Skip to main content
Tessa NewsLink
Paste a health news link, or browse

Several possible studies

Story checked

Our Preoccupation With Protein Intake - by Eric Topol (opens in a new tab)

erictopol.substack.com · 2025-08-31

Short answerEvidenceSource

Short answer

Several possible studies

No clear answer.

More than one paper fits the article's details, and none fits well enough to single out. Checking claims against the wrong study would be worse than not checking them at all.

Checked against the study summary. The full text wasn't available, so some details couldn't be settled either way.

Share this check

Follow the evidence trail
1
2

NewsLink checks it

Several studies could be the source of this story.

More than one paper fits the article's details, and none fits well enough to single out. Checking claims against the wrong study would be worse than not checking them at all.

Open claim evidence
3

Search result

Several studies could fit.

More than one paper fits the article's details, and none fits well enough to single out. Checking claims against the wrong study would be worse than not checking them at all.

Source paper

Source layer

The 2 papers the story cites

Source study separated from background citations.

The research anchor for the report.

Related research

Research nearby

The papers it could be

Nearby papers when the source is unclear.

and 17 more considered

Then inspect each claim

Evidence layer

Claim by claim

What the story asserts. With no source study, there is nothing to check these against.

Claim 1 of 4Not checkedTopol says the current obsession with protein intake is a craze, driven by influencers and protein-product marketing, and that most Americans already exceed the 0.8 g/kg/day recommendation.View evidenceHide evidence

As stated71% want to increase protein; more than 55% of men and 35% of women exceed the federal recommendation

Not checked

NewsLink could not identify one source study, so this claim was not compared against a paper.

Claim 2 of 4Not checkedHe says the published randomized and meta-analytic data do not support protein intake above about 1.6 g/kg/day for benefits such as muscle mass, strength, or lean body mass, and he characterizes 2.2 g/kg/day as an unfounded recommendation.View evidenceHide evidence

As statedabout 1.6 g/kg/day; 2.2 g/kg/day (1 g/lb/day)

Not checked

NewsLink could not identify one source study, so this claim was not compared against a paper.

Claim 3 of 4Not checkedHe says higher protein intake may pose safety concerns, citing observational studies and animal experiments linking high protein or animal protein intake with cardiometabolic risk, all-cause mortality, and shorter lifespan.View evidenceHide evidence

As stated~44,000 women; 2,441 men; 25 diets in mice

Not checked

NewsLink could not identify one source study, so this claim was not compared against a paper.

Claim 4 of 4Not checkedTopol highlights recent work from Babak Razani’s group suggesting that high protein intake, especially leucine, activates mTOR and promotes atherosclerosis in mice, with small human studies showing acute high-protein challenges altered monocytes and increased leucine levels.View evidenceHide evidence

As statedprotein intake from 22% to 50% of energy; extrapolation to 1.5 g/kg/day

Not checked

NewsLink could not identify one source study, so this claim was not compared against a paper.

Finally, the search trail

Method layer

No single source study was found.

NewsLink still surfaces nearby research so you can inspect the field instead of a single paper.

Nearby research

No exact source, but these papers are close.

PubMed, Europe PMC, Crossref · 17 candidate papers

Candidate

Effects of protein supplementation on lean body mass, muscle strength, and physical performance in nonfrail community-dwelling older adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition · 2018 · PubMed

Tessa (opens in a new tab)Source (opens in a new tab)

And 12 more candidates considered.