Idk why these charts are never protein per 100 calories.
Seitan is still the best for price/protein/calories if you can find wheat gluten and make it yourself. Peanut butter powder is also better on protein because of how much less fat is in it.
because it's very standard to list nutrients per 100g, deviating from that for an infographic like this would have people assume it's per 100g anyways and become accidental misinformation.
100g of seitan isn't that much seitan and I'd eat that much in a sitting.
I'm never going to eat 100g (588 calories) of peanut butter in a sitting, so it's not really useful for anything. It has twice as much protein per 100g than tofu, yet tofu is a way better food for hitting daily protein goals. So what exactly is this number useful for if higher isn't better?
Serving sizes on nutrition info are arbitrary, but useful for having an idea of how much of something to eat at once. Protein per calorie is more useful for meal planning to hit minimum protein goals.
I don't see how protein per calorie would misinform as long as it's labelled. To me this is more misinforming because of the vastly different serving sizes.
Dang I'm glad I started sorting by all - this is good content!
That's crazy about seitan but it makes sense if I think about it
Seitan is by far my favorite meat substitute and I am glad I am backed up with science.
Seems weird to just mash all these foods together. Not all of these are whole foods so I don't know by what criteria certain things are included or excluded. Also not all protein is created equal. Pea protein is going to be better than wheat protein for example.
Seitan stays winning. I fuckin love that stuff. Really great for stroganoff and fajitas.
