It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

UFC Fight: Why Nate Diaz Beat Champion Connor McGregor

page: 8
4
<< 5  6  7    9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 9 2016 @ 07:55 PM
link   
And i thought the dialogue with the hidden hand thread was mind-blowing!!!




posted on Mar, 9 2016 @ 07:57 PM
link   
a reply to: AnarchoCapitalist

Yep fad stuff. Like all diets that aren't actually monitored with your genetics.

THERE IS NOT ONE DIET FOR EVERYONE.

And no...you don't want bulking agents if your are a weight cutting athlete or endurance athlete.

There are also different diets for different fazes of your performance and training.

Anybody who says there is one diet is full of Sht.

Different blood types and genes do better with different diets.



posted on Mar, 9 2016 @ 08:02 PM
link   
a reply to: luthier

Perhaps if you don't care about health, but want to maximize performance, then you would be right. People take steroids for performance all the time, but they aren't healthy. As far as the ideal diet for health goes, we can isolate specific nutrients and their effects. We can run randomized control trials on dietary interventions. We can see very clearly that certain foods are harmful and certain foods are beneficial.



posted on Mar, 9 2016 @ 08:11 PM
link   
a reply to: AnarchoCapitalist

BS. On who? Show me the study. Show me the people used.

Tell me would an Inuit do better with his ancestral diet or a vegan diet?

To be honest vegans for the most part are some of the most unhealthy people I know. Not all but most obsess over food like a phobia and are skin and bones.

Nutrition for the most part changes every year. Just like how omega fatty acids are really only beneficial to Inuits. Or coconut oil is magic but it's filled with saturated fat and studies show its not all its cracked up to be.

The food and supplements industry also make half this stuff up.

People live a long time in Okinawa eating rice vegetables and fish.

My great grandfather smoked and ate crap food and drank some kind of wine out of gallon. He lived until 94.

It's genes man. It's the genes. And yeah all the research says that too. You just need to open your eyes.
edit on 9-3-2016 by luthier because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 9 2016 @ 08:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: luthier

originally posted by: o0oTOPCATo0o
a reply to: AnarchoCapitalist

No doubt putting on all the weight(most likely with TONS of meat protein) effected his stamina..
but the true reason he lost is the man in front of him was able to take his punches. He on the other hand, was not.
Connor landed some wicked shots. Diaz was able to roll them off a bit, but he still took a lot of damage
That was the difference though... He took them. He is used to getting hit by someone that size. Connor was not.
I understand your point and I agree that his diet effected his performance, but he did well enough in that fight to knock out most people that were put in front of him... but not Diaz.
He held strong and landed the simplest boxing combination and changed the fight.


Not sure how much weight he put on. Connor is said and has said to walk around at 170. He leans out in camp but cuts huge amounts of weight to get to 145. He is probably most used to sparring around 165 or so. I think he simply didn't cut weight or pay attention to optimizing his diet for his performance.

As much as people love their red meat it's fine as a pro athlete but high demand sports you just don't want to waste so much energy on digestion pre performance. You want your gut optimizing the nutrients you give it.

Conor and his team made a technical error in planning. He underestimated Diaz and overestimated his own ability. He should have plenty of experience sparring at the weight he fought at if he really does walk around around 170. Let's also assume he was planning on cutting down to 155 and not that his actual weight was 155. He didn't gain weight he just didn't cut it. During most of his camps in history I guarantee he was in the mid 160's most of the time and then cuts around 18 lbs (insane)

Saying his diet had something to do with his performance is not a stretch at all. It's another form of discipline and extremely important. That doesn't mean you have to be a veg but eating red meat has to be planned with accordance to have ample digestion time and shouldn't be had during weight cuts due to chemistry and it's slow travel through the intestines. Of coarse some people have different chemistry and your diet at a pro level should be monitored for results.

He was beat by his lack of preparation and ego. That led him to poor choices both in and before the fight.

Reminds of valesquez Werdum where Cain didn't bother doing altitude training before his fight and gassed badly. It wasn't the fatigue and altitude...they where a symptom of a much worse problem. Ego, and poor planning.


This. Very good summation and concluding remarks.

