Every food commercial, advertisement, and packaging in the US is currently protein obsessed. I just bought 3 burritos, and the most noticeable thing on the entire package is its protein content. TV commercials about waffles are advertising that they have X amount of protein per serving. The products in my jobsite’s vending machine have protein all over every package.
Did America have a protein thing recently?
You must log in or # to comment.
Congratulations, you’ve discovered the nature of advertising.
A while back during the gluten-free craze my laundry detergent proudly had “gluten-free” on the packaging.
my laundry detergent proudly had “gluten-free” on the packaging.
I wonder if this has anything to do with Tide Pods and tiktok… Lmao
So while it sounds insane for detergent to label itself gluten-free, for people with severe gluten sensitivity toiletries, cosmetics, and other non-consumable items can still cause them symptoms with exposure, or so I’ve been told by someone I know with gluten intolerance. Whether this is an exaggerated concern or not, there is demand (albeit small) for such products.
No, they have to ingest it. These people are stupid
It depends on the type. Celiac is gut based, but there are other intolerances and allergies. Some are contact based.
I only just found out that I have a severe gluten intolerance, but not coeliac.
My wife and I used to make fun of all the random products that had GF labels, but now we understand the reason for them. There’s so many household items that just contain gluten as a thickening or binding agent and the labels are actually a huge help.
There are probably more, but this is the first thing I found
There isn’t really any evidence for gluten sensitivity. You’re likely reacting to something else, and it’s getting blamed on gluten. Celiac of course is a real thing. But there haven’t been any studies finding gluten sensitivity to have any tangible evidence. But, as always, do what makes feel better.
I stand corrected.
The detergent I used was supposed to be eco-friendly so its target audience might be looking at plant-based cleaners.
My dog shampoo proudly states that it has not been tested on captive animals… so I’m left wondering if they’ve tested it on free animals, or if I should think twice about using it on my dogs.
Or they’re taking the approach of software companies nowadays: don’t test, just make the users test in production
Although my dogs have protested loudly about being bathed with this shampoo, I can confirm that they survived and were cleaner as a result.
I just had a great mental picture of some scientists chasing down and tackling a wild dog to try and shampoo it.
Animal testing typically involves injecting chemicals or rubbing directly into purpose-made abrasions or the eyes of animals. It is MUCH more brutal than it sounds.
Im sure they washed dogs with the final formula.
Animal testing typically involves injecting chemicals or rubbing directly into purpose-made abrasions or the eyes of animals
Man…why are we like this…
Animal testing doesn’t even guarantee that it’ll react the same way in/on humans. We have so many other options and yet we continue cruel practices because tradition. Ugh.
I always thought this meant “this specific product was not tested on animals but the research it is based on maybe probably involved animal testing.” Like there’s some foundational knowledge that forms the basis of “how to make a shampoo”, and that knowledge may be gotten through some unethical means.
Is that even a concern for people with celiac disease? I know you’re not supposed to spend a lot of time in a bakery just because of airborne flour, but how much fucking gluten were they putting in detergent to begin with??
GMO free water is my favourite
I would very much like to know if that’s true. Removing every pollutant from water isn’t easy.
GMO=genetically modified organism. Non-GMO designations have nothing to do with pollutants or purity.
Probably should have been able to put that together myself. Thanks!
From Celiac.org
Do I have to use special gluten-free soaps, shampoos and lotions if I have celiac disease? Can gluten be absorbed through the skin?
No. Gluten cannot be absorbed through your scalp or skin. It must be ingested to affect those with Celiac disease.
https://celiac.org/2016/05/20/9-questions-about-celiac-disease-answered/
I drink my laundry detergent so this is important for me.
My local garage has gluten free oil changes.
As a gluten-intolerant, I’m pretty thankful for the marketing that made GF ‘cool’ for a bit. So many more options. Now if you’ll excuse me, I’ll continue drinking my GF beer.
Right wing/influencer jockey/stupid American marketing/FOMO/idk we just buy whats cheapest and skip/block ads
There have been a bunch of great answers already, but I’m not seeing one important factor: soy farmers. Soy is one of the cheapest sources of protein, and there’s a lot of it grown, so the soy lobby is always trying to push new uses for it.
Meat and dairy are also heavily subsidized by corruption in government.
