned the post-exercise situation to illustrate how little protein is needed to stimulate muscle protein synthesis in THE most critical time period for anabolic actions.
That said, massive amounts aren't needed "generally speaking" either. The recommended guideline for muscular development is 1.5-1.7 gms/kg or 0.65-0.7 gms/ lb of body weight. The only time that up to 2 gms/kg or 0.9 gms /lb of body weight is needed is when you're trying to cut for competition. Extra protein is always required when calories are dropped significantly.
If you walk into a gym and ask a bunch of weightlifters what their guideline would be for protein intake, they would tell you 1gram/ lb at least, but unfortunately this is not the recommendation of most protein researchers. People say this and others believe it as fact...much like when Lou Ferrigno said you can't absorb more than 40 grams of protein at one time back in the 70's. People today still believe that one. The rec you mention is NOT wrong, but I don't want people to think it is absolutely necessary either :) Plus, we both know that folks often think if some is good, more is better....and in terms of protein, that's not the case.
When you apply the guidelines I mentioned to the diet of a bodybuilder for example, protein still amounts to the lowest percentage of overall calories. In other words, for those seeking to add significant amounts of muscle, the diet is typically still at least 50% carb, 25-35% fat, and 15-25% protein. Again, when cutting, the protein in the diet increases, but these guys never (or almost never) follow a diet that consists of 50% protein or more.
Basic studies in biochemistry and metabolism tell us that extra protein in excess of need is shunted to the liver, where the amino acids contribute to glucose production via gluconeogenesis.
Let's not forget...and this is VITALLY important. The most important factor in gaining muscle is NOT protein...it is and always has been energy or calories. You can take in huge amounts of protein, but if the diet is deficient in calories, muscle gain will be almost impossible...and research supports this. Albumin, prealbumin and other serum proteins, along with enzymes and other functional body proteins are much more important and will take priority.
Lastly, I realize you didn't say vegetarians couldn't be athletes. However, your post implied that it is unwise (see impractical) to be vegetarian. With many Myfittribe members being vegetarian, we want to provide information on how to consume an appropriate vegetarian diet, rather than encouraging meat and other foods to those who have already made up their minds...
Lovin' the dialogue my friend!!
B
Brian Zehetner MS,RD,CSSD,CSCS
JamCore and Myfittribe "Nutrition Guy"
Certified Strength and Conditioning Specialist
??
50/35/15 carbs/fat/protein??
That sounds insane!!!!!!!.
if you're eating 4,000 calories then 15% protein is 150g protein. Thats not enough for me, i weigh almost 200lbs and I dont eat anywhere near 4k calories... my maintenance i feel is like 2400-2800. Not too sure and im worried to test it out. 35% from fat is pretty high too, 155g of fat? Yikes. Im not doubting it, but yeesh that cares me >_<
I aim for 30g protein per meal with meals being 2.5-3hrs apart. Post workout I eat closer to 40-50g protein with about 30g being from whey and the rest I use from milk.
Is this completely wrong how i do this? With my protein intake? How many grams of protein do you think a body can handle in a one hour time span, or whatever time span is generally used when discussing protein usage?
Would you go so far as to say the amounts of protein are directly related to the amounts of fatigue placed on your muscles?
I just want to make sure I'm getting enough protein and energy (carbs/fats) but i still want to be careful about adding fat, im trying to stay lean. POst workout meal and Secondary Post workout meal I'm pretty high in calories, then after those two initial meals im pretty careful how many carbs i take in and fats
"Obsession is a term the lazy use to describe the dedicated" - Anon.
"Shoot for the stars, you might just reach the sky" - Unknown
LOL...
I'll try to post something more comprehensively tonight, but briefly...
You said it yourself...you're not taking in 4000 kcals per day, so that 150 gms you mentioned is automatically a higher percentage of your diet. In other words, if you consistently take in 2800 kcals (as opposed to 4000), then 150 gms of protein would be 21% of your total calories. Fairly reasonable, right? The highest protein content at 4000 calories would likely be between 250gms (25% of calories) and 300gms (30%) if you know what you're doing. The reason I mention 300gms or 30% is because lots of guys want to follow a Zone type diet, which is 40% carb, 30% protein and 30% fat. Do guys need to do this to build muscle...absolutely not.
