This is great! When I was going through breast cancer, the main thing they told me about diet was to: 1. Get at least 100g of protein per day! Now that I am using the carbon app, I am getting way more than that and also I have at least 25g of fibre per day! Hers to remission for life! ❤
Layne, Simon Hill ( The Proof) had a nice response to this video. He speaks highly of you and seems to have great amount of respect for you but he thinks you missed some keys points from this study. I personally appreciate both of you for what you do for the health and wellness community and for calling out on all the bullshit. You always say don’t take my word for it read the study, Simon has and has some different point of view about the study. Would love to hear your thoughts about it
Hey! Ditto here. I like and respect both of you and follow you closely. Simon had a lot of interesting points to make about areas that you didn't address in this video and a little bit of dispute about some of the areas that you did. Given that you've been so open-minded in the past, willing to listen to the point of view of others, and even sometimes change your mind about some things, it would be great if you make a point of responding to the points that Simon Hill has made.
I would also like to see Layne's perspective on Simon's replica (eg plat protein being superior not only because of the fiber content), but also the view on the plant & animal protein sources they mention for this study, that are totally different from what someone would expect when thinking about protein sources (pizza, icecream, fruits). Otherwise, we are left with the impresion that Layne cherry picked, contrary to Layne reputation of great scientific papers reviewer (that I always admired). Too bad Simon only featured what bits from the video, instead of having a direct conversation.
You put this way to nicely. Layne showed table 3 in this video and just started spouting nonsense about what we could find in this table. He clearly showed a bias because he can read a bloody simple result table like this. He just chose not to. He just discredited himself where anything that comes out of his mouth needs to be checked with the actual data. This probably isn't the first time Layne messed up but one of the first times he got blatantly caught. Just a matter of time before someone digs through all of his claims and shows Layne might not actually understand statistics. Maybe he always outsourced that part of his studies to someone else? That would be very painful if that gets out. Another researcher using a high publishing model but cannot actually run and report their own statistics. Wouldn't be the first. But for Layne this would really hurt. @"Dr" Layne Norton. Time to fix this. Because if you cannot see what this table actually says. You might want to retire the PhD title.
I appreciate the fact you showed this study and gave your own analysis of it. I'm honestly biased towards plant proteins for the simple fact that most animal protein sources come from unnatural environmental conditions (fed gmo and pesticide and herbicide laden feed) and are chocked full of medicinal chemicals (especially chicken and pork, since they have limited laws for humane treatment) and are cooped up in cages which raises their cortisol levels thanks to factory farming. Biomagnification of chemicals they intake coupled with the release of stress hormones make for a very unhealthy protein. And I'm sure there are studies out there about this, but it's been years since I've personally researched it. I understand there are "grass fed", free range types of options out there, but the environmental impact of graze space and resources used are higher than commercial farms. I personally just can't eat flesh anymore as it doesn't leave me feeling well. I feel too full, and I feel the dead, foul energy of the tortured animal I consumed. My compassion for animals and the environment won my taste buds, and I realize that I have to eat more plant protein. Not saying that if you eat meat you're a horrible person, but it was my choice for the current life I live. Maybe living on a farm where the animals were not eating and drinking a toxic soup everyday in crowded conditions would be a healthier source of protein, but that's not how humans live anymore. We go to a store and buy something wrapped in plastic, cook it on plastic coated pans, and we do it without the adventure of hunting it down like our ancestors. We ingest the extra "crap" that doesn't belong in our stomachs or theirs. I get that not everyone will agree with this, but for me personally, even being raised on mostly meat and potatoes growing up, I have found that I have loads more energy, healthier skin and movements from eating plant based primarily. There needs to be a study out there on all the wonderful chemicals used in the animal for dairy and meat production. But, it won't get funding thanks to capitalism. 🫠
I'm proud to say that now I'm also biased towards favoring protein. I never paid attention to it for 38 years of my life. Now it's almost been one year of paying attention to it (+ big confounding variables of adding exercise and minimizing junk food) and I can easily say two things: I've never felt healthier and I've never felt so satiated as I do these days.
@@tofu-munchingCoalition.ofChaos appreciate the effort, but minions and sycophants can't read "fine print", they just suck on Layne's teat for their nutrition (lack of) understanding.
I’m 62 & never EVER gave 62 a thought in my younger years….& boy am I glad I ate healthy, & loved protein before I knew of its great benefits… appreciate the video Layne 👍
How much protein do you get? The "high protein" quintile in this study was probably averaging around 1.2 to 1.3 g/kg. If you're eating way above this (e.g. 2.2 g/kg), then this study provides little evidence for that amount of protein being healthy.
Great video! I do follow a mainly plant based diet, so happy to hear the positive reviews. I’m also going to be more careful with my protein intake - making sure it’s high enough, that is.
From what I understand, most people (like 97%) in the western world are already getting plenty. I don’t think we need to obsess about it and worry about getting more. I think we just need to ensure we are getting enough, so we are in the sweet spot. The goal isn’t to get as much as possible.
@@arambarsamian6312 They only eat plenty, because they eat mostly processed junk with processed meats. Plant based diet is not that easy to eat a lot of protein and you need to aim on it
@@arambarsamian6312More about getting enough to support the exercise you SHOULD be doing. For most there's no point going over 0.6g/kg unless you make your body ask for more to use in the first place. Then you can use up to 1g/kg or even 1.2+ for people running ultra marathons every other day.
@@arambarsamian6312 We're (as a whole) definitely not. Many of these current videos explain the older you get the more you need. But as a whole we tend to eat LESS as we age believing we need to cut back. If anything, these tens of thousands of videos are consistently proving that we have been consistently mislead into believing biases that have had heinously detrimental effects on our health. I simply cannot take anything anyone from a backed field or position that has time and time again actively in opposition to human health. Everytime we listen to their studies or word in general, health issues increase and quality of life decreases. Everytime we figure things out for ourselves, our medicine cabinets become empty and quality of life increases. Edit: I'm referring to protein intake, not plant intake.
That would be a great move in the right direction! Lentils are amazing! Also, all the veggies that go into the curry would add a bit of protein too - it all adds up! I’d say make a stew, rather than a curry - as coconut milk is extremely high in saturated fat. According to this study, replacing saturated fat with plant protein is beneficial. I love curries too; I just wish there were a way to make them without coconut. Any ideas?
@@gdtoobthat’s traditionally how curries are prepared - using coconut milk. It has a unique flavor that cannot be replaced with another nut milk. Alas…
@@arambarsamian6312 "Traditionally", there is no such thing as a "curry" other than the Western b*stardization of real eastern recipes. Some Southeast Asian and Southern Indian recipes use coconut and they mostly use whole grated coconut complete with fiber. I have never seen lentils with coconut milk other than in American restaurants or TH-cam recipes by some white chef. 90+% of "traditional" recipes do not cook lentils with coconut milk.
@@RaveyDavey 😂 One gets used to it. Also, soaking well, cooking well, and using bay leaves helps a lot. Additionally, as one eats legumes with regularity, one is constantly cultivating the bacteria that eat beans, and thus one’s microbiota gets better and better at digesting beans and the gas and bloating improve. And finally, edamame and chickpeas, especially when consumed as hummus, appear to be much easier on the digestive system.
Strong enough, at least. Even if we do become much weaker, which is inevitable I think, still being almost as strong as the average 20-year-old in your 70s and 80s is pretty good!
The #1 antioxidant required by the body is 'glutathione' and its function is so critical to offset the effects of free radicals and oxidative stress in the body, which leads to disease, especially as you age. Interestingly, animal protein contains the most glutathione and therefore I will gladly include this source as my main source for this exact reason!
Nonetheless, interestingly the study actually shows plant-based protein to be superior. I'm not a plant based person, but just saying maybe recheck the study and not what Layne said. If you need a better break down, see Simon Hill at The Proof channel for more correct reading of the study.
Ditto here, I saw the Simon Hill video and it was very interesting. He made some good points, some of which you just didn't cover here, and some were contrary to what was presented here. I'd love to hear what you think and I hope you be making a video in response sometime in the future.
i read because when you get older you lose alittle bite the ability to digest protein . so to get the "same" amount as you did before you need to eat more protein.
Hi Layne, I love this video, and your content in general. However, at 6:35, you say "every single type of protein had beneficial effects". Then highlight the odds ratios in table 3. But for both total and animal protein, the effects appear to be negative in this table. It looks like you getting the 7% figure from table 2, and only with the 3rd multivariate model. In table 3, modeled continuously, "Total and animal protein intake were significantly associated with higher chronic disease risk in all models." (I edited this comment to reflect that I found the 7% you referenced).
