Go Back   Bodybuilding.net - Bodybuilding Forum > Bodybuilding Discussion > Nutrition Forum
Register Arcade FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-05-2005, 12:23 AM   #1 (permalink)
Darkhorse
Moderator
Rank: Light Heavyweight
Experience: 7-10 Years
 
Darkhorse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: CA
Posts: 3,859
Country:

Gender:
Send a message via Yahoo to Darkhorse
Default Protein Myths

In light of a past debate about how much protein one's body can assimilate at a time, I thought it best to shed some light on the highly debated subject. I like spreading knowledge to help disspell rumors and help people grow. ;)

Myth #2: You can only assimilate 30 grams of protein at one sitting.
Fact: The body has the ability to digest and assimilate much more than 30 grams of protein from a single meal.
Speaking of high intakes of protein, people have been perpetuating the myth that you can only assimilate ~30 grams of protein at a time, making protein meals any greater than a 6 oz. chicken breast a waste. This is anything but true. For example, the digestibility of meat (i.e. beef, poultry, pork and fish) is about 97% efficient. If you eat 25 grams of beef, you will absorb into the blood stream 97% of the protein in that piece of meat. If, on the other hand, you eat a 10 oz steak containing about 60 grams of protein, you will again digest and absorb 97% of the protein. If you could only assimilate 30 grams of protein at a time, why would researchers be using in excess of 40 grams of protein to stimulate muscle growth?1
Critics of high protein intakes may try to point out that increased protein intake only leads to increased protein oxidation. This is true, nevertheless, some researchers speculate that this increase in protein oxidation following high protein intakes may initiate something they call the "anabolic drive".13 The anabolic drive is characterized by hyperaminoacidemia, an increase in both protein synthesis and breakdown with an overall positive nitrogen balance. In animals, there is a correspondent increase in anabolic hormones such as IGF-1 and GH. Though this response is difficult to identify in humans, an increase in lean tissue accretion does occur with exaggerated protein intakes.14,15
The take home message is that, if you are going to maximize muscle growth you have to minimize muscle loss, and maximize protein synthesis. Research clearly shows this is accomplished with heavy training, adequate calories, and very importantly high protein consumption. This means that meals containing more than 30 grams of protein will be the norm. Not to worry, all that protein will certainly be used effectively by the body.

References: (ie. scientific data)
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
11. Boirie Y, Dangin M, Gachon P, Vasson M-P, Maubois J-L, and Beaufrère B. Slow and fast dietary proteins differently modulate postprandial protein accretion (amino acid turnover / postprandial protein anabolism / milk protein / stable isotopes) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA Vol. 94, pp. 14930-14935, December 1997
12. Sarwar G. The Protein Digestibility-Corrected Amino Acid Score method overestimates quality of proteins containing antinutritional factors and of poorly digestible proteins supplemented with limiting amino acids in rats. J. Nutr. 127: 758-764, 1997
13. Millward, D.J. Metabolic demands for amino acids and the human dietary requirement: Millward and Rivers (1988) revisited. J. Nutr. 128: 2563S-2576S, 1998
14. Fern EB, Bielinski RN, Schutz Y. Effects of exaggerated amino acid and protein supply in man. Experientia 1991 Feb 15;47(2):168-72
15. Dragan, GI., Vasiliu A., Georgescu E. Effect of increased supply of protein on elite weight-lifters. In:Milk Protein T.E. Galesloot and B.J. Tinbergen (Eds.). Wageningen The Netherlands: Pudoc, 1985, pp. 99-103

Darkhorse's Sig:"The greater the development and strength of the main muscular structures of the body, the greater the size and strength potential of the small areas of the body." - Stuart McRobert

"Many coaches and athletes don't believe in the benefits of GPP at all. Who are the worst offenders? Bodybuilders and powerlifters are by far the worst!. They feel that all they have to do is train the main lifts to get strong. This is why so many of them are out of shape." - Dave Tate
Darkhorse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2005, 01:24 AM   #2 (permalink)
TAURUS
Banned
Rank: Bantamweight
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 800
Country:

