All 15 study references are in the video's description. 💊MicroVitamin (multivitamin & mineral that I take): drstanfield.com/products/microvitamin For extra insights + a free health checklist, sign up here 👉 drstanfield.com/pages/sign-up
Perhaps the general 1.6 grams per kilogram recommendation for those under age 65 is irresponsible given the findings of the 2024 Golestan Cohort Study. This human study matches the Walter Longo finding in other animals. Or maybe you can explain weakness in the paper See: Dietary amino acids intake and all-cause and cause-specific mortality: results from the Golestan Cohort Study. Nutrition Journal (2024)
@@jackbuaer3828 Just trying to understand what you are saying. The Golestan Cohort Study... "Overall, our findings suggest that diets lower in amino acids were associated with increased hazards of mortality, particularly among older adults." So they are saying more protein reduces, mortality, right? What's the contradiction? pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39522023/
What is confusing for me is that when you combine ENOUGH weight training WITH the high protein intake, you can live 6 years longer. But if you sit the whole day and don't do weight training, a lot of protein will just leave your body through the blatter. So, just eating protein does not help you to live longer. As with all those things, there are a lot of factors working together. Please start exercising if you are over 50!💪
@@ypmaklaes7218 This is mostly true. Everyone should exercise for sure, but everyone's body is different, and most people's issue is just maintaining their existing muscle mass as they age. Increased protein even without exercise will greatly help with this.
Our muscle building hormones decrease with age, so just taking in less protein than needed to maintain our bodies shrinks our muscle, bones, joints, muscle, skin, organs more than they would just by getting older. That’s the point. Bones are 40% collagen protein, so insufficient protein causes osteoporosis….hip fractures after falling
Mice are herbivores that don't eat meat in nature. Humans are omnivores that do eat meat. Why isn't this part of the consideration in mouse studies? Regardless of whether you can get protean from meat or plants, this difference between the test animals and us is going to have significant repercussions.
Mice are omnivorous and will happily consume insects, carrion, meat and even cheese when available. That's why mice, rats, pigs and humans are such successful species. They can basically eat most things. But you are right, results in lab animals don't always translate to humans.
You have a mistake here, it's not Leucine, rather it's Isoleucine: "restriction of isoleucine in adult mice extends lifespan in both males and females (Green et al., 2023), and in humans, blood levels of isoleucine, but not of leucine or valine, are positively associated with mortality (Deelen et al., 2019).Feb 7, 2023
You made a mistake with your comment. Mice does not equal human. Mouse studies are useless in trying to prove a fact. They have completely different diets. Unless you have mice that are carnivore mice, then you have something.
4:20 That 2018 meta analysis is out of date/not the best meta analysis currently out there on protein’s effect on muscle mass. Wolf coaching recently did a video on this. In 2020 there was a new meta analysis of randomised controlled trials that did a better analysis and included two dozen more studies that found benefits for muscle growth for substantially higher protein intakes, up to about 3.1g/kg of protein. The meta analysis is called “Dose-response relationship between protein intake and muscle mass intake: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials”. The wolf coaching video is called “The fitness industry is not eating enough protein”.
The meta-regression study by Tagawa et al. (2020), to which you refer, provides refined, context-specific insights into protein supplementation, including the dose-response relationship between protein intake and muscle mass increase. In contrast, Morton et al. (2018), referenced by Dr Brad Stanfield, offers a broader perspective on the long-term effects and draws more generally applicable conclusions regarding the effectiveness of protein supplementation in resistance training. Both studies complement each other well: one provides detailed insight into specific relationships, while the other focuses on broader, long-term outcomes applicable to various contexts.
@@meltedsnowman9637 Whether that is the case or not, you haven’t addressed the main points of my response, which required 15 to 20 minutes of my time to write.
That's exactly what the volter longo studies show. That in your 50s up till 65, less protien correlated with less cancer. But after 65, people did better with more protein.
@@greggbambu411 But did they have the granularity in the study and discuss which amino acid(s) are a problem or beneficial or neutral in higher doses? Example - methionine is not a good amino acid to get in high doses and the closer you are to the RDA for your calorie intake the better. Animal products can be very high in methionine which is not good for those on the carnivore diet. The amount in 6 ounces from a t-bone steak is 213% of the RDA for the calorie intake that I have. That is only 347 calories of food and one is solidly over double the methionine RDA. Imagine a whole day of someone eating like a typical American diet, let alone a very high animal food diet. Eat a couple of eggs at breakfast, a turkey sandwich at lunch, and a small steak (6oz) and you are only at 668 calories but 400% of the RDA for methionine. You also need to be careful with the BCAAs and getting too much of those. In that same three things about, you are getting in 309% of isoleucine, 261% leucine, and 269% valine - in other words several aminos are way high and you still need another 1,500 to 2,500 calories to go for the day.
As people age, their income is usually lower, their appetites become worse and so does their dentition. Could poorer health and lower protein intake (meat etc being less affordable) in the elderly simply be a correlation rather than causal?
Look, Leucin is one of the three aminoacids has been proven to extend life expectancy in mouse when restricted so precisely this maybe one of the reasons why vegetable protein shows better results in life expectancy than animal based.
Brad this statistic 0.8g /kg is a one tail upper limit for the 97.5 % of the population. Based on nitrogen balance studies. The papers population average needs is around 0.62g/ kg. Or 50% of individuals require less than 0.62g / kg and so on.
หลายเดือนก่อน
Correct. O.8 g protein/kg body mass isn’t any the bare minimum but rather, a protein intake level that would be sufficient for the vast majority of the adult population under different situations (including disease), physical activity and metabolic states.
97.5% have sloppy arms and barely can do 1 proper pull up. Wouldn't call it the healthy lifestyle everyone should aim for. Listen to the podcasts of Peter Attia, exercise is the most important factor for longevity and healthspan and when you do strength training you break muscles and need protein to rebuild it.
Wouldn't consuming more leucine rich foods lead to chronic stimulation of mTOR? Would this still be a bad thing or is it no longer seen to be bad to be chronically stimulating mTOR?
Some people report protein in urine on high protein diets. We talking around 300grams a day. Such as athletes or strong men type of people. Is this normal or it is damaging the kidneys? Or it points to volume load
Good question. I’d also ask whether “clean”, whole food, organic, natural as possible protein would give different results than heavily processed, GMO or GMO grain-fed protein. In other words, do toxins and unnatural substances complicate digestion of protein?
You say 1.6g per kg lean body weight. Lean body mass (LBM) is the weight of your body excluding fat. It includes the weight of your organs, skin, bones, body water, and muscle mass. This is different from total body weight, yet you say 130g protein for a person weighing 80kg. Does not compute.
I was going to comment the same thing. The fat percentage of bodymass can differ widely, but more likely up towards 30% than down to 0% as in his calculations. Assuming an average hight of 178cm and 80 kg would give a bmi of 25.1. Average body fat mass is 18-24% (in USA ;), let's say 20%) (0.8x80)x1.6=102.4 not 128. If the person already is very muscular and just need to maintain muscle mass their protein needs would be lower.
I was thinking about this when he said obese. I did a DEXA scan and then you see that even when you can not feel the fat on your body anymore, you still have 14% of fat, which is considered low for my age. So then the body weight is not 80 kg but 69 kg!
let me tell you something ive learned as a person that is good in math. Seems you guys are as well. Here it is : most people are horrible at math. They dont understand it. They need calculators for basic basic stuff. Its almost like they are blind, or dont understand the "language" of math like we do. Seriously. All they know is what they have memorized as kids. Anything slightly away from those memorized formulas they have zero chance of finding a solution.
Humans have officially complicated the easiest and most important thing to us. Food. If I was back in my country I wouldn't be paying attention to these as much. I would just eat my organic yams, greens, fish etc. And walk ALOT. Keep it simple...
Yeah people are seemingly treating their bodies like they will never handle eating anything. Just about every food has its flaws and benefits and it is not like we were not designed to handle imperfect foods to begin with. I think people should stop worrying so much about dieting as long as the food is not ultra-processed before they allow distress to increase their mortality even more than unhealthy eating regardless.
The concept of "blue zones" has been called into question recently and i would love your take on it. IMO a topic worth its own video. The longevity numbers upon which the concept of "blue zones" is based may not be reliable..
Only because outside of Lomo Linda (Adventists who are active, plant based and great community) rest have adapted Western UPF and why they all losing their previous longevity in younger generation
We always have to see averages and Sardinia is the 5th last region in Italy in terms of life expectancy. Blue zones are just noise. Okinawa also ranks low in Japan.
@MarioMariaMario All measured decades ago and most except Lomo Linda infiltrated by rise of UPF and lazier new generations. The 7th Day Adventists of Lomo Linda still excellent rate Centenarians as they continue plant based diet, active movement and good community, key concepts of Blue zones
I was going to make a similar point although I'd go a bit further and say that the data is definitely not reliable. So whenever I hear people referring to Blue Zones now I direct them to the work of Dr. Saul Newman who has described the data as "comically bad". And you can clearly see why.
If animal products cause inflammation and inflammation beyond a point is ageing? (speculative) Does protein consumption correlate with inflammation? How does collagen correlate with lifespan?
I have recently increased my protein intake, and it as made noticeable gains in muscles. strength was at a plateau, I have for a while been consuming a collagen peptide from mixed sources grass fed cows and fish. shake for lunch, usually just 15 to 20 grams of protein, I now take 30 grams. after workouts I have added Owyn protein shake this is plant based, 32grams of protein. lots of fiber, also different sources and kinds, Acacia fiber, Inulin, psyllium husk, and pectin. I just love the acacia, it has helped with a kidney issue I had/have with acacia I have no issues at all. also acacia does not give me gas or bloat (pectin and Inulin do, so I take less of these). the idea here is to feed my biome and healthy bacteria. (Forget probiotic, Prebiotics is where it's at). I di take a host of supplements, TMG is in the mix. apiginine which I have added to my stack recently has helped with sleep.
