Notifications
Clear all

NOTICE:

DO NOT ATTEMPT TREATMENT WITHOUT LICENCED MEDICAL CONSULTATION AND SUPERVISION

This is a public discussion forum. The owners, staff, and users of this website are not engaged in rendering professional services to the individual reader. Do not use the content of this website as an alternative to personal examination and advice from licenced healthcare providers. Do not begin, delay, or discontinue treatments and/or exercises without licenced medical supervision.

high meat for bone growth?  

  RSS
JeanMacDougall
Eminent Member

ive been on the carnivore diet for a few months now, and so naturally im now ready to try high meat. i have some meat laying around waiting to rot, but i just remembered seeing a bunch of people on here taking k2 for mewing purposes. now, high meat has a really high amount of vitamin k2, and in a form that will be much more efficiently absorbed by the body than supplements... so would high meat be beneficial to mewing? or is the k2 thing just a theory?

Quote
Posted : 09/07/2019 7:33 am
Pame
 Pame
Trusted Member

My only concern with the carnivore diet is the lack of carotenoids, found in fruit and vegetables. Consuming carotenoids gives your skin a healthy, golden glow, which dramatically boosts your attractiveness. We all know that consuming vegetables makes you healthier, and since health and attractiveness are synonymous, this makes you look more attractive as well. A study also found that people highly prefer the carotenoid glow over a suntan. 

The boost in attractiveness from consuming carotenoids is probably higher than anything you'll achieve with posture and mewing, and it only takes 6-8 weeks for it to show in your skin.

ReplyQuote
Posted : 09/07/2019 11:19 am
Greensmoothies
Estimable Member
Posted by: Pame

My only concern with the carnivore diet is the lack of carotenoids, found in fruit and vegetables. Consuming carotenoids gives your skin a healthy, golden glow, which dramatically boosts your attractiveness. We all know that consuming vegetables makes you healthier, and since health and attractiveness are synonymous, this makes you look more attractive as well. A study also found that people highly prefer the carotenoid glow over a suntan. 

The boost in attractiveness from consuming carotenoids is probably higher than anything you'll achieve with posture and mewing, and it only takes 6-8 weeks for it to show in your skin.

Astaxanthin-containing fish such as salmon should cover that and would be good to include in the diet anyway, more importantly to help ensure a good omega 3 to 6 ratio, as well as getting DHA (which is important for adults with the health problems that prompted OP to go on this diet in the first place).

I believe the OP is seeing these benefits because it's a type of elimination diet (to help heal the gut) and second, because reportedly a 90% water diet and the rest a ketogenic diet is said to help even adults with mitochondrial dysfunction or neurodegenerative condition. Interesting note about energy levels improving as this may indicate, in addition to improved breathing, better functioning mitochondria.

Wouldn't think you want to go about replacing a suntan with a carotenoid tan when doing this work, seeing as the sun helps build your bones. Naked in the sun is ideal.

Remember this pain... and let it activate you.

ReplyQuote
Posted : 09/07/2019 1:54 pm
varbrah liked
Pame
 Pame
Trusted Member

@greensmoothies Carotenoids are pigments responsible for the bright red, yellow, and orange colouring found in carrots, peppers, tomatoes and other foods. When you digest carotenoids, they get stored in the fat underneath the top layer of your skin, giving you a healthy yellowish tone. There really aren't any replacements for this from non-carotenoid containing foods. Eating salmon won't have anywhere near the same effect. The difference between consuming carotenoids and not consuming carotenoids is quite dramatic, I recommend checking out this Ted Talk to learn more: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rVE6kZW88lc&t=416s

A study found that people found sun tans less attractive than the colouring gained from carotenoid consumption. Sun exposure is also extremely damaging to your skin, setting you up for fine lines, wrinkles, sun spots, saggy skin etc. In addition it will greatly worsen the appearance of any scarring or red spots you may have. When you say the sun helps build bones, are you referring to the uptake of vitamin D? Sufficient vitamin D levels can be achieved through diet and supplementation. 

I also don't see how adding fruits and vegetables to a diet consisting of otherwise only raw meat would "ruin" the diet. 

ReplyQuote
Posted : 10/07/2019 4:13 am
Greensmoothies
Estimable Member
Posted by: Pame

@greensmoothies Carotenoids are pigments responsible for the bright red, yellow, and orange colouring found in carrots, peppers, tomatoes and other foods. When you digest carotenoids, they get stored in the fat underneath the top layer of your skin, giving you a healthy yellowish tone. There really aren't any replacements for this from non-carotenoid containing foods. Eating salmon won't have anywhere near the same effect. The difference between consuming carotenoids and not consuming carotenoids is quite dramatic, I recommend checking out this Ted Talk to learn more: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rVE6kZW88lc&t=416s

A study found that people found sun tans less attractive than the colouring gained from carotenoid consumption. Sun exposure is also extremely damaging to your skin, setting you up for fine lines, wrinkles, sun spots, saggy skin etc. In addition it will greatly worsen the appearance of any scarring or red spots you may have. When you say the sun helps build bones, are you referring to the uptake of vitamin D? Sufficient vitamin D levels can be achieved through diet and supplementation. 

I also don't see how adding fruits and vegetables to a diet consisting of otherwise only raw meat would "ruin" the diet. 

Yes, I've owned a juicer for 10+ years and know some ins and outs of these "carotinoid tans" (much faster obtained with juice). Protip: carrot is best balanced with beet.

If, as you mentioned previously, that your sole concern with eliminating fruit and vegetables is a supposed lack of carotinoids, then it's a moot point since OP could simply get that from Astaxanthin-containing foods such as salmon. That particular carotinoid imparts (in my opinion) the best skin tint I'm aware of and have tested on myself. But I think that nutrients in those foods such as iodine also help on this front. Not sure if the isolated supplement works.

Assuming OP is benefiting from the elimination-diet side of things, re-introducing foods that might be compromising health before the gut is given a chance to heal may stall progress in this work we discuss on this forum as well as overall health. This is how an elimination diet works... nightshades, wheat and other grains, nuts and dairy are some common culprits that can wreck havoc on the gut in some individuals.

Also you are citing one study in favour of this "carotinoid tan" which is comparatively one drop of pee in the bucket of things that sunlight can do for us. Just searching a keyphrase on pubmed reflecting one benefit of sunlight "circadian rhythm" yields several thousands of results.

Why'd I say it's best to sunbathe naked? Boosts testosterone 200%.

And maybe a Vitamin D supplement does not even work that well for some people. One FAGGA patient here, James, is consuming fish and sunbathing to help get his Vitamin D.

Microdosing vitamin C and exercising moderation with sun exposure (eg: seeking shade, covering with clothing) should go a long way toward helping prevent deleterious effects, as well as use of non-toxic sunscreen on the face and décolletage. Using soap and water can also be culprits behind dry skin (which is why I use the oil-cleansing method to wash my face), as can a low-fat diet. Massage after applying the oil has, I believe, helped eliminate my oral dysfunction-related skin sagging and possibly played a role in preventing wrinkles and fine lines.

Remember this pain... and let it activate you.

ReplyQuote
Posted : 10/07/2019 3:52 pm
jimbobape
Active Member

I will have to look into this but what I can say is that it will get you high for months. 

ReplyQuote
Posted : 11/07/2019 3:25 am
Pame
 Pame
Trusted Member

@greensmoothies How much salmon do you have to consume for it to have any significant effect on your skin tone? Consuming half a kg of salmon a week didn't really show in my skin at all, where as introducing several carotenoid containing foods daily has significantly improved my strength and energy levels, in addition to giving my previously sickly pale skin a golden tone.

A lot of foods high in carotenoid like spinach and squash are low gas vegetables which most people digest well. Several of them are also probiotics, for instance carrots, which will aid in improving gut health and digestion.

And yes I agree that sun exposure has a lot of benefits, and negative effects can be reduced greatly with sunscreen, avoiding the sun at peak and limiting time in the sun in addition to other precautionary measures. However getting a good suntan requires significant damaging of the skin and when its not even aesthetically preferable to a carotenoid tan I don't see it as a good option.

 

 

@jimbobape I recommend making a daily smoothie with a large amount of foods high in carotenoids like spinach, tomatoes and cucumber. Should only affect you positively in addition to giving a quite dramatic boost in attractiveness.

ReplyQuote
Posted : 11/07/2019 7:03 am
Greensmoothies
Estimable Member
Posted by: Pame

@greensmoothies How much salmon do you have to consume for it to have any significant effect on your skin tone? Consuming half a kg of salmon a week didn't really show in my skin at all, where as introducing several carotenoid containing foods daily has significantly improved my strength and energy levels, in addition to giving my previously sickly pale skin a golden tone.

