Morczubel t1_j41wva4 wrote on January 12, 2023 at 4:44 PM

Reply to comment by marriedacarrot in I analyzed 11000 products of a Dutch supermarket to find the cheapest sources of protein [OC] by MemeableData

>Feeding a chicken a diet of processed corn product and antibiotics: Not processed, totally natural. Mushing a bunch of plants together in a tube shape: Disgustingly processed, inherently unhealthy.

Thats why you buy organic chicken. Double points if you get your protein from all kinds of sources, not just animals. If your sausage actually only contains a few things without added sugar or seed oils or additives, that would be great. The backside won’t tell you about how it is processing other than that though. If it really has better macros than chicken ontop of that, then I would be throroughly amazed.

>Plant sausage is a bit salty, so it's a good thing no vegan sits around just eating fake sausage. Other than soy, no one plant protein has all 9 amino acids that the body needs from food.

Afaik quinoa is more complete than soy, which is limited in sulphur containing amino acids. Though not exactly relevant if combined with other sources.

>That's why the first rule of a vegan diet is "get protein from multiple sources."

I know; I somewhat stated this myself in my last comment. Yet it is still far easier to get the things You need from an omnivore diet.

>Please share these primary sources that demonstrate the points you're trying to make about a plant-based diet being unhealthy.

I have never claimed this. Let me reiterate yet another time: I was solely referring to my opinion that highly processed vegan replacement products are not the ideal food (see above). To add: usually the burden of proof lies with the one challenging the status quo. The status quo for nutrition science is that we know absolutely nothing other than a few select things. Even if I wanted to, I cannot fully disprove a plant-based diet being healthy as much as you cannot prove it is healthy as of right now. Same goes for any other diet. Nutrition science is inherently extremely complex as variables are plenty and longterm study/protocol adherence is bad. We just are not there yet and claiming anything else is just an ideology at this point.

marriedacarrot t1_j42gxum wrote on January 12, 2023 at 6:46 PM

The point isn't to compare one specific product to one specific product; you compare a holistic diet with a holistic diet. If I got 50%+ of my protein from seitan sausage, cautioning against processed foods might be relevant, but nobody actually eats that way. (Also, what harm does physically processing foods in machines actually do? Adding salt in the factory and running it through an extruder is no worse than adding salt at home.)

What percent of the chicken an omnivore eats is organic? Do people who say "I only eat organic chicken and beef from my uncle's special farm" never eat at restaurants or friends' houses? Never buy TV dinners? Omnivores seem to enjoy comparing the best theoretical meat-based diet with the worst theoretical plant-based diet, regardless of how people actually eat.

You kicked off this thread with "Gluten is still not considered perfectly safe if as well you read the literature," and are now not providing links to the literature that you told me to read. I'm asking for evidence that gluten is "not safe."