Nice analogy of Werdum/Velasquez. One thing: it's elevation, not altitude.



posted on Mar, 9 2016 @ 08:23 PM
link   
a reply to: BeefNoMeat

Thanks man. I will fix my error next time.

I am at the back end (like going down the hill now) of a life of martial arts and wrestling. I miss the comrodery of training like that. The wakiing up at 4 to train with people before work getting home training again. Repeat. I have some extremely deep and meaningful relationships with the guys I trained with. I assume it's that way with all sports but getting beat up is just so primal.

I like McGregor really. His response to his loss was pretty good and indicates he will learn from it. They just hyped him up way too much. It's hilarious Nate was drinking taquila on yacht when he got the call. Was not training for a triathlon and basically just walked in with a good gameplan, veteran wisdom and grit (and world class bjj).



posted on Mar, 9 2016 @ 08:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: AnarchoCapitalist

BS. On who? Show me the study. Show me the people used.

Tell me would an Inuit do better with his ancestral diet or a vegan diet?

To be honest vegans for the most part are some of the most unhealthy people I know. Not all but most obsess over food like a phobia and are skin and bones.

Nutrition for the most part changes every year. Just like how omega fatty acids are really only beneficial to Inuits. Or coconut oil is magic but it's filled with saturated fat and studies show its not all its cracked up to be.

The food and supplements industry also make half this stuff up.

People live a long time in Okinawa eating rice vegetables and fish.

My great grandfather smoked and ate crap food and drank some kind of wine out of gallon. He lived until 94.

It's genes man. It's the genes. And yeah all the research says that too. You just need to open your eyes.


Vegan diet, for sure. They have high rates of cardiovascular disease. There's actually frozen Eskimo mummies from a thousand years ago that show signs of atherosclerosis.



And you're right, the nutrition companies do make up all sorts of nonsense studies, as do the meat and dairy industry. That's why I look at funding sources for studies before jumping to any conclusions. It's also easy to sniff out the bad ones when you know what to look for.

For example, the studies that say saturated fat has no impact on heart disease risk are all epidemiological studies. We've known since the 1970s that such studies don't have the statistical power to make that determination, only dietary change studies have the power to show the cause-effect relationship.

You should read my article on Dr. Peter Attia where I cover this in more detail:

www.libertariannews.org...



edit on 3/9/2016 by AnarchoCapitalist because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 9 2016 @ 08:39 PM
link   
a reply to: AnarchoCapitalist

Your telling me that eating food a persons gut has never seen will be good for them? Your really assuming a lot as well as to what caused the heart disease. Was it a period of tougher winters with less vegitation? Was it a personal problem. You should also be aware that Inuit have unique body chemistry which wouldn't go along with being a vegan.

So in both these videos you posted they talk about omega fatty acids. Well turns out they are bs.

Same with coconut oil full of saturated fat

Health and diet are a personal thing that go with your body type.

Being a veg could be OK (though strangely our oldest genetic blood type is O and meat helps the diet/not talking about eating for bloodtypes diet) as a base for this diet will most likely not cause you harm. Being vegan not so much. It's dangerous if your not very careful of your calory intake out take. Most people are not disciplined enough to be a healthy vegan and it's an absurd diet for the general population.

That video is absolute bs as well. That is hardly peered review science. Yet he critisizes peer reviewed scientists. Hilarious.
edit on 9-3-2016 by luthier because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 9 2016 @ 08:58 PM
link   
a reply to: luthier
You should watch the video before commenting. I can tell you never looked at it by your response.


edit on 3/9/2016 by AnarchoCapitalist because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 9 2016 @ 09:07 PM
link   
a reply to: AnarchoCapitalist

Oh I watched that bs. The guy goes on about how the Danish researchers never examines people and autopsy reports etc. All the while ignoring all the other studies on Inuits that show their body chemistry adapted to the diet. That by eating raw meat they get vitamins and carbs that don't exist in cooked meat. I took 3 cultural anthropology classes while in school. This guy is full of it.

