When it comes to the topic
of sports nutrition there are many myths and fallacies that float around like
some specter in the shadows. They pop up when you least expect them and throw a
monkey wrench into the best laid plans of the hard training athlete trying to
make some headway. Of all the myths that surface from time to time, the protein
myth seems to be the most deep rooted and pervasive. It just won't go away. The
problem is, exactly who, or which group, is perpetuating the "myth"
cant be easily identified. You see, the conservative nutritional/medical
community thinks it is the bodybuilders who perpetuate the myth that athletes
need more protein and we of the bodybuilding community think it is them (the
mainstream nutritional community) that is perpetuating the myth that athletes
don't need additional protein! Who is right?
The conservative
medical/nutritional community is an odd group. They make up the rules as they
go along and maintain what I refer to as the "nutritional double
standard." If for example you speak about taking in additional vitamin C
to possibly prevent cancer, heart disease, colds, and other afflictions, they
will come back with "there is still not enough data to support the use of
vitamin C as a preventative measure for these diseases," when in fact
there are literary hundreds of studies showing the many benefits of this
vitamin for the prevention and treatment of said diseases. And of course, if
you tell them you are on a high protein diet because you are an athlete they
will tell you, "oh you don't want to do that, you don't need it and it
will lead to kidney disease" without a single decent study to back up
their claim! You see they too are susceptible to the skulking myth specter that
spreads lies and confusion. In this article I want to address once and for all
(hopefully) the protein myth as it applies to what the average person is told
when they tell their doctor or some anemic "all you need are the RDAs"
spouting nutritionist that he or she is following a high protein diet.
Myth #1 "Athletes
don't need extra protein"
I figured we should start
this myth destroying article off with the most annoying myth first. Lord, when
will this one go away? Now the average reader person is probably thinking
"who in the world still believes that ridiculous statement?" The
answer is a great deal of people, even well educated medical professionals and
scientists who should know better, still believe this to be true. Don't forget,
the high carb, low fat, low protein diet recommendations are alive and well
with the average nutritionist, doctor, and of course the "don't confuse us
with the facts" media following close behind. For the past half century or
so scientists using crude methods and poor study design with sedentary people
have held firm to the belief that bodybuilders, strength athletes of various
types, runners, and other highly active people did not require any more protein
than Mr. Potato Head.....err, I mean the average couch potato. However, In the
past few decades researchers using better study designs and methods with real
live athletes have come to a different conclusion altogether, a conclusion hard
training bodybuilders have known for years. The fact that active people do
indeed require far more protein than the RDA to keep from losing hard earned
muscle tissue when dieting or increasing muscle tissue during the off season.
In a recent review paper on
the subject one of the top researchers in the field (Dr. Peter Lemon) states
"...These data suggest that the RDA for those engaged in regular endurance
exercise should be about 1.2-1.4 grams of protein/kilogram of body mass
(150%-175% of the current RDA) and 1.7 - 1.8 grams of protein/kilogram of body
mass per day (212%-225% of the current RDA) for strength exercisers."
Another group of
researchers in the field of protein metabolism have come to similar conclusions
repeatedly. They found that strength training athletes eating approximately the
RDA/RNI for protein showed a decreased whole body protein synthesis (losing
muscle jack!) on a protein intake of 0.86 grams per kilogram of bodyweight.
They came to an almost identical conclusion as that of Dr. Lemon in
recommending at least 1.76g per kilogram of bodyweight per day for strength
training athletes for staying in positive nitrogen balance/increases in whole
body protein synthesis.
This same group found in
later research that endurance athletes also need far more protein than the
RDA/RNI and that men catabolize (break down) more protein than women during
endurance exercise.
They concluded "In
summary, protein requirements for athletes performing strength training are
greater than sedentary individuals and are above the current Canadian and US
recommended daily protein intake requirements for young healthy males."
All I can say to that is, no sh%# Sherlock?!
