Originariamente Scritto da Miller
Visualizza Messaggio
Per "rispondere" (con i riferimenti) un pò alle questioni (diciamo generiche) che sono state poste qua e là nel thread:
Protein requirements (http://sajcn.co.za/index.php/SAJCN/article/view/685)
Dietary protein requirements are elevated with strength, speed or endurance training. According to the DRIs, and more specifically, the recommended dietary allowance (RDA), the general protein requirement for a sedentary person is 0.8 g/kg BW/day.Incidentally, this requirement suffices for general fitness and can be slightly elevated to 1.0 g/kg body weight/day.
- The ACSM (American College of Sport Medicine) recommends daily protein requirements for strength and endurance athletes of 1.2-1.7 g/kg body weight.
- (ISSN, International Society of Sports Nutrition) For building muscle mass and for maintaining muscle mass through a positive muscle protein balance, an overall daily protein intake in the range of 1.4–2.0 g protein/kg body weight/day (g/kg/d) is sufficient for most exercising individuals, a value that falls in line within the Acceptable Macronutrient Distribution Range published by the Institute of Medicine for protein.
- IOC (International Olympic Committee) general protein guidelines for athletes are 1.3-1.8 g/kg BW and 1.6-1.7 g/kg BW/day for strength-training athletes.
Nello specifico sulla Protein safety (https://jissn.biomedcentral.com/arti...0-017-0177-8):
Despite a plethora of studies demonstrating safety, much concern still exists surrounding the clinical implications of consuming increased amounts of protein, particularly on renal and hepatic health. Certainly, it is clear that people in renal failure benefit from protein-restricted diets [215], but extending this pathophysiology to otherwise healthy exercise-trained individuals who are not clinically compromised is inappropriate. Published reviews on this topic consistently report that an increased intake of protein by competitive athletes and active individuals provides no indication of hepato-renal harm or damage [216, 217]. This is supported by a recent commentary [134] which referenced recent reports from the World Health Organization [218] where they indicated a lack of evidence linking a high protein diet to renal disease. Likewise, the panel charged with establishing reference nutrient values for Australia and New Zealand also stated there was no published evidence that elevated intakes of protein exerted any negative impact on kidney function in athletes or in general [219].
Recently, Antonio and colleagues published a series of original investigations that prescribed extremely high amounts of protein (~3.4–4.4 g/kg/day) and have consistently reported no harmful effects [220, 221, 222, 223]. The first study in 2014 had resistance-trained individuals consume an extremely high protein diet (4.4 g/kg/day) for eight weeks and reported no change in adverse outcomes [223]. A follow-up investigation [220] required participants to ingest up to 3.4 g/kg/day of protein for eight weeks while following a prescribed resistance training program and reported no changes in any of the blood parameters commonly used to assess clinical health (e.g., there was no effect on kidney or liver function). Their next study employed a crossover study design in twelve healthy resistance-trained men in which each participant was tested before and after for body composition as well as blood-markers of health and performance [221]. In one eight-week block, participants followed their normal (habitual) diet (2.6 g/kg/day) and in the other eight-week block, participants were prescribed to ingest greater than 3.0 g/kg/day resulting in an average protein intake of 2.9 g/kg/day over the entire 16-week study. No changes in body composition were reported, and importantly, no clinical side effects were observed throughout the study. Finally, the same group of authors published a one-year crossover study [222] in fourteen healthy resistance-trained men. When prescribed to a high protein diet, the participants were instructed to ingest 3 g/kg/day and achieved an average intake of 3.3 g/kg/day and when following their normal diet they consumed 2.5 g/kg/day. This investigation showed that the chronic consumption of a high protein diet (i.e., for 1 year) had no harmful effects on kidney or liver function. Furthermore, there were no alterations in clinical markers of metabolism and blood lipids.
Key points
• Multiple review articles indicate that no controlled scientific evidence exists indicating that increased intakes of protein pose any health risks in healthy, exercising individuals.
• Statements by large regulatory bodies have also indicated that concerns about one’s health secondary to ingesting high amounts of protein are unfounded.
• A series of controlled investigations spanning up to one year in duration utilizing protein intakes of up to 2.5–3.3 g/kg/day in healthy resistance-trained individuals consistently indicate that increased intakes of protein exert no harmful effect on blood lipids or markers of kidney and liver function.
