Do you really have to consume 1g of protein per body weight?

[NLNFunKti0nz]

Let’s say you’re cutting or bulking and weigh 175 lbs. You have breakfast and lunch with a post workout shake and are at 110g of protein for the day.

You have one meal left which is dinner and you end up eating 3 slices of pizza and full for the night. Three slices of pizza is like what 12g of protein?

So that’s 132g of protein for the day but you weigh 175lbs so you have to take 175g of protein but you’re already at a caloric surplus.

Do you stop eating or do you have to eat the remainder 43g of protein to meet your 175g protein goal for the day? I am trying to cut at the moment and today was just an off day for dinner.

[gbullock32]

You would be more than fine with .7g per pound, or 123g if you weigh 175 pounds.

[Mikeez0]

1) You don't need 175grams of protein.
2) You shouldn't be so strict with macros "43 grams of protein left or my gainz are gone".
3) If you are really under protein goal, and you have to be in a calorie deficit, you could simply eat 2 slices of pizza and eat something at home.
4) No way 3 slices of pizza are 12 g of protein, more like 8g of protein per slice. so 20-30 grams would be a good estimate.

[SeanFxxx]

General rule is actually one gram per pound of lean body mass, which is your body weight minus fat mass. You can estimate if you don't have means to calculate your body fat. Point is, it will always be a lower number than your actual weight. Like others have said don't stress over it, just be consistent. Protein recommendations are always a range, not a finite amount.

[NLNFunKti0nz]

Thanks guys I always lose motivation when I don’t meet my protein requirements. I try to balance things out. Like on weekends for dinner rather than eating 8oz chicken breast and a cup of broc**** or brown rice, I would eat out with friends somewhere. It just keeps me sane

[bcradio]

Do you really have to consume 1g of protein per body weight?

Where did this come from?

As said above 0.7g is all you need.

[kusok]

You would be more than fine with .7g per pound, or 123g if you weigh 175 pounds.

It depends. Many people, especially strength and power athletes or bodybuilders in caloric deficit would NOT be "fine" with it, nor would they be fine with 175g protein. 250g is where many people would begin to see increased recovery and strength and hunger diminishing.

[favorableshift]

.6-.7 tops. don't be one of those that eat way too much protein

[formicaman]

.6-.7 tops. Don't be one of those that eat way too much protein

0.7 minimum

[favorableshift]

0.7 minimum

yea 1.5 sounds about right, right?

[sooby]

when i'm bulking i don't really keep track because I naturally overshoot it


however when I'm cutting I make sure to get a gram per lb. people have different optimal protein requirements, some can get away with less, some need to eat more.

[favorableshift]

when i'm bulking i don't really keep track because I naturally overshoot it


however when I'm cutting I make sure to get a gram per lb. people have different optimal protein requirements, some can get away with less, some need to eat more.

ive gone from eating over 1 g per pound to under .7 and have gotten te same results. your body can onluse an x amount of protein after that its useless. its 1 pound per lean muscle mass so unless your 0% bf. 1g is too much. ive learned through experience

[gbullock32]

It depends. Many people, especially strength and power athletes or bodybuilders in caloric deficit would NOT be "fine" with it, nor would they be fine with 175g protein. 250g is where many people would begin to see increased recovery and strength and hunger diminishing.

This is false, more might be beneficial, but .7g as a minimum is more than enough.

Protein Needs
Protein Needs 2
Protein Needs 3
Protein Timing
Muscle Protein Synthesis

[kusok]

yea 1.5 sounds about right, right?

For me it not only sounds right, but is proven to be right over and over. And I'm far from alone. It depends on the individual.

[kusok]

This is false, [b]more might be beneficial[b/], but .7g as a minimum is more than enough.

Protein Needs
Protein Needs 2
Protein Needs 3
Protein Timing
Muscle Protein Synthesis

So which is it? More might be benifitial, or is 0.7 more than enough?


How about people with low carb requirements and poor carb tolerance, should they just do 0.7 anyway because some fat professor tested some people who have nothing to do with one's life, under conditions that don't resemble one's schedule, measured something irrelevant and concluded that what actual countless athletes with a 6-pack and muscle mass observed for decades is all false?

Like let's say my recovery, look, hunger control, and strength is better at 300g protein VS 200 grams, and I have tested this about 20 times (srs) under the strictest conditions with matched calories and no other variables being changed, and have also done the same for about 10 other people under my watch. Should I simply disregard field observations and go with what some study says anyway?

[gbullock32]

So which is it? More might be benifitial, or is 0.7 more than enough?


