Comment by somenameforme | Hacker News Reader

Comment by somenameforme | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

It's just the protein IMO. I've only relatively recently began taking weight training seriously, and it really opened my eyes to how different nutrients really can affect you. When I hit my protein goals (which is 1g per lb of body weight) I'm left basically force feeding myself, in spite of maintaining approximately the same calorie intake as before. Eating proper levels of protein just leaves you so absurdly full. I always read the same was true of fiber, but never experienced this at all myself. I love broccoli and could eat it all day long, literally.

Notably just about the entire developed world is protein deficient. Factor in the DIAAS score [1] and the entire developed world is plainly malnourished as far as protein goes. DIAAS has to do with the fact that the digestibility (and amino acid balance) of protein varies by source. So, for instance to get the equivalent of 100 grams of protein from chicken breast, you'd need to consume 250 grams of protein from roasted peanuts.

Even if somebody isn't working out, bumping up the protein (and protein quality) would almost certainly show great things. I went from relying on intermittent fasting and some fairly cautious eating to maintain my weight, to a "diet" that culminates in "Oh god, I just can't eat anymore!" owing to nothing but dramatic shifts in my protein (and protein quality) intake.

---

The [rapidly diminishing] inverse correlation between veganism and obesity would seem to reject this, but I think that can be easily and entirely explained by the fact that vegans are people who have already voluntarily opted into ideologically motivated dietary restraint. If you're willing and able to not give into what your body wants, then you will have little to no difficulty controlling your weight. It just won't be pleasant.

[1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digestible_Indispensable_Amino...

> Notably just about the entire developed world is protein deficient.

This is very a countervailing claim against what you find when you google protein needs, so I'd like to see some sources for it. Especially for people who aren't even working out.

For example, top google results:

- https://www.health.harvard.edu/nutrition/when-it-comes-to-pr...

- https://www.dietaryguidelines.gov/resources/2020-2025-dietar...

"""Contrary to all the hype that everyone needs more protein, most people in the U.S. meet or exceed their needs. This is especially true for males ages 19–59. The Dietary Guidelines for Americans, 2020–2025 indicate that men in that age range are exceeding their protein recommendations, especially from meat, poultry and eggs."""

> Eating proper levels of protein just leaves you so absurdly full.

Let's say you eat 200g protein per day (1g/1lb weight). I can come up with wildly different dietary patterns that hit that goal. Frankly, the protein dense foods seem the least filling way to hit that number since they don't hit 2000+ calories.

- 260g protein powder: 920 calories

- 2100g tofu: 1800 calories

- 750g beef sirloin: 1875 calories

- 950g seitan: 1000 calories

- 730g chicken breast: 1340 calories

Not to say you should eat any one food item, but I think it's ancient broscience that protein is magically satiating, else you could easily fill up on protein powder and potatoes wouldn't be the most satiating food per calorie.

So I think you're in broscience territory unless you elaborate a bit more.

> Contrary to all the hype that everyone needs more protein, most people in the U.S. meet or exceed their needs. This is especially true for males ages 19–59.

did they back this claim by any sources? I somehow can't find this phrase there. Where did you find it exactly?

Also, actively exercising person's protein intake requirements are usually considered significantly higher.

Well, why not work the opposite direction?

How would you figure out how much protein you should eat starting with a google search bar? Which sources would you accept and what do those sources say?

I would enter something like "study daily protein intake weight lifting".

Top article is this: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5852756/ which says that intake below 1.6g/kg increases results, and effect is diminished above that number.

Peer reviewed studies are the best source of truth we have on this topic. Also they are obviously not perfect.

(btw, 1.6g/kg is 0.725g/lb, so still 73% of the person above's recommendation and only for hypertrophy results)

The person I replied to isn't talking about weight lifting nor optimizing hypertrophy. The actual context was weight management and satiety.

> Notably just about the entire developed world is protein deficient. Factor in the DIAAS score [1] and the entire developed world is plainly malnourished as far as protein goes. [...] Even if somebody isn't working out, bumping up the protein (and protein quality) would almost certainly show great things. I went from relying on intermittent fasting and some fairly cautious eating to maintain my weight, to a "diet" that culminates in "Oh god, I just can't eat anymore!" owing to nothing but dramatic shifts in my protein (and protein quality) intake.

If people are already getting enough protein, I don't see how macronutrient fixation will help with weight loss.

My own suspicion is that most people who are overweight probably need to replace less satiating foods like refined grains with more satiating foods like legumes, potatoes, whole grains, veg/fruits or anything more satiating than the food they are replacing on this index: http://ernaehrungsdenkwerkstatt.de/fileadmin/user_upload/EDW...

Meat is also more satiating than refined grains, but it's clear just looking at the satiety food index that satiety isn't directed by one magical macronutrient, yet the commenter above seems to purport that it's the case.

> If people are already getting enough protein

they likely defined "enough" as maintenance level for average american: overweight and low active.

To maintain healthy weight in long term with office job, person needs to actively exercise, and supply body with nutrition to exercise. Otherwise, methabolism will slow down, and likely overall health degradation will be observed.

> with more satiating foods

correct, and high protein food has high satiety index.

This seems like quite a stretch.

1. Daily protein intake for someone is directed by their body today, not what their body might be in the future nor what their body could be.

2. Daily protein intake isn't based on tiny hypertrophic optimizations even for athletes, so it's weird to double down that this would apply to average people.

Here's a morsel from your own study:

> However, even a 100 kg athlete can satisfy his/her daily protein requirements by consuming ~30 g of protein at each meal, which aligns with the per meal recommendations of 0.24–0.30 g/kg

0.24-0.30g/kg (0.11-0.14g/lb) is quite below 1.6g/kg (0.725g/lb).

Don't you have to bite the bullet here?

> 0.24-0.30g/kg (0.11-0.14g/lb) is quite below 1.6g/kg (0.725g/lb).

0.30g/kg is per meal, and they say meals should be taken every 3-5h, so I guess there are multiple meals per day.

If you would like to see science on it you can search for something like 'protein satiety study.' Brave search, at least, returns countless high quality looking results. [1] Suffice to say it's not even remotely controversial. In any case this isn't complex - just try it yourself, though remember to adjust protein intake vs DIAAS levels. What is controversial is my claim that the world, including the developed world, is largely protein deficient.

Yet we accept that protein not only has countless health benefits, but also significantly helps with things like satiety - in a world where obesity has become arguably the #1 public health crisis. And now pair this with DIAAS scores also emphasizing that many of the sources being used to pump up raw protein numbers (such as flour based products - bread, pasta, etc) are some of the worst possible sources of protein in terms of actual digestibility, let alone amino acid balance. The fact there isn't more focus on protein outside of e.g. body building nutritionists is quite odd.

[1] - https://search.brave.com/search?q=protein+satiety+study&sour...

> The [rapidly diminishing] inverse correlation between veganism and obesity would seem to reject this, but I think that can be easily and entirely explained

It's easily and entirely explained by fiber. Fiber, through gastric distension, is, along with protein, the primary driver of satiation. There are other factors too, like the fact that they eat more whole, unprocessed foods, which are harder for the body to digest (i.e., require more energy.)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com