One of the best interviews that I have heard on Diet Doctor. Dr. Scher's talent of asking pertinent questions on the subject and his ability to give the people he is interviewing a open field to discuss their research and opinions made this interview very relevant to me. What I most enjoyed was that Professors Simpson and Raubenheimer asked the question of why other species can manage to eat a healthy diet but humans have so many problems determining protein, fat and carb goals. Then the progression of whether one is looking for a healthy diet or long living diet made a lot of sense to me. This was an enjoyable and seemingly short hour of discussion that is now pushing me to go do some more reading on the subject. Thanks!
Yes… very interesting, great questions.. thoughtful answers..no speed talking. LOL. Definitely want to read their books. Could’ve listened another hour, thanks for the interview.
I'm an admirer of protein leverage but I hesitate to agree with the idea that we should reduce dietary protein in mid-life. In the real world setting that I work in, aside from findings in lab settings, most of the 50 + year olds I see are particularly sarcopenic or bordering on. Given that there is evidence that lean mass percentage in mid-life is a strong predictor of health status in later life then advocating lower protein would seem conterintuitive. If you ask most people, given the choice they would rather live a shorter life by a few years and have a greater healthspan than suffer ill-health for the last 20 years or so of a longer lifespan.
Jerry Sims, also, decreasing protein for middle-aged mice makes them live longer doesn't necessarily mean doing the same for middle-aged humans will make humans live longer. Mice and humans do not have identical DNA.
There is evidence that with age the body becomes less sensitive to protein intake so to trigger the same building processes, you need more protein with higher age to achieve the same results.
The basic challenge here is that we are not insects so we handle protein "sparing" differently. I would say that Raubenheimer and Simpson are onto a good point about the metabolic costs of using protein for fuel, but that really should not be a main role for amino acids. So I have to wonder if they are slicing/dissecting this concept correctly. We humans also have a unique tool called autophagy to provide protein sparing. Without this autophagy tool, yes, the lifespan is diminished, but exercise and fasting induced autophagy change the nutritional geometry. There also appears to be a fundamental missunderstanding of how autophagy works to provide protein "storage". This view that we must have a set amount of protein each day is just FLAT wrong. Otherwise thousands of us who fast longer than 24 hours would wake up dead. That does not happen and will not happen because of amino acid storage in the body's tissues
Interestingly, I was a video about a study. The results were that meet intake, maybe it was beef intake, increased autophagy. Obviously, humans have evolved for large and intermittent intake of protein, as the evidence indicates. We see that with many hunter-gatherers who will eat until it's gone, even to the point of their bellies being distended, and then not eating for a day or several days. The body digests, metabolizes, and utilizes the protein in meat slowly.
This interview needs to be aired globally! I'm going to re-listen to this episode all week!
Před 3 lety+8
After reading their work I am convinced that they have made one of the most significant contributions to nutrition science, which I really hope makes it's way into mainstream nutrition and medical establishment
Absolutely fascinating interview. Thanks for inviting these amazing scientists guests. I think that you are one of the best interviewers. I enjoy your style, questions very much.
I have not read the book, but it seems that all their research is looking at the optimal protein level in a high carb environment (whether whole foods or ultra processed), which does not address the low carb, keto or carnivore way of eating, which is high in fat so not sure how this would correlate with these low carb diets. Always interesting to hear other perspectives!!
I just read the "eat like the animals book". It's quite cute and funny in the beginning and this protein appetite thing really makes sense; but then for the rest of the book they relate this hypothesis to the conventional nutrition stance. They did a massive mouse study that looked at fat and carbs too and that data pointed them in the low fat; high fibre; low salt etc direction. I don't know the details of the fat to carb ratios and haven't read the study but either it was in favour of carbs or it was interpreted through the standard pro-carb lens. I was disappointed because I personally have quite a pro keto stance but 1) you must follow the science not cherry pick what suits you 2) these guys are bug scientists who have boldly stepped into the hostile minefield of nutrition research. Their main objective is to advocate this protein leverage idea. If they were pro keto or pro intermittent fasting or anything else as well then their protein hypothesis would have been disregarded with all the other stuff. Advocating low carb was not their hill to go die on. So I took the bit 🍒 from the book that made sense; I wouldn't mind reading the earlier more science focused book as well to find out more about other appetites (like maybe the other book touches on calcium appetite etc); and I’ll assimilate this information into my beliefs like the diet doctor team has. Like they don’t 100 agree with everything from every guest or article but they shine a light on the interesting stuff through a low carb lens.
Thanks for these comments. The authors concede that keto/low-carb diets may be helpful for addressing diabetes, heart disease, and obesity; they also describe low carb as unbalanced and unsustainable. But predicted shortened lifespan seems to be the kicker. They speculate: "What are the odds that our species is a rare exception to the rule that long-term exposure to a high-protein, low-carb diet is lifeshortening? Pretty low, we think. Vanishingly so. Especially when you consider that the longest-lived, healthiest populations on the planet are those who consume a lowerprotein, high-carb whole-food diet."
Actually, the evidence shows that the longest lived populations eat a lower-carb, animal-based whole-food diet. The longest lived national populations are precisely those that eat the most meat. See: "Blue Zones Dietary Myth".
Just a thought. I wonder if the reduction of salt to which they refer could be from processed food. Therefore as people reduce processed food, their salt intake decreases massively but gets maybe falsely associated with the better health outcome of not eating it. Maybe also the idea that processed food not only is just sodium salt (not with other mineral in it) but that consumers of so much processed food have such a massive salt load. For example, I eat as much salt as I want and it's quite a bit but when I have just one takeaway, I'm thirsty for hours afterwards. Im thinking it must be something along those lines because they are pretty smart astute researchers. It would be good to have Brett ask them if he gets the chance. The video clarified a lot of things didn't it. Kind of put it all together in a coherent theory
@Dracenea - I read between the lines on that reference to salt being a “killer”. The way I interpreted it was that high salt intake on a high processed-food diet is not good because of the raised blood pressure derived from the insulin effect on the kidneys/salt retention/water retention. Trouble is, salt is in so many processed foods (along with sugar) to make them more palatable, so the “high” salt intake cannot be avoided if processed food is consumed. In context, then, high is relative to what diet is followed. Just goes to show how things can go so wrong for the innocent consumer who will have little or no knowledge of physiology nor of the designed-in hyper-palatability of junk foods. Anyway, the book sounds interesting, I have ordered a copy.