@@NuclearCarnivorefiber feeds good gut bacteria, which provide vitamins and immune function to the body, as well as sweeping the colon clean. Healthy gut bacteria aids digestion, carries out bad fats, increases detoxification, and prevents colon cancer.
Over sixty and my intake is very similar to yours. Including the Owyn brand. I feel better than in my fifties and my increased weight training has been optimal. Glad to see I’m not the only one. TMG, Colagen peptides, apigine have all been a value add.
Doctor Jason Fung recetly uploaded a video that contradicts the traditional belief that someone engaged in weight training needs 1.6 to 2 grams of protein per kilogram of body weight, as this is considered the optimal amount to repair micro-damage through protein synthesis. In contrast, a sedentary person typically requires just 0.8 g per kilogram of body weight. He explains that 0.8 g upto 1 g per kilogram of body weight is sufficient to build muscle and anything extra ingested protein turns to glucose and stored in the cells so body utilises even even little amount of protein most effectively without having to take so much protein It is the only video uploaded on his channel on TH-cam that recommends the most little amount of protein needs to be taken while here on youtube vast majority of muscle building videos explain that those who train need to consume even upto 2.5 g/kg of body justifying it referencing to various studies
@tiagomoraes1510 he's a well qualified doctor and not some nobody to not to believe n he explains it scientifically with studies as reference so watch it first before replying it is available on his channel!! It is not sensible to call something HS without watching it
This is probably true, given that eating the same amount of protein you can grow different amount of muscles depending on your usage of creatine, TMG, berberine etc.
@@Anna-mv9ew recetly I came to know that berberine is not a anabolic supplement because it's only very effective for insulin resistance and preventing Blood glucose spikes,shockingly it has some catabolic properties with regards to muscles when used over a period of time but creatine,tmg are very much effective proven supplements for building muscles
This is the opposite of what most of us been told nearlyall of our lives. When I read Protein Power by Drs Eades, it explained how to calculate my lean mass to separate it from my fat mass. Then they gave an optimal protein intake. It turns out I've been eating 1.5 times my optimal protein. According to some of the best experts in the dietary field! Is it worth reducing my protein intake? I have no idea if it's worth much effort. But I have long since given up on paying extra money for extra protein. Interesting that this gets cancelled by pumping iron. I bet it takes a lot of pumping iron for that to happen.
I prefer the fully thorough scientific coverage on protein of Dr. Michael Greger and Joel Fuhrman. Brad is good but seems to leave out so many good studies mentioned by them.
Unfortunately you do not mention small size people of Ecuador that the have very low igf and thus they do not have cancer. You also do not mention animal protein is 4 fold more dangerous than plant protein.
@@Marco-cl9pb animal protein sources are higher in the amino acids methionine and isoleucine. Methionine is suspected to reduce lifespan by several pathways, including boosting homocysteine levels. Excess isoleucine promotes chronic inflammation, which also reduces lifespan.
I.6 is pretty close. I'm higher at 66 but I lift weights. My Dad at 89 has lost a lot of muscle mass because he eats all carbs and gets little exercise.
My dad has lost a lot of muscle mass because his diet is mostly carb etc. One of a multitude of unsubstantiated claims you often see on these nonsense channels. Go back over your statement and understand why I said that. There are several reasons. Perhaps you can pick a couple.
There's something I've never understood Doc. How can there be a standard recommendation for protein intake per kg/lb with differing body fat percentages. Does someone morbidly obese really need the same amount as someone with a normal or low bodyfat? I.e. 200lb obese vs 200lb normal/low bodyfat. I assume most protein intake is for protein repair and building, therefore the less muscle, the less protein you need to sustain it.
If not enough carbohydrates are consumed your body will breakdown protein (mostly muscle protein), and trim off the amine group from those amino acids, leaving carbohydrates. After a period of time fat will then be broken down into glycerol and free fatty acids. Fatty acids can be used as a less efficient replacement for carbohydrates.
I believe if you are aware of your body's you will know what amount of protein you need. There was a mega analysis of older people eating high protein and lower protein during weight training. They found protein intake made no difference just the weight training did. To be honest I have reduced my protein recently because I found 1.8 grams per kilo of bodyweight just made me feel not right 13:08
So 1.6 g per kg body weight. If I am 85 kg, that's 136 g per day. If an extra large egg has 7 g of protein, that's over 19 eggs per day (assuming no other protein consumed). Can that be true? It seems very high.
I think in the video he was wrong about the study. Lean body weight means that you have to deduct the fat from your total weight to get the accurate numbers. For example, if you're 85kg and your body fat % is 15%, your lean body weight is 85x0.85=72.25kg If you aim to eat 1.6g/kg of lean body weight, your target protein intake should be around 1.6x72.25=115.6g
@@andrasszollosy4418Thanks for clarifying. I realize there's protein in lots of foods, but that's still a high level, equivalent to 16.5 extra large eggs per day. So I should live longer under that regimen? There's no one who eats that way, except those on a strict carnivore diet and bodybuilders. Maybe I need to read the study, but it seems far-fetched.
Instead all the extra info helps us to stay healthy, we get weaker and aicker from all the info who are telling what to eat or to drink to get older...bah, what a world we are living in. .
Its interesting that you brought up blue zones Brad. There was a recent news story about a scientist being awarded a prize after showing that blue zones do not have people with longer life spans.
@bryanmarty7085 it looks like it has been deleted. If you look for UCL Dr Saul Justin Newman. And perhaps add in blue zones and ignoble prize you should find it.
Research the origins of how the minimum protein requirements were set. They were set higher than needed out of fear that, if set too low, some percentage of the population would not consume enough of an essential amino acid. However, if you manually program your amino acid consumption properly, you can lower overall protein in-take quite safely. I only consume 50g of protein per day from almonds, walnuts, pecans, goat cheese, miso, tofu, and minor amounts from vegetables and fruits. However, I know exactly how much of each essential and non essential amino acids I am consuming and I make sure none of them go dangerously (or problematically high). Tldr, even at minimum recommended levels, you still may be eating more protein than is necessary given today's tools and datasets.
In the title and opening slide, how are you getting the 6.4 years figure from the Naghshi et al meta-analysis? The highlighted bit is just showing the pooled effect size of 0.92 for all-cause mortality and plant protein. Thanks.
@DrBradStanfield Ah, I see now. However, I really don't think you can simply multiply the relative risk by average life expectancy to get the effect of protein on lifespan. All the studies I've read that estimate the effect of different interventions on life expectancy use something like a life table method (or something else that is more complicated than simple multiplication). So I would not have confidence in that exact 6.4 year figure, though the true effect may well be quite substantial.
Regarding current views on eggs, dietary cholesterol clearly does increase blood cholesterol levels. This has been known for at least 50 years if not a hundred and demonstrated in countless trials including metabolic ward studies. What has also been known for a long time is that added dietary cholesterol/eggs has little or no effect when baseline dietary cholesterol is already high as it is in the case of average Americans and other Westerners. This is why recent decades have seen floods of highly publicised industry funded studies that find no effect on blood cholesterol levels of added dietary cholesterol. Choose your test subjects and their diets wisely and you can pretty much guarantee what the results will be. Guess which studies the egg industry likes to fund? There have been so many widely published such trials that it is now common wisdom that dietary cholesterol does not affect blood cholesterol levels even among some professionals who ought to know better. Nobody asks why the older independent trials found that dietary cholesterol increased blood cholesterol but modern industry funded trials don't. Also very strange is the fact nobody ever mentions those trials where people consuming average (US) levels of cholesterol had their dietary cholesterol reduced to near zero. In those trials their blood cholesterol levels dropped significantly. A 1992 meta analysis and review of the effect of dietary cholesterol on blood cholesterol also pretty much provided a primer on how to design studies which obscure the effects of dietary cholesterol on blood cholesterol. Perhaps it's no coincidence that we have seen scores of such studies since then?
Ezetimibe, promoted as an alternative to statins, blocks transport of cholesterol across the gut which argues for your point. I once experimented by reducing total cholesterol from 6.5 (which I believe was OK for my old age) to 4.9 by cutting out dairy, eggs and meat and substituting with beans, lentils, chickpeas and tinned, dark fish.
@@alicejwho Apart from the association with an increased rate of major edverse cardiovascular events, you mean? Higher cholesterol levels mean a higher number of low density lipoproteins (LDL). Please read Low-density lipoproteins cause atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease: pathophysiological, genetic, and therapeutic insights: a consensus statement from the European Atherosclerosis Society Consensus Panel
@@alicejwho Cholesterol itself causes inflammation Retention and subsequent accumulation of LDL in the artery wall triggers a number of events that initiate and propagate lesion development.21, 50 Due to the local microenvironment of the subendothelial matrix, LDL particles are susceptible to oxidation by both enzymatic and non-enzymatic mechanisms, which leads to the generation of oxidized LDL (oxLDL) containing several bioactive molecules including oxidized phospholipids.129,130 Oxidized LDL, in turn, initiates a sterile inflammatory response by activating endothelial cells to up-regulate adhesion molecules and chemokines that trigger the recruitment of monocytes-typically inflammatory Ly6Chi monocytes-into the artery wall.131 The importance of oxidized phospholipids in the inflammatory response of the vascular wall has been demonstrated through the transgenic expression of an oxidized phospholipid-neutralizing single-chain antibody, which protected atherosclerosis-prone mice against lesion formation.132
After years of contradicting information I was hoping this video would finally give a conclusive answer on the amount of protein per kg of bodyweight and whether that was calculated based on lean or total bodyweight. However, it mentions 1.6 grams per kg of lean bodyweight, but the following calculations are off. A person that weighs 80 kg would need less than the 130 grams mentioned, as that number is based on total bodyweight as opposed to lean bodyweight. Still no conclusive answers, it's maddening.
