Anyone had good luck muscle building with any G-F protien supp's? Has anyone gotten a response from the major protien powder companies--- if they contain gluten?
any names fellow Celiacs?
Hi,
I haven't actually used any protein supplement recently, so I can't answer your question. But can I ask why you want to use protein?
Even body builders only need about 2 g of protein / kg of body weight. Any excess will only be wasted. Most people can get all the protein they need from eating meat, eggs, nuts, and other real foods.
As a guideline (though I am triathlete - which is an endurance, not a power sport) following are guidelines for protein, carbs and fat guidelines, which we look at:-
Carbohydrate : 6 to 10 g/kg body weight per day
Fat : Fat intake should not be restricted: 20 – 25% of total calories, not less than 15%.
Protein : Endurance athletes 1.2 to 1.4 g/kg body weight per day, Strength athlete 1.2 - 1.7 g/kg body weight,
growing children/ very heavy training/competition up to 2 g/kg body weight.
Of course your protein should be good quality. Easy for meat / animal products, but a bit more difficult for vegetarians who need to be sure to get all the amino acids they need.
Best regards
Sally
I haven't actually used any protein supplement recently, so I can't answer your question. But can I ask why you want to use protein?
Even body builders only need about 2 g of protein / kg of body weight. Any excess will only be wasted. Most people can get all the protein they need from eating meat, eggs, nuts, and other real foods.
As a guideline (though I am triathlete - which is an endurance, not a power sport) following are guidelines for protein, carbs and fat guidelines, which we look at:-
Carbohydrate : 6 to 10 g/kg body weight per day
Fat : Fat intake should not be restricted: 20 – 25% of total calories, not less than 15%.
Protein : Endurance athletes 1.2 to 1.4 g/kg body weight per day, Strength athlete 1.2 - 1.7 g/kg body weight,
growing children/ very heavy training/competition up to 2 g/kg body weight.
Of course your protein should be good quality. Easy for meat / animal products, but a bit more difficult for vegetarians who need to be sure to get all the amino acids they need.
Best regards
Sally
QUOTE(tp23 @ Feb 2 2007, 11:05 PM) 
Anyone had good luck muscle building with any G-F protien supp's? Has anyone gotten a response from the major protien powder companies--- if they contain gluten?
any names fellow Celiacs?
any names fellow Celiacs?
QUOTE(super_sally888 @ Feb 4 2007, 03:42 PM)
Hi,
I haven't actually used any protein supplement recently, so I can't answer your question. But can I ask why you want to use protein?
Even body builders only need about 2 g of protein / kg of body weight. Any excess will only be wasted. Most people can get all the protein they need from eating meat, eggs, nuts, and other real foods.
As a guideline (though I am triathlete - which is an endurance, not a power sport) following are guidelines for protein, carbs and fat guidelines, which we look at:-
Carbohydrate : 6 to 10 g/kg body weight per day
Fat : Fat intake should not be restricted: 20 – 25% of total calories, not less than 15%.
Protein : Endurance athletes 1.2 to 1.4 g/kg body weight per day, Strength athlete 1.2 - 1.7 g/kg body weight,
growing children/ very heavy training/competition up to 2 g/kg body weight.
Of course your protein should be good quality. Easy for meat / animal products, but a bit more difficult for vegetarians who need to be sure to get all the amino acids they need.
Best regards
Sally
I haven't actually used any protein supplement recently, so I can't answer your question. But can I ask why you want to use protein?
Even body builders only need about 2 g of protein / kg of body weight. Any excess will only be wasted. Most people can get all the protein they need from eating meat, eggs, nuts, and other real foods.
As a guideline (though I am triathlete - which is an endurance, not a power sport) following are guidelines for protein, carbs and fat guidelines, which we look at:-
Carbohydrate : 6 to 10 g/kg body weight per day
Fat : Fat intake should not be restricted: 20 – 25% of total calories, not less than 15%.
Protein : Endurance athletes 1.2 to 1.4 g/kg body weight per day, Strength athlete 1.2 - 1.7 g/kg body weight,
growing children/ very heavy training/competition up to 2 g/kg body weight.
Of course your protein should be good quality. Easy for meat / animal products, but a bit more difficult for vegetarians who need to be sure to get all the amino acids they need.
Best regards
Sally
Much as I agree the amount of protein needed is over estimated this also depends on how well its adsorbed and digested...
Excess isn't really wasted but turned into energy anyway so as a celiac it might be sensible to eat a bit more than 2g/kg/day....especially depending on the quality of the protein source and digestability....
However regarding suppliments I think as a celaic these should really be avoided because even when they are gluten-free they are loaded with other protein sources that celaics often develop secondary intolerances to like casein and soy protein.
Recent studies by the WHO have recently re-raised the protein threshhold because in 3rd world countries the quality of the protein is often low... I would argue that for a celiac with inefficient digestion you could apply the same .... and so long as you are not going to excess the benefits outweigh the reasons not to....
I'm not soy intolerant so far as I know but I try and minimise its importantce in my diet, the last thing I want is to overload on it and have another intolerance as bad as gluten.
Similarly I do have mild casein intolerance, however when I'm 100% gluten-free this hardly bothers me... I'd probably be better off cutting out dairy altogether but I just try and eat it vey sparingly...
So on occaision I have gluten-free soy sauce and cheeses BUT I try and make this as minor -part of my diet as possible.
For all the studies on just how much protein we *need* there are no professional bodybuilders consuming less than this (and if the truth be known non of them who are not taking steroids) and body building is certainly not healthy compared to many other sports...
At the same time it can be a very healthy sport psychologically, especially for people who were weak through childhood or have been made weak through illness. Is this over compensation? Sure.. LOL but if it makes them happy its probably good for them ...
Strangely enough I have a friend (in her late 40's) in cancer remission who started body building... and as she said to me this was not something she ever thought she could do but if she did it would have been when she was younger and before the cancer and ops...
She has found a whole new strength from this... and a self-confidence she never had so I'm really happy for her and if this is what works for her then great....
Lifting weights is good for the bones and preventing osteoporosis. I wouldn't call myself a bodybuilder, but I am a weight lifter. I think the benefits of weight bearing exercise are especially good for the gluten intolerant to avoid osteoporosis.
I eat protein with each meal and right after a workout. I agree with the previous posters that it is best to get the protein from your diet. I try to focus on protein and veggies, but I have to have some starchy carbs to feel right, otherwise I get nauseous.
I also have to disagree with gfp (sorry, Steve, but good to see you again) that it is not a healthy sport. Most bodybuilders incorporate cardio into their regimen. Also, they are more aware of their diet than the typical person (avoiding junk food). My dad had his prostate out last year and the doctor thought his age on the chart was wrong. My dad was 69 at the time and the doctor thought he was 59. The doctor also said his bones were as strong as someone 20 years younger than him. He's been a weight lifter since he was 15.
Personally, I think Arnold looks very good for his age, much younger than he is, and very healthy.
I'm sure there are gluten-free protein shakes out there, but I would be concerned about developing another food intolerance (to soy or casein), like gfp mentioned. I don't think there's a shake out there that doesn't have either of those. I wonder if you could add nuts to a fruit smoothie and get the effect of a shake? If you put the nuts in the blender with a little water, they will make a "milk". Then strain it and use it for your shake. I don't know if that's enough protein. I'd rather eat a steak!
I eat protein with each meal and right after a workout. I agree with the previous posters that it is best to get the protein from your diet. I try to focus on protein and veggies, but I have to have some starchy carbs to feel right, otherwise I get nauseous.
I also have to disagree with gfp (sorry, Steve, but good to see you again) that it is not a healthy sport. Most bodybuilders incorporate cardio into their regimen. Also, they are more aware of their diet than the typical person (avoiding junk food). My dad had his prostate out last year and the doctor thought his age on the chart was wrong. My dad was 69 at the time and the doctor thought he was 59. The doctor also said his bones were as strong as someone 20 years younger than him. He's been a weight lifter since he was 15.
Personally, I think Arnold looks very good for his age, much younger than he is, and very healthy.
I'm sure there are gluten-free protein shakes out there, but I would be concerned about developing another food intolerance (to soy or casein), like gfp mentioned. I don't think there's a shake out there that doesn't have either of those. I wonder if you could add nuts to a fruit smoothie and get the effect of a shake? If you put the nuts in the blender with a little water, they will make a "milk". Then strain it and use it for your shake. I don't know if that's enough protein. I'd rather eat a steak!
