protein

We have found the “switch” of cellular aging. The secret is called protein AP2A1

by

Regenerative medicine has a very clear objective ahead today: to look for the ‘button’ that can stop aging and allow us live much longeror at least have a better quality of life when we reach certain ages. And here the Japanese have a lot to say with a discovery that gives us more clues about how to preserve our cells much better. A new study. Everything that has to do with living a little longer, the truth is that it causes a little stir in the scientific world, and the article published in January 2025 in the magazine Cellular Signaling it was no wonder. Here it was shown how a team of researchers from Osaka University managed to identify a protein that literally acts as a cellular senescence switch called AP2A1. Our cells. Just as aging can be seen aesthetically, our cells also age through a process of senescence. Upon entering this state, the cells stop dividing, but do not die, since they become larger, more rigid and adhere strongly to their environment. And here a team of scientists has discovered the exact mechanism that causes this. Here the study has pointed to a protein as the culprit: AP2A1. A molecule that acts as a kind of biological transport truck that moves another protein, called β1 integrin along the fibers of the cell. That is why, over time, this process strengthens cell adhesion, causing the cell to become rigid and “old.” The revolution. The important thing here is that if the function of AP2A1 is suppressed in old cells, the biological clock reverses. That is, the cells decrease in size, lose rigidity, drastically reduce the classic markers of aging and proliferate and migrate again. Basically, they rejuvenate themselves. Furthermore, it has also been seen that if this protein is overexpressed in young cells, the result is great aging that accelerates. Your potential. Here the scientific team has seen that AP2A1 is not only emerging as a great marker that measures a person’s aging, but also acts as a direct therapeutic target. That is why some specialized websites such as Fight Aging! already analyze how blocking AP2A1 prevents inflammatory signaling typical of senescent cells. In this way, if we manage to inhibit this protein in the future, we could develop “anti-senescence” agents capable of extending our healthy life expectancy and combating age-related diseases, such as osteoarthritis. A long way. For now, this is something that has been estimated in cellular models in a dish in a laboratory, but it still remains to be seen how it works in the human organism with all the factors that intervene on a cell that is not isolated. What is clear is that the discovery of AP2A1 is a spectacular milestone in cell biology. We have basically found the button that controls the size and youth of cells in the laboratory, but the next big challenge for science will be to find out if we can press that same button, safely, inside the human body. And for that, there are still many years of research left. Images | National Cancer Institute Huy Phan In Xataka | While half the world is worried about aging, one industry is rubbing its hands: the elevator industry

There is an obsession with protein to gain more and more muscle. Science has more and more doubts that it works

