So Much for Cake, Let Them Eat Steak

Jimmy Moore recently exclaimed "...did you know that if you ate too much protein, it's actually just like eating chocolate cake? I'm not kidding, it is!" (see 21:10 in video)

Take that in for a second. 

Mull it over.

Now then, when someone, even a friend, comes out with something so gobsmacking ridiculous, I can't remain silent anymore.

No Jimmy, eating too much protein is not just like eating chocolate cake; sorry, it just isn't.  My readers can quick run-down of the fate of excess protein here.



So then, Jimmy has, historically, had a roller coaster relationship with the scale.  His ability to gain and lose show he does not have a broken metabolism. In fact I'd say his metabolism is rather robust in its persistence over the years to remain doing what it's designed to do, store and release energy as needed.

His weight ranges since 2004 show a pattern of gain-loss that repeats, year after year, with each successive high higher than before.

2004 - 410
2005 - 230
2006 - 220-245
2007 - 212-250
2008 - 257-274
2009 - 239-260
2010 - 265-289
2011 - 248-300
2012 - 300-306

In May 2012, having reached 306 pounds, Jimmy again modified his diet to lose weight.  And at last check-in, he was down to 256 - honestly, I congratulate him on his efforts and his success to date.  But I cannot, for the life of me, understand his fascination with attributing it to just too much protein, when his calorie intake is the real problem and his current dietary change, while it's increased fat as a percentage, has actually reduced fat in absolute grams, along with calories.

When Jimmy started 2012 at 300 and gained to 306 by May, this helps us understand just how little his excess calorie consumption was - to gain 6 pounds in 135 days took only 156 extra calories a day, or about 1.5 tablespoons of butter or mayo; the absolute easiest things, in a low-carb diet, to add a bit too much of daily.

Simple math can figure out what Jimmy changed for calories without factoring in other changes he's made with hormone replacement, supplements and increased activity.

At 300 pounds, Jimmy required at least 3600 calories a day to maintain that weight based on his basal metabolic rate + the Harris Benedict Formula for his active metabolic rate.

At his reported 175g a day average at the time, that means from real food protein, he was averaging 1870 calories a day from meat, eggs, cheese, etc. since those foods have an average 60% fat and 40% protein mix. 

Add in another 130 calories from carbohydrate and we're up to 2000 calories. 

That leave us to figure out his fat intake. 

To 6 pounds required 156 extra calories a day, on top of his other 1600 calories remaining from fat, to meet his energy requirements, thus he was consuming an estimated 1756 calories from fat, or 195g a day in fat; add that to the 60% from his meats, and we get 3,756 calories, 175g protein, 32.5g carbohydrate, 320g fat - his baseline to calculate changes to his diet in his latest dietary modification.

In macronutrient ratio terms, that was 77% fat, 18% protein, and 3% carbohydrate.  In line with what Jimmy has reported in the past.

He writes that he's now consuming 85% fat, 12% protein and 3% carbohydrate; and has said he's averaging 80g of protein each day.

That looks like he increased his fat, and he keeps insisting he's increased his fat intake - but he hasn't - he's actually reduced not just his protein, but also his fat and his calories; allow me to explain.

If he's consuming 80g of protein, that's 320 calories and 320 calories from protein at 12% of his diet means he's consuming an average of 2,630 calories a day. With 80 calories from carbohydrate (3%), that leaves 2230 calories from fat, or 247g of fat.

Wait a minute!

That's not just reduced protein, it's also less fat, and a significant reduction in calories!

With an average estimate of 2,630 calories a day. With 80 calories, 20g from carbohydrate (3%), and 320 calories, 80g from protein, that leaves 2230 calories from fat, or 247g of fat.

247 is less than 320, is it not?

2630 is less than 3756, is it not?

And if that isn't enough to get you to think about it, consider this - to lose 50 pounds in six months, the boogeyman calorie theory holds that one would need a calorie deficit of about 1,000 calories a day.

Jimmy's calories are not precisely thae same each day, but if you subtract 2650 from 3756, you get 1106 calories a day less than he was eating at baseline.

 Now look up - Jimmy is in range of the calorie deficit that explains his weight loss, with less calories, less fat and less protein.

By golly, he's eating less, and even moving more.

And to be clear, this does not mean I think only calorie in, calories out matter; but Jimmy's experience over the last six years show how strong an influence calories, in a carbohydrate restricted context, do matter.