Protein Powder and Weight Loss - Page 2

I'm sure you noticed that the data stated, "lettuce" not "iceburg lettuce". Of course, there are several different kinds and if you feel the data is incorrect, take it up with the USDA. The source is clearly listed.

Of course you're right about the fact that the data is listed in percentage of total calories and lettuce is very low in calories. If you put together a vegan diet insufficient in protein, (obviously not based on the amount you feel you need but on the amounts proven to be a requirement), you might consider contacting Dr. John McDougall and take him up on his challenge. You'd be the first to do it and you'll show the Vilcambas of Ecuador, the Abkhasians from around the Black Sea and the Hunzas from the Pakistan Himalayas that they're not as healthy as researchers have judged them to be. Perhaps the researchers were thrown off by the average 90 - 100 year lifespan.

Interesting that your information shows skim milk to contain 40% protein. I assume that's 40% of the total calories. When you consider that the Textbook of Physiology and Biochemistry lists cow's milk at 15% protein by calories, something certainly seems amiss. I'd guess there is some basic difference in how the measurements are taken but I haven't a clue what would account for that degree of difference. Other milks listed are Mare - 11%, Goat - 17%, Dog - 30%, Cat - 40% and Rat - 49%. Since the listings compare protein to the growth rate of the young, I'm sure the figures are for whole milk.

I suppose rat milk might deliver the protein levels you feel most secure with but keeping those little milk buckets under them should prove to be most challenging.

Seems like that's probably just from the fact that the milk that come out of a cow isn't _skim_ yet. We take out almost all of it's fat to make it that way. And that would take out it's best source of calories, which would throw off the percentages.


My thoughts on a vegetarian vs. vegan vs. meat eating diet:
I rowed in college, an endurance sport with strength requirements uncharacteristically high for an endurance event. I had a teammate who was a vegitarian. He was the heaviest member of our team, he was also one of the strongest in the weight room. This was not suprising to me because he ate quite a bit of cheese and milk. In other words he got his protein requirements from non-meat sources (and I have read that the proteins from dairy products are the most effective and highest quality proteins out there).

Now, the vegans I know. To a one they have been (in my opinion) sickeningly skinny. From my experience rowing I can say that they'd have to put on alot more muscle before they'd be any good at rowing (although, their bodies look like they could be marathoners). All the vegans I've ever met appear to me to have lost fat and muscle in undertaking their diets.

Which is neither here nor there, but living a prolonged healthy life is not the same as being an elite athlete. I've read that maintaining a caloric intake that is on the brink of starvation is the surest way to achieve longevity..(link) But that doen't mean that you could be even a half-decent athelete on a diet like that.


I guess my point being that I don't believe that being a vegitarian necessarily makes it difficult to be an elite athlete, but, I'll bet that elite vegitarian atheletes utilize dairy protein quite a bit. In terms of elite vegan athletes I'm sure that they are even fewer. Probably because, while a vegan diet that provides the necessities for an elite athelete is possible, it requires alot of time and energy to establish and maintain, energy that could be used for training and recovering

__________________
"There aren't evil guys and innocent guys. It's just... It's just... It's just a bunch of guys." -- Steve Arlo

In the end, you need to figure out what works for your body.

I know, based on years of personal experience, that I can increase strength by increasing my protein intake and lifting heavy weights for low repetitions.

I also know that I can lean down by slightly reducing my carb intake and increasing my cardiovascular exercise.

I am no Atkins fan, but these facts are true for me despite what any data says.

Yes - anecdotal experience can be deceptive, but I've had 37 years of experience with my body and I know how it works. I'm of the opinion that a 40/40/20 protein/carbs/fat split is optimal for me.

I think you're probably right about that. I'm not sure how much protein is lost when the cream is removed from the milk but certainly a great deal of calories are lost with the removal of that much fat.

