[lol] It's so obvious that humans are carnivores.

[undeather]

Quote

We agree that statins are over prescribed

Yes and no. 
Again, we laugh about statements like these because it shows the naiveté of a person who does not have any clinical experience.
 

Quote

The environment is a business that over prescribed every drug and statins not existing would improve the quality of life of the majority. 

That's just wrong. No doctor in my hospital get's money from perscribing a statin. Nobody ever told me I have to perscribe a certain drug over recommending lifestyle modification. The truth is that statins are a terrible way of making money as a pharmaceutical company - it's an old drug and generic versions are all over the place. The drugs which make you money, like PCSK-9 inhibtors, are highly regulated. 

Also, iff you would read any current guideline, you will notice that lifestyle is still the basis of any further intervention. Only in high risk indivudals, further drug treatment is necessary. All this is based on actual data and we can talk about this as well if you want. 
 

 

Quote

Take them yourself and ill respect what you have to say.

I would immediatly if I had to.
I take antihypertensive medicine because I have a rare genetic disroder - and guess what, I feel completely fine. 

 

Quote

Thousands? What do you think your accuracy rate is on that? The thing is you don't even think it matters if they need it or not because you think there are no side effects, its harmless. The foolishness of the entire industry is revealed right there. 

Yes, propably. 
I have been practicing for years as an internal med. doctor and statins are one of the most perscribed drugs. I perscribe them at least once a day when I am doing rounds. Any older person with a fucked up lipid profile gets a statin for protection. That adds up. 

Of course they have side effets. Every drug does. No drug is harmless. But thats not the point. 
The data is showing a benificial effect is just overwhelming. Not implementing a statin would do more harm. Again, if people manage to get to their ApoB goal without statins, than thets even better - cheers to that. But that's just not how it works outreality. People need drugs and it's good that we have them. If you have a good coutnerpoint to that, then please tell me.

Whats your experience with side effects? How many people have you treated?
Your point of view would change if you are actually involved with patients every day, trust me. 

Edited April 27, 2023 by undeather

[integral]

42 minutes ago, undeather said:

Again, we laugh about statements like these because it shows the naiveté of a person who does not have any clinical experience.

42 minutes ago, undeather said:

That's just wrong. No doctor in my hospital get's money from perscribing a statin. Nobody ever told me I have to perscribe a certain drug over recommending lifestyle modification. In fact, if you would read any current guideline, you will notice that lifestyle is still the basis of any further intervention. Only in high risk indivudals, further drug treatment is necessary. All this is based on actual data and we can talk about this as well if you want. 

If does patients where left alone with not treatment what would happen? 

There is no need for financial incentive, your already prescribing them once a day based on your belief system. The business component effects culture that effects the paradigm doctors view health. 

42 minutes ago, undeather said:

I would immediately if I had to.

Take them while your healthy. 

42 minutes ago, undeather said:

I have been practicing for years as an internal med. doctor and statins are one of the most perscribed drugs.

How can they possibly not be over prescribed, its very clear that your not intimate with any of these patients over the long term and likely see them occasionally, you asses there state as "still alive" and go on with your life.

42 minutes ago, undeather said:

if people manage to get to their ApoB goal without statins, than thets even better - cheers to that.

How could they be given a chance to do that when the moment they come into contact with you they are put on drugs. 

42 minutes ago, undeather said:

People need drugs and it's good that we have them. If you have a good coutnerpoint to that, then please tell me.

Yes, your not following up on any of them, you dont understand the effects any of these drugs had on the quality of there life or mental state. If they die or have complications you don't believe it has anything to do with your practice, in fact you believe you helped them live longer. 

There is no indication that putting them on statins changed anything. They lived there entire lives with out statins up to the point they met you, now they suddenly need intervention? Why would that intervention be better then nothing at all?  

42 minutes ago, undeather said:

Whats your experience with side effects? How many people have you treated?
Your point of view would change if you are actually involved with patients every day, trust me. 

My father was put on statins and blood pressure medication at 15, his brother rejected the doctor advice, they both had very high blood pleasure. At 40 my father had a stroke, his brother didnt. At 60 my father is on 30 different medications, his brother is on 1 anti-rejection. They both have polycystic kidney disease and had there kidneys removed and donor transplant. From this experiment I came to the conclusion that statins or blood pressure medications cause hardening of the arteries (father) for long term use. I also came to the conclusion that doing nothing can be better or wiser then intervention. 

How do you know statins don't raise cortisol? Contributing to mood issues (anger)? Are a stressor and agitant on the system. The statin needs to be tested on healthy people and metric not related to cholesterol need to be tracked. 

Edited April 27, 2023 by integral

[undeather]

Quote

 

If does patients where left alone with not treatment what would happen? 

There is no need for financial incentive, your already prescribing them once a day based on your belief system. The business component effects culture that effects the paradigm doctors view health. 

 

We dont need to ask the question - we have the answer.
Thats what randomized, controlled trials are for. You randomize patients in 2 homogenous groups and treat one with statins, the other with placebo. Then you follow them up for some years and ovserve what happens. This has been repeated propably hundreds of times - different groups, pharma-independent and completely in concordance with epidemiological observations (increased life-span in countries with increased healthcare output).

See, I dont need a believe system. It's you that creates the believe. I base my decision on the best available data & my expereince as a docotor.
I agree with you that culture effects the paradigm doctors view health - but then again, this is exactly the issue I described in my previous post: Dont throw the baby out with the bathwater. True integral medicine INVOLVES studies, data & drugs and does not shunt it on any way or form. 

Quote

How can they possibly not be over prescribed, its very clear that your not intimate with any of these patients over the long term and likely see them occasionally, you asses there state as "still alive" and go on with your life.

