If anyone wants to see the full text, please feel free to email me. Many here are doing high fat low carb, rather than high protein. But what do you all make of this study? Could it be the methionine intake from the protein? We know from recent studies that higher intakes of methionine lead to increased mortality in animals. And restriction of this amino acid leads to longer life. If this is the case, then higher intakes of legumes as your main protein source might be better. And indeed, cultures who eat a lot of beans have less mortality. in fact, the more beans the better. Little protein, plant protein, animal protein... or...

Protein DOES upregulate IGF-1 btw, which can cause and accelerate the growth and proliferation of cancer. Hence, its a growth factor.

I'm a little concerned on some of the studies i'm seeing lately, as I can have upto 3 servings of whey protein a day!

Low-carbohydrate-high-protein diet and long-term survival in a general

population cohort.Trichopoulou A, Psaltopoulou T, Orfanos P, Hsieh CC, Trichopoulos D.
1Department of Hygiene and Epidemiology, School of Medicine, University of Athens, Athens, Greece.

Objective:We have evaluated the effects on mortality of habitual low carbohydrate-high-protein diets that are thought to contribute to weight control.Design:Cohort investigation.Setting:Adult Greek population.Subjects methods:Follow-up was performed from 1993 to 2003 in the context of the Greek component of the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and nutrition. Participants were 22 944 healthy adults, whose diet was assessed through a validated questionnaire. Participants were distributed by increasing deciles according to protein intake or carbohydrate intake, as well as by an additive score generated by increasing decile intake of protein and decreasing decile intake of carbohydrates. Proportional hazards regression was used to assess the relation between high protein, high carbohydrate and the low carbohydrate-high protein score on the one hand and mortality on the other.

Results:During 113 230 persons years of follow-up, there were 455 deaths. In models with energy adjustment, higher intake of carbohydrates was associated with significant reduction of total mortality, whereas higher intake of protein was associated with nonsignificant increase of total mortality (per decile, mortality ratios 0.94 with 95% CI 0.89 -0.99, and 1.02 with 95% CI 0.98 -1.07 respectively). Even more predictive of higher mortality were high values of the additive low carbohydrate-high protein score (per 5 units, mortality ratio 1.22 with 95% CI 1.09 -to 1.36). Positive associations of this score were noted with respect to both cardiovascular and cancer mortality.

Conclusion:Prolonged consumption of diets low in carbohydrates and high in protein is associated with an increase in total mortality.European Journal of Clinical Nutrition advance online publication, 29 November 2006; doi:10.1038/sj.ejcn.1602557.

PMID: 17136037 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher]

-- an increase of protein intake by about 15
g/day and a decrease of carbohydrate intake by about 50 g/day) was
associated with a 22% increase in overall mortality--

--It is worth noting that in all
these models mortality tends to be inversely associated with intake of
unsaturated lipids and positively, although not always significantly, with
saturated lipids.--

A post here at CRYahooSG in regard to met

A little more on methionine (MET). Here are six papers which
indicate that certain very common types of cancer are dependent on
MET for their survival/proliferation. Two of the papers are quite
old (1993). But the other four are from 1999, 2001, 2002 and 2003:

Here are some excerpts from one of them:

"Discussion.

The results in this report demonstrate that ........... methionine
dependence occurs in a sizeable proportion of fresh human tumors.
Thus 5 of 21 human tumors analyzed ........ were determined to be
methionine dependent".

(Those were cancers of the breast, colon, melanoma, ovary and
prostate. Three of these are very common cancers.)

Further: "In this light, recent in vivo studies of the effects of
methionine depletion by both dietary and enzymatic means have
indicated anti-tumor efficacy. Methionine depletion has also led to
tumor cell cycle arrest in vivo".

"In summary, the results presented in this report indicate that fresh
human solid tumors frequently express methionine dependence and
suggest that methionine is a potential target for cancer
chemotherapy".

PMID: 8495409

Other papers with broadly similar implications include:

PMID: 14585289
PMID: 11925597
PMID: 11551827
PMID: 10473100
PMID: 8242623

I'd say it's a good thing that in this case all of our low carb diets are not high protein, but high fat, low carbohydrate and protein sufficient. Do yourself (and us) a favor and read a frickin low carb book.

This study has been discussed here previously ... http://forum.lowcarber.org/showthread.php?t=319032


Doreen

I've long been focussed on the connection between prostate cancer and high-meat diets. I always thought the link was hormones in beef. This suggests the link may be methionine. Most of my dietary protein comes from beans or soy. More useful info from Whoa.

