When I switched to low carb, my protein went up to 25% instead of 20.
I think for energy the real question is fat or carbohydrate. Protein is good up to a point, but excess protein is just excreted through our urine, and can tax the kidneys, if you have an issue with them already.
To get 50% protein, I would need to eat 200 grams of protein from my 1600 calorie diet. This is too much for me . I know that many of you have no issue with carbs, so you stick with 30% fat or cut it. That leaves 70 %, and you eat almost double the RDA ( 35% ), but that leaves 35% of the diet from carbs.
This may work for you, some of us can handle it. I would have an issue with that much protein, and definitely the carbs at 35%. I would eat protein over carbohydrates, but more than either, I would eat fat.. at least 50%. I normally eat 60% fat, 25-30% protein, and 10-15% carbs.
I don't think one kind of diet fits all of us, and I don't think you can replace your carbs with protein. Protein is limiting. Have any of you thought that maybe it is the fat you add by eating the protein, that reduces your hunger, along with your lowering of carbs?
I love this thread, but I think when you ask a question like this, it should be part of a larger discussion, and hope that it was not a one time question, that you hope fills your preconceived ideas. If you believe that by adding protein, which adds fat, therefore lowering carbs, there should be many questions to follow. The best way to answer them is to test these theories on yourselves, with an open mind, and you may be surprised at the answers. That is what has gone wrong with the experts these days. They didn't like the answers, so they rigged the tests to say what they wanted.