Thank you for always being data-driven, objective, implementing crucial context of certain facts, and overall just being highly informative and unbiased Layne. Your knowledge and hard work is appreciated.
@@truefitness3277 I believe we all have some level of bias but there are very few that keep that bias to a minimum and focus on the data as Layne does. But that's just my opinion.
@@truefitness3277 you think he's biased? towards what? He's already criticised multiple keto or carnivore videos. If anything, he's biased towards having a balanced diet with a variety of foods .
@@animatedmvs8818 several of his claims here are BS and Matthew Nagra has reached out to him for sources when it comes to some lf the his claims about plant proteins etc, which Biolayne refused to have a discourse about and he didn't change anything when being critcized.
Bugs are unironically good protein tho. I don’t eat them bc why would I if I eat meat, but someone who doesn’t eat animals for moral reasons should consider it
@@jebbush2527 they're actually poor sources, most of the "protein" is non-digestible chitin and keratin. You're better off with soy or legumes in a mixed powder. Or meat
My compromise is using half ground beef and half cooked lentils in a lot of bulk cooking. I made a grass fed ground beef/lentil Mexican casserole today with rice, corn, onions, peppers, rotel and taco seasoning. Protein, carbs, veggies and very low in fat. Works for me.
Layne you are one of my top sources of nutrition science. Love your work and logic. But I would really appreciate (and possibly others as well) if you would post the links of the studies you are referring to. For example I'd love to see the study that compares people who eat meat & veg compared to only veg (7:20 in this clip). Thank you for sharing your knowledge!
3:36 pea protein should be mentioned here as being cheap, widely available and having comparable (though admittedly lower) leucine amounts compared to whey. Whey is 10- -13% and pea protein is 8-9%.
@@kumarsharma16 I consume my protein supplements like the omnivore I am... I take both a pea/hemp protein blend and a whey isolate. I mostly take the plant blend protein throughout the day but I always hit up whey after lifting. Yes, the plant protein supplements have less protein per scoop but I still hit my macro goals each day.
My nutritionist said that pea protein was superior... that it had appetite-suppressing properties. Doesn't matter to me, I guess. I am lactose intolerant, so I'm better off with a pea protein shake!
This ties into something else that bugs me about the fitness space, the constant chase for the optimal diet or training plan. Most of us don’t need optimal; we’re not trying to be professionals or break world records. We probably can’t or won’t arrange the rest of our lives around fitness enough to take full advantage of that optimality anyway. Most of us just need something that’s pretty good and fits our lifestyle so we can do it consistently. If that’s plant-based, OMAD, or whatever else, awesome.
That's something that I was thinking about aswell. For some, if not most of these "influencers" or "biohackers" and whatnot, this is actually their LIFE. They do this stuff all the time and they will eventually lean into very nuance aspects of these things, plus the possible bias, sponsorships, feedback-loop from people who had positive experiences, financial motivation and so forth. So not only will there be nuances at play, but they may also cost an exponential amount of time and/or money and/or effort to put into practice. And in my opinion, most of these folks are weak and will turn into biased sellouts of some kind eventually.
Layne: Thanks for pointing out that cohort study. I'm unsure why it took so long for a higher quality cohort study to be conducted that actually took into account specific dietary pattern metrics, but it was illuminating on this whole debate and the inconsistencies regularly found in this area of study.
I think context matters here. The average person and the average patient for that matter is incredibly unhealthy at baseline and eats a terrible diet. They're also not looking to maximally build the most possible amount of muscle they can, they are looking at doing the least amount of work for the most amount of gain. Plant sources of protein also happen to come with heart healthy fats and exceptionally healthy fiber on top of being loaded with phytonutrients, vitamins, minerals, and other compounds that may reduce risk of metabolic disease and cancers. The average person is not going to see the benefit of maximizing their animal protein intake. There are also other things to consider as well, like the cost of the protein. It's going to be easier and cheaper to get someone to eat a larger bowl of whole grains as their breakfast or add a cup of peas to their dinner than it is to have them essentially add another meal to their day by eating a portion of lean meat which no one is going to do, they'll opt for 80/20 beef or whole fat dairy or bacon or sausage etc. I think this just highlights the difference between a researcher and bodybuilder that minmaxes nutritional intake and a clinician dealing with the average person with the stresses of the average lifestyle.
