E
elzinator
Guest
Bully wrote:
> Bob the Builder wrote:
> > Quite. That's my experience too. I have noticed that eating more
> > protein after a very hard weight training session or climbing
session
> > with screaming quads has a definite muscle building effect almost
> > immediatly. However, even a slight cessation of the increased
> > protein intake leads to a loss of much of that muscle. IMO and
> > experience of 20 years weight training, you have to be obsessively
> > dedicated to be a ripped up AND muscular. It's just not the way
the
> > human form is meant to be.
> > My opinions - not medical facts and I am sure others would
disagree.
> >
> > Roberto
> >
> >
> > "JMW" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news
[email protected]...
> >> Proton Soup <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Sun, 06 Feb 2005 17:13:01 -0500, JMW <[email protected]>
wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> "Sam" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> The research literature is pretty clear that taking in more
than
> >>>>> 2g/kg is,
> >>>>> for most people, excessive. The higher protein intakes are
either
> >>>>> stored as
> >>>>> fat or excreted (these are usually checked with nitrogen
levels).
> >>>>
> >>>> Regarding the fat storage, you're skipping a few steps ...
> >>>
> >>> Do you know if there are any studies that compare protein
> >>> requirements of growing, weight-training athletes, versus those
who
> >>> have "reached their genetic potential" / "plateaued" / etc. ?
> >>> Intuitively at least, it seems like "optimum" protein
requirements
> >>> would be quite high for a beginning, hypertrophy-minded strength
> >>> athlete, but over time those requirements would decrease,
probably
> >>> on an inverse exponential type curve, approaching some asymptote.
> >>
> >> I don't know of any studies that have specifically addressed that
> >> issue. But think of it in these terms: we are usually discussing
net
> >> muscle protein *accretion*. In doing so, we are talking about
> >> countervailing processes which are occurring constantly: muscle
> >> protein synthesis and muscle protein breakdown. Folks seem to
forget
> >> about the latter. When you have "plateaued" at a certain level of
> >> muscular hypertrophy, your muscle protein accretion may slow to a
> >> standstill, but you still need a shitload of circulating amino
acids
> >> just to maintain that muscle in the face of ongoing muscle protein
> >> breakdown. And I don't know, but I strongly suspect, that muscle
> >> protein breakdown occurs at a higher rate as skeletal muscle
tissue
> >> increases. In other words, higher dietary protein intake is
needed
> >> for novices who are seeking to improve muscle protein accretion,
but
> >> it's also needed for experienced strength trainers with
substantial
> >> muscular hypertrophy just to stay ahead of muscle protein
breakdown.
> >>
> >> Of course, insulin and other factors help to slow muscle protein
> >> breakdown, but you still need a lot of circulating amino acids.
> >> --
> >>
> >> JMW
> >> http://www.rustyiron.net
>
> I do doubt somehow that after "a slight cessation of the increased
>protein intake" you really do "lose *much* of that muscle"
It depends on several things. The body adapts to most anything, but
there is a relative baseline. That baseline, or steady state, of
protein turnover (synthesis = breakdown)is relative to the demands on
the interacting systems. When protein turnover is high, say during
elevated degradation in chronic high-intensity or high-volume training,
the baseline adjusts to a higher point as long as substrate is
non-limiting. When training is reduced, that baseline re-adjusts to a
lower state reflecting the demands. The body is more efficient than we
give credit.
Remember that the effects and end result vary according to acute and
chronic training and diet. Athletes who train chronically are more
efficient at protein turnonver than those who do not train chronically
(including newbies).
An athlete carrying a higher amount of muscle mass than the average
person does not require a high intake of protein during short periods
of light-training or de-training because the body is efficient at
maintaining a relatively high baseline of protein homeostasis. Over
time, of course, that baseline creeps downward due to the cessation of
stimulus. (de-training and muscle loss starts ~10 days after cessation
of training)Without that stimulus, an athlete can not maintain the same
amount of muscle mass, protein or no protein.