Soybeans are a complimentary crop for corn, and is farmed in rotation to fix nitrogen in the soil. The soybean lobby and the corn lobby are essentially the same thing in the US, and they have lots of clout.
It turns out the answer is realy very long, but it’s a hell of a ride. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K35FtbuyTh4
TLDW:
It’s a right-wing grift. The Leftist Cooks argue that carnivore and “protein-maxxing” diets are not about health; they’re tied to masculinity, control, grift, and far-right politics. They use figures like Jordan Peterson and the Liver King to show how restrictive meat-heavy high protein diets can become symbols of power, identity, and pseudo-scientific authority.The broader argument is food is never just food. Dietary choices can carry cultural meaning, political signaling, and ideological pressure, and that high protein culture is part of a larger ecosystem that can normalize authoritarian, anti-science, and anti-egalitarian thinking.
The video is excellent though. It’s basically a miniseries on the various causes and effects of this and it’s incredibly well put together, even if it is 6 hours long. 😱
I came in here to link this video too! Its very good
That’s also why they like AI. Thinking is emasculating, better make a machine that thinks for you instead.
Haha I watched this a couple weeks ago.
Another really important point they make is that even among athletes, extra protein intake does not really help. Athletes only have higher protein intake because their overall caloric intake is higher. Studies show that increased protein intake is only associated with higher athletic performance when it is alongside increased intake of other nutrients (carbs). I was looking at a meta analysis a few days ago. I don’t have the link but I took this screenshot.
So a “protein shake” is not likely to help you unless you were already protein deficient, which as somebody else pointed out in this thread, is not likely for Americans who over consume meat.
Disclaimer: I am not an expert.
Oh, I have another much much shorter video that summarises a meta analysis that backs this up. It says that more proteins may actually even lead to marginally reduced muscle gains. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=j1bx0GMofYw&pp=ugUEEgJlbg%3D%3D
it really depends on the athlete - for an endurance athlete in particular, you don’t need a crazy amount of protein. Dancers/gymnasts too or really any sport more reliant on cardiovascular endurance or coordination than maximal strength or power.
bodybuilders/powerlifters are on the far other end of that spectrum, they probably have the highest demand for protein intake out of any athlete. The general consensus is the muscle-building benefits of more protein flatten out around 0.8g protein per 1lb body weight. so about 120g of protein for someone who weighs 150lb. You can definitely eat more or less without issue, that’s just roughly the threshold where more protein doesn’t seem to help you athletically.
The nutritional guidelines under RFK’s administration were changed to recommend 1.2-1.6g protein/lb of body weight for EVERY American, which is fucking ridiculous. It is fine to eat the high end of that range, but you have to be very careful to get enough carbs and fats without introducing too much caloric surplus. There is a valid argument that protein tends to keep you satiated longer and eating a lot of it might be good if you’re looking to lose weight. I don’t think it’s a great idea for everyone though, and most Americans get enough protein for their basic needs anyhow.
but you know what’s even better at keeping you satiated that most Americans are actually super deficient in? that’s right fuckin FIBER baby. Protein is just in fashion right now, especially among conservatives, many of whom are meeting this through red meat probably because they think lentils are icky and woke. and we’re god awful at health education so various nutrients get touted as THE THING YOUR BODY DESPERATELY CRAVES or THE THING THAT IS LITERALLY KILLING YOU on a rotating basis. e.g. electrolytes, carbs respectively.
(I can get more specific academic references for the earlier points, but I encountered much of it in Eric Helms’ The Muscle and Strength Pyramid books, which line up with opinions of other credible trainers I’ve encountered. those books are also just a great read on this topic)
It really depends. If you’re actively working out, you need more protein than most people eat in a day. It doesn’t have to be from meat obviously, but I need to target around 140g and I was no where near that until I changed my diet. There’s plenty of science behind protein ratios for active people without dipping into right wing grifters.
The shake is pretty much a necessity for me since I’m also trying to lose weight. If it weren’t the shake it’d be chicken or fish but that’s a lot of extra cooking.
I reread this and your interpretation seems pretty off the mark. Of course you’re going to get more endurance performance from a higher carb diet, carbs are what give you raw energy. Anyone who’s ever done an endurance sport like long distance running knows they load you up on pasta for a reason.