I used to get stomach problems too, but I eventually found that culprit was sucralose and one other sweetener that triggers me. It tastes awful but I can handle a 2 ingredient whey protein isolate
Will lower fiber sources of plant protein have a higher bioavailability? Such as tofu. Tends to be a decent source of protein (a block of superfirm has somewhere around 70 grams), but it's also a moderately processes food and has little fiber.
If fiber interferes with protein absorption, it likely isn't enough that anyone would notice. Most people are getting in way too much protein as it is. That said, get around 100 grams of protein per day, get 80% of my calories from whole plant foods, take in 65 grams to 80 grams of fiber (typical) with spikes up to 100 grams fiber per day depending on what I am eating. But 65 grams to 70 grams is almost every day. Even when I am sick I still hit 50 grams. But, coming from the bro-science world and taking in double the amount of protein that I take in now but also half the fiber I take in now, I have not noticed any loss of strength, endurance, etc. so I assume my muscle mass is about the same as before. I did lose body fat though by getting most calories from whole plant foods. But the process of denaturing proteins starts in the stomach so even if proteins get bound up in fiber they almost certainly get unbound through the digestive process. Well, all that word salad and with all the stuff I have read about diet and nutrition I can't even recall reading anything about how protein can get bound up in fiber. Other compounds can, but never heard of protein being one of them
Great breakdown on the study. It’s fascinating how limited all these studies are in perspective. It goes to show how little we know. If anything they leave you asking more questions.
To be fair, he wasn’t talking about body builders, he was talking about the average person, and the average person who isn’t looking to build muscle can definitely eat a plant-based diet and get enough protein without having to supplement with protein powder. Also, someone eating a standard American diet would definitely benefit from substituting at least some of the animal protein in their diet with plant-based protein sources that are higher in fiber and lower in saturated fat/cholesterol/calories.
Very well said, agreed, and for those of us doing resistance training on a mostly to only plant based diet--pea protein concentrate is a pretty decent to good source of concentrated protein. It is not as high in leucine as animal sources, but it is not terribly behind either. I hope that someday, a combo pea and corn protein concentrate comes to the market. I may be wrong, but I think there are some plant based sources of just leucine though? If so, one could just combine these. Though not plant based, I would also consider cricket protein powder, as it seems both more ethical* and environmentally sustainable than meat, while being HIGHLY nutritious overall. The high price of it is what keeps me from buying it. I've thought about raising them myself, but right now I'm too busy for that. I'm in the middle of a prototype project where I'm creating a hybrid soft-hard cooler that is primarily vacuum insulated and very light weight and inexpensive (compared to all other vacuum insulated coolers on the market). *Insects are very, very simple forms of life that are very instinctive in nature. I don't think they experience anything close to the emotional fear or stress of unnatural living conditions, that say cows and especially pigs do. Also, they typically are raised to the end of their short life cycle and then frozen, which is a very painless way to end their life (doubt they are even aware that they are dying--they just go to sleep/go dormant and don't wake up again). They require far, far less water and land/area to grow. They truly are quite nutritious. But people with shell fish allergies may have to be careful with consuming them.
To be fair, he dismissed the difference in bioavailability and protein composition by claiming plant protein is high quality compared to meat protein and did not state that somebody "can" eat a plat-based diet but that it's the "preferred" method. Whatever that means. If an average person takes this at face value their effective protein consumption will drop if they swap out an equal amount of animal protein for plant protein and think they're doing better because this guy said it's the preferable route.
