A major scientific review is challenging the idea that more protein is always better.
The review, led by pathologist and biomedical researcher Dudley Lamming and published in the journal Cell Press Blue, examined more than 350 studies involving humans, mice, insects, yeast, and other organisms.
The review found that eating less protein, or less of certain amino acids that make up protein, may turn on body processes linked to healthier aging, as well as metabolism, the process by which the body turns food and drinks into energy.



Or, they waste decades of time and billions of dollars studying an artifact of rodent biology not relevant to humans. Most rodent research does not work out in humans. They are not universal models of diseases.
If 100% of studies do not lead to direct improvements for humans, then, we must give up all the ones that do because you don’t like that all of them do? That seems counterproductive to me. Because mice studies have absolutely contributed to benefits to humans. That’s why they do them. If they didn’t lead to success, people motivated by trying to improve things for humans AND people motivated purely by profit WOULD NOT DO THEM.
uhh … cellular biology between humans and coconut is like 90% similar … at a fundamental level