Ongoing Study Discussion Thread - Nutrition, Training, Health etc.

[Mrpb]

I've never even understood how this could be reported. How can you say you're eating as "surplus of protein" unless protein is literally all you eat? Its like trying to blame an overflowing bucket on a specific drop of water surely.

Well the idea of the study was that they were supposed to eat their normal diet (supposedly maintenance) and just add the extra protein.

But as you probably know, self reported calories are notoriously inaccurate.

Either one could eat excess calories from protein without gaining fat or the other option: they just ate less calories because protein is the most satiating macronutrient. I personally think something like the latter is more likely.

[Heterodox]

Well the idea of the study was that they were supposed to eat their normal diet (supposedly maintenance) and just add the extra protein.

But as you probably know, self reported calories are notoriously inaccurate.

Either one could eat excess calories from protein without gaining fat or the other option: they just ate less calories because protein is the most satiating macronutrient. I personally think something like the latter is more likely.

Hmm well that sucks, self reporting calories is never the best idea and as you say eating that much protein is going to make it hard for anybody to also fit in all their other foods, it makes sense that they reduced their other food consumption due to having to eat so much protein.

Which study has shown the highest beneficial protein intake then was tightly controlled? Like is there a specific study or few studies people are basing the actual protein recommendation on?

[Mrpb]

Hmm well that sucks, self reporting calories is never the best idea and as you say eating that much protein is going to make it hard for anybody to also fit in all their other foods, it makes sense that they reduced their other food consumption due to having to eat so much protein.

Which study has shown the highest beneficial protein intake then was tightly controlled? Like is there a specific study or few studies people are basing the actual protein recommendation on?

The current protein recommendation is based on this: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28698222

But none of those studies were tightly controlled.

Protein recommendations based on tightly controlled studies: http://www.nutritiontactics.com/meas...ein-synthesis/

[Voyager92]

This isn't a study, but an article on reducing the risk of type 2 diabetes.

The points in the text are probably not new to most of the readers in this forum, it is still a good read though.

https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutriti...es-full-story/

[R5GT]

Protein recommendations based on tightly controlled studies: http://www.nutritiontactics.com/meas...ein-synthesis/

There is a linear increase in MPS rates up to approximately 20 g of protein. Further going up to 40 g gives an additional increase of 10-20%.

Is 40g the highest amount that has been tested in a single meal? or could intakes greater than 40g give an even bigger increase in mps?

[Mrpb]

There is a linear increase in MPS rates up to approximately 20 g of protein. Further going up to 40 g gives an additional increase of 10-20%.

Is 40g the highest amount that has been tested in a single meal? or could intakes greater than 40g give an even bigger increase in mps?

A mixed meal with 70 gram has been compared with a meal with 40 gram. It was pretty much equal (in fact 40 was slightly better).

When measured over ~5-6 hours there seems to be no benefit to MPS in getting more than 40 gram protein in a meal. Perhaps this would be different when measured over 12 hours.

[Mrpb]

This was a good podcast: https://www.muscleforlife.com/german...aining-podcast

"In this episode, I have the newly minted Dr. Eric Helms on to discuss a study published in 2016 titled “Effects of a modified German Volume Training program on muscular hypertrophy and strength.”

This study looked at the popular “German Volume Training” program, which involves performing 10 sets of a specific exercise in a single workout (usually 10 sets of 10 reps), and gave great insights into the overall effectiveness of this style of training versus more traditional, moderate-volume work."

It basically answers how much volume you need.

[Nedo]

It basically answers how much volume you need.

Thanks for providing the link. I'm at work and can't listen. Could you please provide a quick summary regarding how much volume is required?

[Mrpb]

Thanks for providing the link. I'm at work and can't listen. Could you please provide a quick summary regarding how much volume is required?

Probably around 10 sets per muscle group per week is a good starting point. Higher volumes likely provide additional benefits. Too high volume can be detrimental.