3 areas that potentially could modify protein leverage hypothesis: 1)Our unique energy demanding brains that may alter our lipid and micronutrient requirements. 2)Our high acid ('scavenger') stomachs which predispose us to utilize fermented (I.e. rotting) food whether plant or animal with only a tiny cecum. 3)Potential calorie reduction of carbs and fat as we age to offset mTOR and methionine (homocysteine) over expression/overload to mitigate shortening of lifespan seen in other animals.
Wow. I actually understood this interview as I listened to it. Protein consumption (I'm 68 yr old female) has become for me a surprising subject matter to investigate in order to create and sustain my healthy bio-system. Who knew? For a long time, clean air and clean water were the top items on my Priority Values List. Thank you for being part of the leading edge of the protein consumption conversation. I enjoyed visualizing the roller coaster ride of protein consumption over my lifetime and have increased it conspicuously. A humorous side note re: the nutrient consumption bias of the locusts and mice... they aren't exposed to the marketing & advertising seductions we humans cannot avoid unless perhaps if we choose to be hermits and/or monks. Just imagine the improved health of humanity if the advertising dollars were instead diverted to support organic food production for all macronutrients!!! Even planet Earth would benefit from that switch. Could we recreate the Garden of Eden??? Keep up the very enjoyable good work you obviously enjoy producing. Win-win.
.... i dont agree with the idea that if lots of protein is availble then the human species reproduces more because of the abundance of protein. When we look at third world countries, they reproduce much more but they are severly lacking in nutrients, especially proteine. In the western world we see a much lower reproduction rate despite protein is abundant
In my misguided early life, I tried every diet or weight reducing idea out there. I was only 15 # overweight. I tried fasting up to 8 days. And I tried protein sparring under a doctor’s guidance. The stuff tasted terrible. The point is that I lost lean body mass and maybe a little weight. Excluding carbs made me very weak and I could hardly move. A naturopathic physician (a real doctor) got me back on track at age 32, when I had almost destroyed my health and my muscle mass with overly restrictive eating. Yes, one needs to get adequate protein, but we also need a broad spectrum of foods, including some carbs. I am a distance backpacker, and I would be hard-pressed to do it without some carbs. Too many people are too restrictive in their eating and naturopaths often steer them in an unhealthy direction. When we stop being at war with eating our food, we will be a lot better off.
Awesome talk! I think we humans are the only animals that “Live to Eat” and not “Eat to Live”. I read a book years ago from a veterinarian about proper nutrition for dogs. He talks about why processed dog foods are so detrimental to their health and longevity. I make my dogs food and have large breed that live to be a healthy 15-17 years old when most of those breeds die before 10 of cancers. Processed foods are not natural for any animal diet.
Absolutely fascinating interview. Thanks so much . I love the exploration of their research and ages of mice in aging, along with sugars and protein. Thanks.
Interesting discussion. Thanks! It's interesting to think whether we overeat for protein or for the nutrients that we need and protein we get by accident. There can also be psychological reasons for overeating.
... mi love this Interview, good questions and great answers, the information in this video provides u with lots of valuable knowledge on how u structure ur personal diet.....
27 minutes in and not sure why there's no protein combined with fat angle? So far it's all about changing carbohydrate sources and protein. Why not add in protein combined with fat?
Interesting though that they said a high carbohydrate diet is best for longevity. I wonder if they have done any studies with a higher fat and lower carbohydrate diet?
well they seem to treat fat and carbs as fuel/ energy/ kilojoules/ calories. So I took it to mean that at a point in your life you need more protein to build muscle or reproduce but then maybe later on its better for you to follow a fuel to protein ratio thats higher in fuel so you can make it through winter or put less strain on your liver /kidneys etc. But these guys reckon that fibre is also pretty vital (whereas Dr Paul Mason is all like yolo you don't need fibre). Our bodies are very adaptable to diet variety and the role of genetics / gut bacteria isn't 100% understood yet. Basically its still gonna take another 50 or 100 years to iron out wrinkles in this science (and then we would have found some new wrinkles)
They don't seem to be considering the range of people's ability to handle carbohydrates. They need to study AMY1 genes and their relation to obesity. Eating carbohydrates makes some people over-produce insulin. Insulin resistance and high blood insulin are very destructive to the cardiovascular system and everything attached to it.
Very reasonable arguments. Even though I'm a high protein advocate, for over 15 years (now 34), I do get a sense of enoughness and balance my intake. This, of course, one can sense only after a year and more of abstinence from processed foods. It took me from my early 18s up to 20 to come back to my natural taste of whole food and become conscious of my own taste, after highly palatable teen years eating salami, starches, seed oil, and sweets. We are fortunate to have the opportunity to listen to this wise discussion, rightfully lead by Dr. Bret. Thank you for delight🙏🏻 I am more firm in the collective thought of changing the industry system at large. If you need an advocate/contributor, here, please✌🏻
Surprised to hear you guys say f and carbs are not used for structure. It's a lipid membrane layer. Glucose is used as a carbon source for structure in proliferating cells.
Maybe I am right to devise this plan: If I fall off the wagon with my diet and eat everything in sight, just add meat to my diet. If I can prioritize eating meat or other protein sources, perhaps consumption of the other foods will decline and I can get back on my weight loss trajectory.
Read Their Book “Eat like the Animals”, fascinating, the authors deserve more recognition. However found the message extremely mixed. Upping protein will created more satiety and less overall ad-libitum calorie intake. They recommend 15% for a middle aged person, then at the same time say you should eat protein until you feel like you have enough of it. Then they stated an example of a former football player whose protein needs will be elevated beyond his active years. Also the result of their mouse study, high protein low carb lead to skinny mice who died early, while the high carb, low protein mice lived longer and healthier lives, many of them fat, which was less unhealthy than high protein intakes. Still much to be said what the optimum diet is and how to determine that.
Underscores that nutritional science is all over the place and not nearly as settled as we would like. But it's maddening for the layperson. These guys present “evidence” that goes against everything we've been hearing (learning) from the low-carb/keto/carnivore so-called experts, like Shawn Baker, Paul Saladino, Robert Cywes, Berry and countless others. Can the issue ever be determined. Are there no facts? This is maddening and frustrating.
So true. I sometimes wonder if big food, big pharma, and big supplement havent conspired to keep us confused. Or maybe its just those wishing to sell thier latest book🙂
Thanks for the video. Just eat mainly real food, meat, fish, and eggs. Once you are past the false sugar addicted cravings, your body will tell you when you've had enough of the real stuff. Once you are metabolically recovered, add in carbs on top if you want to gain some weight. First choice is grass fed meats, or wild caught fish, and yard eggs. If you can find raw dairy, try that. Drink plenty of water as you adjust to a protein leveraged diet due to increased protein synthesis need.