Paper please? FWIW, I've never heard of prostate cancer among populations with traditionally very high meat comsumption e.g. Masai and Inuit. Additionally, the only hormone in beef that I know that has any action in the human body is IGF-1, and it is only comes in appreciable amounts in milk. In any event, except in special circumstance, all hormones will be destroyed in the digestive system. Do you have any references or you listening to old wive's tales? (no offense to old wives. )



Whoa is highly unreliable. Here, he introduces a paper that has previously been discusses AND he even took part in that discussion. Here he provides some brief discussion of of one paper to 'prove' his point; if he is true to form, I doubt he has even read the paper in question, much less all three. This was demonstrated when he posted the low-cholesterol / stroke connection paper that actually undermined his 'proof'. I'm fairly sure he is just searching titles and abstracts to 'prove' his points, but he may not have the reading comprehension either. And I can hardly wait when he posts the 'proof' allegedly from the Framingham study that those with under 150 dg/dl cholesterol dont get heart disease, though nobody else can find it and he repeatedly refuses to discuss it. I guess this could be useful if I printed it out and used it to set light to my wood stove.

This isn't a CRONbie pulpit.

Mutant, Try putting Whoa on ignore. I did it months ago and it has done wonders for my blood pressure.

Am I the only one that thinks attempting to eliminate methionine from the diet (an essential amino acid that has important functions in the body, BTW) based on one study that suggests there may be a link to some cancers is a little premature and silly?

When it's said that a tumor is methionine dependent, that is not saying that methionine causes the problem.

Once again, correlation does not show/prove causation.

It isn't about eliminating Methionine, its about reducing methionine.

Which might be a good idea if one were to develop a methionine dependent tumor. Everyone else doesn't really need to worry about it since methionine doesn't cause the tumors so eliminating or even reducing methionine is pointless in any case but one in which the individual has a methionine dependent tumor and then it's a bit like closing the barn door after the horse is long gone.

It's a little like reasoning that goes like this:
Automobiles are involved in 100% of auto accidents. Therefore, automobiles cause auto accidents.
While it's true that automobiles are involved in auto accidents 100% of the time, they are not the cause of automobile accidents.

I thought this was a low carb forum? If I'm interested in cronbie semi starvation, Cr fora abound. I may be clogging up my arteries with all that dietary cholesterol, but I can still use a mouse.

Actually Matt did finally post something useful in the media section about the health benefits of Ketogenic diets. He's certainly to be commended for such humility, because the research the post concerns fundamentally contradict the CRon approach to optimal wellbeing. But as Mutant keeps pointing out, he could save himself a lot of emaciation if he just read even one low carb book.

As a study in the psychology of evangelism, his posts are fascinating. But useful?

I mean he's still obviously struggling with the 'correlation doesn't necessarily mean causation' concept. How could his usual posts be useful?

Here's my take on cancer after working for a cancer clinic in the supp dept.

Obvioulsy if someone gets cancer..their immune system is hampered.

From all of our reading and some studies done at the center, carbs lower the immune system..significantly, leaving you exposed to a host of aliments including cancer.

They never found a correlation between red meat and cancer.

They did find (after drinking 12 oz of OJ) that ones immune system could be lowered for hours after ingestion.

So the old "remedy" of drinking oj for a cold is B.S.

And we all know that sugar in the form of glucose feeds cancer cells..

Gostrydr, could you explain why okinawans have had the lowest rates of cancer in the world for decades? When their carb intake, specifically from sweet potatoes (over 1000g a day) was as high as 90% of total calories.

thanks!

I think its the high glycemic foods that may cause cancer, not all carby foods. There is plenty of evidence to support this view.



Right, but the cancers also need important growth factors. And protein increases these.

kneebrace and especially Mutant, what the hell is wrong with you both! You're seriously acting like little immature arragant kids! Would you please stop it. You're both completely disrespectful. It's really sad that people can be like this.

EDIT

And I can't afford any book right now. There are lots I want to get but have used up my college grant. Maybe soon but not yet. I also do not care about being skinny, having lower testosterone or whatever. I don't consider it a problem. There is no need to keep going on about it. Deal with the topic at hand .

You also seem to make things so personal and I don't see why. Maybe there is too much testosterone arond here - Better reduce your calories



Reducing protein has been done in many recent studies with consistent results. In studies on a few species they provide an Isocaloric diet showing that reducing methionine content in the diet extends lifespan dramatically. Is it not easy enough to grasp that having an abudance of this amino acid may be a factor in disease? And therefor could be a much easier way to healthier lives than by reducing either carbs, calories or whatever else by 40% or more.

This is why god gave us libraries.