Too much protein?

[jeneml]

Hi! My brother sent me his daily food log and his protein intake seems crazy high, and I’m worried about his liver. But I’m not a body builder, nor a nutritionist so I’m hoping for some advice from you more experienced individuals.

He’s 6’
Weighs 172 lbs
And according to his scale his body fat percentage is 16.

He said his daily caloric intake is around 2400 and he is exercising daily, but isn’t losing weight. I’m assuming he’s gaining muscle mass which is canceling out the weight loss on the scale, because at that caloric intake I would expect weight loss.

He’s also severely lacking in complex carbs, from my understanding.

His daily intake:
Total Cal: 2346.2
Total Carbs(g): 39.4 (+14 veggie)
Total Protein (g): 257.8
Total Fat(g): 90.9
Total Omega3(g): 9.5

50g of that protein is from pre and post workout shakes. 14g of carbs is from 2 cups of green beans, which are the only veggie he eats during the day. The other carbs are from nuts and seeds. Everything else is animal protein.

His goal is to add muscle mass (not a crazy amount) and lose more body fat.

I think he needs to up his complex carbs, lower his protein, and up his calories.

What say you, oh wise ones?? 😁

[Mrpb]

Have you read the stickies? It's all answered there.

Protein intake should be a minimum of 0.7 gram per lb.

[AdamWW]

Hi! My brother sent me his daily food log and his protein intake seems crazy high, and I’m worried about his liver. But I’m not a body builder, nor a nutritionist so I’m hoping for some advice from you more experienced individuals.

He’s 6’
Weighs 172 lbs
And according to his scale his body fat percentage is 16.

He said his daily caloric intake is around 2400 and he is exercising daily, but isn’t losing weight. I’m assuming he’s gaining muscle mass which is canceling out the weight loss on the scale, because at that caloric intake I would expect weight loss.

He’s also severely lacking in complex carbs, from my understanding.

His daily intake:
Total Cal: 2346.2
Total Carbs(g): 39.4 (+14 veggie)
Total Protein (g): 257.8
Total Fat(g): 90.9
Total Omega3(g): 9.5

50g of that protein is from pre and post workout shakes. 14g of carbs is from 2 cups of green beans, which are the only veggie he eats during the day. The other carbs are from nuts and seeds. Everything else is animal protein.

His goal is to add muscle mass (not a crazy amount) and lose more body fat.

I think he needs to up his complex carbs, lower his protein, and up his calories.

What say you, oh wise ones?? ������

That isn't 2,346 calories.

Your math is off.

[jeneml]

Have you read the stickies? It's all answered there.

Protein intake should be a minimum of 0.7 gram per lb.

Newp. I’m a rule-breaker. No, but seriously I glanced through the stickies and posted accord to the “critique my diet” rules.

0.7g of protein at 172lb would be 120g minimum? No maximum? Wouldn’t a diet too high in protein affect muscle gain negatively and result in liver damage?

[AdamWW]

Newp. I’m a rule-breaker. No, but seriously I glanced through the stickies and posted accord to the “critique my diet” rules.

0.7g of protein at 172lb would be 120g minimum? No maximum? Wouldn’t a diet too high in protein affect muscle gain negatively and result in liver damage?

Why would you suspect liver damage? Explain your reasoning.

Why not eye damage or lung damage or spleen damage?

You seem to be just throwing out ideas randomly....

[jeneml]

That isn't 2,346 calories.

Your math is off.

1781.2cal is from food, the rest is supplements and shakes. This is according to his spreadsheet. I’d post the photo but don’t see that option. What are you saying is wrong in the math?

[snailsrus]

1781.2cal is from food, the rest is supplements and shakes. This is according to his spreadsheet. I’d post the photo but don’t see that option. What are you saying is wrong in the math?

its only 2007 calories

[Zschnack87]

If he's exercising daily and not losing/gaining weight, he is most likely in his maintenance calorie area. And yes, there is some math issues here. Stuff not adding up right.

[Mrpb]

Newp. I’m a rule-breaker. No, but seriously I glanced through the stickies and posted accord to the “critique my diet” rules.

0.7g of protein at 172lb would be 120g minimum? No maximum? Wouldn’t a diet too high in protein affect muscle gain negatively and result in liver damage?

I'd use ~1.2-1.3 as a practical maximum. No point in going higher. Going higher is unlikely harmful though.

[desslok]

I would be more worried about his liver if he was drinking a 12 pack of beer every day.

[jeneml]

I'd use ~1.2-1.3 as a practical maximum. No point in going higher. Going higher is unlikely harmful though.

Thank you! That’s the information I was looking for!

[jeneml]

I would be more worried about his liver if he was drinking a 12 pack of beer every day.

Yeah? Maybe I’m just overreacting. But that’s why I came here to ask. I appreciate your help.

[jeneml]

its only 2007 calories

2007 is pretty low though, right? With a high protein/low carb diet at 2007 daily, wouldn’t you expect weight loss?

[Nicksosure1]

2007 is pretty low though, right? With a high protein/low carb diet at 2007 daily, wouldn’t you expect weight loss?

If it was below his or your energy expenditure for the day. If he burns 2300 and only eats ~2000 he will gradually lose weight, yes. Same with moderate protein, moderate carb, high fat/low carb, high carb/low fat, you name it. But don't assume a certain amount of expenditure just based on height, weight and age alone. It's all trial and error and tracking.

