[tejohnso]

I could never personally validate the 1g protein per lean muscle pound requirement. I've worked out six months without worrying about protein as well as six months on a heavy protein overload with multiple shakes per day. And I don't eat meat, so when I'm not deliberately increasing my protein intake, it's probably extremely low by these standards. Regardless, I couldn't make out a significant difference.

[cykros]

That's fantastic to hear, because no amount of fiber seems to combat the gastrointestinal distress caused by ingesting over 100g of whey protein a day.

I really don't get how anyone actually keeps up with such a regimen for any serious length of time. Perhaps they just play T-Rex at a chicken farm every morning.

[oarfish]

1g/lb is also higher than really needed. IIRC the current evidence supports 1.4-1.7g/kg is enough for most people, and eating more will just displace other useful things from your diet. Since the number should be based on lean body mass, the heuristics are less applicable to individuals with obesity or competitive physique athletes. I think the average american already consumes >1g/kg of protein, so most people won't need much more to max out muscle protein synthesis from diet.

[Fire-Dragon-DoL]

I think there was an informed (with links to sources) comment in HN some days ago that stated that anything above 0.8g/kg drastically reduces lifespan. I wish I could find it

Edit: found https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38727635

[sn9]

These studies are never in populations engaging in resistance training, the benefits of resistance training far outweigh any risks from protein consumption, which probably disappear once you increase strength and endurance training along with the proportion of whole foods that are plant based in the diet.

[mhb]

It would sure be nice if that paper explained what it meant by "high protein/high meat" without needing to delve into its 10 references. Ideally in the abstract.