This is wrong. You want to minimise protein when under 65 to reduce MTOR, but increase it when you are over 65 to maintain muscle mass and mobility and survive falls or surgery etc. This has been known for ages and its painful watching Brad flipflop on the subject so much yet still not land on the correct answer.
if you do this, you will be chronically undermuscled in your senior years, so you consuming protein after 65 will maintain the tiny amount of muscle you have. What you said makes absolutely no physiological sense and has absolutely no basis in medicine or fitness. Stop listening to the people you are listening to.
Hormones like testosterone, estrogen, human growth hormone all decrease with age. Exercise by lifting weights helps reverse these. Deep REM sleep is needed for human growth hormone release…magnesium and properly low dose of melatonin can help.
I don't eat enough or eat right but I'd like to know the best protein shake or supplement i could take. I'm 69 fixing to be 70 in December. I feel pretty good most of the time but my appetite has fallen off the past few years. I exercise 30 minutes hard 5 days a week. I can't make myself eat a lot when I'm not hungry.
I'm not an expert, but here’s my best advice based on what I’ve learned. If you’re looking to stay strong and healthy with a lower appetite, a protein shake could be really helpful. A whey protein isolate might be a good choice, as it provides essential amino acids and is usually easy on the stomach. For a non-dairy option, a high-quality plant protein blend can give you a complete amino acid profile as well. For daily protein intake, a general goal for active adults is around 1.2 to 1.5 grams of protein per kilogram of body weight (or about 0.54 to 0.68 grams per pound). So if you weigh around 70 kg (154 lbs), that’s about 84 to 105 grams of protein per day, which can be spread across meals and supplemented with shakes if needed. If you need more complete nutrition, a protein-enriched meal replacement shake is an option, as it combines protein with essential vitamins and minerals. For each shake, aiming for 20-30 grams of protein should be sufficient. Blending in some fruits or greens can add extra nutrients too. And, as always, it’s a good idea to consult a healthcare provider before starting new supplements to make sure it aligns with your needs.
Eat a balanced diet of whole foods, including legumes and other high-quality protein sources. You don't need protein powders. If your body is telling you not to eat as much as you used to, listen to it. Most people eat too much food.
@@isoldam While your advice encourages a healthy, whole-food-based approach, it might not suit everyone, especially those with a lower appetite who still want to ensure they’re getting adequate nutrition. Whole foods are ideal for balanced nutrients, but protein powders or shakes can be a helpful supplement when it’s hard to reach daily protein needs through food alone. Listening to the body’s hunger and fullness cues is generally wise, but as appetite can naturally decrease with age, it’s also important to meet the body’s requirements for protein and calories to maintain strength and muscle. Overall, it’s about finding a balance that provides the nutrients needed for health and activity
4:31 1.6 per kg of LEAN body mass! So I guess that excludes the fat, and if that 80 kg person has 15 kg of fat, for example, then one should calculate protein intake for 65 kg... ?
I've seen a few studies saying that high protein tends to increase fibrinogen. I am not absolutely sure but I would like to know since fibrinogen leads to many problems. For sure there are other things to consider about proteins that might be positive and overall it might be better to get more.
I remember eating 400g of protein per day, 1.62g of protein per kg of body weight seems so little altough I remember the nuance with those studies that there are some responders to maybe even 300g. not sure if I rember correctly
I recently read a statement by a nutritionist. She said in regard to weight loss, 'It's not what you eat, or when you eat it. It's how much'. Made sense to me.
That's a worthless statement without more specifics. The quality of the food is the most important factor. Sure, in theory, someone could lose weight eating nothing but Fruit Loops, but you'll feel hungry and miserable all day.
I don't eat keto , but seems to help many people. Not drinking soda, sugary things is kind of a no brainer. I lost weight by smaller portions of complex carbs, lots of veggies and salads, more beans, lentils etc protein with fiber, still in chicken, fish and good amount of fats in nuts and oils like Extra Virgin Olive Oil , yoghurt - strength training helps as well - still eat fruit mainly berries , and some others . My weight still going down , now a bit worry may lose too much body fat for my age - ie under 15% - still some will power , but consistency and good habits , enjoyment are the key as well . Tend to avoid any processed food with lots of added sugar or salt . I'm lucky as i can easily eat lots of veggies ( non-starch ) , salads with no stomach upsets If you eat poor nutrient deficient food you will always feel hungry. some junk food fool's body that it has more protein with certain additives the manufacturers purposely add . Given that some people really struggle to lose weight , binge , or midnight snacks, for then probably the new drugs are best option. I have never woken up to go eat in the night ever. So I'm lucky - when I decide to lose some weight as gained say 8kg over 5 years - can easily knock first 5kg of without trying We must recognise it's a serious problem for many and they have tried a 101 fad diets I still think more fiber, less sugar bad fat , plenty of protein, veggies, good sources of fat, fruit and water will stop you being more overweight with less effort. But people like their comfort food in front of the telly , instead of say carrot sticks or an apple
I read that the animal protein TMAO is in itself a risk factor for cardiovascular disease. That would mean that saturated fat is not the only villain and going for lean cuts won't cut it (pun intended 😂).
TMAO is not a protein. TMA is produced from several amino acids when exposed to high dry heat, like grilling meat. A liver enzyme then converts TMA into carcinogenic TMAO. TMAO also raises the risk for heart disease and other cardiovascular conditions.
Please, stop that Blue Zones nonsense. I live in Europe. Sardinia and Ikaria are two European regions, and if you look at the official statistics from Eurostat, you'll see that those areas don't even make it into the top 25 European regions with the highest life expectancy.
That’s because they are no longer blue zones due to the modern diet changes - e.g. animal protein, fats & UPF. Checkout the contemporary stats on Loma linda
Higher plant protein and not higher animal protein promote healthy longevity. Resistance training is king not protein intake above RDA. Disappointing that you try to discredit Dr Longo by making making it seem like his stand on low protein is based on a mice study. I think u are better than that.
Do people walk up the stairs? 16 flights twice a day is quite good exercise. There may be a British cultural legacy of Health and Safety of wanting to check the fire escape route frequently.
My understanding is if you eat animal protein you need more glycine to solve this problem, something we used to get by boiling the bones and eating other parts of the animal other than just muscle meat.
THIS. We are not supposed to just eat muscle meat, which is what most of us do. Offal, and bones and feet on broth or stew, is how we used to eat animals. Then it's like medicine.
@@Kinesiology411 Haem Iron is not not essential & is harmful to human health. B12 is an easy fix - it comes in supplement form or B12 enriched foods - e.g plant based milk. Animals meat only contains B12 because they eat faeces or drink contaminated water. Too much overwhelming evidence that a wholefood plant based diet is optimal for human health to argue
Your liver can make all the saturated fats you need. Dietary saturated fats increase your body’s production of cholesterol, especially the dangerous cholesterol carrier low density lipoprotein (LDL).
I'm sorry but no plant protein will ever be as good as animal protein. Soy is not a complete protein and never will be it has two (Methionine & Lysine)of the nine essential amino acids in such low quantities it is negligible. Not only that plant proteins are not nearly as bioavailiable as animal proteins look it up using the DIAAS score and you will see. Soy isn't terrible for you but its laughable to think anyone can get 130 grams of protein a day from plants and think they won't increase their risk of insulin resistance which is now known to be the main driver of disease around the world.
Becaue it's wrong. 1.6g per kg lean body weight. Lean body mass is the weight of your body excluding fat. Statistic 0.8g /kg is a one tail upper limit for the 97.5 % of the population. Based on nitrogen balance studies. The papers population average needs is around 0.62g/ kg. Or 50% of individuals require less than 0.62g / kg and so on.
@ Obsession with protein has been around for a long time. The hospitals are not full of people that are deficient in protein. Many who are in the hospitals are people who have consumed too much protein along with fats and carbs all their life.
@@relaxgood5214 are you arguing with the meta analysis? Statistics don't lie. More muscles less all cause mortality. And more protein up to 1.6g means better muscle building. Of course you need to train in the gym too, otherwise just stick to 0.8g. and I am not talking about steroids abuse and overtraining which is obviously bad for you and causes early death, that's not what we are talking about.
A huge caveat with soy protein is that protein from soy is fine but processed soy protein powder or products with it can be toxic due to the (heating) process of extracting protein from soy.
The 30 day mortality rate for people over the age of 75 is 10%. The one year fall mortality rate for people over the age of 75 is 25%. Can you guess what a major contributor to falls is in the elderly? Muscle size does not equal muscle strength or muscle quality. You just have an infantile view of muscle. Do more muscle research before you make false statements.
Unfortunately you interpret the scientific research, the way you wish. As a gym maniac.... You hope that more protein the best the growth. What a mistake, my friend....
This review is too simplistic and narrow in scope to give an informed answer to the viewers. I recommend people read ‘The China Study’ if you want to mnow the effects of a high protein diet. I’d also recommend looking at the literature on Methionine (found mainly in animal protein) it shortens your life - all the fasting studies bool down to methionine restriction benefits.