The point is that as you take in more kcals, if grams of protein are kept constant, the percentage of calories from protein will drop. This is obvious...
The other point is that macronutrients are manipulated based on goals, genetic predsiposition, body responses, training state and a whole host of other variables. Carbohydrates are the easiest way to get in more calories and they stimulate insulin too...an incredibly anabolic hormoone. This is in a mass building phase...just ask our friend Ravinous!!!
When guys cut, they drop their carbohydrates to decrease insulin and the water weight associated with carbohydrate storage, resulting in pretty high protein and fat intakes for relatively short periods of time. Carbohydrate loading does take place a few days before competition though.
Despite the higher protein and fat intakes, calories are kept very low, which helps to inhibit fat deposition. Don't forget, dietary fat doesn't automatically mean increased bodyfat or adipose tissue :)
B
Brian Zehetner MS,RD,CSSD,CSCS
Proof
Bro, since i've been talking to Brian about the ratio of carbs:protein:fat, i've been growing like crazy & getting much stronger. What's most impressive though is that my body has not changed that much at all... I don't look puffy! Of course, once I get b'fast, my stomach sticks out a bit since i'm eating litterally all day long, but innitially once I wake up every morning, it's not like that... which makes me question whether i'm getting enough calories. On the subject of fats, other than fat from beef, etc. mine comes from oils... olive oil, flax, & fish oils. Maybe it's my body type, but i'm tellin you man, i'm able to pack in more calories by eating this way & my appitite is still increasing every few days. I think the meat thing is more mental than anything else since we've always heard that you have to eat a shit load to get big. But it's quite the opposite! Only 20% of each meal now contains protein. I don't even follow this thing about consuming 1g protein per lb body weight anymore & i'm growing at a much faster rate then when I was. Try it for a month & see what happens to you... (of course, I have no idea about the science behind it. I just did as I was told!) lol
ihear ya
i eat 8 to sometimes 10 times a day and by the end of the day my belly sticks OUT lol but when i wake up im back to normal lol its funny, like the nutty professor even! but i take in (try to at least) 60 to 70 carbs and 30 to 40 grams protein per meal.. try to keep fat like a constant 10grams per meal.. during the week m-f i make sure i have no fat or carbs for the last two meals PRE bed but weekends i eat reg. up to bed time the just protein for PRE bed nutriton
Bobby
- if you let your fears keep you from flying, you will never reach your high-
haha
Well having someone you know you can trust giving you information is definitely a plus, but I've never been one to just try something without knowing about it first. Not saying you would either, I realize you trust Brian and I do too. I just want to know why I'm doing something.
Its nothing personal against anyone I meet, its just how I am,. I like to know why I am doing what I am doing before I actually do it :-p
So Brian, my goals are like Ravinous' , I want to increase my muscle mass and decrease body fat. Of those two, gaining muscle is more a priority. I know some people tell you that its not possible to do both, but my thinking is this:
You need calorie surplus to gain muscle
You need deficit to lose weight (hoping its body fat).
So yes the natural tendency is to ask, how can you do both at the same time, its not possible... But since when do we have to restrict ourselves to a specific time frame? Why not, over the course of 24hours, can we make sure we're in a calorie surplus during the times when are in the most crucial states of building muscle and repairing, and then make an effort to be at a deficit or maintenance when we're not at (or surrounding) those crucial points throughout the day?
Its been my thinking to operate like that for a while now, but I've never really asked a professional about it. Or possibly Take a week's time frame and apply the above ideas similarly, however on your rest days eat under your maintenance calories, and/or possibly do low intensity cardio for a long duration or perhaps try an HIIT cardio routine?
Am i totally wrong in this idea?
Even if this is very difficult to do, If it is at all possible, its what I want to make my goal to do.
"Obsession is a term the lazy use to describe the dedicated" - Anon.
"Shoot for the stars, you might just reach the sky" - Unknown
The Response....
Hey Man,
First of all...thanks for the kind words. Both you and Ravinous.
Secondly, I would NEVER discourage or blame anyone for wanting to find out the "why" when doing something. That's what it's all about my friend!!
Thirdly, your goals aren't quite the same as those of Ravinous...he wants to gain mass and, though he doesn't want to gain a lot of fat mass, he isn't all that concerned about it at this point. He wants to gain...plain and simple.
