Men and boys need to reduce protein?

Need2Exerc1se
Need2Exerc1se Posts: 13,575 Member
edited November 28 in Food and Nutrition
According to new nutritional guidelines.

http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2016/01/07/new-diet-guidelines-urge-less-sugar-for-all-and-less-meat-for-boys-and-men/

The biggest surprise in the guidelines was the conclusion that teenage boys and men were generally consuming too much protein. As a result, the guidelines recommend that men and boys “reduce their overall intake of protein foods” such as meat, poultry and eggs and add more vegetables to their diets.

Replies

  • Yi5hedr3
    Yi5hedr3 Posts: 2,696 Member
    Dub article! Doesn't even define what they consider to be too much.
  • nordlead2005
    nordlead2005 Posts: 1,303 Member
    edited January 2016
    The USDA recommendation for protein is 0.8g/kg or 0.36g/lb of bodyweight per day. Since that is so low (compared to the standard american diet), I can see how they can draw that conclusion since limiting sugar and protein (assuming fat levels are acceptable) would decrease total calorie intake and reduce the biggest problem which is obesity.

    However, since I didn't read the current guidelines or why they made any specific recommendations I'm only speculating.
  • xmichaelyx
    xmichaelyx Posts: 883 Member
    They're not backing this up with science, which makes the recommendation pretty useless. These guidelines are made by a partnership between the USDA and the food industry.

    These are also the same people who just last year dropped the dietary cholesterol cap, even though we've known for well over a decade that dietary cholesterol doesn't give you high cholesterol any more than dietary fat makes you fat.

    Skip government recommendations and go straight to the science.

    (Someone in this thread will no doubt make the claim that too much protein causes kidney problems, but there is zero science behind this idea.)
  • MaternalCopulator
    MaternalCopulator Posts: 125 Member
    xmichaelyx wrote: »
    Skip government recommendations and go straight to the science.

    This would solve so many problems...

  • merpersondemigod
    merpersondemigod Posts: 8 Member
    Protein aside, I definitely think men and boys (and everyone, really) could stand to add more vegetables to their diets! So at least they got that right haha
  • ahamm002
    ahamm002 Posts: 1,690 Member
    merpersondemigod wrote: »
    Protein aside, I definitely think men and boys (and everyone, really) could stand to add more vegetables to their diets! So at least they got that right haha

    Nobody has ever said that we shouldn't eat more vegetables. Well, except maybe the USDA's good old food pyramid from back in the 90's. It suggested that pasta and grains should make up the "foundation" of our diet (probably thanks to influence from food industry lobbyists).
  • ahamm002
    ahamm002 Posts: 1,690 Member
    nordlead2005 wrote: »
    The USDA recommendation for protein is 0.8g/kg or 0.36g/lb of bodyweight per day. Since that is so low (compared to the standard american diet), I can see how they can draw that conclusion since limiting sugar and protein (assuming fat levels are acceptable) would decrease total calorie intake and reduce the biggest problem which is obesity.

    However, since I didn't read the current guidelines or why they made any specific recommendations I'm only speculating.

    Actually the real reason is in the second paragraph of the linked article:
    NYTimes wrote:
    While draft recommendations had suggested all Americans adopt more environmentally-sustainable eating habits by cutting back on meat, that advice was dropped from the final guidelines.

    So in other words, they are making the recommendation based off of environmental concerns. But this year they are smart enough not to admit it. Last year when they admitted their recommendations were partially based on environmental concerns it caused an uproar.
  • Need2Exerc1se
    Need2Exerc1se Posts: 13,575 Member
    ahamm002 wrote: »
    nordlead2005 wrote: »
    The USDA recommendation for protein is 0.8g/kg or 0.36g/lb of bodyweight per day. Since that is so low (compared to the standard american diet), I can see how they can draw that conclusion since limiting sugar and protein (assuming fat levels are acceptable) would decrease total calorie intake and reduce the biggest problem which is obesity.

    However, since I didn't read the current guidelines or why they made any specific recommendations I'm only speculating.

    Actually the real reason is in the second paragraph of the linked article:
    NYTimes wrote:
    While draft recommendations had suggested all Americans adopt more environmentally-sustainable eating habits by cutting back on meat, that advice was dropped from the final guidelines.

    So in other words, they are making the recommendation based off of environmental concerns. But this year they are smart enough not to admit it. Last year when they admitted their recommendations were partially based on environmental concerns it caused an uproar.

