How much protein for max gains?

Chapters:

00:00 Intro

00:16 1. Protein requirements for cutting lifters

06:05 My Online PT Course

06:28 2. Plant vs animal protein sources

09:50 3. TEF & satiety

14:26 Outro

Transcript:

Bodybuilders have long been waiting for a study in strength trained athletes that are cutting to see if we really need at least one gram per pound of protein per day. That study is now here.

The Canadian researchers compared protein intakes of 1.3, 1.7 and 2.3g/kg per day. In freedom units that is 0.6, 0.7 and 1 gram per pound. Again, these were strength trained athletes that were in 12% energy deficit. They were supposed to be in 25% energy deficit, but you know, participants never listen to what the researchers say. The athletes came from various backgrounds, including boxing, soccer, cycling, gymnastics, ice hockey, swimming and ringette. I thought ringette was ice hockey. Anyway, more importantly, there were no significant differences between the groups other than their protein intakes. So energy intake did not significantly differ between the groups, which is very important for a study like this and they also had the same training program, same everything. So what do you think happened? Which group do you think had the best results and what were the margins?

Spoiler alert! There were no significant differences between the groups at the end of the study period. None of their gains in performance, strength or body composition significantly differed between the groups, even between the lowest protein intake group. Body composition was measured by DEXA scans and corroborated by measuring protein mass and resting energy expenditure. Performance was measured by chest press strength, chin up performance, broad jump performance, leg press strength and leg curl strength. And again, none of these measures showed significant differences between the groups.

If we look at absolute values and we are going into over analysis mode we might be tempted to conclude that fat loss was a little bit worse in the highest protein intake group, they actually had no significant fat loss at all, so technically they were actually not in energy deficit, meaning they had a little bit higher energy intake and it also showed up in not significantly higher energy intake, and they had a little bit higher fat free mass gains than the other groups.

But the researchers explicitly noted: “What is more, changes in protein mass obtained by subtracting total body water from fat free mass did not change significantly. No effect of the different protein intakes was observed on any of our body composition variables. It’s important to note that the eta squared for differences in fat free mass between groups was extremely low (0.002), thus indicating the absence of trend in the data for the main study outcome.”

So basically we can say that there was no notable trend at all in terms of better gains in any of the groups. In fact, if you were really going to try to overanalyze the results it seems that the lowest protein group would have like slightly better gains than the medium protein group. All of this is normal variance. We can say that there were no significant differences between the groups.

Now you might be thinking: “This is crazy, Menno, like 1.2g per kilograms??? Are you tripping? That is way too low.” And indeed, that is probably way too low. However, these results fit very well in the total body of literature. Many people are under the impression that if they don’t get 1 gram per pound of protein that they’re going to wither away and die just that same day. That is really not how it works. Protein intakes effects on fat free mass are quite gradual and as you go over even protein intakes as low as 1.2g/kg per day, which is typically what I recommend even for sedentary individuals- Yes, you generally see better gains in studies, but they’re not massive effects. And the more you go up to the ideal protein intake, which I would say is generally something along the lines of at least 1.8g/kg per day, which is 0.8g per pound, then you see very, very small effects.

So in a study like this and this is where the limitations come in, we typically don’t see that these effects are statistically significant. Even between protein intakes as low as 1.2 and 1.6 or 1.7g/kg. And we have many, many studies like this that show no significant differences between groups, even at lower protein intakes. However, when we look not just at individual studies that are tightly controlled, but we look at recent meta analyzes, which I’ve discussed in recent videos in more detail, then we do see a trend in favor of higher protein intakes.

These meta analyzes have significant methodological shortcomings such as not controlling for energy intake or nutrient timing. So we have to take these with a grain of salt, but what we can say based on these analysis and these studies and the current study as well, is that if there is any effect it’s going to be small. You’re not going to see it in a study like this that is 6 weeks long and has 21 athletes that are making it to the end. Now, for you as an individual, that also means that when we’re talking about one gram per pound or a little bit more, a little bit less, we’re really talking about micromanaging. We’re talking about very small effects, even in strength trained individuals that are in energy deficit.

And this study also casts further doubt on the idea that in energy deficit you need higher protein intakes. This is very commonly heard in bodybuilding circles, but it’s actually not based on any solid evidence. I’ve also done a video on that recently that you probably don’t actually need significantly more protein when you’re cutting, so you can check that out on my channel as well, but this study is in line with no effect of energy deficit, because we still don’t see significant effects in this study when they were cutting.