If you have a lung infection with a deadly bacteria, do I need to know you intimately to perscribe you an antibiotic? No, of course not. It will just help because we know it helps. 

It's generally true that our modern medical system lacks in interpersonal relationships between doctors and patients but thats a different issue. 
Also, this is not always the case. I grew up on the countryside and there was 1 general practitioner responsible for the whole village. He was part of everyone's family basically - and guess what, he was perscribed all the medications as well - because he saw it helped. 
 

Quote

How could they be given a chance to do that when the moment they come into contact with you they are put on drugs

Again, a complete misconception of actually practicing medicine.
I dont just "put them on drugs" - I think about their risk profile and tell them the smartest choiced based on all the evidence and my experience. This ALWAYS involves lifestyle modification as the most important pillar because it's highly effective. But I dont know at this moment in the hopsital how far they are willing to go with that - and frankly, if you had ANY experience at all, you would know that most people just dont give a shit. 

Also, it's perfectly fine to go off a statin medication once they implemented healthy lifestyle behaviour. Maybe they can reach their lipid goals without them, maybe they wont.

Quote

 

Yes, your not following up on any of them, you dont understand the effects any of these drugs had on the quality of there life or mental state. If they die or have complications you don't believe it has anything to do with your practice, in fact you believe you helped them live longer. 

There is no indication that putting them on statins changed anything. They lived there entire lives with out statins up to the point they met you, now they suddenly need intervention? Why would that intervention be better then nothing at all?  

 

Of course we are following up patients - university hopsitals have statistics about all sorts of stuff.
Private practice physicians see the same patients all the time and that includes when they report medication side effects. Do you think we are idiots? 

Yes, there is a shitload of data showing that statins WILL change things. How can you ignore all the studies just like that? 
But I guess this is all big industiry sponsered right? (Which is not the case if you had any clue at all). 

What do you mean lived the entire lives without statins? This is about RISK and PREVENTION in the FUTURE. 
We want to PREVENT that heart attack that's been building up for years in the coronary artery.
We want to PREVENT that stroke that would create a big hole in the family. 
This is insane logic my friend. 

 

Quote

 

My father was put on statins and blood pressure medication at 15, his brother rejected the doctor advice, they both had very high blood pleasure. At 40 my father had a stroke, his brother didnt. At 60 my father is on 30 different medications, his brother is on 1 anti-rejection. They both have polycystic kidney disease and had there kidneys removed and donor transplant. From this experiment I came to the conclusion that statins or blood pressure medications cause hardening of the arteries (father) for long term use. I also came to the conclusion that doing nothing can be better or wiser then intervention. 

How do you know statins don't raise cortisol? Contributing to mood issues (anger)? Are a stressor and agitant on the system. The statin needs to be tested on healthy people and metric not related to cholesterol need to be tracked. 

 

See, this is a perfect example how you create your believe system. From 1 ancedote. 
You father and your brother do not have the same genetics - even if they were twins, there are many more components that would make such correlations extremely complicated. I can come up with dozens of counter-examples. It literally doesn't matter. Anecdotes are valuable but you can't just pull up a whole worldview from them. 

I cant help you if you think this is good sensemaking. 

Statins have been tested on healthy people. Again, you lack knowledge.
No I can not preclude any weird side effects that might occur in some patients - I have to take the (sometimes imperfect) data we have and work with it. And that data clearly shows that statins safe lives.

 

Edited April 28, 2023 by undeather

[M A J I]

18 hours ago, Asayake said:

Are you serious? This sounds like a meme but if you're serious I think it's highly unlikely it was because of low cholesterol, that sounds more like carnivore propaganda in my ears rather than scientifically sound. Perhaps you ate too little calories because vegan foods tends to be less calorically dense and eating too little could increase your cortisol levels and perhaps mess with your erections.

@integral There is some truth to this because once you let go of "animals" your consciousness rises to the (higher-chakras) more so, so you are less stimulated and activated in the (lower energy centers) and become more (heart based). This is why after years of veganism you feel much more compassionate, understanding, loving and caring, and much less aggressive and animal-like, by consuming plants you are actually becoming (HUMAN) while most people are still (ANIMAL) hence the need and craving for animal products. Its the easier route to take in the modern day.

Now on a metaphysical/spiritual level, this is just the plants teaching you (energetically) that sex is a 'lower conscious behavior' when there is no 'true love' behind it. When you find someone you truly love, you will be turned on but not sexually aroused and erections will be more meaningful rather than premature erections with excess animal/substance in your system.

Edited April 28, 2023 by M A J I

[integral]

@undeather Studies provide data that is interpreted by the paradigm they view health. Its a interpretation problem and a misunderstanding of what that data is pointing to. Improved blood tests is not a good indication of improved health. Statins will improve one metric in the system while unbalancing another that is not being tracked. 

The problem with all data focused approach's is what a study says at face value is not the issues its the epistemology behind the observer (you). There are conflicting interpretations of all these studies, the more conscious the observer the more counter-intuitive and ambiguous these studies start to become, they are not pointing to what you think they are pointing to. 

 

5 hours ago, undeather said:

Yes, there is a shitload of data showing that statins WILL change things. How can you ignore all the studies just like that? 

What do you mean lived the entire lives without statins? This is about RISK and PREVENTION in the FUTURE. 
We want to PREVENT that heart attack that's been building up for years in the coronary artery.
We want to PREVENT that stroke that would create a big hole in the family. 
This is insane logic my friend. 

Medication for prevention paradigm is a bad strategy. It doesn't work in practice or at scale. They still have heart attacks on or of statins, they will still have heart attack with perfect blood tests. Long term effects of medication is poorly tracked. 