Computational biologist Rasmus Nielsen at the University of California, Berkeley lead the research, and began by looking for genetic differences between a 191 Inuit in Greenland, 60 Europeans, and 44 ethnic Chinese. "When we did that, it pointed directly to one group of genes where we had an extremely strong signal," Nielsen says. "They regulate how much of these omega-3s and omega-6s you make yourself naturally."

Nearly all of the Inuit in Nielsen's study had variances in these genes that researchers think slow down the body's natural production of omega-3 and omega-6 fats. "We saw that the Inuit have such a high diet of omega-3s, so they produce much less of it themselves," Nielsen says. And the genes seem to play a role in lowering levels of LDL cholesterol, the bad kind that's linked to heart disease.

Nowadays, very few Greenlanders still eat a completely traditional diet. And the move away from the high-fat, high-protein diet may be leading to the rising rate of diabetes. "If they switch to a modern diet that's high in carbohydrates, particularly simple ones like glucose and sugar, then they tend to be quite unhealthy," Nielsen says.
www.npr.org...
edit on 9-3-2016 by luthier because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 9 2016 @ 10:02 PM
link   
a reply to: luthier

Ha! Saw that same video. I've always liked the Diazs brothers. Swear to it, I remember where I was when Nick put Lawler to sleep. I became an immediate fan. 209 represent!

I've never trained MMA but was a competitive athlete. So true about building that camaraderie you speak of, especially team sports (what I played). It's just a different type of connection that you don't get in everyday personal relationships.

Not to derail completely, but do post over at BE? If you don't, you should. I'm SippingOnGinAndJuice.


edit on 9-3-2016 by BeefNoMeat because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 9 2016 @ 10:11 PM
link   
a reply to: luthier

Yeah they have gene expression variance based on epigenetic influences. However, that doesn't mean they wouldn't be healthier if they only ate whole plant food.



posted on Mar, 10 2016 @ 08:43 AM
link   
a reply to: AnarchoCapitalist

They are already healthy. Your video is not accurate. It's propaganda.

This is what you don't get. We adapt to our enviornemntal through natural selection. The problem we are facing is the industrialization of food, monoculture (environmental), non local foods, we don't go outside, and people eat processed foods.

You give Inuit a plant based diet and they all freeze to death and die of malnutrition. They Inuit diet is there form of macrobiotics in a sense. It's what is available to them in their environment and just like all the other animals that live in that environment they maximize efficiency for that local ecosystem



posted on Mar, 10 2016 @ 09:02 AM
link   
a reply to: luthier

I'm not sure how you can call published peer-reviewed articles propaganda:

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

full article


The alleged absence of CAD in Greenland Eskimos is a paradoxical finding, given that this is a population mainly sustained on a diet high in animal fat, absence of fruits and vegetables and other important nutrients;36 in other words, a diet which violates all principles of balanced and heart-healthy nutrition.

The totality of reviewed evidence leads us to the conclusion that Eskimos have a similar prevalence of CAD as non-Eskimo populations, 20-23; 31-32;34-35 they have excessive mortality due to cerebrovascular strokes,37-38 their overall mortality is twice as high as that of non-Eskimo populations 38 and their life expectancy is approximately 10 years shorter than the Danish population.39-40



20. Bertelsen A. Grønlandskmedicinskstatistikognosografi. Bd. III:
Detsædvanligegrønlandskesygdomsbillede, [Medical statisticsm and nosography in Greenland: the usual disease pattern in Greenland], vol. 3. Meddelelser om Grønland 1940;117 (3).

21. Bjerregaard P, Young TK, Hegele RA. Low incidence of cardiovascular disease among the Inuit – what is the evidence? Atherosclerosis 2003; 166: 351-357.

22. Chateau-Degat M, Dewailly E, Louchini R, et al. Cardiovascular burden and related risk factors among Nunavik (Quebec) Inuit: Insights from baseline findings in the circumpolar Inuit Health in Transition cohort study. Can J Cardiol 2010; 26: e190-e196.

23. Howard BV, Comuzzie A, Devereux RB, et al. Cardiovascular disease prevalence and its relation to risk factors in Alaska Eskimos. Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis 2010; 20: 350-358.

31. Ebbesson SOE, Adler AI, Risica PM, et al. Cardiovascular disease and risk factors in three Alaskan Eskimo populations: The Alaska- Siberia project. Int J Circumpolar Health
2005; 64: 365-386.