All in all, the researchers concluded: “Taken together we suggest that the American College of Sports Medicine recommendation of 1.2 to 1.7g/kg is sufficient for most athletes, males and females, even during periods of energy restriction if a proper resistance training regimen is implemented.” And I think many bodybuilders might be surprised that the American College of Sports Medicine recommends protein intakes as low as 1.2 to 1.7g/kg for strength trained individuals. I would not recommend protein intakes that low, I would recommend 1.8g/kg per day total protein intake per total body weight at a minimum, which is 0.8g per pound. I would not go below that in almost any scenario because the risk reward is really poor, unless you really struggle somehow to get that protein in due to maybe a medical condition. But it is true and there are a lot of scientists, including the American College of Sports Medicine, that show that the effects of protein intakes, even at lower protein intakes than this are quite marginal. We’re talking about small effects.

Now, I think the ACSM is not fully up to date with the latest research and it’s not suited for individuals that are very serious lifters that are interested in maximizing muscle hypertrophy. If you are that type of individual then I would highly recommend my own PT course, because it is specifically designed by serious lifters for serious lifters to learn everything you need to know about maximizing muscle hypertrophy, fat loss, strength development while also going into diet adherence, health sciences and really everything you need to know to be fit and jacked. If you’re interested in that, definitely check out my PT course, link is in the description.

Most protein intake recommendations, including the one I just gave, rely on a bunch of assumptions. One of those assumptions is that you get at least 50% of your total daily intake from high quality sources. If you don’t, you might need more protein intake. A new meta analysis of 12 studies found that animal proteins, which have high protein quality, typically stimulate a little bit more muscle protein synthesis than plant protein sources. This is one of those findings that ten years ago would have been like, duh! But with the rising popularity of vegan dieting over the last decade this finding is now re-controversial?

Theoretically, it makes perfect sense that plant proteins stimulate less muscle protein synthesis than animal proteins because they have lower protein quality for two good reasons. First- they have lower digestibility. It is harder for a human body to extract the nutrients out of a plant than out of an animal. And secondly- they have lower protein quality.

Animal protein sources have an amino acid composition that is much more similar to that of a human body. If you think about it- animal flesh is, you know, quite similar to human flesh, especially in like a very base biological level. The amino acid composition is quite similar. But if you compare it’s to say soy or bean or some grass, the amino acid composition is very different. And that means that you don’t get all the amino acids that you need. Some amino acids might not be in the food at all and some other amino acids might be in there but in different ratios than for human body. and we talk about protein as if protein intake is like one thing, but it’s not.

Our body cares about the intake of all the amino acids, especially essential amino acids, so it relies on a certain assumption of the ratio of these amino acids to make sure that when we say we have had enough total protein intake that we have, in fact, enough of all the amino acids. Because, again, your body doesn’t care about the total protein intake, it cares about each individual amino acid. We just simplify it to total protein intake because it would be massive pain in the ass to calculate your amino acid intake for every single amino acid. I would reiterate, though, that the difference in muscle protein synthesis between animal and plant protein sources was small.

Now it was dragged down by one study. As you can see here, Monteyne et al., which had a higher protein intake and a much higher calorie intake in the vegan supplement. So that’s not really a fair comparison. If you look at all the other comparisons, it’s basically unanimously in favor of animal protein sources, but the effect sizes are very small. So it’s not like you can’t build muscle on a vegan diet, you just need a little bit extra protein. How much extra depends on the amino acid composition of your foods. You have to look at the complementariness of those foods or if you add around 20% depending on the quality of your protein sources, or if you supplement a relatively high quality vegan protein like a blend of pea and rice protein, 80% pea protein a 20% rice protein- gives you very high digestibility and a very good amino acid composition. Then something like one gram per pound, the traditional bodybuilding recommendation is most likely enough to fuel very good gains.

In another new study animal proteins boosted the metabolism of the participants more than plant proteins. This is likely related to the higher muscle protein synthesis. The muscle protein synthesis is a very energy intensive process and as a result, in this study, in very well controlled conditions, animal protein sources resulted in a higher thermic effect of food and a higher resting energy expenditure compared to plant protein sources. This difference in energy expenditure is most likely too small to affect fat loss outcomes meaningfully in long term research. Indeed, in most long term studies we do not see substantially more fat loss just as a result of people changing their protein source. However, it does fit with the difference in muscle protein synthesis.