by

Until not so long ago, protein was a technical term, linked to clinical nutrition and sports. Today it has become a cultural symbol. Under what some have called the era of Protein Chicprotein is no longer just a nutrient, but a promise: for health, body control and active aging. Eating well has come to mean, almost automatically, eating “with protein.” The market pushes. This change has consolidated an idea that is as simple as it is deceptive: that if protein is good, the more it is, the better. However, while the market push this logic Without nuances, the human body continues to function with very specific limits. And there arises the question that rarely accompanies packaging and slogans: how much protein do we really need to age well, and at what point does it stop adding up? What does science really say? This is where the noise of marketing collides with the evidence. In an extensive report published by The Washington PostProfessor Stuart Phillips, leading researcher in protein metabolism, muscle health and aging at McMaster University (Canada), issues a clear warning: “Consuming more and more protein is not necessarily better. There are no infinite benefits associated with higher intake.” Phillips is not a marginal voice in this debate. He has been studying for decades how nutrition and exercise interact to slow age-related loss of muscle mass —sarcopenia—and he is one of the scientists most cited in this field. His message dismantles much of the dominant narrative. So, let’s get to the data. The classic recommendation of 0.8 grams of protein per kilo of body weight —the well-known recommended daily intake (RDA)— is usually interpreted as an objective to achieve. In reality, it is designed as a minimum to avoid malnutrition. According to Stuart Phillipswhen the focus is on aging healthily and preserving muscle mass, the evidence points to somewhat higher ranges, always combined with strength training. This approach fits with what was published by harvard and Mayo Clinicpoint out that exceeding intakes close to 2 grams per kilo of body weight rarely provides clear advantages to the general population. Instead, they insist on the need to adapt the amount of protein to age, physical activity and health status. Protein: necessary, but not miraculous. It is worth remembering something basic that is often lost in public conversation: the body does not store protein. Once the needs are met, the excess is used as energy or transformed into fat. Eating more protein, by itself, does not build muscle. As they remember from Mayo Clinic: “Muscle is built by strength training, not by shaking.” From 40 or 50 years old, the equation changes slightly. The progressive loss of muscle mass begins and here protein takes on a strategic role, but always in combination with resistance exercise. Spreading the protein throughout the day (between 15 and 30 grams per meal) and not concentrating it only at dinner seems more effective in stimulating muscle synthesis, a point that also underlines the McMaster University researcher. The word of the year: protein. At least in the nutritional field, because – for those who want to know – the word of the year has been “tariff”, and no wonder. But getting back to the topic at hand, protein has sneaked in on social networks, in cafes and in viral morning routines. And going further, the new ritual of well-being involves coffees protein, clear protein, functional supplements and smoothies that promise sculpted bodies. This obsession coexists with other contemporary phenomena: the fear of aging, the cult of the “perfect” body and the popularization of weight loss drugs like Ozempic. In this context, protein is sold almost as a talisman: it satisfies, slims, tones and protects against aging. Nutritionists, however, are more cautious. Many agree that we are paying a premium for ultra-processed products that do not provide more benefits than the real food that we already have at home: eggs, legumes, fish or natural yogurt. The origin of the protein. Another important turn in this debate. We come to a meta-analysis that shows that following patterns like the Planetary Health Dietrich in plant proteins, is associated with both lower mortality and a lower climate footprint. It is not about eliminating animal protein, but about moving it from the center of the plate and prioritizing legumes, nuts and whole grains. The experts introduce a key concept here, widely cited by Harvard: he protein package. It’s not just the protein that matters, but what comes with it. It is not the same to obtain it from an ultra-processed “high in protein” food than from a dish of lentils with fiber, minerals and antioxidants. The nutritional context matters as much as the isolated macronutrient. So who really needs more protein? Protein deficiencies are not common in the general population. They appear especially in older people, patients with illnesses, very restrictive diets or chewing problems. In these cases, supplements can be a useful tool, never a universal shortcut. Alma Palau, dietician-nutritionist and manager of the General Council of Official Colleges of Dietitians-Nutritionists, warned in an interview in CuídatePlus that excess protein is not harmless. “Proteins that the body does not need are metabolized and eliminated, but this process involves making organs such as the kidney or liver work unnecessarily,” he explained. Palau insists that consuming more protein than necessary does not translate into more muscle or more health if it is not accompanied by sufficient carbohydrates, a varied diet and physical activity. In other words: without context, the protein loses its meaning. Along the same lines, Carlos Andrés Zapata, nutritionist interviewed by La Vanguardiawarns that protein has been overstated in current discourse and remembers that it is not more important than other macronutrients such as carbohydrates or fats, nor does it replace a balanced diet or strength training. Less obsession, more balance. Protein matters, a lot. It is essential to maintain muscle, autonomy and quality of life with age. But science does not support the idea that it is infinite or magical. … Read more

The trend of adding protein to coffee was born on TikTok. And capitalism has taken note of this “functional coffee”

by

Drinking coffee is a very personal thing. You can do it because you like its flavorbecause you want to take advantage of its health benefits or even because you want that caffeine ‘shot’. It is also a social drink with that classic “let’s have a coffee”, but in recent years, coffee has also become a functional drink. Reason? The need to add protein to everything. And coffee chains have not been slow to surf the trend. The ‘profess’. Proteins are one of the pillars of a balanced dietbut if we do intense and regular sports, its intake becomes essential. The ideal is to get it from food, but protein powder (whether vegetable or whey) It is a quick and easy way to increase daily grams. The “normal” thing is to have a smoothie, but in 2021 a trend appeared on TikTok: the ‘teacher‘. Basically, it is the combination between ‘protein’ and ‘coffee’ and it is what you are imagining: enrich a coffee with protein powder. Hacking coffee. Named As ‘broistas’, a term that can be somewhat derogatory and combines ‘gymbro’ with ‘barista’, there were those who went directly to a cafeteria, ordered a long coffee and mixed it with their protein shake. Here the search is to convert coffee into a strictly functional drink that provides caffeine that allows you to perform more during the training session, burn more fat if that training is going to be cardio and add a few more grams of protein to the daily count. Dutch Bros menu Dutch Bros.. Evidently, coffee shops have taken note. The entire food industryIn fact, she has been on the protein diet bandwagon for years, with very particular labeling and higher prices in foods that have one or two more grams of protein per 100 grams than the unenhanced version (which is a ridiculous amount). And, as we say, the coffee shops have not wanted to miss that train of body worship. If people come, order a coffee and add it to their proteins, why not offer the combination directly? Thus, at the beginning of 2024, the coffee chain Dutch Bros. -very direct competition from Starbucks, at least on US soil- launched a series of protein drinks. Coffees like the Salted Caramel Protein Latte or the Salted Caramel Protein Mocha have 20 grams of protein and no added sugar. The key is their reduced-fat protein milk to which they have added proteins -casein-, and little by little they have been opening the range of protein versions of their most popular coffees. starbucks. Also in the American West, but somewhat further north, this protein coffee thing resonated. Starbucks wasn’t going to stand by while customers demanded something the competition was already offering, and just a few weeks agothey launched a protein drink line within your menu. It depends on what you choose, but there are milk foam options that provide about 15 grams of protein per drink in a large size, to others that use milk with whey protein that provides between 30 and 35 grams of protein per drink. As is logical at Starbucks, there are plenty of drinks available to choose from and it doesn’t look like it’s going to be a fad: it’s here to stay. Tressie Lieberman is the company’s chief brand officer and commented that it is something that “responds to the growing demand for protein by consumers.” And other companies are preparing their strategies, like Peet’s Coffee with its ‘Vitality Menu‘ with protein lattes. Necessary? I know esteem that the market for this functional coffee is valued at 4,000 million dollars and that it will reach more than 14,700 million by 2034. It is the consequence of that aforementioned cult of the body, especially in younger consumers, because it is an aid to reach the necessary grams of protein in a simpler way. However, there are those who are skeptical. Eating protein, especially if you practice sports, is fine, but nutritionists already warn that, while an essential nutrient, protein “should not be treated like fairy dust that we sprinkle on everything.” In the end, it all depends on each person’s nutritional needs and how convenient a shake is… or the pleasure of getting that protein from food. Images | Xataka, In Xataka | In the 16th century it was believed that coffee was a satanic drink. So Pope Clement VIII decided to “baptize” him