Now, you bring up a very hot topic...and one that has been debated for quite some time. Can you gain muscle and lose fat at the same time? In theory, it seems like this would be impossible. In addition, there aren't any studies to my knowledge that have specifically looked at this question. That said, there are a number of research studies that have investigated other training issues and, as a sidebar, have resulted in participants both gaining muscle and losing fat. Thus, the prevailing theory is that you can gain muscle and lose fat at the same time...but there is a caveat to this. You can't do both to any great degree...at least not to the same degree that you could if you were specifically focusing on one or the other. So if you gain muscle and lose fat simultaneously, you won't be able to gain as much or lose as much as you could if you made either your primary goal. The other important point is that this appears to occur more in novice trainers rather than experienced lifters, so keep this in mind.
In all honesty, we really don't know how the process works at this point, but in all likelihood, it operates in a similar fashion to what you described above. When we same simultaneously, we're not necessarily talking minute by minute...more likely day by day or week by week. The studies I referred to earlier found increases in lean mass and decreases in fat mass after 8, 12 or 16 weeks, so your description above seems practical and likely. Again, we simply don't know enough at this point. To accomplish this, it is important to follow a sound strength program, coupled with a relatively high protein intake and a modest amount of cardio. Some think a reduced-calorie diet is important as well, but I like fluctuating the calories based on the training. Nutrition periodization is just as important as exercise periodization, so a consistently reduced-calorie diet may not be needed.
Ok...I'm tired. We can continue the discussion though!!
B
Brian Zehetner MS,RD,CSSD,CSCS
JamCore and Myfittribe "Nutrition Guy"
Certified Strength and Conditioning Specialist
Well...
Guys, all my life i've been trapped into what you're talking about now. Gaining quality muscle & keeping a low fat percentage is possible! I'm just not sure how I did it before. I'd always find myself "over training" & eating a decent amount of simple carbs, keeping my fat count low & my carb:protein just about the same per meal. I'd always get bigger but stay lean. Those were the days when I thought that the exercise was the main part of "growing." I didn't know anything about simple & complex carbs, chicken was just chicken, & protein shakes were just protein shakes... of course, I was always stretching & was more or less ALWAYS RUNNING SOMEWHERE... gym was 5 days a week, then I was on the field 6 days a week. But without getting into all that, i'm telling you that it IS very possible. But it's difficult. Anyhow, i'm about to hit the tub for a soak...
Alsoo....
Brian, its people like you that make me want to switch my major to nutrition lol, I love knowing how the body works and all about nutrition et al. and you're able to put it into simpler terms where people without a doctorate's degree can understand what you're saying :p
So thank you for the excellent information!
"Obsession is a term the lazy use to describe the dedicated" - Anon.
"Shoot for the stars, you might just reach the sky" - Unknown
IMO
up to this point i believe steve has already proven the theory i mean he gained up to this point and is lean, but anyways i too am in the Bulk phase but im trying to do it as clean as possible although i am 24/7 in a calorie surplus i get all cal's from good foods once to twice a week i have a cheat meal and i use the ratio of around 60/30/10 or 70/40/10 per meal thats carbs protein and fats..one big things is i do no cardio period!!! i should it would keep my fat even lower then it is i went from the 6 pack to 4 pack but HEY goals are goals! lol me and steves long term goals are quite the same to be natural beasts!!! lol but we are taking two different routes in achieving our goals, although our training is pretty similiar.. nutrition is different, it will be awsome to see this work and we both push ourselves and support our selves in and out of the gym!!!! im very excited to follow the log steve...
Bobby
- if you let your fears keep you from flying, you will never reach your high-
Amen
Amen brotha... thanks for the support.
Bulking then cutting is a proven formula for bodybuilding, so regardless we know its going to work. Mentally I dont think I can handle getting 'fat' nor do I like how I feel in such a state, so thats why I want to stay leaner.
If we end up finding out that bulking then cutting will give you better net gains, then so be it. I'll just make sure I gain very lean muscle and little fat which I feel is very possible as long as you eat very clean and are dedicated and consistent. This will also mean I dont have to 'cut' for as long. Regardless im so hyped and excited about this new program and ready to experiment!
"Obsession is a term the lazy use to describe the dedicated" - Anon.
"Shoot for the stars, you might just reach the sky" - Unknown
Believe it!