How about people with low carb requirements and poor carb tolerance, should they just do 0.7 anyway because some fat professor tested some people who have nothing to do with one's life, under conditions that don't resemble one's schedule, measured something irrelevant and concluded that what actual countless athletes with a 6-pack and muscle mass observed for decades is all false?

Like let's say my recovery, look, hunger control, and strength is better at 300g protein VS 200 grams, and I have tested this about 20 times (srs) under the strictest conditions with matched calories and no other variables being changed, and have also done the same for about 10 other people under my watch. Should I simply disregard field observations and go with what some study says anyway?

.7g is more than enough to progress just fine; higher might have some benefits but there are diminishing returns.

What you are arguing is your opinion vs scientific fact; you wont win with anecdotal evidence. Some prefer higher protein (I do myself, due to enjoying meat, eggs, milk, ect) but to say there is a correlation between those who are fit and an increased protein intake over simplifying it.

People who exercise tend to eat higher protein, most think they need to, and they are fit. They are fit because they exercise, not because of the increased protein; they could eat less and have the same results.

Not to mention that most of the shredded guys who are top tier athletes are on multiple 'supplements' that give them a huge advantage.

[kusok]

.7g is more than enough to progress just fine; higher might have some benefits but there are diminishing returns.

What you are arguing is your opinion vs scientific fact; you wont win with anecdotal evidence. Some prefer higher protein (I do myself, due to enjoying meat, eggs, milk, ect) but to say there is a correlation between those who are fit and an increased protein intake over simplifying it.

People who exercise tend to eat higher protein, most think they need to, and they are fit. They are fit because they exercise, not because of the increased protein; they could eat less and have the same results.

Not to mention that most of the shredded guys who are top tier athletes are on multiple 'supplements' that give them a huge advantage.

So if I do NOT progress at 0.7g protein, and do progress at 1.5, is 0.7 more than enough?


People with poor tolerance to carbs, in caloric deficit, involved in strength and power athletics absolutely do need and historically used more than 0.7g/lb protein. All one has to do is check recovery, strength, and hunger levels. Read up on Lyle's how much protein do you need article.

[gbullock32]

So if I do NOT progress at 0.7g protein, and do progress at 1.5, is 0.7 more than enough?


People with poor tolerance to carbs, in caloric deficit, involved in strength and power athletics absolutely do need and historically used more than 0.7g/lb protein. All one has to do is check recovery, strength, and hunger levels. Read up on Lyle's how much protein do you need article.

You would progress on .7g, though you might prefer more. You're argument is that because athletes eat more protein, that more is required. That is not true. If they are eating low carb than they would need to make up for the loss of calories from that macro elsewhere, so of course they would eat more protein to compensate for that.

Your ignorance is amusing.

[AdamWW]

So if I do NOT progress at 0.7g protein, and do progress at 1.5, is 0.7 more than enough?

People with poor tolerance to carbs, in caloric deficit, involved in strength and power athletics absolutely do need and historically used more than 0.7g/lb protein. All one has to do is check recovery, strength, and hunger levels. Read up on Lyle's how much protein do you need article.

Have you actually tested this when you're in a surplus or eating at or around maintenance? If not, it seems kind of hard to compare...

Protein needs should not vary to the degree you're talking about between individuals unless protein quality is extremely poor (ie, you're bulking on nothing but potatoes and spinach).

[kusok]

You would progress on .7g, though you might prefer more. You're argument is that because athletes eat more protein, that more is required. That is not true. If they are eating low carb than they would need to make up for the loss of calories from that macro elsewhere, so of course they would eat more protein to compensate for that.

Your ignorance is amusing.

Hold on, I'm trying to understand this: I have specifically tested 175g protein VS 300g on myself with matched calories and no other parameters being changed, about 20 times. I progress on 300 and do not progress at 175. But you're saying that I nonetheless DO progress on 175 because you said so? So if I see 4 apples in front of me and have carefully checked and rechecked that it's 4 apples, but you say it's 3, then it's 3?

[gbullock32]

Hold on, I'm trying to understand this: I have specifically tested 175g protein VS 300g on myself with matched calories and no other parameters being changed, about 20 times. I progress on 300 and do not progress at 175. But you're saying that I nonetheless DO progress on 175 because you said so? So if I see 4 apples in front of me and have carefully checked and rechecked that it's 4 apples, but you say it's 3, then it's 3?

Anecdotal evidence based off of only your own experiences and you are presenting it as fact.

You are an idiot, and no matter how wrong you are no one can convince you otherwise because you believe you are right despite all evidence to the contrary.

