12 ms·

How is it possible that beef, dairy, and chicken are front and center while Lentils, Tofu (or even just soy), Chickpeas, Nutritional Yeast, Broccoli, etc are al

• schmuckonwheels 9mo ago
  There's a giant head of broccoli at the very top of the new pyramid? They emphasize protein AND fresh produce.
  • nihakue 9mo ago
    I guess what I'm lamenting is the missed opportunity to highlight that many vegetables e.g. broccoli are an excellent protein source as well as other important nutrients. It gives you additional flexibility when meal planning. There's a common misconception (at least in my circles) that protein => animal protein which isn't always useful for planning a balanced meal.
    • tracker1 9mo ago
      Most protein rich vegetables are legumes and beyond this are also rich in complex carbs. Legumes are in the top 10 food allergies. Not to mention the amino profile of vegetable sources isn't very good.
    • reissbaker 9mo ago
      Broccoli has 2.8g of protein per 100g. Beef has 26g per 100g, and chicken has 27g. If you're trying to get protein, broccoli isn't going to do much, and I think it's good that the government is being honest about that. A chart that listed broccoli as a major source of protein would be misleading. Broccoli is a good source of many nutrients, and the chart calls it out as such, but it is not an effective source of protein.
      • scaredginger 9mo ago
        Normalising by mass is a poor way to assess food's protein content since different foods have greatly different water contents. E.g. beef jerky has much higher protein per 100g than beef largely because it's dried (admittedly, probably also because they use leaner cuts)
      • djusk 9mo ago
        If you compare protein per kJ instead, broccoli has 0.021g protein per kJ whereas lean beef mince has 0.028g per kJ. Much more similar. Although of course you would need food that is higher density protein as well so you don't have too much volume to eat.
        • aboodman 9mo ago
          But that is a kind of silly way to compare. Broccoli isn't very filling _and_ it doesn't have very much protein in it. That doesn't change the fact that it lack protein. The question is if I'm preparing a meal that I want to be filling, healthy, and energizing, how should I do it. Broccoli isn't a good answer to the protein part of that question.
          • beejiu 9mo ago
            Protein may be associated with satiety, but so is fibre, of which beef has none.
        • roflmaostc 9mo ago
          Have fun eating 2kg of broccoli to get 50g of protein.
      • mertd 9mo ago
        Good luck getting Americans eat sufficient broccoli to source their protein without also adding a ton of cheese or fat/sugar based sauces.
    • deleted 9mo ago
      [deleted]
    • ricardobeat 9mo ago
      It’s harder to get the target 1-1.6g protein per kg from vegetables, unless you’re consuming beans/pulses which are also high in carbohydrates. Broccoli is not a great protein source, an entire head will give you 10g at most – the average adult would have to eat a dozen+ per day.
      • beejiu 9mo ago
        Beans and pulses are mostly long chain carbohydrates, which are not a problem.
    • layer8 9mo ago
      I like broccoli, but you’d have to eat around six pounds of broccoli to cover the recommended daily intake of essential amino acids.
    • dyauspitr 9mo ago
      You have to consume a very large amount of lentils to make up a healthy amount of protein per day. It’s something like 6 cans of chickpeas vs two chicken breasts per day. I believe you also don’t get a complete amino acids panel like you would with meat which is complete on its own.
      • DetectDefect 9mo ago
        > I believe you also don’t get a complete amino acids panel like you would with meat which is complete on its own. You can challenge beliefs and do a modicum of research, which would easily disprove this false and frankly ridiculous notion, which defies even a rudimentary understanding of plant biology.
        • dyauspitr 9mo ago
          I mean I have. There are almost no vegetables that are considered amino acid complete though there are (well known) combinations like legumes (beans/lentils) + rice. But this goes back to my original point of needing a lot of beans to get your protein requirement for the day. In places like India where there are a lot of vegetarians, diary products are heavily used to make up the deficit.
          • DetectDefect 9mo ago
            > There are almost no vegetables that are considered amino acid complete This is just blatantly and hilariously false. They are literally called "essential amino acids". A plant would not survive if it lacked amino acids which are essential. It it shocking anyone would deny this obvious and extremely basic fact about biology.
