I was sent this article by a friend saying the body can't absorb more than 35g of protein in a sitting. Is this true...

i want a female or a feminine male to love me. not to rape with my toxic farts

You sound like a DYEL faggot with no concept of how to actually structure your diet. You're never going to make it.

You really don't need that much protein, man. You are falling for memes and broscience. Contemporary research shows no benefit for consuming over 0.72 grams of protein per lb of bodyweight (1.6 grams per kg), with most research even claiming 0.64 grams per lb.
>bjsm.bmj.com/content/52/6/376.full

So unless you weigh 278 lbs, you're don't need nearly that much. Clearly your metabolic system doesn't like handling so much protein, so listen to your body.

Attached: 1521990023859.jpg (880x882, 42K)

>So unless you weigh 278 lbs, you're don't need nearly that much
He probably does desu. A lot of the shitty advice on this board comes from DYELs and fatties who don't have the sense to stfu

This annon biologys!

What a predictable response, like fucking clockwork. Look at the link I gave and tell me you know more than the people the article sources.

Trips confirm

Are you retarded? Where am I disagreeing with you? Are you a triggered fatty? Did you get upset that I rightly shit on fats?

wrong

meals containing 50g protein 4x a day
this will be gospel in about a year, get on it now

kek, he just completely misinterpreted your post user, chill out

based and redpilled.

Ignore the retards in this thread. just listen to this guy.

Attached: 1530835102922.jpg (448x500, 37K)

lol oops. by "he probably does" I thought you mean, probably needs that much protein, not probably weighs 278 lbs.

You forgot to link the study that was conducted on people who actually work out and use the muscles.
More protein is required there. Read up.

You can absorb more than that ofc.
Most of the studies showing that more than 30g of protein in a meal is useless isn't actually looking at the anabolic response of heavy protein meals, but just heavy whey protein dosages, whey is absorbed way too fast by itself, as such getting more than 30g of whey protein is useless unless you are eating something with carbs or fats to slow down the absorption.
In a regular meal or whole food the absorption is much slower, as such you can eat way more protein in one sitting without "wasting it".

No it's not, only in beginners or people going through extreme muscle damage form training, aka only beginners and extreme marathon runners.
Experienced lifters and bodybuilders actually need less protein to build muscle than total beginners, believe it or not that's the truth, muscle damage is almost compeltely dissipated after muscles become adapted to significant stress, reason why muscle protein synthesis rates are sky high as a beginner but almost none of it grants actual muscle growth.

examine.com/nutrition/how-much-protein-do-you-need/

Have you done any actual reading?
This is a link to a meta-analysis of evidence based studies.
tl dr is : How much daily protein (g) you need depends on your weight (kg), goal, and level of activity: from 1.2 g/kg if sedentary, to 1.4–2.2 g/kg if physically active, up to 3.3 g/kg if trying to gain muscle or lose fat.

There is enough good studies and evidence that support both sides - the side that active people need more protein and the side that says they don’t. It’s a controversial and complex topic that has not been decided upon yet.

However, there are multiple studies discovering that a high protein diet helps maintain lean body mass when cutting. And by high they usually mean around 2g per Kilogramm bodyweight.

Well I just gave you a source that cites 35 legit studies and gives proper numbers and explanations. Are you able to come up with a counter example? There realy isn't much controversy about this topic nowadays.

If you truly are interested in the topic then you would stop being so ignorant and make an effort to educate yourself by reading both sides.
Here is a study that doesn’t take a definite side, but explains how training age and other factors can indeed make for less protein requirement:
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/22150425/

Again, it emphasizes that high protein intake clearly help when cutting weight, that seems to be a constant that all studies seem to agree with.

>Have you done any actual reading?
I'm guessing you haven't, your link doesn't actually tell you how much protein you "need".
Nitrogen balance is mostly dependant on the calories you're eating, it doesn't matter if you're eating 500g of protein if you're eating only 70% of the calories you need to maintain bodyweight, almost all of the protein you eat is oxidized for energy.
Meta analysis don't take training status and many other things into account.
Actual dietary interventions show that CLEARLY little protein is NEEDED for MAINTAINING and BUILDING muscle, one just has to be honest about the data, reading meta analysis all day won't give you the full picture, you know, of actual requirements for protein.

The 1.2g/kg recommendation for sedentary people is way more than any sedentary person could possibly need, and here's proof.
"Increasing the energy intake of active men, requiring 2800 to 3000 kcal/d, from 900 to 1600 kcal/d (CALLOWAY and SPECTOR, 1954) showed that the N balance was very sensitive to the energy intake when 6 g N or more were provided (Figure 1). For each kcal of energy intake, there was an improvement of 4 mg in the N balance. In other words, an increase of the energy intake by 100 kcal induced a 400 mg improvement of the N balance, or a sparing of 13 g of lean tissue."
Check pic related, calories matter more for nitrogen balance and the maintenance and building of muscle than protein unless you're eating an absolutely pathetic ammount.
1g nitrogen = 6.2-6.3g of protein, do the math, you don't need much protein at all.

archive.unu.edu/unupress/food2/UID07E/UID07E0H.HTM

Attached: UID07E01.png (421x257, 63K)

You're calling me ignorant while citing a paper from 2011, which in turn quotes other pre-2010 studies?
The conclusion of the study is literally 1.3-1.8g of protein per kg of bodyweight and experienced athletes MIGHT require less although not if exercising rigoriously.