Thanks for sharing and explaining. Very helpful...Also, you're very inspirational. I saw your post on Instagram about your nationals outcomes (Congratulations!!). Your comments of all the physical setbacks / injuries you overcame to continue such physical accomplishments was very encouraging as I work through an injury that's sidelined my early weight lifting journey. Appreciate you sharing your experiences, challenges, and successes!
As regards plant protein giving better results than animal protein. Might this be confirmation of the positive effect on aging of reducing the amino acid Methionine which is more abundant in animal protein?
…and Leucine. I mean, plants provide plenty of each, but the point is animal flesh and secretions provide too much. Also, I think that plant protein is probably a marker for plant-food intake. Sure, the levels of methionine and leucine probably have some effect, but every grant of plant protein from whole plant foods comes along with fiber vitamins, minerals, phytonutrients - thousands of nutrients that are combat inflammation and oxidation. The ultimate conclusion of this study really should be to eat enough food (not too little) and to eat as large a percentage of one’s calories from whole plants as possible. Also, exercise (people who exercise end up eating more calories and, therefore, more protein).
Awesome video, awesome interviews, awesome company - Outwork Nutrition - with that said. Dr Norton (from one Dr to another), why use Sucralose in your products given their effect on the gut microbiome? Any plans to change to Stevia?
I liked your recent appearance on the Diary of a CEO podcast btw… it’s pretty funny and jarring to see Dr. Lustig appear on that podcast like right after you lol
My take home, add the beans and rice combo along with veggies to pile up the protein and fiber on top of lean meats and top all of that off with some whey!
One additional thing: Leucine as you mentioned though an MTOR promoter didn’t seem to be a factor. Rapamycin, an MTOR inhibitor increases lifespan in mice ( NIH ITP trials ). But did you know that Leucine was in one of the annual cohorts that results were recently released for. It didn’t increase lifespan. But, imo , more importantly didn’t decrease mouse lifespan.
What you said about people not thinking about how they feel at 70. Unfortunately it's just human behavior/mindset. Nobody thinks they're going to get sick until they actually do. Doesn't matter what their lifestyle looks like, how overweight they are, hell even getting Type II Diabetes often doesn't worry someone... Makes me a bit said to be honest. For some people, it's the "wake up call" that causes the change. For some, they don't get the second chance... Anyway great breakdown buddy this was cool.
Thank you so much for this analysis. And the comments about sarcopenia-I’m not quite 70 yet, but am stronger now than ever and loving it…and it was rather validating as my friends and other family members shake their heads at my dedication to diet and the gym. My biggest nemesis, though,is osteoporosis…a nutritionist I respect says that a high protein diet can increase calcium loss into the urine. So I guess that,for me, it’s balancing the positive effects of high protein with that risk…
I just started eating more protein i will be 52 next month and i feel a lot better, I also quit fasting what a waste of time and energy. I know layne is against this but I also started collagen peptide after being off for a year and having joint pain, its been 3 months now and i feel a lot better still not for building muscles. Eggs meat chicken, nuts, protein bread, cottage cheese before bed, also boosted fiber intake fruits and veggies. Seems to be working so far.
It’s not easy to get junk food protein unless you count the shakes so it probably means you are eating less low nutrient high calorie foodstuffs. There are so many confounding factors there. Protein is more expensive so indicates higher income with all the benefits that go with that. People who workout eat more protein and that could easily explain the results. I hear Layne say they controlled for variables but I don’t understand how they do that.
If you like I could try to explain it (see below - feel free to ask for more). If you want to read the literature or Wikipedia it's called *Cox proportional hazards model.* Btw. Animal (and total protein) in this study was associated with shorter health spans when adjusted. The video just cited the wrong numbers. Not the one in table 3 (ORs1 good), but the ones from the result section. These are the unadjusted number. Explanation of adjustment: Find variables a and b sich that a^(age [year])*b^(protein intake [in %]) best describe the number of bad health outcomes. Best is in the sense of maximum likelihood. So you choose the variables that most likely produce such outcomes as observed. Then b^(protein intake [in %]) is the number of bad health outcomes that could not be explained by giving age a risk factor. Then b³ is the odds ratio of bad health outcomes by increasing protein intake by 3% that can't be explained by giving age a risk factor.
*I think this needs a correction video.* That would be a wonderful example of "I accept data and be honest when I made mistakes". Something that is missing on the internet a lot. The video misrepresents the data. After 5:50 the narration says something different (the opposite) than what the table 3 (which is on screen during narration) shows: Total and animal protein is harmful. Dairy statistically neutral. Plant protein sources beneficial. The narration is about the unadjusted data in the result section. Even just adjusting for age is enough to change the conclusions (see table 3).
Age adjusted, the data shows favorability for dairy protein, but yes, the multivariate models bounce around neutrality. And, yes, this clearly suggests a strong case for plant protein. I get his point that fiber is not controlled for, but he seems a little dismissive of plant protein. It certainly suggests it couldn’t hurt to add a good bit of plant protein to one’s diet.
@@Isaiaswolf66 As I said in the comment above it's the unadjusted (so the wrong numbers for what he wanted to say) data from the result section in the paper. I don't think he has read the study.
@@michaelstone9701 I essentially agree. If you look at the paper and the supplementary data analysis of this paper mentioned in it, you see that the association with reasonable plant protein sources is even stronger. 58% of the plant protein comes from bread, pizza, backed goods, potatoes, ... . Things they show are unfavorably associated (refined carbs) or very weakly associated with health span. Furthermore 23% (vegetables and fruit) explain half of the effect size. And legumes, beans, nuts and peanut butter (12%) and others (6%) the rest of the effect. So it seems "real" plant protein sources have an even larger effect than what was presented. Animal protein was pretty "clean" to my surprise. I would have wished they had done a more sensible analysis of food groups. Looking at macros or such general food groups (where you mix expected healthy with expected unhealthy food), you can't really tell what's happening and it's not actionable. The strange results with MUFAs is an example of that. Increasing MUFAs in this group means typically: less chocolate, less backed goods, ... and more animal fat. Not what I picture when I think about increasing MUFAs.
@@Petunia-fl9lu Eskimos didn't. There are lots of people who don't eat plants, strict carnivore, perfectly healthy. And by that I don't say that we shouldn't eat plants.
@@JCKeus-cx1wm The Inuit have a genetic adaptation that prevents them from going into ketosis. This has enabled them to survive in an environment in which there are very few plants to eat. Their diet is not something that is generalizable to the rest of the world’s population. Also, they are not perfectly healthy.
@@arambarsamian6312 it is not a genetic adaptation, but an environmental adaptation. They are healthy but have harsh lives in the cold. As soon as they move to US and adapt to their poisonous eating habits the get fat and die young too.
No doubt! There are thousands of them: lutein, zeaxanthin, lycopene, etc… Their benefits have been observed for decades. Whole plant foods in general have anti-inflammatory and antioxidant properties. No doubt these properties contribute to thriving. No wonder the Adventist vegans are the healthiest population on earth right now.
I don't recall the individual research numbers, but at least kidneys have been studied and they didn't find any issues up to "unrealistic levels". As always, if you're actually sick then you should follow the instructions from the dietician at the hospital that specialises on the specific thing.
Before I read the study: Was there a stronger correlation between higher plant protein intake and lower calorie intake/body weight then between animal protein and calorie intake/body weight? 🤔 Whole sources of plant protein tend to be less calorie dense and more satiating per calorie. Calorie restriction might have been a factor. Thoughts?
Great video! Would be keen to know if they parsed out the benefit of lean meats vs say fatty or processed meats. Would also be keen to see which plant protein sources are best.
I'd love to get Layne's take on blue zones around the world where people more consistently live for 100 years. From what I understand most of them have significantly lower protein intake over their entire life span. Food for thought 🤔?
A real conundrum in protein intake is how to stave off sarcopenia in someone with early kidney failure who has been prescribed a low protein diet. Obviously lifting will help, but how can muscle protein synthesis occur on a low protein diet?
When someone asks me why eat so much protein as I do - I ask them what do whole foods high in protein contain ? Protein rich foods are densely packed with micronutrients. The effect on healthspan from high protein foods has likely about 33% to do with filling protein needs, 33% managing normal energy balance, 33% to do with almost full spectra of minerals, vitamines and phytonutrients. Protein rich foods are objectively the highest quality (most energy and time consuming) animal or plant can produce (eggs, nuts, seeds, liver, meats). Quality over palatability. Print it to a t-shirt.
Animal foods do not contain phytonutrients. And if they do, it’s because the animal ate plants. Animal foods are the opposite of nutrient-dense. Per-calorie they deliver large quantities of a *a few* nutrients (often too much, actually), but when one compares them with the nutrients supplied by plants, there is just no contest. Animal foods do not contain fiber, so for every gram of animal protein, one gets *zero* fiber. That’s one of the many costs of eating animal foods. If one is interested in increasing protein in order to increase health- and lifespan, one should include more legumes, whole grains, seeds, nuts, and vegetables into one’s diet - all of which have already been shown to be protective in regards to health and increasing longevity. Fruits are the only plant foods that are considered low in protein - and they too have been shown to be protective. Unlike red meat, which is a class-2 carcinogen.
