Trying out a new way of eating

[djansen]

It won't hurt you to eat excess protein for a little while, but I wouldn't exceed 1.5g/kg unless you're hurt really badly. They found no benefits to exceeding 1.2g/kg, I believe it was, in a study that was done. I believe it was published in ACSM journals.
Yes, it is a renal concern.

are you talking sedentary people only?
in strength trained individuals .86kg/kg showed a decrease in whole body protein synthesis and a negative nitrogen balance with 1.4g/kg showing the best results in regards to increases protein synthesis without excess amino acid oxidation.
In middle age men (55-57) the RDA .8g/kg over 14 weeks with no exercise mid-thigh muscle area decreased by an average of 1.7 cm. The authors concluded that the RDA recommendation may not meet the metabolic or physiological all older people. Let me know if you want links to the studies.

Of course, this is a longterm thing.

That's where it is a grey area. As far as I know no adverse effects (as high as 2.8g/kg) have been seen in people with healthy kidney function. And that's up to 6 months. I would love to see more long term data, if you are aware of any more current studies on protein safety I would love to see them.

The point I am trying to make here is that for ageing people, active people (not only training), and people in a caloric deficit I feel the RDA .8g/kg is too low. Especially for people like vegetarians for example, who find it harder to find complete proteins reaching that amount may be flirting with low protein levels. In regards to maintaining or adding LBM with no adverse effects seen in a huge range above but negative effects seen close too .8g/kg or lower why would you not consume more protein? And I am not advocating cutting out one macro-nutrient but setting your protein and fat and protein requirements and getting the rest through CHO based on your target calories.

And I still have to disagree, a high fat meal like cheeseburger and small fry should at least satisfy you. If it doesn't, then that is odd. You don't need to feel full to feel satisfied. Of course that's a mentality thing.


Small portions ONLY apply to energy dense foods.
You can have very large portions of high nutrient dense low energy dense foods and be fine, of course. It's much better to eat a large bowl of salad with chicken breast and tomatoes and peppers for example, than to eat 3 double cheeseburgers, but if you were to eat one double cheeseburger, it would be a better choice. However I'd rather eat a huge salad that one cheeseburger.

Ok, I am weird then . I think we agree here, I am not advocating going on a binge and think your advice about small portions works well but the amount of "junk" can be left to discretion with little to no effects within a realistic range if you know your daily caloric intake.
Have a happy Thanksgiving!

[djansen]

Yeah, the fruit avoidance IS the fructose. They will eat it, but only alone and on an empty stomach. They also don't eat avocado, squash, carrots, potatoes, sweet potatoes, etc. The idea of the diet is to prevent the body from being able to absorb any fat by completely forcing your insulin to never spike, and if it does spike, have nothing else to 'feed' the fat. So fruit would cause an insulin spike, so eating anything with fruit would cause weight gain.. And then all the other weird mixes they aren't allowed. Makes it tricky for my picky eater of a mom. Not to mention they just get lazy and just don't buy the stuff. I haven't seen my mom touch a fruit in about 2 months now.

Wow, I think your parents should look a little into fat metabolism and the role of insulin and less into what is it Suzanne Summers? has to say. Fearing the GI and "insulin spikes" is just silly (unless your diabetic of course).
Fruit is very nutrient dense and do they realize how much actual fructose is in a piece of fruit?
Here is a good read for you on fructose:
http://www.alanaragonblog.com/2010/0...tose-alarmism/

Overall I think you have the right idea and if you throw in some exercise you should be well on your way. Good luck and Happy Thanksgiving!

[Jessica Loesch]

Djansen, while you have good points, I suppose I just speak from seeing the extreme side of things, where excess protein CAN cause problems. I intern at the heart hospital and we have to make sure we don't recommend too much protein because a majority of the patients have renal failure.

Now, I may have misworded something somewhere. Excess protein won't necessarily cause renal failure, but it will be harmful if there are risks. It can be hard on the kidneys and yes there is research out there but I don't think it is based on a certain amount rather than a cause and effect type study.


As far as protein recommendations go, the .8g/kg recommendation is for a healthy, moderately active individual, not sedentary.
When someone is sedentary, of course they will lose muscle mass. That's agiven. It has nothing to do with how much protein you eat at that rate, because if you don't use your muscles, they WILL waste. The protein can help decrease the rate of this, but it still happens. So I don't think the study you are referring to was necessarily aimed towards recommendations for a healthy, active lifestyle but more towards avoidance of muscle wasting in say the sedentary, elderly population, which is a great study because muscle wasting and bone loss in the elderly are big issues.

As I mentioned, it is recommended to get 1-1.2g/kg by ACSM for strength trained individuals, and yes that extra .2-.4g/kg does make a bigger difference than you think. So a .8g/kg causing problems would make sense in heavily strength trained individuals.