When it comes to meat, science knows there’s something better than protein shakes: lean pork

by

If you are one of those who he takes his gym workouts seriouslyyou will know that the post-workout window It is almost sacred. It’s time to give the body what it needs to repair and build muscle, and protein is the undisputed queen. This is where the big question comes in: does the type of protein we provide to the muscle matter? This is exactly what the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign wanted to answer. with a new study. What we think. Within this world of wanting to be as ‘masked’ as possible, without a doubt one of the diets that has transcended the most into the annals of history is the chicken and rice. In this way, chicken has almost taken first place in the type of meat that best suits us after training for its amount of protein and its low fat content. But in the case that we eat pork, it is important to make several distinctions according to science. The study. The research that has been published in the journal The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, reveals that when eating pork after a weight training session, the lean version is significantly more effective in stimulating muscle growth than its counterpart with more fat, even when both provide the same amount of protein. The experiment. To reach this conclusion, scientists, led by Professor Nicholas Burd, designed a rigorous experiment with 16 young, physically active adults. The goal was to compare how the body responded to three different “meals” after a hard leg workout with press leg and quadriceps extension. A routine that would leave many shaking. In this case, participants consumed one of the following diet options: Low-fat pork: a burger with 20 grams of protein and only 4.4 grams of fat. High-fat pork: A burger with the same 20 grams of protein, but only 20.6 grams of fat. Carbohydrate drink as a control measure without any type of protein to measure only the effect of exercise. The measurements. Once the dietary intervention was applied, muscle construction had to be measured. To do this, they used an advanced technique based on the administration of a ‘labeled’ amino acid, specifically L-(ring-13C6)phenylalanine. By marking it, it could be very easy to follow this ‘brick’ that was going to constitute part of the muscles that were hypertrophying. To follow up, a blood sample was taken as well as a muscle biopsy before and after exercise and food. And this allowed us to see in real time how quickly the body was generating new proteins that would end up in the muscle, in a process known as myofibrillar protein synthesis (MPS). The results. As expected, both types of pork increased muscle protein synthesis above resting levels. However, lean pork did so much more potently, despite having the same protein levels. The difference between the two groups was so marked that the anabolic effect of the high-fat hamburger was not statistically significant to that of the carbohydrate drink, which did not contain any protein. In other words, the high concentration of fat seemed to negate the benefit of the protein consumed. Because. The reason for everything seems to be the speed of digestion and absorption of macronutrients. The blood analysis revealed that participants who ate the lean burger experienced a faster and more pronounced spike in essential amino acids and specifically leucine in their blood than those who ate the fatty version. This is fundamental for the leucine “trigger” hypothesis. This theory postulates that a rapid and high increase in the amino acid leucine in the bloodstream acts as a powerful signal for the body to initiate the muscle-building process at that time. The lean pork activated this trigger effectively, while the pork fat probably slowed down gastric emptying and, thus, the arrival of amino acids into the blood and muscles. In fact, the study found a direct correlation between the magnitude of the leucine spike and increased muscle synthesis. The decision. In a time where protein shakes are the ‘norm’, the question may be asked whether it is better to eat food or drink protein. There is scientific literature that points Because it is always best to have a protein diet with food, since they not only provide protein, but also other components such as lipids, carbohydrates, micronutrients and bioactive compounds that can enhance muscle protein synthesis and improve the overall quality of the diet. In this way, drinking a protein shake can be a good way to complement the diet, but without forgetting about real foods like meat. Contradicting. This study has also come to ‘fight’ with the rest of the research teams that pointed out that naturally fattier whole foods such as whole eggs or salmon showed a superior anabolic response. The difference, according to the researchers, could be in the “food matrix.” The pork in the study was processed (minced and blended), which could alter how its nutrients interact, unlike an unprocessed whole food. Conclusion. This study has come to show that not all sources of animal protein are equal. If the goal in this case is to maximize muscle gain and you want to eat pork, opting for the lean version will give a clear anabolic advantage. This way, it’s not just about how much protein you eat, but how it is packaged and how quickly it gets where it needs to go. Images | Alora Griffiths Cindie Hansen In Xataka | The largest study on sustainable eating confirms it: vegetable protein wins the game