A lot of foods high in carotenoid like spinach and squash are low gas vegetables which most people digest well. Several of them are also probiotics, for instance carrots, which will aid in improving gut health and digestion.

And yes I agree that sun exposure has a lot of benefits, and negative effects can be reduced greatly with sunscreen, avoiding the sun at peak and limiting time in the sun in addition to other precautionary measures. However getting a good suntan requires significant damaging of the skin and when its not even aesthetically preferable to a carotenoid tan I don't see it as a good option.

 

 

@jimbobape I recommend making a daily smoothie with a large amount of foods high in carotenoids like spinach, tomatoes and cucumber. Should only affect you positively in addition to giving a quite dramatic boost in attractiveness.

Not sure how much salmon you'd need to eat but you could certainly increase the amount of seafood you eat if that is all you eat per week? I also eat shrimp too which has significant iodine and Astaxanthin. Actually I tested that on myself in my youth with shrimp being the only meat I ate (long story) and my skin tone was good then. Much better than when I ate largely chicken for meat in early adulthood (ugh). And my husband says I look better than the carotinoid tan days, but there are more things behind this result than skin tone.

I've been down the road you are on, being afraid of the sun for fear of aging and juicing fruits and veggies for a carotinoid tan because I looked sickly as a result of the sun avoidance. Working too much indoors under bad lighting didn't help matters either. I do eat fruits and vegetables but don't make a big fuss over it because I don't need that crutch to have a healthy skin colour anymore. My pregnenolone steal syndrome has largely disappeared since I've been fixing my circadian rhythm using sunlight and light avoidance at certain times, and this will make sense to you if you read articles I've linked. Yes, you will look better with a carotinoid tan than without any sort of tan. But the reason you had a sickly skin tone to begin with could simply be because you're sickly, something that the increased fruit and vegetable consumption might not be sufficiently helping with. At least that was the case for me. It's not just our diet that matters but the light and darkness we expose our skin to at the correct times.

Remember this pain... and let it activate you.

ReplyQuote
Posted : 11/07/2019 3:26 pm
EddieMoney
Reputable Member

Bioscience abounds here. Now we can't eat fruits and vegetables because they mess with your gut. 🙄 

ReplyQuote
Posted : 14/07/2019 8:57 am
krajk liked
James
Eminent Member
Posted by: JeanMacDougall

ive been on the carnivore diet for a few months now, and so naturally im now ready to try high meat. i have some meat laying around waiting to rot, but i just remembered seeing a bunch of people on here taking k2 for mewing purposes. now, high meat has a really high amount of vitamin k2, and in a form that will be much more efficiently absorbed by the body than supplements... so would high meat be beneficial to mewing? or is the k2 thing just a theory?

(also worth mentioning, breathing has become better after going carnivore and energy levels are through the roof. my nose is never stuffed anymore. after trying every diet i have finally gotten my life back and i strongly advice everyone try raw carnivore once.)

What is the evidence that high meat contains higher K2?

ReplyQuote
Posted : 18/07/2019 12:15 pm
bergamot
New Member
Posted by: Pame

and it only takes 6-8 weeks for it to show in your skin.

Actually it only takes about 24 hours.

ReplyQuote
Posted : 18/07/2019 5:20 pm
JeanMacDougall
Eminent Member
Posted by: @jimbobape

I will have to look into this but what I can say is that it will get you high for months. 

what do you mean by this? my high meat still isnt ready, but i had some really moldy cheese and i got that crazy "high" feelings. my face became red and i was so happy i cant even explain it. i also became much more flexible than normal. however i had a bad drug experience a few years back and feeling high for months is not a pleasant though. 

ReplyQuote
Posted : 27/07/2019 4:44 pm
JeanMacDougall
Eminent Member
Posted by: @pame

@greensmoothies How much salmon do you have to consume for it to have any significant effect on your skin tone? Consuming half a kg of salmon a week didn't really show in my skin at all, where as introducing several carotenoid containing foods daily has significantly improved my strength and energy levels, in addition to giving my previously sickly pale skin a golden tone.

A lot of foods high in carotenoid like spinach and squash are low gas vegetables which most people digest well. Several of them are also probiotics, for instance carrots, which will aid in improving gut health and digestion.

And yes I agree that sun exposure has a lot of benefits, and negative effects can be reduced greatly with sunscreen, avoiding the sun at peak and limiting time in the sun in addition to other precautionary measures. However getting a good suntan requires significant damaging of the skin and when its not even aesthetically preferable to a carotenoid tan I don't see it as a good option.

 

 

@jimbobape I recommend making a daily smoothie with a large amount of foods high in carotenoids like spinach, tomatoes and cucumber. Should only affect you positively in addition to giving a quite dramatic boost in attractiveness.

i was affraid this would turn into a diet debate. well all im gonna say is that after having been sickly pale all my life, i am now tan as [Rude Language or Insults are not tolerated]. my face has so much color and its [Rude Language or Insults are not tolerated] orange. i look like trump.i dont give a [Rude Language or Insults are not tolerated] about skin color though so its whatever. had a week where i was eating 1kg salmon a day, and ive been eating a ton of fish lately. can we get back to the k2 part?

ReplyQuote
Posted : 27/07/2019 4:49 pm
Parks
Active Member

@eddiemoney

i have it from a reputable source that fruits and veggie are fine. Grains are the only high enough level of phytates and antinutrients to do legitment damage. Possibly nuts too? EAT THE FRUIT & VEG. It's really important. 

ReplyQuote
Posted : 08/08/2019 2:14 am
ancoratu
Active Member

I have tried this diet and did not work very well for me. It was raw too. Diet is a very small piece of the puzzle. There are people out there who eat total garbage and they are much healthier than some individuals trying these dubious diets. Carnivore diet may be fine in the short-term, but, I'd argue it may become problematic in the long term. I believe we should always strive to eat healthily and avoid all the processed crap, but cutting out all vegetables is ultimately only going to make your life hell as you struggle to eat crazy amounts of meat per day (2-3lbs/day). Also, if your prior diet was complete crap and you suddenly cut out all the processed crap you're bound to feel like a god whether you transitioned to veganism or carnivorism. 

ReplyQuote
Posted : 15/08/2019 5:25 pm
Pame liked
Trappey
Active Member

I ate so much red meat growing up but I still ended up with CFD. The entire left side of my face is poorly developed. I have deviated septum pointing to the left. My entire maxilla is crooked (very obvious when smiling)

ReplyQuote
Posted : 15/08/2019 11:26 pm
20_year_old_mewing
Active Member

Unfortunately for all the dead flesh lovers in these forums, humans are designed to consume plants, as we have been for over 50 million years. I believe the last time we were actually omnivores was around 55 million years ago when our diet was mostly bugs. We then started eating fruit. Over the next few million years we went from fruit to leaf and back to fruit. As our size grew, our eyes came closer together, which is important with large/semi large animals and our ability to judge distance etc.  As we know, an animal can eat a small amount of bugs/meat and still be classified as herbivorous. 

"Over the last 800,000 years, our ancestors met considerable and sustained glycemic energy requirements of our expanding brain, reproductive and other tissues, through a combination of carbohydrate (particularly starch) consumption, the use of fire for cooking, and the evolution of multiple copies of the salivary amylase gene AMY1 "

The human brain burns pure glucose, which are carbohydrates. Cooked starches are the perfect brain fuel, literally chains of gluecose. We are built to consume starch and supplement with fruits and vegetables. The okinawins ate 97% of calories from plants, which is defined as a herbivorous diet. 69% of their calories were sweet potatoes.  We were eating leaves and fruit for 20, 30, 40 million years and then along came starches. We are starchivores

"All large populations of trim, healthy people, throughout verifiable human history, have obtained the bulk of their calories from starch. Examples of once thriving people include Japanese, Chinese, and other Asians eating sweet potatoes, buckwheat, and/or rice, Incas in South America eating potatoes, Mayans and Aztecs in Central America eating corn, and Egyptians in the Middle East eating wheat. There have been only a few small isolated populations of primitive people, such as the Arctic Eskimos, living at the extremes of the environment, who have eaten otherwise."     Note the Eskimos had health issues, despite common belief https://youtu.be/6N7Sk1ZRohU

"Men and women following diets based on grains, vegetables, and fruits have accomplished all of the great feats in history. The ancient conquerors of Europe and Asia, including the armies of Alexander the Great (356 – 323 BC) and Genghis Khan (1162 – 1227 AD) consumed starch-based diets.  Caesar’s legions complained when they had too much meat in their diet and preferred to do their fighting on grains.1 Primarily six foods: barley, maize (corn), millet, potatoes, rice, and wheat have fueled the caloric engines of human civilization. "

Reasons to eat meat in the 21st century = zero

 

edit; another interesting piece by a random on quora

"Bread, bread, bread.
Roman soldiers loved their bread and got very grumpy if there was none.
They also grumbled if they had to eat too much meat. Even today Italians prefer meat in small amounts to add flavour to dishes rather than as a main source of calories."

