Complementary Protein Myth Won't Go Away!

Written by Dr. Fuhrman’s colleague Jeff Novick, M.S., R. D. for the May 2003 edition of Healthy Times:

Recently, I was teaching a nutrition class and describing the adequacy of plant-based diets to meet human nutritional needs. A woman raised her hand and stated, “I’ve read that because plant foods don’t contain all the essential amino acids that humans need, to be healthy we must either eat animal protein or combine certain plant foods with others in order to ensure that we get complete proteins.”

I was a little surprised to hear this, since this is one of the oldest myths related to vegetarianism and was disproved long ago. When I pointed this out, the woman identified herself as a medical resident and stated that her current textbook in human physiology states this and that in her classes, her professors have emphasized this point.

I was shocked. If myths like this not only abound in the general population, but also in the medical community, how can anyone ever learn how to eat healthfully? It is important to correct this misinformation because many people are afraid to follow healthful, plant-based, and/or total vegetarian (vegan) diets because they worry about “incomplete proteins” from plant sources.

How did this “incomplete protein” myth become so widespread?

No small misconception

The “incomplete protein” myth was inadvertently promoted in the 1971 book, Diet for a Small Planet, by Frances Moore Lappe. In it, the author stated that plant foods do not contain all the essential amino acids, so in order to be a healthy vegetarian, you needed to eat a combination of certain plant foods in order to get all of the essential amino acids. It was called the theory of “protein complementing.”

Frances Moore Lappe certainly meant no harm, and her mistake was somewhat understandable. She was not a nutritionist, physiologist, or medical doctor. She was a sociologist trying to end world hunger. She realized that there was a lot of waste in converting vegetable protein into animal protein, and she calculated that if people just ate the plant protein, many more people could be fed. In a later edition of her book (1991), she retracted her statement and basically said that in trying to end one myth—the unsolvable inevitability of world hunger, she created a second one—the myth of the need for “protein complementing.”

In these later editions, she corrects her earlier mistake and clearly states that all plant foods typically consumed as sources of protein contain all the essential amino acids, and that humans are virtually certain of getting enough protein from plant sources if they consume sufficient calories.

Amino acid requirements
Where did the concept of “essential amino acids” come from? In 1952, William Rose and his colleagues completed research that determined the human requirements for the eight essential amino acids. They set the “minimum amino acid requirement” by making it equal to the greatest amount required by any single person in their study. To set the “recommended amino acid requirement,” they simply doubled the minimum requirements. This “recommended amino acid requirement” was considered a “definitely safe intake.”

Today, if you calculate the amount of each essential amino acid provided by unprocessed plant foods and compare these values with those determined by Rose, you will find that any single one, or combination, of these whole natural plant foods provides all of the essential amino acids. Furthermore, these whole natural plant foods provide not just the “minimum requirements” but provide amounts far greater than the “recommended requirements.”

Modern researchers know that it is virtually impossible to design a calorie-sufficient diet based on unprocessed whole natural plant foods that is deficient in any of the amino acids. (The only possible exception could be a diet based solely on fruit.)

Pride and prejudice
Unfortunately, the “incomplete protein” myth seems unwilling to die. In an October 2001 article in the medical journal Circulation on the hazards of high-protein diets, the Nutrition Committee of the American Heart Association wrote, “Although plant proteins form a large part of the human diet, most are deficient in one or more essential amino acids and are therefore regarded as incomplete proteins.”1 Oops!

Medical doctor and writer John McDougall wrote to the editor pointing out the mistake. But in a stunning example of avoiding science for convenience, instead of acknowledging their mistake, Barbara Howard, Ph.D., head of the Nutrition Committee, replied on June 25, 2002 to Dr. McDougall’s letter and stated (without a single scientific reference) that the committee was right and “most (plant foods) are deficient in one or more essential amino acids.” Clearly, the committee did not want to be confused by the facts.

Maybe you are not surprised by this misconception in the medical community. But what about the vegetarian community?

Behind the times
Believe it or not, an article in the September 2002 issue of Vegetarian Times made the same mistake. In a story titled “Amazing Aminos,” author Susan Belsinger incorrectly stated, “Incomplete proteins, which contain some but not all of the EAAs [essential amino acids], can be found in beans, legumes, grains, nuts and green leafy vegetables.... But because these foods do not contain all of the EAAs, vegetarians have to be smart about what they eat, consuming a combination of foods from the different food groups. This is called food combining.”

