PeptideStack
5.2kquestions
20kanswers
220users

How much protein in grams do I need at 74 kg on 1,400 kcal a day?

Asked 26 Mar 2026Modified 2 months agoViewed 2.2k times
5

Setup, so nobody has to ask: 74 kg · 1,400 kcal.

I have worked this out and I would like someone to find the error, because I suspect there is one.

My working so far, for the record, is below, and I am fairly sure the error is in the unit conversion rather than the algebra.

How many significant figures are actually justified here?

protein-intake
protein-intake

Protein targets in grams per kilogram, per-meal distribution and the leucine threshold, and the evidence for a higher intake specifically during…

53 questions
nutrition
nutrition

Eating on a suppressed appetite: hitting nutritional targets inside a small energy budget, micronutrient risk, meal structure, and what the trial…

92 questions
lean-mass
lean-mass

Lean body mass as measured rather than assumed: what DEXA, BIA and air-displacement plethysmography each actually estimate, the body-composition…

164 questions
shareeditfollowflag
EV
askedesther_vandeVelde49k3826 Mar 2026
8I tested this on two lots and got the same answer, so at least it reproduces. – Dr_Marek_Zielinski 6 months ago
The timing signature is the useful part. Everything else is confounded. – marta_okonkwo 7 months ago
add a comment

2 Answers

Accepted answer first, then by votes
92

Accepted answer

The relevant detail is that start with the arithmetic, because the answer to the practical question is usually a number and the number is usually achievable.

DEXA precision is better than people assume for fat mass and worse than people assume for lean mass in a single scan — the least significant change for regional lean mass on a well-maintained scanner is on the order of a few per cent. That means two scans three months apart can differ without anything having happened, and it means a scan sequence needs to be at least three points before a trend is interpretable.

Protein target arithmetic

Body mass1.2 g/kg1.6 g/kg2.0 g/kgPer meal at 1.6 (÷3)
62 kg74 g99 g124 g33 g
74 kg89 g118 g148 g39 g
88 kg106 g141 g176 g47 g
103 kg124 g165 g206 g55 g
124 kg149 g198 g248 g66 g

At roughly 4 kcal per gram, 141 g of protein is about 564 kcal — a substantial fraction of a 900 kcal budget, which is the real constraint.

Mechanically, absolute strength holds up better than scale weight during a deficit for a straightforward reason: strength is substantially neural and skill-based, and the contractile tissue you retain is being trained harder relative to its size. Grip strength and repetition maxima are therefore lagging indicators of muscle loss rather than leading ones, which is an argument for measuring both.

Adaptive thermogenesis — a fall in energy expenditure beyond that predicted by the change in body composition — is documented across weight-loss interventions and is the mechanistic basis for the plateau being expected rather than anomalous.

I would be careful with the supplement literature here; effect sizes are small, the studies are mostly in trained young men, and generalisation to a large deficit is not obviously valid.

The plateau is arithmetic. Treat it as arithmetic and the response follows.

shareimprove this answerflag
BC
answered · acceptedbea_castellanos47k1381 May 2026
5Does this hold at lower concentrations, or does adsorption dominate? – tamsin_wray 27 days ago
6Worth flagging that this changed in 2025, so older answers on the site are out of date. – Dr_Fatima_Belkacem 3 months ago
add a comment
Sponsored

PeptideMeter - Independent Peptide Analytics

Aggregated, published test results and vendor ratings built from submitted batches. Methodology stated, dataset browsable, no listing fees.

Browse results
35

Mechanically, a plateau at four to six months is the expected shape of the curve, not a failure of it. Energy expenditure falls with mass, and the deficit closes itself unless intake falls further.

Fibre at very low total intake is a trap. Soluble fibre needs water and motility to work; insoluble fibre adds bulk to a slow transit. At 900 kcal a day with delayed gastric emptying, an osmotic agent is more predictable than a bulking one, and adequate fluid is doing more work than either.

The relevant detail is that hydration state moves a DEXA lean-mass figure directly, because the algorithm assigns water to the lean compartment. Scanning fasted, at the same time of day, before training and without a recent high-carbohydrate day is the difference between a comparable sequence and a noisy one. Bioelectrical impedance is far more sensitive to hydration again, which is why its trend is unusable at this timescale.

The caveat is that population averages tell you about populations. Your own trajectory is a sample of one and should be read as a trend, not as a deviation from a published mean.

Measure strength as well as mass. It is cheaper, it is less noisy, and it is closer to what you actually care about.

edited 1 Jun 2026 by Dr_Rosalind_Achebe — removed a claim I could not source

shareimprove this answerflag
DA
answeredDr_Rosalind_Achebe90k15812 May 2026
The distinction between purity and content cannot be repeated often enough here. – vial_five 11 days ago
add a comment

Your answer

Ask PeptideStack is a static archive. Posting is closed, but the norms are worth stating: answer the question that was asked, show your working, cite the trial or the certificate, and say plainly where the evidence runs out.

Not medical advice. Research-use-only compounds are not approved for human use.