Jump to content

which fruit contains all essential amino acids?


Hero
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 91
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I reallz do not care about complete protein because of the fact that we have an amino-pool and whenever the body needs aminos it takes it from this pool. Of course you need all amino-acids but you do not need them in one food or in one meal.

Anyway: http://www.rawfoodexplained.com/proteins/complete-proteins.html

provides a list although still talking of 8 essential amino acids.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

word. I just want to make sure I am getting all the amino acids i need.

 

Listen to your body and you will get what you need, when you need it!

 

 

 

the thing is I havent eaten many fruits at all growing up....so my body calls for certain things and I dont know where to get them from... other than the non-raw source. I dont crave the actual non-raw food, just whatever nutrient or amino acid it provides.

 

 

I am starting to figure out a pretty good variety of foods to eat that work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the thing is I havent eaten many fruits at all growing up....so my body calls for certain things and I dont know where to get them from... other than the non-raw source. I dont crave the actual non-raw food, just whatever nutrient or amino acid it provides.

What exactly is your body craving for?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What exactly is your body craving for?

 

I dont know, it gets intense cravings at moments throughout the day, but Im started to decipher what they are. like today I realized I craved watermelon after I worked out. so im eating some right now and I feel much better.

 

its just certain moments I crave something but I have no idea what it is. like I crave things like Rice, wheat, and other things that have complex carbs.

also I think a majority of the time is it healthy fats, and protein that my body is calling for. so I decided to start incorporating a lot of nuts/seeds for calories/fat/protein and I feel much better as well.

 

 

my diet right now is semi-varied and I buy what I can when I can and I eat what I crave if I can afford it. I try to buy organic and local as much as possible. I am sticking with eating 100% raw and feel best that way. here are some foods I have been eating lately all raw:

 

bananas (a lot)

cashews

watermelon (and the seeds)

cantaloupe

cucumbers

spinach leaves

pumpkins seeds

occassional peach or apple

carrots

peppers

pineapple

avocado

onion

sunflower seeds

oranges

strawberries

wild blackberries/blueberries I pick in the woods

home grown tomatoes

kombucha

 

 

I'm still detoxing cause I was completely broke and had to eat some cooked food in order to survive. but I just got a gym membership again and Im already building muscle after one day.

 

 

my focus is going to be 1/3 nuts and seeds and avocado, 1/3 sweet fruits, 1/3 non-sweet. And I will shift the balance of what Im eating based on whatever my body calls for.

 

should be starting my job soon and I Will have plenty of money to eat very well

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

You can certainly get all essential amino acids from eating a variety of fruits. There is not one essential amino acid that is not available from fruit sources. However, we don't really know the RATIO of amino acids needed to build muscle vs. maintain muscle vs. fight infection vs. stave off cancer vs......you get the picture. And fruits are not very high in overall protein so you may not be able to get all the protein you need without consuming more calories than your metabolism requires (especially for smaller individuals who require less calories). So I don't know if you could build a lot of muscle on an all-fruit diet. Which is different from MAINTAINING muscle on an all-fruit diet, as I realize some members (who were previously well muscled omnivores) have done.

 

Additionally, the idea that there is a static "pool" of amino acids that your body uses is a bit simplified. Your body cannot store amino acids for future use (like it stores energy, in the form of fat, for future use). You do have a "pool" of circulating amino acids but they are eventually depleted (theories vary on how long they remain in circulation - but 3-6 hours is a fair guess). So it's important to eat essential nutrients often.

 

I completely agree that eating what your body craves is a dangerous way of getting optimal nutrition. Food cravings are based on many factors, including hormone levels, mood, temperature, chemical and enzyme feedback systems and the list goes on. Food cravings are NOT generally based on your body's reaction to low levels of certain nutrients. It would be great if this were true but it is not. And I know there are some of you who disagree but you do a true disservice to those who visit this forum and are easily swayed.

 

Sorry if this post seems argumentative, but I've been holding back on correcting a lot of nutritional misinformation that I read on this forum, given by very passionate individuals who really believe what they are saying without any proof (other than their own personal experience and others "soft" sources) to back it up. At a time when more and more people are turning to veganism and more people are accessing the internet, I shudder to think about some of the conflicting messages new readers receive and then try to sort through.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry if this post seems argumentative, but I've been holding back on correcting a lot of nutritional misinformation that I read on this forum, given by very passionate individuals who really believe what they are saying without any proof (other than their own personal experience and others "soft" sources) to back it up. At a time when more and more people are turning to veganism and more people are accessing the internet, I shudder to think about some of the conflicting messages new readers receive and then try to sort through.

