
How to get enough protein without meat - petethomas
https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/wellness/how-to-get-enough-protein-without-meat/2017/11/13/b6d139b4-c3d7-11e7-afe9-4f60b5a6c4a0_story.html
======
spodek
The article lists protein density in grams of protein per cup or ounce, but a
more relevant measure is grams of protein per calorie.

Most people's health issue is too many calories.

In grams of protein per calorie, many plants score high. You just have to eat
more, which, if you make delicious food, is a benefit.

~~~
DiThi
> Most people's health issue is too many calories.

It's like saying the issue of a murdered man is too much metal inside the
body. Technically correct but misleading.

If you replace the carbs by exactly the same amount in fats, most people will
lose weight. Many of them would be unable to eat so much because they would
feel stuffed and stop feeling hungry all the time. And for those that eat the
same amount of calories, they would not be in fat storage mode so excess is
secreted.

~~~
bagacrap
This is misleading. If they don't eat as much due to higher satiety, then you
are not replacing with equivalent calories.

Calories are meant to be and are calculated as the lingua franca of
macronutrients. 5 calories of one really will have the same effect on your
waistline as 5 of another, holding all else equal.

Regardless, the grandfather is discussing macronutrient distribution and you
seem to be in favor of optimizing it as well, so I don't think there's
disagreement here.

~~~
DiThi
> If they don't eat as much due to higher satiety, then you are not replacing
> with equivalent calories.

That's one factor of why eating fat instead of carbs defeat the calories-in-
calories-out idea. But it's not the only one. Both the lack of release of
insulin and ketosis helps the body work much better.

> 5 calories of one really will have the same effect on your waistline as 5 of
> another, holding all else equal.

That's the problem, nothing else is equal when you have a vastly different
proportion of macronutrients.

~~~
namelost
OK let's ignore protein for a second. You're saying that if you eat the same
number of calories, but as fat instead of carbs, your body will store less of
it. i.e. that the human body is much more efficient at extracting energy from
carbohydrates than it is from dietary fat, i.e. more of the energy from
dietary fat is wasted. Macronutrient choice cannot affect the amount of work
that your body does, only what percentage of the calories are wasted
(inefficiency).

On the face of it this makes no sense because fat is such a good energy source
that _it 's what our bodies use to store energy_, so why would our bodies have
problems extracting energy from dietary fat?

~~~
DiThi
I didn't say that our bodies extract less energy from fat. It stores less
energy as fat. Fat storage mode is stimulated by insulin, which is stimulated
by glucose or by lack of sodium. Insulin brings other health problems in
addition to weight gain.

------
hokkos
An article about getting enough protein without meat and doesn’t talk about
essentials aminoacides is worthless. You should read about Protein
Digestibility Corrected Amino Acid Score and the new Digestible Indispensable
Amino Acid Score all plant proteins are not equals, and should be eaten
simultaneously to avoid deficiencies to have a complete profile to bring
muscle protein. Also anabolic response is lower with plant based protein
versus animal based and it should talk about B12 as deficiencies in it is a
silent killer.

[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Essential_amino_acid](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Essential_amino_acid)

[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protein_Digestibility_Correc...](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protein_Digestibility_Corrected_Amino_Acid_Score)

[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digestible_Indispensable_Ami...](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digestible_Indispensable_Amino_Acid_Score)

[https://dabamirror.sci-
hub.cc/bbb1a373d204d4fe2c1f9a8a38356d...](https://dabamirror.sci-
hub.cc/bbb1a373d204d4fe2c1f9a8a38356daf/10.3945@jn.114.204305.pdf)

[http://dacemirror.sci-hub.cc/journal-
article/a73bbb377b5c4cd...](http://dacemirror.sci-hub.cc/journal-
article/a73bbb377b5c4cd9f09d8376d3ef0ad7/volek2013.pdf)

~~~
KitDuncan
This annoys me so much. The essential amino acid myth has been thoroughly
debunked for years.

[https://nutritionfacts.org/video/the-protein-combining-
myth/](https://nutritionfacts.org/video/the-protein-combining-myth/)

B12 is the only real deficiency vegans experience and it's easily solved by
taking a supplement. B12 isn't some miracle vitamin, exclusive to animal
products either. It's produced by bacteria in the soil and since we're usually
sterilizing our food, it's not usually found on our produce anymore. That's
why livestock are getting it supplemented, just the way vegans are
supplementing it. It's not even like eating meat and animal products saves you
from B12 deficiency as a big chunk of the population is actually deficient.

~~~
passwordqq
Genuine q- can you explain what you mean by- "It's produced by bacteria in the
soil and since we're usually sterilizing our food, it's not usually found on
our produce anymore. "

What if we didn't sterilize? Would the bacteria then produce it in our
stomach? Once I "get " those bacteria in, do I have to replenish?