Default

SO exactly what % of ASSIMILATED protein - not digested - actually goes to rebuilding 'worked' tissue in relationship to the amout diverted to connective tissue growth? IS there a ratio? OR put another way - if you consume 50 gs, how much goes to muscle and how much goes to connective tissues - like veins, cartilage, sinew, gut ? sacks and all that stuff? AND what happens when all muscle tissue has been repaired and connective tissues are ? happy? Surely the excess proteins must be deposited somewhere, and unlike another member has stated in the past - they arent just 'shit out'! Some of the biggest animals on earth (herbivores) are complete vegetarians, and next in line the omnivores, which only will consume proteins seasonally(usually before a hibernation or after giving birth) are both FAR bigger than carnivores(total meat/fat diets) will ever be! Take wolves(dogs) and cougars(cats) for instance - ALL they eat are meats and insects(proteins) and they arent big at all, especially coyotes(dogs). Now take an elephant (a mammal like us) that grows from a few hundred pounds at birth to over a ton a year later eating grasses, WITHOUT any meat protein consumption, and you make me question an exaggerated protein-intake diet! We are Mammals, SO shouldnt the same criteria of other mammal diets apply to us as well, instead of the diet criterias of 'animals' like dogs and cats? In the north, years ago, BEFORE protein powders even existed, there was a sickness called 'protein sickness'. It was a catabolic and neurological disorder which was induced by eating too many -beleive it or not - rabbits over the course of a winters duration! Rabbits are extremely lean, and have almost no fat on them whatsoever. The consistent diet of a high meat-protein diet will eventually have serious effects on both mental and physical wellbeing. I know this is far-fetched, yet its the truth. Im not making this shit up. EVEN right before Atkins kicked the bucket, he did concede that his high protein, low carb and fat diet over a lond period is very detrimental to ones overall wellbeing. I know we need protein - Im just not on board with what some people recommend! I started a thread about protein before and one about 'alternate' protein sources (vegetables/beans,etc) and its a dead issue thread. WELL this got boring fast...
TAURUS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2005, 01:37 AM   #3 (permalink)
Darkhorse
Moderator
Rank: Light Heavyweight
Experience: 7-10 Years
 
Darkhorse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: CA
Posts: 3,859
Country:

Gender:
Send a message via Yahoo to Darkhorse
Default

Well, everyone is entitled to his/her opinion and I respect that. As for your questions, you gotta take it up with all the authors/scientists listed since they are all in compliance with what I posted. I'm confident all your questions can be answered by someone with a degree/PhD. It wasn't hard for me to find the proof. Check it out for yourself and draw your own conclusions. There was alot of times where I was proved wrong and I'm a better man for it. (Not taking away from your perspective) But, from a bodybuilders perspective, the above is reason enough, at least for me, to continue my 40-50 grams per serving of protein without concern.

As for some of your examples of cougars and them eating meat and insects, I think you're getting defensive. They have a genetic limit as do we all. That doesn't have anything to do with the amount of protein humans can eat per serving.

Darkhorse's Sig:"The greater the development and strength of the main muscular structures of the body, the greater the size and strength potential of the small areas of the body." - Stuart McRobert

"Many coaches and athletes don't believe in the benefits of GPP at all. Who are the worst offenders? Bodybuilders and powerlifters are by far the worst!. They feel that all they have to do is train the main lifts to get strong. This is why so many of them are out of shape." - Dave Tate
Darkhorse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2005, 01:55 AM   #4 (permalink)
TAURUS
Banned
Rank: Bantamweight
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 800
Country:

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 0311
Well, everyone is entitled to his/her opinion and I respect that. As for your questions, you gotta take it up with all the authors/scientists listed since they are all in compliance with what I posted. I'm confident all your questions can be answered by someone with a degree/PhD. It wasn't hard for me to find the proof. Check it out for yourself and draw your own conclusions. There was alot of times where I was proved wrong and I'm a better man for it. (Not taking away from your perspective) But, from a bodybuilders perspective, the above is reason enough, at least for me, to continue my 40-50 grams per serving of protein without concern.

