In the China Study, we learn there is a difference between ‘high-quality’ protein and ‘low-quality’ protein.  The words high-quality and low-quality can be misleading in defining which protein is best for the human body.  We are taught that high-quality protein means how fast an organism grows and that it doesn’t necessarily mean the quality of ones health.  We discover that complex metabolic systems, like the human body can derive all the essential amino acids from a variety of plant proteins.

Today we look closer at the protein gap.  The protein gap stipulated that world hunger and malnutrition among children in third world countries was a result of not having enough protein to consume.  Projects were popping up all over the world to address the “protein gap”.  This was in 1976.

• MIT worked on developing a protein-rich food supplement call INCA-PARINA.
• Purdue University was breeding a corn to contain more lysine, which is a deficient amino acid in corn protein.
• The U.S. government was subsidizing the production of dried milk powder to provide high-quality protein.
• Cornell University was providing researchers to the Philippines to help develop a high-protein rice and a live-stock industry.
• Auburn University and MIT ground up fish to produce “fish protein concentrate” to feed the world’s poor.

The battle cry was to eradicate world hunger with high-quality protein.  The United Nations, the U.S. Government Food for Peace Program and numerous universities and organizations took up the battle cry that the lack of protein was without question the most serious deficiency in the nutrition of developing countries.

The Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations claimed that the mass population of these countries subsisted mainly on foods derived from plants often deficient in protein, resulting in poor health.  It was strongly advocated increasing the production and consumption of animal protein to feed the world.

Bruce Stillings at the University of Maryland and the U.S. Department of Commerce also promoted the consumption of animal protein even though he stated that, “there is no requirement for animal protein in the diet per se, the quantity of dietary protein from animal sources is usually accepted as being indicative of the overall protein quality of the diet.”

While this may be true, it is not the only way to obtain consistent long-term health.

In 1965, Professor Charlie Engel, at Virginia Tech was instrumental in implementing a “mothercraft” self-help project in the Philippines.  This project focused on educating the mothers of malnourished children on the right kinds of locally grown foods that could make their children well.  In this project, the preference was to develop peanut crops as the centerpiece of protein.  Peanuts are rich in protein and can be grown most anywhere.  However, there was a problem shown with the peanut crops.  They were contaminated with a fungus-produced toxin known as  aflatoxin (AF).  This toxin is shown to cause liver cancer in rats.  It is the most potent chemical carcinogen ever discovered.  

The sights of older children blinded by malnutrition being led around by younger siblings asking for handouts are common.  Children born without arms and legs was heartbreaking for these scientists.

These sights motivated the scientists to press forward in the research to resolve the problem with AF contamination in peanuts.  Peanuts are the preferred source of protein.  Two grants from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) were obtained.  Dr. Campbell and the other researchers conducted surveys to learn which foods had the most contamination of AF.  They discovered that the local foods with the most contamination were peanut butter and corn.  These foods had 300 times the amount of AF judged for safety in the U.S.  Whole peanuts were not as contaminated.  The moldiest nuts for peanut butter were not removed from the conveyor belt in the processing factories.  These moldy nuts were the ones used for peanut butter.

Dr. Campbell became acquainted with a prominent doctor, Dr. Jose Caedo, who was an advisor to then President Marcos.  Dr. Caedo told Dr. Campbell that there was a serious problem of liver cancer among the children in the Philippines.  Liver cancer was claiming the lives of these children before the age of ten.  The most striking information was, “Namely, the children who got liver cancer were from the best-fed families.  They consumed more protein than anyone else in the country (high quality animal protein) and they were the ones getting liver cancer!”  

How could this be?  We will take a look at this in the next posting.