Talk:Protein combining
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Article may be a little biased
Hey, I'm not an expert in nutrition, but I think this article may be a little biased. The idea of having to eat 2200 calories worth of brown rice - an entire day's worth of nutrition - seems a little off to me. What about the vitamins and minerals from other vegetables? And I think it's uphelpful to imply to vegetarians that they shouldn't worry about whether or not they're getting enough protein, or about which sources they are coming from. While it's true that animal protein is not specifically required in order to meet human dietary needs, science has clearly demonstrated the importance of the essential amino acids in the diet and the importance of a variety of different protein sources in the diet. And there are better examples to use - legumes and soy proteins springing immediately to mind, as they contain higher protein levels and a more complete set of amino acids. CaryK 18:15, 27 February 2007 (UTC)CaryK
I would agree that the estimates of 2200 kcal (ie 10 cups) are not a good comparison for amino acid intake. If a 73kg person’s only source of protein was rice they would need to eat 6 cups a day to receive the estimated full requirement of Methionine & Cystine according to this page. This is not realistic hence the concept of protein combining. ie 2 cups of rice and 1 cup of lentils would cover all essential aa and other foods for other nutrients. The concept that people need to specifically ensure they combine different plant proteins at the one meal is no longer considered necessary as aa that are lacking in one meal are usually consumed in another if a variety of pant foods high in protein consumed.Skeuu 00:49, 19 March 2007 (UTC)jeremy.
- You're both missing the point: the chart shows that even if someone were to only eat brown rice, they'd get all of their essential amino acids. For someone who consumes legumes, nuts, seeds, fruits and vegetables, it's even less of a concern. Kyle Key 22:05, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
-
- The displayed statistic still raises contention since it is based upon 2200 calories of a single food. A more effective statistic would be a comparison between requirements and a reasonable daily quantity of a protein-rich plant such as soy. Zbohannan 21:52, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- Soy is a complete protein, which would make such a comparison irrelevant. I agree with Kyle Key's comment. I think the point is that foods that are deficient in a particular amino acid are still not completely devoid of it and that EVEN an imbalanced diet can meet protein needs, thus a more varied diet would have no problem meeting protein needs. Of course a diet of junk food would be deficient in many things, including protein, but I think the point is that protein combinations are no more of a concern
-
for vegetarians than meeting any other dietary need. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.125.196.222 (talk) 08:34, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
- The brown rice amino acid chart is using WHO research from 1985. WHO published new recommended essential amino acid values in 2007, you can find it under publications. Using the 2007 numbers, the brown rice diet would be deficient in Lysine. Someone else can update it if they would like.
-
-
-
- The Point that food combining is not as vital as once thought was not lost on me, however this page suggests that it is completely irrelevant. This is only true in a theory. in practice if someone was only eating fried rice and vegetables and they could easily not be getting enough of some amino acids and still be getting 2200 kcal. As a Dietitian I see some people take ideas to an extreme and i was concerned that someone could easily get the wrong impression from this article. Jeremy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Skeuu (talk • contribs) 02:33, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] POV problems
Currently, the article is an essay advocating a position: Protein combining is false. The presentation needs to be neutral, and other positions need to be cited. For example, it appears the American Heart Association disagrees (based on the article), but their position is not represented. Guanxi (talk) 05:53, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
- The 'Actual Analysis' section is Original Research and should probably be removed or replaced by actual research. Guanxi (talk) 05:56, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
-
- I navigating to this article by Googling "protein combining table". What I am looking for is a table showing which amino acids are in which foods, and how to combine them to form complete proteins. That type of information seems quite encylcopedic to me, and could be supplemented with information regarding conflicting ideas about the necessity of paying attention to combining. If both sides of the controversy were presented, readers could make their own decision.208.106.101.43 (talk) 15:50, 10 December 2007 (UTC)sommer
- sure, but it should be reliably sourced and I'm not sure if that can happen or not. --WLU (talk) 16:12, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
- I navigating to this article by Googling "protein combining table". What I am looking for is a table showing which amino acids are in which foods, and how to combine them to form complete proteins. That type of information seems quite encylcopedic to me, and could be supplemented with information regarding conflicting ideas about the necessity of paying attention to combining. If both sides of the controversy were presented, readers could make their own decision.208.106.101.43 (talk) 15:50, 10 December 2007 (UTC)sommer
- I would like this article to be expanded to show both sides of the protein combining "issue". Let's see some sources and some comparison, though I fear this may instead become more of a controversy "paper" than an encylopedic entry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.42.90.99 (talk) 14:36, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Conflict with article on "Complete Protein"
Another problem with this page is that it seems to conflict the page Complete_Protein. That page implies that there are only a few plant foods which contain complete proteins (ie all 9 essential amino acids) and lists them, while this page on protein combining implies that almost every plant food source, save fruits, has a complete protein. If this is not a contradiction, it should be clarified. If it is, then the two viewpoints should be stated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.17.119.87 (talk) 17:00, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
- It looks like the Complete Protein article has been removed, so I guess that removes the conflict. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.173.192.45 (talk) 13:53, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complete_protein This article has not been removed. It clearly states that some sources do not contain all essential amino acids. Advocating the consumption of large amounts of a single incomplete protein seems irresponsible. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.226.230.239 (talk) 00:45, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
I do not think the author was ever advocating eating a single source of food or protien. I think he was 1., discussing whether or not protien combing is even necasary, and 2. pointing out that in diets of single food sources, protien levels can be met. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.103.112.253 (talk) 14:07, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Suggestion on more neutral wording
Something like: "Protein Combining is the practice of eating complete protein in each meal by combining vegetable protein sources. Widely practiced after being recommended by Lappe, combining is not regarded as necessary if the overall diet contains sufficient quantities of the essential amino acids."
Spope3 (talk) 21:06, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Original Research
Back in December Guanxi pointed out that the 'Actual Analysis' section was original research. I'm going to tag the section and, if no one can find any primary or secondary references to support it over the next few days, delete it. Mmyotis ^^o^^ 00:12, 7 June 2008 (UTC)