The Empire Strikes Back
What are your thoughts?
See previous threads:
I liked the article. But I’ll have to read more.
I read that this morning and had mixed feelings about it.
From what I’ve learned, I believe he is correct in saying the RDA is not optimal, but to me, his letter smacked of being defensive. And I get it, his new protein bar is pictured in most of those articles trashing protein fear mongering.
The only thing I found misleading was that his argument was mostly that he is right and the RDA is wrong, but most of the press I’ve seen lately is not really mentioning the RDA and it just talks about the over emphasis on protein and that most Americans are getting plenty without buying meat sticks, bars, and packaged foods that advertise the added protein. This is where he lost me… he was arguing about something that has not been the focus.
A personal issue…
Even though he is smart and sites where most of his information comes from, I do have to grain of salt everything he says about protein because he is too financially invested. Meaning, maybe he thinks the optimal is (I’m making this up) 1.4 grams per kg, but he might say 2grams per kg because he believes it’s harmless and he has meat sticks and bars to sell.
I think that criticism can be funny but at the end of the day there is nothing other than the methodology that matter. It’s not funny because it’s inaccurate, it’s funny to talk about someones protein bar sales affecting their recommendations, and sometimes people mistake it for criticism that matters.
Bias and financial investment can explain the choice of methodology, but that can’t take the place of valid criticism in of itself, if that makes sense.
Yes, that makes sense. But do note I agree with him that the RDA is not sufficient, but I know Stuart Phillips recently said most adults are probably fine between 1-1.2gram per kg… and maybe 1.6. Attia says that is only the starting point and he most commonly recommends 2g per kg (I listen to him quite a bit)
So, considering the well regarded protein researcher does not say most adults need 1 gram per pound, which Attia often says, leads me to question why his personal recommendation is always so much higher than the other experts I listen to. I rarely hear him say 1.6, even though he said that in his newsletter. Layne Norton even says 1.6 is most all anyone needs (but you can go higher to squeak out a drop more).
All this is to say I wonder if his financial incentive is indeed weighing in on his higher recommendations for the average person… and not just for body builders and the elderly. I’m not being flip in the least. If he was out there saying 1.6g per kg most of the time, I would not even point out his incentives because that tracks with what most experts in the field say (at least the ones I’ve listened to)
I do wish his cancer letter was not behind the paywall, because at times I hear about this fear with high protein, but he dismisses it, so I was curious to read the studies he references that say it’s bunk. (If protein can’t be aging or cause cancer, there is probably no reason not to go super high, but I just don’t personally know what is true.
That’s not a criticism of the methodology though. You’re telling us his conclusion is wrong, not why it is, except others have different conclusions.
Nothing new to see here.
This can be a more recent thread regarding optimal dietary protein intake.
I appreciate what you are saying… but that is way above my pay grade 
I only know to follow the smartest people on the topic I can find.
I’ll note, as a vegan, I pay a lot of attention to the protein space because it’s pounded into my head that I’m not getting enough.
I totally agree.
All of RDA recommendations were poorly validated.
Attia’s argument is still outdated and oversimplified. It is not as simple too much vs too little protein It is way more nuanced, it is more about what amino acid composition of the given protein that should be consumed for best LONG TERM HEALTH OUTCOMES. Using Trenbolone and 300 gm of protein a day will get you jacked in the gym but will that increase your healthspan ?
Coming from the guy who made rapamycin and m-tor pathway famous, this is really disappointing. ON one hand he’s clearly sees the value of suppressing m-tor and the same time he’s all for its activation with indiscriminate protein consumption. You can’t have it both ways. Maybe you can make the argument for cycling m-tor activation but… he doesn’t even try and there is no evidence for it.
He completely skirts this issue which makes me agree with @Beth - there is a conflict of interest.