Compare the DIAAS scores (see a short overview of DIAAS here — https://www.arlafoodsingredients.com/the-whey-and-protein-bl...). Plant-based sources of indispensable amino acids are lacking; that, combined with the sheer amount of water and energy necessary to produce & process them make them a very bad choice indeed, especially set against pastured ruminants, as (primary) protein sources. The suggestions for protein intake in the Mayo article cited by
blacksmith_tb are minimal levels; more (and quality) protein is needed for better health, not merely for getting enough.
If you mean "essential amino acids" when you say "indispensable amino avids", you are wrong as it is not difficult at all to get all essential amino acids from a varied plant-based diet. In fact you only need to eat soy, or mix other legumes with whole grains to get enough of all essential amino acids.
Regarding water and energy needed for plants vs animals, I'm flabbergasted that you are even making this argument, considering that the vast majority of crops goes into feeding animals for meat and dairy. It's far more inefficient to eat meat and dairy than it is to eat plants when it comes to water and energy usage.
And what do mean mean "more protein is needed for better health, not merely for getting enough". Are you saying that "getting enough" protein is not enough to maintain health? Sounds like a contradiction.
"Indispensable" is the language used in the link I sent, so I was shooting for consistency. While it is possible to get what is needed through plants, obtaining protein from animal sources is far more direct, easy to digest, requires less material for the body to work with, and does not carry along the antinutrients (lectins, oxalates, etc.) plant foods so often deliver and which can be quite damaging to humans.
The argument is also not for feedlots, but for pastures — in a post below I argue for getting rid of the grains which we use to feed these animals (which isn't great for them to eat, either). There is good evidence (see Peter Ballerstedt's work for details on this) that pastured ruminants end up generating excellent soil that holds in water and is actually on the good end of things, methane emission-wise (though the problem of emissions from feedlots are greatly overblown as the pollution which comes from planting, harvesting, processing, and distributing plants rarely gets folded into the equation). Funny that.
And, finally, as for "getting enough" — getting enough to get by is not optimal for health. More & better protein is needed for that, and that comes from renewable animal sources which don't require vast expenditures of energy, processing, and which prevent the loss of topsoil while adding to the vitality of the soil. I want everyone to be healthy, and there's a path for that to happen, one which won't be taken if we go down the "plant based" path instead.
Nope. Everyone sees feedlot production as the only way to raise cows, but it's entirely dependent on using the land which could be used for roaming to raise vast quantities of unhealthy grains. Get rid of the corn and bring back pastures. Not only will there be plenty of room to raise excellent & tasty protein from happy cows, the damage done to humans from corn will be significantly lessened. Then we can turn to the problem of wheat...
Compare the DIAAS scores (see a short overview of DIAAS here — https://www.arlafoodsingredients.com/the-whey-and-protein-bl...). Plant-based sources of indispensable amino acids are lacking; that, combined with the sheer amount of water and energy necessary to produce & process them make them a very bad choice indeed, especially set against pastured ruminants, as (primary) protein sources. The suggestions for protein intake in the Mayo article cited by blacksmith_tb are minimal levels; more (and quality) protein is needed for better health, not merely for getting enough.