Dr. Peat’s protein recommendations seem lower especially for older people

Kvothe

Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2019
Messages
586
Location
Newarre
In young men, varied protein intake doesn't negatively affect thyroid function.
Of course it does. Going low-protein will significantly increase your T3 within two weeks.

When it comes to testosterone optimization, stick to below 35% protein of total calories.
if optimization means keeping it as high as possible, sticking to below 15% sounds more like it.
 

Hans

Member
Forum Supporter
Joined
Aug 24, 2017
Messages
5,856
Of course it does. Going low-protein will significantly increase your T3 within two weeks.
Links, please. I assume you have good human research to show me?
if optimization means keeping it as high as possible, sticking to below 15% sounds more like it.
Have you actually looked at the literature?
 

Cloudhands

Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2019
Messages
988
In young men, varied protein intake doesn't negatively affect thyroid function. When it comes to testosterone optimization, stick to below 35% protein of total calories. I'd say that's a good guideline for thyroid function as well. Plus, protein-rich foods are the best source of micros necessary to optimize thyroid function. When you start to drop below 100-150g carbs daily, then T3 can take a hit though.
thanks u bada$$ mudda fugga
 

Sefton10

Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2019
Messages
1,593
I have never felt worse in my life then when I ate meat, rice, and vegetables because I thought that was the cleanest, healthiest diet on earth. The combination of thyroid suppressing amino acid and hyperinsulinemic starch is an express ticket to hypothyroidism and hypoglycemia.
Of all the messing around with diets over the last few years, the one thing I never really considered as potentially detrimental was protein. I always took it as a given that it was a good thing and have been eating 150g+ a day for many years. It’s only the last 6-8 months or so I’ve gradually realised it has been having a negative impact and likely been suppressing thyroid/metabolism.
 

Kvothe

Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2019
Messages
586
Location
Newarre
When it comes to testosterone optimization, stick to below 35% protein of total calories.

Links, please. I assume you have good human research to show me?

Have you actually looked at the literature?
Come on, there are literally hundreds of studies showing that low-protein diets cause tremendous increases in the metabolic rate of animals. Animals eating low-protein diets eat more, have a higher energy expenditure, are leaner, have better insulin sensitivity, lower cortisol, live longer, have much higher T3 levels, and are apparently much more handsome than protein-shake-rats.

J Nutr
1981 Feb;111(2):252-9.
Influence of diet composition on serum triiodothyronine (T3) concentration, hepatic mitochondrial metabolism and shuttle system activity in rats
R S Tyzbir, A S Kunin, N M Sims, E Danforth Jr

Two experiments were conducted to determine if variations in diet composition sufficient to alter circulating triiodothyronine (T3) concentration would influence hepatic mitochondrial metabolism. In experiment 1, mitochondrial respiration and the activity of succinate dehydrogenase (SDH), cytochrome oxidase (CO) and alpha glycerophosphate dehydrogenase (m alpha-GPD) were measured in 42-day-old male rats fed diets containing casein/carbohydrate/fat: 8/73/10% (low protein), 22/59/10% (control protein), and 45/36/10% (high protein) for 3 weeks. When compared to control, serum T3 was increased 2-3 times in the low and decreased 19% in the high protein-fed groups. Mitochondria isolated from low protein-fed rats consumed less oxygen in both state 4 and state 3 with succinate as substrate when compared to control or high protein fed rats. However, ADP/O and respiratory control (RC) ratios were similar in all groups. Activity of SDH and CO was decreased only in low protein-fed rats. M alpha-GPD activity was increased in the low and decreased in the high protein fed-rats. In experiment 2, alpha-glycerophosphate shuttle activity was increased 2-3 fold and malate-aspartate shuttle activity decreased 60% in intact mitochondria isolated from low protein-fed rats when compared to rats pair-fed control diet. These results suggest a role for diet composition as a regulator of hepatic intermediary metabolism mediated by thyroid hormones.