5 hours ago, undeather said:

See, I dont need a believe system. It's you that creates the believe. I base my decision on the best available data & my expereince as a docotor.

Anecdotes are valuable but you can't just pull up a whole worldview from them. 

Its not that your worldview is based on data, its data is used to support your worldview. its backwards. At some point from life experience and preferences led you to think about health in a specific way then data was there to provide support for it, that mixed with believing what these studies suggest with out realizing the deceptive nature of truth.

Every carnivore diet doctor will interpret studies to show cholesterol is healthy and lowing it with statins doesn't work. People believe what ever they want to believe with this data. A better approach is to try to learn from every camp and see what results each one is getting.

A doctors position prevents them from doing any real inquiry into truth, there job is a practical matter and have to work with what they have and what they where thought up to that point. With thousands of diseases to worry about its impossible to figure out what part of there education is true or not. There are only a handful of doctors that are deeply question what they know and carefully figuring out what works and what doesn't, but because of the Eco chamber and demonization of any doctor with a new perspective all progress ignored.

I'm sure there are plenty of treatment methods you disagree with like how mainstream doctors handles crohn's diseases or any digestive issue is basically shrouded in ignorance.

So why are statins so firmly true in your eyes and not these other treatment methods coming out of the mainstream? A interpretation of studies? Experience? A more holistic perspective? 

 

5 hours ago, undeather said:

Statins have been tested on healthy people. Again, you lack knowledge.
No I can not preclude any weird side effects that might occur in some patients - I have to take the (sometimes imperfect) data we have and work with it. And that data clearly shows that statins safe lives.

Data doesn't show anything, your creating the truth.

Edited April 28, 2023 by integral

[integral]

around 3:00 "lowering your ldl cholesterol these researchers found that there was no consistent relationship between lowering ldl c with a statin and your risk of death, heart attack or stroke"

Long term risks of statins use "Lower testosterone levels, higher glucose, lower CoQ10, muscle pain and worse"

Alternative opinion on statins from a heart surgeon

Edited April 28, 2023 by integral

[Schizophonia]

On 26/04/2023 at 5:20 PM, Eyowey said:

There's an agenda for people to eat meat as far as I can tell. Children eat fruit shaped candy made from pork fat instead of actual fruit. They are made to be so sweet that actual fruit seems boring in comparison. Only the devil would invent something like this.

Wtf, where do you live?
Where I am there are sweets but they are made with normal vegetable fats.
Obviously pork gelatin for "gummy" products (Haribbot bears...) and dairy products, but that's it. It doesn't stop people from eating fruit.

 

If your reward system is wired to look for excitement inflammation, you're in trouble.
When I was little and very stressed, I was overweight and loved to stuff myself with high calorie things.
When my stress decreased and my lifestyle was more pleasant, my tastes directly veered towards sweeter things (fruits, fruit candies/cakes, spiced dishes, any "refined" dishes, etc.).
It didn't take the slightest effort.

On 27/04/2023 at 0:26 AM, Jannes said:

Why is supplementation bad? I agree with you that its not natural but if it works physiologically where is the problem?

Exactly, there is no problem.
I am not saying that complementing each other is a problem, I am saying that complementing each other is further proof that man is not a herbivore, nor an omnivore "with an erbivorous tendency".

Quote

Quick google search will do.

Or here: https://ods.od.nih.gov/factsheets/Omega3FattyAcids-Consumer/

You didn't read your link.
The article explains the daily needs in omega 3 (including ALA), what they are used for and the consequences of the lack of their consumption.

Your statement was "carnivores lack ALA"
He's not saying that carnivores (or humans for that matter) have a deficiency problem.

Quote

ALA is essential

You didn't read your link.
The article explains the daily needs in omega 3 (including ALA), what they are used for and the consequences of the lack of their consumption.

Your statement was "carnivores lack ALA"
It's not saying that carnivores (or humans for that matter) have a deficiency problem and that's very unlikely if you're liberal with fats and especially shellfish.
Having a meat-based diet does not prevent you from eating nuts or easily digestible vegetables, whose membrane contains o3 ALA.
Even Vonderplanitz also had a formula based on walnuts ah ah.

Quote

 

Do you think by eating insects we could get enough b12? 

Probably, according to the amount you eat of course.

Quote

 

That's not what I said that humans are adapted to herbivorous diet and I didn't see it as that important. But I get your reasoning now. Your whole argumentation about what is natural or not is so important to you because that's what you think matters 100% to good health. Natural = Health.

Yes I would agree that humans are not perfectly adapted to a herbivorous diet. I would say that they are adapted to a cooked omnivore diet. So IF your point Natural = Health is true then I would agree that herbivorous diets are unhealthy. You haven't convinced that we are carnivores though. 

Anyways I got a few arguments against "Natural = Health":

This was an argument I already made. Even if you are adapted to diet A, these adaptions could accidentally also be usable for diet B. Like a sprinter is adapted for sprinting but is also a great jogger. 

If physiologically certain unnatural things like supplementation work well or physiologically some things don't work so well like to much colestoral on tons of meat then isnt that more believable then our background story?

Just because we survived on some things in the past doesn't mean we thrived on it or that it was the best diet for us it just means it was enough to get by and reproduce. 

Our biology is long and complicated. The human phase wasn't all our past. There are probably still even some adaptions we got from our biological mouse phase. So it's not really clear to say what we perfectly are adapted to. 

All that is natural is not good, man has evolved to adapt to his environment which was a part of nature.
There are artificial things that come close to this part of nature and won't pose too many problems for the body.
I have no problem with a can of redbull, it's not very nutritious (although vitamin enriched) but easily digestible and pleasant, basically a substitute for what you are adapted to in nature (fruits, fruit juices, honey ...).

