I never heard of this, what do you guys think?

HEMP PROTEIN VIDEO

coconutcream Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I never heard of this, what do you guys think?
>
> HEMP PROTEIN VIDEO

Thumbs down. If you feel the need just dehydrate free organically grown wild heirloom crab grass.

1. Those highly processed "raw" foods are probably worse than cooked.

2. I see no reason to chase after more protein; studies are showing
lower protein intakes are associated with reduced risks for cancers
and CHD. Overall morality is much lower for lowest protein intakes.

The only time you would want to look for more protein is when you
are geriatric and your system is less effective at extracting it from
your foodstuffs. In that event, if you system does not work well
AND you have a low protein intake, you might want to bump it up.

For MADO and just about everyone else here, geriatricity is a long
way away.

Ref: Cell Metabolism 19, 407–417, March 4, 2014

You don't have to be old to have health crisis' that deplete the bodies' ability to utilize enough protein. It happens to people all the time.It's not a bad idea to have some extra easily digestible raw vegan protein powder around in case of emergencies. If stored properly it can stay good enough for many years.

If you pay attention, you would notice that they don't include the aminoacid lysine (collagen, skin, bones, tissue, brain, etc). Hemp has minute amounts of lysine and it is as if it did not have any. The best sources of raw lysine are nuts and seeds. That is probably the only one you would need to focus on.

[examine.com]

Quote

The protein portion of hemp is not a complete protein source, due to being low in Lysine (the rate limiting essential amino acid); it is also relatively low in Leucine, but is relatively high in both L-Tyrosine and Arginine.

sample diet
1679 calories
bananas lettuce celery dates tomatoes mangoes

lysine 112%

so how is it limiting? doesn't seem limiting to me.

in fact that sample diet provides sufficient amounts of all nutrients according to cron.
not as hard as it's made out to be.

it's the cookers that should be concerned, not us.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/27/2015 05:48PM by fresh.

[www.veganhealth.org]

Quote

Lysine: The Limiting Amino Acid in Vegan Diets

Before getting into a somewhat technical discussion about the protein needs of vegans, let's just cut to the chase - the RDA for lysine is more important than for protein. If you meet lysine requirements on a vegan diet, you will most likely meet protein requirements.

Per serving, legumes and seitan are the foods highest in the amino acid lysine. Tofu, tempeh, soy meats, lentils, and seitan are the highest, followed by other legume foods. Quinoa, pistachios, and pumpkin seeds are also decent sources of lysine.

It is very hard to design a vegan diet that meets lysine requirements for a person who does not exercise daily without including legumes, seitan, quinoa, pistachios, or pumpkin seeds without having too many calories. It is much easier to do for regular exercisers whose calorie requirements are higher - the low lysine foods will add up to provide enough. While many vegan, raw foodist athletes appear to thrive on the diet many raw foodist non-athletes struggle with raw diets; it might be the case that part of this is due to the athletes eating more calories and thus meeting lysine needs with low lysine foods.

i just showed you the foods, the calories (which is quite low) and the lysine percent according to cron, which is just as acceptable as anything else.

why do you fall for the common "nutritionist" nonsense?

it has NOTHING to do with how much someone is exercising!
food intake increases accordingly

why is your vague statement above more valid to you than actual numbers that i just showed you?

don't you see that they have no idea what we are eating and therefore any ridiculous statements about how HARD it is are bogus?

do you see that you are doing the EXACT same thing as powerlifter? pulling bogus statements about VEGANS? we are not cooked VEGANS, we are raw vegans, or close to it, totally different foods, totally different nutrition.


here is a study

[ajcn.nutrition.org]

the lysine in my sample diet was 1.7, and i wasn't even trying, and it didn't contain any nuts or seeds

the study says 1.5mg is good

1.7 is higher than 1.5, last time i checked.

another example of false nutritional dogma causing someone to eat suboptimal/dried foods.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 01/27/2015 06:19PM by fresh.

Nutiva brand 15 g hemp protein is rich in iron. I personally think it's great for women around their period. You can always eat other foods to create complementary amino acid ratios. I personally just use hemp seeds most of the time. It is much easier to make and drink hemp seed milk than hemp protein smoothies. Plus hemp seed milk or salad dressing tastes better when made with other seeds and nuts, so that changes the amino acid profile.

Panchito,
Did you post your diet here on the forum? Can you share a link, if you did? I am curious what you eat with so much interesting knowledge that you have.

154% is the iron content of the diet posted above.

not enough?

fresh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> the study says 1.5mg is good
>
> 1.7 is higher than 1.5, last time i checked.
>
> another example of false nutritional dogma causing
> someone to eat suboptimal/dried foods.


Fresh, I hope not to bring negative waves but not even counting absorption/availability, 1.5 miligrams (a thousands of a gram) a day is nothing to build/support tissue, bones, skin, hormones, etc. To put it in perspective, just a single chickpea weights 1000 times more than that.

i made a mistake there. it's grams, not mg.

if you had read the study you would have known that.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/27/2015 07:05PM by fresh.

fresh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> sample diet
> 1679 calories
> bananas lettuce celery dates tomatoes mangoes
>
> lysine 112%
>
> so how is it limiting? doesn't seem limiting to
> me.
>
> in fact that sample diet provides sufficient
> amounts of all nutrients according to cron.
> not as hard as it's made out to be.
>
> it's the cookers that should be concerned, not us.


Vitamins and minerals are easy to obtain - that's nutrition 101. The sample diet you posted is not only very low in omega-3's (specifically EPA & DHA) but also antioxidants, phytochemicals, and enzymes compared to lots of other foods.

It's very clear that you have an agenda against nutritionists and others working in health-related positions. It's okay that you don't know as much as others in regards to health and nutrition, but pretending like nobody has answers just because you don't have the answers is nothing but close-minded and delusional. Your ego prevents you from higher education.

This is one of your quotes from another thread - "forgive me if I expect more from someone who is going to base their own regimen on such unscientific anecdotes" - I guess science only matters when you decide it does, right? It doesn't matter when it comes to super foods, phytochemicals, ALA to EPA/DHA conversion rates, etc., only when criticizing Brian Clement (someone in a health-related position).

Then you say this in another thread - "but of course we will now be bombarded with musings of how none of it is true, and there were no double blind placebo controlled studies", acting as if science doesn't matter at all. Are you a troll? Are you subconsciously continuously seeking arguments? Do you not understand that much of your very beliefs are unscientifically supported yet you attempt to bash Brian Clement for being unscientific?

I could not find anything worthy of response, prindl.
glad you had some fun though

jtprindl,

all that wasted typing, all those pointless keystrokes !

better be careful, this may happen to you

[www.youtube.com]



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/27/2015 07:29PM by fresh.

fresh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I could not find anything worthy of response,
> prindl.
> glad you had some fun though


More like you could not find anything you could refute so you decided to act like it wasn't "worthy" of response as a pathetic way to save face.

*My edit after your edit*

I don't see any of it as pointless as now others can see you for what you truly are, an extremely biased, uneducated troll seeking for arguments who consistently changes his opinions of science when it's convenient.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/27/2015 07:32PM by jtprindl.

lovely, jtprindl, now if you can for a second stop diverting the discussion....

the discussion was about lysine.

that lysine is limiting and low and we need nuts/seeds esp when "exercising"

proven otherwise by my simple example, which contained FACTS, as opposed to vague declarative statements about irrelevant "vegan" diets.

what one could respond with, if one were panchito for example, is, "oh, that's interesting, i hadn't considered that"

or

"hmmm, thanks for that data i will check into it"

or something else that would require a questioning of dearly held beliefs .


has NOTHING to do with your usual efa rantings, or any of your other "stuff"

perhaps you should leave this to panchito, if you have trouble staying on point.

"lovely, jtprindl, now if you can for a second stop diverting the discussion....

the discussion was about lysine."

