Talk:Complete protein

message: How do these sentences: Higher quality proteins have a higher Biological Value (BV) such as whey protein at 100 BV compared to soy protein at 74 BV.[4] A higher BV is more usable than a lower BV for essential protein necessary to meet nutritional human requirements and muscle growth.[4][5][6][7][8] have anything to do with this article? I've removed them until an adequate explanation is offered. Yankees76 17:20, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This article is about complete protein. Explaining about protein quality adds to the article. --Firstocean 17:52, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: How does quoting a couple of random facts about BV and whey protein have anything to do with Complete proteins? Yankees76 18:21, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This explains about complete proteins differ in protein value. The information is a detailed explanantion of the difference in complete protein. You believe they are facts. I will add it back to the article. You can add as you wish. --Firstocean 01:47, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Protein quality 

message: Older versions of this page were more correct:  a complete protein need not contain "all amino acids", but it must contain the essential amino acids.  Steve P. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.231.128.198 (talk) 18:03, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  First Sentence 

message: To the extent editors are taking amino acid prevelance from nutrition tables, doing some arithmetic and then stating various substances either are or aren't complete protiens, that is original research and should be deleted.
Spope3 (talk) 07:54, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  original research 

message: A gram of protein is complete if it contains the following minumums:
    Tryptophan    11 mg 
    Histidine     19 mg 
    Methionine    25 mg (Cysteine can replace some of this) 
    Isoleucine    28 mg 
    Threonine     34 mg 
    Valine        35 mg 
    Lysine        58 mg 
    Phenylalanine 63 mg (Tyrosine can replace some of this) 
    Leucine       66 mg 
This is from Davis & Melina, _Becoming Vegan_ Table 3.2, but is based on data adopted by both WHO and FDA, using a model called PDCAAS (Protein Digestibility Corrected Amino Acid Score).
Since the above only totals .34 grams there is quite a bit of margin.
The statements about "8-10 essential amino acids" are incorrect/misleading, as there are by convention 9 essential amino acids and two that may be used in substitution.
Spope3 (talk) 20:51, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Concerning "8-10", various sources put the number of amino acids at either 8, 9, or 10. I used "8-10" in this article to accommodate all three views. 9 seems to be actually more potentially misleading than 8-10, since 8 and 10 are also sometimes used by sources. For example, in the first page of Google search results for "essential amino acids", all three numbers are found. But on closer examination, the most recent and credible sources, like Merck Manual and the National Academy of Sciences, the Institute of Medicine, and the Food and Nutrition Board all say 9 are essential (or "indispensable"), with up to 6 conditionally essential or indispensable amino acids in addition to the 9. So while using "9" may be not as safe as "8-10", it might be more accurate. So I have no strong opinion either way. -kotra (talk) 08:28, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Numerical Definition of complete protein 

message: The lead repeatedly refers to the proportions of the essential amino acids. I would expect that it is more important that they be present in sufficient amounts than that the proportions are "adequate" or "correct". The MedlinePlus Medical Encyclopedia entry given as source does not provide a definition of the concept; instead, it states, without further explanation: Protein foods are no longer described as being "complete proteins" or "incomplete proteins."  --Lambiam 14:57, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: They should be in specific ratio to each other - "proportions" is a bit clumsy. I'm not sure when the lead was updated, but it definitely could probably be improved. --Yankees76 Talk 21:53, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you have a reliable source for the statement that it is the specific ratios to each other, rather than the amounts, that is important? The PDCAAS formula does not take these ratios into account, but only amounts.  --Lambiam 11:28, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The article uses this source  for the "proportions" statement. Forgive me if I missed something, but are you saying that in order for a protein to be considered a complete protein it requires baseline mg amounts of the 9 essential amino acids? --Yankees76 Talk 12:49, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: A specific problem with the table (labelled S-8) from that source is that the values given are "Based on Estimated Average Requirements for 1- to 3-year-old children", something not reflected in our article. The source does not relate the term "complete protein" to the table, which is supposed to determine (in an unspecified way) "the quality of the dietary protein". As to "complete protein", this source states that "[p]rotein from animal sources", which "provide [sic] all nine indispensable amino acids, ... are [sic] referred to as 'complete proteins' [sic]", whereas proteins from plant sources are "incomplete proteins". Lacking a good definition from a reliable source, I don't know what the precise meaning of the deprecated term "complete protein" is. But, as for as dietary recommendations are involved, if, for some person, the RDA of lysine is 2100 mg and of isoleucine 1400 mg, then (I think) an actual intake of 2000 mg lysine and 2200 mg isoleucine is indeed to be preferred over 1000 mg lysine and 500 mg isoleucine, even though the latter is a much better approximation of the 51 : 25 ratio of the table.  --Lambiam 16:10, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proportions? Or amounts? 

