Well...as an indian.. lentils and beans were a valuable source of protein.. not animal protein.. We ate dairy but the amount so lil.. Just a cup of yogurt (curd) and a small glass milk and that was it.. Meat not more than twice a year.. Soy chunks was something so cheap and really tasty if prepared right.. We were pretty broke ... I'm vegan now.. but I've always eaten mostly vegetarian.. becuz we couldn't afford to est meat.. meat was for rich people (and mind you I'm 18.. so we were pretty broke ) and still kinda is.. Beans and lentils are simply so much cheaper.. and we ate a lot of local veggies and fruits and only expensive thing we ate were walnuts and almonds (along with some seasonal seeds like sesame and flaxseeds)
@@thomascurry4762 no good evidence for high protein diets causing renal dysfunction. If somebody already has CKD, then yes, they need to stick to around 0.8 grams per kg
@@thomascurry4762 I believe the original statement in contention is "then this will start to create a booming business for nephrologists". The above requires good evidence for that statement, and hence the reply works. Your response about not being able to make sweeping statements about the negation of the proposition is sound, but unfortunately, that is not what was being put forward by the reply.
I am particularly interested in protein intake on longevity and the research saying that limiting calorie and protein intake is good for longevity. Also research that mentions certain amino acids are bad for longevity such as high methionine, which is generally much higher in animal based sources. As for mixing foods for protein, I ran the math on it before and there is no actual diet where if you eat the needed raw weight of protein that you did not get enough of any essential amino acid.
I thought I could substantially lower my methionine levels by eating plant proteins. I tried pumpkin seeds, lentils and soy based entered them into Cronometer and they change was insignificant.
@@tinknal6449 No all the evidence base we have on ketogenic diets is showing a much higher risk of mortality across the board. See Valter Longo onthe Rich Roll podcast he explained it rather well.
I love your videos Dr Carvalho but this one felt a lot more "opinion'' than previous videos. I'm not necessarily against anything Dr Philips in says, but because he cites no studies to support his views I can't independently evaluate them. I really can't tell if he know his stuff from this presentation.
I think it’s unfair to expect people to share citations while they have a convo. This guy is sharing what he knows to be most accurate in his professional opinion.
@@tryptamigo In previous videos, Dr Carvalho has added cuts to studies the interviewee has shared with him outside of the interview. Or linked studies in the description. The citations need not be in the video itself.
I love your content Dr. Gil. I have to admit I went into this video with a negative attitude thinking, "Oh, here we go. Another researcher who's never stepped foot inside a gym is going to give nutritional advice to athletes." But I'm glad I watched the whole thing. Everything he said is inline with what I've heard from athletes and trainers. This guy really know his stuff. The only thing I would add is that I think athletes who compete in sports with weight divisions or bodybuilders have to make different choices as far as the types of protein that choose so as to maximize the amount of protein they take in vs calories, so "just eat more" isn't an option if they're doing a weight cut. When it came to the subject of kidney health, I wish you had asked if there was a difference between animal vs plant protein.
I’m curious what your take on Dr. Garth Davis’s Proteinaholic book would be. I find this all to be confusing. It is tempting to ignore all the different voices and just eat a relatively clean diet without obsessing over the macros. As an over-the-road truck driver, it is difficult enough to eat clean, without the added stress of trying to get that perfect balance of protein, fats, carbs, and fiber, not to mention exercise. Some of us have lives that are somewhat counterproductive to what would be considered a healthy lifestyle.
Hi, interesting video. I was a bit surprised and slightly disappointed at the protein and cancer part. I am wondering about Dr Campbell's findings as evidence. In the China study there is a clear connection between animal protein & cancer growth. As far as I remember not just in lab rats but they actually did controlled trials on the Philippines. Both were tested: animal and plant protein, and the first one came out quite bad. I am not a scientist, so I might miss something but that finding seemed pretty strong to me. Of course, thank you as always! I can't wait the second part with Christopher Gardner.
Campbell's work has been completely debunked. It has been shown that he was only able to arrive at his conclusions by heavily cherry picking the data. Never follow a "scientist" who starts a study with an agenda.
It's debatable that the connection is clear in the China study. Of course, Denise Minger argued extensively against it. She is, famously, just a blogger. But researcher Stephen Guyenet supports her position. See wholehealthsource.blogspot.com/2010/07/china-study-problems-of-interpretation.html and wholehealthsource.blogspot.com/2014/11/is-meat-unhealthy-part-iii.html.
As a statistics student, I do not think the study was good enough to conclude meat causes cancer. Across the study the researchers tried to link the vegetarian diet of Chinese villagers with low-cancer rates and increased longevity, however there are just so many other factors that contribute to it. Firstly, the villagers grow their own vegetables and therefore enjoy a diet free pesticides and chemicals. Secondly, they live a stress-free yet active lifestyle. Looking at the big picture, I'd argue that these independent variables had a higher correlation with their longevity compared to just "eating no meat". I won't deny that their diet consisting of vegetables and fruit contributed to their healthiness, however implying that lower-meat consumption has a negative correlation with cancer and other diseases is still a bold claim. I can assure you that villagers who consume fresh seafood and raised poultry would show similar effects. This applies to the meat eaters as well. When the researchers tried to link animal-protein intake with higher chances of cancer, I just couldn't ignore the many variables that play into cancer. The type of animal protein, the quality of the animal protein, the preparation method, and additional ingridients added. As a Chinese person, I know how unhealthy meat dishes can be in China. Not only do they consume high amounts of red meat, the dishes are often smothered in bad-quality oil and laced with high amounts of sodium and msg. I'd also like to emphasie that meat eaters are not consiously thinking about their health and just eat what tastes good. Therefore, linking animal protein with cancer is just absurd because its often the preperation method and meat quality thats the issue. However here are a few things we can agree on: 1. Eating lots of vegetables and fruit is beneficial for the body, and its fibre may even decrease the probality of developing cancer. 2. Living an active and stress-free life is cancer's and other diseases' worst enemy. 3. Cooking your own food is the best for your body as you know exactly what you're eating. 4. We should only consume food that comes from an organic, high-quality source like villagers do. For meat-eaters: Although the study is inconclusive, it is wise to stay safe as research changes over time and I'm also open for my mind to be changed. 1. Only consume organic poultry and wild-caught seafood. Do not consume red meat as its already proven to cause disease. 2. The method of cooking and additional ingredients used is important. Don't use shit quality oil and don't use so much sodium. 2. Do not consume protein in excess, chances are you're not damaging your muscles enough to need it. 3. Your plate should primarily consist of vegetables, fruit, and carbs, not just a big hunk of meat.
I recall that Chris Gardner said that RDA was set at mean plus 2 standard deviations in the US and that mean consumption in the US exceeds most other countries. Also some evidence, from animal studies (Lamming, Mitchell, Fontana) that limiting certain BCAAs, like methionie or isoleucine, may help increase longevity and imrpove metabolic health. An ongoing story. I choose to stay close to RDA and monitor my lean mass, and eat vegan. At 68, if I see my lean mass, which I track, dropping I'll adjust.
I think that the two caloric restriction studies on Monkeys showed us that we can't have too much faith that studies on shorter lived species are applicable to humans or monkeys. For example, calorie restriction extended life of mouse lemurs by 40 -50% but had little or no life extension benefit in the longer lived species of monkeys
Limiting BCAA's may also decrease hypertrophy and protein synthesis. Double edged sword. A lot of these things that are preached by longetivity scientist go against bone, muscle growth so they should especially be avoided by children, although that should be obvious
If I’m not mistaken those in the increased lifespan and decreased co-morbidity space like Dr Long & Dr Sinclair recommend somewhere are .31-.36g protein per pound per day. I’m curious on the whys behind the differences I have heard increasing as you get older, but only because it has a marginal decrease in muscle wasting by increasing protein which is a common factor among the elderly which impacts quality of life.
I've read in a book about nutrition, that it is more like a U curve. You need more when you are younger and when you are middle age, a bit less to decrease cancer risk and when you over 65, you should increase again to prevent muscle wasting. But it is also written there that it does not concern plant protein, since it does not increase cancer risk. So I guess simply switching to mostly plant protein might a good middle ground, without going that low on protein.
At the same time the Research Dr. Greger Shows about Elderly and their Protein Intake is pretty interesting and goes against a Higher Proteinintake above 65yo
@@Slizz I love Dr. Greger as it was his book (and website) that got me so into nutrition. However, I feel the ardent vegans in the WFPB community, Dr. Greger being among them, cherry pick somewhat. Dr. Fuhrman, breaks away from the pack and acknowledges that people over 65 absolutely require more protein. He also points out that some advocates of wfpb eating are flat out wrong by insisting that wfpb eaters automatically get their protein needs met by consuming any whole plant foods. He doesn't name names but I will: The main culprit is Dr. McDougall. He infuriates me.
I never heard why extra protein is good, I am flat out reaching recommended without adding a protein drink. Seems to me it's a correlation within a country with predominantly a SAD pattern. Japanese eat far less protein than Aussies yet females have a greater life expectancy in Japan. The US where SAD is predominant and the lowest life expectancy of a wealthy country should throw out all the data, yep maybe a steak versus a donut is healthy because of its non protein nutrients which can't be found in donuts or french fries or cola or sweet fatty mayonnaise. For the 0.01% of the population who are professional or aspiring sports people ok whatever, that's a whole different story.
@@ivanfoofoo yes that could be a factor. I just looked up the estimated requirements and RDI (Recommended daily intake) for Australia/New Zealand for a male adult and up to 70 years they suggest requirement is 0.68 gm per kg of body weight and RDI 0.84 gm per kg of body weight. For women it was a little less and over 70s male a lot more with RDI for men jumping to 1.07gm per kg of body weight. There was no upper limit recommendation other than not more than 25% of calories from protein. Recommendations are funny in a way, 70th birthday have to all of a sudden increase protein by 20%.
In the US we are protein obsessed because of really good marketing, nothing more. Protein makes you younger, helps you build muscle, helps you lose weight, healthier hair and nails, I mean they infer it'll do just about anything for your health. Everywhere you look, it's being advertised in the food world. My other bewilderment is our obsession with paying for 'infused' bottled water drinks, like vitamins, electrolytes, and yes, even protein water. Can you imagine, protein water? I wonder if it's that way in other countries, paying $2.00 or more 500ml of bottled water. A while back I saw a young supermarket worker drinking something call "Smart Water." I asked, "what makes that water so smart?" He said he didn't know. I said, "keep drinking."
Excess protein is stored in the body as fat. Not sure why he's saying it's not stored. Sure, it's not stored as protein, it's stored as fat. Nearly every medical source out there states this, so unless he has unique information, this is simply incorrect. If it's in fact true, can we see a source for this please?
