This is dumb.
This is dumb.
YMMV wrote:
Your claim to be a "science guy" is comparable to AOC claiming to be an "economist", although she supposedly has at least a piece of paper to back up her sad claim.
You make the exact same arguments that I would have made...in 1977. The fact that you had never even heard of antinutrients (one of the most critical health-affecting components of plant products) until a few weeks ago is testimony to your head-in-the-sand/fingers-in-the-ears blinkered mindset. Stop giving out advice on diet until you can catch up to the 21st century on the issues. Stick to what you know: vlogging your MUT stuff in the meantime.
Why don't YOU "stop giving out diet advice" ??? Why the F-CK should anyone listen to YOU??? Because you jumped on the bandwagon of all these idiotic fad diet trends ?? Wow, you and 1000's and 1000's of other idiots. Your "new cutting edge!" diet knowledge is dime a dozen internet nonsense.
And the hilarious and ironic thing about your types continually spouting off about "diet advice stuck in the past, catch up to the NEW knowledge!" is that the absolute, current, and up to date, and most recent diet advice from virtually ALL of the top science/health/nutrition advisory groups around the world goes against your "exciting NEW 'knowledge' " crap. Virtually all expert organizations agree with the following:
Eat more whole grains (yes, carbs, fiber)
Eat more fruit (yes, carbs/fiber)
Eat more veggies (carbs, fiber, but low cal)
Eat LESS Red Meat
Eat LESS sat fat
(likely) Eat more low fat Dairy
Eat more legumes/beans
Eat more nuts
Eat more UNsaturated Fats
Eat lean cuts of meat (if eating meat)
(and yes, eat less sugar)
Virtually ALL of the above goes against your idiotic VERY LOW CARB-KETO-DON'T EAT GRAINS-FIBER DOESN'T MATTER-PALEO-MEAT FIRST! fad diet BS.
Expert group after expert group have looked at the most current and most up-to-date way of crunching data and examining clinical trials and population data, and have even taken a serious look at the claims of your paleo-low-carb heroes, and the above are their current recommendations.
Why don't YOU stop getting brainwashed by internet whaco's looking to make a $ off gullible fools like you who will literally eat up any and all "NEW AND EXCITING" , sexy against-the-grain diet advice. People like you are sitting ducks for them to sucker in with their "rogue"/contrarian viewpoints.
Join US in the 21st century, and stopping promoting untested, BS, anecdotal advice.
SomeoneWhoKnows wrote:
Sugar is bad for you no matter where it comes from and no matter if you eat the whole fruit or not. Added fiber does not negate the negative effects of sugar.
if sugar were bad for humans/mammals/vertebrates/animals we'd evolve a distaste for it. We haven't.
YMMV is an old grumpy idiot who thinks he's some edgy youngster. He's not gonna change. Best way to ignore this slimy troll.
That list is exactly the same as it was in 1980, when the current holocaust of obesity and disease (particularly autoimmune disease) hit high gear and has not abated. The political-industrial establishment, including the ADA, AHA, FDA, etc.. has a huge (as in billion$ from their primary donors from Big Agra and Big Pharma) stake in continuing this status quo which they initiated and continue ram home throughout the media and academia. What I am providing is information which is alternative, and yes, contradictory for the most part, but which is based on current research, most of which is underfunded and repressed when possible.
I encourage anyone who is experiencing health and performance success with these conventional recommendations to, by all means, stick with them. If however, you find that your results are wanting in terms of energy level, recovery, immune function, orthopedic health, or even mental health, I think that the alternatives which I have offered, and have helped tens of thousands, are well worth a look. In other words, YMMV, but NEVER should you settle for compromised health. Never stop evolving,
The rabidity of my mostly anon opposition here is telling with regard to the level of fear and confusion they are experiencing. Whether their basis is egoic or economic, or both, is none of my concern. They are the epitome of those who are unwilling and unable to evolve as athletes or as human beings.
wait, you're worried about all the money from "Big Agra" trying to push those evil vegetable and fruit crops? Realize meat/dairy is a Billions of dollar industry in the US alone....tied up in government subsidies even...and you think the Atkins/low carb/high-pro meat/dairy studies that support your stance are "underfunded"?!
Soy, corn and wheat. The Holy Trinity of food profiteering in the U.S.. 99% of the drive for "plant-based" in the mainstream is focused on these products. "Vegan" and "plant-based" and "heart healthy" are just window dressing for these ubiquitous and toxic constituents.
Not a single source I have cited has ties to the dairy or meat industry. The Atkins diet is virtually invisible in this space. Things have moved on. The low-carb/carnivore movement is led by people such as Noakes, Teichholtz, Volek, Phinney, Cummins, the Fettkes, Baker, Berry and many many more. Most are invisible to the big money players, but that won't last much longer as momentum for individualized health picks up.
