- Share via
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.
Jimin Yang is a registered dietician and a professor in the Health Informatics Institute at the University of South Florida.
Insights
L.A. Times Insights delivers AI-generated analysis on Voices content to offer all points of view. Insights does not appear on any news articles.
Perspectives
The following AI-generated content is powered by Perplexity. The Los Angeles Times editorial staff does not create or edit the content.
Ideas expressed in the piece
The authors argue that Starbucks’ entry into protein-fortified beverages exemplifies how deeply the protein trend has penetrated American culture, transforming ordinary products into premium-priced items despite most Americans already consuming more protein than their bodies require.
According to the authors, food companies are exploiting consumer psychology by suggesting everyday diets leave people protein-starved, when in reality the average adult exceeds minimum daily allowances without difficulty. The marketing push transforms protein into a premium label similar to how “fat-free” dominated the 1990s.
The authors contend that protein-fortified products often contribute to weight gain because people add these calories without compensating elsewhere in their diets. Many such products are ultraprocessed and laden with added sugars, sodium, and fat, compounding health concerns rather than alleviating them.
The emphasis on protein comes at the expense of other essential nutrients, the authors warn, as the focus on a single nutrient crowds out fiber, beneficial fats, and the full spectrum of vitamins and minerals available through whole foods that cannot be replicated by powders or isolates.
The authors stress that protein requirements vary significantly across life stages, making blanket recommendations misleading. Children require higher amounts relative to body weight for growth, healthy adults need approximately 0.8 grams per kilogram, and older adults benefit from 1.2 to 1.5 grams per kilogram to prevent muscle loss and frailty.
Drawing parallels to previous nutrition fads, the authors argue that the protein craze follows the same pattern as “fat-free” and “sugar-free” trends that ultimately proved to be marketing half-truths rather than genuine health solutions. Each cycle promised easy answers but ended with consumers recognizing they had been misled by engineered products with questionable long-term health impacts.
Different views on the topic
Food industry executives maintain they are responding to genuine consumer demand, with the protein shake market expanding into a $6 billion sector and the number of high-protein drinks surging by 122% from 2020 to 2024[1]. Companies frame protein additions as menu modernization strategies designed to meet evolving customer preferences.
Corporate leadership emphasizes the accelerating pace of consumer adoption, with PepsiCo’s CEO noting that consumers are embracing protein solutions at rates unprecedented compared to previous years, justifying major investments in protein product launches[1]. This suggests market forces rather than manipulation are driving the trend.
Proponents highlight perceived health benefits of protein-laden products, particularly their role in muscle building and providing additional nutrition[1]. The growing popularity on social media platforms demonstrates widespread consumer enthusiasm for protein-fortified foods and beverages.
Companies position protein products as meeting customer wellness goals, with Starbucks’ global chief brand officer expressing confidence that protein-fortified drinks will resonate with customers as part of efforts to reinvigorate sales[1]. The strategy reflects corporate belief that consumers actively seek these nutritional enhancements in their daily purchases.
More From the Los Angeles Times
Podcasts
In 2018, the Camp Fire, California’s deadliest, destroyed Paradise and killed 85 people. Years later, the town rebuilds. Survivors navigate trauma as new residents arrive, aiming for a safer, fire-resilient future.
When comic John Belushi died of a speedball overdose at Hollywood’s Chateau Marmont, it wasn’t clear there had been a crime—until the National Enquirer got involved. This episode follows the tabloid reporter who hunted down Belushi’s dealer and coaxed a confession.
Los Angeles Times journalist Susanne Rust shares her shocking personal audit of the immense plastic volume in her daily life and discusses California’s current, controversial plastic regulations.
