Bioavailable Proteins - Post a day

Mark Westfall wrote:

You can only afford a single serving of beef one time per week?

What do you eat???

Mostly plant based proteins. The rest is coffee.

Todd Berlier wrote:

Is there something bad about powdered plant proteins I'm not seeing that makes them bad?

I've never seen anything that suggested that processed plant proteins are bad but that could be my own ignorance or a lack of study. The worst I've seen is people complaining about phytoestrogens.

For any fellow veggies/vegans out there, soy protein isolate (found in most protein bars) is fairly cheap in bulk and has a very subtle nutty taste. Very easy to add to anything that can handle a dry ingredient. Oatmeal, pancakes, baked goods, etc. Can make it a lot easier to hit protein targets without drinking more shakes. 

Another tip is that roasting soybeans or chickpeas in the oven makes for a delicious and cheap (crag) snack.

From Paul Saladino, MD, Instagram:

Plants don’t want to be eaten...except their fruit!
You’ve been told that the leaves, stems, roots, and seeds of plants are good for you because they contain vital nutrients...
What they didn’t tell you is that compounds found in plants like phytic acid, oxalates etc. actually prevent nutrient absorption from vegetables…
And this makes sense - the plant wants to survive and pass its DNA on to the next generation. It uses the suns energy through photosynthesis to harvest its seed (the plants “baby”)...
The roots, stem, and leaves work simultaneously to do this. If these parts of the plant are eaten, this isn’t possible. So it fills these parts with plant defense chemicals to deter predators from eating it...
The plant WANTS you to eat the fruit - the sweet, colorful, palatable part of the plant that packages the seed. They want you to swallow the seed and poop it out elsewhere so it can germinate, aka move its baby elsewhere to grow and repeat the process...This is intuitive. Roots, stems, and seeds are bitter to taste. Fruit is colorful and palatable. Our ancestors as well as currently living hunter gatherers prize fruit (and honey). The other parts of the plant are simply survival foods...
Carbohydrates are essential for optimal performance, libido, mental clarity, strength, etc. - excluding these can result in electrolyte imbalance, hormone issues, etc...
I believe that fruit (along with honey, maple syrup, etc.) is the least toxic form of carbohydrates and is the most optimal form of carbs to include in the diet...
This, along with meat, organs, honey, and raw dairy is an animal based diet. This is how humans thrive...

James Weiss wrote:

From Paul Saladino, MD, Instagram:

Plants don’t want to be eaten...

Same thing could be said for chickens

James Weiss wrote:

From Paul Saladino, MD, Instagram:

You know this guy is a professional shit poster, right? He spews shit to acquire engagement.

Joseph Chen wrote:

Same thing could be said for chickens

I'm aware of this every time I slaughter my own chickens for meat. I take no pleasure in it, but at least I know where my food comes from. And besides, the chicken is healthier for me than a leaf. 

Long Ranger wrote:

You know this guy is a professional shit poster, right? He spews shit to acquire engagement.

He also practices what he preaches. I predominately try to live an "animal based" lifestyle myself. When I do, I feel better, sleep better, etc. I couldn't say the same thing when I was on a plant based diet many moons ago. Which is actually the number one reason people go off plant based, for health reasons. You may feel good for a season, but we aren't meant to eat plants alone. But to each their own. Just sharing the other side of the coin.

Edit: I'm aware this is MP. What I said is controversial. I'm sure I'll be personally attacked soon, and when I do, I'll gracefully bow out. But if you want to keep this cordial, I'll happily keep the conversation going. 

James Weiss wrote:

He also practices what he preaches. I predominately try to live an "animal based" lifestyle myself. When I do, I feel better, sleep better, etc. I couldn't say the same thing when I was on a plant based diet many moons ago. Which is actually the number one reason people go off plant based, for health reasons. You may feel good for a season, but we aren't meant to eat plants alone. But to each their own. Just sharing the other side of the coin.

Edit: I'm aware this is MP. What I said is controversial. I'm sure I'll be personally attacked soon, and when I do, I'll gracefully bow out. But if you want to keep this cordial, I'll happily keep the conversation going. 

If you look at my initial post I state that there are many wildly different and divergent diets that humans can thrive on. Mostly animal? Mostly plants? Low carb/high carb? Sure -- go for it. Who am I to say which one works best for you specifically? 

Here's our guy Paul -- looking good, Paul! And here's Will Bulsiewicz, also looking fit for an old man at 40-mumble! 

They're both doctors with books about health and nutrition. What do they write about? 

