For example, progressive increases in protein intake are coupled

For example, progressive increases in protein intake are coupled with increased fasting nitrogen losses [45, 46] along with an increase in feeding induced nitrogen accrual [45, 46] that is perhaps even more pronounced than fasting losses [45]. Although not fully elucidated, a possible implication of this might be an effect on lean tissue mass. A few studies specifically address click here change in habitual protein intake. Soenen et al. had participants increase habitual protein intake 16%, from 1.13 g/kg/day to 1.31 g/kg/day via substitution of ~500 kcal with a milk protein based supplement containing 52 g protein. Over 12 weight-stable wk this Selleckchem Rabusertib led

to 0.7 kg greater lean mass gain and fat loss compared to isoenergetic controls [33]. Bray et al. reported that increasing a 1.2 g/kg/day protein intake to ≥ 1.8 g/kg/day via overfeeding led to an ~3.5-4 kg greater gain in lean body mass in eight wk [32]. Additionally, Petzke et al. reported a positive correlation (r = 0.643, p = 0.0001) between change in habitual protein intake and change in fat-free body mass [29]. Habitual intake mediates the effects of protein on bone health and satiety [47, 48] and studies have shown that that the thermic effect of protein decreases over time while dieting [49, 50]. We propose

that changes in habitual protein intake may mediate the effects of protein on lean body mass [29]. Finally, it is likely that adding protein to one’s habitual intake is most beneficial when added to previously protein poor meals, find more as opposed to adding to meals already highin protein [51, 52]. Protein distribution should also be accounted for in future research. Conclusions Baseline protein intakes averaged ~1.31 g/kg/day (Tables 3 and 4), short of the mean high protein group intake during studies showing muscular benefits of 2.38 g/kg/day. Per protein change theory, a 59.5% increase to a representative habitual protein intake of ~1.31 g/kg/day would yield 2.09 g/kg/day. This is close to the aforementioned 2.38 g/kg/day benchmark. The “lay” recommendation Ceramide glucosyltransferase to consume 1 g protein/lb of bodyweight/day (2.2 g/kg/day) while resistance training has pervaded for years. Nutrition professionals often deem this lay

recommendation excessive and not supported by research. However, as this review shows, this “lay” recommendation aligns well with research that assesses applied outcome measures of strength and body composition in studies of duration > 4 weeks [1–7, 9, 10, 17, 28, 38]. That current sports nutrition guidelines for resistance training continue to mirror results of nitrogen balance studies [53, 54], is perhaps not optimal. Higher protein interventions were deemed successful when there was, on average, a 66.1% g/kg/day between group intake spread compared to 10.2% when additional protein was no more effective than control. The average change in habitual protein intake in studies showing higher protein to be more effective than control was +59.5% versus +6.

Comments are closed.