32. Day GE, Lanier AP. Alaska native mortality, 1979-1998. Public Health Rep 2003; 118: 518-530.

34. McLaughlin JB, Middaugh JP, Utermohle CJ, Asay ED, Fenaughty AM, EberhartPhillips JE. Changing patterns of risk factors and mortality for coronary heart disease among Alaska Natives, 1979-2002. JAMA 2004; 291: 2545-2546.

35. Middaugh JP. Cardiovascular deaths among Alaskan Natives, 1980-86. Am J Public Health 1990; 80: 282-285.


edit on 3/10/2016 by AnarchoCapitalist because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 10 2016 @ 10:02 AM
link   
a reply to: AnarchoCapitalist

Your video is propaganda.
Also my friend you have provided a literary review. Not a study. The most recent genetic studies are giving a much better picture. It's a harsh climate and veganism would be an absurd diet. Never mind the fact there actually are no vegis in abundance. Nor would their intestines and DNA know what to do with it.

I can post plenty of articles as well from studies that say different.


How about vegan deaths and heart attacks? Hmm plenty of evidence there. Here is one article.
mobile.nytimes.com...


edit on 10-3-2016 by luthier because: (no reason given)

edit on 10-3-2016 by luthier because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 10 2016 @ 11:45 AM
link   
a reply to: luthier

So a crappy op-ed from 2007, written by a woman who literally runs a cheese store for a living, is the best response you have to a dozen peer-reviewed articles on Eskimo health?

By the way, you can in fact raise a healthy vegan baby. People do it all the time. They even make soy based infant formula that is physician approved and nutritionally adequate.

In fact, dairy based formulas may cause atherosclerosis in infants.

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...


At a recent WHO annual meeting, it was stated that breast milk substitutes cause irreparable damage in infants. This prompted us to verify whether formula feeding and parental cigarette smoking might play a role in the pathogenesis of early atherosclerotic alterations in infancy. The major epicardial coronary arteries from 36 infants dying suddenly and unexpectedly (sudden infant death syndrome) were embedded in paraffin and serially cut for histologic examination. In 67% of the cases, multifocal coronary early atherosclerotic lesions of varying entities were detected. The alterations ranged from focal plaques with mild myointimal thickening to juvenile soft plaques reducing the arterial lumen. A significant correlation was observed between the early atherosclerotic lesions and the risk factors considered. In particular, we noted different morphologic patterns related to formula feeding and cigarette smoking. Baby formula feeding and parental cigarette smoking might have an atherogenic effect on the coronary walls as from the first months of life. The lesions appear to be larger and more diffuse when both these atherogenic factors are present.


If you have a child, you should avoid feeding them animal products at all costs. In fact, the seventh edition of Dr. Spock's Baby and Childcare book, which is the best selling book on childcare of all time, recommends a vegan diet for children. The seventh was the last edition written by Dr. Spock before his death.

These days, it is common to see the beginning stages of atherosclerosis in children as young as 10 at autopsy.



edit on 3/10/2016 by AnarchoCapitalist because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 10 2016 @ 12:07 PM
link   
a reply to: AnarchoCapitalist

No my response was that genetic studies of Inuit are telling us how there genes changed to fit their environment. How exactly would their digestive system process a vegan diet? They haven't eaten substantial starches or vegis in 10's of thousands of years and they mist likely no longer posses the correct enzymes and stomach bacteria to make that diet efficient.

And no that's not the best article I could find just one I member reading.

www.salon.com...


notrickszone.com... 4W3jOL.dpbs

There are others I can give that show people who eat fish and regular vegetarians have less heart disease than vegans.



These studies are extremely limited. None that I have found make the people keep food journals and examine their DNA and blood types. They are studies that suggest things but fully admit the parameters are filled with unknowns. Usually they are brief questionnaires. Far too many variables and enviornemental impacts and stress because of the small numbers in these expirements. They rarely use traditional tribal cultures with indigenous diets.

The best one I can find says people who eat primarily meat who are not indigenous to that diet have higher rates of heart disease. Those that eat meat 2-3 times a week, people who eat fish , and vegetarians have the lowest morbitity and mortality rates. Vegans have a higher level of heart disease and malnutrition.

