Post: #1

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/04...96501.html

Atkins afficionados, Paleo enthusiasts, and Dukan devotees, you may want to reconsider what's on your plate. While high-protein diets have been all the rage over the last few years for their waist-whittling goodness, a new study says they could be as bad for you as smoking.

Researchers at the University of Southern California's Davis School of Gerontology believe high protein consumption in middle age could mean a much higher risk of death from cancer and diabetes. The study followed 6,318 adults from a variety of ethnicities and health histories over two decades and found those with diets high in animal proteins were just as likely to die as a result of cancer as a regular smoker. Animal proteins include things like meats, cheeses, milk, and eggs.

The study also pinpointed animal proteins as the culprit behind the 74 percent increased risk of death within the study period, from any cause. Even when controlling the amount of fats and carbs in the participants' diets, high animal protein diets had negative health effects. Diets high in plant-based proteins, however, including foods like beans, lentils, and nuts, did not have the same dangerous effects as animal proteins.

"The research shows that a low-protein diet in middle age is useful for preventing cancer and overall mortality, through a process that involves regulating IGF-I and possibly insulin levels," study co-author Eileen Crimmins said in a release.

The good news? High-protein diets could actually be beneficial after age 65, when IGF-I levels naturally level off. People over 65 with a high- or moderate-protein diet are actually less susceptible to chronic disease.

The CDC recommends 46 grams of protein per day for adult women and 56 grams for men. But with popular fad diets, many people are consuming considerably more. "The majority of Americans are eating about twice as much proteins as they should, and it seems that the best change would be to lower the daily intake of all proteins but especially animal-derived proteins," co-author Valter Longo said in a release.

High-protein diets have been hotly debated for years. Health experts stress that these diets are deceivingly high in saturated fats and low in fiber, which could mean high cholesterol and an increased risk of heart disease or stroke. In 2010, a study found a direct link between high-protein diets and high rates of lung and colorectal cancers in men. The health of Atkins Diet founder, Robert Atkins, was also cause for concern, as he had a history of heart attack and heart failure before his 2003 death.

The USC study defined low-protein diets as those where 10 percent of calories or less come from protein, and high-protein diets as those with 20 percent or more calories coming from protein. But even moderate-protein diets in middle age were shown to result in three times the likelihood of death from cancer.

Researchers believe the protein-controlled growth hormone, IGF-I, could be to blame. Even slight increases in IGF-I have been shown to significantly increase the chances of cancer-related death.

"Almost everyone is going to have a cancer cell or pre-cancer cell in them at some point. The question is: does it progress?" Longo asked. "Turns out one of the major factors in determining if it does is protein intake."

Post: #2

What about low protein diets?

Post: #3

Fuck it, I don't care anymore. I like my protein. Cancer can come get me if it wants.

Post: #4

Post: #5

I try and eat 180 grams of protein a day... its a chore.

Post: #6

First, from where are these participants eating their meat from? McDonald's Mcnuggets and BK Whoppers or nonprocessed meats?

Second, of course we should trust the federal governments recommendation to consume only 56g of protein because they have our best interests at heart. They are of course immune from any lobbying purporting the health benefits of high-carb diets from the corn milling and refinery industry.

Third, for every study that purports the benefits of one thing another study disparages it.

Post: #7

I'm calling bullshit on this

Post: #8

The only risk I have read about high-protein diets is a slight increase in kidney problems.

I take all these studies with a grain of salt. Next thing you know some study will say high testosterone is bad too.

Post: #9

According to medical research in the past few decades:

1) High protein diets are unhealthy
2) High fat diets are unhealthy
3) High carb diets are unhealthy

Solution: Consume no calories.

Post: #10

Study probably funded by the Big Corn lobby.

Post: #11

Unsurprisingly, this study has already been thoroughly debunked:

http://www.zoeharcombe.com/2014/03/anima...paign=feed

The guy who funded it owns a company that makes a "healthy" plant-based protein supplement. This study smelled like bullshit because it obviously was. The article above breaks it down nicely.

I love how quickly "news" sites like Yahoo will print this shit, because they know people will click and get riled up by it. Plus (conspiracy theory): the corporate elite doesn't want us to eat right and get healthy.

Post: #12

(03-05-2014 06:26 PM)Excelsior Wrote:  Fuck it, I don't care anymore. I like my protein. Cancer can come get me if it wants.

That's what I thought when I heard this on the radio last night. I'm getting sick of all these daily reports every week telling you about something new that's going to give you cancer. After awhile I just say fuck it. I'm sicking of worrying about it.

Post: #13

Somehow, I'll bet the participants in this study weren't eating venison, eggs from free range chicken, wild caught salmon, grass fed beef, and hormone free whey protein. Just a hunch.

Post: #14

The forum's reaction to this:

Post: #15

What the article basically says is that high-protein is bad form you form middle age to 65 years of age, after that it's good for you.

That is mighty controversial and would probably need some more corroborating studies to establish.

Post: #16

Everything in moderation.

The daily values the government tells you is too low, but stuffing yourself full of 400 grams of flesh a day isn't ideal either...

Breaking down meat is energy intensive chore for your system to do, and flesh releases toxic nitrates when doing so. What makes it even worse is that most Western people don't get enough fibre to help break shit down and it just creates even more stress on the system.

Stress = ailments.

The more stress you give your body the quicker things fuck up, and the quicker you are more susceptible to ailments.

If your going to pound back massive amounts of protein and flesh you need to have the amounts of fibre, ruffage, and water to help it along. It isn't one or the other you need both; or you will see problems down the road.

Nothing wrong with light flesh though. Fish has historically be easy for humans to digest and break down, lamb, veal and eggs also.