Huh! 

Should you eat how I eat? I could GaF. My n of 1 experiment without a control is not solid ground to make general recommendations to anyone. And I too can look on Instagram (really?) for my confirmation bias to show the world I am right, since some shill is right now looking for me to follow them down a road of some batship black and white nutrition cult in some attempt to feel superior.

So I'm not saying your diet is bad or my diet is better (how could I?) -- far from it! I'm saying both could really be great. The only the exception I make is a diet primarily based on highly processed, highly palatable junk. That's a path to essentially metabolic health issues. That is what we're seeing in the real world.

What I may be rolling my eyes on is discrediting fucking salad. Do you really believe an Instagram post that leafy greens are bad for you? Are you really scared of a tomato? A carrot?

The funny thing about the "plants don't want to be eaten" argument is that it actually demonstrates the reverse of what it intends to show.   

It is absolutely true that plants produce chemical compounds, such as caffeine, and many others, as a way to reduce predation.  This is exactly why so many plant compounds, medicines, and so on, have strong effects on animals--they evolved to be bioactive.

And yet, this simply shows that animals have been consuming plants for millions of years.   Animals have supplied the evolutionary pressure to drive plant adaptations,  

At the same time, animals (including humans) have evolved mechanisms to efficiently consume plants.  

So, pointing out that plants have defense mechanims against animals really just shows the deep relationships and interdependence of plants and animals.  

Science is fun!

Todd Berlier wrote:

I love when shit posters come up with a logical but stupid premise:

Self consistent doesn’t necessarily require logic, but it’s at least respectable.

Eat raw liver 

Plants don't WANT to be eaten 

Then they build on that premise with a logical progression of bro science.

I’d worry more if plants can consciously object.  

Plants and animals have a fundamental right to be eaten. Those that don’t, let us know. Poison oak and polar bears in their prime are good examples.  

“Bro Nutrition Science” is sort of in its infancy, very much anecdotal and sort of like surgery in the mid-1800s. Coarse at best, but definitely improved.

Does anyone else reading this thread feel like they’re taking crazy pills?

Todd Berlier wrote:

The people who read it or the people participating in the discussion?

I'm confused. 

 

Yes

Eric Marx wrote:

THE MOMENT I'VE BEEN WAITING FOR

Cut all your plant-based protein intakes by an additional 40% since your average plant-protein is only 60% bioavailable(meaning the amount that hits your bloodstream, the rest is wasted as poop), with rare exceptions like tofu. Average animal protein is >90%.

Also, dig further and make sure the ratio of complete amino acids you're getting is as close as possible to the important ratio(animal proteins). Tofu is deficit in methione and cysteine, I've done the math previously and you need to eat a block about the size of a small toaster to equal the usable/complete protein content of 3 eggs. Somebody fact check me cause I'm too lazy. Obviously, nobody does that, so tofu is a lie. For the OP, I'd argue and estimate your usable/complete protein intake is less than 91g, and closer to somewhere around 40g for athletic-training purposes. 

OR ignore all that eating-disordered math and just eat animal products.

My average diet: 4-6 soft boiled pasture-raised eggs in the morning. Sometimes a couple small pieces of cheese or occasionally oatmeal. 7g an egg 95% bioavailable and complete in proper ratios. Pasture raised chickens eat bugs(animal protein) which makes the eggs about half as dense with saturated fat, and instead have around 150mg of DHA/EPA omega 3 per egg and richer in choline(makes eggs deep orange), which is essential for brain health.

Snack: 20g oikos pro yogurt(comes with added whey). Damn, it's 10am I got 50g and I feel like I barely ate anything at all.

lunch: Some form of grass-fed beef usually 90/10 ground, with a very small handful of rice and brussel sprouts/spinach or a barbacoa my wife makes. Low estimate of 40g. Grass-fed is important for the same reason pasture-raised eggs are; cows need a source of animal protein, which is bugs. Grass fed is leaner, contains omega 3, more creatine, and has about twice the general nutrient content of vegetarian/grain fed beef.

Dinner: Another form of grass-fed beef, usually filet mignon or sirloin. low estimate 40g, omega 3, creatine, heme iron, zinc, other relevant heavy metals, all the good stuff. With whatever my wife is making, sweet potatoes/brussels/broccoli/sometimes rice/or lentil pasta. 

Supplement with an additional 1.5g of DHA/EPA omega 3 and vitamin D every day and you're golden.

