Concretely: 74 kg · 1,100 kcal.
I want the working, not the result — I need to be able to redo it with different numbers.
I care about the precision as well as the value — I want to know how many figures are real.
Where is my error, and what is the correct working?
118 to 163 g a day. The range the resistance-training literature supports is 1.6 to 2.2 g per kilogram, which at 74 kg is 118–163 g. At 4 kcal per gram that is 474–651 kcal, or 43–59 per cent of a 1,100 intake — which is why protein has to be planned first at this energy level rather than fitted in afterwards. Split it across three or four servings; roughly 0.4 g/kg per meal saturates the synthetic response and the surplus in one large serving does not carry over.
The honest answer is that most people in a deficit fall well short, and closing that gap matters more than any refinement above it.
Per meal, roughly 0.4 grams per kilogram saturates the synthetic response in most adults, which is about 30 to 40 grams for a typical person. Beyond that the surplus is oxidised or used for other purposes rather than adding to synthesis.
A practical construction: 30 to 40 grams at each of three meals plus a 20 to 30 gram snack covers most targets without any protein powder at all.
Stable-isotope feeding studies establish the per-meal saturation of muscle protein synthesis at around 0.4 g/kg in young adults and higher in older ones.
Plant-based patterns need a higher total and more attention per serving.
Aggregated, published test results and vendor ratings built from submitted batches. Methodology stated, dataset browsable, no listing fees.
Browse resultsThis is one of the better-evidenced areas in nutrition and the disagreements are about the top of the range, not the bottom.
Older adults need more per meal to overcome anabolic resistance, with 1.2 to 1.5 g/kg daily commonly quoted for maintenance and more in a deficit.
Appetite suppression makes protein-rich foods harder to eat because they are satiating. Liquid protein and leaner, less voluminous sources are the usual practical workaround.
Leucine threshold effects are documented across protein sources and explain the difference in per-serving requirements between animal and plant proteins.
Healthy kidneys tolerate this fine. Diseased ones are a clinical question.
Start with which body weight the target is calculated from, because using total weight in someone with substantial adiposity inflates the number without benefit.
The leucine threshold for triggering the response is around two and a half to three grams per meal. Thirty grams of most animal protein reaches it; thirty grams of many plant proteins does not, which is why plant-based targets run higher.
High protein intakes do not damage healthy kidneys in the published evidence; existing kidney disease is a genuine exception and is a clinical question.
Meta-analytic estimates place the plateau of the dose-response for lean-mass retention with resistance training around 1.6 g/kg, with a confidence interval extending to about 2.2.
Plan protein first in the day; with suppressed appetite it will not happen otherwise.
Plant-based patterns need somewhat higher totals and more attention to leucine content per serving to produce an equivalent response.
Hydration requirements rise modestly with protein intake because urea excretion increases, which is a real effect and a small one.
Systematic reviews of high-protein intake in people with normal renal function have not found evidence of harm to kidney function.
Nothing here is dietetic or medical advice.
Per-meal saturation is real. One enormous serving does not do the job of three.
edited 22 Oct 2024 by e_dziedzic — fixed an arithmetic slip in the third paragraph
Protein is also the most satiating macronutrient per kilocalorie, which makes hitting the target easier than it sounds once it is prioritised.
Use reference or adjusted body weight rather than total weight where adiposity is substantial: a common approach is ideal body weight plus a quarter of the excess, which avoids targets that no one could eat.
The body-composition substudies in the major programmes consistently report that the proportion of weight lost as fat mass is approximately three quarters or better, with the lean-mass fraction falling within the range seen in dietary weight loss of comparable magnitude[1].
Targets are population estimates; individual requirements vary and there is no cheap way to measure yours.
1.6 to 2.2 g/kg of reference weight, split three or four ways. That is the 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.