Search

Prevailing definitions of protein quality are predicated on considerations of biochemistry and metabolism rather than the net effects on human health or the environment of specific food sources of protein. In the vernacular, higher "quality" equates to desirability. This implication is compounded by sequential, societal trends in which first dietary fat and then dietary carbohydrate were vilified during recent decades, leaving dietary protein under an implied halo. The popular concept that protein is "good" and that the more the better, coupled with a protein quality definition that favors meat, fosters the impression that eating more meat, as well as eggs and dairy, is desirable and preferable. This message, however, is directly opposed to current Dietary Guidelines for Americans, which encourage consumption of more plant foods and less meat, and at odds with the literature on the environmental impacts of foods, from carbon emissions to water utilization, which decisively favor plant protein sources. Thus, the message conveyed by the current definitions of protein quality is at odds with imperatives of public and planetary health alike. We review the relevant literature in this context and make the case that the definition of protein quality is both misleading and antiquated. We propose a modernized definition that incorporates the quality of health and environmental outcomes associated with specific food sources of protein. We demonstrate how such an approach can be adapted into a metric and applied to the food supply., (Copyright © American Society for Nutrition 2019.)

Background: The Canola Oil Multicenter Intervention Trial (COMIT) was a randomized controlled crossover study designed to evaluate the effects of five diets that provided different oils and/or oil blends on cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factors in individuals with abdominal obesity. The present objective is to report preliminary findings on plasma fatty acid profiles in volunteers with abdominal obesity, following the consumption of diets enriched with n-3, n-6 and n-9 fatty acids., Methods: COMIT was conducted at three clinical sites, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada, Québec City, Québec, Canada and University Park, Pennsylvania, United States. Inclusion criteria were at least one of the followings: waist circumference (≥90 cm for males and ≥84 cm for females), and at least one other criterion: triglycerides ≥1.7 mmol/L, high density lipoprotein cholesterol <1 mmol/L (males) or <1.3 mmol/L (females), blood pressure ≥130 mmHg (systolic) and/or ≥85 mmHg (diastolic), and glucose ≥5.5 mmol/L. Weight-maintaining diets that included shakes with one of the dietary oil blends were provided during each of the five 30-day dietary phases. Dietary phases were separated by four-week washout periods. Treatment oils were canola oil, high oleic canola oil, high oleic canola oil enriched with docosahexaenoic acid (DHA), flax oil and safflower oil blend, and corn oil and safflower oil blend. A per protocol approach with a mixed model analysis was decided to be appropriate for data analysis., Results: One hundred and seventy volunteers were randomized and 130 completed the study with a dropout rate of 23.5%. The mean plasma total DHA concentrations, which were analyzed among all participants as a measure of adherence, increased by more than 100% in the DHA-enriched phase, compared to other phases, demonstrating excellent dietary adherence., Conclusions: Recruitment and retention strategies were effective in achieving a sufficient number of participants who completed the study protocol to enable sufficient statistical power to resolve small differences in outcome measures. It is expected that the study will generate important data thereby enhancing our understanding of the effects of n-3, n-6, and n-9 fatty acid-containing oils on CVD risks., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01351012.