To be fair, his phrasing implies superiority. If his message was to basically "eat healthier, and you can do that through plant-based" I'd see no issue with it. He's got a plant based book out and is clearly pushing his info in a non-sincere way. This is exactly the problem with this industry. Every side claims to have the magic pill, and they all cherrypick studies and results to make their claims seem more solidified as if "This is the way." This is why so many people struggle because they fall into a cult, rather than just getting good info. He may be talking to the average Joe, but he could also let those people know that meat consumption in moderation isn't the worst thing in the world. Being active, eating reasonable amounts of calories, getting your fiber. Strictly switching to plant based isn't the secret, not eating like a glutton is.
i mix legumes with corn/wheat types. for example white beans with pasta. gives you over 100grs perfect bioavailable protein, because the different lacking amino acids complete each other. aalso high in leucine.
@@SLude480 Even PDCAAS is not a very accurate measure as it just looks at the nitrogen balance and we don't know how much is absorbed by the body vs how much gut flora consume.
A feedback on the general approach: you mention "to maximize anabolic growth... " which makes sense. However, that only concerns a tiny minority of people looking into health and nutrition, probably even a minority in your audience. So to enlarge the reach and usefulness of your video, it may make sense to look at your typical viewer as health-interested, rather than body-building interested. Otherwise, 10/10 as usual
Here's the interesting counter to that. When they give sedentary seniors a good boost of animal protein (maybe 25-30 grams minimum per day) they increase their lean muscle mass just doing nothing. However, they get no appreciate gain from the same amount of plant protein. Sarcopenia is a real concern among seniors and most seniors under eat protein. And since you bones are 50% it help build strong bones too.
@@claybutler Thanks for sharing, that's interesting. However, I was referring here to Layne's advice on "nutrition for bodybuilders", which is a minority of the audience
@@ThePowerMoves True, but it turns out that the bodybuilding advice around protein holds true for sedentary people as well. Due to an athlete's enhanced ability to utilize protein, sedentary people may even need more protein as they age, compared to a fit person, due to anabolic resistance. That's why a senior needs more protein than a teenager. They utilize protein less efficiently and have a hard time triggering muscle protein synthesis. The tenager is basically on natural steroids and utilize their protein exceptionally well so can afford to be more sloppy with their diet.
@@MyCommentsRMaturelol I'd say they are the same.There is no harm in a high protein diet but definite harm from under eating protein. I think everyone should try to eat as much protein as possible. There is no downside and only upside. And protein is pretty filling. If a typical person eat a 16oz steak, they will be satisfied for many hours. So I don't know how someone could eat a theoretical amount of "too much protein".
the only reason I use a pea protein powder is because I am allergic to whey and milk protein. I eat red meat, I eat eggs, because I know they are complete source of amino acid, also for some odd reason I can eat yogurt with no issues.
Thanks for this, pea protein it is for me then. I too can eat yoghurt, but milk is a bit of an issue. You don't have issues with gas or anything from the pea protein?
He’s correct. There’s data showing animal protein has a higher link to mortality than even animal fat. More Ampk equals longevity mtor equals faster aging in excess. And 4-5 meals a day stimulating mtor and insulin is a sure way to not get optimal ampk even if it better for bodybuilding. Now a 2 meal a day plan pre and post workout could still provide calories and mtor for sufficient growth even if not optimal while getting enough ampk to maximise longetivity. 11% cals from protein equals greatest health long term. For bodybuilder this could be bumped up but having enough to maximise growth is not the best for health 15-20% is fine and on 3000 calories that’s still around 129-150 protein
My late doctor, who lived to the ripe old age of 95 and was still seeing patients, working in his garden at his office, and still tended to the flower beds at his home and took care of the yard as well, once told me, "everything in moderation...3 balanced meals with 2 healthy snacks," (later found out it was basically what Lee Labrada has been teaching). His handshake was firm, he stood up straight and was not hunched over, he walked with a "spring" of a 30 year old, he didn't "shuttle." He made Biden look like the old infirm-ed fool. His mind was strong and healthy, alert, and still sharp, he didn't stutter or mutter to himself. I believe he weighed a "healthy" 120 Lbs...he was slender, no belly, but certainly did not look frail and weak. Basically, he told me to eat "whole foods," stay away from the processed crap, and eat meat, veggies, complex carbs, and low fat, but healthy fats. I don't trust any diet that says eat just this (vegans, carnivore, etc.).
One of my grandmothers lived to 98 and was a 3 meals a day person who stuck rigidly to the meat/fish and two veg. She was never overweight and was walking till her last day. My other grandmother lived to 103 and was also a 3 meals a day person, except hers was more Mediterranean diet and she was overweight her whole life and barely exercised other than short walks to the shop for the last 50 years of her life. She did have colon cancer in her early 70s. She died from complications of falling and breaking a hip. The doctor said her organs like heart and lungs were like a 20 year old.
@@Uncle-Bull it's political/dumb that he'd even mention Biden when the president has outlived most men and has a lower bmi and is more active than most American men. Hes mocking the president calling him an "infirm-ed fool".
But if maximum muscle mass if your goal, then you're automatically getting higher calories. If higher calories and meat are correlated with shorter lives, is it a good idea to maximze mucle mass? I get that you want to be strong and fit, and perhaps be in the top 1% of fitness levels, but that's different than maximizing muscle mass.
I think the point here is what you do with the excess protein. It is down to training and you don't need to consume as much calories from animal sources to get the same amount of bioavailable protein. Muscular strength is inversely and independently associated with all cause mortality in men after adjusting for cardiorespiratory fitness and other confounding factors.
@@jnrrpg I think the science is clear on muscle strength, but not muscle size. For example, if we look at two categories of people 175 - 185 lbs vs 215 -225, and we assume same or similar height, bodyfat for each group and that each group is in the top 1% of strength for their respective weights. Who lives longer and healthier? That's my basic question. I don't think there is an answer to the question based on current studies. My theory is that the extra mass would be a detriment, but I have no science to back that up. My theory is that the extra weight might be deleterious on joints and that the organs would have to work harder to support the extra muscle. However, I could also see the extra muscle being protective if one had cancer or other serious illness. (The larger mass could help stop someone from wasting away and give someone more time to allow recovery treatments to be effective.) Edit : "Relatively high muscle mass may not be beneficial to blood pressure regulation." Korhonen PE, Mikkola T, Kautiainen H, Eriksson JG. Both lean and fat body mass associate with blood pressure. Eur J Intern Med. 2021
I’ve had good luck switching to mostly plant based at home and whatever elsewhere. Tempeh, TVP and even soy protein are all pretty cheap, cheaper than animal products. They also don’t go bad and are easier to cook for the lazy home cook. It’s not all or nothing.
I have been eating a plant-based diet for the guts of 4 years and I am the strongest and most muscular I have ever been. I typically eat 80-100 grams of protein per day at a bodyweight of around 75kg. No powders, just food. Anytime I have experimented ramping up my protein intake I ended up feeling worse and my performance was negatively impacted.
How many times pers day do you need to eat? And what are your protein sources? Would love to know because plant-based was both horrible for my gut health and my psoriasis. I was also hungry all the time and I felt like a crackhead with my diet. For me, animal based is so simple. I buy one local animal and it lasts me the entire year. Saving on purchasing tons of plastics all year from all over the map just feed my insatiable need for variety.
I tried plant base protein and hated it. Why? Because it makes me so gassy and I fart way too much. My fart really stinks...seriously. The gassy and farts disappeared several days after I stopped taking plant proteins.
Lol, he is simply saying for normal people its easy getting enough protein, AND HE IS RIGHT. Normal people are not trying to get to 200-250 grams of protein ROFL. Strawman from biolayne, disappointing.
Even for non elite bodybuilders these intakes are unnecessary. When Layne talks about optimal he fails to mention it’s barely any better than just getting a normal amount lol. He does the same thing with high training volume where he fails to mention that yes it’s technically better, but you’re doing literally 10 times as much work for 20% more gains. Layne obsesses too much over getting maximum results which is not what the average person cares about at all.
No, the dude in the video is saying that plant protein is better than animal protein and this is "new science" which is just blatantly wrong. He's misleading people and leaving out that animal protein have better amino acid profiles for muscle synthesis and is more bioavailable. If he would qualified himself at all with regard to that, then we could give him the benefit of the doubt, but he didn't. He just straight up said it was better and it's not.
