integral

@Michael569 The first problem is none of them are eating healthy meat this is sick meat found in grocery stores. Contributing it to iron doesn't make any sense there's so many factors, the difference between sick meat and healthy meat that's grass-fed is completely different. You're literally just consuming stress hormone and antibiotics. If the argument is avoiding meat avoids toxins in meat then that's probably true. A lot of studies are showing processed meat creates a lot of problems. The entire conversation we're having is that you take people eating a any diet that is well planned and structured and they're going to be healthy and you take anyone eating a poorly planed diet including the vegans and they're going to be unhealthy. The study did not track whether the people who didn't die were actually healthy. The vegans could have had dementia and it's not part of the study. People who did not eat red meat also had: Diabetes Severe inflammation Nutrient deficiencies Autoimmune conditions Depression or anxiety Cognitive decline Osteoporosis Or simply lived in a chronically unwell state The study still found only a 7–10% relative risk increase in mortality for red meat. That’s a tiny signal one that could easily be statistical noise or residual lifestyle changes or Self-reporting biases. And this is for a bunch of old people! For the fact that it's still garbage meat and not part of our discussion. More importantly some of those people eating red meat didn't die and they might have avoided other diseases because of it but none of this is is part of the equation again it's averaging out everything If a person's genetics will allow them to live the longest on red meat this crucial information is just completely blurred out because you're doing this generalized study and creating generalized conclusions It lacks the individual Tailoring that a diet should have, diets should be tailored to the person. --- The whole problem here is there's no individuality and there's so many cofactors that are trying to demonize meat. The real final interpretation of all of this data is garbage food is bad. > There are some people whose genetics don't allow for veganism to work with them that doesn't matter how you get go about it, it just won't work out for them. At no point are they statistically better off avoiding meat > Do you acknowledge the above sentence?

And all 250,000 people were eating grass fed beef and a balanced, healthy non-processed food diet? If all does people were eating McDonald everyday does that say iron intake is the problem? 😂 Variables not tracked: Eat more fast food or ultra-processed meals Eat fewer vegetables and fiber Exercise less Smoke or drink more Have higher stress levels Live in more polluted environments Have worse sleep Use more medications So what you get is the averaging out of everyone’s genetics, microbiomes, and lifestyles and diversity into a single correlation. so that if 70% of people can only thrive on Hema iron you just don’t see it. If for 30% of people Heme iron avoidance made them sick. It wouldn’t show up in that study. Most people in these cohorts were just eating processed junk, yet the data is treated as if it’s some clean verdict on a specific nutrient. The result is a fractured epistemic signal, generalized, decontextualized, and misused to create sweeping rules for wildly different bodies. That’s why contextual, individualized nutrition always wins over population-level generalizations. Real TLDR: A meta-analysis found that in a population of mostly junk-food eaters, each 1 mg/day increase in heme iron (often consumed with processed meat, fast food, and poor lifestyle habits) was associated with a 7% increase in relative risk for cardiovascular disease. This tells us people eating more garbage had slightly more heart disease, not that heme iron itself causes it. The study didn’t control for quality of diet, genetics, stress, sleep, or lifestyle, it just averaged everything together and blamed the iron. —- It also only tracked cardiovascular problems, which is an obvious Blindspot, the people who avoided iron had other health problems… if it tracked every disease it would reveal that everyone is sick. So the conclusion is you eat unhealthy and you have an unhealthy lifestyle or you have bad genetics or your body isn’t properly adapted to our toxic environment outside of your control then you get sick. But instead, they blamed Iron in a myopic way.

@AION lmao I wouldn’t go as far as you went with this, in her domain of expertise where she put the most energy in she’s fairly insightful. Ironically, that would involve shadow work so any conversation on the shadow we will get the highest level of resistance possible lol It’s a matter of epistemology in the end like why does Sadhguru support Trump? most people need to see some kind of catastrophic failure in their life to realize that their epistemology was wrong instead of learning from other people’s mistakes and avoiding it

Her epistemology is science equals truth and she doesn’t wanna hear anything else. so I used science to show problems with veganism through malnutrition that 50% of vegans are malnourished, then I explained that supplementation doesn’t mean it can resolve these nutrition problems because it’s theoretical not practical and then I use science to explain how correlation doesn’t mean causation and then use science to explain how every diet justifies their beliefs with science. All of this ignored. It’s some kind of shadow conservativism. Like the way a lot of really smart people have some of the worst politics. And when you use the word epistemology they think you’re running around in circles trying to avoid their perfect facts. When really you’re going Meta to resolving the differences between perspectives

Out of all of your good points, you have stupid epistemology in the same way many spiritual people like sadguru support Trump. What is the viable evidence to understand Trump? Cohort scientific studies? 🙄 I just laid out integral, holistic, epistemology, and you shat on it like it was nothing.