Most of the world's gastronomy has been built on this idea of survival and is based on well-prepared sources of starch (soaking, cooking, grinding, mixing with fats, etc.), seasonal plants low in fiber and well cooked etc.
The typical Western/Central European diet has been basically based for thousands of years on animal products but also "sweet" well-cooked vegetables, grains, potatoes and various well-cooked starches with fat for taste and intestinal health, white bread or sourdough rye, etc. etc.

The body works with all of this, the real question is what will happen if you start thinking you're a gorilla, go against your senses, and start consuming large amounts of legumes and very fibrous, or just low-density vegetables? nutritionally.
At best your diet will become a nightmare especially if you have to consume large amounts of calories, at worst it will trigger intestinal discomfort, large amounts of gas, constipation, carabral fog due to endotoxins leaking through your barrier bowel, muscle wasting etc etc.

And, as I have already said before, a fruit diet is also not pleasant and is disgusting, frugivores force themselves by ortorexia and, like starchivores, gorge themselves on smoothie banana dates, "nicecream" etc.
Even freelee banana girl (who is nevertheless quite orthorexic at the base) ended up adding a descent quantity of nuts / avocados (which are almost impossible to find in nature, as a reminder...), because all these carbs ad nuauseam are boring .

Quote

Although it doesn't make up a huge time span relatively speaking there are still some adaptations we got in the last few thousand years ago. When your diet changes radically I think you can make very fast adjustments. For example in the scientific literature a dog is literally considered an omnivore just because we fed dogs so much veggies over the years because meat was to valuable that dogs became omnivores with almost as good veggie digesting capabilities as pigs. Of course not as great but pretty good. And given that humans were not straight carnivores like pigs we probably developed a lot further because our starting point was more in the direction of plant eater in the first point. 

It is probably the opposite that happened to homo sapiens.
Primates (plant based) who have been forced to adopt a meat-rich diet due to various violent climatic changes.
Men still have primate/herbivore characteristics such as teeth, but have also and above all developed carnivore traits, such as a lean and slender physique, more gynoid muscle distribution in general, a more efficient ENT system, greater sweating capacity , stiffer feet and ankles (propulsion), stronger stomach acid for protein digestion (even more than dogs), intestines still large but smaller than other herbivores/primates, more developed gallbladders, high production of protease/ lipase etc
The gallbladder is also developed in humans and I have seen many people develop gallbladder problems on a low fat diet.

Quote

I mean you have a few options like nut and seed bread with avocado or more nut butter, salads with olives, roasted veggies with oil, tahini dressings, scrambled tofu stuff, soy yoghurt. It's not great but also not a nightmare I think. 

Agree

But back to the starting point, you need to excessively tweak, fix, and season your vegan diet to make it enjoyable.

Quote

yeah that is dumb af, please take examples of educated people from the vegan community. 

Incidentally, none of the plants you mentioned exist in nature. And excess polyunsaturated fats can decrease androgen sensitivity, increase estrogen signaling, create more oxidative stress during their beta oxidations than saturated fatty acids, or even glucose oxidation.
The matrix should theoretically help to compensate for these problems (polyphenols, vitamin e...) but this is only a theory.
There was a time when I ate a lot of nuts and my skin/hair was in bad shape.
It may be a coincidence but I'm not the only one having these problems.
It also depends on the nuts, of course.

Quote

Do you have a link?

In fact, most of them are just amino acids that are not very present in plants.

Quote

great apes, elephants, parrots, .. 

and some carnivores are some of the dumbest animals on the planet like crocodiles. 

If there is a survival benefit to intelligence animals become more intelligent no matter what their diet is and if not they stay dumb no matter what their diet is. At least that's my observation. 

The fact is that none of these carnivorous or herbivorous animals come even remotely close to human intelligence, and that intelligence is enabled by an exceptionally large amount of certain omega 3s.
Probably for membrane fluidity (or passage of electrons) even simpler than omega 6s, something like that.

Quote

I like the taste of veggies

No.
You like fruits, tubers and a handful of well-cooked vegetables, the majority of which have been selected and hybridized.

Quote

and there is nothing wrong with causing gas actually. Animals in nature fart all the time. The gas becomes unpleasant and irritating if we don't allow ourselves to get it out by farting which is the real problem. 

There's a difference between sometimes having gas, and turning into a human jet pack.
Depending on your genetics, too much fibrous food will turn you into a human hydrogen bomb and maybe cause you SIBO.

Quote

Yeah but what's the problem? Humans naturally cook things.

Was it meat or plants for that matter? 

 

Quote

With only veggies it's unrealistic but with grains included no problem. Why LF though? 

If you think humans are rather herbivorous then you will think HCLF is ideal, both through HCLF propaganda (McDougall, Furhman, Esselstyn...) and, above all, quite simply because there is no abundant sources of vegetable fats in nature.
You have nuts, avocados and coconuts thanks to globalization.

Quote

 

Isnt tamari like soy sauce. I don't understand. 

Sorry I meant Tamarind

Quote

I wonder how things are if we would be really really hungry. Like if I eat a bunch of chocolate I love the taste of some natural veggie soup but if I am really hungry that really isnt doing anything for me I just want calories and cooked grains would be very appealing to me. 

There is a youtubeur on youtube who made a video about his past as a frugivore with Sv3rige. He explained that once in a state of cachexia, almost to the point of death, he had had a terrible instinctive craving for butter and raw chicken.

Another anecdote: a controversial French naturopath who explained that he too had fallen into a state of cachexia, with tuberculosis and pancreatic disease.
He explained that he did a blind instinctotherapy "test" among lots of foods, and was attracted the most by a very fatty piece of pork, even though he was more or less vegan.
He gained weight and recovered from his chronic illnesses on a "primal" diet. (mainly meat and fruit).

