#1

The Empire Strikes Back

What are your thoughts?

See previous threads:

I liked the article. But I’ll have to read more.

1 Like
#2

I read that this morning and had mixed feelings about it.

From what I’ve learned, I believe he is correct in saying the RDA is not optimal, but to me, his letter smacked of being defensive. And I get it, his new protein bar is pictured in most of those articles trashing protein fear mongering.

The only thing I found misleading was that his argument was mostly that he is right and the RDA is wrong, but most of the press I’ve seen lately is not really mentioning the RDA and it just talks about the over emphasis on protein and that most Americans are getting plenty without buying meat sticks, bars, and packaged foods that advertise the added protein. This is where he lost me… he was arguing about something that has not been the focus.

A personal issue…
Even though he is smart and sites where most of his information comes from, I do have to grain of salt everything he says about protein because he is too financially invested. Meaning, maybe he thinks the optimal is (I’m making this up) 1.4 grams per kg, but he might say 2grams per kg because he believes it’s harmless and he has meat sticks and bars to sell.

3 Likes
#3

I think that criticism can be funny but at the end of the day there is nothing other than the methodology that matter. It’s not funny because it’s inaccurate, it’s funny to talk about someones protein bar sales affecting their recommendations, and sometimes people mistake it for criticism that matters.

Bias and financial investment can explain the choice of methodology, but that can’t take the place of valid criticism in of itself, if that makes sense.

1 Like
#4

Yes, that makes sense. But do note I agree with him that the RDA is not sufficient, but I know Stuart Phillips recently said most adults are probably fine between 1-1.2gram per kg… and maybe 1.6. Attia says that is only the starting point and he most commonly recommends 2g per kg (I listen to him quite a bit)

So, considering the well regarded protein researcher does not say most adults need 1 gram per pound, which Attia often says, leads me to question why his personal recommendation is always so much higher than the other experts I listen to. I rarely hear him say 1.6, even though he said that in his newsletter. Layne Norton even says 1.6 is most all anyone needs (but you can go higher to squeak out a drop more).

All this is to say I wonder if his financial incentive is indeed weighing in on his higher recommendations for the average person… and not just for body builders and the elderly. I’m not being flip in the least. If he was out there saying 1.6g per kg most of the time, I would not even point out his incentives because that tracks with what most experts in the field say (at least the ones I’ve listened to)

I do wish his cancer letter was not behind the paywall, because at times I hear about this fear with high protein, but he dismisses it, so I was curious to read the studies he references that say it’s bunk. (If protein can’t be aging or cause cancer, there is probably no reason not to go super high, but I just don’t personally know what is true.

2 Likes
#5

That’s not a criticism of the methodology though. You’re telling us his conclusion is wrong, not why it is, except others have different conclusions.

#6

Nothing new to see here.

2 Likes
#7

This can be a more recent thread regarding optimal dietary protein intake.

#8

I appreciate what you are saying… but that is way above my pay grade :slight_smile: I only know to follow the smartest people on the topic I can find.

I’ll note, as a vegan, I pay a lot of attention to the protein space because it’s pounded into my head that I’m not getting enough.

1 Like
#9

I totally agree.
All of RDA recommendations were poorly validated.

Attia’s argument is still outdated and oversimplified. It is not as simple too much vs too little protein It is way more nuanced, it is more about what amino acid composition of the given protein that should be consumed for best LONG TERM HEALTH OUTCOMES. Using Trenbolone and 300 gm of protein a day will get you jacked in the gym but will that increase your healthspan ?

Coming from the guy who made rapamycin and m-tor pathway famous, this is really disappointing. ON one hand he’s clearly sees the value of suppressing m-tor and the same time he’s all for its activation with indiscriminate protein consumption. You can’t have it both ways. Maybe you can make the argument for cycling m-tor activation but… he doesn’t even try and there is no evidence for it.

He completely skirts this issue which makes me agree with @Beth - there is a conflict of interest.

6 Likes
#10

I’ve stopped watching Attia’s podcast/YT channel unless he interviews a true expert, someone with research credentials relevant to the topic at hand. Same with Huberman. These guys are spread way to thin and engaged in “businesses” loosely connected to their own credentials. The phenomena of being good in one area often gives people license to pontificate outside of their area, and society plays along.

2 Likes
#11

No contradiction for me, since for me the article was about optimal protein consumption, and not the other stuff. I guess for me it’s pretty clear that there is a balance between those 2 levers, and trying to address it is literally a billion dollar question.

I think that if that were easy to answer, we wouldn’t bother with the RDA amount. Seems like it’s a complicated question (in humans), and a rough proxy for it is RDA amount.

#12

Anecdotally, I have been eating a minimum of 200g of protein every single day for 20 years (sometimes 300-400g) and there haven’t been any concerning blood test biomarkers from it. I don’t think I need this much protein but I get so much of it basically by virtue of being on autopilot for so long.

2 Likes
#13

I’ve read those articles too, but I can’t remember if any of them mention actual numbers.

1 Like
#14

I think Peter Attia is seriously undermining his credibility with some of his endorsements and deep involvements with various companies in the nutritional supplement space. The fact that he teams up in these ventures with Huberman is a big black mark against him - deep involvement of both in the hyped David Bar that has now unravelled in a huge scandal when tested by Consumer Labs, massively overstating protein content (by 16%!), massively understating fat content (by 7g!!), and generally sleazy exploitation of legal technicalities. A video looking at this, pretty balanced:

David Bar Failed With Flying Colors

I rarely ate protein bars, because they upset my digestive system, but now I’m staying away from all of them. Ultraprocessed food is ultraprocessed food, y’all. Sadly, no free lunches out there. I think with such unethical companies and such abysmally abused FDA “rules” and inadequate standards and enforcements, bald lies by marketers and promoters - stay away. Like grandma Michael Pollen said “eat real food”.

The Betrayal of Peter Attia and Andrew Huberman

The Protein Bar Arms Race

https://www.spokesman.com/stories/2025/jul/27/the-protein-bar-arms-race/

4 Likes
#15

Most longevity influencers have sold out one way or another. I’ll stay with Gil and Brad even if the latter has become a supplement salesman :smiley:

3 Likes
#16

Brad has a Rapamycin exercise trial because of the supplement sales as we all know, and apparently coming out in the Nature Aging journal. It should feel good to buy his berry powders it it keeps funding more trials in the future.

2 Likes