Copyright Los Angeles Times
Starbucks has declared itself “all in on protein.” Beginning this month, customers can order Protein Lattes and Protein Matchas, or add Protein Cold Foam to their cold brews and Frappuccinos, turning a daily caffeine ritual into something resembling a workout supplement. This isn’t simply about menu items. It signals how deeply the protein craze has embedded itself into American culture. Across the grocery aisle, protein has become the nutrient of the moment, highlighted with the same zeal once reserved for “fat-free” labels. The inconvenient truth is that most Americans already consume more protein than their bodies require. The average adult exceeds the minimum daily allowance without much effort. Still, brands are eager to convince us otherwise, as every high-protein label can turn an ordinary product into something “premium” and more profitable. They suggest that our everyday diets leave us protein-starved and that salvation lies in protein-fortified coffee, cookies, pancakes, ice cream, popcorn and even bottled water. The real science behind protein is far more complex than marketing suggests. Research shows that ample dietary protein helps with feeling full, protecting lean muscle during dieting and lowering the risk of becoming frail with age. In healthy adults, protein intakes moderately above recommended levels haven’t been consistently shown to cause harm. However, the long-term effects of sustained high-protein consumption remain under study, and emerging data call for more caution. More often, slipping extra protein into drinks and snacks adds calories that people don’t compensate for later, raising the risk of gradual weight gain. Many of these protein-fortified products are also ultraprocessed and high in added sugars, sodium or fat, which only compounds the problem. In addition, the scramble to add protein to every product can translate into sacrificing other essentials: fiber, beneficial fats and the full range of vitamins and minerals that come from whole foods — nutrients that no powder or isolate can truly replace. What makes this fixation particularly misguided is that protein needs shift dramatically over the course of life. Children and adolescents genuinely require higher amounts, relative to body weight, to fuel the growth of muscle, bone and tissue. For most, those needs are easily met through normal meals that include milk, eggs, beans and lean meats, without relying on fortified snacks or supplements. In midlife, once growth has stopped and energy demands stabilize, the body generally requires less protein. For most healthy adults, the recommended dietary allowance of 0.8 grams per kilogram of body weight is sufficient — or roughly the equivalent of two small chicken breasts or a hearty piece of salmon spread across a day. Adults in this stage should focus on quality, incorporating fish, legumes, nuts and dairy, rather than sheer quantity. In older age, protein needs rise again. As the body becomes less efficient at using dietary protein, intakes closer to 1.2 to 1.5 grams per kilogram may help prevent muscle loss and frailty. This increase should ideally come from nutrient-rich foods that deliver more than protein alone. And for anyone hoping to preserve or build muscle, protein works best when paired with regular physical activity. Exercise is what stimulates the body to use dietary protein effectively, especially in maintaining strength with age. This variation makes it clear that a blanket call for more protein ignores basic biology. The 16-year-old athlete and the 45-year-old office worker do not need the same daily boost, and marketing stamped on a box that suggests otherwise can be misleading. We’ve seen this pattern before: In the 1990s, food companies rushed to strip fat from every imaginable product, and “fat free” often translated into foods engineered with additives that were anything but healthy. In the 2000s, “sugar free” promised liberation from empty calories, but sugar was just replaced with artificial and low-calorie sweeteners whose long-term health impacts remain uncertain. Each cycle began with a seductive promise and ended with consumers realizing they had been sold only half-truths. Starbucks didn’t create the protein trend. It’s just trying to capitalize on it. The real problem lies in our willingness to mistake marketing for a health strategy. Protein is indispensable, but like most elements of nutrition, it works best in balance, not in excess. That balance begins with paying attention to how and why we eat protein in the first place. We can all take a step back and ask some simple questions: Am I getting protein as part of a varied, whole-food diet? Or am I relying on powders, bars and shakes that crowd out fruits, vegetables and whole grains? Am I matching my intake to my actual needs, or to a brand’s message? The last few decades of nutrition fads have taught us that while balance rarely makes headlines, it endures as a timeless cornerstone of well-being. The protein craze will eventually fade, just as others before it did. What should remain is a thoughtful, individualized approach to nutrition. If there is one lesson worth carrying forward, it is that health is not built on a single nutrient, but on patterns of eating that are balanced, adaptable to different stages of life, and realistic to maintain over time. Armin Alaedini is a researcher and professor at Columbia University’s Institute of Human Nutrition and Department of Medicine.