@@arambarsamian6312 To get the around 200g of high quality protein a day pure plant based food is practically out of the question for me and for many performance athletes with significant bodyweight. The other thing is plant based food places where there is real winter is only good food in summer time. Winter time fresh plants tase like garbage, they contain massive amounts of pollutants of every kind and lack almost all the nutrients they are known for. I am convinced they beat fast food in their impact of poor health outcomes. Wrt phytonutr - legumes and nuts do contain them and are good significant source of protein - that is the only reason I mentioned them. What nutrients do most greens, fruits and veggies contain per kg is better metric than what they contain per kcal. It is a struggle to pack in the veggies, grains, fruit (how many kg) to get same amounts of minerals and vitamins one can get from few hundred grams of eggs or liver or fish. Fibre needs to come form something else, vitamin C probably as well. Only plant foods in the proximity are nuts, seeds, some legumes and perhaps berries. I love berries and this would be the only plant food I could never drop from my menu. You want to take on some truly nutrient deprived food source per unit kcal of energy - it is grains and oils/fat.
I think the protein itself is also better from plants. Maybe look what dr greger has to say about it. I’m not saying that it is bad to eat meat and living healthy with meat is better than living crappy vegetarian, but still there is a effect, although other factors might be much more impactful.
Consumer Reports December 3, 2018 - Plant-based proteins may have higher contamination levels because the plants are especially prone to absorbing heavy metals from soil, says Sean Callan, Ph.D., a neuroscientist and director of operations at Ellipse Analytics, the lab that tested the protein products.
If the plant protein was beneficial because of fiber, I’m curious, why do you think milk out performed animal protein? I wonder if it’s more about methionine rather than fiber or leucine.
Because dairy did not outperform plant protein. It was better than meet but the plant protein was the best in the end. Simon Hill did a response video that showed where Layne did not drill down into the details of the study and missed some important points especially about the benefits of plants protein versus animal and some things he just got flat out wrong. I'm hoping that layne will make a video in response to that.
Layne left out a lot of details in the discussion section, which clearly indicates that not all proteins are equally beneficial or harmful, see below, th-cam.com/video/qC3Euh8Ghbs/w-d-xo.htmlsi=LV9A0RcXc5AcRLEh
So yes Simon Hill did a video criticizing this video and I then pointed out that his conclusion was very misleading and all the study concluded was that eating 6,4% of your energy from plants protein was benefital whether there is any more benefits beyond that is at the moment unclear and needs further research to confirm... and that saying anything else then this is rather irresponsible and might cause more harm then good.... further more I told him it needs to be noted that those 6,4% was only 24g of the protein in total and that 66% of the protein consumed to produce that lower risk was animal and diary... and that him neglecting to note this is very missleading and has the potential to cause people serious harm. I then told him I have personally seen data that suggest that going above 50% of protein from plants reduces lifespan.... he then asked me for the the data... I gave him a link to the data and even offered to send over the file with the data analysed into graphs... he then removed my comment and blocked me... not very professional... btw the data can be found here ourworldindata.org
@@sport7553 nice, I like the rebuttal effort.... where in ourworldindata should I look to find the respective data? It's a very large site. and BTW if indeed Simon Hill or his troupe removed your comment from their site and blocked you, that's definitely bad form.
There are no studies that can investigate causality directly. All studies including RCTs only test for correlation. Causality is a property of a model only and no observable quantity. The only way to get to causality is through predictive power estimates from statistics. That's beyond inference statistics with it's studies and p-values. The difference between cohort studies is that RCTs can control more variables and through more complex relationships by using randomisation.
@@tofu-munchingCoalition.ofChaos The danger is when correlation is used in place of causation. Vegans/Vegetarians even do worse because they use participant recollection for all of their studies. The anti-meat industry does as well. All they are getting at best is correlation not causation yet they spout it as truth.
@@Kong-kg6ij Your comment does not engage with my comment. Try to understand statistics and the words causality and correlation in a statistical context before you make rhetorical statements.
@@Kong-kg6ij Read my comment again. Obviously you have problems with reading comprehension. If you have questions, feel free to ask. My comment was not that you conflate causation with correlation but that you don't know what these words mean.
I hear a lot that older lifters are more MPS resistant and need a higher protein diet. I’m not sure if that means “they should make sure to reach 1.6g/kg” or “they need higher than the 1.6g/kg.” It would be great if someone could point me to someone in the science-based lifting community who has addressed this specifically.
So this study DOES show that plant protein was superior for “healthy aging”? So let’s say I am eating a high amount of protein already, if I’m eating mostly animal protein (like 75% animal protein and 25% plant protein) should I attempt to eat more dietary fiber (perhaps even via supplementation) to increase longevity and healthy aging?
The study says plant protein is favourable. But not why! There are multiple types of fibre which are known to have diverse effects. Which do you want to supplement with? Plant protein contains also phytonutrients. Perhaps it's not fibre but phytonutrients. Or perhaps it's the food matrix. Fibre supplements often do not have the same effect in studies than eating plants with fibre. For example a macronutrient and fibre matched study on junk-food vs. whole foods with matched palatability still favoured whole foods for satiety and satiation. Furthermore the narration and claims around 5:50 seem to be wrong. Animal protein is negatively associated with chronic disease for example (ORs
@@tofu-munchingCoalition.ofChaos well Layne made a point to say he thinks the benefit differential in favor of plant protein is likely due to the increase in fiber and micronutrient composition of plant foods in general. So that’s why I’m curious if supplementing with dietary fiber while eating a more animal-protein dominant diet would be helpful or not, but you’re suggesting that fiber as an isolated supplement does not have the same effect as fiber in a whole food?
@@Meru112 Is supplementing fiber helpful to weaken the negative effects from animal protein sources? Evidently, yes (from other studies). Is supplementing fiber as effective as substituting animal protein sources with plant protein sources? Evidently no (from other studies).
@@tofu-munchingCoalition.ofChaos thank you for the clarification! I’m gonna try incorporating some dietary fiber supplementation and see how that works. I have intolerances to a bunch of plant foods (such as all nuts, peanuts, tofu, coconut, chickpeas, hemp, oats), so out of necessity I have to include a fair amount of quality animal proteins into my diet for my overall nutritional and protein needs.
@@Meru112 You probably already tested where the intolerance comes from or you're aware of that when you look for health content, but just to be sure: 1. Food intolerance can come from the microbiome. That can be altered (fermented food, extremely slow introduction of food, ...). A microbiome that causes food intolerance is independently a risk factor for bad health outcomes. 2. There is a ranking among animal protein sources: seafood, fermented dairy > non-fermented dairy, lean chicken meat, eggs > chicken, non-red meat > lean red meat > red meat > processed meat If you look at the outcome data than fermented dairy (especially low fat) and fish is very comparable in outcome data to plant protein sources.
I don’t think one needs to worry about that if one is eating a variety of plants foods and getting enough fiber. I get about 60-70g a day. Plenty of soluble and insoluble.
Weird how the forest plots seem to favour protein over monounsaturated fats with a large statistical significance but not saturated fats.... Would have thought the opposite.
It makes sense if you take following into account: (a) MUFA and SFA are approximately equally present in animal fat. (b) The main sources of MUFAs in a western diet is animal fat. (c) Saturated fat is also present in junk food and chocolate in a western diets. But also from plant sources. If you think how the model works, than MUFA is a good proxy for animal fat. So a substitution with protein to MUFA means likely just choosing less lean meat in the model or using more butter. Substitution with saturated fat but equal MUFA means choosing junk food or chocolate with possibly plant based saturated fat instead of animal protein sources. Most other studies that say something about MUFAs substitute animal saturated fats with liquid oils or nuts and seeds.
With that definition it shouldn't take much to climb over the bar 😂 My personal definition of healthy aging would be something like: Being able to run 5 lilometers < 25 minutes well into your 80s. I don't know if this is unrealistic, but this is what I aim for 🤷♂️
Consuming Proteins, animal/dairy/plant is good news to fight sarcopenia, I assume osteoporosis, hair, skin, nails growth. Essential, functional to move walk around in later years. Good health.🚶♀️🏋♀️
Any chance that the people that eat more protein are healthier because they have the funds available to them to spend extra on protein and therefore the funds to take better care of their health?
@@stargazerbirdNo. protein is not expensive. Think MacDonalds and Del Taco. Sure, this type of food has been made artificially cheap, through government subsidies, and it does cost the taxpayers a lot, but in reality people with very little money and access to healthcare have easy access to high amounts of protein.
