Fat is missing though, and there is no essential need for fiber.
And what about vitamines? Water-soluble and fat-soluble vitamines? The latter of which are probably totally missing. All of those are found in good meat, however.
> there is no essential need for fiber
Thinking of food only on its nutritional aspects is reductive
From a health point of view, fiber is a necessity
A reductive approach seems to be the problem of artificial meat, in the first place.
> From a health point of view, fiber is a necessity
If there is a healthy microbiome to digest the fiber, you may want to feed that microbiome with fiber so it stays alive, and even improve the population that way. And I see that fiber can mitigate blood sugar spikes. However, fiber also takes up valuable minerals, prohibiting their uptake. I do not think that the situation is as clear cut as you present it.
>However, fiber also takes up valuable minerals, prohibiting their uptake. I do not think that the situation is as clear cut as you present it.
If this were actually a concern, it would be beneficial to extract all nutrients from whole foods and consume them as a pill (vitamin) instead of eating our nutrition. This has not borne out in extensive research despite billions of dollars invested into developing and marketing nutrient supplements.
The comment is literally regarding its nutritional aspect. "One of the most complete nutritional sources".
Completely wrong.
Fiber is critical.
I know it is a social norm on HN to provide links. But come on, you can just search and find a hundred studies. At some point, just go read them.
in Cell Host & Microbe: https://www.cell.com/cell-host-microbe/abstract/S1931-3128(2...
> we found that a fiber-free diet ameliorates colitis by altering the intestinal localization of a specific gut pathobiont that is required to trigger CD-like disease in genetically susceptible mice. Mechanistically, fiber-free diet inhibited the ability of mucin-degrading microbes to supply critical molecules that are required for the metabolism and maintenance of the disease-causing pathobiont in the mucus layer.
or in Gastroenterology: https://www.gastrojournal.org/article/S0016-5085(23)05306-4/...
> Fiber free exclusive enteral nutrition (EEN) is an effective steroid-sparing treatment used to induce clinical remission in children with Crohn’s disease (CD).
I hope it becomes apparent that having fiber is not the solution to everything. Above papers administer fiber-free diets for treatment.
Other diets focus on the exclusion of certain fibers, like for example, in the widespread and clinically approved FODMAP diet. Hence, it also depends on the type of fiber.
Finally, the low FODMAP diet is not intended to eliminate FODMAPs nor is it intended to be used long term. From the inventors of the low FODMAP diet:
"Given the adverse changes in gut microbial populations associated with long-term adherence to a low FODMAP diet, we always encourage people to enter a re-challenge phase and under the guidance of a dietitian, find an acceptable balance between the occasional inclusion of moderate and high FODMAP foods (naturally rich in healthy prebiotics) and adequate symptom control. In the long-term, we advocate people follow the least restrictive diet necessary. Further research into the rechallenge and long-term maintenance phases of the diet is warranted."
https://www.monashfodmap.com/blog/low-fodmap-diet-provides-b...
You are citing studies on specific narrow medical conditions where a limiting of fiber had some impact. Yes, you can probably find narrow medical conditions that would benefit from any diet you want to support. You can find medical conditions that support 100% fat, 100% carb, 100% protein. Those are niche cases with specific needs.
That isn't what the general regular human would need.
This is like saying, "we've found that in some specific cases, excess water leads to drowning, thus we recommend a water free diet."
Maybe not you. But it is really awful how many people are really eating unhealthily based on this kind of miss-interpretations, and in some cases out right marketing manipulation.
Yes it is a huge field, and there are a lot of different types of fibers, with hundreds of knock on effects. This is one of those fields where there a lot of variables, it is complex, so super easy to purposely confuse people. To then say, we don't need it?
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9511151/
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29566200/
https://academic.oup.com/nutritionreviews/advance-article/do...
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S026156142...
One that is balanced on Pro/Con in different situations
https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6643/14/13/2641
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S000291652...