Exactly. My concern is with macro tracking apps that so many people use while on keto diet, that tell them how much protein to eat, rather than relying on their own natural appetite. So many complain that they end up over-eating their protein allotment (and under-eating fat) given by the app and wonder why. So should the app be trusted or should we trust our natural appetites?
Great interview but EXTREMELY hard to unpack. So I’m 42… For longevity I should be eating a LOW protein HIGH carb diet… but only until I’m “old” at which point I need to raise my protein? That’s seems to be my takeaway which as I’m here files in the face of pretty much everything on this channel. I feel like this video deserves a follow up video.
So here’s the issue (for me). Around two weeks ago I discovered Dr Ted Naimen (before this I had been on Keto for around three months with some success but had stalled in weight loss after 20 lbs… I likely have 10 to go). He has been on this podcast as well. His whole PE ratio diet is based off the work of the two scientist here. BUT…. He seems to be misinterpreting their work in part because he says pretty much everywhere that you CANT overeat protein and he suggests around 1 g per lb which puts me at 45%+ of my daily calories. These guys say 18% is optimal in their book. That’s a HUGE difference and Ted is supposedly basing his recommendation off of these guys. So I’m tossing my hands up in the air on this one. Maybe it’s time to go back to the ice-cream and high blood pressure meds and just stop thinking about what the right diet is! JK… but seriously, what is the person looking for the best diet for their health and longevity to do? Keto doesn’t feel right, at least not the hardcore fat fat fat keto. I hate veggies so that’s a no go. This high protein diet was working out great but not I’m worried I’m waaaaaaay overdoing it with the protein.
@@dylanfgarrison I hear you. Im going through the exact same thing. I lost a lot on keto, then I considered doing Valter Longo's program to lose the last 20 lbs. Then I changed my mind when I started listening to Ted Naiman et al. Now what?
I absolutely disagree with the notion of elaborating any public policy with regards to food and health. What we need to do is undo all policies and regulations favoring big food and big pharma, but no to try and make new ones that we might now think may be the correct ones. That´s the same arrogant, authoritarian mindset that got us here. People should be free to make their own choices and freedom of speech should be protected so we can educate the public and let them listen to different opinions, but nothing more than that. Government has absolutely no place on our table nor the doctor´s office.
Very interesting, but very confusing to this lay person. I am totally baffled as to how much protein I need as a 62 year old woman. This goes against what seems to be recommended by Drs. Mason, Berry and Cywes, all of whom I respect. They seem to advocate for a mostly carnivore approach to eating. Especially as we age, if I am understanding them correctly.
If you use the grams of protein to kilogram of weight, it seems to work out better for determining what to eat. It still depends on what your goal weight is along with your age. 1.2 grams of protein to a kilogram of weight is too low for me to maintain muscle at almost 70. I go with the 1.6 grams right now as that is about all I can eat. Some go to 2 grams per kilogram but I have problems eating that much protein without getting stomach problems. The idea is to find your ideal portion based on your testing of eating more protein at different levels until you find what will work for you.
Dr. TED Naiman recommends a very easy rule of thumb: using your ideal body weight for your height, 100 grams protein for first 5 ft in height., and 5 grams of protein for every inch afterward for women. (Men start at 110 grams protein for first five feet.) I believe Diet Dr. recommends a little less protein with their “formula.” I’m 63, have been eating mostly carnivore for over three years, and just eat fatty meat. That’s it. No formula, no measuring, no fuss, no worries. It has been an absolutely adequate way of eating, and I’ve never felt better!
This was interesting but I didn't hear anything that reconciles the two viewpoints...low protein vs high protein. I'm just as at a loss as ever. I eat about 40 to 50 percent protein which is massively greater than the 18 percent these guys recommend...not to mention they say to decrease protein after middle age versus nearly everyone else who says you need more protein as you get older to overcome the poor absorption issue. Am I missing something?
Nice! Hard to know what to do. What protein if 58, no comorbidities and a lit of weight lifting? Seems like there are many variables to knowing target protein level. Where's the formula? Hope the book has it
Perhaps the salt mentioned is the overdose variety that's in high processed food. When you are cooking protein you usually add salt to taste so I am fine with what they say about salt I think they could have been more direct about the salt added to foods.
Ultra processed is addictive the more you eat the more you want. Once you have crossed the crap food threshold I think some green carbs good animal protein and butter or animal fat will hit the reset button. We dont listen enough to our bodies mine does not deal in calories or percentages. I over eat carbs or so called fibre I bloat and have wind. I ear good protein some dairy and dont fret about the perfect ratio. My body stores fat when I eat rubbish when I eat meat and fish and eat once I just feel better and all the weight is steady.
There is a higher mortality rate associated with lower salt usage than higher. I am going to assume the doctor was referring to added sodium in processed foods??
Fascinating. You talk about "your book" several times. Which book were you referring to? I see 3. Very balanced and nuanced. The recognition of age related requirements is excellent! And useful for any nutrition approach.
Wouldn't it be better to maintain the muscle mass in middle age vs reducing protein intake and trying to play catch up when you're older? I understand that we see societies who follow the Mediterranean diet ( complex carbs and low animal protein) live longer but do we know if that's due to reducing protein intake vs just eating a diet of whole foods devoid of processed food? Or something else in the environment? Could one also do so but eat high quality protein simultaneously? Lastly, I don't know how much we can apply mouse studies to humans. I don't thin one can make definitive claims that reducing protein increases lifespan based on this evidence.
Thanks for this unbiased discussion. I'm a bit concerned by the latest shift of DietDoctor towards high protein version of LCHF a la Ted Naiman. I believe his approach is overly simplistic, while Prof. Raubenheimer and Simpson provide much more nuanced and balanced view on the protein leverage theory.
On the other hand, Prof. Raubenheimer and Simpson have only tested protein+complex carbs and protein+sugar, BUT NOT protein+fat (and low/no carbs). And they haven't tested it in humans...
I didn’t get it. I can’t say I understood what I should take away regarding protein. I also don’t understand why people experimenting on bugs are drawing conclusions on humans. What did I miss?
Meaning, there's no need to search for some strange diet to follow. Humans, et alii, have their "normal" diet written for them by the hand of God (Darwin)?
