There are dangers corresponding too much protein intake -- calcium depletion, for example. It's also pretty hard on your kidneys. A lot of advice in the gym is not necessarily geared towards health as much as it is to maximise muscle development/protection. I will also say that nutrition research is chock full of poor science and worse explanations of that science by well meaning popular books. It was my hobby when I was at university (hence decades ago) to look up the actual papers referenced by popular sports nutrition theorists and never once did I find that it held up (either the papers they were referencing were horrible studies, or they got the conclusions completely wrong). It's been a long time since I've had access to a good library, so I've completely lost touch, but I suspect that little has changed.
I do wonder about some sports teams and whether or not they are puzzling things out. For example, the Sky cycling team is famous for their "marginal gains" approach -- trying to get a tenth of a percentage of improvement from anywhere. But I haven't found them to be particularly forthcoming about nutrition, for example.
Having lifted for 14 years, with some shorter breaks, with protein intake ranging from less than half of that to meeting that, I feel confident that you need nothing like those amounts. If you're a competitive lifter, you might want to push your intake up towards those levels, but the improvements you can expect are tiny.
The research indeed does show improvements, at higher intake, but the difference is small enough that it really is irrelevant to most people.
Most people will take years of serious lifting with a strict focus on increasing strength/volume (rather than "just" staying healthy) before they lift heavy enough for it to be something to even think about. As someone else said, timing might play in a bit more, but total daily intake does not need to be that high.