Life Sci
1987 May 4;40(18):1761-8.
Diet-hormone interactions: protein/carbohydrate ratio alters reciprocally the plasma levels of testosterone and cortisol and their respective binding globulins in man
K E Anderson, W Rosner, M S Khan, M I New, S Y Pang, P S Wissel, A Kappas

The aim of this study was to determine if a change in protein/carbohydrate ratio influences plasma steroid hormone concentrations. There is little information about the effects of specific dietary components on steroid hormone metabolism in humans. Testosterone concentrations in seven normal men were consistently higher after ten days on a high carbohydrate diet (468 +/- 34 ng/dl, mean +/- S.E.) than during a high protein diet (371 +/- 23 ng/dl, p less than 0.05) and were accompanied by parallel changes in sex hormone binding globulin (32.5 +/- 2.8 nmol/l vs. 23.4 +/- 1.6 nmol/l respectively, p less than 0.01). By contrast, cortisol concentrations were consistently lower during the high carbohydrate diet than during the high protein diet (7.74 +/- 0.71 micrograms/dl vs. 10.6 +/- 0.4 micrograms/dl respectively, p less than 0.05), and there were parallel changes in corticosteroid binding globulin concentrations (635 +/- 60 nmol/l vs. 754 +/- 31 nmol/l respectively, p less than 0.05). The diets were equal in total calories and fat. These consistent and reciprocal changes suggest that the ratio of protein to carbohydrate in the human diet is an important regulatory factor for steroid hormone plasma levels and for liver-derived hormone binding proteins.

"The second diet contained carbohydraterich foods such as bread, vegetables, fruit, juices, pastry, and candy~ in this diet 10% of total calories were protein, 70% were carbohydrate, and 20% were fat. "

1652215514286.png
 

Hans

Member
Forum Supporter
Joined
Aug 24, 2017
Messages
5,856
Come on, there are literally hundreds of studies showing that low-protein diets cause tremendous increases in the metabolic rate of animals. Animals eating low-protein diets eat more, have a higher energy expenditure, are leaner, have better insulin sensitivity, lower cortisol, live longer, have much higher T3 levels, and are apparently much more handsome than protein-shake-rats.
Hundreds? Not even close. Actually, the majority shows the opposite: Effects of Dietary Protein on Thyroid Axis Activity - PubMed
The study you linked, they fed the rats casein, which has an awful methionine to glycine ratio, which shortens lifespan (at least in rats). Would giving them their natural diet still have the same effect?
And lastly, animal studies can give us interesting ideas to study in humans, but they should be taken with a heavy grain of salt. So many times you see one thing in animals which doesn't have the same effect in humans.
Diet-hormone interactions: protein/carbohydrate ratio alters reciprocally the plasma levels of testosterone and cortisol and their respective binding globulins in man
K E Anderson, W Rosner, M S Khan, M I New, S Y Pang, P S Wissel, A Kappas

The aim of this study was to determine if a change in protein/carbohydrate ratio influences plasma steroid hormone concentrations. There is little information about the effects of specific dietary components on steroid hormone metabolism in humans. Testosterone concentrations in seven normal men were consistently higher after ten days on a high carbohydrate diet (468 +/- 34 ng/dl, mean +/- S.E.) than during a high protein diet (371 +/- 23 ng/dl, p less than 0.05) and were accompanied by parallel changes in sex hormone binding globulin (32.5 +/- 2.8 nmol/l vs. 23.4 +/- 1.6 nmol/l respectively, p less than 0.01). By contrast, cortisol concentrations were consistently lower during the high carbohydrate diet than during the high protein diet (7.74 +/- 0.71 micrograms/dl vs. 10.6 +/- 0.4 micrograms/dl respectively, p less than 0.05), and there were parallel changes in corticosteroid binding globulin concentrations (635 +/- 60 nmol/l vs. 754 +/- 31 nmol/l respectively, p less than 0.05). The diets were equal in total calories and fat. These consistent and reciprocal changes suggest that the ratio of protein to carbohydrate in the human diet is an important regulatory factor for steroid hormone plasma levels and for liver-derived hormone binding proteins.