A different perspective on protein and other dietary needs for athletes:
http://www.nealhendrickson.com/mcdougall/0...repeopletoo.htm
The idea that plant proteins are incomplete or lacking in quality, while oft-repeated, is untrue. An exploration of the history of protein recommendations, the studies and observations they were based on, etc.:
http://www.nealhendrickson.com/mcdougall/031200puprotein.htm
Also see The China Study, which found that disease prevalence in China is in proportion to the amount of animal products consumed, the studies by Ornish and Esselstyn on heart disease, by Barnard on diabetes, etc. Lower in quality in what sense, I wonder? The idea that one needs to carefully match plant foods to get "complete" protein has been discredited, but continues to get repeated by folks who haven't explored the actual research -- even by some vegetarians! Sigh ... I can hardly blame anyone here for repeating what they've heard; I just wanted to provide the rebuttal.
Anyway, there are dangers from consuming excess protein:
http://www.nealhendrickson.com/mcdougall/0...einoverload.htm
There is no "protein deficiency" disease out there among vegetarians.
You build muscle by eating sufficient calories and working your muscles. I am unaware of any study showing that protein powders have any beneficial effect beyond providing additional calories.
http://www.nealhendrickson.com/mcdougall/0...repeopletoo.htm
The idea that plant proteins are incomplete or lacking in quality, while oft-repeated, is untrue. An exploration of the history of protein recommendations, the studies and observations they were based on, etc.:
http://www.nealhendrickson.com/mcdougall/031200puprotein.htm
Also see The China Study, which found that disease prevalence in China is in proportion to the amount of animal products consumed, the studies by Ornish and Esselstyn on heart disease, by Barnard on diabetes, etc. Lower in quality in what sense, I wonder? The idea that one needs to carefully match plant foods to get "complete" protein has been discredited, but continues to get repeated by folks who haven't explored the actual research -- even by some vegetarians! Sigh ... I can hardly blame anyone here for repeating what they've heard; I just wanted to provide the rebuttal.
Anyway, there are dangers from consuming excess protein:
http://www.nealhendrickson.com/mcdougall/0...einoverload.htm
There is no "protein deficiency" disease out there among vegetarians.
You build muscle by eating sufficient calories and working your muscles. I am unaware of any study showing that protein powders have any beneficial effect beyond providing additional calories.
QUOTE(CarlaB @ Feb 7 2007, 05:30 PM)
I also have to disagree with gfp (sorry, Steve, but good to see you again) that it is not a healthy sport. Most bodybuilders incorporate cardio into their regimen. Also, they are more aware of their diet than the typical person (avoiding junk food). My dad had his prostate out last year and the doctor thought his age on the chart was wrong. My dad was 69 at the time and the doctor thought he was 59. The doctor also said his bones were as strong as someone 20 years younger than him. He's been a weight lifter since he was 15.
Personally, I think Arnold looks very good for his age, much younger than he is, and very healthy.
Personally, I think Arnold looks very good for his age, much younger than he is, and very healthy.
I'm not saying its not healthy, I just said compared to some other sports
Ahem, boxers do a lot of CV work too, probably more than any other sport except cycling but getting repeatedly hit in the head isn't good for you
The governator looks great...
no arguament but then he also freely admits to taking a lof of recreational drugs and I'm sure if you can get him off record he'd admit to taking steroids too.... The problem with serious weight lifting/body building is it wrecks you... its hard for me to put everything down to one thing... since I did semi pro kick boxing while paying my way through college this has left its marks as well but on many occaisions doing serious weights I ripped ligaments and torn muscle beyond what is healthy... and also considerably stressed my joints which has caused other problems as I got older.
Lifting a few weights is healthy but trying to compete even at a level below steroids seriously wrecks your body... the problem is there comes a point where the only way to get bigger is pushing harder and harder but Im not talking about casual lifting in the gym, Im talking about seriously going for it... to the point where when you train you are so past it is no longer an issue....
Incidentally at the same time I was doing this I also damaged myself just doing sit-ups... you'd think they were safe
but one day I decided to do 5,000 and the crazy guys at the gym took it in turns to hold my legs... for the several hours it took... as it turned out I damaged slightly my spine just from the continuous rubbing of my coccyx ... However even if its not the healthiest in terms of the damage you do yourself at "serious" levels moderate weight training is fine... however I think when you start calling it "weight lifting" for those of uis that did this competitively we consider "body building" or "weight lifting" a different level .. its not a sport or passtime but a way of life...
If your whole week is not planned around eating, gym and eating then I'd say that's not this level,....
so perhaps we are talking about different things
Maybe we are ... but then again, my life right now is centered on eating and going to the gym, but that's more to do with my battle of Lyme Disease than anything else, though I also watch what I eat for training, but moderately. I do call it "weight lifting", but not "body building". Since I can't do cardio right now, it just makes sense to me that weight lifting is lifting weights ... not the machines, but free weights.
Overdoing it is definately bad for you. I think, or so I've heard, that some of the old methods have changed, so hopefully there aren't as many damaging themselves as there used to be. However, the magazines/books I read are written for women ... the ones who compete in fitness, not bodybuilding.
And, um, yeah, I would say doing sit-ups all day would be bad ... on many levels!!
As for the original question. Eggs are a good protein source. I eat them almost every day.
Overdoing it is definately bad for you. I think, or so I've heard, that some of the old methods have changed, so hopefully there aren't as many damaging themselves as there used to be. However, the magazines/books I read are written for women ... the ones who compete in fitness, not bodybuilding.
And, um, yeah, I would say doing sit-ups all day would be bad ... on many levels!!
As for the original question. Eggs are a good protein source. I eat them almost every day.
sigh ..
Its really not worth picking points through all the quasi-science but I'll do 1 paragraph....
Its the one that corresponds best to your post and you were so polite about it that I owe you an answer for you to either beleive, research yourself or disbelieve as you like. (see my signature)
The problem with well meaning but ill researched articles such as this are that usually the counterpoint does not address the main point , merely aspects of it... and skirts around this point.
The main point of this point/counterpoint arguament is
point: essential amino acids are absolutely needed for growing rats.... this is the central point
counterpoint: the word amino acid doesn't occur....its completely ignored and the counterpoint focuses on breast milk.
If I were to take his counterpoint I can make an arguament from that BUT the whole point is that humans as well as rats need not only the essential amino acids BUT the correct balance of non essential otherwise they have excess and this leads to toxins... (in your own words)
but it is the excess amino acids which are most toxic not the whole proteins....
Again he goes on about ignoring the bulk of the world who were "perfectly healthy" living on mainly vegetable diets... yet in the later paper he admits the inuit diet is very high in animal protein when he wants to make a different point... and secondly as someone who has spent half of their life in the countries he is referring to I can tell you straight out.... people are not perfectly healthy, disease is rife and malnutrition (along with lack of clean drinking water and lack of medicine) is the major cause.
In most cases "perfectly healthy is a relative term"
Just to prove a contradiction not because this proves its true from a European perspective life expectancy in Italy is not significantly better than it was 2000 yrs ago if you happened to be wealthy.
The Roman diet was for the weathy (equestrain class) very protein based and very animal based...and considering a number of then fatal diseases are now curable they difference isn't large... and the major factor in surviving as part of the upper classes was limiting military service. Your life expectancy dramatically went back up again once you finished military service.
If you take the other classes the diet was largely vegetable and pulse based and life expectancy was much lower.
anyway the conclusion is when reading this sort of thing make sure each point raised is actually answered in the response.
I don't disagree that in general the western nations are eating too much animal prodcuts and that its unhealthy but the point is amino acid imbalances are more likely with vegan diets, especially when care is not taken to balance them.
The second missing item is genetics... people who come from nations where animal protein is scarce who cannot thrive on vegan diets die or don't have children who survive .. so over time these nations have developed a leaning towards people who can do better on vegan diets. It seems some people do better than others...
Lastly there is a very good reason human babies grow more slowly than rats, its very simple and because of the size of a human babies head and brain compared to a rats.
In order for human intellegence to progress we needed to be born with larger heads... and half of the way to do this was by the baby being born earlier in its gestation than other mammals....
Human babies are helpless and can only be maintained by social structure whereas rat's and other mammals have babies which are more fullt developed and mobile... the more herbivorous the species the more mobile the baby at birth.
Thus herd animals have babies which can be walking within the hour, cats and dogs are born blind but soon able to defend themselves but don't need to be as mobile as herbivores because their parents can bring them highly concentrated food in the form of dead animals.
There is considerable evidence to suggest that human brain development really started when humans became seriously omnivorous, within human evolution there is a direct correlation with the cranial diameter and the development of tearing teeth over grinding teeth. As skulls got larger in comparison to body mass so did the dependance on meat and this is part of the evidence used in the development of man after man had developed enough to settle into farming and vegetarian diets the crainial diameter had already stopped getting larger.
