Nah, doesn’t look like you’re being pedantic - from what I can see kcals and cals with nutrition are interchangeable. Just seems like a weird thing to be interchangeable, when in any other circumstance, putting “k” before something means only one thing, haha.
Fair enough, I just can’t see ever buying the 95% stuff - 80% is perfect, tastes so much better.
We use Calories, which is a kilocalorie; they talk calories, which is, obviously, 1/1000 of ours.
Just as obvious: they’re wrong. USA!
It still technically means that thing here, its just no-one actually uses it that way.
Probably true, however I’m a fatty so I need fewer calories with my protein. If all I wanted was taste, I’d eat pizza and doughnuts.
Thanks!
From the Mitchell´s paper:
Both group where in a caloric deficit but appendicular lean mass decreased in the RDA group but remained unchanged in the 2RDA group. Several papers agree that when in a caloric deficit a higher protein intake is needed to prevent muscle loss (but only in men), but the breakpoint is around 1.2g/kg or 1.5RDA. That´s where a higher (than RDA) protein intake really shines, when you are cutting, but when you are in a weight maintenance or gaining phase higher protein intakes show none to minimal benefits.
But what do you mean by “weight gain phase”? Just eating more protein doesn’t necessarily mean you’ll get more muscle, but what about coupled with vigorous exercise and conditioning? I just don’t see in these studies where they’re having people exercise in such a way that a demand for recovery is created.
I agree. This is the problem with many studies in general. So many variables that make a definite answer on any subject debatable if everything is not the same for both groups and if the people in the study don’t really reflect yourself in anyway (age, activity level, level of conditioning). But I would say I agree with you that it’s better to err on the side of too much protein rather than too little, as it is essential to the muscle repair process.
Ouch. My muscles are badly in need of repair right now. I was thinking it was a good time to lose weight and eat less protein, but you got me. Time to cook some good meat.
I have even studied which cuts of meat help repair which types of injuries, so plain stupidity I didn’t remember what I already know.
By “weight gain phase” I meant as a bulking phase.
You do raise a fair point, most of these studies focus on the elderly trying to minimize sarcopenia while doing little physical activity, not high intensity exercise.
But actually resistance training improves protein efficiency, so probably there are no greater protein needs in strength-trained individuals.
I said 1,600 calories from protein. After you factor in the fat content of the beef it yields a total of about 3,400 calories.
Perhaps I was too glib about it, but that was not a daily occurance. I was routinely closer to 350g of protein from all sources, e.g beef, eggs, whey. I also practised IF, so there was normally anything from 20 to 42 hours between such feedings. That makes it much easier to put away such volume. Finally, the absence of plant food ensures no digestion, bloating, etc.
Do you find you have less ability to eat large amounts of food after fasting? I find that if I don’t eat solid food throughout the day, my ability to eat large amounts of solid food decreases.
Ahaha u are crazy, u can eat a lot of meet or fish
I know what you mean but I find the floodgates are quick to open once you get a taste for it!
Although, when I was trying to aggressively cut, I would have about 750g lean ground beef and 3 or so eggs as a single meal for the refeed. That worked quite well too.
This has definitely been the benefit for me when I fast here and there. I have not found it sustainable as a lifestyle diet, for me, but I sometimes do it for a week or two just to regain better control over my hunger and kickstart some fat loss.
Great point you brought up here. I think this is one of the practical benefits of fasting that doesn’t come up in the papers or endless online debates.
Went back in time and saw this one. Interesting, and was curious to get more thoughts. First I think it’s important to clarify the topic further. The only reason this matters is not “for muscle growth” it’s for extraordinary muscle growth, meaning enough muscle growth to be noticeably more muscular (at least to some degree). Set aside optimum health too. That’s a different question and at some point they diverge (the most muscular are not the most healthy).
I’m thinking it’s total calories in proportion to stimulation, and the macros sort themselves out. I.e., as long as you have a caloric surplus and appropriate stimulation and rest, you’ll get growth, and protein being at the low end of what is recommended here or at the high end really won’t make much difference on muscle growth. Where it gets tricky is if you are in a caloric deficit trying to build muscle, then macro ratios are more important. That is a hard cat to skin (drug free anyway).
Dr Darden…premier protein…yes or no…also…my weight 204 lbs…Your recommendations on protein per day…thank you FsuRobinson
However, Gironda also died of heart disease after years of failing health. One site reported a few years ago that one of Vince’s dietary references Stefansson, unfortunately, died of a massive stroke around 80 and Vince of a massive heart attack at 79. Rheo Blair (aka Irvin Johnson), who Vince worked with, died at 62 due to heart issues according to a number of websites.
Gironda was not a doctor nor did he have any background in nutritional science. eg Where’s the science in consuming dozens of dessicated liver tabs a day verifying they’ll get you jacked? Or taking RNA pills for recovery?
The guys who went to see him already and pretty developed physiques. Most of the stars were already juicing – Larry Scott, Arnold, Makkaway, etc. – and few stuck with his “diet”. Vince had his own little racket going and people bought into it.
I found liver tablets worked for me! When eating them I had more energy and felt better over all? Maybe I had an Iron shortage ? I’d eat them now only they are too damn expensive !
Scott
Universal uni-liver is about $20 for 250
I used to get Solgar , that worked great for me but just 20 bucks adds up to too much over the long run.
Scott