Now my intention of
presenting the above quotes from the current research is not necessarily to
convince the average athlete that they need more protein than Joe shmoe couch
potato, but rather to bring to the readers attention some of the figures
presented by this current research. How does this information relate to the
eating habits of the average athlete and the advice that has been found in the
lay bodybuilding literature years before this research ever existed? With some
variation, the most common advice on protein intakes that could be-and can be-
found in the bodybuilding magazines by the various writers, coaches,
bodybuilders, etc., is one gram of protein per pound of body weight per day. So
for a 200 pound guy that would be 200 grams of protein per day. No sweat. So
how does this advice fair with the above current research findings? Well let's
see. Being scientists like to work in kilograms (don't ask me why) we have to
do some converting. A kilogram weighs 2.2lbs. So, 200 divided by 2.2 gives us
90.9. Multiply that times 1.8 (the high end of Dr. Lemon's research) and you
get 163.6 grams of protein per day. What about the nutritionists, doctors, and
others who call(ed) us "protein pushers" all the while recommending
the RDA as being adequate for athletes? Lets see. The current RDA is 0.8 grams
of protein per kilogram of bodyweight: 200 divided by 2.2 x 0.8 = 73 grams of
protein per day for a 200lb person. So who was closer, the bodybuilders or the
arm chair scientists? Well lets see! 200g (what bodybuilders have recommended
for a 200lb athlete) - 163g ( the high end of the current research
recommendations for a 200lb person) = 37 grams (the difference between what
bodybuilders think they should eat and the current research). How do the RDA
pushers fair? Hey, if they get to call us "protein pushers" than we
get to call them "RDA pushers!" Anyway, 163g - 73g = (drum role) 90
grams! So it would appear that the bodybuilding community has been a great deal
more accurate about the protein needs of strength athletes than the average
nutritionist and I don't think this comes as any surprise to any of us. So
should the average bodybuilder reduce his protein intake a bit from this data?
No, and I will explain why. As with vitamins and other nutrients, you identify
what looks to be the precise amount of the compound needed for the effect you
want (in this case positive nitrogen balance, increased protein synthesis, etc)
and add a margin of safety to account for the biochemical individuality of
different people, the fact that there are low grade protein sources the person
might be eating, and other variables. So the current recommendation by the
majority of bodybuilders, writers, coaches, and others of one gram per pound of
bodyweight does a good job of taking into account the current research and
adding a margin of safety. One things for sure, a little too much protein is
far less detrimental to the athletes goal(s) of increasing muscle mass than too
little protein, and this makes the RDA pushers advice just that much more....
moronic, for lack of a better word.
There are a few other
points I think are important to look at when we recommend additional protein in
the diet of athletes, especially strength training athletes. In the off season,
the strength training athletes needs not only adequate protein but adequate
calories. Assuming our friend (the 200lb bodybuilder) wants to eat
approximately 3500 calories a day, how is he supposed to split his calories up?
Again, this is where the bodybuilding community and the conservative
nutritional/medical community are going to have a parting of the ways... again.
The conservative types would say "that's an easy one, just tell the bodybuilder
he should make up the majority of his calories from carbohydrates." Now
lets assume the bodybuilder does not want to eat so many carbs. Now the high
carb issue is an entirely different fight and article, so I am just not going
to go into great depth on the topic here. Suffice it to say, anyone who
regularly reads articles, books, etc, >from people such as Dan Duchaine, Dr.
