mccoy Posted May 1 Report Share Posted May 1 (edited) I found this recent podcast in the Simon Hill series pretty interesting, from the conceptual and research standpoints. The take-home message is that many of the advocates of the hi protein regimens are just overshooting it, aiming for an upper bound, a very cautious value, which would constitute a maximization rather than an optimization. The monetary cost for assuming more protein than needed is trivial usually, whereas the cost in terms of healthspan and longevity may be substantial. The other take-home message is that the body is a self-optimizing system, which 'squeezes' the protein out of the food when needed, as dictated by exercise and activity. My personal thought on the topic is that, given a sufficient energy substrate, especially if sugar-rich, we don't need an overwhelming amount of protein to reach muscle hypertrophy. The studies on weight lifters give a 200% RDA as an upper bound, as also related by Brad Schoenfeld. Values like the ones suggested by Peter Attia, in the region of 275% RDA, are insanely high for most people except maybe extreme endurance athletes. by insanely high I also mean it is very hard to eat those amounts unless we are ravenously hungry all the time. Very hard and most probably unhealthy. Edited May 1 by mccoy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.