Do what you want with it. 

Quote

oh okay

I asked chatgpt in which cases carnivores leave some of their loot and its either because they can't eat it all at once, they can't digest it all, some parts are toxic for the animal or certain tactical behavior. 

I don't think it would be either one of these reasons for humans because they could eat it all together in a tribe and by cooking the meat most parts should loose their toxicity. 

Probably.

Quote

I am no specialist but it doesn't seem to me that it is one of the other reasons. 

So yeah weird that humans don't like the taste of organ meats if they are well adapted to it 

So they probably aren't really.
It depends on the organs and the preparation afterwards.

Quote

Given the fact that we couldn't get EPA and DHA I would agree with you there. 

How much fish was really needed isnt clear though, it could have been relatively little. 

Several times a week.
Most people lack omega 3.

Quote

.. damn took me more then an hour to answer all that. I hope you don't make any good points anymore 

 

This kind of discussion never ends ah ah, it's a black hole of energy. 

Edited April 28, 2023 by Schizophonia

[Schizophonia]

Statins will break your ability to heal wounds, to recover your muscles, will penalize your insulin sensitivity etc etc.

If you're so scared of LDL why not just eat more fiber and less saturated long chain fat?

Inulin smoothie 

Edited April 28, 2023 by Schizophonia

[Jannes]

5 hours ago, Schizophonia said:

Exactly, there is no problem.
I am not saying that complementing each other is a problem, I am saying that complementing each other is further proof that man is not a herbivore, nor an omnivore "with an erbivorous tendency".

Agree

Quote

You didn't read your link.
The article explains the daily needs in omega 3 (including ALA), what they are used for and the consequences of the lack of their consumption.

Your statement was "carnivores lack ALA"
It's not saying that carnivores (or humans for that matter) have a deficiency problem and that's very unlikely if you're liberal with fats and especially shellfish.
Having a meat-based diet does not prevent you from eating nuts or easily digestible vegetables, whose membrane contains o3 ALA.
Even Vonderplanitz also had a formula based on walnuts ah ah.

I thought the carnivores diet is defined as 100% animal based. 

If you can eat plants then of course I agree. 

Quote

Probably, according to the amount you eat of course.

So vegans need B12 from meat 

Quote

All that is natural is not good, man has evolved to adapt to his environment which was a part of nature.
There are artificial things that come close to this part of nature and won't pose too many problems for the body.
I have no problem with a can of redbull, it's not very nutritious (although vitamin enriched) but easily digestible and pleasant, basically a substitute for what you are adapted to in nature (fruits, fruit juices, honey ...).

Most of the world's gastronomy has been built on this idea of survival and is based on well-prepared sources of starch (soaking, cooking, grinding, mixing with fats, etc.), seasonal plants low in fiber and well cooked etc.
The typical Western/Central European diet has been basically based for thousands of years on animal products but also "sweet" well-cooked vegetables, grains, potatoes and various well-cooked starches with fat for taste and intestinal health, white bread or sourdough rye, etc. etc.

The body works with all of this, the real question is what will happen if you start thinking you're a gorilla, go against your senses, and start consuming large amounts of legumes and very fibrous, or just low-density vegetables? nutritionally.
At best your diet will become a nightmare especially if you have to consume large amounts of calories, at worst it will trigger intestinal discomfort, large amounts of gas, constipation, carabral fog due to endotoxins leaking through your barrier bowel, muscle wasting etc etc.

And, as I have already said before, a fruit diet is also not pleasant and is disgusting, frugivores force themselves by ortorexia and, like starchivores, gorge themselves on smoothie banana dates, "nicecream" etc.
Even freelee banana girl (who is nevertheless quite orthorexic at the base) ended up adding a descent quantity of nuts / avocados (which are almost impossible to find in nature, as a reminder...), because all these carbs ad nuauseam are boring .

Yes I agree that through cooking our diet changed a lot and people thinking we should go back to nature and eat lots of raw leaves and fiber are actually wrong because that's not even natural for us. We are not apes living with technology we are homo sapiens living with technology and there quite a big difference between these two. 

I don't think a gorilla would eat a lot of legumes. There are many cultures where people eat a lot of legumes. I feel great on legumes. Yes you have to poop more often and maybe sometimes fart but that's not a health problem it's rather a problem of society thinking its better than animals and repressing these certain natural primitive things. 

I am not saying anybody can eat a lot of legumes though. Some people simply haven't built the gut bacteria for it and other people will never be able to adapt to it because of genetics. Do you have links for these health problems though? Most of them don't seem true at all for me. Especially muscle wasting lol. Legumes are literally a great protein source. 

And you don't have to eat a ton of legumes as a vegan. You can build more around starches, pseudo grain, tofu, nuts, seeds, veggies, fruits. You can eat that very well prepared with moderate amount of fiber and still get your nutritional needs met with a little bit of supplementation. 

Yeah fruit diets are dumb af, that's not what an educated vegan would eat. 

Quote

It is probably the opposite that happened to homo sapiens.
Primates (plant based) who have been forced to adopt a meat-rich diet due to various violent climatic changes.
Men still have primate/herbivore characteristics such as teeth, but have also and above all developed carnivore traits, such as a lean and slender physique, more gynoid muscle distribution in general, a more efficient ENT system, greater sweating capacity , stiffer feet and ankles (propulsion), stronger stomach acid for protein digestion (even more than dogs), intestines still large but smaller than other herbivores/primates, more developed gallbladders, high production of protease/ lipase etc
The gallbladder is also developed in humans and I have seen many people develop gallbladder problems on a low fat diet.