A dangerous myth
To wrongly suggest people need to eat animal protein for nutrients will encourage them to add foods that are known to contribute to the incidence of heart disease, diabetes, obesity, and many forms of cancer, to name just a few common problems.

 

Continue Reading...

Dangers of High-Protein, Low-Carb Diets

From the January 2004 edition of Dr. Fuhrman’s Healthy Times:

Proponents of high-protein diets such as the Atkins diet have brought dangerous fad-dieting to new heights, in spite of mounting reports of deaths attributed to them. High protein diets—those in which calories come predominantly from animal foods—increase the risk of cancer and heart attack and have been linked to cardiomyopathies, electrolyte imbalances, and kidney damage. Dr. Robert Atkins himself had a heart attack from a cardiomyopathy a year before his death, and his autopsy results still remain hidden from the public.

In addition to increased risk of disease from Atkins and other animal-food-heavy diets, research has shown that these faddish eating plans are not very effective—most adherents do not achieve long-term, permanent weight loss. Unfortunately, this has not lessened the popularity of these diets. Well-funded publicity campaigns have succeeded in getting the media to “report”glossed-over, one-sided information. Until news outlets begin to report more accurately, more and more tragedies are going to occur.

Girl dies while dieting

Most recently, a sixteen-year-old girl who had no history of medical problems died after two weeks on the Atkins diet. When the paramedics arrived, she was pulse-less, and the electrocardiogram revealed ventricular fibrillation (a usually fatal loss of normal heart rhythm). Her emergency room evaluation showed electrolyte imbalances that occurred as a result of eating a diet of meat, cheese, and salads for two weeks. She was doing the diet together with her mother.

An ongoing tragedy
Sadly, even as additional dangers are revealed and reported, more and more people misled by one-sided advertising and publicity—are being put at needless risk. At the same time, proven healthful weight loss recommendations are being ignored. Unless Americans quickly learn the facts about these harmful diets, many pointless deaths will continue to occur.

For more on the Atkins Diet check out DiseaseProof's week-long investigation:

Also, be sure to visit AtkinsExposed.org for studies discounting the merits of the Atkins Diet.

Big Problems with Meat-Based Diets for Diabetics

From the September 2003 edition of Dr. Fuhrman's Healthy Times:

So-called “high-protein,” animal-based diets are particularly dangerous for diabetics. Many diabetes “experts” and authors recommend that diabetics limit their intake of refined grains and simple sugars. As a result, most people have accepted the faulty logic that if sugar and refined grains and other high-glycemic foods raise blood sugar and triglycerides, we should eat more protein instead of carbohydrate. They attempt to overcome the triglyceride-raising problems seen in those eating typical high-carbohydrate diets by recommending a diet based on animal products.

Short-term benefits

Carbohydrate-restricted diets rich in animal products, often called “high-protein diets,” offer some short-term improvement in glucose control and weight loss. The problem with them is the increased protein intake promotes the progression of diabetic kidney disease, and the higher saturated fat intake raises cholesterol and promotes heart disease. I have observed numerous diabetic patients over the years who caused significant damage to their kidneys attempting to improve diabetic control with such high-protein, carbohydrate-restricted diets.

Long-term dangers
High-protein, carbohydrate-restricted diets also are heart unfriendly. One comprehensive study on the Atkins’ approach showed that after one year on the diet, blood flow to the heart diminished by an average of 40 percent and inflammatory markers that predict heart attacks increased.1 The low levels of plant fiber, phytochemicals, and antioxidant nutrients on these unbalanced, low produce diets expose the diabetic patient to additional risks. So-called “high-protein diets” may be short-term diabetic-favorable, but they are long-term dangerous.

Long-term benefits

The low-glycemic benefits of “high-protein” diets are achieved by the high-fiber, vegetable/bean/ nut-based Eat to Live (ETL) approach that I recommend, without the health problems linked to eating so many animal products. In addition, because the overall ETL diet contains high levels of fiber and micronutrients that cause triglycerides and blood sugars to fall dramatically, diabetics on this program can consume small portions of fruit safely, allowing them to enjoy the nutritional benefits of these healthful foods. The ETL program is the healthiest way to reverse diabetes.