We have been submerged in “High Protein” food fever. Science has enough doubts that it is useful

by

In a quick visit to the supermarket, it is observed how the shelves no longer compete in flavors, compete in promises: High Protein, extra protein, muscle. We see it in yogurts, breads, tuna and even water, under the promise of the protein. Today we are immersed in the Era of chic proteinwhich turned an essential nutrient into an aspirational banner that jumped from the gym to the purchase cart. However, meanwhile container and slogans emerges the question that many ask ourselves: do we really need so much protein? No more is better. To begin with, protein matters, since it participates in the construction and repair of tissues, immunity and hormonal regulation, among other functions, as explained in the MedlinePlus Medical Portal. In addition, it has a satiating effect, which helps control intake, provided it does not derive in hyperproteic diets, Andrea Jarque nutritionist warns. However, to understand the jump to the shelves of the supermarket responds rather to a market logic. The industry, As always happenshe detected a “reef” in the protein claim and extended it from the cultural niche to the general public, with visual codes and messages that They associate protein By force, aesthetics and performance. Do we need “more protein”? It all depends on the person, but there is something in which almost all coincide Clinical guides: The reference figures change little. In an average and sedentary adult, the daily recommendation is around 0.8 grams of protein per kilo of body weight per day. From the age of 40 or 50 – and especially in menopause – it is convenient to slightly raise the intake up to 1 and 1.2 grams per kilo. In other words, a 70 kilos person would need between 70 and 84 grams of daily protein to curb the loss of muscle associated with age: Sarcopenia. Athletes play in another league. Those who train strength or practice resistance regularly may need more: between 1.2 and 1.7 grams per kilo. Above 2 grams per kilo, the benefits are more than doubtful and, in predisposed people, problems could even appear, as they warn in May Clinic. In practice, most arrive – or even pass – from those amounts. In Spain it is not different: meat intake It is still very high. Hence the nutritionist Jorge Jaldón summarize it with irony in the zero habit podcast: “Shortly after breakfasts, lunch and cenes, you have plenty of protein.” Its example is clear: an egg (6 grams of protein), 100 grams of chicken (22 grams) and a plate of lentils (15–18 grams) are enough to meet the needs of an adult in one day. In other words, a combined dish already covers what many are looking for in a container with the High Protein label. Deficit and excess, the two faces. The shortcomings are unusual in the general population. They appear in cases of aggressive caloric restriction, eating disorders either use of slimming drugs that lead meals. Alert signals They are clear: Little satiety between meals and worse recovery after exercise or disease. At the opposite end, the body does not store protein. Once the needs are covered, the excess is used as energy or becomes fat. “The muscle is built by strength training, not the shake”, Clinic point out in May. In the long term, the effect of excessive chronic intake It is a reason for debate. Specialists from the Spanish Society of Endocrinology and Nutrition (SEEN) They advise caution in people with kidney or liver disease. And what happens to supplements? And this is where the great parallel industry appears. It is not the same to train strength than to lead a sedentary life. Protein supplements can be useful in specific situations: greater with chewing problems, clinical contexts, recovery after training or simply by logistics. Three nutritionists They coincided in a report of this house: They are a tool, not universal shortcut. The Basic Council: Check labels. A good product should provide at least 70–80% real protein by ration, low in sugars, with few additives and reliable brand. And it should not forget the obvious: a shake also adds calories. In addition, many of these products cost more than their equivalent in real food. As some experts ironize, a surcharge is often paid so they already provide lentils or egg. The boom of the plant protein. The other great change is of origin. For decades the recommendation was to replace red meat with chicken or fish. Today the focus is in legumes, nuts, tofu or quinoa. A meta -analysis Confirm that following The so -called Planetary Health Diet (rich in plant proteins) is associated with 21% less mortality and lower carbon footprint. “The more the dish looked like this diet, the lower the risk of dying and the environmental impact,” summarizes the study. Along the same lines, vegetable proteins are also beginning to prioritize food guides, As Stanford professor, Christopher Gardner details: “The beans, peas and lentils would head the list.” Now, the vegetable protein has less bioavailability. “Those who follow exclusively vegetable diets need more quantity and combine different sources,” Remember dietitian Marie Spano. Despite this, as Isabel Martorell, dietitian-nutritionist of Nootric: “No deficits have been observed in vegans with well -planned diets.” Here enters a key concept, that of the Package protein, Popularized by Harvard: The important thing is not only the protein, but the set of nutrients that accompany it. It is not the same to obtain it from a fillet with saturated fats than from a dish of chickpeas with fiber, minerals and antioxidants. Beyond fashion. The evidence points to a simple route (and less expensive): it distributes the protein of the day, prioritizes quality sources – better if they are vegetables -, trains strength and distrust of the Atheat powder. The muscle is built by the gym and constancy. The rest is noise and labels. Image | Pexels Xataka | The greatest study on sustainable food confirms it: the vegetable protein wins the game

