https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patrik_BaboumianRupp fan wrote:
You are not sure that veganism has disadvantages? It is not humanly possible to become a huge (250+ pound) strength athlete on a vegan diet.
Bodyweight: 255lb
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patrik_BaboumianRupp fan wrote:
You are not sure that veganism has disadvantages? It is not humanly possible to become a huge (250+ pound) strength athlete on a vegan diet.
Bodyweight: 255lb
vegan works wrote:
Started running 18 months ago, after going vegan. I was only able to start running because I had so much more natural energy from a eating a Whole foods plant based diet. It was never a goal of mine to become a runner, but when I changed my diet I had an abundance of energy i felt like I NEEDED to run. I'm also the only person I know who doesn't depend on caffeine throughout the day for energy - I run off of carbs and whole plants mainly.
That was 18 months ago, and since then I have brought my mileage up to 65 miles per week consistently for the last 4 months. I just ran a 5k pr of 16:56 today, an almost 50 second improvement off of my time of 17:49 from 2 months ago. Never had an injury. Make of this story what you will.
Welcome to the "vegan honeymoon". Almost all people coming of SAD get it, just as with any long-term fasting. Eight and energy improve as superfluos metabolic baggage is ejected. The problem is that "complete nutrient fasting", which is what veganism essentially is, usually takes a serious irreversible (without animal products) downturn after 1-3 years, and long term most health markers go below that of SAD.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3917888/"our results showed that a vegetarian diet is associated with poorer health (higher incidences of cancer, allergies, and mental health disorders), a higher need for health care, and poorer quality of life."
Table 3
Differences in suffering from various chronic conditions between the different dietary habit groups.
Chronic condition Vegetarian Carnivorous diet rich in fruits and vegetables Carnivorous diet lessrich in meat Carnivorous dietrich in meat p-value (χ2)
Asthma 4.8% 3.3% 3.9% 4.5% .772
Allergies 30.6% 18.2% 20.3% 16.7% .000
Diabetes 2.7% 4.2% 2.4% 2.4% .455
Cataract 4.2% 3.0% 3.3% 1.8% .348
Tinnitus 4.8% 4.8% 4.8% 3.6% .840
Hypertension 11.5% 10.6% 12.4% 15.5% .260
Cardiac infarction 1.5% 1.5% 0.9% 0.6% .610
Apoplectic stroke 1.2% 1.8% 1.5% 1.8% .610
Bronchitis 3.9% 3.6% 2.4% 3.0% .701
Arthritis 8.5% 7.6% 8.8% 10.3% .662
Cancer 4.8% 3.3% 1.2% 1.8% .022
This is the progression of social attitudes towards being vegan:
Era 1: Eating vegan is not possible, we need animal products to live
Era 2: OK, people can survive on a vegan diet, but it's not as healthy as eating animal products
Era 3: OK, people can be healthy on a vegan diet, but they are no better off than people who eat animal products. Athletes of all kinds definitely need animal products to be competitive.
Era 4: OK, there is some evidence that vegans live longer and are healthier, but it's all BS.
Era 5: OK, some athletes can be competitive on a vegan diet(ultra-runners, non-strength based athletes), but not all athletes (some strength-based athletes).
Present day: People who believe vegans can't compete at an elite level are now being routinely proven wrong.
Next month, the best track and field athletes in the world will be lining up at the World Championships. All consume meat.
Meanwhile, the best vegan marathoner in America will be floundering on this message board, posting "everyone should take B12 supplements ya know!!!" for the 50th time.
Draw your own conclusions.
look at the progression wrote:
Era 5: OK, some athletes can be competitive on a vegan diet(ultra-runners, non-strength based athletes), but not all athletes (some strength-based athletes).
Present day: People who believe vegans can't compete at an elite level are now being routinely proven wrong.
Show me a successful vegan athlete who isn't part of a super niche country club sport (ultrarunning, triathlon, crossfit, etc).
Hell even the vegan athletes in those sports aren't entirely successful. Look at Sage getting chicked recently.
Phantasy Star II wrote:
Next month, the best track and field athletes in the world will be lining up at the World Championships. All consume meat.
Meanwhile, the best vegan marathoner in America will be floundering on this message board, posting "everyone should take B12 supplements ya know!!!" for the 50th time.
Draw your own conclusions.
According to the parameters I've learned on letsrun, all the best track and field athletes in the world eat a plant based diet because none are 100% carnivore.
From the study you posted:
"Overall, 15474 individuals, aged 15 years and older, were questioned in computer-assisted personal interviews (CAPI; 54.7% female; response rate: 63.1%)."
"While 0.2% of the interviewees were pure vegetarians "
0.002 * 15474 = 31 people. You had 31 vegans in your study. Not statistically significant. Plus, it was a survey based study - all self-reported data, and it was conducted every 8 years. Very weak. Computer-assisted personal interviews means it could have been an email questionnaire. This is the best you could come up with?
YMMV I practice intermittent veganism no animal products 22 hours a day works for me.
Charlie wrote:
YMMV I practice intermittent veganism no animal products 22 hours a day works for me.
This might be sustainable if you are focusing on 100% raw red meat during those two hours each day.
You might as well become a full fruitarian Mic/"piano", since your intellectual diet is already pure cherry-picking.