However, remember, one study doesn't mean we can generalize this to all, because there are more studies out there that contradict that. I think we can agree to that statement alone.



As far as the comment to fructose:
To the OP - the diet your parents are on is insane. Suzanne Sommers is not a food scientist nor a dietitian.

For one, fructose does not cause insulin spikes. Glucose is accepted by GLUT4 transporters into the blood, and fructose uses a different GLUT transporter. GLUT4 transporters cause insulin secretion, and they are located in the pancreas. Fructose however does not use the same pathway and does NOT increase blood sugar nor insulin. Therefore there is no reason for you not to eat fruit.
The only negative about fructose, which is commonly seen with high fructose corn syrup (concentrated source of fructose), is that it inhibits leptin secretion signaling that you are full and is more readily converted to fat rather than glycogen. However, the reason this is not important for fruit consumption, is because you don't eat enough fruit in one sitting to cause this problem to be an issue. I'd like to see someone TRY to eat enough to cause weight gain.

Oh, and insulin spiking does NOT cause weight gain. It is an important mechanism in your body that allows you to regulate your blood sugar so that you can be active and live well. If you didn't have insulin, you wouldn't be able to lower your blood sugar after having a piece of birthday cake. And when you are exercising, your body is converting glycogen to glucose for your body to actively using energy, and the same thing happens when you have an adrenaline rush. But what happens when you have excess glucose in the blood? Insulin is secreted and it is converted back into glycogen, which is stored mostly in the liver and some in the muscles.

So what does cause weight gain then? EXCESS calories/energy cause weight gain, excess fat especially. Not carbohydrates, which are, by the way, essential for the brain. The brain uses glucose to function, and if for some reason there is no glucose available, it uses ketone bodies, and believe me - you do not want that to happen.

I think it's time to reevaluate what diet you and yours are partaking in

The best way of eating is to watch portion sizes of your heavier energy dense foods, eat more nutrient rich foods that are not energy dense (vegetables, fruits), and follow a diet rich in whole grains, low fat dairy, and lean proteins.

People make diets out to be more than they really are.
I know first hand how hard it is to resist junk food, but if you're dedicated to a diet, at least make it the right one

[djansen]

Djansen, while you have good points, I suppose I just speak from seeing the extreme side of things, where excess protein CAN cause problems. I intern at the heart hospital and we have to make sure we don't recommend too much protein because a majority of the patients have renal failure.

Now, I may have misworded something somewhere. Excess protein won't necessarily cause renal failure, but it will be harmful if there are risks. It can be hard on the kidneys and yes there is research out there but I don't think it is based on a certain amount rather than a cause and effect type study.


As far as protein recommendations go, the .8g/kg recommendation is for a healthy, moderately active individual, not sedentary.
When someone is sedentary, of course they will lose muscle mass. That's agiven. It has nothing to do with how much protein you eat at that rate, because if you don't use your muscles, they WILL waste. The protein can help decrease the rate of this, but it still happens. So I don't think the study you are referring to was necessarily aimed towards recommendations for a healthy, active lifestyle but more towards avoidance of muscle wasting in say the sedentary, elderly population, which is a great study because muscle wasting and bone loss in the elderly are big issues.

I myself consume a "high" protein diet (1g-1.2g per lb body-weight depending on CHO intake) and have been on one for about 6 years and in all my blood-work I have had no issues to speak of. I have reviewed a lot of literature and I have yet to see any negative effects on healthy individuals. I am not saying there are none because I am sure there are and I would really like to review them.

And in regards to the study on the elderly, that is true that if you don't use your muscles they will atrophy. But here is what I got from that study:
Though a loss of muscle mass and bone density is inevitable as you age my goal would to be delay for as long as I can OR reverse some of those effects by A: engaging in some form of resistance exercise and B: consuming adequate protein AND adequate calcium intake (calcium deficient people are a different story). Why would I shoot for the bare minimum and risk this? and i'm not saying an unreasonable amount, 1.2-1.4g/kg sounds reasonable. do you see where I am coming from?

And, great post on insulin and fructose.

[Jessica Loesch]

I myself consume a "high" protein diet (1g-1.2g per lb body-weight depending on CHO intake) and have been on one for about 6 years and in all my blood-work I have had no issues to speak of. I have reviewed a lot of literature and I have yet to see any negative effects on healthy individuals. I am not saying there are none because I am sure there are and I would really like to review them.

And in regards to the study on the elderly, that is true that if you don't use your muscles they will atrophy. But here is what I got from that study:
Though a loss of muscle mass and bone density is inevitable as you age my goal would to be delay for as long as I can OR reverse some of those effects by A: engaging in some form of resistance exercise and B: consuming adequate protein AND adequate calcium intake (calcium deficient people are a different story). Why would I shoot for the bare minimum and risk this? and i'm not saying an unreasonable amount, 1.2-1.4g/kg sounds reasonable. do you see where I am coming from?

