Digestion absorption rate. Fact? Bro science? Or bullshit?

Sk8man101

Member
So I am sure just about every person here has heard someone at somepoint tell them, "You should only eat 'x' amount of protein in one meal because your body can only absorb so much and your body will just shit out the rest"
Usually the magic number I've heard people use is like 20-30g of protein.
Personally I'm going to call bullshit.
The sphincter in between the stomach and the small intestine (pyloric) sends chyme (food stuffs) into the intestines in about 3 ml squirts as it is broken down.
Additionally, threw processes called propulsion and segmentation, the intestines move the foodstuff back and forth further breaking them up mechanically. And if you understand the physiology of the digestive system, you would know all about the brush border enzymes and other enzymes to help your body absorb nutrients. Not to mention the anatomy of the small intestine to help increase it's surface area.
I was hoping people with more knowledge than myself could help shed some light, and add either medical data to back up these claims, or debunk them.
 
A simpler way to word my question I guess would be..
What is the magic number? (if there is one) How much protein/carbs/fats can the body absorb at one time? And what information does anyone have to back up their claims.
 
A simpler way to word my question I guess would be..
What is the magic number? (if there is one) How much protein/carbs/fats can the body absorb at one time? And what information does anyone have to back up their claims.

I've read studies where they've measured this in excruciating detail. How much is pissed out, how much goes out the other way etc. Large number of participants too. Can't quote them, but the useful intake per feeding session number was disappointingly low. No more than 30 grams.

To your point, it probably was all nattys, and on AAS we're supposed to be better at converting, right?
 
it's never been scientifically proven the body uses more than .8 grams per lb. of lean mass. With that being said, in terms of growth I've always placed carbs above protein, you can put a guy on 500 grams of protein a day and cut his fats and carbs and then put a guy on 100 grams a day of protein WITH fats and carbs and the guy taking less protein is going to get more gains. I think protein intake has become extremely over-exaggerated nowadays myself
 
let me just add to that, guys are using protein now as a filler to bridge the calorie gap. If a guy is trying to cut bodyfat and his daily caloric requirements for slashing fat and retaining the most muscle are 2,800 cals a day, many are using protein to get the caloric requirement up to the necessary level since protein is some calories
 
I've read studies where they've measured this in excruciating detail. How much is pissed out, how much goes out the other way etc. Large number of participants too. Can't quote them, but the useful intake per feeding session number was disappointingly low. No more than 30 grams.

To your point, it probably was all nattys, and on AAS we're supposed to be better at converting, right?
If you ever come across it again I'd love to read this study.
 
Arnal MA, et al. Protein feeding pattern does not affect protein retention in young women. J Nutr. 2000 Jul;130(7):1700-4.
 
The body has no realistic limit on the amount of protein you can eat in one sitting. 20-30g is bullshit. A good sized steak is easily 60+g of protein. Do you think you're going to waste it all bc it's more than 30g?

I think we were talking about the maximum amount that will benefit the body's muscle building. And that seems to crest at 30 gram for most, per feeding. Protein is useful for other purposes too, of course.

This is from a site owned by Scientific American, and they also come down at the 30 gram mark, but added this:

How Much Protein Can the Body Absorb?

"The muscle building benefits of protein seem to max out around 20% of calories. And if you want to take advantage of protein's appetite-taming and metabolism-boosting abilities, it's OK to go as high as 30%-35% of calories from protein - as long as you don't have any medical issues (such as reduced kidney function).

One last tip: Your body does use extra water to digest protein. So, if you're increasing your protein intake, be sure to increase your fluid intake as well to avoid dehydration."
 
Protein is used to allow muscles to grow and rebuild. There is ATP that is needed and protein plays a role in this. I would say that is protein synthesis is increased from lifting and AAS. Then your going to need more then the normal person which this person is natty. I forgot much is the info, with gluconeogenisis and glycolysis and the kreb cycle. But protein plays a role with ATP.
 
I think we were talking about the maximum amount that will benefit the body's muscle building. And that seems to crest at 30 gram for most, per feeding. Protein is useful for other purposes too, of course.