(I have added terms in bold for clarity)
"While 0.2% of the interviewees (N=330 in final study)were pure vegetarians (vegans) (57.7% female), 0.8% reported to be vegetarians consuming milk and eggs(ovo-lacto vegetarians) (77.3% female), and 1.2% to be vegetarians consuming fish and/or eggs and milk (pescatarians)(76.7% female). 23.6% reported to combine a carnivorous diet with lots of fruits and vegetables (67.2% female), 48.5% to eat a carnivorous diet less rich in meat (60.8% female), and 25.7% a carnivorous diet rich in meat (30.1% female). Since the three vegetarian diet groups included a rather small number of persons (N = 343), they were analyzed as one dietary habit group. Moreover, since the vegetarian group was the smallest, we decided to match each of the vegetarians (1) with an individual of each other dietary habit group (carnivorous diet rich in fruits and vegetables (2), carnivorous diet less rich in meat (3) and a carnivorous rich in meat (4))."
Face-to-face interviews were conducted by questioning the subjects about their socio-demographic characteristics, health-related behavior, diseases, medical treatments, and also psychological aspects.
The independent variable in this study was the dietary habit of individuals. "
So the term "vegetarian" was expanded to include pescatarian to get a sample size of 330 total. If anything this favors the vegetarian statistics since such people are able to obtain animal nutrition (but not meat). This is due to the original randomized survey not finding many true vegans in the population (not surprising since Austria is a more rural nation than many in Europe. Rural people are more connected with food sources and are less likely to adopt the man-made, synthetic cult of veganism, as opposed to say urban teen girls and tech nerds.
These 330 people were then demographically matched as a control with other groups, a sound design practice, not as often done in more conventional, plant-biased studies.
Yes it is epidemiological, as with so many pro-plant-based studies, but it is excellent as a prospective survey, suggesting areas for further study. And it counteracts the media/corporate-established dogma of "meat bad/plants good". Certainly a tripling of heart attacks and cancer rates among all vegetarians is worthy of further follow-up. As more and more people get sucked into the wasteland of veganism via social media, the study sizes can potentially increase in this group, although the 85% failure rate in 5-10 years means that we may never see reliable data on vegans past 10 years in duration of this eating mode.
I expect you to critique this study with your habitual cherry-picking snark in an upcoming video, Mic.
Piano_Man87 wrote:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patrik_BaboumianRupp fan wrote:
You are not sure that veganism has disadvantages? It is not humanly possible to become a huge (250+ pound) strength athlete on a vegan diet.
Bodyweight: 255lb
He looks nothing like that now. Like most of the "Game-Changers", he is now a semi-retired blob of sh!t. Another "Game Changed" athlete was Kendrick Farris, whose career nosedived on vegan, as we are now seeing with Cam Newton
https://www.eventbrite.com/e/2019-steak-burger-dinner-with-olympic-weightlifter-kendrick-farris-tickets-63774328734#And yes vegans can become 250 lbs...of adipose.
My response was to this, pre-vegan photo:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patrik_Baboumian#/media/File:PatrikBaboumian.jpg
It look like the LRC link doesn't include wiki jpegs?
YMMV wrote:whose career nosedived on vegan, as we are now seeing with Cam Newton
Cam Newton has played all of 2 games as a vegan. He's been bad, but his past couple years as a meat eater weren't good either.
YMMV wrote: Another "Game Changed" athlete was Kendrick Farris, whose career nosedived on vegan,
Yep, he was a two-time Olympian when he went vegan in 2014. Then his career nosedived and he set the American record and went back to the Olympics in 2016. If he went carnivore instead of vegan, he'd have set the world record and won the gold, and would be the Olympic favorite in 2044.
YMMV wrote:
It look like the LRC link doesn't include wiki jpegs?
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:PatrikBaboumian.jpg
We knew you're an old, sad and lonely, trolling overweight moran but didn't know about the closet gay thing...
Adol C wrote:
look at the progression wrote:
Era 5: OK, some athletes can be competitive on a vegan diet(ultra-runners, non-strength based athletes), but not all athletes (some strength-based athletes).
Present day: People who believe vegans can't compete at an elite level are now being routinely proven wrong.
Show me a successful vegan athlete who isn't part of a super niche country club sport (ultrarunning, triathlon, crossfit, etc).
Hell even the vegan athletes in those sports aren't entirely successful. Look at Sage getting chicked recently.
Show me someone who finished DFL who was not a meat eater. In fact. 97% of the bottom 10% of the finishers are meat eaters. 97% of the very worst runners in any race are meat eaters.
Let’s look at facts wrote:
Adol C wrote:
Show me a successful vegan athlete who isn't part of a super niche country club sport (ultrarunning, triathlon, crossfit, etc).
Hell even the vegan athletes in those sports aren't entirely successful. Look at Sage getting chicked recently.
Show me someone who finished DFL who was not a meat eater. In fact. 97% of the bottom 10% of the finishers are meat eaters. 97% of the very worst runners in any race are meat eaters.
+1.
I think we have to admit the jury is out on what the optimal diet is for a variety of sports. There is no scientific explanation why any diet in particular would definitely be optimal. All we have is anecdotal evidence. And anecdotal evidence is terrible. In the 1920's, tour de france cyclists would smoke to prime their lungs. If LRC existed in the 1920's, people on this board would be saying you need to smoke to be an elite cyclist.
Alex Honnold, first person to free solo El Capitan, holder of various other mountain climbing records is a vegetarian and has eaten vegan in preparation for big feats (including free soloing el capitan):
https://gripped.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Alex-Honnold-ESPN.jpg
Random obese non-vegan:
https://www.thesun.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/NINTCHDBPICT000436729559.jpg
This is why using photos as evidence is stupid. It doesn't prove anything.