Queste sono le posizioni del più recente report WHO/FAO/UNU (http://www.who.int/nutrition/publica...HO_TRS_935/en/)
Renal function
There is clear evidence that high intakes of protein by patients with renal disease contribute to the deterioration of kidney function However, the suggestion that the decline of glomerular filtration rate that occurs with advancing age in healthy subjects (13) can be attenuated by reducing the protein in the diet appears to have no foundation
Bone health
The relationship between protein intake and bone health appears to be more complex than was previously believed. Thus the potential negative effect of protein on calcium balance is a function of the overall dietary acid–base bal- ance.
Kidney stones
In conclusion, although some studies suggest that high animal protein intake might increase the risk of kidney stones, particularly in those subjects who are classified as idiopathic calcium stone formers, as yet no clear conclusions can be drawn since dietary effects are apparent only in studies with very large differences in protein intakes (i.e. >185 g/day compared with 80 g/day).
Cancer
As the incidence of cancer is clearly influenced by environment, the role of diet in the development and growth of malignant tumours has received much attention, although the unequivocal identification of dietary influences has proved most difficult.
Recent large studies have shown that high intake of red and processed meat is associated with greater incidence of colorectal cancer (63, 64), that meat and dairy consumption do not influence the incidence of gastric cancer (65), and that vegetable and fruit consumption reduces the risk of breast cancer (66). However, care is needed in the interpretation of these studies because of potential confounding influ- ences.Thus, in the study of meat consumption in the Cancer Prevention Study II nutrition cohort (64), the association of high intake of red and processed meat with higher risk of colon cancer was observed after adjusting for age and energy intake but not after further adjustment for body mass index, cigarette smoking, and other covariates.
The most likely way of identifying disease linkage is when study groups are most closely matched apart from the variable of interest. This was the case in studies of vegetarians where meat or fish intakes were the variables of
interest and all subjects were recruited from population groups with similar healthy lifestyles. In an analysis of the combined data from five prospective studies of death rates from common diseases in vegetarians (no meat or fish, 27 808 vegetarians studied) compared with non-vegetarians with similar (healthy) lifestyles (48 364 non-vegetarians studied), the only difference identified was that mortality from ischaemic heart disease was 24% lower in vegetarians than in non-vegetarians, possibly through a lower blood choles- terol level in the vegetarians (67). Importantly, within these cohorts of healthy adults there was no significant difference between vegetarians and non- vegetarians in mortality from cerebrovascular disease, stomach cancer, col- orectal cancer, lung cancer, breast cancer, prostate cancer, or all other causes combined.
Current knowledge of the relationship between protein intake and health is insufficient to enable clear recommendations about either optimal intakes for long-term health or to define a safe upper limit.
...ancora su "Diet, nutrition and the prevention of cancer" (http://www.who.int/entity/nutrition/...ut6.pdf?ua=1):
Attaining definitive evidence to confirm or refute effects of specific dietary factors on risks of human cancers is challenging and for many relationships may be impossible.
Meat: those who are not vegetarian are advised to moderate consumption of preserved meat (e.g. sausages, salami, bacon, ham etc.) and red meat (e.g. beef,pork, lamb). Poultry and fish (except Chinese-style salted fish, see 5. above) have been studied and found not to be associated with increased cancer risk.
Su siti italiani per chi non ce la fa ad usare google traslate:
AIRC (http://www.airc.it/cancro/disinforma...nimale-salute/)
Un consumo eccessivo di carni rosse, soprattutto di carni rosse lavorate (salumi, insaccati e carne in scatola), aumenta il rischio di sviluppare alcuni tumori. L'aumento del rischio è però proporzionale alla quantità e frequenza dei consumi, per cui gli esperti ritengono che un consumo modesto di carne rossa (una o due volte a settimana al massimo) sia accettabile anche per l'apporto di nutrienti preziosi (soprattutto vitamina B12 e ferro), mentre le carni rosse lavorate andrebbero consumate solo saltuariamente.
• Le proteine animali sono costituite dalle stesse molecole chimiche di quelle vegetali, gli amminoacidi.
• La loro pericolosità per la salute, se consumate in eccesso, risiede principalmente nel modo con cui interagiscono con l'organismo. Per esempio, la lavorazione delle carni per la loro conservazione e le modalità di cottura modificano le molecole presenti, rendendole potenzialmente pericolose per la salute.
• I cibi di origine animale contengono, oltre alle proteine, anche molte altre sostanze tra cui i grassi saturi e il ferro del gruppo eme. In dosi eccessive essi stimolano l'aumento di colesterolo, i livelli di insulina nel sangue e l'infiammazione del tratto intestinale, aumentando il rischio di certe patologie, tra cui i tumori, in particolare quelli del colon-retto.
