back
44 comments
Isn't the focus on protein in the diet more of a weightlifting thing? The amount of protein often recommended for building up muscles is quite a lot, at least double the amount mentioned in the article as the recommendation. If you're trying to hit that amount I can imagine it getting very hard with a regular diet.
It's about feeling satisfied and full too. Satiety. With the demonization of carbs and fat, protein is all that's left for calories. And its the most satiating/satiefying. Which every article like this seems to gloss over.

Protein does two things. The minimum amount required is necessary to replenish amino acids and proteins. The excess is spent on calories. At the end of the day, calories are sort of calories. The body needs energy and it needs one of the three and protein is really the third best of the three, but has the least bad reputation. This is where marketing has overtaken science and fact based decision making.

Complex carbs are the best energy but they need to be cut with bran and fiber to regulate their absorption speed. That kind of gets left out of the fiber discussion, that fiber is part of a pairing with carbs.

The other option for raw calories once nutritional goals are met is raw fat, which historically was called salad dressing. Instead of downing absurd amounts of protein for calories, or covering every carb in fiber; one can douse everything with https://www.walmart.com/ip/La-Tourangelle-Organic-Sunflower-... or https://www.amazon.com/Oleico-Certified-Verified-Expeller-Sa... or https://www.costco.com/chosen-foods%2C-100%25-pure-avocado-o...

The seed oil hysteria (which is really only focused on omega6s/polys anyway,) along with the perception of "fat" making you fat, has steered people away from monounsaturated fats being a primary calorie source despite being cost effective, healthy, and quick to consume.

Another place where marketing/blognutrition has overtaken reality is the idea of every protein needing to be complete, vs just eating complete protein over the course of a week or day. Collagen is missing tryptophan, which is abundant in whole milk, yet collagen is wrongly extolled as "not a source of protein and shouldn't be counted."

The other part of satiety is learning mindfulness, and being ok with hunger, and being mindful of not letting hunger control behavior mindlessly..

I find protein and fat to be an excellent combo of macro nutrients for controlling my hunger, and one of my favorite natural groupings is eggs.

Eggs are nutritionally such a good deal. For the cost of about 77 calories you get 6.3 grams of protein, <1g of carbs and 5.3 grams of fat, and a nice dose of vitamins, phosphorous, and selenium. The protein you do get too, has a high biological value, meaning the amino acid composition is pretty ideal for human use. Even at the crazy prices, I still happily manage to eat 2-4 hard boiled eggs a day.

Keeping a bunch of hard-boiled eggs in my fridge means I always have a reasonably healthy snack at hand.

>The 28-year-old sales representative is big on protein. “I found that if I prioritized protein and half-assed the rest of everything else, it gave me the body I wanted,” he said.

This is all that matters, though. If it works, it works, and for those who use it as a way to eat more candy, nothing will work.

It's all great until cholesterol starts leaking thru your skin.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/life/health-wellness/2025/01/...

6 to 9 pounds of cheese a day is not moderation.
Someone who has a blood cholesterol level in excess of 1000 should have been on heavy dose statins years and years ago. Plenty of people can eat all sorts of diets and not have blood serum cholesterol levels like that.
I was responding to

>This is all that matters, though. If it works, it works

This guy thought his diet "worked" too, even though it silently lead to dangerously high cholesterol levels.

>He lost weight, increased energy and improved mental clarity, the journal article said.

Human physiology still applies.

At least in my case, vegetarianism + being underweight means I need to pay an awful lot of attention to protein. What a strange thing to complain about, given the imo more pressing issues in the standard American diet.
Being vegetarian and underweight puts you pretty far from the average American diet and nutritional needs.
Your case is very different from the demographic that the article is discussing about where people are consuming primarily protein for macros.
Nutrition topics with bait headlines are the worst submissions on HN.

The comments section is always like going to a family reunion and your doughbody uncle has locked you into a convo about how you need to try keto (he's on his 5th day).

Which part of it is bait? Clearly there is an emphasis on protein lately and the article highlighted some downsides people might be overlooking.
That's why this article got flagged. The system works.
https://archive.ph/XguT0
The title seems a bit hyperbolic compared to the article. It does briefly mention cardiovascular risk, but I was able to immediately find a meta-analysis showing no correlation.

If the gripe is with processed foods containing protein, then sure maybe there's a risk compensation argument, but personally speaking I buy Halo Top when I'm craving ice cream, not as a way to avoid eating chicken.

I also imagine that the target audience for these products are people who are relatively active and in that case the ideal protein consumption numbers are generally accepted to be significantly higher than the 0.8g/kg cited in the article.

It's been an annoying trend to people with allergies too, since allergens are often proteins. The various protein powders are basically pure raw allergens, about as potent as possible. People don't expect random junk foods to contain protein powder - but in recent years, here we are. I saw a bag of salt and vinegar potato chips with whey protein isolate in the ingredients. I don't understand the sudden popularity of it - whey used to be a waste product cheesemakers drained into the sewer. Now they add it to junk foods.
I think that's your answer right there. Lots of food additives are just ways to turn waste products into a good thing (when the stars align and marketing is good like your protein example or "vitamins" in cereal) or at least not a cost center for disposal.
According to this conversation between Dr. Andrew Huberman and Dr. Gabrielle Lyon, protein has an important role in overall health and longevity. Don't take my work for it, of course. https://www.hubermanlab.com/episode/dr-gabrielle-lyon-how-to...
Pro bodybuilders almost never drink protein shakes. They get protein from eating food. Not shakes. If they are recommending a protein shake or supplement, it’s because they are getting paid to do so.