 

I agree. That is one of the dangers with forums in general and something I've been aware of and fearing for years. It is also very common in veganism, religion, and other groups of people who follow a specific path. As you've probably noticed, I pretty much never post anything at all in certain categories such as Nutrition because I don't know enough about it to give solid info. I only know my own experiences.

 

It is hard to know what to believe when reading forums, but at the same time, it is nice to hear people's stories and their own experiences. I'll look into more scientific articles and post them on the main website and as stickys in appropriate sections of the forum.

 

Thanks for bringing up that point DV, I actually think it is one of the most important points to bring up, period.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you for both of your replies, Robert and Bikerdave. I was hoping I did not offend anyone.

 

Back to fruit. We have not discovered all of the nutrients that exist. We only discovered that certain fats were even essential in my lifetime. While we do know the vitamin and mineral content of some foods, we don't know them all. Therefore, it might not be prudent to cut some natural foods out of our diet just because they aren't high in certain known nutrients.

 

I'll go back to a point I made earlier concerning antioxidants. Berries, more importantly wild berries and pomangranates have 3-4 times the antioxidant activity as greens such as kale. Who knows what else they contain? Tomatoes are a fruit and contain a fair amount of lycopene. I wouldn't cut them out of my diet (although lycopene is also present in bright red vegetables).

 

I often hear those in the nutrition field urge people to eat a wide variety of colorful plant foods (not just green). Different colors contain different nutrients and we'll continue to discover "new" nutrients as our scientific ability to analyze food grows. I think it's prudent to eat a lot of fruits and vegetables and as wide a variety as you can afford. Additionally, I eat true wild foods whenever I have the opportunity. I am always impressed by the nutritional profiles of wild foods compared to their cultivated relatives.

 

And just one more point about fruit, going back to the original question asked in the first post. The fruit with the most complete essential amino acid profile appears to be - ORANGES. Orange juice does not count - too much is lost in the juicing. Apricots come close but aren't as complete. Bananas don't even come close. I don't know about any particular wild fruits.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry if this post seems argumentative, but I've been holding back on correcting a lot of nutritional misinformation that I read on this forum, given by very passionate individuals who really believe what they are saying without any proof (other than their own personal experience and others "soft" sources) to back it up. At a time when more and more people are turning to veganism and more people are accessing the internet, I shudder to think about some of the conflicting messages new readers receive and then try to sort through.

 

I agree. That is one of the dangers with forums in general and something I've been aware of and fearing for years. It is also very common in veganism, religion, and other groups of people who follow a specific path. As you've probably noticed, I pretty much never post anything at all in certain categories such as Nutrition because I don't know enough about it to give solid info. I only know my own experiences.

 

It is hard to know what to believe when reading forums, but at the same time, it is nice to hear people's stories and their own experiences. I'll look into more scientific articles and post them on the main website and as stickys in appropriate sections of the forum.

 

Thanks for bringing up that point DV, I actually think it is one of the most important points to bring up, period.

 

DV

 

There's conflicting info everywhere you look on this universe, if people have their own opinion on nutrition and want to share it then so be it and they have every right to regardless of it being right or wrong in the same way that you do, we also have a right to share our own experiance because that's our own personal truth even if it's no one elses, my own experiance with nutrition totally goes against what the science/fitness book says but does that mean it's wrong and I can't share it or it's not true to me?....I'm sure if you asked meat eaters about nutrition they will have a different story to tell too and the same with raw vegans, in my opinion all we can do is either relate to it or take it all with a pinch of salt and accept each others differences because forums just happen to be a good way for everyone to share crazy off the wall stuff.

 

My ten cents.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can certainly get all essential amino acids from eating a variety of fruits. There is not one essential amino acid that is not available from fruit sources. However, we don't really know the RATIO of amino acids needed to build muscle vs. maintain muscle vs. fight infection vs. stave off cancer vs......you get the picture. And fruits are not very high in overall protein so you may not be able to get all the protein you need without consuming more calories than your metabolism requires (especially for smaller individuals who require less calories). So I don't know if you could build a lot of muscle on an all-fruit diet. Which is different from MAINTAINING muscle on an all-fruit diet, as I realize some members (who were previously well muscled omnivores) have done.

