Pork Rinds: A question about US RDA for protein

[Philster]

I enjoy the occassional snack of pork rinds (spicier the better) . I don’t eat pork rinds because they are zero carbs (although they got quite popular at the height of that lunie craze), rather I eat them because they are tasty, high in protein, and serving size or two doesn’t drastically cut into my calorie count for the day.

Then, curiously, I looked more closely at the USRDA data on the back…hmmmm, while pork rinds provide double digit amounts of protein, the USRDA notes “Not a significant source of protein”. 15 grams is not significant?

Now, anything with double digit protein is considered high in protein!

Lacking any information from the USRDA information, in my infinite wisdom I am left to guess that pork rinds must contain a very incomplete protein, lacking many essential amino acids???

I am surpised, if that is the case, that the folks who set the USRDAs would actually get that specific, yet then fail to mention it.

Also, it makes me wonder: At what point would an incomplete amino acid structure lead to a specific message? In other words, how incomplete would the amino acid structure need to be?

I don’t even know if I am on the right track.

[cher3]

I had a similar issue with a packaged vegetable curry a while back. It was one of those that don’t have to be refrigerated. Essentially it was a bunch of vegetables and spices, including carrot, tomato, peas and a few other things. And yet the nutritional information stated that it wasn’t a significant source of any vitamins. My theory was that some companies may just choose not to have their products evaluated for nutritional merits, beyond what is strictly required.

[gazpacho]

There is protien and then there is protien that usable by the human body.

Because of the discussion of pork rinds, I picked up a bag of the brand I usually eat (“Better Made” brand, from Cross & Peters Co. in Detroit), and it claims to have 5 grams of fat and 8 grams of protein per 1/2 ounce serving. I would imagine most pork rinds have similar numbers. However, the label also has an asterisk next to the 8 gram figure, and says that it’s “Not a significant source of protein.”

What this almost certainly means is that it’s incomplete “junk” protein. There are other such products. A great example is gelatin (as in Jell-O), since gelatin is pure protein but it’s incomplete, junk protein. (Egg shells and hair are also made of protein, but they are not usable in human nutrition). This would probably explain why some brands are listed as “0” protein, because it may be considered non-nutritive protein, or so insignificant as to be considered such by FDA standards. So legally, they probably have the option of either listing it as 0 grams, or listing it as the full amount but nothing that it’s “not significant.”

I am not sure how authoritative this cite is but it is what I found.
http://www.php.com/sigsupplements/ketogenic/keto97.htm

[SmackFu]

Ha!!!