"The second diet contained carbohydraterich foods such as bread, vegetables, fruit, juices, pastry, and candy~ in this diet 10% of total calories were protein, 70% were carbohydrate, and 20% were fat. "
Really glad you brought up this study. I thought you were going to do so.
The study was only 10 days long and the range was quite big, 10% protein vs 44%. That's huge. Plus the difference in T was small, 371 to 468. Not even a 100 point difference. A recent meta-analysis found that less than 35% of protein of total calories didn't lower to compared to eating more than 35%. So it could be that these peeps had slightly lower T, because they were at 44% and not 35%.
Would T have gone even higher on the low protein diet if the study was longer? Perhaps. Or perhaps things would have equalized after 2-3 months. We don't know.
Furthermore, recent studies have also found that there is not a difference in testosterone when eating protein at 0.8, 1.6 or 2.4g/kg/BW. The whole point here is that if you want to maximize testosterone, there is quite a wide range to play with when it comes to protein.
 
T

tca300

Guest
Not here to argue, just to share a point no one has mentioned yet. Out of the macronutrients, protein has the most inhibiting effect on RT3. The coldest and most hypothyroid state I've experienced in my life with a body temp between 95°F - 96°F was when I was a vegan eating boat loads of fruit with little protein or fats. Anyways... I'd rather cut some years off of my life by eating higher protein than go back to the low protein, low fat, high carb days. I suspect Ray will increase his protein a bit in the future. I think his recent research regarding protein and longevity has encouraged him to experiment a bit.
20220510_142804.png
 

Cloudhands

Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2019
Messages
988
Not here to argue, just to share a point no one has mentioned yet. Out of the macronutrients, protein has the most inhibiting effect on RT3. The coldest and most hypothyroid state I've experienced in my life with a body temp between 95°F - 96°F was when I was a vegan eating boat loads of fruit with little protein or fats. Anyways... I'd rather cut some years off of my life by eating higher protein than go back to the low protein, low fat, high carb days. I suspect Ray will increase his protein a bit in the future. I think his recent research regarding protein and longevity has encouraged him to experiment a bit.View attachment 36568
havent seen u on here in a while, its an honor for you to be chiming in here tca
 

Hans

Member
Forum Supporter
Joined
Aug 24, 2017
Messages
5,856
Not here to argue, just to share a point no one has mentioned yet. Out of the macronutrients, protein has the most inhibiting effect on RT3. The coldest and most hypothyroid state I've experienced in my life with a body temp between 95°F - 96°F was when I was a vegan eating boat loads of fruit with little protein or fats. Anyways... I'd rather cut some years off of my life by eating higher protein than go back to the low protein, low fat, high carb days. I suspect Ray will increase his protein a bit in the future. I think his recent research regarding protein and longevity has encouraged him to experiment a bit.View attachment 36568
I think one of the major reasons for that is zinc (as well as all the other beneficial components in meat). Zinc potently lowers cortisol (which increases rT3) and helps with the conversation of T4 into T3.

And as a side note on that table, even if protein has the best effect on the T3 to rT3 ratio, it's not going to make anyone hypertrophy. No diet is superior than another for increasing energy expenditure and helping with fat loss. It just comes down to what makes you feel best and what you can do consistently.
 

Ritchie

Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2015
Messages
490
And as a side note on that table, even if protein has the best effect on the T3 to rT3 ratio, it's not going to make anyone hypertrophy. No diet is superior than another for increasing energy expenditure and helping with fat loss. It just comes down to what makes you feel best and what you can do consistently.
Well there is a certain amount of protein that the body can process and assimilate as protein and the functions it plays, beyond that it will become progressively detrimental to metabolism and general health. This is because excess will have to be converted to energy via gluconeogenesis, which is a taxing process physiologically, particularly if it's chronic. On top of this, processing excess protein is a burden on the kidney's and I'm sure has many other issues. Many people consume alot of protein because they are under the impression it is good for them and their health, obviously if it isn't then it is advantageous to understand that and adjust consumption accordingly.

In light of that, it would be most beneficial to understand at the mechanistic level how much protein our bodies can actually process as protein, and make sure we get about that in our diet and not go to far beyond. Granted this will vary somewhat depending on age, activity levels, muscle mass and so forth, however from what I gather the bracket is still vastly lower than what is generally consumed. Particularly when consuming adequate glucose from carbohydrates. This is the rationale that Peat seems to be working with currently, and why he has been focused on getting his protein level intake in line with his requirements.