Why are you contradicting yourself? I thought nothing I posted was even worthy of a response yet you've posted two - none of which addressed anything in my initial response (but we already know the truth about why you haven't, you simply cannot refute a single one of my facts).

Secondly, my response was aligned with your comments on this very same thread, you know - "why do you fall for the common "nutritionist" nonsense?" - again portraying your agenda against nutritionists and those in health-related positions, otherwise known as people who know a lot more than you do when it comes to health and nutrition.

I would say that you can get by with low lysine for a while but problems could accumulate on a long term

This source suggest a reasonable requirement of lysine per body weight:

[www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov]

Quote

Recent intake recommendations to meet the lysine requirement range from 64 to 30 mg/(kg.d) for 0.5-y infants and adults (>18 y), respectively.

If we chose the lowest possible, 30mg per Kg of body weight. And lets say that a person weights 70 kg, then the lowest daily lysine requirement would be 70x30 = 2100mg. Note, the above study does not differenciate between plant protein abortion (50%) and animal protein absortion (100%), which could tilt things unfavorably.

Here is an online table with the lysine content of foods:

[www.herpes.com]

Mango 300g 85mg
banana 100g 55mg
dates 83g 50mg
celery 120g 32mg
romain-lettuce 100g 100mg

How do you come up with a bare minimum of 2100 mg of lysine from those foods? (exqample 30 bananas = 30x55 = 1650 mg of lysine). Note, some people would need higher even twice as much

PS: compare with:

almonds 142g 946mg
sesame seeds 150g 1240mg
pumkin seeds 140g 2530mg

these are some mental effects of lysine deficiency that could help identify a problem: [www.livestrong.com]

Quote

Low lysine levels may cause excessive fatigue, which may make it difficult for you to remain focused or attentive during your normal daily activities. You may also experience unusual mood changes, such as irritability, agitation or poor concentration. Mood-related changes may negatively affect your relationships with family, friends or colleagues. Contact your physician if you experience sudden or significant shifts in your mood to ensure that you receive appropriate treatment and care.

thanks for sharing panchito.

a person 70 kg would easily get 2g lysine because they would be eating more calorically than my example.

but i suppose there are those who wish to see a raw diet as problematic,
and those who don't.

> again portraying your agenda against nutritionists and those in health-related positions, otherwise known as people who know a lot more than you do when it comes to health and nutrition.

yes, I have an "agenda" against nutritionists.

what is your point?

you wish to claim that they know more than i do?

fine!

you think I care what you think i know?


lysine remains a no brainer. a non issue.

the data speaks for itself, even though panchito made an attempt.

it's only an issue for those who wish to eat nuts/beans and find a justification to do so.

fresh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------


> it's only an issue for those who wish to eat
> nuts/beans and find a justification to do so.

Are raw nuts, seeds, and beans taboo in your whacky version of raw vegan?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/27/2015 09:19PM by SueZ.

SueZ Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> fresh Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
>
> > it's only an issue for those who wish to eat
> > nuts/beans and find a justification to do so.
>
> Are raw nuts and seeds taboo in your whacky
> version of raw vegan?

ah, zeus, are you unable to have a civil convo, ever?

no, my dear, they are not taboo, just not ideal.

my point was, as i have said, many people (including myself in the past), eat things because of nutritional concerns that are actually not valid, and that those choices are actually less healthful.

fresh Wrote:
> my point was, as i have said, many people
> (including myself in the past), eat things because
> of nutritional concerns that are actually not
> valid, and that those choices are actually less
> healthful.

Are you trying to say raw beans, nuts, and seeds are less "healthful" than, say, this ... "bananas lettuce celery dates tomatoes mangoes" in your personal favorite food religion?

"yes, I have an "agenda" against nutritionists.

what is your point?

you wish to claim that they know more than i do?

fine!

you think I care what you think i know?"


The fact that you have an agenda against a specific group of people clearly exemplifies a major mental imbalance and emotional instability. That is a telling sign of someone who's brain is malnourished or overburdened with toxicity.