I’d like you to review your plant protein bioavailability claim. You claim 50-60-70 percent available. I’ve heard others suggest plant protein is about 6-8 percent less bio available than animal sources. That’s a big difference!
Saturated fat does not matter it's good for us.humans have been eating lots of animal fat for thousands of years and they weren't getting heart disease
Why didn't you mention foods like Hemp or Tofu, or any beans really? Meeting Leucine requirements on a WFV diet, sans supplementation, is almost easy at this stage.
Man Layne, I'd give anything to see you debate Dr Joel Fuhrman. You and him are the only ones who ever made a lick of sense on nutrition to me. You guys both crushed Paul Saladino, id live to see you go toe to toe with one of the top WFPB guys.
@@crye088 Its basically settled now. The guy is eating fruit and honey nonstop. His dietary ideology is incoherent and hypocritical, and only appeals to the lowest common denominator of people looking for a WOE
@@tom4705 not personally a carnivore guy, however, saladino clearly indicates by his videos the majority of his diet consists of meat & organs while supplementing with fruit, honey, etc. My comment was in reference to the norton vs saladino debate via the powercast. It's settled, the overall consensus was norton got owned
@@crye088 Anyone who thinks Saladinos way of eating is ideal is not worth taking seriously. Guy scammed thousands with his carnivore code book that he doesn't even believe in anymore. When you think beef fat is healthier than wholesome veggies, you have a problem.
So if 20% or so of the protein from beans never actually get digested, shouldn't foods with fiber have their nutritional labels adjusted, or is that already compensated for?
if your sole goal is to add size and mass to your body and have zero concerns for health or disease then yes animal protein is superior for building mass, but that's why plant protein is by design lower in protein and it's availability because it is designed to give you what you need but not give you deleterious effects. Which is what the video was trying to convey. A normal adult who doesn't want to be 50 pounds overweight with muscle mass does not ever need to consume animal protein as the plant proteins their body can safely consume in large quantities will serve perfectly in a long healthy life.
@@aarons9879 but the amount needed to maintain muscle mass when you factor is that 100+ g of amino acids are recycled each day from the intestines , leaves a very small need of getting protein from dietary sources which is why natural foods like plants have small amounts of protein in them because they are not needed in high amounts. If you want to be bigger eat more protein and fat and lift, if you want to be leaner , eat less protein and fat , and walk /run. Simple equation that works every time it's tried. Most people don't want to be bigger.
This is the reason I still follow Layne despite the fact that he is not loved in the Low Carb community. He knows his protein as his teacher is the master Jedi of protein 😎
Layne, when you say veggie protein necessitates 20-40% more than egg or whey protein, are you comparing isolate to isolate? Because I can't see fiber holding plant protein absorption back if it's isolate. Ive asked that before. Here's to hoping you answer this time.
@@sagebauer1077 yeah, I don't think there's fiber in isolate, else it wouldn't be isolate but some crude concentrate. Then again, you'd assume that's how veggie vs whey/egg protein studies are done, as that would be the easiest thing to do, give participants protein powders, hopefully in person before or after supervised in lab training sessions. I do recall years back there being speculation that both sources of protein need to be leucine matched to elicit the same anabolic response, Norton?, but when it was matched, the veggie counterpart was still at a disadvantage. I can only assume that was in free living conditions comparing meat eating omnivores to vegetarians with veggie concentrate (with fiber) to compensate for thee lack of sufficient complete protein to compare, so I don't know how useful that would be other than to suggest any animal protein is better than veggie sourced concentrate protein powder, but Layne could clarify all this in a dedicated 20 min video.
@@sagebauer1077 oh, I do think I recall Layne saying it's usually concentrate that's used in veggie protein studies because isolate is so awful tasting. So yeah, I bet there probably wouldn't be a difference if isolate to isolate case scenario was used to compare animal vs veggie sources of protein.
I've been trying this new whey made by bacteria from My protein. I'm lactose sensitive, so having a whey protein that's exactly like dairy whey (their claim) is awesome. So far the salted caramel flavor is the best
Fermentation, longer cooking methods, adequate stomach acid and gut bacteria. You can increase digestion of protein in many ways. Cheese, tempeh, yogurt etc let bacteria do part of the process for you.
