@edgarblythe,
Quote:Red meat is a great protein source. One hundred grams (slightly less than a quarter of a pound) of raw red muscle meat contains 20-25 grams of protein. One hundred grams of cooked red meat contains 28-36 grams of protein. During cooking the water content decreases and nutrients become more concentrated. Protein from meat provides all essential amino acids (lysine, threonine, methionine, phenylalanine, tryptophan, leucine, isoleucine, valine) and has no limiting amino acids. The protein is highly digestible.
This is a false attribution.
Raw meat is not entirely
digestible, therefore the nutrients are in fact "more concentrated", however cooking most certainly destroys micronutrition, whilst increases the digestibility.
Furthermore, a raw carrion is significantly micronutritionally dense than food acknowledged as "meat".
Quote:Red meat is an excellent source of B vitamins. One hundred grams of red meat provides over two thirds of the daily requirement of vitamin B-12, and up to 25% RDI of riboflavin, niacin, vitamin B6 and pantothenic acid. Liver is an excellent source of vitamin A and folate.
Very well.
There are more nutrient dense sources, though beef does appear to have the highest essential amino acid profile, the vegans have sun warrior protein:
Being that your aruement consists of cultural intervention, such as cooking meat, this arguement is refuted.
Also, nothing suggests that biological values, net protein utilisation, or digestibility is 'superior', science has demonstrated data, not the normatives that are cogented by humans, and there is no scientific arguement that such factors do enable meat to be 'superior'.
The data cannot refute the fact that vegan diets enable a positive nitrogen balance.
Why does such methodology exist?
Quote:Beef and lamb meat are among the richest sources of iron and zinc. One hundred grams of red meat provide at least 25% of daily adult requirements of these two minerals. The iron in meat is mostly haem-iron which is well absorbed. Furthermore, the absorption of zinc from a diet high in animal protein is greater than from plant foods. Red meats are also good sources of selenium. One hundred grams provide 20% RDI of selenium. Red meats contain several endogenous antioxidants such as: ubiquinone, glutathione, lipoic acid , spermine, carnosine and anserine. Conjugated linoleic acid (CLA) has antioxidant and immunomodulatory properties. It is mostly present in the fat component of red meat.
False attribution, again.
The iron that is obtained in "meat" is not entirely haem iron, perhaps 50/50 haem/non haem, and is there any vitamin c/vitamers in this "meat"?
Zinc and iron compete for the same binding sites, therefore less iron absorbtion.
Vegan nutrition is diverse in iron, plant material may consist of various acids to enhance absorbtion.
This "meat" does not appear to be nutrient dense, per kilo calorie.
As for the "endogenous antioxidants", what are the measurements on ORAC scale?
Quote:According to the conventional wisdom, the consumption of red meat should be severely limited due to its saturated fat content. Fifty-one percent of the fat in red meat is monounsaturated, of which 90 percent is oleic acid. This is the very same monounsaturated fat found in olive oil. Monounsaturated fats both lower LDL cholesterol and raise HDL cholesterol. Saturated fat constitutes 45 percent of the total fat in red meat. However, a third of that is stearic acid, which increases HDL cholesterol while having no effect on LDL. The remaining 4 percent of the fat is polyunsaturated, which lowers LDL but has no effect on HDL. Thus 70 percent of the fat content of red meat will improve the relative levels of LDL and HDL. The remaining 30 percent will raise LDL cholesterol but will also raise HDL cholesterol and will have an insignificant effect on the ratio of total cholesterol to HDL.
This is red herring.
What is the alpha linoelic acid: linoelic acid ratio?
Perhaps they are do NOT acknowledge the implications of this.
Quote:Do not trim off the fat from your steaks and chops. A low-carb dietary that is high in protein and low in fat will cause illness.
Are they suggesting that the other variations do not "cause illness"?
I am not certain how the testimony entails this suggestion, it has been subjected to logical fallacies.
Quote:The way to achieve success on a low-carbohydrate program is to replace carbohydrates with fat. Humans cannot live on protein alone. In some Central American states, feeding political opponents only lean meat was an “elegant” way of getting rid of them. Diarrhea develops and death soon follows within a few months.
Ketosis is not rational, there is no special pleadings.
Thermodynamic laws determine mass, eliminating carbohydrates results in physiological decline, by pathological metabolism, humans are generally
alkaline, carbohydrates are
necessary for metabolic pathways, hence there is a carbohydrate metabolism.
Excess fatty acids concentrate a ketone body of mass.
Excess protein is extreted, excluding gluconeogensis, thermologous by digestion...ect.