[Mrpb]

2007 is pretty low though, right? With a high protein/low carb diet at 2007 daily, wouldn’t you expect weight loss?

If he really ate 2007 kcal he would lose weight. There are probably some errors in his calorie tracking/weighing. The large majority of people make those errors.

He might also be using cups and table spoons for measuring which is very inaccurate.

[MikeK46]

He said his daily caloric intake is around 2400 and he is exercising daily, but isn’t losing weight. I’m assuming he’s gaining muscle mass which is canceling out the weight loss on the scale, because at that caloric intake I would expect weight loss.

Body recomposition (gaining muscle at the same time as losing fat) while staying the same weight (indicates a eucaloric diet where calories in = calories out) really only happens in highly untrained individuals and doesn't last very long. He's likely eating more calories than he thinks and/or burning fewer than he thinks. Ideally he should pick one goal (whether it be a hypocaloric diet to lose fat or a hypercaloric diet to build muslce) and roll with one for a while before switching to the other.

[Mrpb]

Body recomposition (gaining muscle at the same time as losing fat) while staying the same weight (indicates a eucaloric diet where calories in = calories out) really only happens in highly untrained individuals and doesn't last very long.

Hey Mike, I know that has been believed for a long time but in the last few years we've seen several studies where trained lifters gained muscle while losing fat. The second part of this article explains how it works and contains several references to relevant studies: https://shreddedbyscience.com/can-yo...lorie-deficit/

The fact that even trained lifters can gain muscle while they lose fat has also been confirmed by guys like Brad Schoenfeld, Stuart Phillips, Eric Helms, Menno Henselmans etc.

[MikeK46]

Hey Mike, I know that has been believed for a long time but in the last few years we've seen several studies where trained lifters gained muscle while losing fat. The second part of this article explains how it works and contains several references to relevant studies: https://shreddedbyscience.com/can-yo...lorie-deficit/

The fact that even trained lifters can gain muscle while they lose fat has also been confirmed by guys like Brad Schoenfeld, Stuart Phillips, Eric Helms, Menno Henselmans etc.

Measurement of energy intake and output is quite imprecise. What actually seems to be happening, from what I can tell, is that subjects are unknowingly alternating short (and random) periods of a small energy surplus (resulting in a small amount of lean tissue gain) with periods of energy deficit (resulting in a small amount of fat loss). These periods are unnoticeable; they could be one day or several days long. Over time, it appears as though subjects are gaining muscle while losing fat "at the same time." In reality, it's not happening at the same time at all, and the body composition changes are due to very short "bulking" and "cutting" cycles.

"The 3.4 g/kg group in the Antonio study only lost a total of 0.2 kg, despite a deficit of nearly 240 kcal."
This drives home the point of just how imprecise the energy measurements are. If it was actually a deficit of nearly 240 kcal, then they would have lost more weight. Energy can not just come from thin air to account for those extra 240 kcal, it has to come from the body's energy stores and would manifest as weight loss.

[Mrpb]

Measurement of energy intake and output is quite imprecise. What actually seems to be happening, from what I can tell, is that subjects are unknowingly alternating short (and random) periods of a small energy surplus (resulting in a small amount of lean tissue gain) with periods of energy deficit (resulting in a small amount of fat loss). These periods are unnoticeable; they could be one day or several days long. Over time, it appears as though subjects are gaining muscle while losing fat "at the same time." In reality, it's not happening at the same time at all, and the body composition changes are due to very short "bulking" and "cutting" cycles.

This actually happens several times on a day, we go into short periods of energy surplus and energy deficit, even when we're bulking. But energy deficit and surplus cause fat loss and fat storage. Muscle gain is driven by 24h muscle protein balance, not directly by energy balance.

"The 3.4 g/kg group in the Antonio study only lost a total of 0.2 kg, despite a deficit of nearly 240 kcal."
This drives home the point of just how imprecise the energy measurements are. If it was actually a deficit of nearly 240 kcal, then they would have lost more weight.

That's not correct because they gained 1.5 kg of LBM, which requires energy. The 240 kcal deficit was calculated using some of the highest quality data from metabolic ward studies from Kevin Hall.

[GregG13]

Just take an optimal protein with recommended daily protein intake is 0.9 grams per kilogram of body weight for adolescents and 0.8 grams per kg of body weight for adults....

[XinXom]

This actually happens several times on a day, we go into short periods of energy surplus and energy deficit, even when we're bulking. But energy deficit and surplus cause fat loss and fat storage. Muscle gain is driven by 24h muscle protein balance, not directly by energy balance.



That's not correct because they gained 1.5 kg of LBM, which requires energy. The 240 kcal deficit was calculated using some of the highest quality data from metabolic ward studies from Kevin Hall.

I don't know even their own conclusion was

"The main thing we want you, dear reader, to take home from this article is this – recompositing is normal. It happens – less so in trained individuals, but much more in untrained, new lifters."

And that link doesn't have anything in it about procedure what they considered "trained" that I could find skimming it. Logic seems kind of circular anyway considering my understanding of "trained" or "advanced" were based off how hard it was to make progress and that things like being able to build muscle without a cal surplus was in fact one of the criteria for being "advanced". So possible or not there is plenty of other research that says its simply easier to do it in a surplus epically for someone who is "advanced". I know I personally grow on a deficit but I'm still quite the big boy and I have only been really lifting 2 years now. I would be interested to know what you consider "advanced" to be defined as.