As for some of your examples of cougars and them eating meat and insects, I think you're getting defensive. They have a genetic limit as do we all. That doesn't have anything to do with the amount of protein humans can eat per serving.
CORRECTION - YOUR POST is in compliance with what they hypothesize!
AGAIN with the 'only a person with a 'paper and a PHD' can know what their talking about!
COME on now 0311 - THERE are 2 types of builders right. PERHAPS there is a specific diet for each type of building methodology! ;) PERHAPS a second 'mystery' diet! ;) YET, you wouldnt know a thing about it because your NAT -alledgedly.

AS for the animal content, I only included it because they obviously know what they should be eating, AND you mentioned animals in your 'copy n paste' endeavour so I did too ... in my own words.

IF animal studies have nothing to do with 'real-world' people results, why are animals tested for diets, medications, and disease 'cures' if they have no relevant correalation to us?
TAURUS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2005, 02:02 AM   #5 (permalink)
TAURUS
Banned
Rank: Bantamweight
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 800
Country:

Default

ON the 'topic' of protein requirements of animals like dogs and cats - ARE you aware that they require absolutely ZERO carbs to exist! They never eat carbs in nature so why should they consume them in the foods WE SERVE THEM. AS WELL, often these animals are 'tested' to see what types of nutrients WE humans should be consuming! MAKES no sense to me why a dog or cats protein assimilation capacity could be equated to what a humans should be!
TAURUS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2005, 02:10 AM   #6 (permalink)
Darkhorse
Moderator
Rank: Light Heavyweight
Experience: 7-10 Years
 
Darkhorse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: CA
Posts: 3,859
Country:

Gender:
Send a message via Yahoo to Darkhorse
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TAURUS
CORRECTION - YOUR POST is in compliance with what they hypothesize!
AGAIN with the 'only a person with a 'paper and a PHD' can know what their talking about!
COME on now 0311 - THERE are 2 types of builders right. PERHAPS there is a specific diet for each type of building methodology! ;) PERHAPS a second 'mystery' diet! ;) YET, you wouldnt know a thing about it because your NAT -alledgedly.

AS for the animal content, I only included it because they obviously know what they should be eating, AND you mentioned animals in your 'copy n paste' endeavour so I did too ... in my own words.

IF animal studies have nothing to do with 'real-world' people results, why are animals tested for diets, medications, and disease 'cures' if they have no relevant correalation to us?
Yup, science and bodybuilding don't mix in your words then...

The fact of the matter is simply that you cannot prove your myth. I provided scientific studies, ect. You provided that animals eat insects and it's a piece of paper...
Quote:
In animals, there is a correspondent increase in anabolic hormones such as IGF-1 and GH. Though this response is difficult to identify in humans, an increase in lean tissue accretion does occur with exaggerated protein intakes.14,15
Sounds like those animal studies you're talking about huh???? There you go, forgot about that..
Your post is in compliance blahblahblah. Doesn't sound like a 33 year old trying to have a grownup debate is it? If you want to argue with scientific research, go somewhere else. It started off pretty intelligently, but of course you got defensive. I'd rather you just go your own way or something because this is getting pretty stale. Honestly, show me anything besides your "golden opinion" and prove me wrong about you. Otherwise, go post elsewhere. I don't care. Everytime you ask for research backing my advice I gave it pure and simple. You just have your opinions I'm done with this subject. I know I'm right about this and you proved it with getting defensive and argumentative. Enjoy the forum, I'm done giving advice helping people out. I've tried to help this site out as much as I could, Fuck it-

Darkhorse's Sig:"The greater the development and strength of the main muscular structures of the body, the greater the size and strength potential of the small areas of the body." - Stuart McRobert

"Many coaches and athletes don't believe in the benefits of GPP at all. Who are the worst offenders? Bodybuilders and powerlifters are by far the worst!. They feel that all they have to do is train the main lifts to get strong. This is why so many of them are out of shape." - Dave Tate
Darkhorse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2005, 02:40 AM   #7 (permalink)
TAURUS
Banned
Rank: Bantamweight
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 800
Country:

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 0311
Yup, science and bodybuilding don't mix in your words then...

