LogFAQs > #955603135

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, DB1, DB2, DB3, DB4, DB5, DB6, DB7, Database 8 ( 02.18.2021-09-28-2021 ), DB9, DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear

Topic List	Page List: 1
Topic	Diet/workout experts - does protein really make a difference?
Xenozoa425 06/30/21 1:57:20 PM #190:	pinky0926 posted... Hang on, were we talking about the basic fitness needs of an average 140lb male, or (your words) the "upper limit of protein needed daily [for athletic people]"? Those two things have two different answers (0.34g per lb and 0.8g per lb respectively). The scenario I presented was someone exercising who wants to do their best to put on muscle. Which leads to the next bit: I'm not sure about this bit . Skip to 1m45s. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g82MXEJC3NI&t=105s Though he does highlight the point that this rule of thumb falls apart for overfat/undertrained people. I stated 0.34g per pound or 0.8g per kilogram. I actually made a small mistake, it should be 0.36g per pound or 0.8g per kilogram. Both will give you roughly the same number, it just saves you the trouble of converting to/from the metric system if you are unfamiliar with it. 0.36 x 140lbs = 50.4g protein daily 140lbs / 2.205 metric conversion = 63.5kg 0.8 x 63.5kg = 50.8g protein daily That's all anyone at that weight really needs. More than that is unnecessary. Once your weight starts increasing, then you can add a tiny bit more protein. pinky0926 posted... I wasn't arguing that consistent training is better than intense optimised training over a short term, though (we agree there). Just discussing the academics of where that rule of thumb comes from and how so many studies give different figures on it. If they all arrive at different numbers, it's not unreasonable to conclude that it's a safer bet to aim at the higher end of that range provided there's no adverse risk". So I guess that's the sticking point, is there an adverse risk? ^That guy in the vid suggests not. That post was in response to the other poster and I didn't edit their quote in until you already posted. But I'll post this video as a counter to yours. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7NW32vLq340 Turtlebread posted... the LP group didnt get much leaner, while the HP group lost fat mass and put on more lean mass from this study alone there is obviously a benefit here for some people You didn't read the end of the study nor my post then. Both groups lost fat mass and gained lean muscle. Both groups still had the same relative level of strength after 8 weeks, even though one group ate far less protein than the other. If you can get the same or similar results without having to eat that much protein, then you don't need* to eat that much protein. Working out is a matter of time, patience, discipline and consistency. You will get more clean energy for your workouts, as well as all the other beneficial micronutrients like fiber and antioxidants, if you replace all those extra protein calories with carbs. Even some athletes aren't really healthy because they are so worried about macros, but ignore micronutrients like magnesium, B12, selenium, folate, antioxidants, etc. Perascamin posted... You literally can't stay lean as possible if you don't work out for weeks on end lmao I worked out for the first time today in about roughly 3 weeks and was able to lift the same weight for the same amount of sets and reps as I did last time. --- "Let food be thy medicine." -Hippocrates <cite>Xenozoa425 posted [p:955603135] in Diet/worko... [t:79523951]...</cite> <quote>pinky0926 posted... </cite> <quote>Hang on, were we talking about the basic fitness needs of an average 140lb male, or (your words) the "upper limit of protein needed daily [for athletic people]"? Those two things have two different answers (0.34g per lb and 0.8g per lb respectively). The scenario I presented was someone exercising who wants to do their best to put on muscle. Which leads to the next bit: I'm not sure about this bit . Skip to 1m45s. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g82MXEJC3NI&t=105s Though he does highlight the point that this rule of thumb falls apart for overfat/undertrained people.</quote>I stated 0.34g per pound or 0.8g per kilogram. I actually made a small mistake, it should be 0.36g per pound or 0.8g per kilogram. Both will give you roughly the same number, it just saves you the trouble of converting to/from the metric system if you are unfamiliar with it. 0.36 x 140lbs = 50.4g protein daily 140lbs / 2.205 metric conversion = 63.5kg 0.8 x 63.5kg = 50.8g protein daily That's all anyone at that weight really needs. More than that is unnecessary. Once your weight starts increasing, then you can add a tiny bit more protein. pinky0926 posted... </cite> <quote>I wasn't arguing that consistent training is better than intense optimised training over a short term, though (we agree there). Just discussing the academics of where that rule of thumb comes from and how so many studies give different figures on it. If they all arrive at different numbers, it's not unreasonable to conclude that it's a safer bet to aim at the higher end of that range *provided there's no adverse risk". So I guess that's the sticking point, is there an adverse risk? ^That guy in the vid suggests not.</quote>That post was in response to the other poster and I didn't edit their quote in until you already posted. But I'll post this video as a counter to yours. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7NW32vLq340 Turtlebread posted... </cite> <quote>the LP group didnt get much leaner, while the HP group lost fat mass and put on more lean mass from this study alone there is obviously a benefit here for some people</quote>You didn't read the end of the study nor my post then. Both groups lost fat mass and gained lean muscle. Both groups still had the same relative level of strength after 8 weeks, even though one group ate far less protein than the other. If you can get the same or similar results without having to eat that much protein, then you don't need to eat that much protein. Working out is a matter of time, patience, discipline and consistency. You will get more clean energy for your workouts, as well as all the other beneficial micronutrients like fiber and antioxidants, if you replace all those extra protein calories with carbs. Even some athletes aren't really healthy because they are so worried about macros, but ignore micronutrients like magnesium, B12, selenium, folate, antioxidants, etc. Perascamin posted... </cite> <quote>You literally can't stay lean as possible if you don't work out for weeks on end lmao</quote>I worked out for the first time today in about roughly 3 weeks and was able to lift the same weight for the same amount of sets and reps as I did last time. --- "Let food be thy medicine." -Hippocrates</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1