QUOTE(hathor @ Feb 7 2007, 07:12 PM)
A different perspective on protein and other dietary needs for athletes:
http://www.nealhendrickson.com/mcdougall/0...repeopletoo.htm
The idea that plant proteins are incomplete or lacking in quality, while oft-repeated, is untrue. An exploration of the history of protein recommendations, the studies and observations they were based on, etc.:
http://www.nealhendrickson.com/mcdougall/031200puprotein.htm
Also see The China Study, which found that disease prevalence in China is in proportion to the amount of animal products consumed, the studies by Ornish and Esselstyn on heart disease, by Barnard on diabetes, etc. Lower in quality in what sense, I wonder? The idea that one needs to carefully match plant foods to get "complete" protein has been discredited, but continues to get repeated by folks who haven't explored the actual research -- even by some vegetarians! Sigh ... I can hardly blame anyone here for repeating what they've heard; I just wanted to provide the rebuttal.
Anyway, there are dangers from consuming excess protein:
http://www.nealhendrickson.com/mcdougall/0...einoverload.htm
There is no "protein deficiency" disease out there among vegetarians.
You build muscle by eating sufficient calories and working your muscles. I am unaware of any study showing that protein powders have any beneficial effect beyond providing additional calories.
http://www.nealhendrickson.com/mcdougall/0...repeopletoo.htm
The idea that plant proteins are incomplete or lacking in quality, while oft-repeated, is untrue. An exploration of the history of protein recommendations, the studies and observations they were based on, etc.:
http://www.nealhendrickson.com/mcdougall/031200puprotein.htm
Also see The China Study, which found that disease prevalence in China is in proportion to the amount of animal products consumed, the studies by Ornish and Esselstyn on heart disease, by Barnard on diabetes, etc. Lower in quality in what sense, I wonder? The idea that one needs to carefully match plant foods to get "complete" protein has been discredited, but continues to get repeated by folks who haven't explored the actual research -- even by some vegetarians! Sigh ... I can hardly blame anyone here for repeating what they've heard; I just wanted to provide the rebuttal.
Anyway, there are dangers from consuming excess protein:
http://www.nealhendrickson.com/mcdougall/0...einoverload.htm
There is no "protein deficiency" disease out there among vegetarians.
You build muscle by eating sufficient calories and working your muscles. I am unaware of any study showing that protein powders have any beneficial effect beyond providing additional calories.
Its really not worth picking points through all the quasi-science but I'll do 1 paragraph....
Its the one that corresponds best to your post and you were so polite about it that I owe you an answer for you to either beleive, research yourself or disbelieve as you like. (see my signature)
QUOTE
Studies completed in the early 1940's by Dr. William Rose of the University of Illinois found that l0 amino acids were essential for a rat’s diet.6 The removal of any one of these essential amino acids from the food of growing rats led to profound nutritive failure, accompanied by a rapid decline in weight, loss of appetite, and eventually death. Animal products, such as meat, poultry, milk, and eggs prevented this decline in the rats’ health, and were found to contain the l0 essential amino acids in just the right proportions for needs of growing rats. Based on these early rat experiments the amino acid pattern found in animal products was declared to be the “gold standard” by which to compare the amino acid pattern of vegetable foods. According to this concept, wheat and rice were declared deficient in lysine and corn was deficient in tryptophan.
pointQUOTE
Subsequent research has shown the obvious: the initial premise, that animal products supply the most ideal protein pattern for humans, as they do for rats, is incorrect.7 The dietary needs of rats are considerably different from those of humans, mainly because rats grow very rapidly into adult size as compared to people. Rats are fully adult after 6 months; whereas a person takes 17 years to fully mature. This difference in need is especially clear when the breast milk of both species is examined and compared. The protein content of rat breast milk is 10 times greater than the milk intended for human babies.8,9 Baby rats double in size in 4.5 days; an infant doubles in size in 6 months. The obvious reason for the different needs is because rats grow very rapidly into adult size as compared to humans; therefore requirements for protein to support that growth are very much higher.
counterpountThe problem with well meaning but ill researched articles such as this are that usually the counterpoint does not address the main point , merely aspects of it... and skirts around this point.
The main point of this point/counterpoint arguament is
point: essential amino acids are absolutely needed for growing rats.... this is the central point
counterpoint: the word amino acid doesn't occur....its completely ignored and the counterpoint focuses on breast milk.
If I were to take his counterpoint I can make an arguament from that BUT the whole point is that humans as well as rats need not only the essential amino acids BUT the correct balance of non essential otherwise they have excess and this leads to toxins... (in your own words)
but it is the excess amino acids which are most toxic not the whole proteins....
Again he goes on about ignoring the bulk of the world who were "perfectly healthy" living on mainly vegetable diets... yet in the later paper he admits the inuit diet is very high in animal protein when he wants to make a different point... and secondly as someone who has spent half of their life in the countries he is referring to I can tell you straight out.... people are not perfectly healthy, disease is rife and malnutrition (along with lack of clean drinking water and lack of medicine) is the major cause.
In most cases "perfectly healthy is a relative term"
Just to prove a contradiction not because this proves its true from a European perspective life expectancy in Italy is not significantly better than it was 2000 yrs ago if you happened to be wealthy.
The Roman diet was for the weathy (equestrain class) very protein based and very animal based...and considering a number of then fatal diseases are now curable they difference isn't large... and the major factor in surviving as part of the upper classes was limiting military service. Your life expectancy dramatically went back up again once you finished military service.
If you take the other classes the diet was largely vegetable and pulse based and life expectancy was much lower.
anyway the conclusion is when reading this sort of thing make sure each point raised is actually answered in the response.
I don't disagree that in general the western nations are eating too much animal prodcuts and that its unhealthy but the point is amino acid imbalances are more likely with vegan diets, especially when care is not taken to balance them.
The second missing item is genetics... people who come from nations where animal protein is scarce who cannot thrive on vegan diets die or don't have children who survive .. so over time these nations have developed a leaning towards people who can do better on vegan diets. It seems some people do better than others...
Lastly there is a very good reason human babies grow more slowly than rats, its very simple and because of the size of a human babies head and brain compared to a rats.
In order for human intellegence to progress we needed to be born with larger heads... and half of the way to do this was by the baby being born earlier in its gestation than other mammals....
Human babies are helpless and can only be maintained by social structure whereas rat's and other mammals have babies which are more fullt developed and mobile... the more herbivorous the species the more mobile the baby at birth.
Thus herd animals have babies which can be walking within the hour, cats and dogs are born blind but soon able to defend themselves but don't need to be as mobile as herbivores because their parents can bring them highly concentrated food in the form of dead animals.
There is considerable evidence to suggest that human brain development really started when humans became seriously omnivorous, within human evolution there is a direct correlation with the cranial diameter and the development of tearing teeth over grinding teeth. As skulls got larger in comparison to body mass so did the dependance on meat and this is part of the evidence used in the development of man after man had developed enough to settle into farming and vegetarian diets the crainial diameter had already stopped getting larger.
QUOTE(tp23 @ Feb 2 2007, 11:05 PM)
Anyone had good luck muscle building with any G-F protien supp's? Has anyone gotten a response from the major protien powder companies--- if they contain gluten?
any names fellow Celiacs?
any names fellow Celiacs?
I don't use the one made for working out, but I've been taking the Shaklee protein every day with no problems. They have a list of what has gluten in it and not very many of their products are on the list. The sports nutrition products would be Physique and Performance both of which are o.k. I've heard that they will be redoing the sports nutrition line so it will be interesting to see what they come out with. Hope this helps.
QUOTE(gfp @ Feb 7 2007, 12:57 PM)
sigh ..
Its really not worth picking points through all the quasi-science but I'll do 1 paragraph....
Its the one that corresponds best to your post and you were so polite about it that I owe you an answer for you to either beleive, research yourself or disbelieve as you like. (see my signature)
Its really not worth picking points through all the quasi-science but I'll do 1 paragraph....
Its the one that corresponds best to your post and you were so polite about it that I owe you an answer for you to either beleive, research yourself or disbelieve as you like. (see my signature)
I'll see your "sigh" and raise you another
I would be glad to research. But you offer nothing to look at. Dr. McDougall describes all the studies he relies on -- and discusses amino acids in depth. It is misleading to look at one paragraph and complain he doesn't discuss them in that one paragraph. Sometimes it takes more than one paragraph to completely discuss an issue.You say,"If I were to take his counterpoint I can make an arguament from that BUT the whole point is that humans as well as rats need not only the essential amino acids BUT the correct balance of non essential otherwise they have excess and this leads to toxins... (in your own words)
but it is the excess amino acids which are most toxic not the whole proteins...."
I can't quite parse what you are saying, but I certainly didn't say what you state I did. The problems come from eating excess animal protein. I know of no problems from getting one's protein from plant sources, either theoretically (they contain the animo acids essential to humans) or in practice (no vegans out there who are sick from the mix of amino acids they get).