I think what's important for health is what is happening in our gut. 

Quote

Agree

But back to the starting point, you need to excessively tweak, fix, and season your vegan diet to make it enjoyable.

ketogenic-vegan-diet       just as an example of what's possible but not the go to vegan diet. 

Well we had that argumentation before. Most people still season their meat. Also high calorie food such as fatty meat or fish taste good universally because of lots of calories and that this an an unfair comparison even though I don't mind the taste of unseasoned veggies, find some legumes and starches by themselves pretty enjoyable and I like fruit. And if I were really hungry I would probably love all these foods. 

Quote

Incidentally, none of the plants you mentioned exist in nature. And excess polyunsaturated fats can decrease androgen sensitivity, increase estrogen signaling, create more oxidative stress during their beta oxidations than saturated fatty acids, or even glucose oxidation.
The matrix should theoretically help to compensate for these problems (polyphenols, vitamin e...) but this is only a theory.
There was a time when I ate a lot of nuts and my skin/hair was in bad shape.
It may be a coincidence but I'm not the only one having these problems.
It also depends on the nuts, of course.

The matrix?

Omega3 fatty acids are literally a subset of polyunsaturated fats

Do you know what you are talking about with all that?

It's true though that a high omega6 to omega3 ratio in your diet can cause problems like inflammation and not so great skin can also be attributed to that. So yeah a good amount of fish or a good amount of o3 supplementation is important for good health. 

Edit: Ideally the ratio should be 1:1 although almost nobody even comes close to this and most of the greatest minds probably don't have that ratio either. 

Although it's pretty rare too much omega3 is also bad for health. So fish should be balanced out with plant fat sources. 

Quote

In fact, most of them are just amino acids that are not very present in plants.

All essential amino acids can be found in plants in good quantities. 

Quote

The fact is that none of these carnivorous or herbivorous animals come even remotely close to human intelligence, and that intelligence is enabled by an exceptionally large amount of certain omega 3s.
Probably for membrane fluidity (or passage of electrons) even simpler than omega 6s, something like that.

All animals that eat fish aren't as intelligent as humans. 

So this "If there is a survival benefit to intelligence animals become more intelligent no matter what their diet is and if not they stay dumb no matter what their diet is. At least that's my observation." still stands. 

Also I wouldn't discount animals so quickly. Many animals have incredible problem solving abilities. Our natural environment which is very intellectual makes us a lot more intelligent just by itself. If animals would have the same cognitive tasks each day suited to their species then I think they would be far more intelligent. And even if not as intelligent as humans they still got intelligence somehow without fish. So it's wrong to say that omega 3s enable intelligence. If that were the case no plant eater would ever reach any level of intelligence. 

Quote

No.
You like fruits, tubers and a handful of well-cooked vegetables, the majority of which have been selected and hybridized.

I like pretty much ll veggies in cooked form and many of them raw by themselves. Your taste buts adapt to what you eat you now. 

Yes most of them have been selected and hybridized.

But it's the same for animals. 

Quote

There's a difference between sometimes having gas, and turning into a human jet pack.
Depending on your genetics, too much fibrous food will turn you into a human hydrogen bomb and maybe cause you SIBO.

I can eat more than 100g of dried red lentils in cooked form sometimes without having to fart once when I am relaxed. I can eat a lot more legumes a day although then I need to fart but I don't get stomach problems below like 300g of dried matter. My gut is definitely adapted to it but it might also be genetics. 

Quote

Was it meat or plants for that matter? 

Both

Quote

If you think humans are rather herbivorous then you will think HCLF is ideal, both through HCLF propaganda (McDougall, Furhman, Esselstyn...) and, above all, quite simply because there is no abundant sources of vegetable fats in nature.
You have nuts, avocados and coconuts thanks to globalization.

seeds, everything has a little bit of fat in it, .. no clue if in the end that would be enough. But we need relatively little fat to be healthy. It can be as low as 10% of your calories coming from fat and that is still considered healthy (if its good fat sources).

Quote

Sorry I meant Tamarind

oh okay. Doesn't that taste like a sugar bomb? I loved the taste when I once had it. 

Quote

There is a youtubeur on youtube who made a video about his past as a frugivore with Sv3rige. He explained that once in a state of cachexia, almost to the point of death, he had had a terrible instinctive craving for butter and raw chicken.

Another anecdote: a controversial French naturopath who explained that he too had fallen into a state of cachexia, with tuberculosis and pancreatic disease.
He explained that he did a blind instinctotherapy "test" among lots of foods, and was attracted the most by a very fatty piece of pork, even though he was more or less vegan.
He gained weight and recovered from his chronic illnesses on a "primal" diet. (mainly meat and fruit).

Do what you want with it. 

If I just hear names like Sv3rige or Freelee the banana girl I know you listen to very uneducated people. 

Sorry to say it so harshly. 

They are extremist on both sides. 

You filled your mind with trash from listening to these people.

If you want to listen to good vegan YouTubers listen to someone like Derek from Simnet nutrition. Just someone who actually studied that shit. 

Quote

Probably.

So they probably aren't really.
It depends on the organs and the preparation afterwards.

yeah

Quote

Several times a week.
Most people lack omega 3.

yeah but even lets say 3 times a week fish and the rest plants. That could be as little as 5% of calories. 

Quote

This kind of discussion never ends ah ah, it's a black hole of energy. 

We keep on finding new points aargh 

 

I mean we got at least this far. We both agree that we are adapted to a cooked omnivores diet because of omega3s ALA and EPA/DHA. 

Supplementing can be pretty as healthy as the real things even though it is not as natural although humans kind of isolate things sometimes. 

