Is it true your body can only take in 24G of protein at a time?

[KevJr88]

???

[in10city]

???

No, there is no magic number -> http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showpo...13&postcount=9

[createeen]

False.

[SEANxALLxDAY]

Broscience

[mootonandy]

I heard something like that before but I don't know if it's true or not.

[dawsondvm]

If that were true, explain how a 300lb pro bb could ingested enough protein to grow, eating eight meals a day. That's a total of 192g of protein a day.

[jasontkd]

Very True.....Your body has an internal scale. If you take in any more than 24 grams, you will explode.

[Fabs23]

No...that is false.

I personally like to divide my protein drinks into 25g servings and spread out for metabolism/dietary reasons. but your body can handle much more than 25g's.

[borkpower]

broscience

[snagency]

Is it true your body can only take in 24G of protein at a time?

yup.

almost as true as the myth that a hi-protein diet can cause kidney damage..






in healthy individuals, you can definitively go forward with the reassurance that neither of the above statements are true.

[Murderfox]

No...that is false.

I personally like to divide my protein drinks into 25g servings and spread out for metabolism/dietary reasons. but your body can handle much more than 25g's.

There are no metabolism advantages.

[snagency]

There are no metabolism advantages.

discuss?

[Murderfox]

Fair enough. However, as far as any metabolic advantages over eating 1 or 10 meals a day, there are none.

Say we have two people, both eating the same 3000 calories per day from identical macronutrients. One eats 6 meals of 500 calories/meal while the other eats 3 meals of 1000 calories/meal and we’ll assume a TEF of 10%. So the first will have a TEF of 50 calories (10% of 500) 6 times/day. The second will have a TEF of 100 calories (10% of 1000 calories) 3 times/day. Well, 6X50 = 300 calories/day and 3X100 = 300 calories/day. There’s no difference.

http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/res...ch-review.html

[Fabs23]

discuss?

Similiar to jump starting your metabolism



i spread my caloric intake out...as on a cut. i treat a protein shake like a meal. Not that I'm trying to operate on a deficit but its part of training your body to be able to burn carbs and fats. Protein intake constant throughout the day, carbs and fats fluctuate. With that said as a hunger supression technique spread out the protein shakes.
There's arguments on both sides, I know what works for me.

The only right answer is that there is NO ONE right answer.

[jimbb4life]

I think that 24 gr statement is nonsense.
I do find it interesting however that bodybuilders like Franco Columbu took in .5g/lb of bodyweight (according to his nutrition books) and obviously had no issue gaining muscle. I realize it varies by individual.
I personally think its one of those things that its most prudent to take in more than you need than less.

[Murderfox]

Similiar to jump starting your metabolism



i spread my caloric intake out...as on a cut. i treat a protein shake like a meal. Not that I'm trying to operate on a deficit but its part of training your body to be able to burn carbs and fats. Protein intake constant throughout the day, carbs and fats fluctuate. With that said as a hunger supression technique spread out the protein shakes.
There's arguments on both sides, I know what works for me.

The only right answer is that there is NO ONE right answer.

And, in case you missed it the first time through: eating more frequently does NOT, I repeat DOES NOT, ’stoke the metabolic fire’.

http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/res...ch-review.html



Also, there have been studies which concluded that eating a couple of larger meals as opposed to many bird-like ones decreased hunger.

[snagency]

I do find it interesting however that bodybuilders like Franco Columbu took in .5g/lb of bodyweight (according to his nutrition books) and obviously had no issue gaining muscle. I realize it varies by individual.

i also find it interesting that steroid use changes the way your body assimilates nutrients, and also allows more ingrestion of carbs without storing excess to fatty tissue..

[Fabs23]

http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/res...ch-review.html



Also, there have been studies which concluded that eating a couple of larger meals as opposed to many bird-like ones decreased hunger.

Ive read that and I agree...the problem I've always have had is that when I go to say 3 larger meals as opposed to 6-7 smaller meals I find I gain fat. And at this point my body is conditioned to go with smaller meals...so it hard for me to take enough in without feeling full and to last me say 5-6 hours. From a convenience perspective I'd love to eat 3 larger meals a day.