It appears to me that this study is irrelevant to many people that watch this channel including Layne. Many people here are consuming over 200 grams of protein daily. In this study, I recall that Layne saying that the upper quartile in this study was 90 grams. It would have been interesting to see the results for super consumers of protein, which is a fair amount of people in the fitness community.
I wrote the above comment midway through the video. I see that Layne addressed this towards the end. Nonetheless, it still would have been good to see long term outcomes here.
He's reading/interpreting the ORs pretty incorrectly, but his main point(s) is/are still valid -- incl. about plant vs animal protein esp. w.r.t. fibre.
I think the interpretation of ORs shortly after 5:50 are incorrect, too But why is his main point still valid? Every increase in protein (except plant protein and the two last outcomes) is either inconsistent (>1 in some model and
@@tofu-munchingCoalition.ofChaos Well, the overall ORs still favour the protein groups for many (not all) end points, and definitely do so for the plant protein group -- but, as he rightly points out, this should be influenced by the fact that dietary fibre is an effect modifier here as well as a confounder, but has not specifically been studied in this study.
@@shantanusapru "... overall ORs still favour the protein groups ..." How do you come to that conclusion? Total and animal protein groups have more ORs
@@tofu-munchingCoalition.ofChaos What are you talking about?? Did you even read the paper? Don't go by the video alone! For each kind of protein, there are 3 multivariate models (adjusting for different things). See esp. Table 3. For most types of proteins, and for most end points, the effect is positive/favourable! Even Table 2 indicates similar findings/results. (BTW, OR >1 are indicative of *healthier* outcomes...) P.S.: I'm not worried about/I really don't look at/for 'statistical significance' in such research...
@@shantanusapru Let's stick with table 3. Where do you see positive results (ORs>1) for animal protein? There are 4 outcomes and 4 models. That are 16 results. I see 2 positive results of 16 (of which only 1 of 16 is significant - which is expected with no or negative effect by chance anyway). 14 of 16 results are negative (of which 7 are significant). So mostly it's negative. And statistically it's completely consistent with negative effects overall and negative effects for all outcomes are more likely. For dairy it's neutral and plant protein positive. So table 3 is exactly like I described it in my last comment. Where do you disagree?
I can’t gain weight and I’m sure there are many others. With dysautonomia, several autoimmune diseases, reactive hypoglycemia, exercise induced hypoglycemia, nocturnal hypoglycemia. Type 2 diabetes-controlled by diet. Since my autoimmune diseases and dysautonomia I’ve lost 60lbs. I struggle to not lose anymore weight. 6’ 2” and I weigh 146. I’ve been in physical therapy for 3 years. I can’t do weight training yet due to my body destroying my muscles and connective tissue. I eat over 3,000+ calories per day and when I do gain 5lbs my body then goes and loses it plus more sometimes. I was down to 138lbs. Just work out with Bands when I can and occasional walks. I’m trying to find a diet to control my blood sugar levels and gain weight. It’s difficult to find the right diet. I’m researching keto and carnivore. Any suggestions?
It’s past time America turns away from manufactured food and giant animal farms where the animals are not free range and pumped full of hormones. It’s perfectly possible for local farms to produce enough to feed the surrounding population. This would actually save the consumer money and boost the farmers economy
th-cam.com/video/ePxCeKXsD44/w-d-xo.html Plant protein vs. Dairy protein vs. Animal protein. No comparison, LOL. No doubt Layne will still say "Go eat your chicken breast"
I don’t think so. I don’t think it’s about the protein so much. I think protein in this study is the reductionist nutrient that is a marker for intake of plant foods. And plant foods come along with thousands of nutrients other than protein, which have an effect on health and longevity. Having said that, plant-based meats win over animal flesh any day.
@@EVanDoren That would probably be the healthiest option, but it is less convenient and it is harder to switch to beans than to alternatives to meat for most people.
Have you come across a video from Miche Phd Protein and Aging? She quotes studies that show no benefit from extra protein for health or even muscle mass. It's quite confusing because everything else I see is more in line with what your show in your video. She mostly blames industry influence for the differential. I don't know if it would be bad form to link it here on your channel so I won't.
I have "Miche PhD" on my radar. So far she has not misrepresented studies from ≈10 videos that I've seen. But she might have cherry picked studies (I'm suspicious in two areas but that would need more time on my end to be sure about that). Funnily enough the research presented in this video shows in main points the opposite of what is narrated in the video. He just confused numbers (result section which contains unadjusted ORs vs. table 3 which contains adjusted ORs) in the study. Table 3 (after 5:50 in the video - narration is wrong) Animal protein: significantly and consistently negatively associated with longer health span (ORs 1) And I've seen now multiple outcomes in this direction.
If as a percentage a quarter of calrioes come from protein could it be that it's not the protein itself but maybe the correlation that eatting high protein means they eatting less processed foods that usually high in carbs and fats?
Do we have any studies examining if fiber in form of supplements has the same effect as eating fruit and veggies? Because to me that seems like it would be a high correlation effect, and not direct causation, so supplements shouldnt be even remotely as effective.
![ลองสุ่มไอโฟน 990 โกงมั้ย? [ โกงมั้ยครับ ep.101 ] | DOM](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/bfsWe0j492k/mqdefault.jpg)
This is great! When I was going through breast cancer, the main thing they told me about diet was to: 1. Get at least 100g of protein per day! Now that I am using the carbon app, I am getting way more than that and also I have at least 25g of fibre per day! Hers to remission for life! ❤
Love hearing this 💪
Cutting down on protein is better advice.
Its the opposite. When you have cancer you should eat less protein because it increases cell growth
@@wtsuser not according to the doctors
@@wtsuser
Right on. Cancer grows on protein and uses fermenting sugar for energy!
Love layne when he’s calm!!🎉
Yes…he comes off like the rest of the internet zealots …when he’s screaming
Agreed
Layne's a moron.
He ll give you a taste of normalcy now and again!
Nah he's funny when he's angry!! 😅
Prefer these style videos the best from Layne
Agreed!
Just don't watch his Friday videos 😁
Yes. His Friday videos are so annoying. He is just not funny.
I love what the fitness.
You seem to have missed some things. Watch Simon Hill (The Proof)'s analysis. Would love to see your response.
Me too! I would like to see a response to the Simon Hill video. Lots of interesting points raised there, some of which were not addressed here.
Layne, Simon Hill ( The Proof) had a nice response to this video. He speaks highly of you and seems to have great amount of respect for you but he thinks you missed some keys points from this study. I personally appreciate both of you for what you do for the health and wellness community and for calling out on all the bullshit. You always say don’t take my word for it read the study, Simon has and has some different point of view about the study. Would love to hear your thoughts about it
Hey! Ditto here. I like and respect both of you and follow you closely. Simon had a lot of interesting points to make about areas that you didn't address in this video and a little bit of dispute about some of the areas that you did. Given that you've been so open-minded in the past, willing to listen to the point of view of others, and even sometimes change your mind about some things, it would be great if you make a point of responding to the points that Simon Hill has made.
I would also like to see Layne's perspective on Simon's replica (eg plat protein being superior not only because of the fiber content), but also the view on the plant & animal protein sources they mention for this study, that are totally different from what someone would expect when thinking about protein sources (pizza, icecream, fruits).
Otherwise, we are left with the impresion that Layne cherry picked, contrary to Layne reputation of great scientific papers reviewer (that I always admired). Too bad Simon only featured what bits from the video, instead of having a direct conversation.
You put this way to nicely. Layne showed table 3 in this video and just started spouting nonsense about what we could find in this table. He clearly showed a bias because he can read a bloody simple result table like this. He just chose not to. He just discredited himself where anything that comes out of his mouth needs to be checked with the actual data. This probably isn't the first time Layne messed up but one of the first times he got blatantly caught. Just a matter of time before someone digs through all of his claims and shows Layne might not actually understand statistics. Maybe he always outsourced that part of his studies to someone else? That would be very painful if that gets out. Another researcher using a high publishing model but cannot actually run and report their own statistics. Wouldn't be the first. But for Layne this would really hurt.
@"Dr" Layne Norton. Time to fix this. Because if you cannot see what this table actually says. You might want to retire the PhD title.
