Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2025 Poal.co

224

(post is archived)

You are currently inside a comment thread.
Click here to see all the comments (16).
[–] • 0 pt 2y

No. They don't. First thing you need to do which should cause you to just throw that article out with no other info is this;

Boiled soybeans (or edamame) provide a whopping 63% DV.

They have "incomplete protein" which jews have gotten the FDA to label as protein. To be a protein requires all 9 essential amino acids. Zero plants contain all 9. There's often random (((claims))) that this that or the other highly phytoestrogenic plant does contain all 9, but they never do. Ever.

If a protein is a protein then why is there such a thing as a "complete protein" and an "incomplete protein"? To fool the goyim. That's why and it's obvious. If I were to hand you a brake pedal could I say I just gave you a car while intentionally not labeling but meaning "incomplete car"? No. That's stupid, wrong and should be obvious.

[–] • 0 pt 2y

Beans have protein, but do not contain all of the essential amino acids for the human body to fully utilize that protein. That's why I said "Paired with rice also provides a balance of amino acids" - allowing the human body to fully utilize the plant protein as a meat protein replacement. Cowboys of the old west lived on beans much of the year, they were anything but soy bois.

So, plants can be used to fabricate complete proteins, though a single plant product, ie beans, contains protein but the human body can't utilize that protein without the addition of missing essential amino acids like those found in rice.

It's like mailing an envelope containing a letter. It is legitimate mail, but goes nowhere unless you put a stamp (missing amino acids) on it.

[–] • 0 pt 2y (edited 2y)

Also quit spamming. You contradict yourself in the very first line.

Beans have protein, but do not contain all of the essential amino acids

So they don't have protein.

for the human body to fully utilize that protein.

What kind of lying is this? It has nothing to do with utilization or not. It has to do with it not being a protein. It's a carbohydrate.

So, plants can be used to fabricate complete proteins, though a single plant product,... so

You're making it seem like you've proven or shown something but you haven't. You're just reguritating jew lies about protein as though meaningful.

It's like mailing an envelope containing a letter. It is legitimate mail, but goes nowhere unless you put a stamp (missing amino acids) on it.

No. It's like person A giving you a steering wheel, person B giving you a brake pedal, person C giving you a gas pedal ... YOU HAVE 3* cars goyim!!! No. You do not have 3 cars. You could get one car eventually, at a nonzero cost. The now single car you have from multiple different noncar sources also doesn't come with very important micronutrients as they aren't bioavailable in carb sourced foods.

I'm not doing this further with a )))vegan((( or whatever the fuck you are. The initial onset of malnutrition, and the most dangerous is robbing your brain of required nutrients that only flesh provides to function well, let alone efficiently.

↓ expand content
[–] • 0 pt 2y

I'm not doing this further

Fine by me, but I'll leave you with this simple question to ponder - How do plant eating mammals like beef, bison, deer, pigs, etc become massive with protein? Chickens, Turkey, ducks, quail, partridge etc ... more protein. Where do these critters get their protein?