I enjoyed this interview until they started talking about the overconsumption of salt... It’s so frustrating that so many experts are saying the absolute opposite of most of these basic health/nutritional issues
salt is found in all whole plant foods and animals foods.Too much salt is not good.If you study logic ,do not even believe the expert.Research for yourself the medical literature and find out.Salt is cause of hypertension, and the ratio of sodium and potassium.We need 1-2 grams per day .It is micronutrient and body can do the balance.Fluid and electrolytes balance was the most important subject in physiology ,studying basic medical sciences to be surgeon.There is intake and output.The kidney tubules reabsorb all sodium back into the blood.It is recycled and reused.Do not take salt for the last half century so is my family.
@@dr.samierasadoonalhassani2669 Your advice goes against recent information put out by Dr. Cywes in episodes 175 and 176. So confusing to know whom to believe any more.
@@dr.samierasadoonalhassani2669 I add quite a lot of salt as I'm practically carnivore. I'm 61 years old and tested my BP today: 126 over 75. Not very high in my opinion. According to research presented by (among others) Paul Mason, it's worse to have too little salt. This is all so confusing..
I agree with you ,it is confusing.Each one of us is unique ,hence no one size fit all’s.we are different in our genes and our metabolic health and environment in which we live .It depend on our goal ,what is it ? If it is cardio vascular health ,then listen to vascular surgeon Dr Essylten and before him dr Dean Ornish.Sodium is essential for life and it is in extra cellular fluid.For me can not take salt because it cause fluid shift .Our bodies are very complicated biological system and they work on molecular level and quantum biology ,nano scale.It is not dark or white.I am very sorry to confuse you,I do apologize.If feeling well ,keep doing what you do and check your blood pressure early in the morning.Now the figures of hypertension changed ,not as before.Thank you.Let us close the subject .
Science is evolving and like these guests are saying that you can't just reason that because protein is necessary and good for you that excessive protein is better. So yeah salt might not be as bad for you as we used to believe; and its really needed if you do a water fast or sweat a lot; but there would be an optimal point for each person and going way beyond that isn't just better because "salt is a necessary micronutrient". If you live off processed foods you might be getting too much salt. If you cook your own food and salt it to taste then you're probably being a clever locust
Why does Everyone (especially protein scientists) say we (humans, animals, organisms) have No Ability to store Protein. We store protein everywhere in our body... it's in every cell... we break down food source proteins to amino acids and build the proteins We need with them all over our body storing it for far longer than carbs!
Super, complements the processed food argument with their discovery that one cause of overeating is the drive to eat more of protein poor buy highly desired chemical enhanced food....this combined with 3 meals a day plus continual snacking on high glycaemic carbs, unveils some secrets to good eating policies.
One head scratcher for me was calling your system "nutritional geometry" when your visual conception is graphical, not about shapes. Why not, "nutritional calculus?" I vote for changing the name.
I remember Stephen Fry saying about science vs religion that what sets scientists apart is their humility, and how they're ok with saying "I don't know". And yet listening to video after video on nutrition and what a horror of corruption and misinformation public health is... if there's one thing that comes up over and over again is scientists' unwillingness to learn a lesson or to admit to a mistake and correct themselves, or how doctors are parasites taking advantage of patients' desperation to make a buck. I'm not a person of faith but nobody tell me anything about science's infinite superiority over religion when the reality is this. Everything is turned into a cult, a cult that is all about making money selling snake oil to your fellow man who naively trusted you.
Humans evolved eating mostly meat and to eat large amounts of it when available. And we know this from the anthropological record through firsthand observations of how many healthy populations eat a lot of meat. On top of that, the longest lived populations in the world eat the most meat. But such an evolutionary influence isn't the case for mice and many other lab animals or insects.
Funny watching Dr. Scher smile uncomfortably whenever anyone, not just these two, say that carbs…whole food carbs, can and are healthy. Especially for certain populations. Recently I’ve watched interviews with Dr. Naiman and even the main man Dr. Eenfeldt, when carbs are mentioned in a positive way Dr. Scher noticeably cringes! lol He’s so dogmatic it must be killing him with the new ( and better) direction the channel is taking.
Okinowans post-WWII had no pigs to eat. Just sweet potatoes. But they soon rectified this and went back to pork. Med diet in Lent is no their noram diet either. Just vegan propaganda.
I’m not buying it. I ate high carbs because sugar is addictive. I now eat a carnivore diet because it gives me satiety and it tastes good. I wasn’t eating candy and pastries because my physiology was looking for protein. Who funds this research?🙏
Darwin was wrong about quite a lot, at the great expense of science, medicine and society, so that does not give me confidence in this hypothesis at all. Quite the opposite.
One of the best interviews that I have heard on Diet Doctor. Dr. Scher's talent of asking pertinent questions on the subject and his ability to give the people he is interviewing a open field to discuss their research and opinions made this interview very relevant to me. What I most enjoyed was that Professors Simpson and Raubenheimer asked the question of why other species can manage to eat a healthy diet but humans have so many problems determining protein, fat and carb goals. Then the progression of whether one is looking for a healthy diet or long living diet made a lot of sense to me. This was an enjoyable and seemingly short hour of discussion that is now pushing me to go do some more reading on the subject. Thanks!
Yes… very interesting, great questions.. thoughtful answers..no speed talking. LOL. Definitely want to read their books. Could’ve listened another hour, thanks for the interview.
I'm an admirer of protein leverage but I hesitate to agree with the idea that we should reduce dietary protein in mid-life. In the real world setting that I work in, aside from findings in lab settings, most of the 50 + year olds I see are particularly sarcopenic or bordering on. Given that there is evidence that lean mass percentage in mid-life is a strong predictor of health status in later life then advocating lower protein would seem conterintuitive. If you ask most people, given the choice they would rather live a shorter life by a few years and have a greater healthspan than suffer ill-health for the last 20 years or so of a longer lifespan.
Jerry Sims, also, decreasing protein for middle-aged mice makes them live longer doesn't necessarily mean doing the same for middle-aged humans will make humans live longer. Mice and humans do not have identical DNA.
I agree
Jack Lalanne ate tons of protein and lived until his 90s. Anecdotal, I know.
@@joseromero81 Jack Lalane was mostly HFPB and two meals a day.
There is evidence that with age the body becomes less sensitive to protein intake so to trigger the same building processes, you need more protein with higher age to achieve the same results.
The basic challenge here is that we are not insects so we handle protein "sparing" differently. I would say that Raubenheimer and Simpson are onto a good point about the metabolic costs of using protein for fuel, but that really should not be a main role for amino acids. So I have to wonder if they are slicing/dissecting this concept correctly. We humans also have a unique tool called autophagy to provide protein sparing. Without this autophagy tool, yes, the lifespan is diminished, but exercise and fasting induced autophagy change the nutritional geometry. There also appears to be a fundamental missunderstanding of how autophagy works to provide protein "storage". This view that we must have a set amount of protein each day is just FLAT wrong. Otherwise thousands of us who fast longer than 24 hours would wake up dead. That does not happen and will not happen because of amino acid storage in the body's tissues
Interestingly, I was a video about a study. The results were that meet intake, maybe it was beef intake, increased autophagy. Obviously, humans have evolved for large and intermittent intake of protein, as the evidence indicates. We see that with many hunter-gatherers who will eat until it's gone, even to the point of their bellies being distended, and then not eating for a day or several days. The body digests, metabolizes, and utilizes the protein in meat slowly.
This interview needs to be aired globally! I'm going to re-listen to this episode all week!
After reading their work I am convinced that they have made one of the most significant contributions to nutrition science, which I really hope makes it's way into mainstream nutrition and medical establishment
Absolutely fascinating interview. Thanks for inviting these amazing scientists guests. I think that you are one of the best interviewers. I enjoy your style, questions very much.
I have not read the book, but it seems that all their research is looking at the optimal protein level in a high carb environment (whether whole foods or ultra processed), which does not address the low carb, keto or carnivore way of eating, which is high in fat so not sure how this would correlate with these low carb diets. Always interesting to hear other perspectives!!
I just read the "eat like the animals book". It's quite cute and funny in the beginning and this protein appetite thing really makes sense; but then for the rest of the book they relate this hypothesis to the conventional nutrition stance. They did a massive mouse study that looked at fat and carbs too and that data pointed them in the low fat; high fibre; low salt etc direction. I don't know the details of the fat to carb ratios and haven't read the study but either it was in favour of carbs or it was interpreted through the standard pro-carb lens.
I was disappointed because I personally have quite a pro keto stance but 1) you must follow the science not cherry pick what suits you 2) these guys are bug scientists who have boldly stepped into the hostile minefield of nutrition research. Their main objective is to advocate this protein leverage idea. If they were pro keto or pro intermittent fasting or anything else as well then their protein hypothesis would have been disregarded with all the other stuff. Advocating low carb was not their hill to go die on. So I took the bit 🍒 from the book that made sense; I wouldn't mind reading the earlier more science focused book as well to find out more about other appetites (like maybe the other book touches on calcium appetite etc); and I’ll assimilate this information into my beliefs like the diet doctor team has. Like they don’t 100 agree with everything from every guest or article but they shine a light on the interesting stuff through a low carb lens.
Thanks for these comments.
The authors concede that keto/low-carb diets may be helpful for addressing diabetes, heart disease, and obesity; they also describe low carb as unbalanced and unsustainable.
But predicted shortened lifespan seems to be the kicker. They speculate:
"What are the odds that our species is a rare exception to the rule that long-term exposure to a high-protein, low-carb diet is lifeshortening? Pretty low, we think. Vanishingly so. Especially when you consider that the longest-lived, healthiest populations on the planet are those who consume a lowerprotein, high-carb whole-food diet."
Actually, the evidence shows that the longest lived populations eat a lower-carb, animal-based whole-food diet. The longest lived national populations are precisely those that eat the most meat. See: "Blue Zones Dietary Myth".
Had me until almost the end when he mentions salt being a killer. Agree to disagree. The protein leverage is quite interesting!
Me too. They lost their credibility with that.
Agreed
Just a thought. I wonder if the reduction of salt to which they refer could be from processed food. Therefore as people reduce processed food, their salt intake decreases massively but gets maybe falsely associated with the better health outcome of not eating it.
Maybe also the idea that processed food not only is just sodium salt (not with other mineral in it) but that consumers of so much processed food have such a massive salt load. For example, I eat as much salt as I want and it's quite a bit but when I have just one takeaway, I'm thirsty for hours afterwards.
Im thinking it must be something along those lines because they are pretty smart astute researchers. It would be good to have Brett ask them if he gets the chance.
The video clarified a lot of things didn't it. Kind of put it all together in a coherent theory
Kidneys excrete less salt on a high carb diet.
@Dracenea - I read between the lines on that reference to salt being a “killer”. The way I interpreted it was that high salt intake on a high processed-food diet is not good because of the raised blood pressure derived from the insulin effect on the kidneys/salt retention/water retention. Trouble is, salt is in so many processed foods (along with sugar) to make them more palatable, so the “high” salt intake cannot be avoided if processed food is consumed. In context, then, high is relative to what diet is followed. Just goes to show how things can go so wrong for the innocent consumer who will have little or no knowledge of physiology nor of the designed-in hyper-palatability of junk foods.
Anyway, the book sounds interesting, I have ordered a copy.
3 areas that potentially could modify protein leverage hypothesis:
1)Our unique energy demanding brains that may alter our lipid and micronutrient
requirements.
2)Our high acid ('scavenger') stomachs which predispose us to utilize fermented (I.e. rotting) food whether plant or animal with only a tiny cecum.
3)Potential calorie reduction of carbs and fat as we age to offset mTOR and methionine (homocysteine) over expression/overload to mitigate shortening of lifespan seen in other animals.
Wow. I actually understood this interview as I listened to it. Protein consumption (I'm 68 yr old female) has become for me a surprising subject matter to investigate in order to create and sustain my healthy bio-system. Who knew? For a long time, clean air and clean water were the top items on my Priority Values List. Thank you for being part of the leading edge of the protein consumption conversation. I enjoyed visualizing the roller coaster ride of protein consumption over my lifetime and have increased it conspicuously. A humorous side note re: the nutrient consumption bias of the locusts and mice... they aren't exposed to the marketing & advertising seductions we humans cannot avoid unless perhaps if we choose to be hermits and/or monks. Just imagine the improved health of humanity if the advertising dollars were instead diverted to support organic food production for all macronutrients!!! Even planet Earth would benefit from that switch. Could we recreate the Garden of Eden??? Keep up the very enjoyable good work you obviously enjoy producing. Win-win.
Quality of life is key for me.
Wow ... thank you for this discussion. This is a fascinating insight into what's wrong with our human diet. Thank you.
.... i dont agree with the idea that if lots of protein is availble then the human species reproduces more because of the abundance of protein. When we look at third world countries, they reproduce much more but they are severly lacking in nutrients, especially proteine. In the western world we see a much lower reproduction rate despite protein is abundant
One of the best most cutting edge interviews great job !
In my misguided early life, I tried every diet or weight reducing idea out there. I was only 15 # overweight. I tried fasting up to 8 days. And I tried protein sparring under a doctor’s guidance. The stuff tasted terrible. The point is that I lost lean body mass and maybe a little weight. Excluding carbs made me very weak and I could hardly move. A naturopathic physician (a real doctor) got me back on track at age 32, when I had almost destroyed my health and my muscle mass with overly restrictive eating. Yes, one needs to get adequate protein, but we also need a broad spectrum of foods, including some carbs. I am a distance backpacker, and I would be hard-pressed to do it without some carbs. Too many people are too restrictive in their eating and naturopaths often steer them in an unhealthy direction. When we stop being at war with eating our food, we will be a lot better off.
Awesome talk! I think we humans are the only animals that “Live to Eat” and not “Eat to Live”. I read a book years ago from a veterinarian about proper nutrition for dogs. He talks about why processed dog foods are so detrimental to their health and longevity. I make my dogs food and have large breed that live to be a healthy 15-17 years old when most of those breeds die before 10 of cancers. Processed foods are not natural for any animal diet.
WOW. These fellows are fantastic! Thank you for this interview 😍
Excellent podcast as usual. Your work is very helpful. Thank you.
So if we eat high-protein diet we should die earlier but healthier? What would we die earlier of?
That's a realky good question they don't answer. For me i would rather live a better quality shorter life than be old and bedridden and miserable.
It's not the one or the other. You can be healthy and strong also with moderate protein
Absolutely fascinating interview. Thanks so much . I love the exploration of their research and ages of mice in aging, along with sugars and protein. Thanks.
Dr Scher, great interview and guests. Your questions to the guests are spot on!
Another excellent interview. I especially like the question about why use the word Hypothesis. Diet Dcotor well done!
Interesting discussion. Thanks! It's interesting to think whether we overeat for protein or for the nutrients that we need and protein we get by accident. There can also be psychological reasons for overeating.
... mi love this Interview, good questions and great answers, the information in this video provides u with lots of valuable knowledge on how u structure ur personal diet.....
thought provoking ideas and research. Thank you !
I love this interview. This is a great topic. Your guests are wonderful and so are you, as always.
27 minutes in and not sure why there's no protein combined with fat angle? So far it's all about changing carbohydrate sources and protein. Why not add in protein combined with fat?
Interesting though that they said a high carbohydrate diet is best for longevity. I wonder if they have done any studies with a higher fat and lower carbohydrate diet?
well they seem to treat fat and carbs as fuel/ energy/ kilojoules/ calories. So I took it to mean that at a point in your life you need more protein to build muscle or reproduce but then maybe later on its better for you to follow a fuel to protein ratio thats higher in fuel so you can make it through winter or put less strain on your liver /kidneys etc. But these guys reckon that fibre is also pretty vital (whereas Dr Paul Mason is all like yolo you don't need fibre). Our bodies are very adaptable to diet variety and the role of genetics / gut bacteria isn't 100% understood yet. Basically its still gonna take another 50 or 100 years to iron out wrinkles in this science (and then we would have found some new wrinkles)
They don't seem to be considering the range of people's ability to handle carbohydrates. They need to study AMY1 genes and their relation to obesity. Eating carbohydrates makes some people over-produce insulin. Insulin resistance and high blood insulin are very destructive to the cardiovascular system and everything attached to it.
Very reasonable arguments. Even though I'm a high protein advocate, for over 15 years (now 34), I do get a sense of enoughness and balance my intake. This, of course, one can sense only after a year and more of abstinence from processed foods. It took me from my early 18s up to 20 to come back to my natural taste of whole food and become conscious of my own taste, after highly palatable teen years eating salami, starches, seed oil, and sweets.
We are fortunate to have the opportunity to listen to this wise discussion, rightfully lead by Dr. Bret. Thank you for delight🙏🏻 I am more firm in the collective thought of changing the industry system at large. If you need an advocate/contributor, here, please✌🏻
Salt a huge killer? Where is the evidence for that??
Agreed. This goes against recent information put out by Dr. Cywes in episodes 175 and 176. So confusing to know whom to believe any more.
@@belindaray721 way more credible than Cywes, the PURE study pretty much exonerates salt.
Actually, medical professionals claiming salt is a killer are the real killers.
Surprised to hear you guys say f and carbs are not used for structure. It's a lipid membrane layer. Glucose is used as a carbon source for structure in proliferating cells.
Maybe I am right to devise this plan: If I fall off the wagon with my diet and eat everything in sight, just add meat to my diet. If I can prioritize eating meat or other protein sources, perhaps consumption of the other foods will decline and I can get back on my weight loss trajectory.
Read Their Book “Eat like the Animals”, fascinating, the authors deserve more recognition.
However found the message extremely mixed. Upping protein will created more satiety and less overall ad-libitum calorie intake.
They recommend 15% for a middle aged person, then at the same time say you should eat protein until you feel like you have enough of it.
Then they stated an example of a former football player whose protein needs will be elevated beyond his active years.
Also the result of their mouse study, high protein low carb lead to skinny mice who died early, while the high carb, low protein mice lived longer and healthier lives, many of them fat, which was less unhealthy than high protein intakes. Still much to be said what the optimum diet is and how to determine that.
Underscores that nutritional science is all over the place and not nearly as settled as we would like. But it's maddening for the layperson. These guys present “evidence” that goes against everything we've been hearing (learning) from the low-carb/keto/carnivore
so-called experts, like Shawn Baker, Paul Saladino, Robert Cywes, Berry and countless others. Can the issue ever be determined. Are there no facts? This is maddening and frustrating.
So true. I sometimes wonder if big food, big pharma, and big supplement havent conspired to keep us confused. Or maybe its just those wishing to sell thier latest book🙂
This is gold!
Thanks for the video. Just eat mainly real food, meat, fish, and eggs. Once you are past the false sugar addicted cravings, your body will tell you when you've had enough of the real stuff. Once you are metabolically recovered, add in carbs on top if you want to gain some weight. First choice is grass fed meats, or wild caught fish, and yard eggs. If you can find raw dairy, try that. Drink plenty of water as you adjust to a protein leveraged diet due to increased protein synthesis need.
Exactly. My concern is with macro tracking apps that so many people use while on keto diet, that tell them how much protein to eat, rather than relying on their own natural appetite. So many complain that they end up over-eating their protein allotment (and under-eating fat) given by the app and wonder why. So should the app be trusted or should we trust our natural appetites?
