Fat vs. protein

[Pajarita]

I am sorry but I don't how you can say that you are the ONLY person that has given any evidence on the subject. I have given lots of links that prove the relationship between protein and fat. You have given lots of links but although they are all very informative and some of them quite technical, not all of them are germane to the subject and none, as far as I can see, have proven that there is no link.

I've also tried to find nutritional charts on green and dry grains and seeds but I can't. The only thing that, apparently, it's harvested while still green is wheat (called 'young' wheat) but even that is toasted (freekeh) and, even if we found comparative values on it, it would not be any good because wheat is not part of any wild parrot original natural diet (although they do eat it now all the time).

[Wolf]

Well I think that I may have enough to begin to support my statements the protein and in particular too much protein is a factor in causing liver and kidney disease as well as possibly heart disease and increased hormonal levels that result in aggression and over stimulation of the sexual organs in parrots. The other things that you have mentioned have little to nothing to do with what I have said except possibly that these same protein level may be a factor in high levels of cholesterol. I requested some time, when this discussion was in another thread, to allow me a chance to rebuild my data base that was lost due to the unfortunate demise of my last computer. Instead of allowing me this time this topic was created and this conversation continued. Since my computer time has been severely compromised by flooring issues and other pressing concerns, I have only been able to research about the relationship of protein to liver disease although there is also some support for a causual relationship to pancreatic distress as well as kidney malfunction and possibly to diabetes. This support is however minimal, but then this part of my information has been focused on the relationship of protein to liver disease.

It has not been my intention at any point in this discussion to refute any evidence that shows a correlation between fat content or carbohydrates levels in relation to liver disease, and in fact, I had not begun to research the effects of either of these substances in relation to liver disease, so I an indebted to both teilfan and Pajarita for supplying all of that related material.

http://www.birdsnways.com/wisdom/ww61eiii.htm

Although it is probably not needed, this links primary purpose is to give a very basic understanding of some of the livers functions. It does bring up a relationship between liver disease and vitamin deficiency, particularly the B vitamin choline. For my purposes the only other thing of interest is that it recommends that a low fat and low protein diet be began as soon as there is a diagnosis of fatty liver disease.

https://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/enc ... 002441.htm

This is one of the limited ones that I have that is on humans and does not include either parrots or any other avian species and it does not provide much information and although it does recommend the reduction of protein intake it also warns of reducing the protein intake by too much as it is still a requirement for the proper functioning of the body.

http://jn.nutrition.org/content/131/7/2014.long

I believe that this was also produced by teilfan. This study is suggestive that although high protein levels are not the cause of gout in cockatiels, high levels of protein in their diet does make the condition worse. it also shows that there was a marked increase in the levels and severity of lesions in the liver concurrent with the increase in the intake of protein through diet and then goes on to state that there needs to be further study in this area.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22139567

This link is of interest as it supports the recommendations in the first, somewhat questionable link, in that it states that both the amount and composition of the proteins ingested have a direct impact on renal function. It goes on to recommend a reduction in dietary protein, particularly that found to be of animal origin. It further suggests that protein from plant sources not only not be decreased but rather increased in relation to some types of liver disease to prevent protein malnutrition.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/article ... 1-0020.pdf

This one is very technical and for me it is out of my league to fully understand. It measures different serum levels of proteins and although it appears to me to show increased levels of various serum proteins, I do not understand it enough to make any comments per se. I leave it up to you to make of it what you will.

http://www.exoticpetvet.net/dvms/fattyliver.html

This one once again describes basic liver function although in a little more depth than the first one. It also recommends a reduction in the dietary intake of both fat and protein in the case of fatty liver disease.

http://lafeber.com/vet/nutritional-mana ... -in-birds/

This also recommends not decreasing the levels of protein except in certain cases, however it does suggest a food that contains both reduced fat and protein while stating there is not enough evidence to support its use.

These are what I have at this present moment. I am still in the process of researching the relationship of high protein to liver disease in parrots, as well as its relationship to certain other diseases and malfunctions that afflict our birds. It is not my primary purpose at this time to predict which of the three main sources of fat in the liver is of the most important as I have yet to see anything that has actually been able to establish this type of relationship as of this point in time, I do however believe that I have at the very least established that there is a not insignificant correlation between high levels of protein and liver and perhaps kidney disease.