I appreciate the fact you showed this study and gave your own analysis of it. I'm honestly biased towards plant proteins for the simple fact that most animal protein sources come from unnatural environmental conditions (fed gmo and pesticide and herbicide laden feed) and are chocked full of medicinal chemicals (especially chicken and pork, since they have limited laws for humane treatment) and are cooped up in cages which raises their cortisol levels thanks to factory farming. Biomagnification of chemicals they intake coupled with the release of stress hormones make for a very unhealthy protein. And I'm sure there are studies out there about this, but it's been years since I've personally researched it. I understand there are "grass fed", free range types of options out there, but the environmental impact of graze space and resources used are higher than commercial farms. I personally just can't eat flesh anymore as it doesn't leave me feeling well. I feel too full, and I feel the dead, foul energy of the tortured animal I consumed. My compassion for animals and the environment won my taste buds, and I realize that I have to eat more plant protein. Not saying that if you eat meat you're a horrible person, but it was my choice for the current life I live. Maybe living on a farm where the animals were not eating and drinking a toxic soup everyday in crowded conditions would be a healthier source of protein, but that's not how humans live anymore. We go to a store and buy something wrapped in plastic, cook it on plastic coated pans, and we do it without the adventure of hunting it down like our ancestors. We ingest the extra "crap" that doesn't belong in our stomachs or theirs. I get that not everyone will agree with this, but for me personally, even being raised on mostly meat and potatoes growing up, I have found that I have loads more energy, healthier skin and movements from eating plant based primarily. There needs to be a study out there on all the wonderful chemicals used in the animal for dairy and meat production. But, it won't get funding thanks to capitalism. 🫠
@@unholyquail4560so what was your take away from this study?
I'm proud to say that now I'm also biased towards favoring protein. I never paid attention to it for 38 years of my life. Now it's almost been one year of paying attention to it (+ big confounding variables of adding exercise and minimizing junk food) and I can easily say two things: I've never felt healthier and I've never felt so satiated as I do these days.
Would you look at the table of odd ratios shortly after 5:50 again?
Doesn't the values >1 mean the good results and
Minimize animal protein to and you will feel even better!
I learnt to eat plant protein a lot, wholegrains, fibre, fruits, i also feel like a teenager right now.
I also eat meat but not that much
@@tofu-munchingCoalition.ofChaos appreciate the effort, but minions and sycophants can't read "fine print", they just suck on Layne's teat for their nutrition (lack of) understanding.
I’m 62 & never EVER gave 62 a thought in my younger years….& boy am I glad I ate healthy, & loved protein before I knew of its great benefits… appreciate the video Layne 👍
How much protein do you get? The "high protein" quintile in this study was probably averaging around 1.2 to 1.3 g/kg. If you're eating way above this (e.g. 2.2 g/kg), then this study provides little evidence for that amount of protein being healthy.
@@jakubchrobry3701those crazy high amounts are useful for two things only: bodybuilding and losing weight.
Great video! I do follow a mainly plant based diet, so happy to hear the positive reviews. I’m also going to be more careful with my protein intake - making sure it’s high enough, that is.
From what I understand, most people (like 97%) in the western world are already getting plenty. I don’t think we need to obsess about it and worry about getting more. I think we just need to ensure we are getting enough, so we are in the sweet spot. The goal isn’t to get as much as possible.
@@arambarsamian6312 They only eat plenty, because they eat mostly processed junk with processed meats.
Plant based diet is not that easy to eat a lot of protein and you need to aim on it
@@arambarsamian6312More about getting enough to support the exercise you SHOULD be doing. For most there's no point going over 0.6g/kg unless you make your body ask for more to use in the first place. Then you can use up to 1g/kg or even 1.2+ for people running ultra marathons every other day.
@@arambarsamian6312 We're (as a whole) definitely not. Many of these current videos explain the older you get the more you need. But as a whole we tend to eat LESS as we age believing we need to cut back. If anything, these tens of thousands of videos are consistently proving that we have been consistently mislead into believing biases that have had heinously detrimental effects on our health.
I simply cannot take anything anyone from a backed field or position that has time and time again actively in opposition to human health.
Everytime we listen to their studies or word in general, health issues increase and quality of life decreases. Everytime we figure things out for ourselves, our medicine cabinets become empty and quality of life increases.
Edit: I'm referring to protein intake, not plant intake.
Sounds to me like red lentil curry should be on my permanent weekly line up. Winning!!
That would be a great move in the right direction! Lentils are amazing! Also, all the veggies that go into the curry would add a bit of protein too - it all adds up!
I’d say make a stew, rather than a curry - as coconut milk is extremely high in saturated fat. According to this study, replacing saturated fat with plant protein is beneficial. I love curries too; I just wish there were a way to make them without coconut. Any ideas?
@arambarsamian6312 People cook lentils without coconut milk all the time. I've never heard of anyone using coconut milk with lentils.
@@gdtoobthat’s traditionally how curries are prepared - using coconut milk. It has a unique flavor that cannot be replaced with another nut milk. Alas…
@@arambarsamian6312 "Traditionally", there is no such thing as a "curry" other than the Western b*stardization of real eastern recipes. Some Southeast Asian and Southern Indian recipes use coconut and they mostly use whole grated coconut complete with fiber. I have never seen lentils with coconut milk other than in American restaurants or TH-cam recipes by some white chef. 90+% of "traditional" recipes do not cook lentils with coconut milk.
@@RaveyDavey 😂 One gets used to it. Also, soaking well, cooking well, and using bay leaves helps a lot. Additionally, as one eats legumes with regularity, one is constantly cultivating the bacteria that eat beans, and thus one’s microbiota gets better and better at digesting beans and the gas and bloating improve.
And finally, edamame and chickpeas, especially when consumed as hummus, appear to be much easier on the digestive system.
I like these styles of videos. And I like it when he gets passionate. You do you, Layne!
I eat at least 1g per pound of weight. I’m 41/F and lift heavy. I want to be strong heading into my older years!
Strong enough, at least. Even if we do become much weaker, which is inevitable I think, still being almost as strong as the average 20-year-old in your 70s and 80s is pretty good!
Oh yeah, strength training consistently will make you stronger than most people at ANY age.@@longlostwraith5106
The #1 antioxidant required by the body is 'glutathione' and its function is so critical to offset the effects of free radicals and oxidative stress in the body, which leads to disease, especially as you age. Interestingly, animal protein contains the most glutathione and therefore I will gladly include this source as my main source for this exact reason!
You can also supplement with NAC and glycine to boost glutathione.
Nonetheless, interestingly the study actually shows plant-based protein to be superior. I'm not a plant based person, but just saying maybe recheck the study and not what Layne said. If you need a better break down, see Simon Hill at The Proof channel for more correct reading of the study.
Simon Hill recently posted an interesting rebuttal on your conclusions of the study. Would love your thoughts on it
Ditto here, I saw the Simon Hill video and it was very interesting. He made some good points, some of which you just didn't cover here, and some were contrary to what was presented here. I'd love to hear what you think and I hope you be making a video in response sometime in the future.
Thanks for breaking this study down so clearly, and giving me something to consider with my diet.
Layne, what is your take on protein from fish? I was hoping you would split the categories of animal protein into meat & fish.
i read because when you get older you lose alittle bite the ability to digest protein . so to get the "same" amount as you did before you need to eat more protein.
Great video, I loved the fact that you didn't omit parts of the research that benefit people of one bias or another
Hi Layne, I love this video, and your content in general. However, at 6:35, you say "every single type of protein had beneficial effects". Then highlight the odds ratios in table 3. But for both total and animal protein, the effects appear to be negative in this table. It looks like you getting the 7% figure from table 2, and only with the 3rd multivariate model. In table 3, modeled continuously, "Total and animal protein intake were significantly associated with higher chronic disease risk in all models." (I edited this comment to reflect that I found the 7% you referenced).
Yep. He's interpreted incorrectly.
Yes he’s made errors here. Good to watch Simon Hill’s measured response.
Thanks Layne - great video!! I agree with what some below said - this style suits you - much better & classier than bashing others.
No one watches calm videos. They want to see blood.
@@VernCrisler :😄
Not so great for views though
Bashing BS from others in order to educate people on the right track seems fine to me.
@@aureliandumitru8382at the end of the day it’s just who shouts louder.
Thanks for sharing and explaining. Very helpful...Also, you're very inspirational. I saw your post on Instagram about your nationals outcomes (Congratulations!!). Your comments of all the physical setbacks / injuries you overcame to continue such physical accomplishments was very encouraging as I work through an injury that's sidelined my early weight lifting journey. Appreciate you sharing your experiences, challenges, and successes!
Have you made a video on what you eat for protein etc. on a daily/weekly basis? I would be interested
As regards plant protein giving better results than animal protein. Might this be confirmation of the positive effect on aging of reducing the amino acid Methionine which is more abundant in animal protein?
…and Leucine. I mean, plants provide plenty of each, but the point is animal flesh and secretions provide too much.
Also, I think that plant protein is probably a marker for plant-food intake. Sure, the levels of methionine and leucine probably have some effect, but every grant of plant protein from whole plant foods comes along with fiber vitamins, minerals, phytonutrients - thousands of nutrients that are combat inflammation and oxidation.
The ultimate conclusion of this study really should be to eat enough food (not too little) and to eat as large a percentage of one’s calories from whole plants as possible. Also, exercise (people who exercise end up eating more calories and, therefore, more protein).