He never says the Inuit are healthy. So I don't see your point.
The common diseases we in the West suffer from (the diseases of affluence -- heart disease, stroke, osteoporosis, etc.) are not present in these other, largely vegan societies to any degree. That is his point. Obviously, diet cannot immunize one against unsanitary water or the like (the diseases of poverty). Also those very diseases of affluence can be effectively treated in people in the West using the low fat vegan diet (e.g., Ornish with heart disease). It is easy enough to hypothesize that people metabolize food differently, but where is your proof? Are Westerners healthy as they eat the diet they do -- it doesn't look like it to me. If people get healthier when they switch to something like the McDougall diet (every study I've seen), it seems like your speculation is unfounded. If you know of some study showing the contrary, I would be interested in looking at it.
Yes, the Inuit have developed the ability to eat quantities of meat that would lead anyone else to an early grave. Those Inuit who couldn't didn't live to reproduce and pass on their genes. But they couldn't evolve away from the porous bones they get from their diet. And I'm unaware of any evidence that they would be sickened by a low fat vegan diet, assuming they had the means and willingness to eat one.
You say, "the point is amino acid imbalances are more likely with vegan diets, especially when care is not taken to balance them." Again, where is your proof? What study actually shows this to be the case? Dr. McDougall has challenged people publicly, in a professional journal, to come up with such studies and they weren't able to. You and anyone interested can look at the chart with all the specific animo acids and different foods and see for yourselves. Look at longevity and disease statistics -- are vegetarians healthier or unhealthier? It's the former. The only amino acid problems I've ever heard of are from folks who are on a restricted diet, like a poorly designed infant formula.
To admit that there are some in the world who are healthy on vegan diets is telling. For where is any evidence that different ethnic groups need different mixes of animo acids? The point of studying China was that you have a wide disparity in eating habits in different areas. So it is possible to tease out the effect of diet without having people say the difference is due to different genetic backgrounds.
I haven't seen a single study showing that going vegetarian or vegan for members of any ethnic background makes them sick. Of course, you can eat a junky vegan diet but I'm not talking about that. I don't know enough about the ancient Romans to say what the usual causes of death for the poor folks were. But I seriously doubt it was unbalanced amino acid consumption, since that beastie is unobservable in vegan populations today.
I don't wish to prolong this, because I don't know that anyone else is interested. Folks can read what I linked to -- in full -- and compare it to what you have said and make up their own minds.
I would like to provide a counterpoint to your evolution argument, however: http://michaelbluejay.com/veg/natural.html
I believe there are now techniques for analyzing bone and telling what the diet was. So perhaps at least this dispute will be resolved in time
Even assuming meat eating helped survival in the distant past (another source of nutrition -- one which easily could go to fat stores to aid survival when food was scarce), that doesn't make it the optimal diet today when food isn't scarce. (Assuming you could find meat that is similar in its nutritional profile to what early hominids had available). Further, evolution favors the ability to live long enough to past on your genes. It doesn't care if you die earlier than need be after that.
Thank you for saying I was polite. I tried. I hope I am still in the zone
As always, people who are interested should read both sides (and any others out there) and make up their own minds.Oh well, I've spent way too much time on this. I'm procrastinating from doing something much less enjoyable that having a friendly debate. We may need to agree to disagree and move on.
Oh well, I've spent way too much time on this. I'm procrastinating from doing something much less enjoyable that having a friendly debate. We may need to agree to disagree and move on.
Its up to you, I am more than happy to debate with anyone who is polite as you are....I'm also happy to provide information and I would appreciate you take time to read it but that's up to you but you should not feel under any obligation to respond if you prefer not.
But you offer nothing to look at.
True, but I do that for a reason...
If you trawl the internet we can both find articles and arguaments in both directions and we can achive nothing.
My first degree is actually organic geochemistry and a very large part of organic geochemistry revolves around amino acids and associated lipids so I take my view of this from the basic definition of amino acids...
Secondly the majority of hard scientific data on protein formation are not available on the internet.
Much of my research on this I did while with access to a university library and scientific journals AND I was a vegetarian (not Vegan) at the time. I am however first and foremost a scientist.
Thirdly the articles you link to make some good points, its the justification behind them which is flawed...and the interpretation of data from previous papers which are not cited nor in context.
Just one example... if you take the atheletes who switched diet and bettered their times...
The article does not mention what their diet was before... nor what the control atheletes were eating, indeed it fails to mention any control at all.
A similar thing can be said about the Carl Lewis article....and what it fail to mention is two fold, firstly Lewis was later found guilty of taking banned substances in 1991 a year after the article was written and secondly and perhaps more importantly than this ...
[quote]He told me he was frustrated because all previous eating plans had either caused him to become overweight or left him too weak to compete and win (these were mostly low-calorie, portion-control diets). Shortly afterwards he began eating our recommended low-fat, pure-vegetarian diet and his dilemma was resolved. Yes, he discovered there IS a diet that would allow him to look, feel, function, and perform at his best without ever being hungry – shouldn’t that be the way for all of us? [/quote]Professional atheletes do not maintain themselves in peak condition all of the time they peak for events, especially track events. What they eat in the off-season is not what they eat in the real season nor is the type of training they do in the off-season the same. Sprinters spend a lot of the off-season building and maintaining muscle mass which they then loose over the course of the season... due to the rigors of competing at that level and the need to loose body mass...
In general a sprinter (or boxer or body builder) will have different training regimes and different diets according to the season and competition. Not follow a single regime all the time...
The fact the article is expressing "these were mostly low-calorie, portion-control diets" indicates strongly this was in season. In season most atheletes are in a catbolic state... they burn up what they have saved up over the season.
I can't quite parse what you are saying, but I certainly didn't say what you state I did.
Nope you you stated excess of proteins is toxic, I was actually saying that is correct on one level but the article you site says (and I agree) that it is the byproducts of these proteins which are toxic, not the protein itself.
The difference seems subtle but it is not because proteins do not survive as whole proteins in our digestive systems for very long.
The common diseases we in the West suffer from (the diseases of affluence -- heart disease, stroke, osteoporosis, etc.) are not present in these other, largely vegan societies to any degree. That is his point. Obviously, diet cannot immunize one against unsanitary water or the like (the diseases of poverty). Also those very diseases of affluence can be effectively treated in people in the West using the low fat vegan diet (e.g., Ornish with heart disease). It is easy enough to hypothesize that people metabolize food differently, but where is your proof? Are Westerners healthy as they eat the diet they do -- it doesn't look like it to me. If people get healthier when they switch to something like the McDougall diet (every study I've seen), it seems like your speculation is unfounded. If you know of some study showing the contrary, I would be interested in looking at it.
Again., as I started, cross posting contradictory studies, especially those that have an agenda isn't conducive to a polite discourse. I find it more constructive to address points...that you can consider for yourself...
Taking the above block as a whole instead of chopping it up which leads to contextual problems the average Western diet sucks, no arguament from me. However these societies that don't suffer Western affluence diseases do have plenty of their own which are not simply poverty or access to water and medicine. Many of the populations fall foul of what in a well nourished individual would not kill them but die because they are not strong enough to fight....
The same arguament about protein and sources is equally applicable to basic calorific intake. A human can survive (not die) on very little, indeed a Japanese man recently survived 24 days without food or water however what we can survive on is not what we thrive on.
The first one I find is http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.f...st_uids=8793421
but kwashiorkhor is real... I have seen it wholesale and it is not pleasant.
Yes, the Inuit have developed the ability to eat quantities of meat that would lead anyone else to an early grave. Those Inuit who couldn't didn't live to reproduce and pass on their genes. But they couldn't evolve away from the porous bones they get from their diet. And I'm unaware of any evidence that they would be sickened by a low fat vegan diet, assuming they had the means and willingness to eat one.
I agree however here is my point about the point/counterpoint arguament....
From the last link.... (http://michaelbluejay.com/veg/natural.html)
[quote]McDougall asserts that our early ancestors from at least four million years ago followed diets almost exclusively of plant foods. Many other scientists believe that early humans were largely vegetarian. (See articles by David Popovich and Derek Wall.) This is important because while prehistoric peoples hunted animals, that is still a relatively recent development in the long period of human existence. Certainly not long enough for our bodies to have adapted to it from evolution.[/quote]
All evidence suggests the Inuit have adapted.... Inuit are able to eat foods which would kill on a non Inuit in a single day, large amounts of polar bear fat can kill very quickly from Vitamin A toxicity. I realise it is not your intention to deceive, I doubt its the intention of the writers on the links you provided either but my point is the vegan arguament can't have it both ways... All scientific evidence on evolutionary rates suggests this is not only possible but normal.. people think of evolution in terms of growing or loosing a tail or developing fins etc. but that isn't how it works .. the adaptations are incredibly small and this is demonstrated by the Inuit, they didn't grow extra legs or fins.. they might be a bit thicker set but what changed was very subtle changes in their digestive systems and ability to process certain toxins common to thier environment. Even though Norwegian vikings have a diet very high in fish and sea produce, seal milk etc. they are unable to tolerate this diet to the same extent as Inuit... An interesting read is why the Vikings all died in greenland... (google)
You say, "the point is amino acid imbalances are more likely with vegan diets, especially when care is not taken to balance them." Again, where is your proof? What study actually shows this to be the case?