This is from a site owned by Scientific American, and they also come down at the 30 gram mark, but added this:

How Much Protein Can the Body Absorb?

"The muscle building benefits of protein seem to max out around 20% of calories. And if you want to take advantage of protein's appetite-taming and metabolism-boosting abilities, it's OK to go as high as 30%-35% of calories from protein - as long as you don't have any medical issues (such as reduced kidney function).

One last tip: Your body does use extra water to digest protein. So, if you're increasing your protein intake, be sure to increase your fluid intake as well to avoid dehydration."

So you are focusing on protein synthesis and ignoring proteolysis?

Do you beleive protein needs/usage are static between a 180lb person vs a 220lb person?

Do you know how long it takes a meal containing 50g+ of protein to digest and be utilized?
 
So you are focusing on protein synthesis and ignoring proteolysis?

Do you beleive protein needs/usage are static between a 180lb person vs a 220lb person?

Do you know how long it takes a meal containing 50g+ of protein to digest and be utilized?

Why the hostility? Still Trumpy-grumpy?

I was just pointing out a possible definition confusion (sounded like we were talking about different things).

My other point (and probably yours) was that even if only a certain amount goes to muscle growth, that there's other use for protein too - but eventually the liver turns excess protein into some form of sugar for fuel, so there's definitely a point you don't want to exceed. Which is what the referenced article pointed out, with the author suggesting a max protein intake threshold in relation to overall calories consumed - I think she said around 25% max.
 
Why the hostility? Still Trumpy-grumpy?

It honestly wasn't hostility. They were questions meant to provoke thought. We only argue each other in political threads :p

I was just pointing out a possible definition confusion (sounded like we were talking about different things).

I think we were talking about the same thing. My point was that the 30g of protein in one sitting being the maximum the body can use is incorrect.

My other point (and probably yours) was that even if only a certain amount goes to muscle growth, that there's other use for protein too - but eventually the liver turns excess protein into some form of sugar for fuel, so there's definitely a point you don't want to exceed. Which is what the referenced article pointed out, with the author suggesting a max protein intake threshold in relation to overall calories consumed - I think she said around 25% max.

You're talking about gluconeogensis or the creation of glucose from a substrate other than carbs. You're correct that it can happen. It's not that you def don't want to exceed it just that exceeding it by too much can leave progress in the table in some instances. I'd prefer to err with a bit too much protein than too little.

You don't really want to set protein in something as dynamic as total calories. For example at maintenance or bulking this might be perfectly fine but when dieting down this would mean a reduction of total calories which would then mean a reduction of protein intake at a time when you need more protein. It would be better to do it off bodyweight or preferably lean body mass if an accurate BF% is known.
 
I've read up on this in the past and I got that .8 number from a study too. I was also told to be careful about who is posting the info. The study results might have + and - outcomes and someone could put more emphasis on the - or +. I also read about prehistoric diets where humans ate only 1-2 times daily which mainly consisted of meat, obviously. Also what I thought was interesting was that places (like Alaskan Indians) where food mainly consisted of milk, cheese and meat. Coronary disease, and other diseases caused by high cholesterol were almost none existent.

Sent from my Z981 using Tapatalk
 
Awesome fucking video. Never seen it before. What's this guy's name again? Seen him on dicks corner. I mean...Rick.lol

Sent from my Z981 using Tapatalk
 
Let me personally attest to this shit. I come from a family of big fat people. A quarter of my family are NFL line men and tight ends depending on their height.

I can eat 3 big ass meals a day and gain weight. 1-2 big ass meals or even 1 meal. I digest things really slow and that's just my body. I now learned to scale back and eat smaller meals and my energy is consistent and I'm rockin out with the weights. But everyone's definitely different when it comes to metabolism and what they can digest. I can eat spinach and the next day I can shit out entire leaves lol.... talk about recycling. All you need is a farmer to pluck it out of the toilet, wash it off and resell it lol.
 
Back
Top