Protein Absorption-moved from OT thread

Orla K · 17-09-2013 11:25PM

kevpants wrote: »

Yeah I don't think it's possible to have a perfect 15 minute interview on supplements that doesn't throw out a few head scratchers but for a show like Pat Kenny's with his listenership I was pretty happy it was so refreshingly free of facepalm moments. I could imagine a similar conversation on Liveline getting completely out of hand for example. As usual Pat had done his research and didn't ask any stupid questions, knew the whey drinks were for recovery, that isotonic drinks were about rehydration. Easier to get decent info across when not being interviewed by a moron.

Yeah, I've heard far worse interviews. Pat to be fair to him has always done proper interviews well but he's just no good and the lighter stuff.

The best thing she said was about kids drinking calorie dense isotonic after about 15min of exercise, although I still think the protein part will contribute to the protein is steroids crowd.

Mellor · 18-09-2013 12:43AM

Orla K wrote: »

She also said that any protein over 168g and we just expel it. Don't know where she got that exact figure came from.

24(hours) x 7g

So assuming, 7g per hour is the average rate of absorption. Average guy is about 170lbs or so - That would suggest 1g per lb body weight per day. Pretty standard, no?.
I think it just sounds low when broken down to a per hour figure. I imagine the metabolic pathway for protein from mouth to muscle is quite complex, so when she says the body can absorb 7g per hour, I imagine she is taking about full absorption, not simply digestion. Eating anything over 7g in a single hour won't disappear, it'll just sit waiting to be absorbed.

also, off-topic thread, :rolleyes:

Hanley · 18-09-2013 05:40AM

Mellor wrote: »

24(hours) x 7g

So assuming, 7g per hour is the average rate of absorption. Average guy is about 170lbs or so - That would suggest 1g per lb body weight per day. Pretty standard, no?.
I think it just sounds low when broken down to a per hour figure. I imagine the metabolic pathway for protein from mouth to muscle is quite complex, so when she says the body can absorb 7g per hour, I imagine she is taking about full absorption, not simply digestion. Eating anything over 7g in a single hour won't disappear, it'll just sit waiting to be absorbed.

also, off-topic thread, :rolleyes:

See there it is... when you look at the whole picture, it kinda makes sense. Kinda.

Presumably this is quite easily studied? Feed normal healthy people up to a limit, look at urinary/fecal excretion for markers of undigested protein, work it out from there.

Anyone know if it's been done?

Will Heffernan · 18-09-2013 05:45AM

Hanley wrote: »

See there it is... when you look at the whole picture, it kinda makes sense. Kinda.

Presumably this is quite easily studied? Feed normal healthy people up to a limit, look at urinary/fecal excretion for markers of undigested protein, work it out from there.

Anyone know if it's been done?

Yes.

Heaps of studies. The problem is that people talk about protein as if it is a single thing. Different proteins have different rates of absorption there's an enormous difference between how fast you absorb egg versus steak.

If people really want to see studies let me know....there are heaps. Maybe tell me what you are interested in particular.

Will Heffernan · 18-09-2013 06:32AM

Just as an aside you need to think about a few things talking about stuff like protein absorption...as per usual...here's a list of things to consider in no particular order.

1. There are difference between individuals.
2. Differences between proteins.
3. Differences depending on how the proteins are prepared.
4. Then you have to look at the studies:
a) Were they fasted examinations.
b) Were they all done in the morning or midday or evening.
c) Were they singular protein examinations.
d) Are they singular or multiple feeding examinations.

So any way...that's some things to think about. When someone starts quoting absorption rates you need to ask who was the study on? What type of protein was used? How was absorption measured? Were the people fasted when fed and were they fed one protein or multiple proteins and were they fed one time or multiple times and what time of day or night were they fed.

On and on it goes...some of the science isn't great and by that I mean it isn't particularly applicable.

MrPain · 18-09-2013 10:03AM

Hanley wrote: »

Presumably this is quite easily studied? Feed normal healthy people up to a limit, look at urinary/fecal excretion for markers of undigested protein, work it out from there.

