Personalizing protein nourishment

Abstract

Proteins are not equally digestible—their proteolytic susceptibility varies by their source and processing method. Incomplete digestion increases colonic microbial protein fermentation (putrefaction), which produces toxic metabolites that can induce inflammation in vitro and have been associated with inflammation in vivo. Individual humans differ in protein digestive capacity based on phenotypes, particularly disease states. To avoid putrefaction-induced intestinal inflammation, protein sources and processing methods must be tailored to the consumer’s digestive capacity. This review explores how food processing techniques alter protein digestibility and examines how physiological conditions alter digestive capacity. Possible solutions to improving digestive function or matching low digestive capacity with more digestible protein sources are explored. Beyond the ileal digestibility measurements of protein digestibility, less invasive, quicker and cheaper techniques for monitoring the extent of protein digestion and fermentation are needed to personalize protein nourishment. Biomarkers of protein digestive capacity and efficiency can be identified with the toolsets of peptidomics, metabolomics, microbial sequencing and multiplexed protein analysis of fecal and urine samples. By monitoring individual protein digestive function, the protein component of diets can be tailored via protein source and processing selection to match individual needs to minimize colonic putrefaction and, thus, optimize gut health.

Modulation of the nutritional value of lupine wholemeal and protein isolates using submerged and solid‐state fermentation with Pediococcus pentosaceus strains

“…plant vs. animal proteins) and processing methods (e.g. various heat treatments, fermentation) (Dallas et al, 2017). Fermentation improves digestibility due to the inactivation of trypsin inhibitors and degradation of other proteins (Feng et al, 2016).…”

A Review of the Role of the Gut Microbiome in Personalized Sports Nutrition

“…Potential factors contributing to discrepancies between studies investigating the effect of exercise on the gut microbiome include aspects of study design (e.g., health or disease status; choice of model; age and gender; mode, duration, and frequency of training; and choice of diet) and analytic methods (e.g., DNA extraction, primer bias, and sequencing method; bioinformatic method; choice of metrics; and what taxa are measured and reported).Proteobacteria phylum(98,99), resulting in end products such as ammonia, amines, phenols, and sulfides as well as some SCFAs that may have systemic and metabolic effects on the host(100,101). Different protein types have been shown to have differential effects on the gut microbiome (102-104) and plant-based vs.…”

Are legume-based recipes an appropriate source of nutrients for healthy ageing? A prospective cohort study

“…By contrast, lectins found in legumes could reduce nutrient absorption and impact health in a detrimental way (41)(42)(43) , which is especially relevant for people with malnutrition, such as frail older adults. In addition, legumes are difficult to digest due to the high-fibre content and their content in trypsin inhibitors and tannins (44,45) . This adds to the fact that legumes are consumed in recipes that include processed meat, salt and potatoes.…”