I’m gaining more respect for you the more I listen ;
Are there functional reasons for you not focusing on plant protein is your own diet ? Thanks !
Awesome video, awesome interviews, awesome company - Outwork Nutrition - with that said. Dr Norton (from one Dr to another), why use Sucralose in your products given their effect on the gut microbiome? Any plans to change to Stevia?
Really beneficial explanation. Thanks
I really like this guy when he's not attacking somebody.
I liked your recent appearance on the Diary of a CEO podcast btw… it’s pretty funny and jarring to see Dr. Lustig appear on that podcast like right after you lol
Literally I could not even watch him based on his introduction I was not going to poison my mind
@@tsebosei1285 I couldn't watch him either. I've seen him in the past though. The arrogance of the guy, oof!
yeah I had exactly the same reaction
Right? I couldn’t watch that guy it was so annoying.
Lustig, what a W⚓
Love you, LAYNE! GREAT INFO FOR ME!
My take home, add the beans and rice combo along with veggies to pile up the protein and fiber on top of lean meats and top all of that off with some whey!
One additional thing: Leucine as you mentioned though an MTOR promoter didn’t seem to be a factor.
Rapamycin, an MTOR inhibitor increases lifespan in mice ( NIH ITP trials ). But did you know that Leucine was in one of the annual cohorts that results were recently released for. It didn’t increase lifespan. But, imo , more importantly didn’t decrease mouse lifespan.
What you said about people not thinking about how they feel at 70. Unfortunately it's just human behavior/mindset. Nobody thinks they're going to get sick until they actually do. Doesn't matter what their lifestyle looks like, how overweight they are, hell even getting Type II Diabetes often doesn't worry someone... Makes me a bit said to be honest. For some people, it's the "wake up call" that causes the change. For some, they don't get the second chance... Anyway great breakdown buddy this was cool.
Thank you so much for this analysis. And the comments about sarcopenia-I’m not quite 70 yet, but am stronger now than ever and loving it…and it was rather validating as my friends and other family members shake their heads at my dedication to diet and the gym. My biggest nemesis, though,is osteoporosis…a nutritionist I respect says that a high protein diet can increase calcium loss into the urine. So I guess that,for me, it’s balancing the positive effects of high protein with that risk…
*I'm stronger...
A low fat high carbohydrate diet is 100%! The best diet to live to 100 still kicking and screaming, Carbs FTW!! 💪💪💪
😂😂😂
Diet is religion
We dont know
Tell that to Dr McDougall.
@@Sorrydidyouspeak the one who died in his 70s?
I just started eating more protein i will be 52 next month and i feel a lot better, I also quit fasting what a waste of time and energy. I know layne is against this but I also started collagen peptide after being off for a year and having joint pain, its been 3 months now and i feel a lot better still not for building muscles. Eggs meat chicken, nuts, protein bread, cottage cheese before bed, also boosted fiber intake fruits and veggies. Seems to be working so far.
It’s not easy to get junk food protein unless you count the shakes so it probably means you are eating less low nutrient high calorie foodstuffs. There are so many confounding factors there. Protein is more expensive so indicates higher income with all the benefits that go with that. People who workout eat more protein and that could easily explain the results.
I hear Layne say they controlled for variables but I don’t understand how they do that.
If you like I could try to explain it (see below - feel free to ask for more). If you want to read the literature or Wikipedia it's called *Cox proportional hazards model.*
Btw. Animal (and total protein) in this study was associated with shorter health spans when adjusted. The video just cited the wrong numbers. Not the one in table 3 (ORs1 good), but the ones from the result section. These are the unadjusted number.
Explanation of adjustment:
Find variables a and b sich that
a^(age [year])*b^(protein intake [in %])
best describe the number of bad health outcomes. Best is in the sense of maximum likelihood. So you choose the variables that most likely produce such outcomes as observed.
Then
b^(protein intake [in %])
is the number of bad health outcomes that could not be explained by giving age a risk factor. Then
b³
is the odds ratio of bad health outcomes by increasing protein intake by 3% that can't be explained by giving age a risk factor.
Great video!
Thank you for including the link to the cited study!
Nice analysis and I enjoy seeing this cool toned in depth yet concise style vids
Dear Layne , we need your second series Dr Lustig debunking pleaaaasseeeee !!!!
*I think this needs a correction video.* That would be a wonderful example of "I accept data and be honest when I made mistakes". Something that is missing on the internet a lot.
The video misrepresents the data. After 5:50 the narration says something different (the opposite) than what the table 3 (which is on screen during narration) shows:
Total and animal protein is harmful.
Dairy statistically neutral.
Plant protein sources beneficial.
The narration is about the unadjusted data in the result section. Even just adjusting for age is enough to change the conclusions (see table 3).
Age adjusted, the data shows favorability for dairy protein, but yes, the multivariate models bounce around neutrality.
And, yes, this clearly suggests a strong case for plant protein. I get his point that fiber is not controlled for, but he seems a little dismissive of plant protein. It certainly suggests it couldn’t hurt to add a good bit of plant protein to one’s diet.
Saw that also, I thought I was crazy, were he get the numbers he was saying from ?
@@Isaiaswolf66
As I said in the comment above it's the unadjusted (so the wrong numbers for what he wanted to say) data from the result section in the paper.
I don't think he has read the study.
@@michaelstone9701
I essentially agree.
If you look at the paper and the supplementary data analysis of this paper mentioned in it, you see that the association with reasonable plant protein sources is even stronger.
58% of the plant protein comes from bread, pizza, backed goods, potatoes, ... .
Things they show are unfavorably associated (refined carbs) or very weakly associated with health span.
Furthermore 23% (vegetables and fruit) explain half of the effect size.
And legumes, beans, nuts and peanut butter (12%) and others (6%) the rest of the effect. So it seems "real" plant protein sources have an even larger effect than what was presented.
Animal protein was pretty "clean" to my surprise.
I would have wished they had done a more sensible analysis of food groups. Looking at macros or such general food groups (where you mix expected healthy with expected unhealthy food), you can't really tell what's happening and it's not actionable.
The strange results with MUFAs is an example of that. Increasing MUFAs in this group means typically: less chocolate, less backed goods, ... and more animal fat.
Not what I picture when I think about increasing MUFAs.
@@tofu-munchingCoalition.ofChaos You keep saying backed goods. What are backed goods? Do you mean BAKED goods?
Nice to see the general community acknowledging the benefits of plant protein. Awesome results.
th-cam.com/video/BqmG2y4IeY8/w-d-xo.htmlsi=qkgy-L6NfGjfwYTh
the benefit is the fibre - we've always eaten plants with our meats anyway.
@@Petunia-fl9lu Eskimos didn't. There are lots of people who don't eat plants, strict carnivore, perfectly healthy.
And by that I don't say that we shouldn't eat plants.
@@JCKeus-cx1wm
The Inuit have a genetic adaptation that prevents them from going into ketosis. This has enabled them to survive in an environment in which there are very few plants to eat. Their diet is not something that is generalizable to the rest of the world’s population.
Also, they are not perfectly healthy.
@@arambarsamian6312 it is not a genetic adaptation, but an environmental adaptation. They are healthy but have harsh lives in the cold. As soon as they move to US and adapt to their poisonous eating habits the get fat and die young too.
Great video, thanks Layne
Really insightful video! I wonder whether in addition to fibre whether phytochemicals are contributing a little bit to the benefits of plant protein?
No doubt! There are thousands of them: lutein, zeaxanthin, lycopene, etc… Their benefits have been observed for decades. Whole plant foods in general have anti-inflammatory and antioxidant properties. No doubt these properties contribute to thriving. No wonder the Adventist vegans are the healthiest population on earth right now.
What about high protein and prostate issues or kidney issues? Haven't some studies said high protein is bad for the mentioned areas. Thanks.
I don't recall the individual research numbers, but at least kidneys have been studied and they didn't find any issues up to "unrealistic levels".
As always, if you're actually sick then you should follow the instructions from the dietician at the hospital that specialises on the specific thing.
@@PSA78 thanks was just curious really i read studies and wanted some input. Thank you.
Meat, dairy, beans, lentils and quinoa 👍
Before I read the study:
Was there a stronger correlation between higher plant protein intake and lower calorie intake/body weight then between animal protein and calorie intake/body weight? 🤔
Whole sources of plant protein tend to be less calorie dense and more satiating per calorie. Calorie restriction might have been a factor.
Thoughts?
Love this. The only downside for me regarding fiber is if I get too much, as in 40 grams or more I am bloated the next day
I used to eat 60-70g. The farting was insane
Haha. Same. I’m already regular, so adding more fiber is no bueno
40 g isn't much.
Thanks. This kind of video is way better, instead, you are talking about what some random guy said or thought.
Love these videos, great content!