[tielfan]

Thank you for finding the links. They do a LOT to clear things up, and I think I know where the confusion came from. These links are all about the treatment of existing liver disease, not the cause of liver disease. A damaged liver can't process protein or perform other functions correctly, so protein intake has to be limited to prevent the buildup of waste products. It's not at all incompatible with the idea that protein doesn't cause disease in a healthy liver.

http://www.birdsnways.com/wisdom/ww61eiii.htm
Says nothing about protein causing FLD, but recommends lowering protein intake AFTER FLD has been diagnosed. This veterinary website http://www.exoticpetvet.net/dvms/fattyliver.html says "High quality pellets that are low in fat and PERHAPS lower in protein are an excellent base for birds with fatty liver problems." So it appears protein intake is not always reduced after diagnosis.

https://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/enc ... 002441.htm
Says "In people with badly damaged livers, proteins are not properly processed. Waste products may build up and affect the brain." This explains why they tell us to reduce protein intake AFTER diagnosis in some cases. No indication that protein causes problems for a healthy liver.

http://jn.nutrition.org/content/131/7/2014.long
Yes, this is the same cockatiel study we've been talking about. If was basically an attempt to induce kidney disease that failed. Says "There was no evidence of visceral gout, articular gout or renal pathology; however liver lesion severity, and specifically liver lipogranuloma severity, was significantly increased above 11% CP". Lipogranulomas are not fatty liver disease however, or any of the other problems that we're talking about (obesity, high cholesterol, cardiovascular problems, high hormones, aggression). 11% crude protein is barely within the minimum desired protein range and here's a paper saying that protein deficiency causes liver lesions in rats: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2041335/

The internet is indicating that liver lipogranulomas are common and generally inconsequential. They're often seen in patients with fatty liver disease but are a separate issue than fatty liver disease. They can derive from fatty change of any kind, whatever that means. The cockatiels in the study certainly had a change in their diet. BTW the diet used in the cockatiel study was a chemical stew that used soy protein isolate to achieve the different protein levels. The fat portion of the diet was provided by soybean oil. There was nothing in the recipe that resembled a whole food in its natural state. I can provide a picture of the table showing the details if you're interested.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22139567
Says that a damaged liver can't process protein correctly and ditto for damaged kidneys. Interestingly it says that people with liver cirrhosis should actually increase protein. That might not mean exactly what it looks like but you'd need the full paper to know for sure.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/article ... 1-0020.pdf
This one's out of my league too. It seems to be related to measuring protein levels in people who have liver disease.

http://www.exoticpetvet.net/dvms/fattyliver.html
I hit this one earlier in the thread before I knew you listed it too.

http://lafeber.com/vet/nutritional-mana ... -in-birds/
Also about pre-existing liver disease. Says " Protein restriction is not required except in cases of liver failure and encephalopathy."

[tielfan]

Here are some interesting comments from the cockatiel study. The paper says the maintenance protein requirement for cockatiels has not been determined experimentally. They considered the 11% control level to be a low protein diet. They don't attach an adjective to the 20% level; apparently it isn't considered to be either low or high, but they say that this level is "often supplied in commercial diets used for breeding, growth and maintenance." It says "The high dietary protein levels of 35 and 70% CP were chosen to ensure that if there was a limit to up-regulation of enzyme activity on nitrogen excretion in cockatiels, a protein toxicity would be reached... These data indicate that levels of CP well above expected maintenance requirements did not cause overt protein toxicity."

Omnivores were mentioned at some point in the other thread. The paper says"Liver and kidney enzymes involved in amino acid catabolism generally increased with increasing protein level... These data suggest that cockatiels are able to upregulate enzymes for amino acid catabolism in a manner similar to that of omnivores."

It talks about the increase in urea levels. "Traditionally, blood urea is considered to have little clinical importance in avian species; however, it has been suggested that this variable may be useful to detect early renal failure." Paraphrasing, it said that with these cockatiels the urea level was correlated to dietary protein but not to kidney disease. It goes on to discuss the high uric acid level in the 70% group but says they showed no evidence of pathology "which suggests that high uric acid concentrations may be indicative of dietary protein concentration and not renal damage." Says that in chickens, gout seems to mainly be caused by a genetic predisposition. High dietary protein will aggravate the disease but does not cause it.

Regarding the liver lesions, they said that locally high levels of ammonia might have induced them. But "we did not observe hyperammonemia, and it is not clear whether the changes in liver histology should be considered an indication of protein toxicity. Serum chemistry values indicative of liver function (albumin, total protein) were within normal limits, indicating no severe functional outcome of the lipidosis. Further research is warranted to evaluate the incidence of liver lipogranulomas on the basis of dietary protein level".