ReplyQuote
Posted : 11/11/2019 7:28 pm
sinned
Estimable Member

@20_year_old_mewing

Uhhh no, humans are carnivores or at the very least ate a considerable amount of meat.

https://www.pnas.org/content/106/38/16034

N-15 analyses show that humans were carnivorous. Wolves have n-15 levels of around 10-12%, human bones analyzed in this study as well as many other studies are around 10-14%.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-017-01019-z

In addition to that, the study above demonstrates there's a viable mechanism as well as mechanistic data supporting that sugar promotes the growth of cancer cells. Ingested carbohydrates are metabolized as sugar and therefore a significant amount can promote cancer.

When you look at our digestive system it too resembles that of a carnivore, our gut ph is 1.5, which is a ph lower/more acidic than many carnivores, it's a ph more similar to scavengers.

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0134116

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure/image?size=large&id=10.1371/journal.pone.0134116.t001

Compare our digestive system to that of other primates, ones that are more herbivorous, it is clear we are lacking in adaptions to digest meat. It's important to make clear that eating plants are an adaptation, because they have different compositions than that of animals, they are made up of cellulose and fiber, therefore to get any nutrition from them it requires big guts and fermentation, which humans are lacking in. as shown by the diagram above, the majority of our digestive system is the small intestine, the colon and cecum which is involved in plant digestion is severely lacking. In addition there's growing evidence that the other primates are carnivorous to a degree as well, especially chimps who eat a large amount of insects and monkeys. Data suggesting that chimps are herbivores is outdated and based on the conjecture of people in the past, not fact, truth reveals chimps are actually quite adept hunters and eat a lot of meat. 

So then, if humans are adapted to eating plants, why is it that the colon/large intestine as well as the cecum which are crucial in plant digestion lacking? Why does the small intestine up a large percentage of our digestive system? Even herbivores are on a high fat diet

http://www.vivo.colostate.edu/hbooks/pathphys/digestion/herbivores/rum_absorb.html

"Volatile fatty acids (VFA) are produced in large amounts through ruminal fermentation and are of paramount importance in that they provide greater than 70% of the ruminant's energy supply. Virtually all of the acetic, proprionic and butyric acids formed in the rumen are absorbed across the ruminal epithelium, from which they are carried by ruminal veins to the portal vein and hence through the liver. Continuous removal of VFA from the rumen is important not only for distribution, but to prevent excessive and damaging drops in pH of rumen fluid."

Fiber is converted into fat through fermentation. Even without all these studies suggesting humans are carnivores, how do you suspect humans ate in the past during the ice age? What about during the winter when there are no seasonal fruits and vegetation is buried under the snow? The only time in history we have been able to get a large amount of plants for nutrition is in the last 10,000 years with agriculture and selective breeding, for almost our entire history we have been hunters that have been able to survive by eating plants if need be, not as a base for our nutrition. All n-15 studies of past humans show that we were highly carnivorous.

 

 

 

 

ReplyQuote
Posted : 12/11/2019 1:43 am
Silberman liked
facegettingworseandworse
Eminent Member

I will read your entire response later, at work atm. but I do beileve this video dubunks the idea of trophic levels which u bring up at the start. 

https://youtu.be/FNIoKmMq6cs

too many carbs are bad because the sugar in them promotes cancer? that is the dumbest idea in human history. Our salivary amalise AMY1 gene evolved multiple times so that we could rapidly turn starchy carbs into sugar in our mouths. the okinawins ate 85% carbs and not only were they not getting cancer, they were one of the oldest populations ever. 

full response later

ReplyQuote
Posted : 12/11/2019 2:42 am
sinned
Estimable Member

@facegettingworseandworse

The isotope test is for the most part reliable, especially if you consider the other evidence that humans were considerably carnivorous. Tool usage and paintings for one, while they are not strong proofs when you take into account everything else it's important to consider. The salivary amylase AMY1 gene argument is not strong at all, it's possible the gene survived our evolution because it benefited us in famine and survival situations to be able to handle carbs, especially in the last 10,000 years with agriculture. The only reliable way you're going to be eating as much carbs as we do nowadays is through agriculture, which has only existed for 10,000 years, all animals live off a high fat diet. Herbivores while they ingest highly fibrous food, they digest that food as 70% or more fat, at least in ruminants. Gorillas in captivity get heart disease because of the carbs they are fed, cows get the same issues when fed on standard feed of grains and soy. As far as okinawans go, so what? It's shown in a cause and effect manner that cancer cells favor a metabolism of glycolysis.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4783224/

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-017-01019-z

"The opposite signaling effect that we describe here, i.e., activation of Ras by high glycolytic rate through Fru1,6bisP, may close a reciprocal stimulatory signaling loop between cell proliferation and glycolysis. In this regard, increased cytosolic concentrations of Fru1,6bisP have been found in cancer cells4243. Moreover, occurrence of mitochondrial dysfunction, accumulation of ROS and switch from respiration to increased glycolytic activity has also been observed in a mammalian cell system in which the K-Ras(G12V) oncogene was expressed from an inducible promoter48. Hence, the reciprocal activation between glycolytic flux and Ras may lock cancer cells in a vicious cycle causing both persistent stimulation of cell proliferation and continued maintenance of overactive glycolysis. This would explain the close correlation between the proliferation rate and aggressive character of cancer cells and their fermentation hyperactivity3449"

"Our results suggest that the Warburg effect creates a vicious cycle through Fru1,6bisP activation of Ras, by which enhanced fermentation stimulates oncogenic potency."

ReplyQuote
Posted : 12/11/2019 4:55 am
facegettingworseandworse
Eminent Member

@sinned

Again, the video I linked explains why you are wrong about trophic levels. And the saliva gene wasn’t retained, it continued to expand, inducating that carbs continued to be vital for our survival and evolution. 

All your fancy explainations are  great, but I see my saliva, I see how plants make me attractive, I see that I like to smell like plants, and that I like the taste of plants due to the salt receptors on my tongue. I see all the "carnviores" seasoning their dead flesh with plants. I like the look of an apple, a banana and they both fit in my hand. I smell that my [Rude Language or Insults are not tolerated] isn’t as disgusting anymore. I see my flat fingernails and canines. I see birthday cakes made of plants and not meat, and carbs being described as "comfort food". I see an animal and I don’t want to eat it, I see a dead animal and I don’t want to eat it. After not eating meat for 11 months I can now smell it, and it smells horrible. I see the Okinawins and the adventist vegetarians as some of the longest living populations ever.

But hey, they used multiple long debunked methods of disovering what past humans ate, and dispite concerns with the science since the very beginning, sold us the atkins, paleo AND keto diet. Along with heaps of suppliments and a medical industry that profits off ill health, combined with my lack of self identify and insecurities and BOOM I AM A CARNIVORE ROOOOOOR

lmao

  

ReplyQuote
Posted : 12/11/2019 7:25 am
Silberman
Active Member
Posted by: @facegettingworseandworse

I will read your entire response later, at work atm. but I do beileve this video dubunks the idea of trophic levels which u bring up at the start. 

https://youtu.be/FNIoKmMq6cs

too many carbs are bad because the sugar in them promotes cancer? that is the dumbest idea in human history. Our salivary amalise AMY1 gene evolved multiple times so that we could rapidly turn starchy carbs into sugar in our mouths. the okinawins ate 85% carbs and not only were they not getting cancer, they were one of the oldest populations ever. 

full response later

In this lecture, this woman actually confirms that our ancestors were carnivores, without her understanding.

ReplyQuote
Posted : 12/11/2019 7:30 am
facegettingworseandworse
Eminent Member

@silberman

Thank you for your wisdom silverman. I will be sure to contact her and let her know about your discovery. 

 

Regarding the cancer discussed earlier:

Yes I can see it, 100,000 years ago in west africa. 4 year old Jimmy is about to take a bite of a starch, but his mum quckly jumps in!