Endurance performance is absolutely not the same as athletic performance, which is far more general. There’s no way high protein diets aren’t beneficial to people who need more raw strength than endurance. This meta analysis does not back up your comment.
Marketing & the obsession of a healthy lifestyle promoted by influencers.
If you want to build muscles you need proteins. => You need proteins to build muscle.
But also if you want to lose weight, you have to reduce carbs and eat more proteins. => Your body needs more energy to break down the proteines and convert it to energy than for carbs and fats=> You feel full longer & “burn” more calories when digesting.
Unfortunately, people don’t realize that fibers are more op than proteins. And just eating proteins how some influencers are promoting is kinda BS for your longterm digestive system. => TLDR eat beans over just meat. Also, look forward to the high fiber fad that is about to be started.
Yeah dark leafy greens and lots of beans (with rice). They’re filling, nutritious, low calorie, and once your digestion acclimates you’ll feel great. Also non-fried potatoes are great as well
Its another fad/advertising thing.
At another point, when the Keto Diet was everywhere, there was a restaurant near me that proudly announced that 100% of its menu was “Keto Diet”. There where Keto diet snacks and Keto diet frozen meals etc.
Then there was the fat free phase, I dunno if you remember the fat free cookies that you could buy, or fat free salad dressing, or fat free bread etc.
This trend seems to come from the rise of fitness influencers, and in this case its based in some kind of truth. You need protein if you are working out a lot, you cant built real muscle without it. And so fitness influencers started making videos about the food they ate, and the big thing about it was how much protein it had because that’s what they cared about.
And since influencer driven sales are huge now, you see a lot of companies wanting to cash in on the protein craze, so the packaging shifts towards showing off the protein content, because thats what everyone (or enough people) are tracking right now.
I thought protein was last year and fiber was this year
Genuinely, fiber is always important. It’s something we actually don’t get enough of on average. Forget the trends and influencers, just make sure you’re eating plenty of fiber.
It goes back and forth. Fiber was also big in the 1990s, and protein big maybe like 2004-2016 because of the Atkins diet trend that ended when it turns out that’s not a great thing to do long term, and doesn’t prevent you blocking your arteries with cholesterol.
We’ve literally had this trend before, recently.
i think its the anti fat messaging, and sugar messaging going on.
I noticed that during the big egg “crisis” where eggs went up to the price we normally pay in the UK. Turns out they were gobbling them up like fucking Gaston for “protein”. I get through maybe half a dozen in a particularly eggy week…
No mention of fibre though. Their arses must be split asunder.
I’m sure some people are chugging eggs for protein but it isn’t the norm and that is not at all what led to eggs being more expensive in the US. It was bird flu outbreaks combined with new regulations in some states coming into effect. In my state everything now has to be “cage free” which came into effect right around the whole egg price spike, but from what I can tell the price spike was mostly due to bird flu
They don’t eat real fiber. They gobble up all of the sterculia gum which, coincidentally, is now also not available for people who need it for medical reasons worldwide.
Trends are trending.
Levi makes good videos about these things. I enjoy following his channel: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=19ZjMXZYq_Y
Ozempic. People on it can’t handle sugars and carbs as well.
I think this is the correct answer. A shocking amount of people are on these weight loss drugs. When you are on these medications, you’re given guidelines for a high protein diet. Because these drugs make you lose weight pretty fast. I know several people taking these medications and it’s buy everything high protein because the drugs make you not want to eat at all so you need as much protein as possible when you do.
Because the weight loss comes from muscle first, so Ozempic users MUST eat high protein & lift weights to build/maintain muscle or else their body composition turns into jelly. Ask me how I know 😜
I hope that you’re becoming swole as hell and not turning into jelly in that case.
Yes, pretty much every female at my wife’s work is on it. I still worry that in 10 years we’ll find out there’s some horrible side effect from extended use. I could stand to lose a few myself, but I don’t want to touch the stuff for that reason and the muscle loss mentioned. I lift weights and don’t want to lose any of the gains I’ve made over the last 3 years. If I wanna get lean, I’ll just have to adjust my diet the old fashioned way to a shitload of brown rice, boiled chicken and broccoli.
Same reason they’re obsessed with carnivore diet. It’s about identity projection, macho manosphere bullshit, spun up by a very high amount of money injected by corporate propaganda.
