Big news story: protein

Choc46
Choc46 Posts: 23
in Food and Nutrition
Hi everyone


Big news story 20 mins ago from University of California: lots of animal protein (protein greater than 10% of overall calories) in your diet during middle age increases your risk of cancer four times!!!!

I've had a lot of success over the last few weeks with eating protein (mainly tuna and chicken) at every meal. Very confused now.

http://www.redorbit.com/news/health/1113086883/cancer-risks-elevated-meat-cheese-diet-030414/
«134

Replies

  • sunnyeuphoria
    sunnyeuphoria Posts: 85 Member
    Oh good grief.... Nooooooo Please don't take my meat from me.... I loves me meat... my precious
  • RaggedyPond
    RaggedyPond Posts: 1,487 Member
    In to see where this goes.
  • neanderthin
    neanderthin Posts: 10,217 Member
    Old news and totally bias.
  • tigersword
    tigersword Posts: 8,059 Member
    Whenever a story reports on a study without actually linking to said study, it's generally crap.
  • magerum
    magerum Posts: 12,589 Member
    No sources. Who'd have thunk it?
  • Lleldiranne
    Lleldiranne Posts: 5,516 Member
    Whenever a story reports on a study without actually linking to said study, it's generally crap.

    I agree. They can easily cherry pick quotes from the summary or other parts to make it sound like what they want.

    I really doubt this study has been able to establish causality. Correlation, yes, but what else did they control for? What kind of study was this (longitudinal, cross-section, etc)? How did they determine the subjects' diets? So much that the article is leaving out.

    Not to mention, they say higher protein is risky in "middle age" but protective in "advanced age." Without really saying what those age groups mean (they mention 65, but not necessarily as a boundary age), those statements don't mean much at all. Ambiguous report is ambiguous...


    (edited for brain-cramp sentence fragment)
  • Rayman79
    Rayman79 Posts: 2,009 Member
    Their reasoning seems to be 'controlling IGF-1 and insulin levels' through less consumption of protein? What?

    Eat low protein in middle age, then more protein again as you get older...

    This is a steaming pile of.... terrific research based reporting! :laugh:

    I can't help but feel the irony as I read this article eating ham and cheese, and not giving one single firetruck.
  • cms721
    cms721 Posts: 179 Member
    I remember being in high school and being taught that eggs were soooo bad for you and carbs were soooo good for you. Now water is bad if you drink it out of a plastic bottle. Why don't we all try this new diet - if it wasn't around 2000 yrs ago - don't eat it!
  • tigersword
    tigersword Posts: 8,059 Member
    I remember being in high school and being taught that eggs were soooo bad for you and carbs were soooo good for you. Now water is bad if you drink it out of a plastic bottle. Why don't we all try this new diet - if it wasn't around 2000 yrs ago - don't eat it!
    So, just bread? No foods around today were around 2000 years ago. In fact, there are very few foods today that were around even 500 years ago.
  • RaggedyPond
    RaggedyPond Posts: 1,487 Member
    Even fruits and vegetables have been modified to be easier to eat.
  • neanderthin
    neanderthin Posts: 10,217 Member
    Their reasoning seems to be 'controlling IGF-1 and insulin levels' through less consumption of protein? What?

    Eat low protein in middle age, then more protein again as you get older...

    This is a steaming pile of.... terrific research based reporting! :laugh:

    I can't help but feel the irony as I read this article eating ham and cheese, and not giving one single firetruck.

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2673798/

    http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1359/jbmr.2000.15.4.683/full
  • cms721
    cms721 Posts: 179 Member
    Ok....... 200 yrs ago + pepsi and doritos.
  • Lea_8D
    Lea_8D Posts: 106 Member
    Here's the paper:
    http://www.cell.com/cell-metabolism/retrieve/pii/S155041311400062X

    And here's what New Scientist has to say about it:
    http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn25158-i-can-has-cheezburger-protein-cancer-risk-overblown.html

    I wasn't happy to see the news story because in January I changed my macros to 40/30/30 C/F/P which was a big increase in protein for me. And I'm in their designated danger zone age range. :ohwell:
  • kagevf
    kagevf Posts: 509 Member
    first my ice cream, next my cookies then my jelly beans now my meat?

    ugh! what am i gonna eat now?
  • ninerbuff
    ninerbuff Posts: 48,982 Member
    Where's the info on the 75% higher risk? How much protein are they talking about in grams?

    A.C.E. Certified Personal/Group FitnessTrainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
  • neanderthin
    neanderthin Posts: 10,217 Member
    Here's the paper:
    http://www.cell.com/cell-metabolism/retrieve/pii/S155041311400062X

    And here's what New Scientist has to say about it:
    http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn25158-i-can-has-cheezburger-protein-cancer-risk-overblown.html

    I wasn't happy to see the news story because in January I changed my macros to 40/30/30 C/F/P which was a big increase in protein for me. And I'm in their designated danger zone age range. :ohwell:
    Inherent problems with mouse studies to start with and IGF1 in humans don't show the same effects. Secondly the data collected was a 24 hour recall from the previous day, then extrapolated over the next 18 years.........kinda like paint by numbers.
  • yarwell
    yarwell Posts: 10,477 Member
    Where's the info on the 75% higher risk? How much protein are they talking about in grams?

