ExRx.net

don't let that nasty protein powder put you off, I bought one that played hell with my stomach, but I worked out that if I had it with some carbs it didn't have any negative effects. I've sinced moved to a shake that contains carbs and it's been all good.

I don't really see a problem with the 140 lb badminton player vs. the powerlifter f 250 lb.

They are not the same mass so the recommended amount would be different. therefore what would be spread over 5-6 meals would be different.

Also, you will probably agree that a 250 lb person will have to work a lot harder on average (a statistical concept) to maintain his leanness and muscle than a 140 lb person (although I think this comparison is a tad unfair if we considered the same height body type individuals). Regardless I would argue that given evolutionary constraints, it would be rather difficult for a person who is say 5'10 to maintain a 250 lean physique so there would be no reason for bodily processes to ever be selected to handle eating huge amounts of protein at once.

I never meant to say that you couldn't use more than 20g in the sense of it would go to waste. I was just saying that studies seem to indicate it is just "excess" generic calories that could be used if you want to fill the bill of your energy requirements but would not somehow give you a better ability to gain muscle. Basically, if you are consuming 20g per meal, that is all you need for maximum muscle gain.

@ Stuward, I hope you are joking about statistics otherwise you sound like just another old person spouting "common sense" as accepted fact. Please dont waste space with pointless filler that is neither constructive nor relevant.

For the original poster, my interpretation was that you wanted to "enough protein for optimum muscle gain on a budget". If that is the case, 20g per meal 5-6 times a day is probably going to be fine unless you are very large already, which I am assuming you are not because then you would already know the answer to this question and be doing most things right. You could fill your other calories with protein but you don't need to since cost is a concern.

I agree that the actual amount of protein needed to maintain or increases muscle mass is actually lower than a lot of people think and there are numerous studies suggesting protein requirements of body builders and powerlifters are more than your average Joe but not an insane amount. So yeah I can see what you mean by saying only part of the protein you absorb is going to be used for muscle growth and maintenence. I think most athletes just like to play it safe with having the excess, there's more than enough processes your body can use the protein for.

I'm trained as a Data Analyst and an Accountant and I'm currently working as a staff officer in an army HQ. I was joking but I am serious about statistics and numbers being used to support lies. People assume that because you add a few numbers to your argument, it's scientific and more accurate. It can still be a lie.

This 20g/meal has been debated with no proof for years although 30g was always the number I remember. Never the less, It's possible to gain muscle eating twice a day so it's obviously wrong. You don't have to eat every few hours to gain muscle.

Statistics are the devil. Somehow, people always manage to interpret the same statistic as evidence for supporting opposite claims.

Well maybe that means you only need 40 g per day. Obviously joking.

My point is, there is nothing wrong with statistics. If you think "statistics lie" then you misunderstand the role of statistics in analysis. In an attempt to "enlighten" people who are already confused by this, I think it best to not toss around myths about statistics being bad, when it is really the misunderstanding of what a given sample says that is faulty.

The RDA is .8g per kg which is WAY less than 2g. Unless you are a professional athlete, there is no need for that much protein consumption and even then, I would question "average needs". Funny enough, for the average person (which is supposedly 160lb which I still think is crazy) the RDA would only require 60 g which is 20 g per meal over 3 meals. Anecdotes about people doing fine eating 3 meals per day don't really seem to help illuminate anything here except that perhaps, this question is really hard to answer.

If I were concerned with upping my protein consumption I wouldn't just double my protein intake and then start thinking "wow yeah, I need to eat twice what I used to eat". I would gradually make small changes and measure my progress as a response to the change in diet. If something isn't working well there is no need to totally junk the current plan if you are making some progress. People should think for themselves and find ways to actually measure progress on different programs.

My whole point about protein consumption is throwing around 2g per kg or whatever is just crazy talk with just as little support as anything else. The only you anyone really knows is that you need to eat a fair amount of protein. Each person needs to take the time to figure out what "fair" means and go from there. Not only will this give you the optimum results but it will teach you to think which is something that helps you in all facets of life. This is also the trait sorely lacking in most people.

I like both of you guys. So don't fight. Or scratch that...do fight. I'll learn. don't get mad and leave. Or ban my like Lyle did at Body Recomposition.

To me, statistics can be good, but many of them are crap lol.

Especially the ones that claim saturated fat is bad. haha

I wasn't really talking about leanness. I was referring to how much protein could be absorbed in one sitting. In that case the example is a good one - there's just no way a 250lbs powerlifter will absorb the same amount of protein per sitting than a 140lb badminton player. Doesn't need to be a big PL guy vs smaller badminton guy, put any big guy with a lot of mass up against the opposite. It doesn't matter how mismatched they are or unfair it seems to pair them, it's only in reference to how much protein can be used. The 20/30g or whatever it is is just far too specific to be true.




Yes but, assuming that's true, which it may well be, is 'muscle gain' the only reason we need protein? The PN link I posted goes into more detail...

Also, if you're 'pro low carb diets' and also buy into 20g per sitting of protein then, you contradict yourself.

Take 6 meals with 20g each meal - 480 calories.

Lets say you need 3500 calories per day. You know you need this because you feel like crap in the gym if you eat any less (which is how I judge it - I don't really 'believe' any goverment RDA). Anyway, look at those numbers and your protein intake is about 14% of your daily intake.

Point is, by buying into the 20g per sitting thing, you're limiting yourself in terms of macro break down. Unless you go very high fat then, you're stuck with high carb diets and, we all know how good high carb diets have been to us over the last few decades. In this case, in my view you would be better off going high fat than high carb but regardless, the point is, when you apply the 20g per sitting logic to other scenarios, it just doesn't make sense.

Again, as per the PN link, muscle gain isn't the only reason we eat protein.

KPj