They rated the liver lesions on a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 was least severe and 5 was most severe. The scores ranged from a 1 for the 11% group to a 3 for the 70% group.

[Wolf]

Now I must admit to fluctuating from time to time in my statement on protein being a cause of liver disease an there were times when I said fatty liver disease and times that I just said liver disease. small but sometimes an important distinction, especially when we are getting technical and sometimes it is a moot point. I had originally made a far different post but replaced it a couple of hours later with this one. I am very happy if these links cleared up some confusion for you, but I must admit that they do not do this for me as I am not confused. I only posted these links because you wanted some and to me your post just before mine, made me feel as if you thought that I was not being honest with you about my working to rebuild my database due to the demise of my other computer. For me the links that I provided at this time only serve to illustrate that there is a correlation between liver disease and protein. Just as yours only show that there is a correlation between liver disease and dietary fat and carbohydrates. I have not seen anything that definitively states that dietary fat or carbohydrates are the cause. I am not given to taking this type of information and projecting that they might at some future date discover that protein is a cause of liver disease or that dietary fat is a cause and so on. Do I have thoughts about what I think that they will learn? Indeed I do, but I am not prone to putting such speculation out in public. If I had not read it in at least three different scientific sources that protein was I cause of liver disease then I would never have made the statement, because in my opinion that amounts to speculation and is not the same as a fact.
At this point, I can neither prove or disprove my previous statement and so although, I know what I had read, I can not longer continue to make that statement. I can't prove that the studies were done and were subsequently changed due to new information, I can't say that they were the latest studies and that they validated the theory that protein might have been a cause of any liver disease. At this point I am unable to say one way or the other as to whether protein is a causative factor in liver disease, until I can find either the studies that I had previously read or find new ones to the same effect, I can not validate anything other than there is a link between protein and liver disease. For me this is a very vexing situation, but as I said my research is not complete and so the hunt for supporting evidence continues.

While still on the same topic but a slightly different tangent, one of the studies that I believe that I presented indicates that the particular fat involved in fatty liver disease is not the normal fats stored by carbohydrates, fats or protein in the liver, but is rather triglyceride fat. I had previously read something to this effect, that had sparked my earlier statement that I was interested in triglycerides. It might have even been this study, however I do not think so.

I will get back to you with more links when I am ready as I am still in the process of restoring my files and links on this topic, but at least you know why I was not yet ready to produce the required supporting documentation. I lost three years of information and can't say how long it will take to rebuild it along with any new information that I find along the way.

[tielfan]

There are many potential causes of liver disease, but the scientific community is cautious so you aren't likely to see a definitive statement that this causes that. The mainstream medical/nutritional community says that fatty liver disease is strongly correlated with obesity, which is strongly correlated with overconsumption of calories. In all plant foods, the protein calories are significantly outnumbered by the fat/carb calories, and unless you're really overdoing it, a lot of the protein is going to be diverted to other uses and not used as calories. I don't see why we should specifically blame protein for the problem and not overeating in general, when protein contributes less to the problem than fat and carbs do. This is probably the reason that I haven't seen a mainstream source that considered protein to be a problem, but they do complain about excessive calories and fat in particular. Within a given quantity of food, a higher protein level actually reduces the total calories by occupying space that would otherwise be occupied by higher-calorie fat and/or carbs.

The restrictions required for disease treatment generally don't apply to healthy individuals. As a comparison, people with heart disease may have to restrict their activities because their heart can't handle a normal load. But being active doesn't cause heart disease in healthy individuals, and you can't prevent heart disease by restricting your activities. Quite the opposite in fact. Likewise, dietary protein is restricted in some cases of liver damage because the liver is no longer functioning properly and therefore proteins can't be processed normally. But it's not relevant to what happens when the liver is functioning normally.

[tielfan]

My understanding of triglycerides is limited. But basically it's the main way that fat is stored in the body, not just in the liver but anywhere else that you've got body fat. The fat in meat is body fat so presumably it's mostly composed of triglycerides, but I don't know about the fats in plants, eggs and dairy. It's my understanding that the body generates its own triglycerides as part of the fat metabolism process, so the type of fat that you eat might not have too much to do with it.

When it comes to fat consumption issues, saturated fat is usually considered to be the main all-purpose villain (except in the paleo diet community, where they like saturated fat and hate Omega 6. Long story there lol). But plant foods are low in saturated fat with the exception of coconut and red palm oil. The main fat in most plant foods is Omega 6, and Omega 9 is pretty well represented too.