And isoleucine is also higher in animal protein. And higher levels of isoleucine have been shown to produce chronic inflammation, which reduces lifespan.
And do resistance training of some type, whether it's with your own bodyweight or added weights or bands, near the point of muscular failure. You cannot get the same neurological signaling that improves hormones, insulin sensitivity, with walking alone.
Walking is useless, because it doesn't target visceral and hepatic fat, which are causal to many chronic diseases and classic giveaways of age. Only intensive physical activity that combines aerobic and resistance (like HIIT) works with it (just aerobic, or just resistance do not). Walkers are often low on muscle and high on visceral fat, which is a really bad combo. Walking also does nothing for your brain. Runners at least improve their memory and cognitive function. Of course, walking is better than nothing, but such a poor investment of your time, especially if you live in the area with poor air quality.
@@Anna-mv9ew For 6 or 7 years walked 5 miles/ day commuting. Lost about 5kg and that's stayed off for 20 years (with seasonal fluctuations). There's lots of interpretations, 6km/ hour pace on the flat is a good minimum.
typical instagram youtube influencer - from hyping keto to hyping protein. all of them are the same unfortunately. one meta study tells you nothing in the grand picture
1.6g/kg of bodyweight sounds high, but is actually very low compared to what the fitness community suggests. I weigh 200 lbs / 90kg, so that would be about 144g. The latest protein advice from "fitness scientists" (wolf coaching) is more like 2.5g/kg or 225g. At this point, I don't think anybody really knows, but everybody agrees that the current RDA is too low.
@@_CoachW Wow, it seems he suggests 3g/kg. See what I mean, though? It's all ambiguous. I just hope we don't find out excess protein is harmful in some unknown way or useless later on, like with fish oil, lmnt salt, apple cider vinegar, etc..
@@jenga2017 How are you defining ambiguous. the purpose of Dr Antonio's work was to determine if high protein had a detrimental effect on kidney function, bone density, calcium absorption, etc. Hence why he does the blood work. As far as the other items, I would suggest for one checking to see who is actually making the claims. In my experience it's typically not the scientists making the varying stances, it's the various aspiring gurus. I will give you a separate example. I like to subscribe to different newsletter sources. And one day I get notice about the "% second rule" whether it was real or not when food fell on the floor. One newsletter had the headline that it did not exist, the other said it did. So I looked up the actual study. And the difference was what kind of floor the food fell on. Neither newsletter mentioned that difference they took one aspect and then gave a headline for clicks. And if it helps, Omega 3s - depends on current diet, if you eat a lot of salmon don't worry about it LMNT - yes electrolytes are important but they are not magic. If you are running marathons it might help. Outside that a literal pinch of table salt in a liter of water does the same thing. Apple cider vinegar - Fermented foods help feed digestion. If you regularly eat those ACV has no substantial benefit. If you don't then it could help the healthy bacteria in your gut which benefits other health factors. I also recommend sites like examine.com to look up additional research. Cheers
Yep - checkout the literature on how it resuces prostate & breast cancer & many other health benefits as it is an optimum selective oestrogen receptor agonist
The suggestiion that protein timing is not important is quite myopic. Outside the lab and in the real world, try monitoring cortisol, appetite and energy levels thoughout the day when breaking it up versus 140g all on 1 meal at the end of day. Coomon sense should tell you which option the body prefers
My cholesterol was high when I was eating eggs. Went plant based and it dropped by half in 3 months. Same for my husband. So I think dietary cholesterol is definitely a contributing factor.
Actually the cholesterol in food does not really convert into cholesterol but saturated fats instead, which you also probably reduced when turning vegan. Correlation does not imply causation.
Protein powder HM does not pose an increased risk to health. Its well studied. All supplements, not only protein have long been known to contain HM. The body removes these. Eat vegetables like cilantro if you're worried. A bigger problem is BPA and nanoplastics which contribute to many sicknesses and I don't know if those can be mitigated or removed.
The average American eats over 100 grams of protein per day. This issue is at the bottom of the barrel of concerns for people's health. If anything people should be eating LESS protein and more fruits and vegetables.
Animal protein is higher in methionine and isoleucine than plant protein. Higher levels of methionine increases risk of heart disease, metabolic disease, and cancer growth. Higher levels of isoleucine increases risk of chronic inflammation.
@broddr Then why carnivore diet is often chosen by people wanted to lower their inflammation? Seems to be working for them. Btw. I am not advocating, just trying to learn, because on both sides there are dogmatic preachers and it can be difficult to know who is right at the moment.
@ don’t confuse anecdotes by individuals with scientific data. There are no scientific studies supporting the claim that a carnivore diet reduces inflammation. In fact there are no studies showing _any_ benefits to a carnivore diet other than temporary weight loss. But like most restrictive diets, people rarely stay on a carnivore diet for more than a few months. And when they return to their regular diet, they gain that weight back. Contrast that with a diet high in plants. Only plants have antioxidants, which _have_ been scientifically shown to reduce inflammation.
All 15 study references are in the video's description.
💊MicroVitamin (multivitamin & mineral that I take): drstanfield.com/products/microvitamin
For extra insights + a free health checklist, sign up here 👉 drstanfield.com/pages/sign-up
Protein activates mTor. This is bad advice. Epidimeology not causal.
Perhaps the general 1.6 grams per kilogram recommendation for those under age 65 is irresponsible given the findings of the 2024 Golestan Cohort Study. This human study matches the Walter Longo finding in other animals. Or maybe you can explain weakness in the paper
See: Dietary amino acids intake and all-cause and cause-specific mortality: results from the Golestan Cohort Study. Nutrition Journal (2024)
Can focus on human deep wants Forever Young!!
When Human imaging thing can happen in the future.
Go vegan
@@jackbuaer3828 Just trying to understand what you are saying. The Golestan Cohort Study... "Overall, our findings suggest that diets lower in amino acids were associated with increased hazards of mortality, particularly among older adults." So they are saying more protein reduces, mortality, right? What's the contradiction? pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39522023/
What is confusing for me is that when you combine ENOUGH weight training WITH the high protein intake, you can live 6 years longer. But if you sit the whole day and don't do weight training, a lot of protein will just leave your body through the blatter. So, just eating protein does not help you to live longer. As with all those things, there are a lot of factors working together. Please start exercising if you are over 50!💪
@@ypmaklaes7218 This is mostly true. Everyone should exercise for sure, but everyone's body is different, and most people's issue is just maintaining their existing muscle mass as they age. Increased protein even without exercise will greatly help with this.
Our muscle building hormones decrease with age, so just taking in less protein than needed to maintain our bodies shrinks our muscle, bones, joints, muscle, skin, organs more than they would just by getting older. That’s the point.
Bones are 40% collagen protein, so insufficient protein causes osteoporosis….hip fractures after falling
Cruel, how nature punishes the lazy ones.
100% agree. Exercise is paramount
@@thomasmuller1850it’s almost as if, the less you do, the less you gain. Not sure I would call it punishment. It’s the natural way.
Mice are herbivores that don't eat meat in nature. Humans are omnivores that do eat meat. Why isn't this part of the consideration in mouse studies? Regardless of whether you can get protean from meat or plants, this difference between the test animals and us is going to have significant repercussions.
Excellent observation and point
Historically humans are hipper carnivores, at list is what fissile isotopic analysis indicates
Mice are omnivorous and will happily consume insects, carrion, meat and even cheese when available. That's why mice, rats, pigs and humans are such successful species. They can basically eat most things.
But you are right, results in lab animals don't always translate to humans.
I’ve actually seen mice in my yard eating grasshoppers. They are omnivores.
@broddr and cows eat birds , your point being?
Valter Longo did not only look at mice when making his recommendations to keep protein low in younger people, but to increase it in the elderly
yes but sadley these doctors what like to make youtube videos without actually reading studies properly from start to finish miss this...
You have a mistake here, it's not Leucine, rather it's Isoleucine: "restriction of isoleucine in adult mice extends lifespan in both males and females (Green et al., 2023), and in humans, blood levels of isoleucine, but not of leucine or valine, are positively associated with mortality (Deelen et al., 2019).Feb 7, 2023
You made a mistake with your comment. Mice does not equal human. Mouse studies are useless in trying to prove a fact. They have completely different diets. Unless you have mice that are carnivore mice, then you have something.
Thank you…that’s a huge point
Leucine and Isoleucine are both BCAAs, and all BCAAs are a known to decrease lifespan.
it's both
@@nothingness4884would love to educate myself, please link whatever research you have 🤗
all these studies are like a ping pong game
this is how modern medical industry makes money, either way.
4:20 That 2018 meta analysis is out of date/not the best meta analysis currently out there on protein’s effect on muscle mass. Wolf coaching recently did a video on this. In 2020 there was a new meta analysis of randomised controlled trials that did a better analysis and included two dozen more studies that found benefits for muscle growth for substantially higher protein intakes, up to about 3.1g/kg of protein. The meta analysis is called “Dose-response relationship between protein intake and muscle mass intake: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials”. The wolf coaching video is called “The fitness industry is not eating enough protein”.
The meta-regression study by Tagawa et al. (2020), to which you refer, provides refined, context-specific insights into protein supplementation, including the dose-response relationship between protein intake and muscle mass increase. In contrast, Morton et al. (2018), referenced by Dr Brad Stanfield, offers a broader perspective on the long-term effects and draws more generally applicable conclusions regarding the effectiveness of protein supplementation in resistance training. Both studies complement each other well: one provides detailed insight into specific relationships, while the other focuses on broader, long-term outcomes applicable to various contexts.