I would definitely disagree with what you say here that "no diet is superior than another for increasing energy expenditure and helping with fat loss"... If one is eating a diet that is hindering their health then that diet would be inferior to one that is fostering good health and a fully flourishing system. Eliminating burdens like excess protein processing is part of that.
 

Hans

Member
Forum Supporter
Joined
Aug 24, 2017
Messages
5,856
ell there is a certain amount of protein that the body can process and assimilate as protein and the functions it plays, beyond that it will become progressively detrimental to metabolism and general health. This is because excess will have to be converted to energy via gluconeogenesis, which is a taxing process physiologically, particularly if it's chronic. On top of this, processing excess protein is a burden on the kidney's and I'm sure has many other issues. Many people consume alot of protein because they are under the impression it is good for them and their health, obviously if it isn't then it is advantageous to understand that and adjust consumption accordingly.

In light of that, it would be most beneficial to understand at the mechanistic level how much protein our bodies can actually process as protein, and make sure we get about that in our diet and not go to far beyond. Granted this will vary somewhat depending on age, activity levels, muscle mass and so forth, however from what I gather the bracket is still vastly lower than what is generally consumed. Particularly when consuming adequate glucose from carbohydrates. This is the rationale that Peat seems to be working with currently, and why he has been focused on getting his protein level intake in line with his requirements.
Layne Norton said an interesting thing on Peter Attia's podcast. Let's say that protein oxidation increases over 70g. So that should theoretically show that we can't use more than 70g per day. However, after this point, protein will start to have more of an anabolic effect. I'm paraphrasing here, but something like when the body senses an overabundance of amino acids, it start to be highly anabolic (not cancerous). So it's not that we can't use more than 70g, we actually need to eat more to grow muscle better. Plus, eating large amounts of protein hasn't been shown to be detrimental in humans.

You also mention that many people consume a lot of protein, which I'd have to disagree with. People really don't. The average consumption is very low. It's only a few of the health-conscious individuals and carnivores that eat "a lot". And they are actually the ones that fix their health. If you go too crazy with protein at the expense of other macros, that can create problems for sure.
I would definitely disagree with what you say here that "no diet is superior than another for increasing energy expenditure and helping with fat loss"... If one is eating a diet that is hindering their health then that diet would be inferior to one that is fostering good health and a fully flourishing system. Eliminating burdens like excess protein processing is part of that.
Yes exactly, that's what I said. If the diet makes you sick, it's not going to work. But not everyone gets sick on a vegan, carnivore or keto diet. The can flourish for decades (still an ongoing process).
But when it comes to calories in calories out, there is no superior diet. Calories can't just magically disappear and one kind of diet can't make you hypermetabolic (maybe in rare cases, but it's not general at all).
 

Blossom

Moderator
Forum Supporter
Joined
Nov 23, 2013
Messages
11,032
Location
Indiana USA
Layne Norton said an interesting thing on Peter Attia's podcast. Let's say that protein oxidation increases over 70g. So that should theoretically show that we can't use more than 70g per day. However, after this point, protein will start to have more of an anabolic effect. I'm paraphrasing here, but something like when the body senses an overabundance of amino acids, it start to be highly anabolic (not cancerous). So it's not that we can't use more than 70g, we actually need to eat more to grow muscle better. Plus, eating large amounts of protein hasn't been shown to be detrimental in humans.

You also mention that many people consume a lot of protein, which I'd have to disagree with. People really don't. The average consumption is very low. It's only a few of the health-conscious individuals and carnivores that eat "a lot". And they are actually the ones that fix their health. If you go too crazy with protein at the expense of other macros, that can create problems for sure.

Yes exactly, that's what I said. If the diet makes you sick, it's not going to work. But not everyone gets sick on a vegan, carnivore or keto diet. The can flourish for decades (still an ongoing process).
But when it comes to calories in calories out, there is no superior diet. Calories can't just magically disappear and one kind of diet can't make you hypermetabolic (maybe in rare cases, but it's not general at all).
I love this and it exactly aligns with my experience. I highly doubt I could have reversed sarcopenia without abundant protein consumption. I do not eat as much recently but I’m still far from low end and I’m maintaining those gains fairly easily. It really does vary according to a person’s situation on how much they need to heal and thrive.
 

Ritchie

Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2015
Messages
490
Layne Norton said an interesting thing on Peter Attia's podcast. Let's say that protein oxidation increases over 70g. So that should theoretically show that we can't use more than 70g per day. However, after this point, protein will start to have more of an anabolic effect. I'm paraphrasing here, but something like when the body senses an overabundance of amino acids, it start to be highly anabolic (not cancerous).
Love a bit of bro science. Seen any studies and research lending weight to this claim?
Plus, eating large amounts of protein hasn't been shown to be detrimental in humans.
This isn't true. Just a few for example, but there are plenty more: Adverse Effects Associated with Protein Intake above the Recommended Dietary Allowance for Adults ; The Effects of High-Protein Diets on Kidney Health and Longevity ; https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/acel.13626 ; Low-protein high-carb diet shows promise for healthy brain aging

There's also quite a bit of literature showing the benefits of restricted protein intake on anti aging and longevity. Methionine restriction studies are part of that, and there's obviously the low protein theory on why the Okinawans live so long and relatively disease free - A high-carb diet may explain why Okinawans live so long .. "Solon-Biet has conducted a series of studies examining the influence of dietary composition (rather than sheer quantity) on ageing in animals, and her team has consistently found that a high-carb, low-protein diet extends the lifespan of various species, with her most recent study showing that it reduces some of the signs of ageing in the brain. Amazingly, they have found that the optimum ratio is 10 parts carb to one part protein – the same as the so-called Okinawan Ratio."


On top of that, are all the issues with high protein we know about through Peat's work. High protein comes with high phosphorus, iron, tryptophan, methionine, raised nitric oxide, gluconeogenesis which is taxing and stressful, compromises metabolism and systemic energy production, raises cortisol, etc.


You also mention that many people consume a lot of protein, which I'd have to disagree with. People really don't. The average consumption is very low. It's only a few of the health-conscious individuals and carnivores that eat "a lot". And they are actually the ones that fix their health. If you go too crazy with protein at the expense of other macros, that can create problems for sure.
For most people, meat is the focal point of a meal, particularly in developed first world nations. Ie. chicken with veges, steak with veges, fish, eggs, omlettes, bacon, burgers, sausages, cold cuts, cheese and dairy and on and on, not to mention the supps like protein powders in smoothies and so forth.. One steak is around 60 - 70 gms protein, most servings of chicken amount to almost 70 gms of protein, in a 250 gm serve. That is already close to the 0.8-1 gm protein per kg body weight daily amount most people require, from just one average sitting. You can see how protein intake will sky rocket throughout the day if one eats this way, which most do.
 
Last edited:

Hans

Member
Forum Supporter
Joined
Aug 24, 2017
Messages
5,856
Love a bit of bro science. Seen any studies and research lending weight to this claim?
Bruh. I recommend you check out his vids as well as Paul Saladino's content. They do a great job at debunking all the "meat is bad for you" myths. That goes for your whole post. Too many misconceptions are gotten from association studies.
And the anti-aging thing has only been shown in animals when they are fed a totally unnatural diet in an unnatural environment under unnatural conditions.
Lastly, studies have found that average protein consumption is below 100g daily, moreso around 60-70g. People seriously don't overeat on protein.
 

Hans

Member
Forum Supporter
Joined
Aug 24, 2017
Messages
5,856
I love this and it exactly aligns with my experience. I highly doubt I could have reversed sarcopenia without abundant protein consumption. I do not eat as much recently but I’m still far from low end and I’m maintaining those gains fairly easily. It really does vary according to a person’s situation on how much they need to heal and thrive.
So true. Ben Pakulsi just had Ben Bikman on his show and they talked exactly about this notion that people think protein is bad, why that is, and why it's not.
 

TheSir

Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2019
Messages
1,952
How do you eat a lot of protein while on glucose metabolism without absolutely gorging on carbs in order to avoid stress from blood sugar reduction? Years ago on ketosis I had no problems with eating lots of protein, but these days I can hardly eat as much as I'd like because it's just too stressful to the body.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom