7 ms·

Lift Weights, Eat More Protein, Especially If You’re Over 40

95 points by hvo 9y ago

vanderZwan 9y ago
> The impacts of this extra protein were not enormous. Almost everyone who started or continued weight training became stronger in these studies, whether they ate more protein or not. But those who did ramp up their protein gained an extra 10 percent or so in strength and about 25 percent in muscle mass compared to the control groups. Maybe it's me, but 10% extra performance and 25% extra muscle mass sounds like quite a huge difference to me - "not enormous" is technically correct but also lowered my expectations to a few percentages.
- theoh 9y ago
  Is it not that they gained 110% of the performance (125% of the mass) that the control group gained?
  - vanderZwan 9y ago
    English technically isn't my first language, but from what I understand having 110% of performance is equal to 1.1x control group performance, gaining 110% of performance would be 2.1x control group performance. EDIT: Oh, I grokked the comment by mikeyouse and you now. Yes, I see what you mean. Anyway, compare this to optimising code programming: there are big changes like switching algorithms, or more incremental improvements, like re-using arrays to reduce memory allocations. I'd say the former is like changing the type of sports/exercise, and the latter is more like this dietary change. For an incremental optimisation, 1.1x is quite significant, no? (there isn't really an analogy for bulking up though; since there isn't a causal relationship between code size and performance and smaller is considered better)
- mikeyouse 9y ago
  * RET = Resistance Exercise Training * 1RM = 1 Repetition Maximum Strength "The average RET-induced increase, with all measures of 1RM included, was 27kg (mean±SD; 27±22kg22 32). Notably, dietary protein supplementation augmented the increase in 1RM strength by 2.49kg (9%; figure 2; see online supplementary figure 4), which strongly suggests that the practice of RET is a far more potent stimulus for increasing muscle strength than the addition of dietary protein supplementation." "In addition to increasing changes in muscle strength, RET alone (≥6; 13±8weeks) resulted in an increase in FFM (1.1 ± 1.2kg), an increase in fibre CSA (808±) and an increase in mid-femur CSA (52±30mm2). Dietary protein supplementation augmented the increase in FFM by 0.30kg (27%), fibre CSA by 310µm2 (38%) and mid-femur CSA by 7.2mm2 (14%). The postexercise protein dose did not affect the efficacy of protein supplementation on RET-induced changes in FFM whereas training status (positive), age (negative) and baseline protein intake (positive) did. Relative to untrained participants, resistance-trained participants have a smaller potential for muscle growth and an attenuated postexercise muscle protein turnover. As a result, we speculate that trained persons may have less ‘degrees of freedom’ to change with RET and therefore have a greater need for protein supplementation to see increases in muscle mass. Our thesis is supported by the observation of a more consistent impact of protein supplementation on gains in FFM in resistance-trained individuals than in novice trainees." So working out regularly increases your 1-rep max lift by 27kg. Supplementing with protein can increases that max that by 2.5kg. Resistance exercise can increase your muscle mass by 1.1kg and protein can increase muscle mass further by 0.3kg. There was no difference past a protein dose of 1.6g/kg/day and supplementation mainly benefit those starting from a higher point of muscle mass and strength. http://bjsm.bmj.com/content/bjsports/early/2018/01/18/bjsports-2017-097608.full.pdf http://bjsm.bmj.com/content/bjsports/early/2018/01/18/bjspor...
  - vanderZwan 9y ago
    Ah, thank you. You guessed correctly that I misunderstood to which the percentages applied (although I blame the phrasing of the article)
sjg007 9y ago
How does one start lifting weights or exercising when you have no motivation to.
- mancerayder 9y ago
  Find a competent trainer - gyms that teach Olympic Weightlifting are going to have higher caliber trainers than the typical commercial gym full of 'personal trainers.' There's a massive technical aspect to learn that puts a more scientific spin to appeal to people like us.* * You're on HN, right?
  - lafar6502 9y ago
    Training to be better at something that you will never do for real is somehow depressing, especially if you only do it in a gym. Run or ride a bike, at least you have a chance to do something useful instead of moving a weight for the sake of moving a weight
    - xupybd 9y ago
      No way. I love learning those lifts. I'll never compete but I'll get better. I'll have a challenge that's more than just grinding through reps. I'll get gains faster than just physiological adaptation allows for as my skill goes up. Olympic lifts can be a lot of fun.
    - blackguardx 9y ago
