FRUITARIAN DIET WILL TRANSFORM YOUR RUNNING!!! According to an excellent runner. Must read.

Kipketer_Pumpkin_Eater wrote:

Why don't YOU, MEANWHILE, quit BEING AN A**HOLE. If you have eyes, you could have seen that I asked in that same post to clarify to whom you were referring--the poster or the athlete.

i remember wrote:

Whoaaaaa... sounds like you're eating wayyyy too much protein. Calm down.

Sorry, I've been maxing out my legally allowable limits of testosterone recently, so I've been on edge. Hehe. Just kidding.

Check out this, over 1000 miles in one week as a fruitarian/vegan whatever you call it :)

You get your omega 3s by eating 2 heads of romaine per day plus all of the fruit. Protein is always great, 70+g per day, iron is fine as long as you eat enough calories and greens. its like your education on nutrition and basic human physiology is absent. did you go to school??

Ever hear of dates and bananas? Two EXCELLENT sources of calories. It's easy to eat 7000+ per day eating these, once you've stretched your stomach.

Typical day for ya :)

Breakfast: 14 bananas and a head of romaine blended up

Lunch: 20 medjool dates, 5 bananas, a pear, and some berries blended in a smoothie

Snack: 15 oranges

Dinner: 1 head of romaine, 1 head of red leaf lettuce, one avocado, a few bell peppers, 16oz of tomatoes, some shredded carrots, and beets

That is a "typical" day i guess

yeah too bad I am deficient in all of my nutrients and vitamins today..bummer. lets not forget the all-mighty protein

http://i44.tinypic.com/33f6n8o.png

http://i44.tinypic.com/2mfez4z.png

http://i39.tinypic.com/23kdw13.png

striving for it wrote:

yeah too bad I am deficient in all of my nutrients and vitamins today..bummer. lets not forget the all-mighty protein

http://i44.tinypic.com/33f6n8o.pnghttp://i44.tinypic.com/2mfez4z.pnghttp://i39.tinypic.com/23kdw13.png

Nice. On online dietary management tool that helps to automatically tabulate and calculate nutritional content of foods? Of course, I would want to make sure the data is sourced from the most reputable possible database, but doing the math yourself--unaided by computer-powered calculators and programming efficiencies--is certainly tedious. Cool.

This is a joke, right?

So you have below the RDA for protein and your protein quality is exceptionally low (very low EAA and BCAA content), which is even more problematic when you're getting what, maybe 70g of protein AND you are physically active?

There is nearly no heme-iron in your diet.

EPA/DHA is practically non-existent, as is B-12 and Vitamin D3.

I could go on, but it's pointless.

FRUTARIAN DIET WILL TRANSFORM YOU..

...to a PU$$Y.

lulz wrote:

This is a joke, right?

So you have below the RDA for protein and your protein quality is exceptionally low (very low EAA and BCAA content), which is even more problematic when you're getting what, maybe 70g of protein AND you are physically active?

There is nearly no heme-iron in your diet.

EPA/DHA is practically non-existent, as is B-12 and Vitamin D3.

I could go on, but it's pointless.

The RDA for protein, as set by the Federal Government, has not only changed over the years, but is lacking Scientific evidence supporting its precise amount. As I said, you don't seem to have any Scientific support to back up your assertions about how much protein we supposedly need. It's a MYTH that humans need as much protein as you probably contend. I can give you studies that show that humans are not only fine with far less protein but enjoy far more optimum health than people who have much higher dietary protein intake--all else being equal.

Haven't I told you at least twice to stop using jargon? Who are you fooling. WOW--very low EAA amount. What amino acids do you think we are talking about anyways, besides EAA?

And then you F***king repeat the sole issues about veganism/vegetarianism that I myself raise. You yourself NEVER raised them until I mentioned them. I doubt you even knew what DHA or EPA or Vitamin B12 were before I discussed them in a post, because any knowledgeable critic of veganism/vegetarian diets would be familiar with them. You are stealing my own DAMN ideas. Get a f**king brain you moron.

lulz wrote:

This is a joke, right?

The only joke is you and your stream of joke posts in this thread. Keep posting lulz, I dare you to keep your golden tidbits coming and I'm going to make a highlight reel for all to see.

Protein intake recommendations by the government, in particular, are quite troubling and out of sync with good nutritional science and practice. There are Scientists who discuss why this should be the case (how we got to this point)--but politics aside, there really shouldn't be a significant range for such a basic macro-nutrient (in recent times, if I recall, these recommendations allowed too much of a range). The upper limits of endorsed protein intake are totally reckless from the viewpoint of public health policy. Such excessive protein intake is a sure and Scientifically proven factor towards higher incidences of disease and Cancer, and ultimately death, in the long run.

lol you are beyond clueless.

Start here

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14971434

and then go on with your search.

The government recommendations are quite low and only relevant to sedentary individuals. If you are active and particularly if you are doing resistance training, you need substantially higher protein intake for optimal health and performance.