• Un consumo modesto di carni rosse non aumenta in modo sostanziale il rischio di ammalarsi di cancro del colon-retto in individui a basso rischio di partenza, ma è comunque associato a un maggior rischio di sviluppare diabete e malattie cardiovascolari. Le persone a elevato rischio individuale (per familiarità o altre patologie) dovrebbero discutere del loro piano alimentare insieme a un medico, per valutare quanto è opportuno ridurre l'apporto di carne rossa e carni lavorate, considerando che nella carne vi sono alcuni nutrienti (come la vitamina B12 e il ferro) che potrebbero essere comunque preziosi per il loro benessere.
per i vegani più accaniti (http://www.airc.it/cancro/disinforma...e-china-study/) - il China Study è stato ritenuto inattendibile dalla comunità scientifica e non vi sono studi a favore di una dieta che elimini totalmente le proteine di origine animale, in particolare i latticini.
Un pò di pubblicità anche a menphis
: https://teamubm.com/m-s-shock-la-car...rovoca-cancro/
Altro materiale sul latte (qualcuno a caso ha parlato di latte sempre a caso... come sempre):
(Our review of the totality of available scientific evidence supports that intake of milk and dairy products contributes to meeting nutrient recommendations and may protect against the most prevalent, chronic non-communicable diseases, whereas very few adverse effects have been reported.)
(Milk and dairy products may have both beneficial and adverse effects with regard to the risk of different cancers. The evidence indicating healthful effects of milk and milk product consumption on prevention of cancers is considerably greater than those representing harmful impacts.)
Protein requirements (http://sajcn.co.za/index.php/SAJCN/article/view/685)
Dietary protein requirements are elevated with strength, speed or endurance training. According to the DRIs, and more specifically, the recommended dietary allowance (RDA), the general protein requirement for a sedentary person is 0.8 g/kg BW/day.Incidentally, this requirement suffices for general fitness and can be slightly elevated to 1.0 g/kg body weight/day.
- The ACSM (American College of Sport Medicine) recommends daily protein requirements for strength and endurance athletes of 1.2-1.7 g/kg body weight.
- (ISSN, International Society of Sports Nutrition) For building muscle mass and for maintaining muscle mass through a positive muscle protein balance, an overall daily protein intake in the range of 1.4–2.0 g protein/kg body weight/day (g/kg/d) is sufficient for most exercising individuals, a value that falls in line within the Acceptable Macronutrient Distribution Range published by the Institute of Medicine for protein.
- IOC (International Olympic Committee) general protein guidelines for athletes are 1.3-1.8 g/kg BW and 1.6-1.7 g/kg BW/day for strength-training athletes.
Nello specifico sulla Protein safety (https://jissn.biomedcentral.com/arti...0-017-0177-8):
Despite a plethora of studies demonstrating safety, much concern still exists surrounding the clinical implications of consuming increased amounts of protein, particularly on renal and hepatic health. Certainly, it is clear that people in renal failure benefit from protein-restricted diets [215], but extending this pathophysiology to otherwise healthy exercise-trained individuals who are not clinically compromised is inappropriate. Published reviews on this topic consistently report that an increased intake of protein by competitive athletes and active individuals provides no indication of hepato-renal harm or damage [216, 217]. This is supported by a recent commentary [134] which referenced recent reports from the World Health Organization [218] where they indicated a lack of evidence linking a high protein diet to renal disease. Likewise, the panel charged with establishing reference nutrient values for Australia and New Zealand also stated there was no published evidence that elevated intakes of protein exerted any negative impact on kidney function in athletes or in general [219].
Recently, Antonio and colleagues published a series of original investigations that prescribed extremely high amounts of protein (~3.4–4.4 g/kg/day) and have consistently reported no harmful effects [220, 221, 222, 223]. The first study in 2014 had resistance-trained individuals consume an extremely high protein diet (4.4 g/kg/day) for eight weeks and reported no change in adverse outcomes [223]. A follow-up investigation [220] required participants to ingest up to 3.4 g/kg/day of protein for eight weeks while following a prescribed resistance training program and reported no changes in any of the blood parameters commonly used to assess clinical health (e.g., there was no effect on kidney or liver function). Their next study employed a crossover study design in twelve healthy resistance-trained men in which each participant was tested before and after for body composition as well as blood-markers of health and performance [221]. In one eight-week block, participants followed their normal (habitual) diet (2.6 g/kg/day) and in the other eight-week block, participants were prescribed to ingest greater than 3.0 g/kg/day resulting in an average protein intake of 2.9 g/kg/day over the entire 16-week study. No changes in body composition were reported, and importantly, no clinical side effects were observed throughout the study. Finally, the same group of authors published a one-year crossover study [222] in fourteen healthy resistance-trained men. When prescribed to a high protein diet, the participants were instructed to ingest 3 g/kg/day and achieved an average intake of 3.3 g/kg/day and when following their normal diet they consumed 2.5 g/kg/day. This investigation showed that the chronic consumption of a high protein diet (i.e., for 1 year) had no harmful effects on kidney or liver function. Furthermore, there were no alterations in clinical markers of metabolism and blood lipids.
