Just a quick one for the nutrition experts: Is the concept of "complete" protein a myth? The reason I ask is that I have read that it is, indeed, a myth that has been debunked (http://www.diseaseproof.com/archives/diet-myths-complementary-protein-myth-wont-go-away.html), yet loads of health and fitness articles still talk as if it hasn't! Am I missing something?
Here's what you need to ask yourself. How many sources can you find supporting that this is a myth, how many sources can you find supporting that it is not a myth. Look up nutritional information, etc.. Regardless, you do need to consume adequate amounts of Essential Amino Acids. From my knowledge, meat remains the most efficient way of doing this. Always beware of cognitive dissonance and intellectual dishonesty.
No its not a myth, your need the full compliment of essential amino acids, this is the reason they're called essential.
What dead-pool said. A complete protein is one that has all essential amino-acids, which the body cannot synthesize (8 in the vast majority of people, if memory serves, but can vary in different situations and stages of life). There are both animal and vegetable sources that contain them, mre so animal sources, and animal sources are generally the most dependable ones while carrying their own health risks when overconsumed. There are only three ways in which the concept of complete protein sources could be bunk: if the body produced all aminoacids (it does not; if proved otherwise, nobel prizes and textbook rewrites would be in order), if no foods had all essential amino-acids (untrue, both animal and vegetable sources have them), or if all foods had them (also untrue, hence why there are specific recommendations as to what to eat to get all the essential AAs).