To be a vegan for most cultures in the world is completely impractical. They simply don't have access to the diversity of food necessary. It is an extremist diet and unless you are using it for a specific function and analyzing how your body is working with it it is not safe. A Shepard in Dagestan is going to drop dead trying to feed himself every 20 minutes. There is a serious caloric input output problem with veganism if your not in a place you can get a huge selection of produce and supplements.

Breast milk is the best thing. Soymilk not so much. Soymilk formula is suggested for kids with allergies to dairy. Goat milk is a good alternative to formula.

Babies also die from vegan parents who are extremists. Even with moms breastmilk. That should tell you something.

Why would a diet no one in the world until supermarkets existed has ever used be a good diet for everyone ?
edit on 10-3-2016 by luthier because: (no reason given)



PS your so full of bs it's amazing.
Dr Spock seriously? I am debating with a zealot. That is enough proof in its own your full of it.

Every single article you provide there is one to contradict it. So it's best to use common sense not fads. Do the research listen to your body if your serious have a nutritionist examine how your diet is working with your body by doing blood work and tests.

I can guarantee veganism is not and never will be the optimum diet for everyone.
edit on 10-3-2016 by luthier because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 10 2016 @ 01:24 PM
link   
a reply to: luthier

You talk a lot but I'm the only one citing research studies here. Hopefully people with kids that might read this thread aren't dumb enough to listen to you over the hundreds of doctors that publish on childhood nutrition.

Adventist Health Study 2, with 97,000 participants, found vegans had far lower rates of mortality than regular meat eaters or vegetarians. And the meat eaters in this study ate far healthier diets than typical meat eating Americans.

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...


Vegetarian diets are associated with lower all-cause mortality and with some reductions in cause-specific mortality. Results appeared to be more robust in males. These favorable associations should be considered carefully by those offering dietary guidance.


The EPIC study, with 448,568 participants, found:

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...


After multivariate adjustment, a high consumption of red meat was related to higher all-cause mortality, and the association was stronger for processed meat ...The results of our analysis support a moderate positive association between processed meat consumption and mortality, in particular due to cardiovascular diseases, but also to cancer.




edit on 3/10/2016 by AnarchoCapitalist because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 10 2016 @ 01:36 PM
link   
a reply to: AnarchoCapitalist

Uh I just cited you a research study from last year. I just told you the problems with your studies. They are like bible vs for you. Nice strawmans as well. Never said eating red meat all the time was good.

I will read your studies and comment but you already made the strawmans and am sure you taking things out of context.

People should find a Dr they trust and take their advice as well as their own common sense. A few thousand drs out of millions is hardly a consensus by the way.



posted on Mar, 10 2016 @ 01:51 PM
link   
a reply to: luthier

The Graz study describes it's limitations in the study itself.


Potential limitations of our results are due to the fact that the survey was based on cross-sectional data. Therefore, no statements can be made whether the poorer health in vegetarians in our study is caused by their dietary habit or if they consume this form of diet due to their poorer health status. We cannot state whether a causal relationship exists, but describe ascertained associations.


Much of these issues are reduced in studies like the AHS study that follow a far larger group of people out over a long time frame.

It should be obvious that there will be far more vegetarians who have cancer than meat eaters, as a percentage of people consuming a particular diet, because people who are diagnosed with cancer often take up a vegetarian diet AFTER they get diagnosed.

The only way to control for that is to follow a large group of people over time and then watch to see who develops cancer. This is what the AHS 2 study did that I cited. As you can see, people who start vegetarian and stay that way end up with far lower rates of cancer and other chronic diseases.

This same concept applies to all other issues that can be treated with a vegan diet. People with depression are also often to told to take up a vegetarian diet by their doctors, leading to the same skewed statistical results.

Also, you got the number of doctors on your side wrong. The vast majority of doctors who study nutrition agree with my potion. Only a small handful of mostly meat/dairy industry funded doctors disagree.



edit on 3/10/2016 by AnarchoCapitalist because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
4
<< 5  6  7    9 >>

log in

join