While I agree that bro science overestimates the amount of protein needed for a gym goer/athlete/bodybuilder etc, the numbers that many on the anti-protein crusade throw out can be just as inaccurate. I am really curious what the full macro nutrient breakdown looks like for those that believe 50 or 60 grams of protein is all you need to build muscle. The calories need to come from somewhere, so assuming a fairly reasonable fat intake of 65g or so, does that mean we fill in the rest of an active adult male's diet with over 400g of carbs?
|