Quote:

Originally posted by menglish6 My thoughts on a vegetarian vs. vegan vs. meat eating diet: I rowed in college, an endurance sport with strength requirements uncharacteristically high for an endurance event. I had a teammate who was a vegitarian. He was the heaviest member of our team, he was also one of the strongest in the weight room. This was not suprising to me because he ate quite a bit of cheese and milk. In other words he got his protein requirements from non-meat sources (and I have read that the proteins from dairy products are the most effective and highest quality proteins out there).

The tests done in the 1940s using rats showed the protein in eggs to be the best. But as stated earlier, the data turned out not to mean much for humans. I'm not sure where you read that dairy products contain the best protein for humans but, as with most things regarding nutrition, I'm sure it wouldn't be too difficult to find at least three different sources with three different conclusions.

Quote:

Originally posted by menglish6 Now, the vegans I know. To a one they have been (in my opinion) sickeningly skinny. From my experience rowing I can say that they'd have to put on alot more muscle before they'd be any good at rowing (although, their bodies look like they could be marathoners). All the vegans I've ever met appear to me to have lost fat and muscle in undertaking their diets. Which is neither here nor there, but living a prolonged healthy life is not the same as being an elite athlete. I've read that maintaining a caloric intake that is on the brink of starvation is the surest way to achieve longevity..(link) But that doen't mean that you could be even a half-decent athelete on a diet like that. I guess my point being that I don't believe that being a vegitarian necessarily makes it difficult to be an elite athlete, but, I'll bet that elite vegitarian atheletes utilize dairy protein quite a bit. In terms of elite vegan athletes I'm sure that they are even fewer. Probably because, while a vegan diet that provides the necessities for an elite athelete is possible, it requires alot of time and energy to establish and maintain, energy that could be used for training and recovering

I would think that the reason there are so few elite vegan athletes is because there are so few vegans to begin with. If you figure the percentage of the population who are vegan and then from those, isolate the once that have the genetics to allow them to become elite athletes, the numbers are bound to be fairly small. As far as being skinny yet having a surprising level of athleticism goes, consider the late, Bruce Lee. He was very thin but produced astonishing power, fantastic endurance and was very quick as well.

I suppose the good news for vegans is that in terms of longevity, people who are characteristically 10-15 pounds "underweight" by the standard medically accepted charts tend to have a greater longevity, as you stated, than those who fall within the accepted "healthy" range. To a great degree, people classify others as fat or thin based on what they're used to seeing. If you lived in a society where 70% of the people were obese, and the remaining portion of the population fit within that curve, someone we would see as having a standard build would look thin and emaciated. Were we to live in a culture where everyone looked anorexic, someone carrying the weight we think of as normal would look abnormally bulky. I live in the U.S. where almost 20% of the population is obese.

Another part of the equation is simply fashion. The top models today look absolutely twiggy compared to the top models 40 to 50 years ago. And if you look at paintings of naked women from a few centuries back, you'll see that compared to what we think of as sexy today, those women were quite plump.

I have always been relatively thin but I haven't always been a vegan. I was raised vegetarian and other kids in school often told me that my build was because I didn't eat meat. Since changing to a vegan diet about 12 years ago, I've gained about 7 pounds. But I've also reached an age where people tend to put on a little more weight and I started cycling regularly shortly after switching diets so it's hard to point at any one thing and show that as a cause of anything. I can say that relatives on both sides of the family also tend to be thinner and most of them eat a standard, meat-based diet so genetics would seem to be the primary factor in my situation.

As far as other observations, I no longer seem to get colds - haven't had one in at least 6-years. I've read that this isn't uncommon among people who exclude dairy from their diet but I think the cycling is doing a fair share of boosting my immune system. As far as athleticism, neither of my parents ever showed any interest in sports so I got a rather slow start. I've raced twice at an amateur level (police olympics) and came in second the first time and lost the course while holding 4th place in the national event the following year.

I have seen pictures of John Robbins, the author of "Diet for a New America", and he falls into the standard, thin stereotype for vegans. As I recall, I also saw a photograph of his father, Irv Robbins at one time, (the "Robbins" of "Baskin and Robbins"), and he seemed also to be on the thin side, though he clearly does not subscribe to a vegan or vegetarian diet. At least he didn't prior to his heart attack and some advice from his cardiologist who read his son's book.