Key points
• Multiple review articles indicate that no controlled scientific evidence exists indicating that increased intakes of protein pose any health risks in healthy, exercising individuals.
• Statements by large regulatory bodies have also indicated that concerns about one’s health secondary to ingesting high amounts of protein are unfounded.
• A series of controlled investigations spanning up to one year in duration utilizing protein intakes of up to 2.5–3.3 g/kg/day in healthy resistance-trained individuals consistently indicate that increased intakes of protein exert no harmful effect on blood lipids or markers of kidney and liver function.
Queste sono le posizioni del più recente report WHO/FAO/UNU (http://www.who.int/nutrition/publica...HO_TRS_935/en/)
Renal function
There is clear evidence that high intakes of protein by patients with renal disease contribute to the deterioration of kidney function However, the suggestion that the decline of glomerular filtration rate that occurs with advancing age in healthy subjects (13) can be attenuated by reducing the protein in the diet appears to have no foundation
Bone health
The relationship between protein intake and bone health appears to be more complex than was previously believed. Thus the potential negative effect of protein on calcium balance is a function of the overall dietary acid–base bal- ance.
Kidney stones
In conclusion, although some studies suggest that high animal protein intake might increase the risk of kidney stones, particularly in those subjects who are classified as idiopathic calcium stone formers, as yet no clear conclusions can be drawn since dietary effects are apparent only in studies with very large differences in protein intakes (i.e. >185 g/day compared with 80 g/day).
Cancer
As the incidence of cancer is clearly influenced by environment, the role of diet in the development and growth of malignant tumours has received much attention, although the unequivocal identification of dietary influences has proved most difficult.
Recent large studies have shown that high intake of red and processed meat is associated with greater incidence of colorectal cancer (63, 64), that meat and dairy consumption do not influence the incidence of gastric cancer (65), and that vegetable and fruit consumption reduces the risk of breast cancer (66). However, care is needed in the interpretation of these studies because of potential confounding influ- ences.Thus, in the study of meat consumption in the Cancer Prevention Study II nutrition cohort (64), the association of high intake of red and processed meat with higher risk of colon cancer was observed after adjusting for age and energy intake but not after further adjustment for body mass index, cigarette smoking, and other covariates.
The most likely way of identifying disease linkage is when study groups are most closely matched apart from the variable of interest. This was the case in studies of vegetarians where meat or fish intakes were the variables of
interest and all subjects were recruited from population groups with similar healthy lifestyles. In an analysis of the combined data from five prospective studies of death rates from common diseases in vegetarians (no meat or fish, 27 808 vegetarians studied) compared with non-vegetarians with similar (healthy) lifestyles (48 364 non-vegetarians studied), the only difference identified was that mortality from ischaemic heart disease was 24% lower in vegetarians than in non-vegetarians, possibly through a lower blood choles- terol level in the vegetarians (67). Importantly, within these cohorts of healthy adults there was no significant difference between vegetarians and non- vegetarians in mortality from cerebrovascular disease, stomach cancer, col- orectal cancer, lung cancer, breast cancer, prostate cancer, or all other causes combined.
Current knowledge of the relationship between protein intake and health is insufficient to enable clear recommendations about either optimal intakes for long-term health or to define a safe upper limit.
...ancora su "Diet, nutrition and the prevention of cancer" (http://www.who.int/entity/nutrition/...ut6.pdf?ua=1):
Attaining definitive evidence to confirm or refute effects of specific dietary factors on risks of human cancers is challenging and for many relationships may be impossible.