      The only olympic-style lifts I've done are deadlifts. It is very rewarding to maximally focus all your mental and physical energy into one second of effort. Using your body feels good no matter if the activity has "no purpose."
    - freehunter 9y ago
      >Training to be better at something that you will never do for real is somehow depressing I would argue with the "never do for real" when it comes to weight lifting, and I would also argue against the entire concept. You lift weights all the time. Every time you stand up, every step you take, every time you move any muscle, you're lifting weights. If you're helping a friend move, you're lifting weights. I bought a file cabinet the other day and the guy was amazed that I got it into my truck on my own even though it was 50+ pounds... but I think a normal person should be able to lift that much weight into the bed of a truck no problem. Need to open a pickle jar? Need to move a couch? Need to carry more groceries in from the car? That's what you're training for. And also, people train for things they never do "for real" all the time. Every time you play a video game you train for something you'll never do for real. Every time you play guitar but you're not in a band, you're training for something you'll never do for real. Every time you make a joke if you're not a stand-up comedian, you're training for something you'll never do for real. Every time you take a picture but you're not a photographer you get the idea. You're not really training to be an olympic weightlifter, you're training to lift that weight right there in front of you. That's just as "for real" as anything else you do as a hobby. How is running or riding a bike any more "for real" than lifting a weight? They're all things you do for exercise to be healthy. No one's running everywhere they go, running is something you do in order to run, and you run to get better at running so you can run more. You lift weights in order to lift heavier weights so you can lift more weights. Same exact thing.
r0brodz 9y ago
The benefits of protein are historically documented by all the great bodybuilders. Nothing new here. Mainstream is always behind the freaks who dare to go against "science".
- milesvp 9y ago
  Which is amusing, because in this context the bodybuilders are fundamentally doing science. They have experiments (aka, exercise and eating regiments) that, as I understand it, are repeatable, and consistently produce the desired outcome, at least in terms of sculpted muscle and body fat.
  - curuinor 9y ago
    Modern bodybuilders don't have incredible life spans, either, so they face the consequences.
    - xupybd 9y ago
      I've often wondered about this can you point me in the direction of any info on their life spans?
    - rshannon3 9y ago
      That is mostly because all modern competitive bodybuilders use large amounts of PEDs.
    - barsonme 9y ago
      Yeah, pumping yourself full of tren, clen, and designer drugs, as well as getting up to 400+ lbs will do that to you.
  - coralreef 9y ago
    But the experiments are also tainted, ie. undisclosed steroid supplements or other enhancers.
    - 9y ago
deskamess 9y ago
Is weights better than HIIT for over 40?
- e9 9y ago
  over 40 your main concern is to make it sustainable and avoid injuries. A mix of moderate weights couple of times a week and HIIT couple of times a week would work best.
  - WkndTriathlete 9y ago
    [citation needed] I'm mid-40s and have no problem doing low-rep high-resistance (> 85% 1RM) sets 2-3 days per week and alternating with 2-3 HIIT sessions on bike, run, or swim for triathlon training. You have to decide what your goals are (endurance = 12+ rep sets at 30-50% 1RM, hypertrophy = 8-12 rep sets at 55-75% 1RM, strength = 1-6 rep sets at 85% - 100% 1RM) AND you have to have excellent form for the prime mover exercises (deadlift, squat, bench press, bent-over row) to avoid injury, but with the right diet, discipline, and proper recovery consistent 5% gains per three- to four-week cycles are possible Reference: _Periodization Training for Sports_ by Bompa, http://www.humankinetics.com/products/all-products/periodization-training-for-sports-3rd-edition http://www.humankinetics.com/products/all-products/periodiza...
- oh_sigh 9y ago
  Why not both? No HIIT routine I've seen has you working more than 2 days a week.
yakitori 9y ago
We get these type of fads every decade. Cholesterol was bad for you then fats were bad for you. Then it was running. Then hiking. It never ends. My grandparents lived well into their 90s. All you have to do is eat well and try to be active from time to time. But there is a growing weightlifting movement with a healthy marketing budget...
- InclinedPlane 9y ago
  Many people who smoke have lived into their 90s. That's not a good reason to smoke. Anecdotes are not data.
  - wppick 9y ago
    Data is not the whole picture. Maybe more protein is great for adding muscle mass, and bad for a different reason... The article lists beef as it's first source of protein besides protein shakes. Beef is a class 2A carcinogen. I stopped reading there.
    - always_good 9y ago
      "On the other hand, any form of protein is likely to be effective, it concludes, not merely high-protein shakes and supplements. Beef, chicken, yogurt and even protein from peas or quinoa could help us to build larger and stronger muscles." That's really the part you took issue with? That's a list of protein examples, not "it's first source of protein." It even says "any form of protein is likely to be effective." Fake HN outrage? It goes on to say "On the other hand and conveniently, any type of and time for protein was fine. The gains were similar if people downed their protein immediately after a workout or in the hours earlier or later, and it made no difference if the protein was solid or liquid, soy, beef, vegan or any other."
      - erikpukinskis 9y ago
        Was your OP outraged?
    - 9y ago
rdiddly 9y ago
I would add a clarifying conjecture that probably the 1.6 grams per kg of body weight per day, should be based on your lean weight, i.e. how much you would weigh with only 10 or so percent body fat. If you're obese and weigh 200kg, you don't need to eat 320g of protein per day.
xupybd 9y ago
Anyone have a link the study they're talking about?
- mikeyouse 9y ago
  Yep, it's here: http://bjsm.bmj.com/content/bjsports/early/2018/01/18/bjsports-2017-097608.full.pdf http://bjsm.bmj.com/content/bjsports/early/2018/01/18/bjspor...
thesmallestcat 9y ago
Protein is good, but not too much from meat: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27479196 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27479196 > CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: > High animal protein intake was positively associated with cardiovascular mortality and high plant protein intake was inversely associated with all-cause and cardiovascular mortality, especially among individuals with at least 1 lifestyle risk factor. Substitution of plant protein for animal protein, especially that from processed red meat, was associated with lower mortality, suggesting the importance of protein source.
- justboxing 9y ago
  Thanks. Do you know of any naturally-high-in-protein plant-based source that isn't soy (i.e. tofu etc) or hemp? Asking cos I've had a hard time finding protein dense plant based alternatives, and as a vegetarian, it's really hard to get a lot of proteins from plant-based sources without processed stuff like Vega etc. I do eat quinoa but 1) it's very expensive and 2) you have to eat 2 or 3 cups of cooked quinoa to get like 25 gms of protein which is a lot of quinoa per day.
  - thesmallestcat 9y ago
    I think there have even been studies that correlate all protein intake (regardless of source) inversely with longevity, so I try not to get too worked up about not having a meal with a lot of it. Beans, lentils, peanuts, etc. have a decent amount of protein, but even bread has protein and nowadays it's not hard to find high fiber, high protein bread. I love meat so this is all difficult, and I hope to eat less over time. I think it's a balance between the short-term benefits of protein (energy, muscle) and the long term effects of high protein consumption (tough on your organs).
  - oh_sigh 9y ago
    There is protein powder available from plant only sources, like pea protein. It is obviously processed(not sure how strictly you are against processing), but 'pea protein(extracted from yellow peas)' is the only ingredient in my whole foods version. 20g of it has 15g protein, <1g carbs, 1.5g fat. edit: Just looked up vega and it looks like it is just plant protein like I recommended - sorry about that. What's wrong with extracting proteins out of plant matter? You don't end up with any noticeable amount of reagents or any intermediaries in the final product, thanks to chemistry.
msiggy 9y ago
Duh?
matte_black 9y ago
I think we are making a grave mistake by associating going to the gym and exercise with lifting weights. Let me explain. I think what most people should be doing is calisthenics. I’ve been lifting weights for over a decade, but only started calisthenics two years ago. Personally, I feel calisthenics gives you a much stronger and durable body over all compared to lifting weights. It also strengthens your joints and connective tissues, which people don’t really think about until it’s too late. Aesthetically, I also feel strong calisthenic trained bodies look much more well proportioned and hardened due to the active use of stabilizer muscles. People who have trained calisthenics for a long time are deceptively strong. They don’t look particularly huge, but they perform feats of strength that even the most professional weightlifter would struggle to do. To me, this is a sign of true mastery over one’s body. If you’re just getting started in your exercise career, try calisthenics.
- oh_sigh 9y ago
