Uff a long list - I'll spare some more minutes...
Dori Zook wrote:
>> I think it's obvious that nature provides mothers milk to human
>> children.
>
>
> Be careful! Nature also provides meat to weaned humans.
>
Does it?
I mean to some extent it's plausible.
On the other hand how does nature "provide" a gazelle to a hominid?
Our nature eqipment to catch it, even to open it's skin are sparse.
No fangs, teeth .. as you speak of nature.
>> Protein is abundant in any original vegetarian food.
>
>
> But not complete proteins.
The complete protein story is a myth. Virtall all plant proteins are
complete - have all essential amino acids.
Some have a less ideal composition - so you'd need a little more and
have some more amino acids wasted.
Particualrly wheat protein which is only 60% quality of egg protein
(while meat is a 89%).
Who eats *only* wheat protein?
The myth comes from nitrogen balance tests. Add some legume protein to
wheat protein and you get 101% quality.
Take potatoe protein plus a little egg and you get 136% protein.
I think that's of academic nature - just a thought still spooking in brains.
> Meanwhil, wheat is one of the top food
> allergens. Lectins cause rheumatoid arthritis. Phytoproteins are not
> only
> not always good; some are bad.
I told you that I think here are the real (modern) problems in veg.diets.
> Also worth noting is the fact that early humans ate no extracted food
> items.
> Have we had time to evolve?
>
Maybe I didn't get this straight.
Extracted food items *are* the problem.
> US dietary recommendations were created by attorneys, not nutrition
> experts.
> Should we use the RDA protein recommendations as our Holy Bible of
> nutrition?
No, they are probably much to high.
You can measure real protein usage in nitrogen balance tests.
You can measure how much of the protein eaten is kept inside and used
and how much is burned and excreted.
Some gurus and "experts" postulate very much higher "needs".
Well this are not "needs" , these people promise some other benefits of
eating more protein (possible).
The best argument for more protein is that in nature (paleotimes) it is
hard to get energetically dense items -
for both, plants and animals. So, paleo-historically a higher protein
percentage is probable.
This could have been a benefit or more a problem.
> For many, 2,400 cal/day are too many.
>
For most of these protein amounts per day must be lowered too.
Some exceptions are sedentary or older people.
Maybe they should use more protein-dense items. Maybe they would benefit
from less protein too (topic: kidneys, blood acid)
I've made a protein score list.
here: http://wwwwell.de/paleolix/ProteinScoreE.html (88k)
In the column with the percents you find how much of the RDA (55g) you
get when you eat 2400 kcal of only this.
Or - next column how much grams you have to eat to get 55g protein.
>>> "Which do you find heathier, a vegetarian diet which includes eggs and
>>> dairy, or vegan?
>>
> You ARE kidding, aren't you? Eggs and dairy yes, or eggs and dairy no; a
> very clear question.
Ok then: you *can* do very well in all of these diets, also if you
include meat.
When vegan you should supplement VitB12.
> Not according to several former vegetarians who've been on this list.
>
I've seen.
Some become just tired - I think this is because some nutrients weren't
well in supply.
It would have been possible then to change the diet staying veg.
Some got problems related to intolerances. This is much tougher to answer.
It could be very difficult to come along with severe intolerances.
My girlfriend for example has intolerance against wheat and meat -- and now?
Fortunately there are a some alternatives. Generally non-wheat seeds.
>> You won't find any other micronutrient which isn't easily found from
>> plants. Or often much easier.
>
>
> But adequate? Without ill effects? Wheat can have any number of
> valuable
> micronutrients; it's still very bad for me, many others on this list and
> untold millions on the global level. Some are allergic. Many produce
> too
> much insulin in response to even moderate grain intake. Autoimmune
> disorders followed the introduction of grain to the human diet.
I think it's not fair to mix up veg and intolerances.
If you are allergic you just have to avoid the stuff. period.
It could produce *any* symptom in you.
No other connection with micronutrients.
Most micronutrients supply is best in plants (exception is liver which
is a vitamin wonder).
In making the protein score list I re-gained my
Best-of-all list fo all nutrients. It's online also - but it's 1 MB! beware
( http://wwwwell.de/paleolix/BestOfAllE.html )
Here you have the best supplies (high percentage values) for all
nutrients (not only protein)
in all food items in the USDA Database (sr14). Low-values selected out.
AA (arachidonic acid) anc chol(esterol) RDAs are fake - they are only
included to see food items which
have this.
I want to use this database query as a tool to proof the RDAs for example.
If there are very mans food items with high values then the RDA might be
too low (or it is simply easi to get).
If there are few food items with high values then either the RDA is too
high - or the item is difficult to get (unprobable)
- or some modern requirement exists to ingest more of the stuff (like
Vitamin E due to free radical attacks).
> Many grounds for disagreement here. Protein and fat are the only
> required
> macronutrients as they contain all required micronutrients.
>
Dori, I said *better* micronutient supply. Not "contain all if you
struggle well".
>Plant foods
>often supply too many unnecessary tidbits, including carbohydrates (not
>needed at all).
You may choose to replace carbs by gluconeogenesis. You'll have your
reasons.
You'll never convince me that this is what a primate metabolism was used
too in the millions of years.
It's not possible in the savannah. It's not in history. We don't stem
from inuit.
Ok, some do - I don't.
>> Less acidic food.
>
>
> Wheat and hard cheeses both produce high acid in the digestive
> system. Two
> examples from the top of my head (obtained during interview of Loren
> Cordain, PhD).
Hear the sound to *less*. It sounds different than *no*.
>
>>> Any tips for people going the low-carb route....
>>
>
> Question not answered.
Ok, no tips from me. lc isn't my route.
>
> But humans evolving on a diet containing meat IS human history -- some
> two
> million years worth. The Agricultural Revolution and its negative
> after-effects are also human history.
ok. No objection.
Btw containing is not "consisting of".
>
>
>> Do you consider some 50 years of a diet of cows and pigs (nowadays
>> form) as long term?
>
>
> See above.
>
The diet on cows and pigs is brand new. It's only possible (for the
masses) through mass agriculture.
These animals are *different* to what humans could have eaten for 2 mio
years.
Ok, too much time....
Have a nice day, all of you.
Amadeus
|