I’m going to keep commenting on your videos to help your algorithm. When you get to a million subscribers my job will be complete. You deserve every success. Great content as always.
I wasn't getting enough fiber and protein and having two or more plant protein shakes daily almost feels revolutionary for my energy, damn. Almost ZERO cravings for junkfood. Up that protein and fiber, your cravings might just fade away effortlessly, absolutely wild. I imagine most Americans probably only hit about half or less of their recommended fiber and protein levels most days - especially fiber). The powders can last almost 2 weeks, for $20ish that's a way more worthy investment than how much 2 weeks of junkfood can add up to and the protein and fiber boost might strangely reduce the desire for them. Using an app to keep up with macros and calories might be helpful and fun too - I like the LoseIt one but there are several.
And what about the correlation between hardcore vegans and the rising increase in weaker bone density also the studies done on the increases in poor mental health amongst vegans
I am a biochemist. your criticism of the video you are reviewing can be applied to the video you are making. Implied that proteins were "better" or "worse" based off of their capacity to stimulate skeletal muscle protein synthesis. Why is that the metric? Why are we assuming that more muscle protein synthesis is a good thing? If it is a good thing, how do we know it is, and up to what point? Does more muscle protein synthesis lead to worse outcomes or higher or lower probabilities of different diseases? We (the scientific community) should not be talking about "the best" with out describing what "the best" means, and what the consequences to population health are. Nutrition is hard, and dealing with multivariate systems is a complicated issue with respect to probability and statistics. Bonferroni corrections are often needed. Further, if the population follows a heavy tailed PDF, it is a different issue completely, statistically. I would be interested in seeing you assess a plant based diet in a population health context.
Most people are just b12 deficient in general and should supplement it anyway. You can supplement creatine monohydrate as it is usually synthesized from sarcosine and cyanamide.
have you never heard of high protein tofu? also known as extra firm or super firm tofu. 70g of complete protein in a block. for less than $5. people scared of phytoestrogens in soy but eat a female animal with bioavailable female hormones as well as drink the drink of a lactating cow. makes sense. /sarcasm
While soy is complete, it has less EAAs in it and is slower/harder to digest. So while it is a very good protein, it is not on the same level. The mistake people make, is thinking 30% worse protein equals 30% less gains. Which is not even remotely true, but it s in their head, and people like norton prefer not to clarify it (most of the time), even he knows better. I personally prefer soy all day.
With plant based proteins, you will always have more gains because you can lift heavier weights when you don’t also have to carry the weight of what you did to the animals.
Yeah, he basicly says, that you poop out about 25% of the total calories of e.g. red lentils. I somehow doubt that. Does that also hold for isolated plant proteins? He would destroy other people for that broad claim. While layne usually is very objective, this video felt like almost very anti plant-based.
I remember a Dr Greger video where he sited a study that showed eating peanuts vs peanut butter. For the same weight, since butter is easily absorbed you get a lot more calories vs whole peanuts where your gut flora gets to enjoy a significant percentage.
Great information. Personally I try to get most of my protien from animal products but only use plant based protien when I am trying to get to a certain amount of protien in my meal and maybe shirt 5 or 10 grams then I use items like peanuts...beans...or chochos to get me there
Im not shaw why people go to war over your style of eating, I don’t give a crap all I care about is what to eat to build more muscle and dodge cancer, I don’t care what it is just how good it is for my body
According to Hertzler et al. (2020), pretty well: “Protein blends of pea and rice ranging 40-90% pea protein can achieve a PDCAAS of 1.00.” www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7760812/ Pea is high in leucine (9% of the protein content by weight, close to the 10% whey offers) and just a bit of rice protein patches pea’s weak spot (methionine). Also, as Doc has said before, if you’re getting enough protein (say 1.6g+ per kilo of bodyweight), factors like quality and timing matter much less.