~~~
KitDuncan
I am not suggesting you ingest the soil bacteria, for it to produce the B12
inside your body. If you were to ingest small amounts of soil (on fruit or in
water) it should already contain B12. I don't know why anybody would do that,
if they could just take dirt (hehe) cheap supplements instead though.

~~~
passwordqq
OK, got you. Thanks. Follow up q- in that case what's wrong with
sterilization? The dirt should still have b12 I think?

What about the bacteria though? Not a good idea?

------
brilee
Did anyone else find it bizarre that they quoted "grams of protein per
ounce/cup" of food? America seems to have slowly adopted the metric system,
but it's not what I expected to look like...

~~~
raarts
Per cup is weird, especially to the rest of the world, but what really is
maddening to me is the 'serving'. Every food app is riddled with nutrients
'per serving' . Completely ridiculous. Servings differ greatly between brands,
packages, countries.

~~~
geowwy
> Per cup is weird, especially to the rest of the world

Cups are not weird, just just a pain in the arse because US cups are 240ml and
metric cups are 250ml. If you're following a recipe that needs exact
measurements it often trips you up.

~~~
tom_mellior
> Cups are not weird

Yes they are. For example, the article talks about "dark leafy greens (about 5
grams per cup)". Is that cups of dark leafy greens before chopping them up or
after? If you specified the amout per weight, it would not make a difference.
If you specify them by volume, it does.

------
ojosilva
I've gone (ovo-lacto) vegetarian recently and I couldn't be happier. My body
feels lighter, my mind more productive and my mood improved somewhat.

My initial intention was to be somewhat "flex" and have meat and seafood once
in a while, like once a month, but I've eaten meat only once in 4 months and
it was not specially satisfying: it tasted overwhelmingly salty and I wasn't
able to enjoy the flavor. I guess I lost interest. Biting into a dead animal
now feels wrong, it feels like eating food from a garbage can. Even eggs, milk
and sometimes cheese seem like a stretch for me now. I did not anticipate
that. In fact, I thought I was going to really enjoy my "meat day" but now I
dread it.

Friends ask why I did it. I don't have one particular reason. Just did it. I'm
not sure if the planet's better because of me not eating meat. I don't want to
sound moral, but it does feel civilized, in an almost naive way, not to crave
other animals. But I know I'm vegetarian because my body, and not my
conscience, asked for it.

I've always been a proud meat eater. I laughed at my sister when she turned
vegan. But I now feel relieved like a criminal that confessed his crime after
40 years in hiding. Trust me, eating meat is not important when you eat from a
wide range of sources. Eating meat, poultry, seafood should be a special,
almost mystical thing (in some religions it is), reserved for special
occasions. It should be local, not global. The massive processing of animals
is not only cruel and insanely wasteful, but is quite unhealthy from the
epidemiological and physiological perspective.

~~~
cies
As a long term lacto-ovo vegetarian, who is went mostly plant-based for health
reasons: dairy causes many ailments, a quite unnatural food for humans to
eat...

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h3c_D0s391Q](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h3c_D0s391Q)

~~~
toasterlovin
For some people.

Others of us are well adapted to dairy and, for us, dairy is a miraculous food
category. It is a great source of protein and fat. It adds a wonderful
dimension to so many recipes. And, aside from meat, milk is one of the few
single foods that you can largely sustain yourself on (I think of it as mother
nature’s Soylent).

~~~
cies
> Others of us are well adapted to dairy

No one is properly adapted, that why milk consumption is associated with
shorter lifespan and some diseases.

> And, aside from meat, milk is one of the few single foods that you can
> largely sustain yourself on (I think of it as mother nature’s Soylent).

What? Do yo mean to only drink milk (or eat meat)? In that case you lack
fiber, big time. I've mentioned, and provided you with a video revealing how
damaging milk is to the human body.

It will sustain your medical bill, until you die. :)

> It adds a wonderful dimension to so many recipes.

That's an opinion, and I must say I also really like the taste of some milk
products.

~~~
toasterlovin
> No one is properly adapted, that why milk consumption is associated with
> shorter lifespan and some diseases.

Adaptation to a lifestyle dependent on milk and it's derivatives was a huge
inflection point in the evolution of Europeans. It gave the bearers of this
adaptation a tremendous advantage over people who lacked it and consequently
spread rapidly.

If I were you, I would be very suspicious about diet advice derived from
epidemiological studies, since those studies can only ever infer correlation,
not causation, and are likely mostly useless as a result of this shortcoming.
This article by Gary Taubes goes into great detail about why (and, seriously,
this is one of the most important things I've ever read):

[http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/16/magazine/16epidemiology-t....](http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/16/magazine/16epidemiology-t.html)

> Do yo mean to only drink milk (or eat meat)?

Yes. See the Maasai (huge milk consumption) and Inuit (who historically ate a
diet consisting entirely of meat from sea mammals).