Basically find out how many sets you need to make consistent progress.

[Mrpb]

Is 40g the highest amount that has been tested in a single meal? or could intakes greater than 40g give an even bigger increase in mps?

Forgot to mention: after a full body workout more protein is required to maximise MPS. This has only been tested with whey but 40 gram protein from whey, I expect around 4 gram of leucine, maximised MPS.

With a whole food meal it could easily take 50 gram protein (or more) to reach 4 gram leucine, depending on meal composition.

[MrBumbaclart]

Love these threads,

Can anybody enlighten me on the whole "Amino acid oxidation" thing with higher doses of protein?

I was reading this article ( i can't post links too much of a lurker) bodyrecompositionDOTCOM/research-review/protein-amount-and-post-workout-protein-synthesis-research-review.html

It stated the 40g was better than 20g and yet it also states that.....

"Amino acid oxidation (burning of aminos for energy) was also higher with the higher dose"

If amino acid oxidation was HIGHER in the 40g group that implies even the 20g group was also oxidizing aminos, i thought oxidation only happend when there was excess protein? if 20g was enough to cause oxidation doesn't that mean 20g was excess? if that's the case then why would 40g be better when 20g was already enough to cause oxidation wouldn't 40g just cause more oxidation? What don't i understand here? lol

[Mrpb]

Love these threads,

Can anybody enlighten me on the whole "Amino acid oxidation" thing with higher doses of protein?

I was reading this article ( i can't post links too much of a lurker) bodyrecompositionDOTCOM/research-review/protein-amount-and-post-workout-protein-synthesis-research-review.html

It stated the 40g was better than 20g and yet it also states that.....

"Amino acid oxidation (burning of aminos for energy) was also higher with the higher dose"

If amino acid oxidation was HIGHER in the 40g group that implies even the 20g group was also oxidizing aminos, i thought oxidation only happend when there was excess protein? if 20g was enough to cause oxidation doesn't that mean 20g was excess? if that's the case then why would 40g be better when 20g was already enough to cause oxidation wouldn't 40g just cause more oxidation? What don't i understand here? lol

Figure 4 has the oxidation rates: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4985555/

So oxidation is higher with a larger portion. Not a problem.

Even with slower digesting protein sources like beef there's still some oxidation: http://www.nrcresearchpress.com/doi/...apnm-2012-0092

I would expect that oxidation will be lower if you eat protein with fat, fiber and carbs, because of the slower digestion.

[MrBumbaclart]

Figure 4 has the oxidation rates:
So oxidation is higher with a larger portion. Not a problem.

Even with slower digesting protein sources like beef there's still some oxidation:

I would expect that oxidation will be lower if you eat protein with fat, fiber and carbs, because of the slower digestion.

Forgive my ignorance but what i don't understand is if 20g caused oxidation why would 40g be better and not just cause more oxidation? and not an increase in mps Doesn't oxidation occur when there is more protein than needed?

[LactoseTolerant]

Forgive my ignorance but what i don't understand is if 20g caused oxidation why would 40g be better and not just cause more oxidation? and not an increase in mps Doesn't oxidation occur when there is more protein than needed?

Need is relative. Cells have the ability to sense energy and substrate availability and can match processes to that state. And besides, it is next to impossible to perfectly match amino acid intake to protein synthesis. There will be some "waste". As an analogy, think of a home reno. How likely would you buy enough material and not have anything left over when you're done?

[Mrpb]

Forgive my ignorance but what i don't understand is if 20g caused oxidation why would 40g be better and not just cause more oxidation? and not an increase in mps

40 gram does cause more oxidation and it causes more protein to be build into the muscle too.

Let's say you have an emtpy glass standing two meters in front of you. You're allowed to throw a bucket with water at it. One time you're allowed to throw a full bucket of water, the other time you're allowed to throw a half full bucket. With the full bucket there will likely be more water in the glass and more waste.

Now analogies are always limited and so is this one of course.

