Flex and M & F aren't medical journals, no. But those publications do show what bodybuilders are doing. While the 2g per lb is still prevalent, over the past few years there has been a shift to back that off to 1g per lb (which is what I follow). Namely, Chris Aceto has strongly advocated the 1g per lb which at first was met with resistance, but Aceto has made quite the name for himself as a BB trainer.
But it should be noted that even Aceto says the 1g is a minimum. No upper limit is specified.
Old habits die hard, and you still see many that adhere to the 2g rule of thumb. Granted, just because its been done for years doesn't mean it's right. But it can not be denied that it has been done this way for a long time. Arnold himself advocated at least 1.5g per lb.
Still, if it were THE way (2g/lb) then there wouldn't be so much debate about it today. The fact that there is so much debate is because it has been done this way for so long, yet today, people are scientifically questioning the reason of it. As I said originally, 2g is often prescribed. I never said it is always prescirbed, or that 2g isn't challenged. I've been reading various BB periodicals for years, and as far back as I can remember, I've always read that 2g is a great rule of thumb for bodybuilding. But I do concede that there are scientific studies that have shown that less than that is adequate.......but it should be noted that those studies weren't done on bodybuilders with monstrous hypertrohy in mind. Typically the study rests on strength or endurance gains.
Check this Google Search. There you will find advocates for 2g/lb, those that are against it, and those that are simply wondering who is right. It is a much debated topic.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%2 ... 22+protein