Vegetable protein wins the game

by

In the supermarket hall, more and more containers shout the same: “High in protein”. Powdered beaters, fortified yogurts, breads, even sauces. For decades, the council was simple: replace red meat with chicken or fish. Today, the mantra has changed. “Protein” has become advertising claim, cultural identity and even aesthetic aspiration. But, while the market is filled with promises, science begins to clarify another part of the story: what proteins do they really matter, how they are processed and what cost they have for the planet. Eat “on the planet”. An investigation, Posted in Science Advanceshas gathered 37 studies in a meta -analysis with more than 3.2 million people. The verdict is striking: the more your dish looks like the “planetary health diet” (Planetary Health Diet, PhD), the lower your risk of dying for any cause, and at the same time the climatic footprint of your diet decreases. With nuances, yes, but with an unusual statistical consistency in nutrition. The study. The team combined data from two mass cohorts: Nhanes in the United States (42,947 adults) and the UK Biobank in the United Kingdom (125,372 people). In addition, to integrate meta -analysis. The objective was to see to what extent the adhesion to the PHD influenced both the health and the environmental impact of the diet. The Planetary Health Diet was proposed in 2019 By the Eat-Lancet Commission. This diet is not based on being strict vegetarian, rather, seeks to balance health with environmental sustainability with a more based on plants. In other words: it is a diet designed so that the human being lives more, but also so that the planet can sustain it. The results were clear. On the one hand, in the United States, who followed more closely the PHD had 23% less risk of total mortality. On the other hand, in the United Kingdom, the reduction was 16%, in addition to fewer cancer deaths and respiratory diseases. Metanalysis pointed in the same direction: together, the PHD was associated with 21% less mortality due to any cause: cardiovascular, diabetes and colon and lung cancer. In addition, the researchers estimated the greenhouse gas emissions associated with diets and found a consistent pattern: the more the PHD participants moved away, the greater the climate footprint of their diet. The main responsible: red meat and dairy. Behind the study. The attractiveness of the study is double. On the one hand, he confirms with robust observational evidence that those who follow the PHD live more and better: less cancer, less heart attacks, less diabetes. On the other, it shows that this same pattern reduces the carbon footprint from the daily diet. A difficult combination to ignore in full climatic crisis. The authors themselves ask for caution: it is an observational study and not proof causality. In other words, it does not show that eating in a way directly live more years. Even so, the consistency of the results in millions of people and the scale of meta -analysis give it an unusual weight in nutrition and suggest that the signal is no accident. To the same place. Other investigations were already on the same way to move the animal protein through the vegetable, since it can bring health benefits and, incidentally, for the planet. As we have pointed out in Xataka, For decades the council was to replace red meat with chicken or fish. However, the balance begins to bow towards the vegetable. A study in The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition showed that women with more rich diets in vegetable protein aged in a healthier way. And from another angle, the American Gut Project reached a similar conclusion: diversity matters. Their data revealed that those who added up to 30 plants other than week had a much richer intestinal microbiome. In other words: both in longevity and in intestinal health, patterns based on plants add tests in favor of what now confirms the meta -analysis in Science Advances. Not everything is black or white. Animal protein provides essential amino acids of easier absorption. Sports dietitian Marie Spano, cited by Men’s Healthwarns that those who follow 100% vegetable diets need more total protein and combine different groups. And the degree of processing matters: As explained the epidemiologist Filippa Juul al New York Timesthe ultraprocesses “disguised” as healthy – booked, vegetable lasañas ready to heat – do not offer the same benefits as minimally processed foods. The Mediterranean diet, a nearby mirror. The debate is not just Anglo -Saxon. As we have explained in Xatakaa Spanish study with cohort data Enrica (11,488 people, 14.4 years of follow -up) showed that both the phd and the traditional Mediterranean diet offer similar benefits. Mortality was reduced by 22% in those who followed the PHD most and in 21% in the most faithful to the Mediterranean. Regarding the environmental impact, the differences were minimal: 4.15 kg of CO₂ a day for the pHD compared to 4.36 for the Mediterranean. In other words, both seem to offer a viable path to a healthier and sustainable food. It is not just calories or nutrients. Now it is also measured in years of life and in kilograms of Co₂. The new study in Science Advances confirms that the Planetary Health Diet offers benefits on both fronts: more health, less environmental impact. While the market promotes the “chic protein era” and social networks dictate extreme fashions, scientific evidence suggests a simpler message: more plants, less ultra -processed, meat as accompaniment and not as the center of the dish. The question is no longer how much protein we eat, but from what sources it comes and what footprint leaves in the world. Image | Unspash Xataka | To the question of whether ultraprocessed foods are as bad as they have told us, science still has no clear answer

The Greek yogurt has conquered the supermarket yogurts. All thanks to the magic word: protein

by

On my last visit to the supermarket I realized that it was no longer enough to choose between natural or flavors. Now the labels speak of “Greek” or “protein”, without forgetting the “0% fat.” “Choose your own adventure,” we might think at first glance. However, my approach focuses on the Greek yogurt, because the “protein yogurt” we already know that we are in the It was of chic protein. But what is special for Greek yogurt to have become the protagonist? Is it really better for health or is it a triumph of marketing? More than an exotic name. Greek yogurt is no recent invention. In the Mediterranean basin it has been consumed for centuries as a basic food: thick, satiating and easy to conserve thanks to the casting that eliminates part of the serum. In Greece it is usual to serve it with honey and nuts, and in Türkiye or in the Middle East it is used in salty sauces and dishes. His jump to global fame arrived just two decades ago, when international brands began to market it. And what distinguishes it is not its passport, but rather its process: the liquid serum is sneaking, which gives it a thicker and more creamy texture, and a protein content greater than that of a conventional yogurt. A chute of protein. It seems that here is the kit of the matter. In a New York Times reportEthan Balk, a professor of nutrition at the University of New York, defined it as a complete protein: it contains the nine essential amino acids that the body does not produce for itself. In addition, clinical studies They have demonstrated that consuming it as a snack helps reduce hunger and delay the following meal. Also, a meta -analysis Add that This high protein density can help reduce total caloric intake and to increase metabolism when it is part of a balanced diet. But the Greek yogurt does not stay there. The interesting thing comes when we see what else contributes. Loses part of calcium in the process. And yes, this occurs in the casting part, but still remains a good source of this mineral and protein, key to bone health. In an article for News Medical Today They point out that An adequate intake of both nutrients can reduce the risk of osteoporosis. In addition, a 2014 study He found a relationship between the usual consumption of yogurt and a lower risk of type 2 diabetes. The intestine, great protagonist. All yogurts with live crops, including Greek, contain probiotics: the famous “good bacteria.” Andrew T. Chan, Harvard gastroenterologist, He continued for years To more than 130,000 adults and observed something striking: those who ate yogurt twice a week had 20% less risk of a subtype of colon cancer compared to those who barely tried it. This does not prove that yogurt is a coat against cancer, because it was an observational study and did not distinguish varieties. But it does add to a body of increasing evidence on the value of those fermented in the diet. For its part, Since May ClinicThey add that yogurt bacteria participate not only in digestion, but also in the regulation of the immune system and in the production of neurotransmitters such as serotonin, fundamental for mood. Not all Greek yogurts are the same. At this point it seems obvious, but it should be remembered: not everything that the label “Greek” deserves the same place in the fridge. Some Greek yogurts of flavors can carry both added sugar that go from healthy food to outrage, The New York Times warns. Since May Clinic They recommend fixing in which the container indicates “living and active crops”, since not all yogurts maintain probiotics after the pasteurization process. In addition, dietitian Elaine Siu, cited by NYTsuggests accompanying it with fruit, nuts or seeds: thus we add the fiber that the beneficial bacteria need to multiply. And if you do not consume dairy, the most balanced nutrient alternative is the fortified soy yogurt with calcium and vitamin D. A superfood? This word has become very fashionable and we cannot say that Greek yogurt is. However, if we can clarify that it is a dense product in nutrients: complete proteins, vitamin B12, probiotics and calcium in a single container. In a saturated market of labels and claims, the conclusion seems clear: the value of the Greek yogurt is not called “Greek” but to presume to be another value in the fever of the protein. Image | Freepik Xataka | To the question of whether ultraprocessed foods are as bad as they have told us, science still has no clear answer

For years the chicken was the king of protein. Now the beans and lentils want to dethrone it