It is not necassary to provide a study because the process of protein formation is well known, indeed the basic evidence itself is available on the link...http://www.nealhendrickson.com/mcdougall/031200puprotein.htm with the table showing essential amino acids and minimum needed amounts.
(I did however give you a paper at the end)
[quote]
The results of Dr. Rose`s studies are summarized in the following chart, under "minimum requirements". From the chart, it is clear that vegetable foods contain more than enough of all the amino acids essential for humans.[/quote]Once again this just misses the point that it is not the absolute amount of a amino acid but the balance of these amino acids. A good way to normalise this is human milk. However if you read http://www.nealhendrickson.com/mcdougall/0...einoverload.htm
In particular look down to the picture of the bodybuilder... and the statement "if protein were stored it would be deposited in our muscle tissue and all people on the Western diet would look like body builders...."
Sorry but this is just downright misleading.... it is completely missing 2 huge points ... firstly all professional bodybuilders take anabolic steroidsalong with huge amounts of performance enhancing drugs , it is simply not possible to compete at this level without and secondly they do a LOT of working out.
Anyway, here is the study.....
[quote]A popular book among vegetarians, Diet for a Small Planet, by Frances Moore Lappe’ published in 1971, started a revolution that has had a positive impact for the past three decades on the lives of millions of people. Unfortunately, Ms. Lappe’ failed to understand the basic scientific literature on human protein needs and the sufficiency of plants foods before she wrote her influential book. She believed plants contained “incomplete proteins” with insufficient amounts of certain essential amino acids to meet the needs of people.13 As a result of this misunderstanding, she placed great emphasis on combining vegetable foods to create an amino acid pattern which resembles that found in animal foods. This emphasis is unnecessary and implies that it is difficult to obtain “complete” protein from vegetables without detailed nutritional knowledge. Because of her complicated and incorrect ideas people are frightened away from vegetable-based diets.[/quote]
Once again he uses the protein % of human milk earlier as a benchmark for total protein but now he states that its not relevant to amino acid ratio's. Again sorry but this is just picking selective evidence and disguarding it when its not relevant. What McDougal never adresses in what I read that you directed me to is what happens to essential amino acids that are unused?
This is well established fact, they combine to form non essential amino acids. In order to do this they need to have the right ratio's or there will be lots left over... having excesses of amino acids is not good... again I could site individual references but one has only to search on the benefits of amino acids to see how strongly these affect people... the first reference I found is http://www.sweetpoison.com/phenylalanine.html
[quote]
Dr. McDougall has challenged people publicly, in a professional journal, to come up with such studies and they weren't able to. You and anyone interested can look at the chart with all the specific animo acids and different foods and see for yourselves. [/quote]You can if you are looking at the right things.... for example most of my professisonal life I have looked at remote sensor data in geology. On the face of it its a set of numbers... if a non experienced person was to look at it it means nothing but if I process it, normalise and plot it then I can present something that makes sense to a non geologist. In the same way.... I could if I wished selectively use the evidence to make it show what I wanted or was told to make it show. I have unfortunately had to do this as well, not something I'm proud of but there you go... it happens all the time if a well is not ecomomic or borderline. Its not clever, I dislike it but its very very easy to do.
[quote]
To admit that there are some in the world who are healthy on vegan diets is telling. For where is any evidence that different ethnic groups need different mixes of animo acids? The point of studying China was that you have a wide disparity in eating habits in different areas. So it is possible to tease out the effect of diet without having people say the difference is due to different genetic backgrounds.[/quote]
Firstly please for your own health don't say that to the Chinese... I don't want to sound racist and this is not my intention but as Westerners commonly say "They all look the same to me" ... as it happens they don't to me, I can usually place an ethnic chinese reasonably well, I can almost always distinguish Japanese and Chinese and they certainly can in most cases before they open their mouth and dressed in Western clothes. The only East Asian peoples I have the most difficulty guessing until they speak is Korean who are by definition a large genetic mix in a small space. On a basic level Northern and Southern Chinese look nothing alike, even under communism most chinese will differentiate a Huan from a Cantonese or almost all areas... pretty much all the time.
However lets take your article....on Carl Lewis and the front page title "Why black runners win every race from the sprints to the marathon" .. its really both correct and misleading and I didn't read the article however you find very few West African distance runners and very few ethiopian sprinters...
However by chance while looking for references for you and making sure I had facts stright I found ....
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.f...p;dopt=Abstract
But anyway, the point I am making is NOT if the Eastern diet is healthier than the Western diet... its somewhat irrelevant because I think we BOTH agree the SAD (standard american diet) is very very poor. However this does not take into account the fact that doesn't mean because certain diseases are less prevalent in other cultures that their diet is perfect nor that it does not have its own problems.
One big example of this which is important for celaics is because studies regarding soya in diet completely ignored the other problems that reliance on soya can cause and also ignored that no Asian culture actually eats soy products in anything except small amounts and even then fermented or as tofu.
[quote]I haven't seen a single study showing that going vegetarian or vegan for members of any ethnic background makes them sick. Of course, you can eat a junky vegan diet but I'm not talking about that. I don't know enough about the ancient Romans to say what the usual causes of death for the poor folks were. But I seriously doubt it was unbalanced amino acid consumption, since that beastie is unobservable in vegan populations today. [/quote]I should probably point you here.... it adresses this point exactly but also explains a lot more and is fully referenced.
I would like to provide a counterpoint to your evolution argument, however: http://michaelbluejay.com/veg/natural.html
I believe there are now techniques for analyzing bone and telling what the diet was. So perhaps at least this dispute will be resolved in time
Even assuming meat eating helped survival in the distant past (another source of nutrition -- one which easily could go to fat stores to aid survival when food was scarce), that doesn't make it the optimal diet today when food isn't scarce. (Assuming you could find meat that is similar in its nutritional profile to what early hominids had available). Further, evolution favors the ability to live long enough to past on your genes. It doesn't care if you die earlier than need be after that.
Thank you for saying I was polite. I tried. I hope I am still in the zone As always, people who are interested should read both sides (and any others out there) and make up their own minds.[/quote]
OK I already quoted that and the fact it says insufficient time to evolve wheras I think we both are happy to agree the Inuit have.
A second really important point is this... there is a huge difference in papers written with different agenda's. Anthropologists are not on the whole interested inproving vegetarian or onmivorous diets, although on occaision it can fit pet theories etc. they are more interested in finding out regardless to see how this helps their knowledge of the peoples they are studying.
From the paper you posted
[quote]There's another important fact never acknowledged by meat proponents: Humans act by idea rather than by instinct. Other animals are programmed to know what food is. We are not. For us, it's learned behavior. Or in some cases, guessed behavior. We can make choices about what we should eat even if that's contrary to good health, as millions prove every day when they eat at McDonald's. If our ancestors ate meat, they were simply being human and making choices rather than acting on instinct. Think about it: Do you really believe that cavemen were true experts about nutrition? If so, what other major decisions about your life would you like to put in the hands of a caveman?[/quote]Again, obviously their knowedge of amino acids was limited but again we are discussing what did they eat?
[quote]Other animals are programmed to know what food is. We are not.[/quote]Unfortunately not true....
It pains me as a human to admit but we are on the whole damned violent ...We are not the only animals tech hunting, nor the only ones that kill for fun and sport. Orca's tech their offspring to catch seals and also play "seal football" give a baby a plate of raw meat and it will go in thier mouth, do the same with a baby herbivore and it won't.... the modern practice of feeding animal products to herbivore farm animals (one which I personally is a far better arguament for vegetarianism and a practice I find abhernet at best) at least illustrates how much procesing and disguising you have to do to get a cow or sheep to eat any animal product excluding thier own afterbirth... again this in itself shows most animals including us do know what to eat when... McDo's is not really an arguament because people are unfortunately too stupid to listen to thier own body... I know plenty who have said they ate a McDo with no other than the usual after effects... sure they are UGGGH ... but also we have a lot of advertising pressing us to do this. A cow doesn't need advertising or happy meal deals to know that it needs the nutrients in the afterbirth to nourish its calf.