Mauro Dipasquale, Barry Sears PhD, Udo Erasmus PhD, yours truly, and others
know why the high carb diet bites the big one for losing fat and gaining muscle
(In fact, there is recent research that suggests that carbohydrate restriction,
not calorie restriction per se, is what's responsible for mobilizing fat
stores). So for arguments sake and lack of space, let's just assume our 200lb
bodybuilder friend does not want to eat a high carb diet for his own reasons,
whatever they may be. What else can he eat? He is only left with fat and
protein. If he splits up his diet into say 30% protein, 30 % fat, and 40%
carbs, he will be eating 1050 calories as protein (3500x30% = 1050) and 262.5g
of protein a day (1050 divided by 4 = 262.5). So what we have is an amount
(262.5g) that meets the current research, has an added margin of safety, and an
added component for energy/calorie needs of people who don't want to follow a
high carb diet, hich is a large percentage of the bodybuilding/strength
training community. here are other reasons for a high protein intake such as
hormonal effects (i.e. effects on IGF-1, GH, thyroid ), thermic effects, etc.,
but I think I have made the appropriate point. So is there a time when the
bodybuilder might want to go even higher in his percent of calories >from
protein than 30%? Sure, when he is dieting. It is well established that carbs
are "protein sparing" and so more protein is required as percent of
calories when one reduces calories. Also, dieting is a time that preserving
lean mass (muscle) is at a premium. Finally, as calories decrease the quality
and quantity of protein in the diet is the most important variable for
maintaining muscle tissue (as it applies to nutritional factors), and of course
protein is the least likely nutrient to be converted to bodyfat. In my view,
the above information bodes well for the high protein diet. If you tell the
average RDA pusher you are eating 40% protein while on a diet, they will tell
you that 40% is far too much protein. But is it? Say our 200lb friend has
reduced his calories to 2000 in attempt to reduce his bodyfat for a
competition, summer time at the beach, or what ever. Lets do the math. 40% x
2000 = 800 calories from protein or 200g (800 divided by 4). So as you can see,
he is actually eating less protein per day than in the off season but is still
in the range of the current research with the margin of safety/current bodybuilding
recommendations intact.
Bottom line? High protein
diets are far better for reducing bodyfat, increasing muscle mass, and helping
the hard training bodybuilder achieve his (or her!) goals, and it is obvious
that endurance athletes will also benefit from diets higher in protein than the
worthless and outdated RDAs.
Myth #2 "High
protein diets are bad for you"
So the average person reads
the above information on the protein needs and benefits of a high protein diet
but remembers in the back of their mind another myth about high protein
intakes. "I thought high protein diets are bad for the kidneys and will
give you osteoporosis! " they exclaim with conviction and indignation. So
what are the medical facts behind these claims and why do so many people,
including some medical professionals and nutritionists, still believe it? For
starters, the negative health claims of the high protein diet on kidney
function is based on information gathered from people who have preexisting
kidney problems. You see one of the jobs of the kidneys is the excretion of
urea (generally a non toxic compound) that is formed from ammonia (a very toxic
compound) which comes from the protein in our diets. People with serious kidney
problems have trouble excreting the urea placing more stress on the kidneys and
so the logic goes that a high protein diet must be hard on the kidneys for
healthy athletes also. Now for the medical and scientific facts. There is not a
single scientific study published in a reputable peer - reviewed journal using
healthy adults with normal kidney function that has shown any kidney
dysfunction what so ever from a high protein diet. Not one of the studies done
with healthy athletes that I mentioned above, or other research I have read,
has shown any kidney abnormalities at all. Furthermore, animals studies done
using high protein diets also fail to show any kidney dysfunction in healthy
animals. Now don't forget, in the real world, where millions of athletes have
been following high protein diets for decades, there has never been a case of
kidney failure in a healthy athlete that was determined to have been caused
solely by a high protein diet. If the high protein diet was indeed putting undo
stress on our kidneys, we would have seen many cases of kidney abnormalities,
but we don't nor will we. From a personal perspective as a trainer for many top
athletes from various sports, I have known bodybuilders eating considerably
more than the above research recommends (above 600 grams a day) who showed no
kidney dysfunction or kidney problems and I personally read the damn blood
tests! Bottom line? 1-1.5 grams or protein per pound of bodyweight will have
absolutely no ill effects on the kidney function of a healthy athlete, period.
Now of course too much of anything can be harmful and I suppose it's possible a
healthy person could eat enough protein over a long enough period of time to
effect kidney function, but it is very unlikely and has yet to be shown in the
scientific literature in healthy athletes.
So what about the
osteoporosis claim? That's a bit more complicated but the conclusion is the
same. The pathology of osteoporosis involves a combination of many risk factors
and physiological variables such as macro nutrient intakes (carbs, proteins,
fats), micro nutrient intakes (vitamins, minerals, etc), hormonal profiles,
lack of exercise, gender, family history, and a few others. The theory is that
high protein intakes raise the acidity of the blood and the body must use
minerals from bone stores to "buffer" the blood and bring the blood
acidity down, thus depleting one's bones of minerals. Even if there was a clear
link between a high protein diet and osteoporosis in all populations (and there
is not) athletes have few of the above risk factors as they tend to get plenty
of exercise, calories, minerals, vitamins, and have positive hormonal profiles.