Food for thought: studies have shown that just 4 gram of leucine + 6 gram protein from whey can fully stimulate MPS after a leg workout. So yeah we're getting a lot more protein than needed.

So if your goal is to maximise anabolism (which makes sense for bb-ers) with minimal oxidation (which makes no sense to me) the solution would be to only consume EEAs with some leucine. You'd probably still have some oxidation but it would be far less.

[blue9steel]

So if your goal is to maximise anabolism (which makes sense for bb-ers) with minimal oxidation (which makes no sense to me) the solution would be to only consume EEAs with some leucine. You'd probably still have some oxidation but it would be far less.

Agreed, that doesn't make much sense to me either. Basically you'd be turning on the factory full blast but providing zero raw materials for building product.

[LactoseTolerant]

Jerônimo, Diego Pereira, et al. "Caffeine Potentiates the Ergogenic Effects of Creatine." (2017).

The aim of this study was to determine the effect of caffeine on creatine supplementation on electromyographic activity and torque. Sixteen males were supplemented with caffeine (6 mg·kg-1) and creatine (3 g). They did the knee extension test on the isokinetic dynamometer while electromyographic activity was monitored. The caffeine group achieved 4.57% increase in EMG activity and 4.25% increase in torque. The creatine group achieved a 17 .07% decrease in the EMG activity and a 3.45% increase in torque. The caffeine and creatine group achieved a 3.07% increase in EMG activity and a 5.79% increase in torque. The findings indicate that the consumption of caffeine at 6 mg·kg-1 in association with 3 g of creatine for 7 days generated a significant improvement in performance, increased the production of torque, and improved the EMG muscle activity. Thus, it is more than reasonable to conclude that caffeine potentiates the effects of creatine during a physical exercise.

http://www.asep.org/asep/asep/JEPonl...7_Jeronimo.pdf

[MrBumbaclart]

Food for thought: studies have shown that just 4 gram of leucine + 6 gram protein from whey can fully stimulate MPS after a leg workout. So yeah we're getting a lot more protein than needed.

So if your goal is to maximise anabolism (which makes sense for bb-ers) with minimal oxidation (which makes no sense to me) the solution would be to only consume EEAs with some leucine. You'd probably still have some oxidation but it would be far less.

I remember reading this, Does this mean that leucine is more important than the protein its self? so we don't actually need as much protein as we think its the leucine in the protein that enables us to use the protein for muscle building and there just happens to me a higher protein to leucine ratio in food?

Are there any studies showing benefits of leucine supplementation? It sounds like leucine supplementation might only allow us to eat less overall protein for the same results but not necessarily see better results from adding more leucine?

[Mrpb]

I remember reading this, Does this mean that leucine is more important than the protein its self?

They're both mandatory: leucine and the other EEAs.

so we don't actually need as much protein as we think its the leucine in the protein that enables us to use the protein for muscle building and there just happens to me a higher protein to leucine ratio in food?

Keep in mind that protein has a lot of other functions besides stimulating MPS. However, when we're already consuming >100 gram protein all these functions are likely well taken care off.

Are there any studies showing benefits of leucine supplementation?

Yes.

I suggest reading these two articles. With a disclaimer that Jorn's advanced leucine hypothesis is based on speculation.
http://www.nutritiontactics.com/meas...ein-synthesis/
https://www.strongerbyscience.com/at...rotein-intake/

[boo99]

I remember reading this, Does this mean that leucine is more important than the protein its self? so we don't actually need as much protein as we think its the leucine in the protein that enables us to use the protein for muscle building and there just happens to me a higher protein to leucine ratio in food?

Are there any studies showing benefits of leucine supplementation? It sounds like leucine supplementation might only allow us to eat less overall protein for the same results but not necessarily see better results from adding more leucine?

Yes, true. I've used the research suggested by Jorn in his articles (6g whey + 4.25g leu) that Mrpb linked for you to cut down on my calories while in a deficit whilst still getting the same MPS response as if I had consumed more whey (25g)

[rml27v]

sci-fit.net/2017/overfeeding-study-collection/
Interesting.