>quoting a study from 1954
>thinking every 6.2g of ingested protein equals 1g of nitrogen in the end
>not taking into account actual digestion and metabolic pathways
Just stop.

Are you implying studies from 2011 are not relearn anymore? What a fucking stupid claim.

You are ignorant because instead of reading the available studies yourself you read an Internet blog article that did that for you, trusting their interpretation instead of making your own picture.

>1.3 to 1.8
Yeah, far fetched from what you are suggesting

>MIGHT
There is reasonable evidence to believe that, yes.
You can find numerous other articles that consider the athletes training age when researching protein requirements. If you weren’t such a simple minded ignorant fuck you would use your brain cells to google and look them up yourself.
I’m on a mobile phone, I won’t keep pulling studies for your ass so you can skim through the abstract and pull out the sentences that support your point.

Try getting anything publicized or treated seriously if most of your claims are based on something more than 5 years old.
t. fag from academia

Literally not an issue at all, I grew up in a family full of doctors and just recently witnessed my sisters publication and also her doctor thesis references.
You are full of shit

t. lying faggot

Not a single study, various, read them all in the link I offered if you're interested in actually knowing the truth.
Why do you think the RDA for protein is so low? Do you think it's just a meme and that this shit wasn't tried and tested for many decades? Protein requirements for maintaining muscle in humans are low.
Furthermore the digestion issue is irrelevant because it persists in subjects in those old studies and in subjects used in recent RCT's analysed in meta analysis you seem to cling on so strongly, so what are you babbling about?

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26367529
High protein diets just vastly increase protein oxidation while offering less energy, so they might provide a benefit in losing fat and maintaining the same muscle than lower protein diets, but the difference is only measurable on paper, and you are still gonna have to eat enough calories to gain ANY muscle if you're trained, so it's not an issue.

You guys are actually arguing this is gr8 keep going retarda its funny

>RDA
>just like RDA for Vitamin C
Yeah follow that and enjoy your scurvy.
Fucking brainlets I swear.

Contributing lots of value, as always, user

Much love, unless you argue with random anonymous people on the internet, user

You didn't refute anything of what I said, look at the study, in people that are completely sedentary, 0.4g of protein per KILOGRAM of bodyweight is AS PROTEIN SPARING as 2.4g/kg, there is no difference in NET muscle protein balance, you just get more protein synthesis and also much higher protein breakdown because you're eating more protein, but what you gain is basically the same at the end of the day, it doesn't matter.
Now I am not pushing for this low of a protein intake, but 1.4g of protein intake which is like 4 fucking times of what's actually required for maintaining muscle mass in sedentary healthy people seems more than enough for building muscle, considering that training itself past beginning stages is actually anabolic and increases the response to the protein you eat.

You are right, as always, user. Better shit post and be an insufferable clueless retard online, helps building communities

thats what henselman(the dude from bayesianbodybuilding) does.
BUT he and every other top profile recommends 0.4g/0.6g protein/kg per meal, so it's around 20-40g protein to maximise MPS, more doesn't do harm but it doesn't give extra benefits either.

Samefag who got btfo for lying

wtf guys it's 2018 and you STILL have questions regarding MPS? lil, just lil.

here's an article that will answer all of your questions: nutritiontactics.com/measure-muscle-protein-synthesis/

Yeah, user I'm trying to keep this site retard free but some of them always sneak in
R you inspector gadget?

Intellectual outlets that are scared of discussion because they don’t have the mental capacity to do anything other than procrastinating such as yourself surely are a huge benefit to humanity.

Damn got me there, I forgot that im a retard for not arguing with anons online lmfao

The only value this board ever had was providing interesting information around lifting.
That was possible because of discussion, people educated themselves and figured out what works and what doesn’t.
And then there are retarded mouth breathers such as yourself that are too stupid to participate and then also act as if people are stupid because they discuss with each other critically.
Dumb people such as yourself truly hold humanity back.

>. Contemporary research shows no benefit for consuming over 0.72 grams of protein per lb of bodyweight (1.6 grams per kg), with most research even claiming 0.64 grams per lb.
that's why a study evaluated two groups of rugby players(iirc) which also lifted and that were consuming 1.9g/kg of protein and the other 1.9g/kg protein + 40g casein pre-sleeping
the casein group ended up having better recovery and slightly more lean body mass

so you better be on the safe side and consume more, 2g/kg ends up at 25% of my daily calories atm, which is pretty easy to hit with 4 meals per day, I would eat above that if I ate intuitively

>I would eat above that if I ate intuitively
Fat cunt detected

Get some "carb gainer" in your diet.

:^)

Attached: 24-09-18.jpg (760x960, 104K)

You seem kinda upset, tryna relax a bit, breath in n breath out my fella

>not loving meat more than anything
I would eat a big ass rare steak in EVERY meal if I could.
Stay forever low-T.

You have perhaps the worst ab genetics I've ever seen

stay mad

I’m just trying to make you understand how extremely stupid you are, but I guess exactly that makes it impossible.

Post body please