Speaking of the thermic effect of food, that is another reason to consume a high protein diet beyond its effect on muscle growth. With a high protein diet, not only do you get more muscle growth, you also stimulate your energy expenditure more because protein has a high thermic effect. It costs a relatively high amount of energy to absorb and digest protein, and it has a positive effect on our metabolism, in part by increasing muscle protein synthesis and even if you don’t synthesize new proteins when you consume more protein, oxidizing protein is a relatively energy inefficient process so you still get a little bit of an increase in your metabolism. Moreover, high protein diets typically stimulate more satiety, making you feel more full and having less desire to eat compared to low protein diets. However, how big are these advantages exactly? This was investigated in the last new study I have for you today. The researchers compared two diets consisting of ultra processed foods with either 30% or 13% of their calories coming from protein. A group of healthy young adults ate as much as they want of each diet, and the researchers strictly monitored what happened to their energy expenditure and energy intake in a controlled laboratory for 54 hours.

The high protein group ended consuming a whopping 3.3g/kg protein, which is 1.5g per pound compared to the “low” protein group of 1.5g/kg, which is 0.7g per pound. So how many extra calories do you think the high protein group burned? Energy expenditure was 128 calories higher in the high protein group. So not a trivial difference but also not a shockingly large difference. They did achieve that while also consuming 196 calories less. So basically the 200 calorie lower energy intake and about 100 calories higher energy expenditure, making the total difference in energy balance 300 calories. And that is very substantial. However, if we look at the total literature, this difference is highly inflated compared to most studies because of the extreme energy intakes. The lower protein group had a 32% energy surplus, so massive, massive overfeeding dreamer bulk, and the high protein intake group, while having a lower energy balance still was an 18% energy surplus. So this was basically dreamer bulk versus ultra, ultra dreamer bulk.

A recent meta analysis which studied more moderate normal type conditions with whole foods found that the difference in energy expenditure between higher and lower protein diets in most conditions was actually statistically insignificant. You typically need to double your protein intake, and again, in this study, this was also looking at doubling your protein intake to get approximately a 70 calorie difference in energy expenditure. So in that light it’s not so great. It’s a nice added bonus, but going out of your way to consume a lot of extra protein just to get 70 calories higher energy expenditure doesn’t make a whole lot of sense. It costs more money and if you’re force feeding yourself a whole lot of extra protein, which you may not enjoy as much, so if you don’t enjoy a super high protein diet, then the cost both in terms of effort and money, because protein is more expensive than the other nutrients, typically, it’s probably not worth it to go super high on protein just to get, you know, 50 calorie extra energy expenditure.

Moreover, when you go to protein intakes beyond those required for maximum muscle protein synthesis and muscle growth we see that the satiety difference also becomes trivial in most research. In fact, in a new study, the high protein group reported higher subjective appetite. So while consuming fewer calories, they were also more hungry, which is not necessarily a big advantage when you’re cutting because you typically don’t want to be hungry.

In our own well-controlled study on more normal circumstances, comparing 1.8 versus 2.7g/kg, so 50% increase in protein intake above requirements for muscle growth, also found no significant difference in satiety between the more moderate and super high protein intake. These findings are in line with protein leverage. Our bodies drive us to consume protein until we have had enough protein. But after that point, protein becomes just like any other food. Most lean protein sources are still quite good for satiety because they are relatively low in calories- chicken breast and the like having somewhere around 100 calories per 100g. But if you compare those to high fiber foods, vegetables, and the like, even potatoes, protein sources don’t consistently beat those out. In fact, they do worse in most research.

So in conclusion, there are 3 big benefits to consuming a high protein diet: more muscle growth, more energy expenditure and less hunger. However, there are sharp diminishing returns to all of those benefits. When you get to protein intakes of 1.8g/kg or 0.8g per pound, additional further benefits for satiety, energy expenditure, muscle growth, or strength development are very, very small and non-existent, in fact, in most studies. So if you love consuming a super high protein diet these are nice additional benefits. But if you don’t love consuming a high protein diet or if you want to economize on your diet and save some money then it’s probably not worth going up to extreme protein intakes just to get very small further benefits.

All right. I hope this helps you set up your diet. If you want to stay up to date on the latest science to master your physique I’d be honored if you like and subscribe.