[Fabs23]

i also find it interesting that steroid use changes the way your body assimilates nutrients, and also allows more ingrestion of carbs without storing excess to fatty tissue..

thats debateable...(the ingestion of carbs part) depends on substance and how it effects the Beta receptors. As I type this I have mild Clen shakes. (srs)

[snagency]

Similiar to jump starting your metabolism



i spread my caloric intake out...as on a cut. i treat a protein shake like a meal. Not that I'm trying to operate on a deficit but its part of training your body to be able to burn carbs and fats. Protein intake constant throughout the day, carbs and fats fluctuate. With that said as a hunger supression technique spread out the protein shakes.
There's arguments on both sides, I know what works for me.

The only right answer is that there is NO ONE right answer.

i am aware..and i agree with you.

the ppl who say # of meals, size of meals, and macronutrient proportions have no impact on metabolic function, are grossly misinformed.

anyone who does not realize the simple act of eating more protein will increase metabolic output (thru digestion process alone), is lacking any real-world application that would show them this is true.

thermic effect of protein alone is 30% (meaning, 30% of every gram we ingest is burned in digestion)..i can't recall what exactly the other macros TEF is, seems like @ 6-8% for carbs, and 2-3% for fats.

[Fabs23]

i am aware..and i agree with you.

the ppl who say # of meals, size of meals, and macronutrient proportions have no impact on metabolic function, are grossly misinformed.

anyone who does not realize the simple act of eating more protein will increase metabolic output (digestion process), is lacking any real-world application that would show them this is true.

thermic effect of protein alone is 30% (meaning, 30% of every gram we ingest is burned in digestion)..i can't recall what exactly the C'F TEF is, seems like @ 6-8% for carbs, and 2-3% for fats.

Not going to lie, id love to hit an Ihop and see how I fare with the all you can eat pancakes. Thanks for blowing up my dream!

That 2-3% fats is the one always argued depending on the type of fat. Not trying to start a good/fat bad fat debate in here. That is the sticking point..or where I always feel like an asteric needs to be placed since there seems to be a lot of debate.

[snagency]

thats debateable...(the ingestion of carbs part) depends on substance and how it effects the Beta receptors. As I type this I have mild Clen shakes. (srs)

what is not debatable, is the effect AAS have on nutrient consumption/distribution of those cals.

just like Jay Cutler eating 800g of carbs a day, i would not as a natty athlete base my macro breakdowns on what someone who is juicing is doing.

[Murderfox]

i am aware..and i agree with you.

the ppl who say # of meals, size of meals, and macronutrient proportions have no impact on metabolic function, are grossly misinformed.

anyone who does not realize the simple act of eating more protein will increase metabolic output (digestion process), is lacking any real-world application that would show them this is true.

thermic effect of protein alone is 30% (meaning, 30% of every gram we ingest is burned in digestion)..i can't recall what exactly the other macros TEF is, seems like @ 6-8% for carbs, and 2-3% for fats.

1- It has been proven by studies, i'm unsure of how that is misinformed.
2- Eating more protein will obviously result in burning more calories due how much calories are burned by the digestion process, however that has nothing to do with meal frequency.

If person A eats 200g protein, 300g carbs, and 60g fat in 6 meals
and person B eats 200g protein,300g carbs, and 60g fat in 1 meal, there is no different. TEF is the same.

Now, if one ate less protein/more fat and the other less fat/more protein, there could be a difference because protein takes more calories to digest than fat.

[Fabs23]

what is not debatable, is the effect AAS have on nutrient consumption/distribution of those cals.

just like Jay Cutler eating 800g of carbs a day, i would not as a natty athlete base my macro breakdowns on what someone who is juicing is doing.

not familiar with his diet. Does he yo yo it or is he doing that all the time? I cant imagine he does that pre contest time.

Carbs seem to be misunderstood and debated more now than a few years ago. I think the south beach type diets really blew things out of proportion.

[jimbb4life]

what is not debatable, is the effect AAS have on nutrient consumption/distribution of those cals.

just like Jay Cutler eating 800g of carbs a day, i would not as a natty athlete base my macro breakdowns on what someone who is juicing is doing.

Whie we obviously agree on the nonsense of this 24g protein statement...im not sure if you are inferring that due to steroid use you could take in LESS protein. I would think if anything they would facilitate the bodies ability to utilize more protein.
As far as nutrient "partitioning" yes i agree - some steroids are more effective than others re: this. Like trenbolone for example.
At any rate as i said columbu's advice re: protein take is interesting to me. I didnt say i agree with it...but its def interesting.
As i said id much rather take in too much than not enough thats for sure.