Protein powder virtually has no fiber which makes the bioavailability almost exactly the same as animal protein. I would say just choose between pea, rice and soy and you're good to go
@@ahappyimago yeah and so does soy. I wouldn't worry to much about the amino acid profile, if you consume 2.2g of protein per kg of bodyweight per day you will have more than enough
Leucin triggers mTOR, mTOR activation is correlated with cancer afaik. So maximizing muscular potential and keeping your cancer risk at the lowest is probably not possible. I've often read 70/30 rice/pea protein is superior to soy and not that much worse then whey. It's probably
The Epidemiology of Red Meat and Cancer Of those 800+ epidemiological studies, a mere 29 were put forth by the WHO as “informative” about the connection between unprocessed red meat and colorectal cancer. Of those 29 studies, 14 suggested that red meat was associated with a higher risk for colorectal cancer in humans; 15 of them did not. The Epidemiology of Processed Meat and Cancer As for processed meat, the WHO chose 27 of the 800+ studies to make its case for the cancer connection. Of those 27 studies, 18 suggested that processed meat was associated with a higher risk for colorectal cancer in humans; 9 did not.
Well bro you may have a point with this new science thing.... though there are papers who get retracted. Or results that can't be reproduced. There are new analysis methods and analyzers or plain mistakes. For example bittering quality of different hop acids. So there is old science.
Idk why everyone insists on cutting entire food groups out of their diet. Barring allergies and other exceptions, of course... but generally it's better to get a good balance of food in your diet, relying on meat and eggs for protein and fats, and veggies/grains for carbs and fiber. That way you get everything essential, plus a good mix of micros and flavor. Edit: some fruits are nice too, mainly for the micros. The sugar is not ideal in general but with all the fiber, your insulin sensitivity won't get completely shot like it would with processed sugar snacks.
Yep. I have no clue why people like to torture themselves by eating an overly restrictive diet for no good reason. One small correction to your comment though: You forgot about beans for carbs, fiber, protein and of course .... farts. :)
This is what I've been saying about eating other people! The MOST digestible protein source (it already comes pre-formed in the same structure), the MOST environmentally friendly (one human has the carbon footprint worth a million trees' carbon fixation), and the MOST tasty (many say it is difficult to distinguish from pork). So needlessly restrictive.
The problem is all these people dont really have a clue, but they hear any Information put smth at the top of it n put it on the Internet… n the worst case is when they call themselves „health doctors“… damn, god, it gettin really worse with all that new n old sience shit 🤦♀️ Thanx… nice video ❤❤❤
Sounds like he’s making valid claims on dietary patterns as a whole (plant based, typically more fiberous, better outcomes than common omnivorous diets), but then for some reason uses the word (protein) as if that’s the same thing. He also seems to compare healthy plant diets to poor omnivorous diets, but I guess it makes sense in the clinical context of „patients objecting to increasing plant consumption because of concerns about protein quality“.
It is not hard to get enough protein and all the amino acids you need to optimize health from plants. You seem to want to deter people from eating a whole food plant based diet.
The Epidemiology of Red Meat and Cancer Of those 800+ epidemiological studies, a mere 29 were put forth by the WHO as “informative” about the connection between unprocessed red meat and colorectal cancer. Of those 29 studies, 14 suggested that red meat was associated with a higher risk for colorectal cancer in humans; 15 of them did not. The Epidemiology of Processed Meat and Cancer As for processed meat, the WHO chose 27 of the 800+ studies to make its case for the cancer connection. Of those 27 studies, 18 suggested that processed meat was associated with a higher risk for colorectal cancer in humans; 9 did not.
Its only an issue if you mega dose it as a supplement, and no research linking supplementation to cancer the last I checked. Worst case you use injectable and bypass it
@@VerySeriousUser There is no such thing called an evolutionarily appropriate diet. Cooking with fire is the most unnatural thing we did and that is the only thing that differentiated us from animals. Even most plants and animals we eat nowadays are selectively bred by us and not part of any natural evolution.
I can safely say the idea you can't gain muscle on a plant-based diet is bogus. The DIAAS scores of various foods, the basis of so-called "protein quality", are vastly overrated, especially in terms of real-world diets. DIAAS scores are based on animal feeding studies using isolated, raw foods, not cooked or processed foods that most people eat on a well-planned plant-based diet.