You sound like me a month & a half ago. LOL
I hated the idea of looking in the mirror & seeing a fat ravinous. But now that i've been following this diet, all i'm seeing is a bigger version of the normal me with an expanded stomach. What you can probably do it up your good carbs, drop your "good" protein & up your "good" fat intake & you won't be as "fat." To tell you the truth bro, the only thing i've been craving recently is meat, so if I do decide to have a cheat meal, I just up the protein in one of my meals twice a week at most. The other thing I crave is chocolate, but that's another story. You won't get fat if you do the same bro. Not if you're training like the beast I know you are.
thanks
Haha yeah :(. Well Im ready to start something new, just need to know the guidelines so I guess i have to wait til Brian wakes up :-p.
You think i need to drop my protein intake though? I think its good where its at, not too high and not too low. Its about 30g per meal, with 40-50g for post workout and the meal after that.
"Obsession is a term the lazy use to describe the dedicated" - Anon.
"Shoot for the stars, you might just reach the sky" - Unknown
Oh for the love of kittens...
All together now! Ready?
"This is the thread that never endssss!
Yes it just goes on and on my friendddd
Some people - started posting here not knowing WTF
And they'll just keep on posting here forever just because -"
OK, first off, about the lose fat while gaining muscle debate.
http://drsquat.com/articles/zigzag.html -- now we all know who this guy is, and how much he's done, and the consensus here would indicate that periodization, even on a day by day level is the only real way to address the problem of losing and gaining at the same time. You lose weight on Mon and Tue, then gain weight the rest of the week, or vice versa.
Second, about the protein requirements... sorry, but every bit of research I've ever seen (a lot of it coming from the same guy) have clearly and explicitly indicated the "1 gm / lbs body weight" to be the requirements for intense training, and the need for protein falls based on less intense training. A maintenance workout may need only .5 gm per lb. Now you're saying for a heavy powerlifting/bodybuilding style workout, twice a day, I only need 0.7 grams per day? Not buying it.
Got any references or sources you could cite? Preferably ones where 20 athletes were divided into 2 groups of 15 or something with the experimental group ingesting the new amount of protein (0.7 gm per lb) and the control group ingesting the traditional amount (1.0 gm per lb) in which the result was that the experimental group made comparative gains to the control group, when heavy and intense resistance exercise was performed. That would make me a believer.
And so... the epic thread continues, as we join Cornholio, in his never ending quest, to find ATP for his bunghole.
WiLL I AM!
Alright the little big brother? Is here.
I simply agree with practically everything everyone's said.
I've always told my brother you can't gain muscle and burn fat at the same time. Its impossible!!! however, i ALWAYS forgot to ask the most critical component, delta T. :) Change in time. Because I am completely into the now and immediacy of nutrition. Because i firmly believe your body does what it needs to do, when it needs to do it. It doesnt have much "though process" for nutrition in a sense.
For example, you could eat a nice complete meal, then go train. Your body needs energy when its training, plain and simple right? lets say your lacking amino acid profiles in your blood.... since your body doesnt "Store" protein (in the sense of the other macronutrients).... you either "got it" or "you dont".. so that said... if you dont have it, your body looks to other sources ... muscle tissue :) Now, the HOW, WHY, and more importantly WHEN, is still under deep deep study.
Carbs are soooooooo beneficial in many many ways. Not only are they the preferred and CLEANEST (therefore equating healthiest :) , idk...) form of energy, they also help indirectly preserve muscle tissue. If your body is using its muscle tissue to perform an exercise, but needs energy, its not going to look at your muscles. It will look for carbs first...depending on your current staate ("normalcy" or "Ketosis" is different).. it may also look for fat... as well as DELTA T :) if you're 2 hours into a workout.... or 1 hour or whenever... your body will search for alternate... so if you used a lot of carbs, your body will likely be into the fat stores.. .in fact i dont believe it takes too long to tap into those... but i wont say that for a fact, because of studies i would have to go find, :)..... it also is proven that beyond 2 hours... MUSCLE TISSUE (or actually, protein).... begins to be used. (Is this why typical marathon runners are more fat (bodyfat %) then others say sprinters? I personally think so.