Protein shakes and other supplements is an industry trying to sell you something.

Most don’t work out hard enough to need a protein shake. The protein will turn to fat.

Protein can't turn into a fat. There is no path for that in our body.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protein_metabolism disagrees:

"Dietary proteins are first broken down to individual amino acids by various enzymes and hydrochloric acid present in the gastrointestinal tract. These amino acids are absorbed into the bloodstream to be transported to the liver and onward to the rest of the body. Absorbed amino acids are typically used to create functional proteins, but may also be used to create energy. They can also be converted into glucose. This glucose can then be converted to triglycerides and stored in fat cells."

Excessive protein, doubly so for animal protein, is pro-aging. The only exceptions are if one is doing substantial amounts of unaerobic exercise or if one is on weight loss agents like Ozempic.
it’s not about protein. It’s about the convenience of being able to eat these things without having to cook them and wash dishes. As well as chewing them. It takes time. I wonder if the person who wrote the article has ever had to run a surplus.
Isn't all of this just a marketing ploy to sell you more food?
Protein plays a major role in satiety. They're even claiming that "excess" protein causes heart disease. What a load of nonsense, not a surprise from "nutrition experts".
I think satiety is way more cultural and personal than some sort of objective measure. I recall an interview with a guy who ran an American fast food franchise somewhere in Asia. He was talking about how they have to modify the menu for the locale and he was saying how they absolutely have to serve rice because people will say "a burger just won't fill me up without rice."

In America we say the opposite.

I read on Reddit and HN that all sorts of things I personally find very filling are objectively unfilling and "you'll be hungry 10 minutes later." The hive mind just doesn't match my experience.

That's fascinating. But the rice is a pretty clear analogue to fries. Did they have those, too?
If you are looking for satiety, fat is best. A whole egg will satisfy you longer than the same amount of chicken because the egg has fat.
Disagree , protein and fiber is best for satiety. You have to limit fat including saturated versions of it to stay healthy and control cholesterol
I can eat unlimited eggs and never feel full (hyperbole, but getting my point). 150g of fat plus a salad with lettuce, tomato and cottage cheese makes me full, which is something hard to achieve for me
Same amount (weight? volume?) or same calories?

A low fat salad will fill you up longer than either of those options due to the larger volume in my experience.

It will fill your stomach but it won't stick with you the way it would if you had some fat.
That's complete nonsense if you are TRULY hungry. If a salad fills you up, you have psychological hunger, not a real energy need.

I have been in a situation where I accepted very light super (even though I run every day), in particular salads and invariably I have been awoken at night hungry as hell.

Real hunger is satisfied with calories (and your ability to process them) not the volume they have.

Yeah that part really rubbed me the wrong way. The study cited is not evidence that if you eat a lot of protein you'll get heart disease. Any decent nutritionist will tell you that idea is horse shit.

I think the article is misguided in general. Look, chicken breast is boring. Unless you plan on banning hyperpalatable foods altogether (good luck with that, Food Stalin), they are always going to be around. Protein keeps you full for longer than carbs, and is less calorie dense than fat. Sounds like exactly what Americans need. If these hyperpalatable foods shift toward a more protein heavy composition, it's probably going to be good for public health.

We don't need the "all natural" cult screwing this up.

Americans are stupid when it comes to eating so no surprise we've fallen for another fad diet.
Eating enough protein and fiber is part of a healthy diet. Including diverse sources of it not just supplements though
Fiber is the nutrient that is challenging to meet the recommended daily intake. I incorporate fiber supplements into my protein powder drink due to its compatibility with the powder and its ability to bind together effectively. Fiber supplements can affect medication depending on timing.

Age Group | Men (g) | Women (g)

14-18 years=31,25

19-50 years=38,28

51+ years=30,22

It’s really not that challenging.

2 slices of Sara Lee 45 cal whole wheat bread is 5grams

FiberOne Brownie is 6g

Baby Carrots can be 3g for 10

1 bag of Trader Joe’s Almonds is 4g

1 cosmic crisp apple is 4g

1 cup of hash browns are 3g

That’s 25g right there and it’s low calorie too

Eating a lot of protein is a good thing, especially if you're lifting weights and want to see results from that.

Eating a lot of highly processed protein is not. Just because ultra-processed foods have protein in them doesn't make them less unhealthy. Eat chicken breasts, skyr, tofu, eggs - not candy bars, ice cream and other junk that happens to have protein in it.

Is there any evidence that a protein bar is lower quality protein for you than yogurt? Aside from the added sugars etc, the protein should be similar?
It's not the protein itself you need to worry about. It's the processing on the entire bar - see here for a study: https://www.cell.com/cell-metabolism/pdf/S1550-4131(19)30248...
Math. +500 calories per day * 14 days = 7,000 calories excess which led to a 2 pound weight increase. 2 pounds is 7000 calories.

“Ad libitum intake was 500 kcal/day more on the ultra- processed versus unprocessed diet”

I'm disappointed by the article's failure to capitalize on the potential of the "nuts" / "protein" pun.