gerry:
>For the record, following is a comparison of the protein percentage in milk of
>different species by John Robbins' Pulitzer Prize nominated book "Diet For A
>New America," and founder of EarthSave:
>
>Human 5%

It is a puzzler why human breast milk is lower in protein than many other
species (most of whom feed much less of a brain). Perhaps it has something
to do with how immature humans are born--I don't know. It is one of the
real anomolies in nutrition. But I can tell you that even at 5% an infant
gets quite a bit of protein (of _everything_ that is in there) since they
consume lots of breastmilk--at least our 10-month old daughter shows no
sign of slowing down ;)

>"Human mother's milk provides five percent of its calories from protein.
>Nature seems to be telling us that little babies, whose bodies are growing the
>fastest they will eer grow in their life, and whose protein needs are
>therefore at a maximum, are best served by the very modest level of 5%protein.

Is this John Robbin's speaking? Regardless, it is a dicey game to
extrapolate the ideal human diet from breastmilk macronutrient percentages.
What does the 40% (by calories) fat content of breastmilk tell us about the
human diet? What do the relatively high levels of B12, cholesteral, DHA,
and EPA tells us about the human diet. If we were to consider only these
items (as Mr. Robbins apparently considers only protein) then we would have
a hard time arguing for a vegetarian diet methinks, and certainly not a
vegan diet.

>"Even in fact, were we at the very top end of the spectrum....needing to
>derive a full TEN PERCENT of our calories from protein, unless we are trying
>to live only on fruits and sweet potatoes, vegetarian foodstuffs easily
>provide for our protein needs....by doing nothing more than including...fresh
>vegetables...wheat (17% protein) or oatmeal (15%) or pumpkin (15%)...or
>nothing but cabbage (22%) we'd have over double the maximu we might need.
>"In fact, if we ate nothing but the lowly potato (11%) we would still be
>getting enough protein. This fact does not mean potatoes are a particularly
>high protein source. They are not. Almost all plant foods provide more. What
>it does show, however, is just how low our protein needs really are."

It doesn't show this at all. To extrapolate all that from the protein % of
breastmilk is quite far-fetched. As I mentioned, what if we tried to use
similar reasoning for fat, or cholesteral, or B12? It just isn't as simple
as Mr Robbin's would like it to be.

>Note: "The day we stop learning we stop living."

And the day you start swallowing vegetarian propaganda whole is the day
you'll need a dietary supplement.  ;)

Cheers,
Kirt

Secola  /\  Nieft
[log in to unmask]