 

Additionally, the idea that there is a static "pool" of amino acids that your body uses is a bit simplified. Your body cannot store amino acids for future use (like it stores energy, in the form of fat, for future use). You do have a "pool" of circulating amino acids but they are eventually depleted (theories vary on how long they remain in circulation - but 3-6 hours is a fair guess). So it's important to eat essential nutrients often.

Reading your text above I realized that modern science (and you) are not really sure about nutrition and I appriciate that you admit this. Concerning that "future use"-statement: You say the idea (of a static (I never used that word)pool) is "simplyfied" and then you state there is a circulating pool (obviously less simplified ) and that there are theories about how long it lasts. Sorry for being a bit sarcastic at this point but this arbumentation really represents what "science" understand right now...

 

 

I completely agree that eating what your body craves is a dangerous way of getting optimal nutrition. Food cravings are based on many factors, including hormone levels, mood, temperature, chemical and enzyme feedback systems and the list goes on. Food cravings are NOT generally based on your body's reaction to low levels of certain nutrients. It would be great if this were true but it is not.

You obviously understand that many physiological factors determine the bodies needs. IMO if you eat raw like Topher does one goal should be to listen to your body instead of eating in rations and RDAs. Nutrition and life is more than science right now understands and it is important to learn about you individual needs.

 

And I know there are some of you who disagree but you do a true disservice to those who visit this forum and are easily swayed.

I am really sorry that you argumentation goes this way.

 

Sorry if this post seems argumentative, but I've been holding back on correcting a lot of nutritional misinformation that I read on this forum, given by very passionate individuals who really believe what they are saying without any proof (other than their own personal experience and others "soft" sources) to back it up. At a time when more and more people are turning to veganism and more people are accessing the internet, I shudder to think about some of the conflicting messages new readers receive and then try to sort through.

As far as I understand you admit you (and science) do know only little about nutrition. How can you say others who have personal experience misinform or need to be corrected by you? If "hard sources" are not avaible you have to rely on the other sources avaible IMO.

Every person has to find his /her own way. It is all about personal believes and that ioncludes modern science. Sorry to be argumentative, too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bigbwii and Flanders! I knew I could count on you both to comment.

 

Both of you are very passionate about your raw food lifestyles and that's great as it's worked for you. But many people (me included) require proof other than personal experience when buying into dietary changes. There are "The China Study" and "Plant Based Nutrition and Health" (to name just 2) books that point to well-researched benefits of a vegan diet. There is no raw book that comes even close to being scientifically sound - probably because there are so few raw foodists. Maybe there are studies being done right now that compare the health benefits of a raw vs. cooked diet. I would love to read them. I would also love to read any study which proves that listening to your body will lead you to the correct food choices, except in a few rare instances where some pregnant women eat dirt due to a mineral imbalance. I see the effects of people eating what their bodies crave every day at work and it's not pretty. Your body isn't that smart - that's why we need to listen to our brains an use reason when making food choices.

 

As a health care professional and an older forum member, I am sometimes concerned by the way it appears some impressionable members are swayed by posts that appear to be convincing but really have no proof to back them up. This is a problem with the internet in general. I try to never post my opinion unless I have well-researched proof behind it. Otherwise, I state that it is opinion only.

 

And that's my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But many people (me included) require proof other than personal experience
Your body isn't that smart

 

i didn't have the desire to get in the middle of this, but i couldn't help but point out some of your concepts which are formulated by society. that you are a good little consumer, that you don't know what's best for yourself, that you need to be told what's right and not feel what's right. that you aren't qualified to feed yourself and to survive on your own?

 

i mean come on these are laughable. yet i understand because i sounded exactly like this with just as much passion about five years ago. but things change and personal experiences happen that prove these ideas otherwise.

 

the funny thing is i hear similar arguments all the time, as if i haven't heard them before. as if i haven't been exposed to the same society, the same big corporations with their mass marketings and influence in education and studies, or the same scientific rationale. many of us are aware of both sides of the argument, and supposed short falls. usually much more so than the challenger. generally, science is notorious for being a bit behind the curve of truth, i mean the world is flat and you need meat for protein and milk builds strong bones... right?