Its up to you, I am more than happy to debate with anyone who is polite as you are....I'm also happy to provide information and I would appreciate you take time to read it but that's up to you but you should not feel under any obligation to respond if you prefer not.
But you offer nothing to look at.
True, but I do that for a reason...
If you trawl the internet we can both find articles and arguaments in both directions and we can achive nothing.
My first degree is actually organic geochemistry and a very large part of organic geochemistry revolves around amino acids and associated lipids so I take my view of this from the basic definition of amino acids...
Secondly the majority of hard scientific data on protein formation are not available on the internet.
Much of my research on this I did while with access to a university library and scientific journals AND I was a vegetarian (not Vegan) at the time. I am however first and foremost a scientist.
Thirdly the articles you link to make some good points, its the justification behind them which is flawed...and the interpretation of data from previous papers which are not cited nor in context.
Just one example... if you take the atheletes who switched diet and bettered their times...
The article does not mention what their diet was before... nor what the control atheletes were eating, indeed it fails to mention any control at all.
A similar thing can be said about the Carl Lewis article....and what it fail to mention is two fold, firstly Lewis was later found guilty of taking banned substances in 1991 a year after the article was written and secondly and perhaps more importantly than this ...
[quote]He told me he was frustrated because all previous eating plans had either caused him to become overweight or left him too weak to compete and win (these were mostly low-calorie, portion-control diets). Shortly afterwards he began eating our recommended low-fat, pure-vegetarian diet and his dilemma was resolved. Yes, he discovered there IS a diet that would allow him to look, feel, function, and perform at his best without ever being hungry – shouldn’t that be the way for all of us? [/quote]Professional atheletes do not maintain themselves in peak condition all of the time they peak for events, especially track events. What they eat in the off-season is not what they eat in the real season nor is the type of training they do in the off-season the same. Sprinters spend a lot of the off-season building and maintaining muscle mass which they then loose over the course of the season... due to the rigors of competing at that level and the need to loose body mass...
In general a sprinter (or boxer or body builder) will have different training regimes and different diets according to the season and competition. Not follow a single regime all the time...
The fact the article is expressing "these were mostly low-calorie, portion-control diets" indicates strongly this was in season. In season most atheletes are in a catbolic state... they burn up what they have saved up over the season.
I can't quite parse what you are saying, but I certainly didn't say what you state I did.
Nope you you stated excess of proteins is toxic, I was actually saying that is correct on one level but the article you site says (and I agree) that it is the byproducts of these proteins which are toxic, not the protein itself.
The difference seems subtle but it is not because proteins do not survive as whole proteins in our digestive systems for very long.
The common diseases we in the West suffer from (the diseases of affluence -- heart disease, stroke, osteoporosis, etc.) are not present in these other, largely vegan societies to any degree. That is his point. Obviously, diet cannot immunize one against unsanitary water or the like (the diseases of poverty). Also those very diseases of affluence can be effectively treated in people in the West using the low fat vegan diet (e.g., Ornish with heart disease). It is easy enough to hypothesize that people metabolize food differently, but where is your proof? Are Westerners healthy as they eat the diet they do -- it doesn't look like it to me. If people get healthier when they switch to something like the McDougall diet (every study I've seen), it seems like your speculation is unfounded. If you know of some study showing the contrary, I would be interested in looking at it.
Again., as I started, cross posting contradictory studies, especially those that have an agenda isn't conducive to a polite discourse. I find it more constructive to address points...that you can consider for yourself...
Taking the above block as a whole instead of chopping it up which leads to contextual problems the average Western diet sucks, no arguament from me. However these societies that don't suffer Western affluence diseases do have plenty of their own which are not simply poverty or access to water and medicine. Many of the populations fall foul of what in a well nourished individual would not kill them but die because they are not strong enough to fight....
The same arguament about protein and sources is equally applicable to basic calorific intake. A human can survive (not die) on very little, indeed a Japanese man recently survived 24 days without food or water however what we can survive on is not what we thrive on.
The first one I find is http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.f...st_uids=8793421
but kwashiorkhor is real... I have seen it wholesale and it is not pleasant.
Yes, the Inuit have developed the ability to eat quantities of meat that would lead anyone else to an early grave. Those Inuit who couldn't didn't live to reproduce and pass on their genes. But they couldn't evolve away from the porous bones they get from their diet. And I'm unaware of any evidence that they would be sickened by a low fat vegan diet, assuming they had the means and willingness to eat one.
I agree however here is my point about the point/counterpoint arguament....
From the last link.... (http://michaelbluejay.com/veg/natural.html)
[quote]McDougall asserts that our early ancestors from at least four million years ago followed diets almost exclusively of plant foods. Many other scientists believe that early humans were largely vegetarian. (See articles by David Popovich and Derek Wall.) This is important because while prehistoric peoples hunted animals, that is still a relatively recent development in the long period of human existence. Certainly not long enough for our bodies to have adapted to it from evolution.[/quote]
All evidence suggests the Inuit have adapted.... Inuit are able to eat foods which would kill on a non Inuit in a single day, large amounts of polar bear fat can kill very quickly from Vitamin A toxicity. I realise it is not your intention to deceive, I doubt its the intention of the writers on the links you provided either but my point is the vegan arguament can't have it both ways... All scientific evidence on evolutionary rates suggests this is not only possible but normal.. people think of evolution in terms of growing or loosing a tail or developing fins etc. but that isn't how it works .. the adaptations are incredibly small and this is demonstrated by the Inuit, they didn't grow extra legs or fins.. they might be a bit thicker set but what changed was very subtle changes in their digestive systems and ability to process certain toxins common to thier environment. Even though Norwegian vikings have a diet very high in fish and sea produce, seal milk etc. they are unable to tolerate this diet to the same extent as Inuit... An interesting read is why the Vikings all died in greenland... (google)
You say, "the point is amino acid imbalances are more likely with vegan diets, especially when care is not taken to balance them." Again, where is your proof? What study actually shows this to be the case?
It is not necassary to provide a study because the process of protein formation is well known, indeed the basic evidence itself is available on the link...http://www.nealhendrickson.com/mcdougall/031200puprotein.htm with the table showing essential amino acids and minimum needed amounts.
(I did however give you a paper at the end)
[quote]
The results of Dr. Rose`s studies are summarized in the following chart, under "minimum requirements". From the chart, it is clear that vegetable foods contain more than enough of all the amino acids essential for humans.[/quote]Once again this just misses the point that it is not the absolute amount of a amino acid but the balance of these amino acids. A good way to normalise this is human milk. However if you read http://www.nealhendrickson.com/mcdougall/0...einoverload.htm
In particular look down to the picture of the bodybuilder... and the statement "if protein were stored it would be deposited in our muscle tissue and all people on the Western diet would look like body builders...."
Sorry but this is just downright misleading.... it is completely missing 2 huge points ... firstly all professional bodybuilders take anabolic steroidsalong with huge amounts of performance enhancing drugs , it is simply not possible to compete at this level without and secondly they do a LOT of working out.
Anyway, here is the study.....
[quote]A popular book among vegetarians, Diet for a Small Planet, by Frances Moore Lappe’ published in 1971, started a revolution that has had a positive impact for the past three decades on the lives of millions of people. Unfortunately, Ms. Lappe’ failed to understand the basic scientific literature on human protein needs and the sufficiency of plants foods before she wrote her influential book. She believed plants contained “incomplete proteins” with insufficient amounts of certain essential amino acids to meet the needs of people.13 As a result of this misunderstanding, she placed great emphasis on combining vegetable foods to create an amino acid pattern which resembles that found in animal foods. This emphasis is unnecessary and implies that it is difficult to obtain “complete” protein from vegetables without detailed nutritional knowledge. Because of her complicated and incorrect ideas people are frightened away from vegetable-based diets.[/quote]
Once again he uses the protein % of human milk earlier as a benchmark for total protein but now he states that its not relevant to amino acid ratio's. Again sorry but this is just picking selective evidence and disguarding it when its not relevant. What McDougal never adresses in what I read that you directed me to is what happens to essential amino acids that are unused?
This is well established fact, they combine to form non essential amino acids. In order to do this they need to have the right ratio's or there will be lots left over... having excesses of amino acids is not good... again I could site individual references but one has only to search on the benefits of amino acids to see how strongly these affect people... the first reference I found is http://www.sweetpoison.com/phenylalanine.html
[quote]
Dr. McDougall has challenged people publicly, in a professional journal, to come up with such studies and they weren't able to. You and anyone interested can look at the chart with all the specific animo acids and different foods and see for yourselves. [/quote]You can if you are looking at the right things.... for example most of my professisonal life I have looked at remote sensor data in geology. On the face of it its a set of numbers... if a non experienced person was to look at it it means nothing but if I process it, normalise and plot it then I can present something that makes sense to a non geologist. In the same way.... I could if I wished selectively use the evidence to make it show what I wanted or was told to make it show. I have unfortunately had to do this as well, not something I'm proud of but there you go... it happens all the time if a well is not ecomomic or borderline. Its not clever, I dislike it but its very very easy to do.