  Do calisthenics have the same effect on bone density(that is, increasing bone density and decreasing chances of developing osteoporosis) that lifting weights does? I agree with your point generally though that the best exercise routine(or diet) is one that you stick with and progresses you towards your goals.
  - pmoriarty 9y ago
    Calisthenics is weight lifting. It just so happens that the weight you are lifting is your own body's weight rather than weights external to your body.
- acconrad 9y ago
  "Grave mistake" is a hyperbolic criticism, considering your only arguments for calisthenics revolve around strength based on personal anecdotal evidence, and a personal, subjective view of aesthetics. I've tried calisthenics and lacks in many areas. For starters, it woefully neglects the legs. Pistol squats and bridges are not nearly as taxing as barbell squats and deadlifts, though bridges have the added benefit of working flexibility. Push ups and pull ups quickly reach a plateau with 1 arm variations, and at that point you're no longer doing calisthenic movements but training like a gymnast. Calisthenics seem to be most effective at building strength for the core (pikes, leg raises, planks) and the shoulders (if you have the coordination to do hand stand push ups). Barbell training should not be avoided. I've also had serious injuries, such as a broken humerus as a child, where rotator cuff and deltoid muscles atrophied to an extreme level; and those joints are now stronger than ever because I weight trained in specific movement patterns that are difficult to replicate with calisthenics. And I say this as someone who has also been lifting weights for over a decade and has competed in both powerlifting and bodybuilding.
shdwban 9y ago
What would be a natural way to find if you're taking enough protein? If my sleep patterns, digestion, stomach, bowel movement, muscular recovery are fine, am I taking enough protein in accordance with my workout regimen? Or could it be that I may be absolutely fine but still taking less protein than the one my workout requires and hence building up less? Edit: by natural I mean without using scales, going just by how I'm feeling and body is doing.
- acconrad 9y ago
  Define "natural" - meaning you don't want to track what you eat? If that's the case, if you simply eat 4-8oz of some sort of lean protein with every meal, 3-5 meals a day, your protein intake will be adequate.
  - shdwban 9y ago
    Yes but protein is expensive and I don't want to take excessive either. (assuming I'm financially constrained)
    - acconrad 9y ago
      pea and whey proteins are cheap, less than $1 / serving
    - hungerstrike 9y ago
      Eggs are pretty cheap and each one contains about 6 g of high-quality protein.
- lemming 9y ago
  From: https://examine.com/nutrition/how-much-protein-can-i-eat-in-one-sitting/ https://examine.com/nutrition/how-much-protein-can-i-eat-in-... That being said, since fecal losses of protein and short-chain peptides tend to smell incredibly bad one can use a 'sniff-test' after bowel movements to assess if protein is being lost in the feces and thus not taken up by either the intestines or the muscle. Not pleasant, perhaps, but should be effective :-)
mhb 9y ago
But can't eat the protein all at once: Research by McMaster University’s Dr. Stuart Phillips and others has found that if you eat more than 20 to 30 grams of protein at a time, you don’t get any further anabolic boost. Any extra protein is simply burned for energy; unlike carbohydrate or fat, you can’t save it for later. https://www.runnersworld.com/sweat-science/why-and-when-you-need-more-protein https://www.runnersworld.com/sweat-science/why-and-when-you-...
- rshannon3 9y ago
  It's not as black and white as that article makes it seem. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tJpdPYedWjc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tJpdPYedWjc
- lemming 9y ago
  Examine.com disagrees with this, and implies it may be an urban myth: https://examine.com/nutrition/how-much-protein-can-i-eat-in-one-sitting/ https://examine.com/nutrition/how-much-protein-can-i-eat-in-...
acconrad 9y ago
If you want to learn more about the basics of strength training and eating healthy with more protein, you should watch this lecture from a doctor and strength coach who would agree with the ask from this article: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7tsTwcOb_0k https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7tsTwcOb_0k
agnivade 9y ago
Not even a single mention of the risks of increasing mTor signalling due to extra protein. You would be well advised to keep that in mind.
- pjc50 9y ago
  First I've ever heard of this, and google tells me that mTor is a unit of vacuum - could you explain please?
  - agnivade 9y ago
    Sure. Check these out - https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2016/05/07/too-much-protein-triggers-aging-cancer.aspx https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2016/05/... http://www.primalbody-primalmind.com/protein-how-much-is-too-much/ http://www.primalbody-primalmind.com/protein-how-much-is-too...

