Was there ever really a “sugar conspiracy”?

Re:Was there ever really a “sugar conspiracy”? by gerardnll on Tuesday February 20, 2018 @10:57AM (#16421256)

The objective of that study is only checking "if dietary protein supplementation augments resistance exercise training (RET)-induced gains in muscle mass and strength." nothing else.

Taking protein shakes could affect negatively other parts of your body. And nobody talks about the quality of that protein. Why do we want real food? Let's all eat Soylent.

I believe high protein intake is as bad as high fat intake, high calories intake, and high everything else. Just stop wanting unreal bodies that are only achieved by supplementation.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Was there ever really a “sugar conspiracy”? by ElatedOwl on Tuesday February 20, 2018 @11:14AM (#16421392)

>I believe high protein intake is as bad as high fat intake, high calories intake, and high everything else.

What constitutes high protein intake, and at what point is it detrimental? Should our macro breakdown be 33%/33%/33%?

How does increased calorie expenditure play into this? The study I referenced says I should eat 130g protein (520 cal) for best gains. My TDEE (on days I don't run) is 2500, putting me at roughly 20% protein. If I do run I've got an extra ~500 cals, how should those calories be allotted?

[ Parent | on HN ]