Dr. Peter Rogers has an excellent background, including Stanford and Harvard, and graduating first in his class. He has a very strong background in biochemistry and neurology. He seems to recommend a low-protein, very low fat, high-starch diet (~80‐10-10), much like Dr. Mcdougall. Could you do a review? Or at least comment on this sort of diet? One of Rogers' concerns is preventing cancer, which is one of the leading causes of early death. High-protein diets may be good for muscle building, but they also (apparently) increase one's odds of cancer formation and early death. Elderly people may need more protein, but they also need to take their cancer risk - which is serious - into account as well.... Your response to balancing these concerns (cancer, sarcopenia, protein benefits)?
@@NutritionMadeSimple as someone who spends a lot of time listening to podcasts and RUclips videos I can tell the computer mic is used, but the quality is fine nonetheless 👍 Great job as always!
Why would a patient with cancer eat more protein? Please shed some light on that.. i really wanna know about it.. I've heard some really conflicting views on this .. And probably science is more on the "protein from plants" side especially when it comes to cancer.. I dunno.. I'm just a premed..studying science.. but science we do is not even half as complex as you do or understand.. Please help! My grandpa died of cancer ... It was heartbreaking for my mum..so painful for both of em um.. so this is something i would really wanna know about.. I appreciate your work.. thank you 💚🌱
Most kids get 1.2 g/kg? Not been my experience when reviewing protein with parents of youth athletes. They frequently skip breakfast, have school lunch (total crap and low protein), and dinner is a ? based on the parents schedules.
Great video - a year after it was posted. Studies with animal based proteins mostly don’t give the source. A big difference between chick and hot dogs.
I eat my plant protein (a lot of that actually..)... And i never count..and this hasn't failed me... I'm more than 6 feet tall now ..and that's considered tall for a 16 year (turn 17 in aug ...) old girl.. and since I'm really tall and active...i have a huge appetite..
Yes, in animal studies of short lived species. However, when we have ported similar studies (calorie restriction) from short lived species ( mouse lemur) to monkeys, the approximate 40-50% lifespan extension either completely or mostly disappeared in the two studies on the subject. Unless we have a study on Monkeys or Humans with similar results, I would not put much stock in the studies on short lived species
@@jackbuaer3828 If I remember correctly, protein restriction rationale had a different mechanism than caloric restriction and no studies in primate level mammals have been done. The mechanism had something to do with Methionine/Leucine promoting higher igf-1 or mTor upregulation, promoting cancer. Less cancer = longevity.
@@mitesh8utube Thanks Mitesh. It should be noted that calorie restriction appears to also operate by downregulating MTOR. " CR inhibits the activity of the mechanistic target of rapamycin (mTOR) [2,3]. mTOR is a kinase, which operates as two distinct complexes with different downstream targets and physiological functions, mTORC1 and mTORC2 [4,5]. Genetic or pharmacological inhibition of mTORC1 signaling leads to increased lifespan. It was proposed that high activity of mTORC1 is a major driving force of aging, while the suppression of mTOR contributes to many benefits of CR, including lifespan extension" Tulsian R, Velingkaar N, Kondratov R. Caloric restriction effects on liver mTOR signaling are time-of-day dependent. Aging (Albany NY). 2018 Jul It's apparently a lot easier to extend life in short lived species, so I think it's unlikely that any dramatic benefit we see in mice, flies, worms etc . . . , regardless of the operating pathway, will port over to humans.
@@jackbuaer3828 It's not about life extension in smaller organisms versus humans. This video tries to make a point that increased protein intake is probably better, and other hypothesis countering that already exist. Longest living humans, for whom we have some data are 7th day Adventists (vegan) and okinawans (95% diet sweet potatoes). This totally flies in the face of "expert advice" of higher protein intake in this video. At one point the expert also said, animal protein is clearly better. Inuits get all their protein from animal sources, how long do they live? This is not science. My comment was just to give a counter point to the protein hype in this video.
@@mitesh8utube You seem to be basing your conclusion on Buettner's centenarian survey in the Blue Zones. There is disagreement on what the Okinawans and the rest of the Blue Zones commonly eat. At least one respected researcher, Dr. Michael Lustgarten, does not believe that Buettner's data holds up to the limited peer reviewed data on Centenarian diets that he has reviewed. Buettner's underlying data, as far as I know, has not been published in a peer reviewed journal. I find Dr. Lustgarten to be unbiased. He does not follow any dogmatic dietary philosophy. His personal diet is highly (but not exclusively) plant based, so he is not coming at this from a Keto, low carb, high protein philosophy. He just does not believe Buettner's data based upon other data sets he has looked at. Mona Ottum, an RD, in her blog, pegs average protein levels as follows: Ikaria 1.1 g per KG Okinawa 1.4 per KG Sardinia 1.6 per KG U.S 1.4 per KG See: Nicoya, Costa Rica: A Puzzling Blue Zone Diet Light on Vegetables and High in Carbohydrate and Sugar, May, 17, 2017. Mona's numbers seem to fit in line with Dr. Phillips' recommendation. So from a cultural dietary perspective, it really depends what you believe the longest living cultures actually eat. We have different sets of numbers floating around. I don't know what the answer is and I don't think it's all that clear. I also don't think that there is consensus among experts. Also, diet is just one factor in longevity. I would guess that some centenarians eat high protein and that others eat moderate or low protein.
Stuart Phillips has done a lot of work for the meat, dairy, egg, whey protein industries. That doesn't annul his research but means we should interpret it with caution
I believe if you want to get a very in-depth view of protein both the good or bad interview David Raubenheimer and Stephen Simpson. They are researchers who have made extensive studies of various creatures on this planet and their protein requirements. In fact they wrote a popular book about the subject. The title is, " Eat Like The Animals".
Dr Sean Hasmi in Los Angeles is a plant-based nephrologist, not vegan. He was a body builder before he was a nephrologist. He has a podcast titled Plant Based Kidney Health.
1.6 grams per kg has been shown to keep 95% of hard training, lean, world class athletes in nitrogen balance. Above 1.9 grams, all additional protein yields urea or ammonia, meaning that it is 100% turned into glucose for fuel above that level.
Yeah, I have also read majority of studies never found musle building benefits beyond 1.4 g/kg optimal bodyweight. The 1.6, or at max 1.8 are margins of "safety".
I edited these numbers upon rechecking. 1.6 grams per kg have been shown to keep lean world class athletes in nitrogen balance while training intensely several hours a day. At over 1.9 there is no increase in protein retention for them. The males in the study also averaged 9% bodyfat. Furthermore, at above 2.2 grams per kilogram (1 gram per pound) every additional gram of protein yielded ammonia which hinders performance.
People interested in building muscle are usually recommending a higher protein intake than scientists researching longevity and chronic disease. I’m more interested in living long and not getting cancer than having big muscles and this guy hasn’t convinced me I want more than the 0,8 g/kg.
Exactly, longevity studies go the opposite direction, the less protein the better, so long as you’re meeting your minimum. There is something to say about older people consuming a little more, sure, but other than that, less is more. I usually do about 1 or 1.1/kg, sometimes less.
@@hugomarquez3189 Can you link those studies? Logically, more muscle mass and less fat equals to better health. More muscle mass needs more protein than 1.1g/kg, especially, when you are in a calorie deficit and you are cutting. I've always heard and read that higher protein diets for muscle building are more healthy. more healthy.
Current obesitology textbooks often say 1g/kg optimal bodyweight, that sounds like happy medium to me. Easily achievable and probably still allows to build muscle at decent rate. On the other hand I wouldn't consider something like 1.2 or even 1.5 "high" protein that would somehow alter risks regarding longevity.
It wont be the protein that kills you unless you eat ridiculous amounts for years. So eating 0.8g is pointless. If you have any goals for your physique or performance you should eat a lot more. sacrificing performance and muscle mass for little to no reward seems dumb.
As a weight lifter aiming to gain muscle I consume 2.2g of protein per Kg of bodyweight, which for me is 194g of protein. A lot of egg whites, chicken, fish, whey protein powder and soy protein isolate powder.
Dad grew up in the Azores Island. He would eat in a week the amount of protein many eat in a day. Their diet consisted of mostly Legumes (many), Taro (many root veggies), Collard Greens, Cabbage, and corn bread (no wheat) some fish. 92 years old going strong. Read Proteinaholic. You should get Dr Garth Davis on your show for an alternative perspective. ✌️
@@NutritionMadeSimpleone problem I see here too is a lot of sicker older people are told they need protein and get eat boost shakes and what not. Dairy and corn syrup. Not healthy.
Im wondering if they consumed any fat sources (nuts, seeds) or sugars (fruits) in their diet? Nuts and seeds are considered healthy but even they contain some saturated fat and i wonder if it's better to be kept at 0 for longevity. The same with sugars, even if they come from fruit?
I really appreciate your balanced and scientifically informed approached videos. I’ve binged watched your videos for the last few days because I recently had a calcium score of 113 at age 50. I tried Lipitor previously but had serious memory problems. Here are some questions I hope you can answer: 1. There is a myriad of differing opinions from reputable sources whether dietary consumption of fats leads to elevated serum levels. Even Harvard has a recent article saying eggs are okay. Please help clarify. 2. What is the effect size of alcohol on lipids, particularly triglycerides? And can you speak more about triglycerides as a risk factor? 3. Is there any meaningful differences between the statins aside from potency?
hi, eggs can raise cholesterol, depending on context, although they're not the strongest factor. see our video on eggs & cholesterol. yes alcohol can raise TGs, we have whole video on lowering TGs that touches on this. TGs are essentially a marker of VLDL particles, high TGs can be secondary to diabetes, overweight or other situations. different statin classes can have different rates of side effects for example. we have a video coming out soon on this
As a cancer survivor (among other things) I teeter between being 85 to 98 percent whole food plant based. While I agree that avoiding animal products is wise, to me avoiding high glycemic foods and processed food is at. least as important. And this is where I know I may differ from the WFPB community at large. I'd rather have a piece of wild salmon and a large salad than a vegan faux meat or pasta meal filled with oil, sugar, flour, salt and emulsifiers. Many wfpb eaters would choose the latter if pressed.
@@jazzluvr87 Same here. Nice to share the same views with someone regarding diet. Things can get pretty contentious here on RUclips. The plant based and the paleo/keto groups are often at war. Good luck and good health to you.
That is an enormous amount of protein other than protein drinks I have no idea how I could eat that much. I am 200 pounds so 140 t0 170 grams of protein?
