How Much Protein Do Women Need?

A reality check on protein requirements, labeling loopholes, and a review of Mel Robbins’ protein shot.

BongkarnThanyakij/Getty Images

If you are like me, you have probably been inundated with content about protein in the news, on podcasts, and on social media, all extolling its almost magical benefits. Weight loss, brain health, bone health, muscle health, longevity…protein can do it all. (But can it do my laundry? I digress).

Is everything you put in your mouth filled with protein? WHY NOT? IT IS THE ONE DIETARY INGREDIENT TO RULE THEM ALL.

The protein pressure is real, but how much protein do we need?

This is a common question, and it’s no wonder as in 2025 we approached protein monism, where protein is everything and everything is protein. (Monism is an idea or doctrine where there is only one thing or one kind of thing).

Obviously, we need protein. Just like we need fats, carbohydrates, and vitamins, etc. But we also need to enjoy our meals and not feel like life is one big hunt for the next protein bolus that we can hopefully choke down. Let’s start with what people really need, because 2025 was filled with some pretty serious protein myths, such as women in menopause need more protein per kg of body weight than anyone else or if you have 20 g or less of protein in a meal that it gets turned into sugar. It seemed like a lot of people were engaged in protein one-upmanship in the fight for attention on social media.

The evidence-based recommendation for protein is 1.2-1.6 g/kg/day. This means that someone who weighs 80 kg needs 96-128 g per day. A competitive athlete may need a little more (maybe 1.6-1.8 g/kg/day). It’s ideal to divide the protein into three meals, aiming for at least 20-30g per meal, but total protein matters more than timing throughout the day. (There are probably nuances in how protein should be divided up throughout the day for competitive athletes.) In North America, many people fall short on protein at breakfast, so finding ways to get a little extra protein here could help many people meet their protein goals. Elizabeth Ward and Hilary Wright (@MenopauseDietPlan on Instagram) recently posted some easy protein- and fiber-filled breakfast options (click here).

Adequate dietary protein can protect against sarcopenia (muscle loss with age), and when combined with resistance training, helps us build muscle. There is also evidence that protein can help with fat loss, help someone feel full, and, when people are getting enough calcium, can help maintain bone mass. No real expert is arguing that protein isn’t important, but those of use who don’t profit from the protein-hype machine are also not promoting it as a magical health elixir. Dr. Stuart Phillips, a PhD and internationally respected expert in protein and muscles, refers to protein as “the (thin) layer of icing) or the sprinkles on the icing.” You can read a recent article of his here: “2025 Was the Year Protein Jumped the Shark.” When we are talking about muscle gains with protein, we mean complete protein, not collagen.

Mel Robbins apparently also noticed the protein conversation, and announced this week that she is entering the protein market. Here are some quotes from her about her new product, Pure Genius:

“TODAY I am launching my first-ever product and it’s something that I’m so proud of because there is absolutely nothing like it in the world until now.”

“It’s something I needed in my own life, and couldn’t find, so I partnered with some of the world’s leading nutritional and scientific experts to create it.”

“unlike any other protein you’ve ever had, It’s a protein shot containing 23 g of complete protein in a 3 oz bottle…”

(The name Pure Genius immediately made me think of Wile E. Coyote, who claimed he was a Super Genius.)

Here is the product:

To me, the copy put out by Robbins read like this was completely her idea, or her idea along with some other doctors she had interviewed on her podcast, and then they worked to design a novel product and bring it to market because there was nothing like it. I’m surprised she couldn’t find a protein shot, as there are quite a few on the market, not to mention protein bars, protein powders, protein drinks, and protein cereals, etc. But then again, it’s hard for me to believe that there is a market for yet another type of lipstick or yoga pants, and yet capitalism finds a way to deliver new products and make it seem like there is nothing like them. Also, when you have a large audience, I suspect it is easier to muscle into a crowded market.

I get that it is standard marketing hyperbole for brands to claim their product, be it jeans or bras or massive-lash mascara or whatever is UNLIKE ANYTHING ELSE. But it’s quite a flex to claim that your 23 g protein shot is so novel that it is “unlike any other protein,” and yet be very much like a 23 g protein shot that was introduced in March of 2025, called Genius Shot. So similar, in fact, that the old Instagram account for Genius Shot directs to Pure Genius Protein.

I was first alerted to this by Beth Wilkas Feraco (a great follow on Instagram, you can find her here), but many others soon chimed in wondering how Pure Genius, by Mel Robbins, was substantively different from Genius Shot, by Dr. Mike Israetel? I went over to Dr. Israetel’s Instagram, and sure enough, this is a post of his from March 2025: 23 g of complete protein in about 3 ounces.

The math isn’t mathing regarding the claim of “absolutely nothing like it in the world until now.” It’s completely fair to find a business opportunity with a brand you love or be approached by one that may be struggling (I don’t presume to know the nature of connection, only that it seems there is one). But claiming there was nothing like it before is not, in my opinion, transparent. And honestly, if it were just this, I’d be rolling my eyes and not writing about it, because, while expensive, Genius Shot delivered a whack of high-quality protein for 90 calories in 3 ounces.

The problem is that when you get people’s attention, you get their attention. Pure Genius was then checked by several coaches, registered dietitians, and Dr. Kevin Klatt, who is a PhD, metabolism researcher, and registered dietitian, and they all noticed that Pure Genius has less complete protein than Genius Shot (there are details on the math behind calculating this below). I spent a little time messaging Dr. Klatt about this, and I shared his post about it on Instagram. I learned something very interesting from him about protein labeling that I want to share with you.