You’re treating anything outside your preferred studies as “just anecdote,” but that reveals a misunderstanding of epistemology how we actually know things. In complex, real-world domains like nutrition, we must integrate multiple forms of evidence: empirical, experiential, observational, historical, cultural, and personal pattern recognition. That’s how real people, practitioners, and systems thinkers solve problems that reductionist science can’t fully address yet. When you dismiss all this as invalid because it doesn’t match your meta-analysis, you’re not being scientific, you’re being dogmatic. It’s like someone saying: “We’ve statistically proven heterosexuality leads to higher reproduction rates, so clearly it’s the optimal and natural orientation for everyone. We should outlaw all other forms of sexuality” Its bad logic and it’s epistemically negligent to diversity. Some people actually have to eat meat or they get sick, but you just don't account for this. What I’m arguing for is epistemic pluralism, using all the tools available, not just the ones that confirm an agenda. I'm also arguing within your epistemic domain of only relying on the scientific lens, that you are warping it to just fit your agenda. Every crime known to man was done through the epistemology you are using right now. It's devilish.

Chatgpt has begun shaping culture.

Integral Life Health Plan PDF

Guy does veganism 10 years eventually switches back.. Do not think of this as an anecdote, you have to view this as an epistemic clue to combine it all together. Take the partial truths of every perspective and bring it all together. It's not that he did it wrong... this is such a toxic mindset... Failing to see differences between people. It's ironic that vegans tend to be Pro diversity and inclusiveness but not for diet lmao

The problem with the data is that its Cherry Picked for veganism, people eating unhealthy processed diets filled with processed meat Dairy and eggs have a higher risk of cholesterol problems, arthrosis and high blood pressure, and people eating an unhealthy vegan diet are high risk of a million other things. The studies have nothing to do with specific Foods, they are targeting a large portion of the population for eating garbage and creating statistical correlations. Eating meat and eating cholesterol plays no role whatsoever in clogging your arteries or increasing blood pressure. This is a long-standing myth. The Paleo Community doesn't have this problem, the carnival Community doesn't have this problem, omnivore communities... healthy balanced diets don't have this problem. People eating a healthy Paleo diet are not dying of heart attacks... Can you see the confirmation bias? Take 100 people and feed them whatever diet and most of them would be fine and one of them is going to have a ridiculous artery clogging cholesterol problem. Most of the people I know with high cholesterol and high blood pressure are eating perfectly fine yet their problems are ridiculous. People who have these clogged arteries they have predisposition health conditions genetic problems that make their body just build up cholesterol in their arteries that is not one-to-one correlated with their eating. (but it can be greatly improved with better lifestyle). --- Science does not prove: That veganism works equally well across different genetics, microbiomes, life stages, or health conditions. Anything trying to claim that is using statistics to prove their ideology, a common trap. Every diet community uses science and statistics to prove everything they believe. ^^^ conflation Every healthy diet has the same effect! "It’s not about meat vs plants. It’s about healthy diet and lifestyle vs garbage diet and lifestyle." Im not anti-vegan. Im anti-ideology disguised as science and I'm in favor of individualized tailored nutrition. The idea that veganism works is completely theoretical, they're assuming supplementation is an effective "treatment". Most studies that report high deficiency rates don’t reliably track supplement use. The claim that vegan deficiency “it’s reversible with supplementation” is theoretical, based on what should happen biochemically not necessarily what does happen in real people long-term. There is very little robust, long-term follow-up showing that vegans who correct their nutrient intake via supplements go on to maintain optimal health for 10+ years without new problems emerging. ^^^

Buy a cage that's Unbreakable and then lock yourself inside and take the key and throw it across the room. You now created a limit so you cannot leave the cage and there's no way for you to break that limit. That's basically what a wall is, you can't move your hand past the wall because you created a limit and threw away the key.