Great video! Would be keen to know if they parsed out the benefit of lean meats vs say fatty or processed meats. Would also be keen to see which plant protein sources are best.
I'd love to get Layne's take on blue zones around the world where people more consistently live for 100 years. From what I understand most of them have significantly lower protein intake over their entire life span. Food for thought 🤔?
Good work thank you
A real conundrum in protein intake is how to stave off sarcopenia in someone with early kidney failure who has been prescribed a low protein diet. Obviously lifting will help, but how can muscle protein synthesis occur on a low protein diet?
Thank you Layne!!!!
At 67 i try to get 1gm per lbs of IDEAL bodyweight
When someone asks me why eat so much protein as I do - I ask them what do whole foods high in protein contain ?
Protein rich foods are densely packed with micronutrients.
The effect on healthspan from high protein foods has likely about
33% to do with filling protein needs,
33% managing normal energy balance,
33% to do with almost full spectra of minerals, vitamines and phytonutrients.
Protein rich foods are objectively the highest quality (most energy and time consuming) animal or plant can produce (eggs, nuts, seeds, liver, meats).
Quality over palatability. Print it to a t-shirt.
Animal foods do not contain phytonutrients. And if they do, it’s because the animal ate plants. Animal foods are the opposite of nutrient-dense. Per-calorie they deliver large quantities of a *a few* nutrients (often too much, actually), but when one compares them with the nutrients supplied by plants, there is just no contest. Animal foods do not contain fiber, so for every gram of animal protein, one gets *zero* fiber. That’s one of the many costs of eating animal foods.
If one is interested in increasing protein in order to increase health- and lifespan, one should include more legumes, whole grains, seeds, nuts, and vegetables into one’s diet - all of which have already been shown to be protective in regards to health and increasing longevity. Fruits are the only plant foods that are considered low in protein - and they too have been shown to be protective. Unlike red meat, which is a class-2 carcinogen.
@@arambarsamian6312 To get the around 200g of high quality protein a day pure plant based food is practically out of the question for me and for many performance athletes with significant bodyweight.
The other thing is plant based food places where there is real winter is only good food in summer time. Winter time fresh plants tase like garbage, they contain massive amounts of pollutants of every kind and lack almost all the nutrients they are known for. I am convinced they beat fast food in their impact of poor health outcomes.
Wrt phytonutr - legumes and nuts do contain them and are good significant source of protein - that is the only reason I mentioned them.
What nutrients do most greens, fruits and veggies contain per kg is better metric than what they contain per kcal. It is a struggle to pack in the veggies, grains, fruit (how many kg) to get same amounts of minerals and vitamins one can get from few hundred grams of eggs or liver or fish.
Fibre needs to come form something else, vitamin C probably as well.
Only plant foods in the proximity are nuts, seeds, some legumes and perhaps berries. I love berries and this would be the only plant food I could never drop from my menu.
You want to take on some truly nutrient deprived food source per unit kcal of energy - it is grains and oils/fat.
Can you please do a video on seed oils? :) please and thank you, Sir.
I think the protein itself is also better from plants. Maybe look what dr greger has to say about it. I’m not saying that it is bad to eat meat and living healthy with meat is better than living crappy vegetarian, but still there is a effect, although other factors might be much more impactful.
Consumer Reports
December 3, 2018 - Plant-based proteins may have higher contamination levels because the plants are especially prone to absorbing heavy metals from soil, says Sean Callan, Ph.D., a neuroscientist and director of operations at Ellipse Analytics, the lab that tested the protein products.
You forget that animals eating herbicides and pesticides biomagnify those chemicals and once you eat them, their concentrations are much higher.
@@Not.going.back777 That's why I always check any supplements & many health foods at Consumer Lab & LabDoor, who test many of them.
If the plant protein was beneficial because of fiber, I’m curious, why do you think milk out performed animal protein? I wonder if it’s more about methionine rather than fiber or leucine.
Because dairy did not outperform plant protein. It was better than meet but the plant protein was the best in the end. Simon Hill did a response video that showed where Layne did not drill down into the details of the study and missed some important points especially about the benefits of plants protein versus animal and some things he just got flat out wrong. I'm hoping that layne will make a video in response to that.
Layne left out a lot of details in the discussion section, which clearly indicates that not all proteins are equally beneficial or harmful, see below,
th-cam.com/video/qC3Euh8Ghbs/w-d-xo.htmlsi=LV9A0RcXc5AcRLEh
So yes Simon Hill did a video criticizing this video and I then pointed out that his conclusion was very misleading and all the study concluded was that eating 6,4% of your energy from plants protein was benefital whether there is any more benefits beyond that is at the moment unclear and needs further research to confirm... and that saying anything else then this is rather irresponsible and might cause more harm then good.... further more I told him it needs to be noted that those 6,4% was only 24g of the protein in total and that 66% of the protein consumed to produce that lower risk was animal and diary... and that him neglecting to note this is very missleading and has the potential to cause people serious harm. I then told him I have personally seen data that suggest that going above 50% of protein from plants reduces lifespan.... he then asked me for the the data... I gave him a link to the data and even offered to send over the file with the data analysed into graphs... he then removed my comment and blocked me... not very professional... btw the data can be found here ourworldindata.org
@@sport7553 nice, I like the rebuttal effort.... where in ourworldindata should I look to find the respective data? It's a very large site.
and BTW if indeed Simon Hill or his troupe removed your comment from their site and blocked you, that's definitely bad form.
Magnificent Dr❤😮😊
Remember all cohort studies are not causal but correlative. Big difference.
There are no studies that can investigate causality directly. All studies including RCTs only test for correlation.
Causality is a property of a model only and no observable quantity.
The only way to get to causality is through predictive power estimates from statistics. That's beyond inference statistics with it's studies and p-values.
The difference between cohort studies is that RCTs can control more variables and through more complex relationships by using randomisation.
@@tofu-munchingCoalition.ofChaos The danger is when correlation is used in place of causation. Vegans/Vegetarians even do worse because they use participant recollection for all of their studies. The anti-meat industry does as well. All they are getting at best is correlation not causation yet they spout it as truth.
@@Kong-kg6ij
Your comment does not engage with my comment.
Try to understand statistics and the words causality and correlation in a statistical context before you make rhetorical statements.
@@tofu-munchingCoalition.ofChaos You are the one conflating the two not me.
@@Kong-kg6ij
Read my comment again. Obviously you have problems with reading comprehension. If you have questions, feel free to ask.
My comment was not that you conflate causation with correlation but that you don't know what these words mean.
I hear a lot that older lifters are more MPS resistant and need a higher protein diet. I’m not sure if that means “they should make sure to reach 1.6g/kg” or “they need higher than the 1.6g/kg.” It would be great if someone could point me to someone in the science-based lifting community who has addressed this specifically.
Hello Dr could you please review the Paper: Regular use of fish oil supplements and course of cardiovascular diseases: prospective cohort study.
Very informative!!!
thank you layne
Dr Gregor and Huel are going to go mad on this!
Especially if you have cancer or Aids cachexia bemes a strong possibility
Great News, thanks!
Great video!!!
Leaving the comment for the community guidelines
Weird question.. where’s your shirt from?
Great video. Wish I could like it more than once. Even so, commenting for the algorithm 😊
So this study DOES show that plant protein was superior for “healthy aging”? So let’s say I am eating a high amount of protein already, if I’m eating mostly animal protein (like 75% animal protein and 25% plant protein) should I attempt to eat more dietary fiber (perhaps even via supplementation) to increase longevity and healthy aging?
The study says plant protein is favourable. But not why!
There are multiple types of fibre which are known to have diverse effects. Which do you want to supplement with? Plant protein contains also phytonutrients. Perhaps it's not fibre but phytonutrients. Or perhaps it's the food matrix.
Fibre supplements often do not have the same effect in studies than eating plants with fibre. For example a macronutrient and fibre matched study on junk-food vs. whole foods with matched palatability still favoured whole foods for satiety and satiation.
Furthermore the narration and claims around 5:50 seem to be wrong. Animal protein is negatively associated with chronic disease for example (ORs
@@tofu-munchingCoalition.ofChaos well Layne made a point to say he thinks the benefit differential in favor of plant protein is likely due to the increase in fiber and micronutrient composition of plant foods in general. So that’s why I’m curious if supplementing with dietary fiber while eating a more animal-protein dominant diet would be helpful or not, but you’re suggesting that fiber as an isolated supplement does not have the same effect as fiber in a whole food?
@@Meru112
Is supplementing fiber helpful to weaken the negative effects from animal protein sources? Evidently, yes (from other studies).
Is supplementing fiber as effective as substituting animal protein sources with plant protein sources?
Evidently no (from other studies).