Nearly no one is obsessed with the carnivore diet. Maybe a person in a thousand does it. Most who do use the diet do so so for health to address a health problem, some do it for athletic performance (running on fat means you don’t bonk; there is no wall)
It is presented as super masculine, but I’m sure the old Reddit community that called it zero carb were mostly women
Also it’s not a high protein diet. I just did the maths for my default meal which by energy* is 76.2% fat 23.8% protein
* Not that we can get significant energy from protein. I don’t think it should even be in the energy calculation on food labels. A human who tries to live on protein (and whatever supplements to keep healthy) starves. Body builders used to (and probably still do) protein sparing modified fasts - eating lean protein to avoid the body burning muscle to feed the nervous system while fasting. They do it to achieve the same as of a fast — to radically reduce body fat. Protein is hardly energy when people use it to help them starve themselves thin
I’m obsessed with the carnivore diet because it works, you can evaluate its effectiveness in just a few days/weeks - it’s the single simplest diet for maintaining health. It’s biggest super power isn’t meat, its removal of all the variables that could be hurting you - It’s an amazing elimination diet tool.
And, its quite inexpensive, i’m saving so much money. I can’t see how a corporation makes money from promoting zero carb, the strict carnivores don’t each much, they don’t spend much, and they like to buy locally produced meat anyway… they are very bad customers.
Just to give an example to make a point, smoking cigarettes achieve similar results: more energy, lower weight, better cognition in the short term. Doesn’t mean it’s better for you!
I can give you diet instructions proven to do the same not only in the short term but the long term as well. Most carnivore benefits share some benefits with many other scientifically proven better diets, but the benefits subside drastically after mere months to a year typically.
The nutritional deficits and anti-nutrients associated culminate to exacerbate health issues in the longterm.
There is no scientific peer reviewed consensus support for carnivore diet. If you need an elimination diet there are also better diet. If it’s temporary and works for you to figure out sensitivities, just exercise caution!
Please cite scientific peer reviewed studies backing your claims. Science isn’t litigated by consensus.
What specific claim I made are you interested in to start? Please give 1-3. I’d rather not do a wild goose chase of moving goalposts.
Litigated among experts? Probably not. The problem is your use To Litigate inherently, circularly, suggests dispute; but of course, if you have significant consensus, then there is also little to no dispute and thus little to no litigation. Scientific Consensus is absolutely a pillar nonetheless. Especially among laypersons. Peer-review by way of Systematic Reviews deploying meta-analysis, and especially albeit not limited to Cochrane studies do tend to attempt to draw consensus. These further reinforced when medical experts associations (e.g., AHA, AMA, AND) and regulatory agencies crafting food guidelines follow suit. From Canada to Norway (both outperforming US in health outcomes, generally) none of these dispute the findings, nor recommend anything remotely close to a Carnivore Diet for this reason.
Expert consensus was key in overcoming the deluge of conspiracy theory misinformation propaganda originating largely from right-wing sources on matters ranging from Climate Change, to Vaccinations during the coronavirus pandemic; and just like these two, so too is the misinformation surrounding diet originating significantly from far-right and pro-business sources as opposed to any threshold of scientific peer-review one would deem consensus.
Nobody said it better than Bertrand Russell, that when the conglomeration of expert belief and evidence points to a certain conclusion, then the layperson would be wise to follow.
Edit: I see now why the perplexing skepticism, given one moderates “Friendly Carnivore”, as well as “Low Carb High Fat - Ketogenic”
other scientifically proven better diets
Great, where is the rct data?
the benefits subside drastically after mere months to a year typically.
This doesn’t match the literature i have read at all, as long as the fat metabolism is maintained so are the benefits.
The nutritional deficits and anti-nutrients associated culminate to exacerbate health issues in the longterm.
There are no demonstrated deficits, and what anti-nutrients are you referring to? The only anti-nutrients i’m aware of are in plant foods.
no scientific peer reviewed consensus support for carnivore diet.
That isn’t saying much, there are no RCTs for any diet. Keto is the diet with the most publication papers on it
If it’s temporary and works for you to figure out sensitivities, just exercise caution!
Why does it need to be temporary? I’m cautious, what should i be looking for?
Yes, RCTs do exist. I’m curious why one denies such an easily-found claim. Have you done much research yourself into this topic?