Velter Longo found that MTOR and IGf1 spikes (which are cancer and inflammation promoting) are mainly caused by excessive protein consumption and recommends 0.35g per kg. However, he recommends a bit more after the age of 65.
@@RC-rk2xs what about his group of 27 Sicilians some or who have reached 114 and ALL have passed 100? Btw he has physiological mechaism that got Nobel nomination not correlation and epidemiology.
@@RC-rk2xs you don’t know how to read? He said to INCREASE protein for elderly! Check word INCREASE in your dictionary. Other thing, I clearly said he was a Nobel nominnee. Again, learn to read.
I can still gain muscle on the RDA or even lower, on a plant based diet. I don't know about consuming so much protein. I like Dr Longo's work on the fast-mimicking diet, which is a low protein diet.
3:44 if u're vegan, the recommendation used to be that u need 20-30% more protein [which would be up to 1.56g instead of 1.2g for non-lifters], but now with foods like beyond meat, he would recommend 1.2-1.4g for vegan non-lifters. however... 6:13 animal protein is better quality because (1) fiber lowers the absorption of protein, and (2) amino acid profile, although you could just eat more plant foods to get more amino acids, or combine plant foods to improve the aa profile [see cronometer for accurate aa profiles of plant foods and their combinations].
Instead of traditional protein powders, I prefer to use peanut butter powder. Not a long list of ingredients. Pretty clean, and the fat is mostly removed. Goes great in my smoothies. Btw. I am not fat phobic, but eating peanuts is pretty filling. This way I can get more protein into my diet without feeling too full.
I can eat two spoons maximum from peanut butter. I'm not a big fan of powders though. I'm not so sure if all of it is absorbed by our guts, so I try to have it in something to eat and something that has to be digested.
@@stellasternchen no..that would be digested...and if someone's says the opposite... he's unscientific!! Digestibility differs from people to people.. but it's not like it's 100% or nothing... Most of that would be absorbed...so make sure to eat much more than the recommended amount.. protein powder comes in handy tho! I'm 6 feet.. i get all of my protein from minimally processed foods ...but your requirements could be even more..
I think that shows that everyone is different. I find peanuts (and any other nuts) not filling at all. Give me a kg of shelled peanuts, and they will survive for as long as it takes me to eat them. An hour or so. If I'm disciplined enough to eat slowly. In other words, though it pains me, I stay away from them. They are really bad news for my weight.
UPDATE: ok, Philips talked about 1.6gr of protein/kg, but he did not mention this was referred to resistance-trained individuals. This is all clear now. I gave a like to the video ;) OLD COMMENT: No, sorry, 1.6gr of protein/kg is close to the upper level that produces maximum muscle synthesis, which is 1.8gr/kg, so the way this video starts is misleading.
About the cancer effect from animal protein. I think the doubt is the QUALITY of the meat. (Grass fed VS regular cattle fed with grained and raised with all the antibiotics cocktails). Great video doc!
Hey everyone! Nice conversation, thanks. You debunked the, as you called it, myth that high protein diets lead to poor bone health. That was interesting to me. What about the link between protein and calcium in the pee? I've read studies that show a pretty clear connection. I' m wondering about this topic because 1 in 3 women in the western societies will deal with osteopenia-osteoporosis after perimenopause..... By the way, if there was a way to build my muscles with protein and without workouts, I would had choose the protein. I' m not lazy, it's just so hot.. hahahaha... Thanks for the (as always) great video, Gil. See ya next week.
Here's the conclusion from "Meta-analysis of the effect of the acid-ash hypothesis of osteoporosis on calcium balance" The authors state "There is no evidence from superior quality balance studies that increasing the diet acid load promotes skeletal bone mineral loss or osteoporosis. Changes of urine calcium do not accurately represent calcium balance. Promotion of the "alkaline diet" to prevent calcium loss is not justified." Meta-Analysis J Bone Miner Res Tanis R Fenton 1, Andrew W Lyon, Michael Eliasziw, Suzanne C Tough, David A Hanley PMID: 19419322
Basicly.. If you eat enough Calcium on a high Animal Protein Diet.. you will per Out the Calcium you Just consumed (Not from the Bones) If you dont consume enough Calcium when you eat high Animal Protein it comes from the Bones.
The volume from plant-based is not the fiber. Fiber volume/weight is very little. It is the high intrinsic water content. Another words, we would like to see the weight of the food that you ate (ie calorie density) An issue that was not discussed other than peripherally in terms of “passengers that come with protein“ was sodium, which in terms of highlights were in the ham possibly the cheese (unless it was Swiss) as well as the impossible and other vegan burgers which have to add high sodium to be palatable , much higher milligram of sodium to protein gram ratio for instance, than the natural levels of sodium in unadulterated meats. That is no small issue as it relates to our hypertension epidemic
I don’t see why the RDA would be too low for most people’s health, but I can see the benefit of having more protein in some contexts such as for the elderly or athletes.
I'm really surprised Gil didn't challenge his bro-science meat is better source because it has less fiber point. He asked about the increased cancer risk, but also didn't challenge the point. And lastly, I didn't hear anything about meat protein being accompanied by cholesterol and leading to heart disease. I understand having discussion with people who hold varying opinions but if you don't challenge their points then, it looks like they are the expert and your audience's health could suffer from their advice...
@@ChadRD If we're talking about heart disease then yes, all of them are factors. The stress from smoking affects our arteries. Diabetes is a disease of fat toxicity (too much) and is associated because the same "foods" that causes it also cause heart disease. Hypertension is caused by fat & cholesterol restricting the amount of blood that can flow causing our bodies to increase or hype up the tension in order to get that blood to various parts of our system. Think about what happens when you squeeze a water hose in one section. That what's happening inside us
He said, fiber "dampens" protein digestion. There is something called the Protein Digestibility Corrected Amino Acid Score, which rate animal products, e.g., meat, dairy, etc., at the top of the list. I've no idea whether or not the 'science' of this is valid, and if there's any real relevance to health. Certainly isolated processed proteins would be more 'digestible.' But, does that mean if I'm ingest 50 grams of protein from plant sources, say beans with lots of fiber, do I then net less protein than if I ingested the same amount of protein from an animal source with zero fiber? Are our body's that discerning?
Never understood the per kg of bodyweight measurements, obese people don´t need more protein... they need less of everything, however they still wanto to maintain health and muscle as they lose weight.
Maybe more seniors than you realize aren't getting enough protein. I totaled what I ate today, and I come up with about 80 g. I weigh 140 lbs. And I typically run 16 miles per week, and have started upper body exercises, because I'm losing muscle mass. Part of the problem is I cook for myself, and I have been scared off meat and eggs due to cholesterol concerns
Finally, some real information on the effect of protein on kidneys. However, the statement was that if you have kidney issues, and I assume that includes a low filtration rate, then you should go easy on the protein. Then the statement was basically that there isn’t any proof yet, but if a kidney is healthy, then it can handle protein just fine. The problem with that is that kidney disease is not flagged until you’re well into it, somewhere in the middle 30% filtration rate. It is natural for our kidneys to age as we age and the filtration rate goes down as we age. However, no doctor will tell you that those declining filtration rate numbers on your blood test is a sign that you are losing kidney function until you are in stage three kidney disease. I have several friends in their 60s who are in stage three, and are having to manage it with what they eat. I am in my 70s and have a 78% filtration rate. I am assuming that I can eat too much protein from time to time and get away with it while my friends in stage three cannot. So why wasn’t somebody telling my friends when they were in stage two that they needed to cut back on proteins? I am a vegan since my early 60s (heavy veggies along with my animal proteins prior) and my friends were basically carnivores with a few veggies on the side (just saying).
I have been getting less than 0.6 gr of protein per kilo the past 9 months still getting good results and I am at 8% body fat, I do a lot of MMA training not for competition, I think if I want to increase muscle mass much more I’ll slowly increase my intake, by the way plantbased proteins here.
I'm on 0.7 gr per lb of plant protein, and I believe I'm getting better results, with a better overall diet of course, than when I did a higher amount with animal based protein
Dr. Phillips' primary area of research seems to be protein intake and its impact on muscle building, recovery, and athletic performance. These areas don't directly address neither cancer prevention nor maximisation of lifespan.
I think this video needs some clarification. When it's suggested that people should eat 0.8 - 1.2g protein/kg/day....Is that based on their ideal weight? Is it based on their current weight? (even if they are currently obese according to BMI?) Is it based only on lean body mass? What weight is the recommendation based on please?
I've looked at dozens of articles and videos on protein intake and they all say about the same amount. Approx. 1.2g/Kg/d for an adult. For me that amounts to the equivalent of 4 cans of tuna or 20 eggs or 10 Tbls of whey protein powder (which is 600 Cal) per day. Not sure about his calculations at the end, but if I go by the nutrition facts on those foods, its challenging to reach your protein goals while trying to lose weight on caloric deficit diet.
Actually, this is the opposite, the RDA of 0.8gr per kilo of lean body weight (because having more body fat doesnt significantly increases protein need obviously)have a margin to cover most people needs. In studies, 0.66g/kg cover at least half people protein needs.
right, the RDA covers the basic needs of 97.5% of people. Dr. Phillips is arguing that getting a bit more (~1.2g) may help optimize some outcomes. esp. in some contexts, e.g. pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26960445/ We´ll have other people on soon who may disagree (e.g. Christopher Gardner). I think exposing people to legitimate, evidence-based scientific exchange is beneficial
@@NutritionMadeSimple is that 1.2g of protein for lean/healthy body weight? what about ppl with 30% bodyfat? If i was lean i would be like 70kg but i am 88kg
@@stuartphillips8181 It doesnt make any sense because having at least a significant excess of body fat doesnt increases significantly the need for protein. This is why i use approximate lean body weight.
when it comes to food it all depends on your dietary needs. in actuality people should be exercising more, getting more fresh air and sunlight, eating more whole foods, and as well eating more protein. if we're talking about optimizing health and wellness that is.
Hamilton is my hometown! My marks weren't quite good enough to get into McMaster, at the time. I'm a weight lifter with a genetically skinny build who also does a lot of cardio, and I was already trying for 1.6. It's hard to do without using supplements and animal based proteins. It just takes a lot of lentils and beans to be able to make up that amount in a day. I know we're supposed to be eating more plant based proteins for good health. I've been trying to reduce fluid milk, the most. It says that the saturated fat in that, isn't any better for you than what's in beef, or in pork. Cheese and yogurt are fermented foods. Those are the only two foods left in my diet, where I get an appreciable amount of saturated fat. Boneless, skinless chicken breast has long been the weight lifter's staple. I don't think my kidneys like 40 grams or more of protein at once. It's been detected in my urine before.