I have a friend who lives several states away who switched from a standard meat-based diet to a vegan diet about 5-years ago. Her weight has remained the same, though she does report increased energy and an overall less lethargic feeling which is common in the vast majority of those who make the transition. Of course that's anecdotal and personal perception so it really carries little weight in the overall concept. She had hoped, that along with gaining health, she would lose a little weight as she feels she would be happier if she could shed a few pounds. But it hasn't happened and I think at this point, isn't likely to happen without instituting some other changes.

I've also met both vegetarians and vegans who are obviously over-weight. Though a vegan diet is less prone to leading to obesity than a meat-based diet, it certainly doesn't exclude one from becoming not just over-weight, but clinically obese.

As you indicated by mentioning marathon runners, there are different body types which are dictated primarily by genetics. Diet will play a role beyond that but stereotypes are powerful things and when you see a vegan that fits the vegan-stereotype, the image is reinforced.

There are certain conclusions that can be considered; people who tend to have the classic mesomorph physique usually carry more body weight and more muscle bulk and produce explosive power for short durations. Thinner people who still have a tendency toward athleticism tend to be better at endurance events and rarely do well in activities requiring explosive power. Most of this is likely due to their ratio of slow twitch to fast twitch muscle fiber. Sprinters and climbers in cycling are a fairly good example.

The role of diet in athleticism is less well defined. However, some rough observations can be drawn among non-human animals. Those who are strict carnivores such as lions and tigers tend to carry more weight and muscle mass and produce short-term, explosive power but quickly tire from exertion and usually spend more time sleeping. In the case of lions, 21-hours of sleep daily is about average. These animals also tend to gorge, consuming large quantities at each meal then go for a period of time without eating.

Animals which are strict herbivores tend to be lighter, (though there are a number of notable exceptions), and produce less explosive power but tend to have greater stamina. They remain awake for more than half the day and tend to graze or nibble throughout the day.

Physiologically, carnivores usually pant to cool their bodies. They have large canine teeth which extend into gaps in the teeth on the opposing jaw structure, with small, sharp incisores and sharp jagged molars for cutting meat and tendons. They display claws on the feet and have less well developed salivary glands. The saliva itself is usually acidic and doesn't contain special enzymes for pre-digesting any plant tissues. The stomach produces an acid much stronger than that produced by herbivores and the digestive tract is characteristically smooth inside and about 3-times the length of the body.

Herbivores tend to cool their bodies by sweating through pores in the skin. They display teeth of generally equal length with flat back molars and move the jaw side to side while chewing rather than just up and down. They have well developed salivary glands and alkaline saliva with an enzyme called ptyalin. They have no claws, produce relatively weak stomach acid and have long, twisted and puckered digestive tracts about 10-times their body length.

Hi Sandie,
When losing weight, the main question you have to ask yourself is "Am I burning more calories than I'm taking in?" If you answer yes, then you're losing weight. Then next question is a little more complex, but not much. "What KIND of weight am I losing?" Obviously, you don't want to lose muscle mass, you want to lose fat. A good rule of thumb is: the lower intensity the exercise, the higher the ratio of fats to carbs being burned. So if your goal is to lose fat, then aim for this lower intensity. If you're really short on breath and/or your legs are burning, you're pushing too hard. :-)
As to watching your carbs/fat intake, don't worry about that as much as what's going on with the daily TOTAL calorie count. If you're mainly concerned with the weight, then that first question should be enough. In order to lose one pound of fat, you need to burn 3500 calories more than you take in. So if you can keep close track of your overall calories for a while, it'll be fairly straightforward... Best of luck!

__________________
-Shep

I'd just like to inform that vegemaniacs that cooked dead animal flesh tastes REALLY fecking good.

The fact that the fat is removed from skim milk of course accounts for why it has a higher protein % than regular milk.

Checking out the nutritional link above, appears I would have no problem getting 75-100 grams of protein from vegetable sources. And, it doesn't even have to be tofu....my "veggie plate" favorites like good old collard greens, okra and blackeyed peas all contain significant protein per 200 calorie servings.