I don't "think" you're uneducated when it comes to health and nutrition, it's a well-established fact from what you post. You're not even consistent with your irrationalities - some threads science is very important, others it's irrelevant, all depending on whether or not it happens to be consistent with your current beliefs. Your aggressive attitude towards a targeted group of individuals combined with your delusional thinking patterns and complete lack of logic leaves little doubt that your dietary choices are quite suboptimal, and that you're just some random egotistical raw foodist who thinks he knows a lot more than he actually does.

My initial post stands correct.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/27/2015 10:15PM by jtprindl.

SueZ Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> fresh Wrote:
> > my point was, as i have said, many people
> > (including myself in the past), eat things
> because
> > of nutritional concerns that are actually not
> > valid, and that those choices are actually less
> > healthful.
>
> Are you trying to say raw beans, nuts, and seeds
> are less "healthful" than, say, this ... "bananas
> lettuce celery dates tomatoes mangoes" in your
> personal favorite food religion?

yes !

still puzzled that you refer to others diets as religion,
and yours not as religion?
really not necessary.
doesn't matter to me what anybody eats, just sharing and learning here.
too much attachment and defensiveness.

"still puzzled that you refer to others diets as religion,"

Because of your irrational, close-minded, dogmatic, unsupported views on how everyone should eat under the delusional assumption that everyone is the same.

jtprindl Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "yes, I have an "agenda" against nutritionists.
> what is your point?
> you wish to claim that they know more than i do?
> fine!
> you think I care what you think i know?"
> The fact that you have an agenda against a
> specific group of people clearly exemplifies a
> major mental imbalance and emotional instability.
> That is a telling sign of someone who's brain is
> malnourished or overburdened with toxicity.
>

oh prindl, so serious, so silly , i was agreeing to your manipulative use of the word "agenda" just to placate your frothing mouth.

i don't REALLY have an AGENDA, i merely have an opinion regarding the paradigm that most of them operate by. puzzling why this is so panic inducing for you.

> I don't "think" you're uneducated when it comes to
> health and nutrition, it's a well-established fact
> from what you post. You're not even consistent
> with your irrationalities - some threads science
> is very important, others it's irrelevant, all
> depending on whether or not it happens to be
> consistent with your current beliefs. Your
> aggressive attitude towards a targeted group of
> individuals combined with your delusional thinking
> patterns and complete lack of logic leaves little
> doubt that your dietary choices are quite
> suboptimal, and that you're just some random
> egotistical raw foodist who thinks he knows a lot
> more than he actually does.

thanks for sharing.

happy to be here.

nice to be chatting with you today.

>
> My initial post stands correct.

of course it's correct prindl ! how could the great prindl ever be wrong about anything, ever? perish the thought laddie !

you feel better now?

believe it or not, and i know this is hard for you to process....

i am legally and ethically permitted to hold an opinion about "nutritionists" and their views, your crazy rantings notwithstanding. as if this particular issue that is so dear to you had some major relevance to this thread.

is your mommy a nutritionist? papa?

do tell

jtprindl Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "still puzzled that you refer to others diets as
> religion,"
>
> Because of your irrational, close-minded,
> dogmatic, unsupported views on how everyone should
> eat under the delusional assumption that everyone
> is the same.

i was not talking to you, i was talking to zeus, unless you ARE zeus.

i do not agree with your characterization above, but i know how you wish
to put forth such pronouncements, so , you know, have at it, if it makes you feel better.

are you sure you don't have anything to discuss other than attacking me?

surely you must !

"i am legally and ethically permitted to hold an opinion about "nutritionists" and their views"

And I, as well as anyone else here, are legally and ethically permitted to refute your uneducated opinions and views which are aren't supported by anything outside of your brain (but you insist on playing them off as factual).


"i do not agree with your characterization above, but i know how you wish
to put forth such pronouncements, so , you know, have at it, if it makes you feel better."

Has nothing to do with me other than the fact that I called you out on it. You have posted on here that you disagree with the notion that not everyone can thrive on fruit and vegetable diets. I know this is hard for you to process, but that would align with what I previously said.