Per meal protein doses to 'optimize' anabolism? Aka, "how much protein should I eat?" I think it's pretty clear that 20g does the job (1). The incremental rise in MPS from 20-40g was 14% (using egg protein in young men after an intense
leg workout). Witard et al. (2), once again, 20g gets the job done (whey protein and leg exercises only). In that study going from 20-40g gets you an extra 16% in MPS. MacNaughton et al. (3) say 40g > 20g for whole-body resistance exercise; the difference between MPS
from 20 to 40g was ~18% (see Figure below). Now we know acute measures of MPS (over h) don't align well with hypertrophy (4), yet some insist that 40g is 'better' than 20g. My bet, since only two doses were tested that 30g would have done just as good a job in stimulating MPS.
It's a statistical nuance that Macnaughton found what neither Moore nor Witard did. The dose of per meal protein to maximally stimulate MPS is still pretty close to 20-30g friends, especially if you're younger and lifting.
REFERENCES
1.Moore DR et al. Ingested protein dose response of muscle and albumin protein synthesis after resistance exercise in young men. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 2009;89(1):161-8. doi: 10.3945/ajcn.2008.26401.
2.Witard OC et al. Myofibrillar muscle protein synthesis rates subsequent to a meal in response to increasing doses of whey protein at rest and after resistance exercise. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 2014;99(1):86-95.
3.Macnaughton LS et al. The response of muscle protein synthesis following whole-body resistance exercise is greater following 40 g than 20 g of ingested whey protein. Physiol Rep 2016;4(15). doi: 10.14814/phy2.12893.
Recently, I had the pleasure of speaking in Frankfurt with @BradSchoenfeld and Keith Baar (@MuscleScience). Aside from the great science, an interesting theme emerged for nutritional support of muscle gains and connective tissue 'repair' or remodelling.
Both I and Keith stated
that the main, by far, driver of gains in muscle mass is lifting weights or providing isometric tension/loading in the case of the tendon/ligament/cartilage.
This is why I can't understand the preoccupation with overly nuanced variables beyond a total daily protein intake of
1.6 g protein/kg/d. The 'protein' effect is simply so damn small that getting your knickers in a twist over things like animal versus plant or 3 vs. 4 meals per day is simply hard to comprehend when you look at the overall magnitude of the effect - see onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jc…
@theproof@GardnerPhD If nitrogen balance related to a physiological outcome, I could believe that it was a meaningful outcome. The main flaw in using the RDA is as if it’s a target 🎯 It’s not! The flaws in Nbal are many, well known, and painstakingly documented. It’s been shown, numerous times 1/n
@theproof@GardnerPhD To reflect adaptive, and at the EAR accommodative, processes. Thus, it’s not optimal but rather a reflection of a economy of N use. These are old points made by many. So, in answer to your question Simon, it it likely that a number of people can stay in N balance, through 2/n
@theproof@GardnerPhD Consuming plant proteins that are not as processed, yes. The question becomes, is that a good thing? The answer is, it depends. When able to live in this state without stressors - viral infection as a pertinent recent example - it’s probably fine. But when a stressor happens 3/n
After posting something about light(er) weights in promoting muscle mass and strength gains, it's always interesting to read the emails I get. They range from, thank you, this is so liberating to read, it hurts when I lift heavy, and I never knew
lifting lighter had the same effects. Then I get emails excoriating "my" paradigm (as if it's mine) and that lifting light(er) weights is a waste of time. Most of the latter types of emails talk about the "fear" of people prescribing exercise that clients will see no benefit
and that it's a "waste of time" to light 3lb dumbells to improve arm strength or bodyweight squats do not make you stronger. It's honestly stunning to read the knots into which people will twist themselves and their narrative as to why lighter weights don't "work." My take
Systematic review and meta-analysis of protein intake to support muscle mass and function in healthy adults pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35187864/
Bench press strength is slightly increased by ingesting more protein in <65 years old subjects during RE training
(SMD = 0.18, 95% CI 0.03:0.33, P = 0.01, 32 studies, low level of evidence). The effects of ingesting more protein are unclear when assessing handgrip strength and only marginal for performance in physical function tests. In conclusion, increasing daily protein ingestion results
in small additional gains in LBM and lower body muscle strength gains in healthy adults enrolled in resistance exercise training. There is a slight effect on bench press strength and minimal effect performance in physical function tests.
Many arguments around protein requirements and adequacy are based on a foundation that the RDA is correct, is a target intake at which we should aim, and represents a level beyond which no further health benefit would result.
Hot take: None of these assumptions are true and
it has been shown time and again, using various methods, that optimal levels of protein intake are high(er) than the RDA. How much higher? Well, there I can agree we have room for discussion!
As for the 'downsides' of consuming 'too much' protein, it's probably prudent
to remind folks that the AMDR says protein intake at 10-35% of total Ein is associated with good health. But that's a big range!
Most evidence, in my experience/view, points to intakes >RDA (more than could be cited here) but that benefit plateaus approaching 1.6 g/kg/d
Stop saying that higher protein intakes cause renal failure, you are wrong. From the WHO/FAO:
“…the suggestion that the decline of glomerular filtration rate that occurs with advancing age in healthy subjects can be attenuated by reducing the protein content
in the diet has no foundation.”
From the IOM in setting the last DRI:
“…protein content of diet is not related to progressive decline in kidney function with age.”
A causal link? No evidence:
Changes in Kidney Function Do Not Differ between Healthy Adults Consuming
Higher- Compared with Lower- or Normal-Protein Diets: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis academic.oup.com/jn/article/148…
A Systematic Review of Renal Health in Healthy Individuals Associated with Protein Intake above the US Recommended