4 ms·
Approximately Half of Total Protein Intake by Adults Must Be Animal-Based
- nathan_compton 4y agoWeird use of the word "must."
- hoppyhoppy2 4y ago>Total diet cost was not allowed to increase. If tofu and beans supply adequate nutrition but cost $1 more per week than meat, the study design would conclude you "must" eat meat.
- shapefrog 4y agoNot everyone in the world makes 500k + stock options to tap at a keyboard a few hours a day.
- hoppyhoppy2 4y agoI don't think a hypothetical $52/year increased food cost requires a half a million dollar salary. I don't make great money right now in my non-tech job, but beans and tofu are still on the menu.
- causasui 4y agoA package of tofu costs $1.99, which is enough for a meal for 2. How much does meat cost you these days? This trope is so tired.
- nathan_compton 4y agoBuddy, I have as much contempt for the 500k + stock options keyboard jockies as the next person.
- shapefrog 4y agoI am down with your "must". Its may be technically valid within the constraints of the paper - no supplementation, no higher cost etc, but it as a word has little place in the title of an academic publication. My contempt is for the "people should just spend more money" crowd.
- imjonse 4y agoI may be wrong but the meat and dairy industry get a lot more state subsidies than their plant-based competitors.
- mtrycz2 4y agoAlso, where in the world do beans cost more than meat?
- i_am_jl 4y agoReturns 403. Anyone got a mirror?
- andai 4y agohttps://archive.ph/1G4Vl https://archive.ph/1G4Vl
- perlgeek 4y agoSources of Support: MS-Nutrition and MoISA received financial support from the French National Interprofessional Association of Livestock and Meat (Interbev)
- plutonorm 4y agothis is going to be an unpopular truth. If it holds up, I'm unsure why you couldn't take a multivitamin.
- binarymax 4y agoHow does a multivitamin replace many grams of protein?
- waffleiron 4y agoBecause the paper's main claim isn't about protein deficiency, but about non-protein nutrients such as vitamin B12
- rob74 4y agoIt doesn't - it just has to provide the stuff that you can't get from plant-based protein.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- m0llusk 4y agoSeems like the cultured meat options are likely to win over plant based made with basic processing. Cultured meat in theory can have almost any amino acid profile targeted which means it could potentially be made with plenty of arginine and lysine which is a limiting factor with meat from creatures.
- inglor 4y agoIsn't the piece kind of silly? It implies that protein intake must be animal-based (that's even in the title) where all it shows is (the well known fact) people eating primarily plant-based diets need to supplement their nutrition with stuff like B12 pills. Edit: Reading the full paper itself, it seems to be the case. They explicitly add "excluding the use of nutritional supplements or fortified foods." - very silly and misleading. Doubly so given their actual conclusion (not listed in the abstract): "...would necessarily require food fortification and/or nutrient supplementation to cover adult nutritional requirement". So they acknowledge their title is basically a lie. (As a side note their math/calculations also look very "I made this up and this has numbers" vs. a serious statistical analysis but that's really not the main point here)
- Schroedingersat 4y agoNot that fortification is costly or even all that environmentally taxing, but they omitted some major vegan nutrient sources. Yeast, algae, and sunlight treated mushrooms cover most of your bases for missing micronutrients and in quantities higher than meat for some nutrients.
- Victerius 4y agoIsn't the piece kind of silly? It implies that calorie intake must be food-based (that's even in the title) where all it shows is (the well known fact) people eating primarily food-based diets need to supplement their nutrition with stuff like soylent green./s Let's not start replacing normal nutrition by pills if we can.
- inglor 4y agoI'm not sure how you got "replacing normal nutrition with pills" with "this article isn't news and its point is misleading" but ok.. My critique was about how they claim one thing (You need 50% of your protein to come from meat) but don't show it and instead show that if you don't take supplements you need to do that which is a _completely different claim_. The silly bit isn't that supplements are needed for a balanced plant-based diet it's that this piece is silly and the point it _actually_ makes isn't news. People supplement their diets all the time - babies get Vitamin D3 drops and iron drops. Mothers take folic acid during pregnancy. Would they die otherwise? Usually not, but supplementing your diet according to medical advice to avoid things like neurological defects is generally a good idea.
- ramesh31 4y agoOr else?
- shishy 4y ago“Sources of Support: MS-Nutrition and MoISA received financial support from the French National Interprofessional Association of Livestock and Meat (Interbev). Interbev had no role in the design, implementation, analysis and interpretation of the data.” Make of that what you will!
- williamtrask 4y agoAlso https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Society_for_Nutrition https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Society_for_Nutriti...
- ninefathom 4y agoMy first thought when reading the title: "I wonder what livestock group subsidized this." A reasonable wondering, it seems. That doesn't invalidate the data, but it does raise questions about how the researchers might frame the experiment or interpret or present the results (such as a click bait title). Then, of course, there's always the possibility of a modicum of cultural bias...
- thomascgalvin 4y agoFrom the abstract: > This study provides factual information about the animal protein contribution to total proteins compatible with meeting all nutrient-based recommendations at no additional cost and shows that it varies between 45% and 60% depending on the group of adults considered. TL;DR, if you replace animal protein with non-animal protein, you're probably losing out on other nutrients. Also: > In Model Set#2, for women and men over 65 years (C and E), decreasing animal protein contribution to total proteins below 55% and 60% respectively led to protein levels below recommend levels. This suggests that non-animal proteins are not used by the body as efficiently as animal proteins. I don't think this means your protein must by animal-based, but if you're substituting vegan options, you probably need more protein than you think, and also need additional vitamin supplements, as well.
- hyperboreanChad 4y ago
- mmaunder 4y ago“… led to protein levels below recommend levels.” Imagine a smoking study funded by big tobacco that defines its own safe tar and nicotine levels and then determines if we’re within those thresholds.
- albertTJames 4y agoHm, misleadingt title and abstract. Basically animal food source is more dense in protein, so cheaper. If you constrain the price of the meals, optimal solution will of course favour animal source. In the intro they even say for western country it food source would not matter because we're above minimum protein intake. Very misleading, not sure how this title passed the bulshit test.
- walnutclosefarm 4y agoWhat a bizarre article. Basically shows that if you don't take any animal protein, then you probably need vitamin supplements to go with your vegan diet in order to achieve optimal nutrition. That's hardly news. But it also shows, without trumpeting it so loudly (maybe because of their meat industry sponsors), that the average French diet could well do with a lot less meat (in as much as most of the target populations studied already get MORE than 100% of their protein requirements from animal sources). Personally, I'm going to stick with my almost vegetarian diet (I probably average 2 servings of meat a month, at most, but get most of my protein requirements from eggs and cheese, while the bulk of calories come from grain, vegetables, fruits and nuts). To me the reason to cut back on animal products isn't nutrition, or health (moderate animal product consumption is clearly not a big health negative), but environmental and ethical: the way most meat, especially, but also dairy and eggs, is produced is environmentally unsustainable, and ethically abhorrent.
- PurpleRamen 4y agoWhat happens if not? Aren't there whole populations where people live without meat for cultural reasons? Like many regions in Asia, especially India? How do those survive till today?