Great interview but EXTREMELY hard to unpack. So I’m 42… For longevity I should be eating a LOW protein HIGH carb diet… but only until I’m “old” at which point I need to raise my protein? That’s seems to be my takeaway which as I’m here files in the face of pretty much everything on this channel. I feel like this video deserves a follow up video.
So here’s the issue (for me). Around two weeks ago I discovered Dr Ted Naimen (before this I had been on Keto for around three months with some success but had stalled in weight loss after 20 lbs… I likely have 10 to go). He has been on this podcast as well. His whole PE ratio diet is based off the work of the two scientist here. BUT…. He seems to be misinterpreting their work in part because he says pretty much everywhere that you CANT overeat protein and he suggests around 1 g per lb which puts me at 45%+ of my daily calories. These guys say 18% is optimal in their book. That’s a HUGE difference and Ted is supposedly basing his recommendation off of these guys. So I’m tossing my hands up in the air on this one. Maybe it’s time to go back to the ice-cream and high blood pressure meds and just stop thinking about what the right diet is! JK… but seriously, what is the person looking for the best diet for their health and longevity to do? Keto doesn’t feel right, at least not the hardcore fat fat fat keto. I hate veggies so that’s a no go. This high protein diet was working out great but not I’m worried I’m waaaaaaay overdoing it with the protein.
@@dylanfgarrison I hear you. Im going through the exact same thing. I lost a lot on keto, then I considered doing Valter Longo's program to lose the last 20 lbs. Then I changed my mind when I started listening to Ted Naiman et al. Now what?
I guess it depends on whether you're a locust
I absolutely disagree with the notion of elaborating any public policy with regards to food and health. What we need to do is undo all policies and regulations favoring big food and big pharma, but no to try and make new ones that we might now think may be the correct ones. That´s the same arrogant, authoritarian mindset that got us here. People should be free to make their own choices and freedom of speech should be protected so we can educate the public and let them listen to different opinions, but nothing more than that. Government has absolutely no place on our table nor the doctor´s office.
I agree with you
It would be great if you invited Dr Michael Eades or Prof Thomas Seyfried
Fascinating
Very interesting, but very confusing to this lay person. I am totally baffled as to how much protein I need as a 62 year old woman. This goes against what seems to be recommended by Drs. Mason, Berry and Cywes, all of whom I respect. They seem to advocate for a mostly carnivore approach to eating. Especially as we age, if I am understanding them correctly.
You may find this helpful and more straight forward.
www.dietdoctor.com/food-policy/protein
@@dietdoctor Thank you for that information. Is there any value in considering age instead of just height?
If you use the grams of protein to kilogram of weight, it seems to work out better for determining what to eat. It still depends on what your goal weight is along with your age. 1.2 grams of protein to a kilogram of weight is too low for me to maintain muscle at almost 70. I go with the 1.6 grams right now as that is about all I can eat. Some go to 2 grams per kilogram but I have problems eating that much protein without getting stomach problems. The idea is to find your ideal portion based on your testing of eating more protein at different levels until you find what will work for you.
Dr. TED Naiman recommends a very easy rule of thumb: using your ideal body weight for your height, 100 grams protein for first 5 ft in height., and 5 grams of protein for every inch afterward for women. (Men start at 110 grams protein for first five feet.) I believe Diet Dr. recommends a little less protein with their “formula.”
I’m 63, have been eating mostly carnivore for over three years, and just eat fatty meat. That’s it. No formula, no measuring, no fuss, no worries. It has been an absolutely adequate way of eating, and I’ve never felt better!
What a wonderful talk thank you for this interview, most enlightning!
45:50 Salt is a major killer? Since when?
This was interesting but I didn't hear anything that reconciles the two viewpoints...low protein vs high protein. I'm just as at a loss as ever. I eat about 40 to 50 percent protein which is massively greater than the 18 percent these guys recommend...not to mention they say to decrease protein after middle age versus nearly everyone else who says you need more protein as you get older to overcome the poor absorption issue. Am I missing something?
Here is our guide to protein.
www.dietdoctor.com/food-policy/protein
@@dietdoctor ok...so your chart here says 90 grams would be the minimum for me. I eat 100 to 120 grams most days. So I'm pretty much on target.
Wow! Very interesting discussion and research. Thank you!
Nice! Hard to know what to do. What protein if 58, no comorbidities and a lit of weight lifting? Seems like there are many variables to knowing target protein level. Where's the formula? Hope the book has it
Book says your TDEE * 0.15 / 4 or 15% protein intake when a middle aged person.
Perhaps the salt mentioned is the overdose variety that's in high processed food. When you are cooking protein you usually add salt to taste so I am fine with what they say about salt I think they could have been more direct about the salt added to foods.
They should have qualified that.
Oh, and I'm not a bug.
Ultra processed is addictive the more you eat the more you want.
Once you have crossed the crap food threshold I think some green carbs good animal protein and butter or animal fat will hit the reset button.
We dont listen enough to our bodies mine does not deal in calories or percentages.
I over eat carbs or so called fibre I bloat and have wind. I ear good protein some dairy and dont fret about the perfect ratio.
My body stores fat when I eat rubbish when I eat meat and fish and eat once I just feel better and all the weight is steady.
Fascinating stuff and enjoyed listen to it. They are two amazing scientist doing incredible work in the field of nutrition.
I think it comes down to percentage of protein to energy cal in diet .. so u need increase protein and decrease carbs and fat intake
There is a higher mortality rate associated with lower salt usage than higher. I am going to assume the doctor was referring to added sodium in processed foods??
Fascinating. You talk about "your book" several times. Which book were you referring to? I see 3. Very balanced and nuanced. The recognition of age related requirements is excellent! And useful for any nutrition approach.
He did mention it at the beginning.
Eat Like the Animals.
Wouldn't it be better to maintain the muscle mass in middle age vs reducing protein intake and trying to play catch up when you're older? I understand that we see societies who follow the Mediterranean diet ( complex carbs and low animal protein) live longer but do we know if that's due to reducing protein intake vs just eating a diet of whole foods devoid of processed food? Or something else in the environment? Could one also do so but eat high quality protein simultaneously? Lastly, I don't know how much we can apply mouse studies to humans. I don't thin one can make definitive claims that reducing protein increases lifespan based on this evidence.
fascinating
Thanks for this unbiased discussion. I'm a bit concerned by the latest shift of DietDoctor towards high protein version of LCHF a la Ted Naiman. I believe his approach is overly simplistic, while Prof. Raubenheimer and Simpson provide much more nuanced and balanced view on the protein leverage theory.