The fact of the matter is simply that you cannot prove your myth. I provided scientific studies, ect. You provided that animals eat insects and it's a piece of paper...
Sounds like those animal studies you're talking about huh???? There you go, forgot about that..
Your post is in compliance blahblahblah. Doesn't sound like a 33 year old trying to have a grownup debate is it? If you want to argue with scientific research, go somewhere else. It started off pretty intelligently, but of course you got defensive. I'd rather you just go your own way or something because this is getting pretty stale. Honestly, show me anything besides your "golden opinion" and prove me wrong about you. Otherwise, go post elsewhere. I don't care. Everytime you ask for research backing my advice I gave it pure and simple. You just have your opinions I'm done with this subject. I know I'm right about this and you proved it with getting defensive and argumentative. Enjoy the forum, I'm done giving advice helping people out. I've tried to help this site out as much as I could, Fuck it-
Science and bbing dont mix! HOW the fuck do make that hypothesis based on what I say - You dont really understand anything other than 'orders' do you!
YOU hate the fact I can school you and your ignorant methods of trying to dis my fact-based-opinions....I KEEP MENTIONING DR. LOTHAR WENDTS PROTEIN THEORY to back up my case! If you took your head out of your ass long enough to look into it you might be surprised....AND a bit humbled...BUT thats not what you want to happen...YOU havent got the skills to debate anything without bringing up personal stuff like my age, which really has nothing to do with this at all,,,IF you want to get personnal Ill call you a NOB right now... just because your big doesnt mean you know shit about anything besides bullying and cheap shots. IF YOU want to get it on and become personnal Ill have to retaliate like-wise. YOU are a spin-doctor - YOU turn everything around to make the situation seem like your in control and you know what your talking about - just like a 'politician'. I dont mean to put a smack-down on you, YET when YOU become defensive, and YOU become personnal first, I have no option but to sink to your....age level, and slap you back in the face ...THIS PLACE WILL BE BETTER OFF WITHOUT YOUR BULLSHIT RHETORIC - GO BACK TO 400! ...I dont feel any better a person for this event taking place - I just think YOU mis-lead too many noobs with some of your BS 'copy n paste' methods ,,I, / STAND DOWN!

Last edited by TAURUS; 06-05-2005 at 02:49 AM.
TAURUS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2005, 07:37 AM   #9 (permalink)
TAURUS
Banned
Rank: Bantamweight
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 800
Country:

Default

LEE HAYWARDS 3 PIECE REPORT: http://www.leehayward.com/protein_part1.htm
THIS IS ONE TO READ THROUGH-OUT!
TAURUS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2005, 06:55 PM   #10 (permalink)
sdf42450
Rank: Member
Experience: 7-10 Years
 
sdf42450's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 434

Default


dude, all those links are from 1 source... hardly compelling evidence when 1 researcher came to those conclusions.

and Dr. Lothar Wendt's protein theory can be debated quite easily. if you read anything futher than just that one theory and/or tested some of the theories you'd probably have a much different opion of Dr. Wendt's theory.

Last edited by sdf42450; 06-05-2005 at 07:04 PM.
sdf42450 is offline   Reply With Quote
 

Reply

  Bodybuilding.net - Bodybuilding Forum > Bodybuilding Discussion > Nutrition Forum


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:54 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.0.0 RC5
4TV.com - Watch TV Online