Doesn't look like it's a joke to the World Health Organization or elite Kenyan runners. http://running.competitor.com/2013/03/nutrition/protein-intake-and-performance-for-runners_22711

lulz wrote:

What myth is debunked? Who says he is telling the truth at all about what his supplementation is like or if the blood test is entirely fraudulent? You simply cannot get enough of those essential nutrients on such a diet. It is impossible without heavy supplementation.

10% protein is a joke. No wonder the guy looks like shit.

kanny wrote:

10% protein is a joke. No wonder the guy looks like shit.

[/quote]

Here's a KENYAN guy who refused to eat low protein diet and instead went high protein/high fat. Result:

Needless to say, he gets all the long distance chicks.

kanny wrote:

Doesn't look like it's a joke to the World Health Organization or elite Kenyan runners.

http://running.competitor.com/2013/03/nutrition/protein-intake-and-performance-for-runners_22711

lulz wrote:

What myth is debunked? Who says he is telling the truth at all about what his supplementation is like or if the blood test is entirely fraudulent? You simply cannot get enough of those essential nutrients on such a diet. It is impossible without heavy supplementation.

10% protein is a joke. No wonder the guy looks like shit.

The same article suggests 30% protein for active individuals. Are you fvcking blind?

Did you even read what I wrote? Where did I say it was a joke to the author of the article?

lulz wrote:

lol you are beyond clueless.

Start here

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14971434

None of your posts are kind, well-intentioned or supported. You keep resorting to the same old recipe:

1. insult

1b. saying someone lacks insight

2. and then a very terse statement or no statement at all, like your post, that just simply states some fact, without your own words to explain or paraphrase anything, along with some non-specific link.

If someone was truly ignorant and you were kind-hearted, you would at least meet them half way and provide SOME explanations of things. Why should 30% be a good amount of calories to have from protein for an athlete? What is both the theoretical idea supporting this (human biochemistry) as well as empirical scientific data and research? I am not, as jerkoffs in other threads say nonsensically, demanding that you answer such questions conclusively and exhaustively and unreasonably. But if you were kind, you would at least elaborate on your own thoughts on the matter...

But I'll start (these studies admittedly do not cover research correlating protein intake and athletic training or performance, but that does not mean they are not relevant)

Campbell TC. "The dietary causes of degenerative diseases: nutrients vs. foods." In: N.J. Temple and D.P. Burkitt (eds.), Western diseases: their dietary prevention and reversibility, pp. 119-152. Totowa, NJ: Humana Press, 1994.

Campbell TC, and Chen J. "Diet and chronic degenerative diseases: a summary of results from an ecologic study in rural China." In: N.J. Temple and D.P. Burkitt (eds.), Western diseases: their dietary preventation and reversibility, pp. 67-118. Totowa, NJ: Humana Press, 1994.

Esselstyn CB, Ellis SG, Medendrop SV, et al. "A strategy to arrest and reverse coronary artery disease: a 5-year longitudinal study of a single physician's practice." J. Family Practice 41 (1995): 560-568

Ornish D., Brown SE, Scherwitz LW, et al. "Can lifestyle changes reverse coronary heart disease?" Lancet 336 (1990): 129-133

MAdhavan TV, and Gopalan C. "The effect of dietary protein on carcinogenesis of aflatoxin." Arch. Path 85 (1968): 133-137

Huang HH, Hawrylewicz EJ, Kissane JQ, et al. "Effect of protein deit release of prolactin and ovarian steroids in female rats." Nutr. Rpts. Int. 26 (1982): 807-820

"Why was there such a massive variation in cancer rates among different counties when genetic backgrounds were similar from place to place? Might it be possible that cancer is largely due to environmental/lifestyle factors, and not genetics?" (-T. Colin Campbell)

See:

Li J-Y, Liu B-Q, Li G-Y, et al. "Atlas of cancer mortality in the People's Republic of China. An aid for cancer control and research." Int. J. Epid. 10 (1981): 127-133.

SerVaas C: "Diets that protected against cancers in China." The Saturday Evening Post October 1990: 26-28

"Several studies have now shown, in both experimental animals and in humans, that consuming animal-based protein increases blood cholesterol levels." (-T. Colin Campbell)

See: Carroll KK. "Dietary proteins and amino acids--their effects on cholesterol metabolism." In: M. J. Gibney and D. Kirtchevsky (eds.), Animal and Vegetable Proteins in Lipid Metabolism and Atherosclerosis, pp. 9-17. New York,, NY: Alan R. Liss, Inc., 1983.

National Research Council. Diet, Nutrition and Cancer. Washington, D.C: National Academy Press, 1982.

United States Department of Health and Human Services: The Surgeon General's Report on Nutrition and Health. Washington, DC: Superintendant of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, 1988.

National REsearch Council, and Committee on Diet and Health. Diet and health: implications for reducing chronic disease risk. Washington, D.C: National Academy Press, 1989.

Expert Panel. Food, nutrition and the prevention of cancer, a global perspective. Washington, DC: American Institute for Cancer Research/World Cancer Research Fund, 1997.