I am a little bit confused. The claims are for protein seperately and do not to be transferred to the whole protein source including the matrix they are delivered in, right?
I'd really be interested in learning about protein in yogurt. We've learned fat from dairy is best replaced, so you can get low-fat yogurt, but what about the protein?
Y’all got close with the cancer/IGF1 topic, but I was hoping to hear his opinion of Dr Valter Longo’s research on the longevity benefits of a relatively low protein diet and maybe some of the role of protein in metabolic syndrome. I understand that those issues are complex and less clearly attributable to protein, so maybe that was a good reason to not go there.
@@christopherbrand5360 Those studies never got (never will?) the publisity they deserve. Ppl are obsessed with protein although most lack fiber and folate.
When this guy talks protien he's referring to animal sourced, plants are a sidebar that he obviously has little knowledge about about made obvious by his jumping on processed plant meats as a source. I'd look at who is funding his "studies".
I’m curious now if the protein recommendation is based on lean body mass or total weight. For those with lower body fat mass the difference may be negligible but for… my friend, that I’m asking for 😅… the difference get pretty big, pretty fast. Does it make sense to “feed” our fat mass? Again, for a friend.
It is based on lean body mass because indeed having more body fat doesnt increases significantly the need for protein. As a man, i weigh around 60 kg and my lean body mass is around 50kg if i remove body fat, i have a body fat scale, therefore, i need around 40gr of protein daily and maybe less because the RDA have a margin.
@@Julottt The numbers that Stuart gave for protein are based on total body weight and not LBM. However, if you are an athlete or someone with a significant amount of LBM and low body fat, it's probably better to calculate protein based on LBM, as you suggest.
I eat a mostly plant based vegan diet and you are right in that your plant based menu would be just too much food for me. Granted, at 130 lbs, I'd have a lower requirement than you. If I'm just moderately active (lifting and light cardio) it's not too difficult to hit my requirements. In the past when I was doing endurance sports it was more difficult as my appetite didn't increase enough to compensate for calories burned and I'd lose weight (which I don't need to). I'd be really curious to see a video covering nutrition specific to active women.
Eating as a WFPB vegan that has tried to purposely eat low protein, and still got 50gr, I’m good I follow the protein recommendations of Dottore Valter Longo, he’s an expert in the field of aging Ok, edit: I love hearing these protein debates and then going back to the US for a visit and seeing 8 out of 10 obese/overweight Americans waddle around with a drink and a 500 calorie protein “snack” in their hand. Americans should maybe focus on eating more vegetables and fruits, and worry less about getting more more more protein
I had a professor in the 80s who had studied the diets of Papua New Guinean tribesmen in the 50s and 60s. They were perfectly healthy with about one third of the rda level of protein. I suspect that there's not a lot of solid science behind the protein rda because starving people is unethical, so it's all a safe guess.
I eat a mostly whole foods plant based diet. I get about .8 g/kg now, on my 1600-1700 cal diet. I already eat legumes. To get 1.2 g/kg, I'd have to replace foods with meat or supplements, or just gain weight and get fat.
High blood pressure, high cholesterol and high blood sugar cause kidney damage. Saturated fats and over consumption of fructose and alcohol (which both convert to lipids in the liver) causes type II diabetes and insulin resistance. High cholesterol and saturated fats damages the liver, pancrease, kidneys, heart, brain, and arteries. Our body makes all the cholesterol it needs. Dietary cholesterol comes from meat, fish, shrimp etc. and it creates havoc. Eating saturated fats increase the amount of cholesterol the body makes. Dairy causes autoimmune diseases like type I diabetes and throws the hormone levels wacky in men and women. My adult facial and body hair only finished growing in after I gave up dairy 40 years ago. Say goodbye to migraines too.
What about overweight people (especially if they want to lose weight)? Should they eat 1.6g of protein per kg of their current weight, or 1.6g of protein per kg of the weight, they should ideally have (respectively want if they're planning to lose weight)?
I've studied this matter from scientists like this for quite a few years and one thing I NEVER see mentioned is what body weight are we talking about? Obviously a morbidly obese individual shouldn't be eating twice the protein of someone sporting a six pack. I suggest that x grams/kg is based on an ideal body weight. That 400 pounder should pretend he's at a perfect 180 pounds, say. A better starting point would be lean body mass, but that's not easy to accurately determine. Then there's the matter of getting adequate protein while on a reduced calorie diet. My metabolism is damaged from being obese once. I'm 6'2", male, 77 y/o, 220 pounds, pretty sedentary. My ideal would be 190. I record everything I eat and have for 13 years with some breaks. I have to keep my calories around only 1500 cals/day or I gain weight! Carbs average about 70. I make a whey shake about half of the days, which really helps. For those of us on the Imperial system, here's a shortcut: Take your ideal weight, multiply by .55 and there's your protein needs at 1.2 grams/kg weight.
1.6g a kilo means I need 144g a day. My morning bowl of porridge with milk is only 10g. That leaves me having to find another 132g in two meals. I don’t eat a lot of meat. I’m still confused. On one vid you’re saying the RDA is fine. The protein expert you interviewed is saying much higher. I’m losing weight right now and have another 12lb to go. I have to eat 1800 to lose at an appreciable amount weight. I’m 90KG - I guess quite muscular in the scheme of things. I don’t think i can I hit these higher protein level on a PBD. And I have been losing muscle sadly despite keeping the weights up. Thinking now supplement would have been a good idea.
Why are legumes plus grains better than just legumes, proteinwise? I mean some grains add valuable proline, but other than that...? If you're starving you might be not getting enough methionine just from legumes, while (what no one talks about) you'd be getting too much of it and way less glycine (unless you eat skin, cartillage and bones) and arginine with animal protein alone. When you consume 1.2 g/kg of protein a day you could fulfill that need for methionine even when your protein comes exclusively from legumes, while you couldn't reach a good level of level of lysine with grain protein alone, and compared to legumes, most grains are also quite low in leucine, glycine and arginine.
Athletes and longevity ate 2 different things. Lots of athletes end up in wheel chairs. For the immense majority of healthy active people, it should not be of great concern if you love beans, nuts and seeds.
I’m not against eating solely for maximizing longevity, but as Dr. Longo put it recently, lots of old folks in his native Italy were frail at very old age. I prefer not overdoing it at either extremes, but trying to age gracefully, remain strong and live a long life while maintaining a long health span.
Two things which are not as good as usual on this channel. Firstly I'm not as much interested in mechanisms but more in the effects of food. If the protein via IGF1 is the problem (What is enough evidence precisely? - most of nutritional research has not enough evidence to be predictive but this seems not the goal for other topics) or things which come with the protein is in practice not important to me. The mechanism is a perhaps interesting side note but the way it is discussed as if this resolves the problem is strange. Secondly it seemed very handwavy overall. What are the recommendation in the video based on? Evidence and function/goal to optimise is completely missing. btw. I'm eating a lot of protein (>1.6g/kg per day on average often >2.0g/kg). So I have nothing personal against higher protein.
Great talk and excellent questions. Thank you to both. Eagerly waiting for the next video.
Awesome !!
Stu Phillips is the protein research king.
Great Channel and big Fan :)
Well...as an indian.. lentils and beans were a valuable source of protein.. not animal protein..
We ate dairy but the amount so lil..
Just a cup of yogurt (curd) and a small glass milk and that was it..
Meat not more than twice a year..
Soy chunks was something so cheap and really tasty if prepared right..
We were pretty broke ...
I'm vegan now.. but I've always eaten mostly vegetarian.. becuz we couldn't afford to est meat.. meat was for rich people (and mind you I'm 18.. so we were pretty broke ) and still kinda is..
Beans and lentils are simply so much cheaper.. and we ate a lot of local veggies and fruits and only expensive thing we ate were walnuts and almonds (along with some seasonal seeds like sesame and flaxseeds)
I presume min/recommended intake is based on lean mass otherwise overweight people would be on huge intakes? Apologies if this was covered
I just posted the exact same question. Actually laughed out loud when I saw yours. 🤷♂️
@@thomascurry4762 no good evidence for high protein diets causing renal dysfunction. If somebody already has CKD, then yes, they need to stick to around 0.8 grams per kg
@@thomascurry4762 somebody didn’t watch the video.
@@thomascurry4762 I believe the original statement in contention is "then this will start to create a booming business for nephrologists". The above requires good evidence for that statement, and hence the reply works. Your response about not being able to make sweeping statements about the negation of the proposition is sound, but unfortunately, that is not what was being put forward by the reply.
@@thomascurry4762 In really overweight people we use ideal body weight
I am particularly interested in protein intake on longevity and the research saying that limiting calorie and protein intake is good for longevity. Also research that mentions certain amino acids are bad for longevity such as high methionine, which is generally much higher in animal based sources.
As for mixing foods for protein, I ran the math on it before and there is no actual diet where if you eat the needed raw weight of protein that you did not get enough of any essential amino acid.
More people should talk about this
I believe that the PURE long term study showed a lower all cause mortality for people on ketogenic diets.
I thought I could substantially lower my methionine levels by eating plant proteins. I tried pumpkin seeds, lentils and soy based entered them into Cronometer and they change was insignificant.
@@rwh4114 Soy is probably higher than others, but all plant proteins are loosely comparable to animal protein in terms of methionine
@@tinknal6449 No all the evidence base we have on ketogenic diets is showing a much higher risk of mortality across the board. See Valter Longo onthe Rich Roll podcast he explained it rather well.
I love your videos Dr Carvalho but this one felt a lot more "opinion'' than previous videos. I'm not necessarily against anything Dr Philips in says, but because he cites no studies to support his views I can't independently evaluate them. I really can't tell if he know his stuff from this presentation.
And he believe in the false myth of the necessity of " plant protein combining"
I think it’s unfair to expect people to share citations while they have a convo. This guy is sharing what he knows to be most accurate in his professional opinion.
@@tryptamigo In previous videos, Dr Carvalho has added cuts to studies the interviewee has shared with him outside of the interview. Or linked studies in the description. The citations need not be in the video itself.
@@Julottt And name calling fiber as "anti-nutrient".
There are two people on this planet you can trust when it comes to protein, Dr. Stuart Phillip and Dr. Donald Layman.
Excellent video - very informative. I’m looking forward to next week.
I love your content Dr. Gil. I have to admit I went into this video with a negative attitude thinking, "Oh, here we go. Another researcher who's never stepped foot inside a gym is going to give nutritional advice to athletes."
But I'm glad I watched the whole thing. Everything he said is inline with what I've heard from athletes and trainers. This guy really know his stuff.