    Why only males, then?
  • ahamm002
    ahamm002 Posts: 1,690 Member
    Need2Exerc1se wrote: »
    ahamm002 wrote: »
    nordlead2005 wrote: »
    The USDA recommendation for protein is 0.8g/kg or 0.36g/lb of bodyweight per day. Since that is so low (compared to the standard american diet), I can see how they can draw that conclusion since limiting sugar and protein (assuming fat levels are acceptable) would decrease total calorie intake and reduce the biggest problem which is obesity.

    However, since I didn't read the current guidelines or why they made any specific recommendations I'm only speculating.

    Actually the real reason is in the second paragraph of the linked article:
    NYTimes wrote:
    While draft recommendations had suggested all Americans adopt more environmentally-sustainable eating habits by cutting back on meat, that advice was dropped from the final guidelines.

    So in other words, they are making the recommendation based off of environmental concerns. But this year they are smart enough not to admit it. Last year when they admitted their recommendations were partially based on environmental concerns it caused an uproar.

    Why only males, then?

    Apparently they eat more meat and eggs then females? There certainly is not any strong evidence that the current amount of protein eaten by most American males is in and of itself detrimental.
  • _John_
    _John_ Posts: 8,646 Member
    edited January 2016
    I think a lot of this is written with the intent of how it will be applied, not what actually "is".

    We'd be importing a LOT (more) of veggies if the population really followed all government dietary recommendations overnight.
  • Need2Exerc1se
    Need2Exerc1se Posts: 13,575 Member
    xmichaelyx wrote: »
    They're not backing this up with science, which makes the recommendation pretty useless. These guidelines are made by a partnership between the USDA and the food industry.

    They say it is based on science. Can you provide anything to refute?

    http://health.gov/dietaryguidelines/2015/guidelines/introduction/developing-the-dietary-guidelines-for-americans/#stage-1

    Stage 1: Review of Current Scientific Evidence

    In the first stage, the Secretaries of HHS and of USDA appoint an external Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee (Advisory Committee). The use of a Federal advisory committee is to ensure the Federal Government is seeking sound external scientific advice to inform policy decisions. Nominations from the public were sought for candidates to serve on the 2015 Advisory Committee. The 15 members of the 2015 Advisory Committee are prestigious researchers in the fields of nutrition, health, and medicine. Their role was to provide advice and recommendations to the Federal Government on the current state of scientific evidence on nutrition and health. Per Federal Advisory Committee Act rules, Advisory Committee members were thoroughly vetted for conflicts of interest before they were appointed to their positions and were required to submit a financial disclosure form annually.
  • steuartcj
    steuartcj Posts: 132 Member
    Well feds show me the science.
  • Carlos_421
    Carlos_421 Posts: 5,132 Member
    And the research to back up these silly claims and goofy new guidelines is where?

    A nice snippet from the article:
    “These dietary guidelines are virtually identical to those of the past 35 years, during which time obesity and diabetes have skyrocketed,” said Nina Teicholz, an investigative journalist and Nutrition Coalition board member. “Given the same advice, it’s not clear why we should expect different outcomes.”
  • Need2Exerc1se
    Need2Exerc1se Posts: 13,575 Member
    edited January 2016
    Carlos_421 wrote: »
    And the research to back up these silly claims and goofy new guidelines is where?

    A nice snippet from the article:
    “These dietary guidelines are virtually identical to those of the past 35 years, during which time obesity and diabetes have skyrocketed,” said Nina Teicholz, an investigative journalist and Nutrition Coalition board member. “Given the same advice, it’s not clear why we should expect different outcomes.”

    I do agree with that last sentence, but I also think the nutritional guidelines have little to do with skyrocketing obesity and diabetes. Ignoring them probably is more of a cause. The guidelines do not say "overeat".
  • Hadabetter
    Hadabetter Posts: 942 Member
    Maybe the typical American teenage boy and man eats more protein than they need. But the typical American teen boy and man eats at a Calorie surplus and doesn't get much exercise. If you exercise regularly, especially resistance exercises, you probably need a little more than 0.8g/kg. And if you want to preserve lean mass while eating at a calorie deficit you need a lot more than 0.8g/kg...more like 1.4g/kg.
  • RodaRose
    RodaRose Posts: 9,562 Member
    http://health.gov/dietaryguidelines/2015-scientific-report/pdfs/scientific-report-of-the-2015-dietary-guidelines-advisory-committee.pdf
    Here is the scientific report from Feb 2015 --- nothing about men and boys reducing protein.
    Most likely the new dietary were created without a lot of attention to the science.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories