Marty Kendall's (optimising nutrition's) take on higher protein

(Bob M) #1

Here’s Marty Kendall’s (optimising nutrition’s) take on higher protein:

I have to say that I’m not a big fan of Mr. Kendall, for multiple reasons. One is that his system does not take into account the actual absorbability of food (i.e., if you’re eating a plant, you’re not getting all the vitamins and minerals listed). A second is that his data set comes from a very specific group of people – those people that want to log what they eat into a program. So, you have no idea how that translate to others, like me for instance, who never logs anything. You also have somewhat “psychotic” people who may be quite fit (or may not be - who knows who uses MyFitnessPal), or at least be motivated enough to log everything. (And I mean nothing negative to those who log their food intake, it’s just you’re a particular group whose characteristics may not applicable to other groups.)

Anyway, he comes out on the “more protein is better” side of the isle.

(You've tried everything else; why not try bacon?) #2

I’m not sure it’s really all that important to worry about exactly how much protein we are getting. If Raubenheimer and Simpson, who first advanced this “protein-leveraging” hypothesis, are correct, then we have an instinct for how much protein we need to eat, and we can probably be fine, if we just listen to our bodies. Ted Naiman was big on their work for a while, and he did a few presentations showing how, in a protein-rich diet, we need to eat fewer calories to be satisfied, whereas the reverse is true when our diet is diluted with a lot of carbohydrate. It appears that Marty Kendall has now discovered Raubenheimer and Simpson, too.

My guess, both from the research and from experience, is that when we get enough protein we are basically happy, and then if we need more energy, we instinctively eat fat till we are satisfied. My further guess is that all the people on the forums who say they find protein more satiating than fat probably have a higher protein requirement, so of course they are not going to be happy until they get enough. Those of us who focus on the satiating qualities of fat probably have a comparatively lower protein requirement—proportionally speaking, at least. The two macros have to work in tandem, of course, because protein doesn’t usually provide energy, being needed for the body’s structural needs, which fat can’t provide. And fat, of course, is a rich source of energy. Just from thinking in evolutionary terms, it would make sense that we evolved instincts (i.e., hormonal pathways) to tell us whether or not we’re getting enough of what we need.

(Bob M) #3

While I totally agree with the hormonal pathway theory, what if your hormonal pathway has been damaged somehow (let’s say eating SAD or genetically)? Why is it that I can eat low fat, high protein and be perfectly happy, while others seem to prefer higher fat? Is that a difference in hormones?

I personally find people on this board and elsewhere who are still convinced that eating “too much” protein is bad. I see no evidence for that. As shown my Marty’s graphs, there is really no “too much” protein, at least for this set of people.

Also, my perspective has been that if I eat enough protein (say, lean pork chops), I physically cannot eat more. But, were you to give me butter or a fat bomb or yogurt, I could easily eat that, on top of the pork chops. So, there is something about my fat feedback mechanism (if such a thing exists) that is broken, and I have an overactive protein feedback mechanism.

Having said that, one way to interpret his graphs is that eating higher protein is more satiating and causes one to have less body weight. Another way to interpret them is that people who eat higher protein weigh less. In other words, the people who weigh less just happen to eat higher protein (say they are body builders or lifters or people who otherwise exercise a lot but also eat a lot of protein).

This is why his information is always suspect. (Not to mention the people are using My FITNESS pal, not “My Laziness pal”, so you’re looking at people who are into “fitness”, whatever that means.)

Like you, I think there is some amount of protein that the body tries to get. But unlike others on this board, I think if you go over that amount of protein, you aren’t killing yourself. (I actually think the latter is vegan propaganda – if you advocate veganism, you need to say that lower protein is better, because you will be eating a low protein diet.) You may even be helping, as you’re forcing your body to burn more calories to convert protein into fuel. So, I think the constant “OMG! I ate too much protein!” we see on this board is completely wrong and likely not beneficial.

(Jack Bennett) #4

Anecdotally (N=1), I’ve noticed that deliberately increasing my protein has made OMAD and fasting somewhat easier. Subjectively, anyway.

I tend to get 120-150g protein in my usual weekday lunch (eggs, beef or salmon, protein shake, nuts, cheese). This seems to suppress appetite for the whole day.

(Jane) #5

I’ve never purposely limited my protein even though I’ve always eaten more than most macros recommend for my stature.

I started out before discovering this board and keto basically on Atkins. 20 carbs or less. Then I discovered keto and learned I could have fat, too! It kept the “diet” from being so boring and getting burned out.

Still never limited protein as I feel it is self-limiting for me also. I can’t overeat it.