M "no jimmy you have had too many potatoes, any more and you will get cancer due to the sugar"

J "but mum, that makes no sense. our saliva turns the food into sugar so that we can use it as our primary means of fuel, the fiber and antioxidants help keep my body healthy, and I feel great eating them, this has beem our primary means of evolution over the last million years"

M "no jimmy, I won't let you"

-grabs the potato and in a similar fashion to Shaggy during scooby doo 2

M  "F**** evolution, imma stay this way forrr-evvv-errrrrrr

-throws the potato

M "now go use your keen sense on smell, claws and overlapping teeth used to crush bone, and go get-em Jimmy" !

J "but mum i dont have any of those things"

M "well then scavange my son!"

J "How TF am I suppose to drive my evolution by scavanging left over dead flesh"??

M "Tell your great grandchild to ask @sinned on the great work

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ReplyQuote
Posted : 12/11/2019 7:57 am
sinned
Estimable Member

@facegettingworseandworse

" I like the taste of plants due to the salt receptors on my tongue" - Animals are the most abundant sources of sodium, herbivores seek out salt licks because plants lack salt.

" I see all the "carnviores" seasoning their dead flesh with plants. I like the look of an apple, a banana and they both fit in my hand." - How is this an argument, some people season their meat with just salt, or no salt, or they eat it raw. I could make the same argument on the other hand, try eating these seasonings in their whole form, eat a paprika or curry plant, try eating raw legumes, eat your plants whole and raw. Eat your plants without any seasoning, sauce, or dressing.

"I see my flat fingernails and canines" - We don't need claws or long canines, in fact it would only be a detriment, claws would interfere with tool usage and long canines would interfere with speech, both are much more important then having claws or long canines. Blue whales are carnivores, where are their canines? Many birds are also carnivores and they don't have canines.

"I see birthday cakes made of plants and not meat, and carbs being described as "comfort food"." - Carbs can be seen as an addiction in some cases.

"I see the Okinawins and the adventist vegetarians as some of the longest living populations ever." Epidemiology is not a good proof.

"But hey, they used multiple long debunked methods of disovering what past humans ate, and dispite concerns with the science since the very beginning, sold us the atkins, paleo AND keto diet. Along with heaps of suppliments and a medical industry that profits off ill health" -

Citation? What concerns, are you referring to epidemiology?What has been debunked? In an isolated case you could make that argument for the isotope analysis, however, every n-15 study of prehistoric humans have the same results, and when the amino acids are analyzed specifically it is shown the high n-15 levels were due to meat eating. It's called Compound-specific isotope analyses (CSIA), using this researchers are able to separately analyze the amino acids contained in the collagen. These amino acids are influenced by the environment and food eaten, to determine for example that neanderthals ate a more terrestrial diet while humans ate more seafood. https://www.pnas.org/content/116/11/4928 Here's a study that uses that method.

The co-author of both studies, Michael P. Richards, has done many human bone isotope analyses studies. https://www.sfu.ca/archaeology/faculty/richards.html

https://scholar.google.ca/citations?user=0fMpFU8AAAAJ

You can check it out for yourself, some are not accessible but the general gist is that prehistoric humans tend to have high n-15 levels, when using CSIA it is shown this is due to meat eating, not only that, it is specific to prehistoric humans, ie humans before 10,000 years ago, before the advent of agriculture. With the advent of agriculture although there were still peoples who ate a lot of meat, however the trend started shifting and therefore the composition of the isotopes changed and n-15 levels lowered. Here's one example https://www.uniarq.net/uploads/4/7/1/5/4715235/rb_55.pdf

Along with that, archaeological remains of animals near humans, remains of tools used for hunting and butchering meat, remains of a shelter literally made out of mammoth bones, cave paintings depicting humans hunting animals or just animals in general.

Also your hypothetical 100,000 years ago doesn't disprove the study, I would like to see an explanation or rebuttal to the mechanistic, cause and effect study. Carbs can be made by your own body, they are not essential at all, same goes for antioxidants, in fact most antioxidants are produced by your own body. Fiber is also not essential, it is indigestible, only 5-10% can be converted in SCFA, and this relies on the bacteria in our large intestine. A true herbivore utilizes most of the plant matter with their large guts and bacteria fermentation and/or repeated digestion, ie they eat their poop. And yes, there is evidence to suggest early hominids scavenged, which explains our low stomach ph of 1.5, which is akin to that of a scavenger like that of an owl or bald eagle, the only plant eaters with low ph are those that regularly eat their own excrement like rabbits or store plants like beavers, which allows them to build up bacteria and pathogens, both of which has no evidence occurred in humans, which means they likely scavenged for meat which selected for hominids with lower ph.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4519257/

 

 

 

 

ReplyQuote
Posted : 12/11/2019 7:56 pm
20_year_old_mewing
Active Member

@sinned

I just want to say I have no ill wishes towards you.

As with most "carnivores" I speak to on the internet, you take a simple concept and somehow manage to conclude the complete opposite of what common sense tells us. You will never find a kid or young teenager who behaves this way, similar to how many more 20 year olds have maxilla recession than 12 year olds. You yourself never would have had any carnivore or scavenger tendencies as a young child if you were brought up in a herbivorous tribe. You never would have randomly wanted to kill some animal you saw, or scavenge some dead flesh. Yet here you are, trying to pretend that we are carnivores. On the other hand, we have many natural tendencies related to plant foods, as I have already outlined. 

Even though AMY1 expanded multiple times during our evolution, you somehow believe that this is just an evolutionary safeguard. Why would our brains evolve to burn carbs, and our saliva evolve to process carbs, if we are truly supposed to eat meat? Why would we evolve to eat meat instead of carbs, just so our bodies can them turn that meat into glucose......which carbs are the perfect source of.......? My dog isn't this dumb.     Again, competently backwards land. A 5 year old could easily figure this out. 

"We don't need claws or long canines"  well at the very least we would need some tenancy to eat meat when we saw an animal, which no human naturally does. I don't need to be taught that I like hot woman, but I definitely needed to be taught to eat meat, even though I always thought it looked and smelt disgusting as my dad was preparing it before cooking. 

"Epidemiology is not good proof"  I don't need good proof. Again, similar to not needing a study telling me to put my d*** inside woman instead of men. I'm not less intelligent than a toddler

"Along with that, archaeological remains of animals near humans, remains of tools used for hunting and butchering meat, remains of a shelter literally made out of mammoth bones, cave paintings depicting humans hunting animals or just animals in general."- would someone get this man a gold star please?

"Also your hypothetical 100,000 years ago doesn't disprove the study" - o golly you got me. It was actually just a hilarious little story intended to more easily capture the retardation of your ideas. Although re-tarded people might find that comparison offensive, as I would too. 

There is no doubt that the ability to eat meat is beneficial for evolving h**o-sapiens. However I am certainly not dumb enough to do so in the 21st century.

The age of information is upon us, and veganism is rapidly spreading. What a strange coincidence. We need some peer reviewed research to find out why this is!

ReplyQuote
Posted : 13/11/2019 12:38 am
sinned
Estimable Member

@20_year_old_mewing

"Even though AMY1 expanded multiple times during our evolution, you somehow believe that this is just an evolutionary safeguard." - The mouth and saliva is but one part of the digestive process, to infer or extrapolate this one adaptation in one part/step of the digestive process is indicative of a need for carbs, whether for survival or for well being, is quite a stretch, especially if you consider our digestive system resembles more closely to a carnivores. So if you're going to try to prove that we are designed to eat starch despite our prehistory and physiology because of one adaptation in one part/step of the digestive process, you're going to need a lot more extraordinary evidence.

"Why would our brains evolve to burn carbs, and our saliva evolve to process carbs, if we are truly supposed to eat meat? Why would we evolve to eat meat instead of carbs, just so our bodies can them turn that meat into glucose......which carbs are the perfect source of.......? My dog isn't this dumb.     Again, competently backwards land. A 5 year old could easily figure this out. "

Your brain is made of cholesterol and fat, your body can produce it's own carbohydrates through gluconeogenesis. This is the case in a lot of animals, even herbivores, who ingests primarily fibrous foods and digests 70% or more saturated fat. For ruminating animals for example their diet is 70% or more fat.