What the argumentation revolves around now is I think "Can the bulk of the diet be plants or should there be a significant agree of animal products in it?"

Edited April 28, 2023 by Jannes

[M A J I]

Some Pioneers of raw natural (human) food who are thriving and looking much younger than most people their age. And then there are 100s of plant-based pioneers who look amazing for their age compared to those who eat animal products and junk/incorrect foods... Hell even the Sadguru knows whats up..

The level of denial of truth on this forum is beyond me.

[Jannes]

6 hours ago, M A J I said:

25-30 pounds of fruit 

In bananas that would be 10735 calories and 125g of protein and 34g of fat

In apples that would be 5856 calories and 34g of protein 45g of fat

It's funny that at those quantities even fruit becomes a fat and protein source. 

6 hours ago, M A J I said:

The level of denial of truth on this forum is beyond me.

Because the truth is often boring and these "miraculous" examples are mostly rare exceptions and often don't show the full truth. There are 8 billions people on earth with different genetics. Someone will have the right genetic to thrive on anything. And if it was all so obvious everybody would have figured it out already. 

[M A J I]

1 hour ago, Jannes said:

25-30 pounds of fruit 

In bananas that would be 10735 calories and 125g of protein and 34g of fat

In apples that would be 5856 calories and 34g of protein 45g of fat

It's funny that at those quantities even fruit becomes a fat and protein source. 

Because the truth is often boring and these "miraculous" examples are mostly rare exceptions and often don't show the full truth. There are 8 billions people on earth with different genetics. Someone will have the right genetic to thrive on anything. And if it was all so obvious everybody would have figured it out already. 

Incorrect, we are all one human species with the same core/fundamental genetics. Yes most of us have been brought up in ignorance but as I said, once you clear up the (toxins/poisons) in your body, consciousness naturally arises (as your body/vessel/receiver starts to function at higher levels) and "receive" more signals from the cosmos... and thus you naturally tap into your greater humen intelligence (to see the 'bigger picture' and 'connect the dots') rather than some animal-mutation high were all addicted that act as stimulants and drugs, addicted to sex and animal-pleasures, and low conscious behavior, yet while on a self-actualization forum.

Rather than resort back to the natural (species specific diet) e.g for humans that is Fruit and actually become Alive, Awake and "living" , not half-asleep, you cannot thrive then, it is only survival. Yes everyone is at different levels of consciousness/vibration but that does not change the fundamental, undeniable, fact that humans are designed for plants, predominantly fruit, than anything else.

This is why birthing mothers who were given high doses of Iodine and fruit (which flushes fluoride out of the body and aids in overall detoxification) resulted in higher IQ and more emotionally intelligent children than the all the previous children they had. All the answers are within the Pineal Gland. This is why people haven't figured it out, they are all still deep asleep.

Edited April 30, 2023 by M A J I

[M A J I]

2 minutes ago, RebornConsciousness said:

According to this guy, the concept of calories doesn't exist either, he's "debunked" it. So, you know... tread lightly

They are but a concept, an outdated science. I have experimented with almost all known diet/nutrition/lifestyle combinations for the last 15 years, extensively, what I discovered in my studies and experience is that its not about calories but more so about nutrient-density, yet ultimately, its about biological nutrient efficiency, when the correct fuel for the body is provided, the proper healing and repair of the body thru Intracellular revitalization takes place, before you can start to feel truly healthy and alive again, which is why most try it then bail.. they are not properly educated, they experience 'difficulties', they have no guide or teacher with experience, they panic and bail.. not realizing they were experiencing (the detox symptoms).

Think about how many years you ate junk food and toxic food/incorrect fuel in the body, Imagine always adding petrol to your diesel engine or vice versa, it is going to take you at least 1/4 of that time to heal all of that unless you do extreme juicing and fasting for long periods of time, but maybe if you are lucky, a few years of just fruit will bring all the proof and evidence you need. Then we can discuss things as humans. Because when you operate at higher levels of health and circulate, regenerate and recreate effectively, you don't need nowhere near as much food/substance.

I have even gained muscle mass on both OMAD 1000 - 1500 calories a day(plant-based) and 3000 on fruit, results were same, people have yet to truly understand how the body works. This is where I have specialized. Dr Nun Amen Ra debunks such science first hand, you can find him online where he proves its (nutrient-density) that is paramount, not calories.

[Schizophonia]

On 28/04/2023 at 10:09 PM, Jannes said:

 

If I just hear names like Sv3rige or Freelee the banana girl I know you listen to very uneducated people. 

I'm just gonna answer this cause it's getting annoying
Frelee sometimes appears on youtube for some obscure reason, for Sv3rige I watched some "interviews" of ex vegans, that's all.
Why not answer on the merits?
It is not because a person is marginal, even bizarre, even mentally ill that everything that emanates from him is devoid of reason/interest.

Otherwise these people are not my "references", I refer to no one, and when this is the case I take people who are said to be the most informed.
When I was vegan I "followed" people like McDougall, Fuhrman, Dr Greger...
I have read their studies and tried their "diet".

On 28/04/2023 at 10:09 PM, Jannes said:

Sorry to say it so harshly. 

Bring me closer to spending too much time on the internet, it's true 

But don't blame me for "not being informed".

On 28/04/2023 at 10:09 PM, Jannes said:

They are extremist on both sides. 

agree

That's why I eat and do what I want. I remain aware that the body is a war machine for survival and that diet culture is partly paranoia.
I eat steaks, oats and red bull and am more energetic and quick-witted than the majority of orthorexics, as long as I sleep well, avoid ruminating... 