> Bob the Builder wrote:
> > Quite. That's my experience too. I have noticed that eating more
> > protein after a very hard weight training session or climbing
session
> > with screaming quads has a definite muscle building effect almost
> > immediatly. However, even a slight cessation of the increased
> > protein intake leads to a loss of much of that muscle. IMO and
> > experience of 20 years weight training, you have to be obsessively
> > dedicated to be a ripped up AND muscular. It's just not the way
the
> > human form is meant to be.
> > My opinions - not medical facts and I am sure others would
disagree.
> >
> > Roberto
> >
> >
> > "JMW" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news
[email protected]...> >> Proton Soup <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Sun, 06 Feb 2005 17:13:01 -0500, JMW <[email protected]>
wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> "Sam" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> The research literature is pretty clear that taking in more
than
> >>>>> 2g/kg is,
> >>>>> for most people, excessive. The higher protein intakes are
either
> >>>>> stored as
> >>>>> fat or excreted (these are usually checked with nitrogen
levels).
> >>>>
> >>>> Regarding the fat storage, you're skipping a few steps ...
> >>>
> >>> Do you know if there are any studies that compare protein
> >>> requirements of growing, weight-training athletes, versus those
who
> >>> have "reached their genetic potential" / "plateaued" / etc. ?
> >>> Intuitively at least, it seems like "optimum" protein
requirements
> >>> would be quite high for a beginning, hypertrophy-minded strength
> >>> athlete, but over time those requirements would decrease,
probably
> >>> on an inverse exponential type curve, approaching some asymptote.
> >>
> >> I don't know of any studies that have specifically addressed that
> >> issue. But think of it in these terms: we are usually discussing
net
> >> muscle protein *accretion*. In doing so, we are talking about
> >> countervailing processes which are occurring constantly: muscle
> >> protein synthesis and muscle protein breakdown. Folks seem to
forget
> >> about the latter. When you have "plateaued" at a certain level of
> >> muscular hypertrophy, your muscle protein accretion may slow to a
> >> standstill, but you still need a shitload of circulating amino
acids
> >> just to maintain that muscle in the face of ongoing muscle protein
> >> breakdown. And I don't know, but I strongly suspect, that muscle
> >> protein breakdown occurs at a higher rate as skeletal muscle
tissue
> >> increases. In other words, higher dietary protein intake is
needed
> >> for novices who are seeking to improve muscle protein accretion,
but
> >> it's also needed for experienced strength trainers with
substantial
> >> muscular hypertrophy just to stay ahead of muscle protein
breakdown.
> >>
> >> Of course, insulin and other factors help to slow muscle protein
> >> breakdown, but you still need a lot of circulating amino acids.
> >> --
> >>
> >> JMW
> >> http://www.rustyiron.net
>
> I do doubt somehow that after "a slight cessation of the increased
>protein intake" you really do "lose *much* of that muscle"
It depends on several things. The body adapts to most anything, but
there is a relative baseline. That baseline, or steady state, of
protein turnover (synthesis = breakdown)is relative to the demands on
the interacting systems. When protein turnover is high, say during
elevated degradation in chronic high-intensity or high-volume training,
the baseline adjusts to a higher point as long as substrate is
non-limiting. When training is reduced, that baseline re-adjusts to a
lower state reflecting the demands. The body is more efficient than we
give credit.
Remember that the effects and end result vary according to acute and
chronic training and diet. Athletes who train chronically are more
efficient at protein turnonver than those who do not train chronically
(including newbies).
An athlete carrying a higher amount of muscle mass than the average
person does not require a high intake of protein during short periods
of light-training or de-training because the body is efficient at
maintaining a relatively high baseline of protein homeostasis. Over
time, of course, that baseline creeps downward due to the cessation of
stimulus. (de-training and muscle loss starts ~10 days after cessation
of training)Without that stimulus, an athlete can not maintain the same
amount of muscle mass, protein or no protein.