"SCFAs or volatile fatty acids are the products of the
anaerobic microbial fermentation of complex carbohydrates in the forestomach and large intestine. Acetate,
propionate and butyrate, the predominant SCFAs, are
readily absorbed and assimilated as a nutrient source by
the ruminant (Bergman, 1990). Ruminants depend on
SCFAs for up to 80% of their maintenance energy
requirements (Bergman, 1990)"

https://www.ajol.info/index.php/ajb/article/viewFile/92235/81689

""We don't need claws or long canines"  well at the very least we would need some tenancy to eat meat when we saw an animal, which no human naturally does. I don't need to be taught that I like hot woman, but I definitely needed to be taught to eat meat, even though I always thought it looked and smelt disgusting as my dad was preparing it before cooking. " - 

https://www.nationalheraldindia.com/national/goa-govt-sends-meat-eating-cows-for-treatment-wants-them-turned-herbivore

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/10/22/killer-rat-eating-monkeys-stun-scientists-malaysia/

Many examples of "herbivorous" animals with a craving for meat, there's plentiful vegetation yet they still eat meat if it's available. Why do chimps hunt colobus monkeys if they have plentiful leaves and fruit? Herbivory is an adaptation, which is why herbivores have large fermenting guts which are metabolically expensive, a food that is completely different from your own composition is hard to digest, which is why meat comparatively is easy to digest and why animals specialized in carnivory have small guts. In addition, even carnivores are taught how to hunt and eat meat, this is not exclusive to humans. Cats, tigers, cheetahs, jaguars, wolves, etc., are all taught how to hunt, these animals when raised in captivity without the opportunity to watch and learn how their mother or fellow kin hunt are doomed if they are suddenly put out in the wild. Some instincts and skills are innate but many are not. In addition I could make the same argument that kids need to be taught to eat vegetables, why is it such a struggle for parents to get kids to eat veggies? 

""Epidemiology is not good proof"  I don't need good proof. Again, similar to not needing a study telling me to put my d*** inside woman instead of men. I'm not less intelligent than a toddler"- Epidemiological studies have too many variables to be used in a way to draw conclusions from.

You're shifting goal posts, respond to the points I made, although I entertained the arguments you made in your latest post I want to see an actual response.

ReplyQuote
Posted : 13/11/2019 1:30 am
guiduck
Active Member

@pame

we actually don't have much evidence of vegetables being healthy. The fiber topic is really controversial and most researchs that say it helps the gut are measured through probiotics administration on rodents and not actual fiber. Other researchs correlate the consumptions of fiber and constipation, [Rude Language or Insults are not tolerated] bleeding and overall bad gut health. Vegetables also contain tons of oxalates and their vitamins might not even be digestable. Vegetables contain a lot of antinutrients, fruits on the other hand want to be consumed to help spred their seeds. But then you should be careful about with the high fructose and fatty liver. The best source of vitamins would always be digestable meat like liver or heart.

That said, I'm interested about this carotenoid stuff. Is this purely aesthetical? Any good fruits that are safe to have that? 

ReplyQuote
Posted : 13/11/2019 3:41 pm
Pame
 Pame
Trusted Member

@guiduck They did this study where people who took beta carotene supplements for 12 months were 50% more likely to be rated as attractive compared to before supplementing. https://www.spring.org.uk/2017/02/vegetable-more-attractive.php  

And this was from supplementing only one form of carotenoid, which won't have nearly the same effect on attractiveness as acquiring all 600+ types of carotenoids through diet. As Im sure you're aware health and attractiveness are fairly synonymous, and if you consume a lot of vegetables you are more healthy as your body is more suited to fight off various types of diseases and cancers amongst other things. Vegetables help with everything from fighting off bad body odor to preventing macular degeneration and cognitive decline. Just because they also have some anti nutrients does not mean you should avoid them all together. You can try implementing them yourself, and if you feel they don't benefit you just stop consuming them. 

 

Skin color plays a central role in facial attractiveness, much more than people are aware of. If you wish to dramatically increase your attractiveness in a fast, simple and guaranteed manner carotenoids is your answer. 

 

 

ReplyQuote
Posted : 13/11/2019 4:01 pm
guiduck
Active Member
Posted by: @20_year_old_mewing

Unfortunately for all the dead flesh lovers in these forums, humans are designed to consume plants, as we have been for over 50 million years. I believe the last time we were actually omnivores was around 55 million years ago when our diet was mostly bugs. We then started eating fruit. Over the next few million years we went from fruit to leaf and back to fruit. As our size grew, our eyes came closer together, which is important with large/semi large animals and our ability to judge distance etc.  As we know, an animal can eat a small amount of bugs/meat and still be classified as herbivorous. 

"Over the last 800,000 years, our ancestors met considerable and sustained glycemic energy requirements of our expanding brain, reproductive and other tissues, through a combination of carbohydrate (particularly starch) consumption, the use of fire for cooking, and the evolution of multiple copies of the salivary amylase gene AMY1 "

The human brain burns pure glucose, which are carbohydrates. Cooked starches are the perfect brain fuel, literally chains of gluecose. We are built to consume starch and supplement with fruits and vegetables. The okinawins ate 97% of calories from plants, which is defined as a herbivorous diet. 69% of their calories were sweet potatoes.  We were eating leaves and fruit for 20, 30, 40 million years and then along came starches. We are starchivores

"All large populations of trim, healthy people, throughout verifiable human history, have obtained the bulk of their calories from starch. Examples of once thriving people include Japanese, Chinese, and other Asians eating sweet potatoes, buckwheat, and/or rice, Incas in South America eating potatoes, Mayans and Aztecs in Central America eating corn, and Egyptians in the Middle East eating wheat. There have been only a few small isolated populations of primitive people, such as the Arctic Eskimos, living at the extremes of the environment, who have eaten otherwise."     Note the Eskimos had health issues, despite common belief https://youtu.be/6N7Sk1ZRohU

"Men and women following diets based on grains, vegetables, and fruits have accomplished all of the great feats in history. The ancient conquerors of Europe and Asia, including the armies of Alexander the Great (356 – 323 BC) and Genghis Khan (1162 – 1227 AD) consumed starch-based diets.  Caesar’s legions complained when they had too much meat in their diet and preferred to do their fighting on grains.1 Primarily six foods: barley, maize (corn), millet, potatoes, rice, and wheat have fueled the caloric engines of human civilization. "

Reasons to eat meat in the 21st century = zero

 

edit; another interesting piece by a random on quora

"Bread, bread, bread.
Roman soldiers loved their bread and got very grumpy if there was none.
They also grumbled if they had to eat too much meat. Even today Italians prefer meat in small amounts to add flavour to dishes rather than as a main source of calories."

where did you get this information from? the evidence I've seen is the complete opposite. It makes this seems like it has no scientific basis. Humans stomachs are pretty much carnivore and that would be more true depending on your place of birth like european or african and less but not even close to herbivore if you are south american. Some people can tolarate fruits and vegetables better, but vegetables are mostly antinutrient and some races would even get immediate allergic inflamattory responses from a high carb diet.

@sinned thanks for being well informed and providing a lot of useful science based facts. I'm looking into this rn

ReplyQuote
Posted : 13/11/2019 4:03 pm
guiduck
Active Member
Posted by: @20_year_old_mewing

@sinned

I just want to say I have no ill wishes towards you.

As with most "carnivores" I speak to on the internet, you take a simple concept and somehow manage to conclude the complete opposite of what common sense tells us. You will never find a kid or young teenager who behaves this way, similar to how many more 20 year olds have maxilla recession than 12 year olds. You yourself never would have had any carnivore or scavenger tendencies as a young child if you were brought up in a herbivorous tribe. You never would have randomly wanted to kill some animal you saw, or scavenge some dead flesh. Yet here you are, trying to pretend that we are carnivores. On the other hand, we have many natural tendencies related to plant foods, as I have already outlined. 

Even though AMY1 expanded multiple times during our evolution, you somehow believe that this is just an evolutionary safeguard. Why would our brains evolve to burn carbs, and our saliva evolve to process carbs, if we are truly supposed to eat meat? Why would we evolve to eat meat instead of carbs, just so our bodies can them turn that meat into glucose......which carbs are the perfect source of.......? My dog isn't this dumb.     Again, competently backwards land. A 5 year old could easily figure this out. 

"We don't need claws or long canines"  well at the very least we would need some tenancy to eat meat when we saw an animal, which no human naturally does. I don't need to be taught that I like hot woman, but I definitely needed to be taught to eat meat, even though I always thought it looked and smelt disgusting as my dad was preparing it before cooking. 

"Epidemiology is not good proof"  I don't need good proof. Again, similar to not needing a study telling me to put my d*** inside woman instead of men. I'm not less intelligent than a toddler

"Along with that, archaeological remains of animals near humans, remains of tools used for hunting and butchering meat, remains of a shelter literally made out of mammoth bones, cave paintings depicting humans hunting animals or just animals in general."- would someone get this man a gold star please?