Anyone know if it's been done?

Here is very good peer reviewed review on the literature surrounding protein.
http://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CDoQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.researchgate.net%2Fpublication%2F7003706_A_review_of_issues_of_dietary_protein_intake_in_humans%2Ffile%2F9c960514d545ac59a2.pdf&ei=hWs5UrisD-Wf7gagl4CwAg&usg=AFQjCNEAoUX7QDescBrwOjlv0e93r5AYCA&bvm=bv.52288139,d.ZGU&cad=rja

Will Heffernan · 18-09-2013 11:33AM

MrPain wrote: »

Here is very good peer reviewed review on the literature surrounding protein.
http://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CDoQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.researchgate.net%2Fpublication%2F7003706_A_review_of_issues_of_dietary_protein_intake_in_humans%2Ffile%2F9c960514d545ac59a2.pdf&ei=hWs5UrisD-Wf7gagl4CwAg&usg=AFQjCNEAoUX7QDescBrwOjlv0e93r5AYCA&bvm=bv.52288139,d.ZGU&cad=rja

I don't think it is a very good paper actually....but that's just me...and I am a bit gun shy with regard being considered as being 'off topic' even in the 'off topic' thread and don't want to get in trouble for personal criticisms like...ahhh...Bilsborough has never actually been a resident of a planet I like to call Earth and has never witnessed any of the things that occur here when people eat protein'. I actually remember reading this paper when it came out and laughing...it is always so obvious when a 'scientist' starts off with a belief and the does whatever they can to back it up. As much as I would like to point out all the errors in this paper I have to worry about defamation these days even when pointing out the truth.

Maybe others can point out the obvious retarded bits and I'll just signal my approval by 'thanking' those posts

Zombienosh · 18-09-2013 11:37AM

I'm going to do a scientific study on how awesome strawberry milk is...........
It will consist mostly of pictures of me drinking said milk.

When I say mostly I mean that's all it will consist of.

The hard scientific proof will be in the happy belly and smile on my face post study.

Will Heffernan · 18-09-2013 11:40AM

Zombienosh wrote: »

I'm going to do a scientific study on how awesome strawberry milk is...........
It will consist mostly of pictures of me drinking said milk.

When I say mostly I mean that's all it will consist of.

The hard scientific proof will be in the happy belly and smile on my face post study.

That study has been done plenty of times...I actually did a chocolate milk study not long ago....it was the only time I got my results back and was happy that they were positive.

Will Heffernan · 18-09-2013 12:03PM

Just as an aside and because it might surprise people...or maybe not...but in light of the discussion re bodybuilding and whether it is a sport or not I have been reading a lot of papers relating to bodybuilding.

Personally if I was a bodybuilder or a power/strength athlete I would of rung up Pat Kenny and asked her what she knew about protein absorption rates in body builders and power and strength athletes. I would have asked her like I am asking you guys now if you know what other adaptations occur in these athletes which makes all the figures and numbers that have been discussed in this latest discussion irrelevant?

Brian? · 18-09-2013 01:29PM

A subject well worth it's own thread.

Theresalwaysone · 18-09-2013 01:32PM

Absorb?

Brian? · 18-09-2013 01:37PM

Theresalwaysone wrote: »

Absorb?

Corrected.

Theresalwaysone · 18-09-2013 01:39PM

Brian? wrote: »

Corrected.

I was discussing an absorption just before i posted

Genuinely double guessed myself... googled it and all.

Brian? · 18-09-2013 01:39PM

Theresalwaysone wrote: »

Genuinely double guessed myself... googled it and all.

I am currently so confused on the two I don't know which is which right now

runawaybishop · 18-09-2013 01:41PM

Off topic thread gets too many on topic posts
Posts merged into topical thread
off topic posts ensue

kevpants · 18-09-2013 02:29PM

runawaybishop wrote: »

Off topic thread gets too many on topic posts
Posts merged into topical thread
off topic posts ensue

Now watch the conversation die.