 

we are intelligent beings - many of us coming with backgrounds in physiology and nutrition. many of us initially having the same exact arguments searching for scientific validation. but it doesn't matter because at the end of the day we develop the ability to listen confidently to ourselves and our bodies.

 

we've tried it your way, the validated way. for whatever reason that didn't work for us. so we found something better. so i feel qualified, having tried both for considerable time, which is better for me. have you lived both? and i don't mean "raw for a weekend", but developed the ability to trust in the infinite wisdom of your being.

 

if not, then how dare you criticize the people who have and have made that decision?

 

so in response to your quote above,

what else matters other than "personal experience"?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Critique is good. It makes us question our believes and move along. You being raw is a consequence of this.

The point is, you wont feel your homocysteine rising, you don't feel clogged arteries, you won't feel vitamin D deficiency, in fact, alot of life threatening complications won't be felt at all until it's too late.

If you choose to defy the evidence that do exist in an area, I would like to know why since, if you can point me to any scientific evidence, I would like to know it so I can consider bettering my lifestyle.

Remember, the track record of 100% raw veganism is bad to say the least. There are almost no studies, no tribes/native people, you won't find alot of people sticking to the diet for a significant portion of time and the ones who do don't create any sort of records.

I'm not questioning to piss anyone off, I just want to learn more and the way I do it is by science, ie testing the evidence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just want to say that I think this is an important discussion and it is becoming and important and interesting thread from all aspects.

 

Thanks for your input everyone. Lots of good valid points from all angles and it gives us lots to think about.

 

When I give talks one of the basic things I tell people is to seek out the truth and to seek wellness since that is one of our most basic rights and desires, to feel well and be well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

that you don't know what's best for yourself,

 

Are you suggesting that since she is not raw, that she doesn't know what's best for her?

 

Anyways...

 

For me, I have personal experience AND documented scientific proof that being raw was indeed harmful to me. Fructose is very hard on the liver, especially when all of your carbohydrates are coming from fruit. I'm 6'1, my metabolism is huge. I had to eat a TON of fruit, resulting in more fructose than my already impaired liver should have had to deal with. In addition to that, I have on paper from multiple blood tests showing that the more I substituted raw fruit and it's calories for some other form of cooked food calories (rice, amaranth,etc), the lower my white blood cell count went, it is now at a very dangerous level. Needless to say I'm not eating raw anymore.

 

Everyone's path is different, but it is dangerous to suggest things about diet to someone you don't even know, with no scientific evidence behind such a diet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

offense74,

i don't think you're at risk of pissing anyone off, no worries. it's an interesting and worthy debate. these conversations are helpful and i think its beneficial to point out that we're all here together for a reason. that we share more in common than our differences.

 

the difference i guess is that i truly believe that those ailments would make themselves evident. like you suggest in your post, you are interested in new documented science to tell you how to better yourself. i think as long as we have that extrinsic thought process it will be difficult to internalize our health.

 

people will have low energy, headaches, back pains, emotional distress, etc, or just a feeling that something isn't right, and will just take a pill, herb, cleanse or ignore it - symptomatic treatments.

 

our body gives us distinct signs when things are not working correctly. and yes i believe that the case for even things like homocysteine and vitamin levels once we tune into our body for answers and not to scientific journals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you suggesting that since she is not raw, that she doesn't know what's best for her?

 

no, but that if she is looking to science instead of her own body and personal experience, then that might not be what's best for her.

 

additionally, thank you for sharing your story. i will remind you though that i have not pushed any specific dietary regimen on anyone, nor prophesied a fruitarian or raw food dogma. i'm not a believer that there is one diet that surpasses all others. we are all different and in different stages of our lives. the fact that you have experimented with your body and (at this time) found what has or has not worked for you is commendable and right in line with what i believe.

 

my argument is that science doesn't replace personal experience.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i will remind you though that i have not pushed any specific dietary regimen on anyone, nor prophesied a fruitarian or raw food dogma. i'm not a believer that there is one diet that surpasses all others. we are all different and in different stages of our lives. the fact that you have experimented with your body and (at this time) found what has or has not worked for you is commendable and right in line with what i believe.

 

Thanks for that.