(Side note, if you want an expert’s take on the new food pyramid, check out Dr. Klatt’s Substack).

The protein that was the star of Genius Shot was beta-lactoglobulin or BLG, which is the major whey protein of cow and sheep’s milk. It is highly concentrated and dissolves well, so it is a good way to get a lot of protein in a small volume.

The image above is the nutritional label for the old Genius Shot. The amount per serving column is the amount of protein, any protein, in the serving; this can be a complete protein, like BLG, or an incomplete protein, like collagen. As the only protein here is BLG, we can assume that all 23 g is BLG. We can double check this with the percent daily value (%DV), the column on the right-hand side in the image. This %DV is calculated based on a maximum of 50 g. Dr. Klatt told me that it is corrected for protein quality using a metric called PDCAAS (Protein Digestibility Corrected Amino Acid Score), which measures protein quality based on amino acid content and digestibility. BLG is a complete protein with a PDCASS of 1, meaning it counts as 1 gram per gram toward the percent daily value. This is why 23 g of protein in Genius Shot is 46% of the daily value, because 23 is 46% of 50.

The promotion for Mel Robbins Pure Genius claims “23 g of complete protein,” as well as collagen for hair and skin benefits. (As an aside, the science supporting collagen supplements for skin and hair is weak.) Collagen is an incomplete protein (it lacks tryptophan and is low in leucine, which is critical for muscle protein synthesis).

Now let’s look at the nutrition facts and ingredients for Pure Genius (screenshot from January 7, 2026).

There are two sources of protein, BLG and collagen. Pure Genius still has 23 g of protein, so some of those grams must be collagen.

You can see the %DV for protein for Pure Genius is 32%, lower than the 46% for Genius Shot. This is because the PDCAAS score for collagen is zero, meaning the protein in collagen does not count towards the %DV. Since 32% of 50 g is 16 g, this means, according to their own labeling, the Pure Genius protein shot is 16 g of complete protein, not 23 g. There is no other way to do the math. The %DV of protein decreased because the high-quality protein was diluted with collagen.

Why make Pure Genius lower in complete protein than Genius Shot? Who knows? Perhaps because they believe the collagen hype (which is primarily based on industry-funded data), and I suspect focusing on hair and skin may help them stand out as a product for women. Collagen is likely cheaper than BLG, so replacing BLG with collagen, in theory, should increase the profit per bottle.

There will be some people who complain that I, and others, are attacking Robbins because she is a woman, and no one attacks men for introducing similar products. I’m not attacking anyone, I am reviewing a product, and pointing out that it doesn’t appear to be as novel as claimed and explaining the protein component doesn’t match some of the marketing. I review products aimed at women, so I’m going to be writing about women investors because this market interests them. For those who are interested, here is one example of a product created by men that I appropriately lambasted.

Pure Genius isn’t a bad product, but it has 16 g of complete protein, about one-third less than the label implies. While it’s accurate for the front label to say 23 g of protein, you, the consumer, always need to do due diligence with protein products and check the %DV if the amount of complete protein matters to you. Given protein is more the icing on the cake, it’s unlikely a 7 g difference in complete protein is going to make a big difference for most people, but if your sole reason for taking a protein shot is to maximize protein for your muscles, Pure Genius’ own labeling says they don’t deliver 23 g of complete protein, and that may matter to you, especially given the price of $4 a shot. For comparison, Oikos has a protein drink with 23 g of complete protein for 120 calories and also has 40% of your daily calcium, and some vitamin D, and it’s $2.99 for a bottle. Although at 7 ounces, unlike Pure Genius, it is not TSA-friendly for travel. Many Greek yoghurts or Skyr have 15-16 g of complete protein per serving and have other nutritional benefits, and are less than half the price of Pure Genius. Then again, price may not matter to some, and if people love Pure Genius and it works for them, then great.

I am not at all opposed to protein-supplemented products, and I have my favorites. I just strongly believe that people deserve to know what they are buying.

As Dr. Klatt said, you shouldn’t have to know labeling regulations and do math to know how much complete protein you are actually getting. Transparency matters. And the amount of complete protein in a product may matter for some people. Personally, I don’t want to pay for collagen as I don’t find the data compelling.

There is also another issue. Going forward, for listeners of Mel Robbins, the fact that she now sells a protein and collagen product also opens her up to the risk of bias. Will she be more likely to invite guests who overhype protein or collagen? It gets really sticky when products enter the picture. It will be interesting to see how many times protein and collagen are mentioned in her upcoming episodes.

Meanwhile, I wonder if the proteinification of everything will ever run its course? After all, once everyone is saturated with protein content, another AMAZING superfood or supplement will be needed to move the needle for clicks and products. Who knows, maybe 2026 will be the Year of Fiber (it has always been important, but it is ripe for a wellness make-over). Although given the MAHA food pyramid, I suppose there are plenty of wild cards. Here’s hoping 2026 is NOT the Year of Beef Tallow.

References

Stuart M. Phillips, Stéphanie Chevalier, and Heather J. Leidy. 2016. Protein “requirements” beyond the RDA: implications for optimizing health. Applied Physiology, Nutrition, and Metabolism. 41(5): 565-572. https://doi.org/10.1139/apnm-2015-0550