Prof Tim Noakes' U-turn on Carbohydrates

[Captain Fastbastard Mayhem]

Breaking news : Noakes shamed in hotel pizza sting

 

http://www.thegatsby.co.za/2013/02/26/noakes-bust-in-sordid-hotel-room-pizza-bender/

 

Bahahahaha!

[Uni]

Breaking news : Noakes shamed in hotel pizza sting

 

http://www.thegatsby.co.za/2013/02/26/noakes-bust-in-sordid-hotel-room-pizza-bender/

 

The moral of the story is you can't deprive yourself and be so restrictive - a beer and pizza won't kill you

[Sawdust]

So it seems a high protein diet is only safe after 65??

 

http://www.health24....abetes-20140305

 

 

Meat, eggs and cheese are bad for you, a new study says. ~ Shutterstock

 

 

 

High protein diets such as Atkins, Dukan, South Beach, Miracle Metabolism and The Zone Diet have, for many years, extolled the benefits of diets low in carbohydrates. Claiming that healthy meals should rather contain higher amounts of protein and, in some cases such as the Tim Noakes diet or the Paleo diet, fat.

 

However, a new study published in Cell Metabolism claims to show that high levels of protein (from animal sources) can in fact have severe negative health consequences in the long term.

 

In particular, adherents of these diets are apparently up to four times more likely to develop cancer and diabetes than those eating smaller amounts of protein.

 

The authors go as far as to suggest that eating a lot of protein (e.g. a diet based on eggs, milk, meat and cheese) increases the risk of cancer almost as much as smoking 20 cigarettes a day

 

Beans better than meat

 

The report also points out that these harmful effects were almost entirely eliminated if this protein was sourced from vegetables such as beans, instead of meat and dairy.

 

Read: Paleo diet, is it worth the switch?

 

The study, which focused on a representative group of 6 381 people aged over 50, aimed to address the lack of long-term studies of the protein-rich diets which have been the subject of renewed popularity in recent years.

 

The lead author of the study, Valter Longo, suggests that to prevent exposure to a high risk of diabetes and cancer, people shouldeat no more than 0.8g of protein per kilogram of body weight a day (equivalent to 48g for a 60kg person, and 64g for an 80kg person). Anything beyond this level is likely to increase the risk of illness.

 

Read: high protein diets are linked to kidney disease

 

In an interesting twist, however, this effect seemed to get reversed once an individual is over the age of 65. After passing this milestone, a high-protein diet was associated with improved health and a lower chance of developing serious illness.

Edited March 6, 2014 by Sawdust

[duringd]

Nou is daar moeilikheid!!!

[Captain Fastbastard Mayhem]

Erm, this study is being very highly discredited.

 

Among other things, the effects of the following items were "excluded" fromt he study

 

Obesity

Smoking

Cholestorol Count

Blood Sugar

Diabetes

 

Essentially, it is flawed science... There wasn't a proper study of the effects of a changed diet, or comparing one diet against another, or anything. Heard TN on the radio yesterday...

[SwissVan]

Erm, this study is being very highly discredited.

 

Among other things, the effects of the following items were "excluded" fromt he study

 

Obesity

Smoking

Cholestorol Count

Blood Sugar

Diabetes

 

Essentially, it is flawed science... There wasn't a proper study of the effects of a changed diet, or comparing one diet against another, or anything. Heard TN on the radio yesterday...

 

And what exactly is "low" and "high" intake?

 

Also is it actually protein that is the problem or the source of protein?

The "cell Metabolism" linked article says "These associations were either abolished or attenuated if the proteins were plant derived."

 

Maybe its related to something else i.e. mass produced red meat

[Captain Fastbastard Mayhem]

And what exactly is "low" and "high" intake?

 

Also is it actually protein that is the problem or the source of protein?

The "cell Metabolism" linked article says "These associations were either abolished or attenuated if the proteins were plant derived."