@@Max-bh1pl Not trying to attack you or anything, but did you use chat gpt for your comment just out of interest?
If I eat more than 1 gram per kilo I put on weight and so do other women I know
@@meltedsnowman9637 Whether that is the case or not, you haven’t addressed the main points of my response, which required 15 to 20 minutes of my time to write.
@@Max-bh1pltrue and you deserve a response, but his polite tangential enquiry of interest also deserves a response
4:36 Someone who weighs 80 kg doesn’t have 80 kg of “lean body weight.”
Deleted my mistaken reply after checking Wikipedia.
"Lean body mass equals body weight minus body fat"
Human study: While *high amino acid diets were detrimental in middle-aged adults* (
All plants have all amino acids in varying amounts.
That's exactly what the volter longo studies show. That in your 50s up till 65, less protien correlated with less cancer. But after 65, people did better with more protein.
These studies that come up with some arbitrary magical age to change your diet seems silly.
@@greggbambu411
But did they have the granularity in the study and discuss which amino acid(s) are a problem or beneficial or neutral in higher doses? Example - methionine is not a good amino acid to get in high doses and the closer you are to the RDA for your calorie intake the better. Animal products can be very high in methionine which is not good for those on the carnivore diet. The amount in 6 ounces from a t-bone steak is 213% of the RDA for the calorie intake that I have. That is only 347 calories of food and one is solidly over double the methionine RDA. Imagine a whole day of someone eating like a typical American diet, let alone a very high animal food diet.
Eat a couple of eggs at breakfast, a turkey sandwich at lunch, and a small steak (6oz) and you are only at 668 calories but 400% of the RDA for methionine.
You also need to be careful with the BCAAs and getting too much of those. In that same three things about, you are getting in 309% of isoleucine, 261% leucine, and 269% valine - in other words several aminos are way high and you still need another 1,500 to 2,500 calories to go for the day.
As people age, their income is usually lower, their appetites become worse and so does their dentition. Could poorer health and lower protein intake (meat etc being less affordable) in the elderly simply be a correlation rather than causal?
also, not to mention, Blue zones unfortunately have been debunked...
Look, Leucin is one of the three aminoacids has been proven to extend life expectancy in mouse when restricted so precisely this maybe one of the reasons why vegetable protein shows better results in life expectancy than animal based.
Brad this statistic 0.8g /kg is a one tail upper limit for the 97.5 % of the population. Based on nitrogen balance studies. The papers population average needs is around 0.62g/ kg. Or 50% of individuals require less than 0.62g / kg and so on.
Correct. O.8 g protein/kg body mass isn’t any the bare minimum but rather, a protein intake level that would be sufficient for the vast majority of the adult population under different situations (including disease), physical activity and metabolic states.
This is correct. 0.8 kg / kg is far enough for most. Don't consume more (even athletes), later in life you will regret it.
97.5% have sloppy arms and barely can do 1 proper pull up. Wouldn't call it the healthy lifestyle everyone should aim for. Listen to the podcasts of Peter Attia, exercise is the most important factor for longevity and healthspan and when you do strength training you break muscles and need protein to rebuild it.
Wouldn't consuming more leucine rich foods lead to chronic stimulation of mTOR? Would this still be a bad thing or is it no longer seen to be bad to be chronically stimulating mTOR?
mtor is not a bad thing, peole were just looking at it wrong. mtor does not increase mortality at all.
@luisursua5338 oh yeah? How did they look at it wrong? What was the mistake?
Just got this fella worked out.. thanks for the help..
Some people report protein in urine on high protein diets. We talking around 300grams a day. Such as athletes or strong men type of people. Is this normal or it is damaging the kidneys? Or it points to volume load
Good question. I’d also ask whether “clean”, whole food, organic, natural as possible protein would give different results than heavily processed, GMO or GMO grain-fed protein. In other words, do toxins and unnatural substances complicate digestion of protein?
I wonder if they have kidney problems or other pre existing conditions.
Kidney damage comes from urine concentration, just drink plenty of water and it will be ok
@@chamuuemura5314 what impedes protein digestion is anti nutrients, on of the reasons why you fart if you eat plants,
You say 1.6g per kg lean body weight. Lean body mass (LBM) is the weight of your body excluding fat. It includes the weight of your organs, skin, bones, body water, and muscle mass. This is different from total body weight, yet you say 130g protein for a person weighing 80kg. Does not compute.
I was going to comment the same thing. The fat percentage of bodymass can differ widely, but more likely up towards 30% than down to 0% as in his calculations. Assuming an average hight of 178cm and 80 kg would give a bmi of 25.1. Average body fat mass is 18-24% (in USA ;), let's say 20%) (0.8x80)x1.6=102.4 not 128. If the person already is very muscular and just need to maintain muscle mass their protein needs would be lower.
I was thinking about this when he said obese. I did a DEXA scan and then you see that even when you can not feel the fat on your body anymore, you still have 14% of fat, which is considered low for my age. So then the body weight is not 80 kg but 69 kg!
let me tell you something ive learned as a person that is good in math. Seems you guys are as well. Here it is : most people are horrible at math. They dont understand it. They need calculators for basic basic stuff. Its almost like they are blind, or dont understand the "language" of math like we do. Seriously. All they know is what they have memorized as kids. Anything slightly away from those memorized formulas they have zero chance of finding a solution.
@@rando9574 Uh, this is basic math.
Humans have officially complicated the easiest and most important thing to us. Food. If I was back in my country I wouldn't be paying attention to these as much. I would just eat my organic yams, greens, fish etc. And walk ALOT. Keep it simple...
Yeah people are seemingly treating their bodies like they will never handle eating anything. Just about every food has its flaws and benefits and it is not like we were not designed to handle imperfect foods to begin with. I think people should stop worrying so much about dieting as long as the food is not ultra-processed before they allow distress to increase their mortality even more than unhealthy eating regardless.
The concept of "blue zones" has been called into question recently and i would love your take on it. IMO a topic worth its own video. The longevity numbers upon which the concept of "blue zones" is based may not be reliable..
The Italian blue zone has family members claiming benefits for long dead family members, so yeah, those numbers are skewed.
Only because outside of Lomo Linda (Adventists who are active, plant based and great community) rest have adapted Western UPF and why they all losing their previous longevity in younger generation
We always have to see averages and Sardinia is the 5th last region in Italy in terms of life expectancy. Blue zones are just noise. Okinawa also ranks low in Japan.
@MarioMariaMario All measured decades ago and most except Lomo Linda infiltrated by rise of UPF and lazier new generations. The 7th Day Adventists of Lomo Linda still excellent rate Centenarians as they continue plant based diet, active movement and good community, key concepts of Blue zones
I was going to make a similar point although I'd go a bit further and say that the data is definitely not reliable. So whenever I hear people referring to Blue Zones now I direct them to the work of Dr. Saul Newman who has described the data as "comically bad". And you can clearly see why.
If animal products cause inflammation and inflammation beyond a point is ageing? (speculative) Does protein consumption correlate with inflammation? How does collagen correlate with lifespan?
I have recently increased my protein intake, and it as made noticeable gains in muscles. strength was at a plateau, I have for a while been consuming a collagen peptide from mixed sources grass fed cows and fish. shake for lunch, usually just 15 to 20 grams of protein, I now take 30 grams.
after workouts I have added Owyn protein shake this is plant based, 32grams of protein. lots of fiber, also different sources and kinds, Acacia fiber, Inulin, psyllium husk, and pectin. I just love the acacia, it has helped with a kidney issue I had/have with acacia I have no issues at all. also acacia does not give me gas or bloat (pectin and Inulin do, so I take less of these). the idea here is to feed my biome and healthy bacteria. (Forget probiotic, Prebiotics is where it's at).
I di take a host of supplements, TMG is in the mix. apiginine which I have added to my stack recently has helped with sleep.
You’re a fool for eating fiber
@@NuclearCarnivorebased on what? Silly comment if you don’t explain…I bet you’re constipated?
@@NuclearCarnivorefiber feeds good gut bacteria, which provide vitamins and immune function to the body, as well as sweeping the colon clean.
Healthy gut bacteria aids digestion, carries out bad fats, increases detoxification, and prevents colon cancer.
Over sixty and my intake is very similar to yours. Including the Owyn brand. I feel better than in my fifties and my increased weight training has been optimal. Glad to see I’m not the only one. TMG, Colagen peptides, apigine have all been a value add.
Seems like around 1 to 1.2 g protein per kg would be a good, realistic middle ground
Doctor Jason Fung recetly uploaded a video that contradicts the traditional belief that someone engaged in weight training needs 1.6 to 2 grams of protein per kilogram of body weight, as this is considered the optimal amount to repair micro-damage through protein synthesis. In contrast, a sedentary person typically requires just 0.8 g per kilogram of body weight. He explains that 0.8 g upto 1 g per kilogram of body weight is sufficient to build muscle and anything extra ingested protein turns to glucose and stored in the cells so body utilises even even little amount of protein most effectively without having to take so much protein
It is the only video uploaded on his channel on TH-cam that recommends the most little amount of protein needs to be taken while here on youtube vast majority of muscle building videos explain that those who train need to consume even upto 2.5 g/kg of body justifying it referencing to various studies
U people will really believe anything holy
@tiagomoraes1510 he's a well qualified doctor and not some nobody to not to believe n he explains it scientifically with studies as reference so watch it first before replying it is available on his channel!! It is not sensible to call something HS without watching it
@@Chris-vt6nl i know this charlatan, he is going against all evidence to sell to ingenuous people for over 7 years at least
This is probably true, given that eating the same amount of protein you can grow different amount of muscles depending on your usage of creatine, TMG, berberine etc.