"Also your hypothetical 100,000 years ago doesn't disprove the study" - o golly you got me. It was actually just a hilarious little story intended to more easily capture the retardation of your ideas. Although re-tarded people might find that comparison offensive, as I would too. 

There is no doubt that the ability to eat meat is beneficial for evolving h**o-sapiens. However I am certainly not dumb enough to do so in the 21st century.

The age of information is upon us, and veganism is rapidly spreading. What a strange coincidence. We need some peer reviewed research to find out why this is!

how can you know any of this. this seems completely based on your imagination. People dump the vegan diet cause they lack nutrition value from food and they start craving for fat in maximum for +/- 42 days. Kids are actually being treated of neurodegerarative deseases such as autism and diabetes through a high fat diet. Our blood tests even evolved to measure lipid panels with fractionation tests as now we know that our cholesterol tests are based on poor research that accounted high carb with addition of fat diets. Veganism is becoming less popular this year as we have numerous reports of it lacking real nutrition dense and digestable foods. 

ReplyQuote
Posted : 13/11/2019 4:21 pm
guiduck
Active Member

@pame

I don't think vegetable should be avoided all together. But I've struggled with diarrhea for 3 weeks when switching to a high fat diet that only stopped after I stopped eating fiber, which was really hard to do. From what I've seen they are more about fasting, cleansing and detoxification, but no nutritional value. You develop digestable issues that results in problems with your sleep routine(and this is my main problem with vegetables and I don't have that with fruits). There are also good sources of carbs such as honey or bananas that are very good, it just gets too complicated when I try to find what types of foods would be okay for me to eat and I find it less effortful to just keep myself away from them so I don't get out of ketosis or [Rude Language or Insults are not tolerated] up my sleep schedule.

For better digestability and consequently good sleep this is what would work the best

I'm interest in supplementing with carotenoid now. I've seen multiple times people talking about good food sources for a better skin and they mentioned some that have carotenoids on it but I didn't noticed it. You will probably like this guy too: 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VxROrVfRXr4

I will probably try it with celery and carrots. Thanks man

edit: I'm wondering how much of it should I eat to get those results, they didn't say how much supplementation the group received

ReplyQuote
Posted : 13/11/2019 4:45 pm
Pame
 Pame
Trusted Member

@guiduck Vegetables are abundant in vitamins and minerals.

I recommend choosing foods from this list https://www.myfooddata.com/articles/natural-food-sources-of-beta-carotene.php Spinach is probably the best choice as it also contains a lot of lutein and zeaxanthin which are carotenoids that also contribute greatly to skin color in addition to the beta carotene. Its also a low gas vegetable and shouldn't contribute to digestion issues. Ideally you would pick multiple vegetables to consume daily.

I've also been trying to figure out what amount of carotenoids gives optimal skin tone. Something like 200 grams of spinach and 300 grams of carrots daily should give a nice color. I was initially eating about 300 grams of sweet potato, 200 grams of carrot and 100 grams of spinach daily, and that was enough for multiple people to comment that I was looking really tan and asking if I had been out in the sun a lot.

ReplyQuote
Posted : 13/11/2019 4:59 pm
facegettingworseandworse
Eminent Member

As of yet, I do not believe anyone has actually answered why they believe we expanded our AMY1 gene multiple times. Lots of diagrams and fancy science but my b***** Amy appears to have you raging carnivores stumpt. I apologize for any greif she has caused

ReplyQuote
Posted : 13/11/2019 6:15 pm
sinned
Estimable Member

@pame

You should just read my posts on this thread, my arguments are well cited, I don't think eating vegetables for skin tone is a strong argument. Plant food are simply not digestible or absorbable, many people will have issues with advice to eat foods with carotenoids because they can't convert it into vitamin A, if I find the study I'll link but a significant amount of people cannot convert beta carotene into vitamin A. In addition, vitamin A is a fat soluble vitamin, so to convert beta carotene into vitamin A you need it in the presence of fat. That's why it's probably possible for your skin tone to change, it's your body lacking the ability to convert the carotenoids into vitamin A, I don't think this is a good thing even if it can possibly resemble healthy skin tone.

@facegettingworseandworse I did answer that question in the post I made before this, saliva is one step, one part of the digestive process. You're trying to extrapolate that this one adaptation in one step, one part of the digestive process is evidence that we should be eating carbs despite isotope analyses showing humans were carnivores, our digestive system resembling a carnivores, and a mechanism in which cancer cells favor metabolism through glycolysis, ie the warburg effect.

ReplyQuote
Posted : 13/11/2019 7:34 pm
facegettingworseandworse
Eminent Member

@sinned

Actually I never extrapolated anything. I just made the simple observation, as most scientists have over many years, that our mouths are designed to process carbs into sugar, and that our brains feed on this sugar. 

So to answer my question, you have no idea. I completly understand your difficult positon, since it makes absolutely no sense for this evolutionary trait to occur, given your theory that we are meat eaters. A shame

I wonder at what point you believe we actually became predominant meat eaters, and why this would have happened after 50+ million years of being mostly herbivorus. I would be surprised if that had EVER happened to any species in history in such a short amount of time. 

 

ReplyQuote
Posted : 13/11/2019 9:37 pm
sinned
Estimable Member

@facegettingworseandworse

There's examples of such things occurring, whether an animal turns from herbivore to carnivore or vice versa in a relatively short amount of time, the marsupial lion's ancestors were herbivores, panda's ancestors were carnivorous. You are making the assumption that our distant ancestors were herbivorous, even though that is probably not the case. We've assumed for a long time that chimps were herbivorous for example, only to find out they actually hunt. And yes, you did extrapolate, just because we have one adaption to help beak down carbs, doesn't mean we should eat carbs. There are many examples of these sort of adaptions taking place, like sea wolves https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=idp3H6K3Ys8&t=

These wolves have some adaptations that make them better in water, this doesn't mean they can live in the water like a water-dwelling animal can. In the same way, humans have eaten carbs, so we still have adaptations in the same vain, these are relatively minor when you consider everything else. Your body produces it's own carbs through gluconeogenesis, carbs are not essential, just because the brain feeds on carbs doesn't mean you require the ingestion of carbs. 

If it's so inconceivable humans have evolved eatting meat, why is it all the isotope studies show that we were meat eaters? You said this method of study was debunked yet I proved it's only in isolation that isotope analysis not reliable, when using CSIA, researchers are able to separately analyze the amino acids contained in the collagen, we know from this the food that humans ate, and it's undeniably meat. You can try to deny it all you want but we ate meat, furthermore, it was our primary source of nutrition, we are carnivores, all evidence points to that fact. 

ReplyQuote
Posted : 13/11/2019 10:54 pm
20_year_old_mewing
Active Member

I never denied that we have eaten meat lol. I already agreed that we have eaten meat and that the ability to do so is benifical for survival. 

You still haven't taken a guess about Amy

 

 

ReplyQuote
Posted : 13/11/2019 11:52 pm
sinned
Estimable Member

@20_year_old_mewing

My point is though we are carnivores, not just that we ate meat, which was the crux of the debate. You believe we are starchivores despite lacking evidence and the fact that majority isotope studies show prehistoric humans were high trophic level carnivores, and that when analyzed further with CSIA it is clear that the results of the isotope analyses is due to meat eating.

ReplyQuote
Posted : 14/11/2019 12:35 am
facegettingworseandworse
Eminent Member

I don't need to continue this conversation. You clearly enjoy eating meat and probably always have. I was enjoying it hours before I decided to stop eating it.

Anyone with half a brain can read this thread and determine that I am making sense and that you are unable to answer my questions in a way that lines up with your ideas. AKA being logically consistent, which is an impossible task when you are arguing something illogical. 

All your rebuttals of my points basically come down to "but that isn't everything" or "that doesn't scientifically prove anything" or "we just hung on to that trait cause meh" or "just because we don't have claws or sharp teeth doesn't mean we are not carnivores"  Clearly you are on the back-foot in regards to my points. 

Something that I have noticed about you guys, is that despite the clear, global consensus that we are mostly plant eaters, you speak in a way, as if to pretend that this consensus it not the case. Even though most people attain most of their calories from plants, you speak as if your words shouldn't surprise anyone, even though you know they would. As if to act like "yeah of course we are carnivores". Basically faking it until you making it, or just until you get a little dopamine hit at least. 