by

For decades they told us that the healthy thing was to change red meat by chicken or fish. The recommendation was so assumed that it became a kind of nutritional mantra. However, a change begins to glimpse either on supermarket shelves, gyms or social networks, the word “protein” appears more than ever. And the striking thing is that it is increasingly associated with meat, but plant foods. The question is inevitable: why now the vegetable protein? Vegetable protein in the center. The advisory committee of the United States food guides wants to turn the pyramid. According to a report by The Washington Postfor the first time it is proposed that vegetable proteins have priority. Not even chicken or fish, for years synonymous with healthy food, would occupy that place. Christopher Gardner, a professor at Stanford, summed it up with a simple phrase: “The beans, peas and lentils would lead the list of protein sources.” Red meat would be, on the other hand, in the last position. The evidence that supports this turn. The recommendation does not come from nothing. Rahman, clinical director of Barnard Medical Center, remembered the same media than those who eat more plants have less risk of cancer, diabetes, obesity and even deterioration of memory. In a study, Published in the American Journal of Clinical NutritionThey analyzed some 50,000 women, where they concluded that diets rich in plant proteins favor a healthier aging than those based on animal proteins. Beyond the guides, reality speaks for itself. According to The New York Timeslegumes are a pillar of the Mediterranean diet. A single cup of lentils or beans provides about 15 grams of protein, to which fiber, iron, magnesium, folate and vitamin E should be added. Vegetable or animal? Here the nuance appears. In Men’s Health They point to something that usually goes unnoticed In the middle of the vegetable boom: animal protein still plays with advantage. The reason is how we take advantage of it. Its essential amino acids – that our body cannot manufacture – are absorbed more effectively than those of plant origin. The simplest example is on the plate: 85 grams of chicken add up to 20 grams of protein. The same amount of chickpeas stays at six. Marie Spano, sports dietitian cited by the magazinewarns that those who follow exclusively vegetable diets need more daily total protein. Even so, the solution is to combine legumes, whole grains, nuts and seeds throughout the day. The great nuance: natural vs. ultraprocessed. Not all vegetable proteins are the same and here the most critical point appears. In The New York Times They warn of risk to trust ultra -processed that “disguise” healthy. A clinical trial showed that, even with good nutritional profile on the label, the ultra -processed (including shakes and vegetable meals) They do not offer the same benefits than minimally processed foods. In the study, the participants who followed a diet with little processed foods – fruits, natural yogurt, homemade legumes – lost twice as much weight and body fat that those who consumed “healthy” ultraprocesses such as vegetable lasagers ready to heat or protein smoothies. As the epidemiologist Filippa Juul summarized, cited by the NYT: “Ultraprocesses have less texture, chew faster and stimulate appetite artificially.” The world revolves around protein. The boom is not only nutritional, also cultural and commercial. We live in full “It was protein chic”: Protein has become a symbol of sculpted bodies and aspirational well -being. Social networks such as Tiktok popularize extreme routines, hyperproteic milkshakes and diets that touch the obsession, sometimes linked to eating disorders. The food industry has not been left behind. Product containers “High in protein” They adopt aggressive visual codes, with black and red typefaces designed to attract the male public. A strategy that remembers what happened in its day with the “Light” products in pink, aimed at women worried about weight loss. Protein is no longer just a nutrient: it is marketing, identity and business. So the powder protein? The most recognizable symbol of the protein boom may not be lentils or vegetable hamburgers, but the shake that is stirred in the locker room of any gym. But is it essential? The expert’s response is nuanced. Nutritionist Saray López defends it in Xataka As a practical tool: “It has no contraindications and can help reach daily requirements.” But others, such as the dietitian Jesús Guardiola, They underline this same medium that with a balanced diet it is not necessary to resort to supplements: “The problem is when the shake replaces real food.” Specialists agree that dust protein can be useful in concrete contexts: older people with difficulties in chewing, patients in recovery, who seek to gain muscle mass or even workers who barely have time to eat. But they insist that it is not a universal or magical solution. Everything indicates that it is not a passenger fashion. Protein has become the star of the global food conversation. From the official guides to the shelves of the supermarket, of the fitness routines to the homemade cooking recipes, everything seems to revolve around it. But beyond the boom, the background debate is not only how much protein we eat, but from what sources it comes and how it is processed. Image | Freepik Xataka | Powder protein has become the star accessory of modern well -being. Nutritionists have something to say

We are carrying the design of protein foods where to eat clear tuna is from males

by

The hallway has changed a lot in recent years. Light -low fat products are a thing of the past, now what is carried are proteins. Not only with yogurts, Proteíca fever It is in many foods and almost everyone has a design clearly oriented to attract the male audience, but perhaps we are going out of hand. All to black. They commented on this Bluesky thread Following the design of the container of the tuna cans to the natural day. Black background, a small detail in blue and high protein very large. It is not the only product with a design from style; yogurts, fresh cheese, paste and even Frozen Noodles (¿? ¿?). Most have containers in which black color predominates and, to a lesser extent, red, with aggressive designs that highlight the amount of protein that the product has. If you had not noticed, you just have to look for “proteins” in any supermarket. Day, Carrefour, Consume, Mercadona… The trend is clear. Products “high in protein” in day supermarkets. Black does not mean more protein. Or at least not many more. The case of day tuna is a good example. In their container they indicate that it is high in protein, specifically 14.3 grams per can, 25 grams per 100 grams of drained product. However, it is enough to compare it with the Normal natural tuna of the same brand To see that it only has 2 more protein. Of course, the price is much higher: 19.20 euros/kilo for the high protein version and 11.67 euros a kilo for normal. The public. Protein -rich products are aimed at those who seek to increase their muscle mass. Traditionally, the male public has been the most interested in strength training and everything around him. However, we have seen that in recent years every time More women began to do strength trainingto the point that Almost half of gym subscriptions are women. Some powdered protein containers. Gym aesthetics. Although gymnasiums are a more balanced terrain as far as gender is concerned, the aesthetics of training related products such as Protein milkshakes It is already entrenched. A lot of black, intense colors, aggressive typefaces and an aesthetic that seems to shout “if you take this, you will get strong.” The food industry has adopted this visual language, first were the energy drinks And now we see how it has spread to all kinds of products. The containers are sexist. We like it or not, It is so. Right now there is an obsession with eating more protein, but we have also lived others such as low -fat products. If protein -rich products are black, Light They are pink and have softer fishes. The reason is clear: traditionally the female audience has been the most concerned with weight loss. We can still find many products like this In the super, but the fashion of proteins seems to have moved them. Influences. We can think that the container does not matter, but the reality is that it is key in the purchase decision. In This study They found that the container influenced the perception of whether a product was healthy or not, even altering its perception of flavor and determining the purchase decision. The participants tended to associate the products that had a female packaging as healthier, while the most masculine were perceived as less healthy. Some containers of cosmetic products for men. Packaging For males. There is another predominantly feminine industry where we can see this trend more clearly even: cosmetics. The men More and more care about their personal care Beyond the shaving and many brands have launched products of products oriented to them where we find dark colored containers such as black or blue. This ‘masculinization’ is also reflected in the name of the products, such as the ‘fuel’ facial of Kiehl’s or the ‘pure carbon’ of l’Oreal to refer to a facial cream. Perhaps the most exaggerated example we have with This makeup for men To which ‘War Paint’ have baptized, because of course, a real man does not make up, he goes to war. Cover image | Day supermarkets, own edition In Xataka | We had been thinking that creatine served to train better. It turns out that the greatest benefit was in the brain