@@Anna-mv9ew recetly I came to know that berberine is not a anabolic supplement because it's only very effective for insulin resistance and preventing Blood glucose spikes,shockingly it has some catabolic properties with regards to muscles when used over a period of time but creatine,tmg are very much effective proven supplements for building muscles
This is the opposite of what most of us been told nearlyall of our lives.
When I read Protein Power by Drs Eades, it explained how to calculate my lean mass to separate it from my fat mass. Then they gave an optimal protein intake. It turns out I've been eating 1.5 times my optimal protein. According to some of the best experts in the dietary field!
Is it worth reducing my protein intake? I have no idea if it's worth much effort. But I have long since given up on paying extra money for extra protein.
Interesting that this gets cancelled by pumping iron. I bet it takes a lot of pumping iron for that to happen.
I prefer the fully thorough scientific coverage on protein of Dr. Michael Greger and Joel Fuhrman. Brad is good but seems to leave out so many good studies mentioned by them.
Unfortunately you do not mention small size people of Ecuador that the have very low igf and thus they do not have cancer. You also do not mention animal protein is 4 fold more dangerous than plant protein.
Why would it be "more dangerous"...
@Marco-cl9pb Because gerontologist professor Walter Longo proves that it is.
@@Marco-cl9pb animal protein sources are higher in the amino acids methionine and isoleucine. Methionine is suspected to reduce lifespan by several pathways, including boosting homocysteine levels. Excess isoleucine promotes chronic inflammation, which also reduces lifespan.
I.6 is pretty close. I'm higher at 66 but I lift weights. My Dad at 89 has lost a lot of muscle mass because he eats all carbs and gets little exercise.
My dad has lost a lot of muscle mass because his diet is mostly carb etc. One of a multitude of unsubstantiated claims you often see on these nonsense channels. Go back over your statement and understand why I said that. There are several reasons. Perhaps you can pick a couple.
I think that the lack of exercise is the biggest factor for your dad. Please tell him to do more exercise.
If your dad made it to 89 (and counting!) he must be doing it right, the muscle loss may be due to not exercising?
Can you do a review on the use of Peptides, would be much appreciated
Peptides are just short chains of amino acids. Just like protein they are broken down to individual amino acids during digestion.
I am on high protein diet but my BUN test results got too high. How do we prevent BUN from climbing?
There's something I've never understood Doc. How can there be a standard recommendation for protein intake per kg/lb with differing body fat percentages. Does someone morbidly obese really need the same amount as someone with a normal or low bodyfat? I.e. 200lb obese vs 200lb normal/low bodyfat. I assume most protein intake is for protein repair and building, therefore the less muscle, the less protein you need to sustain it.
Study Don Layman, protein timing does matter.
The 100g study was casein, which is ver low digesting. Not the same as most proteins.
ARE carbs needed for human survival?
If not enough carbohydrates are consumed your body will breakdown protein (mostly muscle protein), and trim off the amine group from those amino acids, leaving carbohydrates. After a period of time fat will then be broken down into glycerol and free fatty acids. Fatty acids can be used as a less efficient replacement for carbohydrates.
I believe if you are aware of your body's you will know what amount of protein you need. There was a mega analysis of older people eating high protein and lower protein during weight training. They found protein intake made no difference just the weight training did. To be honest I have reduced my protein recently because I found 1.8 grams per kilo of bodyweight just made me feel not right 13:08
So 1.6 g per kg body weight. If I am 85 kg, that's 136 g per day. If an extra large egg has 7 g of protein, that's over 19 eggs per day (assuming no other protein consumed). Can that be true? It seems very high.
If you want to be a body builder.. But are body builders healthy?
I think in the video he was wrong about the study. Lean body weight means that you have to deduct the fat from your total weight to get the accurate numbers. For example, if you're 85kg and your body fat % is 15%, your lean body weight is 85x0.85=72.25kg
If you aim to eat 1.6g/kg of lean body weight, your target protein intake should be around 1.6x72.25=115.6g
It is not your weight on the scale but that weight without your bodyfat. You still have bodyfat, even when you are not obese.
@@andrasszollosy4418Thanks for clarifying. I realize there's protein in lots of foods, but that's still a high level, equivalent to 16.5 extra large eggs per day. So I should live longer under that regimen? There's no one who eats that way, except those on a strict carnivore diet and bodybuilders. Maybe I need to read the study, but it seems far-fetched.
valter longo disagrees.
agreed
I don't really trust you since you praised seed oils
Yes, Joe Rogan knows more about health than medical doctors.
Instead all the extra info helps us to stay healthy, we get weaker and aicker from all the info who are telling what to eat or to drink to get older...bah, what a world we are living in. .
What I do know is that I am going to die much sooner if I listen to all the studies that come out.
Its interesting that you brought up blue zones Brad. There was a recent news story about a scientist being awarded a prize after showing that blue zones do not have people with longer life spans.
Source? I searched online and can’t find anything
@bryanmarty7085 if you tube will allow me I'll post a link...
@bryanmarty7085 search out: UCL demographer’s work debunking ‘Blue Zone’ regions of exceptional lifespans wins Ig Nobel prize
@bryanmarty7085 it looks like it has been deleted. If you look for UCL Dr Saul Justin Newman. And perhaps add in blue zones and ignoble prize you should find it.
You will always see what you want to see.
Research the origins of how the minimum protein requirements were set. They were set higher than needed out of fear that, if set too low, some percentage of the population would not consume enough of an essential amino acid. However, if you manually program your amino acid consumption properly, you can lower overall protein in-take quite safely. I only consume 50g of protein per day from almonds, walnuts, pecans, goat cheese, miso, tofu, and minor amounts from vegetables and fruits. However, I know exactly how much of each essential and non essential amino acids I am consuming and I make sure none of them go dangerously (or problematically high). Tldr, even at minimum recommended levels, you still may be eating more protein than is necessary given today's tools and datasets.
Please, what is PE protein?
Pea, as in the vegetable
@@N330AA Ah! Thank you! We call it "arvejas" in Argentina☺
@@patri7451 realmente? los llamamos guisantes en Paraguay
In the title and opening slide, how are you getting the 6.4 years figure from the Naghshi et al meta-analysis? The highlighted bit is just showing the pooled effect size of 0.92 for all-cause mortality and plant protein. Thanks.
I should have put on the slide, "based on an average life expectancy of 80 years"
@DrBradStanfield Ah, I see now.
However, I really don't think you can simply multiply the relative risk by average life expectancy to get the effect of protein on lifespan. All the studies I've read that estimate the effect of different interventions on life expectancy use something like a life table method (or something else that is more complicated than simple multiplication). So I would not have confidence in that exact 6.4 year figure, though the true effect may well be quite substantial.
Regarding current views on eggs, dietary cholesterol clearly does increase blood cholesterol levels. This has been known for at least 50 years if not a hundred and demonstrated in countless trials including metabolic ward studies. What has also been known for a long time is that added dietary cholesterol/eggs has little or no effect when baseline dietary cholesterol is already high as it is in the case of average Americans and other Westerners. This is why recent decades have seen floods of highly publicised industry funded studies that find no effect on blood cholesterol levels of added dietary cholesterol. Choose your test subjects and their diets wisely and you can pretty much guarantee what the results will be. Guess which studies the egg industry likes to fund? There have been so many widely published such trials that it is now common wisdom that dietary cholesterol does not affect blood cholesterol levels even among some professionals who ought to know better.
Nobody asks why the older independent trials found that dietary cholesterol increased blood cholesterol but modern industry funded trials don't. Also very strange is the fact nobody ever mentions those trials where people consuming average (US) levels of cholesterol had their dietary cholesterol reduced to near zero. In those trials their blood cholesterol levels dropped significantly.
A 1992 meta analysis and review of the effect of dietary cholesterol on blood cholesterol also pretty much provided a primer on how to design studies which obscure the effects of dietary cholesterol on blood cholesterol. Perhaps it's no coincidence that we have seen scores of such studies since then?
Ezetimibe, promoted as an alternative to statins, blocks transport of cholesterol across the gut which argues for your point. I once experimented by reducing total cholesterol from 6.5 (which I believe was OK for my old age) to 4.9 by cutting out dairy, eggs and meat and substituting with beans, lentils, chickpeas and tinned, dark fish.
What makes higher cholesterol levels a bad thing?
@@alicejwho Apart from the association with an increased rate of major edverse cardiovascular events, you mean? Higher cholesterol levels mean a higher number of low density lipoproteins (LDL). Please read
Low-density lipoproteins cause atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease: pathophysiological, genetic, and therapeutic insights: a consensus
statement from the European Atherosclerosis Society Consensus Panel
@tomgoff7887 but surely they're only dangerous if there is inflamed endothelium for them to patch up?
@@alicejwho Cholesterol itself causes inflammation
Retention and subsequent accumulation of LDL in the artery wall
triggers a number of events that initiate and propagate lesion development.21, 50 Due to the local microenvironment of the subendothelial matrix, LDL particles are susceptible to oxidation by both
enzymatic and non-enzymatic mechanisms, which leads to the generation of oxidized LDL (oxLDL) containing several bioactive molecules including oxidized phospholipids.129,130 Oxidized LDL, in turn,
initiates a sterile inflammatory response by activating endothelial cells
to up-regulate adhesion molecules and chemokines that trigger the
recruitment of monocytes-typically inflammatory Ly6Chi monocytes-into the artery wall.131 The importance of oxidized phospholipids in the inflammatory response of the vascular wall has been
demonstrated through the transgenic expression of an oxidized
phospholipid-neutralizing single-chain antibody, which protected
atherosclerosis-prone mice against lesion formation.132
After years of contradicting information I was hoping this video would finally give a conclusive answer on the amount of protein per kg of bodyweight and whether that was calculated based on lean or total bodyweight. However, it mentions 1.6 grams per kg of lean bodyweight, but the following calculations are off. A person that weighs 80 kg would need less than the 130 grams mentioned, as that number is based on total bodyweight as opposed to lean bodyweight. Still no conclusive answers, it's maddening.