On the other hand, Prof. Raubenheimer and Simpson have only tested protein+complex carbs and protein+sugar, BUT NOT protein+fat (and low/no carbs). And they haven't tested it in humans...
Confusing for us carnivores, yes; but we can still eat a 2:1 fat:protein ratio, zero carb, and hit their protein percentage recommendations, right?
I didn’t get it. I can’t say I understood what I should take away regarding protein. I also don’t understand why people experimenting on bugs are drawing conclusions on humans. What did I miss?
You can read more about high protein in this guide on our website.
www.dietdoctor.com/high-protein
Great as usual.
It can’t be this complicated with protein
The great practical result is that this diet gives us the biological/natural manual to macronutrient composition leading to optimal health and living.
Meaning, there's no need to search for some strange diet to follow.
Humans, et alii, have their "normal" diet written for them by the hand of God (Darwin)?
What is a high protein diet? How many grams /lb lean body mass.
Extremely interesting.
Did they look at protein intake on a zero carb diet? I am zero to 20 carbs and eat about 30% protein to feel sated
I enjoyed this interview until they started talking about the overconsumption of salt... It’s so frustrating that so many experts are saying the absolute opposite of most of these basic health/nutritional issues
salt is found in all whole plant foods and animals foods.Too much salt is not good.If you study logic ,do not even believe the expert.Research for yourself the medical literature and find out.Salt is cause of hypertension, and the ratio of sodium and potassium.We need 1-2 grams per day .It is micronutrient and body can do the balance.Fluid and electrolytes balance was the most important subject in physiology ,studying basic medical sciences to be surgeon.There is intake and output.The kidney tubules reabsorb all sodium back into the blood.It is recycled and reused.Do not take salt for the last half century so is my family.
@@dr.samierasadoonalhassani2669 Your advice goes against recent information put out by Dr. Cywes in episodes 175 and 176. So confusing to know whom to believe any more.
@@dr.samierasadoonalhassani2669 I add quite a lot of salt as I'm practically carnivore. I'm 61 years old and tested my BP today: 126 over 75. Not very high in my opinion. According to research presented by (among others) Paul Mason, it's worse to have too little salt. This is all so confusing..
I agree with you ,it is confusing.Each one of us is unique ,hence no one size fit all’s.we are different in our genes and our metabolic health and environment in which we live .It depend on our goal ,what is it ? If it is cardio vascular health ,then listen to vascular surgeon Dr Essylten and before him dr Dean Ornish.Sodium is essential for life and it is in extra cellular fluid.For me can not take salt because it cause fluid shift .Our bodies are very complicated biological system and they work on molecular level and quantum biology ,nano scale.It is not dark or white.I am very sorry to confuse you,I do apologize.If feeling well ,keep doing what you do and check your blood pressure early in the morning.Now the figures of hypertension changed ,not as before.Thank you.Let us close the subject .
Science is evolving and like these guests are saying that you can't just reason that because protein is necessary and good for you that excessive protein is better. So yeah salt might not be as bad for you as we used to believe; and its really needed if you do a water fast or sweat a lot; but there would be an optimal point for each person and going way beyond that isn't just better because "salt is a necessary micronutrient". If you live off processed foods you might be getting too much salt. If you cook your own food and salt it to taste then you're probably being a clever locust
I don’t agree with the salt idea
Why does Everyone (especially protein scientists) say we (humans, animals, organisms) have No Ability to store Protein. We store protein everywhere in our body... it's in every cell... we break down food source proteins to amino acids and build the proteins We need with them all over our body storing it for far longer than carbs!
Cheers!!!
Super, complements the processed food argument with their discovery that one cause of overeating is the drive to eat more of protein poor buy highly desired chemical enhanced food....this combined with 3 meals a day plus continual snacking on high glycaemic carbs, unveils some secrets to good eating policies.
But show me a photo of an obese locust 😭 Was he also sleeping all summer while Mr Ant was stockpiling for winter?
One head scratcher for me was calling your system "nutritional geometry" when your visual conception is graphical, not about shapes. Why not, "nutritional calculus?" I vote for changing the name.
I remember Stephen Fry saying about science vs religion that what sets scientists apart is their humility, and how they're ok with saying "I don't know". And yet listening to video after video on nutrition and what a horror of corruption and misinformation public health is... if there's one thing that comes up over and over again is scientists' unwillingness to learn a lesson or to admit to a mistake and correct themselves, or how doctors are parasites taking advantage of patients' desperation to make a buck. I'm not a person of faith but nobody tell me anything about science's infinite superiority over religion when the reality is this. Everything is turned into a cult, a cult that is all about making money selling snake oil to your fellow man who naively trusted you.
bret scher is super smart glad to eat high healthy fat if he says to.
Nutritional geometry, obese locust, middle aged mice, etc. What a interesting interview. Thank you!
And yet mice are grain eaters and not carnivore
Humans evolved eating mostly meat and to eat large amounts of it when available. And we know this from the anthropological record through firsthand observations of how many healthy populations eat a lot of meat. On top of that, the longest lived populations in the world eat the most meat. But such an evolutionary influence isn't the case for mice and many other lab animals or insects.
Protein is work so good....
Veggie protein and sea protein and ground protein ......for diet and diabetic
Common sense is not so well-known!
Evolution is a "very unstable" term...
...great video.
clear as mud. The style doesn't help. Talking about the "sweet spot to a bad diet" ? Constant misdirection like that. Just not clear.
Funny watching Dr. Scher smile uncomfortably whenever anyone, not just these two, say that carbs…whole food carbs, can and are healthy. Especially for certain populations.
Recently I’ve watched interviews with Dr. Naiman and even the main man Dr. Eenfeldt, when carbs are mentioned in a positive way Dr. Scher noticeably cringes! lol
He’s so dogmatic it must be killing him with the new ( and better) direction the channel is taking.
This one confused me.
Tax payer subsidies to corn ,soy and inflammatory
Ingredients we pay for 3
times..subsidy,purchasing and pharmacology ....
Useless information until there is data from humans…
Okinowans post-WWII had no pigs to eat. Just sweet potatoes. But they soon rectified this and went back to pork. Med diet in Lent is no their noram diet either. Just vegan propaganda.
I’m not buying it. I ate high carbs because sugar is addictive. I now eat a carnivore diet because it gives me satiety and it tastes good. I wasn’t eating candy and pastries because my physiology was looking for protein. Who funds this research?🙏
Darwin was wrong about quite a lot, at the great expense of science, medicine and society, so that does not give me confidence in this hypothesis at all. Quite the opposite.
Same here!