Recommendations for dietary protein are primarily based on intakes that maintain nitrogen (i.e., protein) balance rather than optimize metabolism and/or performance. PURPOSE: This study aimed to determine how varying protein intakes, including a new tracer-derived safe intake, alter whole body protein metabolism and exercise performance during training. METHODS: Using a double-blind randomized crossover design, 10 male endurance-trained runners (age, 32 ± 8 yr; V˙O2peak, 65.9 ± 7.9 mLO2·kg·min) performed three trials consisting of 4 d of controlled training (20, 5, 10, and 20 km·d, respectively) while consuming diets providing 0.94 (LOW), 1.20 (MOD), and 1.83 (HIGH) g protein·kg·d. Whole body protein synthesis, breakdown, and net balance were determined by oral [N]glycine on the first and last day of the 4-d controlled training period, whereas exercise performance was determined from maximum voluntary isometric contraction, 5-km time trial, and countermovement jump impulse (IMP) and peak force before and immediately after the 4-d intervention. RESULTS:Synthesis and breakdown were not affected by protein intake, whereas net balance showed a dose-response (HIGH > MOD > LOW, P < 0.05) with only HIGH being in positive balance (P < 0.05). There was a trend (P = 0.06) toward an interaction in 5-km Time Trial with HIGH having a moderate effect over LOW (effect size = 0.57) and small effect over MOD (effect size = 0.26). IMP decreased with time (P < 0.01) with no effect of protein (P = 0.56). There was no effect of protein intake (P ≥ 0.06) on maximum voluntary isometric contraction, IMP, or peak force performance. CONCLUSION: Our data suggest that athletes who consume dietary protein toward the upper end of the current recommendations by the American College of Sports Medicine (1.2-2 g·kg) would better maintain protein metabolism and potentially exercise performance during training.
RCT Entities:
Recommendations for dietary protein are primarily based on intakes that maintain nitrogen (i.e., protein) balance rather than optimize metabolism and/or performance. PURPOSE: This study aimed to determine how varying protein intakes, including a new tracer-derived safe intake, alter whole body protein metabolism and exercise performance during training. METHODS: Using a double-blind randomized crossover design, 10 male endurance-trained runners (age, 32 ± 8 yr; V˙O2peak, 65.9 ± 7.9 mL O2·kg·min) performed three trials consisting of 4 d of controlled training (20, 5, 10, and 20 km·d, respectively) while consuming diets providing 0.94 (LOW), 1.20 (MOD), and 1.83 (HIGH) g protein·kg·d. Whole body protein synthesis, breakdown, and net balance were determined by oral [N]glycine on the first and last day of the 4-d controlled training period, whereas exercise performance was determined from maximum voluntary isometric contraction, 5-km time trial, and countermovement jump impulse (IMP) and peak force before and immediately after the 4-d intervention. RESULTS: Synthesis and breakdown were not affected by protein intake, whereas net balance showed a dose-response (HIGH > MOD > LOW, P < 0.05) with only HIGH being in positive balance (P < 0.05). There was a trend (P = 0.06) toward an interaction in 5-km Time Trial with HIGH having a moderate effect over LOW (effect size = 0.57) and small effect over MOD (effect size = 0.26). IMP decreased with time (P < 0.01) with no effect of protein (P = 0.56). There was no effect of protein intake (P ≥ 0.06) on maximum voluntary isometric contraction, IMP, or peak force performance. CONCLUSION: Our data suggest that athletes who consume dietary protein toward the upper end of the current recommendations by the American College of Sports Medicine (1.2-2 g·kg) would better maintain protein metabolism and potentially exercise performance during training.
Authors: Felicia A Hartono; Patrick W Martin-Arrowsmith; Wouter M Peeters; Tyler A Churchward-Venne Journal: Sports Med Date: 2022-02-03 Impact factor: 11.928
Authors: Mette Hansen; Mikkel Oxfeldt; Anne E Larsen; Lise S Thomsen; Torben Rokkedal-Lausch; Britt Christensen; Nikolaj Rittig; Frank V De Paoli; Jens Bangsbo; Niels Ørtenblad; Klavs Madsen Journal: J Int Soc Sports Nutr Date: 2020-09-07 Impact factor: 5.150