I wanted to get your thoughts on these two studies.
If I’m reading this correctly, the first study says that protein sources really don’t matter as long as a leucine threshold (>2 g/dose) is reached.
The second study pretty much says that BCAA’s are overrated.
So does that mean beef vs. chicken vs. fish vs. lentils vs. cow milk vs. soy milk does not matter that much? If it matters, to what degree? Does it make a 1% difference or 50% difference?
Is the average person strength training for overall health going to have any real benefit to any particular protein source as long as their overall protein requirements are met?
Does this only matter for elite level strength athletes trying to maximize every ounce of their nutrition for performance?
The 2nd one isn’t a study at all, rather it is a poorly written op-ed with severe issues to the claims being made. That said, I would agree with the premise that additional BCAAs in the context of a high protein diet probably aren’t terribly useful.
In some populations post RT, sure. There is some variability there and I don’t think you can actually say protein sources don’t matter if you state that leucine (and EAA) content matters, which is what the paper says.
No, that’s not what the paper says.
I don’t think so, but the equation is dynamic meaning that with protein sources changing- the protein requirements also change.
Thanks for taking the time to respond Jordan. Very helpful!
I think it’s pretty difficult for the lay person to sift through all of these studies/op-eds/medical opinions and accurately interpret the data. That’s some solid job security for you!