[Schizophonia]

11 hours ago, M A J I said:

Some Pioneers of raw natural (human) food who are thriving and looking much younger than most people their age. And then there are 100s of plant-based pioneers who look amazing for their age compared to those who eat animal products and junk/incorrect foods... Hell even the Sadguru knows whats up..

The level of denial of truth on this forum is beyond me.

Why sadhguru speaks in slow motion and looks like a bottle of orangina ?

Why is Dr. Morse is fat and lacking in muscle tone, has gray hair, and talks in slow motion?

Why doug graham speaks in slow motion and has incredibly thin skin?

Why do 3/4 of fruitarians look like they have dementia/have a shitty stream of thought?

Why the only muscular fruitarian (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dR1FCJS8DoM) looks ODDLY (could just be a coincidence, don't get carried away lol) like someone on a high dose of nandrolone or derivative of 19nor-testosterone.

Why am I more muscular and quick-witted than 3/4 of fruitarians? Why do most women (like freelee by the way) lose their periods? Why most men are physically weak and infertile (when not on TRT, HCG or even deca roids lol)

etc

And especially : 

Why do you repeatedly say that others are ignorant/in denial, when we have absolutely no evidence or rational reasoning for what you say? Are you able to debate and understand that you too have a controversial and marginal opinion ? 

These are serious questions. 

Edited April 30, 2023 by Schizophonia

[Jannes]

2 hours ago, Schizophonia said:

I'm just gonna answer this cause it's getting annoying

Ok

2 hours ago, Schizophonia said:

Frelee sometimes appears on youtube for some obscure reason, for Sv3rige I watched some "interviews" of ex vegans, that's all.
Why not answer on the merits?
It is not because a person is marginal, even bizarre, even mentally ill that everything that emanates from him is devoid of reason/interest.

Otherwise these people are not my "references", I refer to no one, and when this is the case I take people who are said to be the most informed.
When I was vegan I "followed" people like McDougall, Fuhrman, Dr Greger...
I have read their studies and tried their "diet".

Of course they can have some good point but they are also good at triggering and working with panic to get their point across. They can make very stupid things believable because they activate some more primal parts of our brain. For example if they show examples of vegans who look like skeletons and put it in a story where they don't outline the things the vegan did wrong with their vegan diet and just say This is the result of being vegan period. That triggers some real deep primal panic in you. Even if you now that the particular vegan is mentally ill, maybe only eats a handful of fruit and does everything wrong and could easily gain weight with grains, nuts, legumes, .. the more emotional stuff shapes your mind a lot more then a rational argumentation. That's why I wouldn't listen to it to begin with because it's hard to bring reason into a very emotionally shaped view on something.

Just like you can't convince your emotions that you can just be chill and talk to that hot girl because she is just another human like you. Well maybe but that takes a lot of hard work, a loooot of convincing of the rational mind. 

2 hours ago, Schizophonia said:

Bring me closer to spending too much time on the internet, it's true 

But don't blame me for "not being informed".

I don't think you're bad informed otherwise I would not have argued with you for so long. I just feel like the way you talk about some things you seem to be emotionally about it. 

"diet" like why? That's so emotionally charged.

 

 

[Schizophonia]

1 hour ago, Jannes said:

Ok

Of course they can have some good point but they are also good at triggering and working with panic to get their point across. They can make very stupid things believable because they activate some more primal parts of our brain. For example if they show examples of vegans who look like skeletons and put it in a story where they don't outline the things the vegan did wrong with their vegan diet and just say This is the result of being vegan period. That triggers some real deep primal panic in you. Even if you now that the particular vegan is mentally ill, maybe only eats a handful of fruit and does everything wrong and could easily gain weight with grains, nuts, legumes, .. the more emotional stuff shapes your mind a lot more then a rational argumentation. That's why I wouldn't listen to it to begin with because it's hard to bring reason into a very emotionally shaped view on something.

I know a lot of people are outcasts with weird diets.
But when I quoted freelee and sv4rige, it was to respond to the frugivore diet proposition, not an argument against veganism as a general rule.

1 hour ago, Jannes said:

Just like you can't convince your emotions that you can just be chill and talk to that hot girl because she is just another human like you. Well maybe but that takes a lot of hard work, a loooot of convincing of the rational mind. 

I'm not an English speaker, I'm not sure I understand. It doesn't matter.

1 hour ago, Jannes said:

I don't think you're bad informed otherwise I would not have argued with you for so long. I just feel like the way you talk about some things you seem to be emotionally about it. 

It's probably true

1 hour ago, Jannes said:

"diet" like why? That's so emotionally charged.

 

 

I put "diet" in quotation marks to emphasize the misnomer, because it's generally more a way of eating than a real plan.
It wasn't a mark of disdain. 

[Jannes]

1 hour ago, Schizophonia said:

I know a lot of people are outcasts with weird diets.
But when I quoted freelee and sv4rige, it was to respond to the frugivore diet proposition, not an argument against veganism as a general rule.

Oh okay. Yeah I don't think much of frugivore diets as well. 

Quote

I'm not an English speaker, I'm not sure I understand. It doesn't matter.

Oh I just basically meant that sometimes our emotions completely dominate our rational mind and wanted to illustrate that on a romantic example but I didn't write that well sorry.

Quote

I put "diet" in quotation marks to emphasize the misnomer, because it's generally more a way of eating than a real plan.
It wasn't a mark of disdain. 

Okay I misunderstood. 

 

 

Edited April 30, 2023 by Jannes

[RendHeaven]

On 4/30/2023 at 8:49 AM, Schizophonia said:

Why sadhguru speaks in slow motion and looks like a bottle of orangina ?

Bro you're my favorite user on this forum ??????

[Schizophonia]

19 hours ago, RendHeaven said:

Bro you're my favorite user on this forum ??????

ty