Most people that follow a well-planned vegan diet develop health problems within the first year if they get past that point they develop health problems around the 5-year Mark and then after that the 10 year mark then after that they're good because it worked and they're compatible with the diet. | “Where’s the evidence that people who do it right for 10+ years actually thrive, and don’t quietly develop problems?” | The answer is: That data is thin. We have case studies, small samples, and positive outcomes from health-conscious subgroups — but not definitive, large-scale proof. Go on YouTube and watch people talk about the health problems they went through because of the vegan diet. Just keep watching these over and over and over again. The point of this is to accustom the mind to see examples of how this potentially is not working at scale and that people have completely different genetics and dietary compatibilities and this doesn't just work for everyone blindly because science says so. I looked at all the studies that showed veganism well planned pregnancies produce no significant health risk to the child yet it doesn't follow long-term any of this. Long-term is the only thing that matters here, and the studies do not go long enough. ^^^ this is the right mindset to have when going into a vegan diet that illustrates the difficulty of the situation this is not a walk in the park. Its not a situation where anyone could just start doing this at 15 years old and you're just going to thrive on this. This is hard and it requires extensive testing and follow-ups multiple times a year. When its this difficult it is very clear this is a challenging diet. But the vegan Community does not want to hear this, they just go on and on of how simple it is.

You think one diet fits all… so your projecting Only vegans speak in absolutes (insert Star Wars reference)

Kids are entering the fourth fifth and sixth grade being unable to read or write and have absolutely no attention span or ability to comprehend basic things. They must be stimulated by their phone nonstop When I grew up, I was able to just sit and do nothing, those days are long gone

Doesn’t work in practice Doesn’t work in practice Doesn’t work in practice That about sums up every answer you will ever ask on this topic.

I have the same experience on l-theanine. It’s similar to coffee for some people

The guy posted saying eating meat has made him feel fantastic and you vegans are so ideological You literally cannot take this basic perspective into account into your larger worldview. Consider why you can’t understand why eating meat could’ve produced a positive benefit to his life @Emerald

You don’t need to be a vegan to care about your health. Eating discipline comes when you take responsibility for what comes into your body and that has nothing to do with going vegan or not. Every vegan is naturally corrupted by their emotions and agenda. And it’s particularly bad because you’re not eating healthier than most people. It’s complete confirmation bias self-deception. Vegans cannot see the full scope of the problem. That people have completely different genetics, different gut micro biomes, and it’s complex and you cannot just forced a specific diet onto people. It does not work in practice at scale. When a vegan acknowledges this problem, they will have reached the next stage of their development. Then we could have a real discussion about real solutions to the problem and none of that, Is this naïve avoidance of meat. You will literally make the whole planet sick that’s how delusional you are.

Unbalanced perspective

@Schizophonia when climate change becomes a real problem money will be put into removing CO2 from the atmosphere and scientist will invent a simple solution. Like releasing a gas into the air that binds to CO2. The problem is the world’s financial system is not aligned with the problem yet, but when the problem gets big enough that it affects the billionaires life then it’s going to be solved This isn’t a hard problem to solve with innovation scientifically Right now all the billionaires want to become immortal and that will be solved very soon, because AI lol

@manuel bon your health comes first not the environment everyone needs better health and that will then translate to a better environment

I exist therefore I am corrupt

This life has the intelligence so I could “die” which I assume “exits” the dream. If a dream is made where there is no exit then it becomes permanent and nothing else will ever be dreamed again? That seems like special treatment because then that one dream gets all the attention? It’s like locking yourself in a cage with no escape and then you’ll never dream again.

@Leo Gura This is life not infinite horror, so I’m not seeing “evidence” that god would image a horror world. This was imaged not a horror reality, I can see how infinite imagination can create anything, but just because it can I’m not seeing why it would actually do it. Why do it?

@freddyteisen you’ll lose your motivation to do everything… If you have any motivation problems now to have any kind of financial success, it will go to absolute zero after an awakening You have no idea what you’re trading for this it is not just an uphill achievement This is not about achievement You are moving in the opposite direction of achievement No 20-year-olds should be going anywhere near any drug at all. It’s just pointless You’re already super high on biology there is no need to do any of this Just sit there and contemplate. if Leo began his journey at 20 years old, doing psychedelics, he would never have achieved anything And he should be telling you not to do it —— We live in an orange achievement oriented culture, and anyone who is not centred at that point will struggle. Going down the hippie path in your 20s leads to a bunch of problems. You have to buckle down and achieve in your 20s nothing else. But I assume you have a big financial cushion called your parents to help you play around. —- you have never had a real problem in life and which is why you’re going down this path at a super young age, young and dumb All your problems are confident issues and self-esteem and nonsense that you’ll just naturally grow up from if you just put the work in. Psychedelics is not gonna create real growth and development within you. There is no pill to magically grow you up. Realizing God through some grand emotional event is the last thing most people should focus on, you could just contemplate and practice. Real growth comes from years of effort. —- I don’t know anyone that was better off because they experimented with drugs in their 20s. The pattern is the opposite.