MMMmmm.... BBQ's must be a riot at Chez-dhk.....

Flesh tastes better! LOL

It's a developed taste. Often within 6-months to a year of the time people choose to give up the flesh on their plate, just the idea of putting it their mouth sickens them It doesn't always happen but often the natural aversion to putting dead animal in one's mouth will return if allowed.

By the way, barbeques smell horrid. It's interesting how people gag, cringe and make gross comments about smelling the odors from the cremation room of a funeral home but when lunch time rolls around, they drop by the local Burger King for some char broiled cow.

A friend of mine worked as an animal control officer for a few years and always becamed sicken at the smells from the local humane shelter when they would cremate the bodies of the euthanised dogs. That is -- he felt that way after the first time he experienced it. He admitted to me that the first time he walked in and didn't know what was going on, he noted the smell in the air and asked someone who was having lunch adding that it smelled good. He wasn't sure how to react when they told him what he smelled was the dogs burning in the back room.

1. Why would I choose to give up meat? Surely those choosing to give it up are those who are going to feel sicked at putting it in their mouth, makes sense?

2. No, they don't. I salivate when I smell one, therefore to my body they smell lovely.

3. If dog tasted good and was readily available legally, I'd hapily eat it.

Most make the choice after doing some hard looking at the health aspects. Some people not only care about their health but aren't happy ignoring the information and following everyone else around as another mindless member of the flock. As Einstein once said; "In order to form an immaculate member of a flock of sheep one must, above all, be a sheep."

I'm not sure at what age Einstein gave up meat but his writings make it clear that he felt there were many good reasons. The same goes for Sir Isaac Newton, Leonardo da Vinci, Plutarch, Pythagorus, Socrates, etc., etc.

People can learn to consider a great number of things "tasty", which was my point. In Japan, cold snake blood is held quite highly and in Burma, fried horse parasites are a yummy snack. The Chinese seem to have a taste for whipped frog ejaculate or skewered pig rectums.

Then perhaps you're in luck! Poshintang Korean dog soup is said to be best if the dog is beaten to death. If you prefer Taiwan you can try "Winter dog soup".

People seem to think of placing things that most of us consider disgusting in their mouths and swallowing them as some test of bravado or courage. If such is the case, I'll submit that Jefferey Dahmer still has you beat. If you're really feeling brave, perhaps raw sewage could be irradiated to eliminate the health hazards.

I, on the other hand, still submit that frog ejaculate, snake blood and horse parasites as well as the other items and your aforementioned barbeque are grotesque and the barbeque smells horrid, as does the crematorium.

Not a lot of use to me if I have to import it...





It's not.

What's brave about eating a steak? It's just meat.

Hey there Sandi (sorry if that is spelled wrong)

I think you should know that there are simply alternatives to protein powder. I am a veggie and have been for years, having competed at Division 1 college athletics in both rowing and softball (one endurance and one explosive) and have found no problem in getting adequate protein intake from a varied diet. Make sure you have your blood checked once or twice a year to ensure that you are not becoming anemic (gotta love the `perks` of being a woman). Check with a dietician if you are unsure. It shouldnt be a new phenomena to seek out the alternatives with GMO foods, steroids/antibiotics added to animal meats, and pollution damaging our food supplies. Quite simply put, in this day and age eating meat is not necessary unless you dont have any other option. With the variety of foods available, do what feels good for your body. To each, his or her own.

e
PM me if you have any questions.

__________________
If you cant keep up, then you simply dont want to.

Perhaps you should hang out near the entrance to the O.R. at your local hospital. Don't worry about what's in the little trays, it's just meat. It should reduce the cost of your average grocery bill.

Some very good points and you're quite right of course that eating meat isn't necessary. But it has little to do with the day and age. Vegetarianism has a long, long history. Statistically, vegetarian women actually suffer fewer cases of anemia than do their counter-parts who prefer to ingest animal-products. The same goes for many other ailments, which should be no surprise once a good objective look has been had at human physiology.