The only thing I would add is that I think athletes who compete in sports with weight divisions or bodybuilders have to make different choices as far as the types of protein that choose so as to maximize the amount of protein they take in vs calories, so "just eat more" isn't an option if they're doing a weight cut.
When it came to the subject of kidney health, I wish you had asked if there was a difference between animal vs plant protein.
This is very useful content, regardless of one's diet preferences.
But how to avoid protien from switching on mTor so it doesn't accelerate aging.
WooooW! Cool video 😎🤘
Many THX to both of U 🌹
I'm looking forward to vid 2 😄
I’m curious what your take on Dr. Garth Davis’s Proteinaholic book would be. I find this all to be confusing. It is tempting to ignore all the different voices and just eat a relatively clean diet without obsessing over the macros. As an over-the-road truck driver, it is difficult enough to eat clean, without the added stress of trying to get that perfect balance of protein, fats, carbs, and fiber, not to mention exercise. Some of us have lives that are somewhat counterproductive to what would be considered a healthy lifestyle.
100% agree. get the overall pattern right and the macros largely take care of themselves
Dr Garth Davis has changed his stance on protein since writing the book.
I haven’t followed Dr D for about three years, so that would’ve passed by me unnoticed.
@@lizziedripping71what is his stance now?
Hi, interesting video. I was a bit surprised and slightly disappointed at the protein and cancer part. I am wondering about Dr Campbell's findings as evidence. In the China study there is a clear connection between animal protein & cancer growth. As far as I remember not just in lab rats but they actually did controlled trials on the Philippines. Both were tested: animal and plant protein, and the first one came out quite bad. I am not a scientist, so I might miss something but that finding seemed pretty strong to me.
Of course, thank you as always! I can't wait the second part with Christopher Gardner.
I agree with you 100%. One of the reasons why I went whole food plant based is precisely because of how toxic consuming a lot of animal protein is
Campbell's work has been completely debunked. It has been shown that he was only able to arrive at his conclusions by heavily cherry picking the data. Never follow a "scientist" who starts a study with an agenda.
@@DSRWFeb Campbell is a proven fraud.
It's debatable that the connection is clear in the China study. Of course, Denise Minger argued extensively against it. She is, famously, just a blogger. But researcher Stephen Guyenet supports her position. See wholehealthsource.blogspot.com/2010/07/china-study-problems-of-interpretation.html and wholehealthsource.blogspot.com/2014/11/is-meat-unhealthy-part-iii.html.
As a statistics student, I do not think the study was good enough to conclude meat causes cancer.
Across the study the researchers tried to link the vegetarian diet of Chinese villagers with low-cancer rates and increased longevity, however there are just so many other factors that contribute to it. Firstly, the villagers grow their own vegetables and therefore enjoy a diet free pesticides and chemicals. Secondly, they live a stress-free yet active lifestyle. Looking at the big picture, I'd argue that these independent variables had a higher correlation with their longevity compared to just "eating no meat". I won't deny that their diet consisting of vegetables and fruit contributed to their healthiness, however implying that lower-meat consumption has a negative correlation with cancer and other diseases is still a bold claim. I can assure you that villagers who consume fresh seafood and raised poultry would show similar effects.
This applies to the meat eaters as well. When the researchers tried to link animal-protein intake with higher chances of cancer, I just couldn't ignore the many variables that play into cancer. The type of animal protein, the quality of the animal protein, the preparation method, and additional ingridients added. As a Chinese person, I know how unhealthy meat dishes can be in China. Not only do they consume high amounts of red meat, the dishes are often smothered in bad-quality oil and laced with high amounts of sodium and msg. I'd also like to emphasie that meat eaters are not consiously thinking about their health and just eat what tastes good. Therefore, linking animal protein with cancer is just absurd because its often the preperation method and meat quality thats the issue.
However here are a few things we can agree on:
1. Eating lots of vegetables and fruit is beneficial for the body, and its fibre may even decrease the probality of developing cancer.
2. Living an active and stress-free life is cancer's and other diseases' worst enemy.
3. Cooking your own food is the best for your body as you know exactly what you're eating.
4. We should only consume food that comes from an organic, high-quality source like villagers do.
For meat-eaters:
Although the study is inconclusive, it is wise to stay safe as research changes over time and I'm also open for my mind to be changed.
1. Only consume organic poultry and wild-caught seafood. Do not consume red meat as its already proven to cause disease.
2. The method of cooking and additional ingredients used is important. Don't use shit quality oil and don't use so much sodium.
2. Do not consume protein in excess, chances are you're not damaging your muscles enough to need it.
3. Your plate should primarily consist of vegetables, fruit, and carbs, not just a big hunk of meat.
I recall that Chris Gardner said that RDA was set at mean plus 2 standard deviations in the US and that mean consumption in the US exceeds most other countries. Also some evidence, from animal studies (Lamming, Mitchell, Fontana) that limiting certain BCAAs, like methionie or isoleucine, may help increase longevity and imrpove metabolic health. An ongoing story. I choose to stay close to RDA and monitor my lean mass, and eat vegan. At 68, if I see my lean mass, which I track, dropping I'll adjust.
I´m chatting with Gardner soon, will get his take as well :)
I think that the two caloric restriction studies on Monkeys showed us that we can't have too much faith that studies on shorter lived species are applicable to humans or monkeys. For example, calorie restriction extended life of mouse lemurs by 40 -50% but had little or no life extension benefit in the longer lived species of monkeys
Limiting BCAA's may also decrease hypertrophy and protein synthesis. Double edged sword. A lot of these things that are preached by longetivity scientist go against bone, muscle growth so they should especially be avoided by children, although that should be obvious
are there any blood test that measure protein in our body? is it BUN, creatinine, uric acid test or something alse?
If I’m not mistaken those in the increased lifespan and decreased co-morbidity space like Dr Long & Dr Sinclair recommend somewhere are .31-.36g protein per pound per day. I’m curious on the whys behind the differences I have heard increasing as you get older, but only because it has a marginal decrease in muscle wasting by increasing protein which is a common factor among the elderly which impacts quality of life.
I've read in a book about nutrition, that it is more like a U curve. You need more when you are younger and when you are middle age, a bit less to decrease cancer risk and when you over 65, you should increase again to prevent muscle wasting. But it is also written there that it does not concern plant protein, since it does not increase cancer risk. So I guess simply switching to mostly plant protein might a good middle ground, without going that low on protein.
Older people need more protien, great tip, thank you both. Perhaps you should do a video about how ones nutrition requirments change with age.
Thanks, there must be a lot of baby boomers out there.😎
At the same time the Research Dr. Greger Shows about Elderly and their Protein Intake is pretty interesting and goes against a Higher Proteinintake above 65yo
@@Slizz I love Dr. Greger as it was his book (and website) that got me so into nutrition. However, I feel the ardent vegans in the WFPB community, Dr. Greger being among them, cherry pick somewhat. Dr. Fuhrman, breaks away from the pack and acknowledges that people over 65 absolutely require more protein. He also points out that some advocates of wfpb eating are flat out wrong by insisting that wfpb eaters automatically get their protein needs met by consuming any whole plant foods. He doesn't name names but I will: The main culprit is Dr. McDougall. He infuriates me.
I never heard why extra protein is good, I am flat out reaching recommended without adding a protein drink. Seems to me it's a correlation within a country with predominantly a SAD pattern. Japanese eat far less protein than Aussies yet females have a greater life expectancy in Japan. The US where SAD is predominant and the lowest life expectancy of a wealthy country should throw out all the data, yep maybe a steak versus a donut is healthy because of its non protein nutrients which can't be found in donuts or french fries or cola or sweet fatty mayonnaise.
For the 0.01% of the population who are professional or aspiring sports people ok whatever, that's a whole different story.
In an overweight/obese society a higher protein consumption would help as it will promote, at least to some extent, weight loss.
@@ivanfoofoo yes that could be a factor. I just looked up the estimated requirements and RDI (Recommended daily intake) for Australia/New Zealand for a male adult and up to 70 years they suggest requirement is 0.68 gm per kg of body weight and RDI 0.84 gm per kg of body weight. For women it was a little less and over 70s male a lot more with RDI for men jumping to 1.07gm per kg of body weight. There was no upper limit recommendation other than not more than 25% of calories from protein. Recommendations are funny in a way, 70th birthday have to all of a sudden increase protein by 20%.
In the US we are protein obsessed because of really good marketing, nothing more. Protein makes you younger, helps you build muscle, helps you lose weight, healthier hair and nails, I mean they infer it'll do just about anything for your health. Everywhere you look, it's being advertised in the food world.
My other bewilderment is our obsession with paying for 'infused' bottled water drinks, like vitamins, electrolytes, and yes, even protein water. Can you imagine, protein water? I wonder if it's that way in other countries, paying $2.00 or more 500ml of bottled water. A while back I saw a young supermarket worker drinking something call "Smart Water." I asked, "what makes that water so smart?" He said he didn't know. I said, "keep drinking."
@@ivanfoofoo Prove it.
@@Joseph1NJ it was proved already, probably due to its higher thermic effect of food
Excess protein is stored in the body as fat. Not sure why he's saying it's not stored. Sure, it's not stored as protein, it's stored as fat. Nearly every medical source out there states this, so unless he has unique information, this is simply incorrect. If it's in fact true, can we see a source for this please?
Dr. Peter Rogers has an excellent background, including Stanford and Harvard, and graduating first in his class. He has a very strong background in biochemistry and neurology.
He seems to recommend a low-protein, very low fat, high-starch diet (~80‐10-10), much like Dr. Mcdougall.
Could you do a review? Or at least comment on this sort of diet?
One of Rogers' concerns is preventing cancer, which is one of the leading causes of early death. High-protein diets may be good for muscle building, but they also (apparently) increase one's odds of cancer formation and early death.
Elderly people may need more protein, but they also need to take their cancer risk - which is serious - into account as well....
Your response to balancing these concerns (cancer, sarcopenia, protein benefits)?
I'm finna send Gil a new microphone, my guy is two hardware upgrades away from being the best dietary channel
I thought it was fine now!! no? :) we did touch up the sound and image recently
oh wait you mean the convo part or the intro? the zoom is just the computer mic...
@@NutritionMadeSimple as someone who spends a lot of time listening to podcasts and RUclips videos I can tell the computer mic is used, but the quality is fine nonetheless 👍 Great job as always!
Why would a patient with cancer eat more protein?
Please shed some light on that.. i really wanna know about it.. I've heard some really conflicting views on this ..
And probably science is more on the "protein from plants" side especially when it comes to cancer..