 

Also, I'm not an enemy of raw foods or anything. I still eat a lot, and I totally give credit to raw vegetable juices for helping me heal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name="seand

no' date=' but that if she is looking to science instead of her own body and personal experience, then that might not be what's best for her.

 

my argument is that science doesn't replace personal experience.[/quote]

 

Of course I listen to my body and experiences, just as most people do. However, knowledge gained through scientific and nutritional studies should not be ignored. Since my body hasn't clearly spoken to me regarding omega fatty acids, for example, I turn to nutritional studies. Our diets have changed so much in the past 100 years (some good and some bad changes) that it might not be in our best interest to ignore the knowledge gained by science.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bigbwii and Flanders! I knew I could count on you both to comment.

 

Your body isn't that smart - that's why we need to listen to our brains an use reason when making food choices.
Our diets have changed so much in the past 100 years (some good and some bad changes) that it might not be in our best interest to ignore the knowledge gained by science.

Seems to me that the more we listen to our "brains" and the more we take the knowledge gained by science into account the worse our diet became. Listening to your body does not mean to eat everything you crave but to learn to make

 

As a health care professional and an older forum member, I am sometimes concerned by the way it appears some impressionable members are swayed by posts that appear to be convincing but really have no proof to back them up. This is a problem with the internet in general. I try to never post my opinion unless I have well-researched proof behind it.

As a scientist myself I have to state that there is no such thing as a scientific proof and a health care pro should know that. I already discussed the topic of well researched science with Magnus and there are good arguments pro and against modern scientific research. The good thing about this forum and the internet as a whole is that all kinds of opinions are avaible and only few things are censored.

 

@seand: I second so much what you posted. You use the words I am searching for in my bad english! Thanks for that!

 

@offense: Nobody is pissed of by you asking for a proof but as you already know there is little or no traditional scientific research done in the rawfood area. Not listening to advices that are scientifically prooven only does not mean to be ignorant. Many ideas of life science (natural hygiene) are contrary to the medical doctrine but still helped many health-seekers.

For example: there is this debate about if humans are fruigivores or omnivores. There is not proof science we do not have a time mashine. There are indications for both directions. And there are arguments. At the end you have to decide whome to believe and which argument makes more sense to you.

 

I just want to say that I think this is an important discussion and it is becoming and important and interesting thread from all aspects.

Thanks for your input everyone. Lots of good valid points from all angles and it gives us lots to think about.

I second that a lot!

 

For me, I have personal experience AND documented scientific proof that being raw was indeed harmful to me. Fructose is very hard on the liver, especially when all of your carbohydrates are coming from fruit. I'm 6'1, my metabolism is huge. I had to eat a TON of fruit, resulting in more fructose than my already impaired liver should have had to deal with. In addition to that, I have on paper from multiple blood tests showing that the more I substituted raw fruit and it's calories for some other form of cooked food calories (rice, amaranth,etc), the lower my white blood cell count went, it is now at a very dangerous level. Needless to say I'm not eating raw anymore.

Since your liver is impaired your personal experience and blood tests provide important information for your journey towards a better health but they are no documented scientific "proof".

Concerning your low white blood cell count: Does a lowered number of white blood cells compared to the average make you a sick person? How do they measure the average? Since you are unique and your livers functions are impaired you may not be able to eat what a healthy person my thrive on. But eating less raw does not mean to eat less fructose.

Btw: You do not need to eat "TONS" of fruit. IMO about 6-7 pounds of rawfood are enough for a person of your height and weight. Metabolism is not static but will adjust to new situation pretty quick.

Everyone's path is different, but it is dangerous to suggest things about diet to someone you don't even know, with no scientific evidence behind such a diet.

When someone with serious health problems (say an impaired liver function) seeks for advice in our forum and does not inform the others about his illness a dangerous situation might be the consequence.

 

@everybody taking part in this debate: To provide newbies with lots of information is one important goal of this forum. Sice we all come from different backgrounds our advices will differ. The new vbb-members have to decide on their own which argumention to follow. Saying the information the rawfood members provide is well-meant but dangerous is not helpful at all. Modern science and the so-called scientific approach can also be criticized in many ways. IMO under normal circumstances telling someone to eat as much rawfood as possible with a emphasis on fruit accompanied by vegetables, nuts, seeds and sprouts is not a dangerous advice.

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...