I have never seen any meat eater argue their point like someone on the plant based side. There's no vigor, no confidence in what you say. You speak like robots. You speak as if you don't care about whether anyone eats a specific diet or not. Frankly, you speak like a loser on the internet. I never get the sense that you guys live very happy lives at all, or that you have something to live for. The very structure of this conversation will show anyone reading who the enforcer is and who is on the back foot, despite you pretending that it's the other way around. 

I have had this exact discussion a good 100 times this year. No one is ever able to answer my points in a way that semi convincingly supports their argument. 

-Over the last couple thousand years, the majority of calories consumed by all humans have been starches. 

-Humans have no natural inclination to eat meat

-Many people including myself have found raw meat quite unappealing for years, despite always eating cooked meat. Now, does this mean that you should eat it if you DON'T feel this way? of course not. Again, this is the backfoot. If you DON'T feel something, that isn't a reason to DO something. The front foot would be humans who naturally salivate when they see/smell raw meat, which again is not the case. And then if you were to argue that we eat our meat cooked---- if that were the case we would find raw meat somewhat appealing, It's similar to how we can all tell when a 10 year old girl/boy is attractive/sexually appealing, even though they are not sexually mature yet. When someone calls a young girl "gorgeous" or "pretty" or a young boy "handsome", they all mean the same thing---sexually attractive (or at least, whatever they ARE calling them, is similar/related to being sexually attractive). 

 

I mean no rudeness/harm with anything I say. I am just being honest. 

 

I'm not going to reply here anymore. I have said what I have wanted/could be bothered to say, and I am convinced that an open minded person without any biases or desires to eat a cetain way, will agree with alot of what I have said

ReplyQuote
Posted : 14/11/2019 3:11 am
Pame
 Pame
Trusted Member

@sinned Not all of beta carotene is supposed to be converted into vitamin A, just some of it. I don't think there would have been so much effort from politicians these recent years to make us eat more vegetables for longevity and health if they're not at all absorbable or digestible.

When eating more fruits and vegetables has a direct and enormous impact on your attractiveness I think it quite clearly communicates that this is something thats health inducing and desirable for your body.

ReplyQuote
Posted : 14/11/2019 4:34 am
sinned
Estimable Member

@pame

This is off memory, if you're interested I'll try to find the studies, only 5-10% of plants ingested can be digested, the rest comes out as excrement. In addition, there's a significant portion of the population who can't convert beta carotene into vitamin A at all. I'm of the opinion you shouldn't eat foods you don't need and aren't physiologically adapted for. While we don't know the skin tone of prehistoric humans, by every other measure they were healthy, and in the majority of isotope analyses it is shown they were carnivores.

ReplyQuote
Posted : 14/11/2019 5:59 am
facegettingworseandworse
Eminent Member

@pame

Couldn't agree more. One tip I have is purple potatoes/purple sweet potatoes. One of the healthiest foods on planet earth. As you have said, getting the carotinioids is fairly easy. 

My advice;

-Base the diet on starches

-Supplement with fruits and vegetables

-Eat a very wide variety if you can. An easy way to keep it simple is to rotate the specific plant foods every couple of weeks. This way you can eat a small/simple variety day to day, but over months you will create a diverse microbiome. 

-Try to eat some healthy plant fats, vitamin c, and small amounts of the onion family during as many meals as possible. 

-I personally am aiming for at least 75% carbs. No reason to be below 70%. Remember, any amount of protein or fat over what you need = aging    

-try to avoid exothermic heat during eating. eating a wide variety will help balance things out, especially antioxidants. there are also different types of antioxidants. good video for this https://youtu.be/7nz5Kza9Bqg     blueberries are my go to for avoiding exothermic heat- this may be due to how they lower the blood sugar spike, but i'm not 100% on this.    I am beginning to think that not cooking my sweet potatoes as much (for chewing purposes) may cause additional exothermic heat--- this is a complete guess though. 

-no reason to eat past 5-6 pm if you don't have to. Eating at night causes higher blood sugar responses because our bodies are winding down for sleep..... and then the sleep itself is also effected.     load up in the morning. for example 40% at 7am  35% at 11am and 25% at 3pm.   

 

 

ReplyQuote
Posted : 14/11/2019 6:26 am
Progress
Member Moderator
Posted by: @facegettingworseandworse

Anyone with half a brain can read this thread and determine that I am making sense and that you are unable to answer my questions in a way that lines up with your ideas.

[...]

The very structure of this conversation will show anyone reading who the enforcer is and who is on the back foot, despite you pretending that it's the other way around. 

I figured you would appreciate my unbiased input, with me having half a brain and other cool stuff: you come off as being so emotionally invested in your dietary preferences that you commit several argumentative fallacies and transparent projection in an attempt to justify your refusal to consider the validity of the opposing arguments and evidence you have been offered. It seems that someone disagreeing with your proposed dietary ideas is practically an offense to you. For all your talk about the haplessness, ignorance and illogicality of meat eaters, you are using a lot of hubristic rhetoric to disguise what could only be seen as your own lack of intellectual depth. The totality of your actual argumentation in this thread could be summed up to a few superficial factoids, a couple of anecdotes and bursts of one-dimensional reasoning.

I never understood this herbivore vs carnivore debate, since humans have never been strictly either. We have always been opportunistic omnivores. What this means is that we make us of the cards our environment has dealt us. Due to the vast diversity of environments us humans live in, attempting to impose universality on the human diet is awkward at best and impossible at worst. Dietary habits that improve the health of one will ruin that of another. Even on individual level, foods that worked yesterday may not work tomorrow. The needs change all the time.

What I propose is that, instead of using impersonal science to determine personal dietary needs, the reader would learn to intuitively listen to what their body is in need of. With practice, you may learn to understand how your dietary needs change all the time based on seasons, activities and other circumstances in your life. Feeling the need to limit yourself to one dietary framework is borderline orthorexic. Doing so may bring comfort and calm your mind, but what it cannot bring you is optimal health. 

ReplyQuote
Posted : 14/11/2019 7:45 am
Autokrator and Kyte liked
Kyte
 Kyte
Estimable Member
Posted by: @progress
Posted by: @facegettingworseandworse

Anyone with half a brain can read this thread and determine that I am making sense and that you are unable to answer my questions in a way that lines up with your ideas.

[...]

The very structure of this conversation will show anyone reading who the enforcer is and who is on the back foot, despite you pretending that it's the other way around. 

I figured you would appreciate my unbiased input, with me having half a brain and other cool stuff: you come off as being so emotionally invested in your dietary preferences that you commit several argumentative fallacies and transparent projection in an attempt to justify your refusal to consider the validity of the opposing arguments and evidence you have been offered. It seems that someone disagreeing with your proposed dietary ideas is practically an offense to you. For all your talk about the haplessness, ignorance and illogicality of meat eaters, you are using a lot of hubristic rhetoric to disguise what could only be seen as your own lack of intellectual depth. The totality of your actual argumentation in this thread could be summed up to a few superficial factoids, a couple of anecdotes and bursts of one-dimensional reasoning.

I never understood this herbivore vs carnivore debate, since humans have never been strictly either. We have always been opportunistic omnivores. What this means is that we make us of the cards our environment has dealt us. Due to the vast diversity of environments us humans live in, attempting to impose universality on the human diet is awkward at best and impossible at worst. Dietary habits that improve the health of one will ruin that of another. Even on individual level, foods that worked yesterday may not work tomorrow. The needs change all the time.

What I propose is that, instead of using impersonal science to determine personal dietary needs, the reader would learn to intuitively listen to what their body is in need of. With practice, you may learn to understand how your dietary needs change all the time based on seasons, activities and other circumstances in your life. Feeling the need to limit yourself to one dietary framework is borderline orthorexic. Doing so may bring comfort and calm your mind, but what it cannot bring you is optimal health. 

The End

ReplyQuote
Posted : 14/11/2019 1:51 pm
facegettingworseandworse
Eminent Member

@Progress

As I have already mentioned, everything I have put forward in this thread, as my way of discussing this issue, has been ignored or refutted by lack of scientific study.

The video I linked near the very beginning basically debunks this entire thread, but nobody actually bothered to watch it or respond to it.

The video debunks his main claim about isotopic values. And his response was "for the most part the isotopic test is reliable" 

So he chose to ignore it. I then followed up.

And once again, he ignores the evidence that I provide, which was my very first rebuttal of his first argument, at the start. 

The irony of being told that I have "refused to take into account other people's valid evidence" WHEN THE EVIDENCE I PROVIDED, DISPROVING THAT EVIDENCE, WAS IGNORED!  cmon dude W T F

So while I agree that I have been far from perfect in this thread, I think it is unfair for you to signal me out like that.