[kusok]

Have you actually tested this when you're in a surplus or eating at or around maintenance? If not, it seems kind of hard to compare...

Protein needs should not vary to the degree you're talking about between individuals unless protein quality is extremely poor (ie, you're bulking on nothing but potatoes and spinach).

Protein needs vary dramatically based on individual.

https://bodyrecomposition.com/muscle...athletes.html/

https://bodyrecomposition.com/fat-lo...eting-qa.html/

Cliffs:
1.5g/lb is recommended for some people.

[gbullock32]

Protein needs vary dramatically based on individual.

https://bodyrecomposition.com/muscle...athletes.html/

https://bodyrecomposition.com/fat-lo...eting-qa.html/

Cliffs:
1.5g/lb is recommended for some people.

The first article is from 2007, the second is from 2010 and neither site any actual scientific studies or sources.

Those are poor sources to use to argue your point.

[AdamWW]

Protein needs vary dramatically based on individual.

https://bodyrecomposition.com/muscle...athletes.html/

https://bodyrecomposition.com/fat-lo...eting-qa.html/

Cliffs:
1.5g/lb is recommended for some people.

Re: first link:
"..We don’t know how much protein is required to optimize all of the potential pathways important to athletes.

We know that a protein intake of 1.4 g/lb (3.0 g/kg) isn’t harmful and may have benefits that are too small to be measured in research

As long as eating lots of protein doesn’t keep an athlete from eating too few of the other nutrients (carbs/fats), there’s no reason to not eat a lot. And there may be benefits.

Essentially, a high protein intake won’t hurt an athlete (basically everything you may have read about the dangers of high protein intakes is nonsense), it may provide small benefits of importance to elite athletes and, at the end of the day athletes and coaches don’t give a **** about pedantic scientific debates over amino acid metabolism that gives researchers and nerds like me a giant hardon. Admittedly, they didn’t put it in exactly those terms but that’s the gist of it."

So basically, there's no actual proof or data to actually suggest it's better, we just know it 'won't hurt', so why not do it anyway?


The other link is during a diet... not during calorie maintenance or surplus, which is what I was referring to.

[NLNFunKti0nz]

So 0.7g of protein per body weight is enough to cut or to bulk? If it is I will stick with 0.7g of protein per body weight so that way I won’t have to spend more money on protein sources cause protein is darn expensive

[gbullock32]

So 0.7g of protein per body weight is enough to cut or to bulk? If it is I will stick with 0.7g of protein per body weight so that way I won’t have to spend more money on protein sources cause protein is darn expensive

.7g is the minimum recommended for cutting or bulking; more is fine and can have some benefit, but it is not required. Getting 4 meals of 30g of protein with 3g of leucine in each would pretty much be optimal for muscle retention/growth.

[kusok]

The first article is from 2007, the second is from 2010 and neither site any actual scientific studies or sources.

Those are poor sources to use to argue your point.

Lyle McDonald is a poor source?

[gbullock32]

Lyle McDonald is a poor source?

With no scientific sources to back the claim, it is little more than opinion; also he even states in the article that higher only 'may' be beneficial and there is no direct proof. Only that higher is not harmful.

Just accept you lost this argument and move on.

[kusok]

Re: first link:
"..We don’t know how much protein is required to optimize all of the potential pathways important to athletes.

We know that a protein intake of 1.4 g/lb (3.0 g/kg) isn’t harmful and may have benefits that are too small to be measured in research

As long as eating lots of protein doesn’t keep an athlete from eating too few of the other nutrients (carbs/fats), there’s no reason to not eat a lot. And there may be benefits.

Essentially, a high protein intake won’t hurt an athlete (basically everything you may have read about the dangers of high protein intakes is nonsense), it may provide small benefits of importance to elite athletes and, at the end of the day athletes and coaches don’t give a **** about pedantic scientific debates over amino acid metabolism that gives researchers and nerds like me a giant hardon. Admittedly, they didn’t put it in exactly those terms but that’s the gist of it."

So basically, there's no actual proof or data to actually suggest it's better, we just know it 'won't hurt', so why not do it anyway?


The other link is during a diet... not during calorie maintenance or surplus, which is what I was referring to.

Thus when you specifically notice better strength, recovery, abs visibility and energy with more protein VS less, you should go ahead and do more. Even if some fat professor in some university found you don't have to.

[AdamWW]

Thus when you specifically notice better strength, recovery, abs visibility and energy with more protein VS less, you should go ahead and do more. Even if some fat professor in some university found you don't have to.

You’re being impertinent.

Enjoy your protein if ya like.