Anabolic resistance is a real research concept. “Every masters cyclist needs 1.6–2.2 g/kg, four equal meals and casein before bed” is a much stronger claim—and the masters-specific evidence does not establish it.
The useful middle ground is to take muscle maintenance and protein adequacy seriously without pretending that age creates one diet. Total energy, carbohydrate, training, body size, dietary pattern, goals, appetite, gastrointestinal tolerance and health all change the decision.
This article explains the anabolic-resistance question. Use the masters nutrition hub for the full energy-carbohydrate-protein audit, the canonical protein guide for the general cyclist question and the bedtime protein review for pre-sleep evidence.
The direct answer
Anabolic resistance describes a lower muscle-protein-synthesis response to a given anabolic stimulus in some ageing research. A pooled analysis of acute feeding studies estimated that healthy older men reached a muscle-protein-synthesis plateau at a higher relative protein dose than younger men.
That result can support checking whether a low-protein meal is adequate. It does not determine a daily intake for a masters cyclist, establish a four-meal rule, represent women, or prove a long-term performance outcome.
The most direct masters-athlete synthesis is a 2025 scoping review. It found only 12 heterogeneous reports across endurance, multi-sport and strength-trained athletes. Reported average protein intakes ranged from 1.0 to 1.9 g/kg/day. The authors said population-specific recommendations were uncertain or speculative and called for better research.
That evidence gap matters. A range used in general sports nutrition may be a starting reference for a qualified practitioner; it is not automatically a requirement created by a fortieth birthday.
Start with total energy and carbohydrate
Protein cannot fix a diet that does not support the training load. Before changing grams per kilogram, ask:
- Is body mass changing intentionally or unexpectedly?
- Are long and demanding rides fuelled before and during the work?
- Does the rider have access to a normal meal or snack after training?
- Are training quality, recovery, sleep, mood or concentration deteriorating?
- Are there recurrent injuries, illness or other symptoms?
The IOC REDs consensus describes how problematic low energy availability can affect health and performance in female and male athletes. It also makes clear that the syndrome is complex. One calorie estimate does not diagnose it.
An observational study of 108 competitively trained male endurance athletes classified many participants at risk using estimated energy availability and found lower values among cyclists than runners in that cohort. The authors warned that the cut-points were derived from female research and required validation for men. It is a reason to investigate chronic under-fuelling—not a diagnostic shortcut.
Use the fuelling self-assessment to find obvious gaps and the in-ride nutrition guide for the training-specific carbohydrate question.
What can a per-meal dose tell us?
Acute tracer studies measure a short-term physiological response under controlled conditions. They are valuable for mechanism, but they do not by themselves tell us which meal pattern produces the best performance, strength, body composition or health over months.
The Moore analysis estimated a larger relative meal dose for the older men in the pooled data. But a small eight-week randomized trial at about 1.1 g/kg/day found no difference between even and uneven protein distribution in measured lean mass, strength, function or protein kinetics among 14 older adults.
The studies answer different questions. Together, they support a practical review:
- Estimate current daily intake rather than assuming it is low.
- Find meals that contribute little protein.
- Decide whether changing one meal is useful and tolerable.
- Reassess the overall diet, training and outcome.
An even pattern can be convenient. It is not mandatory. A rider who prefers three meals, eats an adequate diet and performs well has not failed a proven four-feeding protocol.
Does protein before sleep matter more after 40?
In a randomized acute trial, 48 healthy older men received 40 g casein, 20 g casein, 20 g casein plus leucine or placebo before sleep. The 40 g condition increased overnight myofibrillar protein synthesis compared with placebo.
The correct inference is specific: pre-sleep casein was digested and affected overnight muscle-protein synthesis in that population and setting. The trial did not test masters cyclists, women, long-term recovery, sleep quality, race performance or whether bedtime protein outperforms fixing breakfast, total intake or post-training access to food.
Pre-sleep protein can be an optional way to distribute intake when the rest of the diet is adequate and the rider tolerates it. It is not one of the “must-do” rules of ageing.
Body composition is not an instruction to chase the lowest weight
Climbing performance can depend on both power and mass. That does not make every reduction in body mass beneficial. Restriction can reduce training quality and may compromise lean mass, recovery and health. The body-composition guide separates those outcomes; the lighter-is-faster review explains why scale weight alone is an incomplete target.
If weight change is appropriate, use a gradual, monitored process. Protect the sessions that matter, track performance and health as well as weight, and do not assume that a high protein intake neutralises an aggressive deficit.
A decision table for masters cyclists
| Situation | First action | What not to infer |
|---|---|---|
| Breakfast contains little protein | Review the whole day's intake and test a practical change | That four equal meals are compulsory |
| Total intake appears low during a heavy block | Check energy and carbohydrate alongside protein | That protein alone will restore recovery |
| A rider wants a bedtime snack | Consider preference, tolerance and total intake | That 40 g casein guarantees better cycling performance |
| Weight is falling and performance is declining | Stop treating it as a simple race-weight project | That age or anabolic resistance is the diagnosis |
| Kidney disease, diabetes or another clinical condition is present | Use an appropriate clinician and sports dietitian | That a general athlete range is safe or suitable |
When to seek individual help
A registered sports dietitian can assess dietary records, training demands, preferences and the goal together. Qualified clinical assessment matters for rapid or unexplained weight change, recurrent injury or illness, persistent fatigue, menstrual disturbance, disordered eating, suspected low energy availability or a condition such as kidney disease or diabetes.
Roadman provides education and coaching. It does not diagnose REDs or sarcopenia, prescribe a therapeutic diet, or set individual protein and energy targets for a clinical condition.
Primary sources and review boundary
- Franzke et al.: protein intake, performance and body composition in master athletes
- Moore et al.: acute protein dose response in healthy older versus younger men
- Kim et al.: even versus uneven protein distribution over eight weeks
- Kouw et al.: pre-sleep protein and overnight muscle protein synthesis in healthy older men
- IOC consensus statement on Relative Energy Deficiency in Sport
- Low energy availability in competitively trained male endurance athletes
These sources define what this guide can and cannot infer. They do not validate Roadman's decision table as a clinical tool or establish one masters-cyclist diet.