[tielfan]

I found a couple of papers about liver damage related to protein consumption but they used an abnormal feeding pattern. It might be relevant to humans on some kind of fad diet but no sensible bird owner would do anything like this to their pets.

This paper says 5-day periods of protein starvation alternating with normal protein consumption can cause liver damage: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20878513 I'm guessing that the protein starvation had more to do with it than the normal protein consumption did.

Here's a paper showing that liver damage was caused by 48 hours of fasting followed by consumption of a 40-50% protein diet. So we're looking at total starvation followed by a level of protein consumption that can't be achieved with ordinary plant foods: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21902856

Those links and more were available from this article: https://examine.com/faq/can-eating-too- ... d-for-you/ The summary on protein and the liver is "In healthy persons and rats, there is no evidence to suggest a relatively normal style of protein intake is harmful to the liver when habitually consumed as part of the diet."

It also mentions kidney damage in mice when the protein level in the diet was abruptly changed from 10-15% of the diet to 35-45%. Slower increases are not considered to be a problem for kidney disease.

[Wolf]

At no point am I saying that protein is the only cause of liver disease, one of the links, I provided says that the omnivourous species of birds tended to choose regularly protein sources of above the 10% level of protein, but also noted that granivores tended to choose protein sources of less than 10% while mostly going for even lower levels of close to 8%. If this is true, and closer to 8% protein is what their body is designed to use and we are feeding a protein level of 14% or more, that represents an almost 100% increase in protein levels and over time that is very likely to have a negative impact, but this is speculation.
I have no problem with saying that seeds and pellets fed in excess can lead to liver disease because I already do so most of the time. I use the protein levels mostly in relation to excessive aggression and hormone levels and even then I am not saying that protein causes it but that all of the hormones used in a reproductive capacity are manufactured from proteins and that if there is excessive protein in the diet that some of this protein will be used in the manufacture of these hormones which do lead to continued gonadal growth and to increased aggression. When in fact may statements in this area should probably say that this level of protein may be a factor in these things.

I guess it really comes down to what we do not know enough as we do not know what levels of fat, protein or carbs is likely to contribute how much in any given circumstance. It does not require a large increase of a substance in the body to bring about a large change, which may have something to do with the way these substances interact causing something that is not harmful to become very dangerous.

[tielfan]

The experts say that we shouldn't try to replicate the wild diet, because the wild diet is unsuitable for the average pet bird. A wild bird's needs for calories is disproportionate to its need for everything else. Eating a large amount of high-energy food that is relatively low on other nutrients lets a wild bird accumulate enough of both calories and other nutrients to meet its needs. If you give this same diet to a pet bird, you will either have the right amount of calories but not enough of everything else; or too many calories and the right amount of everything else. For pet birds it's generally desirable to have lower-calorie foods that have higher densities of other nutrients. We need to look at what they need to thrive in captivity not what they need to thrive in the wild.

From the Koutsos et al paper at http://www.bioone.org/doi/abs/10.1647/1 ... 5D2.0.CO;2
"The diets consumed by free-living birds can rarely be duplicated in captivity because the vast range of seeds and other food items are not usually available in sufficient quantities. Even if these food items, or very similar ones, could be obtained, they may still not be nutritionally adequate. This is because birds usually eat a quantity of food necessary to satisfy their energy needs, and free-living birds have to expend considerable energy to support thermoregulation, extensive foraging, defenses, etc... Thus, the amount of food consumed by a free-living bird is much greater than the amount of the same foods consumed by that bird in captivity. However, the daily need for amino acids, minerals, and vitamins is relatively constant regardless of energy expenditure. Therefore, birds in captivity must acquire the same daily quantity of essential nutrients as free-living birds but with much less food consumed. Consequently, the concentrations (g/kg) of amino acids, vitamins, and minerals must be higher in captive diets than wild diets, and food items that might be sufficient for a wild bird can be inadequate for the same bird in captivity. Additionally, birds in the wild do not always have the nutritional wisdom to select adequate diets. Many animals are able to balance energy, amino acid, and calcium levels in their diets by selecting among dietary items, but there is little evidence that animals can select for adequate levels of many other nutrients."

The paper goes on to say that domestic plants skew in the wrong direction.

"The nutritional characteristics of food items from domestic plants are often very different from those from native plants. In general, seeds from domestic plants are more concentrated in energy and lower in protein and many other essential nutrients than seeds available in the wild. Likewise, domestic fruits and vegetables are higher in energy and water but lower in other essential nutrients compared with relatives in the wild."