Can someone who knows a bit tell me what the most likely outcome is from knocking back a protein shake with like 80g of protein in it. Given the speed at which say, whey protein in a moderately trained man in his 20s would be absorbed, how much of that would be wasted?

Given digestion is about transit, stuff moves along and on its way fairly sharpish all going well, my underqualified, underdeveloped yet highly analytical mind suspects there just isn't time to make use of that much protein.

Is there anything that can be done to speed up absorption? Like for example iron is apparently more easily absorbed in the presence of vitamin C. Is there anything that performs a similar role with protein? I do recall a lot of unconvincing arguments about carbs+protein making insulin transport protein to the muscles but it all sounded a bit "theoretical" to me the last time I attempted to understand any of this.

Disclaimer: If this gets too technical at some point someone's going to have to break out the sock puppets to explain this to me.

Another one. Vegans. When they talk about how you don't need meat and only a minimal amount of protein is required, they always post a picture of a silverback gorilla. Everyone rolls their eyes and bleats on about a different species etc. and we all agree it's a ridiculous argument. But seriously, can someone actually explain how an animal manages to grow, maintain and repair that much meat on a diet of green shoots? Like presumably the same processes loosely apply to them as us? I'm not advocating veganism, I just can't explain muscular things that don't eat protein. Can anyone? I re-wrote this paragraph twice to try to not sound like a vegan troll but I can't do it. I promise I'm not.

thegreatiam · 18-09-2013 02:37PM

kevpants wrote: »

Now watch the conversation die.

Can someone who knows a bit tell me what the most likely outcome is from knocking back a protein shake with like 80g of protein in it. Given the speed at which say, whey protein in a moderately trained man in his 20s would be absorbed, how much of that would be wasted?

Given digestion is about transit, stuff moves along and on its way fairly sharpish all going well, my underqualified, underdeveloped yet highly analytical mind suspects there just isn't time to make use of that much protein.

Is there anything that can be done to speed up absorption? Like for example iron is apparently more easily absorbed in the presence of vitamin C. Is there anything that performs a similar role with protein? I do recall a lot of unconvincing arguments about carbs+protein making insulin transport protein to the muscles but it all sounded a bit "theoretical" to me the last time I attempted to understand any of this.

Disclaimer: If this gets too technical at some point someone's going to have to break out the sock puppets to explain this to me.

Another one. Vegans. When they talk about how you don't need meat and only a minimal amount of protein is required, they always post a picture of a silverback gorilla. Everyone rolls their eyes and bleats on about a different species etc. and we all agree it's a ridiculous argument. But seriously, can someone actually explain how an animal manages to grow, maintain and repair that much meat on a diet of green shoots? Like presumably the same processes loosely apply to them as us? I'm not advocating veganism, I just can't explain muscular things that don't eat protein. Can anyone? I re-wrote this paragraph twice to try to not sound like a vegan troll but I can't do it. I promise I'm not.

1st part, you will absorb it slowly. some is stored. The article in post 3/4? from marks daily apple explains it all quite well.

thegreatiam wrote: »

http://www.marksdailyapple.com/dear-mark-how-much-protein-can-you-absorb-and-use-from-one-meal/#axzz2f9KsM2Fw

2nd part, gorillas have enough testosterone in their blood to kill a rugby scrum. plus they eat loads of food, all day. Protein is not just in meat, its in seeds and plants too, just not as much. so gorillas eat more and more often. hard to get a picture of a gorilla that isnt eating.

btkm8unsl0w5r4 · 18-09-2013 02:48PM

If you read the stickies and squat past parallel you can digest 12g per hour fact...

If a single molecule of carbs are in with the protein it will all turn into fat deposited on your head fact.

If you do cardio before weights the protein turns into toxins. fact

If the protein is not from wheat feed Buddhist cows it will turn into "fat muscle". fact.

If you trainer has fraudulent before and after photos, any protein you eat will turn to excrement. fact.

Your protein absorption rate is inversely directly proportionally proportional to the sum of your dead lift, squat and bench divided by your body-fat percentage. fact.