I dunno.. I'm just a premed..studying science.. but science we do is not even half as complex as you do or understand..
Please help!
My grandpa died of cancer ... It was heartbreaking for my mum..so painful for both of em um.. so this is something i would really wanna know about..
I appreciate your work.. thank you 💚🌱
Most kids get 1.2 g/kg? Not been my experience when reviewing protein with parents of youth athletes. They frequently skip breakfast, have school lunch (total crap and low protein), and dinner is a ? based on the parents schedules.
Great video - a year after it was posted. Studies with animal based proteins mostly don’t give the source. A big difference between chick and hot dogs.
I eat my plant protein (a lot of that actually..)... And i never count..and this hasn't failed me... I'm more than 6 feet tall now ..and that's considered tall for a 16 year (turn 17 in aug ...) old girl.. and since I'm really tall and active...i have a huge appetite..
Protein restriction, especially Methionine and Leucine restriction, were correlated with longevity, right?
Yes, in animal studies of short lived species. However, when we have ported similar studies (calorie restriction) from short lived species ( mouse lemur) to monkeys, the approximate 40-50% lifespan extension either completely or mostly disappeared in the two studies on the subject. Unless we have a study on Monkeys or Humans with similar results, I would not put much stock in the studies on short lived species
@@jackbuaer3828 If I remember correctly, protein restriction rationale had a different mechanism than caloric restriction and no studies in primate level mammals have been done. The mechanism had something to do with Methionine/Leucine promoting higher igf-1 or mTor upregulation, promoting cancer. Less cancer = longevity.
@@mitesh8utube Thanks Mitesh. It should be noted that calorie restriction appears to also operate by downregulating MTOR.
" CR inhibits the activity of the mechanistic target of rapamycin (mTOR) [2,3]. mTOR is a kinase, which operates as two distinct complexes with different downstream targets and physiological functions, mTORC1 and mTORC2 [4,5]. Genetic or pharmacological inhibition of mTORC1 signaling leads to increased lifespan. It was proposed that high activity of mTORC1 is a major driving force of aging, while the suppression of mTOR contributes to many benefits of CR, including lifespan extension"
Tulsian R, Velingkaar N, Kondratov R. Caloric restriction effects on liver mTOR signaling are time-of-day dependent. Aging (Albany NY). 2018 Jul
It's apparently a lot easier to extend life in short lived species, so I think it's unlikely that any dramatic benefit we see in mice, flies, worms etc . . . , regardless of the operating pathway, will port over to humans.
@@jackbuaer3828 It's not about life extension in smaller organisms versus humans. This video tries to make a point that increased protein intake is probably better, and other hypothesis countering that already exist. Longest living humans, for whom we have some data are 7th day Adventists (vegan) and okinawans (95% diet sweet potatoes). This totally flies in the face of "expert advice" of higher protein intake in this video. At one point the expert also said, animal protein is clearly better. Inuits get all their protein from animal sources, how long do they live? This is not science. My comment was just to give a counter point to the protein hype in this video.
@@mitesh8utube
You seem to be basing your conclusion on Buettner's centenarian survey in the Blue Zones. There is disagreement on what the Okinawans and the rest of the Blue Zones commonly eat.
At least one respected researcher, Dr. Michael Lustgarten, does not believe that Buettner's data holds up to the limited peer reviewed data on Centenarian diets that he has reviewed. Buettner's underlying data, as far as I know, has not been published in a peer reviewed journal.
I find Dr. Lustgarten to be unbiased. He does not follow any dogmatic dietary philosophy. His personal diet is highly (but not exclusively) plant based, so he is not coming at this from a Keto, low carb, high protein philosophy. He just does not believe Buettner's data based upon other data sets he has looked at.
Mona Ottum, an RD, in her blog, pegs average protein levels as follows: Ikaria 1.1 g per KG Okinawa 1.4 per KG Sardinia 1.6 per KG U.S 1.4 per KG See: Nicoya, Costa Rica: A Puzzling Blue Zone Diet Light on Vegetables and High in Carbohydrate and Sugar, May, 17, 2017. Mona's numbers seem to fit in line with Dr. Phillips' recommendation.
So from a cultural dietary perspective, it really depends what you believe the longest living cultures actually eat. We have different sets of numbers floating around. I don't know what the answer is and I don't think it's all that clear. I also don't think that there is consensus among experts.
Also, diet is just one factor in longevity. I would guess that some centenarians eat high protein and that others eat moderate or low protein.
Stuart Phillips has done a lot of work for the meat, dairy, egg, whey protein industries. That doesn't annul his research but means we should interpret it with caution
I believe if you want to get a very in-depth view of protein both the good or bad interview David Raubenheimer and Stephen Simpson. They are researchers who have made extensive studies of various creatures on this planet and their protein requirements. In fact they wrote a popular book about the subject. The title is, " Eat Like The Animals".
Dr Sean Hasmi in Los Angeles is a plant-based nephrologist, not vegan. He was a body builder before he was a nephrologist. He has a podcast titled Plant Based Kidney Health.
1.6 grams per kg has been shown to keep 95% of hard training, lean, world class athletes in nitrogen balance. Above 1.9 grams, all additional protein yields urea or ammonia, meaning that it is 100% turned into glucose for fuel above that level.
Yeah, I have also read majority of studies never found musle building benefits beyond 1.4 g/kg optimal bodyweight. The 1.6, or at max 1.8 are margins of "safety".
I edited these numbers upon rechecking. 1.6 grams per kg have been shown to keep lean world class athletes in nitrogen balance while training intensely several hours a day. At over 1.9 there is no increase in protein retention for them. The males in the study also averaged 9% bodyfat.
Furthermore, at above 2.2 grams per kilogram (1 gram per pound) every additional gram of protein yielded ammonia which hinders performance.
People interested in building muscle are usually recommending a higher protein intake than scientists researching longevity and chronic disease. I’m more interested in living long and not getting cancer than having big muscles and this guy hasn’t convinced me I want more than the 0,8 g/kg.
Exactly, longevity studies go the opposite direction, the less protein the better, so long as you’re meeting your minimum. There is something to say about older people consuming a little more, sure, but other than that, less is more. I usually do about 1 or 1.1/kg, sometimes less.
@@hugomarquez3189 Can you link those studies? Logically, more muscle mass and less fat equals to better health. More muscle mass needs more protein than 1.1g/kg, especially, when you are in a calorie deficit and you are cutting. I've always heard and read that higher protein diets for muscle building are more healthy. more healthy.
Current obesitology textbooks often say 1g/kg optimal bodyweight, that sounds like happy medium to me. Easily achievable and probably still allows to build muscle at decent rate. On the other hand I wouldn't consider something like 1.2 or even 1.5 "high" protein that would somehow alter risks regarding longevity.
It wont be the protein that kills you unless you eat ridiculous amounts for years. So eating 0.8g is pointless. If you have any goals for your physique or performance you should eat a lot more. sacrificing performance and muscle mass for little to no reward seems dumb.
if you want longevity you should want big muscles, ure not doing your research properly.
As a weight lifter aiming to gain muscle I consume 2.2g of protein per Kg of bodyweight, which for me is 194g of protein. A lot of egg whites, chicken, fish, whey protein powder and soy protein isolate powder.
Dad grew up in the Azores Island. He would eat in a week the amount of protein many eat in a day. Their diet consisted of mostly Legumes (many), Taro (many root veggies), Collard Greens, Cabbage, and corn bread (no wheat) some fish. 92 years old going strong. Read Proteinaholic. You should get Dr Garth Davis on your show for an alternative perspective. ✌️
I´m in touch with him, need to get thru some references
@@NutritionMadeSimpleone problem I see here too is a lot of sicker older people are told they need protein and get eat boost shakes and what not. Dairy and corn syrup. Not healthy.
Im wondering if they consumed any fat sources (nuts, seeds) or sugars (fruits) in their diet? Nuts and seeds are considered healthy but even they contain some saturated fat and i wonder if it's better to be kept at 0 for longevity. The same with sugars, even if they come from fruit?
Love that you gave an example meal plan!
I thought the amount was x times lean body mass (lbm) not total weight.
total body weight, unless overweight or obese then ideal body weight. Nobody knows their LBM, so total BW is much easier
Dr Longo is much, much more up to date.
I really appreciate your balanced and scientifically informed approached videos.
I’ve binged watched your videos for the last few days because I recently had a calcium score of 113 at age 50. I tried Lipitor previously but had serious memory problems.
Here are some questions I hope you can answer:
1. There is a myriad of differing opinions from reputable sources whether dietary consumption of fats leads to elevated serum levels. Even Harvard has a recent article saying eggs are okay. Please help clarify.
2. What is the effect size of alcohol on lipids, particularly triglycerides? And can you speak more about triglycerides as a risk factor?
3. Is there any meaningful differences between the statins aside from potency?
hi, eggs can raise cholesterol, depending on context, although they're not the strongest factor. see our video on eggs & cholesterol. yes alcohol can raise TGs, we have whole video on lowering TGs that touches on this. TGs are essentially a marker of VLDL particles, high TGs can be secondary to diabetes, overweight or other situations. different statin classes can have different rates of side effects for example. we have a video coming out soon on this
@@NutritionMadeSimple thank you!
Thank you for asking about cancer! I’m a cancer survivor and this is the main reason I avoid animal protein.
Good choice.
Kidney damage too is cause of excess animal protein. You start exhaling ammonia and people avoid you. It can be worse than cancer.
As a cancer survivor (among other things) I teeter between being 85 to 98 percent whole food plant based. While I agree that avoiding animal products is wise, to me avoiding high glycemic foods and processed food is at. least as important. And this is where I know I may differ from the WFPB community at large. I'd rather have a piece of wild salmon and a large salad than a vegan faux meat or pasta meal filled with oil, sugar, flour, salt and emulsifiers. Many wfpb eaters would choose the latter if pressed.
@@sectionalsofa oh I totally agree! Fake meats scare me. I do eat fish for the health benefits and protein content, but rarely eat meat.
@@jazzluvr87 Same here. Nice to share the same views with someone regarding diet. Things can get pretty contentious here on RUclips. The plant based and the paleo/keto groups are often at war. Good luck and good health to you.
That is an enormous amount of protein other than protein drinks I have no idea how I could eat that much. I am 200 pounds so 140 t0 170 grams of protein?
Velter Longo found that MTOR and IGf1 spikes (which are cancer and inflammation promoting) are mainly caused by excessive protein consumption and recommends 0.35g per kg. However, he recommends a bit more after the age of 65.
@@RC-rk2xs what about his group of 27 Sicilians some or who have reached 114 and ALL have passed 100? Btw he has physiological mechaism that got Nobel nomination not correlation and epidemiology.
