From Steaks to Shakes: A Brief History of Protein in America

By Jacq HundleyOctober 20265 min read

Protein has become a selling point across the grocery store. It appears on yogurt containers, snack bars, breakfast foods, and drinks.

But the enthusiasm is much older than the modern protein shake.

In the United States and Western Europe, protein has been associated with physical strength, prosperity, public health, athletic performance, and weight loss. Those associations have changed as scientific understanding, living conditions, and commercial interests have evolved.

Understanding that history helps us make sense of today’s conversation.

The 1800s: strength, work, and prosperity

During the nineteenth century, influential scientists gave protein a particularly important place in nutrition.

German chemist Justus von Liebig promoted the idea that protein supplied the energy for muscular work. That explanation proved incomplete, but it helped shape early dietary thinking.

Social assumptions mattered too. Affluent populations often ate more protein, and their consumption was used to help justify recommendations. By the 1890s, USDA guidance recommended more than 110 grams daily for working men.

These were early attempts to understand nutritional needs, made with limited evidence and influenced by the societies producing them. ^[1]

The early 1900s: testing the assumptions

In the early twentieth century, Yale researcher Russell Chittenden demonstrated that men could maintain physical function on substantially less protein than prevailing recommendations suggested.

His experiments challenged the assumption that large amounts were necessary for vigor. They did not settle every question about long-term health or optimal intake.

Meanwhile, nutrition science expanded beyond protein to include vitamins and other essential nutrients. ^[1]

Public guidance increasingly translated that science into recognizable foods. The first U.S. Recommended Dietary Allowances appeared in 1941, including a recommendation for protein. USDA’s 1956 “Basic Four” guide gave milk and meat their own groups alongside fruits and vegetables, and grain products.

For families, the message centered on getting enough nourishment through a varied diet. Protein-rich foods remained prominent, even before counting protein grams became a common consumer habit. ^[2]

The postwar years: public health and muscular ideals

During the 1950s and 1960s, concern about a worldwide “protein gap” gave protein renewed attention among international nutrition organizations. Later criticism challenged approaches that treated protein shortages too separately from inadequate food access and overall energy intake.

The lesson was that solving malnutrition required attention to the whole diet and the circumstances surrounding it. ^[1]

At the same time, American bodybuilding culture connected nutrition to the pursuit of exceptional muscular development.

Historian Conor Heffernan documents how figures such as Vince Gironda and supplement entrepreneur Rheo H. Blair promoted dairy-centered approaches in the 1960s. Their claims sometimes extended far beyond established evidence.

Protein’s genuine biological importance made it a compelling subject for both experimentation and marketing. ^[3]

The late twentieth century: competing dietary messages

By the 1970s, American dietary guidance increasingly addressed chronic disease, including concerns about saturated fat, cholesterol, and sodium.

That changed the conversation around some protein-rich foods. Questions about meat and dairy increasingly involved their overall composition, rather than protein alone. ^[2]

Meanwhile, low-carbohydrate diets offered a competing message. Robert Atkins’s 1972 Diet Revolution, followed by later editions, helped popularize eating patterns that restricted carbohydrates while allowing protein-rich and fatty foods.

Low-carbohydrate and high-protein diets are not identical. But in popular discussion, they became closely associated. Protein increasingly belonged to conversations about weight management as well as muscle. ^[4]

Today: broader interest, better evidence, continuing debate

Protein’s audience now extends well beyond bodybuilding. In IFIC’s 2025 consumer research, 70% of Americans reported trying to consume protein, and high-protein eating ranked as the most commonly reported dietary pattern. These findings describe consumer interest, rather than demonstrating nutritional need. ^[5]

The scientific conversation has also become more specific.

Researchers distinguish between meeting basic requirements and supporting particular goals. The established adult Recommended Dietary Allowance of 0.8 grams per kilogram of body weight is intended to meet the needs of nearly all healthy adults. It was not designed specifically as a target for maximizing muscle growth. ^[6]

Research supports a role for additional protein in some circumstances. A major analysis of resistance-training trials found that protein supplementation produced modest additional improvements in muscle size and strength. Those findings concern protein alongside sustained training, rather than protein acting independently. ^[7]

The 2025–2030 Dietary Guidelines for Americans, released in 2026, brought protein further into public guidance, setting a goal of 1.2–1.6 grams per kilogram daily. They also recommend a variety of animal and plant protein foods. ^[8]

That higher target remains debated. A 2026 perspective in The Journal of Nutrition questioned whether the available evidence justifies applying it universally across the population. Our understanding continues to develop, and individual circumstances matter. ^[9]

A useful place for protein

History gives us reasons to value protein and to examine the promises attached to it.

The practical question is how much we need, which foods provide it, and how it fits within an overall nourishing diet. Convenience can help, but a protein label alone tells us little about everything else a food offers.

That is the perspective we want to bring to Embr: complete whey protein designed for hot coffee, with a clear, practical purpose within someone’s morning routine.

Protein deserves thoughtful attention. The strongest case for it comes from understanding what it can do, where the evidence is strongest, and how to use it well.

Sources

Back to journal