95 points by hvo 9y ago

> The impacts of this extra protein were not enormous. Almost everyone who started or continued weight training became stronger in these studies, whether they ate more protein or not. But those who did ramp up their protein gained an extra 10 percent or so in strength and about 25 percent in muscle mass compared to the control groups. Maybe it's me, but 10% extra performance and 25% extra muscle mass sounds like quite a huge difference to me - "not enormous" is technically correct but also lowered my expectations to a few percentages.

theoh 9y ago
Is it not that they gained 110% of the performance (125% of the mass) that the control group gained?
- vanderZwan 9y ago
  English technically isn't my first language, but from what I understand having 110% of performance is equal to 1.1x control group performance, gaining 110% of performance would be 2.1x control group performance. EDIT: Oh, I grokked the comment by mikeyouse and you now. Yes, I see what you mean. Anyway, compare this to optimising code programming: there are big changes like switching algorithms, or more incremental improvements, like re-using arrays to reduce memory allocations. I'd say the former is like changing the type of sports/exercise, and the latter is more like this dietary change. For an incremental optimisation, 1.1x is quite significant, no? (there isn't really an analogy for bulking up though; since there isn't a causal relationship between code size and performance and smaller is considered better)
mikeyouse 9y ago
* RET = Resistance Exercise Training * 1RM = 1 Repetition Maximum Strength "The average RET-induced increase, with all measures of 1RM included, was 27kg (mean±SD; 27±22kg22 32). Notably, dietary protein supplementation augmented the increase in 1RM strength by 2.49kg (9%; figure 2; see online supplementary figure 4), which strongly suggests that the practice of RET is a far more potent stimulus for increasing muscle strength than the addition of dietary protein supplementation." "In addition to increasing changes in muscle strength, RET alone (≥6; 13±8weeks) resulted in an increase in FFM (1.1 ± 1.2kg), an increase in fibre CSA (808±) and an increase in mid-femur CSA (52±30mm2). Dietary protein supplementation augmented the increase in FFM by 0.30kg (27%), fibre CSA by 310µm2 (38%) and mid-femur CSA by 7.2mm2 (14%). The postexercise protein dose did not affect the efficacy of protein supplementation on RET-induced changes in FFM whereas training status (positive), age (negative) and baseline protein intake (positive) did. Relative to untrained participants, resistance-trained participants have a smaller potential for muscle growth and an attenuated postexercise muscle protein turnover. As a result, we speculate that trained persons may have less ‘degrees of freedom’ to change with RET and therefore have a greater need for protein supplementation to see increases in muscle mass. Our thesis is supported by the observation of a more consistent impact of protein supplementation on gains in FFM in resistance-trained individuals than in novice trainees." So working out regularly increases your 1-rep max lift by 27kg. Supplementing with protein can increases that max that by 2.5kg. Resistance exercise can increase your muscle mass by 1.1kg and protein can increase muscle mass further by 0.3kg. There was no difference past a protein dose of 1.6g/kg/day and supplementation mainly benefit those starting from a higher point of muscle mass and strength. http://bjsm.bmj.com/content/bjsports/early/2018/01/18/bjsports-2017-097608.full.pdf http://bjsm.bmj.com/content/bjsports/early/2018/01/18/bjspor...
- vanderZwan 9y ago
  Ah, thank you. You guessed correctly that I misunderstood to which the percentages applied (although I blame the phrasing of the article)

sjg007 9y ago

How does one start lifting weights or exercising when you have no motivation to.