 

Maybe its related to something else i.e. mass produced red meat

 

Yeah, but then the veggies could have been non smokers. Or diabetic. Or previous cancer sufferers. There apparently just wasn't enough control in the study to render the results applicable.

[Stevief]

I cant keep up with all these claims anymore, wake up today protein bad, tmrw carbs good, monday fat the way to go, tuesday carbs suck, wednesday protein is the future. FFS just eat a little bit of everything and stop this madness.

[Helpmytrap]

1. Sensational title.

2. This study was based on a dietary survey. So not actually a study.

3. One can’t prove causation through correlating statistics collected from questionnaires.

4. Humans are not mice, so that part shouldn't actually be taken into account.

5. The "study" only refers to the "protein consumption" of animal or plant forms, not once did it specifically mention meat, eggs, dairy, fish etc. The protein sources could have been from junk food.

6. The results were observed, not proven.

7. As Mayhem said, there was no control.

 

Andreas Eenfeldt gave it a more appropriate title: “There is a 20 percent chance that meat quadruples the risk of cancer for people under the age of 65 and reduces the risk for older people.”

 

As for the Kidney disease part,

 

http://authoritynutrition.com/how-to-win-an-argument-with-a-nutritionist/

Nutritionist Says: “Protein is Bad For Your Kidneys”

 

 

Answer: It is often claimed that a high protein intake can cause harm to the kidneys, but this is false. Even though it is important for people with pre-existing kidney disease to reduce protein, the same is not true for people with healthy kidneys.

The studies show that a high protein intake has no detrimental effects of kidney function in healthy people, not even in bodybuilders that eat massive amounts of protein.

Studies

1. Manninen AH. High-Protein Weight Loss Diets and Purported Adverse Effects: Where is the Evidence? Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition, 2004.
   
2. Martin WM, et al. Dietary protein intake and renal function. Nutrition & Metabolism, 2005.
   

[eddy]

Kamikaze pilots who gave up flying were more likely to die of cancer than those who flew a mission.

 

So, we can deduce that giving up Kamikaze flying leads to cancer ???

[Cellar]

Erm, this study is being very highly discredited.

 

Heard TN on the radio yesterday...

 

Well, he does have a vested interest in selling his brand of science.

[deanbean]

Noakes' diet is Low Carb, high fat, not high protein. Recommends that you have a lower protein intake because the body can produce glycogen from protein, which would defeat the objectives of a low carb diet.

Edited March 6, 2014 by deanbean

[Captain Fastbastard Mayhem]

Well, he does have a vested interest in selling his brand of science.

 

Ergh. It's not his brand. Not his science. He just supports it because he's read and understands the studies associated with the diets, and how they affect the body in certain people.

[Cellar]

Ergh. It's not his brand. Not his science. He just supports it because he's read and understands the studies associated with the diets, and how they affect the body in certain people.

 

Seems like he's selling something.

[Captain Fastbastard Mayhem]

Seems like he's selling something.

 

Everyone does at some point. He's a well published nutritionist wiff a medical degree and loads of personal and practical experience, who wants to help people. Why is it wrong for him to put it in book format, and get money from it? It's his profession, after all...

 

Only reason he's getting so much attention out of this is due to the about-face that he's had after publishing the Lore of Running and backing the high carb diet that the majority of the scientific world USED to back when studies on the long term effects of a high carb diet were still in their infancy.

 

Would you rather he stayed with his previous convictions, when we are hearing, all the more often, that those assertions that he held were based on bad nutritional science and studies done by other people? Remember - the scientific world held for the past 30 to 50 years that the high carb, low fat diet was a good thing, and that unsaturated fats were the good guy, animal fats the bad, and fat intake (as opposed to sugar intake) had a direct causal link to diabetes and heart disease?

 

Not his fault that the studies were bad...

[Riaanvt]

Maybe this will shed some light as to where/who the money goes to...