Morgan · The Proceedings of the Nutrition Society 2025 · narrative review · n=?

Dietary protein recommendations to support healthy muscle ageing in the 21st century and beyond: considerations and future directions.

Cited 27 times in the scientific literature.

Level 5 - mechanism / opinion, no new human data

Narrative review based on conference presentations without primary data or systematic search

PubMed 37818636 · doi:10.1017/S0029665123003750 · record verified 2026-08-28

What was done

This narrative review summarizes presentations from the 2023 Nutrition Society summer conference examining dietary protein requirements and recommendations for skeletal muscle remodeling and healthy ageing. The authors evaluated standard assessment methods (such as nitrogen balance) against contemporary techniques (such as indicator amino acid oxidation), assessed factors beyond dose (protein source, quality, timing, pattern, and co-ingestion), and evaluated the efficacy and sustainability of alternative and plant-based protein sources.

What was found

The authors note that current dietary protein recommendations sit at approximately 0.8 g/kg/d based largely on traditional nitrogen balance studies. Contemporary methods such as indicator amino acid oxidation suggest actual protein needs for older adults may be higher, indicating targets should increase to >1.0 g/kg/d. The review also notes that evidence indicates animal-free protein sources can stimulate skeletal muscle remodeling comparably to animal-derived proteins, though food systems must balance both sources for overall nutrient adequacy.

Why it matters

It highlights an emerging consensus that minimum protein requirements designed to prevent deficiency may be insufficient to optimize muscle maintenance and metabolic health during ageing, while offering guidance on incorporating sustainable non-animal protein sources.

Limits

The abstract describes a narrative conference review rather than a systematic review or meta-analysis. No sample size, quantitative effect estimates, or formal risk of bias assessments are provided, and conclusions rely on synthesized expert consensus rather than newly reported experimental data.

Cited by