Tue, Dec-16-03, 16:21
|
|
Senior Member
Posts: 1,042
|
|
Plan: atkins
Stats: 283/250.5/190
BF:
Progress: 35%
Location: Pacific NW
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Lisa N
Presumably, but the article doesn't say that:
Their quote implies animal protein, but doesn't specifically state animal protein when it comes to that 28 grams.
|
Granted, it could have been edited to be a bit clearer, but careful reading shows that the writer is referring to 28 grams of animal protein. Here is the entire paragraph:
"If all of those people went on an Atkins-style diet, their requirement for animal protein would rise to about 100 grams. A billion dieters each eating an extra 44 grams could not easily be satisfied by giving them a bigger share of current animal protein production. As it is, humans worldwide average only 28 grams per day."
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Lisa N
....Regardless of whether that 28 grams is plant or animal protein, it's not nearly enough to sustain a full grown adult or a growing child.
|
Nowhere in this article are they advocating a diet based on 28 grams of protein. Your assertion that it does so is a red herring that begs the real question. That is, what are the probable ecological implications that would result from a massive, global shift toward a low-carb diet by 1 billion overweight dieters (however unlikely such a shift may be)?
|