Most coaches, athletes, and bodybuilders don’t like to read scientific studies, review papers or anything containing a bunch of scientific jargon. At the same time these papers can be beneficial in prescribing training, nutrition and supplementation protocols to enhance performance and physique. You might ask is there any way I can get this information without reading these boring papers? Good news. Your savior has arrived. The Practical Scientist column will provide key points from the most prominent scientific training and nutrition research. You won’t have to spend hours looking through papers with long complex words and multiple formulas. I will have already taken care of that task. I will provide readers with the key points and most useful information that can be gathered from the data discussed. The information will be provided in bullet style format. Believe it or not some of us actually like to spend our days reading, analyzing and discussing these papers with scientists, researchers and analytical thinkers. I hope you enjoy the new column. If you have any questions feel free to ask.

In 2003 Tipton and Wolfe presented one of the most comprehensive review papers to date on protein (Protein and amino acids for athletes). The objective of the review was to update the literature since 1991 and critically examine the available information on protein nutrition for athletes. In February of 2007 Tipton wrote another outstanding paper concerning protein and athletes (Protein Requirements and Recommendations for Athletes: Relevance of Ivory Tower Arguments for Practical Recommendations). The focus on this paper was the author’s view of various factors involved in protein nutrition and how they may influence the adaptations that result from training and nutritional intake, and how this information may be used by practitioners, coaches, and athletes to determine appropriate protein intakes during training for optimal competitive results. In this article I will point out some of the key points Tipton revealed in his February 2007 paper.

Key Points from Protein Requirements and Recommendations for Athletes: Relevance of Ivory Tower Arguments for Practical Recommendations, Kevin D. Tipton, PhD, Oliver C. Witard, Msc

In general, scientific opinion on the protein controversy divides itself in two distinct camps- those who believe that exercise and sport increase the bodies demand for protein and those who believe protein requirements for exercising individuals and athletes are no different than the general population.

The demands of training vary within a particular sport or in individuals. Scientific studies often cited in the literature may be irrelevant for athletes, coaches, and nutrition practitioners. My comment: athletes are ultimately concerned with physique and performance not a bunch of scientific jargon.

The camp supporting the need for higher protein for athletes often cites nitrogen balance as an indicator. Numerous well-controlled studies have shown that nitrogen balance in athletes is greater the sedentary control groups. Increased protein needs may come from increased amino acid oxidation during exercise or growth and repair of muscle tissue.

There is no reason to recommend protein supplements per se because there is no evidence that supplements work better than foods

Increased MPS (muscle protein synthesis) is induced after resistance and endurance training (My comment: many endurance athletes do not consider the need for increased mitochondria and mitochondria enzymes which could lead to increased protein needs), suggesting additional protein would be necessary to provide needed amino acids.

The opposing camp argues that exercise, even when of long duration and intensive does not increase the dietary requirement for protein. Their argument is based on the fact that exercise has been shown to increase the efficiency of use of amino acids from ingested protein. Butterfield and others demonstrated this as they showed even at calorie deficits and low protein intakes nitrogen balance was improved with exercise.