How much protein?

[Löwenherz]

The old question: How much protein?

Greg Ellis believes that at least 2.2 grams of protein per kg bodyweight are optimal for our immune system and overall health:

Human Protein Needs Part 2
Löwenherz

[aLptHW4k4y]

Haha sure, everyone believes something, and how that applies to others is irrelevant.
Just eat as much as it feels right to you.
E.g. I eat 1g/kg bodyweight, and I don't lose muscles nor my immune system is impaired..

[eveheart]

This guy is an extreme bodybuilder, and the examples he cites are extreme athletic situations. How does he go from that specific demographic to "everyone's" needs? P.S. - his version of low-carb is fairly high in carbs and low in fat. The more I hear of his theories, the more I think he is one deluded voice crying out in the wilderness. So I wonder, why is Greg Ellis featured here so much in the last few days?

[l0rdcha0s]

I used to buy into the "bodybuilder diet". High carb to put on weight lower the calories and carbs to lose weight, etc., etc. At times I ate nearly 300g of protein a day. My family was worried with kidney function and high protein toxicity. I had a physical done and nope, nothing wrong. That being said though, after researching the topic a bit more I found that an optimal protein intake is probably around 100g/day. Depending on your activity and exercise intensity (and thus muscle breakdown) a little higher or lower. High protein levels like my first number, will not technically harm a healthy person with healthy kidney function. But I did realize that, while not harming me, it was probably causing unneeded stress on my body's system. Lowering my consumption also helped to lower calories and get a better ratio of macronutrients (carbs, protein, fats) more in line with a healthy high fat, moderate protein, low or very low carb diet.

[van]

another approach would be to see how much one could reduce protein amounts while strengthening their fat burning ability at the same time,, and then determine how much protein is needed.  If you can burn fat for energy, your body will continue to demand either sugar or protein.

[aLptHW4k4y]

What do you mean by "strengthening their fat burning ability"? How are you going to do that?
I'm seriously interested

[l0rdcha0s]

What do you mean by "strengthening their fat burning ability"? How are you going to do that?
I'm seriously interested

In the absence of a high carbohydrate (sugar) intake, your body uses energy stored in fat cells for the majority of it's fuel. High insulin levels due to chronically high levels of sugar flowing around in your bloodstream encourage fat to be deposited rather than used. I cannot say with certainty exactly what van is talking about but I would assume since fat is often linked with protein sources (meat), how little protein you feel your body needs to allow your body to continue burning fat at an optimal level or even strengthen the ability of your body to primarily rely on fats as a fuel source.

[van]

Right,  to effectively be able to burn fat you have to basically train your body to burn fat, the fat you eat, and the fat that is stored in your body.  It took me weeks to feel good again or have my body make the switch from sugar to fat.  So if one isn't patient enough it is often easy to confuse the need for more protein ( excess gets converted to sugar, at the expense of not so helpful by-products that the body has to get rid of) for simply not being able to process fat for fuel effectively yet. 

[l0rdcha0s]

Once you lower your carbohydrate intake (which of course constitutes most paleo diets). Your body learns to use fat more often. Carbohydrates are still the preferred fuel source for your body and it will burn those first. What happens in the wrong diet is due to chronically high insulin levels in the blood the body is told to not let go of the fat (insulin promotes fat synthesizing) and thus when the glucose is burned up it tells your brain it's hungry again while the fat sits stored and collecting. In the right diet (much lower insulin levels), once the carbohydrates are burned your body knows instinctively that it has energy stored in fat cells for fuel. Due to low insulin levels these are easily accessible. This prolongs your hunger for a much longer period. Once your body gets used to it, you'll realize you can go much longer without food.

Since switching over I've experienced this. Going from the typical 5-6 meal "bodybuilder" diet, which was laden with carbohydrates I can no go the whole day with only eating maybe 1-2 meals max. I eat when I'm hungry and often I'm not hungry until midday. I go to the gym in the morning but I don't consider it fasted because my body is burning the fuel it's been storing for the past couple of years off and it's a much more efficient machine than when I was feeding it wrong.

[aLptHW4k4y]

Fat burning will be more or less same irrelevant of how much sugar you eat..

What you're talking about is ketone burning (when you eat very low-sugar), and that's different from fat burning. Ketones try to substitute sugar (as much as it's possible), not fat. Ketones are produced from fat and some ketogenic amino acids, but that doesn't mean that more fat is directly burned for energy.
Number of perixosomes does increase as you increase fat intake (especially if the extra fat is very long chain), but they simply break down very long-chain fat into medium chain and forward it to mitochondria.

Avery simplified example:
I'm eating 150g sugar and 150g fat. That's probably plenty of sugar according to you, but it doesn't mean I'm not using up all that fat. If I were to lower the sugar to 50g, and increase fat to 200g, I'd still burn 150g fat and then the rest of the fat would be ketones.

[l0rdcha0s]

Okay I didn't quite directly mean that actual "fat" is burned for energy but it is converted, like you said, to ketones which can then be used by your body for energy. In the absence of carbohydrates your body will convert fat stores and fat you eat into ketones and use those for energy. In your formula you also must factor in that some fat is converted to glucose to refill glycogen cells that have been depleted and cannot fully be refilled by 50g of sugar. It's not a fat burning process obviously but your body is using more of it's fat reserves and those in diet to accomplish it's task.

[Löwenherz]

So I wonder, why is Greg Ellis featured here so much in the last few days?

He's just one of many low carb bodybuilders. For me, it's fun to see the 180 degree contrary beliefs of the "experts". BTW: I don't see Ellis as an expert.

Caldwell Esselstyn is an real expert, imo, for example. He recommends a very high complex carb diet to all his heart patients and seems to be really successful. Bill Clinton is one example. One the other side of the spectrum there is Ron Rosedale who sees all glucose from food as more or less toxic...

Löwenherz

[LePatron7]

In your formula you also must factor in that some fat is converted to glucose to refill glycogen cells that have been depleted and cannot fully be refilled by 50g of sugar.

Actually I think protein gets converted into carbs. Fat doesn't turn into carbs. Actually carbs turn into fat.

[l0rdcha0s]

Actually I think protein gets converted into carbs. Fat doesn't turn into carbs. Actually carbs turn into fat.

Both fat and protein can both be turned into glucose by the body in the absence of enough carbohydrates.

Gluconeogenesis is the synthesis of glucose from molecules that are not carbohydrates, such as amino and fatty acids.

[aLptHW4k4y]

@l0rdcha0s

The existence of glyoxylate cycles in humans has not been established, and it is widely held that fatty acids cannot be converted to glucose in humans directly. However, carbon-14 has been shown to end up in glucose when it is supplied in fatty acids.[13] Despite these findings, it is considered unlikely that the 2-carbon acetyl-CoA derived from the oxidation of fatty acids would produce a net yield of glucose via the citric acid cycle.[10]