SO all this said, just to say if your body needs energy, say you're trying to burn fat while doing cardio.... once you tap into that energy source, your body needs energy NOW, so it's not going to use a meal you eat in a few hours, of coruse, it's got to use what it has... so that brings into the equation how YOU PERSONALLY eat & nutritionize (hehe) yourself. SO if you can do it properly, with advanced studies :), you can manipulate it with exrecise intensities and nutrition, your body to do what you want it. its not easy, and its not understood competely, but i think its possible. :)
whew. good thing i have time to type :) or DELTA T! lol.
I'm wondering about this new guy?
Kasey, We see you share interests in these topics!! AWESOME! We love nutrition...it also seems that you have an interest in debunking all methods past, traditional or new, that aren't up to what you agree with.
To me, you come off as having much knowledge, but yet non-nutritional (variety, incase you didn't get that). It seems that you are becoming ethno-DrSquat-tric. This does or can lead to bias. Other sources helps you gather information for yourself, instead of spitting back purely what others say.
Tjhere are a lot of people who are excellent sources, Dr. Squat may be one of them dont get me wrong, but you should not rely on just one. It would be impossible for brian you get you a source like that ;) (20 atheltes divided into 2 groups of 15? :) )
We're glad you want to help, but we're all here with positivism, not negativism. We're not bodybuilding.com forums either, ,ruined with teens asking questions about which supplements to take, only to get flamed by others to recieve no answers, and get much "medially influeneced" data, only then to go on to train improperly, not get results, and give up.
We here are much different. You ahve to be open to change, and learn to listen to others ideas, and not disregard them completley and immediately.
We look forward to your input, we love new ideas and other peoples takes on simliar topics.
a.k.a. Ry_i_am
Here you go...
Here's a few reviews and one clinical trial...I simply don't have time to gather any more research for you, but obviously if you go to the references for these studies, you'll find that much more research. These are from the TOP researchers in the world on protein kinetics and metabolism...Lemon, Kreider, Ziegenfuss, Tarnopolsky, Tipton, Wolfe etc.
1.6-1.7 here, but up to 1.8/kg in his 2000 review
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9841962?ordinalpos=1&itool=EntrezSyst...
essentially same as above
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12380246?ordinalpos=1&itool=EntrezSys...
You don't need 2-3gms/kg
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14971434?ordinalpos=3&itool=EntrezSys...
Absolute max is 2.0-2.5/kg, so do we need to recommend this to all strength trainers? No...
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16779921?ordinalpos=1&itool=EntrezSys...
1.41 is fine…2.4/kg is nutrient overload
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1474076?ordinalpos=84&itool=EntrezSys...
ISSN position Stand---Kreider, Ziengenfuss, Almada and the fellas (1.4-2.0 gms/kg)
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17908291?ordinalpos=2&itool=EntrezSys...
Position Stand of American College of Sports Medicine, Dietitians of Canada and the American Dietetic Association--(same numbers I've been quoting)
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11128862?ordinalpos=11&itool=EntrezSy...
Most researchers agree that exact protein determinations are hard because of the complexity of protein and muscle metabolism, but these recs are the best we have, based on the available scientific evidence.
To be honest, we're splitting hairs to some degree, since a few grams here or there really won't make that much difference...
By the way, it's probably best to look at research findings from a number of different researchers, rather than "a lot of it coming from the same guy". You may end up forming a bias based on his work...
In the end, we can just agree to disagree!!! :)
Peace bro!!
B
Brian Zehetner MS,RD,CSSD,CSCS
JamCore and Myfittribe "Nutrition Guy"
Hmm.
Straight up bro, my chest just got tight reading this. Your profile says your 26 but you sure fooled me. Grow up a little. That was just rude and completely uncalled for. Thats great you want to contribute here at MFT and the information seemed useful, but no one wants that kind of attitude here, no matter how intelligent you may be.
"Obsession is a term the lazy use to describe the dedicated" - Anon.
"Shoot for the stars, you might just reach the sky" - Unknown
wha?
Yea I'm getting that "you're rude!" thing a lot lately. I went up and reread my own post twice just now.
Where exactly are you seeing this "rude" or "immature" vibe come in? I mean precisely what sentence gives that impression? Was it the cute little rhyme I came up with at the start? If you guys dont like my sense of humor I guess I'll just stick with the facts from now on. (I still chuckle at ATP for my bunghole).