If you lost weight by manipulating your macros regardless of what it was then that's the only way to do it. Fact.

Half naked selfies on boards allow more glutamine into your system enhancing your delta muscle fibers and leading to being shredded. fact.

Wearing vibrams, foam rolling for longer than you workout and swinging from the gym like a monkey can enhance your digestive enzymes, greatly improving your good protein absorption rate. Fact.

Questions?

runawaybishop · 18-09-2013 03:43PM

kevpants wrote: »

Another one. Vegans. When they talk about how you don't need meat and only a minimal amount of protein is required, they always post a picture of a silverback gorilla. Everyone rolls their eyes and bleats on about a different species etc. and we all agree it's a ridiculous argument. But seriously, can someone actually explain how an animal manages to grow, maintain and repair that much meat on a diet of green shoots? Like presumably the same processes loosely apply to them as us? I'm not advocating veganism, I just can't explain muscular things that don't eat protein. Can anyone? I re-wrote this paragraph twice to try to not sound like a vegan troll but I can't do it. I promise I'm not.

You will often see direct comparisons to tests/studies conducted on animals applied to humans. Point out to yon vegans that Humans are not Silverback Gorillas, we have oodles of Myostatin and they do not. This means we consume/metabolise muscle, they don't really.

Inspector Coptoor · 18-09-2013 05:46PM

The best way to get protein to be absorbed quickly is to consume it by itself and or consume predigested protein (ie amino acids/bcaas).

Protein is digested by proteases in the stomach as they work best at pH 2 which is provided by the HCl acid in the stomach.

Consuming carbs and or fats with protein would decrease the surface area available for these proteases to work on breaking down the protein.

I dont know exact figures, but once the bodies protein needs have been met, the excess protein is brought to the LIVER to be deaminated, (with the exception of glutamate which is deaminated in the kidneys) i.e. to have the amino or nitrogen containing group (NH2) removed and this can be turned into a carb which could be oxidised to produce energy through respiration OR to be stored as glycogen OR if those stores are full, can be stored as adipose tissue.

However, here's the rub, many people consider this as a static thing, we need x g of protein and y calories to maintain etc.
When in reality, not only are we trying to repair damaged cells, new cells are being made all the time to replace old and clapped out cells and NOT just muscle cells.
Every day you need to replace a shed load of blood cells, skin cells etc.
Cells need DNA, one of the main parts of DNA is nitrogen.

We can ONLY get nitrogen into our system by ingesting protein and then stripping the amine from it.

Will Heffernan · 19-09-2013 12:50AM

kevpants wrote: »

Now watch the conversation die.

Can someone who knows a bit tell me what the most likely outcome is from knocking back a protein shake with like 80g of protein in it. Given the speed at which say, whey protein in a moderately trained man in his 20s would be absorbed, how much of that would be wasted?

Given digestion is about transit, stuff moves along and on its way fairly sharpish all going well, my underqualified, underdeveloped yet highly analytical mind suspects there just isn't time to make use of that much protein.

Is there anything that can be done to speed up absorption? Like for example iron is apparently more easily absorbed in the presence of vitamin C. Is there anything that performs a similar role with protein? I do recall a lot of unconvincing arguments about carbs+protein making insulin transport protein to the muscles but it all sounded a bit "theoretical" to me the last time I attempted to understand any of this.

Disclaimer: If this gets too technical at some point someone's going to have to break out the sock puppets to explain this to me.

I will give you some real simple statements to either help you frame your questions or add to or clear up somethings.

Consider this...one of the adaptations that a bodybuilder/strength/power athlete will have to a) increased energy expenditure and requirements + b) energy intake is both c) an increased speed on transit through the gut (can be up to 4 times faster than endurance athletes) and d) equal rates of absorption.

I think you can absorb that and make the necessary assumptions.

This is one of the many reasons I don't think the Bilsborough and Mann paper is sound because it doesn't take any of this into consideration.

p.s: If you want the science to back up my points above let me know and I will go all PubMed on it's ass.

Protein Absorption-moved from OT thread

Comments