[Mrpb]

Yes, true. I've used the research suggested by Jorn in his articles (6g whey + 4.25g leu) that Mrpb linked for you to cut down on my calories while in a deficit whilst still getting the same MPS response as if I had consumed more whey (25g)

Probably a bit more would be necessary for middle aged men

[blue9steel]

Jerônimo, Diego Pereira, et al. "Caffeine Potentiates the Ergogenic Effects of Creatine." (2017).



http://www.asep.org/asep/asep/JEPonl...7_Jeronimo.pdf

Hurrah! Science says my morning coffee and creatine routine prior to workout makes sense.

[LactoseTolerant]

I remember reading this, Does this mean that leucine is more important than the protein its self? so we don't actually need as much protein as we think its the leucine in the protein that enables us to use the protein for muscle building and there just happens to me a higher protein to leucine ratio in food?

Are there any studies showing benefits of leucine supplementation? It sounds like leucine supplementation might only allow us to eat less overall protein for the same results but not necessarily see better results from adding more leucine?

Here are a couple of articles by the same principle investigator.

https://bmcnutr.biomedcentral.com/ar...795-017-0131-9

The first one shows that "native" whey (whey sourced from raw milk rather than from cheese production) spiked blood leucine levels higher and faster than regular whey.

https://jissn.biomedcentral.com/arti...970-017-0202-y

The second one shows that despite the observations of the first study, native whey did not result in greater MPS than regular whey 5 hours post exercise.

There's a lot we don't understand yet, certainly not enough to pin down the minimum amount of protein/leucine to get maximum MPS.

[boo99]

Probably a bit more would be necessary for middle aged men

You sure know how to make me feel old, lol

But yes, you're right in the pure whey amount with no leu supplementing, I usually get in 40-45g if resorting to whey

[Mrpb]

Here are a couple of articles by the same principle investigator.

https://bmcnutr.biomedcentral.com/ar...795-017-0131-9

The first one shows that "native" whey (whey sourced from raw milk rather than from cheese production) spiked blood leucine levels higher and faster than regular whey.

https://jissn.biomedcentral.com/arti...970-017-0202-y

The second one shows that despite the observations of the first study, native whey did not result in greater MPS than regular whey 5 hours post exercise.

The native whey did increase MPS slightly more than regular whey, but the difference was small. This is because the difference in leucine content was very small: only 0.5 grams and both conditions had enough leucine anyway (> 2 gram). Had they given 4 vs. 2 gram leucine the difference in MPS would have been a bit bigger.

Also, the study only involved a leg workout only. More leucine will be required after a full body workout.

[Mrpb]

But yes, you're right in the pure whey amount with no leu supplementing, I usually get in 40-45g if resorting to whey

But the 6g protein from whey + 4.25g leucine was tested in young guys. We probably need more slightly to maximise MPS in that scenario. Maybe 5 gram is enough, I'm not sure.

[boo99]

But the 6g protein from whey + 4.25g leucine was tested in young guys. We probably need more slightly to maximise MPS in that scenario. Maybe 5 gram is enough, I'm not sure.

Good point

Which is where OCD kicks in nicely cause I'll usually go higher than I'm supposed to with my supps

I usually throw in 5g in that scenario but we'll never know I suppose unless studies emerge

I wish Jorn would study if adding leu did increase LBM in older lifters

All I can go by is what I apparently see in my own body composition from the addition of leu and that's not valid really, just anecdotal

[Mrpb]

I wish Jorn would study if adding leu did increase LBM in older lifters

I bet Stu Phillips' lab is doing just that at the moment. Could take months or a year before it's published though.

[boo99]

I bet Stu Phillips' lab is doing just that at the moment. Could take months or a year before it's published though.

If that happens, that would be very interesting to read

Stu is another one that's on my top shelf of researchers