If you're interested about diet and how it relates to health, Good Calories,
Bad Calories by Gary Taubes is an amazing book, which is, on the surface,
about how dietary fat and carbohydrates affect health, but is really a deep
dive into how we ascertain knowledge and how the political process of
scientific recommendations gets corrupted by human shortcomings.

------
hoosieree
Anecdotal, but my vegetarian friend had "excessive protein" show up in a blood
test. Which was surprising, because he's not _trying_ to get extra protein.
Personally, when I'm vegetarian (95% of the time) I just make sure to get some
beans and grains and variety, and call it a day.

~~~
copperx
That's highly unusual. Did he have protein clearance problems due to early
kidney disease?

------
k__
I never had the impression that protein was a huge deal for vegans.
Considering tofu and seitan.

Aren't low testosteron levels a bigger issue?

~~~
cies
> Aren't low testosteron levels a bigger issue?

Nope. Vegans have higher T levels. Also higher than vegetarians. Here an
article with plenty links to studies:

[https://nutritionfacts.org/2013/02/12/less-cancer-in-
vegan-m...](https://nutritionfacts.org/2013/02/12/less-cancer-in-vegan-men-
despite-more-testosterone/)

~~~
fingerprinter
Linking to nutritionfacts.org is like linking to Exxon with an article on why
green energy is bad.

~~~
cies
What does nutritionfacts.org sell? Broccolli?

Does nutritionfacts.org pay for studies? Nope. (Exxon does)

Sorry, bad comparison. But I understand what you mean: Greger eats a plant
based diet himself so he must be biased and the probably goes about cherry
picking studies to match his beliefs. After a lot of research I've come to the
conclusion he's honest and works in the interest of people's health.

~~~
saosebastiao
> What does nutritionfacts.org sell?

A religion.

------
d13
What about the amino acids? Aren't those more important to a vegetarian diet
than protein?

~~~
cies
Protein breaks down in amino acids, so when zoomed out they are pretty much
the same thing in nutrition.

------
coldtea
A better question is, why?

------
ardit33
Can't read the article because of the paywall. But if you are looking for
protein without consuming meat, then usually dairy protein is great.

1) Milk based products that are high on protein (either whey, or casein). Most
shakes are usually whey. Otherwise yogurt is a great source (Icelandic skyr is
mostly protein). Some cheeses have more protein than fat, etc...

2) Egg protein. Either full eggs, or just whites, or powder egg protein.

3) Peas, Beans, Peanut Butter are good protein sources as well... but you can
really eat so much in a day

4) Avoid soy, (for many reasons, but mainly because it is thought to be
andrenogenic).

If you can't eat either milk or egg based products and I think you are a bit
out of luck. Yes, there are people that manage fine with (there even vegan
bodybuilders), but it really becomes tough diet wise as it is very
restrictive....

~~~
optimusclimb
It seems pointless to me when people become "vegetarian" to opt out of the
factory farming/animal cruelty machine...only to eat massive amounts of eggs
and dairy.

~~~
anarazel
It's a question of degree. One hundred gram of meat vs 200g of yoghurt implies
a significantly higher energy use and on average is more crucial pretty
calorie.

~~~
cies
He's talking about the "factory farming/animal cruelty machine", thus ethics.

You are responding about "energy use", this environmental impact.

Two separate reasons to go vegan. (besides the issues of pollution, scarcity
and health-impact)

~~~
anarazel
I also referenced the cruelty? The point being that to get the same amount of
energy out of milk/egg based products you'll need fewer animals than for meat
based production (where animals have to grow for multiple months to years just
to be slaughtered). Which means fewer animals will suffer to feed one person.
It's obviously possible to reduce further.

~~~
cies
Hard to compare the cruelty involved in breeding-for-slaughter, breeding-for-
milking-then-slaughter or breeding-for-egg-laying-then-slaughter. Or to
compare suffering in a chicken with the suffering of a cow. How many chicks
convert to one cow?

Bottom line is vegan, period. And even that line is blurry if you zoom in
enough :)

~~~
optimusclimb
Just in case you check your replies now and then - yes, you get what I was
saying.

One can opt out of meat and meat products for reasons of health (which are
complicated and debatable, but a personal choice), reducing environmental
impact, and not taking part in the way we currently handle animals for food.

The latter one is complicated, as it is technically possible to opt out of
supporting the chicken/cow "matrix" if you really truly only ever eat
meat/eggs/dairy from animals that are raised, used, and finally killed on
(likely) local farms that generally treat their animals with "dignity" for
whatever that's worth until they kill them. I personally don't think that real
free range cattle and chickens that are eventually slaughtered have bad lives
for what they are - but being able to only eat such animals is definitely a
choice only available to the upper-middle class and up, given the current
system.

But if you're a vegetarian and you routinely buy 48 egg cartons for $6 at your
local safeway and eat tons of cheese? You just have a restrictive weird diet.