mancerayder 9y ago
Find a competent trainer - gyms that teach Olympic Weightlifting are going to have higher caliber trainers than the typical commercial gym full of 'personal trainers.' There's a massive technical aspect to learn that puts a more scientific spin to appeal to people like us.* * You're on HN, right?
- lafar6502 9y ago
  Training to be better at something that you will never do for real is somehow depressing, especially if you only do it in a gym. Run or ride a bike, at least you have a chance to do something useful instead of moving a weight for the sake of moving a weight
  - xupybd 9y ago
    No way. I love learning those lifts. I'll never compete but I'll get better. I'll have a challenge that's more than just grinding through reps. I'll get gains faster than just physiological adaptation allows for as my skill goes up. Olympic lifts can be a lot of fun.
  - blackguardx 9y ago
    The only olympic-style lifts I've done are deadlifts. It is very rewarding to maximally focus all your mental and physical energy into one second of effort. Using your body feels good no matter if the activity has "no purpose."
  - freehunter 9y ago
    >Training to be better at something that you will never do for real is somehow depressing I would argue with the "never do for real" when it comes to weight lifting, and I would also argue against the entire concept. You lift weights all the time. Every time you stand up, every step you take, every time you move any muscle, you're lifting weights. If you're helping a friend move, you're lifting weights. I bought a file cabinet the other day and the guy was amazed that I got it into my truck on my own even though it was 50+ pounds... but I think a normal person should be able to lift that much weight into the bed of a truck no problem. Need to open a pickle jar? Need to move a couch? Need to carry more groceries in from the car? That's what you're training for. And also, people train for things they never do "for real" all the time. Every time you play a video game you train for something you'll never do for real. Every time you play guitar but you're not in a band, you're training for something you'll never do for real. Every time you make a joke if you're not a stand-up comedian, you're training for something you'll never do for real. Every time you take a picture but you're not a photographer you get the idea. You're not really training to be an olympic weightlifter, you're training to lift that weight right there in front of you. That's just as "for real" as anything else you do as a hobby. How is running or riding a bike any more "for real" than lifting a weight? They're all things you do for exercise to be healthy. No one's running everywhere they go, running is something you do in order to run, and you run to get better at running so you can run more. You lift weights in order to lift heavier weights so you can lift more weights. Same exact thing.

r0brodz 9y ago

The benefits of protein are historically documented by all the great bodybuilders. Nothing new here. Mainstream is always behind the freaks who dare to go against "science".

milesvp 9y ago
Which is amusing, because in this context the bodybuilders are fundamentally doing science. They have experiments (aka, exercise and eating regiments) that, as I understand it, are repeatable, and consistently produce the desired outcome, at least in terms of sculpted muscle and body fat.
- curuinor 9y ago
  Modern bodybuilders don't have incredible life spans, either, so they face the consequences.
  - xupybd 9y ago
    I've often wondered about this can you point me in the direction of any info on their life spans?
  - rshannon3 9y ago
    That is mostly because all modern competitive bodybuilders use large amounts of PEDs.
  - barsonme 9y ago
    Yeah, pumping yourself full of tren, clen, and designer drugs, as well as getting up to 400+ lbs will do that to you.
- coralreef 9y ago
  But the experiments are also tainted, ie. undisclosed steroid supplements or other enhancers.
  - 9y ago

deskamess 9y ago

Is weights better than HIIT for over 40?

e9 9y ago
over 40 your main concern is to make it sustainable and avoid injuries. A mix of moderate weights couple of times a week and HIIT couple of times a week would work best.
- WkndTriathlete 9y ago
  [citation needed] I'm mid-40s and have no problem doing low-rep high-resistance (> 85% 1RM) sets 2-3 days per week and alternating with 2-3 HIIT sessions on bike, run, or swim for triathlon training. You have to decide what your goals are (endurance = 12+ rep sets at 30-50% 1RM, hypertrophy = 8-12 rep sets at 55-75% 1RM, strength = 1-6 rep sets at 85% - 100% 1RM) AND you have to have excellent form for the prime mover exercises (deadlift, squat, bench press, bent-over row) to avoid injury, but with the right diet, discipline, and proper recovery consistent 5% gains per three- to four-week cycles are possible Reference: _Periodization Training for Sports_ by Bompa, http://www.humankinetics.com/products/all-products/periodization-training-for-sports-3rd-edition http://www.humankinetics.com/products/all-products/periodiza...
oh_sigh 9y ago
Why not both? No HIIT routine I've seen has you working more than 2 days a week.

yakitori 9y ago

We get these type of fads every decade. Cholesterol was bad for you then fats were bad for you. Then it was running. Then hiking. It never ends. My grandparents lived well into their 90s. All you have to do is eat well and try to be active from time to time. But there is a growing weightlifting movement with a healthy marketing budget...