that risotto eats on the moon. And they already investigate a supereno and more protein rice

by

We continue to have the colonization of the bodies that surround us between eyebrow and eyebrow. For a while, Mars became the “Manifest destination” of the United Statesbut the moon has returned to the first position of extraterrestrial colonization. Is the reason for being of the Artemis missionand it is evident that the moon has much to offer in the form of minerals and energy. But to be able to establish ourselves in the satellite, there is a fundamental step: Cultivate food on the moon. And now Italy has presented The main ingredient of food on the moon: rice. Space farmers. NASA wants to return to the moon, Europe and Russia also. AND China is making great advances. And something that all nations are exploring is how to grow in the lunar soil, from potential food to tobacco, how is China exploring. Lunar soil is hostile because there are no nutrients, so in the past We have experienced with worms and fungi to do the first fertilization work. The idea is to make the regolito, Something very valuable To create materials and leading element of the lunar soil, it is more fertile, but while we find the way, from the Italian Space Agency (like) they have had another idea: to create varieties of dwarf rice by genetic edition to grow in the conditions of the moon. Miniarrocera. The initiative led by the Italian organism implies a joint investigation with universities such as Milan, Roma Sapienza and Naples Federico II, and the objective is to develop a variety of supersenan rice that grows in microgravity conditionsas well as in extremely reduced spaces such as those that can occur in lunar bases. The idea is to maximize production in an extremely narrow space, and that is why they seek to reduce the size of the plant as possible without affecting the amount of rice it can give. A rice plant can reach heights between 70 and 150 centimeters, but the research objective is that the maximum size of those lunar plants is about 10 centimeters. Overcome. Beyond achieving a very compact size, the project seeks to modify the genetics of the plant so that the resulting rice is more nutritious than what we have on Earth. For example, that has a superior protein contribution, something that the “normal” rice suffers. Samples of this miniarroz Difficult. For this project baptized as ‘Moon-Rice’, each of the centers deals with a task. The University of Milan isolates mutant varieties with dwarfism; The University of Rome identifies the best genes to achieve maximum performance despite the size and that of Naples contributes its experience in space crops (such as the Melissa project of ESAwhich simulates closed ecosystems to recycle air and water in long -term missions). But, although promising candidates have already been identified to modify, such as the Japanese dwarf variety kozosumikathis miniaturization presents multiple challenges. Alter the gibberelin of the plant (the plant hormone that allows regulating the height) can also affect production, being that balance between dwarfism and maximum productivity the balance so delicate that must be managed in the laboratory. Terrestrial applications. As it happens so many times when a technology is developed or explored for lunar use, we also see potential for use within the atmosphere. For example, developing a rice that occupies little space, that is more nutritious and more resistant than usual, can be useful for both Urban agriculture as, above all, for the development of crops in arid areas of the Earth. And, beyond this moon-rice that is in initial phases, it is evident that Italy is taking seriously lunar exploration. As a member of ESA, it is collaborating with other agencies that also have interest in the satellite. An example is the interest at the Mohammed Bin Rashid space center of the United Arab Emirates to promote exploration on the Moon, but also a contract With the Thales Satellite manufacturer Alenia Space to develop a habitability module to operate in the lunar base as part of the Artemis program. It only remains to be seen if, in that Lunar module of Italy, the risotto is the main dish. And, who knows, beyond being a source of food, that the ‘inhabitants’ of the moon see green can have positive effects on their mental health during long -term missions. Images | University of Milan, THAT In Xataka | To the big question about what the hell is in the hidden face of the moon, China has just given the first answers

Log In

Forgot password?

Forgot password?

Enter your account data and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Your password reset link appears to be invalid or expired.

Log in

Privacy Policy

Add to Collection

No Collections

Here you'll find all collections you've created before.