This is wrong. You want to minimise protein when under 65 to reduce MTOR, but increase it when you are over 65 to maintain muscle mass and mobility and survive falls or surgery etc. This has been known for ages and its painful watching Brad flipflop on the subject so much yet still not land on the correct answer.
if you do this, you will be chronically undermuscled in your senior years, so you consuming protein after 65 will maintain the tiny amount of muscle you have. What you said makes absolutely no physiological sense and has absolutely no basis in medicine or fitness. Stop listening to the people you are listening to.
High protein diet require heavy weight exercises, which could damage the entire body - the internal organs and muscu-skeletal system.
A video idea might be what are the chemicals/enzymes that, as we age, we produce less of that can be boosted by supplements?
Hormones like testosterone, estrogen, human growth hormone all decrease with age.
Exercise by lifting weights helps reverse these.
Deep REM sleep is needed for human growth hormone release…magnesium and properly low dose of melatonin can help.
We are not mice!
Thank you
Really? discussing blue zones? as if that nonsense should be taken seriously?
no protein means less lean mass, so a single fall can really debilitate the elderly- not sure how to weigh less protein vs adequate protein
I don't eat enough or eat right but I'd like to know the best protein shake or supplement i could take. I'm 69 fixing to be 70 in December. I feel pretty good most of the time but my appetite has fallen off the past few years. I exercise 30 minutes hard 5 days a week. I can't make myself eat a lot when I'm not hungry.
I'm not an expert, but here’s my best advice based on what I’ve learned. If you’re looking to stay strong and healthy with a lower appetite, a protein shake could be really helpful. A whey protein isolate might be a good choice, as it provides essential amino acids and is usually easy on the stomach. For a non-dairy option, a high-quality plant protein blend can give you a complete amino acid profile as well.
For daily protein intake, a general goal for active adults is around 1.2 to 1.5 grams of protein per kilogram of body weight (or about 0.54 to 0.68 grams per pound). So if you weigh around 70 kg (154 lbs), that’s about 84 to 105 grams of protein per day, which can be spread across meals and supplemented with shakes if needed.
If you need more complete nutrition, a protein-enriched meal replacement shake is an option, as it combines protein with essential vitamins and minerals. For each shake, aiming for 20-30 grams of protein should be sufficient. Blending in some fruits or greens can add extra nutrients too. And, as always, it’s a good idea to consult a healthcare provider before starting new supplements to make sure it aligns with your needs.
@Max-bh1pl Thank you. That's very helpful. I'll give it a shot.
Eat a balanced diet of whole foods, including legumes and other high-quality protein sources. You don't need protein powders. If your body is telling you not to eat as much as you used to, listen to it. Most people eat too much food.
@@isoldam While your advice encourages a healthy, whole-food-based approach, it might not suit everyone, especially those with a lower appetite who still want to ensure they’re getting adequate nutrition. Whole foods are ideal for balanced nutrients, but protein powders or shakes can be a helpful supplement when it’s hard to reach daily protein needs through food alone. Listening to the body’s hunger and fullness cues is generally wise, but as appetite can naturally decrease with age, it’s also important to meet the body’s requirements for protein and calories to maintain strength and muscle. Overall, it’s about finding a balance that provides the nutrients needed for health and activity
The yummiest pea protein is Happy Viking but anything will help
4:31 1.6 per kg of LEAN body mass! So I guess that excludes the fat, and if that 80 kg person has 15 kg of fat, for example, then one should calculate protein intake for 65 kg... ?
I've seen a few studies saying that high protein tends to increase fibrinogen. I am not absolutely sure but I would like to know since fibrinogen leads to many problems. For sure there are other things to consider about proteins that might be positive and overall it might be better to get more.
I remember eating 400g of protein per day, 1.62g of protein per kg of body weight seems so little
altough I remember the nuance with those studies that there are some responders to maybe even 300g. not sure if I rember correctly
Plant protein is high histamine. Not ideal for auto immune, prevalent as you age
Animal protein has high methionine which is not considered good.
the cute wavey feather on ur left shoulder is greeting us thruout the video
11:39 Goals!
❤❤❤
I recently read a statement by a nutritionist. She said in regard to weight loss, 'It's not what you eat, or when you eat it. It's how much'. Made sense to me.
No shit sherlock
That's a worthless statement without more specifics. The quality of the food is the most important factor. Sure, in theory, someone could lose weight eating nothing but Fruit Loops, but you'll feel hungry and miserable all day.
I don't eat keto , but seems to help many people. Not drinking soda, sugary things is kind of a no brainer. I lost weight by smaller portions of complex carbs, lots of veggies and salads, more beans, lentils etc protein with fiber, still in chicken, fish and good amount of fats in nuts and oils like Extra Virgin Olive Oil , yoghurt - strength training helps as well - still eat fruit mainly berries , and some others . My weight still going down , now a bit worry may lose too much body fat for my age - ie under 15% - still some will power , but consistency and good habits , enjoyment are the key as well . Tend to avoid any processed food with lots of added sugar or salt .
I'm lucky as i can easily eat lots of veggies ( non-starch ) , salads with no stomach upsets
If you eat poor nutrient deficient food you will always feel hungry. some junk food fool's body that it has more protein with certain additives the manufacturers purposely add .
Given that some people really struggle to lose weight , binge , or midnight snacks, for then probably the new drugs are best option. I have never woken up to go eat in the night ever. So I'm lucky - when I decide to lose some weight as gained say 8kg over 5 years - can easily knock first 5kg of without trying
We must recognise it's a serious problem for many and they have tried a 101 fad diets
I still think more fiber, less sugar bad fat , plenty of protein, veggies, good sources of fat, fruit and water will stop you being more overweight with less effort. But people like their comfort food in front of the telly , instead of say carrot sticks or an apple
I read that the animal protein TMAO is in itself a risk factor for cardiovascular disease. That would mean that saturated fat is not the only villain and going for lean cuts won't cut it (pun intended 😂).
Animal proteins like lasagne, hamburgers, and hotdogs, which are usually served with fries and a Coke.
TMAO is not a protein. TMA is produced from several amino acids when exposed to high dry heat, like grilling meat. A liver enzyme then converts TMA into carcinogenic TMAO. TMAO also raises the risk for heart disease and other cardiovascular conditions.
It's not 6.4 years.
Careful studies of Professor M'Ondongo fron CenterBanana Republic proves that it is just 6.3 and not 6.4 as pretended.
it depends to the persons body chemistry
Dammit! I just bought a whole cow 🐄. Now what am i supposed to do with this guy.
Sound like Bob Mortimers Barry Home owner character 😂😂😂😂
Please, stop that Blue Zones nonsense. I live in Europe. Sardinia and Ikaria are two European regions, and if you look at the official statistics from Eurostat, you'll see that those areas don't even make it into the top 25 European regions with the highest life expectancy.
That's exactly my point in the video. We can't rely on observational data. We need randomized controlled trials
That’s because they are no longer blue zones due to the modern diet changes - e.g. animal protein, fats & UPF. Checkout the contemporary stats on Loma linda
How about Spirulina for both protein and leucine ? I know it tastes like pond scum to some, but I sort of like it in a glass of cold water.
Ok in soup
Higher plant protein and not higher animal protein promote healthy longevity. Resistance training is king not protein intake above RDA. Disappointing that you try to discredit Dr Longo by making making it seem like his stand on low protein is based on a mice study. I think u are better than that.
So you are applying the fallacy of individual recommendations from a upper bound population statistic when most people don't need 0.8g /kg.
The bro manual says 1 gram per pound
The people with the highest life expectancy is Hong Kong…and they consume the most meat of any nation
Do people walk up the stairs? 16 flights twice a day is quite good exercise. There may be a British cultural legacy of Health and Safety of wanting to check the fire escape route frequently.
My understanding is if you eat animal protein you need more glycine to solve this problem, something we used to get by boiling the bones and eating other parts of the animal other than just muscle meat.
THIS. We are not supposed to just eat muscle meat, which is what most of us do. Offal, and bones and feet on broth or stew, is how we used to eat animals. Then it's like medicine.
You can get all the amino acids you need from plants. Your body makes protein from them.
@@LRCutler you cannot get heme iron and B12 from plants though. Meat is medicinal in the right amounts.
@@Kinesiology411 Haem Iron is not not essential & is harmful to human health. B12 is an easy fix - it comes in supplement form or B12 enriched foods - e.g plant based milk. Animals meat only contains B12 because they eat faeces or drink contaminated water. Too much overwhelming evidence that a wholefood plant based diet is optimal for human health to argue
@@Kinesiology411 saying meat is medicinal is like saying eating tide-pods helps determine lifespan.
Why saturated fats are a problem? Saturated means less reactive. And thus a good and neutral source of energy..
Your liver can make all the saturated fats you need. Dietary saturated fats increase your body’s production of cholesterol, especially the dangerous cholesterol carrier low density lipoprotein (LDL).
