this post was submitted on 02 Jul 2025
121 points (97.6% liked)
2meirl4meirl
1756 readers
194 users here now
Memes that are too meirl for /c/meirl.
Rules:
-
Respect the community. If you're not into self-deprecating/dark/suicidal humor then this place isn't for you. Kindly just block and move on. This is just how some of us cope.
-
Respect one another.
-
All titles must begin with 2meirl4meirl. This is for multiple reasons. One is just so you can be lazy with titles but another is so people who aren't into this kind of humor can avoid it.
-
Otherwise just the general no bigotry, no dickishness, no spam, no malice, etc stuff.
Sidebar will be updated when I feel like and considering I'm Sadboi extraordinaire we'll see when that will be.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Extreme focus on protein these days is really weird, especially in Western diets high in meat. As long as you're a relatively healthy adult and not pregnant, a healthy daily protein intake is about 0.8 grams of protein for every kilogram of weight. If you weigh 100 kg (about 220 lbs), you're looking at 80g per day. On a 2000-Calorie diet, that's about 15% of your calories from protein. This represents about 250 grams (~9 oz) of chicken breast. For your entire daily value. The entire rest of the day you could just drink water if you solely cared about protein intake. And this is again for someone who would be considered clinically obese by BMI were they 180 cm (5'11").
Colloquially we call meats and several plant-based foods "proteins" in the context of meal composition, but these are just called that because they're especially rich sources. You'll find yourself consuming protein all the time throughout the day even when you aren't trying. Every 100 grams of oats, for example, has about 14 grams of protein. Factors like completeness matter too, of course, but realistically, you are getting enough protein unless you're living on three square meals of ramen per day. Even then, for a random chicken-flavored instant ramen packet I found online, that's 13 grams of protein, so three square meals would yield 39 grams, or about enough for someone weighing 50 kg (~110 lb). And even then, the 0.8 g/kg isn't an absolute bare minimum beyond which you'll become anemic and waste away and die; it's a healthy amount.
What Western diets desperately do need to focus on, however, is fiber. As an example, only 5% of Americans meet or exceed their recommended daily intake of fiber.
People who need to heal need more protein - such as burn victims, recovering from surgery, injuries, or even just body building (every day at the gym is a very minor injury the body repairs).
The protein debate about adequate levels is ongoing
I think its more sustainable for people to prioritize protein in their meals and eat until they are not longer hungry. Let the body's biofeedback mechanism be the guide.
Fibre is not a essential nutrient. Meaning it provides nothing the body can't produce on its own.
Most of the reported benefits of Fibre are from people eating a unhealthy (western) diet, and the fibre reducing the impact of the bad food. I would agree fiber is a necessary to ameliorate a bad diet (western), but not necessary with a good diet.
There has been a associative link established between fibre consumption and gut biome diversity in the western diet, but we don't know what a good gut biome is yet. We have data that people eating zero fibre also have very diverse gut biomes.
Maybe I'll get around to responding to this pseudoscientific garbage, maybe I won't. Let alone that your treatment of the RDA is just completely fucking wrong.
But for anyone who comes across this in the interim who just sees two people slinging nutrition science terms and thinks "well gee I guess it's just inconclusive", I'm going to point out that jet follows and peddles a carnivore diet, a health fad with zero clinical evidence of any health benefits and a known major risk factor for multiple chronic diseases such as heart disease and cancer. They're the "smoking doesn't cause cancer, and it's good because it helps you relax" type of quack you'd see in the 1960s in the face of increasingly overwhelming scientific evidence otherwise. They're trying to drag as many impressionable people as they can to lifelong, debilitating health issues. You arguably cannot find a less trustworthy source of nutritional information on this website for just how steeped in disinformation they are.
Full disclosure: I'm vegan. Not plant-based for health, but vegan for the animals and the environment. Yet despite having every incentive to focus only on the extensive long-term health benefits of a plant-based diet (especially one predominantly from whole foods), I will continue to loudly advertise the shortcomings of a plant-based diet whenever it's even somewhat relevant. This is because I treat my diet as a nice side effect of my ethics, not a bullshit pseudoscience panacea to our accelerating health crisis. I would gladly eat plant-based regardless of if it were less healthy than an omnivorous diet, and yet vast amounts of evidence continue piling up that the opposite is true.