            • tomp 9mo ago
              you need to educate yourself better about "basic facts about biology" they're called essential because humans cannot produce them internally, so we have to consume them (though you could in principle make the same assessment for other animal species, but that's less relevant, unless you're, I don't know, raising cows?) plants don't eat, but produce organic molecules from raw ingredients (or almost raw, in case of nitrogen), and can produce all amino acids - but in different quantities, so maybe the (parts of) plants you eat don't have all the necessary amino acids.
    • margalabargala 9mo ago
      > I guess what I'm lamenting is the missed opportunity to highlight that many vegetables e.g. broccoli are an excellent protein source as well as other important nutrients I can see why you would expect something like that from this administration, but surprisingly the linked webpage seems to be based in fact. Broccoli are not an excellent protein source from a dietary perspective.
    • sergiotapia 9mo ago
      those are terrible sources of protein.
• samiv 9mo ago
  Steak is actually an excellent source of protein (and fat, if you get the fattier steak as you should). Just because vegetables, lentils or nuts contain protein it doesn't mean it's the same/equivalent to the protein in an animal product. Meat is actually super easy for humans to digest and it has no downsides to it. All vegetables on the other side contain plenty of anti-nutrients such as folate and oxalates. Everything in human body, skin, connective tissues, tendons, hair, nails, muscles is essentially built out of protein and collagen. Fats are essential for hormone function.
  • nihakue 9mo ago
    It's a good point, and maybe Broccoli isn't then as compelling as something like tofu, which contains nearly as much (and nearly as bio available) protein/calorie as lean steak. I guess I'd challenge the 'no downsides' claim. Few people stick to super lean grass-fed cuts, and the picture on the site is even a ribeye steak :P The protein density (g/kcal) of a ribeye steak is basically the same as tofu (I think like 14g/100kcal vs 11g/100kcal in tofu) I know I'm moving the goal posts slightly (I admit I didn't know about bio availability, and see now that I have more to read up on e.g. Broccoli), but am learning as I discuss rather than arguing a fixed point.
    • treis 9mo ago
      The bigger problem is nutritional density. I tried meeting the 1-1.5 g/kg protein level through a vegetarian whole grains diet and it's a lot of flipping food. Equivalent of like 3kg of chickpeas a day to make it. It was definitely eye opening on the sort of ancient benefit of meat. It's really hard to reach your muscular potential without it.
      • rafram 9mo ago
        An adult who weighs 75 kg, so is targeting about 75 grams of protein intake per day, would only need to eat 833 grams of cooked chickpeas (which are 9% protein by weight) to get there. That is indeed a lot of chickpeas! But a lot less than you claimed, and you probably shouldn't be getting all your protein from chickpeas anyway.
• tracker1 9mo ago
  No vegetable is as protein dense as actual meat in its natural form. Ruminant meat is absolutely one of the best bioavailable forms of a mostly complete amino acid profile, though eggs and dairy is more complete with differing ratios depending on form/feed. As to lentils, tofu, chickpeas etc. They're fine for most people in moderation, but they are also relatively inflammatory and plenty of people have digestive issues and allergies to legumes (I do), soy is one of the top 10 allergens that people face. While almost nobody is allergic to ruminant meat.
  • dachris 9mo ago
    As you say, in moderation. That also applies to red meat, considering the adverse effects listed on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_meat https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_meat
  • eweise 9mo ago
    AI says legumes are anti-inflammatory.
    • deinonychus 9mo ago
      my AI says they aren't
      • eweise 9mo ago
        Try Google
    • a3w 9mo ago
      WHO says meat gives you cancer.
• reissbaker 9mo ago
  Beef has ~3x more protein per gram than legumes. It is much more protein-dense than vegetables or legumes. Similarly, it's a "complete" protein, whereas most vegetables and legumes are missing necessary amino acids. The downside of beef isn't the "density" of nutrients: the downside is high saturated fat. Chicken breast, though, is similarly high in protein without the saturated fat downside.
  • tracker1 9mo ago
    Worth noting that like amino acids there are essential fatty acids as well, and most people have poor nutrition there... red meat isn't "only" saturated fat, but a fairly balanced fatty acid profile. You can have too much, but in moderate cuts it isn't too bad. I usually suggest around 0.5g fat to 1g protein as a minimal, higher if keto/carnivore.