message: Table 11 of http://www.ajcn.org/content/59/5/1203S.long (reference 6 as of this writing) has a summary of the conclusions of the paper. The gist of it is that the general claim that vegetable protein is incomplete is a myth, which contradicts what is said in that bullet point.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joakimlundborg (talk • contribs) 16:43, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reference marked as supporting the claim that vegetable protein is incomplete says the exact opposite 

message: The table near the top that shows if you get enough calories from potatoes, you get enough of all the essential amino acids, is great.  But where did the numbers for the amino acid contents of potatoes come from?  I checked the three references in the paragraph before the table, and I don't see them.  I'd love to find data like this on more foods, so I can check them for myself.  —Darxus (talk) 23:01, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Source for the amino acid contents of potatoes? 

message: It would be nice to know what a large baked potato is.
a) Is it measured in inches, kilos, pounds or some other unit?
b) The actual measurement of each of the potatoes, or a range within which the label large can be considered to apply should be specified.
c) The total number of kilo-calories used to prepare the chart can be achieved by using a combination of small, medium and/or huge potatoes. If one has access to a calorimeter, that figure might be realized, but at the expense of one's potato supply. So, there should be some other means to determine whether one has an appropriate number of potatoes of the right size to obtain results close to those shown in the chart.
- It appears that some of the links specified as related to this item are broken and the ones that aren't broken do not seem to shed any significant light on a measurement that applies.
Note: It would be of interest to know what kind of potatoes are used, as it is possible that different varieties may offer differing results.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Raccoonnookkeeper (talk • contribs) 01:02, 10 September 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: The reference has been changed to grams to reflect the current USDA Nutrient Database.--SaletteAndrews (talk) 15:37, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  9 large baked potatoes 

message: What is the relevance of nine large baked potatoes, and their amino acid profile, to this article? I don't really see it. This article is about complete protein, and potatoes are not a source of complete protein. I do find it interesting that nine potatoes can provide one's daily protein and amino acid allowance, but I don't think it has anything to do with this particular article. Perhaps I'm missing something, and someone can explain the relevance? Otherwise this material should be deleted from this article. I think it would be better suited to the protein combining article, since it shows that combining proteins is not necessary to get a full day's allowance of amino acids. ChicagoDilettante (talk) 16:52, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nine Large Baked Potatoes Relevance? 

message: It's a myth that plant proteins lack one of more essential amino acids
http://circ.ahajournals.org/content/105/25/e197
For exmaple, a search in https://ndb.nal.usda.gov/ndb/foods/show/4970?fgcd=&man=&lfacet=&count=&max=&sort=&qlookup=&offset=&format=Full&new=&measureby=
show that kidney bean has all the amino acids  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.216.146.165 (talk) 06:28, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not just the existence of amino acids, it's their relative proportions as well. Roricka (talk) 15:58, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

text: Here are proportions: soybenas meal has the smallest food sample to provide right amount all EAAshttps://www.nature.com/articles/srep26074/tables/5https://www.nature.com/articles/srep26074also beans are good.Guniarz (talk) 08:40, 7 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plant Foods Have a Complete Amino Acid Composition 