The video also addresses ideas about the variations of human diet, which you discuss @Progress

Also regarding eating foods that make you feel good. There are some issues with this idea. Once you invite certain types of bacteria into your body, your body naturally wants more of it. The idea that you are what you eat is very much true. If you eat dead animals, your body is partially made of dead animals, and this obviously influences the type of bacteria your microbiome wants ingested. However, you can change your microbiome very dramatically. So to quite a large extent, you can "feel good" eating many different things, some will do better at promoting health than others.

I would also like to point out that different animals can evolve the same trait for differenet reasons and/or different traits for the same reason. This appears to not be apparent to many in this thread

 

ReplyQuote
Posted : 14/11/2019 6:02 pm
sinned
Estimable Member

@facegettingworseandworse

She never mentions compound-specific isotope analysis.

https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015EGUGA..1713956P/abstract

"The application of compound specific analysis of specific components of food products helps to increase the precision of established models. Compound groups like fatty acids (FAMEs), vitamins or amino acids can help to add further detailed information on physiological pathways and local conditions (micro-climate, soil, water availability) and therefore might add further information for the separation of micro-localities."

She says that n-15 levels can be affected by water availability and water stress, compound-specific isotope analysis fixes this issue. Not that the levels change, but CSIA can make up for the inaccuracies of bulk stable isotope analysis.

ReplyQuote
Posted : 14/11/2019 8:37 pm
facegettingworseandworse
Eminent Member

@sinned

Thanks

i'll check it out

ReplyQuote
Posted : 14/11/2019 8:48 pm
Goblin_slayer
Active Member

This is a post from another forum I'm in (not mine) thought it was interesting

Plant fats are less stable than animal fats and oxidize rapidly outside of the body as well as inside. This means increased body levels of oxidized cholesterol.
Plants never contain cholesterol, this means the body needs to produce it endogenously and waste precious nutrients to do so. If it uses plant fats as stated above the produced cholesterol will be fragile and prone to oxidation. In comparison raw milk for example supplies the body with unoxidized large particle cholesterol which is a ROS scavenger in the body and the necessary building block for our hormones. It also protects our myelin sheaths in the brain and prevents alzheimers. Furthermore every cell in the body is built from cholesterol. Limiting its intake is thus very counterproductive to health in even many more ways than I just listed.
Plant minerals are almost always present in the form of oxalates, not only are these almost unusable by the body they are also anti nutrients in general and bind already existing bioavailable minerals into inert forms. Minerals from animal sources are largely present as taurate which is highly bioavailable. Oxalates can furthermore create the symptom known as "leaky gut" in people who are genetically prone to it.
Plant proteins do not increase IGF-1 like most animal proteins do. This may be a benefit to you if you have cancer or you care about nothing except for maximum longevity but it will lead to decreased bone density, muscle mass and skin and teeth quality. Strict vegans who have done the diet for several years get brittle bones, muscle wasting and lose their teeth. Endstage vegans even lose bone mass in their face leading to the irreversible appearance of extreme aging.
Plant proteins are the least bioavailable of all. The highest ones are: Whey, Egg, Milk, Fish, Beef, Chicken and Casein in that order. Thus Vegan Protein intake which is already low due to plants not producing much protein is even worse when this is kept in mind. Rice protein is only 74% bioavailable, soy protein only 59% and bean protein only 49%. Furthermore plant proteins are not complete proteins, they lack certain amino acids which while it won't kill you to not ingest them will affect your health and optimal performance levels both physically as well as mentally. This also leads to lower muscle mass as some of the lacking amino acids have an anabolic and anti-catabolic effect.
Plants being high in carbs in many different forms always increase endogenous glucose levels. Glucose metabolism is inherently inflammatory compared to the ketogenic metabolism which leads to worse skin, overall unnecessary body inflammation and creeping, slow, cell and organ damage. Furthermore the abundance of glucose is a driver of candida infections and insulin resistance. This is most often seen in Fruitarians but affects Vegans in general.
Plants do not have Vitamin K2 which is necessary for the body to correctly use Vitamin D and deposit calcium into the bones. Plants only contain Vitamin K1 except for fermented soy beans (Natto). But even if you eat Natto every day the form of vitamin K2 is less bioavailable than the animal form.
Plants do not provide the body with Vitamin B12 which is needed for nerve cell-, blood platelet- and DNA strand production.
Plants do not contain heme-iron which is the form of iron the body needs. Iron in plants is almost exclusively iron oxalate as mentioned previously.
Plants do not contain Vitamin A, they only contain Beta carotene which many people genetically cannot convert into active Vitamin A. The ones who are able to convert it still waste other nutrients in the conversion process compared to simply taking up Vitamin A from animal sources.
Plants do not contain DHA (active form of Omega 3). Some contain ALA which is a precursor but the body can only convert about 0.5% of it into active DHA making it impossible to reach functional intake levels. Some vegans claim you can simply guzzle Flaxseed oil but again, flax is only ALA and it comes with xenoestrogens, anti nutrients and highly oxidative fat from the flax. You would also consume ridiculous amounts of calories if you did that. 😆
Plants do not contain Vitamin D. Vitamin D can be endogenously produced through daily prolonged sun exposure but people who avoid the sun due to its skin- and DNA damaging effects need to have it in their diet.
Plants do not contain (I'm gonna group these up as the list is getting too long) Taurine, Carnosine, Carnitine, Creatine, Choline, CLA and CoQ10. Vegan shills will tell you these are not essential nutrients but they are absolutely essential for health and optimal performance. Take Carnitine for example, in the body it fills the role of a methyl donor which is extremely important in endogenous protein synthesis such as for muscle, joint or skin building/repair. This process is rate-limited by methionine which loses a methyl group in the process, Creatine can re-methylate the methionine i.e. recycle it back into its active state. This is just one of many functions of Carnitine and the functions of the other substances I listed are tremendously important as well, but it would take a lot of text to talk about them all. You can go to examine.com and punch them into the search to get a basic overview of why they should be in your diet.
Plants especially seeds and nightshades contain harmful poisons, some of which are still present in small quantities even when cooked. Humans have developed some defense mechanisms against these poisons but they are always taxing to the body and depending on genetics some people are not as adapted towards neutralizing these as some others are. Animal products contain no toxins at all unless the animals were diseased and kept/fed extremely poorly.
Plants also contain anti-nutrients other than oxalates. Among them are Lectins, Tannins, Amines, Trypsin inhibitors, several different FODMAPS, Salicylates, Sulphites, Benzoates, Lignins, Triterpenes, Glycosides, several different Alkaloids, several different Saponins and Phytic acid. As mentioned previously they lead to mineral deficiencies, histamine reactions, decreased dietary nutritional uptake, liver damage, inflammation, kidney stones, inhibition of stomach and colon enzymes and can lead to leaky gut and IBS.
Plants contain a lot of fiber which irritates the colon and can lead to cancer.

Lastly, the body is very resilient. Minerals and Vitamins are stored in body fat so someone who is fat and goes vegan can live off the stored nutrients for a while and appear healthy. People who are already skinny will quickly run into the body wasting effects I've mentioned. In general, plants should not only not be your main food intake they should be avoided entirely whenever possible.

ReplyQuote
Posted : 15/11/2019 2:07 am
Silberman
Active Member

Facegettingworseanworse,

As I pointed out to you further up this thread, the woman in the youtube lecture you refer to confirms that our ancestors were carnivores without herself realizing it. This happens around 13.30 when she talks about the n-15 measurements. These show that our ancestors who lived on the African savanna had even higher levels than lions. She says that it is obvious that our ancestors could not have eaten more meat than a lion, and that the n-15 measurements must therefore be incorrect.

Here she shows that she does not understand what she is talking about. (This is not her field of study either.) The fact that our ancestors had n-15 levels higher than lions can easily be explained by the fact that they not only hunted herbivores, but also carnivores. This fits with what we know about how they hunted. They did not behave like other predators, but used weapons and animal traps. Then you can not only catch herbivores, but also carnivores. As sinned writes, recent and even more precise measurement methods have confirmed what the n-15 studies have shown. 

This woman obviously has the best intentions, but in this lecture she makes a fool of herself and manages to confirm exactly what she is trying to disprove. I would therefore very much appreciate it if you stopped using her lecture as a proof that our ancestors were herbivores.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FNIoKmMq6cs&feature=youtu.be  

Silberman

 

 

 

ReplyQuote
Posted : 15/11/2019 9:49 am