Groups of people from certain heritage and backgrounds, especially Inuits, whom live of diets which are around 70%-80% fat and flesh have kidneys, bladders, and livers double the size of regular folks to handle the amount of toxins which extracted from the process of breaking down meat. They are the exception though, majority of humans don't have that genetic deposition to be able to take on that kind of diet.

I've always been in the camp that Paleo is a trap. Its a myth diet that does not put in place the realities of energy. If you had to bleed, pluck, and skin your chicken each time you wanted to wolf it down you would think twice about trying to eat protein exclusively. Driving to the super market ain't real, humans always had to haul ass to get meat and Paleo does not take that into account and its a myth diet as a result.

Now the grand conclusions of the article is bullshit. Eating 60 grams of Protein a day will make you waste away, so vegans can chill in trying to spin this as a victory for their camps (also a genetic disposition to able to flourish of eating exclusively no-meat) but its important to re-think how much you eat, what kind you get, the quality, and what your combining with that protein to make sure your body breaks it down efficiently and with ease.

*Goes and takes a bite of a chicken thigh*

In the end..if you actually want to be as healthy as you can be trace back your heritage and see what your ancestors ate. Your genetics will be tailor set to run its best of those sources of foods. For example: if you Irish in heritage and potatoes were a staple of your ancestors don't be dumb and ignore them, your body will utilize them as a marco and energy source far better then rice or grains. A common staple form my heritage is fufu which is ground cassava or yam, it would put most into a glycemic comma because its literally a dense ball of starch, but to me I can eat a pound of the stuff and be perfectly fine. Do the research into the type of make and model your car is (AKA you and your composition) and work to figure out how to best fuel and maintain it. This is lost on Western culture, largely due to ignorance. A lot of issues would be fixed if many just went back to their roots and incorporate the pieces of the puzzle that helped create them in the first place.

Post: #17

They use keto-genic diet to battle cancer, I doubt they supplement soy shit for proteins.

Post: #18

(03-05-2014 06:58 PM)Capitán Peligroso Wrote:  Somehow, I'll bet the participants in this study weren't eating venison, eggs from free range chicken, wild caught salmon, grass fed beef, and hormone free whey protein. Just a hunch.

Nor do they even lift.

Just a hunch, too.

Disregard obvious bullshit study, lift and chomp down on delicious meat, gents.

Post: #19

(03-05-2014 06:34 PM)Flavius Aetius Wrote:  I take all these studies with a grain of salt.

Shoudnt do that. Salt is bad for you.

Post: #20

I smoke a lot.
I eat a lot of red meat.
I eat a lot of cheese.
I drink a lot of whole milk.
I put salt on everything.
I eat lots of bread.
I drink a lot of vodka.


Does this mean I am going to die?

I mean, it's not like everyone dies or anything....

Post: #21

Do these diets take into account total caloric intake? That's what I think is the reason why the lipid hypothesis came to be: people who eat too much by default eat more animal fat/protein than usual, and therefore it appeared that too much animal fat caused clogged arteries (instead of inflammation caused by visceral fat). Of course now you have 300 lbs who swear by "i eat low fat" as they stuff bagels and rice down their throats. I've lost 20-30 lbs reducing carb intake and focusing on meat in every meal.

Post: #22

OK, the truth comes out on the last page of the study http://download.cell.com/cell-metabolism...diate=true

The study was funded by L-Nutra, who makes enteral nutrition products http://www.l-nutra.com/index.php/products

Obviously they are going to fund a study that disputes high protein in favor of the "traditional" square meal because that's what the company manufactures.

Post: #23

(03-05-2014 06:43 PM)Soma Wrote:  According to medical research in the past few decades:

1) High protein diets are unhealthy
2) High fat diets are unhealthy
3) High carb diets are unhealthy

Solution: Consume no calories.

The funny thing is that this is actually true. The main component to live longer is to decrease calories, tested and proven. High protein might also affect cancers, since more protein=bigger and bigger=more chance in cancer (big people have a lot higher cancer tendency than smaller people). Nevertheless for a qualitative and muscular life, Ill stick with the proteins and the good fats, whatever factors that are bad will be greatly outweighted by the benefits of cuttin all the crap sugar and carbproducts out there.

Good comments as well on type of protein and influence of lobby agencies, im sure both influence this study in some ways!

So no worries guys, we are on the right track, everyone who tried low carb diets know this already.

Post: #24

So let me get this straight. At an age range where you are losing muscle daily without working out, you should consume less protein.

This better not be a federally funded grant. I'd rather see my taxes go toward welfare for some white trash motherfucker than these bullshit studies. At least the former is entertaining when the make Cops.

There are so many factors to consider it is unfathomable.
Middle age men are, on the whole, some unhealthy dudes to begin with. Maybe not at that moment, but they are working toward problems. 20 years of being lazy isn't made up for by switching to a bowl of cheerios for breakfast.
Stress and cortisol levels
How much water did they drink each day? I can probably count on one hand the number of men over 40 I know who stay adequately hydrated.
Source of meat (generic BS, frozen whatevers, or grass fed)
Fiber intake
Vegetables consumed, type and quantity
Fats that are consumed
How food is cooked (if you get down to the nitty gritty on this sort of thing)
Combination of fats and carbs
Other vitamin and nutrient intake
Exercise
Family history
BMI and/or BF%
Amount of quality sleep a person gets
"Health" status is incredibly broad

Post: #25

I also learned in second grade health class about the food pyramid that suggested I eat 6-12 servings of carbs a day.

This story was making the rounds on news sites today. What worries me is some gung-ho moronic teacher will take this and tell her kids tomorrow that not only does eating animal products hurt the little animals at the farm, but it will also give you cancer.