InclinedPlane 9y ago
Many people who smoke have lived into their 90s. That's not a good reason to smoke. Anecdotes are not data.
- wppick 9y ago
  Data is not the whole picture. Maybe more protein is great for adding muscle mass, and bad for a different reason... The article lists beef as it's first source of protein besides protein shakes. Beef is a class 2A carcinogen. I stopped reading there.
  - always_good 9y ago
    "On the other hand, any form of protein is likely to be effective, it concludes, not merely high-protein shakes and supplements. Beef, chicken, yogurt and even protein from peas or quinoa could help us to build larger and stronger muscles." That's really the part you took issue with? That's a list of protein examples, not "it's first source of protein." It even says "any form of protein is likely to be effective." Fake HN outrage? It goes on to say "On the other hand and conveniently, any type of and time for protein was fine. The gains were similar if people downed their protein immediately after a workout or in the hours earlier or later, and it made no difference if the protein was solid or liquid, soy, beef, vegan or any other."
    - erikpukinskis 9y ago
      Was your OP outraged?
  - 9y ago

rdiddly 9y ago

I would add a clarifying conjecture that probably the 1.6 grams per kg of body weight per day, should be based on your lean weight, i.e. how much you would weigh with only 10 or so percent body fat. If you're obese and weigh 200kg, you don't need to eat 320g of protein per day.

xupybd 9y ago

Anyone have a link the study they're talking about?

mikeyouse 9y ago
Yep, it's here: http://bjsm.bmj.com/content/bjsports/early/2018/01/18/bjsports-2017-097608.full.pdf http://bjsm.bmj.com/content/bjsports/early/2018/01/18/bjspor...

thesmallestcat 9y ago

Protein is good, but not too much from meat: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27479196 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27479196 > CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: > High animal protein intake was positively associated with cardiovascular mortality and high plant protein intake was inversely associated with all-cause and cardiovascular mortality, especially among individuals with at least 1 lifestyle risk factor. Substitution of plant protein for animal protein, especially that from processed red meat, was associated with lower mortality, suggesting the importance of protein source.

justboxing 9y ago
Thanks. Do you know of any naturally-high-in-protein plant-based source that isn't soy (i.e. tofu etc) or hemp? Asking cos I've had a hard time finding protein dense plant based alternatives, and as a vegetarian, it's really hard to get a lot of proteins from plant-based sources without processed stuff like Vega etc. I do eat quinoa but 1) it's very expensive and 2) you have to eat 2 or 3 cups of cooked quinoa to get like 25 gms of protein which is a lot of quinoa per day.
- thesmallestcat 9y ago
  I think there have even been studies that correlate all protein intake (regardless of source) inversely with longevity, so I try not to get too worked up about not having a meal with a lot of it. Beans, lentils, peanuts, etc. have a decent amount of protein, but even bread has protein and nowadays it's not hard to find high fiber, high protein bread. I love meat so this is all difficult, and I hope to eat less over time. I think it's a balance between the short-term benefits of protein (energy, muscle) and the long term effects of high protein consumption (tough on your organs).
- oh_sigh 9y ago
  There is protein powder available from plant only sources, like pea protein. It is obviously processed(not sure how strictly you are against processing), but 'pea protein(extracted from yellow peas)' is the only ingredient in my whole foods version. 20g of it has 15g protein, <1g carbs, 1.5g fat. edit: Just looked up vega and it looks like it is just plant protein like I recommended - sorry about that. What's wrong with extracting proteins out of plant matter? You don't end up with any noticeable amount of reagents or any intermediaries in the final product, thanks to chemistry.

msiggy 9y ago

Duh?

matte_black 9y ago

I think we are making a grave mistake by associating going to the gym and exercise with lifting weights. Let me explain. I think what most people should be doing is calisthenics. I’ve been lifting weights for over a decade, but only started calisthenics two years ago. Personally, I feel calisthenics gives you a much stronger and durable body over all compared to lifting weights. It also strengthens your joints and connective tissues, which people don’t really think about until it’s too late. Aesthetically, I also feel strong calisthenic trained bodies look much more well proportioned and hardened due to the active use of stabilizer muscles. People who have trained calisthenics for a long time are deceptively strong. They don’t look particularly huge, but they perform feats of strength that even the most professional weightlifter would struggle to do. To me, this is a sign of true mastery over one’s body. If you’re just getting started in your exercise career, try calisthenics.