message: Rather than have this article get politicized, we should have a section that simply states that concept of complete proteins has been used to discredit vegan and vegetarian diets as unhealthy with proper references and citations.
We can still find on internet examples of nutrition cites stating plant protein not a complete protein:
Another example on medlineplus.gov site:
>
Also we should add a section on protein deficit illnesses: Kwashiorkor  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Murmullo (talk • contribs) 00:26, 13 July 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: But concepts that have been used to discredit veganism is something that can be documented in the article(s) on veganism, and protein deficit illnesses have their own article at Protein–energy malnutrition.  I can't see any way to save this article.  I'm starting to think it should be merged into protein quality. Great floors (talk) 13:14, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plant vs Animal protein history and politics 

message: Paragraphs 1 and 2 explain the topic with four references, and the references say:
# Animals have different requirements to humans
# The quality of some plant proteins is lower than that of soy, meat and eggs
# Plant proteins being "incomplete" is a myth
# Adding soy to other plant proteins makes up for animo acids that are low
So how is this article titled "complete protein"?
There is nothing there about complete and incomplete.  The fact is that all plants contain all the essential amino acids.  Gelatin (from animals) is the only food item I've heard of that is missing in any of the essential aminos.
Now, one difference is that some foods (eg. meat, dairy, and soy) have better ratios of the aminos, so most of this info would be useful in an article about protein quality.
(Also worth noting is that "protein combining" is only necessary over long periods.  Our livers store the essential aminos and release them as needed.  So failing to get useful protein from a food that doesn't have much of some essential amino acid would require first having a liver that's depleted of that amino acid.)
Anyone interested in this article?  Should the title be changed?  The content? Great floors (talk) 12:45, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah fixed it. I think the title should remain because it shows where and when the instances of plant protein incorrectly interpreted as incomplete are mentioned. This article certainly needs more changes. Thanks. --14.139.196.4 (talk) 14:35, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article isn't about "complete protein" 

message: Do all the editors here agree that performing calculations based on values from nutrition tables constitutes original research and should not be in the article?
Spope3 (talk) 20:07, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Original Research 

message: I have seen this article edited with removal of accurate information several times. The misleading information is that plants lack some amino acids and some plant sources such as quinoa and soy are complete protein this is incorrect. 
The term complete or incomplete protein is misleading. All plants and there proteins thereof contain all essential amino acids, yes there exist a polymer which can have a same monomer but large proteins generally contain all amino acids, except gelatin all proteins derived from plants and animal sources contain all amino acids and in dietary terms they do contain all essential amino acids, there is no single amino acids lacking, a more accurate term would be that plant proteins have low amino acid profile than animal protein. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6893534/https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8172124/ I would ask the readers or reviewer/editor to review this with FAO and USDA databases to check amino acid content of plant before making the claim that plant lack certain amino acids. Wikipedia should be unbiased and remove this myth, so I suggest to remove this article or let the information be accurate. Also I would suggest people to not remove peer-reviewed literature sources. 111.125.209.233 (talk) 15:14, 23 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggestion to remove this article 

message: Look, the main reason this topic even has an article is because complete proteins are common in some diets but not all. Otherwise there would be no study of complete proteins, because animal proteins are considered to be complete. The information I added is not telling vegetarians and vegans what they should eat, but informing readers of the aspects that need to be considered in a plant-based diet. These are produced by valid sources; without them, the article is severely lacking in useful content. If they should be backed up by more specific sources chosen by Wikipedia consensus, either add them, or allow somebody else to add them later; if they are contradicted by other research, provide it. It's obvious that if you do a google search for "complete protein", the vast majority of results make some reference to its importance in plant-based diets. —Lights and freedom (talk ~ contribs) 03:00, 3 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: It doesn't matter so much what, but there has to be some discussion about animal sources being more complete proteins than plant sources. This was in the article until an IP editor removed it. —Lights and freedom (talk ~ contribs) 03:09, 3 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vegetarian protein sources, etc.