Vegans aren't anti-protein- that's a gross generalization. But we do get
sick of people trying to shove supplements down our throat, when study
after study has shown western vegans already get more than enough. I got
60-80 g a day without even trying- on a 1200 calorie diet (no, that's
not my normal caloric intake, I was really on a diet).
But there are often negative health effects from getting too much of
something in the same way there are for getting too little. Or am I
mistaken in believing too much protein, without adequate carbohydrates,
actually causes muscular breakdown (ketosis) because the body can't
metabolize the protein properly?
No one here is advocating and protein diet- that's ridiculous. As
ridiculous as a diet consisting entirely of raw meat (best source of
creatine in nature, right?).
Also, as I recall, the highest rates of osteoporosis are in countries
with the highest milk consumption per capita, osteoporosis is increasing
in Asian cultures as they adopt a more westernized diet, and non-meat
eaters actually show an increase in bone density, not a decrease.
Obviously, these are only demographic studies, but actual research has
shown weight bearing exercise has the single greatest effect on
increasing bone density... diet is only a significant factor in the
absence of weight bearing exercise, and statistically it's in the
vegan's favor.
Lyle McDonald wrote:
>> Bill R wrote:
> >
> > pathos wrote:
> > >
> > > In article <385626D5.4786 at erols.com>, Stuart Dunn <dunns99 at erols.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Protein intakes far above 100g increase the risk of
> > > > kidney failure, and certain types of protein, such as egg white protein
> > > > and casein, increase the amount of calium that is removed from the
> > > > bloodstream by the kidneys. In extreme cases, this causes kidney stones.
> > > > If that calcium that is lost is not properly replaced (from milk,
> > > > calcium pills, or food), osteoperosis will result.
> > >
> > > Sounds to me like this can be substaintiated with a paper or two. You
> > > state is a fact and it may be a fact but let the studies decide that.
> >
> > The person above is failing to consider that for a valid
> > comparison, all other parameters should be the same:
> > same total calcium, same total phosphorus.
> >
> > I bet that is not so in whatever study he is looking at.
> >
> > In any cases, the demographic group with the highest
> > bone mineral density -- namely, weightlifters -- also
> > is one with among the highest protein intakes. So it
> > certainly is not true that high protein diets *will*
> > cause calcium loss.
> >
> > This would be apparent to anyone capable of even
> > a modicum of thought.
>> All I'll say is that the vegan/anti-protein folks really need to look
> at more current reseearch. The protein-calcium loss is far from
> proven and recent research suggests that the early studies suggesting
> kidney damage were drawing false conclusions.
>> They might want to check out the paper:
> Millward, DJ. "Optimal intakes of protein in the human diet" Proc
> Nutr Soc (1999) 58: 403-413.
>> Rather than quoting from 20 year old books.
>> Lyle
--
Catherine Caruso
ccaruso at mediaone.net
ICQ#: 46412288
"The difference between fiction and reality?
Fiction has to make sense." -Tom Clancy