[quote]
To admit that there are some in the world who are healthy on vegan diets is telling. For where is any evidence that different ethnic groups need different mixes of animo acids? The point of studying China was that you have a wide disparity in eating habits in different areas. So it is possible to tease out the effect of diet without having people say the difference is due to different genetic backgrounds.[/quote]
Firstly please for your own health don't say that to the Chinese...
I don't want to sound racist and this is not my intention but as Westerners commonly say "They all look the same to me" ... as it happens they don't to me, I can usually place an ethnic chinese reasonably well, I can almost always distinguish Japanese and Chinese and they certainly can in most cases before they open their mouth and dressed in Western clothes. The only East Asian peoples I have the most difficulty guessing until they speak is Korean who are by definition a large genetic mix in a small space. On a basic level Northern and Southern Chinese look nothing alike, even under communism most chinese will differentiate a Huan from a Cantonese or almost all areas... pretty much all the time. However lets take your article....on Carl Lewis and the front page title "Why black runners win every race from the sprints to the marathon" .. its really both correct and misleading and I didn't read the article however you find very few West African distance runners and very few ethiopian sprinters...
However by chance while looking for references for you and making sure I had facts stright I found ....
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.f...p;dopt=Abstract
But anyway, the point I am making is NOT if the Eastern diet is healthier than the Western diet... its somewhat irrelevant because I think we BOTH agree the SAD (standard american diet) is very very poor. However this does not take into account the fact that doesn't mean because certain diseases are less prevalent in other cultures that their diet is perfect nor that it does not have its own problems.
One big example of this which is important for celaics is because studies regarding soya in diet completely ignored the other problems that reliance on soya can cause and also ignored that no Asian culture actually eats soy products in anything except small amounts and even then fermented or as tofu.
[quote]I haven't seen a single study showing that going vegetarian or vegan for members of any ethnic background makes them sick. Of course, you can eat a junky vegan diet but I'm not talking about that. I don't know enough about the ancient Romans to say what the usual causes of death for the poor folks were. But I seriously doubt it was unbalanced amino acid consumption, since that beastie is unobservable in vegan populations today. [/quote]I should probably point you here.... it adresses this point exactly but also explains a lot more and is fully referenced.
I would like to provide a counterpoint to your evolution argument, however: http://michaelbluejay.com/veg/natural.html
I believe there are now techniques for analyzing bone and telling what the diet was. So perhaps at least this dispute will be resolved in time
Even assuming meat eating helped survival in the distant past (another source of nutrition -- one which easily could go to fat stores to aid survival when food was scarce), that doesn't make it the optimal diet today when food isn't scarce. (Assuming you could find meat that is similar in its nutritional profile to what early hominids had available). Further, evolution favors the ability to live long enough to past on your genes. It doesn't care if you die earlier than need be after that.
Thank you for saying I was polite. I tried. I hope I am still in the zone
As always, people who are interested should read both sides (and any others out there) and make up their own minds.[/quote]OK I already quoted that and the fact it says insufficient time to evolve wheras I think we both are happy to agree the Inuit have.
A second really important point is this... there is a huge difference in papers written with different agenda's. Anthropologists are not on the whole interested inproving vegetarian or onmivorous diets, although on occaision it can fit pet theories etc. they are more interested in finding out regardless to see how this helps their knowledge of the peoples they are studying.
From the paper you posted
[quote]There's another important fact never acknowledged by meat proponents: Humans act by idea rather than by instinct. Other animals are programmed to know what food is. We are not. For us, it's learned behavior. Or in some cases, guessed behavior. We can make choices about what we should eat even if that's contrary to good health, as millions prove every day when they eat at McDonald's. If our ancestors ate meat, they were simply being human and making choices rather than acting on instinct. Think about it: Do you really believe that cavemen were true experts about nutrition? If so, what other major decisions about your life would you like to put in the hands of a caveman?[/quote]Again, obviously their knowedge of amino acids was limited
but again we are discussing what did they eat? [quote]Other animals are programmed to know what food is. We are not.[/quote]Unfortunately not true....
It pains me as a human to admit but we are on the whole damned violent ...We are not the only animals tech hunting, nor the only ones that kill for fun and sport. Orca's tech their offspring to catch seals and also play "seal football" give a baby a plate of raw meat and it will go in thier mouth, do the same with a baby herbivore and it won't.... the modern practice of feeding animal products to herbivore farm animals (one which I personally is a far better arguament for vegetarianism and a practice I find abhernet at best) at least illustrates how much procesing and disguising you have to do to get a cow or sheep to eat any animal product excluding thier own afterbirth... again this in itself shows most animals including us do know what to eat when... McDo's is not really an arguament because people are unfortunately too stupid to listen to thier own body... I know plenty who have said they ate a McDo with no other than the usual after effects... sure they are UGGGH ... but also we have a lot of advertising pressing us to do this. A cow doesn't need advertising or happy meal deals to know that it needs the nutrients in the afterbirth to nourish its calf.
Great debate. The time and thought put into your posts' have not gone un-noticed. Thanks!
QUOTE(Heather22 @ Feb 9 2007, 04:37 PM)
Great debate. The time and thought put into your posts' have not gone un-noticed. Thanks!
Well, I did a lot of research on this when I was vegetarian.
What I missed doing was in retrospect looking into the other possible problems with wheat and soya proteins, boy did I eat a lot of Soya protein at the time thinking it would be the best replacement... my mom who's also a celaic is actually very soy intolerant, she had some tablets with soy in (actually because of her celiac disease) and was ill until she changed .. in retrospect Im just glad I didn't trigger a soy intolerance in myself.
When I look back my GI probs actually started in this phase. I remember a specific night when I had eaten and the food just sat like a lump of lead ... Im not saying it caused it but I do worry about the amount of TSP I consumed...
Regarding suppliments the big prob for me is they are almost all based on proteins you can develop intolerances for like casein (for non vegans) and soy...
Just to say I'm not ignoring you. I will look at what you've said in more depth. I accidentally glutened myself yesterday and feel completely awful/nonfunctional ...
Of course, it could be we've really said all that can be said and the record will speak for itself. I hope so. My mind isn't really all there. About all I can process right now is that you responded
Of course, it could be we've really said all that can be said and the record will speak for itself. I hope so. My mind isn't really all there. About all I can process right now is that you responded
post deleted by lm
[quote name='hathor' post='268087' date='Feb 10 2007, 01:18 AM']Just to say I'm not ignoring you. I will look at what you've said in more depth. I accidentally glutened myself yesterday and feel completely awful/nonfunctional ...[/quote]
Ouch ... _____HUGS__________
[/quote]
Of course, it could be we've really said all that can be said and the record will speak for itself. I hope so. My mind isn't really all there. About all I can process right now is that you responded
[/quote]
Hey, you don't need to respond, I am just trying to give something you can think over. Like I said, don't feel under obligation to respond. It doesn't matter really if you read and still disagree, mostly here I'm just replying to your posts although somehow mine always get long winded!
I did a lot of research on this but, hey so did a lot of people If you are healthy and happy then that is really what is important... (well I'd like being heathy and happy too 
)
What I'm saying is I appreciate the ethical arguament against eating our fellow animals, (wow did I spend a lot of time debating that with myself) ... I just don't see a need to push it as nutrition.
Really, there are 101 good diets, all for different reasons but no diet fits everyone. Medically, there are diabetics for instance. The best diet for them might not be the same for me, especially if it contained wheat! UGGGHGGHHHH
So if there is no single best diet then that means there are lots of "very good" diets, including well thought out vegan.
All I hope you take away is too perhaps consider the amount of soy you eat and think it "wouldn't hurt" to try and balance amino acids ..( even if you find out later otherwise)
Ouch ... _____HUGS__________
[/quote]
Of course, it could be we've really said all that can be said and the record will speak for itself. I hope so. My mind isn't really all there. About all I can process right now is that you responded
[/quote]
Hey, you don't need to respond, I am just trying to give something you can think over. Like I said, don't feel under obligation to respond. It doesn't matter really if you read and still disagree, mostly here I'm just replying to your posts although somehow mine always get long winded!
I did a lot of research on this but, hey so did a lot of people
If you are healthy and happy then that is really what is important... (well I'd like being heathy and happy too ) What I'm saying is I appreciate the ethical arguament against eating our fellow animals, (wow did I spend a lot of time debating that with myself) ... I just don't see a need to push it as nutrition.