I'm sorry but no plant protein will ever be as good as animal protein. Soy is not a complete protein and never will be it has two (Methionine & Lysine)of the nine essential amino acids in such low quantities it is negligible. Not only that plant proteins are not nearly as bioavailiable as animal proteins look it up using the DIAAS score and you will see. Soy isn't terrible for you but its laughable to think anyone can get 130 grams of protein a day from plants and think they won't increase their risk of insulin resistance which is now known to be the main driver of disease around the world.
did religion books forbid animal protein? no it did only forbid the pork so heres your answer eat anything except pork
There is a reason why religion books are not published in peer reviewed scientific journals
@@robgibb430 whats the reason?
this report is messy
I do not believe this higher protein requirement at all.
Becaue it's wrong. 1.6g per kg lean body weight. Lean body mass is the weight of your body excluding fat.
Statistic 0.8g /kg is a one tail upper limit for the 97.5 % of the population. Based on nitrogen balance studies. The papers population average needs is around 0.62g/ kg. Or 50% of individuals require less than 0.62g / kg and so on.
@ Obsession with protein has been around for a long time. The hospitals are not full of people that are deficient in protein. Many who are in the hospitals are people who have consumed too much protein along with fats and carbs all their life.
@@relaxgood5214 are you arguing with the meta analysis? Statistics don't lie. More muscles less all cause mortality. And more protein up to 1.6g means better muscle building. Of course you need to train in the gym too, otherwise just stick to 0.8g. and I am not talking about steroids abuse and overtraining which is obviously bad for you and causes early death, that's not what we are talking about.
A huge caveat with soy protein is that protein from soy is fine but processed soy protein powder or products with it can be toxic due to the (heating) process of extracting protein from soy.
No sentinarian is a muscle person. I doubt about the importance of protein and muscle in longevity. I hold suspicious on this analysis.
The 30 day mortality rate for people over the age of 75 is 10%. The one year fall mortality rate for people over the age of 75 is 25%. Can you guess what a major contributor to falls is in the elderly? Muscle size does not equal muscle strength or muscle quality. You just have an infantile view of muscle. Do more muscle research before you make false statements.
Protein and muscle growth are related to mtor which hurts longevity. It is hard to tell what is really an infantile view on longevity.
Unfortunately you interpret the scientific research, the way you wish. As a gym maniac.... You hope that more protein the best the growth. What a mistake, my friend....
This review is too simplistic and narrow in scope to give an informed answer to the viewers. I recommend people read ‘The China Study’ if you want to mnow the effects of a high protein diet. I’d also recommend looking at the literature on Methionine (found mainly in animal protein) it shortens your life - all the fasting studies bool down to methionine restriction benefits.
And isoleucine is also higher in animal protein. And higher levels of isoleucine have been shown to produce chronic inflammation, which reduces lifespan.
Don't focus on supplements to live longer. Just get out there and walk everyday. Or do it on a treadmill. Just walk to live longer. Don't run, walk.
And do resistance training of some type, whether it's with your own bodyweight or added weights or bands, near the point of muscular failure. You cannot get the same neurological signaling that improves hormones, insulin sensitivity, with walking alone.
Walking is useless, because it doesn't target visceral and hepatic fat, which are causal to many chronic diseases and classic giveaways of age. Only intensive physical activity that combines aerobic and resistance (like HIIT) works with it (just aerobic, or just resistance do not). Walkers are often low on muscle and high on visceral fat, which is a really bad combo. Walking also does nothing for your brain. Runners at least improve their memory and cognitive function. Of course, walking is better than nothing, but such a poor investment of your time, especially if you live in the area with poor air quality.
@@Anna-mv9ew For 6 or 7 years walked 5 miles/ day commuting. Lost about 5kg and that's stayed off for 20 years (with seasonal fluctuations). There's lots of interpretations, 6km/ hour pace on the flat is a good minimum.
@@plinble walking is good for losing subcutaneous fat but not visceral, unfortunately only visceral is implicated with health problems
diet, exercise, and sleep are king
Good more steaks for me.
Carnivore baby!
Leucine is also high in nuts like pumpkin, walnuts, pistachios, sunflower, peanuts, cashews. Thanks for another really informative video.
typical instagram youtube influencer - from hyping keto to hyping protein. all of them are the same unfortunately. one meta study tells you nothing in the grand picture
Eat protein, as much as you want, whenever you want. Got it.
Tried a protein supplement one time. Got more thirsty, maybe that's where the kidney damage stories came from.
1.6g/kg of bodyweight sounds high, but is actually very low compared to what the fitness community suggests. I weigh 200 lbs / 90kg, so that would be about 144g. The latest protein advice from "fitness scientists" (wolf coaching) is more like 2.5g/kg or 225g. At this point, I don't think anybody really knows, but everybody agrees that the current RDA is too low.
In regards to fitness you might want to look up the work of Dr Jose Antonio.
You do not weigh 90 kg, you have to subtract your bodyfat from it for the protein amount calculation.
@@_CoachW Wow, it seems he suggests 3g/kg. See what I mean, though? It's all ambiguous. I just hope we don't find out excess protein is harmful in some unknown way or useless later on, like with fish oil, lmnt salt, apple cider vinegar, etc..
@@ypmaklaes7218 Ah, yes. Thanks. I adjusted for that in my dietary plan, but not in my mind it seems.
@@jenga2017 How are you defining ambiguous. the purpose of Dr Antonio's work was to determine if high protein had a detrimental effect on kidney function, bone density, calcium absorption, etc. Hence why he does the blood work.
As far as the other items, I would suggest for one checking to see who is actually making the claims. In my experience it's typically not the scientists making the varying stances, it's the various aspiring gurus.
I will give you a separate example. I like to subscribe to different newsletter sources. And one day I get notice about the "% second rule" whether it was real or not when food fell on the floor.
One newsletter had the headline that it did not exist, the other said it did. So I looked up the actual study. And the difference was what kind of floor the food fell on.
Neither newsletter mentioned that difference they took one aspect and then gave a headline for clicks.
And if it helps,
Omega 3s - depends on current diet, if you eat a lot of salmon don't worry about it
LMNT - yes electrolytes are important but they are not magic. If you are running marathons it might help. Outside that a literal pinch of table salt in a liter of water does the same thing.
Apple cider vinegar - Fermented foods help feed digestion. If you regularly eat those ACV has no substantial benefit. If you don't then it could help the healthy bacteria in your gut which benefits other health factors.
I also recommend sites like examine.com to look up additional research.
Cheers
Did this guy just suggest we eat soy? 😂
Yep - checkout the literature on how it resuces prostate & breast cancer & many other health benefits as it is an optimum selective oestrogen receptor agonist
The suggestiion that protein timing is not important is quite myopic. Outside the lab and in the real world, try monitoring cortisol, appetite and energy levels thoughout the day when breaking it up versus 140g all on 1 meal at the end of day. Coomon sense should tell you which option the body prefers
Go vegan
His take on saturated fats from fish, meat, etc. are false and stupid.
My cholesterol was high when I was eating eggs. Went plant based and it dropped by half in 3 months. Same for my husband. So I think dietary cholesterol is definitely a contributing factor.
Actually the cholesterol in food does not really convert into cholesterol but saturated fats instead, which you also probably reduced when turning vegan. Correlation does not imply causation.
I heard some doctor said that eating red meat could lengthen the telomere.
You mean quacks
@@larryc1616 nutritionj.biomedcentral.com/counter/pdf/10.1186/s12937-016-0189-2.pdf?form=MG0AV3
I don't think saturated fat is that bad when it's freezing cold and you need the calories.
I avoid plant protein powder because of heavy metals
I avoid it to avoid oxalates and other plant poisons and anti-nutrients.
@ yeah I’m surprised he didn’t cover any of that
@@alldeeplearning949 dosage makes the poison. There’s a reason vegan protein powder has CA Prop 65 warnings
Protein powder HM does not pose an increased risk to health. Its well studied. All supplements, not only protein have long been known to contain HM. The body removes these. Eat vegetables like cilantro if you're worried. A bigger problem is BPA and nanoplastics which contribute to many sicknesses and I don't know if those can be mitigated or removed.
@amc1140 The studies suggest its not a big problem
The average American eats over 100 grams of protein per day. This issue is at the bottom of the barrel of concerns for people's health. If anything people should be eating LESS protein and more fruits and vegetables.
What about eating animal protein?
Animal protein is higher in methionine and isoleucine than plant protein. Higher levels of methionine increases risk of heart disease, metabolic disease, and cancer growth. Higher levels of isoleucine increases risk of chronic inflammation.
@broddr Then why carnivore diet is often chosen by people wanted to lower their inflammation? Seems to be working for them. Btw. I am not advocating, just trying to learn, because on both sides there are dogmatic preachers and it can be difficult to know who is right at the moment.
@ don’t confuse anecdotes by individuals with scientific data. There are no scientific studies supporting the claim that a carnivore diet reduces inflammation. In fact there are no studies showing _any_ benefits to a carnivore diet other than temporary weight loss. But like most restrictive diets, people rarely stay on a carnivore diet for more than a few months. And when they return to their regular diet, they gain that weight back.
Contrast that with a diet high in plants. Only plants have antioxidants, which _have_ been scientifically shown to reduce inflammation.
Plant-based protein FTW! 🌱💪
Grass fed carnivore is the way to go.
To atherosclerotic heart disease 💔
beef❤
You are animal protein. Eat animal protein!
Not logical
How do I explain that to my rabbit?
You are human protein. Eat human protein! 🗣️🗣️🔥🔥🔥🔥
@@Birbop 😀
@@Birbop dont forget the bones!