Fact of the matter is, studies have shown athletes to have denser bones than
sedentary people, there are millions of athletes who follow high protein diets
without any signs of premature bone loss, and we don't have ex athletes who are
now older with higher rates of osteoporosis. In fact, one recent study showed
women receiving extra protein from a protein supplement had increased bone
density over a group not getting the extra protein! The researchers theorized
this was due to an increase in IGF-1 levels which are known to be involved in
bone growth. Would I recommend a super high protein diet to some sedentary post
menopausal woman? Probably not, but we are not talking about her, we are
talking about athletes. Bottom line? A high protein diet does not lead to
osteoporosis in healthy athletes with very few risk factors for this
affliction, especially in the ranges of protein intake that have been discussed
throughout this article.
Myth #3 "All
proteins are created equal"
How many times have you
heard or read this ridiculous statement? Yes, in a sedentary couch potato who
does not care that his butt is the same shape as the cushion he is sitting on,
protein quality is of little concern. However, research has shown repeatedly
that different proteins have various functional properties that athletes can
take advantage of. For example, whey protein concentrate (WPC) has been shown
to improve immunity to a variety of challenges and intense exercise has been
shown to compromise certain parts of the immune response. WPC is also
exceptionally high in the branch chain amino acids which are the amino acids
that are oxidized during exercise and have been found to have many benefits to
athletes. We also know soy has many uses for athletes, and this is covered in
full on the Brinkzone site in another article. Anyway, I could go on all day
about the various functional properties of different proteins but there is no
need. The fact is that science is rapidly discovering that proteins with
different amino acid ratios (and various constituents found within the various
protein foods) have very different effects on the human body and it is these
functional properties that bodybuilders and other athletes can use to their
advantage. Bottom line? Let the people who believe that all proteins are
created equal continue to eat their low grade proteins and get nowhere while
you laugh all the way to a muscular, healthy, low fat body!
Conclusion
Over the years the above
myths have been floating around for so long they have just been accepted as
true, even though there is little to no research to prove it and a whole bunch
of research that disproves it! I hope this article has been helpful in clearing
up some of the confusion for people over the myths surrounding protein and
athletes. Of course now I still have to address even tougher myths such as
"all fats make you fat and are bad for you," "supplements are a
waste of time," and my personal favorite, "a calorie is a
calorie." The next time someone gives you a hard time about your high
protein intake, copy the latest study on the topic and give it to em. If that
does not work, role up the largest bodybuilding magazine you can find and hit
hem over the head with it!
References
1 Lemon, PW, "Is
increased dietary protein necessary or beneficial for individuals with a
physically active life style?" Nutr. Rev. 54:S169-175, 1996.
2 Lemon, PW, "Do
athletes need more dietary protein and amino acids?" International J.
Sports Nutri. S39-61, 1995.
3 Tarnopolsky, MA,
"Evaluation of protein requirements for trained strength athletes."
J. Applied. Phys. 73(5): 1986-1995, 1992
4 Phillips, SM,
"Gender differences in leucine kinetics and nitrogen balance in endurance
athletes." J. Applied Phys. 75(5): 2134-2141, 1993.
5 Tarnopolsky, MA, 1992.
6 Carroll, RM,
"Effects of energy compared with carbohydrate restriction on the lipolytic
response to epinephrine." Am. J. Clin. Nutri. 62:757-760, 1996.
7 Bounus, G., Gold, P.
"The biological activity of undenatured whey proteins: role of
glutathione." Clin. Invest. Med. 14:4, 296-309, 1991
8 Bounus, G.
"Dietary whey protein inhibits the development of dimethylhydrazine induced
malignancy." Clin. Invest. Med. 12: 213-217, 1988.
|
Diet Supplements Revealed
By Will Brink
Independant review of the most common diet and weight loss supplements by sports nutrition expert Will Brink. Don't buy another diet supplement until you read this.
Click here for more info.
|
|
Muscle Building Nutrition
By Will Brink & Charles Poliquin
A full nutrition program, Supplement Reviews & Training chapter by Charles Poliquin. Private members forum, everything you need to know to gain muscle.
Click here for more info.
|