And, great post on insulin and fructose.

I think I have actually read that study, and I agree with it 100%. However for a normal individual, .8g/kg should be significant enough, if they aren't doing a lot of strength training (involving muscle tears thus needing extra protein for rebuilding) but remaining active. I have not seen any research done on a younger individual that is healthy and active on the impacts of the recommended protein intake. As Americans, most of us get plenty of protein anyway, thus it is not a concern for a vast majority of us. However once you hit a certain age, and I think it is detailed in that study or others, it is important to increase your protein needs just a little, not a lot. We recommend at least 1g/kg protein at the nebraska heart hospital, where 95% of the patients are at this point.
I think muscle wasting is less due to the amount of protein intake, and more due to the amount of protein utilization within the body, concerning absorption, along with maintaining an active healthy lifestyle. Those that maintain that throughout adulthood are seen to have less muscle wasting, so we should not be attributing it to just one factor.
I genuinely believe that if one eats between .8-1.2g/kg of protein no matter on what end of the spectrum, throughout their diet, and maintain a healthy exercise regimen which engages muscles and bones, along with eating a variety of protein sources including ANIMAL proteins, because there is no vegetable source of protein that contains all amino acids (sorry vegetarians, you have to work harder here, but it can still be done), then there is no need for concern. My grandfather is a prime example of that. So to highlight what the study said, I agree - consume adequate protein and maintain a healthy exercise regimen for a longlasting life. I see what you are saying, but I by no means think that .8g/kg is too low for certain individuals, such as naturally thin people, females, etc.

As far as high protein intake, I would not really consider 1-1.4 g/kg high, while it can make a reasonable difference in those training against muscle wasting/repair, it will not make a siginificant difference renally. You are fine

I think it is where we get above 2g/kg when concern starts to occur, depending on lifestyle of course.

[djansen]

I think I have actually read that study, and I agree with it 100%. However for a normal individual, .8g/kg should be significant enough, if they aren't doing a lot of strength training (involving muscle tears thus needing extra protein for rebuilding) but remaining active. I have not seen any research done on a younger individual that is healthy and active on the impacts of the recommended protein intake. As Americans, most of us get plenty of protein anyway, thus it is not a concern for a vast majority of us. However once you hit a certain age, and I think it is detailed in that study or others, it is important to increase your protein needs just a little, not a lot. We recommend at least 1g/kg protein at the nebraska heart hospital, where 95% of the patients are at this point.
I think muscle wasting is less due to the amount of protein intake, and more due to the amount of protein utilization within the body, concerning absorption, along with maintaining an active healthy lifestyle. Those that maintain that throughout adulthood are seen to have less muscle wasting, so we should not be attributing it to just one factor.
I genuinely believe that if one eats between .8-1.2g/kg of protein no matter on what end of the spectrum, throughout their diet, and maintain a healthy exercise regimen which engages muscles and bones, along with eating a variety of protein sources including ANIMAL proteins, because there is no vegetable source of protein that contains all amino acids (sorry vegetarians, you have to work harder here, but it can still be done), then there is no need for concern. My grandfather is a prime example of that. So to highlight what the study said, I agree - consume adequate protein and maintain a healthy exercise regimen for a longlasting life. I see what you are saying, but I by no means think that .8g/kg is too low for certain individuals, such as naturally thin people, females, etc.

As far as high protein intake, I would not really consider 1-1.4 g/kg high, while it can make a reasonable difference in those training against muscle wasting/repair, it will not make a siginificant difference renally. You are fine

I think it is where we get above 2g/kg when concern starts to occur, depending on lifestyle of course.

It looks like time will tell, I really look forward to future research on this topic. That said, I am not looking at what is "enough" or the bare minimum but rather what is optimal. And I full acknowledge the fact that there a lot of variables at play. I guess overall we are pretty much on the same page, with maybe a few things we can agree to disagree on then.
thank you for the discussion.
and good luck on getting your masters on the road to a dietitian. I am also currently in school for exercise science and not sure what exactly what field I want to go into yet.

[Jessica Loesch]

It looks like time will tell, I really look forward to future research on this topic. That said, I am not looking at what is "enough" or the bare minimum but rather what is optimal. And I full acknowledge the fact that there a lot of variables at play. I guess overall we are pretty much on the same page, with maybe a few things we can agree to disagree on then.
thank you for the discussion.
and good luck on getting your masters on the road to a dietitian. I am also currently in school for exercise science and not sure what exactly what field I want to go into yet.

Good discussion indeed. I started out as a nutrition, exercise, and health science major (basically exercise science), so I added on dietetics. I'd love to do something that combines the two, but we will see.

Hope this info was helpful to the OP.