oh_sigh 9y ago
Do calisthenics have the same effect on bone density(that is, increasing bone density and decreasing chances of developing osteoporosis) that lifting weights does? I agree with your point generally though that the best exercise routine(or diet) is one that you stick with and progresses you towards your goals.
- pmoriarty 9y ago
  Calisthenics is weight lifting. It just so happens that the weight you are lifting is your own body's weight rather than weights external to your body.
acconrad 9y ago
"Grave mistake" is a hyperbolic criticism, considering your only arguments for calisthenics revolve around strength based on personal anecdotal evidence, and a personal, subjective view of aesthetics. I've tried calisthenics and lacks in many areas. For starters, it woefully neglects the legs. Pistol squats and bridges are not nearly as taxing as barbell squats and deadlifts, though bridges have the added benefit of working flexibility. Push ups and pull ups quickly reach a plateau with 1 arm variations, and at that point you're no longer doing calisthenic movements but training like a gymnast. Calisthenics seem to be most effective at building strength for the core (pikes, leg raises, planks) and the shoulders (if you have the coordination to do hand stand push ups). Barbell training should not be avoided. I've also had serious injuries, such as a broken humerus as a child, where rotator cuff and deltoid muscles atrophied to an extreme level; and those joints are now stronger than ever because I weight trained in specific movement patterns that are difficult to replicate with calisthenics. And I say this as someone who has also been lifting weights for over a decade and has competed in both powerlifting and bodybuilding.

shdwban 9y ago

What would be a natural way to find if you're taking enough protein? If my sleep patterns, digestion, stomach, bowel movement, muscular recovery are fine, am I taking enough protein in accordance with my workout regimen? Or could it be that I may be absolutely fine but still taking less protein than the one my workout requires and hence building up less? Edit: by natural I mean without using scales, going just by how I'm feeling and body is doing.

acconrad 9y ago
Define "natural" - meaning you don't want to track what you eat? If that's the case, if you simply eat 4-8oz of some sort of lean protein with every meal, 3-5 meals a day, your protein intake will be adequate.
- shdwban 9y ago
  Yes but protein is expensive and I don't want to take excessive either. (assuming I'm financially constrained)
  - acconrad 9y ago
    pea and whey proteins are cheap, less than $1 / serving
  - hungerstrike 9y ago
    Eggs are pretty cheap and each one contains about 6 g of high-quality protein.
lemming 9y ago
From: https://examine.com/nutrition/how-much-protein-can-i-eat-in-one-sitting/ https://examine.com/nutrition/how-much-protein-can-i-eat-in-... That being said, since fecal losses of protein and short-chain peptides tend to smell incredibly bad one can use a 'sniff-test' after bowel movements to assess if protein is being lost in the feces and thus not taken up by either the intestines or the muscle. Not pleasant, perhaps, but should be effective :-)

mhb 9y ago

But can't eat the protein all at once: Research by McMaster University’s Dr. Stuart Phillips and others has found that if you eat more than 20 to 30 grams of protein at a time, you don’t get any further anabolic boost. Any extra protein is simply burned for energy; unlike carbohydrate or fat, you can’t save it for later. https://www.runnersworld.com/sweat-science/why-and-when-you-need-more-protein https://www.runnersworld.com/sweat-science/why-and-when-you-...

rshannon3 9y ago
It's not as black and white as that article makes it seem. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tJpdPYedWjc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tJpdPYedWjc
lemming 9y ago
Examine.com disagrees with this, and implies it may be an urban myth: https://examine.com/nutrition/how-much-protein-can-i-eat-in-one-sitting/ https://examine.com/nutrition/how-much-protein-can-i-eat-in-...

acconrad 9y ago

If you want to learn more about the basics of strength training and eating healthy with more protein, you should watch this lecture from a doctor and strength coach who would agree with the ask from this article: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7tsTwcOb_0k https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7tsTwcOb_0k

agnivade 9y ago

Not even a single mention of the risks of increasing mTor signalling due to extra protein. You would be well advised to keep that in mind.

pjc50 9y ago
First I've ever heard of this, and google tells me that mTor is a unit of vacuum - could you explain please?
- agnivade 9y ago
  Sure. Check these out - https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2016/05/07/too-much-protein-triggers-aging-cancer.aspx https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2016/05/... http://www.primalbody-primalmind.com/protein-how-much-is-too-much/ http://www.primalbody-primalmind.com/protein-how-much-is-too...