Really, there are 101 good diets, all for different reasons but no diet fits everyone. Medically, there are diabetics for instance. The best diet for them might not be the same for me, especially if it contained wheat! UGGGHGGHHHH
So if there is no single best diet then that means there are lots of "very good" diets, including well thought out vegan.
All I hope you take away is too perhaps consider the amount of soy you eat and think it "wouldn't hurt" to try and balance amino acids ..( even if you find out later otherwise)
I use Jay Robb's vanilla whey protein. It has NO gluten, casein, among other offenders. It has 24 grams of protein in a single scoop. It is delicious and i drink at least one protein smoothie each day made with the Jay Robb protein. You can buy it in Whole Foods and probably other places too. There is also a web site www.jayrobb.com. His gluten-free protein bars are delicious as well. I buy both in bulk.
I am a 46 year old woman who works out 1 1/2 -2 hours a day (cardio and strength training), vegetarian and I would have to say this protein powder and his bars have certainly ebabled me to keep up such a pace and work full time and keep 8 animals happy.
My favorite smoothie has at least a cup of frozen unsweetened strawberries, 1 scoop of protein, about a cup of diet Ocean Spray Cranberry jucie and blended with ice cubes to thicken.
I should also mention that American Whey protein sold in GNC stores is gluten free. I contacted the company personally to find out as that is the protein I used before I found the Jay Robb. The American Whey tastes pretty good, but not quite as good as the Jay Robb. If budget is a concern, the American Whey is less expensive.
Sorry for the typo's but I'm in a hurry, rushing off to work out. Good luck.
I am a 46 year old woman who works out 1 1/2 -2 hours a day (cardio and strength training), vegetarian and I would have to say this protein powder and his bars have certainly ebabled me to keep up such a pace and work full time and keep 8 animals happy.
My favorite smoothie has at least a cup of frozen unsweetened strawberries, 1 scoop of protein, about a cup of diet Ocean Spray Cranberry jucie and blended with ice cubes to thicken.
I should also mention that American Whey protein sold in GNC stores is gluten free. I contacted the company personally to find out as that is the protein I used before I found the Jay Robb. The American Whey tastes pretty good, but not quite as good as the Jay Robb. If budget is a concern, the American Whey is less expensive.
Sorry for the typo's but I'm in a hurry, rushing off to work out. Good luck.
Thanks. I'm not feeling particularly healthy and happy right now but that it my own fault for not being careful at a restaurant.
All I want to add is that you shouldn't assume. I am following the diet I am for health reasons. I said nothing to indicate I was doing so because I object to eating animals for ethical reasons (I spent decades eating animals, and currently wear leather and even fur [albeit hesitantly when I go to my favorite vegetarian restaurants ]) I also eat very little soy (Enterolab is now testing for that, inter alia) and try to avoid isolated soy protein altogether.
I've read about nutrition for years and will continue to do so. I urge everyone to do the same because of its importance to our health.
All I want to add is that you shouldn't assume. I am following the diet I am for health reasons. I said nothing to indicate I was doing so because I object to eating animals for ethical reasons (I spent decades eating animals, and currently wear leather and even fur [albeit hesitantly when I go to my favorite vegetarian restaurants
]) I also eat very little soy (Enterolab is now testing for that, inter alia) and try to avoid isolated soy protein altogether.I've read about nutrition for years and will continue to do so. I urge everyone to do the same because of its importance to our health.
QUOTE(hathor @ Feb 10 2007, 02:37 PM)
[color=#9932CC]Thanks. I'm not feeling particularly healthy and happy right now but that it my own fault for not being careful at a restaurant.
Yeah, it sucks but I do the same thing. To me its a question of me controlling the disease not becoming a slave to it. No matter how careful you are it still happens form time to time but equally once the fog has lifted you usually learn something.
QUOTE
All I want to add is that you shouldn't assume. I am following the diet I am for health reasons.
Sorry, your right but I guess I misworded it... what I'm really trying to say is regardless of your reasons anyone and everyone should have the fundamental right to know what's going into their body and that I view veganism as a perfectly valid choice for lots of reasons. In other words I'm not a vegan but I'm really not anti-vegan at all. A problem I perceive is that because of moral issues they can't put aside (nor should they have to) many vegans spend a lot of time trying to evangelise. When they do this the aruaments they propose are for a large part not balanced because they extract what they want to see from the evidence and ignore what they don't want to see.
This is human nature, these people are not doing this because they are nasty people or want to deceive, they are doing it because that is what they see.
In many ways I think they ask the wrong questions. For instance is a vegan diet healthier/better etc. than the standard American diet. To me this is pointless because almost any diet that makes you think before you put something in your mouth has to be healthier and better. Its very easy to find a study where someone becomes vegan and see's health, performance benefits etc. because on the whole the Western diet is so bad to start off with but there are equal numbers of people who make terrific health gains on the complete inverse with high protein diets like Atkins.
In the same way proponents of Atkins who have seen health benefits will make all sorts of claims and say how much better they are. If you want to set out to prove Atkins is "the best diet" there are 1001 internet sources stating studies saying how its the best most natural diet along with an equal number for the Hay's diet or Paleolithic diets.
QUOTE
I said nothing to indicate I was doing so because I object to eating animals for ethical reasons (I spent decades eating animals, and currently wear leather and even fur [albeit hesitantly when I go to my favorite vegetarian restaurants ])
Like I say, sorry my intention was not to make assumptions about you. ])QUOTE
I also eat very little soy (Enterolab is now testing for that, inter alia) and try to avoid isolated soy protein altogether.
I pretty much think that's a good idea. I don't seem to react though I haven't been tested but I see enough people here who do to make me think its proably best avoided by celiacs. QUOTE
I've read about nutrition for years and will continue to do so. I urge everyone to do the same because of its importance to our health.
Obviously, all I am saying really is that neutral sources are best.
If you want to determine what paleolithic man ate then do so as an excersize, not with an agenda of proving he was either a vegan or carnivore. It will be very interesting to find out more on this because I love the whole subject of anthropology but there is also a lot of evidence already that paleolithic man not only ate a lot of animals but each other too. However, I just don't see how this is an arguament for or against Veganism... after all if we find paleolithic man got a large amount of protein from canibalism we are not going to suddenly start eating each other?
Hope you start feeling better soon...... more cyber HUGS....
Body Fortress makes a whey protein powder. I talked to Teresa for Body fortress . You can get it at Walmart for 13.00 2lbs. It has 23g protein 1.5g fat. Contains soy. Made in facilty that handles wheat. Their customer service stinks, so if you have any additional questions it takes awhile for an answer.
I use HDT ProBlend 55, either the Chocolate Fudge or the Alpine Vanilla. Both are gluten free, but contain a variety of protein sources including eggs, whey and casein. I have at least one shake a day and haven't had problems with this product. I had to sell several unopened cannisters of SAN Anabolic Infusion because it did contain gluten, although it was the tastiest powder I've ever used. I agree that whole foods would be a better choice, but there are times (like when I'm working) that I can't eat a meal, but I can sip a shake.
I consider myself a bodybuilder. My entire day is centered around the gym and eating or preparing food, but as a celiac and mother of a celiac, the gluten issue is just one more giant hassle in a world of food issues. I'm a personal trainer and pretty much live at the gym.
I really disagree that bodybuilding or serious weight training is unhealthy. COMPETITION PREP is unhealthy. Doing lifts incorrectly or too heavy is unhealthy. Obviously, anabolic steriods and no cardio is unhealthy.
And yes, maybe I'm compensating. I have fibromyagia as well and found that eating clean and lifting weights pretty much ended my pain.
I consider myself a bodybuilder. My entire day is centered around the gym and eating or preparing food, but as a celiac and mother of a celiac, the gluten issue is just one more giant hassle in a world of food issues. I'm a personal trainer and pretty much live at the gym.
I really disagree that bodybuilding or serious weight training is unhealthy. COMPETITION PREP is unhealthy. Doing lifts incorrectly or too heavy is unhealthy. Obviously, anabolic steriods and no cardio is unhealthy.
And yes, maybe I'm compensating. I have fibromyagia as well and found that eating clean and lifting weights pretty much ended my pain.
QUOTE(cchhrriiss @ Feb 12 2007, 03:48 PM)
Body Fortress makes a whey protein powder. I talked to Teresa for Body fortress . You can get it at Walmart for 13.00 2lbs. It has 23g protein 1.5g fat. Contains soy. Made in facilty that handles wheat. Their customer service stinks, so if you have any additional questions it takes awhile for an answer.
Prostar Ultimate Nutrition is gluten free except for their cookies n cream flavor. It is a whey protein...my husband uses it and he checked with the company since he didn't want the powder to be all over the kitchen if it contained gluten.