In their conclusion, for emphasis:
Randomized controlled trials within the scope of the PREDIMED study demonstrated the risk-reducing effects on major health problems and risk factors as well as the current and known effects of the Mediterranean diet.
Epidemiological evidence is further considerably high and most beneficial in matters related to diet and longevity or health outcomes, given the statistical long-term focus capacity of these types of studies. The two are thus very much complementary in the world of nutrition study.
These further reinforced when medical experts associations (e.g., AHA, AMA, AND) and regulatory agencies crafting food guidelines follow suit. These expert associations all have a strong leaning toward promoting a diet closely adherent to the Mediterranean or DASH diet, and much further away from something like a carnivore diet, paleo, caveman, keto, etc.
I think most importantly, is by contrast limited to no RCTs or corroborating epidemiological studies indicating carnivore diet outperforming other diets, let alone as found by systematic peer review, cochrane studies performing meta-analysis.
Side note but have you heard of Blue Zones? Highest concentrations of populations of centenarians? Their diets have nothing in common with Carnivore Diet.
The Carnivore Diet may offer short-term health benefits but carries substantial risks of nutrient deficiencies, reduced intake of health-promoting phytochemicals, and the development of cardiovascular disease. At this time, long-term adherence to a CD cannot be recommended.
Precisely as I originally stated. What “literature you read” goes counter to this conclusion?
Carnivore diet tends to be lacking in a host of micro and phyto-nutrients, ranging from Vitamin C, Potassium, fiber, folate, thiamin (b-vitamins), and maybe in my opinion the most important, antioxidants given the anti-nutrient properties of NOCs, LPOs, HCAs, and PAHs one is commonly exposed to on this diet (leaving aside Neu5Gc, which I need to do more research on). There’s a reason why the link between red meat and colorectal cancer is strongly established in meta-analysis peer reviewed literature, and that Red Meat and Processed red meats are Class 2A and 1 carcinogens as defined by the WHO.
Kidney stones, appendicitis risk all increase under these diets as well; and possibly gallbladder inflammation and stones as well.
Look I’ve been both meat eater and vegetarian over my life. I’m not super into pissing contests over this, I’m just trying to help you out. To this day I practice vegetarianism but slightly counter to that, I am actually convinced of the scientific literature and widespread consensus that some variation of a whole foods mostly plant-based diet with a little bit of fish like the Mediterranean or DASH diet are optimal. This is what I recommend to my aging parents and what I have my children on. I’m just saying, don’t fall for the immediate pitfall because I noticed you deflected my valid point as to the short-term benefits of. If you’ve got tunnel-vision on body-weight, then there is less risk associated with just taking GLP-1 (though you could just up your fiber intake and probably get the same result once your microbiome adapts; farting is generally not a bad thing).
Again while there are a few short-term benefits to the carnivore diet in terms of weight-loss and brain fog, these are not unique inclusive to carnivore diet that cannot be found elsewhere; and at the same time, there are lost nutrients and elevated risks associated therewith that aren’t found in other diets. So why do it?
What specific evidence let you to choose Carnivore Diet over something like DASH or Mediterranean Diet? Are you drawn to it as a result of taste preference?
I’ll leave you with one final thing to note. The following study was conducted in partnership with 5 different universities across multiple countries in a 30 year follow-up, and the dietary patterns revealed therefrom:
What’s going on in the chart at the end? Fast food looks greener than legumes.
I was wondering that, too. I think the category is possibly too general. “Fast and fried foods” may point to, say, an Asian stir fry place, like a Mongolian grill or Thai place full of vegetables, seafood, etc. as opposed to say, McDonald’s (and note where french fries and meat are by comparison). Why it’s out of order relative to the other green-rated foods with positive outcomes, I’m not sure – but maybe it’s a matter of weighing the total number of samples within that category (and thus it has a lower significant difference)?
Seeing Wine higher than Tea was also interesting to me, but there is a known social element to longevity, leaving aside a lack of control for added sugars in coffee and tea in this.
I agree.
I wasn’t so surprised by tea / coffee because most people add sugar and diary to it. Like you said, alcohol is associated with diseases like cancer but it does reduce stress and helps you bond with others.
I’m curious why one denies such an easily-found claim. Have you done much research yourself into this topic?
