From: traub@rtf.bt.co.uk (Michael Traub)
Newsgroups: rec.food.veg
Subject: Re: De-muffining
Date: 15 Apr 92 08:45:12 GMT
Organization: BT Customer Systems, Brighton, UK

In article <18131@oasys.dt.navy.mil> jeanthea@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Mark Jeantheau) writes:
>Part I.  TOTAL PROTIEN REQUIREMENTS
>
>Regarding total protien requirements, "The Vegetarian Handbook" (Ref. 1) tends 
>to support the assertion that we over-consume protien.  But it still gives the
>"official" answer that men need between 30 and 60 grams of protien each day, 
>women 25-50 grams (p. 38).  The National Research Council's RDA of 56g protien 
>daily for a "normal" man and 44g for a "normal" woman fall within these ranges 
>(Ref. 2, pp. 311-312).
>
>Concerning the protien content of brown rice, I'll assume you mean cooked rice 
>(raw rice--yum yum).  Ref (3) gives the protien content of 1 cup of cooked 
>long-grain brown rice as 4.9g (p. 462).  This seems about right when compared 
>to the listing in reference (2) of 14.8g protien for raw brown rice  (p.277).  
>(ie. 1 cup raw ~ 3 cups cooked --> 4.9g x 3 = 14.7g :: pretty close!).
>
>OK-- Now let's say that 1 cup of cooked rice is the normal daily serving.  
>Even if 100% of the 4.9g protien is utilizable--which we know it's not--you'd 
>still only be filling about 10% of the NRC's RDA for protien for an average 
>man.  Even going with the low-end estimates for protien requirements cited in 
>reference (1), 1 cup of cooked rice--by itself--doesn't get you even close.  
>(And my doubts about your junk-food-can-provide-all-the-protien-you-need 
>statement grow larger....)

The  amounts  I  quoted  were  for  *uncooked*  rice.  Using  cooked weight
figures  is  *very*  unreliable  due  to  the different absorption rates of
different  types  of  foodstuffs  (and  it  depends  how  much you cook the
stuff).  Your  figure  of 3 to 1 is more typical of a white basmati rice, a
rice  which  fluffs  up  a  lot  when  cooking. Brown rice does not usually
fluff  up  to the same extent. This makes comparisons unreliable and is why
*dry* weight figures are normally quoted.

How  can  anyone  survive  on  1 cup of cooked rice per day? That amount of
rice would not even provide sufficient carbohydrates let alone protein! Do
you really think I would be so stupid as to intimate that someone can live
on 1 cup of cooked rice per day?!?!?!?

I  was  talking  about  using  brown  rice  as  a *sole* protein source. In
communities  where  this  is the case the usual rice intake is in the order
of  one  and  a  half  *uncooked*  cups of rice per day. This is sufficient
protein,  as  the  USRDA  figures  are *very* conservative. WHO figures are
*one half* of the USRDA figures.

If  you  look at *your* figure of 1 cup of uncooked rice providing 14.7g of
protein  and  *your*  figure  of  30g of protein for a man per day then you
will notice that it is rather close to the figure of 47% that I quoted.

Satisfied now?


>Part II.  FOOD COMBINING
>
>Reference (3) states emphatically that protien combining is not required 
>(p.415).  Reference (4), by implication at least, agrees with this. However, 
>Reference 1--"The Vegetarian Handbook"--states just as emphatically that it 
>*is* important to consume complementary protiens together (p.58 and other 
>places).
>
But Reference 1 is wrong! Can't you understand that?

>Part III.  HUH?
>
>I admit that I'm new to the vegetarian game, but I've been trying to take a 
>scientific approach to ensure I meet all nutritional requirements.  It appears 
>to me that even among "experts" there are still large differences of opinion.  
>This is not unusual in *any* scientific field.  Experimental data is 
>interpreted in different ways by different researchers; newly postulated 
>theories make sense to some and are poppycock to others.  All I can do is read, 
>learn, come to my own conclusions, and keep on reading! 
>
Sounds  good  to  me,  just  remember that many of these books referring to
protein  combining  were based on the original work of Frances Moore-Lappe.
Her  book  "Diet  for  a  small  planet"  stressed  the  need  for  protein
combining.  Many  people  took  up  on  this  concept  and  the idea spread
widely.  Several  years  later  Frances  produced a new edition of the book
and  *removed*  all  references  to protein combining as she had discovered
that it was unnecessary. Unfortunately it will take some time for everybody
else  to  catch up. Your help in this matter wuld be appreciated. Please do
not continue to spread the myths surrounding protein combining.


>REFERENCES
>1. "The Vegetarian Handbook," G. Null, St. Matrin's Press, 1987
>2. "Nutrition Almanac," L. Dunne, McGraw-Hill, 1990
>3. "The New Laurel's Kitchen," Robertson, Flinders, and Ruppenthal, Ten Speed 
>Press, 1986
>4. "Food Combining Made Easy," H. Shelton, Willow Publishing, 1982
>(note: in this case (ref 4), "food combining" refers to the practice of eating 
>different types of foods (like starch, beans, meats, fruits, etc.) separately 
>to improve digestion)

I  thought  you  were also going to prove that a diet of chocolate biscuits
and  potato  crisps would not provide enough protein. What happened to that
assertion?  A  diet  of  chocolate biscuits and potato crisps is actually a
better  protein  source than brown rice! (And by better I do not mean it is
better for you:-).

P.S.  This  is  not  a  "spelling flame" but protein is spelt "protein" not
"protien".

-- 
Michael Traub
BT Customer Systems, Brighton Systems Centre. traub@rtf.bt.co.uk