Thread by @fleroy1974

THREAD -The attempt of @TrueHealthINIT's plant-fueled crew to lobby for a new protein metric based on ideology rather than science, is no surprise. Now that fake-meat is going for $$$, focus on protein quality will increase & that could seriously harm business.

Here's why 👇
1/

In 2013, the FAO came up with a new and improved protein evaluation system, taking into account true digestibility, thus proposing to replace the PDCAAS system they had adopted in the past (1993).

/2

Note that for most animal source foods, DIAAS values are ≥1, exceeding those from plants [soy=0.8-0.9; legumes=0.6; cereals=0.3-0.5].
link.springer.com/article/10.100…

/3

But... using DIAAS (rather than PDCAAS) would result in the fact that most nuts, seeds, tofu & legumes/pulses would no longer be considered as a "good source" (DIAAS > 0.75) of protein [Marinangeli & House 2017].

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/P…

/4

Because too many of the diet-sustainability (LCA) studies were strikingly improbable, and indeed often sloppy and flawed, some scientist have started to inspect the underlying assumptions. They discovered that the concept of protein quality has been neglected.

/5

And more voices are now stating that if one does not properly address nutritional quality, LCAs become meaningless.

/6

Especially, because the apparently higher GHG costs of some foods can be offset by their higher nutritional values. /7

And the effects can indeed lead to surprising shifts.

Quite a problem, if your basic material is pea protein extract and your goal is to make people believe that it is more sustainable than meat.

nature.com/articles/srep2…
/8