For more of Dr. Fuhrman's thoughts about
meat-based diets and diabetes, check out these previous posts:

 

Continue Reading...

Exposing Diet Myths

Over on Joy’s Health Bite she is debunking some popular diet myths, here’s one of note:
  • Fresh fruits and vegetables are more nutritious than frozen.
Not necessarily. Frozen can be a great produce option (just avoid varieties with added salt, sugar, and sauce). Frozen foods are picked in the peak of ripeness, then frozen. You can eat them as you need them -- and most of the nutrients are locked in. On the other hand, fresh fruit and vegetables are typically harvested before they ripen, and can have nutrient variability. Also, the longer fresh produce sits around in your fridge, the less nutrients it will contain.


Bottom line: Buy both fresh and frozen and eat as much as you can.

Diet Influences So Many Aspects of Health

Tired of arthritis pain? Looking for an alternative to pricey medications? Well, grab a box of raisins, and a bottle of gin. I’m not kidding! Apparently white raisins soaked in gin are a popular home remedy for arthritis. Anahad O’Connor of The New York Times explains:
“You get some gin and get some white raisins — and only white raisins — and soak them in the gin for two weeks,” she said Teresa Heinz Kerry. “Then eat nine of the raisins a day.”
O’Connor points out that no rigorous studies have been conducted to prove the validity of the claim. However grapes do contain compounds that reduce inflammation, but most are lost during the drying process.

I don’t think you’ll see a recipe for gin soaked raisins popping up in one of Dr. Fuhrman’s book anytime soon. According to him alcohol isn’t exactly the health promoting substance it is sometimes reported to be. Here’s a quote from a previous post:
A few years ago the University of California’s Berkeley Wellness Letter reported on new research about the so-called heart-healthy “benefits” of alcohol consumption. Previous studies had led to a recommendation that moderate consumption of red wine—but not other alcoholic beverages—helped reduce the risk of heart attack. What did the new research reveal?


If we were to rely on the Berkeley Wellness Letter for this information, the latest news would be that moderate consumption of any alcoholic beverage—red or white wine, even beer and spirits—can be heart-healthy. Unfortunately, their latest news is still woefully out-of-date. More recent studies show that even moderate alcohol consumption is linked to significantly increased incidence of atrial fibrillation,1 a condition that can lead to stroke, and to higher rates of breast cancer.2,3

Moderate drinking is defined as a maximum of two drinks for men. Consuming more than this is associated with increased fat around the waist4 and other potential problems. For example, alcohol consumption leads to mild withdrawal sensations the next day that are commonly mistaken for hunger, which leads people to eat more than is genuinely necessary, resulting in weight gain.
In Eat to Live, Dr. Fuhrman explains arthritis is one of many diet-sensitive conditions:
Patients are told that food has nothing to do with the disease they develop. Dermatologists insist that food has nothing to do with acne, rheumatologists insist that food has nothing to do with rheumatoid arthritis, and gastroenterologists insist that food has nothing to do with irritable and inflammatory bowel disease. Even cardiologists have been resistant to accept the accumulating evidence that atherosclerosis is entirely avoidable. Most of them still believe that coronary artery disease and angina require the invasive treatment of surgery and are not reversible with nutritional intervention. Most physicians have no experience in treating disease naturally with nutritional excellence, and some physicians who don’t know about it are convinced it is not possible.


Not only are common disorders such as asthma associated with increased body weight and our disease-causing diet, but in my experience these diseases are also curable with superior nutrition in the majority of cases.5 Asthma is an example of a disease considered irreversible that I watch resolve regularly.

My patients routinely make complete and predictable recovery from these illnesses, predominantly through aggressive dietary changes. I am always delighted to meet new patients who are ready to take responsibility for their own health and well-being.
Dietary-Caused Illnesses with High Prevalence
acne allergies angina
appendicitis asthma arthritis
atherosclerosis constipation colonic polyps
diabetes(adult) diverticulosis esophagitis
fibromyalgia gallstones gastritis
gout headaches hemorrhoids
high blood pressure hypoglycemic symptoms indigestion
irritable bowel syndrome kidney stones lumbar spine syndromes
macular degeneration musculoskeletal pain osteoperosis
sexual dysfunction stroke uterine fibroids

Continue Reading...