@@tofu-munchingCoalition.ofChaos thank you for the clarification! I’m gonna try incorporating some dietary fiber supplementation and see how that works. I have intolerances to a bunch of plant foods (such as all nuts, peanuts, tofu, coconut, chickpeas, hemp, oats), so out of necessity I have to include a fair amount of quality animal proteins into my diet for my overall nutritional and protein needs.
@@Meru112
You probably already tested where the intolerance comes from or you're aware of that when you look for health content, but just to be sure:
1. Food intolerance can come from the microbiome. That can be altered (fermented food, extremely slow introduction of food, ...).
A microbiome that causes food intolerance is independently a risk factor for bad health outcomes.
2. There is a ranking among animal protein sources: seafood, fermented dairy > non-fermented dairy, lean chicken meat, eggs > chicken, non-red meat > lean red meat > red meat > processed meat
If you look at the outcome data than fermented dairy (especially low fat) and fish is very comparable in outcome data to plant protein sources.
For Fibre - should we be getting a balance of insoluble and soluble Layne?
I don’t think one needs to worry about that if one is eating a variety of plants foods and getting enough fiber. I get about 60-70g a day. Plenty of soluble and insoluble.
Weird how the forest plots seem to favour protein over monounsaturated fats with a large statistical significance but not saturated fats.... Would have thought the opposite.
It makes sense if you take following into account:
(a) MUFA and SFA are approximately equally present in animal fat.
(b) The main sources of MUFAs in a western diet is animal fat.
(c) Saturated fat is also present in junk food and chocolate in a western diets. But also from plant sources.
If you think how the model works, than MUFA is a good proxy for animal fat. So a substitution with protein to MUFA means likely just choosing less lean meat in the model or using more butter.
Substitution with saturated fat but equal MUFA means choosing junk food or chocolate with possibly plant based saturated fat instead of animal protein sources.
Most other studies that say something about MUFAs substitute animal saturated fats with liquid oils or nuts and seeds.
With that definition it shouldn't take much to climb over the bar 😂
My personal definition of healthy aging would be something like: Being able to run 5 lilometers < 25 minutes well into your 80s. I don't know if this is unrealistic, but this is what I aim for 🤷♂️
Consuming Proteins, animal/dairy/plant is good news to fight sarcopenia, I assume osteoporosis, hair, skin, nails growth. Essential, functional to move walk around in later years. Good health.🚶♀️🏋♀️
Plant Based Protein for the Win!
LOL yeah, if you read all the comments then it's clear they didn't hear that.
Excellent
Any chance that the people that eat more protein are healthier because they have the funds available to them to spend extra on protein and therefore the funds to take better care of their health?
Good question!
As everything you should to eat you can grow except for the protein I doubt it.
It's mote pikely that people who eat more protein tend to care more about their health in general.
Protein is expensive so I would imagine higher protein goes hand in hand with better healthcare, less stress, better all round environment.
@@stargazerbirdNo. protein is not expensive. Think MacDonalds and Del Taco. Sure, this type of food has been made artificially cheap, through government subsidies, and it does cost the taxpayers a lot, but in reality people with very little money and access to healthcare have easy access to high amounts of protein.
It appears to me that this study is irrelevant to many people that watch this channel including Layne. Many people here are consuming over 200 grams of protein daily. In this study, I recall that Layne saying that the upper quartile in this study was 90 grams. It would have been interesting to see the results for super consumers of protein, which is a fair amount of people in the fitness community.
I wrote the above comment midway through the video. I see that Layne addressed this towards the end. Nonetheless, it still would have been good to see long term outcomes here.
I must not be looking at the same studies, because we sure do disagree with the conclusions
He's reading/interpreting the ORs pretty incorrectly, but his main point(s) is/are still valid -- incl. about plant vs animal protein esp. w.r.t. fibre.
I think the interpretation of ORs shortly after 5:50 are incorrect, too
But why is his main point still valid?
Every increase in protein (except plant protein and the two last outcomes) is either inconsistent (>1 in some model and
@@tofu-munchingCoalition.ofChaos Well, the overall ORs still favour the protein groups for many (not all) end points, and definitely do so for the plant protein group -- but, as he rightly points out, this should be influenced by the fact that dietary fibre is an effect modifier here as well as a confounder, but has not specifically been studied in this study.
@@shantanusapru
"... overall ORs still favour the protein groups ..."
How do you come to that conclusion?
Total and animal protein groups have more ORs
@@tofu-munchingCoalition.ofChaos What are you talking about??
Did you even read the paper? Don't go by the video alone!
For each kind of protein, there are 3 multivariate models (adjusting for different things).
See esp. Table 3. For most types of proteins, and for most end points, the effect is positive/favourable!
Even Table 2 indicates similar findings/results.
(BTW, OR >1 are indicative of *healthier* outcomes...)
P.S.: I'm not worried about/I really don't look at/for 'statistical significance' in such research...
@@shantanusapru
Let's stick with table 3.
Where do you see positive results (ORs>1) for animal protein?
There are 4 outcomes and 4 models. That are 16 results.
I see 2 positive results of 16 (of which only 1 of 16 is significant - which is expected with no or negative effect by chance anyway).
14 of 16 results are negative (of which 7 are significant).
So mostly it's negative. And statistically it's completely consistent with negative effects overall and negative effects for all outcomes are more likely.
For dairy it's neutral and plant protein positive. So table 3 is exactly like I described it in my last comment.
Where do you disagree?
I can’t gain weight and I’m sure there are many others. With dysautonomia, several autoimmune diseases, reactive hypoglycemia, exercise induced hypoglycemia, nocturnal hypoglycemia. Type 2 diabetes-controlled by diet. Since my autoimmune diseases and dysautonomia I’ve lost 60lbs. I struggle to not lose anymore weight. 6’ 2” and I weigh 146. I’ve been in physical therapy for 3 years. I can’t do weight training yet due to my body destroying my muscles and connective tissue.
I eat over 3,000+ calories per day and when I do gain 5lbs my body then goes and loses it plus more sometimes. I was down to 138lbs. Just work out with Bands when I can and occasional walks. I’m trying to find a diet to control my blood sugar levels and gain weight. It’s difficult to find the right diet. I’m researching keto and carnivore. Any suggestions?
It’s past time America turns away from manufactured food and giant animal farms where the animals are not free range and pumped full of hormones. It’s perfectly possible for local farms to produce enough to feed the surrounding population. This would actually save the consumer money and boost the farmers economy
th-cam.com/video/ePxCeKXsD44/w-d-xo.html
Plant protein vs. Dairy protein vs. Animal protein. No comparison, LOL. No doubt Layne will still say "Go eat your chicken breast"
Comment for the algorithm, thanks for the video.
yeah
Showing the wrong data table in the section from 5:50 to 7:15
seems like results that vegans will love
For the algorithm!
Plant-based meat alternatives for the win?
I don’t think so. I don’t think it’s about the protein so much. I think protein in this study is the reductionist nutrient that is a marker for intake of plant foods. And plant foods come along with thousands of nutrients other than protein, which have an effect on health and longevity.
Having said that, plant-based meats win over animal flesh any day.
@@arambarsamian6312 That is a fair assessment.
Why meat alternatives? Just cook legumes.
@@EVanDoren That would probably be the healthiest option, but it is less convenient and it is harder to switch to beans than to alternatives to meat for most people.
@@VeggoFix Lentils are super-easy to cook.
Have you come across a video from Miche Phd Protein and Aging? She quotes studies that show no benefit from extra protein for health or even muscle mass. It's quite confusing because everything else I see is more in line with what your show in your video. She mostly blames industry influence for the differential. I don't know if it would be bad form to link it here on your channel so I won't.
I have "Miche PhD" on my radar. So far she has not misrepresented studies from ≈10 videos that I've seen. But she might have cherry picked studies (I'm suspicious in two areas but that would need more time on my end to be sure about that).
Funnily enough the research presented in this video shows in main points the opposite of what is narrated in the video.
He just confused numbers (result section which contains unadjusted ORs vs. table 3 which contains adjusted ORs) in the study.
Table 3 (after 5:50 in the video - narration is wrong)
Animal protein: significantly and consistently negatively associated with longer health span (ORs 1)
And I've seen now multiple outcomes in this direction.
So what I take from this study is that if I live exclusively on pea protein shakes I will live forever!
If as a percentage a quarter of calrioes come from protein could it be that it's not the protein itself but maybe the correlation that eatting high protein means they eatting less processed foods that usually high in carbs and fats?
No, it's the underestimation of other foods.
to me it looked like mono unsaturated did better but maybe I looked at it wrong, could you maybe make a video on mono vs. poly unsaturated fats?
All whole plant foods have protein.
Do we have any studies examining if fiber in form of supplements has the same effect as eating fruit and veggies? Because to me that seems like it would be a high correlation effect, and not direct causation, so supplements shouldnt be even remotely as effective.