Armstrong D, and Doll R. "Environmental factors and cancer incidence and mortality in different countries, with special reference to dietary practices." Int. J. Cancer 15 (1975); 617-631

Haenszel W, and Kurihara M. "Studies of Japanese Migrants: mortality from cancer and other disease among Japanese and the United States." J Natl Cancer Inst 40 (1968): 43-68

Guo W, Li J, Blot WJ, et al. "Correlations of dietary intake and blood nutrient levels with esophageal cancer mortality in China." Nutr. Cancer 13 (1990): 121-127

Horio F, Youngman LD, Bell RC, et al. "Thermogenesis, low-protein diets, and decreased development of AFB1-induced preneoplastic foci in rat liver." Nutr. Cancer 16 (1991): 31-41.

The reason I cite these studies--not all of which are related directly to an exclusive independent variable of protein intake--is that, I, too, was once like you. I believed the more protein, the better. I read books by athletes, and general textbook advice from nutritionists and yada yada. I never asked about what the Scientific literature and evidence was for this, or even what the deeper theoretical explanations were for this. When I came across studies like the ones I have mentioned, they made me question my existing beliefs.

I am, contrary to what the few inconsiderate haters have suggested, not purporting to know all the answers or many of the answers. I am, however, an individual who is in search of answers. I do not have the free-time nor financial means or lifestyle security necessary to devote time to immerse myself in pursuit of this quest, but I am open and searching for fruitful discussion on the matter. I am in conversation with University Professors, academic researchers, and researchers and experts outside of academic settings, currently, I might add. I am making inquiries and getting opinions. I am not yet searching a lot of scholarly databases, mostly because I do not have home access to them, and I have limited time in my schedule to spend on institutional computers with such access.

There is reason to be cautious about protein intake. I might add that, I once believed that protein intake was, essentially, UNCONDITIONALLY good. But very few individual nutrients--micro or macro--are UNCONDITIONALLY good. There are usually caps to optimal amounts of intake of those macro or micro nutrients, or some other considerations which would lead cautious people to limit intake to reasonable amounts (opportunity cost for other nutrients, particularly in the case of macro-nutrients--you cannot increase, by definition, your percentage of calories from protein without that coming at the expense of, most probably, carbohydrates--since, I assume most people are not looking to make huge increases in their dietary fat consumption!!!)

I don't have any definitive answers, and I am flexible. But I am thirsty for a deeper explanation from high protein diet advocates why this should be so. It would be nice for some Scientist somewhere, in support of high protein diets, to explain what occurs at different levels of protein intake, and to really dig deep into the nuances. To me, I am getting mixed messages from many sources, and all in all, no specific message, as to exactly what the truth of the matter is, what volumes and percentages of protein are good or bad to eat, etc.

Some folks suggest a very wide range is permissible, while others suggest that there are vastly different outcomes at either ends of those ranges--these are two totally different contentions, with two totally different implications about good health, bad health, good performance, bad performance, good eating, bad eating, etc. They imply two understandings, two theoretical frameworks that are contradictory. It's not a fun situation.

I say all this to illustrate my feelings: Protein is not as simple and "obvious" a matter as some people make it out to be. It is not a "foregone" conclusion. And, there are some studies that suggest that the stakes are, in essence, nothing less than our health and risk of life-threatening and quality of life destroying disease. So, yes, to an extent, I take it seriously.

striving for it wrote:

LOL just gotta laugh at this post. I have been eating a high fruit, not fruitarian, high carb low fat low protein low sodium vegan diet now for 3 years and i am in the best shape of my life.

i remember wrote:

This is the same guy who a couple years ago said not to eat any vegetables, only fruit, and thinks his 37 minute 10k is world class - delusional.

Kipketer_Pumpkin_Eater wrote:

First of all, it's not very respectful to call someone delusional.

You are being mean and I doubt anyone with a 37m 10k is bragging on Letsrun about it, so you are surely engaging in hyperbole.

See, now he's posted twice more, still think he's not bragging huh.

i remember wrote:

See, now he's posted twice more, still think he's not bragging huh.

You quoted excerpts from three different posts in your post. And then you say someone has posted twice more and they don't think they are bragging. Huh?

Who and what are you talking about, referring to?

Who is bragging? And who doesn't think they are bragging? And who has posted "twice more"? And what does any of that have to do with excerpts from three different poster's posts? (Those posts which are not directly, sequentially related (in an unbroken post and response and post and response chain))

The first person you quote seems to advocate vegetarianism/veganism/fruitarianism.

The second poster you quoted was criticizing the athlete that is the subject/prompt of this thread (which was not clear until it was clarified later)

Then you quote me reacting to the second poster you quoted, because I was not clear who he was referring to.

The confusion between me and the second poster you quoted was later cleared up.

Are you saying the fruitarian athlete is bragging? Are you saying I am bragging? And who posted twice more. And where is the evidence for bragging or posting twice more in any of the posts you quoted? You don't even quote more than one post from a single poster, so it's not clear who "posted" twice more.

The reference to bragging in the posts you are quoting refer, ultimately, to some other person not making the posts you quoted.

Definitely wayyy too much protein. :-o