I never said I got "All my research from 1 guy", I was just using him as a reference for argument sake. I could very well find all sorts of names and books I could list as references, but rather than go through the trouble my point was that what we generally understand from research says one thing.
And if asking any Tom Dick and Harry to list their sources when they make claims go counter to what we typically know to be true (or in essence, asking to be proved wrong by new research as any good scientist would want) is considered rude, then yea, I'm definitely in the wrong forum. If thats frowned upon here I should probably leave, because I'm going to be doing that a LOT. Its the best and quickest way to stay up-to-date on the latest research, since trying to find credible information through a search engine results in 465,890,142 results found for BIG SALE! BUY NOW!!! and 3 results for "controlled experiment observing effects of EAAs on athletes in a clinical setting".
I was happy, actually a little excited, to come back and see so many links posted and planned to get to reading them immediately... and the "dividing 20 athletes into 2 groups of 15" -- ok, so I'm not the greatest stand up comic in the world... my follow up was going to be that Chris Angel was conducting the experiment! *RIMSHOT*
............... *cricket cricket*
You know what? Forget it. I'm going to read those links now.
haha
Np man. Its the net, you can't really tell what people are saying.
We're typically up to date here, that's why we're helping people learn that any news isnt good news. So like you said, sources are the best bet. And learning how these studies were conducted. Ya know ? We dont want information from an invalid source like Fox News study hahaha!!! Done with 10 people trying to tell us this new fat loss pill works, or that protein isn't necessar in the diet... :D
Just that you're "FIRST OFF".. and stuff like that seemed a bit aggressive... b-e aggressive.. haha. a little cheer there. (WOW :) )
And we love learning why new concepts are "true" and that way we can formulate our opinions on whether it's legite or not. You're def. in the right place.. we all just got the wrong impression!! no biggie... :)
can't wait to hear some awesome debates guys!! (and women too!!! )
a.k.a. Ry_i_am
Hey Man!!
Friendly banter and debate is what science is all about :)
B
Brian Zehetner MS,RD,CSSD,CSCS
35% fats
Hey, all!
What a wonderful forum!! Just discovered it. It's great.
Well, after reading this thread I thought i would ask Brian a question, not about protein, but about the exact status of fats in a bodybuilder's diet.
Thirty five percent fats in the diet? The right macronutrient ratio to put on some extra muscle?
I totally agree with that because it just matches my own experience.
But I was curious as to the rationales used to back up this recommendation.
It seems that just about everyone has kept coming up with a different justification, lastly.
The most common-sense one being, of course, the kcal. argument (9kcal pg vs 4 kcal, etc.)
But there are some explanations I just can't get - Warning: I am not the sharpest tool in the box either, that's a fact I can't deny ;) -, for example that fats are better than CHO for N retention because, as it is quoted from an old study "protein synthesis is required to support new fat depots." Er... yes? All right, then... But could someone here perhaps explain that to me??
And, Brian, could you please enumerate the benefits of taking so much fat to increase muscle mass?
Well, I hope I won't be crucified for reactivating this owohohold thread... or asking boring questions... :)
haha let it go
no need to get angry at the 26 year old little guy! remember what u told me steve..
Bobby
- if you let your fears keep you from flying, you will never reach your high-
35% fat
Hey, all!
What a wonderful forum!! Just discovered it. It's great.
Well, after reading this thread I thought i would ask Brian a question, not about protein, but about the exact status of fats in a bodybuilder's diet.
Thirty five percent fats in the diet? The right macronutrient ratio to put on some extra muscle?
I totally agree with that because it just matches my own experience.
But I was curious as to the rationales used to back up this recommendation.
It seems that just about everyone has kept coming up with a different justification, lastly.
The most common-sense one being, of course, the kcal. argument (9kcal pg vs 4 kcal, etc.)
But there are some explanations I just can't get - Warning: I am not the sharpest tool in the box either, that's a fact I can't deny ;) -, for example that fats are better than CHO for N retention because, as it is quoted from an old study "protein synthesis is required to support new fat depots." Er... yes? All right, then... But could someone here perhaps explain that to me??
And, Brian, could you please enumerate the benefits of taking so much fat to increase muscle mass?
Well, I hope I won't be crucified for reactivating this owohohold thread... or asking boring questions... :)