I’m guessing you haven’t actually read the study you just cited.
The RCT you cite did not have a zero carb arm, or a ketogenic arm, so it is not a RCT that backs up your claim that carnivore has been offset by better science, i.e. no RCT of carnivore and your pet diet. Your study is not actually a RCT, it’s not a controlled trial, it uses the PREDIMED data over 8 years - the population was at risk elder dwelling community members for CVD. The study was verified with food frequency questionnaires. The three groups in the study were 1. “control” low fat, 2. MD + olive oil 3. MD + nuts; AT BEST - this study can inform you of associations (not causation) of people doing best effort low fat vs medeterrian. To be clear this study does not resolve questions about optimal or best diets, which you implied. It’s not a controlled study, verification of diet adherence is problematic in FFQs.
Epidemiological evidence is further considerably high and most beneficial in matters related to diet and longevity or health outcomes,
Just because people haven’t collected the data it doesn’t make observational epidemiology any more relevant to inform on cause and effect.
Clearly we have different standards for evidence in science - https://hackertalks.com/post/15439661
Before proceeding further, please acknowledge one moved the goalpost:
From: “there are no RCT studies for any diet” --> to “there ARE in fact RCT studies indicating efficacy of Mediterranean Diet in isolation.”
If one cannot acknowledge this, then clearly we have a different understanding of logical fallacies (blanket statements, goalpost moving, strawman) and without a basic foundation of logic I have no interest going further.
Edit: Bonus:
The available evidence shows that the traditional Mediterranean diet represents a sustainable, healthy, and highly palatable pattern with a wide array of associated health benefits. In particular, its protective effects on cardiovascular disease have been supported by several consistent large RCTs, namely, the Lyon Diet-Heart Study, PREDIMED, PREDIMED-Plus and CORDIOPREV.
Before proceeding further, please acknowledge one moved the goalpost:
there are no RCT studies for any diet…
That’s fair, there was a RCT of MED vs Low fat, but in the context of our conversation: it doesn’t prove a scientifically better diet then carnivore. And epidemiology is hardly a RCT, not real controls in this trial.
Regardless we are not going to have a productive discussion, i wish you well, but i’m calling it here.
You have done very definite beliefs there
I can give you diet instructions proven to do the same not only in the short term but the long term as well. Most carnivore benefits share some benefits with many other scientifically proven better diets, but the benefits subside drastically after mere months to a year typically.
I doubt you can find better. I’ve been in online zero carb communities for long enough to have heard everything people have said this diet mitigates. I have never heard such a list for low carb, for example, nor from low fat or mediterranean.
The moderator of /r/zerocarb had been doing the diet for about 7 years when I was there regularly. I have been eating only meat for three years and am not feeling any ill effects.
The nutritional deficits and anti-nutrients associated culminate to exacerbate health issues in the longterm.
Deficits? What nutrient isn’t found in beef? Cows are made of the same stuff as us. Anti nutrients? That’s a thing plants do - lock up nutrients to make them hard to extract; packaging them with anti nutrients to remove the benefit of eating them. Animals don’t engage in chemical warfare against the things that eat them, cows use horns and hooves. Plants use chemicals. Nothing wants to be eaten.
In Poland we also have this. A lot of products of have a huge infromarion how much protein it has or comercials in big cities with a new prootein products
i assumed it was the popularity of gym culture moving into every day life
I also think this is it. I have a couple of friends that buy these kind of products, and they are also the only gym goers I know. So for my tiny sample it’s an absolute one to one correlation.
Aside from people working out protein isn’t really going to make a difference.
It does, it makes your farts smell way worse.
Isn’t going to make a difference in… what?
Protein is absolutely important to your diet and makes a big difference to your body whether or not you’re a bodybuilder
Going out of your way to gain more than you need is what all this extra protein does. Just urea at the end of the day.
Protein doesn’t make you gain weight, that’s just a matter of the calories you eat. Protein intake effects how much of you weight gain goes to your muscles
This might need confirming so take it with a grain of salt
I heard because GLP-1 treatments got super cheap in US lately everyone is getting slimmer. So slimming doesn’t seem as a luxury anymore. And because meat quality went down massively and expensive - protein is the new luxury and “bulking up” is the new trend rather than slimming.
Typical American market manipulation.