    • reissbaker 9mo ago
      That's true, although fish has a better balance of essential fatty acids than red meat. Although, oddly enough, wagyu has a (much) better fatty acids profile than other types of beef, so you can justify the occasional wallet splurge on health grounds!
  • PaulDavisThe1st 9mo ago
    > The downside of beef isn't the "density" of nutrients: the downside is high saturated fat. There are other downsides to beef .. such as the batshit crazy use of ecosystems and resources required to produce it at industrial scale. Got a (beef) cow roaming in your yard, somehow getting by on whatever grows out of the ground? Enjoy your steak! Generating 6x the calories via a water-intensive cover crop to feed the cow so you can eat it later? Just say no.
    • reissbaker 9mo ago
      This is orthogonal to nutritious eating habits; I don't think the food pyramid should lie about nutrition due to ecological concerns. (I do think the food pyramid should be a little more concerned about saturated fat than it is, though — which is why I called out chicken as an alternative, and elsewhere also mentioned fish.)
• jhanschoo 9mo ago
  As a flexitarian, I've had to think quite a lot about how to get enough bioavailable protein while moderating my carb consumption and digestive upset due to beans, and to do so in a sustainable manner factoring in convenience and lack of leisure. I certainly won't recommend anything but lean meat and dairy as protein staples to people who aren't used to watching what they eat.
  • amanaplanacanal 9mo ago
    I also didn't do very well with most beans, but for some reason chickpeas don't bother me, if you haven't tried them.
    • jhanschoo 9mo ago
      Yep, I now have a lentil-based staple that also has grams, but that's of course after planning and adaptation.
• nozzlegear 9mo ago
  > How is it possible that beef, dairy, and chicken are front and center while Lentils, Tofu (or even just soy), Chickpeas, Nutritional Yeast, Broccoli, etc are all left off? To quote famed businessman and philosopher Eugene Krabs: "Money."
  • tonyedgecombe 9mo ago
    Big Broccoli need to step up.
    • nozzlegear 9mo ago
      I agree, but sadly it stands no chance against the lobbying powers of industrial pork producers, cattle ranchers or poultry giants like Tyson.
• ElijahLynn 9mo ago
  So true thanks for saying this. Seems like a missed opportunity, and definitely suspect of lobbying by the meat industry. And of course broccoli and legumes doesn't have a lobby group, do they?
  • a3w 9mo ago
    Big Broccoli even rolls off the tongue, time to start it!
• trashface 9mo ago
  And bananas and oatmeal at the bottom. I guess one way to solve the elderly entitlement crisis is if we all just start dropping dead from heart attacks.
• dqv 9mo ago
  There are nuts and legumes there in the bottom left. So funny to see people reflexively defend those things being left off because it confirms their own beliefs. A deeper inspection of the actual guidelines has them being very fair to plant proteins: > Consume a variety of protein foods from animal sources, including eggs, poultry, seafood, and red meat, as well as a variety of plant-sourced protein foods, including beans, peas, lentils, legumes, nuts, seeds, and soy. The thing is... the pyramid is just a graphic, the actual words give more context. https://cdn.realfood.gov/DGA.pdf https://cdn.realfood.gov/DGA.pdf
  • hallole 9mo ago
    It's not just a personal belief that plant sources are, on the whole, better from a health perspective. Since we're talking about the actual wording of the report, it admitted the significance of previous reports deciding to order plant foods before animal products. That is reversed in this most recent report, and very intentionally, which they make clear. They also pretend that the health effects of saturated fat intake are still fuzzy, as if the evidence doesn't heavily point towards it being detrimental. If anyone is holding to unshakeable beliefs and unwilling to consider evidence, it's the shoddy scientists (many with meat-industry related conflicting interests) that wrote the report.
    • nonethewiser 9mo ago
      Focus on what he is saying. The original commenter is simply misinformed about them excluding plant based protein. That is what his comment was shows.
  • kelseydh 9mo ago
    Kinda of wild that Dairy got its own section in that document as a proscribed thing to eat. There are plenty of lactose intolerant people. These people can meet their nutritional needs without dairy. (For Calcium: via Sardines, leafy greens, Tofu, etc.)
• parliament32 9mo ago
  > most/all of the most protein dense foods are vegetables/legumes Are you abusing "dense" to mean calories over calories, rather than the expected calories over weight measure? Even a cursory search shows the latter to be untrue. The former is disingenuous, because despite "density", people do not eat kilograms of broccoli daily to hit minimum-viable protein targets.
  • nihakue 9mo ago
    I do regret mentioning Broccoli because it seems to have become a bit of a distraction from my original point, which was that getting enough protein from a varied diet actually isn't that hard once you start to notice how much protein is in certain common veg. I'm not totally sure I understand where the mentality that all your protein has to come from a single source in isolation comes from, but suspect representations like this pyramid are at least partly to blame. Agree that g/kcal isn't perfect but g/g has its own corner cases like water content skewing things badly (e.g. dried spirulina is 57% protein by weight but you'd never eat more than like a gram in a serving). I never meant to suggest that people should be eating broccoli _in place of_ turkey, only that by _de-emphasising_ the protein content of many vegetables in favor of animal proteins, the graphic encourages meal planning that must always contain an animal protein. More insidiously, in my experience at least, it blurs the line between the nutrition content of different animal proteins ("I have my veg I just need 'a protein' now") which leads to more consumption of red meat regardless of quality. The graphic that I wish someone would make is the 'periodic table of macro nutrients' that positions foods along multiple dimensions at once but I don't know how you would actually do it in just two dimensions.
• cryptoegorophy 9mo ago
  Can you back up this claim? “ Steak is a terrible source of protein (in terms of nutrient density)” In terms of value meat is far more important than vegetables unless I am missing something?
  • themk 9mo ago
    Not the poster, but, usually what people are referring to is all the other stuff that comes along. Per calorie beef and broccoli are actually surprisingly similar, but broccoli comes with fiber, calcium and vitamin C, while beef comes with saturated fat. Of course, broccoli is not very calorie dense, so you would need to eat a lot. More realistically, tofu, which has about as much protein per calorie (and almost as much per gram) as middling lean beef. But has half the saturated fat, more iron, more calcium, and fibre. You just get more good stuff, and less bad stuff with veg.
• feifan 9mo ago
  Cultural reflex probably; lentils and tofu are displeasurable to most Americans
  • tills13 9mo ago
    Tofu being displeasurable is funny to me because it literally has no taste and texture by default. It becomes whatever you put it in or how you cook it. You want crunchy? You got it. Puree? Sure. Sweet? Fine. Salty? Spicy? Tangy? Easy. People just don't want to actually put in the effort to prepare it.
    • yoyohello13 9mo ago
      I used to be a tofu hater. Once I learned how to actually cook it though, it became one of my favorite protein sources.
    • Anamon 9mo ago
      My problem is that I just can't get it to take up any of the flavour. I can marinate it for days, and the marinade will still just be a superficial layer on top of a piece of tofu which, itself, always remains completely unfazed and tasteless. It's not a problem for saucy dishes like a curry, but even experimenting with friends and borderline "molecular cuisine" techniques I have never once managed to flavour tofu itself :(
      • tills13 9mo ago
        yeah that can be very difficult. I think you should aim to _season_ the tofu (i.e. salt -- or slight umami with soy sauce), but your primary flavour should still come from a sauce that's on it. I really like sticky sauces that cling to tofu like buffalo sauce or sugary, sticky glazes.
• globular-toast 9mo ago
  Lots of people trying to explain it logically but let's just be honest here, it's because it's made by "real men".
• a3w 9mo ago
  Beef and chicken cause cancer. Milk can help in regions with dietary low calories, but is mediocre or bad for fat US citizens. I also found the food shown very misleading.
  • Knufen 9mo ago
    Beef and chicken does not cause cancer anymore than anything else does. It is an insane take that regular food causes cancer in any level that should be worrisome. Don't cite the studies where they grouped frozen pizza in the same category as beef.
  • roflmaostc 9mo ago
    Beef (red meat) is classified as a probable carcinogen, while chicken (white meat) is safe according to current research.
• bean469 9mo ago
  > How is it possible that beef, dairy, and chicken are front and center while Lentils, Tofu (or even just soy), Chickpeas, Nutritional Yeast, Broccoli, etc are all left off? Possibly because those foods are culturally un-American or something silly like that
• nihakue 9mo ago
  Replying to my own comment because I've had some more time to look through the scientific foundation document. In particular, this was an illuminating section (and maybe hinting at where the 'war on protein' language comes from) > The DGAs recommend a variety of animal source protein foods (ASPFs) and plant source protein foods (PSPFs) to provide enough total protein to satisfy the minimum requirements set at the Recommended Dietary Allowance (RDA) of 0.8 g/kg body weight for adults and to ensure the dietary patterns meet most nutrient needs [3, 4]. However, over the past 20 years, an extensive body of research has underscored the unique and diverse metabolic roles of protein, and now there is compelling evidence that consuming additional foods that provide protein at quantities above the RDA may be a key dietary strategy to combat obesity in the U.S (while staying within calorie limits by reducing nutrient-poor carbohydrate foods). Instead of incorporating this approach, the past iterations of the DGAs have eroded daily protein quantity by shifting protein recommendations to PSPFs, including beans, peas, and lentils, while reducing and/or de-emphasizing intakes of ASPFs, including meats, poultry, and eggs. The shift towards PSPFs was intended to reduce adiposity and risks of chronic diseases but was primarily informed by epidemiological evidence on The Scientific Foundation for the Dietary Guidelines for Americans, 2025–2030: Appendices | 350 dietary patterns, even in some cases when experimental evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was available to more specifically inform this recommendation. Another key aspect that DGA committees have inadequately considered are the nutrient consequences when shifting from ASPFs to PSPFs. ASPFs not only provide EAAs, they also provide a substantial amount of highly bioavailable essential micronutrients that are under-consumed. Encouraging Americans to move away from these foods may further compromise the nutrient inadequacies already impacting many in the U.S., especially our young people. Compounding this is the recent evidence highlighting the fallacies of using the unsubstantiated concept of protein ounce equivalents within food pattern (substitution) modeling, leading to recommended reductions in daily protein intakes and protein quality since ASPFs and PSPFs are not equivalent in terms of total protein or EAA density. Given that 1) there is no Tolerable Upper Intake Level (UL) for dietary protein established by the Dietary Reference Intakes (DRIs) and 2) consuming high quality ASPFs above current recommendations has shown no negative health risks in high quality RCTs, it’s unclear as to why previous DGAs encouraged shifts in protein intake towards limiting high quality, nutrient dense ASPFs. It's essential to evaluate the evidence to establish a healthy range of protein intake and to substantiate whether or not limiting ASPFs is warranted and/or has unintended consequences. An alternative approach that may be more strongly supported by the totality of evidence is the replacement of refined grains with PSPFs like beans, peas, and lentils. Given their nutrient dense profile (e.g., excellent source of fiber, complex carbohydrates, & folate, etc.; good source of protein) nutrient dense PSPFs complement but do not replace the nutrients provided in ASPFs (i.e., excellent source of protein, vit B12, zinc, good source of heme iron, etc.). By including high quality, nutrient dense ASPFs as the primary source of protein, followed by nutrient dense PSPFs as a replacement for nutrient-poor refined grains, a higher-protein, lower-carbohydrate dietary pattern can be achieved which likely improves nutrient adequacy, weight management, and overall health. -- https://cdn.realfood.gov/Scientific%20Report%20Appendices.pdf https://cdn.realfood.gov/Scientific%20Report%20Appendices.pd... Appendix 4.9
• Gareth321 9mo ago
  > Steak is a terrible source of protein (in terms of nutrient density). At 23g/100g, lean beef has a very high protein/weight ratio. Similar to chicken and turkey breast and exceeded only by canned tuna and processed protein isolates like soy protein isolate, whey protein isolate, and wheat gluten. For comparison, protein content of firm tofu, lentils, and chickpeas is much lower, at 14g/100g, 9g/100g, and 8.5g/100g, respectively. They all contain a lot more carbs per 100g than lean beef. Further, lean beef contains a full and balanced amino acid profile, which lentils, tofu, chickpeas, soy protein isolate, and wheat gluten does not. It's an excellent food. However there is evidence that charred red meat and red meat containing nitrites is associated with a slight increase in colorectal cancer, so people should be consuming minimally processed red meat where possible, as per the guidance.