[Fabs23]

Whie we obviously agree on the nonsense of this 24g protein statement...im not sure if you are inferring that due to steroid use you could take in LESS protein. I would think if anything they would facilitate the bodies ability to utilize more protein.
As far as nutrient "partitioning" yes i agree - some steroids are more effective than others re: this. Like trenbolone for example.
At any rate as i said columbu's advice re: protein take is interesting to me. I didnt say i agree with it...but its def interesting.
As i said id much rather take in too much than not enough thats for sure.

as someone who has used "those" type of substances I'm going to say I cant take enough protein in when I'm on. I've gone thru a 5 lbr in 2 weeks before. The thought is certain chemicals utilize protein more efficiently in the body, create an advanced synthesis because of nitro intake with the existing protein. Tren is going to stimulate appetite, better be protein than going on a binge when you can control yourself.

Regardless I'm all set taking in less protein while on.


Have we hijacked OP' thread?

[snagency]

If person A eats 200g protein, 300g carbs, and 60g fat in 6 meals
and person B eats 200g protein,300g carbs, and 60g fat in 1 meal, there is no different. TEF is the same.

you make it sound so simple, cut & dried.

the flaw in your logic, however, is the fact that there are other parameters that affect body composition, storage of nutrients (aka, metabolism), other than what you refer to.

for instance, there is no direct correlation to the digestive value (i.e. cal expenditure) of that one meal you noted above (2540cals), and that same # of cals split over 5-6 feedings. it does not equate out that ~25% of each feeding will be burned in digestion in the smaller meals, so logically 25% of those cals get burned in one huge feeding..that is one flaw. in fact - the larger the meal, the less proportion of cals that will be utilized to digest that feeding. if you overest, then your body is probably not digesting that excess intake.

other flaws include stability of blood glucose levels thruout the day - not only to keep hunger levels at bay, but also to inhibit unneeded insulin release that ultimately leads to more fat storage potential.

eating that one meal daily as you propose, what do you think is the insulin response from the body to that feeding? and then to go another day without food, before eating that large meal again..what do you think will ultimately be the body's response to this practice?
invariably, body will slow down the metabolism, because it senses after awhile that it will not get fed again for another day; thus, it holds onto those nutrients for dear life, stores them as fat for survival, and burns them as energy only if necessary. the body is a very adaptive mechanism..its #1 goal is survival..

i really could care less what some 'study' says about this..which, btw, you have not presented to me yet, but please save your time.

if it didn't matter how many times you ate, then why are there so many diets that espouse this concept, yet so few that espouse 3x daily feedings?

how do companies like Beverly International, who have long championed this approach, continue to exist let alone thrive?

because - in the real world, this approach works.
it works for me, and it works for my trainees.

i am not saying this is the only way to go about it; i'm simply saying, intuitively, you cannot deny the success of this approach when it is put in play correctly.

it just makes sense.

[snagency]

Whie we obviously agree on the nonsense of this 24g protein statement...im not sure if you are inferring that due to steroid use you could take in LESS protein. I would think if anything they would facilitate the bodies ability to utilize more protein.
As far as nutrient "partitioning" yes i agree - some steroids are more effective than others re: this. Like trenbolone for example.
At any rate as i said columbu's advice re: protein take is interesting to me. I didnt say i agree with it...but its def interesting.
As i said id much rather take in too much than not enough thats for sure.

carbs are protein-sparing..the natural ability of the body however to assimilate mass amounts of macros (not just protein) is finite; steroids change that landscape.

and yes as you mention, certain ones are more impactful than others.

for me, i am very carb-conscious. without some form of nutrient partitioner in play (Pslin for example), i cannot do large amounts of carbs without spillover to fat.

[mward26]

Nope not one bit..spread the truth to your highschool buddies!

[jimbb4life]

carbs are protein-sparing..the natural ability of the body however to assimilate mass amounts of macros (not just protein) is finite; steroids change that landscape.

and yes as you mention, certain ones are more impactful than others.

for me, i am very carb-conscious. without some form of nutrient partitioner in play (Pslin for example), i cannot do large amounts of carbs without spillover to fat.

I agree with all of this..and btw im the same way Re; carb intake....