Jump to content

gain weight without protein?


endcruelty
 Share

Recommended Posts

He didn't talk about amino acid supplementation? I got that he is a raw food supporter. You get the protein from enzymes in fruit and vegetables. Looking at live food for the protein content instead of cooked.

 

I wonder if a tablespoon of nutritional yeast is comparable to the enzymes in fruit and vegetables.

 

If enzymes are a chain of amino acids, then the body still has to break them down to get the amino acids. Maybe cause they are just a small chain of amino acids as compared to the mega chains of amino acids all put together into a conglomerate mass (the protein in legumes and other grains), then the body doesn't have to work so hard (so hard in digestion).

 

Mmmm. . . . . . . . .

 

As we age we lose alot of our digestion enzymes. I wonder if as you grow older, it might be favorable to go raw with fruits and vegetables, instead of calorie restriction (which also lowers the amount of digestion the body has to do to get the nutrients from the food). As a foodie, the raw diet would be my choice .

 

As a BBer, I use supplements of protein. Though that is what they are - supplements. I still eat the legumes and grains for my protein sources. You need to eat food to get the variety of nutrients your body needs to be optimal as an athlete.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

He puts out a lot of theory, but no proof. According to him, all amino acids in fruits and vegetable come from enzymes, yet they disappear once you cook them? And they have no protein, but they do have amino acids? (Well, enzymes are PROTEINS made up of AMINO ACIDS.) A bit confusing, his talk.

 

As an aside, I must say that I have a problem with the idea of "living" foods. An apple taken from a tree is not alive. It is slowly decomposing. Some enzymes in vegetables cause decay faster unless you deactivate them - this is the reason why some vegetables need to be blanched before freezing. Enzymes are chemically active proteins, or rather they catalyze chemical reactions. They are not "alive." There seems to be an entire movement based on people's belief that enzymes are more, and yet less, than what they are.

 

If you take a short look at even this simple wikipedia description of enzymes you can see that people really pick out little beliefs concerning certain digestive enzymes while ignoring the rest. A little information mixed with a lot of belief does not result in better understanding. Heat breaks large enzymes into smaller amino acids that our bodies can use. I don't understand why this is worse than my body using a protease to break down an ingested enzyme into amino acids that I can use. Human digestive enzymes are needed to break down the enzymes contained in ingested foods so that we can utilize the amino acids in those ingested enzymes!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've gained muscle on a diet with less than 10% protein; it was slow but steady (1 pound a month) going, and I'm 47 yrs old. I think Richard Blackman also eats less than 10% protein and he's pretty solid.

 

I don't mean to be a jerk, but don't you have another thread where you are complaining about uneven energy levels?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm talking about vegans who have low energy; I have more than I know what to do with. And the body doesn't use protein for energy; it's a building block. Only sugars can be oxidized to release energy. If your body is digesting proteins into sugar for energy(a lengthy energy intensive process), then you aren't eating enough simple carbs. I easily gain weight on less than 10% protein and take no supplements of any kind. Go to a marathon sometime; nobody eats beef jerky or steaks for "energy", they eat oranges and bananas and dates (cause ONLY sugar can be oxidized.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After your body uses it's glycogen stores it will turn to the fat stores for energy. Fat is broken into fatty acids and glycerol - which is converted to glycogen by the liver. Unused amino acids eventually get converted into fat but are not a good source of ready energy. This is one of the reasons that many bodybuilders use a high-protein, low-carb diet in the cutting phase before a competition - fat can be burned more efficiently for some people when doing this, although it can definitely give you less over-all energy (until you eat higher carbs again).

 

While carbs can give you energy, eating simple carbs by themselves can give you a wide swing in your insulin levels which can result in a lowered blood glucose level (the "crash" after eating a candy bar, for instance). Steady-state insulin levels are healthier for you and steady-state energy levels are easier to obtain with complex carbs (such as the whole fruit mentioned above).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whole fruit does not cause insulin swings because the available simple carbohydrate is fairly low-fruit on average is 70% water and contains fiber. Fruit has a moderate glycemic index and a lower glycemic LOAD than many starches: a baked potatoe will cause a greater insulin response than a banana. (Glycemic Load=AVAILABLE carbohydrate times glycemic index.) Because cooking usually dehydrates food (which is why a baked potatoe shrinks), cooked foods, like starches, usually have a higher glycemic load than whole fruits. Frugivores, like myself who keep the fat content low, do not have insulin swings; in fact, a low-fat fruit diet has repeatedly been used to cure type 2 diabetes.

 

And "whole fruit" is not a "complex carb"; it's caloric content is primarily sugar-simple carbs. Complex carbs (polysacarrides) are predominately starches-roots, grains, and legumes. The next time you watch a marathon, keep your eyes out for people eating carrots and kidney beans-it's gonna be a LONG day!

 

You can always tell a product humans are not biologically suited to eat: it can't be eaten in its natural state and has to be technologically processed. Try eating a raw potatoe sometime; that tasteless, hard "yuk" your feeling is nature telling you not to eat it. Listen to your senses; they're there for a reason!

 

Nature and our bodies are infinitely more complex and sophisticated than our most evolved technologies. What makes us think we can improve on 100s of millions of years of evolution? That we should just defy our senses, natures decision making system for us, with technology whose consequences we do not fully understand? Technological consequences are challenging enough in the external world-like global warming. Since we do not FULLY understand the consequences of technological processes like cooking, and because substantial evidence exists indicating cooking often reduces nutritional quality, putting cooked products and byproducts INTO OUR BODIES does not make sense. Technology has a place in the world, but in our food and into the infinite subtlty and complexity of our bodies is not it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...