We don’t need nearly as much protein as we consume • Hacker News Board

Re: We don’t need nearly as much protein as we consume

#71

Post by yawaworht1978 » Mon, Sep 06, 2021, 2:40 PM UTC

slothtrop wrote: post #57

yawaworht1978 wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't worry, all the healthy fats and slow released carbs are much worse than the worst protein source. Excess protein might be wasteful to the wallet and the environment, but at least it will not get you as fat.

Calories get you fat. It's CICO. Protein is satiating, which is a major advantage if weight-loss is a goal. But then again, so is fiber. Many people have successfully lost weight on a high fiber diet.

But why not the combination of both?

Losing weight and losing fat is not always the same, a diet with insufficient protein intake might cause muscle loss and thus, decrease metabolic rate(muscle metabolism rate is less than people think, but over a year, it makes a big difference).

However, i understand that not everyone cares about preserving muscle on a diet, some people just want to be slimmer, fair enough.

Re: We don’t need nearly as much protein as we consume

#72

Post by mypastself » Mon, Sep 06, 2021, 2:42 PM UTC

Rompect wrote: post #34

wombatmobile wrote: post #26

TFA curiously asks questions about what the body really needs, in order to investigate a processed food category from an industry that spends billions on advertising and technology designed to make people eat more than they need for only one reason - to generate profits for manufacturers. What the body really needs is not processed foods, which are loaded with salt, sugar, and fat [0, 1]. Processed foods are what the…

No. I've been eating beef meat, chicken and a suet that is 99.8% fat for more than a month now and it's great. Nobody needs vegetables or nuts.

Do you think your self-reported experience of “greatness” of a particular diet over one month is sufficient evidence to make such a conclusion?

Re: We don’t need nearly as much protein as we consume

#73

Post by orwin » Mon, Sep 06, 2021, 2:42 PM UTC

bobobob420 wrote: post #61

dragontamer wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Canned or frozen can contain more nutrients because of the preservation process though. Fresh foods lose nutrients as they are shipped around. The vitamins may have leached into the water, but toss that water into a soup and you're good. I don't think freshness matters much at all. Flour certainly doesn't need to be fresh to make good bread.

Fresh pasta vs store bought? Worlds of difference. When I lived in Europe the quality of produce and dairy blew me away compared to what we were eating in America. Tons of flavor in fresh natural produce.

There is a difference between fresh in producer market and fresh in a supermarket. Supermarket canned tomatoes (with no added salt, i got surprised once) are better, more ripe than supermarket fresh tomatoes. This extend to a lot of canned food (as long as the process is just food+water in bain-marie or similar).

Re: We don’t need nearly as much protein as we consume

#74

Post by slothtrop » Mon, Sep 06, 2021, 2:52 PM UTC

yawaworht1978 wrote: post #71

slothtrop wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Calories get you fat. It's CICO. Protein is satiating, which is a major advantage if weight-loss is a goal. But then again, so is fiber. Many people have successfully lost weight on a high fiber diet.

But why not the combination of both? Losing weight and losing fat is not always the same, a diet with insufficient protein intake might cause muscle loss and thus, decrease metabolic rate(muscle metabolism rate is less than people think, but over a year, it makes a big difference). However, i understand that not everyone cares about preserving muscle on a diet, some people just want to be slimmer, fair enough.

Well there's no reason it has to be "insufficient" and having too little protein is certainly a bad idea. If you consume a source of protein at every meal, whatever the makeup, you can easily hit 16%+ as part of your macros. Even vegetables like broccoli and peas have protein.

Re: We don’t need nearly as much protein as we consume

#75

Post by mumblemumble » Mon, Sep 06, 2021, 2:53 PM UTC

xenocratus wrote: post #69

mumblemumble wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The article itself would also serve as a source: Another demographic who can benefit from extra protein? The elderly. That’s because as we age, we need more protein to retain muscle mass. But we also tend to eat less protein as we get older because our taste-buds begin to prefer sweet over savoury.

True, however they just didn't link to anything (unlike other parts, e.g. in the paragraph prior to that one, where they send you to published research).

That, though, would be a reason to aim a [citation needed] at the BBC, not at someone who's just offering a TL;DR type summary of what the BBC said.

Re: We don’t need nearly as much protein as we consume

#76

Post by dragontamer » Mon, Sep 06, 2021, 2:55 PM UTC

bobobob420 wrote: post #61

dragontamer wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Canned or frozen can contain more nutrients because of the preservation process though. Fresh foods lose nutrients as they are shipped around. The vitamins may have leached into the water, but toss that water into a soup and you're good. I don't think freshness matters much at all. Flour certainly doesn't need to be fresh to make good bread.

Fresh pasta vs store bought? Worlds of difference. When I lived in Europe the quality of produce and dairy blew me away compared to what we were eating in America. Tons of flavor in fresh natural produce.

What is "fresh pasta"? That flour's been sitting in my pantry for months!

Yes, fresh eggs taste better. But fresh flour? Not really. grains, beans, flour, rice... these "preserved" foods can last months or even well into a year or longer.

Re: We don’t need nearly as much protein as we consume

#77

Post by dragontamer » Mon, Sep 06, 2021, 3:00 PM UTC

orwin wrote: post #73

bobobob420 wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fresh pasta vs store bought? Worlds of difference. When I lived in Europe the quality of produce and dairy blew me away compared to what we were eating in America. Tons of flavor in fresh natural produce.

There is a difference between fresh in producer market and fresh in a supermarket. Supermarket canned tomatoes (with no added salt, i got surprised once) are better, more ripe than supermarket fresh tomatoes. This extend to a lot of canned food (as long as the process is just food+water in bain-marie or similar).

Indeed. And plenty of frozen options too, if that's your preference.

People underrate canned veggies in regards to healthy eating. They're really not bad at all from a health perspective, and can often taste very fresh.

Pineapples, pears, peaches are great canned. Artichoke, corn, beans, string beans, spinach, and tomatoes are also good canned products in my experience.

I'm not hating on fresh: big leafy Romaine Lettuce is best fresh, as are onions. But certain foods hold really well in a can, and its extremely convenient to mix-and-match storage strategies. (Ex: Use that Romaine Lettuce for salads this week, and canned corn next week)

Re: We don’t need nearly as much protein as we consume

#78

Post by Retric » Mon, Sep 06, 2021, 3:04 PM UTC

yawaworht1978 wrote: post #27

Retric wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Excess protein gets you just as fat as excess carbs or fat does. The only difference is people tend to think of protein as more essential even if it’s just being used as energy. 1000 of each isn’t obviously excessive of any one but without exercise you will get fat.

Well, not really. This all depends on other factors as well. For example, how much glucose is stored at the moment of the food intake. If you are full of glucose, any fat will go straight to the fat deposits. Carbs, if the stores are full, will be converted to body fat in a calorie surplus, up to 25percent, depending on genetics. If glucogen stores are empty, fat won't get stored easily. And carbs will not be convert…

The perceptual differences between different energy sources are one thing, but in the end energy is energy. Take a perfectly healthy and balanced diet without weight gain or weight loss, then add just 100 calories per day of extra protein and you will gain weight.

Re: We don’t need nearly as much protein as we consume

#79

Post by Retric » Mon, Sep 06, 2021, 3:07 PM UTC

kiba wrote: post #24

Retric wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Excess protein gets you just as fat as excess carbs or fat does. The only difference is people tend to think of protein as more essential even if it’s just being used as energy. 1000 of each isn’t obviously excessive of any one but without exercise you will get fat.

It's more costly to turn protein into glucose, though.

Efficiency isn’t that important. An extra 100 calories per day of protein, fat, or carbs is largely interchangeable assuming an otherwise balanced diet. In other words if your in a balanced diet with 33% of each and you add 100 calories of any of them you will gain weight.

Re: We don’t need nearly as much protein as we consume

#80

Post by lumost » Mon, Sep 06, 2021, 3:07 PM UTC

alistairSH wrote: post #35

lumost wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m a bit dubious of the articles core claim that excess protein is wasteful - the alternative of excess fat/carbs is wasteful and harmful. I don’t use any sports supplements but I do try to prioritize my diet in terms of protein > fat > carbs. It’s tough to find unprocessed protein sources that aren’t at least somewhat healthy. Even red meat provides a great iron source at 1 8 oz filet every week or 2.

Why are you claiming the alternative to excess protein is excess fat/carb? Why not a calorie neutral diet with the correct macros?

Aiming for strict calorie neutrality is fairly difficult in my experience. Unless you are tracking, it's pretty easy in the US to slip up on empty carbs or processed fats.

Sit anyone down in front of their local pizza joint and tell them to eat a calorically neutral diet without a tracker and see what happens. Compare this to what happens when someone is sat in front of roast chicken and a high fiber vegetable like asparagus/spinach etc.

Odds are you'll get closer to calorie neutrality and balanced macros in the latter scenario than the former.