Current public health recommendations for physical activity and protein intake are designed to prevent deficiency rather than promote long-term health, independence, and quality of life, and should be updated to reflect more recent evidence, argues Chris Macdonald, PhD, a fellow at Lucy Cavendish College, University of Cambridge, and director of the Better Protein Institute, in a perspective paper.

"Public health advice often focuses on the minimum people need to avoid problems," said Macdonald. "But many people want to know what they should do to remain strong, independent, and mentally sharp throughout life."

In the paper, Macdonald reviews evidence linking regular physical activity with lower mortality risk, improved mental health, enhanced cognition, and greater resilience against age-related decline. He highlights research suggesting that combining aerobic exercise with resistance training provides particularly strong benefits.

On protein, he notes that current UK guidelines are based largely on preventing deficiency in sedentary adults. More recent research indicates that physically active individuals, older adults, and pregnant women may benefit from substantially higher protein intakes.

Rather than replacing minimum recommendations, Macdonald proposes adding guidance aimed at optimal health outcomes and providing the public with clearer, more practical advice. Guidance also needs reframing and new perspectives, he wrote: “… high-intensity exercise and high-protein diets are often associated with bodybuilders and superficial aesthetic goals. However, high-intensity exercise and high-protein diets also empower the general population to extend their lifespan and healthspan. Therefore, it is less about having ‘abs’ and a ‘beach body’ and more about being able to lift up, play with, and even remember, your grandchildren thanks to a strong and resilient body and mind.”

“When we see a stereotypical image of a hunched-over slow, fragile person with ill health in their later years, it seems like an inevitable consequence of ‘Father Time.’ I propose that in most cases, it is evidence of a non-evidence-based lifestyle. We should proactively empower people to reclaim their health and their independence. The reduction in unnecessary suffering would be profound.”

To read the full paper, published in Frontiers in Nutrition, click here