    From http://download.cell.com/cell-metabolism/mmcs/journals/1550-4131/PIIS155041311400062X.mmc1.pdf

    "Using Cox Proportional Hazard models we found no association between protein
    consumption and either all-cause, CVD, or cancer mortality (Table S2). However, high
    and moderate protein consumption were positively associated with diabetes-related
    mortality. One explanation is that diabetes may be more prevalent in these groups,
    possibly because of a switch to a higher protein, lower fat, and lower carbohydrate intake
    following a diabetes diagnosis."

    High protein is 94 g/day. Risk table :-

    TableS2.png?dl=1&token_hash=AAHQlRJqeEEyHC86N3cpOMqqkGKHFaBLVFXS6M2byGiHnA
  • sunman00
    sunman00 Posts: 872 Member
    Where's the info on the 75% higher risk? How much protein are they talking about in grams?

    A.C.E. Certified Personal/Group FitnessTrainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

    It says here that a man my age should only be eating 60g of Protein per day, but that I can go up to 92g once I clear 65y.o.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2573088/Eating-lots-meat-cheese-middle-age-deadly-SMOKING.html
  • aarondnguyen
    aarondnguyen Posts: 270 Member
    I've begin eating anywhere from 1-1.3g protein per pound body weight for the past 3 years. I feel fine.

    CW: 142.8lb
    Protein: 150g+

    These studies are invalid.
  • smantha32
    smantha32 Posts: 6,990 Member
    Whenever a story reports on a study without actually linking to said study, it's generally crap.

    Every study contradicts every other study. Just eat like a human and cut back on the processed crap.
  • toddis
    toddis Posts: 941 Member
    Whenever a story reports on a study without actually linking to said study, it's generally crap.

    Every study contradicts every other study. Just eat like a human and cut back on the processed crap.

    Generally it's misreported studies that contradict one another.

    Found the study

    http://www.cell.com/cell-metabolism/fulltext/S1550-4131(14)00062-X
  • FoxyLifter
    FoxyLifter Posts: 965 Member
    It's gone full circle. At first, fats were the enemy, then carbs. Now protein? I bet scientists are going to start recommending that Air and Sunlight only diet. :noway:
  • tennisdude2004
    tennisdude2004 Posts: 5,609 Member
    The report was bought to today with the great taste of L-nutra (the diet for longevity).

    Lol????
  • tennisdude2004
    tennisdude2004 Posts: 5,609 Member
    I've begin eating anywhere from 1-1.3g protein per pound body weight for the past 3 years. I feel fine.

    CW: 142.8lb
    Protein: 150g+

    These studies are invalid.

    Yes but how old are you.

    And have you done a will yet?

    Only joking - for peace of mind switch to L-nutra diet.
  • michael300891
    michael300891 Posts: 275
    Many people have pointed out the obvious: correlational study etc, im going to point out the less-obvious:

    First, the authors trawled through the data, finding nothing of interest for diabetes, then rerunning the models looking at protein and age, then finding no main results arbitrarily splitting into 50-65 year olds and 66+ which had significant differences.

    Second, there is no mention in the paper anywhere of smoking, media outlets have simply compared hazard ratios for protein from this paper, with that against other papers to produce their god-awful irrelevant headlines.

    Probably the most interesting thing, is that the head author of the paper has an equity stake in a company called L-Nutra who specialise in plant-based dietary supplements to prolong lifespan.

    This paper substantially supports the business plan.

    Doctoral Research in Exercise Metabolism
  • SunofaBeach14
    SunofaBeach14 Posts: 4,899 Member
    Ok, so reading though a few of the thoughtful comments just saved me wasting my time reading the article. Let me know when something worth reading arrives. Off to get some work done . . .
  • CrimsonWhite
    CrimsonWhite Posts: 104 Member
    It's gone full circle. At first, fats were the enemy, then carbs. Now protein? I bet scientists are going to start recommending that Air and Sunlight only diet. :noway:

    Well I don't know why they'd do that-air and sunlight have already been shown to cause cancer! :smile: (free radicals and UV-they be bad!).

    What to do, what to do..... :frown:
  • Lea_8D
    Lea_8D Posts: 106 Member
    I've begin eating anywhere from 1-1.3g protein per pound body weight for the past 3 years. I feel fine.

    CW: 142.8lb
    Protein: 150g+

    These studies are invalid.

    The article I linked earlier gives some valid reasons why this study may not be valid, but your reasoning is not valid (maybe you are just kidding). For example, I know a guy who has smoked most of his life and he's fine. Therefore smoking doesn't increase your risk of health problems?
  • Redhead_23
    Redhead_23 Posts: 58
    we only need 10-20% of our calories to be from protein. Anything extra is just that, extra. If your trying to bulk up then sure, protein OD all day.
  • Lea_8D
    Lea_8D Posts: 106 Member
    It's gone full circle. At first, fats were the enemy, then carbs. Now protein? I bet scientists are going to start recommending that Air and Sunlight only diet. :noway:

    Well I don't know why they'd do that-air and sunlight have already been shown to cause cancer! :smile: (free radicals and UV-they be bad!).

    What to do, what to do..... :frown:

    Don't eat anything at all, I guess. Then very soon, all our troubles will be over! :frown:

Categories