That estimate alone puts me at 130ish-g. I weigh 185 and aim for 145(.8). I drop this number when my training is less intense(.6-.7) Maybe some jerky or whatever other BS throughout the day and I'm good. No processed protein shakes(besides the small amount of whey in the yogurt), though I keep a bag of whey around for when I have a busier day and can't hit my base with real food. If I have a single protein shake in 3 weeks that's a lot.  

Let's build strength athletes here.

Li Hu wrote:

Ignorance can be blissful.  

Back on thread, 1gm/kg seems reasonable for most  bouldering climbers and perhaps the same for sport climbers?

Luckily 1 Double IPA per 25 kg is pretty good for moderate trad. 

James Weiss wrote:

He also practices what he preaches. I predominately try to live an "animal based" lifestyle myself. When I do, I feel better, sleep better, etc. I couldn't say the same thing when I was on a plant based diet many moons ago. Which is actually the number one reason people go off plant based, for health reasons. You may feel good for a season, but we aren't meant to eat plants alone. But to each their own. Just sharing the other side of the coin.

Edit: I'm aware this is MP. What I said is controversial. I'm sure I'll be personally attacked soon, and when I do, I'll gracefully bow out. But if you want to keep this cordial, I'll happily keep the conversation going. 

I’d be interested in objective data suggesting this is true. What specific health concerns?

B12 deficiency can be an issue for vegans, that’s about it. Plant-based diet or not, dietary protein deficiency in otherwise healthy people rarely occurs, at least in the developed world.

Jaren W wrote:

The CDC ranking is interesting, and I’m grateful you alluded to it. I enjoyed reading it and was happy to learn more about where certain fruits and vegetables rank.

Of course, it’s a list of fruits and vegetables. As such, we can conclude rather little (nothing, actually) about animal products from said list.

You (and others) might be interested in a study that analyzes the nutrient density in both plant and animal based foods. It’s worth noting that this study’s findings contain some overlap with the CDC rankings; namely, dark leafy greens are very nutrient dense.

The nutshell takeaway is that many animal products do appear to contain a dense complex of micronutrients, often to a greater degree than many or most plant foods.

Important caveats: this study did not examine all nutrients but was focused on micronutrients that are commonly undersupplied, particularly in low to middle income countries. Therefore, some caution is advised against extrapolating too broadly. But it’s perhaps reasonable to conclude that the relative nutrient density of the analyzed foods is independent of whether this or that population is getting enough of those nutrients in their diet. In other words, a food high in iron is high in iron whether or not my diet contains enough.

I’m somewhat loath to post a single graphic from the study when many more are present, but as this graph is roughly similar (but not identical, it should be noted), I’ll post one here. 

From the authors, “Calories and grams needed to provide an average of one-third of recommended intakes of vitamin A, folate, vitamin B12, calcium, iron, and zinc for adults ≥25.”

This is why I said in my previous comment that it’s probably easier to acquire a human body's required nutrients via animal products, which is not to say you can’t get there with plants. You just have to eat a lot of them. I wouldn’t argue that anyone should adopt a carnivore diet based on the above, simply that it might be worth considering animal products if nutrient density is among one’s dietary goals.

If I’ve misunderstood any part of your comment to me, can you help by clarifying?

Link to the study

That’s a valid counterpoint. The nutrients they’ve chosen tend to be plentiful in animal products, but the list would be different if things like fiber, vitamin C, magnesium and iodine were included. So which of those nutrients are most essential?

But to run with your premise, would you consider a diet rich in organ meats (4 of the top 10) healthier than one rich in fruits and veggies? What about a handful of vitamin pills and protein powder? Are nutrition targets for the developing world applicable to first world rock climbers?

I know athletic performance is the dietary goal for many in this forum. But what should one eat to optimize longevity?

An interesting study attempts to address this question

highaltitudeflatulentexpulsion wrote:

Does anyone else reading this thread feel like they’re taking crazy pills?

Agree, Mr. Flatulentexpulsion, this is a serious topic, and we should treat it as such!  

Matt N wrote:

Luckily 1 Double IPA per 25 kg is pretty good for moderate trad.

Absolutely!   

I’m not Dave Mccleod but I know a little bit. Enough that you’re not going to convince me of this shit. 

highaltitudeflatulentexpulsion wrote:

I’m not Dave Mccleod but I know a little bit. Enough that you’re not going to convince me of this shit. 

Many different opinions have been offered in this thread, so it’s little unclear which sh!t you find so objectionable.

Care to comment on your preferred protein source? I‘m gonna guess beans.

So, how much of the Amazon will need to be razed to feed all you budding bœf bros?