Level of evidence |
Decrease risk |
Increase risk |
Convincing |
Physical activity (colon) |
Overweight and obesity (oesophagus, colorectum, breast in postmenopausal women, endometrium, kidney)Alcohol (oral cavity, pharynx, larynx, oesophagus, liver, breast)Aflatoxin (liver) Chinese-style salted fish (nasopharynx) |
Probable |
Fruits and vegetables (oral cavity, oesophagus, stomach, colorectum*)Physical activity (breast) |
Preserved meat and red meat (colorectum)Salt preserved foods and salt (stomach)Very hot (thermally) drinks and food (oral cavity, pharynx, oesophagus) |
Insufficient |
Fibre, soya, fish, n-3 fatty acids, carotenoids, vitamins B2, B6, folate, B12, C, D, E, calcium, zinc, selenium, non-nutrient plant constituents (e.g. allium compounds, flavonoids, isoflavones, lignans) |
Animal fats, heterocyclic amines, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, nitrosamines |
Meat: those who are not vegetarian are advised to moderate consumption of preserved meat (e.g. sausages, salami, bacon, ham etc.) and red meat (e.g. beef,pork, lamb). Poultry and fish (except Chinese-style salted fish, see 5. above) have been studied and found not to be associated with increased cancer risk.
Su siti italiani per chi non ce la fa ad usare google traslate:
AIRC (http://www.airc.it/cancro/disinforma...nimale-salute/)
Un consumo eccessivo di carni rosse, soprattutto di carni rosse lavorate (salumi, insaccati e carne in scatola), aumenta il rischio di sviluppare alcuni tumori. L'aumento del rischio è però proporzionale alla quantità e frequenza dei consumi, per cui gli esperti ritengono che un consumo modesto di carne rossa (una o due volte a settimana al massimo) sia accettabile anche per l'apporto di nutrienti preziosi (soprattutto vitamina B12 e ferro), mentre le carni rosse lavorate andrebbero consumate solo saltuariamente.
• Le proteine animali sono costituite dalle stesse molecole chimiche di quelle vegetali, gli amminoacidi.
• La loro pericolosità per la salute, se consumate in eccesso, risiede principalmente nel modo con cui interagiscono con l'organismo. Per esempio, la lavorazione delle carni per la loro conservazione e le modalità di cottura modificano le molecole presenti, rendendole potenzialmente pericolose per la salute.
• I cibi di origine animale contengono, oltre alle proteine, anche molte altre sostanze tra cui i grassi saturi e il ferro del gruppo eme. In dosi eccessive essi stimolano l'aumento di colesterolo, i livelli di insulina nel sangue e l'infiammazione del tratto intestinale, aumentando il rischio di certe patologie, tra cui i tumori, in particolare quelli del colon-retto.
• Un consumo modesto di carni rosse non aumenta in modo sostanziale il rischio di ammalarsi di cancro del colon-retto in individui a basso rischio di partenza, ma è comunque associato a un maggior rischio di sviluppare diabete e malattie cardiovascolari. Le persone a elevato rischio individuale (per familiarità o altre patologie) dovrebbero discutere del loro piano alimentare insieme a un medico, per valutare quanto è opportuno ridurre l'apporto di carne rossa e carni lavorate, considerando che nella carne vi sono alcuni nutrienti (come la vitamina B12 e il ferro) che potrebbero essere comunque preziosi per il loro benessere.
per i vegani più accaniti (http://www.airc.it/cancro/disinforma...e-china-study/) - il China Study è stato ritenuto inattendibile dalla comunità scientifica e non vi sono studi a favore di una dieta che elimini totalmente le proteine di origine animale, in particolare i latticini.
Un pò di pubblicità anche a menphis
: https://teamubm.com/m-s-shock-la-car...rovoca-cancro/Altro materiale sul latte (qualcuno a caso ha parlato di latte sempre a caso... come sempre):
(Our review of the totality of available scientific evidence supports that intake of milk and dairy products contributes to meeting nutrient recommendations and may protect against the most prevalent, chronic non-communicable diseases, whereas very few adverse effects have been reported.)
(Milk and dairy products may have both beneficial and adverse effects with regard to the risk of different cancers. The evidence indicating healthful effects of milk and milk product consumption on prevention of cancers is considerably greater than those representing harmful impacts.)
Cosi come il fatto della carne rossa, il vero problema non è la carne rossa in se ma le altre sostanze carcerogene come negli affettati o quando cuoci la carne.
Comunque quello che hai postato parla di test su alte quantità proteiche, il mio discorso era più riferito al fatto di ingerire alte quantità di cibo (quindi tante calorie) e sul fatto che l'apparato digerente è sempre sotto stress per via dei numerosi pasti da effettuare (ad altissime calorie sfido chiunque a mangiare poche volte al giorno).
E poi avevo detto del fatto che se si è predisposti a un tumore questo si sviluppa piu velocemente con diete ad alte quantità proteiche soprattuto se animali..
Comunque anche io sto discutendo, non vedo perchè gli altri si fanno problemi.
Originariamente Scritto da chiurlo
Visualizza Messaggio
Originariamente Scritto da debe
Visualizza Messaggio
Commenta