I’m not a nutritionist or an exercise scientist, so I could be interpreting this incorrectly, but I think you are overly dismissive of the idea that people should be eating more protein.
The guideline’s recommendation of 0.7 to 1 gram per kilogram daily represents the minimum intake needed to prevent malnutrition and maintain nitrogen balance; it is insufficient for optimal muscle growth when combined with strength training.[1] For people who are trying to increase their muscle mass, Huberman’s suggestion is accurate and helpful.[2] Since muscle mass is associated with lower all-cause mortality, I think that Huberman’s suggestion (when accompanied with adequate exercise) is more beneficial than the government guideline. This is especially true for older adults, but to ensure healthy aging and longer health spans, it is preferable to build muscle throughout adulthood.
That said, we should, of course, be encouraging people to get as much of their protein intake as possible from non-animal sources. Personally, I encourage vegans to exercise and try to eat in the range of 0.7 to 1 gram of protein per pound (1.5 to 2.2 grams per kg) of body weight per day, not only for your own health, but to be an example to others that they can reduce animal suffering without sacrificing their health or muscle growth.
https://​​bjsm.bmj.com/​​content/​​52/​​6/​​376 https://​​pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/​​articles/​​PMC8978023/​​ Note that the first meta-analysis finds that the effect of supplementing protein plateaus at 1.6 g/​kg. This is still within Huberman’s range, and is still much higher than the guideline of 0.7 − 1. I’ve seen people in the exercise community quibble a lot about this supposed plateau. My position is that in expectation the benefit of going up from 1.6 g/​kg to 2.2 g/​kg is higher than the (pretty much non-existent) risk.
This analysis doesn’t account for the potential downsides of excess protein consumption—cf., based on a quick non-AI search, the discussion here for a specific risk, this older review article for a broader discussion.
I don’t claim to be qualified to balance those potential tradeoffs against the potential advantages, but think they should be acknowledged.
Hi Jason, thanks for this. I was not aware of this review article. There is a new review article that came out this year, which concludes that there is insufficient evidentiary basis for harm from high protein intake. In particular, it seems like some of the results of previous studies may have been confounded with calorie intake.
I’m not a nutritionist or an exercise scientist, so I could be interpreting this incorrectly, but I think you are overly dismissive of the idea that people should be eating more protein.
The guideline’s recommendation of 0.7 to 1 gram per kilogram daily represents the minimum intake needed to prevent malnutrition and maintain nitrogen balance; it is insufficient for optimal muscle growth when combined with strength training.[1] For people who are trying to increase their muscle mass, Huberman’s suggestion is accurate and helpful.[2] Since muscle mass is associated with lower all-cause mortality, I think that Huberman’s suggestion (when accompanied with adequate exercise) is more beneficial than the government guideline. This is especially true for older adults, but to ensure healthy aging and longer health spans, it is preferable to build muscle throughout adulthood.
That said, we should, of course, be encouraging people to get as much of their protein intake as possible from non-animal sources. Personally, I encourage vegans to exercise and try to eat in the range of 0.7 to 1 gram of protein per pound (1.5 to 2.2 grams per kg) of body weight per day, not only for your own health, but to be an example to others that they can reduce animal suffering without sacrificing their health or muscle growth.
Note that the review you linked specifically excludes multi-component interventions, including protein and exercise combinations.
https://​​bjsm.bmj.com/​​content/​​52/​​6/​​376
https://​​pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/​​articles/​​PMC8978023/​​
Note that the first meta-analysis finds that the effect of supplementing protein plateaus at 1.6 g/​kg. This is still within Huberman’s range, and is still much higher than the guideline of 0.7 − 1. I’ve seen people in the exercise community quibble a lot about this supposed plateau. My position is that in expectation the benefit of going up from 1.6 g/​kg to 2.2 g/​kg is higher than the (pretty much non-existent) risk.
This analysis doesn’t account for the potential downsides of excess protein consumption—cf., based on a quick non-AI search, the discussion here for a specific risk, this older review article for a broader discussion.
I don’t claim to be qualified to balance those potential tradeoffs against the potential advantages, but think they should be acknowledged.
Hi Jason, thanks for this. I was not aware of this review article. There is a new review article that came out this year, which concludes that there is insufficient evidentiary basis for harm from high protein intake. In particular, it seems like some of the results of previous studies may have been confounded with calorie intake.
Some numbers for emphasis on overconsumption of protein (I’m far from a nutritionist):
A 170 pound man eating 170g protein. Assuming 2400 calories per day that is 28% of calories as protein.
That is more than the recommended quote above