@@RC-rk2xs Nobel Commitee must have missed your perspective
@@RC-rk2xs you don’t know how to read? He said to INCREASE protein for elderly! Check word INCREASE in your dictionary. Other thing, I clearly said he was a Nobel nominnee. Again, learn to read.
Find a human study that Dr. Longo has done… I’ll wait
@@mackinprof him and Maira di Tano just published one human/mice study (Jun 2022) so I guess you missed it since it is very recent
I can still gain muscle on the RDA or even lower, on a plant based diet. I don't know about consuming so much protein. I like Dr Longo's work on the fast-mimicking diet, which is a low protein diet.
This information seems to contradict Dr. Valter Longo's research on protein and longevity. Now I am thoroughly confused.
Has Dr. Longo ever done a study in humans?
3:44 if u're vegan, the recommendation used to be that u need 20-30% more protein [which would be up to 1.56g instead of 1.2g for non-lifters], but now with foods like beyond meat, he would recommend 1.2-1.4g for vegan non-lifters. however...
6:13 animal protein is better quality because (1) fiber lowers the absorption of protein, and (2) amino acid profile, although you could just eat more plant foods to get more amino acids, or combine plant foods to improve the aa profile [see cronometer for accurate aa profiles of plant foods and their combinations].
Instead of traditional protein powders, I prefer to use peanut butter powder. Not a long list of ingredients. Pretty clean, and the fat is mostly removed. Goes great in my smoothies. Btw. I am not fat phobic, but eating peanuts is pretty filling. This way I can get more protein into my diet without feeling too full.
I’d even look into fermented protein powder. Might help with how well the protein digests
I can eat two spoons maximum from peanut butter. I'm not a big fan of powders though. I'm not so sure if all of it is absorbed by our guts, so I try to have it in something to eat and something that has to be digested.
@@stellasternchen no..that would be digested...and if someone's says the opposite... he's unscientific!!
Digestibility differs from people to people.. but it's not like it's 100% or nothing... Most of that would be absorbed...so make sure to eat much more than the recommended amount.. protein powder comes in handy tho!
I'm 6 feet.. i get all of my protein from minimally processed foods ...but your requirements could be even more..
I think that shows that everyone is different. I find peanuts (and any other nuts) not filling at all. Give me a kg of shelled peanuts, and they will survive for as long as it takes me to eat them. An hour or so. If I'm disciplined enough to eat slowly. In other words, though it pains me, I stay away from them. They are really bad news for my weight.
UPDATE: ok, Philips talked about 1.6gr of protein/kg, but he did not mention this was referred to resistance-trained individuals. This is all clear now. I gave a like to the video ;)
OLD COMMENT: No, sorry, 1.6gr of protein/kg is close to the upper level that produces maximum muscle synthesis, which is 1.8gr/kg, so the way this video starts is misleading.
About the cancer effect from animal protein. I think the doubt is the QUALITY of the meat. (Grass fed VS regular cattle fed with grained and raised with all the antibiotics cocktails). Great video doc!
Hey everyone! Nice conversation, thanks. You debunked the, as you called it, myth that high protein diets lead to poor bone health. That was interesting to me. What about the link between protein and calcium in the pee? I've read studies that show a pretty clear connection. I' m wondering about this topic because 1 in 3 women in the western societies will deal with osteopenia-osteoporosis after perimenopause..... By the way, if there was a way to build my muscles with protein and without workouts, I would had choose the protein. I' m not lazy, it's just so hot.. hahahaha... Thanks for the (as always) great video, Gil. See ya next week.
Here's the conclusion from "Meta-analysis of the effect of the acid-ash hypothesis of osteoporosis on calcium balance" The authors state "There is no evidence from superior quality balance studies that increasing the diet acid load promotes skeletal bone mineral loss or osteoporosis. Changes of urine calcium do not accurately represent calcium balance. Promotion of the "alkaline diet" to prevent calcium loss is not justified." Meta-Analysis J Bone Miner Res
Tanis R Fenton 1, Andrew W Lyon, Michael Eliasziw, Suzanne C Tough, David A Hanley PMID: 19419322
Basicly.. If you eat enough Calcium on a high Animal Protein Diet.. you will per Out the Calcium you Just consumed (Not from the Bones)
If you dont consume enough Calcium when you eat high Animal Protein it comes from the Bones.
Thank you for posting this. I enjoyed it.
The volume from plant-based is not the fiber. Fiber volume/weight is very little. It is the high intrinsic water content. Another words, we would like to see the weight of the food that you ate (ie calorie density)
An issue that was not discussed other than peripherally in terms of “passengers that come with protein“ was sodium, which in terms of highlights were in the ham possibly the cheese (unless it was Swiss) as well as the impossible and other vegan burgers which have to add high sodium to be palatable , much higher milligram of sodium to protein gram ratio for instance, than the natural levels of sodium in unadulterated meats. That is no small issue as it relates to our hypertension epidemic
I don’t see why the RDA would be too low for most people’s health, but I can see the benefit of having more protein in some contexts such as for the elderly or athletes.
I'm really surprised Gil didn't challenge his bro-science meat is better source because it has less fiber point. He asked about the increased cancer risk, but also didn't challenge the point. And lastly, I didn't hear anything about meat protein being accompanied by cholesterol and leading to heart disease.
I understand having discussion with people who hold varying opinions but if you don't challenge their points then, it looks like they are the expert and your audience's health could suffer from their advice...
@@ChadRD It's actually the only factor necessary for heart disease
@@mreverydaylife259 really? What about smoking, hypertension and diabetes?
@@ChadRD If we're talking about heart disease then yes, all of them are factors. The stress from smoking affects our arteries. Diabetes is a disease of fat toxicity (too much) and is associated because the same "foods" that causes it also cause heart disease. Hypertension is caused by fat & cholesterol restricting the amount of blood that can flow causing our bodies to increase or hype up the tension in order to get that blood to various parts of our system.
Think about what happens when you squeeze a water hose in one section. That what's happening inside us
He said, fiber "dampens" protein digestion. There is something called the Protein Digestibility Corrected Amino Acid Score, which rate animal products, e.g., meat, dairy, etc., at the top of the list. I've no idea whether or not the 'science' of this is valid, and if there's any real relevance to health. Certainly isolated processed proteins would be more 'digestible.' But, does that mean if I'm ingest 50 grams of protein from plant sources, say beans with lots of fiber, do I then net less protein than if I ingested the same amount of protein from an animal source with zero fiber? Are our body's that discerning?
He didn't say it was better he said it was more available
There's a fiber deficiency in the west, not a protein one.
Never understood the per kg of bodyweight measurements, obese people don´t need more protein... they need less of everything, however they still wanto to maintain health and muscle as they lose weight.
obese people can use ideal body weight
Gil, any interest in interviewing T Colin Campbell?
Oh, that would be so great!
Maybe more seniors than you realize aren't getting enough protein.
I totaled what I ate today, and I come up with about 80 g. I weigh 140 lbs.
And I typically run 16 miles per week, and have started upper body exercises, because I'm losing muscle mass.
Part of the problem is I cook for myself, and I have been scared off meat and eggs due to cholesterol concerns
Finally, some real information on the effect of protein on kidneys. However, the statement was that if you have kidney issues, and I assume that includes a low filtration rate, then you should go easy on the protein. Then the statement was basically that there isn’t any proof yet, but if a kidney is healthy, then it can handle protein just fine. The problem with that is that kidney disease is not flagged until you’re well into it, somewhere in the middle 30% filtration rate. It is natural for our kidneys to age as we age and the filtration rate goes down as we age. However, no doctor will tell you that those declining filtration rate numbers on your blood test is a sign that you are losing kidney function until you are in stage three kidney disease. I have several friends in their 60s who are in stage three, and are having to manage it with what they eat. I am in my 70s and have a 78% filtration rate. I am assuming that I can eat too much protein from time to time and get away with it while my friends in stage three cannot. So why wasn’t somebody telling my friends when they were in stage two that they needed to cut back on proteins? I am a vegan since my early 60s (heavy veggies along with my animal proteins prior) and my friends were basically carnivores with a few veggies on the side (just saying).
I don’t have an issue with animal protein, but I do have an issue with animal fats.
I have been getting less than 0.6 gr of protein per kilo the past 9 months still getting good results and I am at 8% body fat, I do a lot of MMA training not for competition, I think if I want to increase muscle mass much more I’ll slowly increase my intake, by the way plantbased proteins here.
Holy crap, for an 80kg male that's 50g of protein. You could get more protein from just chewing on bread all day.
@@TactlessGuy not very boo available
I'm on 0.7 gr per lb of plant protein, and I believe I'm getting better results, with a better overall diet of course, than when I did a higher amount with animal based protein
How do you calculate your body fat?
@@metalmusistop the cap
The real difficulty is when you need to keep your calories low which is especially likely to happen to women.
Absence of evidence IS evidence of absence. It is just not proof of absence.
I thought choline (meat, eggs, dairy) has been statistically tied to prostate cancer. In fact over 3x risk. No?
Dr. Phillips' primary area of research seems to be protein intake and its impact on muscle building, recovery, and athletic performance. These areas don't directly address neither cancer prevention nor maximisation of lifespan.
Question - Should an obese person calculate their proper amo. of protein from their current wt or their goal weight?
I think this video needs some clarification. When it's suggested that people should eat 0.8 - 1.2g protein/kg/day....Is that based on their ideal weight? Is it based on their current weight? (even if they are currently obese according to BMI?) Is it based only on lean body mass? What weight is the recommendation based on please?
see part 2. it's total weight unless they're very overweight
Great video. Thank you for that. Very informative.
Thanks so much for the great episode
RDA is not minimum though, isn't it 2 standard deviations above EAR. Otherwise there is an adequate intake.
I've looked at dozens of articles and videos on protein intake and they all say about the same amount. Approx. 1.2g/Kg/d for an adult. For me that amounts to the equivalent of 4 cans of tuna or 20 eggs or 10 Tbls of whey protein powder (which is 600 Cal) per day. Not sure about his calculations at the end, but if I go by the nutrition facts on those foods, its challenging to reach your protein goals while trying to lose weight on caloric deficit diet.
How is it hard ?
I'm currently in a fat loss phase, my protein intake is 2.2g/kg/day
My calorie deficit is somewhere between -500 and -750
Actually, this is the opposite, the RDA of 0.8gr per kilo of lean body weight (because having more body fat doesnt significantly increases protein need obviously)have a margin to cover most people needs.
In studies, 0.66g/kg cover at least half people protein needs.
right, the RDA covers the basic needs of 97.5% of people. Dr. Phillips is arguing that getting a bit more (~1.2g) may help optimize some outcomes. esp. in some contexts, e.g. pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26960445/
We´ll have other people on soon who may disagree (e.g. Christopher Gardner). I think exposing people to legitimate, evidence-based scientific exchange is beneficial
@@NutritionMadeSimple is that 1.2g of protein for lean/healthy body weight? what about ppl with 30% bodyfat? If i was lean i would be like 70kg but i am 88kg
The RDA is per kg of body weight. If you have someone who is obese or very overweight then use ideal body weight
@@johnsmith-zf1fd total body weight
@@stuartphillips8181 It doesnt make any sense because having at least a significant excess of body fat doesnt increases significantly the need for protein.
This is why i use approximate lean body weight.
I’m doing great with much less protein! Other plant based docs are saying we need only .8 not 1.2.
when it comes to food it all depends on your dietary needs. in actuality people should be exercising more, getting more fresh air and sunlight, eating more whole foods, and as well eating more protein. if we're talking about optimizing health and wellness that is.
Hamilton is my hometown! My marks weren't quite good enough to get into McMaster, at the time. I'm a weight lifter with a genetically skinny build who also does a lot of cardio, and I was already trying for 1.6. It's hard to do without using supplements and animal based proteins. It just takes a lot of lentils and beans to be able to make up that amount in a day. I know we're supposed to be eating more plant based proteins for good health. I've been trying to reduce fluid milk, the most. It says that the saturated fat in that, isn't any better for you than what's in beef, or in pork. Cheese and yogurt are fermented foods. Those are the only two foods left in my diet, where I get an appreciable amount of saturated fat. Boneless, skinless chicken breast has long been the weight lifter's staple. I don't think my kidneys like 40 grams or more of protein at once. It's been detected in my urine before.
I am a little bit confused. The claims are for protein seperately and do not to be transferred to the whole protein source including the matrix they are delivered in, right?
Excellent. Great questions and clear responses. Best episode in a while. Thanks
Wow, lots of experts in the comment section. How lucky we all are, lol.
:D good one
Really cool, I love how you ask questions that the average layman is thinking.
I'd really be interested in learning about protein in yogurt. We've learned fat from dairy is best replaced, so you can get low-fat yogurt, but what about the protein?
This was an absolute gem, thanks Gil
Y’all got close with the cancer/IGF1 topic, but I was hoping to hear his opinion of Dr Valter Longo’s research on the longevity benefits of a relatively low protein diet and maybe some of the role of protein in metabolic syndrome. I understand that those issues are complex and less clearly attributable to protein, so maybe that was a good reason to not go there.
Have you seen documentary Forks Over Knives?
@@soilikasanen yes, I have. But it has been a while. Why?
N
@@christopherbrand5360 Those studies never got (never will?) the publisity they deserve. Ppl are obsessed with protein although most lack fiber and folate.
When this guy talks protien he's referring to animal sourced, plants are a sidebar that he obviously has little knowledge about about made obvious by his jumping on processed plant meats as a source.
I'd look at who is funding his "studies".
Some people say if you're getting enough calories, you're getting enough protein. T. Colin Campbell seemed to disagree with the guest here.
I’m curious now if the protein recommendation is based on lean body mass or total weight. For those with lower body fat mass the difference may be negligible but for… my friend, that I’m asking for 😅… the difference get pretty big, pretty fast. Does it make sense to “feed” our fat mass? Again, for a friend.
I think I’m wrong about this - maybe it’s only 400/500 calories if you carry 100lbs of fat mass versus 40lbs.
It is based on lean body mass because indeed having more body fat doesnt increases significantly the need for protein.
As a man, i weigh around 60 kg and my lean body mass is around 50kg if i remove body fat, i have a body fat scale, therefore, i need around 40gr of protein daily and maybe less because the RDA have a margin.
@@Julottt The numbers that Stuart gave for protein are based on total body weight and not LBM. However, if you are an athlete or someone with a significant amount of LBM and low body fat, it's probably better to calculate protein based on LBM, as you suggest.
For children protein is essential due to the various growth processes. 1.2 is slightly lower than ideal to induce significant growth outcomes.
These people want child's small and weak
I eat a mostly plant based vegan diet and you are right in that your plant based menu would be just too much food for me. Granted, at 130 lbs, I'd have a lower requirement than you. If I'm just moderately active (lifting and light cardio) it's not too difficult to hit my requirements. In the past when I was doing endurance sports it was more difficult as my appetite didn't increase enough to compensate for calories burned and I'd lose weight (which I don't need to). I'd be really curious to see a video covering nutrition specific to active women.
Eating as a WFPB vegan that has tried to purposely eat low protein, and still got 50gr, I’m good
I follow the protein recommendations of Dottore Valter Longo, he’s an expert in the field of aging
Ok, edit: I love hearing these protein debates and then going back to the US for a visit and seeing 8 out of 10 obese/overweight Americans waddle around with a drink and a 500 calorie protein “snack” in their hand. Americans should maybe focus on eating more vegetables and fruits, and worry less about getting more more more protein
Why do I feel much better on 50 gram of protein a day? Bent Nissen 61 years old, 185 cm, 112 kg
Same. Can't eat more than 50g quality protein, just can't
I had a professor in the 80s who had studied the diets of Papua New Guinean tribesmen in the 50s and 60s. They were perfectly healthy with about one third of the rda level of protein.
I suspect that there's not a lot of solid science behind the protein rda because starving people is unethical, so it's all a safe guess.
I eat a mostly whole foods plant based diet. I get about .8 g/kg now, on my 1600-1700 cal diet. I already eat legumes. To get 1.2 g/kg, I'd have to replace foods with meat or supplements, or just gain weight and get fat.
0:28 that was a perfect cut. It was like you just teleported 😂
Hopefully you are going to consult with multiple reputable sources.
yup happy to revisit this (and all other) topic with more researchers who focus on it
High blood pressure, high cholesterol and high blood sugar cause kidney damage. Saturated fats and over consumption of fructose and alcohol (which both convert to lipids in the liver) causes type II diabetes and insulin resistance. High cholesterol and saturated fats damages the liver, pancrease, kidneys, heart, brain, and arteries.
Our body makes all the cholesterol it needs. Dietary cholesterol comes from meat, fish, shrimp etc. and it creates havoc. Eating saturated fats increase the amount of cholesterol the body makes. Dairy causes autoimmune diseases like type I diabetes and throws the hormone levels wacky in men and women. My adult facial and body hair only finished growing in after I gave up dairy 40 years ago. Say goodbye to migraines too.
What about overweight people (especially if they want to lose weight)? Should they eat 1.6g of protein per kg of their current weight, or 1.6g of protein per kg of the weight, they should ideally have (respectively want if they're planning to lose weight)?
cronometer is giving me 2.3g/kg for my daily protein. where does that recommendation come from?
I've studied this matter from scientists like this for quite a few years and one thing I NEVER see mentioned is what body weight are we talking about? Obviously a morbidly obese individual shouldn't be eating twice the protein of someone sporting a six pack. I suggest that x grams/kg is based on an ideal body weight. That 400 pounder should pretend he's at a perfect 180 pounds, say. A better starting point would be lean body mass, but that's not easy to accurately determine.
Then there's the matter of getting adequate protein while on a reduced calorie diet. My metabolism is damaged from being obese once. I'm 6'2", male, 77 y/o, 220 pounds, pretty sedentary. My ideal would be 190. I record everything I eat and have for 13 years with some breaks. I have to keep my calories around only 1500 cals/day or I gain weight! Carbs average about 70. I make a whey shake about half of the days, which really helps.
For those of us on the Imperial system, here's a shortcut: Take your ideal weight, multiply by .55 and there's your protein needs at 1.2 grams/kg weight.
thank you for the example at the end!
restaurants are still bad at doing high protein meals in my area, but it's not that difficult.
I'm eating 2g protein/kg/day because I'm going to the gym and lifting heavy weights.
Any objections? I don't see even 2.5g/kg/day as excessive.
1.6g a kilo means I need 144g a day. My morning bowl of porridge with milk is only 10g. That leaves me having to find another 132g in two meals. I don’t eat a lot of meat.
I’m still confused. On one vid you’re saying the RDA is fine. The protein expert you interviewed is saying much higher.
I’m losing weight right now and have another 12lb to go. I have to eat 1800 to lose at an appreciable amount weight. I’m 90KG - I guess quite muscular in the scheme of things. I don’t think i can I hit these higher protein level on a PBD. And I have been losing muscle sadly despite keeping the weights up.
Thinking now supplement would have been a good idea.
What are the benefits of eating a higher protein intake??
Insulin resistance, higher mTor, igf1
Why are legumes plus grains better than just legumes, proteinwise? I mean some grains add valuable proline, but other than that...? If you're starving you might be not getting enough methionine just from legumes, while (what no one talks about) you'd be getting too much of it and way less glycine (unless you eat skin, cartillage and bones) and arginine with animal protein alone. When you consume 1.2 g/kg of protein a day you could fulfill that need for methionine even when your protein comes exclusively from legumes, while you couldn't reach a good level of level of lysine with grain protein alone, and compared to legumes, most grains are also quite low in leucine, glycine and arginine.
If I eat all that food, I’ll NEVER lose weight! I don’t want to sustain my body but reduce its size. Protein tips for those not at optimal weight??
Athletes and longevity ate 2 different things. Lots of athletes end up in wheel chairs. For the immense majority of healthy active people, it should not be of great concern if you love beans, nuts and seeds.
I’m not against eating solely for maximizing longevity, but as Dr. Longo put it recently, lots of old folks in his native Italy were frail at very old age. I prefer not overdoing it at either extremes, but trying to age gracefully, remain strong and live a long life while maintaining a long health span.
Who likes beans, nuts and seeds. They taste like nothing. Clearly not our evolutionary diet
How about having Don Layman on to get his perspective? I think his recommendations are somewhat -- not hugely -- higher.
Two things which are not as good as usual on this channel.
Firstly I'm not as much interested in mechanisms but more in the effects of food. If the protein via IGF1 is the problem (What is enough evidence precisely? - most of nutritional research has not enough evidence to be predictive but this seems not the goal for other topics) or things which come with the protein is in practice not important to me. The mechanism is a perhaps interesting side note but the way it is discussed as if this resolves the problem is strange.
Secondly it seemed very handwavy overall. What are the recommendation in the video based on? Evidence and function/goal to optimise is completely missing.
btw. I'm eating a lot of protein (>1.6g/kg per day on average often >2.0g/kg). So I have nothing personal against higher protein.