Have you ever figured out what an oxalate or a lectin is? Considering the pikes of them you are consuming, you might want to educate yourself beyond the middle school level:
Compare Dr. Fuhrman to Dr. Baker. One looks very emaciated, the other looks strong fit and healthy. Not sure what you think healthy looks like. But proof is in the pudding.https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=2dskPm_6uVo&feature=youtu.behttps://www.instagram.com/p/BwKDjFvgyYl/
Banana Bread wrote:
track chick wrote:
The thing that would concern me the most, and I don't have time right now to study the thread to see if someone else mentioned this in one of the pages so apologies if it's a repetition - is if the fruits have been bred to be supersweet varieties.
Fruit in the supermarket today is not the same as the fruit of the 50s, 60s, 70s. It is modified and bred to be as sweet as possible. Some of it is junk.
Now if you're getting some berries from a plant that's been in a rural garden for the last 100 years that's a different issue.
Just don't eat the berries at your local campus gym or everyone will complain about how old the plant is that the berries came from.
The darker the fruit the sweeter the berry...
No, I'm a professional scientist. What's anathema to me is the garbage bogus pseudoscience a lot of uneducated ignorant charlatans are passing off as serious intellectual work. When people who don't know any genetics, any biochemistry, the slightest thing about electromagnetism, etc. spout off about how evolution conditions what people now eat, it's a mistake to listen, because they are just spewing speculative, unfounded, imaginative silliness that at best is seriously misleading. Most of those going about paleodiets and the like are engaging in the most pseudointellectual exercise of all which is purely analogic thinking that lacks any check by empiricism or mechanistic theoretical explanation.
Seventh day Adventist church wrote:
A lot of the studies supporting vegetarian/vegan diets are either funded by the seventh day Adventist church, and/or done by scientist who are seventh day Adventist.
Links? Get some proof here -- solid evidence that vegetarian diet studies are funded by the Seventh Day Adventist Church. Solid evidence that the authors of the studies are members of the Seventh Day Adventist Church. No slouching on this one - I'm challenging you to produce the evidence or shut-up!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IlhL-WQ_X2YI'm calling you out on this one wrote:
Seventh day Adventist church wrote:
A lot of the studies supporting vegetarian/vegan diets are either funded by the seventh day Adventist church, and/or done by scientist who are seventh day Adventist.
Links? Get some proof here -- solid evidence that vegetarian diet studies are funded by the Seventh Day Adventist Church. Solid evidence that the authors of the studies are members of the Seventh Day Adventist Church. No slouching on this one - I'm challenging you to produce the evidence or shut-up!
Plenty of solid evidence.
Finally, some good news on the global front in preserving food choice (I am pro-choice in most matters political):
YMMV wrote:
Finally, some good news on the global front in preserving food choice (I am pro-choice in most matters political):
https://www.bmj.com/content/365/bmj.l1700.full
thebmj wrote: Cornado warned that a global move to such a diet could lead to the loss of millions of jobs linked to animal husbandry and the production of “unhealthy” foods, and destroy traditional diets which are part of cultural heritage.
Note that it has nothing to do with health, just disrupting Big Meat which is apparently taboo even in Europe.
YMMV wrote:
Finally, some good news on the global front in preserving food choice (I am pro-choice in most matters political):
https://www.bmj.com/content/365/bmj.l1700.full
Idiot.
Old
idiot.
this is the worst place to seek advice on a nutritional question like this. It is a good question but i would look to nutritional sites written by experts to get advice like this.
middle.professor wrote:
SomeoneWhoKnows wrote:
Sugar is bad for you no matter where it comes from and no matter if you eat the whole fruit or not. Added fiber does not negate the negative effects of sugar.
if sugar were bad for humans/mammals/vertebrates/animals we'd evolve a distaste for it. We haven't.
Not true. We need some sugar to live, so there's the necessity. Current research shows it's the biggest contributor to heart disease and Alzheimer's and even some cancers.
seattle prattle wrote:
this is the worst place to seek advice on a nutritional question like this. It is a good question but i would look to nutritional sites written by experts to get advice like this.
I already summed up for you what virtually all expert, national and international medical/health/science/nutrition expert groups recommend. Really. Save yourself some time, headaches and heart attacks and read it. Keep it simple, and don't waste your time "figuring it out yourself on google."
Man you gotta be a moron to question if fruit is good or bad. Sugar is a nutrient. Fruit is the only food on this planet that tastes good raw unprocessed. Eat a bowl of plain rice it's boring and needs to be seasoned it's not human food, same with oats and other grains. Meat is disgusting raw makes you ill and carcinogenic cooked. Nuts and seeds are for birds. Damn if the fruit isn't FULL of sugar then it isn't FULL of vitamin/minerals. People are so dumb.
Great interview with Steve Cram - says Jakob has no chance of WRs this year
I’m a D2 female runner. Our coach explicitly told us not to visit LetsRun forums.
Guys between age of 45 and 55 do you think about death or does it seem far away
2024 College Track & Field Open Coaching Positions Discussion
adizero Road to Records with Yomif Kejelcha, Agnes Ngetich, Hobbs Kessler & many more is Saturday